Social Science in Agroecological Transition: Observing Rural Dynamics

1. XXVII European Society For Rural Sociology Congress, Krakow, Poland July 24-27 2017 Second thematic line: ‘Knowledges in processes of rural change’  13. Shaping methods, shaping voices and the engagement of discourses in an age of uneven rural change  Convenors: Michael Woods, Aberystwyth University, UK and Anthonia I. Onyeahialam, Aberystwyth University, UK Doing Social Science in Agroecological Transition The setting of a collaborative observatory of social dynamics in innovative rural projects Suported by Marc Barbier – INRA SAD, UMR LISIS, Marne La Vallée Claire Lamine - INRA SAD, UR Ecodéveloppement, Avignon With Floriane Derbez, Jessica Thomas, Guillaume Ollivier, Nathalie Couix, Camille Lacombe, Véronique Lucas, Stéphanie Barral, Roberto Cittadini, Martine Napoleone, André Bloué, Marion Diaz, Catherine Darrot

2. Introduction Objective: • to present an on-going social research project, which aims at setting a collaborative observatory of social dynamics in innovative rural projects placed under the umbrella of the agroecological turn in France. Context: • The French Ministry of agriculture launched a large national Agroecological Plan in 2013 to foster sustainable transitions in agriculture and rural agri-food systems. • A display of various public action instruments have been mobilized to enhance this Plan, among them an innovative call for tenders entitled “Collective mobilisation for Agroecology” has been opened to support more directly local initiative and innovative farmers groups without using the incumbent roads of the Agricultural Knowledge System to reach farmers’ groups. • In this context, 109 collectives of farmers and intermediaries - among 469 initial candidates - have been selected, committed and financed to realise breakthrough initiatives and projects.

3. The 1990’s The 2000’s The 2010’s

4. From 2013: Agroecological Project For France From 2014: Agroecology as a ical Project For France

5. UN Secretary General Climate Summit29 September 2014A statement by FAO Director-General José Graziano da Silva Ladies and gentlemen, Climate change and access to food directly impact on food security today. I would like to emphasize that there are many alternatives to address climate change and ensure sustainable food security. The Global Alliance for Climate Smart Agriculture emerges as a strong force pursuing food security and adaptation. FAO is ready to play an active role in this alliance. Last week an international technical symposium on Agro-ecology took place last week at the FAO Headquarters in Rome, and it was attended by over 400 scientists, governments and non-state representatives. They called for an UN System-wide initiative on Agro-ecology as an element to sustainably promote food security, address climate change, and build resilience. Climate-smart agriculture and Agro-ecology as well as the Genetic Modified Organisms could be complementary options and need to be considered under a real scientific approach – not in passionate ideological discussions. We need to keep all the doors open to face climate change impacts and implement the adaptation needed to assure food for all in the future. We will need to feed more than 9 billion people by 2050.   There are many paths to food security and sustainable development. Governments need to choose the solutions that best respond to their specific needs. FAO is ready to help you make it and implement evidence-based decisions.

7. Research framework • A group of 12 social researchers have proposed a research project to accompany and assess the social dynamic at work in 20 of these groups. • This project relies on three articulated tasks: • (1) a long term collaborative study (2014-2018) and follow-up of these 20 projects based on interviews, participant observations and action-research methods, • (2) a global appraisal of submitted projects based on advanced documentary methods to depict and discuss the landscape of agroecological initiatives at the national level; • (3) a reflexive open seminar with practitioners involved in projects to discuss findings, purposes and issues of the sub-politics of the agroecological turn. Research-Action Project Sociological Observatory of AgroEoclogical Transitions

8. Methodological challenges and issues Challenge • To cross various methodological streams towards the establishment of a more permanent social observatory to promote inclusiveness and more direct discussions between researchers and actors with the view to use social science outcomes. Issues • Coordination of case studies and various type of ethnography or social enquiry at work request to address practical and theoretical issues within the research group. Answer • A common methodological framework has been established and a shared format of reporting on each case study enables comparisons of groups’ dynamics and accounts for the diversity and the communalities of transition at play, as they are matters of facts and of concerns for actors of those projects.

9. Hypothesis Central hypothesis: The awarded projects are diverse in the way they organize a context of local action (already there) and the mobilization of resources dedicated to a specific collective action Each project entails a specific arrangement to be characterized according to a specific context  All together projects draw the landscape of the dynamics of change and learning of the agroecology in action (a disruption of agroecology in discourses)  The study and the cross-cutting analysis of projects makes it possible to analyze what "agro-ecology" means for a diversity of actors involved in these projects specific approaches, varied conceptions, transformative sociabilities) • A common framework of description allows to give a detailed analysis of the grass-root institutionalization process of agroecology and to propose the conditions of an observatory of transitions

10. Research as a Collective Enquiry Intermediary Feedback (Dec 2016) Documentary Exploration (nov 14/may 15) Phase 1: Enquiry/follow-up/discussion 2015-16 Analysis of the Landscapeof submitted projects Common methodological framework Phase 2: Enquiry/follow-up/discussion 2016-2017 and Thematic deepening • Inductive Grid for project typology Social context Sociotechnical promise System of relations in partnership Type of innovation and technological milieu • Content analysis of texts of project Basic Statistics Textual content analysis Sociosemantic network analysis • Comparative Analytical grid of Case studies • Social networking: how farmers’ collective have been emerged and how did the structuration occur. • Goals : How did the objectives have been defined and how agroecological has been indexed through technological breakthrough, knowledge production and ways of doing. • Organization : How collectives are organized and managed? How technical companioning has been shaped and organized and what is the importance of external advisory? 2018: Final report and Colloquium Learning and feedback for the Design of an Observatory of AgroEcological Transition

11. Results

12. Content analysis of project as texts The standardisation of Projectsin the Call for Tender Structure of the Project Items (compulsory items): • Definition • Territorial specificity • Description of collective • Objectives • Actions • Innovativeness • Scientific and educational partnership • Partnership with stakeholders • Project governance • Perspective of the project • Diffusion • Indicators of achievements Technical Information  : Title Region – City Cost Organization in charge Name Duration Nb of Farmers in the project 489 Submitted 103 Accepted

13. The geogrpahy of AgroEcologicalMobilization Répartition régionale des projets soumis (Dabowski et al., 2013) et sélectionnés - Une forte asymétrie spatiale dans l’offre de projets - selon l’hypothèse du déterminisme de la population agricole : • + : Pays de Loire, Midi-Pyrénée et Languedoc-Roussillon • - : Aquitaine, Auverge, Champagne-Ardennes • Globalement traduite dans la distribution des projets lauréats => peu d’effet du processus de sélection

14. Map :Factorial analysis of terms about the « innovative characteristic of project » (Iramutefq Software)

15. Coword Analysis of N-grams Co-occurrence in Title CorTexT Manager(Top 200; Metric: raw; Layout: Louvain) Analysis CorTexT Manager

16. Six common main areas of sociologicalenquiry? • How the Project has been initiated? • What objectives and form of farming model? • What implication of farmers? • What are the concrete actions and on-going arrangements ? • Who carry the coordination and what knowledge is produced and circulated? • Who are the partners and how are they associated ?

17. Collective dynamicsatstake Terre & Bocage Peasant Agriculture CAVAC AgroEcological Infrastructures (landscape, natural zone) Organizational features / intermediation Seed Messicoles Bio de provence ADDEAR 42 CIVAM PACA AEVO Pétanielle ADEAR 32 MAPS Amap de Provence Cedapa Soil Conservation Agriculture Salsa Change of technical system Fricato SCARA Sols en Caux APAD 62 CUMA de Brutz Cuma de Charnizay

18. Trajectoire projet « Paysamap », Les AMAP de Provence Projets futurs Casdar MCAE 19 paysans-conseils Des références pour tous, journées d’échange et du tutorat ciblés sur les spécificité du métier de paysan en AMAP objectifs Accompagner les paysans en Amap Pérenniser la démarche et LAdP… (contexte Paca) Guide des bonnes pratiques (réf tk-éco) Montage projets (PEI?) mutualisation-capitalisation Formations PC Brochures Parcours et indicateurs de réussite actions Appui informel Paysans conseil Tutorats Journées d’échange Ciblage territorial Tutorat informel Fiche cadre Évaluation particip. et outils 2001 2004 2012 2014 2015 2016 COPIL 1 COPIL 2 Projet monté par le pdt gouvernance Portage interne : un salarié, 3 PC référents, 1 membre du bureau partenariat Avec GAB sur tk GAL+PNR + GAB05 sur tk

19. Cross Cutting Analysis of Projects for AgroEcological Transition • Collective dynamics at stake: inner commitment and relation to professional system of relation • AgroEcology as a practice and as an indexical reference • Dynamics of knowing and production/circulation of knowledge

20. Core objectives of groups and forms of mentoring

21. Collective Dynamics atstake

22. Vision of AgroEcology and types of Agriculture Reference to AgroEcology • Agroecology as a word very often is not mentionned in text of project and rarely exposed as a normative frame of farming • Practices are indexed as « agroecological » without much explanation, and very often organice farming is the common reference • More rarely agroecology is mentionned in relation to a systemic representation of farming activities Explicit references to agricultural « model » • Organic Farming • Peasant Framing • Sustainable Farming • Conservation Farming

23. Epistemological bargainand commitments • Question: Ethical and epistemological issues at stake when a collective social enquiry is bounded with a public action dispositive that has its own trajectory and political agenda. • Our project does not have the function of an evaluation of the groups with regard to public policy objectives: this has been stated with the Ministry. • We expect to enlighten what is at stake in the conditions of possibilities of agroecological transition with regard to the format of projectification of public action • Because the objective of this research project includes a a production of scientific knowledge on the relevance and the induced effects of the policy instrument device, it thus makes it impossible to break the contract of trust with groups for their involvement in seminars and their openness to work Research

24. Diffusion and participation On Line • Interaction of each researcher with his/her group • 2 seminars per year with farmers and intermediaries • Steering committee with the Ministry representatives Standalone • A final colloquium with farmers, intermediaries, public officers, extension institution representative and researchers Spillovers contributions • Participation: to Ministerial internal meeting, to intermediaries group meeting, to research seminars