Search

This document represents the Deliverable D5.2 within Workpackage WP5 “Governance and policy assessment” of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO (Understanding and improving the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems in the EU). The overall objective of this Deliverable (D5.2) is to identify and analyse the governance structures which characterise the different transition “patterns” in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The specific objectives of D5.2 can be synthesized as: To identify and analyse the most relevant actors for addressing key agro-ecological dilemmas in each Case Study (across the seven main types of actors: farmers; authorities and administrations; agri-food value chain actors; science, innovation, advisory and capacity building actors; NGOs, civic society organisations, local community representatives; consumers; media); To identify and analyse the governance networks with relevance for the challenge. The focus is on power relations, conflicts, collaborations, collective action dynamics, the flows of knowledge and tangible goods. The purpose is to understand the decision-making process and how the network and its elements (actors and actor-actor links) can influence pathways of agro-ecological transitions. Social Network analysis (SNA) is the method that has been used to analyse the governance structures involved in the transition towards agro-ecological farming system (AEFS). The analysis went well-beyond the farm level, by looking at how different stakeholder groups are engaged in the transition processes towards sustainable agriculture and food systems. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 includes an introduction to the topic with particular attention to governance networks enabling the transition towards AEFS. Section 3 reports on the research method (Social Network Analysis) used for the data collection in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. Section 4 presents an overview of all case studies, while Section 5 provides a comparative analysis of the different governance networks. Conclusions are drawn in Section 6. The Annex (10.5281/zenodo.4568451) includes a more detailed description of all the 15 case studies.

Story maps are a specific form of website to tell stories by making use of multimedia elements such as pictures, maps and videos. The purpose of story maps in UNISECO is to share the results of the assessment of social-ecological systems (SES) in the case studies with a wider public. The story maps also build on the results of sustainability assessments in Task 3.2 (Landert et al., 2019) and the governance and network assessment in Task 5.2 (Vanni et al., 2019). These story maps comprise easily understood messages from farmers, rural communities and civil society, businesses and authorities referencing environmental, social, economic and governance issues across rural areas in 15 countries of Europe. The story maps were the basis for co-constructing strategies to support transition of farming systems towards agroecology. The final UNISECO outcomes informed then again an update of existing and new story maps, leading to an updated set of story maps published on the website of the European Network for Rural Development, on WWF Globil and in Deliverable D3.6.

The overall objective of this report is to summarise the analysis of barriers and drivers hindering or facilitating the implementation of agro-ecological practices, and the strategies identified that address the barriers and drivers of agro-ecological transitions in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The co-construction of the transition strategies with the local actors aims to propose changes in the governance of the farming system to address the key barriers and drivers of implementing the practices, and to identify market and policy incentives that are expected to support an agro-ecological transition. Particular attention is paid on how cooperation between actors can help to address the key drivers and barriers. Key aspects for successful agro-ecological transitions are improved knowledge on the benefits of agro-ecological practices and economic opportunities, the importance of education, training and life-long learning, and mature social capital and strengthened collaborative action and collective institutions in agro-ecological value chains. This would enable higher prices to be charged for agro-ecological products and utilise the potential of agro-ecological farming to be economically viable. Such processes need to be supported by policy and the public sector, to address issues of economic exploitation and power relations as well as problems of over-consumption and food waste in food chains, with implications for public health, social justice and food security. The outcome of the co-construction of the strategies has informed: i) the assessment of trade-offs at farm level (Albanito et al., 2021, Deliverable D3.5) by providing information on the farm management changes and agro-ecological practices that are seen as effective and acceptable; ii) the multi-criteria assessment of policy instruments and incentives (Galioto et al., 2021, Deliverable D5.4) by identifying innovative market and policy incentives that are suitable to promote agro-ecological transition; and iii) the lessons learnt for agro-ecological transitions reflecting the different local and place-based context of the story maps from each case study (Landert et al., 2021, Deliverable D3.6). This document is Deliverable D3.4 in Work package “Assessment at farm level” of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO. UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project on: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Story maps are a specific form of website to tell stories by making use of multimedia elements such as pictures, maps and videos. The purpose of story maps in UNISECO is to share the results of the assessment of social-ecological systems (SES) in the case studies with a wider public. The story maps also build on the results of sustainability assessments in Task 3.2 (Landert et al., 2019) and the governance and network assessment in Task 5.2 (Vanni et al., 2019). These story maps comprise easily understood messages from farmers, rural communities and civil society, businesses and authorities referencing environmental, social, economic and governance issues across rural areas in 15 countries of Europe. The story maps were the basis for co-constructing strategies to support transition of farming systems towards agroecology. The final UNISECO outcomes informed then again an update of existing and new story maps, leading to an updated set of story maps published on the website of the European Network for Rural Development, on WWF Globil and in Deliverable D3.6.

This document represents the Deliverable D5.2 within Workpackage WP5 “Governance and policy assessment” of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO (Understanding and improving the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems in the EU). The overall objective of this Deliverable (D5.2) is to identify and analyse the governance structures which characterise the different transition “patterns” in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The specific objectives of D5.2 can be synthesized as: To identify and analyse the most relevant actors for addressing key agro-ecological dilemmas in each Case Study (across the seven main types of actors: farmers; authorities and administrations; agri-food value chain actors; science, innovation, advisory and capacity building actors; NGOs, civic society organisations, local community representatives; consumers; media); To identify and analyse the governance networks with relevance for the challenge. The focus is on power relations, conflicts, collaborations, collective action dynamics, the flows of knowledge and tangible goods. The purpose is to understand the decision-making process and how the network and its elements (actors and actor-actor links) can influence pathways of agro-ecological transitions. Social Network analysis (SNA) is the method that has been used to analyse the governance structures involved in the transition towards agro-ecological farming system (AEFS). The analysis went well-beyond the farm level, by looking at how different stakeholder groups are engaged in the transition processes towards sustainable agriculture and food systems. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 includes an introduction to the topic with particular attention to governance networks enabling the transition towards AEFS. Section 3 reports on the research method (Social Network Analysis) used for the data collection in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. Section 4 presents an overview of all case studies, while Section 5 provides a comparative analysis of the different governance networks. Conclusions are drawn in Section 6. The Annex (10.5281/zenodo.4568451) includes a more detailed description of all the 15 case studies.

The overall objective of this report is to summarise the analysis of barriers and drivers hindering or facilitating the implementation of agro-ecological practices, and the strategies identified that address the barriers and drivers of agro-ecological transitions in the context of the 15 UNISECO case studies. The co-construction of the transition strategies with the local actors aims to propose changes in the governance of the farming system to address the key barriers and drivers of implementing the practices, and to identify market and policy incentives that are expected to support an agro-ecological transition. Particular attention is paid on how cooperation between actors can help to address the key drivers and barriers. Key aspects for successful agro-ecological transitions are improved knowledge on the benefits of agro-ecological practices and economic opportunities, the importance of education, training and life-long learning, and mature social capital and strengthened collaborative action and collective institutions in agro-ecological value chains. This would enable higher prices to be charged for agro-ecological products and utilise the potential of agro-ecological farming to be economically viable. Such processes need to be supported by policy and the public sector, to address issues of economic exploitation and power relations as well as problems of over-consumption and food waste in food chains, with implications for public health, social justice and food security. The outcome of the co-construction of the strategies has informed: i) the assessment of trade-offs at farm level (Albanito et al., 2021, Deliverable D3.5) by providing information on the farm management changes and agro-ecological practices that are seen as effective and acceptable; ii) the multi-criteria assessment of policy instruments and incentives (Galioto et al., 2021, Deliverable D5.4) by identifying innovative market and policy incentives that are suitable to promote agro-ecological transition; and iii) the lessons learnt for agro-ecological transitions reflecting the different local and place-based context of the story maps from each case study (Landert et al., 2021, Deliverable D3.6). This document is Deliverable D3.4 in Work package “Assessment at farm level” of the EU Horizon 2020 project UNISECO. UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project on: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901. This publication reflects only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.