Costanza Conti , Andrew Hall , Alastair Orr , Caroline Hambloch , Kai Mausch
{"title":"农业食品系统干预措施的复杂性意识原则:项目遭遇复杂性的经验教训","authors":"Costanza Conti , Andrew Hall , Alastair Orr , Caroline Hambloch , Kai Mausch","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><p>Complexity has long been recognised as a key feature of agri-food systems. Yet, it remains largely theoretical or poorly addressed in practice, hampering the potential of international development projects to address agriculture and food-related challenges in the Global South.</p></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><p>The paper identifies and examines six sources of complexity that can manifest in projects, namely: unpredictability; path dependencies; context-specific dynamics; power relations; multiple temporal and spatial scales. It then proposes and tests six agri-food system principles that could be drawn upon to more successfully navigate this complexity. The aim of the paper is to illustrate how these principles could help projects respond to the changing circumstances and unpredictable turns of agri-food systems contexts in a different way, which flexibly embraces complexity. This flexibility is essential in an age of uncertainty and transformation.</p></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><p>Comparative case study analysis of six projects implemented by the CGIAR: aflatoxin control in groundnuts in Malawi (1), pigeonpea in Eastern and Southern Africa (2), sorghum beer in Kenya (3), sweet sorghum for biofuel in India (4), precooked beans in Uganda and Kenya (5), Smart Foods in India and Eastern Africa (6). The projects aimed to either increasing smallholder farmers' incomes or addressing food and nutrition security, or both. They were specifically selected as all they were affected by some of the sources of complexity, which hampered the projects to different extents. This makes the cases relevant for not only illustrating manifestations of complexity, but also help reflect on alternative strategies to tackle it.</p></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSION</h3><p>The analysis of the case studies reveals how complexity can frustrate objectives of development interventions under several aspects. It also serves to discuss how complexity can be more successfully navigated (within but also beyond the selected cases) by applying the set of proposed agri-food system principles. The principles are also presented as ways future interventions could avoid clinging to what is “known to work” and instead venture into more powerful pathways of change.</p></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><p>The following complexity-aware principle are proposed: Welcome surprises and openly discuss trade-offs; Shun orthodoxies; Engage with context-specificity; Expose patterns of power; Embrace the lengthy nature of change; Understand the multi-scale (in terms of space and time) nature of agri-food systems contexts. These principles could be used by project designers and implementors to cope with the complexity and uncertainty that will inevitably be encountered in agri-food system interventions, and can no longer be ignored.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"220 ","pages":"Article 104080"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X24002300/pdfft?md5=d207f3a5ece0b831407599a2b640cc02&pid=1-s2.0-S0308521X24002300-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complexity-aware principles for agri-food system interventions: Lessons from project encounters with complexity\",\"authors\":\"Costanza Conti , Andrew Hall , Alastair Orr , Caroline Hambloch , Kai Mausch\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104080\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><p>Complexity has long been recognised as a key feature of agri-food systems. Yet, it remains largely theoretical or poorly addressed in practice, hampering the potential of international development projects to address agriculture and food-related challenges in the Global South.</p></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><p>The paper identifies and examines six sources of complexity that can manifest in projects, namely: unpredictability; path dependencies; context-specific dynamics; power relations; multiple temporal and spatial scales. It then proposes and tests six agri-food system principles that could be drawn upon to more successfully navigate this complexity. The aim of the paper is to illustrate how these principles could help projects respond to the changing circumstances and unpredictable turns of agri-food systems contexts in a different way, which flexibly embraces complexity. This flexibility is essential in an age of uncertainty and transformation.</p></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><p>Comparative case study analysis of six projects implemented by the CGIAR: aflatoxin control in groundnuts in Malawi (1), pigeonpea in Eastern and Southern Africa (2), sorghum beer in Kenya (3), sweet sorghum for biofuel in India (4), precooked beans in Uganda and Kenya (5), Smart Foods in India and Eastern Africa (6). The projects aimed to either increasing smallholder farmers' incomes or addressing food and nutrition security, or both. They were specifically selected as all they were affected by some of the sources of complexity, which hampered the projects to different extents. This makes the cases relevant for not only illustrating manifestations of complexity, but also help reflect on alternative strategies to tackle it.</p></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSION</h3><p>The analysis of the case studies reveals how complexity can frustrate objectives of development interventions under several aspects. It also serves to discuss how complexity can be more successfully navigated (within but also beyond the selected cases) by applying the set of proposed agri-food system principles. The principles are also presented as ways future interventions could avoid clinging to what is “known to work” and instead venture into more powerful pathways of change.</p></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><p>The following complexity-aware principle are proposed: Welcome surprises and openly discuss trade-offs; Shun orthodoxies; Engage with context-specificity; Expose patterns of power; Embrace the lengthy nature of change; Understand the multi-scale (in terms of space and time) nature of agri-food systems contexts. These principles could be used by project designers and implementors to cope with the complexity and uncertainty that will inevitably be encountered in agri-food system interventions, and can no longer be ignored.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Systems\",\"volume\":\"220 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104080\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X24002300/pdfft?md5=d207f3a5ece0b831407599a2b640cc02&pid=1-s2.0-S0308521X24002300-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X24002300\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Systems","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X24002300","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Complexity-aware principles for agri-food system interventions: Lessons from project encounters with complexity
CONTEXT
Complexity has long been recognised as a key feature of agri-food systems. Yet, it remains largely theoretical or poorly addressed in practice, hampering the potential of international development projects to address agriculture and food-related challenges in the Global South.
OBJECTIVE
The paper identifies and examines six sources of complexity that can manifest in projects, namely: unpredictability; path dependencies; context-specific dynamics; power relations; multiple temporal and spatial scales. It then proposes and tests six agri-food system principles that could be drawn upon to more successfully navigate this complexity. The aim of the paper is to illustrate how these principles could help projects respond to the changing circumstances and unpredictable turns of agri-food systems contexts in a different way, which flexibly embraces complexity. This flexibility is essential in an age of uncertainty and transformation.
METHODS
Comparative case study analysis of six projects implemented by the CGIAR: aflatoxin control in groundnuts in Malawi (1), pigeonpea in Eastern and Southern Africa (2), sorghum beer in Kenya (3), sweet sorghum for biofuel in India (4), precooked beans in Uganda and Kenya (5), Smart Foods in India and Eastern Africa (6). The projects aimed to either increasing smallholder farmers' incomes or addressing food and nutrition security, or both. They were specifically selected as all they were affected by some of the sources of complexity, which hampered the projects to different extents. This makes the cases relevant for not only illustrating manifestations of complexity, but also help reflect on alternative strategies to tackle it.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
The analysis of the case studies reveals how complexity can frustrate objectives of development interventions under several aspects. It also serves to discuss how complexity can be more successfully navigated (within but also beyond the selected cases) by applying the set of proposed agri-food system principles. The principles are also presented as ways future interventions could avoid clinging to what is “known to work” and instead venture into more powerful pathways of change.
SIGNIFICANCE
The following complexity-aware principle are proposed: Welcome surprises and openly discuss trade-offs; Shun orthodoxies; Engage with context-specificity; Expose patterns of power; Embrace the lengthy nature of change; Understand the multi-scale (in terms of space and time) nature of agri-food systems contexts. These principles could be used by project designers and implementors to cope with the complexity and uncertainty that will inevitably be encountered in agri-food system interventions, and can no longer be ignored.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural Systems is an international journal that deals with interactions - among the components of agricultural systems, among hierarchical levels of agricultural systems, between agricultural and other land use systems, and between agricultural systems and their natural, social and economic environments.
The scope includes the development and application of systems analysis methodologies in the following areas:
Systems approaches in the sustainable intensification of agriculture; pathways for sustainable intensification; crop-livestock integration; farm-level resource allocation; quantification of benefits and trade-offs at farm to landscape levels; integrative, participatory and dynamic modelling approaches for qualitative and quantitative assessments of agricultural systems and decision making;
The interactions between agricultural and non-agricultural landscapes; the multiple services of agricultural systems; food security and the environment;
Global change and adaptation science; transformational adaptations as driven by changes in climate, policy, values and attitudes influencing the design of farming systems;
Development and application of farming systems design tools and methods for impact, scenario and case study analysis; managing the complexities of dynamic agricultural systems; innovation systems and multi stakeholder arrangements that support or promote change and (or) inform policy decisions.