Page 1 of 4

riculture
Seven Dimensions of Sustainable Agriculture
by Nicanor Perlas

Almost everybody talks about sustainable agriculture as an alternative to the outworn “green
revolution” agriculture. However, the term has quickly become an empty phrase meaning almost
anything including such oxymoron terms as “safe pesticides” and “environmentally friendly”
biotechnology. Even WTO advocates use sustainable agriculture to justify corporate control of
the food chain. It is important for civil society, which originated the idea, to concretely articulate
what it understands by the term “sustainable agriculture.”

In 1983, the author and two other friends coined the term, “sustainable agriculture.” Together
they co-founded the International Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture (IISA), which
 Page 2 of 4

spearheaded a global discussion on a widened view of “sustainability.” In recent years, by

viewing sustainability from the perspective of the farming family, the author has articulated
seven dimensions of sustainability in agriculture, which have been receiving national and
international acceptance. Because sustainability immediately brings into focus a temporal
consideration, these dimensions have to be understood also as including intergenerational
concerns. (For details, see Perlas, N. (1993) The Seven Dimensions of Sustainable Agriculture,
Manila: CADI) In the Philippines, this view of sustainable agriculture is widely accepted--
having emerged from numerous dialogues, conferences, workshops and consultations with
farmers, farmer organizations and civil society organizations. The Sustainable Agriculture
Coalition (composed of around 300 organizations) for instance embraces this SA framework for
advocacy and project implementation.

At the household level, farmers, by the very nature of their profession, have a direct
relationship with Nature. (I avoid the term “natural resources” because the term immediately
prescribes a limited, narrow, and utilitarian view of and relationship with Nature.) To be
sustainable at this level, the relationship with Nature has to be ecologically sound. Concretely
this means the following: a) Instead of pesticides we use ecological pest management; b) instead
of chemical fertilizers, integrated soil fertility management; c) instead of monocultures, the
harnessing of biodiversity to create polycultures; d) instead of creating chemically addicted
seeds, alternative breeding strategies which produce species adopted to ecologically sound
practices; e) instead of erosion and water depletion, soil and water conservation; f) instead of
mass production or factory farming of animals, “humane” animal raising methods; and, g)
instead of a fixation on genes and chemical substances, we work in partnership with the living
formative energies of Nature through, for instance, the use of bio-dynamic preparations and other
bio-dynamic practices.

In the picture at right, rice farmers

preparing biodynamic compost.

Environmentally sound technology

is not enough to ensure SA (even if most
technocrats have a fatal attraction for
technological fixes). Farmers do not
exist in a vacuum. Economic, political,
and cultural developments, even if far
removed from the farm and village
level, either nurture or oppress the life
of farmers and the farming community.
(See Figure above.) In the age of
globalization and often mindless
industrialization, subsistence farming today is fast becoming a thing of the past.

Interaction of farmers with the local, national and global economy produces the widespread
phenomenon of poverty. Both socialist and capitalist economies have become engines of poverty
creation. To be sustainable, agriculture has to move beyond these limited economic ideologies
and seek creative solutions to the questions of fair pricing, cost internalization, food security, the
right to an adequate livelihood, and the multifunctional role of agriculture. One such approach is
 Page 3 of 4

associative economics. This will be a potent antidote for the WTO machine and for incipient
commercialism in the organic farming movement.

Policies promulgated far away in imperial Manila and other cities often do very little to
support farmer initiatives at the community level. Poverty can only worsen if farmers are not
protected by a proper policy environment that insulates them from destructive technologies,
abusive creditors, exploitative traders, usurious land tenure arrangements, gender bias, and
disempowerment. Sustainable agriculture advocates therefore have to ensure that social justice
and equity prevail all the way to the farm household level.

Can farming be sustainable when indigenous knowledge and values are dominated and
marginalized? The rural youth are voting with their feet, and the answer is a resounding, NO!
The young are migrating away in droves from rural settlements. They leave behind the old who
have no choice except to farm. They also say goodbye to the children who have no capability for
an independent choice. Modernization has created a social “black hole,” mindlessly destroying
anything that smacks of rural culture. To be sustainable, agriculture has to be culturally sensitive
and empowering and should nurture the cultural
renaissance of the countryside.

In the picture at right, rice farmers display pesticide-

induced lesions on the feet during the CADI advocacy to
ban hazardous pesticide formulations.

Science is often portrayed as our salvation from

backwardness especially in agriculture. There is an
element of truth in this. But the issue is not whether we
should have science or not. Rather the key question is:
What Science? We have seen the damage that “green
revolution” agriculture has forced upon farmers. No one
can defend as “progress” a P6700 health bill imposed on farmers every 6 months by the science
of pesticides. Despite good intentions, conventional science is far too reductionist. The
wholeness of living Nature disappears as scientists focus on mere parts, often at the molecular
level. The salvation for sustainable agriculture lies in the pursuit of holistic science.

Technology development is another favorite activity of larger society that seems far removed
from the realities at the household level. But since fundamentally the farmer's relationship with
Nature is directly mediated by technology, it is clear that appropriate technology has to be one of
the dimensions of sustainability in agriculture.

Agricultural biotechnology is particularly alarming. The concerns for the potential adverse
effects of genetic engineering have already been the subject of dozens of workshops sponsored
by government agencies and scientific associations, and of published journal articles involving
hundreds of scientists. From the many years of research and analyses conducted by the scientific
community, there has emerged a growing consensus on the ecological, health and socio-
economic risks associated with genetic engineering, as well as the neglect of adequate safety
measures and policies, not to mention the moral and ethical questions.
 Page 4 of 4

Ecological problems, economic challenges, oppressive policies, cultural degeneration,

reductionist science, double-edged technology—all these are clarion calls to awaken, to redefine
the meaning of human existence, and move away from the disempowering illusion of daily
routines. To awaken, however, means that all of us who advocate for sustainability in agriculture
must develop our individual and universal human potentials and capacities to the fullest. The
problem here can be defined as one of deep sustainability. Transformation at the different levels
of sustainability requires being able to enter our inner sanctum, our “sacra,” our inner source of
creativity, dedication, and courage. Only then can we avoid "burnout," overcome hardship and
enter into the creative realm of creating alternative futures.

In the picture at right, visitors examine Ikapati

Farm, the first and largest commercial operation to
produce biodynamic and organic vegetables
through sustainable agricultural practices. CADI
established the farm to demonstrate the viability of
alternatives to conventional and chemically
intensive vegetable production.

Well-meaning efforts that balk at a serious

consideration of these dimensions of agricultural
sustainability and their strategic challenges are
ultimately doomed to failure. (See Table below.)
And millions of lives and the bounty of Nature will continue to be wasted, all in the name of
progress.

SA Dimensions and Strategic Challenges

Dimension Strategic Challenge
"Safe Pesticides", chemical fertilizers, monoculture,
chemically addicted seeds, soil erosion and water
Ecological Soundness
scarcity, factory farming, methodological materialism
(nature as a biological machine)
WTO. Agreement on Agriculture. "Organic
Associative Economics Commercialism." Lack of integration. Commodity-
based polyculture.
Traditional politics of exploitation. Appropriation.
Social Justice/Equity
Disempowerment.
Neglect and collapse of indigenous knowledge
Cultural Sensitivity
systems and farming culture.
Holistic and More Spiritual Science Reductionism, Materialism, Fragmentation
Commodification and molecular reduction of humans
Appropriate Technology and living nature by "environmentally friendly"
biotechnology. Non-diffusion of good technologies.
Attaining "deep sustainability," Overcoming gender
Development of Full Human Potential
bias