The Nature of Agricultural Systems

Author(s): J. E. Spencer and Norman R. Stewart

Source: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 63, No. 4 (Dec., 1973), pp.
529-544
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of the Association of American Geographers
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2562058
Accessed: 11/10/2010 21:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Association of American Geographers and Taylor & Francis, Ltd. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Annals of the Association of American Geographers.

http://www.jstor.org
 THE NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS
J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART

ABSTRACT. Many problemsas to the originsof, and differences in, agricultural

practicearoundtheearthare stillunsolved.A persistent questionconcernsthe num-
Varied approachesand conceptualformulations
kindsof agriculture.
ber of different
have been employed,but these often mix togetherthe bases for categorization,
whereasthereare markeddifferences betweenconceptsaimed at groupingby re-
gions,typologies,and systems.Differencesin the concepts are clarified,and nine
primarycriteriahaving second-orderelementsare set up to distinguishthirteen
agriculturalsystemsthathave evolvedsincethebeginningofprimaryproductionlate
in the MesolithicEra. KEY WORDS: Agriculture, Agriculturalregions,Agricultural
systems,Agriculturaltypologies,Classificationof agriculture.

W[THIN the broad subjectof agriculture Despite the fundamentalnature of these

geographershave assumed a share of questions and the relativelylarge literature
responsibilityfordescribingand explainingthe aroundthem,no completelysatisfactory answers
variablenatureof agricultural practice.Primary have been forthcoming. Our atlas and textbook
productionof plant and animal commoditiesis maps, because they representparticularized
amongthemostvariableand complicatedof all interpretations of basic agriculturalarrange-
human endeavors,and it is hardly surprising ment, are commonlyused with reservation,
that we cannot yet claim full comprehension qualification,or outrightdissatisfaction.The
of the patternsand processes of agricultural search for the most logical and meaningful
differentiation.Inquiry still tends to resolve structureby whichto categorizeand represent
around such fundamentalquestionsas: variationsof agriculturalpracticecontinuesto
challengegeographersregardlessof generation
1) How essentiallydissimilarare the di- or persuasion.Gregorhas reviewedand com-
verseagriculturallandscapesof theearth? mentedon a large numberof importantcon-
2) Do dissimilaragriculturallandscapes re- tributions to thisgeneraltheme,and Grigghas
flectgenericformsof agriculture? reviewed many of the concepts dealing with
3) What kinds of criteria best serve to agriculturalregionalization.'Both the signifi-
isolate genericdifferencesin agriculture? cance and complexityof the problemare sug-
4) Where,how, and underwhat conditions gestedin persistentefforts by the International
did variouskindsof agriculture originate Geographical Union to evolve uniformand
and develop? acceptable bases for spatial comparison of
5 ) What changes are taking place in the various attributeson a global scale. Commis-
natureand practiceof worldagriculture? sions establishedto map world agricultureac-
In essence these questions are directedto the cording to a standardlegend, to standardize
central but unresolved issues of how many agriculturalnomenclature,and to constructa
specific kinds of agricultureexist (or have typologyfor world agricultureare working
existed), and how the observedfacts of vari- towardcommon objectives.2This paper is in-
able agriculturalpracticecan be mosteffectively
and realisticallyorganizedto distinguishthem. 1 Howard F. Gregor, Geography of Agriculture:
Themes in Research (Englewood Cliffs,N. J.: Pren-
tice-Hall, 1970); and David Grigg, "The Agricultural
Accepted for publication 11 March 1973.
Regions of the World: Review and Reflections,"Eco-
nomic Geography, Vol. 45 (1969), pp. 95-132.
Dr. Spencer is Professor of Geography at the Univer- 2 The three commissions of the International Geo-
sity of California in Los Angeles, CA 90024, and Dr. graphical Union are: Commission on World Land Use
Stewart is Associate Professor of Geography at the Survey, No. 3, Hans Boesch, Chairman; Commission
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee in Milwaukee, on International Geographical Terminology, No. 5,
WI 53201. Emil Meynen, Chairman; and Commission on Agri-
ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS Vol. 63, No. 4, December 1973
? 1973 by the Associationof AmericanGeographers. Printedin U.S.A.

529
530 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

tendedas an argumentative contribution to this earth.Surelyit is thenatureof primaryproduc-

effort. Our studyhas tangentialimplicationsfor tion, itself, that we are tryingto describe,
all the problemsraised,but is more pointedly analyze, and categorize. To those concerned
aimed at the recognitionof genericformsand withboththevarietyof typesand theirresultant
kindsof agriculture and theirpotentialvalue as landscapes the operationof the farmsbecomes
a basis for differentiation of world agricultural the focus of study.Land, plants and animals
patterns. as "crops," technology,and productiveinputs
of energyand resourcesall determinethe levels
BASES FOR APPROACHES
of productionand create culturallandscapes.
One basic objectiveof geographicalanalysis Man is importantin this contextonly as an
of agriculture is theidentification and classifica- agent,the operatorof the farmwho normally
tionof its areallyvariablecomponents.Straight- maximizesproduction.Decisions are mechanis-
forwardas this issue may appear, there has ticallyarrivedat, and can onlybe accountedfor
been a persistentdivergenceof opinion on the by the concept of "economic man." This ap-
most appropriateends and means, and ap- proachcan be followedto itslogicalends so that
proachesto the problemvaryin relationto the varietiesof categoriesresult,but the haunting
wide range of perspectiveswithingeography. question is the degree of realityachieved by
It has been argued, for example, that the consideringman a disembodiedspiritmechanis-
onlyeffective approachto the studyof agricul- ticallytriggering productionprocesses.Success
tureis the'examinationof the individualfarm, in thisapproachdependson accurateand com-
thatis, theanalysisof an explicitplot of ground pletedata on thefullrangeof operationalactivi-
on which some kind of primaryagricultural ties in all partsof the earth.The acquisitionof
productiontakes place. The precise nature, the basic data, preferablyin some quantified
kind,level,quality,and productivity of agricul- formfor effectivecomparison,is a laborious
turecan onlybe discernedby detailedexamina- chore not yet completed.
tion of the elementsthatgo into any one case It can also be arguedthatthe worldmap is
of primaryproduction,therebyallowingdirect the basis on which any characterizationof
and accuratecomparisonwithothercases of a agriculturalproductionmust hinge. A clear
different nature.Such an approach poses for- depictionof dominantmodes of agricultureby
midable if not insoluble problems.Farms are separate spatial units becomes the objective.
notlaid out and operatedby universalspecifica- Depictionof thewide rangeof typesin any one
tions; no two farms are ever identical since regionmust give way to majoritycomponents
theyvary in the microecologicalattributesof that can be shown in unitarytermsin areal
site, situation,quality, and size; since their dimensionsdictatedby the scale of the map.
operatorsare never fullycontrolledto ensure The usual atlas map should then present a
identical productionprocedures according to simple and clear set of regional patternsin
variantmodes; and since theiroperatorsprob- which elements are shown at unitarylevels
ably neverhave identicalfundsof knowledge, withoutcomplex overlap of many elementsin
equipment,capital, and skills. Furthermore, the same unit of area. Whereas the studentof
notwithstanding consolidationin modern cor- individualfarmsand the studentof operational
porateor collectivizedcontexts,theremuststill rankingsare "splitters,"the cartographer filling
be close to 250,000,000 "farms"scatteredover in hismap by unitarycomponentsis a "lumper,"
the earth. Obviously some formof sampling, seekingthe dominantmode forany one spatial
grouping,or generalizationmust be soughtin uniton his map. Unfortunately thereare widely
order to arrive at any understandingof the differing views on appropriatecriteriadistin-
natureof agriculturalendeavor. guishingdominantmodes,and theirrepresenta-
It has been argued that any groupingof tionis dependenton matterssuch as scale, that
modes of primaryagriculturalproductionmust have little directly to do with agricultural
concentrateon the formsand kindsof primary practice.
productioncarried on within the plots and Fourthly,it has been persuasivelyargued
rangesof land that make up the farmsof the thatthecontemporary worldmustbe thetheater
in whichagriculture mustbe ordered,since all
cultural Typology, No. 15, Jerzy Kostrowicki, Chair- modes must be examinedin the same way to
man. permitcomparativeanalysis.Since the agricul-
1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 531

turepracticedtodayoccupies the landscapesof culturerealmsof theearth.At no timeshortof

primaryproduction,there is no call for the theeighteenth centurydid agricultural man ever
inclusionin any list of categoriesof the forms abandontheculturalperformances thatinvested
practicedin any historicpast era. Exclusion of primaryproductionwith elementswe distin-
remnantalformsof primaryproduction,those guish as peasant systemsand a "way of life."3
thatno longercontributesignificant volumesof The marketplaceand purelysecular trade did
produce, would greatlysimplifyproblems of slowlydevelop in the early world,but within
field examinationof world farmscapes.This the framework of intergroup sociopoliticalrela-
approach neglects the facts that progressive tionshipsin whichthe establishment and main-
change was not only characteristicof earlier tenanceofpeacefultradingcontactswithnearby
practicebut thatchangeis takingplace rapidly social groupswas a primaryobjective.In only
today to produce new formsnot yet widely certainparts of the earth,afterthe eighteenth
accepted and not yet occupyinglarge areas. century,has agricultureeven now been "secu-
Any schemethatattemptsfull-scalecategoriza- larized" of its socioculturalsignificance by eco-
tion must allow the inclusion of relict (but nomicconceptsof maximizedprofitmaking.In
identifiable)formsof agricultural practice,just many parts of the earth the socioculturalin-
as it must allow for the inclusionof evolving volvementsthat stillinfluenceor directopera-
formsnot yet widely distributed. tions in agriculturalproductionformthe very
Finally,it can be argued that geographical noneconomicinvolvement thatis the despairof
analysis of agriculturehas been unduly com- those who seek to "modernize" the cultures
pressed to fitthe relativelyrestrictive require- of the underdevelopedworld.
mentsof moderneconomic theory-as if the The inclusionof socioculturalcriteriain the
sole aim of all primaryproductionhad always assessmentof forms of agriculturalpractice
been the maximizingof materialreturns,and presents thornyproblems.4The isolation of
the only significantdeterminants of its practice effectivecriteriain social organizationand in-
had been the forcesof themarketplace.In fact stitutionalstructuring among different societies
fornearlyten thousandyearsagricultural prac- has consistentlybaffled agriculturalgeogra-
tice has been more of a socioculturalthan a phers,leadingmoreoftenthannot to the rejec-
mechanisticprofit-making endeavor. Thus the tion of such mattersas nongeographic.The
search for generic distinctionsin agricultural heart of the problemlies in identification of
practice must not only examine operational those elementsof socioculturalstructurethat
elements but must inquire into the cultural possess validityin operationalterms,and that
milieu withinwhich agricultureis carried on. can be equated with technologicaland strictly
Particularlythe elementsof historicchange in input-output criteriain orderto satisfysecular-
agriculturalpracticecannotbe dissociatedfrom ized theory.It is necessaryto comprehendthe
reciprocal change in social organizationand operationalimpactson agriculturalpracticeof
politicalinstitutions. the evolvingculturalinstitutionalisms thatonce
Processes developingnew agriculturalland- weresimplyarrangedsocioeconomicand socio-
scapesand operationaltechnologiesoccurwithin
evolvingculturesystemsin whichhumaninitia- 3 "Peasant societies"had/haveinstitutionalizedso-
tive is the intrinsicdrivingforce. During the ciopoliticalcontrolsthatexertstronginfluenceon the
late MesolithicEra primaryproductionbegan local agriculturalsystem.The earlymodernization of
as an alternativeand collateralformof acquisi- peasant agriculturalsystemsin Europe, as well as
tionof thosefoodstuffs necessaryto thebiologi- elsewhere,had as much to do withchange in these
controlsas with technology;George Dalton, "Peas-
cal subsistenceof smallworkingbandsof people antriesin Anthropologyand History,"CurrentAn-
who collectedand ate as theygrewhungry.As thropology,Vol. 13 (1972), pp. 385-415; and S. H.
"agriculture"evolved and spread, many of Franklin, The European Peasantry, the Final Phase
man's (by then) well habituatedactivitiesper- (London: Methuen& Co., 1969).
4 Clarence W. Olmstead,"The Phenomena,Func-
sisted. Despite the gradual acquisitionof in- tioning Units,and Systemsof Agriculture," in J. Kos-
creasinglycomplex technologies,people have trowickiand W. Tyszkiewicz,eds., Essays on Agri-
continued to surround "economic" behavior cultural Typology and Land Utilization, Geographia
with formsof noneconomicbehavior that be- Polonica,Vol. 19 (1970), has a numberof conceptual
principlesthat carrysociopoliticalimplications,and
came stylizedinto distinctiveculturepatterns the diagramsare suggestive,but the accompanying
in thevariedlocal environments makingup the textfallsshortof spellingout thoseimplications.
532 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

politicalcontrols.Involved are such aspects as patterncharacterizedby genetic and generic

the transformation of usufructory controlover cohesion of elements,traits,technologies,pro-
resourcerangesinto systemsof feudal control, cedures,and activities.Individualsystemsdiffer
theninto systemsof privateownership-tenancyin the innovativedevelopmentand employment
controls and, recently,into systemsof state of dissimilarsociocultural,technological,and
controls;or involvedare the transformation of operational methodsbroughtto bear on the
obligationalgift-giving into the myriadforms productionand dispositionof assemblages of
of sociallyinfluencedbarterdealings,theninto plantand animalcommodities.In pluralusage,
exacted tributeand requisitionedsupply,then agriculturalsystemsrefersto an orderlyand
into secularizedbarterlacking social involve- loosely evolutionary,hierarchicalgroupingof
mentand, finally,into modernnonsocial com- kinds of agriculturalpracticesdistinguished on
mercial trade relyingon supply-demandcon- the basis of a small numberof universal,hence
trols.Such socioculturalelementshave played primary,genetic/generic criteria.The grouping
powerfulroles in creatingoperationaldiversity formsan open-endedstructuring that includes
in agriculturalpracticefromNeolithicto mod- both the earliestproceduresof the initialagri-
erntimes,and thetransformation of institution- culturalsystem(once plant and animaldomes-
alized systemsplays a role in alteringthe agri- ticationhad been achieved),and themostrecent
cultural system.These are complex elements procedures now undergoingformulationinto
withwhichto deal, but geographerswho would different and morecomplexlyorganizedpatterns.
fully understandvariationsin the form and usage the termtypologyis a
In agricultural
articulationof agriculturalpractice must find plural concept in which the identification of
ways to incorporateculturalfactorsinto their specificvarietiesof agricultural activityis based
analyses along with the simple technological upon the applicationof numerousbut selective
and crop criteriawith which they have been criteriachosen arbitrarily froma wide rangeof
longfamiliar. The establishmentof
definablecharacteristics.
Other bases for approaches to the under- a typologyinvolves distinguishingdissimilar
standingof agriculture can be argued,but it is "types of farming"withoutestablishingany
quite apparentthatfollowingany one approach developmentalor genetic structuringof the
will lead to a categorizationsuited only to a resultanttypes,and withoutnecessarilyplotting
particularobjective.Examinationof these ap- all typesin any spatialunitless thanthe whole
proaches leads to the conclusion that several earth.
different kinds of classificationsare possible, The termregionis here taken to be a con-
althoughin much of the currentliteratureall tiguous area of lands, on the cultivatedparts
approaches seem to be considered almost of which recognizablydominant assemblages
synonymous variants.In thesectionsthatfollow of crops/animalscharacterizeagriculturalpro-
we have attemptedto distinguishclearly be- duction. The term agriculturalregions refers
tweenkinds of categorizations, with particular to some orderlygroupingor arrangementof
concernfortheconceptof systemsas a realistic unitsof area by theirdefinitions. Regionaliza-
basis for differentiation of world agricultural tionmaybe based on systemicand/ortypologi-
patterns. underthe rubrics"predominant
cal distinctions
economies,""land use associations,"or "types
THE NATURE OF CATEGORIZATIONS
of farming,"but the central objective is the
The differentiationof agricultureon a global unitarycharacterization of the organizationof
scale presupposesa classificationof basic ele- agriculturalproductionover large areas.
ments generalizedin some internallylogical
and coherentway. Systemsof categorizationto AgriculturalSystems
date have been organizedwithinone of three Amongthe firstmodernattemptsto general-
alternativeframeworks:1) systems,2) typolo- ize theevolvingnatureof agriculture on a global
gies,and 3) regions. scale was an effortto distinguishproductive
For purposes of clarity,informalworking systemsthroughthe geneticcharacteristicsof
definitionsare necessary.The term systemis theirtechnologies.The conceptualbasis forthis
heretakento referto a recognizableassemblage view is customarilycreditedto Eduard Hahn,
proceduresand activitiesthatcan who recognizedthe fundamental
of agricultural importanceof
be distinguishedas a functionallyintegrated originsand evolutionary sequencesto an under-
1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 533

standingof thedifferentiation and variableareal differentiation

would appear to have been based
expressionof agricultural For his time solely on the source of energyemployed,but
activity.5
and the state of knowledgeof the earth,Hahn implicitin the distinctionis a broad spectrum
made a significant and lastingcontribution to of culturallydetermined factorsincludingtools,
the considerationof agriculturalproductionin technologies, social organizationof labor forces,
the genetic and generic senses. Unfortunatelycrop combinations, and mechanismsforthedis-
his rationale has not been widely accepted, positionofproducts.
partlybecause it has not been fullyextended The objective of systemicanalysis is the
in theEnglishlanguageworld,and particularly isolation of a relativelysmall set of genetic
because discussionstoo oftenfounderon the criteriaapplicable to all formsof agriculture,
complexitiesof modernland use. In any case each criterionhaving an ordered subset of
a contemporarysystematiccategorizationof secondarycriteria,dependenton its inherent
agricultureincorporating the geneticprocesses complexity.The result should be a relatively
responsibleforits varietyhas yetto evolve. small hierarchicallist of agriculturalsystems
Implicit in the approach to agriculture having an almost limitlessseries of local and
throughthe concept of systemsis the recogni- subordinatevariants.The spatial organization
tion thatin the long evolutionarydevelopment of systemsand theirvariantsshould show less
of agriculturetherehave been many separate correlationwith climaticzones than did many
objectivesfor production,each of which may earlier frameworksfor classification,but it
best be understoodfroma culturalviewpoint. would emphasize relationshipsto geographic
This holds as trueforthe "money"objectiveas patternsof culturalevolutionand technological
for the seasonal feastor the underwriting of a change. Such a structuring of agriculturalsys-
religiousfestival,since the developmentof the temswould permitrecognition of theevolution-
money economy is a matterpeculiar to the arydevelopmentof agriculture, includingrecent
growthof particularculturecomplexes within modernphases in which productionhas been
one culture system.A genetic separation of increasinglydivorced from the sociocultural
differentkinds of agricultureinto agricultural matrix.The list of agriculturalsystemsmust
systemsmust include some criteriathat take provide for the inclusionof intermediateand
into accountthe socioculturaldrivesas well as transitional formswhentheirstructures become
the economic and technologicalones. known, for there well may be archaic and
Categorizationby systemsinvolvesthe iden- remnantalvariantsabout which we currently
tificationof basic geneticelementsas primary have littleknowledge,just as modernevolution-
criteria,with theirgenericallyassociated vari- ary movementsare obscuringthe traditional
ants as secondaryor tertiarycriteria.In the attributesof old systems.On a map utilizing
systemicview thereare relativelyfew primary modern cartographictechnologythe distribu-
genetic componentsbut innumerablegeneric tion of systemsneed not be shown in unitary
variants.Hahn, for example,proposed as pri- patternsby dominantmodes only, thus ac-
mary separationsthe genetic distinctionsbe- knowledging theessentialcomplexity of modern
tween"hoe culture"and "plow culture."7This real-worldagriculture.

5 For a convenient review of the evolution of con-

cepts in the categorization of agriculture,see Fritz L.
Kramer, "Eduard Hahn and the End of the 'Three
Stages of Man,'" Geographical Review, Vol. 57
(1967), pp. 73-89. The firstpresentationof the ideas
was in Eduard Hahn, "Waren die Menschen der Urzeit
zwischen Jagerstufeund der Ackerbaus Nomaden?"
Die Ausland, Vol. 64 (1891), pp. 481-87. The present
paper makes no effortto trace all concepts herein
discussed.
6 Most German authors follow Hahn's lead in pre-
senting broadly categorized economies. Maps in En-
glish language atlases have adopted a similar broad
treatment under such headings as Predominant
Economies.
7 Hahn employed the termsHackbau and Ackerbau,
and the distinctionwas that of human versus animal
Agricultural
Regions
The concept of spatial similarityin patterns
of agriculturalproductionhas a considerable
energy, Hahn, op. cit., footnote 5. Hahn clearly rec-
ognized the confusion inherentin "hoe culture," and
alternated between defending the term and seeking
ways to refineand clarifyit; Kramer, op. cit., footnote
5. The full categorization developed by Hahn was set
forth in "Die Wirtschaftsformender Erde," Peter-
mnann'sMitteillngen, Vol. 38 (1892), pp. 8-12, in
which the primary forms were: hunting and fishing,
hoe culture,plantation culture, European-West Asiatic
agriculture, animal husbandry, and horticulture. A
modified version of his map is reproduced in Grigg,
op. cit., footnote 1.
534 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

history,the tracingof whichis not an objective Whittleseyemployedthe terms"systems"and

of thispaper. Many maps wereproducedin the "regions" interchangeably, and his map com-
nineteenthand early twentiethcenturiescom- bines the two concepts.12 Shiftingcultivation
bining different elementsof agriculturalpro- was mapped, systematically, whereverWhittle-
duction and showing their relationshipsto sey'sknowledgeheld it operativewithoutquali-
aspectsof environment.8 One of themosteffec- tativecommenton its origin,but mediterranean
tive was the compositemap createdby Baker agriculturewas accepted as the classical and
whichestablishedthebasic patternsforall suc- unique productof the Mediterraneanbasin, an
ceedingmaps of the agricultural regionsof the almostperfectexpressionof regionalism.Medi-
UnitedStates."This examplehas been followed terraneanagriculturewas portrayedin similar
in manylater constructsfor otherparts of the climaticregionsbecause recentEuropean set-
earth,and has been elaborated upon in later tlerspresumablyhad carriedan identicalkind
workthattrendedin the directionof typology. of agriculturewith them.'3In contrastto his
In the constructionof a set of agricultural enchantment with the Mediterranean,Whittle-
regions,whetherfora local territory or forthe sey's writingsuggeststhat he was discouraged
world as a whole, it is necessaryto select the by whathe could learn of southernand eastern
dominantmode of agriculturalproductionfor Asia, and could not view the Orientas a sys-
each areal unit. Subordinateproductionpat- tematist.14In effecthe broke the Orient into
ternsmustbe excluded,and all local variance
must be suppressed.The map of agricultural
regions can present comparative data in a of theagriculture practiced,"Whittlesey,op. cit.,foot-
note 10, p. 200.
usefulmannerand, when properlyused, is a 12Whittleseywrote one sentenceemployingboth
valuable tool, but it cannot effectively depict terms:"In thispaper an attemptis made to further
localized variationor zones of complex mix- comparativestudyof agriculturalregionsby ranging
tures.The numberof regionsinto which any on a singlemap all the agriculturalsystemsof the
firstdegreeof magnitude,
largearea can be dividedis criticallydependent by and to clarifycla'ssification
restrictingit to propertiesinherentin the agricul-
on the scale of the map. The selectivecriteria tureitself,"Whittlesey, op. cit., footnote10, p. 200.
employedin choosingthe dominantmode must Elsewherehe alternated"region"and "system"in re-
be gross and generalized. ferringto the same issue.The titleof the paper used
Ostensibly exemplary of the regional ap- the term "region,"whereasthelargestnumberof cate-
goriesplaced on themap weremoreproperlysystems
proachis the worldmap of Major Agricultural than regions,althoughthe depictionwas for regions
Regions publishedin 1936 by Whittlesey, and as such.
13 The textreads: "Fromthegeographic
still carried in essentiallyunrevisedform in standpoint,
Mediterranean Agricultureis the mostsatisfactory of
many publications.10The map covered the all thetypes.Probably becauseit represents an ancient
world withregionalizedpatternsbased on the and stable collaborationbetweenman and the land.
nature of agriculturaloperationsthemselves.11 So vital has thisprovedthat it stoutlymaintainsits
characterin the regionof its origin,despitebuffetings
of the worldwideshiftfromisolationto interdepen-
8 Grigg,op. cit.,footnote1, reproducedthe criteria denteconomics.The settlement by Europeansin the
and worldmaps formanyof the regionalizations, but new continents has only emphasizedthe integrity of
did not deal explicitlywithcriteria/maps for smaller the type,by developingin each new continenta re-
units. gion approximating its prototypein the Old World,"
9 0. E. Baker,"A GraphicSummaryof American Whittlesey, op. cit.,footnote10, pp. 226-27. The text
Agriculture, Based Largelyon the Census of 1920,"' thenpointsout some featuresin the Mediterranean
in United States Depatament of Agriculture,Yearbook, culturallandscapeand concludes:"Yet eventhepoorer
1921 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, peasantspossesshouseholdgoods morenumerousand
1922). The map is entitled"Agricultural Regionsof more valuable than the low-latitudeorientalfarmer
theUnitedStates,"and appearson p. 146. can boast,"p. 228. The map as originallyprepareddid
10 Goode's World Atlas, thirteenthedition (Chi- not includeparts of southernAustraliaas zones of
cago: Rand McNally, 1970), pp. 34-35. Comparison Mediterranean climate,and fewadaptersof theWhit-
of the currentmap with the original in Derwent tleseymap have added thisomission.
Whittlesey, "MajorAgricultural Regionsof theEarth," 14 Afternotingthe characteristicsof the cultivation
Annals,Associationof AmericanGeographers, Vol. 26 systemWhittlesey commented:"In spiteof indefati-
(1936), pp. 199-240,revealsa veryfewsmallchanges gable labor,per capitaproductionis not highand the
in details. people are abjectlypoor. They live in close-setand
11Whittlesey's wordingwas: "In the classification close-packedvillagescrowdedupon the smallestpos-
herepresented regionsare recognizedand groupedinto sible acreage,to preservepreciousland fortillage,on
typeson theexclusivebasis of the inherent properties sand spits,tonguesof unirrigableland, or other in-
1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 535

two regions: Intensivesubsistencetillagewith ber of ways.The selectionof first-order criteria

rice dominant,and Intensivesubsistencetillage attemptsto diagnose those operationalaspects
withoutpaddy rice. Further,he adopted the thatcan be measuredin some finiteway.Ranges
regionaltechniqueof placing unitarypatterns of values maybe establishedforeach first-order
on themap withoutallowingthepossibilitythat element to provide discriminatory ability in
morethanone systemcould be practicedin any those criteriafor which adequate quantitative
These twomattersofmixedexecu-
one region.15 data can be secured. Second- and third-order
tion have always discomfitedmany users of criteriamaythenallow finedegreesof discrimi-
theWhittlesey map. nation of farmingtypes that can set apart
localized patternsof agriculturalpractice.
AgriculturalTypologies The typologicalapproachhas been employed
The thirdapproach to the differentiation of by theUnitedStatesDepartmentof Agriculture
agricultureis theconstruction of farmingtypes.Normally
of typologiesthat in its differentiation
can distinguish"types of farming."Many dif- cartographic representation cri-
is by first-order
ferentlycontrivedgroupingsbelongingto this teria only, but detailed studies employing
familyhave been produced,seekingto classify second- and third-order criteriadivide agricul-
agriculturalconditionsin some partof theearth turalpracticein the United States into a very
withoutconstitutingformal typologies.16The large number of localized patterns.17 Third-
simplerconstructsoftencloselyresemblemaps order criteriaoftenrelate to culturalvariables
of agriculturalregions.The simplercriteriafor so far as these can be distinguished.
discrimination of the spatialunitsin a typology There have been few attemptsat the con-
are the frequentlygrown crops and animals, struction of a universaltypologyof agriculture
eithersinglyor in some rangeof combinations, applicable to the whole earth; it is easier to
and the cartographicproduct is a composite reprinta slightlymodifiedversionof the Whit-
distributionmap. The true typologyseeks a tleseymap or to constructa generalizedmap of
largerrange of criteria,adding to crops, ani- predominanteconomies.A commissionof the
mals, and crop/animalratios such criteriaas InternationalGeographicalUnion has been at
farmsize, land productivity, marketorientation, workon a formaltypologyforsome yearsand
labor application,operatingtechnology,power is makingprogress.s The search is for a rea-
input,and fertilization.The searchfora typol- sonablylimitednumberof variablesboth syn-
ogy employsthe "splitter"techniquein a num-
of the UnitedStatesDepart-
17 Severalpublications
feriorsoils. In delta districtswhole populationsmay mentofAgriculture and theBureauof theCensushave
dwell on houseboats.The furnishings of the homes numbersof third-order
presenteddifferent areal units.
are meager,"Whittlesey, op. cit.,footnote10, p. 221. Perhapsthe mostdetailedwas F. F. Elliott,Regional
These qualitativecommentsare not primaryto the Problems in Agricultural Adjustment (Washington,
identificationof the operativeagricultureof southern D.C.: AgriculturalAdjustmentAdministration, 1935),
China. Whittleseyrelatedthe second type (without in which 12 major type-of-farming regionswere di-
paddyrice) to northern China,but thentiedit to the vided into 100 subregionsand 514 type-of-farming
aridmargins, to somedesertoases,and finallyto Egypt areas. The studyemployeda restricted list of typo-
as an example.He foundsome likenessin livingpat- logical criteriamapped on a regionalbasis. A later
ternsin the Sudan and in the MexicanHighland,but publicationwithfirst-ordermaps of farmingtypesis
remarked that ". . . it would not do to press the paral- Generalized Types of Farming in the United States,
lelism too far. True 'oriental'agriculturedoes not AgricultureInformationBulletin No. 3 (Washing-
extendwestwardand southwardbeyondthe Sahara," ton: Bureauof Agricultural Economics,1950), which
p. 223. has nine major agriculturalregions,61 subregions,
15 The originalWhittlesey map was containedon and 165 generalizedtype-of-farming areas. The Na-
twofold-insheetsin blackand whiteat a level of car- tional Atlas of the United States of America (Washing-
tographyand reproduction somewhatbelow that of ton, D.C.: United States Geological Survey,1970)
othermaps thenbeingpublished.The economicsof containsa new map presentingland use by sixteen
publicationmayhavedictatedsimplecartographic pre- first-order criteria,butwhetherthisis supportedby an
sentation,and Whittleseymighthavepreferred a more available studydepictingmore detailedsecond-order
complexrendition undermorefavorableconditionsof subregionalizations and third-ordertype-of-farming
publication. areas is not knownat thiswriting.
16 One of the strictlytechnicalrecenttypological 18 JerzyKostrowickihas publishednumerouspre-
constructionsis A. N. Duckhamand G. B. Masefield, liminary paperson theissuesinvolved.Severalof these
Farming Systems of the World (New York: Praeger were mimeographedworkingpapers distributedin
Publishers,1969), in whichthe operationalelements connectionwith the I. G. U. Commissionon Agri-
of categorizationare almostwhollyeconomic. culturalTypology,but see the papersin Geographia
536 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

theticand universallyapplicable that may be time,and mean littlein the face of poor data,
utilizedas first-order diagnosticcharacteristics. the range in values appears to presentmore
The aim is to findvariablesforwhichthereare effectiveguidelinesthan do averages, for ap-
sufficient data to rank levels withineach vari- proximations of rangecan, if necessary,remain
able. Whereasobjectivelyquantifiablevariables descriptive.For some criteriathe typologistis
have been sought,thereis recognitionthatcer- forcedto use purelydescriptivedata thatcan-
tainhighlysignificant criteriacannotbe quanti- not be equated in any meaningfulway with
fied,but can onlybe separatedinto classes by those generated in numericallymeasurable
type.A practicaltypologyof thissortcould be terms.
of tremendous value in comparativestudies,but The approachto the formulation of a set of
it is unlikelythattheproductcould be translated agriculturalsystemsfaces questions that are
intoa simplemap. essentiallynonquantitative. The distinctionbe-
tween the conceptsof usufructand individual
PROBLEMS IN WEIGHTING CRITERIA in land is generic,and the same
proprietorship
The problemof effective weighting of criteria is trueof thedistinction betweentheapplication
has been commonto all methodsof classifying of human and nonhumanenergyas the source
agriculturaloperations and landscapes. The of agricultural work.The systematist's problems
nonequivalenceof the criteriaon any one list relate to the identification of critical genetic
is an almostinsolubleproblemin any method. criteriathatoriginateas operationalaspects of
No clearly establishedsets of known values different modesof culturaldevelopment.Unfor-
may be equated by simpleprocedures,and no tunately,little progresshas been made since
sets of effective averagescan be used in multi- Hahn firstset down his small list of generic
variateanalysis.The problemof weighting does terms.If a relativelysmall numberof critical,
not disappear when using only the operative genericcriteriacould be agreedupon, it would
characteristicsof agricultureon which some seem practicalto assign them equal weighting
data can be secured. in general application.This could then place
In settingdown criteriaforthe map of agri- thefocusofconceptualization properlyon selec-
culturalregionstherelativecrop dominancehas tion of the criteriathemselvesratherthan on
been theusual criterionforthe dominantmode some mechanicalscalingprocedure.
to be assigneda spatial unit. This dominance
CRITERIA IMPORTANT TO SYSTEMS
can normallybe estimatedfairlyreliably,and
OF AGRICULTURE
significant complementary crops may be added
whereappropriateor necessary.'9Similarly,the Any systemof agriculturewill bear strong
relativeimportanceof livestockover cropping relationto the structural makeupof the culture
patternsmay also be estimatedwithreasonable of the societythat employsthat system.This
accuracy.A farmorethornyproblemfaces the premise may appear tautological,but it has
typologist who seeks to discriminate amongthe been almosttotallyignoredby thosewho insist
relativelylarge numbersof criteriahe is in- on examinationof only the inherentelements
clinedto prefer.Since averageschangethrough of agricultureitself,and who therebyproduce
typologiesor regionalisms.At least threeattri-
Polonica, Vol. 1 (1964), pp. 111-46; Vol. 2 (1964), bute complexesof culturesystemsstronglyin-
pp. 159-67; Vol. 14 (1968), pp. 265-74; and Kos- fluence the evolutionarydevelopmentof an
trowickiand Tyszkiewicz, op. cit., footnote 4. agriculturalsystem: organizationalconstructs,
19 Perhaps one of the best examples of a map of
agriculturalregions by straightforward crop patterns is economic conceptualisms,and technological
the classic "Agricultural Regions of China" in John assemblages. Each complex manifestsitselfin
Lossing Buck, Land Utilization of China (Chicago, ways as a societyadoptsspecificmeth-
different
Universityof Chicago Press, 1935). This map was re- ods in, and objectivesfor,carryingon agricul-
produced in slightlymodified form in J. E. Spencer, turalproduction.These culturecomplexeshave
Asia, East by South (New York: John Wiley, 1954),
p. 322, and in still more modifiedform in J. E. Spen- played historicalroles in the initial develop-
cer and W. L. Thomas, Asia East by South: A Cul- mentsand subsequentalterations of agriculture,
tural Geography, 2nd edition (New York: John Wi- and each is criticalto the categorization of sys-
ley, 1971), p. 528; Buck's original version is on p. 413 tems of agriculture.We have set down our
of Harry Robinson, Monsoon Asia: A Geographical
Survey, revised edition (New York: Praeger Pub-
elaborationof thesignificant elements
first-order
lishers, 1967). of each set of attributesand those aspects of
1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 537

TABLE 1.-TENTATIVE STRUCTURING OF FIRST-ORDER CRITERIA FOR

DIFFERENTIATION OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS

Set/ Aspects/
Element Activities resulting

I. Organizational matrices Organizational focus

A. Societalmatrix Social stratification
B. Tenurialmatrix Occupance/land tenure
C. Institutional
matrix Societalinputs/subsidies
D. Labor matrix Forms/groupings oflabor

II. Economic processes Decision-making

E. Producerconcentration Choicesof crops/animals
F. Dispositionalprocess Allocationofproducts
G. Redistributiveflow Socioeconomiccosts

III. Operational applications Mechanics of production

H. Energyinputs Applications
of energy
I. Technologicalcomplementation Additivetechnologies
Source: Prepared by authors.

agricultural economycontrolledby each (Table (tenurialmatrix).All societiesshow some insti-

1). The elaborationof the second-orderdis- tutionalformsthatimpingeon thenatureof the
tinctions,because of its length,is placed at the agriculturalsystem,rangingfrom "no- work"
end (Table 4). days amongshifting cultivatorsto experimental
Several significant criteriawhichderivefrom breeding stations operatingunder formalized
essential forms of human organizationhave departmentsof agriculture(institutionalma-
been placed under Organizational Matrices trix). The organizationalprinciplesby which
(Table 1). The interrelations betweenhuman any societyhandles its agricultural labor forces
organizationand agricultural practiceare acute, helps in shaping its agriculturalsystem,to
mutual,and even symbioticin a sense, since whichthe historicalterationsin labor practices
existing organizationmay direct features of in the United States Cotton Belt speak very
agriculture as it initiallybecomes part of a cul- eloquently(labor matrix).
turesystem,just as laterchangesin the agricul- Three criteriathatare primarily economicin
turalsystemmay lead to alterationsin phases natureand functionhave been placed underthe
of human organization(societal matrix). As headingof Economic Processes.All studentsof
early social elaboration took place, culture agriculturalclassificationmake a place for the
groups placed individualsin separate ranking firstcriterion,the crops or animals produced
positions in society. Small groups of social (producerconcentration).Under dispositionof
equals, such as lineage groups,could not have productsitwillappearthatwe havenotarranged
attemptedagriculturalproductionin the same the second-orderelementsin a way commonto
manneras social groupsthatrangedtheirmem- the "subsistence versus commercial" pattern
bers fromunprivileged slaves to privilegedaris- (dispositionalprocesses). The third criterion
tocrats,and a complexdemocraticsocial group too oftenforgotten in the discussionof agricul-
vaguelybased on wealth and educationneces- ture is oftenthe societal equalizer in the flow
sarily would arrangeits agriculturalactivities of wealth (redistributive flow). Any form of
differentlythaneither. agriculturalproductionhas socioeconomiccosts
Land formedthe basis for all agricultural thatare exactedby nonagricultural institutions.
operationsduringearliereras (althoughit need Such costs are elementsin patternsof redistrib-
notdo so today), and tenurialprinciplesof con- utiveflowof wealthwithina society,and they
trollingfarm land (de facto rather than de take many different forms.However they are
jure) become criticalto the distinguishment of arranged,and whatevertheirforms,thesecosts
separateagricultural systems, as seen in usufruct manifestthemselvesas integralelementsof agri-
among tribalshifting cultivatorsas opposed to culturalsystemsthat cannot be ignored.That
private ownershipamong advanced societies some culture groups of eastern Africa keep
538 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

cattlewithwhichmen buy wiveswho will work ing each or any single elementto a primary
in gardensto grow crops is an institutionalismcriterion.
affectingagriculturein that region, although We would assert that our primarycriteria
marriagesystemsper se have no place in classi- can be weightedequally in the identification of
fyingsystemsof agriculture. The southernMex- agricultural systems.The second-orderelements
ican farmermustdevotepartof his agricultural have been carefullyselectedto expresselements
productionto thesupportof thevillagefestival, of rangein characteristics withintheframework
since this is a social responsibilityhe bears in of each primarycriterion.No uniformpattern
returnfor his high status withinhis culture of range has been set up, as is customaryin
group.Social status-ranking of certainagrarian developing a typology,because the develop-
communitymembers,and the village festival, mentof culturehas not alwaysfollowedmathe-
are both nonagricultural complexesservingre- maticalprogressionas new conceptshave come
distributive-flow functionsby placing a socio- intobeing.The second-ordercriteriahave been
economic cost on agriculture.In the United chosenwithan eye to significant genericdiffer-
States the "school tax" portionof the tax on ences thatclearlyseparatelevels of activityin
land was a well-hiddenelementin the factors the workingoperationsof agriculture.
that motivatedagriculturalchange in the late It may be chargedthatwe have overloaded
nineteenthand earlytwentieth centuries,but it our primarycriteriafrom the cultural side,
also amountsto a socioeconomiccost imposed therebyindulgingin a patternof circularity;
on agriculture. thatis, we have set up so manyculturalcriteria
The two remainingcriteriaare placed to- thatby equal weighting we could only produce
getherunderOperationalApplicationsbecause a structure thatis culturallybound. Considera-
theyincludethestrictly working-operation tech- tion of this point returnsto the difference be-
nologies that carry out productiononce the tween the typologicalconcept and that of the
organizationaland decisional processes have system.Those who insistthatthecategorization
been established.The firstrelatesto the flowof of agriculture mustbe based onlyon the inher-
energy into agriculturalproduction,and the ent characteristics of agricultureitselfheavily
only distinctivefeatureis the particularman- overload theircriteriawith working-operation
ner in which the second-orderelementshave and technologicalfeatures.Most elementsthat
been distinguished (energyinputs). In the sec- derivefromtheorganizational aspectsof society
ond criterionwe take what may be considered are omitted,therebynecessarilyproducingwhat
an unusual procedurein groupingtogetherall is here consideredto be a typologyof typesof
technologiesby whichfarmersimproveon the farming.
edaphic and bioticenvironments (technological Brief descriptiveand explanatoryphrases
complementation).Although these elements
attemptto clarifythenatureof theclassificatory
may appear superficially quite unlike in forms
and properties, theyare generically similartech- criteriaused in the fullset of first-and second-
nologiesadditiveto naturalbiotic processesin order criteria (Table 4). The second-order
both plants and animals. The timingof the criteriahave been arrangedin an ascending
originof manyof the traditionaladditivetech- order of complexityfrom the rudimentary
nologiesvaries greatlyin different parts of the towardthe more complexpatternsof the con-
earth,and throughvariablediffusion the earlier temporaryera. For the sake of simplicitythe
formshave become quite irregularly distributed collectivistprinciples of Communist agricul-
around the earth,therebygreatlycomplicating turalorganizationare placed last. In identifica-
ordinaryclassificationprocedures.In our view tionof specificattributes of agriculturalsystems
no singleone of these technologies(irrigation, we have not necessarilyadheredto terminologi-
fertilization,crop protection,soil building,the cal convention.We have made no overtattempt
applicationof pesticides,or thefeedingof biotic at avoidanceof termsjustbecause theirmultiple
supplements)should be elevated to a primary usages have led to misunderstandings (as in
criterionin the identificationof an agricultural reference to thewordpeasant), but neither have
system.We have attemptedto arrangethe full we been tied to termsof generallyunderstood
assemblageof additivetechnologies bytherange meaningoftenused in classifications. There is
of increasein qualitativepower insteadof rais- temptation in framinga new constructto create
1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 539

TABLE 2.-HIERARCHICAL LIST OF garden vegetableproductionon chinampas in

AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS the Valley of Mexico). These developments
may have arisen out of SedentaryGardening
Number System
coupledwithearlyexchangeto produceForma-
1. ShiftingCultivation tive CommercialGardening.Developed Gen-
2. SedentaryGardening eral Plow Culture,as an advanceoverits primi-
3. PrimitivePlow Culture tive predecessor,we would date relativelylate,
4. Formative Commercial Gardening
5. Developed General Plow Culture
to be alteredby the modernization trendsthat
6. Semimechanized Commercial General Farming have yielded Semimechanized Commercial
7. Developed Mechanized Farming General Farming and Developed Mechanized
Farming; regional variants of both of these
8. Traditional Pastoralism
systems are maturingas the modernization
9. Commercial Livestock Ranching
processesdiffusearound the earth.
10. Traditional Latifundia Animal husbandry,as an early probable
11. Modern Corporate Plantation alternative to crop growing,is placed separately
as an alternatesequence, withfull recognition
12. IndustrializedAgriculturalProduction
thatdraftanimalsbecame integrated intocrop-
13. Collectivized Managerial Agriculture growingsystemsat the level of PrimitivePlow
Culture.The earliestanimalhusbandryappears
Source: Prepared by authorsfromTables 1 and 3.
in our list as TraditionalPastoralism,to be
succeededby-CommercialLivestockRanching.
a jargon-loadedvocabulary,butwe have resisted We believethatthebeginningsof Traditional
in theinterests of simplicity and clarity. Latifundia,in some of manyregionalvariants,
followedthe developmentof political institu-
A TENTATIVE HIERARCHY tionsprovidingderivativecontrolsoverterritory
We have assumed that criteriamust permit of the sort often termedfeudal (recognizing
any list of agriculturalsystemsto allow the thattherewere manyearlyformsof feudalism
inclusion of relict and evolvingsystems.We beyondtheclassicalEuropeanvariant),butthat
pretendto no omniscienceregardingthehistory this was a divergenttrend.The Modern Cor-
of agriculture, but we believewe can tentatively porate Plantation,oftentendingto produce a
identify thirteensystemsin a loosely evolution- range of products,we view as a successorto
arysequencethathave been practicedsince the the classical monocrop traditionalplantation,
onset of the Neolithic, includingdeveloping in developmentalterms,but we also believe
contemporarysystems(Table 2). that modernizationis producingconvergence
We assume, from present knowledge,that in severalof the advancedand complexagricul-
ShiftingCultivation,including the dooryard turalsystems.
garden planting sites, was the beginningof An immature contemporarydevelopment,
crop growing.The firstseven members are IndustrializedAgriculturalProduction,is pres-
arrangedin a possiblehierarchicalorderon the entlyappearingin several parts of the earth.
assumptionthatcrops have been the long-term CollectivizedManagerial Agriculture,also still
dominant element and that farmer-operatedundergoingevolutionary development,is tenta-
"agriculture"constitutesa continuouslydevel- tivelyplaced as thefinalmemberof our list.
oping series. We believe that permanent-field We have matchedour interpretation, faulty
SedentaryGardeninginitiatedthe traditionof as that may be, of specificfirst-and second-
''private"land controlwell before formalized ordercriteriaagainstthelistof agricultural sys-
privateland ownershipwas made possible by tems (Table 3). Inevitablymore than one ele-
developing political institutions.A Primitive mentwithinanygivenprimarycriterionmaybe
Plow Culturemarkedthe initialintegrationof diagnostic,particularly whensystemsare transi-
plantsand animalsin a productionsystem.We tionalin nature.Specificsystemsmaysharesub-
believe,also, thatthebeginningsof commercial sets, but are distinguishable by theiraggrega-
exchange in agriculturalproducts are much tionsof secondaryelements.Systems6, 7, 11,
older than modern economic historiansgen- and 12 have markedsimilarities in second-order
erallyassume (as in the earliestspice tradeout criteria, which is expectablein view of thecon-
of the East Indies and, possibly,in the market vergenceprocesses active in manyparts of the
 TABLE 3.-APPLICABILITY OF CRITERIA TO SPECIFIC SYSTEMS

I ~~~
~~~II
Number Agriculturalsystem A B C D E F

1. Shiftingcultivation 1 1 1 1-2 1-2 1-2

2. Sedentarygardening 2 2 2 2 1-2 1-2
3. Primitiveplow culture 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 4 3
4. Formative commercial gardening 3 3 3 2, 4 2 2-3
5. Developed general plow culture 3 3-4 3-4 4-5 4-5 4
6. Semi-mechanized commercial generalfarming 4 4 4 5 4, 6 5
7. Developed mechanized farming 4 4-5 4-5 5 4-5-6 5
8. Traditional pastoralism I I I 1 3 1-2
9. Commercial livestockranching 4 4-5 3-4 4-5 6 4-5
10. Traditional latifundia 3 3 3 3 2, 5-6 3-4
11. Modern corporate plantation 4 5 4-5 5 6 5
12. Industrializedagriculturalproduction 4 5 4-5 5 7 5
13. Collectivized managerial agriculture 5 6 6 6 3-4-5-6 6

Source: Compiled by authors from Tables 1, 2, and 4.

1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL
TABLE 4.-CRITERIA DETERMINING
AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS
I. ORGANIZATIONAL MATRICES
A. Societal matrix
(Involves all aspects of societal organizational struc-
turing of social groupings, classes, ranks in bondage,
status patternsas freeman,and membershipsin group-
ings permittingassignmentto labor/productioncorps.)
1. Communal, lineage, and clan social organization/ 6. Collective rightsvia centralized state controls. In-
structuring.Includes voluntary"living groups" asso-
ciated through membership in lineages, ramages,
clans, or other communal groupings in simpler so-
cietal structures.
2. Nonstratifiedbut structured societal organization.
Includes all forms of simpler groupings of inde-
pendent prepeasant populations having structured
forms of organization but not forms codified and
institutionalizedthrough sociopolitical controls.
3. Stratified and socially structured agrarian organi- (Involves all societal structures and institutional
zation. Includes forms by which populations can mechanisms within which individuals and organiza-
be held in chattel bondage as labor forces; includes tions adopt practices affectingagricultural perform-
status patterns holding populations in bondage/ ance.)
vassalage throughderivativecontrols; includes free-
holders subject to obligational services; includes
populations holding derivative controls over any
bonded elements.
4. Complex "capitalistic" and "democratic" social or-
ganization. Includes all socially organized patterns
by which agrarian populations essentially are not 2.
subject to derivative controls creating forms of
bondage/vassalage/territorial restriction; includes
social forms in which agrarian populations form
recognized classes of "freeman".
5. Complex collective "Marxist" social organization.
Includes all socially organized patterns by which
populations are in any way subject to assignment
to structuredorganizations that carry on agrarian
production of any kind.
B. Tenurial matrix
(Involves all formsof rightsto usage of land, terms of 4. Competitive "marketplace" operational determi-
occupance, forms of ownership, concessions to man-
agement, and patternsof restriction/reversion of rights
to land.)
1. Collective usufructuarycontrols. Includes all forms
of specifiedterm-occupance of production sites un-
der collective ownership but denies alienation by
individuals.
2. Permanentoccupance controlsvia mutual authority.
Includes incipient/evolvingpermanent occupance/
allotment of production sites under concession by
mutual social action in the absence of organized
political controls and institutions.
3. Derivative rightscontrols via formalized structures.
Includes all forms of derivative territorial rights
through conferment and derivative entailment of
land in fief; includes all forms of vassalage and
landed/chattel bondage of land occupants/pro-
ducers/agrarian populations holding reciprocal/
vested "rights"in cultivable land.
4. Allodial rights controls via concessions to indi-
viduals. Includes individualized allodial rights to
land per occupance/production; includes all forms
SYSTEMS 541
of direct/relegativeusage of land in whatever ten-
ancy; includes institutionalized patterns of title/
forfeitureand conceded rights of alienation by/to
individuals.
5. Allodial controls via concessions to corporate struc-
tures. Includes all forms of accumulatory assem-
blage of allodial rights/large-scale leasings by
corporate structuresfor mass production patterns;
includes all formsof direct/relegativeusage of land
in whatever tenancy; includes institutionalizedpat-
terns of title/forfeitureand rightsof alienation.
cludes all forms of reversion/recessionof rightsof
occupance/usage of land to collective management
of land/production; includes variable permissions
to use of "private plots" for individualized produc-
tion; includes all patterns of incomplete recession
of any pre-existingrightswith implications toward
eventual completion of recession process.
C. Institutionalmatrix
1. Group/community determinants. Involves partici-
pation in group-sanctionedsite selections, planting-
harvestingoperations, and product disposition; in-
cludes individual roles in diverse group/specialist
ritual sequences fosteringproduction and affecting
disposition.
Incipient "community"determinantswithoutformal
controls. Includes voluntary/incipient"community"
improvements that increase control over natural
landscapes, but involves relatively free rein in
choice of actual agriculturaloperations since formal
institutionalcontrols are lacking.
3. Authoritarian operational determinants. Includes
development of improvementsto productive land-
scapes on behalf of community,regional, and ter-
ritorial populations by sociopolitical mechanisms,
but involves imperative controls over agrarian pop-
ulations carryingon actual agricultural operations.
nants. Includes minimal developments performed
for agrarian populations by sociopolitical mecha-
nisms, but involves individually determined opera-
tions under the influences/effectsin individual/
group decisions by economic forces generated by
the competitive "marketplace" institution.
5. Complex governmentdirected-agencydeterminants.
Includes all formsof capital inputs designed to con-
trol and improve productivelandscapes; involves all
forms of government agency experimental breed-
ing/supportive activities carried on on behalf of
agricultural producers; involves all forms of sanc-
tioned "cooperatives" and all forms of government
subsidy arrangements supportive of agricultural
producers.
6. Centralized collective-management determinants.
Includes all forms of government operational
mechanisms controlling management directive of
production sequences; includes all variants of
wholly/partiallycollectivized operations and toler-
ated "private plot" patterns.
542 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

D. Labor matrix 3. Herd animals.Involves all handlingof herd ani-

(Involvesall formsof organizingthe labor/workin- mals on extensiveranges,includingtranshumance;
puts in development of productivelandscapesand in includes varied simple forms of complementing
all agricultural operationsand activities.) animal feed supplies; sometimesincludes minor
food crop growingas seasonal complement.
1. Voluntaryworking-group Includesvol- 4. Mixed crops/livestock/poultry
structures. producedon stable
untaryassociationvaryingfromindividualsthrough fieldpatterns.Includes any assemblageof crops/
small workingparties to "gardenfamily"struc- animals producedon stable,permanent-field pat-
tures;includesobligationalrendering of commodi- ternsof land use.
ties/services to leadershipelements. 5. Mixed crops/livestock/poultry producedon rota-
2. Independent"community"cooperativestructures. tional fields.Includes any assemblageof crops/
Includes familyoperationsper nuclear/extended animals produced on lands involvingrotational
familywith arrangeddivisionof labor; includes patternsof land use.
peak-seasonreciprocalcommunitycooperationin 6. Specialized crop/animalproductionpatterns.In-
labor groups under varied organizationalstruc- cludes any degreeof concentration on any single
tures;involvesobligationalrendering of commodi- crop/narrow rangeof crops and/orany degreeof
ties/services to "community"/leadership underin- concentration on any singleanimal/narrow range
cipientlydevelopingpoliticalinstitutions. of animals when produced and sold off farms/
3. Labor-gangorganizational structuresunderderiva- rangesas "products."
tivecontrols.Includesall formsof organizedlabor 7. Integratedindustrialproduction.Involves provi-
performanceby chattel-bondedpersons/groups/ sion of concentration of facilitiescreating"con-
gangsthatare housedbutusuallyprovideown food trolled environments" that intensifies production;
productionpatternson local lands. Includesstrati- includes integrationof processingof "product"
fied supervisory/management rules by holdersof fromproduction stageinto"endproduct"consumer
power. commodities.
4. Peasant-community structuresunder derivative
controls.Involves familyworkingpatternsin di- F. Dispositional processes
rect agricultural productionbut includescoopera- (Involvesall formsof socioeconomicand sociopolitical
tive operationsby variablyorganizedcommunity mechanismsthat transferagriculturalcommodities
"groups"; includes all organizationalforms by fromproductionsitesto consumerpopulations.)
which derivative controls exact services/labor
(apart fromdirectproductionactivities)by strati- 1. Localized subsistencepatterns.Involvesdirectap-
fiedsociopoliticalstructures. propriativeuse of agricultural yieldsas consumer
5. Freeholdproducer-hired labor structures. Includes commoditieswithoutsignificanttransferbeyond
direct producer operations by freeholderinde- neighboring social units.
pendents/tenants who may/may not hire wage la- 2. Intraregional communityexchange patterns.In-
bor on somecontractual patternsand may/maynot volves varied socially controlledand ritualized
contractforperformance of someaspectof produc- forms of gift-giving; includes festival-supporting
tionoperations. and other sanctionedtransferprocedureswithin
6. Collectivizeddirected/managed laborstructures. In- local regions;includes sociopoliticalmechanisms
cludes all formsof organizedstructures by which forintraregional "barter"and ceremonialexchange.
agrarianpopulationsare wholly/partially assigned 3. Incipientcentral-marketing functions/patterns. In-
to agricultural cooperatives/collectives/state farms volves evolutionary mechanisms/patterns of rural-
in which labor/workis by organized units in hinterland provisioning of town-city nonagricultural
state-planned patternson state-controlled lands; in- consumers on intraregional patterns;includessocio-
cludes all patternsin whichincompletestructuring politicallyarrangedperiodictransfers across inter-
at
of land/laborforceshas notyetarrived complete regional boundaries between separate societies/
collectivization/management. populations.
4. Organizedcentral-market patterns.Involvesvaried
II. ECONOMIC PROCESSES
organized mechanisms of intraregional/interre-
gionaltransfer of volumesof commodities destined
E. Product orientation forsupportof nonagricultural populations;includes
(Involvesall plant crops and all animal productsin mechanismsby which primaryproducersbecome
any setsof combinations, includingany rangeof con- detachedfromterminalmarketing operations.
centration on primaryproducts;includesany comple- 5. Commercial, competitivemarketingpatterns.In-
mentary associationof subordinate, auxiliary,or minor cludes varied complex chain mechanismsfor in-
crops/products.) traregional/interregional transferof commodities
under competitivesupply-demand"marketplace"
1. Multiplepatchcrops.Includesall patterns of mixed determinants.
croppingin "patch plots"/dooryard gardens; in- 6. Centralizedcollectionand allocationpatterns.In-
volvessome appropriation of wild products. cludes all formsof state-controlled collectionof
2. Patch crops-smallanimals.Includesall patternsof agriculturalyields and dispositionto consuming
mixed croppingof major/minorcrops on small populationsthroughdiversemechanisms (rationing,
holdingscombinedwithkeepingof small animals allocation, controlled markets, supply against
aroundhomesteads(such as pigs,dogs, and poul- "workpoint"equivalents);includestoleratedminor
tryas food sources); involvessome appropriation amountsof "black market"/free exchangeby in-
of wild products. dividuals.
1973 NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS 543

G. Redistributiveflow 4. Organizedanimal-powered complextool kits. In-

(Involvesall obligationalelementsincidentalto agri- volvesmoderately highvolumesof energyapplied
culturalproductionthatplace costs on primarypro- extensivelythroughtime to large land units; in-
duction;includesall socioeconomicarrangements that cludesanimalenergyappliedintensively to particu-
utilizeagricultural resourcesin establishment/mainte- lar tasks;includeshumanenergyappliedintensively
nance of agrariansocieties;includesall formsof po- to particularnonmechanized field/farmstead tasks.
liticoeconomic assessment on land as production sites). 5. Semimechanized mixedtool systems. Involvesvari-
able degreesof conversionto mechanizedtool kits
1. Sharingobligationalto leadership/community. In- and variable ratios of older and newer energy
cludes the renderingof commodities/services to sources/tool kits;includesvariableratiosof human
leadership/community group in supportof group energyapplied intensivelyat assortedfarmstead
solidarityin absenceof formalizedinstitutions for tasks.
assessmenton persons/products/land. 6. Mechanized high-poweredcomplex tool systems.
2. Ritualized equalizationpatterns.Includes institu- Involveshigh-level mechanization employing large,
tionalizedformsfordisposalof surplusesthrough- complextool kits;includesextensiveenergyappli-
out generalpopulations(ceremonialfestivalsand cationsthroughtimewithintensiveapplicationson
benevolences); includes ritualized terminaldis- specializedtasks,involvesrelativelylow volumes
posals for purposesof economiclevelling(burial, of humanenergyin operationalaspectsof tool kits.
sacrifice,reparations,indemnity, and reapportion-
ment). I. Technological complementation
3. Societallysanctionedcompensatory cost patterns. (Involvesall those technologicalproceduresinfluenc-
Includes all formsof obligationalexpenditure of ingproductionthatmanipulateand improvetheman-
primaryproductionin establishment of families ageability of thecrop/animal environment and thereby
and maintenance of socioeconomic solidarity enhanceproductivity.)
(bride-price, dowry,mutualaid, and othersupport
patterns). 1. Rudimentaryacceptance of the natural environ-
4. Levy exactionpatterns. Includesall formsand pat- ment.Involvesall perceptionsof the environment
ternsby whichlabor/commodities are exactedby thatresultin ritualizedsupplication of theforcesof
authoritarian/derivative political controlsto form productionbut affectno formalintervention with
direct/indirect assessmentson agrarianproducers. nature except for simple clearing/preparation of
5. Specifictaxationpatterns.Includesall formsof di- plantingsites.
rect/indirect taxation on lands/productionvol- 2. Primitivecomplementation of the productionenvi-
umes/netincomes via agencies fundinggovern- ronment. Involves all primitive but directlyinter-
ments/rulers. ventionalproceduresthat improveplantingsur-
6. Indirecttaxation systems.Includes all formsof faces, grazingranges,managementof water,and
withdrawalfromproduction/producers thosecom- productivity of soils;includesclearingand burning,
modity/labor"income" yields consideredinstitu- simplefieldterracing, divertedgravityflowirriga-
tional investment capital/government fundingvia tion,simpleselectionof planting/breeding stocks,
collectivemanagement controls. and low-level application of composts/natural
manures.
III. OPERATIONAL APPLICATIONS 3. Intermediate complementation of environments of
production. Involvesadvanced-but-traditional forms
H. Energy applications of interventional proceduresimprovingproductiv-
(Involvesall sourcesof energyexpenditure by types; ity;includessuch featuresas complexterracesys-
includes tool kits in grouped patternsper energy tems with integrated water control,organizedse-
sources; includesvariable ratios of power generally lectivebreedingof crop plants/animals, fallowing/
to
applicable productiveoperations in fieldsand at green manuring/rotation of fields,
organized provi-
farmsteads.) sionforirrigation, and otherrelatedformsof com-
plementationon an intermediatelevel of tech-
1. Human labor hand tool kit.Includesall groupings nology.
of hand tool assemblages;involvessmall volumes 4. Scientificcomplementation of productionenviron-
of energyper workingunit intensivelyapplied ments.Involvesall the complexmodern/scientific
throughtime. formsof augmentingproductivity; includessuch
2. Transhumantanimal energy.Involves animal en- featuresas breedingof plant/animal formsto spec-
ergy expendedin transhumance/grazing; includes ificationof need in selectiveenvironments, de-
relativelysmall volumesof humanlabor employ- terrentand additivechemicalpesticides-fertilizers-
ing simple tool kits applied extensivelythrough biological substances,environmental heating-frost
time. controls,land levellingand otherformsof field
3. Animal-powered simpletool kits.Involvesmoder- control/reconstruction, complex water provision/
ately low volumesof energyper unit applied ex- controlsystems,and relatedscientific procedures.
tensively throughtimeto smallland units;includes 5. Constructed/controlled artificialproductionenvi-
humanenergyfor sharesof populationsnot pos- ronments. Involvescreationof made-to-order envi-
sessinganimal energy;includeshumanenergyex- ronmentalconstructs thatfacilitateindustrialpro-
pendedon manytasksnotsubjectto animalpower, duction of agriculturalcommoditiesunder fully
theserequiringintensiveapplicationthroughtime manipulated"factory"conditions.
in fields/farmsteads. Source: Prepared by authors.
544 J. E. SPENCER AND NORMAN R. STEWART December

earth,a featurepointedout by Gregor.20Sys- are blurring,and that severalmay be destined

tem twelveis stillemergentand occupies only
small amountsof space, but the similarityin
the otherthreememberssuggeststhat current
distinctionsin world agriculturalproduction
20 H. F. Gregor, "The Changing Plantation," An-
nals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 55
(1965), pp. 221-38; and Gregor, op. cit., footnote 1,
pp. 102-03.
to disappear.
Whittlesey, in his 1936 paper, suggestedthat
regionswas a tentative
his listingof agricultural
one, subjectto criticalreviewand modification,
and our presentationis offeredin the same
vein.We would hope thatthislistis givenmore
promptand more criticalreviewthan that set
forthbyWhittlesey.