Autor(es):
Pinto-Correia, Teresa 
; Menezes, Helena ; Barroso, Filipe
Data: 2013
Identificador Persistente: http://hdl.handle.net/10174/10220
Origem: Repositório Científico da Universidade de Évora
Assunto(s): Montado landscape; Land manager; Typology; Productivism and post-productivism; Management paradigms
Descrição
Transition theories suggest that there is a spatial, temporal and structural co-existence
of several processes of transition from productivism to post-productivism going on in rural areas
in multiple combinations resulting in a more complex, contested, variable mix of production,
consumption and protection goals. This is particularly true for South European landscapes
dominated by extensive agro-silvo-pastoral systems. The fragile agricultural sector is in some
cases just entering the productivist phase, let alone moving towards post-productivism both in
terms of discourse and management practices. At the same time, these are landscapes increasingly
valued by society, and this demand should encourage new strategies for farm survival and new
ways of managing the land. But such new strategies require a paradigm shift, not only in policy
goals and formulation, but also in farmers’ attitude towards their role and their management
goals. In this paper, the question addressed is how the land managers within this system, facing
multiple transition options, are choosing different management paradigms, in the complex range
between productivism and post-productivism. Based on a farm survey in southern Portugal, a
typology of land managers is produced, aiming to grasp the combination between their
management practices in the farm and their expressed attitudes towards farm management and the
role of their farm in the landscape. Results reveal some inconsistencies between land managers’
intentions and their landscape outcomes, in an opposite sense to what has been earlier identified
in Northwestern Europe. Even if they manage a multifunctional system, their self-concept is
dominantly productivist and not affected by the public expectations of multifunctionality. This
tension may reflect contradictions in the policy framework and, at the same time, raises challenges
which the existing policy mechanisms do not consider.
