The world has already seen multiple agricultural revolutions, with technological breakthroughs that have allowed productivity to increase by an astounding factor of ten since the 18th century.^1,2 Some prominent innovations responsible for this impressive boost include the mechanization of farming equipment, the development of fertilizers and pesticides, the genetic modification and breeding of crops, and the creation of irrigation systems.¹ Once considered innovative, these advances are now standard practice. However, they have come at a cost. By now, it is well understood that typical practices used in food production are unsustainable and wasteful of our increasingly scarce natural resources.

Although there is still progress to be made, policies are in fact being enacted to address this need for improvement. For example, in 2009, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) introduced the approach of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) to guide countries as they improve their agricultural policies and practices.³ In response, the World Bank has developed various Climate-Smart Agriculture Investment Plans (CSAIPs), with over 2.5 billion dollars invested into CSA projects and initiatives globally.⁴ Now is a critical time for the agricultural sector: standard practices must be revolutionized again to meet sustainability goals while simultaneously maintaining a steady increase in production to feed the growing population.⁵

Going forward, it is estimated that we will need to produce 56% more food by 2050 than we did in 2010.⁶ Apart from how to achieve this ambitious figure, another concern is that the growth in global productivity has been slowing down for the past decade.⁷ Issues in the agricultural sector have not gone unnoticed by the general public: there is growing dissatisfaction about the rising cost of food as well as doubt about the safety of consuming genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and produce grown with agrochemicals.⁸ Given these concerns, it is no surprise that participation in Alternative Food Networks (AFNs) is rising.

AFNs encompass a wide range of food-provisioning methods that are not part of the conventional system, such as farmers’ markets.⁹ Socially, AFNs facilitate closer ties between food consumers and agricultural producers, creating both a community that participants value and more transparency about how the food is produced.⁹ This emphasis on proximity is also geographic: AFNs rely on short supply chains and local food production, which means less energy is expended on transportation. Many participants see purchasing local food as a type of responsible consumerism, with the idea that purchasing is inherently a political act that can influence the demand side of the economy.⁹ In fact, some supermarkets and grocery stores have taken notice of this growing consumer preference and now advertise locally-produced items.¹⁰

While AFNs are often considered a more sustainable alternative to purchasing food at a grocery store, other agricultural trends apply to how the food is produced more so than where. In response to conventional agriculture’s tendency to degrade soil quality, various regenerative methods, collectively called “agroecological methods,” focus on preserving or even improving ecological health through agriculture. While agroecology has been gaining wide acceptance from both the international scientific community and relevant global organizations such as the UN,^11,12 many agroecological methods are somewhat limited to small-scale farming due to the increased attention to detail they typically require, which is not conducive to conventional agriculture.

One such agroecological method, permaculture, has an international social movement and popular involvement associated with its practice.¹³ Permaculture incorporates the domestic home as a relevant element in the design of food production systems,¹⁴ so it is not surprising that it is relatable and attractive to a wider public. With its focus on building and recycling natural capital onsite, permaculture offers a strategy to bring agriculture into urban and suburban spaces in the form of small-scale production. It lends itself well to gardeners, urban farmers, and homesteaders and has therefore become a part of the local food movement as well. With the rising popularity of AFNs, there is an opportunity for those practicing permaculture to participate as producers in the local food economy.

AFNs, permaculture, and their associated social movements drive bottom-up action toward reaching sustainability. Conversely, the decisions of policymakers and technological innovations within the agricultural sector create meaningful impacts from the top down. To achieve the goal of a more sustainable agricultural system, top-down and bottom-up approaches can meet each other halfway, complementing one another to target inherently different aspects of a solution.

References:

1. Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, 2009. Putting Meat on the Table: Industrial Farm Animal Production in America [online]. Retrieved April 16, 2023, from www.ncifap.org
2. Trewavas, A. (2002). Malthus foiled again and again. Nature, 418(6898), 668–670.
3. Saj, S., Torquebiau, E., Hainzelin, E., Pages, J., & Maraux, F. (2017). The way forward: An agroecological perspective for Climate-Smart Agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 250, 20-24.
4. Climate-Smart Agriculture. World Bank. (2021, April 5). Retrieved April 16, 2023, from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climate-smart-agriculture
5. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) (2018). Measuring what matters in agriculture and food systems: a synthesis of the results and recommendations of TEEB for Agriculture and Food’s Scientific and Economic Foundations report. Geneva: UN Environment.
6. World Resources Institute, 2019. Creating a Sustainable Food Future: A Menu of Solutions to Feed Nearly 10 Billion People by 2050 [online]. Retrieved April 16, 2023, from www.research.wri.org
7. Morgan, S., Fuglie, K., & Jelliffe, J. (2022, December 5). World Agricultural Output Growth Continues to Slow, Reaching Lowest Rate in Six Decades. Retrieved April 16, 2023, from https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2022/december/world-agricultural-output-growth-continues-to-slow-reaching-lowest-rate-in-six-decades
8. Grauerholz, L., & Owens, N. (2015). Alternative Food Movements. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 566–572.
9. Barbera, F., & Dagnes, J. (2016). Building Alternatives from the Bottom-up: The Case of Alternative Food Networks. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 8, 324-331.
10. Grebitus, C., Printezis, I., & Printezis, A. (2017). Relationship between Consumer Behavior and Success of Urban Agriculture. Ecological Economics, 136, 189–200.
11. De Schutter, O. (2010). Agroecology and the Right to Food. Report presented to the Human Rights Council A/HRC/16/49, sixteenth session. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.srfood.org/index.php/en/component/content/ article/1174-report-agroecology-and-the-right-to-food
12. Wibbelmann, M., Schmutz, U., Wright, J., Udall, D., Rayns, F., Kneafsey, M., Trenchard, L., Bennett, J. and Lennartsson, M. (2013) Mainstreaming Agroecology: Implications for Global Food and Farming Systems. Centre for Agroecology and Food Security Discussion Paper. Coventry: Centre for Agroecology and Food Security.
13. Ferguson, R. S., & Lovell, S. T. (2013). Permaculture for agroecology: design, movement, practice, and worldview. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 34(2), 251–274.
14. Mollison, B. C., & Slay, R. M. (2013). Introduction to permaculture. Tasmania, Australia: Tagari Publications.