Farmers’ upheaval, climate crisis and populism

This article aims to unravel underlying reasons for the enigmatic outburst of farmers’ fury that swept large parts of Europe in the autumn of 2019. It does so by focussing on the Netherlands where the upheaval was particularly striking. Farmers’ resentment against ‘agribashing’ was a common theme in the many protests. This refers to, and simultaneously delegitimizes, all critiques of the current organization of farming and the unequal international patterns in which it is embedded. The article argues that the currently emerging farmers’ movement basically represents a regressive populism. It ignores the many-sided crisis of agriculture (related to ever increasing use of nitrogen, pesticides and energy that contribute to the climate crisis and loss of biodiversity) and the politico-economic processes and unequal power relations underlying this. Although this movement creates many smoke screens, it is essentially fighting for the reproduction of the same order that makes a substantial contribution to these multiple crises. As international comparison shows, this new form of right-wing, rural populism reflects the degree to which entrepreneurial agriculture has internalized the logic of capital: it needs ongoing expansion, both for material and symbolic reasons. Peasant agriculture could provide a much needed counter-image to this. In practice, though, it is highly segmented and dispersed and is in urgent need of a new unifying device.</p

Coexistence et confrontation des modèles agricoles et alimentaires

De nouveaux modèles agricoles et alimentaires se déploient dans les territoires en réponse aux critiques des formes anciennes et pour faire face à de nouveaux enjeux. Ils incarnent des archétypes de la diversité observée, des projets d’acteurs ou bien de nouvelles normes. Les auteurs analysent ici des situations de coexistence et de confrontation de modèles agricoles et alimentaires selon quatre dimensions majeures du développement territorial : la tension entre spécialisation et diversification, l’innovation, l’adaptation et la transition alimentaire. Une série de travaux conceptuels et d’études de cas en France et de par le monde permet de comprendre les interactions entre ces modèles (confrontation, complémentarité, coévolution, hybridation, etc.), au-delà de la caractérisation de leur diversité et de l’évaluation de leurs performances relatives. La coexistence et la confrontation de ces modèles renforcent leur capacité de changement radical. L’ouvrage souligne les questions originales du cadre d’analyse, ses défis méthodologiques et les conséquences attendues pour l’accompagnement du développement agricole et alimentaire dans les territoires ruraux et urbains. Il est destiné aux chercheurs, enseignants, étudiants et professionnels intéressés par le développement territorial

CONSTRUCTING SOCIOTECHNICAL TRANSITIONS TOWARD SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE: LESSONS FROM ECOLOGICAL PRODUCTION OF MEDICINAL PLANTS IN SOUTHERN BRAZIL

International audienceThis paper provides an analysis of knowledge generation and ‘novelty production' into new social arrangements within a sociotechnical transition scenario. The purpose is to contribute to the debate about convergences between creativity, learning and collective action for enhancing the sustainability into agriculture. By raising a Multilevel, Multi-actor and Multi-aspect analytic framework, built with elements from Multilevel Perspective and Actor Oriented Approach, we have examined emerging ‘novelties' generated by family farmers who have been producing medicinal plants under ecological systems in the Southern of Brazil. This production system was considered as a novelty, being composed by a ‘web of novelties', i.e. as integrated whole of new techniques and social practices that are at odds with prevalent sociotechnical regime. The ‘novelty production' depends on dynamic learning processes, related to knowledge contextualization, enabled through the mobilization of social networks, crucial for creating opportunities to bring together different bodies of knowledge. Farmers and other actors are creating spaces of autonomy in which we recognized some characteristics of ‘niche of innovation', a social space where rules and institutional apparatus can be ignored; it is a privileged locus for innovativity. Otherwise there are difficulties in stabilizing specific networks around ‘medicinal plants', in this way it will be necessary to create political and social conditions in order to involve actors from several domains, like researchers, extensionists, consumers and policy makers. Farmers in seeking autonomy are renewing the agriculture as an activity rooted locally and contributing to generate potential transitions to prevalent sociotechnical regime

Interpretation of results from on-farm experiments: manure-nitrogen recovery on grassland as affected by manure quality and application technique. 1. An agronomic analysis

In a 5-year field experiment, a comparison was made between the manure application practices of two adjacent dairy farms in the north of the Netherlands. Grassland management systems at Drogeham and Harkema contrasted in manure application technique (surface application versus shallow injection, respectively), quality of applied manure (slurry + MX: slurry with Euromestmix&reg; clay mineral additive versus regular slurry), and some relevant site characteristics (high versus low soil organic matter content and soil moisture supply). Effects of manure types and application techniques, and treatment of the soil with a micro-organism supplement, were tested in a factorial experiment at the two sites, two blocks per site, one with and one without additional application of 157 kg N ha–1 year–1 inorganic fertilizer. Apparent N recovery was higher after shallow injection than after surface application. For plots receiving no additional inorganic fertilizer, this difference was largest for slurry + MX applied at site Harkema, since this slurry–site combination resulted in the highest observed average apparent N recovery following shallow injection (47%) and the lowest N recovery following surface application (20%). For plots receiving additional inorganic fertilizer N the contrasts between treatments were less pronounced. Year effects on N uptake and dry matter production could be related to cumulative temperature and precipitation surplus over the growing season. A simple comparison between the grassland management systems was carried out based on the response curves derived from the experiment. This demonstrated that the grassland system where slurry was applied by shallow injection is not necessarily the lowest in actual amount of N not accounted for (i.e., potentially lost). The efficiency of the Harkema system strongly depended on high N recovery, but showed high potential losses in some years and a high herbage crude protein content in other years, due to the low DM production capacity. On the other hand, the Drogeham system was tuned to high DM production and was characterized by higher system stability, as reflected by more stable relationships between DM production and N not accounted for and herbage crude protein content. These differences between the systems were probably to a large extent caused by differences in water balance and soil organic matter content

Interpretation of results from on-farm experiments: manure-nitrogen recovery on grassland as affected by manure quality and application technique. 2. A sociological analysis

This article discusses the outcomes of a re-analysis of a grassland experiment, by locating it within the wider institutional context composed of well-established routines used in agronomic research and the dominant epistemological tradition of agricultural sciences. It is argued that both, research routines and epistemological tradition, are strategic pillars of the reigning socio-technical regime. They contribute to path-dependency, thus reinforcing the uni-lateral development tendency centring on technological solutions that fit within the dominating regime. An important, albeit probably unintended consequence is that promising novelties are obscured within and through research, thus blocking a potentially highly effective road towards sustainability

Coexistence et confrontation des modèles agricoles et alimentaires

De nouveaux modèles agricoles et alimentaires se déploient dans les territoires en réponse aux critiques des formes anciennes et pour faire face à de nouveaux enjeux. Ils incarnent des archétypes de la diversité observée, des projets d’acteurs ou bien de nouvelles normes. Les auteurs analysent ici des situations de coexistence et de confrontation de modèles agricoles et alimentaires selon quatre dimensions majeures du développement territorial : la tension entre spécialisation et diversification, l’innovation, l’adaptation et la transition alimentaire. Une série de travaux conceptuels et d’études de cas en France et de par le monde permet de comprendre les interactions entre ces modèles (confrontation, complémentarité, coévolution, hybridation, etc.), au-delà de la caractérisation de leur diversité et de l’évaluation de leurs performances relatives. La coexistence et la confrontation de ces modèles renforcent leur capacité de changement radical. L’ouvrage souligne les questions originales du cadre d’analyse, ses défis méthodologiques et les conséquences attendues pour l’accompagnement du développement agricole et alimentaire dans les territoires ruraux et urbains. Il est destiné aux chercheurs, enseignants, étudiants et professionnels intéressés par le développement territorial

Theorizing Agri-Food Economies

This paper discusses agri-food economies and how they evolve over time. It also analyses how these economies, which often have contradictory dynamics, are theorized. A central thesis of the paper is that different theoretical representations not only reflect the differences in agro-economies and their developmental tendencies, but are also important drivers that actively shape the trajectories that they describe. The paper concludes by arguing that, more often than not, it is the newly emerging alternatives that are taking the initiative, responding to changing socio-economic demands while the hegemonic systems are merely reacting to the emerging alternatives. While it is possible that the alternatives might be appropriated and ‘conventionalized’ by the hegemonic systems, it is equally possible that the alternatives, especially when interconnected and rooted in democratic institutions, might induce a generalized crisis in the food systems that are currently dominant

Family farming in Europe and Central Asia: History, characteristics, threats and potentials

Most people have a clear understanding of what the term 'family farm' means. This is especially true in Europe. The term refers, in a seemingly straightforward and unambiguous way, to well-known and self-evident realities. It is solidly internalised in the memory of most people, even those with an urban background. People may like or dislike family farming, and scientists may dispute its virtues or shortcomings (Osaba 2014), but there is hardly any confusion or debate over the concept itself. [...