Next Article in Journal
Environmental Comfort Indicators for School Buildings in Sustainability Assessment Tools
Next Article in Special Issue
Energy Assessment of Pastoral Dairy Goat Husbandry from an Agroecological Economics Perspective. A Case Study in Andalusia (Spain)
Previous Article in Journal
An Exploratory Analysis of Factors Associated with Health-Related Physical Fitness in Adolescents. The ASSO Project
Previous Article in Special Issue
Absent Agroecology Aid: On UK Agricultural Development Assistance Since 2010

Holistic Management and Adaptive Grazing: A Trainers’ View

School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2018, 10(6), 1848;
Received: 22 March 2018 / Revised: 25 April 2018 / Accepted: 31 May 2018 / Published: 2 June 2018
Holistic Management (HM) is a grazing practice that typically uses high-intensity rotation of animals through many paddocks, continually adapted through planning and monitoring. Despite widespread disagreement about the environmental and production benefits of HM, researchers from both sides of that debate seem to agree that its emphasis on goal-setting, complexity, adaptivity and strategic decision-making are valuable. These ideas are shared by systems thinking, which has long been foundational in agroecology and recognized as a valuable tool for dealing with agricultural complexity. The transmission of such skills is thus important to understand. Here, twenty-five Canadian and American adaptive grazing trainers were interviewed to learn more about how they teach such systems thinking, and how they reflect upon their trainees as learners and potential adopters. Every trainer considered decision-making to be a major component of their lessons. That training was described as tackling both the “paradigm” level—changing the way participants see the world, themselves or their farm—and the “concept/skill” level. Paradigm shifts were perceived as the biggest challenge for participants. Trainers had difficulty estimating adoption rates because there was little consensus on what constituted an HM-practitioner: to what level must one adopt the practices? We conclude that: (1) trainers’ emphasis on paradigms and decision-making confirms that HM is systems thinking in practice; (2) the planning and decision-making components of HM are distinct from the grazing methods; and (3) HM is a fluid and heterogeneous concept that is difficult to define and evaluate. View Full-Text
Keywords: Holistic management; adaptive grazing; agroecology; systems thinking; social-ecological system; complex system Holistic management; adaptive grazing; agroecology; systems thinking; social-ecological system; complex system
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Mann, C.; Sherren, K. Holistic Management and Adaptive Grazing: A Trainers’ View. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1848.

AMA Style

Mann C, Sherren K. Holistic Management and Adaptive Grazing: A Trainers’ View. Sustainability. 2018; 10(6):1848.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mann, Carolyn, and Kate Sherren. 2018. "Holistic Management and Adaptive Grazing: A Trainers’ View" Sustainability 10, no. 6: 1848.

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop