Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
professionals offering technical expertise. The advisory system was supported by public
sector experts (academics, researchers and administration staff) as well as previously
neglected local research institutions. Finally, a network of private certification agencies was
created and accredited by the state accreditation agency (AGROCERT).
The process of anchoring
In the initial phase in Lannion Bay, even a scientific report which suggested that reducing
nitrate concentration was crucial in controlling green tides (Ménesguen, 2003) was
questioned by regional mainstream farming organizations and some leaders of the agri-food
industry. However, institutional anchoring at the local level did occur through the creation
of a Local Professional Committee of Agriculture (CPA) bringing together farmers from
both regime and niche (Diaz
et al.
, 2013). At the technical level, the issue of nitrate
reduction from agriculture constituted a strong common reference point and enabled the
connection of different networks. After consecutive technical solution failures, local elected
representatives and farmers from CPA sought further scientific support. Experienced
researchers endorsed the proposition of the niche network, acting as hybrid actors linking
niche and regime networks. They also proposed collaboration with conventional farmers
but were unable to secure funding until the death of a horse, which may have been poisoned
by rotting algae in 2009, forced the Government to act.
Furthermore, farmers did not choose between two models but instead empirically
combined elements from both, according to the characteristics of each farm. Ansaloni and
Fouilleux (2006) considered that this selection of practice, called 'technical hybridization',
consists of the appropriation of selected low inputs and also perceived cost practices by
intensive farmers. Finally, a trend towards larger extensive farms was observed within the
dominant regime, facilitated by the retirement of older farmers, although the niche tried to
retain medium-sized units in order to enable young people to enter agriculture.
CEDAPA was initially very close to the political left (Déléage, 2004), as its principles
were based on left-wing values. These historical roots remained strong, although the
association gradually became more open. This may explain the difficulty faced by the niche
in influencing the dominant regime. Farmers and/or their local representatives changed
their perceptions regarding grassland systems during the ensuing 15 years. However, they
continued to hold strong opinions about the early supporters of these systems. Under these
circumstances, some farmers adopted the role of hybrid actors, facilitating anchoring by
adopting only technical changes and enrolling farmers with whom they shared economic,
but necessarily political, perspectives. Productivity, however, was not open to debate; a
proposal for a decrease in the number of animals was abandoned following resistance by
farmers.
In the Mangfall Valley catchment, the initiative focused on organic farming because
this system was widely accepted as the most effective in protecting groundwater. Subsidies
appear to have been a crucial factor encouraging adoption in the area, together with the fact
that dairy agriculture in the Miesbach District already operated largely according to organic
principles, hence most farmers could convert to organic farming without prohibitive
investment. Nevertheless, the increased incidence of weeds in grassland observed on many
contract holdings, as well as the use of expensive organic feedstuff for high milk-yielding
cattle breeds (such as Fleckvieh), which were needed to prevent undernourishment in cattle,
Search WWH ::
Custom Search