A half-century of Holistic Management: what does the evidence reveal?
This comprehensive literature review describes the main tenets of HM and addresses the longstanding and unresolved controversy over its legitimacy. It additionally provides a meta-analysis that not only provides an up-to-date review of the multidisciplinary evidence and ongoing arguments about HM, but also provides a novel explanation for the controversy.
Deficiencies in the Briske et al. Rebuttal of the Savory Method
In this paper, Dr. Richard Teague examines the shortcomings and inaccuracies of his colleague Dr. David Briske’s claims against Allan Savory’s methods.
Benefits of multi-paddock grazing management on rangelands: Limitations of experimental grazing research and knowledge gaps
This paper refutes recent research that finds no benefits for vegetation or animal production under “multi-paddock rotational grazing” in comparison to continuous grazing. It finds that these studies were small scale and fixed protocol experiments that did not adequately match the experience of successful managers.
Regarding Holechek and Briske, and Rebuttals by Teague
This article discusses reports authored by university researchers David Briske and Jerry Holechek that were critical of methods they had attributed to Allan Savory. It is shown that the Briske and Holechek mischaracterized Savory’s work and that, in fact, the types of trials they reviewed are precisely the type that Savory himself discourages.
Origin, Persistence, and Resolution of the Rotational Grazing Debate: Integrating Human Dimensions Into Rangeland Research
This paper examines the origins of the “rotational grazing” debate in range management and suggests that discrepancies between scientific findings and manager experience can be rectified through a context of “complex adaptive systems” where social and biophysical factors are considered as well as experimental evidence. The paper mistakenly equates the work of Allan Savory with rotational grazing and demonstrates the author’s lack of deep understanding on the issue.
Multi-paddock grazing on rangelands: Why the perceptual dichotomy between research results and rancher experience?
This paper explores how perceptions differ among rangeland managers who have effectively used multi-paddock grazing systems and the research scientists who have studied them.
A global assessment of Holistic Planned Grazing™ compared with season-long, continuous grazing: meta-analysis findings
This paper performs a “quantitative meta-analysis” of twenty-one grazing studies that are claimed to represent Holistic Planned Grazing (HPG) in a comparison with performance data from year long continuous grazing. The paper finds no significant difference in plant basal cover, plant biomass and animal performance and thus refutes claims that HPG is superior in those areas. It does not say it is inferior, only that there is no meaningful difference. There is a thorough rebuttal to this paper.
Who’s afraid of Allan Savory? Scientometric polarization on Holistic Management
This paper uses “scientometrics” to understand the structure of science on Holistic Management (HM) to better understand the controversy underlying it. Results show that those who take a positive position on Holistic Management are those doing farm-scale (rather than experimental) work in dry climates.