What’s in a name?

The management has been busily occupied with agreeing on just the right names for AGRO’s four scientific flagships. In just a few words the names must support the task of the flagships in order to profile their scientific areas and make them even more visible.

The names must indicate what the flagships focus on and also send the message that the flagships are integrating and inclusive. Visibility, professionalism and interdisciplinarity have been key aspects when deciding upon the names.   

On behalf of the management Department Head Erik Steen Kristensen explains the reasons that lie behind the choices of names for the flagships:

”It is important that the names and, thereby, the flagships can stand alone and thus be independent of each other while also being able to stand together in the agroecological context.

We have chosen to have English names partly to send a message about an international perspective and partly because they quite simply sound better in English.

Soil Functions

The name describes something very important. We are really good at researching the soil as a resource and its many functions and qualities.  

We have heard that several people in JORD would like this flagship to be called ’Soil Ecosystems Services’, but that name is too broad and would overlap too much with the other flagships. Instead of gathering all soil expertise in one flagship we would like to send the message that some of these will be used in the other flagships. The name ’Soil and Soil Functions’ has also been debated but with the simpler and easier-to-say name ’Soil Functions’ it is implicit that the soil resource is included. 

Sustainable Nutrient Management

Sustainable Pest Management

Both of these flagships contain the words ’sustainable’ and ’management’. Even though the word ’sustainable’ is used so much that you might get a bit tired of hearing it, I think it is a good word. It says something about the relation between the needs of present and future generations, which is central to these two flagships.

You can interpret this relationship in different ways depending on your view of the issue. It is implicit that the environmental organisation Danmarks Naturfredningsforening would prioritise the needs of the environment and future generations highly. On the other hand, the agricultural organisation Bæredygtigt Landbrug would say that the present generation’s needs are the most important thing. I do not believe that we in AGRO should act as judge in such cases. We must just contribute knowledge that describes the consequences of various actions and management practices now and in the future.

The word ’management’ is also part of the names of these two flagships. In one of them it comprises plant protection products such as pesticides for controlling crop pests while in the other flagship it comprises controlling nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous. These so-called additives are indispensable and very important for present-day agricultural production and productivity. However, it is also important to note that theses additives often have a negative impact on the environment and thereby the possibilities for fulfilling the needs of future generations.

Climate-Smart Agri-Food Systems

The name of this flagship has been changed compared to the one we presented at the junior and senior VIP meetings, where the name was ’Climate-Smart Agriculture’. This is because we have listened to the critique. There was criticism at the meetings that food systems as such and environmenntal impact per produced unit were not included. We now accommodate this by writing ’agri-food systems’ instead of ’agriculture’ combined with FAO’s definition of ‘Climate-Smart’, which integrates several dimensions of the sustainability concept in the light of the climate challenges.

With the concept ’climate-smart’ we now include one more angle in our agricultural research, namely the climate angle. The word ’smart’ means that we produce in an intelligent manner, which is to say very integrating – also with regard to knowledge from the other flagships since using fewer additives often leads to a reduced emission of greenhouse gases per produced unit. ‘Intelligent’ also comprises many aspects with regard to sustainable development. This is also where we have the best chance to link directly to the new bioeconomy agenda as described in e.g. SCAR’s fourth foresight exercise.

Total agroecological context

The names of the four flagships thus comprise sustainability, management, systems, food and other bio-based products, climate, nutrients, pests and the soil resource. All together, the four scientific flagships describe some very important aspects of the agroecosystem. They cover areas in which we stand strongest and from which we can deliver to all the areas covered by the contract with the Ministry of Environment and Food and thus also the areas where we know that society will continue to demand all the scientific knowledge that we can create. The flagships’ competences can also contribute to synergy and collaboration in several of Science and Technology’s new interdisciplinary centres.”