Revisiting the debate on mountain agricultural development, Dr. Rhoades refers to the different positions as 'half full', 'half empty' and 'empty' glass debates. According to Rhoades the neo-Malthusian position can be described as the 'half empty glass', because of the dominant negative factors in the analyses. The 'half-full' group are more optimistic as they see 'tremendous internal strength to solve their own problems'. It also seeks to move mountains higher on the development agenda by raising the awareness of policy makers, identifying replicable components of successful cases of transformed mountain areas, and identification and advocacy of improved technologies for sustainable mountain agriculture. The next issue pertains to the multiple perceptions on the sustainability of mountain agriculture.
Sustainability means different things to different people.
Other, there is also confusion about sustainability as a means or end, as process and capacity, and between different points in time and space. It is only through these linkages of space and various processes that a systematic and scaled database may be created for analysis and better understanding of agriculture. The organisation of a systematic mountain database is the subject of much discussion with emphasis on generating a working typology of farming systems, providing working maps, and a specialised and relational database. On the linkages between farming, poverty, and environment, Rhoades is amazed that imprecise conceptualisations can not only generate such a huge body of literature but also sweeping and blanket generalisations. Perceptions regarding poverty and environment play an important part in what is seen as resources, problems, and opportunities.