Defining Agricultural Resilience for Sustainable Development

Introduction: The Need for a Standardized Vocabulary

The concept of “resilience” is increasingly central to agricultural strategy, yet a standardized definition is absent from key resources such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Agricultural Library. This terminological gap presents a significant barrier to implementing effective strategies for sustainable food systems. Addressing this issue is critical for advancing several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 13 (Climate Action), as a shared understanding of resilience is fundamental to building agricultural systems capable of withstanding climate shocks and ensuring food security.

The NIARR Initiative: A Collaborative Approach

A consortium of approximately 20 scientists from the Network for Integrated Agricultural Resilience Research (NIARR), spanning North America, is undertaking a project to formally define agricultural resilience and approximately 30 related terms. This collaborative effort, initiated at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, exemplifies SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) by uniting diverse expertise to create a foundational tool for agricultural science and policy.

Challenges in Adapting Ecological Concepts for Agriculture

Distinguishing Social-Ecological Systems

A primary challenge identified by the research network is the direct application of resilience concepts from ecology to agriculture. Agricultural systems are complex social-ecological systems, not purely ecological ones. The significant role of human intervention means that concepts such as “self-organization,” common in ecological resilience, are less applicable. This distinction is crucial for developing definitions that accurately reflect the interplay between human activity and environmental processes, a key consideration for SDG 15 (Life on Land), which focuses on the sustainable management of terrestrial ecosystems.

Redefining Key Concepts for Agricultural Contexts

The network is re-evaluating core ecological terms to fit the agricultural context. A key example is “regime shift,” which has a clear meaning in ecology but is ambiguous in agriculture. The group is working to determine what constitutes a regime shift in a managed system, such as changing crop types or land use. Clarifying such terms is essential for developing strategies to maintain productive agricultural landscapes and prevent unfavorable shifts that could undermine food production, directly impacting the targets of SDG 2.

Methodology and Contribution to Global Goals

A Deliberative and Collaborative Process

The project employs a meticulous, consensus-based approach to developing definitions. The process involves:

1. Individual scientists drafting definitions for assigned terms.
2. Group review and discussion during monthly meetings to refine the definitions.
3. An iterative process that allows for deep consideration of nuance from diverse scientific and geographical perspectives.

This rigorous methodology ensures the resulting terminology is robust and widely applicable, providing a solid foundation for research and policy aimed at enhancing agricultural sustainability.

Expected Outcomes and Impact on SDGs

The primary outputs of this initiative will be a formal academic paper and a proposal to integrate the new terminology into the USDA’s National Agricultural Library Thesaurus. By creating a standardized language, the project will empower stakeholders to more effectively research, analyze, and manage complex agricultural systems. This will facilitate the development of concrete strategies that contribute to several SDGs:

• SDG 2 (Zero Hunger): Providing tools to better understand and enhance “production stability” and “agricultural diversity” will help secure food supplies against shocks.
• SDG 13 (Climate Action): A clear vocabulary for resilience is essential for developing and implementing climate adaptation strategies in the agricultural sector.
• SDG 15 (Life on Land): Defining terms like “spatial heterogeneity” supports the design of agroecosystems that promote biodiversity and sustainable land use.

Ultimately, this work will provide a critical framework for translating resilience science into practical actions, helping farmers and policymakers build agricultural systems that are both productive and sustainable.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • The article focuses on defining “agricultural resilience” to create sustainable and stable food production systems. This work is fundamental to ensuring food security, which is the primary goal of SDG 2. The mention of concepts like “production stability” directly links the research to the goal of ending hunger by making agriculture less vulnerable to shocks.
2. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
   • The article describes a scientific research initiative, the Network for Integrated Agricultural Resilience Research (NIARR), funded by the National Science Foundation. This effort to create a foundational terminology for agricultural resilience is a form of scientific innovation aimed at upgrading the sector’s capacity to understand and implement complex concepts.
3. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • Agricultural resilience is a key component of adapting to climate change. The article’s focus on creating systems that can withstand shocks and avoid “unfavorable regime shifts” directly addresses the need to strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards, which are a major threat to agriculture.
4. SDG 15: Life on Land
   • The discussion treats agriculture as a “social-ecological system” and involves defining terms like “agricultural diversity” and “spatial heterogeneity.” This approach acknowledges the deep connection between agricultural practices and the health of terrestrial ecosystems. Building resilient agricultural systems is crucial for the sustainable management of land.
5. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • The entire initiative described is a multi-stakeholder partnership. It involves scientists from multiple universities (University of Nebraska-Lincoln), government bodies (USDA), and a wide range of research networks spanning North America (Canada to Mexico), including the Resilience Alliance. This collaboration to share knowledge and expertise exemplifies the spirit of SDG 17.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 2.4: “By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality.”
   • The article’s central theme is the scientific effort to define “agricultural resilience” and related concepts. This foundational work is a prerequisite for implementing, researching, and measuring the “resilient agricultural practices” mentioned in this target. The goal is to provide a clear language for stakeholders to “develop resilient agricultural systems.”
2. Target 9.5: “Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all countries…including…encouraging innovation and substantially increasing the number of research and development workers…”
   • The article details the work of the NIARR, a network of approximately 20 scientists dedicated to enhancing scientific understanding in agriculture. By creating a standardized vocabulary, they are building the intellectual infrastructure needed for advanced research and innovation in agricultural resilience.
3. Target 13.1: “Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.”
   • The project’s objective to define agricultural resilience is a direct effort to strengthen the adaptive capacity of the agricultural sector. A clear, shared understanding of resilience is the first step for farmers and policymakers to develop and implement strategies that can withstand climate-related hazards.
4. Target 17.16: “Enhance the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources…”
   • The article explicitly describes such a partnership. The NIARR brings together scientists from Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, and integrates networks like the “USDA-ARS Long-Term Agroecosystem Research Network, the Canadian Agroecosystem Living Labs Network, ResNet of Canada and the Resilience Alliance” to share knowledge and define key concepts.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For Target 2.4:
   • The article implies future indicators by mentioning the specific terms the scientists are defining. Concepts like “production stability,” “agricultural diversity,” and “spatial heterogeneity” are being defined precisely so they can be researched and measured. Once defined, these can serve as direct indicators of agricultural resilience.
2. For Target 9.5:
   • An indicator of progress is the primary output of the project: the creation and formal submission of a “list of terms to the USDA to include in its online National Agricultural Library Thesaurus Concept Space.” The adoption of this standardized vocabulary by a national institution would be a clear measure of enhanced scientific infrastructure.
3. For Target 13.1:
   • The article implies an indicator through the words of scientist Marie-Noelle Thivierge, who states the developed tool will help stakeholders “translate them into concrete strategies to help farmers develop resilient agricultural systems.” An indicator would be the number of strategies developed or the number of farmers and agronomists who adopt practices based on this new, clearer understanding of resilience.
4. For Target 17.16:
   • The existence and composition of the partnership itself serve as an indicator. The article mentions the number of scientists involved (about 20) and names the specific, diverse networks collaborating within NIARR. The scale and international nature of this network are a direct measure of a functioning multi-stakeholder partnership.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: news.unl.edu