Discourses on the performance gap of agriculture in a green economy: a Q-methodology study in Indonesia

Sacha Amaruzaman, B. Leimona, M. van Noordwijk, B. Lusiana
{"title":"Discourses on the performance gap of agriculture in a green economy: a Q-methodology study in Indonesia","authors":"Sacha Amaruzaman, B. Leimona, M. van Noordwijk, B. Lusiana","doi":"10.1080/21513732.2017.1331264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Gaps exist between aspirations of ‘green agriculture’, which protects biodiversity and ecosystem services, and the reality on the ground. Using Q-methodology, we explored expert opinion in Indonesia on the contributing factors to the gaps. Q-methodology indicated three dominant discourses on ‘green agriculture’ and groups of experts who prioritize them: (1) endorsers of regulations and innovations; (2) providers of resources for access to capital, technology and knowledge; and (3) proponents of green economy (GE) and land-use planning (LUP). Group 1 pointed out the importance of endorsing incentives to reduce the gap, while Group 2 reckoned that building smallholders’ capacity and providing them with access to capital, technology, and knowledge are needed to green agricultural practices. Group 3 described the importance of integrating environmental value into the gross domestic product and earmarking sources derived from environmental levies for greening the agricultural sector. All discourses recognized the importance of scientific policy formulation. Groups 1 and 3 agreed that non-synchronization of LUP between national and local governments highly contributes to the gap. Groups 2 and 3 perceived that ecosystem services from the agricultural sector have not been sufficiently understood to promote green agricultural development. By simultaneously addressing the gaps on each level and understanding how each factor contributes to the gap, we propose a set of recommendations to improve the implementation of green agriculture in Indonesia by creating a platform that all three groups can recognize and support. EDITED BY Dagmar Mithöfer","PeriodicalId":31680,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystem Services Management","volume":"13 1","pages":"233 - 247"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21513732.2017.1331264","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystem Services Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2017.1331264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

ABSTRACT Gaps exist between aspirations of ‘green agriculture’, which protects biodiversity and ecosystem services, and the reality on the ground. Using Q-methodology, we explored expert opinion in Indonesia on the contributing factors to the gaps. Q-methodology indicated three dominant discourses on ‘green agriculture’ and groups of experts who prioritize them: (1) endorsers of regulations and innovations; (2) providers of resources for access to capital, technology and knowledge; and (3) proponents of green economy (GE) and land-use planning (LUP). Group 1 pointed out the importance of endorsing incentives to reduce the gap, while Group 2 reckoned that building smallholders’ capacity and providing them with access to capital, technology, and knowledge are needed to green agricultural practices. Group 3 described the importance of integrating environmental value into the gross domestic product and earmarking sources derived from environmental levies for greening the agricultural sector. All discourses recognized the importance of scientific policy formulation. Groups 1 and 3 agreed that non-synchronization of LUP between national and local governments highly contributes to the gap. Groups 2 and 3 perceived that ecosystem services from the agricultural sector have not been sufficiently understood to promote green agricultural development. By simultaneously addressing the gaps on each level and understanding how each factor contributes to the gap, we propose a set of recommendations to improve the implementation of green agriculture in Indonesia by creating a platform that all three groups can recognize and support. EDITED BY Dagmar Mithöfer
绿色经济下农业绩效差距的论述:基于印尼q -方法论的研究
摘要保护生物多样性和生态系统服务的“绿色农业”的愿望与实际情况之间存在差距。使用Q方法,我们探讨了印度尼西亚关于造成差距的因素的专家意见。Q方法论指出了关于“绿色农业”的三种主要论述以及优先考虑它们的专家组:(1)法规和创新的支持者;(2) 获得资本、技术和知识的资源提供者;以及(3)绿色经济和土地利用规划的支持者。第一组指出了认可减少差距的激励措施的重要性,而第二组则认为,建设小农户的能力并为他们提供获得资本、技术和知识的机会是绿色农业实践所必需的。第3组介绍了将环境价值纳入国内生产总值的重要性,并指定环境税来源用于绿化农业部门。所有论述都认识到科学政策制定的重要性。第1组和第3组一致认为,国家政府和地方政府之间的土地利用率不同步是造成这一差距的主要原因。第2组和第3组认为,农业部门的生态系统服务没有得到充分理解,无法促进绿色农业发展。通过同时解决每个层面的差距,并了解每个因素是如何造成差距的,我们提出了一套建议,通过创建一个所有三个群体都可以认可和支持的平台,来改进印尼绿色农业的实施。编辑:Dagmar Mithöfer
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
46 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书