Resilience as a universal criterion of health.

To promote and maintain health in agricultural and food systems, appropriate criteria are needed for the description and assessment of the health of soils, plants, animals, humans and ecosystems. Here we identify the concept of resilience as a universally applicable and fundamentally important criterion of health in all relevant areas of agriculture. We discuss definitions of resilience for soils, plants, animals, humans and ecosystems, and explore ways in which resilience can be applied as a criterion of health in different agricultural contexts. We show how and why resilience can be seen as a key criterion of health. Based on this, we discuss how resilience can be used as a link between soil, plant, animal, human and ecosystem health. Finally, we highlight four key areas for future research on resilience in agriculture, namely spatial and temporal scaling of resilience; effects of diversity; the role of networks for resilience; and stakeholder involvement.

Assessing health in agriculture--towards a common research framework for soils, plants, animals, humans and ecosystems.

In agriculture and food systems, health-related research includes a vast diversity of topics. Nutritional, toxicological, pharmacological, epidemiological, behavioural, sociological, economic and political methods are used to study health in the five domains of soils, plants, livestock, humans and ecosystems. An idea developed in the early founding days of organic agriculture stated that the health of all domains is one and indivisible. Here we show that recent research reveals the existence and complex nature of such health links among domains. However, studies of health aspects in agriculture are often separated by disciplinary boundaries. This restrains the understanding of health in agricultural systems. Therefore we explore the opportunities and limitations of bringing perspectives together from the different domains. We review current approaches to define and assess health in agricultural contexts, comparing the state of the art of commonly used approaches and bringing together the presently disconnected debates in soil science, plant science, veterinary science and human medicine. Based on a qualitative literature analysis, we suggest that many health criteria fall into two paradigms: (1) the Growth Paradigm, where terms are primarily oriented towards continued growth; (2) the Boundary Paradigm, where terms focus on maintaining or coming back to a status quo, recognising system boundaries. Scientific health assessments in agricultural and food systems need to be explicit in terms of their position on the continuum between Growth Paradigm and Boundary Paradigm. Finally, we identify areas and concepts for a future direction of health assessment and research in agricultural and food systems.