Content uploaded by Stuart Hill
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Stuart Hill on Jun 14, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Conceptual Framework for the Transition from Conventional to Sustainable Agriculture
Abstract
A conceptual framework for assessing strategies to support the transition from conventional to sustainable agriculture is described, and examples from farming and institutional settings are provided.
... Plus spécifiquement, lorsqu'on aborde la transition agroécologique à l'échelle des agroécosystèmes, l'action collective semble être indispensable pour orchestrer les changements de pratiques, à travers l'accompagnement technique ainsi que les échanges entre pairs, tout en assurant une connectivité des agroécosystèmes à l'échelle du paysage (Barnaud et al., 2018 Pour mieux appréhender les verrous ainsi que les modalités de mise en oeuvre de la transition agroécologique, la recherche s'est intéressée à l'étude de cette transition en tant qu'objet, ainsi qu'aux méthodes d'analyse à adopter pour examiner l'ensemble du processus. En agronomie, l'analyse des changements de pratiques en tant que processus de transition s'est largement centrée sur le modèle d'efficacité-substitution-reconception (Padel et al., 2019), développé notamment par Hill et MacRae (1996). Ce cadre décrit trois stades de transition : (i) l'efficacité (efficiency) vise à réduire l'utilisation des ressources et les impacts environnementaux de l'agriculture ; (ii) la substitution (substitution) vise à remplacer les intrants par des options plus respectueuses de l'environnement ; (iii) la reconception (redesign) vise à complètement repenser et restructurer le système (Merot et al., 2019a). ...
While the importance of the agroecological transition is widely recognized today, approaches and transition strategies vary considerably depending on the individual representations of the actors involved in this process. The agroecological transition (AET) therefore requires an understanding of the ecological and socio-economic causes and constraints, particularly in the case of the wine sector. In France, 95% of wine production is under Geographical Indications (GI), so practices are largely regulated by product specifications. GIs are particularly concerned with the AET in France, especially since the EGalim law (Law No. 2018-938 of 30/10/18), which required the integration of agroecological principles into the specifications associated with GIs.
This research aims to analyze the agroecological transition at multiple scales in a winegrowing area under PDO, developing a new analytical approach based on an adaptation of E. Ostrom's IAD/SES framework to the study of viticultural agroecosystems. The thesis aims to analyze the change in practices of winegrowers under PDO, and how decision rules and the collective organization modalities of producers within the ODG associated with GIs influence the conduct of the agroecological transition at the territorial level. Specifically, based on a case study in the wine region of Anjou-Saumur, it revolves around three objectives: (i) characterizing collective action for the development of collective agroecological transition strategies at the institutional level of the territory; (ii) analyzing the process of winegrowers’ changes of practices towards agroecology at the farm level in the context of an evolution in PDO specifications; and (iii) analyzing the role of knowledge networks in changing representations allowing transformative practice change towards agroecology.
To address these objectives, I use the IAD/SES framework applied to agroecosystems. Firstly, I revisit the concept of focal action situation of this framework in order to analyze the different collective transition strategies that have been developed at the institutional level, and how these strategies overlap and complement each other. I identified the key role of the wine federation, the chamber of agriculture, and elected winegrowers in the development and implementation of these strategies at the level of winegrowers. Secondly, I extend the concept of resource system from the IAD/SES framework to agroecosystems, defining the "agroecological resource system", allowing to encompass both productive and non-productive areas at the scale of the field-margin complex. This allows me to analyze the diversity of changes in ground cover management practices of winegrowers, in the context of a change in specifications prohibiting herbicides in the inter-row. I classified winegrowers into five ground cover management strategies reflecting a potential trajectory towards a reduction in herbicide and tillage use. I identified bottlenecks along this potential trajectory, and found that they were sometimes due to differences in representations of the agroecological resource system. Finally, in a third step, I use network analysis to understand the role of knowledge networks in changing representations to overcome these bottlenecks. I observed that geographical proximity facilitated the link between people with different viticultural practices, while cognitive proximity favored a knowledge-sharing network within the community of organic winegrowers. I then identified certain winegrowers, accompanying technicians, and collectives such as the wine federation as bridges between knowledge-sharing communities.
This thesis makes a dual scientific contribution. Firstly, it enriches the understanding of the determinants and processes of practice changes in the wine sector under PDO. Furthermore, it introduces a new methodological approach that allows the analysis of agroecological transition at different scales and explores the interactions between these scales during the transition process.
... Também de modo complementar, consideramos ainda como componentes estruturantes do entendimento da agroecologia os cinco níveis de transição para sistemas agroalimentares sustentáveis (Gliessman, 2016), quadro conceptual que é muito útil no sentido de aferir o "aprofundamento" agroecológico das iniciativas no terreno (figura 3, em baixo). Os primeiros três níveis já estão descritos há longa data e resultam da investigação no âmbito da agricultura de conservação (Hill & MacRae, 1996). A novidade aqui é a introdução de uma nova racionalidade com os níveis que compõem a dimensão dos "sistemas alimentares", em especial o nível 5, que advoga uma completa reconfiguração do sistema alimentar vigente, no sentido do reforço da participação, da escala local, da equidade e da justiça democrática (Gliessman, 2016). ...
Relatório com o levantamento das experiencias agroecológicas em Portugal (ciência e movimentos sociopolíticos).
... It has long been recognised that agri-food system redesign is needed to achieve the intertwined objectives of managing wide ecosystem outcomes, ensuring food and nutrition security, making food systems more equitable and providing livelihoods and economic opportunities in rural areas (FAO, 2019;Hill and MacRae, 1996;OECD, 2021). However, agri-food systems worldwide are still facing the immense challenge of providing safe and nutritious food, while meeting planetary boundaries (Gerten et al., 2020;Richardson et al., 2023). ...
Governance networks, made of diversified and multidisciplinary actors, have a prominent role in the development and implementation of actions for agri-food system transformation that foster both farm-level and societal change, as in the case of agroecology transitions. This article aims at delivering a typology of governance networks, building on evidence from across Europe. By adopting a governance network theory perspective, a multiple case study is developed through participatory research, by characterising the emerging governance networks from transition actions at different levels in the pathway towards agroecological redesign. Three types of governance networks are identified. Adoption networks develop from early-stage actions in the agroecology transition pathway, to facilitate the shift from conventional to more sustainable farming practices. Positioning networks emerge from actions to create a demand for agroecologically produced food, through the development of marketing strategies and the creation of market channels. Amplification networks are the closest to agroecological redesign, originating from actions structured towards participatory planning and the development and reinforcement of diversity and trans-disciplinarity. Advisory services play a key role in all three types, by fostering knowledge diffusion and exchange, as well as by developing trust among farmers and encouraging cooperation, including conflict management. The role of advisory services for agroecology could be strengthened further through targeted policy. Measures to sustain multi-actor cooperation have the potential to create these conditions by developing and exploiting synergies between and within value chains, and with other relevant actors, including consumers.
... Melo et al. analyze the strategies to transition from an input-intensive to a biodiversity-based agriculture. They use the Efficiency-Substitution-Redesign framework (Hill and MacRae, 1995) to methodically characterize the research geared toward management of the globally invasive fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Through a corpus of 1923 publications, they show that almost half of studies explore (singlefactor) substitution solutions, i.e. the replacement of synthetic chemical inputs with more environmentally benign alternatives such as biological control agents or biopesticides. ...
... Gardarin et al., 2022): implementing precision agriculture, changing sowing dates, using resistant crop varieties and crop-variety mixtures, mechanical weed control, biocontrol, using intercropped service crops, extending crop rotations and diversifying crops. These practices can be categorized according to the Efficiency-Substitution-Redesign framework of Hill and MacRae (1996). Efficiency practices (e.g., implementing precision agriculture) optimize pesticide use by increasing pesticide productivity without decreasing crop yields (Boussemart et al., 2013). ...
CONTEXT
Implementing alternative practices to the use of pesticides involves work issues that can limit adoption of these practices, particularly on dairy farms. Depending on how practices change, work organization may completely change, additional skills and knowledge may be required, and system complexity may increase, inducing a higher mental workload. This can result in an excessive total workload for already overburdened farmers.
OBJECTIVE
The present study examines whether work limits the implementation of alternative practices to reduce pesticide use on dairy farms, depending on the amount of change the practices require. Three work dimensions were considered: work organization, skills and knowledge, and physical and mental workload.
METHODS
We used nine semi-structured interviews with crop and livestock experts in Brittany (France's leading region for dairy production) to classify multiple categories of practices by their degree of difficulty and the type of work dimension involved, with a specific focus on three practices: using resistant crop varieties, mechanical weed control and extending crop rotations.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
First, experts emphasized certain alternative practices over others depending on the institution to which they belonged. Second, the need to balance the feeding system and an increase in herd size, which is not compatible with all alternative practices, were barriers specific to dairy farms. Third, all three practices we focused on were skill- and knowledge-intensive, but in different ways. Using resistant crop varieties requires access to the right information, while mechanical weed control raises issues of training, investment or outsourcing. Finally, extending crop rotations, considered as a redesign of the production system, requires obtaining the resources, time and autonomy to think about new rotations.
SIGNIFICANCE
This study shows that, in addition to work organization, other work dimensions are crucial for reducing pesticide use on dairy farms.
... La transition de l'agrosystème à l'agroécosystème passe par trois étapes, généralement consécutives, selon l'intensité du changement (Hill et MacRae, 1995 ;Vanbergen et al., 2020) : augmentation de l'efficacité des pratiques déjà utilisées (pour réduire la consommation d'intrants), substitution d'une pratique par une autre (par exemple, remplacement d'un insecticide chimique par un auxiliaire de lutte), et reconception complète du système 9 De l'agriculture intensive vers l'agroécologie 9 de culture, aussi bien dans son organisation spatiale que temporelle (Wezel et al., 2014 (Foley et al., 2005 ;Newbold et al., 2015). Pourtant ces agrosystèmes (intensifs) pourraient néanmoins fournir ces autres services écosystémiques (Zhang et al., 2007). ...
Sustainable agriculture addresses the environmental, economic, and social issues related to agricultural systems. In general, the objectives of sustainable agriculture are intended (1) to improve the entire food and agricultural system. (2) To ensure that arable land is protected and (3) to preserve the vitality of family-owned farms and rural communities. With the development of sustainable agriculture, it might increase high-yield polyculture, organic fertilizers, biological pest control, irrigation efficiency, perennial crops and crop rotation. Green solutions should be developed to overcome the issues, i.e. environmental sustainability and food security and safety achieving sustainable agriculture. Integrated management concerning water resource management, soil management, fertilizers and pesticides management, integrated farming system, and climate-smart agro-foresty management (CSAFM) should be established. In addition, the developed innovation technologies should be focused on renewable energy (biogas), soil conservation (biochar), water quality/wetlands, agricultural drip irrigation, and AIoT technologies for precision agriculture. The critical connection of water resource, energy efficiency and food production could be affected in green agriculture. The implementation of Green Chemistry Principles (GCP) with green process engineering could enhance energy-resource efficiency, water reclamation effectiveness and food-security assurance by forming water–Energy–Food (WEF) nexus. Therefore, construction of decarbonizing supply chains for carbon neutrality in agriculture industries should be developed in the future.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.