Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T13:54:56.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Who's afraid of Allan Savory? Scientometric polarization on Holistic Management as competing understandings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2017

Kate Sherren  and
Carlisle Kent
Kate Sherren*
Affiliation:
School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada.
Carlisle Kent
Affiliation:
School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Downsview, ON, M3N 1S4, Canada.
*
*Corresponding author: kate.sherren@dal.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How to graze livestock sustainably is an important and complex question. The debate between rotational and continuous grazing has been ongoing since the 1950s, yet evidence is perennially mixed. We used scientometrics to understand the structure of science on Holistic Management (HM), the most contentious of these adaptive practices. We used papers in Web of Science since 1980 citing the work of HM's ‘father’, Allan Savory, as a way of delineating a field that is otherwise chaotic with terminology. Results show an increasingly diverse use of Savory's work geographically and in terms of subject areas. Taking a positive position on HM seems most likely for those doing farm-scale (rather than experimental) work in dry climates. Bibliographic factions align with the various disciplines working on grazing research and also their expressed opinion on HM practices. Factions represent disciplinary strength, suggesting barriers for integrative work but also the need for the resolution of competing understandings in specific contexts with diverse participants to inform grazing decisions.

Keywords

agroecosystemsbibliometricsevidencelivestockrangelandsrhetoricrotational grazingscience–policy interfacesustainable grazing
Type
Review Article
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 77 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alfaro-Arguello, R., Diemont, S.A.W., Ferguson, B.G., Martin, J.F., Nahed-Toral, J., David Álvarez-Solís, J., and Ruíz, R.P. 2010. Steps toward sustainable ranching: An energy evaluation of conventional and holistic management in Chiapas, Mexico. Agricultural Systems 103:639–646.Google Scholar
Asner, G., Elmore, A., Olander, L., Martin, R., and Harris, A. 2004. Grazing systems, ecosystem responses, and global change. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 29:261–299.Google Scholar
Bracken, L.J. and Oughton, E.A. 2006. ‘What do you mean?’ The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 31:371–382.Google Scholar
Briske, D.D., Sayre, N., Huntsinger, L., Fernandez-Gimenez, M., Budd, B., and Derner, J.D. 2011. Origin, persistence, and resolution of the rotational grazing debate: Integrating human dimensions into rangeland research. Rangeland Ecology & Management 64:325–334.Google Scholar
Briske, D.D., Bestelmeyer, B.T., Brown, J.R., Fuhlendorf, S.D., and Polley, H.W. 2013. The savory method can not green deserts or reverse climate change. Rangelands 35:72–74.Google Scholar
Briske, D.D., Ash, A.J., Derner, J.D., and Huntsinger, L. 2014. Commentary: A critical assessment of the policy endorsement for holistic management. Agricultural Systems 125:50–53.Google Scholar
Browne, G.J., Pitts, M.G., and Wetherbe, J.C. 2007. Cognitive stopping rules for terminating information search in online tasks. MIS Quarterly 31:89–104.Google Scholar
Carien De Villiers, A., Esler, K.J., and Knight, A.T. 2014. Social processes promoting the adaptive capacity of rangeland managers to achieve resilience in the Karoo, South Africa. Journal of Environmental Management 146:276–283.Google Scholar
Carter, J., Jones, A., Brien, M., Ratner, J., and Wuerthner, G. 2014. Holistic management: Misinformation on the science of grazed ecosystems. International Journal of Biodiversity 2014:10.Google Scholar
Cheney, G. 1983. The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech 69:143–158.Google Scholar
Chiaviello, A. 2000. Anarchy in range science: Allan Savory and the rhetoric of holistic resource management. In Coppola, N. and Karis, B. (eds). Technical Communication, Deliberative Rhetoric, and Environmental Discourse: Connections and Directions. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Stamford, Connecticut. p. 301–320.Google Scholar
Coleman, C.M., Rothwell, E.J., and Ross, J.E. 2004. Investigation of simulated annealing, ant-colony optimization, and genetic algorithms for self-structuring antennas. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 52:1007–1014.Google Scholar
Cornell, S., Berkhout, F., Tuinstra, W., Tàbara, J.D., Jäger, J., Chabay, I., De Wit, B., Langlais, R., Mills, D., Moll, P., Otto, I.M., Petersen, A., Pohl, C., and van Kerkhoff, L. 2013. Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change. Environmental Science & Policy 28:60–70.Google Scholar
Cortner, H.J. 2000. Making science relevant to environmental policy. Environmental Science & Policy 3:21–30.Google Scholar
Delonge, M.S., Miles, A., and Carlisle, L. 2016. Investing in the transition to sustainable agriculture. Environmental Science & Policy 55(Part 1):266–273.Google Scholar
Ferguson, B.G., Diemont, S.A.W., Alfaro-Arguello, R., Martin, J.F., Nahed-Toral, J., Álvarez-Solís, D., and Pinto-Ruíz, R. 2013. Sustainability of holistic and conventional cattle ranching in the seasonally dry tropics of Chiapas, Mexico. Agricultural Systems 120:38–48.Google Scholar
Fischer, J., Abson, D.J., Butsic, V., Chappell, M.J., Ekroos, J., Hanspach, J., Kuemmerle, T., Smith, H.G., and Von Wehrden, H. 2014a. Land sparing versus land sharing: moving forward. Conservation Letters 7:149–157.Google Scholar
Fischer, J., Sherren, K., and Hanspach, J. 2014b. Place, case and process: Applying ecology to sustainable development. Basic and Applied Ecology 15:187–193.Google Scholar
Foley, J.A., DeFries, R., Asner, G.P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S.R., Chapin, F.S., Coe, M.T., Daily, G.C., Gibbs, H.K., Helkowski, J.H., Holloway, T., Howard, E.A., Kucharik, C.J., Monfreda, C., Patz, J.A., Prentice, I.C., Ramankutty, N., and Snyder, P.K. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–574.Google Scholar
Fynn, R. 2008. Savory insights—is rangeland science due for a paradigm shift? Grassroots: Newsletter of the Grassland Society of Southern Africa 8:25–37.Google Scholar
Garbach, K., Milder, J.C., DeClerck, F.A.J., Montenegro De Wit, M., Driscoll, L., and Gemmill-Herren, B. 2017. Examining multi-functionality for crop yield and ecosystem services in five systems of agroecological intensification. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 15:11–28.Google Scholar
Gieryn, T.F. 1983. Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review 48:781–795.Google Scholar
Golman, R., Loewenstein, G., Moene, K.O., and Zarri, L. 2016. The preference for belief consonance. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 30:165–187.Google Scholar
Greiner, R., Miller, O., and Patterson, L. 2008. The role of grazier motivation and risk attitudes in the adoption of grazing best management practices. In Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society (ed.). 52nd Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society. ACT, Canberra. Available at Web site http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/6002/2/cp08gr28.pdf.Google Scholar
Hadley, C.J. 2000. The wild life of Allan Savory. Rangelands 22:6–10.Google Scholar
Hellström, T. 2000. Technoscientific expertise and the significance of policy cultures. Technology in Society 22:499–512.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, C.C. 2008. Interdisciplinarity and boundary work: Challenges and opportunities for agrifood studies. Agriculture and Human Values 25:209–213.Google Scholar
Hlwiki International. 2015. Scopus vs. Web of Science [Wiki]. Available at Web site http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Web_of_Science_vs._Scopus.Google Scholar
Hodbod, J., Barreteau, O., Allen, C., and Magda, D. 2016. Managing adaptively for multifunctionality in agricultural systems. Journal of Environmental Management 183:379–388.Google Scholar
Holling, C.S. (ed.) 1978. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
Jacsó, P. 2009. Database source coverage: Hypes, vital signs and reality checks. Online Information Review 33:997–1007.Google Scholar
Karlsson, S., Srebotnjak, T., and Gonzales, P. 2007. Understanding the North–South knowledge divide and its implications for policy: A quantitative analysis of the generation of scientific knowledge in the environmental sciences. Environmental Science & Policy 10:668–684.Google Scholar
Kent, C. and Sherren, K. 2015. Who's Afraid of Allan Savory: Probing the Impact of one Influential Author, Halifax, NS. Available at Web site https://rhompas.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/rhompasreport1_whos-afraid-of-allan-savory_kentandsherren.pdf.Google Scholar
Kent, C. and Sherren, K. 2016. Rhetorical Analysis of Practitioner Discourse: Examining the Impact in Holistic Management and Permaculture, Halifax, NS. Available at Web site https://rhompas.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/rhompasreport2_rhetorical-analysis-of-practitioner-discourse_kentandsherren.pdf.Google Scholar
Koutrika, G. 2015. Data Personalization. In Colace, F., De Santo, M., Moscato, V., Picariello, A., Schreiber, F.A., and Tanca, L. (eds). Data Management in Pervasive Systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham. p. 213–234.Google Scholar
Lalor, B.M. and Hickey, G.M. 2013. Environmental science and public policy in Executive government: Insights from Australia and Canada. Science and Public Policy 40:767–778.Google Scholar
Lord, C.G., Ross, L., and Lepper, M.R. 1979. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37:2098.Google Scholar
McCosker, T. 2000. Cell grazing—the first ten years in Australia. Tropical Grasslands 34:207–218.Google Scholar
Mills, T.J. and Clark, R.N. 2001. Roles of research scientists in natural resource decision-making. Forest Ecology and Management 153:189–198.Google Scholar
Monbiot, G. 2014. Eat more meat and save the world: The latest implausible farming miracle. The Guardian, August 4, 2014.Google Scholar
Moya-Anegón, F.D., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F., González-Molina, A., and Herrero-Solana, V. 2007. Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics 73:53–78.Google Scholar
Nelson, K.C., Brummel, R.F., Jordan, N., and Manson, S. 2014. Social networks in complex human and natural systems: The case of rotational grazing, weak ties, and eastern US dairy landscapes. Agriculture and Human Values 31:245–259.Google Scholar
Nelson, M.P. and Vucetich, J.A. 2009. On advocacy by environmental scientists: What, whether, why, and how Sobre la Abogacía por Científicos Ambientales: Qué, Sí, Porque y Cómo. Conservation Biology 23:1090–1101.Google Scholar
Nordborg, M. and Röös, E. 2016. Holistic Management—A Critical Review of Allan Savory's Grazing Method, Uppsala, Sweden. Available at Web site https://internt.slu.se/globalassets/ew/org/centrb/epok/dokument/holisticmanagement_review.pdf,SLU/EPOK-CentreforOrganicFood&Farming-Chalmers.Google Scholar
Oreskes, N. 2004. Science and public policy: What's proof got to do with it? Environmental Science & Policy 7:369–383.Google Scholar
Palmer, C.L. and Cragin, M.H. 2008. Scholarship and disciplinary practices. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 42:163–212.Google Scholar
Pannell, D.J., Marshall, G.R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., and Wilkinson, R. 2006. Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46:1407–1424.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., and Podsakoff, N.P. 2011. Sources of method bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on how to control It. Annual Review of Psychology 63:539–569.Google Scholar
Pohl, C. 2008. From science to policy through transdisciplinary research. Environmental Science & Policy 11:46–53.Google Scholar
Pontis, S. and Blandford, A. 2015. Understanding ‘influence’: An exploratory study of academics’ processes of knowledge construction through iterative and interactive information seeking. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66:1576–1593.Google Scholar
Population Division. 2002. World urbanization prospects: The 2001 revision, Data tables and highlights. In Department of Economic and Social Affairs United Nations Secretariat (ed.). Available at Web site http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wup2001/wup2001dh.pdf.Google Scholar
Robertson, D.P. and Hull, R.B. 2003. Public ecology: An environmental science and policy for global society. Environmental Science & Policy 6:399–410.Google Scholar
Roche, L.M., Cutts, B.B., Derner, J.D., Lubell, M.N., and Tate, K.W. 2015. On-Ranch grazing strategies: Context for the rotational grazing Dilemma. Rangeland Ecology & Management 68:248–256.Google Scholar
Ryan, G.W. and Bernard, H.R. 2003. Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods 15:85–109.Google Scholar
Sarewitz, D. 2004. How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environmental Science & Policy 7:385–403.Google Scholar
Savory, A. 1983. The Savory grazing method or holistic resource management. Rangelands 5:155–159.Google Scholar
Savory, A. 2013. How to Green the World's Deserts and Reverse Climate Change. Available at Web site https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change?language=en,TED.Google Scholar
Savory, A. and Butterfield, J. 1999. Holistic Management. Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Savory, A. and Parsons, S.D. 1980. The Savory grazing method. Rangelands 2:234–237.Google Scholar
Sherren, K. and Darnhofer, I. in review. Precondition to integration: In support of standalone social science in rangeland and silvo-pastoral research. Rangeland Ecology & Management.Google Scholar
Sherren, K., Fischer, J., Clayton, H., Schirmer, J., and Dovers, S. 2010. Integration by case, place and process: Transdisciplinary research for sustainable grazing in the Lachlan River catchment, Australia. Landscape Ecology 25:1219–1230.Google Scholar
Sherren, K., Fischer, J., and Fazey, I. 2012. Managing the grazing landscape: Insights for agricultural adaptation from a mid-drought photo-elicitation study in the Australian sheep-wheat belt. Agricultural Systems 106:72–83.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, P.J. and Vos, T. 2009. Gatekeeping Theory. Routledge, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Shwed, U. and Bearman, P.S. 2010. The temporal structure of scientific consensus formation. American Sociological Review 75:817–840.Google Scholar
Skupin, A. 2014. Making a mark: A computational and visual analysis of one researcher's intellectual domain. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 28:1209–1232.Google Scholar
Steel, B., List, P., Lach, D., and Shindler, B. 2004. The role of scientists in the environmental policy process: A case study from the American west. Environmental Science & Policy 7:1–13.Google Scholar
Stinner, D.H., Stinner, B.R., and Martsolf, E. 1997. Biodiversity as an organizing principle in agroecosystem management: Case studies of holistic resource management practitioners in the USA. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 62:199–213.Google Scholar
Tanaka, J.A., Maczko, K.A., Hidinger, L., and Ellis, C. 2016. Usable science for sustainable rangelands: Conclusions. Rangelands 38:90–95.Google Scholar
Teague, R., Provenza, F., Norton, B., Steffens, T., Barnes, M., Kothmann, M., and Roath, R. 2008. Benefits of multi-paddock grazing management on rangelands: Limitations of experimental grazing research and knowledge gaps. In Schroder, H.G. (ed.). Grasslands: Ecology, Management and Restoration. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Hauppauge, New York. p. 1–40.Google Scholar
Teague, R., Provenza, F., Kreuter, U., Steffens, T., and Barnes, M. 2013. Multi-paddock grazing on rangelands: Why the perceptual dichotomy between research results and rancher experience? Journal of Environmental Management 128:699–717.Google Scholar
Teague, W., Apfelbaum, S., Lal, R., Kreuter, U., Rowntree, J., Davies, C., Conser, R., Rasmussen, M., Hatfield, J., and Wang, T. 2016. The role of ruminants in reducing agriculture's carbon footprint in North America. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 71:156–164.Google Scholar
Tscharntke, T., Clough, Y., Wanger, T.C., Jackson, L., Motzke, I., Perfecto, I., Vandermeer, J., and Whitbread, A. 2012. Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biological Conservation 151:53–59.Google Scholar
Vanclay, F. 1992. Barriers to adoption: A general overview of the issues. Rural Society 2:10–14.Google Scholar
van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. 2007. VOS: A new method for visualizing similarities between objects. In Decker, R. and Lenz, H.J. (eds). Advances in Data Analysis: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Gesellschaft für Klassifikation e.V., Freie Universität Berlin, March 8–10, 2006. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. 2009. VOSviewer: A Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping, ERIM Report Series #ERS-2009-005-LIS. Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Rotterdam, Netherlands. p. 22.Google Scholar
van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. 2010. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84:523–538.Google Scholar
van Kerkhoff, L. 2005. Integrated research: Concepts of connection in environmental science and policy. Environmental Science & Policy 8:452–463.Google Scholar
Vasileiadou, E., Heimeriks, G., and Petersen, A.C. 2011. Exploring the impact of the IPCC Assessment Reports on science. Environmental Science & Policy 14:1052–1061.Google Scholar
Waghorn, T. 2012. Holistic land management: Key to global stability. Forbes. Available at Web site http://www.forbes.com/sites/terrywaghorn/2012/12/20/holistic-land-management-key-to-global-stability/.Google Scholar
Whitley, R. 1984. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. Oxford University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Sherren and Kent supplementary material

Sherren and Kent supplementary material 1

Download Sherren and Kent supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 861.4 KB