Conclusions - Transition Pathways towards Sustainability in Agriculture: Case Studies from Europe - page 212

disconnection between the purpose of the subsidy (reduction of water pollution) and the
measure supported (new production techniques associated with organic farming). Poor
understanding of the latter led to other problems in associated farming operations, such as
reduced livestock welfare. Payment for ecosystem services is an option for states looking
to reduce dependence on subsidies for the production of public goods, but further
exploration of its utility and unintended consequences is required.
The role of networks
Within the MLP, the concept of networks is embedded in the conceptualization of
transition processes: niche actors working together to develop novelties within a niche
(Geels and Schot, 2007). Network anchoring, simply defined as changes in the network of
actors who produce, use or develop the novelty, is identified as one of Elzen et al. 's
(2012) three primary forms of anchoring, and could be considered the primary means in
which the agency of actors is considered within the MLP. Network development is a
primary component of the formation and development of most of the cases studied in this
book.
Distinctions between bridging and bonding social capital are well recognized in the
academic literature, as is the role of networks in rural development (Wilson, 2010).
Bonding social capital (the connection between individuals with similar objectives) and
bridging social capital (the ability to make connections to individuals with different
objectives) are viewed as important in enabling change processes (Pretty, 2003). Although
niches might be expected to arise initially from bonding social capital, what is evident
from the cases studied here is that almost all of the niches were formed through bridging
social capital. For example, all three of the local certification schemes described by
Lošťák et al. (this volume) were formed by actors working collaboratively across the
production chain (such as farmers and food processors, wine retailers and processors). All
three of the collaborative actions described by Schiller et al. (this volume) were organized
by advisors or environmental activists working in collaboration with farmers; and in all
three renewable energy cases, farmers worked with engineers to develop renewable
energy technologies (Sutherland et al. b, this volume). Darrot et al. (this volume) term
these partnerships 'niche tandems': individuals from different sub-regimes or regimes
working together towards a shared vision.
This dependence on bridging social capital has implications for niche development.
We suggest that niches founded on bridging social capital will be inherently novel but also
less stable than niches initially formed from bonding social capital. For 'bridging' niches,
the initial vision for the niche is at least two-fold; for example, securing good prices for
farmers whilst achieving the environmental aims of activists. These dual objectives can
lead to conflicts, which are further complicated as the niche anchors. For example,
Schiller et al. (this volume) describe how collective buying power is a benefit for
members who purchase inputs through a machinery ring (e.g. farmers) but this can result
in prices and income being driven down for other members (e.g. fuel suppliers). In some
cases, the response of niche participants is to resist further bridging efforts and retreat into
bonding social capital. Lošťák et al. (this volume) discuss two cases where once
'successful' local certification schemes, originally oriented towards regional economic
development, preservation of heritage varieties and marketing of local products, later