The infrastructures beyond the diversity and redistribution of actors' roles within Living Labs

International audienceLiving Labs are developing in widely divere innovation domains. They namely invite to question the various actors' roles and their making processes. Such roles rely on the actions they perform within the innovation process. What are, beyond the methods of participation, the infrastructures (e.g. collaboration platform, communication supports) that help or hinder possibilities for actors to take or make their own roles? Our case study of an agricultural LL in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes (France) showed that an ambiguity on users' roles was maintained by the created and existing information infrastructures. Among these, we describe the farmers' workshops, and the information sharing paths, both limiting the ownership of the process by nonincumbent actors. Complementarily to the distinctions of various roles in litterature, we contribute to relate potentially neglected aspects of the LivingLab management (because not judged strategical) to the room for manoeuver and possibilities for expected actors' roles to be built and performed

How “fundamental knowledge” supports the cropping system redesign by farmers?

Re-designing cropping systems to move towards agroecology leads farmers to implement practices which involve biological processes, sometimes qualified as “knowledge-intensive”, as they involve the renewal of agronomic principles and numerous interactions between the systems’ components and their regulations. Agronomists have developed an abundance of models, which encapsulate partial knowledge on systems’ functioning, but these appear to be seldom used by farmers. By contrast, several studies recognize the value of exchanging specific and fundamental knowledge with farmers in relation to technical change processes. This paper discusses how fundamental and generic knowledge acquires an agronomic sense and is reinvested in the action of farmers through their technical changes. We performed an inductive case study of step-by-step cropping system re-design situations. We combined individual interviews with farmers re-designing their cropping-system, and facilitated farmers meeting about a shared technical problem. From full transcripts, we identified each new element of knowledge and its reformulation, its relation to action mentioned by farmers. The focus of our analysis concerns the knowledge which made possible to develop action strategies when farmers were facing hindrances in continuing their technical changes. Our findings concern the specific fundamental knowledge actually mobilized, and the processes of its linkage with action through contextualization. We conclude by suggesting that farmers alternate between systematic and systemic thinking about the biological processes at play in their own situation. This has practical implications for agronomists wishing to support such re-design processes, and provides an insight on how farmers’ experiments might be combined to fundamental scientific knowledge on agroecosystems components to enhance cropping system redesign

Agronomic knowledge for cropping system design: characterization and dynamics of mobilization

absen

Transition towards low-input cropping systems: characterization of actionable knowledge for technical change

In the context of a current need for cropping systems adapted to new economic, social and environmental requirements, some agronomists have focused their research and advice activities on the re-design of cropping systems. Such adaptation requires firstly new knowledge on biological and ecological mechanisms supporting cropping systems less dependent on synthetic inputs, and secondly, tools (models, methods, participatory processes in which farmers have an active participation) for their design and evaluation. However, the new knowledge and tools proposed until now mainly address a de novo design of completely described cropping systems. Thus, questions remain concerning how farmers may benefit from these resources in order to undertake progressive technical changes in their own cropping systems, without necessarily having a clear description of one specifically targeted cropping system. This led us to study the way farmers engaged in such technical changes are managing the available knowledge in the design of their action. To this end, different characteristics of knowledge were analyzed, and used to describe the forms of knowledge mobilized or not by farmers. We proceeded with different types of interaction between farmers and agronomists to bring out the relevant characteristics: we surveyed farmers re-designing their cropping system and advisors helping them in this action, we organized meetings with farmers, supported with a set of information materials previously characterized. Axes of description of knowledge characteristics include forms of quantification, ways in which different time scales are addressed, ways in which it refers to uncertainty and risks, ways it refers to agronomic situations, and to onfield action. Knowledge characteristics were studied with the aim to understand how they influence legitimation and validation for action, and how they allow them to act in their particular situation, which will need further research. With a better understanding of what can be actionable knowledge, we finally aim at making proposals for adapting the knowledge produced to support technical changes

How “fundamental knowledge” supports the cropping system redesign by farmers?

Re-designing cropping systems to move towards agroecology leads farmers to implement practices which involve biological processes, sometimes qualified as “knowledge-intensive”, as they involve the renewal of agronomic principles and numerous interactions between the systems’ components and their regulations. Agronomists have developed an abundance of models, which encapsulate partial knowledge on systems’ functioning, but these appear to be seldom used by farmers. By contrast, several studies recognize the value of exchanging specific and fundamental knowledge with farmers in relation to technical change processes. This paper discusses how fundamental and generic knowledge acquires an agronomic sense and is reinvested in the action of farmers through their technical changes. We performed an inductive case study of step-by-step cropping system re-design situations. We combined individual interviews with farmers re-designing their cropping-system, and facilitated farmers meeting about a shared technical problem. From full transcripts, we identified each new element of knowledge and its reformulation, its relation to action mentioned by farmers. The focus of our analysis concerns the knowledge which made possible to develop action strategies when farmers were facing hindrances in continuing their technical changes. Our findings concern the specific fundamental knowledge actually mobilized, and the processes of its linkage with action through contextualization. We conclude by suggesting that farmers alternate between systematic and systemic thinking about the biological processes at play in their own situation. This has practical implications for agronomists wishing to support such re-design processes, and provides an insight on how farmers’ experiments might be combined to fundamental scientific knowledge on agroecosystems components to enhance cropping system redesign

L’activité de re-conception d’un système de culture par l’agriculteur : implications pour la production de connaissances en agronomie

La re-conception des systèmes de culture, souvent considérée comme nécessaire à la transition agroécologique, est l’enjeu de nombreuses recherches en agronomie. Ces recherches portent souvent sur la formulation de systèmes cibles, sur les outils et méthodes de conception, et plus rarement sur la re-conception « en train de se faire » vue comme la transformation par l’agriculteur de son activité. Dans cet article, nous présentons les apports d’une analyse basée sur des entretiens et ateliers avec des agriculteurs et des agronomes, qui vise à comprendre les productions, circulations, et mobilisations de connaissances par ces acteurs. Nous insistons d’abord sur l’évolution des connaissances mobilisées tout au long du changement. Nous approfondissons ensuite le lien entre cette dynamique du changement, les indicateurs utilisés par les agriculteurs et les connaissances fondamentales sur les objets biologiques.The re-design of cropping systems is often seen as a promising form of evolution of these systems for an agroecological transition, and has become the issue of numerous research in Agronomy. These research focuses mainly on the development of possible and satisfactory systems regarding some expected performances, as well as on tools and methods of design and co-design with diverse stakeholders. Less frequent are the studies that analyze what means the re-design as an ongoing process, as a transformation by the farmer of his own activity. In this article, we present contributions from an analysis of these changes in practices, based on interviews and several workshops with farmers and agronomists that accompany them. This analysis aimed in particular at understanding the knowledge generations, circulations, and mobilizations by these actors. We insist on the evolution of knowledge mobilized throughout the change of practice, from which we propose to identify three phases corresponding to specific forms of legitimation of knowledge and specific assessment of the ongoing change by the farmer. Then, we deepen, discussing the implications for agricultural research and development, the link between this dynamic of change and, on the one hand, the indicators used by farmers, whose learning functions are highlighted, and on the other hand, the basic knowledge on biological objects, whose function in building new action strategies is describe

Indicators used by farmers to design agricultural systems: a survey

Agriculture is undergoing profound transformation in response to the global challenges of food security, pollution and climate change. In particular, some farmers are exploring and tentatively applying new practices based on agroecological principles. However, depending on biological regulation, these practices have uncertain results. In order to choose and monitor their changes, farmers use various indicators. In our study, we examined these indicators as they were applied in the implementation of technical changes, with a view to determining their exact nature, partly unexplored by agronomists. We held six interviews, performed a retrospective analysis of a redesign project involving five farmers and four advisors, observed collective visits at long-term field experiments, and organized a design workshop with eight farmers. We then coded the verbatim transcript in order to characterize the functions and attributes of the indicators, using the principles of grounded theory. Our results show that indicators have 22 different functions regarding the farmers’ technical action, grouped into five categories. The most common functions are more learning-oriented than assessment-oriented, e.g., “adaptation-monitoring” with 92 out of the 260 statements on indicators identified, and “understanding-reinterpretation” with 107 out of 260 statements. The attributes of the indicators are predominantly visual (62 %), relative (63 %), and passive (75 %). In addition, we found that indicators used at a strategic decision level are specific, as they are mostly quantified, concern large time and spatial scales, and are essentially dynamic, that is, interpreted in as trends

The need for agronomic indicators to monitor and assess action and to enhance learning loops during cropping system redesign process

absen

How “fundamental knowledge” supports the cropping system redesign by farmers?

Re-designing cropping systems to move towards agroecology leads farmers to implement practices which involve biological processes, sometimes qualified as “knowledge-intensive”, as they involve the renewal of agronomic principles and numerous interactions between the systems’ components and their regulations. Agronomists have developed an abundance of models, which encapsulate partial knowledge on systems’ functioning, but these appear to be seldom used by farmers. By contrast, several studies recognize the value of exchanging specific and fundamental knowledge with farmers in relation to technical change processes. This paper discusses how fundamental and generic knowledge acquires an agronomic sense and is reinvested in the action of farmers through their technical changes. We performed an inductive case study of step-by-step cropping system re-design situations. We combined individual interviews with farmers re-designing their cropping-system, and facilitated farmers meeting about a shared technical problem. From full transcripts, we identified each new element of knowledge and its reformulation, its relation to action mentioned by farmers. The focus of our analysis concerns the knowledge which made possible to develop action strategies when farmers were facing hindrances in continuing their technical changes. Our findings concern the specific fundamental knowledge actually mobilized, and the processes of its linkage with action through contextualization. We conclude by suggesting that farmers alternate between systematic and systemic thinking about the biological processes at play in their own situation. This has practical implications for agronomists wishing to support such re-design processes, and provides an insight on how farmers’ experiments might be combined to fundamental scientific knowledge on agroecosystems components to enhance cropping system redesign