Integrated Assessment of the Sustainability and Resilience of Farming Systems

Increased global agricultural output since the 1990s has been largely driven by innovations that raised the efficiency of use of labour, land, capital and other inputs—referred to as total factor productivity (TFP) growth. Yet debates over the future of farming still weigh heavily on models of agricultural land use and socioecological trade-offs along traditional (partial factor productivity) growth paths of ‘intensification’ or ‘extensification’. Overlooking the role of TFP in the evolution of global agriculture not only obscures the changing drivers of productivity growth but also misses vital linkages with agricultural sustainability and farming system resilience. We describe two pathways for growth—technology-based and ecosystem-based—and link these in a heuristic framework that emphasizes sustainability and resilience outcomes in farming systems. Interdisciplinary research is urgently needed to empirically examine the dynamic interplay of TFP growth, farming system sustainability and resilience. Such insights will help to transform TFP growth as metric into actionable efforts on farms and beyond. Since the 1990s, global agricultural output has been driven largely by innovations that raised the efficiency of using labour, land and other inputs, together called total factor productivity (TFP). This Perspective discusses this reality and suggests two pathways for future growth: technology-based and ecosystem-based. Future research on farm-system sustainability and resilience should leverage these options.

Finding pathways to more sustainability and resilience of farming systems requires the avoidance of exceeding critical thresholds and the timely identification of viable alternative system configurations. To serve this purpose, the objective of this paper is to present a participatory, integrated and indicator-based methodology that leads researchers and farming system actors in six steps to a multi-dimensional understanding of sustainability and resilience of farming systems in the future. The methodology includes an assessment of current performance (Step 1), identification of critical thresholds whose exceedance can lead to large and permanent system change (Step 2), impact assessment when critical thresholds are exceeded (Step 3), identification of desired alternative systems and their expected improved performance of sustainability and resilience (Step 4), identification of strategies to realize those alternative systems (Step 5), and an assessment on the compatibility of alternative systems with the developments of exogenous factors as projected in different future scenarios (Step 6). The method is applied in 11 EU farming systems, and the application to extensive sheep production in Huesca, Spain, is presented here, as its problematic situation provides insights for other farming systems. Participants in the participatory workshop indicated that their farming system is very close to a decline or even a collapse. Approaching and exceeding critical thresholds in the social, economic and environmental domain are currently causing a vicious circle that includes low economic returns, low attractiveness of the farming system and abandonment of pasture lands. More sustainable and resilient alternative systems to counteract the current negative system dynamics were proposed by participants: a semi-intensive system primarily aimed at improving production and a high-tech extensive system primarily aimed at providing public goods. Both alternatives place a strong emphasis on the role of technology, but differ in their approach towards grazing, which is reflected in the different strategies that are foreseen to realize those alternatives. Although the high-tech extensive system seems most compatible with a future in which sustainable food production is very important, the semi-intensive system seems a less risky bet as it has on average the best compatibility with multiple future scenarios. Overall, the methodology can be regarded as relatively quick, interactive and interdisciplinary, providing ample information on critical thresholds, current system dynamics and future possibilities. As such, the method enables stakeholders to think and talk about the future of their system, paving the way for improved sustainability and resilience.

Although Indonesia has recorded good performance in its national economic development, especially in the agriculture sector during the Covid-19 pandemic, the impact of the pandemic on farming and food systems has not been evaluated yet. This study has evaluated the resilience of the two dominant existing farming systems in West Timor, i.e. (i) wetland farming system and (ii) dryland farming system. This research aims to understand the resilience of farming after the Covid-19 pandemic and to develop strategic policies that could be adopted to increase the resilience of the farming system in West Timor. A quantitative analysis using the Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was employed to evaluate the relationship and impact of the following seven generic aspects: labour movement, sustainability, economy, socio- culture, output markets, input markets, farming system resilience, and 27 reflective indicators. The analysis shows that dryland farming systems are more resilient than wetland farming systems. It might be understood from the size of the regression coefficient, as the impact of exogenous construct variables of the environment, socioculture, input, and output on the resilience of dryland farming systems is more significant than on wetlands. Economic performance rather than labour movement factors will create better resilience of farming systems for wetland or dryland after the Covid-19 pandemic. Finally, the economic recovery process and the ongoing input supply mechanism after the Covid-19 pandemic have increased the resilience of the dryland food system more than the resilience of the wetland farming system.

For improving the sustainability and resilience of EU farming systems, it is important to assess their likely responses to future challenges under future scenarios. In the SURE-Farm project, a five-steps framework was developed to assess the resilience of farming systems. The steps are the following: 1) characterizing the farming system (resilience of what?), 2) identifying the challenges (resilience to what?), 3) identifying the desired functions (resilience for which purpose?), 4) assessing resilience capacities, and 5) assessing resilience attributes. For assessing the resilience of future farming systems, we took the same approach as for current farming systems, with the addition that future challenges were placed in the context of a set of possible future scenarios, (i.e., Eur-Agri-SSP scenarios). We evaluated future resilience in 11 case studies across the EU, using a soft coupling of different qualitative and quantitative approaches. The qualitative approach was FoPIA-SUREFarm 2, a participatory approach in which stakeholders identified critical thresholds for current systems, evaluated expected system performance when these thresholds would be exceeded, envisaged alternative future states of the systems (and their impact on indicators and resilience attributes), as well as strategies to get there. Quantitative approaches included models simulating the behavior of the systems under some specific challenges and scenarios. The models differed in assumptions and aspects of the farming systems described: Ecosystem Service modelling focused on the biophysical level (considering land cover and nitrogen fluxes), AgriPoliS considered, with an agent-based approach, socio-economic processes and interactions within the farming system, and System Dynamics, taking a holistic approach, explored some of the feedback loops mechanisms influencing the systems resilience from both a qualitative and quantitative approach. Each method highlighted different aspects of the farming systems. For each case study, results coming from different methods were discussed and compared. The FoPIA-SURE-Farm 2 assessment highlighted that most farming systems are close to critical thresholds, primarily for system challenges, but also for system indicators and resilience attributes. System indicators related to food production and economic viability were often considered to be close to critical thresholds. The alternative systems proposed by stakeholders are mostly adaptations of the current system and not transformations. In most case studies, both the current and alternative systems are moderately compatible with 'Eur-Agri-SSP1 – Agriculture on sustainable paths’, but little with other Eur-Agri-SSPs’. From the point of view of ecosystem services and nitrogen fluxes, the more resilient case studies are those able to provide multiple services at the same time (e.g., hazelnut cultivations in Italy and vegetable and fruit cultivation in Poland, able to provide good levels of both food production and carbon storage) and those well connected with other neighbouring farming systems (e.g., the Dutch case study receiving manure by the livestock sectors). The System Dynamic simulation (applied quantitatively for the Dutch and French case study) highlighted the need to develop resources that can increase farmers’ flexibility (e.g., access to cheap credit, local research and development, and local market). It also showed that innovation, networks, and cooperation contribute to building resilience against economic disturbances while highlighting the challenges for building resilience to environmental threats. From the application of AgriPoliS to the German case study it was concluded that changes in direct payment schemes not only affect the farm size structure, but also the functions of the farming system itself and therefore its resilience. The report showed complementarity between different methods and, above all, between quantitative and qualitative approaches. Qualitative approaches are needed for interaction with stakeholders, understand perceptions of stakeholders, consider available knowledge on all aspects of the farming system, including social dimensions, and perform a good basis for developing and parameterizing quantitative models. Quantitative methods allow quantifying the consequences of mental models, operationalizing the impact of stresses and strategies to tackle them and help to unveil unintended consequences, but are limited in their reach. Both are needed to assess resilience of farming systems and suggest strategies for improvement and to help stakeholders to wider their views regarding potential challenges and ways to tackle them.

This Special Issue showcases findings from the SURE-Farm research project which aims to assess the resilience and sustainability of farming systems in Europe. The call for greater resilience responds to the accumulating economic, environmental, institutional and social challenges facing Europe's agriculture. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, the need for enhanced re-silience has become an overarching guiding principle of EU policymaking. But what exactly is resilience and how can it be enhanced? How can farming systems prepare for different and often simultaneous types of shocks and stresses, for unexpected and even unknown events? The articles in this Special Issue distinguish three resilience capacities: for some shocks and systems robustness (‘bouncing back’) is adequate, but other circumstances require adaptability and transformability (anticipation, quick learning and change). Putting these capacities central, each article addresses key questions such as: whether current capacities match the resilience needs; which characteristics of a system can enhance resilience; how an enabling environment affects resilience; whether current governance systems constrain resilience; and which actors can actually influence and build resilience capacities. Promisingly, the contributions identify various pathways to enhance resilience. However, many of our suggestions require substantial change compared to current practices and policies. Meuwissen et al. conclude that resilience strategies tend to focus on the farm level, while farming systems include many other actors that also need to actively engage. Reidsma et al. find that resilience strategies in the past were often geared too much towards increasing the profitability of farming systems, and tended to neglect the coupling of agricultural production with local institutions, natural resources, and a facilitating infrastructure for innovation. Spiegel et al. demonstrate the importance of learning as part of resilience-enhancing strategies. Several articles derive specific recommendations to change public policies towards resilience – probably resonating with farmers’ perception that current policies are inadequate (Nicolas-Davies et al.). Buitenhuis et al. recommend policies that could contribute to a better balance between support for robustness, adaptability and transformability of Europe's farming systems. In the ‘Point de Vue’ article Mathijs and Wauters argue similarly that public policies play key roles in determining the resilience of farming systems and should invest more in foresight and resilience structures. Current policies towards addressing the ‘young farmer problem’ are considered to be inadequate. Coopmans et al. propose that more attention is devoted to the stages preceding farm take-over, during which possible entrants develop a ‘successor identity’. On a similar theme, Pitson et al. call for greater focus on increasing the human capital base of the agricultural sector through training, trans-sectoral and trans-regional mobility – including the provision of adequate infrastructure in rural areas to attract a young skilled labour force. The importance of attracting ‘young potential’ is visualised by Slijper in the Parlons Graphiques which illustrates the predominance of negative net migration rates from rural areas in Europe. Vroege et al. stress that the policy environment should more fully enable agricultural insurance innovations to underpin risk management in a rapidly changing global environment. If all of the above issues are capable of being addressed, can resilience of agricultural systems really be enhanced? Or will the prevailing governance systems facilitate unsustainable exploitation of socio-economic and ecological systems that fundamentally undermine their resilience? There are reasons for optimism. Firstly, our research found much spirit for change – and calls for more long-term vision and courage (see for example ‘frequent question’ Q4, Meuwissen et al.). Secondly, the systematic analysis of the multiple components contributing to resilience has enabled us to develop a better understanding of processes of change in agri-food systems, the need to develop greater resilience in Europe's farming systems and the priority areas to be addressed. We record our thanks for the comments of external reviewers of all articles in this Special Issue and to the editorial team for their expert guidance and recommendations. We wish you an inspiring read. The ‘Science talks’ video about this special issue is available at: www.wur.nl/en/project/Resilient-Farming-Systems.html. “Resilience is more than robustness; learning and change are essential.” “La résilience est davantage que la robustesse; l'apprentissage et le changement sont essentiels.” “Resilienz bedeutet mehr als nur Stabilität, denn Lernen und Veränderung sind in diesem Zusammenhang von wesentlicher Bedeutung.” This research was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. The content of this issue does not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for the information and views expressed herein lies entirely with the authors. Miranda Meuwissen Peter H. Feindt

According to stakeholders, many European farming systems are close to critical thresholds regarding the challenges they face (e.g., droughts, price declines), functions they deliver (e.g., economic viability, biodiversity and habitat) and attributes required for resilience (e.g., social self-organization). To accelerate a transition process towards sustainable and resilient agriculture, this study aimed to identify actor-supported alternative systems across 10 European farming systems, and to identify associated future strategies that contribute to strengthening resilience attributes, using a backcasting approach. This paper synthesizes 1) the participatory identification of desired alternative systems and their expected performance on sustainability and resilience, 2) the participatory identification of strategies to realize those alternative systems, 3) the contribution of identified past and future strategies to 22 resilience attributes, and 4) the compatibility of the status quo and alternative systems with different future scenarios, the Eur-Agri-SSPs. Many identified alternative systems emphasized technology, diversification and organic and/or nature friendly farming, while in some farming systems also a focus on intensification, specialization, better product valorization, collaboration, or creating an attractive countryside could increase sustainability and resilience. Low economic viability limited farming system actors to pay attention to environmental and social functions. Further, most alternative systems were adaptations rather than transformations. Many stakeholders had difficulty to envisage systems without the main products (e.g., starch potato in NL-Arable, sheep in ES-Sheep and hazelnut in IT-Hazelnut), but in few cases transformative systems were designed (e.g. local organic farming in PL-Horticulture and RO-Mixed). Sustainability and resilience can be enhanced when alternative systems and strategies are combined, thereby improving multiple functions and attributes at once. In particular, production and legislation need to be coupled to local and natural capital. Identified alternative systems seem only compatible with Eur-Agri-SSP1 ‘agriculture on sustainable paths’. This requires policies at EU-level that stimulate macro-level social, institutional, economic, and technological developments that strengthen this scenario. We conclude that to get stakeholders along, incremental adaptation rather than radical transformation should be sought. The identification of alternative systems is only a start for the transition process. Their analysis, along with the strategies identified, need to trigger the involvement of farmers and other ‘enabling actors’ inside and outside the farming systems to make a change, and where needed, systems can evolve into more transformative systems.

Changes in temperature and extreme weather caused by the climate crisis have the potential to damage agricultural systems, threaten food security, and reduce agricultural productivity. This study aims to evaluate the integrated paddy-cattle farming system's resilience and capability to improve sustainability in the face of persistent difficulties. The research used a literature review approach with the aim of collecting, analyzing, and synthesizing previous research results relevant to the research topic. These sources will be drawn from reputable scientific databases, such as Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and JSTOR, which have peer-reviewed articles and journals. There has been no in-depth study of paddy-cattle resilience through literature review, which is the novelty of the article. The results of this review indicate that paddy-cattle integration systems can be an effective solution to the challenges of sustainable agriculture in the midst of climate change. However, to achieve sustainability, it requires supportive policies, training for farmers, and further research on the application of this system in various local conditions. This study provides insights for the development of more adaptive and sustainable farming systems, as well as optimizing synergies between crops and livestock in the face of climate change. This study has limitations in terms of the amount of literature that is not up-to-date and with a relatively small amount, therefore, future researchers related to the same topic should add more up-to-date and relevant literature citations.

SummaryOne of the aims of the post‐2020 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is to improve the resilience of Europe's farming systems. The CAP of the budget period 2014–2020, however, has insufficiently supported the resilience of farming systems. The ongoing CAP reform process offers an appropriate opportunity to integrate a broader perspective on resilience in the CAP. We therefore propose a set of policy recommendations on how to improve the capability of the CAP to support more fully the resilience (i.e. robustness, adaptability and transformability) of farming systems in the EU. The policy recommendations are based on a comparative analysis of six national co‐design workshops with stakeholders and a final EU‐level workshop with Brussels‐based experts. We concluded three key lessons about the CAP's influence on resilience: (1) resilience challenges, needs and policy effects are context‐specific; (2) resilience capacities are complementary, but trade‐offs between robustness, adaptability and transformability occur at the level of policies and due to budget competition; (3) there is a need for a coordinated long‐term vision for Europe's agriculture, which is difficult to achieve through the bargaining processes associated with a CAP reform. We propose specific policy recommendations that could contribute to a better balance between policies that support robustness, adaptability and transformability of Europe's farming systems.

Short supply chains are a new approach to agricultural marketing, responding to the challenges posed by globalization and the complexity of traditional supply chains, and changing the way agrarian producers market their products and interact with consumers. This article explores the impact of short-supply chains on agricultural marketing, and the study results show that short-supply chains offer multiple advantages, including increased transparency, reduced costs, and stronger relationships between producers and consumers. The research presents a case study to highlight the trends and potential of this model in agricultural marketing. The findings highlight the need for a wider integration of short supply chains in agrarian marketing strategies, but also for improving the sustainability and resilience of farming systems.

Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) is increasingly recognized as a vital approach for enhancing the sustainability, productivity and resilience of farming systems under changing climatic conditions. CSA encompasses a wide range of climate-smart agricultural technologies such as use of precise farming tools water-saving irrigation methods, cultivation of drought-tolerant crop varieties, integrated nutrient management, conservation tillage, agroforestry practices and renewable energy-based farm operations. These technologies are specifically designed to mitigate the adverse impacts of climate change while ensuring improved resource efficiency and long-term food security. This study investigates the attitudes of farmers toward CSA technologies in Tamil Nadu, a region where agricultural livelihoods are highly vulnerable to erratic rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts and rising temperatures. The research was carried out in five purposively selected districts representing diverse agro-climatic zones and technology adoption environments. A structured attitude scale comprising 32 statements related to the perceived benefits, applicability, risks and constraints of CSA technologies was developed and validated using Edward’s criteria. The final scale was administered to a sample of 300 farmers using a five-point Likert format. The results revealed that 28 % of respondents expressed a highly favourable attitude toward CSA Technologies, 57 % respondents showed a favourable attitude and 14 % showed an unfavourable attitude. The favourable responses of the majority of farmers for CSA Technologies demonstrated its role in enhancing crop productivity, improving soil health, increasing water-use efficiency, reducing input costs in the long term and minimizing vulnerability to climate-induced risks. Conversely, unfavourable attitudes were largely influenced by challenges such as high initial investment requirements, technical complexity, inadequate access to credit, limited availability of technologies and insufficient institutional support. These findings underline the critical importance of strengthening awareness programs, providing need-based farmer training, developing cost-effective CSA Technologies packages and improving extension services for effective dissemination of climate-resilient technologies. Understanding farmer’s attitudes toward CSA technologies is essential for formulating targeted outreach strategies, policy interventions and capacity-building initiatives aimed at scaling up the adoption of climate-smart agricultural technologies in Tamil Nadu.

Agricultural innovation is an essential component in the transition to more sustainable and resilient farming systems across the world. Innovations generally emerge from collective intelligence and action, but innovation systems are often poorly understood. This study explores the properties of innovation systems and their contribution to increased eco-efficiency in agriculture. Using aggregate data and econometric methods, the eco-efficiency of 79 countries was computed and a range of factors relating to research, extension, business and policy was examined. Despite data limitations, the analysis produced significant results. Extension plays an important role in improving the eco-efficiency of agriculture, while agricultural research, under current conditions, has a positive effect on eco-efficiency only in the case of less developed economies. These and other results suggest the importance of context-specific interventions rather than a “one size fits all” approach. Overall, the analysis illustrated the potential of a macro-level diagnostic approach for assessing the role of innovation systems for sustainability in agriculture.

Agricultural innovation is an essential component in the transition to more sustainable and resilient farming systems across the world. Innovations generally emerge from collective intelligence and action, but innovation systems are often poorly understood. This study explores the properties of innovation systems and their contribution to increased eco-efficiency in agriculture. Using aggregate data and econometric methods, the eco-efficiency of 79 countries was computed and a range of factors relating to research, extension, business and policy was examined. Despite data limitations, the analysis produced some interesting insights. For instance public research spending has a positive significant effect for emerging economies, while no statistically significant effect was found for foreign aid for research. However, foreign aid for extension is important in less developed economies. These and other results suggest the importance of context-specific interventions rather than a “one size fits all” approach. Overall, the analysis illustrated the potential of a macro-level diagnostic approach for assessing the role of innovation systems for sustainability in agriculture.

The Mediterranean region is expected to be a hotspot for climate change, making the resilience of farming systems a major challenge. Some studies have used quantitative models at the farm scale to analyze the resilience of farming systems but with little involvement of stakeholders. We used a participatory approach with local actors on the Sais plain of Morocco to design possible future states and qualitatively assess the resilience of typical farm types (FTs) experiencing major change. Our approach combined individual interviews of farmers and local actors, mainly public, with participatory collective meetings to identify representative FTs and their performance, project their evolutions and future performance in the face of change, and evaluate their resilience. Performance, defined according to literature, interviews and meetings, included different types of capital, income, yields, markets, support of public policies, and water access. Four FTs were considered: highly irrigated horticulture (FT1), rainfed cereals (FT2), partly irrigated cereal-legumes (FT3), and mostly irrigated fruit-tree/horticulture (FT4). The primary driver for FT2 and FT3 was climate change; for FT1 and FT4, it was limiting access to water resources. Participants designed more diversified systems for all FTs in relation to those changes. Rankings of FT performance did not change between current and future states. Performance did not evolve significantly, but FT4 was seen as the most resilient and FT2 the least. These qualitative results differ somewhat from other studies mobilizing quantitative approaches, but they highlight the potential of local adaptation to limit the impacts of global change on vulnerable agriculture.

State support for financial risk management schemes has been introduced in numerous agricultural policies to enhance farming system resilience in response to increased income fluctuations and partially reduced producer support levels in the agricultural sector. In order to better understand how financialisation of risks can contribute to an actual improvement of specific farming systems’ resilience, this study investigates its effects with regards to dairy farming. Based on an in-depth case study of a dairy system in Northwest Germany, multilayered challenges faced by the farm system are identified, resilience strategies investigated and the role of financial risk management evaluated. In doing so, the resilience assessment framework developed by Meuwissen et al. (2019) is applied in order to analyse the systems’ capacity to resist, adapt or transform in response to external challenges threatening the provision of system’ functions. The results indicate a high relevance of insurances and savings with regards to the system’s robustness against short-term shocks. However, to address the various long-term pressures, resilience-enhancing attributes that increase the system’s capacity to adapt and transform would need to be strengthened. In particular, more cooperation and knowledge transfer beyond system boundaries could contribute to a holistic risk management allowing for improved farming system resilience.

Agriculture, which is critical to global livelihoods, is undergoing a significant transformation due to the incorporation of modern technologies, most notably the Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence (AI). This study investigates the critical role of IoT in enabling real-time data collection through networked devices equipped with sensors and actuators. With these instruments, key environmental elements such as soil moisture, temperature, and crop health may be monitored precisely. In contrast, AI improves agriculture by allowing for intelligent decision-making via data analytics, predictive modeling, and automation. This study comprehensively investigates how IoT and AI influence precision agriculture, with the goal of optimizing all aspects of farming to increase output while decreasing resource inputs. Efficiency case studies show tangible benefits for farmers, such as greater yields and more efficient resource management. However, challenges such as initial installation costs, concerns about data security, and the need for increased education and training are recognized. Furthermore, the study examines future improvements, predicting the ongoing evolution of IoT and AI technologies and their seamless integration into agricultural practices. To summarize, this study highlights the revolutionary potential of combining IoT and AI in agriculture, underlining the importance of widespread adoption in maintaining sustainable and resilient farming systems, particularly in light of rising global food demand