47 research outputs found
Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmersâ perspectives
Pesticide reduction is a key current challenge. Scientific findings in landscape ecology suggest that complex landscapes favor insect pest biological control by conservation of natural enemy habitats. A potential agro-ecological innovation is to conserve or engineer such complex landscapes to reduce pesticide use. However, whereas the relevant resources are often well known in most natural resource management situations, potential resources involved in this innovation (natural enemies and the landscape) are not necessarily considered as resources in the eyes of their potential users. From the perspective that resources are socially constructed, our objective was to investigate whether and how these resources are considered by their potential users. To do so, we conducted research in an area specializing in tree-fruit (apple) production in southwestern France. This site was selected for its high pest incidence and high use of insecticides on orchards and, consequently, high stakes involved for any alternative. We conducted 30 comprehensive interviews with stakeholders (farmers and crop advisors) about their pest control strategies to explore their representation of their landscape and natural enemies. Our results show that natural enemies are considered by local stakeholders as public good resources, especially in the context of interventions by public institutions for their conservation, acclimation, and management. Farmers sometimes consider natural enemies as private goods when they can isolate the crop, enclosing it with nets or some other type of boundary. We also show that the landscape was not considered as a resource for biological pest control by conservation, but rather as a source of pests. We advocate for more research on the effects of landscapes on natural enemies, including participatory research based on dialogue among farmers, crop advisors, and scientists
Coupling agent-based models and argumentation framework to simulate opinion dynamics: application to vegetarian diet diffusion
International audienceAgent-based simulation has been extensively used to studyopinion dynamics. However, the vast majority of the existing modelshave been limited to extremely abstract and simplified representationsof the diffusion process, which impairs the realism of the simulationsand disables the understanding of the reasons for the shift of an actorâsopinion. This paper presents a generic framework implemented in theGAMA platform allowing to explicitly represent exchanges of argumentsbetween actors in a context of an opinion dynamic model. More precisely,we propose to formalize the inner attitude towards an opinion of eachagent as an argumentation graph and give them the possibility to sharearguments with other agents. We present an application of the frameworkto study the evolution of the vegetarian diet at a city level
Governance of ecosystem services in agroecology : when coordination is needed but difficult to achieve
Transitioning towards agroecology involves the integration of biodiversity based ecosystem services into farming systems: for example, relying on biological pest control rather than pesticides. One promising approach for pest control relies on the conservation of semi-natural habitats at the landscape scale to encourage natural enemies of insect pests. However, this approach may require coordination between farmers to manage the interdependencies between the providers and beneficiaries of this ecosystem service. The main objective of this study was to identify hindrances to landscape-scale coordination strategies to control pests. To this end, we used a theoretical framework specifically designed to explore social interdependencies linked to ecosystem services. We applied this framework to a participatory research case study on pest control in apple orchards in southwest France to identify and describe key obstacles. We found four main impediments: (1) The perception of most stakeholders that the landscape does not deliver significant pest control services, (2) the challenge of coping with agroecological uncertainties, (3) an integrated vertical supply chain focused on pesticide use, (4) the existence of independent, non-collective alternatives. We discuss the potential of overcoming these obstacles or turning them into opportunities that promote a transition to agroecology and the integration of ecosystem services in farms and their supply chains
The elephant in the room is really a cow:using consumption corridors to define sustainable meat consumption in the European Union
Implementing the European Green Deal requires a consistent food systemsâ policy that involves not only targeting the supply side but also conducting extensive changes in diets at the consumer level. Reducing meat consumption is an obvious strategy to put the European food system on track to meet the Green Dealâs goals. This cannot be achieved by focusing solely on consumer choice and individual responsibility. Stronger governance is required to reduce the scale of meat consumption to sustainable levels. Such governance needs to be informed by a holistic definition of âsustainable meat consumptionâ, designed to ensure that important sustainability priorities are not neglected, and to account for all emissions associated with EU consumption, regardless of where production takes place. This article presents a conceptual framework to define âsustainable meat consumptionâ based on the concept of consumption corridors (CCs). A CC is the space between a minimum (the floor) and maximum (the ceiling) consumption level, which allows everybody to satisfy their needs without compromising othersâ ability to meet their own. Embedded in a powerful set of principles (recognizing universal needs; tackling both over and under-consumption; framing food as a common good; promoting public participation; and addressing environmental justice and planetary sustainability), CCs are attuned to the Green Dealâs ambition to âleave no one behindâ, in the EU and beyond. CCs provide a demand-side solution encompassing a more equitable alternative to discuss what is actually a âfair shareâ of the worldâs limited resources when it comes to meat consumption.</p
The elephant in the room is really a cow: using consumption corridors to define sustainable meat consumption in the European Union
Modélisations participatives pour explorer des voies innovantes de gestion des ravageurs par le paysage
Lâappel Ă projet de SMaCH en 2013 a Ă©tĂ© lancĂ© sur le thĂšme : « Gestion Durable de la SantĂ© des Cultures ». Lâobjectif de ce sĂ©minaire a Ă©tĂ© prĂ©senter les rĂ©sultats des projets retenus, auxquels sâajoutent quatre thĂšses soutenues par SMaCH, c'est ainsi que seize exposĂ©s ont prĂ©sentĂ© les rĂ©sultats obtenus dans la pĂ©riode 2013-2016.
La premiÚre journée a été consacrée à la conception de systÚmes durables et à la transition vers l'agroécologie. Tous les projets ont démontré la nécessité d'une démarche globale intégrant non seulement des leviers techniques mais aussi organisationnels et économiques. La deuxiÚme journée a mis l'accent sur la nécessité de raisonner à l'échelle du territoire et non pas que de la parcelle. C'est en effet à cette échelle large que l'on observe et que l'on gÚre la diffusion des agents pathogÚnes, la résistance aux pesticides et l'utilisation des auxiliaires.
Ce sĂ©minaire a Ă©tĂ© Ă©galement lâoccasion de faire un focus particulier sur le partenariat et le transfert des rĂ©sultats de SMaCH
Quitting livestock farming: transfarmation pathways and factors of change from post-livestock farmers' accounts
Transitioning away from livestock farming would limit the carbon footprint of humanity and reduce the pressure on water, land and biodiversity. It would also improve human health, as animal farming increases the risks of pandemics and bacterial resistance. All of these risks and opportunities make a compelling case for a transition towards plant-based diets. In case of a large-scale transition, hundreds of thousands of farmers would have to quit animal farming and switch to other activities. Such transition is potentially happening in developed countries, where industrial operations are located, consumption per capita is the highest and alternatives to animal products are increasingly available. However, there is considerable resistance from farmers to this transition. There is thus a need to better understand potential transition pathways to support smooth transitions. To do so, 27 stories of farm transitioning out of livestock farming - so called transfarmation - were collected. Most of these cases are located in Switzerland and the US. These accounts were published on the websites of organizations that support farmers transitioning out of livestock production or by farmers themselves. In this qualitative study, I coded these accounts to identify patterns in the drivers, behaviour, and decision-making of farmers explaining their transition. Two main patterns were identified: (1) transfarmations from intensive poultry or pig farms towards a mushroom or market gardening farm, driven by economic interests and (2) transfarmations driven by compassion to animals, mostly leading to a farmed animal sanctuary or market gardening farm. Support organizations for transfarmation seem to be particularly beneficial for the second type of transition. I conclude this paper with research perspectives on the topic of transfarmation, especially on the role of gender and the potential of transfarmation for the green care economy.ISSN:2571-581
La Gestion PaysagÚre des Ravageurs : exploration des verrous et leviers d'une innovation agroécologique par la modélisation participative
Agroecology implies the design of farming systems integrating ecosystem services. Biological pest control by natural enemies might be favored to pesticide, the most common strategy in pest control. Some landscape ecology findings show that landscapes with a high proportion of semi-natural habitats (woods, forests, meadows, etc) favour natural enemies because they provide shelters, egg-laying sites and food. Landscape pest management would require to design and set up agricultural landscape favouring these habitats and thus natural enemies and biological pest control. However, implementation by stakeholders of such potential innovation remains to be explored. In this research-action PhD, we explored the design of such pest regulating landscape alongside local and scientific stakeholders. We initiated a participatory research in a farming region in Tarn-et-Garonne, France, specialized in fruit tree production, which are pesticide intensive production systems. Based on stakeholdersâ representations and knowledge we identify conditions in which the landscape and natural enemies are socially constructed as resources providing pest control ecosystem services. We also explored if these stakeholders were linked via interdependencies, which could necessitate some coordinated action. We explored the possibility of landscape pest management through several participatory modelling cycles. First, we qualified the diversity of mental models of local stakeholders on the pest control strategy, then we co-constructed Bayesian models to explore uncertainties about biological pest control processes, and finally we co-constructed an agent-based model about the invasive pest Drosophila sukzukii and its potential landscape management. Doing so, we identified that the landscape composition in semi-natural habitats is weakly related to pest control ecosystem services in actual representation of scientific or local stakeholders, even though such landscape is often favorable to functional biodiversity. Without clearly identified benefits, local stakeholders are not dependent on each other and the need to coordinated action is limited. Most farmers indicate a clear preference for individual solutions towards pests like pesticides or protective nets around their crops. This individual focus suggests that innovating in biological pest control by natural enemies could be easier through manipulation of natural vegetation inside individual farms, like inter-rows of orchards. Besides, these results stress the need for scientific studies linking ecology and economics in order to explicitly measure benefits coming out of landscapes favorable to natural enemies. Positive results would help to motivate participatory researches in this area of research. Finally, this participatory and exploratory PhD was able to identify new sites and research questions about landscape pest management which might be followed up.LâagroĂ©cologie implique la conception de systĂšmes agricoles intĂ©grant autant que possible les services Ă©cosystĂ©miques. Aux produits chimiques souvent employĂ©s contre les ravageurs de cultures peut ĂȘtre privilĂ©giĂ© la rĂ©gulation par leurs ennemis naturels. Des rĂ©sultats en Ă©cologie indiquent que des paysages agricoles dont la composition est riche en habitats semi-naturels (bois, forets, prairies, etc) les favorisent en leur fournissant abris, sites de pontes et nourriture. Il serait donc possible de mettre en place une Gestion PaysagĂšre des Ravageurs (GPR), câest-Ă -dire de concevoir et dâamĂ©nager des paysages agricoles en faveur de ces habitats afin de favoriser les ennemis naturels et le contrĂŽle biologique. Toutefois, lâimplĂ©mentation dâune telle innovation potentielle par les acteurs de ces paysages reste largement Ă explorer. Dans cette thĂšse, dans un esprit de recherche-action, nous avons pris le parti dâexplorer la conception de tels paysages rĂ©gulateurs de ravageurs en sâimpliquant avec des acteurs locaux et scientifiques. Nous avons initiĂ© une dĂ©marche de recherche participative avec des acteurs agricoles dâune rĂ©gion du Tarn-et-Garonne spĂ©cialisĂ©e dans lâarboriculture fruitiĂšre, intensive en traitements chimiques. A partir de leurs reprĂ©sentations et de leurs connaissances nous avons cherchĂ© Ă dĂ©terminer quels Ă©taient les facteurs favorables ou non Ă la GPR. En particulier, nous avons qualifiĂ© les conditions dans lesquelles le paysage et les ennemis naturels Ă©taient construit socialement par ces acteurs comme des ressources pourvoyeuses de services Ă©cosystĂ©miques de rĂ©gulation. Nous avons cherchĂ© Ă©galement Ă identifier si ces acteurs Ă©taient liĂ©s entre eux par des dĂ©pendances pouvant nĂ©cessiter une gestion coordonnĂ©e du paysage. Nous avons explorĂ© la possibilitĂ© de la gestion paysagĂšre par plusieurs cycles de modĂ©lisations participatives. La thĂšse a ainsi : mis Ă jour et qualifiĂ© la diversitĂ© des modĂšles mentaux des acteurs locaux sur leurs stratĂ©gies de gestion des ravageurs, co-construit des modĂšles BayĂ©sien participatifs afin dâexplorer via des scĂ©narios les incertitudes autour de la question de la rĂ©gulation biologique des ravageurs et, enfin, rĂ©alisĂ© la co-construction dâun modĂšle multi-agents autour de le la dynamique de population du ravageur invasif Drosophila suzukii et de sa potentielle gestion paysagĂšre. Nous avons pu ainsi dĂ©terminer quâen lâĂ©tat actuel des reprĂ©sentations des acteurs, quâils soient scientifiques ou locaux, la composition du paysage en Ă©lĂ©ments semi-naturels leur apparaĂźt comme faiblement reliĂ©e Ă un service Ă©cosystĂ©mique de rĂ©gulation des ravageurs, quand bien mĂȘme ce paysage est souvent favorable Ă la biodiversitĂ© fonctionnelle. Actuellement, faute de bĂ©nĂ©fices agricoles clairement identifiĂ©s, les acteurs impliquĂ©s sont en consĂ©quence peu dĂ©pendants entre eux et le besoin de se coordonner pour mettre en place une GPR est faible. La plupart des agriculteurs indiquent plutĂŽt une nette prĂ©fĂ©rence pour les solutions individuelles vis-Ă -vis des ravageurs, par lâutilisation de pesticides et de filets protecteurs entourant les cultures. Ce focus individuel suggĂšre quâinnover dans lâintĂ©gration de lâactivitĂ© des ennemis naturels pourrait ĂȘtre plus aisĂ© au niveau de la vĂ©gĂ©tation naturelle des exploitations individuelles, comme peut lâĂȘtre lâinter-rang des vergers. Par ailleurs, ces rĂ©sultats font apparaĂźtre le besoin dâĂ©tudes scientifiques liant Ă©cologie et Ă©conomie qui chercheraient Ă mesurer explicitement les bĂ©nĂ©fices obtenus par les acteurs agricoles par le biais de paysages favorables aux ennemis naturels. Des rĂ©sultats positifs de telles Ă©tudes seraient mobilisateurs pour de futures recherches participatives dans ce domaine. Enfin, cette thĂšse participative et exploratoire nous a permis Ă©galement dâidentifier de nouveaux terrains et questions de recherches dans le domaine de la GPR qui pourront ĂȘtre poursuivis
Landscape pest control : exploring determinants of an agroecological innovation through participatory modelling
LâagroĂ©cologie implique la conception de systĂšmes agricoles intĂ©grant autant que possible les services Ă©cosystĂ©miques. Aux produits chimiques souvent employĂ©s contre les ravageurs de cultures peut ĂȘtre privilĂ©giĂ© la rĂ©gulation par leurs ennemis naturels. Des rĂ©sultats en Ă©cologie indiquent que des paysages agricoles dont la composition est riche en habitats semi-naturels (bois, forets, prairies, etc) les favorisent en leur fournissant abris, sites de pontes et nourriture. Il serait donc possible de mettre en place une Gestion PaysagĂšre des Ravageurs (GPR), câest-Ă -dire de concevoir et dâamĂ©nager des paysages agricoles en faveur de ces habitats afin de favoriser les ennemis naturels et le contrĂŽle biologique. Toutefois, lâimplĂ©mentation dâune telle innovation potentielle par les acteurs de ces paysages reste largement Ă explorer. Dans cette thĂšse, dans un esprit de recherche-action, nous avons pris le parti dâexplorer la conception de tels paysages rĂ©gulateurs de ravageurs en sâimpliquant avec des acteurs locaux et scientifiques. Nous avons initiĂ© une dĂ©marche de recherche participative avec des acteurs agricoles dâune rĂ©gion du Tarn-et-Garonne spĂ©cialisĂ©e dans lâarboriculture fruitiĂšre, intensive en traitements chimiques. A partir de leurs reprĂ©sentations et de leurs connaissances nous avons cherchĂ© Ă dĂ©terminer quels Ă©taient les facteurs favorables ou non Ă la GPR. En particulier, nous avons qualifiĂ© les conditions dans lesquelles le paysage et les ennemis naturels Ă©taient construit socialement par ces acteurs comme des ressources pourvoyeuses de services Ă©cosystĂ©miques de rĂ©gulation. Nous avons cherchĂ© Ă©galement Ă identifier si ces acteurs Ă©taient liĂ©s entre eux par des dĂ©pendances pouvant nĂ©cessiter une gestion coordonnĂ©e du paysage. Nous avons explorĂ© la possibilitĂ© de la gestion paysagĂšre par plusieurs cycles de modĂ©lisations participatives. La thĂšse a ainsi : mis Ă jour et qualifiĂ© la diversitĂ© des modĂšles mentaux des acteurs locaux sur leurs stratĂ©gies de gestion des ravageurs, co-construit des modĂšles BayĂ©sien participatifs afin dâexplorer via des scĂ©narios les incertitudes autour de la question de la rĂ©gulation biologique des ravageurs et, enfin, rĂ©alisĂ© la coconstruction dâun modĂšle multi-agents autour de le la dynamique de population du ravageur invasif Drosophila suzukii et de sa potentielle gestion paysagĂšre. Nous avons pu ainsi dĂ©terminer quâen lâĂ©tat actuel des reprĂ©sentations des acteurs, quâils soient scientifiques ou locaux, la composition du paysage en Ă©lĂ©ments semi-naturels leur apparaĂźt comme faiblement reliĂ©e Ă un service Ă©cosystĂ©mique de rĂ©gulation des ravageurs, quand bien mĂȘme ce paysage est souvent favorable Ă la biodiversitĂ© fonctionnelle. Actuellement, faute de bĂ©nĂ©fices agricoles clairement identifiĂ©s, les acteurs impliquĂ©s sont en consĂ©quence peu dĂ©pendants entre eux et le besoin de se coordonner pour mettre en place une GPR est faible. La plupart des agriculteurs indiquent plutĂŽt une nette prĂ©fĂ©rence pour les solutions individuelles vis-Ă -vis des ravageurs, par lâutilisation de pesticides et de filets protecteurs entourant les cultures. Ce focus individuel suggĂšre quâinnover dans lâintĂ©gration de lâactivitĂ© des ennemis naturels pourrait ĂȘtre plus aisĂ© au niveau de la vĂ©gĂ©tation naturelle des exploitations individuelles, comme peut lâĂȘtre lâinter-rang des vergers. Par ailleurs, ces rĂ©sultats font apparaĂźtre le besoin dâĂ©tudes scientifiques liant Ă©cologie et Ă©conomie qui chercheraient Ă mesurer explicitement les bĂ©nĂ©fices obtenus par les acteurs agricoles par le biais de paysages favorables aux ennemis naturels. Des rĂ©sultats positifs de telles Ă©tudes seraient mobilisateurs pour de futures recherches participatives dans ce domaine. Enfin, cette thĂšse participative et exploratoire nous a permis Ă©galement dâidentifier de nouveaux terrains et questions de recherches dans le domaine de la GPR qui pourront ĂȘtre poursuivis.Agroecology requires the design of farming system integrating as much as possible ecosystem services. Biological control by natural enemies may substitute commonly used pesticides. Ecology findings demonstrate that farming landscapes with a high proportion of natural habitats (woods, forests meadows, etc) favor natural enemies by providing them shelter, nesting sites and food. Landscape Pest Control (LPC), i.e. the design of farming landscapes in favor of these habitats, may be implemented to foster natural enemies and biological pest control. However, how stakeholders may design such landscapes remains unexplored. In this PhD, we followed an action-research approach and explored the design of such pest regulating landscapes together with local and scientific stakeholders. We initiated a participatory approach with agricultural stakeholders in a part of the Tarn-et-Garonne region specialized in fruit production. Our research seeks to identify the factors in favor of a LPC according to stakeholdersâ representations and knowledge. In particular, we qualified the conditions under which natural enemies and the landscape are socially constructed resources providing ecosystem services. We also seek to identify if these stakeholders were linked through dependencies which may necessitate a coordinated management of the landscape. We explored the possibility of a LPC through several cycle of participatory modelling. This PhD successively established mental models of local stakeholders about their pest control strategies, co-constructed participatory Bayesian models in order to explore uncertainties surrounding LPC, and finally we co-constructed an agent-based model about the population dynamic of the invasive pest Drosophila suzukii and its potential landscape management. Our results show that, according to scientific and local stakeholderâs actual representations, the composition of the landscape in natural habitats is weakly related with pest regulation ecosystem services, even though the landscape is related with higher functional biodiversity. Nowadays, as stakeholders see little benefit, they donât consider to be dependent to benefit from an enhanced biological control through a LPC strategy. Farmers rather mention their preference towards individual solutions such as pesticides or exclusion nets surrounding their orchards. This individual focus suggests that designing innovation favorable to natural enemies might be more relevant within farms, like focusing on the vegetation between rows of fruit trees. Besides, these results show the need for scientific studies relating economics and ecology to explicitly measure the benefits farmers could obtain from a landscape favorable to natural enemies. Positive results of such study would enhance further participatory research around LPC strategies. Finally, this participatory and exploratory research identified new sites for investigation and raised questions about the LPC which could be further looked into
In complexity we trust: learning from the socialist calculation debate for ecosystem management
ISSN:1748-9326ISSN:1748-931