有机农业和传统农业管理方式在破坏性外部影响方面的比较。荷兰有机奶牛养殖与传统园艺的案例

M. Blom-Zandstra, B. Gremmen, Reginald Boersma, Douwe de Goede, P. Haperen
{"title":"有机农业和传统农业管理方式在破坏性外部影响方面的比较。荷兰有机奶牛养殖与传统园艺的案例","authors":"M. Blom-Zandstra, B. Gremmen, Reginald Boersma, Douwe de Goede, P. Haperen","doi":"10.1080/10440046.2012.695327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conventional Dutch farming systems are constantly improving their technology to withstand disruptive external influences, while organic farming tends to focus on methods that stress conservation of natural and nonrenewable resources. We hypothesize that management styles to withstand disruptive external influences clearly differ in both systems. Conventional farming aims to protect crops and livestock with hands-on solutions, whereas organic farming aims at reducing the consequences of disruptions. To study these two extremes, we compared a conventional horticultural system with an organic dairy system and interviewed the entrepreneurs about their decision-making strategies, dilemmas, and tradeoffs when dealing with undesirable events. To our surprise, all entrepreneurs used a similar set of interventions aimed at maximizing income and minimizing costs. We also discovered that all entrepreneurs tended to aim at both homogeneity and heterogeneity dependent on the level: all aimed for a uniform output of their whole system, while utilizing the genetically defined diversity between individual plants or animals. Based on previous experiences, farmers rely on natural compensation for losses within their system: heterogeneity within their system provides flexibility to accept uncertainty within a certain range. Therefore, we conclude that the societal discrimination between management styles does not represent well-defined differences between conventional and organic farming.","PeriodicalId":50032,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sustainable Agriculture","volume":"36 1","pages":"893 - 907"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10440046.2012.695327","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Management Styles in Organic and Conventional Farming with Respect to Disruptive External Influences. The Case of Organic Dairy Farming and Conventional Horticulture in the Netherlands\",\"authors\":\"M. Blom-Zandstra, B. Gremmen, Reginald Boersma, Douwe de Goede, P. Haperen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10440046.2012.695327\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Conventional Dutch farming systems are constantly improving their technology to withstand disruptive external influences, while organic farming tends to focus on methods that stress conservation of natural and nonrenewable resources. We hypothesize that management styles to withstand disruptive external influences clearly differ in both systems. Conventional farming aims to protect crops and livestock with hands-on solutions, whereas organic farming aims at reducing the consequences of disruptions. To study these two extremes, we compared a conventional horticultural system with an organic dairy system and interviewed the entrepreneurs about their decision-making strategies, dilemmas, and tradeoffs when dealing with undesirable events. To our surprise, all entrepreneurs used a similar set of interventions aimed at maximizing income and minimizing costs. We also discovered that all entrepreneurs tended to aim at both homogeneity and heterogeneity dependent on the level: all aimed for a uniform output of their whole system, while utilizing the genetically defined diversity between individual plants or animals. Based on previous experiences, farmers rely on natural compensation for losses within their system: heterogeneity within their system provides flexibility to accept uncertainty within a certain range. Therefore, we conclude that the societal discrimination between management styles does not represent well-defined differences between conventional and organic farming.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50032,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sustainable Agriculture\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"893 - 907\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10440046.2012.695327\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sustainable Agriculture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2012.695327\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sustainable Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2012.695327","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

传统的荷兰农业系统不断改进其技术,以抵御破坏性的外部影响,而有机农业往往侧重于强调保护自然和不可再生资源的方法。我们假设,在两个系统中,抵御破坏性外部影响的管理风格明显不同。传统农业的目标是通过实际操作来保护农作物和牲畜,而有机农业的目标是减少干扰的后果。为了研究这两个极端,我们将传统园艺系统与有机乳制品系统进行了比较,并采访了企业家,了解他们在处理不良事件时的决策策略、困境和权衡。令我们惊讶的是,所有的企业家都使用了一套类似的干预措施,旨在实现收入最大化和成本最小化。我们还发现,所有的企业家都倾向于同时瞄准同质性和异质性,这取决于水平:所有的目标都是他们的整个系统的统一产出,同时利用遗传定义的单个植物或动物之间的多样性。根据以往的经验,农民依靠自然补偿其系统内的损失:其系统内的异质性提供了在一定范围内接受不确定性的灵活性。因此,我们得出结论,管理方式之间的社会歧视并不代表传统农业和有机农业之间明确的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Management Styles in Organic and Conventional Farming with Respect to Disruptive External Influences. The Case of Organic Dairy Farming and Conventional Horticulture in the Netherlands
Conventional Dutch farming systems are constantly improving their technology to withstand disruptive external influences, while organic farming tends to focus on methods that stress conservation of natural and nonrenewable resources. We hypothesize that management styles to withstand disruptive external influences clearly differ in both systems. Conventional farming aims to protect crops and livestock with hands-on solutions, whereas organic farming aims at reducing the consequences of disruptions. To study these two extremes, we compared a conventional horticultural system with an organic dairy system and interviewed the entrepreneurs about their decision-making strategies, dilemmas, and tradeoffs when dealing with undesirable events. To our surprise, all entrepreneurs used a similar set of interventions aimed at maximizing income and minimizing costs. We also discovered that all entrepreneurs tended to aim at both homogeneity and heterogeneity dependent on the level: all aimed for a uniform output of their whole system, while utilizing the genetically defined diversity between individual plants or animals. Based on previous experiences, farmers rely on natural compensation for losses within their system: heterogeneity within their system provides flexibility to accept uncertainty within a certain range. Therefore, we conclude that the societal discrimination between management styles does not represent well-defined differences between conventional and organic farming.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Sustainable Agriculture
Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 农林科学-农业综合
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
9 months
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信