Search

Agricultural research is expected to foster agro-ecological transitions. For that purpose, methodologies of participative integrated assessment of new farming and cropping systems are requested. However, the territory level and the stakeholders’ participation are often not sufficiently embraced. Based on the companion modeling approach, a group of researchers from different disciplines experimented an approach where researchers and stakeholders collaborated intensively all along the process of design and use of the model. The researchers selected a small rural area where agriculture plays a major role (Valensole plateau, south of France) and where they had not carried out any investigation before. In such conditions, we argue that the interactions between researchers and stakeholders involved in the co-design from scratch of a simulation model stimulate a collective reflection about the sustainability of current and alternative farming systems. This article describes the different phases of the process from stakeholders’ enrolment until the final discussion of the results provided by the model. It underlines the conditions that favored the emergence of consensus and the production of a new set of knowledge. It emphasizes how the discordances between data and disagreements between stakeholders were used to stimulate collective debates and underlines the role played by the model. Finally, the article discusses the drawbacks that the approach did not overcome.

Viticulture involves high pesticide use. While methods to reduce this use have been proposed by researchers, they have not yet been widely implemented by winegrowers. Involving winegrowers in the participatory design of new management strategies could encourage the adoption of these methods to reduce pesticide use. In this study, we designed and tested a participatory approach to reducing pesticide use that would be acceptable to winegrowers from a South-Western cooperative (i.e., not ‘pioneering’ winegrowers). The approach was composed of three main steps: A) co-design of the management strategies, B) implementation of the management strategies, and C) co-evaluation of the performances of the implemented management strategies. Winegrowers, researchers, advisors and engineers were involved in the study. The application of this participatory approach enabled the co-design and testing of two management strategies: IPM for Integrated Pest Management [50% reduction of pesticide treatment frequency index (TFI) as compared to the French High Environmental Value reference (HEV)], and ORG2kgCo for organic farming system with a maximum of 2 kg of copper/ha/year. These two management strategies were implemented by 11 winegrowers in three vineyards in South- Western France. In both management strategies, two main technical levers were selected to reduce pesticide use: a Decision Support System to optimise the use and substitution of pesticides by biocontrol products. The implementation of the IPM management strategy resulted in a significant reduction of TFI (from -14% to -57%, with an average of -25%, for all pesticides combined) compared to HEV, and the winegrowers who tested ORG2kgCo managed to not exceed the limit of 2 kg of copper per year. This original participatory approach, combining co-design workshops, on-farm experimentation and co-evaluation workshops, highlighted the benefits of involving winegrowers in the reduction of pesticide use.

Assessing the conditions and performance of agroecological transitions in different contexts is key to supporting these transitions. However, assessing agroecological transitions presents methodological challenges, including: 1) being adaptable to local conditions, 2) consideration of social interactions among stakeholders involved in transitions, 3) clarifying the concept of agroecology, 4) consideration of the temporal dynamics of the transitions to better understand barriers and levers in their development, and 5) using a participatory bottom-up approach. The objective of this research was to design a method that provided evidence on 1) the barriers and levers in the development of agroecological transitions, and 2) their performance related to four dimensions: techno-economic issues, agroecosystem health, quality of life and resilience. To design, test and adapt such a method, while also involving end-users, we adopted a co-design approach based on prototyping. The co-design approach unfolded in nine stages alternating research work and co-design with end-users. The prototype was built on the approaches of existing published methods covering the five challenges for assessing agroecological transitions. It consisted of a four chronological step assessment method. The first three steps consisted of framing the assessment, with the final step a multidimensional performance assessment, using an initial set of 73 indicators to cover the four dimensions. The prototype was then tested and adapted in the village of Sare Boubou, Senegal, which is going through an agroecological transition supported by a non-governmental organization. Changes during the testing and adaptation phase affected three steps of the prototype and allowed the initial prototype to adapt to the case study’s specificities, related to its scale and context. Context-related changes particularly affected the performance assessment, with a total of 31 indicators changed. The analysis of barriers and levers revealed that the transition began 29 years ago, achieved a fair level of advancement and yet was still ongoing. Results revealed heterogeneity between the nine households of the village in terms of: uptake of agroecological practices, household resources, diversification of activities, coverage of food needs through production and level of sales. This heterogeneity explained the large variability in household multidimensional performances across all dimensions. Large disparities were also noticeable at the individual level between men, women and young men in the village regarding the level of education, empowerment and participation in knowledge sharing networks. Despite a method seen as time-consuming and data intensive, end-user validation acknowledged the comprehensiveness of the method and its usefulness for steering and managing agroecological transitions, making it possible to identify levers for action at different scales.