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

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/).