TY - JOUR
T1 - The effects of the industrialization of US livestock agriculture on promoting sustainable production practices
AU - Hinrichs, C. Clare
AU - Welsh, Rick
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding for the promotion of sustainable agriculture practices often originates at sympathetic foundations such as the Kellogg Foundation or from the US Department of Agriculture’s Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE) (http://www.sare.org). Funding from SARE is available for research into sustainable agricultural prac- tices, as well as for promoting practice adoption through the cooperative extension systems (SARE). Some of the technical practices and systems promoted by sustainable agriculturalists include reductions in synthetic chemical use through crop rotations, farm diversification through integrating crops and livestock, and intensive rotational grazing of livestock, as well as other more environmentally friendly, less capital intensive livestock production (see Beeman and Pritchard, 2001; Beus and Dunlap, 1990; Bird et al., 1995; SARE).
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - US livestock agriculture has developed and intensified according to a strict productionist model that emphasizes industrial efficiency. Sustainability problems associated with this model have become increasingly evident and more contested. Traditional approaches to promoting sustainable agriculture have emphasized education and outreach to encourage on-farm adoption of alternative production systems. Such efforts build on an underlying assumption that farmers are empowered to make decisions regarding the organization and management of their operations. However, as vertical coordination in agriculture continues, especially in the animal agriculture sectors, this assumption becomes less valid. This paper examines how the changing industrial structure in four US livestock sectors (poultry, hogs, beef, and dairy) affects possibilities in each for promoting more sustainable production practices. Comparisons between the sectors are based on the relative ability to employ an intensive pasture or alternative (deep-bedded) housing system, which are widely seen as sustainable livestock alternatives. While the highly integrated poultry sector appears impregnable to traditional sustainable agriculture approaches, the cow-calf sub-sector of the beef industry, non-feedlot dairy operations, and small parts of the hog industry, especially in the Midwest, still retain some potential for effectively targeting the farmer. Building on the presentation of barriers and opportunities in the four livestock sectors, the paper concludes by evaluating several structurally-oriented approaches to promoting a more sustainable livestock agriculture that should complement more traditional approaches. They include developing alternative coordinated networks in livestock agriculture, pressing integrators to permit more sustainable production practices, and working for legislation that shifts more decision-making within integrated systems towards growers.
AB - US livestock agriculture has developed and intensified according to a strict productionist model that emphasizes industrial efficiency. Sustainability problems associated with this model have become increasingly evident and more contested. Traditional approaches to promoting sustainable agriculture have emphasized education and outreach to encourage on-farm adoption of alternative production systems. Such efforts build on an underlying assumption that farmers are empowered to make decisions regarding the organization and management of their operations. However, as vertical coordination in agriculture continues, especially in the animal agriculture sectors, this assumption becomes less valid. This paper examines how the changing industrial structure in four US livestock sectors (poultry, hogs, beef, and dairy) affects possibilities in each for promoting more sustainable production practices. Comparisons between the sectors are based on the relative ability to employ an intensive pasture or alternative (deep-bedded) housing system, which are widely seen as sustainable livestock alternatives. While the highly integrated poultry sector appears impregnable to traditional sustainable agriculture approaches, the cow-calf sub-sector of the beef industry, non-feedlot dairy operations, and small parts of the hog industry, especially in the Midwest, still retain some potential for effectively targeting the farmer. Building on the presentation of barriers and opportunities in the four livestock sectors, the paper concludes by evaluating several structurally-oriented approaches to promoting a more sustainable livestock agriculture that should complement more traditional approaches. They include developing alternative coordinated networks in livestock agriculture, pressing integrators to permit more sustainable production practices, and working for legislation that shifts more decision-making within integrated systems towards growers.
KW - Beef
KW - Coordination
KW - Dairy
KW - Hogs
KW - Industrialization
KW - Poultry
KW - Sustainable agriculture
KW - US livestock agriculture
KW - Vertical integration
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4344634688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4344634688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1023/A:1024061425531
DO - 10.1023/A:1024061425531
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:4344634688
SN - 0889-048X
VL - 20
SP - 125
EP - 141
JO - Agriculture and Human Values
JF - Agriculture and Human Values
IS - 2
ER -