Abstract :
In the context of declining government subsidization of agriculture, many analysts have predicted reversals in certain characteristic trends of post-1945 Western agriculture with positive implications for agroecosystem well-being. One example, investigated herein, is the suggestion that, in the absence of government safety nets, farmers will seek to diversify their operations in order to buffer against production failures or market downturns in any one output. Such a shift is not only consistent with agricultural risk-management theory, but also, at first glance, early ‘mirror image’ conceptualizations of post-productivist agriculture; if (output) specialization has been an observed trend of productivism, then (output) diversification should be the trend of post-productivism. In fairness, however, where diversification has been identified as a manifestation of post-productivism, it has usually implied the development of largely non-agricultural activities that supplement household income. Clearly, a clarification of meaning is needed, and this paper offer some suggestions for doing so. Additionally, crop data from Saskatchewan, Canada are analysed for the years 1994–2000 to determine the degree to which arable producers there have sought to diversify their operations following the loss of an historically and financially significant export subsidy. Given limited evidence of diversification at the level of individual farms, the maximum scale at which crop diversity has any significance in ecological terms, a discussion follows of the various limitations to adopting an output diversification strategy to manage market and other risks, and the likelihood of farmers further pursuing output specialization in an era of reduced government support and increasingly chaotic commodity markets.
