The olive quick decline syndrome (OQDS) diffusion in Apulia Region: an apparent contradiction according to the agricultural model

The agricultural models and innovations are not neutral, in relation both to the goals and to the territorial impacts, with special reference to the ecological and social dimensions. This awareness has become the key to observe the olive quick decline syndrome (OQDS) that has affected the Apulia, a land of secular olive trees characterizing landscape and economy. By an inductive approach and according to data on the provincial level, we have verified the correlation between the ways of land use and the OQDS diffusion. In fact, in the Lecce and Brindisi provinces affected by the phenomenon we have observed an unexpected distribution of herbicides and the location of experimental fields with chemical products. The hypothesis is that the pathogens have damaged the weaker plants, that is to say those in polluted and poor soils, while the zones with a higher presence of organic agricultural land result less affected by the OQDS. Data on the local scale could be very important to know the correlation in greater detail, and make clearer the OQDS focus origin, as well as to better understand the territorial impact.Les modèles agricoles et les innovations ne sont pas neutres quant à leurs objectifs et leurs effets territoriaux (notamment dans leurs dimensions écologique et sociale). Nous utilisons cette clé d’observation pour analyser le complexe du dessèchement rapide des oliviers (CDRO) qui a affecté les Pouilles, terre où les oliviers séculaires marquent le paysage et l’économie. Par une approche inductive et sur la base des données à l’échelle provinciale, nous avons vérifié la corrélation entre les modalités d’utilisation de la terre et la diffusion du CDRO. Dans les provinces de Lecce et Brindisi, affectées par le phénomène, nous avons observé une distribution massive d’herbicides et la présence de champs d’expérimentation de produits chimiques. L’hypothèse est que les pathogènes ont affecté les plantes les plus faibles, c’est-à-dire celles qui sont dans des terrains pauvres et pollués. Par contre, les zones moins affectées comptent une plus grande présence de terrains conduits selon les modalités de l’agriculture biologique. Les données à l’échelle locale pourraient aider à affiner l’étude des corrélations et à rendre plus claire l’origine de l’épicentre du CDRO, ainsi qu’à mieux comprendre l’impact territorial

L’approccio ecosistemico come strumento di mitigazione del rischio ambientale. Un’applicazione per la valutazione della gestione del ‘caso Xylella’

Il rischio ambientale di matrice antropica è il risultato dell’alterazione dell’ecosistema e della gestione del territorio diretta da logiche competitive e di speculazione. La mitigazione del rischio ambientale richiede, dunque, oltre la conoscenza dell’ambiente, delle sue criticità e degli impatti antropici, un approccio che ponga al centro l’ecosistema e il territorio. Pertanto, si propone l’approccio ecosistemico su base scientifica come strumento di valutazione e mitigazione dei rischi ambientali e dei costi ecologici e socioeconomici connessi, in fase ante operam, in corso d’opera e post operam. Tale approccio è stato applicato al «caso Xylella» permettendo di verificare come le scelte di gestione se ne siano profondamente discostate producendo significativi effetti territoriali. Tuttavia, essendo il caso Xylella ancora in corso si ritiene che, alla luce di tale approccio, sia possibile operare una rivalutazione delle scelte adottate al fine di contenere gli impatti antropici, mitigare e ridurre i rischi connessi.The Ecosystem Approach as an Environmental Risk Mitigation Instrument. An Application for the Evaluation of the «Xylella Case» Management. The environmental risk by human activities is the outcome of the ecosystem alteration and the territory management driven by competitive and speculative logics. The environmental risk mitigation requires, in addition to the knowledge of the environment, its level of criticality and the human impact, an approach that places at the centre the ecosystem and the territory. Therefore, we propose the ecosystem approach based on the scientific methodology as a mitigation and an evaluation instrument of the environmental risks and linked ecological and socioeconomic costs, in the ante operam, in progress and post operam phases. This approach applied to the «Xyella case» has allowed to verify as the management choices, that disagree with this approach, have produced very important territorial effects. However, because the “Xylella case” is in progress, we think that is possible reconsider the made choices in order to limit the human impacts, mitigate and reduce the linked risks.L’approche écosystémique comme instrument de mitigation du risque environnemental. Une application pour l’évaluation de la gestion du « cas Xylella » Le risque environnemental généré par les activités anthropiques est le résultat de l’altération de l’écosystème et de la gestion du territoire dirigée par les logiques compétitives et de la spéculation. La mitigation du risque environnemental demande, en plus de la connaissance de l’environnement, de ses criticités et impacts anthropiques, une approche centrée sur l’écosystème et le territoire. Donc, nous proposons l’approche écosystémique basée sur la méthodologie scientifique comme un instrument d’évaluation et mitigation des risques environnementaux et des couts écologiques et socioéconomiques liés, dans les phases ante operam, en cours de développement et post operam. Cette approche a été appliqué au « cas Xylella » en permettant de vérifier comment les choix de gestion sont très loin de cette approche et ont produit d’importants impacts territoriaux. Cependant, puisque le cas Xylella est en cours de développement, nous pensons qui est possible de reconsidérer les choix adoptés au but de limiter les impacts anthropiques et réduire les risques dérivants

How can the concept of landscape-grabbing provide a reflection on sustainable rural systems?

peer reviewedRural areas face huge transformations due to driving forces that are mainly on the international or global scale. Local populations are required to adapt to maintain their livelihood but are often obliged to migrate or to undertake radical transformations that alter their lifestyles, including their agricultural practices (Barcus et al., 2022). This process questions territorial sovereignty, as well as the freedom of present and future generations to choose how they will manage the local environment and its resources. Transformations often occur as a result of land grabbing, which occurs when companies, governments, or wealthy individuals buy and divert land from small scale land owners for their agenda. One variation of this process is green grabbing (Fairhead et al., 2012), when the appropriation of land and resources is specifically for supposed environmental ends. In many places around the world, other grabbing mechanisms occur when people are obliged to change their land use practices, thus altering the landscape. This leads to feelings of expropriation and abuse through a variety of financial, legal, cultural, physical, mental and environmental pressures. The series of rapid land use changes which are linked to development strategies, policies based on utilitarian and competitive logic, the privatization of public places and commons, commodification and large-scale production models, but also environmental regulations, affect people’s sense of place. The land grabbing concept is not adequate to describe the observed phenomenon, and thus, Ciervo and Cerreti (2020) suggested using the concept “landscape grabbing”. Based on the draft concept presented in Geotema, this paper aims to scrutinize both the landscape and political geography literature to assess the interest of this concept within the conceptual map of the geographical research and points out the interest of this approach to better understand rural areas and reflect on their sustainability.Landscape grabbing10. Reduced inequalitie

La Strategia di bioeconomia è sostenibile? Territori, impatti, scenari.

Da alcuni anni, nel mondo della politica e dei media, avanza incalzante l’idea della bioeconomia come nuova frontiera dell’economia ‘verde’, la panacea capace di coniugare lavoro e ambiente. Ma è davvero così? Cosa sono le Strategie di bioeconomia europea e italiana? Tali Strategie sono in sintonia con la teoria bioeconomica di Georgescu Roegen fondata sull’idea di un’economia compatibile con la vita e le leggi della natura? Tali Strategie rappresentano un’opportunità o un rischio per le economie locali? Che effetti produrranno sul paesaggio e i patrimoni territoriali? Sugli assetti socio-ecologici? Come incideranno sulle dinamiche ad effetto climatico? Quali impatti produrranno sulle matrici vitali, sulla salute e sulle comunità territoriali? Quali gli scenari geopolitici connessi

Innovating for sustainable growth. A bioeconomy for Europe. Un punto di vista geografico-economico critico

La cosiddetta “bioeconomia” promossa dalla Commissione Europea corrisponde davvero alla rivoluzione economica propagandata? Produce benefici per l’ambiente e la società? E’ un’opportunità per gli Stati membri e per l’industria? A quale paradigma e a che tipo di modello produttivo fa riferimento? Presenta potenziali rischi? Per chi? In definitiva, la bioeconomia è realmente la “panacea” cosi come sostenuto da alcune istituzioni e divulgato dai media?Is the so-called "bioeconomy" really an economic revolution, as promoted by the European Commission? Do the environment and society benefit from it? Is it an opportunity for the EU member states and their industries? What production model does it refer to? Does it present any risks? If yes, to whom? In the end, is bioeconomy really a “silver bullet”, as claimed by some institutions and media