Summary
This critical policy analysis compares agricultural sustainability discourses in EU and Chinese policy documents using a four-phase methodology to assess alignment with genuine transitions to sustainable agriculture. Both regions' policies are found to prioritise techno-economic/productionist approaches aligned with weak sustainability, whilst agroecological and ruralist discourses remain marginalised despite environmental imperatives. The authors call for deeper cultural and social critique and more participatory policymaking to enable alternative agricultural visions.
UK applicability
The findings regarding techno-economic dominance in agricultural policy discourse may resonate with UK policy contexts, particularly post-Brexit agricultural reform agendas. However, direct applicability requires separate analysis of UK policy documents and policymaking processes to determine whether similar patterns of weak sustainability framing and marginalisation of transformative approaches operate in the British context.
Key measures
Heuristic positioning of policies on weak-to-strong sustainability scale; classification of policy discourses into three sustainability positions (techno-economic/productionist, blended, agroecological/ruralist)
Outcomes reported
The study analysed and compared agricultural policy documents from the EU and China, positioning them on a heuristic scale from weak to strong sustainability based on dominant policy discourses. The analysis identified three sustainability positions (techno-economic/productionist, blended, and agroecological/ruralist) and their representation in each region's policy framework.
Topic tags
Dig deeper with Pulse AI.
Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.