Towards Operational groups in SPAIN

1. Towards Operational groups in SPAIN • Andrés Montero Aparicio (INIA) ,Isabel Bombal (MAGRAMA), Jaume Sió (Gov. Catalonia)

2. Content • 7 examples of “existing” OG (2 FEADER funded) and 3 examples of “non existing” OG from recent history that could have been an operational group ( just 4 to be presented in the CWG) • 3 examples (real or imagined) that would not qualify as an operational group • What are bottlenecks in your country for farmers to discuss and be active in innovation? • How can EIP / Operational Groups address these bottlenecks? • How can Operational Groups be set up and farmers be motivated ? • What are bottlenecks in linking farmers with other stakeholders (business, ngo’s, research) ? • Questions for the discussion

3. “existing” OG: Control of the Mediterranean fruit fly • What challenge / opportunity does “OG” discuss? • Control of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) in citrus and other fruit trees by an area-wide Sterile Insect Technique Program • How did the “OG” start, who initiated? • Producers, Government (National and Regional), and Research centres. • In fact the project was developed with the support of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Centre for Biological Research of the National Research Council (CSIC), the Valencia region Agricultural Research Institute (IVIA), TRAGSA (a Public Company oriented to rural development and infrastructures) and stakeholders (Cooperatives and farmers) in the Mediterranean area with more than 100.000 ha involved. • What have been the key success factors for the “OG”? • This biological control approach have contributed to a significant reduction in the use of pesticides to control this key pest and to produce more safety fruits • How have (national) policies contributed to the “OG”? • By giving scientific and technical support and funding to develop the project and to build the mass-rearing facility and the follow up

4. “existing” OG: methyl bromide • What challenge / opportunity does “OG” discuss? • Methyl bromide alternative methods to pests, diseases, and weeds control. • New alternative methods to methyl bromide: critic uses. • New solutions research and knowledge transfer processes for soil disinfection on Spanish’s strawberry. After MB critical uses period. Research on new solutions against plant diseases. • How did the “OG” start, who initiated? • Producers, Producer Associations, Phytosanitary Companies, Government (National and Regional), and Research centres. • In fact the first project was developed with the support of the Ministry of Agriculture, and National Agricultural Research Institute (INIA), and stakeholders (Cooperatives and farmers) in the Production and Nurseries areas with more than 90.000 ha involved. • What have been the key success factors for the “OG”? • This control approach have contributed to find chemicals alternatives to methyl bromide and new application methods to those chemicals. Furthermore these project s have characterizated the implementation of new chemical alternatives able to be authorized in the next future by the European Union and developing & transferring knowledge processes on non-chemical alternatives based on the biofumigation in combination with soil solarization techniques, not enough disseminated among farmers & agronomist of the cultivation area. • How have (national) policies contributed to the “OG”? • By giving scientific and technical support and funding to develop the project and the follow up

5. “existing” OG:Development oftriploid watermelon commercial label • What challenge / opportunity does “OG” discuss? • Changes in consumers (children acceptance) and house hold patterns/ Production of watermelon adapted to the consumers demand (lower weight and seedless to increase children acceptance (given the increase that this crop has had globally from 18 to 88Mill tons in the past 40 years) • How did the “OG” start, who initiated? • 20 years ago, a farmers cooperative operating in the whole territory of Spain, but mainly in the Mediterranean (Anecoop) started the project. • The OG is integrated by Anecoop, IVIA (Valencia region Agricultural Research Institute), Polytechnic University of Valencia, Fundación Ruralcaja (a branch of a Bank oriented to innovation, field trials and extension services),, Seed producers (Seminis, Ramiro Arnedo, Rijk Zwaan, Syngenta-Anecoop) • What have been the key success factors for the “OG”? • Consumers acceptance • Watermelon production homogeneity • Higher added value to traditional watermelon production system by using novel techniques like grafting on resistant varieties to key pathogens? • Continuity and evolution of production oriented to other consumers demands (Non processed ready to eat ,...) • How have (national) policies contributed to the “OG”? • Public support and funding

6. “existing” OG: Fruit.net • What challenge / opportunity does “OG” discuss? • Optimize the use of pesticides and provide alternatives for the control of various diseases, pests or postharvest disorders in apple, peer, peach and citrus fruit crops. • How did the “OG” start, who initiated? • Following producers concerns to adapt to the new legislation on sustainable use of pesticides, the Catalan Regional Government has given support and funding to IRTA (research institute). • What have been the key success factors for the “OG”? • Involvement of researches and producers • Reduction in use of fungicides and insecticides • How have (national) policies contributed to the “OG”? • Changes in legislation on sustainable use of pesticides • Support and funding by the Catalan Regional Government.

7. “existing” OG: Olive oil panel • What challenge / opportunity does “OG” discuss? • Set up and monitor programs to improve olive oil quality, through rationalization of decision making. • Facilitate and improve sales through differentiation of quality oil. • How did the “OG” start, who initiated? • Producers associated under a designation of origin. • What have been the key success factors for the “OG”? • Involvement of researches and producers. • Permanent support and advice for issues related with production processes and comercialization. • How have (national) policies contributed to the “OG”? • Suport and funding by the Catalan Regional Government.

8. What challenge / opportunity does OG discuss? • Designing a monitoring tool of beehives based in the sound produced by the colonies inside them, which will give useful information for apiaran practice and environmental studies (if the queen is still alive or died, if the colony is prepared to swarm or storing honey at harvest time, etc.) • How did the OG start, who initiated? • It is a research project initiated by the European University of Madrid in collaboration with the University of Cordoba and apiaries, with support and funding of the Ministry of Agriculture and FEADER • What have been the key success factors for the OG? • Reducing costs, increasing productivity in apiaries and beehives welfare, with the encouragement of economic diversification in rural areas, and the supplement in agricultural incomes • How have national policies contributed to the OG? • Financing and dissemination of the project • Dissemination ways: • - National Rural Network • Specialized journals • -Other “existing” OG (FEADER funded) : monitoring tool of beehives based in sound

9. “existing” OG (FEADER funded) : Pilot project to assess the adaptation of specific machines of production and collecting of fodder in mountain areas and the establishment of a good practices guide What challenge / opportunity does OG discuss? The project aims to assess the feasibility of specific machinery of production and collecting of fodder in mountain areas and disseminate and promote good utilization of them How did the OG start, who initiated? Navarra Government and Asturias Rural Affairs and Fisheries Government began this project. Castilla y León Government joined them. The project was developed by Navarra Government, through the Navarra Technical and Management Livestock Institute and the collaboration of the Technical School of Agricultural Engineering (Navarra Public University), Castilla y León Government, through the Castilla y León Agriculture Technological Institute, and Asturias Rural Affairs and Fisheries Government, through the Technical School of Agricultural Engineering (Léon University). This initiative has received financial support from the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment What have been the key success factors for the OG? Increasing the efficiency of investment and multidisciplinary approach due to the collaboration between regions and various scientific and technical institutions How have national policies contributed to the OG? The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment has collaborated economically with the OG initiative through the National Rural Network Programme, cofunded also by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development

10. Non existing OG: forestry case 1 • Objective • Obtaining productive pinus pinea clones to produce pinion • Evolution • - 25 years of development of a programme to improve forest genetic resources. Clones obtained will enter in the National Catalogue of Material Base, since then can be commercialized in reforestation agroforestry • - OG members should be the Direction for Rural Development, INIA, National Federation of Growers • Successes • - The clones obtained produce between 20 and 40% more of pinion and became productive between 20 and 25 years before • - They can be used in reforestation on marginal lands. Currently the pinion is deficient and its price is rising

11. Non existing OG: forestry case 2 • Objective • Obtaining elms trees resistant to the graphiosis • Evolution • - 28 years working with elms trees resistant to this disease, resistant clones were obtained, which will enter in the National Catalogue of Material Base, since then can be commercialized • - OG members should be the Direction for Rural Development, INIA, National Federation of Growers, Universities • Successes • - Obtaining elms trees resistant to the graphiosis • - Can be used to replace missing elms groves and singular elms (village squares)

12. Non existing OG: forestry case 3 • Objective • - Identification and management of mycorrhizae to be inoculated in forestry plan (especially in Quercus and Pinus genus) • Evolution • - After 7-8 years it has obtained a protocol to identify the inoculated plant in the laboratory of mycorrhizal • - OG members: Serranillo Center, Truffleculture Association, research centers. • Successes • - Possibility of certify the plant ensuring that inoculation is effective (truffles and boletus)

13. Case 1 that would not qualify as OG • Give a real or imagined example of a group that includes farmers, that according to your ideas would not be allowed to qualify as OG (or where you have doubts). • Those groups only integrating technology producers and farmers without the participation of knowledge based sector (research centres, universities, technological centres). • Groups not having a clear goal/objective

14. Case 2 that would not qualify as OG • Give a real or imagined example of a group that includes farmers, that according to your ideas would not be allowed to qualify as OG (or where you have doubts). • Field trials of technology producers. ie. Tractors trials/exhibitions; seed testing

15. Case 3 that would not qualify as OG • Give a real or imagined example of a group that includes farmers, that according to your ideas would not be allowed to qualify as OG (or where you have doubts). • Obvious developments like for instance introduction of already existing techniques in the field in dropping irrigation systems because of lack of water; cultivating a new variety without any innovative approach

16. Bottlenecks for farmers to discuss and be active in innovation • Isolation • Lack of capacities/training • Territorial dispersion (mountain agriculture) • Lack of Trust • Cultural barriers against changes • Value for money • Lack of efficient knowledge transfer/ extension services • Management analysis • Benchmarking • Lack of innovation networks • Structural dimension of main agricultural production/ commercialization companies (Agri-coop) • Global corporations

17. How can EIP / Operational Groups address these bottlenecks? • Increasing the dimension of agri-food production structures. • Giving confidence on the developments • Mutual interaction • Continuity in the action/activity • Development of innovation networks • Enhance the participation of social representative entities (farmers organisations, cultural organisations, professional organisations, financial org., industries and coop org.). • Increase incentives for R+D+i and knowledge transfer activities. • By developing cross-border interactions

18. How can Operational Groups be set up and farmers be motivated ? • By realising on the added value given by the innovation to their production /operations • By responding to concerns and difficulties expressed by farmers • By enhancing cross-border exchanges (not only at EU level).

19. Bottlenecks in linking farmers with other stakeholders? • Isolation • Lack of capacities/training • Territorial dispersion • Lack of Trust • Lack of efficient knowledge transfer/ extension services • Benchmarking • Lack of innovation networks

20. Questions for the discussion • There exist a wide variety of innovation and knowledge transfer structures in the different EU Member States. The OG should be assessed within a flexible framework in order to fit with the different existing national/regional realities • How the IPR´s are thought to be managed?. How results from FEADER funded OG´s should be disseminated? • How Global Corporations and Non SME´s companies can have the opportunity to participate in OG´s, while keeping the Rural Development main target oriented to local communities and small and medium scale farmers? • Do we have already the evaluation toolbox and funding scheme for the OG´s. Will be there any difference depending on the size and legal status of the OG´s participants?