scieee Science in your language
[en] (orig)

The Sustainability of agriculture in a northern industrialized country : from controlling nature to rural development

Abstract

The concept of sustainability has been a part of theory and practice in agriculture for a long time, but the diverse roots of the concept have led to a number of different definitions of sustainable agriculture. This paper provides an overview of the policy development of sustainable agriculture in Finland by examining internal and external discourses of sustainability and the evolution in different dimensions of sustainability. We show that the debate on sustainability within European Union s Common Agricultural Policy and Finnish agri-environmental policy are reflected in attempts to implement and monitor sustainability in agriculture in Finland. However, indicators suggest a largely non-sustainable condition. This has contributed to a shift in policy objectives from sustainable agriculture to sustainable rural development, especially in the EU context. As there are commonly trade-offs between the economic, ecological and social dimensions of sustainable development, future developments in sustainable agriculture will inevitably be characterized by continuous redefinitions of problems, paradigm revisions and reassessments of actions already taken.

Read accessible full text

The Sustainability of agriculture in a northern industrialized country : from controlling nature to rural development

Author: Hildén, Mikael,Jokinen, Pekka,Aakkula, Jyrki
Publisher: ch
Year: 2013
Source: https://jukuri.luke.fi/bitstream/10024/480642/1/Hilden.pdf
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4, 3387-3403; doi:10.3390/su4123387
sus ainabili y
ISSN 2071-1050
www.mdpi.com/jou nal/sus ainabili y
A icle
The Sus ainabili y o Ag icul u e in a No he n Indus ialized
Coun y—F om Con olling Na u e o Ru al De elopmen
Mikael Hildén 1, Pekka Jokinen 2,* and Jy ki Aakkula 3
1 Finnish En i onmen Ins i u e, P.O. Box 140, Helsinki FIN-00251, Finland;
E-Mail: mikael.hilden@ympa is o. i
2 Uni e si y o Eas e n Finland, P.O. Box 111, Joensuu FIN-80101, Finland
3 MTT Ag i ood Resea ch Finland, Jokioinen FIN-31600, Finland; E-Mail: [email p o ec ed]
* Au ho o whom co espondence should be add essed; E-Mail: [email p o ec ed];
Tel.: +358-50-593-0272.
Recei ed: 15 Oc obe 2012; in e ised o m: 8 Decembe 2012 / Accep ed: 14 Decembe 2012 /
Published: 18 Decembe 2012
Abs ac : The concep o sus ainabili y has been a pa o heo y and p ac ice in
ag icul u e o a long ime, bu he di e se oo s o he concep ha e led o a numbe o
di e en de ini ions o sus ainable ag icul u e. This pape p o ides an o e iew o he
policy de elopmen o sus ainable ag icul u e in Finland by examining in e nal and
ex e nal discou ses o sus ainabili y and he e olu ion in di e en dimensions o
sus ainabili y. We show ha he deba e on sus ainabili y wi hin Eu opean Union’s
Common Ag icul u al Policy and Finnish ag i-en i onmen al policy a e e lec ed in
a emp s o implemen and moni o sus ainabili y in ag icul u e in Finland. Howe e ,
indica o s sugges a la gely non-sus ainable condi ion. This has con ibu ed o a shi in
policy objec i es om sus ainable ag icul u e o sus ainable u al de elopmen , especially
in he EU con ex . As he e a e commonly ade-o s be ween he economic, ecological and
social dimensions o sus ainable de elopmen , u u e de elopmen s in sus ainable
ag icul u e will ine i ably be cha ac e ized by con inuous ede ini ions o p oblems,
pa adigm e isions and eassessmen s o ac ions al eady aken.
Keywo ds: sus ainable ag icul u e; u al de elopmen ; ag i-en i onmen al policy; Finnish
ag icul u e; EU ag icul u al policy
OPEN ACCESS
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3388
1. In oduc ion
The concep o sus ainabili y is no new o a ming p ac ice, ag icul u al science, o e en o
ag icul u al policy [1]. Many ag icul u al p ac ices can be seen as ways o sus aining he p oduc i i y
o a able land. The scien i ic deba e conce ning ag icul u al sus ainabili y has adi ionally been
ag o-ecologically o ien ed, al hough since he publica ion o he “B und land Repo ”, economic and
social aspec s o ag icul u al sus ainabili y ha e gained inc easing a en ion [2–4]. As he concep o
sus ainabili y mo e ecen ly pene a ed in o policy-making a enas a all le els, he dominance o
ecological sus ainabili y issues has somewha diminished [5].
The di e se oo s o he concep s o sus ainabili y ha e led o a numbe o di e en de ini ions o
sus ainable ag icul u e. One o he mos comp ehensi e and widely accep ed de ini ions has been
gi en by he US Depa men o Ag icul u e. The 1990 Fa m Bill de ined sus ainable ag icul u e as an
in eg a ed sys em o plan and animal p oduc ion p ac ices ha ing a si e-speci ic applica ion ha will,
o e he long- e m, (1) sa is y human ood and ibe needs, (2) enhance en i onmen al quali y and he
na u al esou ce base upon which he ag icul u e economy depends, (3) make he mos e icien use o
non- enewable esou ces and on- a m esou ces and in eg a e, whe e app op ia e, na u al biological
cycles and con ols, (4) sus ain he economic iabili y o a m ope a ions, and (5) enhance he quali y
o li e o a me s and socie y as a whole [6].
The a emp s o apply he concep o sus ainable ag icul u e in p ac ice b ing in o play di e en
ac o s esponsible o he planning and implemen a ion o ag icul u al policies. Co e challenges
comp ise sec o al in eg a ion o policies, changes in ins i u ions, he ange o policy ins umen s and
ools, and he ole o ci il socie y [7]. The in eg a ion o economy and he en i onmen in
decision-making may e en be seen as he mos impo an ea u e o he in e na ional en i onmen al
go e nance build up a ound he idea o sus ainabili y [8], (c. ., [9]).
A majo challenge is o ind wo king p ac ical in e p e a ions o he de ini ions o sus ainable
ag icul u e. Thei ex ensi e scope and he mul idimensionali y o policy p ocesses endo sing
sus ainabili y c ea e di icul ies o p ac ical decision-making [10] and sys ems and c i e ia o
moni o ing p og ess owa ds sus ainabili y. S ic in e p e a ions and c i e ia could dismiss nea ly all
o ms o ag icul u e as non-sus ainable. Weake in e p e a ions open up a a ie y o ade-o s,
poli icking and no ma i e con lic s.
The pu pose o his pape is o examine he eme gence and e olu ion o he sus ainabili y discou se
in Finnish ag icul u al policy. Finland is an in e es ing case o no he n indus ialized coun ies:
Finnish ag icul u e has adi ionally been based on amily a m p ac ices and on ca ying ou bo h
ag icul u e and o es y ac i i ies, bu ag icul u al sus ainabili y is inc easingly pola ized be ween
la ge-scale indus ial ag icul u e and mul i unc ional and small-scaled a ming [11]. Thus, some
dimensions o sus ainabili y, such as he conce n o en i onmen al ex e nali ies, ha e ad anced,
whe eas o he dimensions, such as he economic iabili y o a m ope a ions, a e clea ly weak. The
ensions be ween di e en dimensions o sus ainabili y and he gene al e olu ion o he discou se on
sus ainabili y also e lec he implemen a ion o ag i-en i onmen al policy in he Eu opean Union.
Ou analy ical ame is based on con as ing wo di e en pa adigms o ag icul u e, which we call
“al e na i e” and “con en ional” ag icul u e, and hei in e ac ion. Then we ocus on he deba e on
sus ainabili y wi hin Eu opean Union’s common ag icul u al policy and Finnish ag i-en i onmen al
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3389
policy as well as on a emp s o implemen and moni o sus ainabili y in ag icul u e in Finland. The
pape concludes by looking a policy challenges aised by he sus ainabili y discussion in ag icul u e.
The pape is based on li e a u e and on he mos ele an empi ical esea ch a ailable on he case
o Finland.
2. Al e na i e and Con en ional Ag icul u e
Basically, i can be a gued ha all o ms o ag icul u e aim a sus ainable p oduc ion, bu iews as
o wha should be he basis o his sus ainabili y and how s ic ly i should be in e p e ed, a y g ea ly.
I is he e o e use ul o examine a se o cha ac e is ics wi hin he con as ing pa adigms. The
de ini ion o con en ional ag icul u e is deba able bu he e m usually e e s o he p e ailing o m o
ag icul u e p ac iced in indus ialized coun ies. I is conside ed capi al-in ensi e, la ge-scale and
highly mechanized, and i s ypical ea u es a e monocul u e, he ex ensi e use o chemical inpu s, and
in ensi e animal husband y (e.g., [12]). The many de ini ions o sus ainable ag icul u e allow plen y o
scope o a ious al e na i e ag icul u al me hods o p oduc ion o decla e ha hey each p omo e
sus ainabili y. Mos al e na i e o ms o ag icul u e ha e hei o igins in c i icisms o con en ional
ag icul u e and i s alleged ad e se ecological and social impac s.
I is no in he scope o his pape o de elop any comp ehensi e ypology co e ing he a ious
o ms o al e na i e ag icul u e ha emphasize sus ainabili y (e.g., [1,13]). We sugges , howe e , ha
i is use ul o iden i y h ee basic b anches o al e na i e ag icul u e. The i s b anch ep esen s he
al e na i e mains eam, is based on ideas which a e p edominan ly ag o-ecological by hei na u e.
This app oach ei he disclaims ag o-chemicals, o o ce ully es ic s hei use and ega ds
sus ainabili y as s ewa dship o he ag icul u al en i onmen and ecosys em. The cu en mains eam
o his ype o al e na i e ag icul u e is o ganic ag icul u e (some imes also called ecological o
biological ag icul u e). Also, na u al sys ems’ a ming and low inpu ag icul u e belong o he
i s b anch.
The second b anch emphasizes he impo ance o aking ca e o he ag icul u al en i onmen , bu i
also exp esses philosophical o e en me aphysical iewpoin s no commonly ag eed o accep ed. This
b anch is exempli ied by biodynamic a ming, na u e a ming, and pe macul u e.
The hi d b anch is no al e na i e in he adi ional sense, because i endo ses app oaches ha
u ilize sophis ica ed e sions o he same p oduc ion echniques applied in con en ional a ming. An
in eg a ed a ming sys em is a so echnology e sion de i ed om p ac ices p e ailing in
con en ional ag icul u e. “Ha d echnology” e sions in he o m o p ecision ag icul u e apply he
la es inno a ions om in o ma ion and elecommunica ion echnologies and au oma ion echnologies
o a m managemen , cul i a ion and animal husband y.
These b anches o al e na i e ag icul u e emphasize pa ly di e en dimensions o he o e all
sus ainabili y agenda. Ou compa ison be ween con en ional and al e na i e ag icul u e is ounded on
ideal ypes which e lec a sha p dis inc ion be ween an al e na i e and a con en ional mode o
p oduc ion (Table 1; based on [14–17]) by combining he di e en b anches o al e na i e ag icul u e.
This leads o in e p e a ions o he basic sus ainabili y dimensions ci ed abo e, i.e., (1) sa is ac ion o
human ood and ibe needs, (2) enhancemen o en i onmen al quali y and he na u al esou ce base
upon which he ag icul u e economy depends, (3) e icien use o non- enewable esou ces and
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3390
on- a m esou ces and in eg a ing, whe e app op ia e, na u al biological cycles and con ols, (4)
sus ained economic iabili y o a m ope a ions, and (5) enhancemen o he quali y o li e o a me s
and socie y as a whole.
The e a e ob iously many in e media e o ms and hyb id solu ions ha eme ge om he di e en
b anches o al e na i e ag icul u e. A de ailed discussion o ypologies o classi ica ion me hods o
p oduc ion modes is beyond he scope o his pape , bu i should be no ed ha hey p o ide a
con inuum o in e p e a ions o he di e en elemen s o sus ainabili y, including he dis inc ion
be ween weak and s ong in e p e a ions o sus ainabili y. Especially he “ha d echnology” b anch o
al e na i e ag icul u e ends o accep weak sus ainabili y, ega ding na u al and human-made capi al
as in e changeable o a ce ain ex en .
Table 1. The pa adigms o al e na i e and con en ional ag icul u e.
Elemen s o he
pa adigm Al e na i e ag icul u e Con en ional ag icul u e
Rela ionship o na u e Ha mony wi h na u e Con ol o e na u e
En i onmen al quali y
A holis ic pe cep ion o he en i onmen :
ag icul u al land as pa o a la ge
ecosys em
A na ow pe cep ion o he
en i onmen : ag icul u al land
managed sepa a ely om he
su ounding ecosys em
Resou ce base
An emphasis on he exis ing local
esou ce base; nu ien cycles and o ganic
ma e ial o m he basis o he
main enance o he esou ce base
The esou ce base can and should be
supplemen ed whene e necessa y and
economically a ional by ex e nal
inpu s
P o ision o ood and
ibe Majo conce n o basic human needs
Economic p o i abili y as e lec ed by
(possibly subsidized) ma ke p ices
should de e mine wha and how much
is p oduced
Economy o he a m A s eady s a e o mode a e “na u al”
g ow h
P o i -d i en g ow h a he same o
highe a e han in socie y a la ge
Li ing condi ions o
a me s
Fa ming as social and spi i ual
expe ience; he spi i ual expe ience as
impo an as he economic ewa ds o
p oduc ion
Fa me s as en ep eneu s able o
ensu e hei s anda d o li ing by
making su icien p o i om
p oduc ion
Rela ionship be ween
a me s
A communi y wi h sha ed alues and a
s ong sense o communi y and mu ual
assis ance
A communi y wi h sha ed alues,
which ne e heless compe es wi hin
ma ke s
Role o a ming in socie y
Fa ming as pa and pa cel o he socie y
based on well-being, p oducing bo h ood
and a wide a ay o public goods,
including landscape, main enance o
biodi e si y, ec ea ional
oppo uni ies, e c.
Fa ming as a necessa y pa o he well
unc ioning socie y ensu ing he ood
supply, o e ing employmen and he
basis o a p ospe ous indus y ha
con ibu es o economic well-being
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3391
The ensions be ween he ex emes (Table 1) ha e p o ided incen i es o de elop in e media y
solu ions be ween al e na i e and con en ional ag icul u e bo h a he poli ical and he p ac ical le el.
These ha e led o he de elopmen and ecogni ion o concep s such as mul i unc ional a ming,
ecosys em se ices, u al policy, and local ood.
The new concep s do no aim o simple comp omises be ween he ex emes. The e a e also
elemen s o e aming he pe cep ion o ag icul u e and shi s in he weigh o he di e en dimension
o sus ainabili y. Thus mul i unc ional a ming ocuses on non-ma ke goods and encou ages a ming
o play se e al oles in socie y (e.g., [18,19]). This emphasizes he ole o ag icul u e as a con ibu o
o he well-being and iabili y o u al a eas by sus aining he u al landscape and gene a ing
employmen . This is in line wi h objec i es o u al policies ha seek o “ ein eg a e” ag icul u e in o
u al de elopmen (e.g., [20,21]). The li ing condi ions o a me s he e o e become a dominan
elemen in he sus ainabili y discou se. In con as he concep o ecosys em se ices is used o
p omo e he conse a ion o na u al esou ces and hei sus ainable use by connec ing he p ocesses o
ecosys ems o human wel a e (e.g., [22,23]). The basic policy idea is o sa egua d he a ie y o li e
and, he e o e, he sus ainabili y discou se ocuses in pa icula on he ela ionship o na u e. Finally,
local ood is a concep ha emphasizes p oduc ion-consump ion ood ne wo ks, bu also he ole o
a ming in a wide socie al pe spec i e [24].
The ensions be ween he con en ional pa adigm and al e na i e pa adigm main ain discussion o e
wha is sus ainable and wha is no . Also echnical and social de elopmen s challenge he
in e p e a ions and de ini ions o sus ainabili y. A opical example is he use o gene ically modi ied
o ganisms (GMOs) and o he bio echnological inno a ions in ag icul u al p oduc ion (e.g., [25]). Some
o he al e na i e pa adigms o ag icul u e, such as o ganic a ming, ha e clea exclusiona y iews
ega ding GMOs, mainly on he basis o e hical conside a ions. In con as , he con en ional pa adigm
conside s hem a key ag icul u al echnique o esol ing he global hunge p oblem.
3. The Sus ainabili y Agenda in Finnish Ag icul u al Policy
The pe cep ion o sus ainabili y is a ec ed by di e en poli ical discou ses (e.g., [26]). In his
sec ion we discuss he e olu ion o ag i-en i onmen al discou ses a sup ana ional and na ional le els
in he las decades and examine how he ideas and concep s o sus ainabili y ha e been applied in
Finland. We also pay a en ion o he ac ual implemen a ion o sus ainable ag icul u al p ac ices.
Be o e ha we sho ly in oduce he s uc u al changes aken place in Finnish ag icul u e.
The mode niza ion o Finnish socie y has esul ed in he somewha la e bu hen apid ansi ion o
he indus ial s uc u e in o a se ice-domina ed socie y and also in he depopula ion o u al a eas.
Thus, he ole o a ming has g adually changed in 50 yea s, and in pu e economic e ms, ag icul u e’s
signi icance nowadays is a he mino as ag icul u e con ibu es one pe cen o he g oss domes ic
p oduc and ou pe cen o he employmen (Table 2). The numbe o a ms has dec eased d as ically
and, in he p esen con ex o he globalized ma ke and he Eu opean Union’s ag icul u al policy, i is
expec ed o dec ease u he . Meanwhile, he a e age a m size has mo e han quad upled (ibid.).
Nowadays se en pe cen o he coun y’s o al land a ea is ag icul u al land, and Finnish p oduc ion is
based mainly on animal husband y, wi h dai y a ming and bee p oduc ion accoun ing o he hal o

Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3392
he o al ag icul u al p oduc . O ganic a ming has expanded om he ea ly 1990s on wi h he cu en
sha e o eigh pe cen o he o al cul i a ed a ea [27].
Table 2. The s uc u e o Finnish ag icul u e 1960–2010 (sou ces [28–30]).
Yea Pe cen o
o al GDP
Pe cen o o al
employmen
Numbe o
a ms
A able land
(1000 ha)
A e age
a able land
by a m (ha)
O ganic
a ms, % o
all a ms
1960 10.7 28.7 331,263 2,654 8 ..
1970 6.9 20.3 297,527 2,667 9 ..
1980 4.3 10.8 224,721 2,563 11 ..
1990 3.2 6.9 129,114 2,545 20 0.5
2000 1.4 4.0 77,896 2,187 28 6.5
2010 1.0 3.7 62,450 2,292 37 6.3
No e: Numbe o a ms: in 1960–1980 all a ms > 1 ha; 1990-2010 ac i e a ms only.
3.1. The E olu ion o Sus ainable Ag icul u e as a Mac o-Policy Objec i e
His o ically ag icul u e and ag icul u al policies ha e been domina ed by he sec o ’s own iew. I has
included a me s’ o ganiza ions, he ood indus y, he indus y p oducing e ilize s, machine y e c., and
he ag icul u al adminis a ion. This “in e nal discou se” o sus ainabili y has adi ionally emphasized he
economy o he a m and he p o ision o ood and ibe . O he aspec s o he sus ainabili y agenda
ha e en e ed only slowly (Table 3). This can also be seen a he EU le el in he e olu ion o he
Common Ag icul u al Policy (CAP). O e all, he in eg a ion o en i onmen al conce ns wi hin he
CAP has been a complica ed p ocess [31]. The policy, cha ac e ized in i s ea ly decades by pu ely
p oduc i is goals, had in p ac ice been di o ced om en i onmen al conside a ions un il he 1980s.
The i s phases o he EU ag i-en i onmen al policy in he la e 1980s and ea ly 1990s aimed a
encou aging a me s o adop en i onmen ally iendly p ac ices as a means o de-in ensi ying hei
p oduc ion and p o ec ing he u al en i onmen .
The “ex e nal discou se” on he sus ainabili y o ag icul u e was o iginally ini ia ed by he
en i onmen al sec o , including NGOs, en i onmen al esea che s and he en i onmen al
adminis a ion. In he 1990s i has expanded o include consume in e es s, and also b oade socie al
conce ns such as ai ade (Table 3).
The ex e nal discou se no doub con ibu ed o he g eening o he in e nal ag icul u al policy
discou se, which was con inued by he 1992 CAP e o m. In line wi h he s eng hening o he
pos -p oduc i is e hos, claims o he u he inco po a ion o en i onmen al issues in o he
ag icul u al policy eme ged [32,33]. This was illus a ed by he Agenda 2000 policy e o m, which
became he amewo k o he EU ag icul u al policy un il 2006. Agenda 2000 in oduced he
Eu opean model o ag icul u e based on “heal hy and p o-en i onmen al p oduc ion p ac ices, capable
o p oducing high-quali y p oduc s ha mee he equi emen s o socie y”. A b oade and mo e holis ic
no ion o sus ainable u al and e i o ial de elopmen was also in oduced, wi hin which a ming was
de ined as he cen al elemen [34].
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3393
Table 3. The in e nal and ex e nal discou ses and hei e olu ion o e 40 yea s.
1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s
In e nal
discou se
Economy o he
a m, p oduc ion o
ood and ibe
Economy o he
a m, p oduc ion
o ood and ibe ,
weak ecogni ion
o ex e nal
discou se
Budding in e es in
o ganic a ming,
ecogni ion o he
en i onmen al agenda
and he impo ance o he
ex e nal discou se.
[32,33]
Di e si y in he discou se,
ag ibusiness s. amily
a ming.
Recogni ion and use o he
u al a gumen and he li ing
coun y-side. Dialogue wi h
he ex e nal discou se and he
eme gence o Agenda
2000 [34].
Ex e nal
discou se
In e nal discou se
gene ally accep ed,
ea ly ecogni ion o
impac s o biocides
Recogni ion o
wa e pollu ion
by nu ien s,
budding deba e
Widening en i onmen al
agenda: conce n o
biodi e si y and u al
issues, ise o he
sus ainabili y agenda in
ood p oduc ion [35].
Li e cycle analysis, global
issues, including clima e
change, sea ch o no el
solu ions: bioene gy;
biogas
An impo an p oblem o he EU and na ional policy-making has been o ind a balance be ween
he manda o y and uni e sal espec o EU-wide en i onmen al legisla ion and na ional o local
olun a y policy mechanisms ha a e capable o esponding o local conce ns and local ag icul u al
condi ions [36,37]. In e nal and ex e nal con lic s and discou ses on sus ainabili y (Table 3), and hus
policies designed o p omo e sus ainable ag icul u e, a e necessa ily also condi ioned by na ional
adi ions in ag icul u al and en i onmen al hinking, and by na ional pa icula i ies in he ela i e
s eng h o he key ag i-en i onmen al policy ac o s [38,39].
Due o Finland’s accession o he common ag icul u al ma ke in 1995, ag i-en i onmen al policy
has been linked o he adap a ion o domes ic ag icul u e o he EU policy. The dominan
ag i-en i onmen al discou se became also mo e he e ogeneous as i abso bed new issues such as
biodi e si y and clima e change. Du ing he i s yea s o membe ship, new ag i-en i onmen al
measu es we e also in oduced [38,40,41]. The mos impo an scheme, he Finnish ag i-en i onmen al
subsidy has co e ed no less han 90% o he o al a able a ea o he coun y. This policy measu e,
essen ially an income suppo , can be seen as se ing bo h en i onmen al goals and he wel a is idea o
equali y o esul s be ween di e en ag icul u al egions and di e en ypes o a ms. Howe e , i s
e ec i eness in e ms o p oducing en i onmen al bene i s has inc easingly been ques ioned. I has no , o
example, esul ed in any signi ican educ ion o nu ien loads o wa e cou ses [42].
In he 2000s, sus ainable de elopmen and i s h ee basic dimensions (economic, ecological, and
social sus ainabili y) ha e la gely been accep ed bo h in he in e nal and ex e nal discou ses. This does
no , howe e , mean ha a consensus has eme ged. As no ed abo e, he new concep s ha ha e en e ed
he scene do no pu equal weigh on all dimensions o sus ainable de elopmen . Fu he mo e, he e is
also a legacy o he pas in he o m o p oblems such as excessi e leaching o nu ien s o wa e
cou ses. In he 2000s, he dominan in e nal discou se has g adually begun o adop mo e economic
and pa icula ly social a gumen s conce ning sus ainabili y ha appea o jus i y some sac i ices in he
ecological dimension. The ex e nal discou se has also di e si ied, including a s ongly heal h d i en
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3394
demand o “ecological” ag icul u al p oduc s, a conce n o e global ai ness in ade and an agenda o
sus ain biodi e si y, o en amed in e ms o sa egua ding ecosys em se ices.
3.2. Moni o ing and Implemen ing Sus ainable Ag icul u e
The dimensions o sus ainable ag icul u e ha e o be ansla ed in o ope a ional c i e ia and
indica o s ha can be moni o ed o demons a e p og ess owa ds sus ainabili y. In he ea ly 2000’s,
The S a egy o Renewable Na u al Resou ces in Finland (un il 2010) in e es ingly delega ed his
esponsibili y o he implemen a ion o sec o al and heme-speci ic s a egies and p og ams and o he
egula adminis a i e moni o ing ha was pa o he pe o mance guidance linked o he ope a ional
and inancial planning o he Minis y o Ag icul u e and Fo es y [43]. In addi ion, a p oposal was
made o a ull se o ag i-en i onmen al and u al de elopmen indica o s [44]. The idea was ha
indica o s could be used in he moni o ing o he s a egic goals and ha hey could also p o ide a
basis o decisions conce ning ag icul u e.
A compa ison o he s a egy o enewable na u al esou ces [43], he p oposed indica o s [44] and
he gene al de ini ion o sus ainable ag icul u e sugges s ha by and la ge he e has been enough
in o ma ion o allow he moni o ing o he dimensions o sus ainable ag icul u e. The e has been a
s ong emphasis on he ecological aspec s o ag icul u e, and he e ha e been a numbe o ela ed
indica o s a ailable, o which i has been possible o ob ain use ul ime-se ies [44]. The e ha e also
been se e al de ailed indica o s o he a m le el economy, income changes, he con inua ion o
a ming, and indica i e in o ma ion on human, social and cul u al capi al in u al a eas.
The esul s o he moni o ing a e ambiguous. Fo example, he a m ne income in Finland has
a ied du ing he pas 15 yea s wi hou any dis inc end, gene ally ollowing he EU a e age (Figu e 1).
Howe e , Finnish subsidies o ag icul u e a e among he highes in he whole EU and he a e age
subsidy le el has inc eased nea ly by abou 80% du ing he same pe iod [45]. This clea ly does no
sugges s ong economic sus ainabili y.
Figu e 1. Fa m ne income in Finland and EU a e age. Da a om: [45].
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3395
The de elopmen in he en i onmen al dimension sugges s ha sus ainable ag icul u e has no ye
been achie ed. Reduced use o e ilize s has been documen ed bu as illus a ed by Table 4,
ag icul u e clea ly emains he single mos impo an discha ge o nu ien s (phospho us and ni ogen)
in o wa e cou ses.
Table 4. Main sou ces o eu ophica ion in Finland in 2011 (P and N, ones pe yea and %) [46].
Sou ce Phospho us Tones/a Phospho us Sha e
(%)
Ni ogen
Tones/a
Ni ogen Sha e
(%)
Poin sou ces
(indus y,
communi ies)
329 8.2 13,989 20.1
Sca e ed se lemen s 355 8.9 2,500 3.6
Fo es y 231 5.8 3,253 4.7
Ag icul u e 2,750 68.7 39,500 56.8
O he 139 3.4 1,553 2.3
Ai bo ne pollu ion 200 5.0 8,800 12.6
To al 4,004 100 69,595 100
The social dimension is di icul o cap u e, bu he numbe o ac i e a ms has been ega ded as
one indica o . I shows a s eady decline du ing he pas decades (Table 2). Also he numbe o a me s
has declined and hei a e age age has inc eased [47]. This does no sugges ha social sus ainabili y
has been achie ed.
On he basis o he a ailable indica o s, i is ai o conclude ha ag icul u e in Finland is no
sus ainable in i s p esen o m and ha he e a e only weak signals o p og ess in some dimensions
(Table 5). I he indica o s we e o di ec decision making, one could expec an ac i e sea ch o no el
solu ions ha could adically change ag icul u al policy. A he EU le el such a sea ch is going on wi h
he Commission a guing ha “ he CAP can con ibu e mo e o de eloping in elligen , sus ainable and
inclusi e g ow h. The CAP mus also ake g ea e accoun o he weal h and di e si y o ag icul u e in
he EU’s 27 Membe S a es” [48].
I is, howe e , ob ious ha speci ic decisions canno be based on pa icula indica o s, o wo main
easons. Fi s , any ac ual decision is mo e complex han e en an ambi iously comp ehensi e se o
indica o s can co e . This means ha indica o s can a mos highligh an issue bu no p o ide
no ma i e piece o e idence in a o o a pa icula decision. Second, indica o s documen his o y, and
he de elopmen s hey desc ibe a e dependen on a b oad a ay o ci cums ances and e en s beyond
hose ha can be con olled in any indi idual decision. The e o e hey canno be used in a simple way
o indi idual decisions a ec ing u u e de elopmen s, as his would imply ex apola ion based on
incomple e co e age o he ele an cause-e ec ela ionships. Fo ins ance, as no ed abo e, ends in
he numbe o a ms and hei income s uc u e show ha he p esen a ming is no sus ainable in an
economic sense in Finland. Howe e , i appea s ha “poli ical sus ainabili y” calls o a main enance
o subsidies as hei disman ling would cause a numbe o unexpec ed side e ec s.
Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3402
44. Yli-Viika i, A.; Risku-No ja, H.; Nuu inen, V.; Heinonen, E.; Hie ala-Koi u, R.;
Huusela-Veis ola, E.; Hy önen, T.; Kan anen, J.; Raussi, S.; Rikkonen, P.; e al.
Ag i-En i onmen al and Ru al De elopmen Indica o s: A P oposal; MTT Ag i ood Resea ch:
Jokioinen, Finland, 2002.
45. Ag icul u e and Ru al De elopmen Fa m Accoun ing Da a Ne wo k Home Page. A ailable
online: h p://ec.eu opa.eu/ag icul u e/ ica//da abase/da abase_en.c m (accessed on 30 No embe
2012).
46. Finnish En i onmen Ins i u e. Nu ien Loads Home Page. A ailable online:
h p://www.ympa is o. i/de aul .asp?con en id=29826&lan= i (accessed on 2 Decembe 2012).
47. In o ma ion Cen e o he Minis y o Ag icul u e and Fo es y. Fa m Regis e 2009; Tike:
Helsinki, Finland, 2010.
48. Ag icul u e and Ru al De elopmen Home Page. A ailable online: h p://ec.eu opa.eu/ag icul u e/
cap-pos -2013/index_en.h m (accessed on 1 Decembe 2012).
49. Biodi e si y.Fi Home Page. A ailable online: h p://www.biodi e si y. i/en (accessed on 30
Sep embe 2012).
50. S a is ics Finland. Finland’s G eenhouse Gas Emissions in 1990–2010. In Suomen
kas ihuonekaasupääs ö 1990–2010; S a is ics Finland: Helsinki, Finland, 2012.
51. Sippola, J.; Yli-Halla, M. S a us o Soil Mapping in Finland (Resea ch Repo No. 9) In Soil
Resou ces o Eu ope; Jones, R.J.A., Housko a, B., Mon ana ella, L., Bullock, P., Eds.; O ice o
O icial Publica ions o he Eu opean Communi ies, Eu opean Soil Bu eau: Luxembou g, 2004;
pp. 133–138.
52. Mikkola, H. Pel obioene gian uo an o Suomessa: Po en iaali, ene giasuh ee ja ne oene gia.
Ph.D. hesis, Uni e si y o Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland, 2012.
53. E elä-Sa on ELY-keskus 2012. Maa ilojen kehi ysnäkymä 2020. Home Page. A ailable online:
h p://www.ely-keskus. i/ i/ iedo epal elu/2012/Si u /E ela-Sa onmaa ilojenkehi ysnakyma sel
i e iin%E2%80%93 ilojenmaa a ahenee.aspx (accessed on 30 Sep embe 2012).
54. Rikkonen, P.; Aakkula, J.; Kai o-oja, J. How can u u e changes in Finnish ag icul u e and
ag icul u al policy be aced: de ining s a egic agenda on he basis o a Delphi s udy. Eu . Plann.
S ud. 2006, 14, 147–168.
55. Be ge , G.; Flynn, A.; Hines, F.; Johns, R. Ecological mode niza ion as a basis o en i onmen al
policy: Cu en en i onmen al discou se and policy and he implica ions on en i onmen al supply
chain managemen . Inno a ion 2001, 14, 55–72.
56. Eu opean Commission. O ganic a ming s a is ics Home Page. A ailable online: h p://epp.eu os a .ec.
eu opa.eu/s a is ics_explained/index.php/O ganic_ a ming_s a is ics (accessed on 1 Decembe 2012).
57. EC 2010. An analysis o he EU o ganic sec o . Di ec o a e-Gene al o Ag icul u e and Ru al
De elopmen Home Page. A ailable online: h p://ec.eu opa.eu/ag icul u e/o ganic/ iles/eu-
policy/da a-s a is ics/ ac s_en.pd (accessed on 1 Decembe 2012).
58. Maaseudun ule aisuus. Luomun kysyn ä kas aa (Edi o ial: The demand o o ganic g ows) Home
Page. A ailable online: h p://www.maaseudun ule aisuus. i/mielipi ee /p%C3%A4%C3%A4
ki joi ukse /luomun-kysyn %C3%A4-kas aa-1.12076 (accessed on 1 Decembe 2012).
59. Mickwi z, P.; Hildén, M.; Seppälä, J.; Melanen, M. Sus ainabili y h ough sys em ans o ma ion:
Lessons om Finnish e o s. J. Clean. P od. 2011, 19, 1779–1787.

Sus ainabili y 2012, 4 3403
60. Raghu, G.; Gehman, J. Me a heo e ical pe spec i es on sus ainabili y jou neys: E olu iona y,
ela ional and du a ional. Res. Pol. 2012, 41, 980–995.
61. Leh onen, H.; Bä lund, I.; Ta a i, S.; Hildén, M. Combining dynamic economic analysis and
en i onmen al impac modelling: Add essing unce ain y and complexi y o ag icul u al
de elopmen . En i on. Modell. So w. 2007, 22, 710–718.
62. Meadowc o , J. Who is in cha ge he e? Go e nance o sus ainable de elopmen in a complex
wo ld. J. En i on. Pol. Plann. 2007, 9, 299–314.
63. Minis y o Ag icul u e and Fo es y. Final Repo o he Expe G oup: Fu u e Al e na i es o
he Finnish Ag icul u al Policy; Minis y o Ag icul u e and Fo es y: Helsinki, Finland, 2007.
64. K öge , L. Policy Change and Lea ning: Implemen ing EU En i onmen al Policies A ec ing
Ag icul u e; MTT Ag i ood Resea ch Finland: Jokioinen, Finland, 2009.
65. Kaljonen, M. Caugh be ween S anda disa ion and Complexi y. S udy on he ins i u ional
ambigui ies o ag i-en i onmen al policy implemen a ion in Finland; Tampe e Uni e si y P ess:
Tampe e, Finland, 2011.
66. Vinna i, M.; Tapio, P. Sus ainabili y o die s: F om concep s o go e nance. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 74,
46–54.
© 2012 by he au ho s; licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land. This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and condi ions o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion license
(h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/3.0/).