Participatory stakeholder approaches to and systemic thinking in agricultural production and resource use in Central Asia

Henryk Alff

Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development (HNEE), Eberswalde, Germany, & KIMEP University, College of Social Sciences (CSS), Almaty, Kazakhstan

*Email: h.alff@kimep.kz

https://doi.org/10.29258/CAJSCR/2026-R1.v5-1/1-13.eng

Thematic cluster: Climate, Environmental Science, Landscape/Agriculture

Type of paper: Research paper

xxxxx xx, 2025

Abstract

Rural development across the Central Asian states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) is predominantly shaped by top-down decision-making in which powerful state bodies take centre stage. While their directives in agriculture and livestock production are informed by upgrade-inspired growth thinking, the social-environmental complexities inherent to agro-ecosystems receive less attention. The present special issue of the Central Asian Journal of Sustainability and Climate Research (CAJSCR), based on the stakeholder workshop organized by Germany’s Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development (HNEE) and held at the German-Kazakh University (DKU) in Almaty in the fall 2024, explores different approaches to participatory stakeholder involvement in sustainable rural development. The compilation canvasses the corresponding methodologies, including their strengths and weaknesses, novel to the Central Asian Region (CAR).The articles of the special issue argue that the participatory engagement of smallholder farmers, students, pastoralists, and ordinary citizens in systemic thinking and participatory mapping processes augments their agency in decision-making and opens up fresh and so far untapped prospects for local development in the CAR, which provides a new angle of engagement not only for local-level state executive entities, but likewise for CSOs, international cooperation and applied research actors.

Download the Paper

Available in English

For citation: Henryk Alff (2026). Participatory stakeholder approaches to and systemic thinking in agricultural production and resource use in Central Asia. Central Asian Journal of Sustainability and Climate Research, 5(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.29258/CAJSCR/2026-R1.v5-1/1-13.eng

Rerefences

Alff, H. & Spies, M. (2020). Overcoming path dependencies in bioeconomy? Agricultural intensification processes from a socio-ecological perspective [ger. Pfadabhängigkeiten in der Bioökonomie überwinden? Landwirtschaftliche Intensivierungsprozesse aus sozial-ökologischer Perspektive]. PERIPHERIE 159/160(40), pp. 334-359 (https://doi.org/10.3224/peripherie.v40i3-4.06)

Alff, H., Konysbayev, T. and Salmyrzauly, R. (2023). Old stereotypes and new openness: discourses and practices of trans-border re- and disconnection in south-eastern Kazakhstan’s agricultural sector. Eurasian Geography and Economics 64(7-8), pp. 896-918 (https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2023.2169184)

Anderson, C., Bruil, M.J., Chappell, J., Kiss, C. and Pimbert, M.P. (2021). Agroecology Now! Transformations Towards More Just and Sustainable Food Systems. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61315-0)

Audouin, E., Bergez, J.-E. and Therond, O. (2019). Participatory methodology for designing an agroecological transition at local level. In: Bergez, J.-E., Audouin, E. and Therond, O. (2019), eds. Agroecological Transitions: From Theory to Practice in Local Participatory Design. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 177-206 (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01953-2_9)

Backhouse, M. (2021). Global inequalities and extractive knowledge production in the bioeconomy. In: Backhouse, M., Lehmann, R., Lorenzen, K., Lühmann, M., Puder, J., Rodríguez, F. and Tittor, A. (2021), eds. Bioeconomy And Global Inequalities. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 25-44 (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68944-5_2)

Backhouse, M., Lehmann, R., Lorenzen, K., Puder, J., Rodríguez, F. and Tittor, A. (2021). Contextualizing the bioeconomy in an unequal world: biomass sourcing and global socio-ecological inequalities. In: Backhouse, M., Lehmann, R., Lorenzen, K., Lühmann, M., Puder, J., Rodríguez, F. and Tittor, A. (2021), eds. Bioeconomy And Global Inequalities. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 3-22 (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68944-5_1)

Bergez, J.-E., Audouin, E. and Therond, O. (2019). Eds. Agroecological Transitions: From Theory to Practice in Local Participatory Design. Springer International Publishing, Cham (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01953-2)

Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (2000). Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol. Appl. 10(5), pp. 1251-1262 (https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2)

Blumroeder, J.S., Hobson, P.R., Graebener, U.F., Krueger, J.-A., Dobrynin, D., Burova, N., Amosa, I., Winter, S. and Ibisch, P.L. (2018). Towards the evaluation of the ecological effectiveness of the Principles, Criteria and Indicators (PCI) of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC): case study in Arkhangelsk Region in the Russian Federation. Chall. Sustain. 6(1), pp. 20-51 (https://doi.org/10.12924/cis2018.06010020)

BMBF and BMEL (2020). National Bioeconomy Strategy: Tabletop Version [ger. Nationale Bioökonomie-Strategie: Kabinettversion] of 15.01.2020, Germany’s Federal Ministry of Education and Research [ger. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, BMBF] and Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture [ger. Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft, BMEL], Berlin

Conservation Measures Partnership (2013). Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, version 3. Conservation Measures Partnership (CMP), Washington, D.C.

Díaz-Reviriego, I., Turnhout, E. and Beck, S. (2019). Participation and inclusiveness in the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Nat. Sustain. 2(6), pp. 457-464 (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0290-6)

Dieken, S., Dallendörfer, M., Henseleit, M., Siekmann, F. and Venghaus, S. (2021). The multitudes of bioeconomies: a systematic review of stakeholders’ bioeconomy perceptions. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 27(July), pp. 1703-1717 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.006)

European Commission, EC (2018). A Sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: Strengthening the Connection Between Economy, Society and the Environment. Updated Bioeconomy Strategy. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxemburg

Garimella, P.P. & Prakash, A. (2023). Sustainable socio-ecological transformations in agriculture: cases from South Asia. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 20(1) (https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2023.2228393)

Giampietro, M. (2019). On the circular bioeconomy and decoupling: implications for sustainable growth. Ecol. Econ. 162(August), pp. 143-156 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.05.001)

GIZ Conservation Measures Partnership (2020). Conservation standards applied to ecosystem-based adaptation. German Society for International Cooperation ger. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, GIZ

Gottwald, F.-T. & Krätzer, A. (2014). Bioeconomy as a Misguided Path: A Critique of A Totalitarian Approach [ger. Irrweg Bioökonomie. Kritik an einem totalitäрен Ansatz]. Suhrkamp, Berlin

Ibisch, P.L. & Hobson, P.R. (2014). Eds. MARISCO: Adaptive MAnagement of Vulnerability and RISk at COnservation Sites. A Guidebook for Risk-Robust, Adaptive and Ecosystem-Based Conservation of Biodiversity, Centre for Econics and Ecosystem Management, Eberswalde

Jiao, Y., Li, X., Liang, L., Takeuchi, K., Okuro, T., Zhang, D. and Sun, L. (2012). Indigenous ecological knowledge and natural resource management in the cultural landscape of China’s Hani terraces. Ecol. Res. 27(2), pp. 247-263 (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-011-0895-3)

Lehmann, R. (2021). Knowledge, research, and Germany’s bioeconomy: inclusion and exclusion in bioenergy funding policies. In: Backhouse, M., Lehmann, R., Lorenzen, K., Lühmann, M., Puder, J., Rodríguez, F. and Tittor, A. (2021), eds. Bioeconomy and Global Inequalities. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 107-129 (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68944-5_6)

Marsden T. & Farioli, F. (2015). Natural powers: from the bio-economy to the eco-economy and sustainable place-making. Sustain. Sci. 10(2), pp. 331-344 (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0287-z)

Martínez-Fernández, J., Pérez-Ibarra, I., Banos-González, I. and Esteve-Selma, M.A. (2023). Social-ecological systems modelling to understand the linkages between water, agriculture and rural systems. Ecological Modelling 482(Aug), 110375 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110375)

OECD (2018). Meeting Policy Challenges for a Sustainable Bioeconomy. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, Paris
Padoch, C. & Sunderland, T. (2013). Managing landscapes for greater food security and improved livelihoods. Unasylva 64(241), pp. 3-13

Pimbert, M.P. & Barry, B. (2021). Let the people decide: citizen deliberation on the role of GMOs in Mali’s agriculture. Agric. Hum. Values (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-021-10221-1)

Pissarskoi, E., Ouma, S., Schopp, K., Singo, L. and Potthast, T. (2021). Which Bioeconomy for Which Future? On the Repoliticization of the Discourse in the Global North through the Insights from Tanzania [ger. Welche Bio_Ökonomie für welche Zukunft? Zur Repolitisierung eines Diskurses im Globalen Norden durch Einsichten aus Tansania]. PERIPHERIE 159/160(40), pp. 258-283 (https://doi.org/10.3224/peripherie.v40i3-4.03)

Roue, M. & Nakashima, D. (2018). Indigenous and local knowledge and science: from validation to knowledge coproduction. Hilary Callan. 1st ed., The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology, Wiley, Hoboken, pp. 1-11 (https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118924396)

Spies, M. (2019). Northern Pakistan: High Mountain Farming and Changing Socionatures. Vanguard Books, Lahore
Spies, M. & Alff, H. (2020). Assemblages and complex adaptive systems: a conceptual crossroads for integrative research? Geogr. Compass 14(10), article e12534 (https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12534)

Spies, M., Zakirova, A., Zuberi, M., Schick, A. and Alff, H. (2025). Participatory Strategy Development for Sustainable Biomass Production (PARSCO): A Practical Guide Using the MARISCO Toolbox. Eberswalde (https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-hnee/frontdoor/index/index/docId/992)

Spies, M., Zuberi, M., Mählis, M., Zakirova, A., Alff, H. and Raab, C. (2022). Towards a participatory systems approach to managing complex bioeconomy interventions in the agrarian sector. Sustainable Production and Consumption 31(May 2022), pp. 557-568 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.03.020)

Sterling, E.J., Zellner, M., Jenni, K.E., Leong, K., Glynn, P.D., Ben Dor, T.K. and Bommel, P. (2019). Try, try again: lessons learned from success and failure in participatory modeling. In: Kapuscinski, A.R., Locke, K.A. and Borsuk, M. (2019), eds. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene 7(Jan), p. 9-10 (https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.347)

This post is also available in: Русский (Russian)