Governance Networks Supporting Agro-Ecological Farming Systems

Vanni, Francesco; Gava, Oriana; Povellato, Andrea; Guisepelli, Emmanuel; Fleury, Philippe; Vincent, Audrey; Pražan, Jaroslav; Schwarz, Gérald; Bartel-Kratochvil, Ruth; Hollaus, Alexander; Weißhaidinger, Rainer; Frick, Rebekka; Hrabalova, Andrea; Carolus, Johannes; Yoldi, Uxue Iragui; Hurtado, Sandra Elía; Pyysiäinen, Jarkko; Aakkula, Jyrki; Helin, Janne; Rikkonen, Pasi; Smyrniotopoulou, Alexandra; Vlahos, George; Balázs, Katalin; Szilágyi, Alfréd; Jegelevičius, Gražvydas; Mikšytė, Elvyra; Zīlāns, Andis; Veidemane, Kristīna; Frățilă, Mihaela; Röös, Elin; Sahlin, Kajsa Resare; Miller, David; Kyle, Carol; Irvine, Katherine N.; Aalders, Inge

doi:10.5281/zenodo.4568422

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Each team could select the most suitable data collection technique, i.e., workshop or interviews, to meet MAP member availability and the sociocultural context of the case study (Table 2). The number of participants in the workshops and interviews ranged from 5 to 10, covering 6 types of stakeholders [47]: (i) farmers and farmers' associations; (ii) science, innovation, advisory, and capacity-building actors; (iii) authorities and administrations; (iv) nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), civic society organizations, and local community representatives; (v) consumers; (vi) agri-food value chain actors. In total, 105 stakeholders participated in the case study workshops or interviews (Table 3), 76% of whom were from public authorities, scientists, or advisory experts, with a lower representation of the consumer sector.…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the Common Agricultural Policy 2014–2020 in Supporting Agroecological Transitions: A Comparative Study of 15 Cases across Europe

Quero

Yoldi

Gava³

et al. 2022

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is aimed at analyzing the potential that CAP 2014–2020-related instruments have on supporting agroecological transitions in Europe by focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of key instruments. Through a stepwise participatory research methodology, 105 key stakeholders (farmers, advisors, academics, environment experts, administration representatives, and professionals from food chains) in 15 countries in Europe were engaged in the discussion of the potential of current CAP instruments to solve the barriers that constrain agroecological farming systems in their particular regions. The results of this comparative study show which CAP instruments are valued with a high potential to support transitions to agroecology. The analysis of the stakeholders’ perceptions contributes to an enhanced understanding of why CAP instruments have failed or succeeded to promote agroecological transitions.

show abstract

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%