Agriculture and Human Values 20: 231240, 2003.

2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

The cultural background of the sustainability of the traditional farming

system in the Ghouta, the oasis of Damascus, Syria
Sameer K. Alhamidi,1 Mats Gustafsson,1 Hans Larsson,1 and Per Hillbur2

1 Department of Crop Science, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp, Sweden; 2 Technology and Society, Malm
University, Malm, Sweden

Accepted in revised form July 13, 2002

Abstract. This paper discusses the practical impact of a non-materialistic culture on sustainable farm management. Two elements are discussed: first, how deeply rooted religion is in this culture; second, the feasibility of
using both human knowledge and experience, so-called tradition and divine guidance in management. Finally,
the implications of the fusion of these two elements are drawn. The outcome is the capability of man to integrate
ethical values into decisions and actions. This integration, when applied by skilled farmers, leads to a management
of natural resources in an altruistic fashion and not merely to economic ends. Moreover, it makes agriculture
meaningful and sustainable.
Key words: Alternative agriculture, Culture, Ethics, Farm management, Gods guidance, Sustainability, Tradition
Sameer K. Alhamidi is a PhD student at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. He has a
M.Sc. in the Technology of Crop Protection from Reading University, England. He is currently preparing his
thesis on sustainable agriculture: the case of a complex traditional farming system in the region of Damascus.
Mats Gustafsson is professor at the department of Crop Science, the Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences. He has a PhD in Experimental Botany from Lund University. Then he turned over to be a practical
plant breeder at Svalf AB. Currently he is working with the utilization of disease resistance in plant breeding.
He is the head of a team supervising PhD students working on sustainable agriculture and Sameer Alhamidi is
one of these students.
Per Hillbur is Senior Lecturer in Environmental Science at School of Technology and Society, Malm
University. He has a PhD in Human Geography from Lund University, Sweden. His research experience ranges
from tropical agricultural systems (particularly East Africa) to participatory approaches and development of
methodological tools in sustainable development. The latter finds applications in agricultural as well as urban
planning settings.
Hans Larsson is senior research officer at the Department of Crop Science, SUAS, Alnarp. He has a
Master of Science in Agriculture and although originally an entomologist he is now working more on organic
farming. He has three years experience with plant breeding in Madagascar and is now responsible for a project
on plant breeding of cereals for organic farming.
Introduction
Agriculture is one of the most important human activities that is associated closely with nature. The operational units of this activity are agricultural systems,
which emerge and develop over time in a cultural
context. That is because the methods of production
are intimately linked with culture (Dlouhy, 1983) and,
consequently, all forms of agriculture reflect the characteristics of the culture to which the agriculturists
belong (Van Mansvelt, 1988).

All human activities are guided by a philosophy of

life (worldview), which provides both an explanation
for what is and a justification for behavior positive
and negative (Merrill, 1988). A philosophy of life is
based on a complex of ideas consisting of a number of
fundamental ideas, judgments, and standards (norms)
(Dlouhy, 1983). With regard to nature, Kaufman cites
a passage from the Old Testament: Be fruitful and
multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have
dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds
of the air and over every living thing that moves upon

232

S AMEER K. A LHAMIDI ET AL .

the earth [Genesis 1:28]. His aim was to clarify the

anthropocentric nature of the Judeo-Christian tradition
and the religious context from which Western science
emerged. He depicted science carrying on this theme
of dominating or conquering nature even though it had
replaced the earlier religious worldview (Kaufman,
1988).
Nature, as a result, is regarded as merely a source
and a means of production, and, as such, the basic
human relationship with it becomes that of detachment
and dominance (Dlouhy, 1983; Kaufman, 1985; Callicott and Ames, 1989; Engel, 1990; Leiss, 1994). It is,
therefore, obvious that the most characteristic feature
of Western culture is that of the utilitarian materialistic and mechanistic approach (Dlouhy, 1983). In
agriculture, these tenets of industrialism as a worldview gained dominance only gradually during the last
100 years (Kaufman, 1985). This worldview, accompanied by a reduction of human value to that only
of the economic (Busch, 1981), leads to an intensive
exploitation of nature through technical aids. This
trend, which has gained the seductive name modern
agriculture, has diminished the importance of farming
as a way of life, and creates certain problems such
as ecological degradation. Consequently, bearing in
mind the growing skepticism about the ability of technology to increase productivity in order to meet future
demand, it can be said that modern agriculture is not
sustainable (Bird, 1988; Rayner and Welham, 1995).
This means that the development on earth has a clear
course towards an ecological disaster (Dlouhy, 1983).
Thus, modern agriculture finds itself at the focus of
moral controversies such as: to what extent, if any,
is it morally permissible to allow short-term increase
in production to jeopardize long-term sustainability?
(Shepard, 1985). Accordingly, it has been concluded
that agriculture finds itself in a crisis that is not a
technological one, but one of culture (Berry, 1977;
Douglass, 1985; Altieri and Rosset, 1995). Therefore,
there is a growing need and awareness to take issues
of ethics and values into consideration when selecting
research goals (Freudenberger, 1986), where the realm
of modern agriculture as a whole is subject to a metaphysical as well as an ethical critique (Kunkel, 1984;
Thompson, 1988; Callicott, 1990).
In this world where modern agriculture prevails,
understanding traditional farming systems, which have
emerged and developed in different cultural contexts
and are still functional, may help to highlight these
issues related to sustainability. One of these systems
is the traditional farming system (TFS) in the Ghouta,
oasis of Damascus. This system, which is still proving
to have all attributes associated with sustainability
of an agricultural system (Alhamidi et al., 2003),
has stood the test of time, i.e., the test of sustain-

ability. Sustainability is a dynamic concept implying

the ability of the system to maintain its existence even
when subject to major or minor perturbations. This
concept is based on three interrelated dimensions: the
biophysical, the economic, and the social dimension.
Our concern in this study is the cultural background
due to its substantial role in shaping the agricultural
system as mentioned earlier and because of the difficulty in separating the study of traditional agricultural
systems from the study of the culture that nurture
them (Altieri, 1987). The objective is to explore the
links between farmers actions, decisions, and justifications on one side, and sustainability from the other
side.
This study may take part in meeting the need to
borrow much from the worldviews of other societies
(Callicott and Ames, 1989; Engel, 1990). This could
provide insights for redirecting modern agriculture
towards a sustainable path (Berkes et al., 1995).

Method
Damascus, the present capital of Syria, occupies a
site that has been continuously settled for thousands
of years (Thompson et al., 1982). No one knows
exactly how old Damascus is, but we do know that
it has existed since the time of Abraham (Ginfold,
1978). It is located in the heart of the birthplace of
the three heavenly religions of Judaism, Christianity,
and Islam. The agricultural activity in the Ghouta,
which in Arabic means a place rich with water and
trees (Elmonjid, 1997: 562) depends on the careful
utilization of irrigation water as well as the sparse rainfall (150200 mm). The area consists of many villages
surrounding and integrated with Damascus city. The
city provides the farming community with money
and other requirements and the Ghouta provides the
city with required food and labor (Khair, 1966).
The continuous agricultural activity in the Ghouta
dates back 4000 years (Bianquis, 1989). That is why
Kurd Ali stated: the entrance of the Arab Muslims
(centuries ago) to the Ghouta was just a replacement of
one successful team by another (Kurd Ali, 1984). The
success of both teams belonging to different cultures
can be understood when sustainability is considered
as a performance criterion of the agricultural system.
That continuous agricultural activity was the most
important reason behind the selection of the TFS in
this area for studying sustainability.
The study is based on long-term field studies
(19982000) among the farmers of the Ghouta. These
studies focus on the three dimensions of sustainability
using a variety of methods. The qualitative research
interview was the main tool for understanding what

C ULTURAL BACKGROUND OF

THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE TRADITIONAL FARMING SYSTEM IN THE

guides the farmers in this area towards sustainable

use of natural resources. For this purpose, a strategic
sample representing a variety of agricultural practices
was picked with the aid of extension workers.
The subject of this kind of research is the
world of the interviewees. Semi-structured interviews
focused on certain themes allowing the interviewees to
describe spontaneously what they feel and how they
act (Kvale, 1983). The aim of the interview analysis
was to understand what the farmers experience and
feel, and how they act.
The mode of understanding involved in the qualitative research rests on a continuum that exists between
description and interpretation. The descriptions made
by interviewees including any possible corrections,
which may occur as a result of direct influence from
interrelation of the interviewer, are interpreted in three
levels: the first level is limited to self-understanding
of the interviewees; a second level of analysis is an
attempt of the interviewer to get at the spirit of what
is said by drawing on a wider knowledge of the topic
investigated; in the third, the interviewer may draw
on a more theoretical interpretation, which is likely to
go beyond the previous phases. Then a re-interview
was conducted. The aim of the re-interview phase
was to provide an opportunity for the interviewees
to comment on the interviewers analysis and interpretations (Kvale, 1983). This mode of understanding
is close to the phenomenological method in central
points (Kvale, 1983).
Participant observation is a method in which the
researcher participates in routine production activities
(Pratt and Loizos, 1992). This method, which was
mainly used for studying economic and biophysical
dimensions of the systems sustainability, played an
important but different role in this approach. The
interview is described by Sullivan (1954) as an
interpersonal situation where relevant knowledge is
constituted by the interaction between the interviewer
and the interviewee. Thus the interviewer should be
conscious of the inter-personal dynamics within this
interaction in order to recognize and apply that knowledge in the interview and the analysis (Sullivan, 1954;
Kvale, 1983). The reciprocal influence of interviewer
and interviewed on both the cognitive as well as an
emotional level is not primarily as a source of error
but a strong point of the qualitative research (Kvale,
1983). In addition, discussions including why questions with farmers individually and in groups, and
notes of everyday life were used to support that mode
of understanding.
It was observed that the farmers in the Ghouta
during interviews frequently cited proverbs, which
in Arabic mean the wisdom gained from experiment
(Mahmoud, 1990). Verses from the Koran and Prophet

G HOUTA

233

Mohammads sayings (the hadeath1 ) were also used

by the farmers to support their proverbs representing
the practical fruit of their experience or to justify some
actions or decisions because there is nothing in these
verses or sayings telling man how to cultivate land or
how to deal with agrochemicals. Therefore, in order
to understand the practical use of these citations, they
have been discussed with extensionists working in the
Ghouta, with academics in Damascus, and with elderly
local farmers.

Results and discussion

Culture and religion
In this Arabic speaking country, the term culture
still needs a foreign crutch in order to understand its
use, since the term itself was only recently introduced
into the language (Ibn Nabi, 1984). Similarly nature
and environment are also new terms for Arabic. If
one accepts the definition of culture as the peoples
attitude to life (Kenichiro, 1993), then the following
may be observed:

There is a clear distinction between Gods guidance and tradition, which means humans
knowledge and experience. Both are transferable,
but whereas tradition is changeable because it is
man-made, Gods guidance, as far as norms are
concerned, is unconditionally unchangeable.
There is an accordance between the role of religion in human life, as mentioned in The Koran2
(8/63), and the Latin origin of the term religion itself, i.e., unity (Ibn Nabi, 1984). The
unchangeable criterion of Gods guidance is an
expression of the unity of humanity.
There is no separation between culture and religion in this area as far as Islam (i.e., the religion of the farming community in the Ghouta) is
concerned. In other words, religion is so deeprooted in the culture that it extends to cover how
people regard their relation to God, to themselves, to other people, and to the universe as
a whole. Things such as food, clothes, etc. are
covered by religious norms too. In brief, Islam
contains the principles for a complete way of life.
The nature of this culture must therefore play a
substantial role in structuring this study.

Islam is a monotheistic religion where unification

(Tawheed) forms its basis. Tawheed specifies that God
is the only God and that He alone deserves to be
worshiped. The prophet Mohammad described Islam
as a continuation of other heavenly religions (narrated
by Al-Bukhari). In addition, the Koran confirms that

234

S AMEER K. A LHAMIDI ET AL .

the Koran, the Torah, and the Gospel are guidance and
light (Koran, 5/1516, 5/44, 5/46).
As far as Islam, the religion of the targeted farming
community in the Ghouta, is concerned the following
is an outline of the basic Islamic principles well known
by the farmers:

The revelation does not recommend or suggest

scientific theories or lessons, but a framework
of norms within which man is free to experiment and acquire knowledge about the best
methods for the manipulation and use of nature
(Mohammad as narrated by Moslim). According
to these norms, human actions fall in one of
the following categories: 1) compulsory actions
2) desirable (encouraged to perform) but not
compulsory 3) permissible actions (complete
freedom to perform) 4) abominable actions
(morally but not legally wrong), and 5) prohibited actions. All Muslims must evaluate their
actions according to these norms, which cannot
be found out by experiment. These norms, which
are never alterable, regardless of consequences,
form, therefore, the base of the unity of humanity
mentioned earlier.
The universe is very diverse in both living
and nonliving components (Koran, 35/2728),
and this interrelated whole was created suitable for human activities (Koran, 45/13; 31/20;
67/15). Earth, as a part of that whole, has not
been created to service the present generation
alone, but for all (Koran, 2/29). These verses
clearly support sustainability of agriculture, as an
example of human activities, through the indication of diversity that can be adopted on the farm
level, and through taking other generations (intergenerational equity) into account. Thus sustainability or protecting the component elements of
life regardless of any immediate benefits is a
human responsibility according to these norms
mentioned above.
Both rationality and hope in the mercy of
God guide the actions of man (Koran, 39/53).
The term rationalism derives from the Latin
term ratio meaning reason (McGrath, 1988).
But this does not imply a total dependency
on reasons, which are the creations of God;
thereby reasons alone do not have the power to
produce any results. If Man believes reasons can
create results on their own accord, then he/she is
committing a type of polytheism the opposite
of monotheism a mortal sin that implies God
has partners that have a power of their very own
to create on a par with that of Gods!

It has been observed that those involved in agricultural activity that have a more intellectual point of view
consider traditional management in Syria as irrational,
maybe because those farmers hesitate to adopt their
recommendations. In fact, the farmers believe that
they have been learning agriculture through living with
plant-soil-animals rather than learning from books
as extensionists do. The farmers, therefore, accept
only practical and fruitful recommendations. There is
a very common proverb supporting this acceptance:
al-hikmeh dhallet al-moemin, which means wisdom
is guidance for believers regarding issues that can
rightly be reached by man as in agriculture, where
errors can be corrected by experimentation.
Man and agriculture
Management. The following points discuss two things:
first the practical outcome of the farmers experience
for generations; then how close that outcome is to keep
the system in existence, the farmers overall objective.
In this context, it is worth mentioning that the farmers
are always looking for a spiritual dimension of their
actions and decisions.
The farmers believe agriculture to be the right
means to achieve the right purpose; it should work
in an environment where the ethical values and the
soul of mercy have priority compared with economic
revenues. Such belief stems from both their own
experience: any farmer who lives by cheating will
die in poverty, and from the Koran, where it has
been mentioned that mischief (or misbehavior) of man
regardless of profession leads to ecological disasters
(Koran, 30/41). That means agriculture works well
only by complying with the ethical values linked to
Gods guidance, which imposes self-supervision on
mans behavior. There are many examples reflecting
this compliance with ethical values in the farming
community in the Ghouta. During one visit to that
area, it was observed that apricot trees are not sprayed
with pesticides. This was because that farmer noticed
that the apricot fruits absorb chemicals like a sponge
and, according to these norms, it is prohibited to
poison others. Another farmer slaughtered all of his
seven cows because they had been infected with Malta
fever (Brucellosis) and he had been informed that
this disease could be transferred to humans. A third
example: May 6th is regarded as the last day when frost
can be expected (a date ascertained by local experience). Subsequently, the farmers do not approve of
making any contract to sell fruits, which would be
still unripe, before this date. The reason behind such
attitude is that the purchaser may stand to lose most,
perhaps all, of the fruit crop, such as apricot, if it is
blighted by frost. In other words, there is a risk for the

C ULTURAL BACKGROUND OF

THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE TRADITIONAL FARMING SYSTEM IN THE

purchaser. That is why this kind of sale is prohibited

(Prophet Mohammad as narrated by Al-Bukhari). So,
the human mind is used to determine how to implement the principles of revelation wisely in order to
protect the interests of others, because May 6th, as an
example, is not determined by Gods guidance. Thus
faith is an indispensable requirement in compliance
with ethical values, not only because they are good, but
also because the believer is obliged to obey the will of
God.
The farmers use their own accumulated knowledge and experience, their so called tradition, for
rational management as far as humanly possible. Frost,
as an example, is well known in the Ghouta as the
most destructive natural disturbance, especially to
trees. Therefore, the farmers adopt many practices to
mitigate the impact of damage caused by frost, such as
growing many vegetables, including resistant ones. If
frost should strike, then they stop hoeing and irrigation, and replant as soon as possible the destroyed
vegetables, or replace them by an alternative crop.
Moreover, frost does not worry the farmers since it
destroys many pests. This reduces the pest problem for
the next season, meaning there will be healthier crops,
which can compensate for any losses due to frost in
the previous season. In another example, the farmers
believe fi ab la tiklib al torab, which means plowing
of the soil in August (the hottest month of the year),
will burn the soil as they turn it and therefore must not
be practiced. Scientifically this means killing the living
soil. A third example, small plots are usually devoted
to secondary crops, which are mainly used to achieve
the important objective of self-sufficiency. These plots
play a very important role before expanding the area of
a crop, and in testing a new crop before introduction.
Besides these and many other rational on-farm practices, the farmers pay special attention to managing the
relation between the internal balances and the external
world, but always in such a way as to preserve the
systems diversity. The overall objective is to keep
the system economically alive in a future context. For
example, the farmers supply a diversity of produce
because low prices on one or two types of crops can
be compensated by higher prices on others. In addition, the farmers have developed a complex network
of distribution channels, middlemen, and marketing
activities where many kinds of farm produce are sold
on-farm. The aim is to reduce marketing costs and to
maintain an acceptable level of prices (Alhamidi et al.,
2003).
After all of the above precautionary measures based
on farmers experience, the farmers accept the final
results whether they are good or not. This acceptance is viewed from two angles. First, strong hope in
the mercy of God who knows what is best for them,

G HOUTA

235

which is certainly not just money. It may be a good

health. That hope is expected only after acting rationally. Second, the believer will either be patient when
bad results occur or thankful to God in the case of
good results. In both attitudes, Gods pleasure, which
is sought by believers, can be reached (narrated by
Moslim). This perspective makes the farmers in the
Ghouta live quietly, a matter that supports choosing
farming as a way of life.
The farmers consider diversity as the key practice
to satisfy their overall objective. In this context, the
farmers believe the farms must be similar to a supermarket where man can find his needs and whoever
has a cow will never be poor. That is why a standard
agricultural practice in the Ghouta is to a have a
diverse farm where cows and trees (such as apricot,
walnut, olive, and poplar) are always integrated with
more than thirty kinds of plants (such as vegetable
crops, cereals, legumes, and fodder crops, and even, in
some instances, reed and ornamentals). These farmers,
therefore, describe their farms as gardens. A similar
conception is mentioned in the Koran where a garden
is depicted as a paradise on Earth (Koran, 18/32).
Whenever they find their experience in line with these
mentioned indications, the farmers feel confident in
meeting their overall objective. In this context, it may
be observed that all farms have at least one olive tree,
a fig tree, a grape tree, and a pomegranate tree. All
of these trees have multiple uses pertinent to family
consumption, and their being mentioned in the Koran
encourages growing these trees. Of particular note are
figs and olives, because God swore beside these trees
(Koran, 95/2) that man was created in a best stature.
It is of paramount importance to mention that the fig
(Ficus) is considered a keystone resource significant in
the conservation of the overall bio-diversity (Terborgh,
1986). Olive trees, which can live for hundreds of
years, and which also receive special attention, may
play a similar role.
The farmers usually take human needs as standards to determine the needs of soil, plants, and
animals. For example, humans do not like to eat one
or two kinds of food for long periods and the soil
suffers when one or two crops are grown continuously. A further example: just like man needs a rest
after working hard, so too does the soil after being
worked hard. A soil may be rested either by leaving it
fallow for a certain period, or by the growing of alfalfa
for three years continuously. The farmers take care of
calves in the similar manner as one would look after
babies. The farmers experience leads to this simple
humanitarian principle. The farmers who know this
similarity between man and agriculture has a similar
indication in the Koran will be happier. In fact that
similarity is clarified when comparing the discharge by

236

S AMEER K. A LHAMIDI ET AL .

a man of sperm and then implantation of the fertilized

egg inside the uterus to that of sowing the seeds into
the soil. Both plant and man spend some time in these
environments to grow and develop. Man is born weak
and so is the plant, and both die after passing stages of
development. Finally while the plant grows again from
a seed, man is resurrected in a similar way to the other
life. This comparison, which is implied in the Koran
(22/5), describes human reproduction.
The farmers do not know the concept of risk. An
important reason can be deduced from their management, which is opened to feed back from nature.
Accepting good or bad results as mentioned above
play a complementary role in the lack of this concept
among the farming community in the Ghouta. That
is why the farmers are prepared psychologically and
mentally for poor harvest or low prices. The extract
is formulated in the following proverb: The farmers
have to expect to experience nine poor seasons that
are compensated on the tenth one or enjoy nine good
seasons and lose out on the tenth occasion. In this
context, a relation between the meaning of wisdom
in Arabic as mentioned earlier and the behavior of
the farmers concerning farm management has been
observed. The wisdom (al-hikmeh) means prevention,
that is to say, to prevent man from committing an
action for which he will have to repent (Al-Omar,
1991).
The farmers, in their capacity as managers, often
complain about modern technology. They say that the
goodness lies in the hoof of animal and they lose the
goodness of the soil when they use the tractor, which
is considered a poisonous instrument. That is why
they describe a plow drawn by animals as a merciful
tool, compared to the tractor. The common opinion
among these farmers regarding modern technology is
that although it brings a degree of physical comfort
(relaxation), it creates in reality a far greater amount
of anxiety due to technical problems such as soil
compaction, problems of maintenance, and increased
running costs. Modern technology is described as
a nice girl who attracts you into marrying her, but
once you marry her, the problems will never stop and
life becomes hell. The terms used by farmers imply
non-materialistic expressions.
The farmers apologize when they express themselves in the first person singular, I, because it gives
the impression that man by his own faculties and
capabilities has succeeded in achieving such efficiency.
This attitude is described by a common proverb: men
kala ana jaleba al ena which means who says I
invites pains. Similarly, the farmers also apologize
when they say, they own a piece of land because
the real owner is God and man is just a maintainer of
the due balance created for man. The farmers attitude

regarding mans achievements is based on their belief

that man was created with shortcomings (deficiencies)
such as weakness (Koran, 4/28), and therefore they
genuinely realize mans modest capabilities.
View of money. Compared to the agricultural practices (permissible actions mentioned above), farmers
actions and decisions regarding money are limited due
to religious constraints, which do not permit trial and
error in monetary transactions:

The farmers in the Ghouta regard that at least

some of the payments from different jobs in the
city are ill-gotten gains because it has involved
cheating others in some way. Therefore, they
prefer the well-gotten gains of agriculture regardless of how low a profit yield.
The farmers believe that agriculture is the only
economic pursuit that offers charity through
the feeding of birds, ants, rich and poor people.
That is why agriculture is regarded as a virtuous
job. This implies on one hand that other living
vessels besides human beings are morally significant and hence bio-diversity, which is a key
pillar of sustainability, is enhanced. On the other
hand, it gives an impression that preservation
of the component element of life is achieved
in an altruistic fashion, and not merely for its
benefits (Samarrai, 1990). This attitude is a practical interpretation of what Prophet Mohammad
said in this context (narrated by Al-Bukhari). It
is, therefore, well established in the mind and
heart of those farmers that there is an intimate
relation between donation to others, including
non-human creatures, and the increase of rizk.
The latter term is an Arabic word, which implies
the provision or grace conferred from God and it
is used instead of production or profit. Therefore,
one of the social functions of the system is to
donate some of the farm produce free to others,
such as poor people (compulsory action), friends,
guests, and relatives (desirable action). In one
visit, a farmer described a walnut fruit as a miser
because when he broke it open he was unable to
extract the pulp easily to give it to the researcher.
Agriculture does not work with borrowed money.
A common proverb describes this principle: if
the farmer helps his son to marry with borrowed
money (without interest), that son will borrow
money with interest for a similar purpose. This
is a description of how the situation will get
worse for each generation if one continues to
borrow money. In reality, the farmers of our
study never borrow money at interest. It is something that is absolutely prohibited (Koran, 2/275

C ULTURAL BACKGROUND OF

THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE TRADITIONAL FARMING SYSTEM IN THE

279). Having interest on borrowed money is

rejected both as an economic activity and as an
unethical mode of behavior. The truth of the
matter, according to those farmers, is that the real
farmer who works on his own farm does not need
to borrow any money.
Agriculture either makes the farmer rich or selfsufficient, a situation described as tistor (an
Arabic term which simply means there is no
need for others). This accepted level of life
can be reached by keeping the system in existence. Prophet Mohammed asked God for a selfsufficient standard of living (kefaf) that would be
neither opulent nor wretched, but would serve
his needs (narrated by Moslim). Regarding this
standard of living, the farmers used to say:
el fellah al makfi (derived from kefaf) is melk
makhfi which means that the farmer who lives
self-sufficiently is an unseen king having a hidden
kingdom. God does not like squanderers (Koran,
7/31), and therefore thrift is still a social ideal
in this area. In this respect, it is of paramount
importance to mention the role of monotheistic
faith where man must not worship other entities,
such as money. The slave of money will never be
happy (narrated by Al-Bukhari).
The farmers do not consider cash as the only
measurement of efficiency but also the total
performance for ten years of the whole system.
Happiness and safety, the two fruits of such a
system, are very important parameters of performance upon which an economic value cannot be
placed.

As far as sustainability is concerned, it can be

said that the modest goals of the farmers may play a
significant role in sustaining the system.
View of agriculture. Those farmers who were born and
raised in an agricultural environment appreciate living
independently and in dignity (not to be controlled by
others) on a piece of land where clean air and fresh
food of high quality are always available resulting
in healthier bodies, psychologically and physically.
That is why they love agriculture, describing it as
lumps of sugar, which taste sweet wherever it is licked.
And since they believe that agriculture loves whoever
loves it, a mutual love is well established between the
farmer and agriculture. In addition, they believe that all
members of human community were created to serve
one another, one serves others as a doctor, another
serves as a farmer, and so on. This belief, which
is clearly mentioned in the Koran (43/32), supports
choosing farming as a way of life. Thus, no indication of envy or spite among the farmers toward others

G HOUTA

237

living in the city (whose life is comfortable in terms

of air-conditioned places of employment etc.) was
observed.
There is a close connection between the farmers
and the components of the farm to the extent that the
farmers seem to be able to talk with them. One farmer
during one of the meetings said, while he was pointing
on a piece of land, that piece of land told him it
was too tired. But he did not listen to it and sowed
broad bean on it. The growth was poor. He went therefore to another farmer, who used same kind of seeds,
to check the performance of his crop. He observed a
flourishing growth of broad bean on that farm. At that
point he remembered what the soil told him and realized that the reason behind the poor growth of broad
bean on his own farm had been his careless attitude
towards the complaint of the soil. He therefore decided
to plough the soil and leave it fallow in order for it
to rest. This close relation with land reflects, as the
farmers feel, a kind of love to the components of nature
resulting in a sustained care of these components. The
Prophet Mohammed said something similar once when
describing his and his followers relation with a mountain in an area called Auhud. He said, while looking
at the Auhud Mountain, It loves us and we love it
(narrated by Moslim).
There is an intimate relation with land to the
extent it is considered as a matter of honor. It is very
common to hear the expression al ard erdh, which
means the land is a matter of honor. Therefore, the
farmers in the Ghouta resist the seduction of high
prices to sell their lands (selling land without urgent
need is an abominable action). They feel, when they
sell their land, they become homeless. Zour (a pile) of
soil is better than zour of gold. The first (a metaphor
of a piece of land) is a resource, which by sustainable use will pay off safely for ever, while the gains
of gold in this cultural context are limited and less
safe. Therefore, those farmers possessing a piece of
land feel secure, which is an important goal for them.
This security, which is an outstanding benefit of this
farming system, is based on: faith, an integrated set
of unchangeable ethical values and norms connecting
Earth and Heaven, love towards others (including inanimate and non-human creatures), and sustainable land
use, which means a little but continuous level of
production from those farmers point of view. There
are two proverbs supporting this view: First, kalil
dayem ahsan min kathear zael which means that a
little continuously is better than a lot at once. Second,
sakiah jaryah wela nehr maktoue which means that
a ditch with continuous flow is better than a river
dwindled to nothing.

238

S AMEER K. A LHAMIDI ET AL .

Conclusion
It is evident that agriculture is viewed as a natural
phenomenon that operates in a friendly universe
created suitable for mans existence. It does not operate
in a hostile environment as Spedding (1990) stated.
The base of this view is a consistent system of ideas,
values, and norms where nothing, whether on the farm
or in the universe as a whole, is considered as an enemy
to man, except Satan (Koran, 35/6). Consequently
there is no place in this culture for terms such as
struggle, dominance, and control.
The Greeks classified ethics as either aim ethics
(instrumental ethics) or rule ethics (intrinsic ethics)
(Hartel, 1994). Again there is no place in this culture
for such classification. Thus, a complete separation between law and ethics is clearly unnecessary
(Samarrai, 1990). That is because there is no action
practiced for just its own sake. The ultimate aim is
the pleasure or contentment of God. Thus complying,
ethics provide them with a law of self-respect, and
hence a moral decision-making process is practiced.
Whenever this law is broken, or when man deviates towards destroying every thing, including human
beings, the guidance of God plays its role as a bridle
to bring man back to the right way. In other words,
faith and these norms and values form a framework
indispensable to contain (to check) mans motivations to do whatever he or she thinks is right (Kutb,
1982).3
As far as agriculture is concerned, the fruit of this
cultural context is to view love of agriculture as a
virtuous job and as a way of life, not just food production. This love is deeply rooted in the mind and heart
of those small-scale farmers who operate as nurturer of
the system. This makes agriculture a productive rather
than an extractive activity (Allen and Dusen, 1988).
That is why love of agriculture as a way of life is a
constant theme within the literature of alternative agriculture (Freudenberger, 1986). The spiritual dimension
of farmers experience and knowledge sustain such
relation between the farmers and agriculture.
The wise attitude of those farmers lies in a sort
of marriage between that consistent system of ideas,
values, and norms on one side and human knowledge
and experience, so called tradition, on the other side.
This marriage is described in the Koran (42/35) as light
upon light, light of revelation and light of mind. Both
lights are required to reach the truth and to be rightly
guided. Therefore, it seems wrong to use the term
traditional culture to describe this kind of culture as
tradition forms only part of it. One side of tradition
relates to human knowledge and experience, and the
other side comprises the religious faith. Therefore this
expression tradition may be deceptive or misleading.

In brief, it can be said that the practical outcome of

the cultural background in the Ghouta makes agriculture meaningful and sustainable.

Notes
1. Al-Bukhari and Moslim were the most important men
who collected the Prophet Mohammads sayings so called
hadeath. Their books are called Sahih Al-Bukhari and
Sahih Moslim respectively. Numbers are usually used in
these books to refer to a specific saying. These numbers are
used in the list of references in the same order mentioned in
the text.
2. The English translation of the Korans verses and most
of the sayings of Prophet Mohammad have not been
used in the text because whatever the translation is, it
cannot express the spiritual sense (moral) of these verses
or sayings. Instead of that, the meanings or the implications are used in the text. All references to the Koran are
mentioned in two numbers, the first refer to the number of
surah (chapter), and the second refer to the number of Ayeh
(verse).
3. Kutb, S. is well known as a commentator of the Koran in
the 20th century. His book is called Fi Dhilal Al-Koran (see
references).

References
Al-Bukhari, M. I. (1997). Sahih Al-Bukhari. Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia: Dar-Assalam, 3535, 21932199, 2320, 6435 [in
Arabic].
Alhamidi, S. K., P. Hillbur, M. Gustafsson, J. Ibrahim, and
H. Larsson (2003). A Study of the Traditional Farming System
in the Ghouta, Oasis of Damascus, Syria (forthcoming).
Allen, P. and D. V. Dusen (1988). Sustainable agriculture:
Choosing the future. In P. Allen and D. V. Dusen (eds.),
The Proceedings of the Sixth International Scientific Conference of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture
Movements (IFOAM) on Global Perspectives on Agroecology
and Sustainable Agricultural Systems (pp. 114). Santa Cruz:
Agroecology Program, University of California.
Al-Omar, N. S. (1991). Al Hikmeh. [The Wisdom.] London:
Darulifta Office [in Arabic].
Altieri, M. A. (1987). Agroecology: The Scientific Basis of
Alternative Agriculture. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press/
London: IT Publication.
Altieri, M. A. and P. Rosset (1995). Agroecology and the
conversion of large-scale conventional systems to sustainable management. International Journal of Environmental
Studies 50(34): 165185.
Bianquis, A. (1989). La reforme agraire dans la Ghouta de
Damas. Damascus, Syria: Institut Franais de Damas [in
French].
Berkes, F., C. Folke, and M. Gadgil (1995). Traditional
ecological knowledge, biodiversity, resilience and sustainability. In C. A Perrings, K. G. Mler, C. Folke, C. S.

C ULTURAL BACKGROUND OF

THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE TRADITIONAL FARMING SYSTEM IN THE

Holling, and B. O. Jansson (eds.), Biodiversity Conservation (pp. 281300). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Berry, W. (1977). The Unsettling of America: Culture and
Agriculture. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Bird, E. R. (1988). Why modern agriculture is environmentally unsustainable: Implications for the politics of the
sustainable agriculture movement in the US. In P. Allen
and D. V. Dusen (eds.), The Proceedings of the Sixth International Scientific Conference of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) on Global
Perspectives on Agroecology and Sustainable Agricultural
Systems, Vol. 1 (pp. 3137). Santa Cruz: Agroecology
Program, University of California.
Busch, L. (1981). Introduction. In L. Busch (ed.), Science and
Agricultural Development (pp. 16). Totowa, New Jersey:
Allanheld, Osmun & Co.
Callicott, J. B. (1990). The metaphysical transition in farming:
From the newtonian-mechanical to the eltonian ecological.
Journal of Agricultural Ethics 3: 3649.
Callicott, J. B. and R. T. Ames (1989). The Asian traditions
as a conceptual resource for environmental philosophy. In
J. B. Callicot and R. Ames (eds.), Nature in Asian Traditions
of Thought: Essays in Environmental Philosophy (pp. 121).
Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
Dlouhy, J. (1983). Philosophy behind alternative forms of
agriculture. In J. Dlouhy and G. Nilsson (eds.), The Proceedings of International Scientific Colloquium on Comparison
between Farming Systems, March 2124, 1983 (pp. 4953).
Uppsala: Department of Plant Husbandry, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
Douglass, G. K. (1985). Moral conflict in agriculture:
Conquest or moral co-evolution? In T. C. Edens, C. Fridgen,
and S. L. Battenfield (eds.), Conference Proceedings on
Sustainable Agriculture and Integrated Farming Systems
(pp. 1021). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Elmonjid (1997). [an ArabicArabic help dictionary]. Beirut,
Lebanon: Dar el-Mashreq, p. 562.
Engel, J. R. (1990). The ethics of sustainable development.
In J. R. Engel and J. G. Engel (eds.), Ethics of Environment
and Development. Global Challenge, International Response
(pp. 123). London: Belhaven Press.
Freudenberger, C. D. (1986). Value and ethical dimensions of
alternative agricultural approach. in quest of a regenerative
and just agriculture. In K. A. Dahlberg (ed.), New Directions
for Agriculture and Agricultural Research (pp. 348364).
Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman and Allanheld.
Ginfold, H. (1978). Syria. New York: Franklin Watts.
Hartel, P. G. (1994). Overview. In P. G. Hartel, K. P. George,
and J. Vorst (eds.), The Proceedings of a Symposium on
Agricultural Ethics: Issues for the 21st Century, October 31
November 5, 1992 (pp. 110), Madison, Wisconsin: Soil
Science Society, American Society of Agronomy, and Crop
Science Society.
Ibn Nabi, M. (1984). Moshkilat al-thekafah. [The Problem
of Culture.] Damascus, Syria: Dar Al-Fikr [translated from
French to Arabic by A. Shaheen].
Kaufman, M. (1985). The pastoral ideal and sustainable agriculture. In T. C. Edens, C. Fridgen, and S. L. Battenfield
(eds.), Conference Proceedings on Sustainable Agriculture

G HOUTA

239

and Integrated Farming Systems (pp. 219232). East Lansing:

Michigan State University Press.
Kaufman, M. (1988). From domination to cooperation: Ethical
and economic motivations towards sustainable food production systems. In P. Allen and D. V. Dusen (eds.), The
Proceedings of the Sixth International Scientific Conference
of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) on Global Perspectives on Agroecology and
Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Vol. 1 (pp. 7582). Santa
Cruz: Agroecology Program, University of California.
Kenichiro, H. (1993). The state and cultural transformation
in modern East Asia. In H. Kenichiro (ed.), The State and
Cultural Transformation: Perspectives from East Asia (pp. 1
11). Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Khair, S. (1966). Ghoutet Dimashk. Diraseh fi al-geografiah
al-ziraeiah. [Damascus Ghouta: A Study in Agricultural
Geography.] Damascus, Syria: Ministry of Culture [in
Arabic].
Kunkel, H. O. (1984). Agricultural ethics the setting.
Agriculture and Human Values 1(1): 2022.
Kurd Ali, M. (1984). Ghoutet Dimashk. [Damascus Ghouta.]
Damascus, Syria: Ministry of Culture [in Arabic].
Kutb, S. (1982). Khasais al-tasawwur al-islami and mokawimatah. [Pillars of Islamic Perspective.] Beirut, Libanon: Dar
Al-Shurok [in Arabic].
Kutb, S. (1986). Fi dhilal al-Koran. [Shadows of Koran.] Dar
Al-Ilm for Printing and Publishing. Jiddah, Saudi Arabia/
Cairo, Egypt: Dar Al-Shurok for Printing and Publishing [in
Arabic].
Kvale, S. (1983). The qualitative research interview: A
phenomenological and a hermeneutical mode of understanding. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 14: 171
196.
Leiss, W. (1994). The Domination of Nature. Montreal: McGillQueens University Press.
Mahmoud, Z. N. (1990). Arabi bayna thakafeteyn. [An Arab
between Two Cultures.] Cairo, Egypt: Dar Al-Shurok [in
Arabic].
McGrath, A. E. (1988). Science and Religion, an Introduction.
Blackwell.
Merrill, M. C. (1988). Some philosophical prerequisites for a
sustainable agriculture. In P. Allen and D. V. Dusen (eds.),
The Proceedings of the Sixth International Scientific Conference of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture
Movements (IFOAM) on Global Perspectives on Agroecology
and Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Vol. 1 (pp. 8391).
Santa Cruz: Agroecology Program, University of California.
Moslim Ibn Al-Hajaj Al-Naisabouri (1987). Mokhtasar Sahih
Moslim. [Summarized Sahih Moslim.] Verified by M. N. AlAlbani. Beirut, Lebanon: Al-Makteb Al-Islami, 1602, 2092,
556, 788 [in Arabic].
Pratt, B. and P. Loizos (1992). Choosing Research Methods.
Data collection for Development Workers. Development
Guidelines No. 7. Oxford: Oxfam.
Rayner, A. I. and S. J. Welham (1995). Economic and statistical considerations in the measurement of Total Factor
Productivity (TFP). In V. Barnett, R. Payne, and R. Steiner
(eds.), Agricultural Sustainability: Economic, Environmental
and Statistical Considerations (pp. 2338). Chichester, UK:
John Wiley & Sons.

240

S AMEER K. A LHAMIDI ET AL .

Samarrai, M. Y. I. D. (1990). Islamic environmental ethics:

Law and society. In J. R. Engel and J. G. Engel (eds.),
Ethics of Environment and Development (Global Challenge,
International Response) (pp. 189198). London: Belhaven
Press.
Shepard, P. T. (1985). Moral conflict in agriculture: Conquest
or moral co-evolution? In T. C. Edens, C. Fridgen, and S. L.
Battenfield (eds.), Conference Proceedings on Sustainable
Agriculture and Integrated Farming Systems (pp. 244255).
East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Spedding C. R. W. (1990). Crop protection in lower input
systems of agriculture. In U. Roger (ed.), The Proceedings
of British Crop Protection Council on Crop Protection in
Organic and Low Input Agriculture, September 46, 1990
(pp. 38). Cambridge, UK: BOPC (British Crop Protection
Council).
Sullivan, H. S. (1954). The Psychiatric Interview (pp. 327).
New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Terborgh, J. (1986). Keystone plant resources in the tropical
forest. In M. E. Soule (ed.), Conservation Biology the
Science of Scarcity and Diversity. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer.

Thompson C. L., M. M. Anderberg, and J. B. Antell (eds.)

(1982). The Current History, Encyclopaedia of Developing
Nations (pp. 170174). New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Thompson, P. B. (1988). Ethical dilemmas in agriculture: The
need for recognition and resolution. Agriculture and Human
Values 5(4): 415.
Van Mansvelt, J. D. (1988). Basic concepts of alternative agriculture. In P. Allen and D. V. Dusen (eds.), The
Proceedings of the Sixth International Scientific Conference
of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) on Global Perspectives on Agroecology and
Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Vol. 1 (pp. 114). Santa
Cruz: Agroecology Program, University of California.
Address for correspondence: Sameer K. Alhamidi, Swedish
University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Crop
Science, Box 44, S-23053 Alnarp, Sweden
Phone: +46-40-224358; Fax: +46-40-462166;
E-mail: sameer.alhamidi@telia.com