Idan Shapira

Socio-ecological research and the transition toward sustainable agriculture

It is well-established that modern agricultural practices contribute to the deterioration of the environment and negatively impact human health (Reganold & Wachter, 2016; Rockström et al., 2017). Studies have therefore aimed at strengthening both the scientific base for, as well as promoting, practical alternatives that will reduce the environmental impact of conventional agricultural practices (Godfray et al., 2010). In this commentary, we draw attention to the benefits of a transdisciplinary, socioecological research framework for studying the challenges associated to sustainable practices in agriculture. Such research has taken an integrative approach to environmental science, emphasizing components in both biological and social spheres, as well as their interconnectedness (Collins et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2007). More specifically, agro-ecology advocates synergies between three distinct systems: the environment, food production and the socio-economic context. Sustainable intensification promotes the understanding that crop yields can be significantly increased without causing further environmental deterioration (Pretty, Toulmin, & Williams, 2011). For both of these approaches, primary means to achieving ‘sustainable agriculture’ include the integration of local, practical knowledge that deals with the needs and concerns of farmers in conjunction with iterative testing of the validity of ecological solutions to environmental challenges (Gliessman, 2014; Pretty & Bharucha, 2014). It has already been demonstrated, however, that major hindrances to the uptake of more sustainable agricultural practices by farmers – such as the Integrated Pest Management (IPM) method – include farmers’ motivations, knowledge, attitudes and risk perceptions (e.g. Meijer, Catacutan, Ajayi, Sileshi, & Nieuwenhuis, 2015). On the one hand, farmers are reluctant to make a transition because of (perceived or real) increased economic risk, including the cost of materials and equipment, the uncertainty of profitability and potential reduction in yields (Grover & Gruver, 2017; Rodriguez, Molnar, Fazio, Sydnor, & Lowe, 2009). Furthermore, scientists, and especially conservation ecologists, are often unsuccessful in expressing their research results in ways that are meaningful to their target-groups (Groffman et al., 2010). Our suggestion here, therefore, is that interdisciplinary, socio-ecological research can assist in overcoming such uncertainties and risk perceptions, and thus contribute to a transition toward more sustainable agriculture. Our brief reflection here is based on our ongoing study of the interrelations between biodiversity and a transition toward sustainable practices in wine-grape growing (Shapira et al., 2017). Viticulture offers greater incentives, but also unique challenges, for sustainable agriculture compared with other food-producing agricultural activities, because wine is considered a luxury good. In addition, vineyard growers are often subjected to industrial wineries’ requirements. Wineries are usually equipped with business plans and branding ambitions, permitting the farmers little independence in their choice of growing practices. In our case, a winery interested in rebranding their product as environmentally sustainable turned to a team of ecologists to suggest and examine strategies for increasing biodiversity in vineyards. The farmers in the study were asked by their winery’s agronomist not to use herbicides between rows in one of their vineyards and instead let the local herbaceous vegetation