Blending knowledge systems for agroecological nutrient management and climate resilience
-
Published:2024-04-16
Issue:
Volume:
Page:1-5
-
ISSN:2152-0801
-
Container-title:Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development
-
language:
-
Short-container-title:J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.
Author:
Blesh JenniferORCID, Schipanski MeaganORCID
Abstract
Agroecology links multiple ways of knowing in order to understand and manage farms as the ecosystems that they are—agroecosystems. Farmers often have deep, place-based knowledge of their agroecosystems that informs how to manage ecological interactions for multiple benefits. Many Indigenous practices sustained food production for generations without fossil fuel inputs, and traditional ecological knowledge is a valuable source of wisdom for adaptive management of agroecosystems. Other forms of ecological knowledge have been developed using Western scientific research approaches. Through the concept of the ecosystem, ecology applies systems thinking to understand complex relationships between organisms (including humans) and their environment across spatio-temporal scales. In practice, blending these ways of knowing has a wide range of interpretations and manifestations, especially in the past several decades, as agroecology has developed into a science, practice, and social movement. Embracing all three of these aspects, we argue that agroecology could more fully integrate traditional ecological knowledge and farmer knowledge with ecological science—including valuing where they overlap and their unique contributions (Kimmerer, 2013)—in support of food system transformation. We focus on the example of agroecological nutrient management in the context of climate change. . . .
Publisher
Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems
Reference18 articles.
1. Bezner Kerr, R., Snapp, S., Chirwa, M., Shumba, L., & Msachi, R. (2007). Participatory research on legume diversification with Malawian smallholder farmers for improved human nutrition and soil fertility. Experimental Agriculture, 43(4), 437-453. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479707005339 2. Blesh, J. Mehrabi, Z., Wittman, H., Bezner Kerr, R., James, D., Madsen, S., Smith, O. M., Snapp, S., Stratton, A., E., Bakarr, M., Bicksler, A. J., Galt, R., Garibaldi, L. A., Gemmil-Herren, B., Grass, I., Isaac, M. E., John, I., Jones, S. K., Kennedy, C. M., . . . Kremen, C. (2023). Against the odds: Network and institutional pathways enabling agricultural diversification. One Earth, 6(5), 479-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2023.03.004 3. Carlisle, L. (2022). Healing grounds: Climate, justice, and the deep roots of regenerative farming. Island Press. 4. Carpenter, S. R., Caraco, N. F., Correll, D. L., Howarth, R. W., Sharpley, A. N., & Smith, V. H. (1998). Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Ecological Applications, 8(3), 559-568. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(1998)008[0559:NPOSWW]2.0.CO;2 5. Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., & Smith, L. T. (2008). Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483385686
|
|