Sociotechnical controversies as warning signs for niche governance

Agronomy for Sustainable Development - Tập 38 - Trang 1-12 - 2018
Raphael Belmin1,2,3, Jean-Marc Meynard4, Laurent Julhia5, François Casabianca1
1Research Laboratory on Livestock Development, National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), Corte, France
2Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), Montpellier, France
3HortSys, Univ. Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier, France
4UMR « Sciences pour l’Action et le Développement, Activités, Produits, Territoires », INRA, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, Thiverval-Grignon, France
5UE Citrus, National Institute for Agricultural Research, San Giuliano, France

Tóm tắt

In agriculture, not all sociotechnical niches seek to plant the seeds of further regime transition: Some niches are designed to last as stable subnetworks harboring alternative agri-food systems. However, such niches often interact with sociotechnical regimes, leading to controversies, conflicts, and threats to niches sustainability. This situation calls for proactive governance of niche-regime interactions. We studied the innovation process in the “Corsican clementine” niche, using semi-structured interviews and participant observation. We wondered how local actors have been dealing with three controversial innovations: a clementine variety, a biological pest control method, and a pruning technique. Cross-analysis of the three innovations shows that (i) the niche’s innovation pathway can be diverted by regime-driven innovations; (ii) to protect their niche, local actors set collective rules, both formal and informal; and (iii) controversies over technical innovations make niche-regime tensions more visible, leading local actors to make collective decisions for governing the innovation pathway. This study is the first to highlight the key role of sociotechnical controversies in niche governance.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Belmin R, Casabianca F, Meynard JM (2018) Contribution of the transition theory to the study of geographical indications. Environ Innov Societal Transit 27:32–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.10.002 Belmin R, Casabianca F (2018) The key role of geographical indications in the governance of ‘terroir niches’. Insights from three Corsican case studies. 13th European IFSA symposium, July 2018, Chania Belmin R (2016) Construction de la qualité de la clémentine de Corse dans une Indication Géographique Protégée. Analyse des pratiques agricoles et du système sociotechnique. PhD dissertation. University of Corsica Belmin R (2017) Clémentine de Corse. Un fruit, des hommes, une histoire. Alain Piazzola, Ajaccio, 192p Belz FM (2004) A transition towards sustainability in the Swiss agri-food chain (1970–2000): using and improving the multi-level perspective. In: Elzen B, Geels FW, Green K (eds) System innovation and the transition to sustainability: theory, evidence and policy. Edward Elgar Publishing, UK, pp 97–114 Bowen S (2010) Development from within? The potential for geographical indications in the global south. J World Intellect Prop 13(2):231–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2009.00361.x Callon M (1981) Pour une sociologie des controverses technologiques. Fundamenta Scientiae 2(3/4):381–399 Darnhofer I (2014) Contributing to a transition to sustainability of agri-food systems: potentials and pitfalls for organic farming. In: Bellon S, Penvern S (eds) Organic farming, prototype for sustainable agricultures. Springer, Netherlands, pp 439–452 Darrot C, Diaz M, Tsakalou E, Zagata L (2014) ‘The missing actor’: alternative agri-food networks and the resistance of key regime actors. In: Sutherland LA, Darnhofer I, Wilson G, Zagata L (Eds). Transition pathways towards sustainability in agriculture: case studies from Europe. CAB International Oxfordshire. pp 143–155 Diaz M, Darnhofer I, Darrot C, Beuret JE (2013) Green tides in Brittany: what can we learn about niche–regime interactions? Environ Innov Societal Transit 8:62–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2013.04.002 Duru M, Fares M, Therond O (2014) Un cadre conceptuel pour penser maintenant (et organiser demain) la transition agroécologique de l’agriculture dans les territoires. Cah Agric 23(2):84–95. https://doi.org/10.1684/agr.2014.0691 Duru M, Therond O, Fares M (2015) Designing agroecological transitions; a review. Agron Sustain Dev 35(4):1237–1257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-015-0318-x Esnouf C, Russel M, Bricas N (eds) (2013) Food system sustainability: insights from duALIne. Cambridge University Press 303p Geels F, Raven R (2006) Non-linearity and expectations in niche-development trajectories: ups and downs in Dutch biogas development (1973–2003). Tech Anal Strat Manag 18(3–4):375–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320600777143 Geels FW, Schot J (2007) Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res Policy 36(3):399–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003 Geels FW (2004) From sectoral systems of innovation to sociotechnical systems: insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Res Policy 33(6):897–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015 Geels FW (2002) Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res Policy 31(8):1257–1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8 Geels FW (2011) The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: responses to seven criticisms. Environ Innov Societal Transit 1(1):24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002 Guichard L, Dedieu F, Jeuffroy MH, Meynard JM, Reau R, Savini I (2017) Le plan Ecophyto de réduction d’usage des pesticides en France: décryptage d’un échec et raisons d’espérer. Cah Agric 26(1):14002. https://doi.org/10.1051/cagri/2017004 Hannachi M (2011) La coopétition au service du bien commun. Les stratégies de entreprises de collecte et de stockage de céréales face aux OGM. PhD dissertation. University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines Hare JD, Morgan DJ, Nguyun T (1997) Increased parasitization of California red scale in the field after exposing its parasitoid, Aphytis melinus, to a synthetic kairomone. Entomologia experimentalis et applicata 82(1):73–81. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1570-7458.1997.00115.x Ingram J (2015) Framing niche-regime linkage as adaptation: an analysis of learning and innovation networks for sustainable agriculture across Europe. J Rural Stud 40:59–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.06.003 Ingram J (2018) Agricultural transition: niche and regime knowledge systems’ boundary dynamics. Environ Innov Societal Transit 26:117–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.05.001 IPES-Food (2016) From uniformity to diversity: a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological systems. Louvain-la-Neuve: IPES, 96 p. http://www.ipesfood.org/images/Reports/UniformityToDiversity_FullReport.pdf Joly PB (2001) Les OGM entre la science et le public? Quatre modèles pour la gouvernance de l'innovation et des risques. Économie rurale 266(1):11–29. https://doi.org/10.3406/ecoru.2001.5273 Magrini MB, Triboulet P (2012) Transition agroécologique, innovation et effets de verrouillage: le rôle de la structure organisationnelle des filières. Cah Agric 21(1):34–45. https://doi.org/10.1684/agr.2012.0539 Meynard JM, Messéan A (2014) La diversification des cultures: lever les obstacles agronomiques et économiques. Quae, Versailles. https://www6.paris.inra.fr/depe/Projets/Diversification-des-cultures Rip A (1986) Controversies as informal technology assessment. Knowledge 8(2):349–371 Sainte Marie CD, Agostini D (2003) Du signe à l’inscription géographique de l’origine: la requalification de la clémentine de Corse. In: Dubuisson-Quellier S, Neuville JP (2003). Juger pour échanger: La construction sociale de l'accord sur la qualité dans une économie des jugements individuels. Quae, Paris, pp185–212 Scott WR (1995) Institutions and organizations. Foundations for organizational science. A Sage Publication Series, London Sonnino R, Marsden T (2005) Beyond the divide: rethinking relationships between alternative and conventional food networks in Europe. J Econ Geogr 6(2):181–199. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbi006 Stassart PM, Jamar D (2009) Agriculture Biologique et Verrouillage des Systèmes de connaissances. Conventionalisation des Filières Agroalimentaires Bio Innovations agronomiques 4:313–328 Teil G (2012) Le bio s’use-t-il ? Analyse du débat autour de la conventionalisation du label bio. Économie rurale (332):102–118. https://doi.org/10.4000/economierurale.3708 Torre A (2016) El rol de la gobernanza territorial y de los conflictos de uso en los procesos de desarrollo de los territorios. Revista Geográfica de Valparaíso 1(53) Vandecandelaere E, Arfini F, Belletti G, Marescotti A (2009) Linking people, places and products. FAO/SINERGI, Rome Vanloqueren G, Baret PV (2009) How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations. Res Policy 38(6):971–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.02.008