Time Magazine about multifunctional agriculture, some thoughts about the farmers’ identity

While waiting for my train at Utrecht Central station – I tend to kill my time looking around in the book/magazine shop – the cover of the latest Time Magazine struck my eye, heading: “France’s Rural Revolution, traditional French farmers are dying. Can farmers make money from town dwellers’ love of the land?”. Interested about the heading – and teased by the astonishing landscape on the cover – I bought a copy for the second part of my trip to Rotterdam.

Bruce Crumley (the author) poses the question what eventually will save rural France. French farmers are hit by a shrinking agricultural sector, falling food prices (globalization) and tightening E.U. support (so called CAP reforms (Common Agricultural Policy) in 2013). These developments are not exclusive to France, farmers in many other E.U. member states are facing these problems. However, future CAP reforms are considered to be critical especially to French farmers, since the French receive nearly 20% of the total CAP funding.

By illustrating the developments on three French farms the author focuses on one of the ways to get out of this tightening trap by diversifying the farm business with new (‘non-farming’) activities. A strategy also known as multifunctional agriculture. The farmers mentioned in the article developed new activities in rural tourism and the production and selling of regional products like beer and ham. Interestingly, the article has many parallels with the conversations I had myself (in relation to our research project on (Dutch) multifunctional agriculture). Apparently, many farmers (eventually) don’t regret their step on the multifunctional pathway. On the contrary, many farmers say to enjoy the new farm dynamics, contacts with new people and some even claim to have reinvented entrepreneurship. However, we needn’t to underestimate the step of ‘just’ diversifying your farm to survive. In the article colleague rural sociologist François Purseigle argues many farmers simply refuse to find new sources of income as they see diversification as a betrayal of the agricultural profession they took on. As a parallel, I experienced many interviewed Dutch farmers – who have made the step or are still hesitating in some way – have or are still struggling with their identity of being a ‘real farmer’: “It’s not just running a business” – one farmers stressed – “it’s a way of life!”. I think the notion of multifunctional agriculture has matured but still often perceived as something for losers or nothing ‘real farmers’ should deal with. Often the environments of hesitating farmers aren’t ready for this new way of farming, yet.  

The article can be found on the Time website. The page also offers a great picture gallery about the topic.

Citizens and Animal Welfare: Methods, Findings and Policy Implications

Last Thursday (20th of May) I participated in an interesting workshop about citizens and animal welfare.  The workshop was organized at Aarhus University in Denmark and dealt with questions like: Whose opinion on animal welfare counts? How can one integrate the different perspectives of,  for example farmers, citizens, (animal) scientists and the government? We already know that citizens consider animals’ ‘naturalness’ a very important feature of ‘good animal welfare’. But what is naturalness exactly? Can you implement this in animal farming systems? Can you measure it? And what if the choice for naturalness is in conflict with other aspects, such as animal health? How do citizens make trade-offs between such dilemmas in animal farming? And how should one involve citizens in animal welfare research? Via surveys, farm visits, consensus conferences or are there other ways to be explored? To be short, although much research has already been done on animal welfare over the last decade, there are still many questions surrounding the animal welfare debate when it comes to citizens’ participation and involvement.

Raising new questions is of course a characteristic of research: finishing a research can give you the feeling that you answered some questions, but in the end it will always result in more questions. That’s what keeps us going. What in addition keeps me going, is the cooperation and discussion with other researchers in the world. Particularly after doing a PhD for six years on my own, it is really nice to exchange ideas and cooperate with other researchers in this field, like Jan Tind Sørensen of the Department of Animal Health and Bioscience and Peter Sandøe of the Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment . During my PhD I often had the feeling I was one of the very few researchers who is interested in public perceptions of animal farming. But recently, the importance of the public opinion of animal farming is more and more acknowledged, also in the field Animal Science, of which this workshop was a good example.

Pleidooi Duurzame Veeteelt

Er is nogal wat commotie rondom het ‘Pleidooi Duurzame Veeteelt’. Het pleidooi is inmiddels ondertekend door ruim 200 hoogleraren, ook vanuit Wageningen, zoals Noëlle Aarts, Paul Struik, Cees Leeuwis, Olaf van Kooten en onze ‘eigen’  Han en Jan Douwe.

Het pleidooi staat voor een drastische verandering van de intensieve veehouderij, in navolging van het rapport van Commissie Wijffels in 2001: 

“De intensieve veehouderij moet ingrijpend worden veranderd. Dieren moeten meer ruimte krijgen voor natuurlijk gedrag, zoals het buiten rondscharrelen. Het transport van levende dieren moet worden beperkt en het fokken van vee moet niet uitsluitend gericht zijn op toename van de productiviteit.”

Het debat rondom de intensieve veehouderij speelt al tijden en laait met enige regelmaat weer op. Met dit actuele pleidooi lijkt het stoplicht voor de intensieve veehouderij nadrukkelijk op oranje te staan… Kunnen en willen we op deze wijze dierlijke producten blijven produceren in Nederland of niet? Oftewel, accepteren we de huidige manier van produceren – het stoplicht blijft groen – of zeggen we  ‘STOP, het is tijd voor een andere veehouderij’?

De keuze is aan jou. Velen – inclusief ondergenoemde – zijn je inmiddels voorgegaan en hebben het pleidooi ondersteund.

Thesis possibility: Sheep & Wine in South Africa

The Rural Sociology Group offers a possibility to do your master thesis about organic wine production in South Africa.

As organic wine production cannot make use of pesticides, wine growers search for other ways to control the weeds in the vineyard, for example by mowing or burning.
More recently, the idea has come up to let sheep graze in the vineyards, see for example http://news.ucanr.org/newsstorymain.cfm?story=977: “If sheep avoid grapes, they can graze the floor of a vineyard, providing farmers an alternative to using herbicides and mowing.”

Although organic wine is also produced in South Africa, this idea has neither been studied nor applied in there. This offers interesting possibilities for a master thesis.

The research will be carried out under supervision of Rural Sociology (Birgit Boogaard) en Rural Development Sociology (Paul Hebinck) and in cooperation with the Unversity of Stellenbosch and an organic winegrower in South Africa – who is very interested in this concept.

If you are interested, just send me an email (birgit.boogaard@wur.nl ) for further information.

Best regards,
Birgit.

Foundation for Tomorrow (Koken voor Morgen)

Friday the 15th of January I was at the closing event of the Foundation for Tomorrow workshop cycle which aims to educate women about the water footprint of home cooking. The women who attended the cooking workshops were awarded a special certificate to acknowledge their expertise on cooking home made meals more sustainably. More that 70 women attended the ceremony, most of them are of a Turkish background.

The Foundation for Tomorrow (Stichting voor Morgen) is the initiative of Sevim Zor, who is a ICT software engineer working in the Netherlands, but with a background in Turkey. Sevim started the Foundation in order to make available scientific information about water footprint in an easily understandable way for practical situations in daily life. One of the projects is a series of ten workshops Cook for Tomorrow (Koken voor Morgen), which were given in low income neighborhoods in The Hague aimed at people of different ethnic backgrounds. Workshop participants are stimulated to cook their (traditional) dishes with produce grown regionally (rather than in their country of origin), and also to store them properly in order to avoid wasting food. Continue reading