Diverse dynamics in agroecological transitions on fruit tree farms

Dupré, Marie; Michels, Thierry; Gal, Pierre-Yves Le

doi:10.1016/j.eja.2017.07.002

Cited by 27 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The adopted methodological framework disregards a set of value-chain-related factors which may affect farmers' choices on adoption of some EFFPs when consumers are willing to pay a price premium for agri-food products produced by farmers adopting, for example, organic or low-input farming practices. Price premiums are generally observed when consumers perceive these food products as both healthier and less harmful to the environment than the conventional ones (see [55] for a review), when EFFP-linked products are sold through short chains [56], and/or when territorial-specific alternative value chains are created thanks to EFFPs [57][58][59]. Nevertheless, the impact of price premiums on farmers' decisions largely depends on several issues, like the structure of the supply chains and the different bargaining power held by firms at the different stages of the chain which affects the magnitude of the value transmission along the chain upwards to the farmers [60].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices: Can Geographical Context and Time Explain the Differences Emerging from Literature?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices (EFFPs) are tools aimed at providing ecosystem services or mitigating the environmental impacts of intensive agriculture. A large literature has explored the factors affecting the adoption of EFFPs by farmers. However, opposite effects of several factors on uptake have often emerged. We carried out a qualitative meta-analysis of the literature seeking to identify some geographical and temporal trends that can provide a rationale to explain these opposite results. To reach this goal, we analysed the literature and classified the following factors affecting farmers’ behaviour according to the theory of reasoned action and planned behaviour: farm, farmer, informational, and social factors. Our perspective in exploring the existing literature shows that the geographical context and the temporal period under analysis, considered as different adopters’ cohorts, can explain most of the opposite effects. For example, while the different effects of farm structural factors show specific geographical patterns, those of the management and economic factors follow temporal trends. The impact of some farmers’ socio-demographical characteristics and some social factors can be explained in terms of both geographical context and time. The broad trends we found cast light on the importance of further research adopting the same methodological approach in different geographical contexts and under a temporal perspective.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices: Can Geographical Context and Time Explain the Differences Emerging from Literature?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Agroecology as an approach to foster the transition to food systems that conserve resources and improve human well-being [1][2][3], has been increasingly promoted by scientists [4,5], Non-Governmental Organisation (NGOs) [6], international organisations [7], and peasant movements [8]. Agroecology advocates for small-scale, autonomous, resilient and efficient farming systems, that also value human rights (including women, youth and indigenous people), local cultures, social participation and food traditions [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Farm Diversity to Promote Agroecological Transitions

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agroecology is increasingly promoted by scientists, non-governmental organisations (NGO’s), international organisations and peasant movements as an approach to foster the transition to sustainable and equitable food systems. The challenges to agroecological transitions are not the same for all farmers, as they can face different social and bio-physical conditions. We developed a farm typology combining participatory and quantitative methodologies to assess and categorise farm diversity and its implications for developing strategies to promote agroecological transitions. The participatory typology was developed during workshops to acquire insights on local farmers’ perceptions and knowledge, and to generate hypotheses on family farm diversity. The participatory-based hypotheses were tested in the quantitative farm characterisation, which provided information on household characteristics, production strategies, land use, participation in public policies and extension services. Farms were located in Zona da Mata, Minas Gerais, Brazil, which harbour a wide diversity of farmers and where different actors have been engaged in agroecological transitions for the past 30 years. Our main findings were: (i) In the face of agroecological transitions, farmers differ in their management strategies, practices and principles; (ii) farmers identified as agroecological typically had stronger engagements in a network composed of farmers’ organisations, universities and NGO’s; (iii) agroecological farms showed great potential to provide a wide range of ecosystem services as they featured a higher crop diversity and a higher number of crops for self-consumption; (iv) to promote agroecology, it is crucial to recognise peasant knowledge, to change the dominant discourse on agriculture through social movement dynamics, and to generate support from public policies and funds; and (v) participatory and quantitative methodologies can be combined for more precise and relevant assessments of agroecological transitions.

show abstract

“…There is a large continuum between IPM and ACP. Figures 8 and 9 show via spider graphs differences between the two paradigms, according respectively to the ESR framework (Hill and MacRae 1995;Dupré et al (2017) and to six ecosystem services (Ratnadass 2020). In particular, Fig.…”

Section: Origins and Definition Of Acpmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…« E » stands for increased « Efficiency » (of synthetic inputs); « S » for « Substitution » (of synthetic inputs by alternative inputs split into off-farm and onfarm: cf. Dupré et al 2017), « R » for « re-design » combination applied weekly to the crop at a dose of 495 g ha -1 has been replaced by spot spraying of a biological insecticide (spinosad) on trap plants at less than one gram per dose. On chayote (Sechium edule, also called cho-cho) insecticide and herbicide applications have been completely eliminated.…”

Section: Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 Spider graph showing the positioning (on 0-75% scale axes) of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Agroecological Crop Protection (ACP) according to their respective share between the components of the E-S-R framework(Hill and MacRae 1995). « E » stands for increased « Efficiency » (of synthetic inputs); « S » for « Substitution » (of synthetic inputs by alternative inputs split into off-farm and onfarm: cf Dupré et al 2017),. « R » for « re-design »…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Integrated pest management: good intentions, hard realities. A review

Deguine

Aubertot

Flor³

et al. 2021

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

277

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) provides an illustration of how crop protection has (or has not) evolved over the past six decades. Throughout this period, IPM has endeavored to promote sustainable forms of agriculture, pursued sharp reductions in synthetic pesticide use, and thereby resolved myriad socio-economic, environmental, and human health challenges. Global pesticide use has, however, largely continued unabated, with negative implications for farmer livelihoods, biodiversity conservation, and the human right to food. In this review, we examine how IPM has developed over time and assess whether this concept remains suited to present-day challenges. We believe that despite many good intentions, hard realities need to be faced. 1) We identify the following major weaknesses: i) a multitude of IPM definitions that generate unnecessary confusion; ii) inconsistencies between IPM concepts, practice, and policies; iii) insufficient engagement of farmers in IPM technology development and frequent lack of basic understanding of its underlying ecological concepts. 2) By diverting from the fundamental IPM principles, integration of practices has proceeded along serendipitous routes, proven ineffective, and yielded unacceptable outcomes. 3) We show that in the majority of cases, chemical control still remains the basis of plant health programs. 4) Furthermore, IPM research is often lagging, tends to be misguided, and pays insufficient attention to ecology and to the ecological functioning of agroecosystems. 5) Since the 1960s, IPM rules have been twisted, its foundational concepts have degraded and its serious (farm-level) implementation has not advanced. To remedy this, we are proposing Agroecological Crop Protection as a concept that captures how agroecology can be optimally put to the service of crop protection. Agroecological Crop Protection constitutes an interdisciplinary scientific field that comprises an orderly strategy (and clear prioritization) of practices at the field, farm, and agricultural landscape level and a dimension of social and organizational ecology.

show abstract

Diverse dynamics in agroecological transitions on fruit tree farms

Cited by 27 publications

References 37 publications

The Role of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices: Can Geographical Context and Time Explain the Differences Emerging from Literature?

The Role of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices: Can Geographical Context and Time Explain the Differences Emerging from Literature?

Understanding Farm Diversity to Promote Agroecological Transitions

Integrated pest management: good intentions, hard realities. A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About