6 Conclusions
Farming has a very high potential to exploit multifunctional activities and provide multiple outputs. In
particular between farming and rural landscapes a strong joint relation can be found. Any type of farming
inevitably has an impact on the landscape. In the past, the skewed remuneration systems in markets made
modern farming practices put less emphasis on non-marketable outputs, which were before produced for free
(weak disposability). However, because of growing importance of rural areas as consumptive areas, farming
should again emphasize this role.
Rather than a bimodal model (Thompson, 2004; Potter and Tilzey, 2005), we see scope for
multifunctionality as a unifying concept under which the productive role of agriculture and its role in land
management for biodiversity conservation, recreation, water management, climate control and
so on can be brought in harmony. By enlarging the definition of competitiveness, production
systems efficient in combining several functions can emerge. These can operate either at local
markets (both food and non-food), or at international markets. Distinctiveness in markets can be
found by unique combinations of resources and values. It is this what is propagated by the term
multifunctionality: the fact that specific agricultural systems contribute to distinctive economic, natural,
cultural and territorial subsystems. Therefore, we think that by converting the relation and
starting the analysis from what makes local rural and farming systems distinctive, we may find
clues to build stronger production and food networks which cannot only contribute to rural
wealth but bring the existing production system in line with social expectations. In such an
approach biodiversity, local identity, cultural heritage and other non-marketable outputs of
agriculture become assets with potential value (Marsden et al., 2002
) that should and will be
protected.
The above ideas correspond with a lot of thinking on agri-food networks or districts
(Goodman, 1999; Murdoch, 2000; Marsden et al., 2002; Bertolini and Giovannetti, 2006; Sonnino, 2007)
and also encompasses some of the ideas of neo-institutional economics on micro-institutions
(Ménard, 2003, 2004) which argue that in agro-food systems the contractual relations and rules of
exchange both horizontally and vertically are important for managing food systems.
To further develop the concept of multifunctionality, we agree therefore with G.A. Wilson
(Wilson, 2004; Burton and Wilson, 2006) that there is a need to further theoretically underpin and
decompose the concept. But, besides theoretical work (according to the lines sketched in this review)
we also think there is a need for empirical research. Four major research lines can hereby be
distinguished:
- More empirical research on evidence about the contributions of agriculture in general, and
different farming systems in particular, beyond food and fibre production. As shown in this
overview the empirical results are still scarce and not really comprehensive. Such research must
start from a clear definition (not confusing with diversification e.g.) and clearly distinguish the
contributions of conventional production systems from more specific contributions of alternative
production systems (such as more extensive farming systems or organic agriculture). This must
allow policy indications on how far a shift to such alternative systems and thus reallocation of
support is socially desirable.
- Research on indicators for multifunctionality: if multifunctionality is accepted to have a
normative side, it is important to be able to measure in how far individual farming systems
or the farming sector in a region or country is approaching the desired level of multiple
outputs. This requires the development of indicators measuring the contributions towards
desired outcomes. So far notwithstanding a few exceptions (Wiggering et al., 2006; Mander
et al., 2007), such indicators are rare. They may differ from usual sustainability indicators in
the sense that they need to emphasize the positive role of farming in society.
- Research on policy instruments and farm behaviour with respect to multifunctional agriculture.
Because the price signal for non-commodity outcomes may be incomplete, it must be
corrected by policy instruments to enforce the social desired optimum. Traditional commodity
instruments are not adapted to the new outcomes and therefore need to be replaced gradually
by newly designed instruments. However, because of the farm and location specific elements of
multifunctionality, the individual farm reaction to these instruments becomes a core element
as it will be important to know the regional impact of generic but maybe regionally adapted
instruments. This requires, as indicated in Buysse et al. (2007) more specific farm modelling
and analysis of farm behaviour towards certain policies. Enriching or coupling these models
with farm styles research, GIS, multi-agent systems, risk behaviour and so on are promising
avenues in this respect.
- Research on multifunctionality as an asset. As stated before multifunctionality may be regarded
as an asset for regional development. Research should show through case studies how such
multifunctional farming systems, landscapes or regions can be built on the basis of the assets
represented by the joint outputs of these systems. We therefore strongly plea for integrated
case study work showing the economic and social value for both individual farms and farming
regions of producing non-commodity outputs and to reveal the real value of things such as
rural identity and embeddedness both socially and economically. This can evolve in the study
of mechanisms to construct, maintain and institutionalise such a multifunctional system.
We conclude with stating that we believe that the conceptual work on multifunctionality in the recent
past is only the start for further more theoretical and empirical research to which a lot of disciplines and
schools can contribute. Cross fertilisation between the here developed socio-economic frameworks
and the insights of e.g. the ecosystem service or landscape based frameworks would certainly
further enrich the insights in the concept. We hope that this contribution is a further step in this
direction.