Systems approach

Key to the methods used in this research is a systems approach that recognizes the interdependence of social, ecological, economic, psychological and behavioural aspects of sustainability.

Checkland’s (1985) Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), ‘developed as an alternative to the methodology of systems engineering based on defining goals or objectives’ is considered appropriate for the study of the ‘messy, ill-structured real world problems’ (ibid) associated with food and fibre production to consumption systems. Soft Systems Methodology is described by the following crucial ideas; the realisation that all real world problem situations are characterised by desire for purposeful action, that models of purposeful action can only be built on the basis of a declared context (or ‘Weltanshauung’) and that the problem solving processes require learning cycles ‘in which models of human activity systems could be used to structure a debate about change’ (Checkland 2005:A54).

A systems approach places as much emphasis on identifying and describing the connections between objects and events as on identifying and describing the objects. Checkland (1985) describes a seven stage description of action research using soft systems methodology:

1 The problem situation unstructured 2 The problem situation expressed 3 Root definitions of relevant systems 4 Making and testing conceptual models 5 Comparing conceptual models with reality 6 Identify feasible and desirable changes 7 Action to improve the problem situation

Soft Systems Methodology involves a comparison between the world as it is and models of the world as it might be, resulting in a better understanding of the world. In stage one, two and three the researcher considers the real-world problem. In stages three and four, new conceptual models are developed, and then compared with the real world model. In this process "ideal" models are compared to the actual situation to improve understanding of potential areas of improvement. Differences between the models and reality become the basis for planning changes.

Soft Systems Methodology was used in two important ways in this study. Firstly it was used to define and understand the main units of analysis used in the study, the production to consumption systems described below. Secondly, it was used in combination with adaptive theory in the development and comparison of conceptual models that describe both understandings of the ‘actual’ reality of sustainable supply chains and the ‘ideal’ or intervention model.

4.3.1 Production to consumption systems

As set out in Chapter 1, the study considers production to consumption systems rather than individual supply chain actors or segments as the primary source of information concerning food and fibre sustainability. The analysis involved assessment of environmental and social issues associated with the cycle of production from growing to consumption. This form of analysis is based on the methods developed by Courville (2001), who uses production-to- consumption systems as the main unit of analysis in her study into supply chain dynamics in Fair Trade certified coffee. Courville (2001:51) describes production-to-consumption system as a ‘hybrid of designed physical systems and human activity systems based in and limited by natural systems’.

This approach departs from literature on sustainable agriculture derived from the Natural Resource Management (NRM) / Landcare model, with its strong focus on farmers as almost the sole performers in the theatre of sustainable agriculture. The perspective used in the study views farmers within the production to consumption systems they are involved in, symbolized in the system output: the product. The model developed for use in this study was adapted from Courville (2001) and is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Production to consumption system used in this study

The production to consumption model recognises both human and environmental systems recognising the different scale at which human systems and environmental systems operate (after Courville 2001). The model focuses on the human and environmental systems directly related to the supply chain and is inclusive of all supply chain sectors from farm to consumer. However, the model also recognises within its boundaries other human systems that influence food and fibre production and consumption such as the wider community, government, non government organisations and industry. As some of the case study products are exported, local, regional, state national and international human and environmental systems are included in the model. There is a particular focus on the environmental and human systems at the farm scale. Key sustainability supports are also considered in the production to consumption systems model, represented by the black boxes at the bottom of the diagram. These may represent certification organisations, government or NGOs that support environmental and agricultural sustainability initiatives and sustainable consumption.

This model allows supply chain sectors to be considered independently but also allows the supply chain, as well as the entire production to consumption system to be considered as a complete entity. This assists in the addressing the issues raised in the agri-food literature reviewed in the previous chapter concerning the difficulty of integrating both consumer and producer perspectives.

4.3.2 Boundary critique

As Midgley (2000) points out, understanding the boundaries of analysis is an essential component of operational research. Midgley (2000) argues that the development of boundaries is crucial and suggests that boundary development should consider both the type and nature of the intervention and the stakeholders involved. Boundaries need to be defined in dialogue by all those involved and affected by the intervention (Midgley 2000).

Even in the case of the insider, which I consider myself to be in this study, Midgley (2000) highlights the need to take care and time to hear the questions and associated purposes of stakeholders related to the topic. He adds that precisely because of this insider role, the researcher may not be privy to all of the relevant issues.

Once these views are established, the intervener, or catalyst, is responsible for managing the tensions between the different viewpoints of stakeholders and their own viewpoint. This, Midgley (2000: 229) points out is a critical factor in the emergent intervention:

…selection and or design of methods will be influenced by whatever boundaries are accepted during, or become dominant in the intervention

Based on this, boundaries of the study were continually assessed during the research, resulting in new participants being brought in, as described in the next chapter,. This boundary critique has important implication for determining effective interventions. The outcome of the boundary critique is considered in the concluding chapter of this thesis.