# Mapping the development of agroecology in Europe

Alexander Wezel, Baptiste Grard, Vasileios Gkisakis

► To cite this version:

Alexander Wezel, Baptiste Grard, Vasileios Gkisakis. Mapping the development of agroecology in Europe: Country Reports Series, Vol. 1. Isara, France; Agroecology Europe, Belgium. 2023, 10.5281/zenodo.7774412. hal-04061823

HAL Id: hal-04061823

https://isara.hal.science/hal-04061823

Submitted on 7 Apr 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
MAPPING THE DEVELOPMENT OF
# AGROECOLOGY
## IN EUROPE

COUNTRY REPORTS SERIES

**VOLUME 1**

MARCH 2023

Wezel A. - Grard B. - Gkisakis V.
VOLUME 1
COUNTRY REPORTS SERIES

TABLE OF CONTENT

INTRODUCTION 7

METHODOLOGY 8

Mapping activity categories 8

Step 1: Key informant selection and interviews 10

Step 2: Initiative selection and interview 11

Steps 3 and 4: Data analysis and country reports 12

ALBANIA 13

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 14

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN ALBANIAN] 15

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 16

CONTEXT 16

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 18

Education and training 18

Living lab 18

Movement 19

Practice 19

Science 20

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 21

Education and training 22

Movement 23

Practice 25

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 29

REFERENCES 29

AUSTRIA 30

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 31

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN GERMAN] 32

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 33

CONTEXT 33

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 34

Education and training 34

Living lab 35

Movement 35

Practice 36

Science 36

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 37

Education and training 39

Living lab 45

Movement 49

Practice 55

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 57

REFERENCES 58

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 59

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 60

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN BOSNIAN/CROATIAN/SERBIAN] 61

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 62

CONTEXT 62

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 65

Education and training 65

Living lab 66

Movement 66

Practice 67

Science 68

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 69

Education and training 70

Movement 72

Practice 74

Science 77

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 78

REFERENCES 79

BULGARIA 80

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 81

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN BULGARIAN] 83

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 84

CONTEXT 84
<table><tbody><tr><td>CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY</td><td>87</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>87</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>88</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>88</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>89</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES</td><td>91</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>94</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>98</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>104</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>108</td></tr><tr><td>CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE</td><td>112</td></tr><tr><td>REFERENCES</td><td>113</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td><strong>CROATIA</strong></td><td><strong>114</strong></td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY</td><td>115</td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN CROATIAN]</td><td>116</td></tr><tr><td>METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS</td><td>117</td></tr><tr><td>CONTEXT</td><td>117</td></tr><tr><td>CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY</td><td>119</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>119</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>121</td></tr><tr><td>AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES</td><td>122</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>125</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>129</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>133</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>137</td></tr><tr><td>CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE</td><td>139</td></tr><tr><td>REFERENCES</td><td>140</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td><strong>GERMANY</strong></td><td><strong>141</strong></td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY</td><td>142</td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN GERMAN]</td><td>143</td></tr><tr><td>METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS</td><td>144</td></tr><tr><td>CONTEXT</td><td>145</td></tr><tr><td>CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY</td><td>146</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>146</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>147</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>147</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>148</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>Science</td><td>148</td></tr><tr><td>AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES</td><td>150</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>153</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>158</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>168</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>174</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>179</td></tr><tr><td>CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVE</td><td>183</td></tr><tr><td>REFERENCES</td><td>184</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td><strong>GREECE</strong></td><td><strong>185</strong></td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY</td><td>186</td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN GREEK]</td><td>187</td></tr><tr><td>METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS</td><td>188</td></tr><tr><td>CONTEXT</td><td>189</td></tr><tr><td>CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY</td><td>190</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>190</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>191</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>191</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>192</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>192</td></tr><tr><td>AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES</td><td>193</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>195</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>203</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>211</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>213</td></tr><tr><td>CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVES</td><td>215</td></tr><tr><td>REFERENCES</td><td>215</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td><strong>ITALY</strong></td><td><strong>216</strong></td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY</td><td>217</td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN ITALIAN]</td><td>218</td></tr><tr><td>METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS</td><td>219</td></tr><tr><td>CONTEXT</td><td>220</td></tr><tr><td>CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY</td><td>221</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>221</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>223</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>224</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>226</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>229</td></tr><tr><td>AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES</td><td>231</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>233</td></tr></tbody></table>
Living lab 243

Movement 251

Practice 257

Science 270

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 278

REFERENCES 281

## KOSOVO 282

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 283

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN ALBANIAN] 284

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN SERBIAN] 284

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 285

CONTEXT 285

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 287

Education and training 287

Living lab 287

Movement 288

Practice 288

Science 289

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 290

Education and training 291

Movement 293

Practice 297

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 301

REFERENCES 301

## MALTA 302

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 303

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN MALTESE] 304

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 305

CONTEXT 305

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 307

Education and training 307

Living lab 307

Movement 308

Practice 308

Science 309

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 310

Education and training 311

Movement 312

Science 319

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 320

REFERENCES 320

## MONTENEGRO 321

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 322

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN MONTENEGRIN] 323

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 324

CONTEXT 324

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 326

Education and training 326

Living lab 326

Movement 326

Practice 327

Science 327

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 328

Movement 329

Practice 331

Science 335

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 337

REFERENCES 338

## NORTH MACEDONIA 339

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 340

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN MACEDONIAN] 341

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 342

CONTEXT 342

CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY 344

Education and training 344

Living lab 345

Movement 346

Practice 347

Science 348

AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES 350

Education and training 352

Living lab 354

Movement 356

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE 360

ABBREVIATION 361
<table><tr><td>ROMANIA</td><td>362</td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY</td><td>363</td></tr><tr><td>EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [IN ROMANIAN]</td><td>364</td></tr><tr><td>METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS</td><td>365</td></tr><tr><td>CONTEXT</td><td>366</td></tr><tr><td>CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY</td><td>368</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>368</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>369</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>369</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>370</td></tr><tr><td>Science</td><td>371</td></tr><tr><td>AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES</td><td>372</td></tr><tr><td>Education and training</td><td>374</td></tr><tr><td>Living lab</td><td>380</td></tr><tr><td>Movement</td><td>383</td></tr><tr><td>Practice</td><td>390</td></tr><tr><td>CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE</td><td>402</td></tr><tr><td>REFERENCES</td><td>403</td></tr><tr><td>GENERAL CONCLUSION</td><td>404</td></tr></table>
COUNTRY REPORTS SERIES
VOLUME 1

AUTHORS

**General report:** Alexander Wezel and Baptiste Grard, ISARA; and Vasileios Gkisakis, ELGO-DIMITRA.

**Coordination of the Agroecology Europe Youth network:** Karla Škorjanc and Stella Beghini.

**Country reports:** Rolando Belardoni, Stella Beghini, Andrea Bianchi, Anna Brumer, Paola Cassiano, Raluca Dan, Anastazija Dimitrova, Alice Fasso, Athina Fragkiadoulaki, Ana Ghiban, Vasiliki Giatsidou, Vasileios Gkisakis, Samwel Grima, Maria Hetman, Alina Jantol, Igor Kalaba, Luka Lopičić, Matthias Lorimer, Angelica Marchetti, Jana Marjanović, Paola Migliorini, Maja Mlinarec, Panayotis Papadopoulos, Davide Primucci, Massimiliano Sanfilippo and Ralitsa Shentova.

**Proofreading:** Jessica Donham, Agroecology Europe.

TO CITE

Wezel, A., Grard, B. and Gkisakis. V. (eds) 2023. Agroecology in Europe. Country Reports Series, Vol. 1, ISARA, Lyon, France; Agroecology Europe, Corbais, Belgium.

LAYOUT DESIGN

Stéphane Georges. www.griffincreation.com

PICTURES

Pictures rights are of Agroecology Europe and ISARA if not otherwise mentioned.

FUNDING

The country reports for Croatia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Malta included in the book received a dedicated funding from the European Union through the LIFE Programme and the Fondation de France. This publication reflects the views and opinions of the author(s) only. Neither the European Union, CINEA, nor the Fondation de France, can be held responsible for them or any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Fondation
de
France

The country reports for Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Italy, North-Macedonia and Romania included in the book received a dedicated funding from the European Union from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No101000478. This publication reflects the views and opinions of the author(s) only. The European Union cannot be held responsible for them or any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>
INTRODUCTION

Agroecology is a holistic concept that embraces a diversity of interpretations, intentions and realities that are dependent on the country in questions, its context, history, stakeholders, and socio-political environment. In order to scale up agroecology, it is critical to document and analyse its development in different contexts as a necessary step to attain larger insights about the state of art of agroecology, as well as to support its expansion and use at the policymaker level. Through the "mapping of agroecology in Europe" we aim to provide an overview of the situation that shows the reality of agroecology in different European countries.

This mapping is not foreseen to be completely exhaustive, but rather as illustrative, synthesising and providing key information on the road to building a common understanding of agroecology, as well as its development at European level (Wezel et al. 2018). This is furthered by the planned creation of a European partnership of Agroecology Living Labs and Research Infrastructures which will provide additional support and information. This work was carried out under the AE4EU project and through a LIFE operating grant which involved a large number of organisations,

as well as many so-called "mappers" who conducted the work in the different European countries. Among them were many members of the Agroecology Europe Youth Network (AEEUYN). In order to carry out the mapping, a common methodology was defined, building on already existing elements used for previous mapping efforts executed by Agroecology Europe. In this first volume of the Country Reports series, 13 countries have been mapped: Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Kosovo, Malta, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Romania.

This mapping includes the identification of different initiatives, cases, examples, and programmes relating to five different activity categories: Practice, Science, Movement, Living Labs, Education, and Training. Moreover, it provides an overview about the current state of agroecology in each country and the barriers and perspectives for the future development of agroecology in Europe.

References

Wezel, A., Goris, M., Bruil, J., Félix, G.F., Peeters, A., Bàrberi, P., Bellon, S., Migliorini, P. (2018). Challenges and actions points to amplify agroecology in Europe. Sustainability 10, 1598. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051598

<footnote n="1">¹ https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/agriculture-forestry-and-rural-areas/ecological-approaches-and-organic-farming/partnership-agroecology_en</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² https://www.agroecology-europe.org/mapping-of-agroecology-initiatives/</footnote>
# METHODOLOGY

## 1. MAPPING ACTIVITY CATEGORIES

The mapping of agroecology was carried out in different European countries with a common methodology. The information collected was organised according to the three major elements commonly recognised as making up agroecology, as a scientific discipline, a set of practices, and a social movement (Wezel et al. 2009) (Figure 1).

To take into consideration complementary aspects and the European dynamic on the topic, as well as the European partnership in agroecology, two additional activity categories were added (Figure 1):

* "Living labs", as recognised and spotlighted by the European Commission in its project "Agroecology living labs and research infrastructures"*;

* "Education and training", in order to distinguish the many initiatives, programmes and training are existing outside the academic and scientific sphere which would be described under the 'scientific discipline' activity category.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

<footnote>*https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/agriculture-forestry-and-rural-areas/ecological-approaches-and-organic-farming/partnership-agroecology_en</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ We define living labs according to the definition established by the international Agroecosystems Living Laboratories (ALL) working group (Agroecosystems Living Laboratories (ALL) Executive Report 2019, www.macs-g20.org): "Transdisciplinary approaches which involve farmers, scientists and other interested partners in the co-design, monitoring and evaluation of new and existing agricultural practices and technologies on working landscapes to improve their effectiveness and early adoption."</footnote>
ACTIVITY AND CATEGORIES ICONS

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2:** Icons used for the five activity categories of mapping agroecology</figcaption></figure>

Apart from the recognition of these five activity categories, two concepts and notions were at the centre of the mapping:

- **Key informants:** a diverse range of experts providing information regarding one or more of the established activity categories (e.g. researchers from universities or research institutions, representatives of an NGO or other organisation who is active in agroecology, participants of a national agroecological conference, individuals who had been involved in previous mapping projects).

- **Initiatives:** understood in this report as a formal action led by an organisation towards agroecology. This can include a diversity of initiatives, examples or cases related to one or more of the five activity categories:

* Programmes, projects, and initiatives that put agroecology into practice (farms networks, farmer's cooperatives, local markets, etc.);

* Living labs;

* Platforms or organisations that collect information about what they know about agroecology and disseminate it;

* University programmes and courses, or training and teaching courses and activities promoted by any organisation;

* Social movements of people promoting agroecology for any reason;

* Research projects and programmes on agroecology, including research infrastructures.

Building on this, the mapping methodology was organised in four steps (Figure 2). The first step mainly consists of finding key informants and interviewing them. Second, initiatives are selected and analysed through in-depth interviews and complemented by desktop research. The third step includes the analysis of the data that was collected, as well as complementary desktop research, and evaluation into one of the five activity categories.

Finally, the last step mainly consist on presenting the results for the current state of agroecology in the country in question with a description and analysis of the selected initiatives. A mapping team developed the methodology together, with regular exchanges within the team to ensure the quality of data collected and synthetised. All data collected was stored in a common database and a central server. In the following section, each step will be further detailed.
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3:** Schema of the four methodological steps used in the mapping.</figcaption></figure>

## 2. STEP 1: KEY INFORMANT SELECTION AND INTERVIEWS

Key informants were selected according to their knowledge on one or more of the five selected activity categories. They were identified through the AE4EU and Agroecology Europe network, through desktop research, the SCAR Agroecology group* contacts, and/or named by other key informants. All interviews were framed as semi structured interviews conducted preferably in the native languages of the informant to minimise the loss of information. General information about the interviewees were gathered before or during the interview. Each interview lasted between 30 to 60 minutes.

**The interviews were organised in three main parts:**

1. A preamble which aimed to understand the knowledge and vision of the interviewee regarding agroecology. Five key areas (organic agriculture, agroecology, agroforestry, territories and food system, regenerative farming) and associated key words were provided to the interviewee if it was found necessary to clarify their understanding of agroecology.

2. The first part of the interview, which gathered information regarding initiatives known by the interviewee on one or more of the five activity categories. This part started with a general question on known initiatives, followed by an exchange that detailed the information per activity category.

3. The second part of the interview targeted the understanding and perception of key information regarding the present state and recognition of agroecology in the country.

4. The interview ended with questions regarding the barriers, perspective and any additional information that still could be provided.

The full questionnaire given to key informants is described in Grard et al. (2023).

### References

Grard, B., Wezel, A., and Gkisakis, V. (2023). AE4EU - Mapping questionnaire for key informant and initiative. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7520262

<footnote>*https://scar-europe.org/index.php/agroecology</footnote>
## 3. STEP 2: INITIATIVE SELECTION AND INTERVIEW

The most promising initiatives are selected and analysed through in-depth interviews with other key informants and complemented by desktop research.

In order to help this selection, five flexible criteria were defined:

1. Initiatives existing for longer than three years, with an exception for initiatives that stand out notably in some aspect of interest that are about two to three years old.

2. Outstanding initiatives that tackle social, environmental, economic problems or difficulties in agriculture.

3. Agricultural initiatives that provide an economic role (such as a living wage to the people involved in the project) and are socially sustainable.

4. An initiative cited by more than one key informant or mentioned in previous mapping exercises.

5. Initiatives which are located in different parts of the country.

Once selected, information was gathered on each initiative according to a grid which was adapted as a questionnaire that aimed to target key points for each activity category. At least one semi-structured interview had to be conducted per initiative to collect the most information possible, and preferably with one of the persons leading the initiative. The full questionnaire is described in Grard et al. (2023).

In order to deepen the analysis of the initiatives, the criteria used in the report "100 Iniciativas locales para una alimentacion responsable y sostenible" (CERAI 2019) were applied to describe and evaluate their positive impact, as well as their limitations and challenges (CERAI 2019). These criteria allowed to describe on dimensions, type of activity and criteria of the initiative impact (Table 2).

<table><caption>Table 1: CERAI criteria used to analyse each initiative, as well as the dimensions, type of activity, and icons used.</caption><thead><tr><th>DIMENSION</th><th>TYPE OF ACTIVITY</th><th>ICONS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">ENVIRONMENTAL</td><td>Natural resources and biodiversity management</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Energy and waste management</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Health</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">POLITICAL</td><td>Cooperation</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Governance</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>
<table><thead><tr><th>DIMENSION</th><th>TYPE OF ACTIVITY</th><th>ICONS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">ECONOMIC</td><td>Sustainable and fair economics</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercialisation is local, fair and/or collective</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">SOCIAL</td><td>Traditional food and heritage conservation</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Society and equity</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Education</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /></figure>

## 4. STEPS 3 AND 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND COUNTRY REPORTS

To ensure data reliability and uniformity a common frame was used as database. This allowed a certain uniformity of data that was then analysed.

Reports were divided into three main parts:

1. Context: a short description of agriculture (based on the literature, as well as interviews) and the state of the art of agroecology in the country.

2. Current situation of agroecology: a summary of the collected information divided per activity category.

3. Agroecology initiatives, cases and examples: a description of the different initiatives analysed per activity category.

Each country report was reviewed by a range of people, and if possible, by an expert from that country to ensure the reliability of the shared information.

### References

CERAI (2019) Sistemas alimentarios territorializados en España. 100 iniciativas locales para una alimentación responsable y sostenible. CERAI, https://cerai.org/publicaciones-de-cerai/100-iniciativas-sat/
Wezel, A., Bellon, S., Doré, T., Francis, C., Vallod, D., David, C. (2009). Agroecology as a science, a movement or a practice. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29: 503-51
Grard, B., Wezel, A., and Gkisakis, V. (2023). AE4EU - Mapping questionnaire for key informant and initiative. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7520262
MAPPING AGROECOLOGY IN
ALBANIA

**AUTHOR:** Stella Beghini, Agroecology Europe

**REVIEWERS:** Vasileios Gkisakis, ELGO-DIMITRA; Baptiste Grard and Alexander Wezel, ISARA.

**TO CITE:** Beghini S. (2023). Mapping agroecology in Albania. In: Wezel, A., Grard, B. and Gkisakis, V. (eds). Mapping agroecology in Europe. Country Reports Series, Vol. 1, ISARA, Lyon, France; Agroecology Europe, Corbais, Belgium.

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /></figure>

This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No101000478. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. More information about the H2020-Agroecology for Europe project can be found here: www.ae4eu.eu

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /></figure>
ALBANIA
---
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In Albania, the term agroecology has a little recognition as a complex approach in farming and food system transformation. It is mostly understood as a scientific discipline examining environmental interactions at the farm level, having little reference in academic and research institutions. At the farm level, some agroecological principles and practices are present, mostly in small-scale farms, where traditional crop and tree varieties and animal breeds are maintained in a mixed production system. However, farmers tend not to use this term when referring to their production systems.

A social-political movement acting as a unified voice for agroecology is not present in Albania. Further, there is a difficult landscape for cooperation at the horizontal and vertical level, among farmers and among other stakeholders, common to the whole farming sector. Key informants and initiatives described actions that have the potential to move towards agroecology through the promotion of organic agriculture by strengthening the capacity building of farms and non-governmental organisations, but they are quite geographically scattered and do not act under the umbrella of agroecology. Direct financial support for agroecology is missing, while the agri-environmental measures for farms created by the Ministry, such as those related to organic agriculture and agrobiodiversity conservation, are seen as not consistent and not easily accessible by small-scale farmers, who therefore cannot plan medium and long-term investments. Training courses and on-farm assistance on sustainable agricultural practices, on the other hand, are provided by certain national and international NGOs. Unfortunately, such programs or services are not adopted by ministerial extension services, which often lack resources and skills in organic agriculture and/or agroecology.

Other limiting factors to the development of organic agriculture and agroecology are market demand and consumer education regarding organic agriculture. The term organic is still confused with "natural" and does not automatically provide a premium price to the producers. However, traditional local food is gaining increasing attention within the surge of agri-tourism in certain regions of the country, especially in the South and in the Albanian Alps.

Promising networks and advocacy initiatives, such as the Rural Parliament, hold the prospect of more integration between civil society actors engaged in sustainable agriculture and rural development. Institutional policies boosting support towards sustainability for small-scale farmers and economic valorisation of their diverse farming systems, are needed to boost the Albanian farming sector, as well as to create an enabling environment for real development towards agroecology in the country.
ALBANIA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (IN ALBANIAN)

Në Shqipëri, termi agroekologji njihet pak si një qasje komplekse në fermë dhe në transformimin e bujqësisë dhe sistemit ushqimor. Më së shumti agroekologjia kuptohet si një disiplinë shkencore që shqyrton ndërveprimet mjedisore në nivel ferme, dhe megjithatë, ajo ka pak referenca në institucionet akademike dhe kërkimore. Në nivel ferme, disa parime dhe praktika agroekologjike janë të pranishme, kryesisht në fermat e vogla, ku varietetet tradicionale dhe racat e kafshëve mbahen në një sistem të përzier prodhimi. Megjithatë, fermerët priren të mos e përdorin këtë term kur i referohen sistemit të tyre të prodhimit.

Mungon një lëvizje sociale e politike që vepron si një zë i unifikuar për agroekologjinë në vend dhe vështirësia e bashkëpunimit në nivel horizontal dhe vertikal, mes fermerëve dhe aktorëve të tjerë është e përbashkët për të gjithë sektorin e bujqësisë. Informacione dhe iniciativa të ndryshme kanë në bazë veprime që shkojnë drejt agroekologjisë përmes promovimit të bujqësisë organike, forcimit të kapaciteteve të fermave dhe organizatave joqeveritare, por ato janë mjaft të shpërndara gjeografikisht dhe nuk veprojnë nën ombrellën e agroekologjisë. Mungon mbështetja financiare për agroekologjinë, ndërkohë që masat agro-mjedisore për fermat (bujqësia organike dhe ruajtja e agrobiodiversitetit) të parashikuara nga Ministria nuk janë konsistente në kohë dhe nuk janë lehtësisht të aksesueshme nga të gjithe fermerët e vegjël, të cilët për këtë arsye nuk mund të planifikojnë investime afatmesme e afatgjata. Kurset e trajnimit dhe asistenca në fermë për praktikat e qëndrueshme bujqësore kryhen nga disa OJQ kombëtare dhe ndërkombëtare, por kjo qasje nuk realizohet nga shërbimet e ekstensionit, të cilave shpesh iu mungojnë burimet dhe aftësitë për bujqësinë organike dhe/ose për agroekologjinë.

Faktorë të tjerë kufizues të zhvillimit të bujqësisë organike dhe agroekologjisë janë kërkesa e tregut dhe edukimi i konsumatorëve në lidhje me bujqësinë organike pasi ato janë ende shumë të ulëta dhe termi organik ngatërrohet edhe me «natyror» dhe nuk njeh automatikisht një çmim më të lartë për prodhuesit. Megjithatë, ushqimi tradicional vendas po fiton vëmendje në rritje nëpërmjet zgjerimit të agroturizmeve në rajone të caktuara të vendit, veçanërisht në jug dhe në rajonet e Alpeve Shqiptare.

Rrjetet premtuese dhe nismat advokuese, si Parlamenti Rural, theksojnë rëndesinë e bashkëpunimit midis aktorëve të shoqërisë civile të angazhuar në bujqësi të qëndrueshme dhe zhvillim rural. Politikat institucionale që nxisin mbështetjen e qëndrueshme ndaj fermerëve të vegjël, për vlerësimin ekonomik të sistemit të tyre bujqësor të larmishëm janë të nevojshme për të forcuar sektorin bujqësor shqiptar dhe për të krijuar një mjedis të përshtatshëm për zhvillimin e ndryshimeve më të mëdha drejt agroekologjisë.
# 1. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The information regarding key informants in Albania are summarised in Table 1.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** List of key informants in Albania</caption><thead><tr><th>Key informant n°</th><th>Type of organisation</th><th>Main sector of involvement</th><th>ACTIVITY CATEGORY CONCERNED</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>NGO</td><td>Food sovereignty</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>NGO</td><td>Rural development</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Private Company</td><td>Organic agriculture</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Research Centre</td><td>Plant protection</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>NGO</td><td>Farmers organisation</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Public institution</td><td>Rural development</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_22.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_24.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_25.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_26.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_27.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_28.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_29.png" /></figure>

# 2. CONTEXT

In the last century, agriculture in Albania has encountered radical changes which impacted every aspect of the sector. Three land reforms occurred between 1939 and 1991, which were primarily aimed at land ownership. The first came into power before the second world war, which intended to distribute land that was owned by big landlords that were part of the establishment of the Ottomon empire to peasants. The second started in 1946 with the expropriation of private land and their collectivisation during the communist regime; while the last reform was implemented after the fall of the communist regime in 1991, distributing land to all rural inhabitants (Ciaian et al. 2018). During the communist regime (1944-1990), the country was politically isolated, leaving all production designated to internal consumption. Industrial and larger-scale mechanised farms were created with great investments in external inputs and infrastructures, and the rural population was forced to work in state cooperatives, leaving no land for private cultivation (Bernet and Kazazi 2012). The system was characterised by inefficiency, and in many periods food production was not sufficient for the national consumption demand. This accelerated the shift into a market economy in the early 1990s, after the fall of communism. The land reform which was initiated in 1991 aimed to redistribute land equally to all those who had worked in collective and state farm, namely the "head of the household". This resulted until today in negative consequences for women, who are still not recognised within agricultural roles: women currently represent 50% of the agricultural workforce but own/manage/head only around 6.5% of farms (FAO 2020).

According to the latest available data, Albanian farms are characterised primarily by family and small-scale farms, with 86% of the farms being 2 ha or under. Most Albanian farms are mixed farms, as a strategy to reduce economic risk with different production systems, as well as the realities of having limited access to markets that can absorb large quantities of a single product (FAO 2020). After 1991, the Albanian production model changed and new farmers abandoned industrial field crops such as rice, cotton, wheat and tobacco for investments
in livestock, agro-processing plants and horticulture (Jani 2020). Agriculture now accounts for roughly 20% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the sector is trying to transform further, by developing several new strategies and policies, especially since the membership application to the EU was submitted in 2008.

Another process which impacted the sector in the last 30 years is the emigration of 900,000 people out of Albania, but also through internal migrations to urban areas, which consisted in a large population increase in the bigger cities of Tirana and Durrës, while inhabitants in the rural areas of the North and the South were particularly impacted, who were mostly working in the agricultural sector (Kullaj et al. 2018).

The term agroecology ("Agroekologjia" in Albanian) is used only by agri-environmental scientists and the broader concept is not well known among civil society and policy makers (ALB-KI-5, Table 1). Indeed, it can be found in only a few national scientific publications. One publication, which includes agroecology in its title, refers to the study of the agri-environment and agroecological conditions for the cultivation of plant species. Still, political and social movements are at an early stage of adherence to the concept (ALB-KI-2, Table 1).

An organic agricultural movement began after the transition period of 1991, as a farming model close to smallholders and traditional farmers, and also to open up market opportunities for high-quality products. The ten-years international project "Sustainable Agriculture Support", led by FIBL International from 2001 to 2011, paved the way into regulatory aspects, implementation and capacity building for the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) (Bernet and Kazazi 2012). Subsidies to organic farms, "agri-environment"-like schemes (from 2018 are also accessible to farms in conversion) are available, but it is often challenging for small-scale farms to access them, considering the bureaucracy and discontinuity of measures (ALB-KI-3 & ALB-KI-4, Table 1). Moreover, the support is fixed at a lower level and does not take into account the farm size and farm activities (Kullaj et al. 2018). At the national level, the amount of land devoted to organic farming is still very low, with only 0,08% of the total agricultural land certified organic (Madzarić et al. 2019). However, the harvest of wild products in forests or other natural areas are also included in some of these statistics, compromising 5% of the land categorised as organic. Furthermore, organic agriculture in Albania is export-oriented, with medicinal and aromatic plants, followed by olive and essential oils exported to Europe, Turkey and the USA (Madzarić et al. 2019). At a country level, the awareness of organic agriculture among local consumers is still very low, with only a handful of specialised shops offering organic certified products and other agroecological products (ALB-KI-2, Table 1).

In the last few years, peri-urban agriculture and agri-tourism (also connected with the Slow Food movement) are promoting new models of food systems, often preferring agroecological and organic farming practices. Although there is no movement specifically working on agroecology, NGOs such as ANRD (Albanian Network for Rural Development) are tackling rural development issues by advocating for small scale rural livelihoods and thus strengthening the basis for political and social movements in this channel. In 2019, the FAO organised in Tirana the first "Dialogue of agroecology" for the Western Balkans and Caucasus areas, bringing together many stakeholders from these regions. This was the first forum tackling agroecology as a multidisciplinary approach, which was a novelty in Albania.

<footnote n="4">⁴ https://www.librariaubt.com/produkti/agroekologjia-velesin-peculi-albert-kopali-2/</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ https://www.fao.org/europe/events/detail-events/fr/c/1181808/</footnote>
# 3. CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY

## 3.1. EDUCATION AND TRAINING

<figure><img src="image_30.png" /></figure>

Specific trainings on agroecology are thus far absent in the Albanian context. NGOs such as the Institute of Organic Agriculture (IBB) and the Albanian Network for Rural Development (ANRD) offer trainings on agroecology-linked farming practices such as organic crop production, integrated pest management (IPM), soil fertility and agro-biodiversity. Such capacity building initiatives are usually financed by government agencies and donor organisations such as the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ), Italian Agency for Development Cooperation (AICS), and International Visegrad Fund. The private certification body "Albinspekt" also organises capacity building trainings on organic agriculture as a regulatory framework. AgriNet Albania (see the initiatives chapter), an NGO of 15 farmer organisations, operating in the Korça and Elbasan region, in the south-east of Albania, organises trainings mostly on integrated production such as integrated pest management, but it also focuses on financial education for farmers and how to capacity build for women and increase their role in the rural farming sector.

The research center IBB in Durrës offers trainings to farmers, students and extensions/public officers on organic agriculture, which also builds on the experiences from experiments and research taken in 20 farms scattered in 5 counties (Tirana, Durrës, Valona, Skhodra, Leizha). It is important to recognise that conventional and adult training schools, almost absent in rural areas, do not include agroecology-related content in their curricula (FAO 2020). In general, there is low awareness amongst farmers on the ecological impacts that agriculture has, thus usually resulting in inadequate fertilisers and pesticides utilisation and other practices that could be harmful to the environment (Kullaj et al. 2018). Key informants also added that proper capacity building on farm management is also missing (ALB-KI-1 & ALB-KI-3, Table 1). Furthermore, vocational education is male-dominated, both in who is teaching and the majority of students in agricultural programs, deepening the knowledge and skills gap between genders (FAO 2016).

Agricultural, food and environmental sciences are present at the university level at the Agricultural University of Tirana and the University of Korça "Fan S. Noli" but neither has developed specific materials that approach agroecology as a multi-category discipline - it is only considered within the scientific, environmental interactions at the farm level.

## 3.2. LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_31.png" /></figure>

No evidence was found that any living labs related to the field of agroecology in Albania are present. However, it should be highlighted that the project "FILA", in the framework of the program INTERREG CBC (Italy-Albania-Montenegro), developed a Living Lab in all three countries.

In 2019, a three-phase Living Lab was conducted in the Korça region which aimed to bring together stakeholders of the agri-food chain (small-medium enterprises, farmers, innovation brokers and research organisations).

<footnote n="6">6 https://www.italy-albania-montenegro.eu/fila-living-labs-cooperation-and-technology-transfer-in-the-agri-food-sector</footnote>
## 3.3. MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_32.png" /></figure>

There is currently no specific movement focusing on agroecology in Albania. However, different organisations are working towards sustainable agriculture, environmental protection and rural development. One of the most prominent organisations related to these topics is the Albanian Network of Rural Development (ANRD), an umbrella-organisation for 20 associations. The network advocates and promotes initiatives towards the formulation and implementation of sustainable rural development policies, with national and international members working in Albania. Their most important event is the "Albanian Rural Parliament", held biannually. In 2021, the 2nd parliament took place, organised as an online and physical event, with over 600 participants coming from all over Albania. Representatives of public institutions, farmers associations, civil society organisations and other stakeholders came together for two days to meet, discuss and present the "Declaration of the Second Albanian Rural Parliament", containing a call to policy makers to support actions towards: national support schemes for agriculture, rural development, remote and mountainous areas, small farmers, youth, rural women and the implementation of the LEADER program in Albania's rural communities (ANRD 2021). While agroecology is not mentioned, these fields of action are a ground to mainstream agroecology programs in Albania.

On the other hand, associations related to organic agriculture, such as the initial Organic Agriculture Association (OAA) and then BioAdria, despite receiving capacity building and financial support, are still limited in their membership size and lobbying power at the decision-making level.

In parallel, the development of the Slow Food movement with regional groups, has raised consumer concern and focus towards local, healthy food. A network of restaurants and so called "presidia" farms, follow particular sustainability criterias, based on the concepts of "good, clean and fair" food. The agri-tourism sector has witnessed a huge increase in the last few years due to donor funds and local foundations, such as Gijorokastra Foundation (ALB-KI-1 & ALB-KI-5, Table 1). Even if they do not define themselves as agroecological per se, the sector is deemed active and crucial to revitalise local food culture from mostly family farming systems.

## 3.4. PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_33.png" /></figure>

Albania is characterised by two pedoclimatic zones: the continental, internal one and the Mediterranean coastal area. This divides the country in three main agroecological areas: lowlands where intensive agriculture is practiced, the hills where arable crops and fruit trees are mainly cultivated and the mountains with mainly grasslands, fruit crops and some cereals (Kullaj et al. 2018). In mountainous and hilly areas, small-scale farms with an average area of 1.5 ha are predominant, which include diversified crops and livestock present on a single farm (Jani and Kume 2018). Farming products are mostly for family and self-consumption, with excess products going into the market channels. In small-scale farms a higher use of local cultivated varieties is observed, as farmers tend to conserve specific crops adapted to the local soil and climatic conditions. Normally, they tend to use organic fertilisation with manure, composting, and crops rotations. However, a lack of information on best farming practices, inadequate farming techniques, the misuse of pesticides and fertilisers, and the negative impacts on the environment from overgrazing and burning crop residues are frequently observed (Kullaj et al. 2018).
One close link with agroecology is found within Albanian organic agriculture. Nevertheless, while the farming approach is close to traditional smallholders' practices, the actual amount of certified organic agricultural land in Albania is still very low (0,08% of agricultural land), as is the knowledge of organic agriculture among farmers (ALB-KI-2, Table 1).

Increasing actions are being taken toward the conservation of local food traditions, with projects aimed at doing research and conservation of cultivated agrobiodiversity and local livestock breeds. For instance, the Institute for Organic Agriculture (IBB) is doing experimental research with a few traditional horticultural varieties in collaboration with the Institute of Plant Genetic Resources. Other approaches such as agroforestry have been promoted in a few projects, and in 2018 a conference on agroforestry took place. However, there is no evidence of specific initiatives currently working on this topic.

### 3.5. SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_34.png" /></figure>

The Agricultural University of Tirana (AUT) and the University of Korça "Fan S. Noli" (both public) are the only universities offering degrees in agricultural, food and environmental sciences. AUT, one of the largest academic institutions in the Western Balkans, offers courses in a wide range of subjects. In the Department of Agriculture, agri-environmental and organic crop production is addressed but they do not constitute a single course. Though agronomy students can attend courses on integrated rural development, marketing, rural sociology and finance, it is not compulsory to integrate them in their curriculum. Overall, no specific mention of agroecology as a multi-categories discipline was found.

When it comes to the other academic institutions, researchers at the University of Korça have collaborated with AgriNet Albania to create Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and soil organic fertilisation training booklets but no other work regarding organic agriculture is present so far. Research in agriculture is also channeled in Agricultural Technology Transfer Centers (ATTCs)--public bodies managed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD)--which are scattered throughout Albanian regions and focus in a particular on the agricultural and food-processing sector, with a mission of technology transfer. Nevertheless, ATTCs have low resources and do not focus on agroecological practices.

The Institute of Organic Agriculture (IBB) in Durrës is a private scientific research institute founded in 2010 as an NGO. It focuses on the promotion of organic agriculture through performing field research mainly on biological pest control, fertilisation and crop protection. The Institute collaborates with the public extension office, AUT and the Institute of Agro meteorology to provide capacity building on the topic. They have also developed different farmer trainings courses on organic crop production.

<footnote n="7">7 https://anrd.al/second-rural-parliament/ 8 https://www.slowfood.com/nazioni-condotte/albania/ 9 https://gjirokastra.org/food-tours/</footnote>

<footnote n="10">10 https://twitter.com/AgrofMM?fbclid=IwAR3gL2K2ERYOEsqqFVTQv-OZ2JqFk5OPuo3eq9MUlb_n2DNWfCUZ1ED1vaQ</footnote>
## 4. AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES

<table><caption>**Table 2:** An overview about initiatives, cases and examples described and analysed.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE N°</th><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE NAME</th><th rowspan="2">SCALE</th><th rowspan="2">TYPE OF STRUCTURE</th><th rowspan="2">AIM</th><th colspan="5">ACTIVITY CATEGORIES</th></tr><tr><th>EDUCATION & RESEARCH</th><th>LIVING LAB</th><th>MOVEMENT</th><th>PRACTICE</th><th>SCIENCE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>IBB - Institute of Organic Agriculture. Instituti I Bujqesise Biologijke</td><td>National</td><td>NGO</td><td>Promotion of organic agriculture</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>ANRD - Albanian Network for Rural Development. Rrjeti Shqiptar për Zhvillimin Rural</td><td>National</td><td>NGO</td><td>Sustainable rural development, policies and instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>AgriNet Albania</td><td>Regional</td><td>NGO</td><td>Capacity building</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Agropuka</td><td>Local</td><td>Farmers association</td><td>Rural development of Puka</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_35.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_36.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_37.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_38.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /><figcaption>**Table 3:** Additional initiatives, cases and examples in the country - not included in this report.</figcaption></figure>

<table><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE N°</th><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE NAME</th><th rowspan="2">SCALE</th><th rowspan="2">TYPE OF STRUCTURE</th><th rowspan="2">AIM</th><th colspan="5">ACTIVITY CATEGORIES</th></tr><tr><th>EDUCATION & RESEARCH</th><th>LIVING LAB</th><th>MOVEMENT</th><th>PRACTICE</th><th>SCIENCE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>Slow Food Network in Albania</td><td>National</td><td>NGO</td><td>Promotion of local food cultures and traditions</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Uka Farm</td><td>Local</td><td>Farm</td><td>Permaculture</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Community Seed Bank of Zadrima</td><td>Local Regional</td><td>NGO</td><td>Conservation and valorisation of traditional crop varieties</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>BioZadrima</td><td>Local</td><td>Farmers association</td><td>Organic Agriculture</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_40.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_41.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_42.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_43.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_44.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_45.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_46.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_47.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_48.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_49.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_50.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_51.png" /></figure>

INSTITUTI I BUJQESISE BIOLOGIJKJE
https://ibb.al/

INITIATIVE N°1 – IBB

# INSTITUTE OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE

The Institute of Organic Agriculture (IBB) is an Albanian private non-governmental organisation based in Durrës (West of Albania), who aims to increase organic agricultural knowledge and technical services. It was established in 2010 when the Swiss-government financed the "SASA" (Sustainable Agriculture Support for Albania) project through FIBL, the Swiss Research Center for Organic Agriculture. Currently, it employs 1 full-time and 3 part-time experts. The specialisation of IBB is plant protection, organic vegetable and fruit production. Agricultural technologies, such as weather stations to monitor and forecast diseases, are tested and promoted in different locations in order to have a more accurate and rational use of inputs for disease and pest control. Usually bulletins are sent to its members with results from these studies. IBB performs research activities which are also based on the experiments they do on various farms located in the Tirana, Durrës, Valona, Shkodra and Leizha areas. Moreover, IBB collaborates with approximately 25 other farms, some of which are used as "demonstration farms" for training courses and other activities.

IBB implements trainings for agricultural specialists such as public extension agricultural officers and farmers. There is no fixed training program, but they can include organic cultivation and standards, and pest and disease control techniques. For instance, IBB has an collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture for a 'Training of Trainers' program for public extension officers. The Institute is also engaged in events for consumer education and the promotion of organic agriculture.

IBB is considered as the most important research institution for organic agriculture, providing advisory services to organic farmers in Albania. It collaborates with several institutions like the AUT, ANRD, Institute of Agro meteorology, as well as agricultural high schools and other actors. Specifically, in their collaboration with experts at AUT, certain course lessons were developed which related to sustainable/organic agriculture, and a Bachelor thesis was hosted for students. Trainings on concepts related to the economy were also organised with ANRD, while the use of weather stations to create a prognosis and warning system regarding plant protection was promoted in cooperation with the Institute of GeoSciences, Energy, Water and Environment, with a specialisation in Agrometerology.

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

IBB plays an important role in the research and promotion of organic agriculture in Albania. The Institute develops research experiments based on local challenges.

## KEY FEATURES

* **Type of education and training:** workshop and courses on organic agriculture

* **Main topics:** plant protection

* **Type of legal entity:** NGO

* **Members:** scientists

* **Project duration:** various durations, depends on the course program

<figure><img src="image_52.png" /><figcaption>Picture 1: Professor Enver Isufi inspecting biological trap for pests. Source: The Institute of Organic Agriculture.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_53.png" /><figcaption>Picture 2: The technical brochures published by the NGO. Source: The Institute of Organic Agriculture.</figcaption></figure>

SCIENCE

EDUCATION
<figure><img src="image_54.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_55.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_56.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_57.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_58.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

INITIATIVE N°2 – ANRD

<figure><img src="image_59.png" /></figure>

ANRD

ALBANIAN NETWORK FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT

RJETI SHQIPTAR PËR ZHVILLIMIN RURAL

RJETI SHQIPTAR PËR ZHVILLIMIN RURAL
https://anrd.al/homepage/

# ALBANIAN NETWORK OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT

ANRD is an Albanian non-governmental organisation launched in 2015 in Tirana after an extensive civil society movement which aimed to create a platform which operate for the well-being of rural communities, by taking up an active role in the processes and reforms of the rural development sector. To this end, ANRD intends to build an active and inclusive national rural agenda which includes gender equality, rural youth civic engagement, community-led local development, family farming, agri-tourism, sustainable agriculture, and smart villages. ANRD is a membership organisation, an association of associations and other entities. The number of its members is now 27. Members operate in almost every region in the country, bringing territorial or sectorial priorities and stakes to the network, while operating as a single voice in the policy framework development. A participatory and bottom-up perspective is adopted for advancing the national rural agenda and lobbying for sustainable rural development policies, which was inspired by the LEADER program approach (i.e. program fund by the European Union that aim to support pilot projet in rural areas over Europe).

The most important event the network runs is the Albanian Rural Parliament. The Parliament engages in a two year process that collects consultations from local stakeholders, agricultural organisations and rural development issues, culminating in the final declaration after a 2-day event. The first Parliament was launched in 2017 with the collaboration of the Agricultural University of Tirana. The Albanian Rural Parliament is the primary instrument through which the Albanian Network for Rural Development seeks to influence the rural development agenda in the country. It is also the strongest advocacy act so far that is inclusive and nationwide in character, applying a bottom-up perspective to accelerate Albania's reform process in EU policy of Community Led Local Development (CLLD).

The 2nd Albanian Rural Parliament was organised in 2021, in coordination with the Agricultural University of Tirana and Epoka University. It brought together, both physically and remotely, 600 participants from rural areas, as well as important actors in agricultural and rural development, to discuss the challenges and actions that can be taken to serve the well-being of rural people. The 2021 Parliament aimed to find innovative instruments and alternatives to enable farmers, women, youth, entrepreneurs and other rural stakeholders to voice their concerns and aspirations to connect and actively participate in the development and decision-making processes.

## KEY FEATURES

* Main goal: rural development

* Founded in: 2015

* Type of organisation: formal NGO

* Farming sectors: diversified systems

* Scale of the organisation: national

<figure><img src="image_60.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 3:** Product of supported women entrepreneurs. Source: Albanian Network of Rural Development.</figcaption></figure>
While agroecology is not an integral part of the work of ANRD, certain projects deal directly with the adoption and promotion of sustainable agriculture practices (e.g. conservation of old crops varieties); sustainable land management; protection of old orchards and trees; pesticide use reduction; water harvesting; soil and erosion management; and the introduction of innovative horticultural practices. The socio-political aspect of agroecology is reflected through their support and promotion of the needs and empowerment of small-scale farmers, which is not usually reflected in the national policy debate. Improving the conditions of rural women is also an important concern for the Network.

<figure><img src="image_61.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 4:** Workshop of the project Rural Youth. Source: Albanian Network of Rural Development.</figcaption></figure>

Over the years, ANRD has cooperated with several international organisations (European Rural Parliament, Balkan Rural Development Network, Standing Working Group, European Union, UNDP, GIZ, Latvian Rural Forum, AICS, International Visegrad Fund). ANRD is also a member organisation of the networks PREPARE (Partnership for Rural Europe), an European civil society organisation, and the Balkan Rural Development Network, who both intend the transfer of know-how and to influence EU reform processes in rural development through joint advocacy and lobby initiatives.

ANRD has also collaborated with various state institutions such as the Albanian Parliament, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Agricultural University of Tirana, Epoka University, Agriculture and Rural Development Agency, Regional Development Agencies, Albanian Development Fund, and nationwide municipalities.

ANRD is currently engaged in several projects, in particular "Rural-You. Rural Albanian Youth", which advocates for the participation and recognition of rural youth in Albania. Another current project is NAGE (Networking and Advocacy for Green Economy), a three-year project funded by the European Union. NAGE is implemented by a consortium of rural networks in Western Balkan countries acting jointly in the interest of their constituents through the Balkan Rural Development Network (BRDN). The partners have tailored an action that reflects the BRDN development goals, and therefore strengthens the positioning of the network in the region, while encouraging grassroots involvement in public decision-making and reform processes. They also focus on networking and advocacy to introduce the concept of the green economy by offering evidence-based policy solutions. A recently finished project is the "Academy from Farm to Fork - V4 for Sustainable Agriculture in Albania". The project aimed to share micro-scale, cost-effective farm know-how regarding biodiversity protection and climate change adaptation solutions from four Visegrad countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) with farmers from Albania (particularly young farmers). Through this project, farmers gained knowledge and witnessned in-practice measures pertaining to the enhancement of sustainability, environmental preservation, and the prevention of further losses in biodiversity.

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

ANRD operates as a unique voice which advocates for better rural development policies in Albania, acting as a catalyst of cooperation for many diverse actors scattered in the country, while trying to overcome the low levels of such cooperation that still exists throughout the Albanian society.

The Albanian Rural Parliament is an innovative participatory process which offers a unique model of the bottom-up approach to influence effective governance in the area.

## POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_62.png" /></figure>

**COOPERATION:** ANRD is engaged in promoting actions based on participatory processes which is an innovative approach and methodology for the country.

<figure><img src="image_63.png" /></figure>

**SOCIETY AND EQUITY:** The empowerment of youth and women has been at the core of ANRD's mission, in order to advance their interests, priorities and civic engagement, and generate public support for enhanced socio-economic opportunities.

## LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_64.png" /></figure>

**COOPERATION:** Cooperation among different stakeholders is difficult, not only between farmers, but also between public and private actors.
<figure><img src="image_65.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_66.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_67.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_68.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_69.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

INITIATIVE N°3 – AGRINET

AGRINET ALBANIA

AgriNet is an Albanian, non-governmental and not-for-profit organisation which was established in 2005. It has a head office in Korca and two other field offices in Elbasan and Peshkopi. During 2005-2020, AgriNet has implemented different projects which have been supported by different donors. The overall objectives have been the improvement of the social and economic situation in different rural regions of Albania.

From 2018, AgriNet has started its transformation to a membership organisation aiming to establish a network of farmer associations. This network started with 10 formal and non-formal associations, composed by 250 members, of which 100 were women. Currently, AgriNet is composed by 15 organisations with 450 members, including 200 women. AgriNet employs a team of full time and part time staff with a broad spectrum of skills in areas such as rural community and agricultural development.

AgriNet's mission has four components to: (i) increase the management capacities of farmer associations; (ii) promote good farming techniques and education in farm management topics; (iii) advocate for gender equality and strengthen the recognition of the role of rural women, and (iv) lobbying at the national level and network with Albanian and international organisations. A transition to better agricultural practices is in the mission of AgriNet. In regards to the local farming context, the organisation operates in counties which are dominated by plains, which often have intensive fruit cultivation systems. The use of chemicals is very large and the highly hazardous pesticides are commonly applied in the fields. In contrast, in hilly and mountainous areas, agricultural systems are less intensive and so is the use of external inputs. So far, organic production is very limited and farmers are mostly unaware of the harmful effects of pesticides for both human health and ecosystems.

KEY FEATURES

* **Agroecological practices concerned:** integrated pest management, organic pest control

* **Founded in:** 2005

* **Farming sectors concerned:** fruit cultivation

* **Types of stakeholders involved:** 15 farmers association

* **Scale of the initiative:** regional

<figure><img src="image_70.png" /><figcaption>Picture 5: Farmers group. Source: Agrinet Albania.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_71.png" /></figure>

Facebook: @agrinet.al
AgriNet organises trainings in integrated production systems and biological pest control in collaboration with the research institute IBB. The other topics that are promoted by AgriNet are soil quality improvement, integrated production of fruit and vegetables, the implementation of GAP standards, organic farming, environmental protection, and climate change adaptation measures.

AgriNet is supported by international development bodies and private foundations. AgriNet is a co-founder and Board Member of the Albanian Network for Rural Development (ANRD). It collaborates with the University of Korça on research on IPM, and is carrying out trainings and field demonstrations on members' farms.

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 6:** Farmers group. Source: Agrinet Albania.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The association works together with farmers from the regions of Korça and Elbasan to promote better agricultural practices in fruit production, in order to decrease dependence from hazardous chemicals and to provide practical alternatives to farmers. They also combine trainings and capacity building with project management and the enhancement of farmers' professional skills.

Finally, they provide support to member associations of farmers from various fields of agricultural production, including the introduction of different standards (Global GAP, ISO, etc.).

## POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_73.png" /></figure>

**SOCIETY AND EQUITY:** AgriNet advocates for gender equality in agriculture, recognising the work and interests of women in the sector.

<figure><img src="image_74.png" /></figure>

**EDUCATION:** The initiative offers training programs to farmers who usually do not have access to higher agricultural education.

## LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_75.png" /></figure>

**GOVERNANCE:** They have found it difficult to create powerful lobbying actions at the local andregional level.
<figure><img src="image_76.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_77.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_78.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_79.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_80.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

INITIATIVE N°4 – AGROPUKA

<figure><img src="image_81.png" /></figure>

https://www.agropuka.org/
Facebook: @AgroPuka

AGROPUKA

AgroPuka is an association of agricultural producers in the municipalities of Puka and Fushë Arrëz, in the Puka county (Northern Albania). It was established in 2001 by agricultural and rural development advisors, and farmers, with the support of Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC). The association has more than 300 members, consisting of farmers, food producers, animal breeders, advisors and local citizens. Over 50% of members are women and in the year 2019, AgroPuka adopted a Gender Policy and Strategy to be implemented by the organisation and their stakeholders. Currently, the staff of AgroPuka consists of 6 people. The pool of external advisors for AgroPuka includes about 20 experts in diverse disciplines (livestock breeding, agronomy, beekeeping and others).

KEY FEATURES

* Agroecological practices concerned: agrobiodiveristy conservation, non-timber wood products

* Founded in: 2011

* Farming sectors concerned: permanent crops, livestock, forestry

* Scale of the initiative: inter-municipal

AgroPuka focuses on offering dedicated services, such as technical assistance for quality production, to members in the field of agriculture, livestock breeding, food transformation and marketing. Since Puka county is dominated by mountainous areas, over 80% of the land, the association aimed to develop the sectors that are suitable to the geographical conditions: beekeeping, livestock breeding and dairy production, wild harvesting (such as wild berries, mushrooms, and herbs) and rural tourism. While supporting agricultural production development, AgroPuka is giving support to market products and the promote cooperation between producers, especially women and youth. The association has invested in creating a commercial branch which takes care of the processing, packaging and marketing of different products (dried mushrooms, dried fruits, herbs, berries, preserves and jams). The revenues generated from the marketing sector go to the employment of women to process fruits and other products. The label "AgroPuka" is currently well recognised at the national level.

<figure><img src="image_82.png" /><figcaption>Picture 7: AgroPuka product exposition. Source: Agropuka.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_83.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 8:** Development of Ecotrails (left) and Pruning session (right). Source: Agropuka.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_84.png" /></figure>

While AgroPuka does not refer specifically to agroecology, issues of agrobiodiversity and restoration of the environment are placed high on the agenda of the association. During the communist regime, the environment was strongly transformed with land use changes such as cutting forests, even in mountainous and sloped areas, in order to put them under agricultural production. These areas are now mostly abandoned and riddled with soil erosion issues. In response to this issue, AgroPuka works to promote the recovery of these lands, and experimental work has been put in place, especially in the reintroduction of chestnut trees and through planting aromatic herbs. Another important component of AgroPuka's work is devoted to the conservation and valorisation of endangered fruit trees varieties, especially apple. They have created a collection of apple tree varieties and studies have been carried out by specialists on the best adapted varieties to the local conditions. The association is also working on educating young students on the importance of protecting the environment through information campaigns, and small actions in the villages and schools through the cultivation of trees and herbs in communal gardens.

AgroPuka is a donor-based organisation and relies mostly on external funding coming from SDC, the EU, Italian Cooperation Agency and the Swedish grant "We effect". AgroPuka is a founder member of ANRD (Albanian Network for Rural Development) and has many ties with national and international NGOs.

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

AgroPuka represents a model of cooperation in creating jobs and skills in remote mountainous areas, creating diversity in cultivated crops and exploiting forestry products in a sustainable way. Half of the members of the association are women and gender inclusion and promotion of activities aimed at improving the rural women livelihoods is placed high on the association's agenda.

### POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_85.png" /></figure>

**TRADITIONAL FOOD AND HERITAGE CONSERVATION:** Local fruit trees and horticultural varieties are preserved and monitored for their adaptation to local farming and climatic conditions.

<figure><img src="image_86.png" /></figure>

**COMMERCIALISATION IS LOCAL, FAIR AND/OR COLLECTIVE:** AgroPuka developed a commercial entity which promotes the production and sales of transformed products. This strengthens the recognition of the brand and ensure income to the groups of producers.

### LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_87.png" /></figure>

**SOCIETY AND EQUITY:** Youth involvement is quite difficult in a context with a high rate of emigration. Moreover, it is difficult to find qualified skilled labourers in the primary sector.

<figure><img src="image_88.png" /></figure>

**GOVERNANCE:** Since AgroPuka mostly works on a project to project basis, finances and the management of resources are subjects to fluctuations.
# 5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE

The current report highlights that the development of agroecology in Albania is still at an early stage and the term is not usually used by the diverse range of practitioners. While farmers and civil society organisations are coming together under the umbrella of advocacy for inclusive rural development policies, institutional support is needed to ensure an effective transition to sustainable agriculture models, such as organic agriculture and small-scale farming systems. Key informants denounce the inconsistency of financial support to organic agricultural conversion and maintenance, as well the bureaucratic difficulties for small farmers to access support measures (ALB-KI-3, ALB-KI-4 & ALB-KI-6, Table 1). Furthermore, the number of training and education programmes on agroecological practices are still limited, as well as the capacity of the extension services in organic agriculture (ALB-KI-4, Table 1).

Strengthening the cooperation of farmers concerned in promoting more sustainable practices and promoting more direct link with consumers, including tourists, are two directions where agroecology can be promoted, both of which are encountering promising results. However, strong support from institutions and a clearer perspective towards the multi-dimensional nature of agroecology are necessary to create the basis for a sustainable impact in the country.

## ABBREVIATION

AICS: Agenzia Italiana per la Cooperazione allo Sviluppo: Italian Agency for Development Cooperation

ANRD: Albanian Network for Rural Development

CBC: Cross-Border Cooperation

GDP: Gross Domestic Product

GIZ: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH- German Development Agency

FILA: Fertilisation and Innovation Labs in Agro-food®

IBB: Instituti i Bujqësisë Biologjike - Institute of Organic Agriculture

IPM: Integrated Pest Management

OAA: Organic Agriculture Association

SDC: Swedish Development Cooperation

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to thank everyone who contributed to this research, in particular, the always close colleagues of COSPE, the estimated people met again and the experts and practitioners known for the first time in occasion of this renewed mapping research. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No101000478. The authors are thankful to Jessica Donham for proofreading this report.

## REFERENCES

ANRD (2021). Declaration of the Second Albanian Rural Parliament, European Perspective of Rural Albania. Tirana.

Agroecology Europe, 2020. Agroecology initiatives in European countries. Agroecology Europe, Corbais, Belgium 232 pages.

Balogh, L., Katalin, R., Balazs, B., 2020. Mapping agroecology in Hungary. https://www.agroecology-europe.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/AE-Mapping-HUN02.09.pdf

Bernet T., Kazazi I. (2012). Organic Agriculture in Albania - Sector Study 2011.

Swiss Coordination Office in Albania (SCO-A), Research of Organic Agriculture (FIBL) & Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Consumer Production of Albania (MoAFCP), Tirana, Albania.

CERAI, 2019. CERAI - Sistemas alimentarios territorializados en España 100 iniciativas locales para una alimentación responsable y sostenible.

Ciaian, P., Guri, F., Rajcaniova, M., Drabik, D., Paloma, S., (2018). Land fragmentation and production diversification: A case study from rural Albania. Land Use Policy 76, 589-599.

FAO (2016). Gender, agriculture and rural development in Albania. Budapest
FAO (2020). Smallholders and family farms in Albania. Country study report 2019.
FAO, Budapest.

Jani S., Cakalli A., Hobdari V., Damo R. (2020) Case Study of Local Varieties and Landraces of Vegetable Crops in Korça Region. Special Issue of the conference Agriculture a Life Science with Roots in Applied Biology; 3-4 Dec 2020.

Jani, S., Kume, K. (2018). Agrobiodiversity in Southeast Europe - assessment and policy recommendations - country report Albania. Skopje, GIZ.

Kullaj E., Sallaku, F., Kume, K. (2018). Agri-environmental policy in Albania. In: Cukaliev, O., Bartel, A., Ilic, B., Mohr, B., Gjorgjieska, D.P., Gavrilova, E. (eds). AGRI-environmental policy in South-East Europe - Skopje: Standing working group for regional rural development (SWG).

Madzarić, S., Al Bitar L., Bteich M.R., Pugliese P. (eds.). Mediterranean Organic Agriculture Network. Albania-Country Profile. Report 2019. CIHEAM Bari, Valenzano (BA), Italy.

Wezel, A., Bellon, S., Doré, T., Francis, C., Vallod, D., David, C., 2009. Agroecology as a science, a movement and a practice. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2, 27-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0394-0_3

Wezel, A., Goette, J., Lagneaux, E., Passuello, G., Reisman, E., Rodier, C., Turpin, G., 2018. Agroecology in Europe: Research, education, collective action networks, and alternative food systems. Sustainability. 10, 1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/su100
MAPPING AGROECOLOGY IN
AUSTRIA

**AUTHOR:** Anna Brumer, ISARA

**REVIEWERS:** Jens Dauber, Thünen Institute; Baptiste Grard and Alexander Wezel, ISARA; Vasileios Gkisakis, ELGO-DIMITRA.

**TO CITE:** Brumer, A. (2023). Mapping agroecology in Austria. In: Wezel, A., Grard, B. and Gkisakis, V. Mapping agroecology in Europe. Country Reports Series, Vol. 1, ISARA, Lyon, France; Agroecology Europe, Corbais, Belgium.

<figure><img src="image_89.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_90.png" /></figure>

This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No101000478. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. More information about the H2020-Agroecology for Europe project can be found here: www.ae4eu.eu

<figure><img src="image_91.png" /></figure>
AUSTRIA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report gives an overview of the development of agroecology in Austria. As part of the H2020 project Agroecology for Europe (AE4EU), this work provides an analysis of the current state of agroecology and descriptions of existing initiatives. Information and data provided here are results from interviews conducted with 8 experts named as key informants and 9 representative initiatives, and desktop research held between March and July 2021. In this study, information on the development and existing initiatives were collected according to five activity categories: Education and Training, Living Lab, Movements, Practice, and Science.

The term agroecology is not commonly used in Austria and understood differently by the key informants. The concept of agroecology was mostly defined as closely related to the principles of organic agriculture. Organic agriculture, like agroecology, is understood as a systemic approach going beyond European regulations and national prescribed practices. Through its early historical development, organic agriculture is well recognised in Austria and will continue to be a driving force in the development of agroecology.

The ÖPUL (Austrian agri-environmental programme) was identified as a programme promoting agroecology. Key informants identified different barriers for the development of agroecology in Austria, these including economic and political barriers similar to organic farming, as well as missing awareness.

The initiatives presented here serve as examples, which can inspire others as they all contribute to transform the current food system. Positive impacts and limitations of these initiatives are related to their respective scale and specific aim. All are working towards either sharing knowledge or educating farmers and civil society on topics related to agroecology (organic farming, permaculture, biodiversity conservation, seed preservation, and food waste).
AUSTRIA
---
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (IN GERMAN)

Dieser Bericht gibt einen Überblick über die Entwicklung der Agrarökologie in Österreich. Im Rahmen des H2020-Projekts Agrarökologie für Europa (AE4EU) bietet diese Arbeit eine Analyse des aktuellen Stands der Agrarökologie und Beschreibungen bestehender Initiativen. Die hier bereitgestellten Informationen sind das Ergebnis von Interviews, die zwischen März und Juni 2021 mit 8 Experten (Schlüsselinformanten genannt), 9 Vertretern von Initiativen und Desktop-Recherchen geführt wurden. In dieser Studie wurden Informationen über die Entwicklung und bestehende Initiativen in fünf Säulen gesammelt: Bildung und Ausbildung, Living Lab, Bewegungen, Praxis und Wissenschaft.

Agrarökologie ist in Österreich ein nicht gebräuchlicher Begriff und wird von den Schlüsselinformanten unterschiedlich verstanden. Der Begriff der Agrarökologie wurde meist als eng mit den Prinzipien des Bio-Landbaus verbunden definiert. Bio-Landbau wird als systemischer Ansatz verstanden, der über europäische Vorschriften und national vorgeschriebene Praktiken hinausgeht und ist damit in völliger Übereinstimmung mit der Agrarökologie. Der Bio-Landbau genießt durch seine frühe historische Entwicklung einen hohen Bekanntheitsgrad in Österreich und wird auch weiterhin als eine treibende Kraft in der Entwicklung der Agrarökologie wirken.

Als Programm zur Förderung der Agrarökologie wurde das ÖPUL (Österreichisches Programm für Umweltgerechte Landwirtschaft) identifiziert. Schlüsselinformanten identifizierten verschiedene Hindernisse für die Entwicklung der Agrarökologie in Österreich, darunter wirtschaftliche, politische Hindernisse, ähnlich den Hindernisse für den ökologischen Landbau, sowie fehlendes Bewusstsein.

Die hier vorgestellten Initiativen dienen als Beispiele, die andere inspirieren können, da sie alle zur Transformation des aktuellen Ernährungssystems beitragen. Positive Auswirkungen und Grenzen dieser Initiativen hängen mit ihrem jeweiligen Ausmaß und ihrem spezifischen Ziel zusammen. Alle arbeiten daran, entweder Wissen auszutauschen oder Landwirte und die Zivilgesellschaft zu agrarökologischen Themen (ökologischer Landbau, Permakultur, Erhaltung der biologischen Vielfalt, Erhaltung von Saatgut und Lebensmittelverschwendung) aufzuklären.
# 1. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The information regarding key informants in Austria are summarised in Table 1.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** List of key informants in Austria.</caption><thead><tr><th>Key informant n°</th><th>Type of organisation</th><th>Main sector of involvement</th><th>ACTIVITY CATEGORY CONCERNED</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>Chamber of agriculture</td><td>Soil and water protection</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Chamber of agriculture</td><td>Organic agriculture – arable farming & viticulture</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Chamber of agriculture</td><td>Plants</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Research infrastructure</td><td>Soil ecology</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Chamber of agriculture</td><td>Agricultural and regional policy</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>NGO</td><td>Agroforestry, regenerative farming</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>University</td><td>Organic agriculture, agroecology</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Ministry of agriculture</td><td>ÖPUL, mountain farmers and less-favoured areas, organic farming</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_92.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_93.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_94.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_95.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_96.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_97.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_98.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_99.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_100.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_101.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_102.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_103.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_104.png" /></figure>

# 2. CONTEXT

Austria has a farmland area of 26 698 km², covering over 32 % of the land area (Eurostat 2019) whereas 40% of the land area is covered by forest (BMLRT 2020). The average size of agricultural holdings is 45 ha (2016), with a disparity between the different regions (Machold and Groier 2020). In Western Austria, in central and southern Burgenland and in the West Styria, over 50% of farms are small holdings (average size 8.5 ha). Since the 1970s, the number of small holdings has continuously declined, which is a trend observed in many other European countries. Between 2003-2016, 26% of small holdings were abandoned in Austria.

Historically, Austria is a pioneer in organic farming (AUT-KI-7, Table 1), starting with the development of biodynamic agriculture by Rudolf Steiner in 1924, followed by the first biodynamic farms created in 1925 in Carinthia, and the creation of the first organic association (which became Demeter) in 1932 (Steinwidder and Starz 2020). The number of organic farms were relatively low until the eighties, followed by the high increase in the nineties. This surge of organic agriculture in Austria can be traced back to the start of organic subsidies in 1991, which led to an increase of more than eightfold in the number of organic farms between 1990 and 1994. Currently, organic agriculture is promoted by the Bio-Aktionsprogramm 2015-2020, which has been prolonged until 2022. Organic farms generally receive a high allowance payment (Biobonus). A specificity of Austria is that mountains cover 70% of its area, according to EU classification (Art. 32(2), Regulation 1305/2013) and is considered as disadvantaged mountainous region for which many organic farms receive additional subsidies. With over 25% of the agricultural land is farmed organically in 2019, Austria has the highest percentage of organic farmland in the EU and the third worldwide (Steinwidder and Starz 2020).
The Austrian agri-environmental programme ÖPUL (Österreichisches Programm für Umweltgerechte Landwirtschaft, Austrian programme for environmentally friendly agriculture) supports organic agriculture activities (over 40% of its budget go to organic agriculture), water conservation measures, biodiversity conservation and integrative pest management (Grandl, Weber-Hajszan, and Neudorfer 2016) and can therefore be considered as a programme promoting the development of agroecology (AUT-KI-1, AUT-KI-5, AUT-KI-6, AUT-KI-7 & AUT-KI-8, Table 1). The ÖPUL measures are implemented on a voluntary basis and the impact of effectiveness for these measures are not yet evaluated (Eichberger et al. 2019).

In comparison to organic agriculture, agroecology remains less known in Austria. In 2011, with the first European Food Sovereignty Forum in Krems, Austria, the term became more popular within social movements and practitioners (Agroecology Europe 2020). The term agroecology is still very uncommon and not many people can associate something with it (AUT-KI-5, Table 1). In many cases and by different stakeholder groups, it is more commonly understood and often named together with organic agriculture. Hence, some organic farmers practicing agroecology do not use the term itself. This holds for farmers that work together with scientists or social movements and therefore are often familiar with the term, but rarely use it.

# 3. CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY

## 3.1. EDUCATION AND TRAINING

<figure><img src="image_105.png" /></figure>

Education in the broad field of agroecology is fragmented in Austria and rarely exists under that name. A major focus remains on organic agriculture, which can be explained by its historical development in the country. Key informants mentioned courses and trainings related to agroecology from different organisations, movements, schools and universities:

* The 'Bioschule Schlägl' (organic school Schlägl; see initiative description – part 3.1) provides education on organic farming to 14 to 17-year-olds students and adults (see initiative description - part 3).

* The 'Ländliches Fortbildungsinstitut Rural Education Institute' (LFI – Rural Education Institute) regroups all education opportunities for adults in rural Austria. Trainings on organic farming, biodiversity and direct marketing can be found.

* The 'Permakultur Akademie im Alpenraum' (permaculture academy; see initiative description – part 3.1) provides education on permaculture.

* The University of Life Science (BOKU) in Vienna offers many courses related to the topic of agroecology and a masters' degree on Organic Agricultural Systems and Agroecology.

* Agricultural and regional sociology are taught at the University of Innsbruck.

Finally, different associations offer educational courses, for example BioAustria has trainings for farmers on many topics<fnref n="12" /> including nature conservation, low input dairy farming, and soil fertility. The 'Bodenpraktiker' course focuses on soil health teaching how to create fertile soils, by covering topics such as soil formation and structure, nutrient mobilisation, cover crops, weed control and composting (see previous mapping project: Agroecology Europe 2020). The network of farmers and advisors called the 'Humus Bewegung' also offers courses on regenerative farming¹³.

<footnote n="12">¹² https://www.bio-austria.at/bio-bauern/beratung/bildungsangebote/ - ¹³ https://www.humusbewegung.at/veranstaltungen/bodenkurs-im-gr%C3%BCnen</footnote>
## 3.2. LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_106.png" /></figure>

According to interviewees (AUT-KI-6 & AUT-KI-7, Table 1), living labs in agriculture seem to be a recent concept that is still rarely used in Austria. In fact, most key informants could not name any, and most of agroecological living labs are often recent initiatives. Two living labs mentioned were the Grand Farm (demonstration activity started in 2018, see initiative description – part 3.2), and the long-term ecological research experiments (see initiative description – part 3.2) of the AGES (Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety). Representatives from the two living labs stated that they link farmers to researchers, putting research experiments in a real-world context permitting innovation. Another aspect is sharing of knowledge; many initiatives but especially living labs aim to co-create knowledge and transmit it to other practitioners.

## 3.3. MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_107.png" /></figure>

The concept of agroecology has been used by different movements in Austria, even if the term itself is not always explicitly used. Most movements link agroecology to socially fair and sustainable production. The ÖBV-via Campesina Austria¹⁴ and nyéléni Austria¹⁵ focus on food sovereignty (see initiative description – part 3.3) and community supported agriculture (CSA, Solidarische Landwirtschaft – solidarity farming). Over 40 initiatives of CSA have been listed in Austria¹⁶. FIAN Austria (FoodFirst Information and Action Network) has created a document on agroecology (FIAN Österreich 2017) for decision-makers and Austrian stakeholders who help shaping the process of change within food and agricultural policy.

Another association mentioned by key informants was the 'Boden.Leben' association (soil. life), promoting practice-oriented research and farmer-to-farmer knowledge exchange mainly on soil protection. The association 'Sezioneri' (seasonal workers), advocating for the rights of agricultural workers in Austria, is also an example of an initiative that could be considered as agroecological.

A further type of movement is the emergence of food policy councils aiming to involve citizen in decision-making processes in food systems (Sieveking 2019), creating a new appreciation for food and its producers, promoting local, sustainable and fair food supply. A map of different food councils in Austria and other European countries has been established¹⁷. Food councils follow many agroecological principles such as recycling (food waste), co-creation of knowledge, social values and diets, connectivity and participation (for principles see HLPE 2019; Wezel et al. 2020). Their work relies on volunteers and their actions are limited by the lack of recognition and financial support by governments. The description of the Vienna Food Policy Council is described below (initiative description – part 3.3).

Different associations like BioAustria (representing two thirds of all organic farmers in Austria), Demeter and Bioland established guidelines going beyond the EU organic farming regulations (AUT-KI-1, AUT-KI-2, AUT-KI-6 & AUT-KI-7, Table 1). For example, all different productions of a farm need to be organic to have the BioAustria label, other major differences to the EU guidelines are on animal welfare requirements. There are also requirements for packaging, horticultural production and communication and education that are not mentioned in the EU regulations. These guidelines are adapted regularly with the involvement of farmers, advisors and experts (proposal, discussions, final vote). While these additional guidelines do not use the term agroecology, organic farming is understood as its inventors, in a systems approach, meaning that the values and ideas behind it are completely compatible with agroecology.

<footnote n="6">⁶ https://www.italy-albania-montenegro.eu/fila-living-labs-cooperation-and-technology-transfer-in-the-agri-food-sector</footnote>
## 3.4. PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_108.png" /></figure>

In Austria, some associations like BioAustria, Demeter, Bioland, and Boden. Leben are actively promoting promote exchanges on practices, linking farmers, and offering courses on specific practices. Different agroecological practices are implemented in Austria according to key informants: crop rotation, organic farming, flower meadows, flower strips, traditional old species and adapted cultivars, intercropping, agroforestry, drip irrigation, direct seeding, cover crops, and reduced or no tillage. While some of these are identified agroecological practices (Wezel et al. 2014), some of them, for example organic farming, refer to a production system including a series of different practices. Others like flower strips are linked to an agri-environmental measure, which, in case it is used to support ecosystem services, is an agroecological practice.

Summarising and assessing the main practices at the country level has not yet been carried out. Nevertheless, regional differences can already be mentioned. Two regions in Austria are labelled organic model regions: the 'Ökoregion Kaindorf' (case study in the UNISECO project¹⁸) and the 'BioRegion Mühlviertel'¹⁹. These regions have a high percentage of organic farms and aim to develop sustainable practices throughout the territory linking different stakeholders, creating regional value chains, and raising awareness of inhabitants through events and workshops.

## 3.5. SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_109.png" /></figure>

The scientific aspect of agroecology encompasses a multitude of subjects and is often fragmented in different research areas in Austria. Key informants named three universities: 'Universität für Bodenkultur' (BOKU), 'Universität Innsbruck' and 'Universität Wien' researching on agroecology related topics. The BOKU has a department on sustainable agricultural systems with a specific division on organic farming (IFÖL). The 'Universität Innsbruck' has a research group called 'Agrar- und Regionalsoziologie' (agricultural and regional sociology) in the institute of sociology, working in the field of rural development and on food systems. At the 'Universität Wien', the division of terrestrial ecosystem research (TER²⁰) as well as the department of Botany and Biodiversity research at the 'Universität Wien' are doing relevant research regarding environmental issues such as land-use change and soil role in food security.

Four research infrastructures were identified: 'Bioforschung Austria'²¹, HBLFA Raumberg-Grumpenstein²² (Higher Federal Teaching and Research Institute for Agriculture), AGES²³ (Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety) and FiBL²⁴ (Research Institute of Organic Agriculture). The research done by the 'Bioforschung Austria' and the FiBL focuses on organic farming. The HBLFA has a research institute on organic farming and livestock biodiversity. The AGES mainly deals with the research topics of sustainable plant production, agroecology and biodiversity, pathogens and allergens in and on plants and plant products, animal nutrition and feed as well as foodborne diseases, zoonoses, and bee protection.

<footnote n="6">⁶ https://www.italy-albania-montenegro.eu/fila-living-labs-cooperation-and-technology-transfer-in-the-agri-food-sector</footnote>
## 4. AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES

<table><caption>**Table 2:** An overview about initiatives, cases and examples described and analysed.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE N°</th><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE NAME</th><th rowspan="2">SCALE</th><th rowspan="2">TYPE OF STRUCTURE</th><th rowspan="2">AIM</th><th colspan="5">ACTIVITY CATEGORIES</th></tr><tr><th>EDUCATION</th><th>LIVING LAB</th><th>MOVEMENT</th><th>PRACTICE</th><th>SCIENCE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>Permaculture academy<br>Permakultur Akademie</td><td>National</td><td>Association</td><td>Teaching permaculture</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Biodiversity monitoring with farmers<br>Biodiversitätsmonitoring mit LandwirtInnen</td><td>National</td><td>Association</td><td>Farmers monitoring biodiversity in agricultural landscapes, changing practices to promote biodiversity</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Organic school Schlägl<br>Bioschule Schlägl</td><td>Local</td><td>School</td><td>Capacity building</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Grand Farm</td><td>Local</td><td>Farm</td><td>Innovations along three themes: soil health, agroforestry, market gardening</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>LTER - long term field experiments</td><td>National</td><td>Research infrastructure</td><td>Long term ecological research plots</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Field - association of the use of unused<br>Verein zur Nutzung von Ungenutztem</td><td>Local</td><td>Association</td><td>Reducing food waste by transforming unsold food</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Arche Noah</td><td>International</td><td>NGO</td><td>Preservation and development of the diversity of cultivated plants</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Vienna Food Policy Council<br>Ernährungsrat Wien</td><td>Local/ National</td><td>NGO</td><td>Relocating - food system and decision making processes in Vienna</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>ENP - Result oriented nature conservation planning<br>Ergebnisorientierter Naturschutzplan</td><td>National</td><td>-</td><td>Result based nature conservation planning</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_110.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_111.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_112.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_113.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_114.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_115.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_116.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_117.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_118.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_119.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_120.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_121.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_122.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_123.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_124.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 3:** Additional initiatives, cases and examples in the country - not included in this report.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE NAME</th><th rowspan="2">SCALE</th><th rowspan="2">TYPE OF STRUCTURE</th><th rowspan="2">AIM</th><th colspan="5">ACTIVITY CATEGORIES</th></tr><tr><th>EDUCATION</th><th>LIVING LAB</th><th>MOVEMENT</th><th>PRACTICE</th><th>SCIENCE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Zerfuchs</td><td>Local</td><td>Farm (CSA)</td><td>Provide sustainable food to local community</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Krautwerk</td><td>Local</td><td>Farm</td><td>Preserve old, traditional plant varieties and cultivation techniques</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>ÖBV Via Campesina Austria</td><td>National</td><td>Association</td><td>Stand for specific interests and needs of mountain farmers in Austria</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Nyéléni Austria</td><td>National</td><td>Network</td><td>Food sovereignty</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Boden praktiker</td><td>National</td><td>Traineeship of BioAustria</td><td>Trainings on soil health</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Agricultural and regional sociology<br>Agrar und Regionalsoziologie</td><td>-</td><td>Research group at University of Insbruck</td><td>Study rural development, society and agriculture, food politics</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Hay milk</td><td>Local</td><td>Farmers network</td><td>Hay milk production, maintain traditional multifunctional systems</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Food council<br>Innsbruck<br>Ernährungsrat Innsbruck</td><td>Local</td><td>Association</td><td>Develop a regional, fair and ecological food supply in Innsbruck</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Humus academy – eco-region Kaindorf<br>HumusAkademie Ökoregion Kaindorf</td><td>Regional</td><td>Association</td><td>Training in humus build-up and sustainability</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Circular Vienna</td><td>Local</td><td>Association</td><td>Develop circular economy in Vienna – regenerate, reinvest, reuse</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>LIVERUR - Südburgenland</td><td>Regional</td><td>H2020 EU project</td><td>Promote circular economy</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Village university, education for everyone<br>everywhere<br>DorfUni.at, Bildung für Alle Allerorts</td><td>National</td><td>Open community of people and institutions</td><td>Virtual academy for sustainable development</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_125.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_126.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_127.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_128.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_129.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_130.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_131.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_132.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_133.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_134.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_135.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_136.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_137.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_138.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_139.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_140.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_141.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

INITIATIVE N°1 – BIODIVERSITY MONITORING BY FARMERS

# THE PERMACULTURE ACADEMY (PIA)

<figure><img src="image_142.png" /></figure>

PERMAKULTUR-AKADEMIE
IM ALPENRAUM

PERMAKULTUR AKADEMIE

https://www.permakultur-akademie.com/

The Permaculture Academy has been teaching permaculture for almost 20 years, in all of Austria to all age students (18-70+). Inspired by Bill Mollisons categories of permaculture and the linked 12 principles (Mollison and Slay 2013), the trainings focus on three dimensions: ecology, people's need of food, and social connections (economy without money, cooperation, individuals, society, and nature should profit from these connections). The aim is to train people in reading landscapes and being able to plan accordingly. The academy is managed by the association E.R.D.E (Österreichisches Institut für Angewandte Ökopädagogik - Austrian Institute for Applied Ecological Education) and the "Plantago-Verein zur Förderung von permakulturellem Wissen und Handeln".

## KEY FEATURES

* **Type of education and training:** lectures and practice

* **Main topic:** permaculture

* **Training duration:** 88 hours (basic training)

* **Type of legal entity:** non-profit association

* **Accessible to:** everyone (18 - 70+ years olds)

The training consists of lectures, practice and guided tours where the courses take place. A basic training in permaculture (88 hours over 9 week-ends, proposed 3 to 4 times/year) comprises 4 modules with a first introduction to permaculture:

1. Self-sufficiency (e.g. food, clothing...),

2. Living and constructing (work with natural, environmentally compatible construction elements, reduced energy inputs),

3. Social permaculture (exchange rings, local currency), and

4. Agriculture (alternatives for cultivation, for animal husbandry and for forestry).

The basic training presents the theory hence the modules 1-4 can be taken in any order once the introduction is completed. This can be followed by specific courses on soil analysis, composting, soil structure, agroforestry, mixed cropping, woodland garden, and/or building solar cookers. The basic training is not mandatory for the specific courses. Overall, 70 courses are proposed to provide a complete overview on permaculture. Around 15-18 people follow a cycle of the basic training per year and a certificate is provided after completion (almost 600 certificates have been given so far). Trainings are open to everyone, and furthermore supported and recognised by some employment agencies for unemployed individuals. The academy also accompanies students to obtain the Diploma of Applied Permaculture Design.

The ideas behind the concept of agroecology are used in most courses, even though the term itself is not always mentioned because the emphasis lays on permaculture. Soil restoration, closing (nutrient) cycles, preservation of seeds, and building competencies and skills are at the core of the proposed trainings.
A partner of PIA is the winter school Ulten in Italy, where the training is more developed, as it is promoted by the state which is not the case in Austria, and participants need to pay for their participation.

The training is not recognised in Austria as a skilled occupation, it is considered as a leisure activity. Future objectives are the further development of training options, increasing the recognition of permaculture, convincing more farmers to implement permaculture, and cooperating with more training facilities throughout Europe.

<figure><img src="image_143.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 1:** Three illustration of steps to obtain the Diploma of Applied Permaculture Design (planning, designing, setting up, developing and maintaining), which consists of creating at least ten-self-chosen, real-world permaculture projects. Source: Ortner PIA.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The permaculture academy in Austria proposes a high variety of courses on permaculture. A holistic view is applied to the concept of permaculture and the main aim is that students develop skills to implement permaculture in any place. Through lectures and connected experiential learning the PIA offers a multidisciplinary intergenerational learning experience.
<figure><img src="image_144.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_145.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_146.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_147.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_148.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

BIODIVERSITÄTSMONITORING MIT
LANDWIRTINNEN
www.biodiversitaetsmonitoring.at

INITIATIVE N°2 – BIODIVERSITY MONITORING BY FARMERS

# BIODIVERSITY MONITORING BY FARMERS

The Biodiversitätsmonitoring mit LandwirtInnen (biodiversity monitoring by farmers) is an education project aiming to raise farmers' awareness of biodiversity, with a focus on extensive grassland. The pilot project started in 2007, based on the results of the scientific research project MOBI-E, which proposed to integrate farmers in biodiversity monitoring projects as those represent the main stakeholders when considering land use management. The project helps farmers to monitor biodiversity on their land through the observation of indicator species, showing what species can be found and the relationship between management and occurrence of certain rare species. The project executing organisation is

the ÖKL (Österreichisches Kuratorium für Landtechnik und Landentwicklung - Austrian board of trustees for agricultural engineering and rural development), a non-profit association active throughout Austria for adult education and further training in the agricultural sector.

The project started with 50 farmers observing only plant species. It was successively expanded and there are now 700 farmers involved for monitoring plant and animal species. The monitoring is on a voluntary basis, any farmer can take part as long as their agricultural operation involve pastures or meadows which are mowed maximum twice a year or grazed extensively. Once a farmer is registered, an expert (ecologist, biologist or zoologist) visits the farm and observes with the farmer the existing biodiversity, followed by determining species and explaining causal relationships (species occurrence linked to practice). This usually lasts half a day and ends with a monitoring basis on maximum three plots per farm, which represents the core of the educational training. The first visit of the farm is currently done by about 10 experts from the ÖKOTeam (private Institute for Zoology in Graz). Overall, there are 1000 plots that are monitored with a standardised survey, where at least one analysis is done every year. Indicator species are counted and reported, enabling farmers to see if species richness and diversity is stable. They can link the results to their management of the land. Many farmers also monitor other non-indicator species they are attached to, like swallows, enabling ecologist to make a qualitative analysis. For each farm, the farmer has access to the data collected (monitoring and management details) and they can see the differences from year to year and link it to their practice.

Various information events are organised in the different regions on specific themes, like insect-friendly mowing techniques. The results of the monitoring analysis in the regions are also shared in these events.

Per regions, there are 1-2 representative farmers ("Projektvertreter") who organise events on their farms and visit schools to raise awareness and educate other farmers and students. The programme is determined with the class teacher, and it often consists of two theoretical hours on biodiversity and agriculture followed by an excursion to a grassland, where species are determined and monitored. The project works regularly and intensively with 15 agricultural schools, and with other schools on an irregular basis.

## KEY FEATURES

* **Type of education and training:** training of farmers and school visits on the field

* **Main topic:** biodiversity monitoring on extensively used grassland

* **Type of legal entity:** non profit association

* **Accessible to:** farmers
In Austria, funding for farmers for the maintenance of extensive grassland is regulated through the Austrian rural development programme of the ministry of agriculture, regions and tourism (BMLRT, Bildungsmaßnahme – educational measure and Naturschutzmaßnahme – nature conservation measure - for the monitoring).

The project's success is linked to farmers' involvement and motivation to protect biodiversity. An objective is to continue the close cooperation between farmers and ecologists and expand the monitoring from grassland to fields, field margins, flower strips, and fallow fields, to demonstrating the purpose of such structures. The initiative evolves and is looking for alternative approaches to keep a close contact with the farmers and encourage them to report and collect data, which can sometimes be difficult and demands time and adequate funding.

<figure><img src="image_149.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 2:** (Left) Observations are made on the development of around 200 plant and 50 animal species on Austrian meadows and alpine pastures. Source: https://www.biodiversitaetsmonitoring.at/wiesen-und-almen. (Right) Newcomers get a complete free project folder with guides and species profiles of plants and animals observed in the project. Source: https://www.biodiversitaetsmonitoring.at/neueinsteiger.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The educational project promotes farmers' endeavour to actively protect biodiversity and change or adapt practices to conserve different indicator species on the farms. The standardised process and follow-up requirement gives farmers a concrete acknowledgement of their engagement. Indeed, having stable indicator species numbers and monitoring specific species (emotional link to biodiversity) provides pride and a sense of accomplishment. Funding programmes exist for education to raise awareness on the topic of biodiversity which are important to implement good practices. The initiative also covers the education of agricultural students and future actors in the agricultural sector.
<figure><img src="image_150.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_151.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_152.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_153.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_154.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

INITIATIVE N°3 – BIOSCHULE SCHLÄGL

ORGANIC SCHOOL
SCHLÄGL

The Bioschule Schlägl (organic school Schlägl) is located in Upper Austria in the Mühlviertel, and was created in 2002. Before, there was already an agricultural school since 1924. The school educates agricultural workers with a focus on organic farming. Additionally, 14-17 years old students and adults can also follow a curriculum. A specific teaching system was implemented based on the different seasons to link theory with practice. The knowledge is conveyed in different interdisciplinary modules, with the aim to give students a comprehensive overview of organic farming.

The Bioschule Schlägl is the only agricultural school, financed by the Upper Austria region, where the focus is solely on organic farming in Austria. However, a high school graduation at the school is not yet established.

The school has about 180 to 200 students and about 23 permanent teachers which is strongly anchored in the region. The completion of the three years gives apprenticeship credits (which are equivalent to the first apprenticeship year). A third of the classes are practical and consist of group work and excursions in the region. The school has a few plots where experiments are conducted. Near the school there are 2 partner farms (Betrieb Mandel, Betrieb Höglinger) where practical training takes place. During holidays, students need to do a 14-day internship at an organic farm, while between the second and third year a three-month internship must be done (which can be at non-organic farm and outside of Austria). The training for adults consists of 500 hours with 140 hours of practice, distributed in a year. In the last decade, the demand and interest have highly increased, resulting in an expansion of the courses offered from only evening classes to additional day courses for adults. Around 60 to 90 adults are trained every year, which many come from different Austrian regions or from Germany and aim to change career.

At the school's experimental station (Biokompetenzzentrum), created in 2011 and run by the school and FiBL, different experiments take place to answer region specific questions, such as on grain breeding, corn cultivation in organic farms, and consequences of climate change. There are no specific lectures on organic farming or agroecology because it is a teaching principle and therefore integrated in every lecture. Ethical, economic, and social aspects as well as circularity are also addressed throughout the teaching modules.

The Bioschule is involved in the Interreg research and innovation project, aiming to develop and establish cross-border educational programme with the Kringell Ökoakademie (Bavaria, Germany), with the goal to offer diverse training opportunities in organic farming.

<figure><img src="image_155.png" /></figure>

BIOSCHULE
SCHLÄGL

BIOSCHULE SCHLÄGL

https://www.bioschule.at/

KEY FEATURES

* **Type of education and training:** training for agricultural workers

* **Main topic:** organic farming

* **Training duration:** 3 years (students) or 550 hours (adults)

* **Type of legal entity:** public school

* **Accessible to:** students (14-17 years old) and adults
<figure><img src="image_156.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 3:** The entrance of the organic school Schlägl. Source: Bioschule Schlägl.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The Bioschool Schlägl provides a transdisciplinary education in organic farming and is currently the only school in Austria solely focusing on organic farming. The school is not only training 14-17 year-olds to become agricultural skilled workers, but adults can also follow a specific training. Action learning is a key characteristic of the educational programme.
<figure><img src="image_157.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_158.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_159.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_160.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_161.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_162.png" /></figure>

INITIATIVE N°4 – GRAND FARM

GRAND FARM

Innovation • Forschung • Demonstration

https://grandfarm.at

GRAND FARM

The Grand Farm is located in eastern Austria (about 40 km NW from Vienna) and run by the Grand family for generations. 6 people are employed on the farm (4 full labour equivalents) and 1-3 interns are working during the growing season.

Since 2006, it is certified organic and no ploughing has been implemented in the last 25 years. In 2018, the Grand Farm became a demonstration farm, with tight cooperation between science and research institutes. Through its engagement and targets, this initiative contributes to 11 of the 17 SDGs, with main goal is to search for sustainable solutions and a systemic approach, considering for example diversity and yield jointly.

KEY FEATURES

* Main topics: agroecological practices and production

* Founded in: 2018

* Type of organisation supporting the living lab: farm

* Type of actors involved: farmers and scientists

* Scale of the living lab: regional

Three main themes are studied at the Grand Farm:

1. Soil health - Trial and evaluation of different measures that promote soil health are executed. Experiments are carried out with the focus on reduced tillage and no-till, crop rotation, greening management and seed mixtures.

2. Agroforestry - Over 5000 trees and bushes were planted to serve as hedges, with two main purposes, protecting the climate by actively capturing CO2 and slowing the effect of wind hence, it reduces the evaporation in adjacent fields. It is also a habitat for important biodiversity and provides goods (wood, fruits, etc.).

3. Market gardening - The "Grand Garten" of 1 ha, where no tractors are used, aims to produce organic vegetables for the region (vegetable boxes and gastronomy). Further aspects include the contribution to climate mitigation and adaptation, the increase of species diversity (nesting possibility and food provisioning for insects, birds, bats), and the cultivation of rare vegetables and ancient species.

The Grand Farm is currently involved in three different researches or training projects:

* trAEce (https://traece.eu/), is aiming to provide agroecological vocational training for farmers,

* BEST4SOIL (https://www.best4soil.eu/), a network of practitioners to share knowledge on prevention and reduction of soil borne diseases.

* The global network of lighthouse farms (https://www.lighthousefarmnetwork.com/), is aiming to produce sustainably and render ecosystem services.

The concept of agroecology (and organic farming) is implemented at the Grand Farm. The agroecological principles of soil health, input reduction, economic diversification, synergy and co-creation of knowledge, connectivity and participation are followed.
The initiative is considered as a living lab as it integrates different on-farm trials, horizontal sharing of knowledge with farmers in the region and the different networks it is involved in. The Grand farm aims to demonstrate the feasibility of agroecology, the economic benefits, and share this knowledge to convince farmers to transition towards sustainable production and marketing.

<figure><img src="image_163.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 4:** Sharing of knowledge and demonstration with farmers in the region (left) buckwheat field (right).
Source: Alfred Grand, GRAND Farm (Austria).</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_164.png" /></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The Grand Farm is exemplary on multiple levels. It is following many agroecological principles which include not only the sustainable production of food, but also social aspects like knowledge sharing and encouraging participation of farmers. The systemic approach is central to the development of the farm. The close connections to different European projects linking scientists and farmers show the motivation to innovate, change practices, and share experiences.

## POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_165.png" /></figure>

**NATURAL RESOURCES AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT:**

The Grand farm has been implementing many agroecological practices (no ploughing, agroforestry, organic fertilisation...) and aims to protect biodiversity.

<figure><img src="image_166.png" /></figure>

**SUSTAINABLE AND FAIR ECONOMICS:** The initiative helps the local economy of the region, by providing job opportunities. The farm is economically profitable through its different income sources.

<figure><img src="image_167.png" /></figure>

**TRADITIONAL FOOD AND HERITAGE CONSERVATION:** In the Grand Garten, traditional and rare vegetables are cultivated. Promoting local knowledge is an important motivation for the famer.
<figure><img src="image_168.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_169.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_170.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_171.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_172.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_173.png" /></figure>

https://www.ages.at/umwelt/boden

INITIATIVE N°5 – LONG-TERM ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH-AGES

# LONG-TERM ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH-AGES

The long-term ecological research (LTER) done by the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES) involves scientists and farmers in different standardised field management experiments. The AGES was founded in 2002 and owned by the state of Austria. It aims to guarantee food safety, food security, and consumer protection.

Many different experiments are conducted under the agroecology topic regarding soil protection, groundwater protection, maintaining biodiversity, sustainable plant production, plant protection and animal feeding, and climate protection and adaptation. Current experiments are on the comparison of standard management in a field with improved management, for example mineral fertilisation and organic fertilisation (with different composites) and its effects on soil chemical, physical and biological properties (e.g., pH value and nutrient level measures). The impact on yield is also analysed in those experiments. The long-term use of compost was shown to improve yield and humus content (Kurzemann et al. 2020).

The AGES has experimental stations all over Austria (in upper Austria, lower Austria, Kärnten, Styria, Alpenvorland, Marchfeld) where regular field days are held to explain and show results. The involvement of farmers is considered as indispensable for innovating and implementing adapted practices.

Three (Rottenhaus/Grabenegg, Fuchsenbigl, Lysimeter Station AGES VIENNA) of the 38 LTER Sites (Mirtl 2010) listed by the Austrian Long-Term Ecosystem Research Network, are managed by the AGES. The LTER-Austria focuses on three research areas: process-oriented ecosystem research, biodiversity and nature conservation research and socio-ecological research.

The AGES is part of the b5-corporate soil competence network (https://www.ages.at/en/topics/environment/soil/partner-und-netzwerke/b5-corporate-soil-competence), a consortium of five institutions linking experts in soil science, protection and analytics. The AGES is a partner in the MINAGRIS project (https://www.minagris.eu/) aiming to assess the impact of micro plastic in agricultural soils.

## KEY FEATURES

* Main topic: agroecological practice

* Founded in: 2002

* Type of organisation supporting the living lab: research infrastructure and living lab

* Type of actors involved: scientists and farmers

* Scale of the living lab: national

<figure><img src="image_174.png" /><figcaption>Picture 5: Soil sample shown by participant. Copyright reserved.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_175.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 6:** Illustration of planting by participant. Source: Karolina Grabowska - https://www.pexels.com.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The AGES does long term ecological experiments to collect a variety of data on different practices all over Austria. The experiments are focusing on many different topics related to agroecology and giving insights on the effects of different practices on biodiversity and soil health.

### POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_176.png" /></figure>

**NATURAL RESOURCES AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT:**

The initiative tests different techniques that favour soil protection, promote efficient water management, maintaining biodiversity, sustainable plant production, plant protection and animal feeding, and climate protection and adaptation.

### LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_177.png" /></figure>

**COOPERATION:** There is limited co-design with the farmers in the experiments.
<figure><img src="image_178.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_179.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_180.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_181.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_182.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_183.png" /></figure>

VEREIN zur Nutzung von Ungenutztem

http://feld-verein.at/

INITIATIVE N°6 – FELD

# FELD – VEREIN ZUR NUTZUNG VON UNGENUTZTEM

The association feld aims to reduce food waste by transforming unsold vegetables (literal translation: association to use the unused). Around 30 members from civil society are involved in the association created in 2014 in Innsbruck. The association started with the aim to deal with the general topic of unused resources, the focus on vegetables was coincidental and linked to early and easy contact with vegetable producers around Innsbruck. Two years ago, the cooperative 'feld:schafft' was created and is in charge of catering and educational projects. The cooperative consists of 20 long-term members, such as the association feld and the Lebenshilfe (an association that stands up for the interests of people with intellectual disabilities or with learning difficulties).

## KEY FEATURES

* Main goal: reduce food waste

* Founded in: 2014

* Type of organisation: association

* Farming sectors: market gardening

* Scale of the organisation: local

The vegetables come currently from 5-6 cooperating farmers, private gardeners, and community gardens. A cooperation with the city has been established to harvest fruit trees, while a contract with a supermarket provides other food sources. Every 1-2 month 60-80 kg of vegetables are picked up and transformed to food. A key purpose is to reduce waste not just at the production level but also after the transformation of products. All the products sold by feld are packaged in reusable glass containers or delivered in the cooking pot. The initiative follows a zero waste objective. Material needed for transportation are built and tinkered to avoid buying new one. In the city, food is transported with cargo bikes and trailers. The initiative does not receive regular subsidies, but the cooperative received funding for specific projects from the city (education projects and rebuilding the kitchen). The transformed products, the catering, and soup production are sold in a shop at prices that compensate the production and permits to give a part-time salary to 4 people.

In addition, education programmes have been developed for schools adapted to the student (ages 7-10, 11-14, and >14). It usually consists of excursions and coupled project hours, mainly on food supply, field diversity, from field to kitchen, seasonality, vegetable origins, and food waste.

The initiative contributes to agroecology in different ways: it aspires to fully use what is produced, to deviate from norms and quality standards, and to promote real quality (e.g. it does not make any sense to throw away a split carrot). The initiative has a comprehensive practical approach, where food, the person who produced and transformed it, and the soil is fully appreciated. The initiative is connected to other initiatives in Tirol and Austria, who are also working on reducing waste. It is also increasingly recognised by stakeholders in universities, chambers of agriculture and closely linked to the food policy council Innsbruck.

feld aims to continue its work locally, as all of their actions remain in a diameter of 20 km, and help another similar initiatives to emerge and become successful.
<figure><img src="image_184.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_185.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 7:** The pictures show examples of the diversity of carrots (variety and form), used by feld to raise awareness. Reducing food waste means not throwing away edible food just because it deviates from the set standard.
Source: feld-Verein.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

Feld aims to transform the food system by giving a second life to food that would otherwise be thrown away. Raising awareness through actions and education projects is another objective of the initiative. Through its engagement, the association shows that there are many possibilities to reduce waste and appreciate food while rightly considering the value of nature and every person involved in the food chain.

## POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_186.png" /></figure>

**ENERGY AND WASTE MANAGEMENT:**

The initiative is devoted to the reduction of food waste and more generally to the use of unused resources, and to transform in different types of food (soup, chutneys,...).

<figure><img src="image_187.png" /></figure>

**COOPERATION:** Through its engagement,

the association with other organisations, have convinced the state of Tirol to create a coordinator position working on nutrition. This represents a real success and is essential to have a global approach and change the current food system. The association is helping other initiatives to develop.

<figure><img src="image_188.png" /></figure>

**EDUCATION:** The cooperative

feld:schafft is organising courses in different schools including excursions, raising awareness and food appreciation. The initiative is also convincing farmers that their complete production has value, spoiled or vegetables outside the norms have a nutritious value.

## LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_189.png" /></figure>

**NATURAL RESOURCES AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT:**

The initiative does not specifically promote agroecological practices like improving soil fertility for example. The association members are aware that their action do not favour a more sustainable practice at the field level.

<figure><img src="image_190.png" /></figure>

**COMMERCIALISATION IS LOCAL,**

**FAIR AND/OR COLLECTIVE:** The lack of

funding represents a clear limit, indeed the initiatives is doing an essential work is not enough recognised and does not fit criteria to get subsidy or other funding. The impact and amount of food transformed depends on financial means.
<figure><img src="image_191.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_192.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_193.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_194.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_195.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_196.png" /></figure>

ARCHE NOAH

https://www.arche-noah.at/

INITIATIVE N°7 – ARCHE NOAH

ARCHE NOAH

ARCHE NOAH is a non-profit association for the preservation and further development of crop diversity. The organisation was created in 1989, has about 17 000 members (mainly in Austria and some in other countries), and around 40 employees. ARCHE NOAH has an organic seed collection consisting of cultivated plants, comprising 5500 varieties. It is one of the largest private collections in Europe. Their aim is to make organic seeds obtainable for farmers especially the ones that are not available in the European seed market anymore. The seeds are sold all over the world. They work with different companies and partner farms to get the diversity of cultivated plants back into the breadth.

The association has a political department focusing on the framework for crop diversity, they are actively committed to change laws and patent practices. A success was the rejection of the new EU seed law in 2014, which would have "threatened the survival of local varieties, ignore consumers' freedom of choice, and advanced the interests of agribusiness". ARCHE NOAH also organises international workshops on seed policy.

A wide range of educational opportunities such as workshops, courses, and lectures are proposed by the initiative on different themes from urban gardening and self-sufficiency to advanced training on plant breeding. The educational aspects are key to share knowledge on the diversity of cultivated plants.

ARCHE NOAH is financed by the membership fees, donations, sales of seeds and plants, and funding from specific projects. The association is currently involved in the LEADER (vegetable rarities) project from the Kamptal, in Schiltern, for advocating diverse vegetable cultivation, regional marketing, and seed sovereignty in the Kamptal region. Together with producers and restaurant owners, they are working on sustainable and diverse vegetable growing with short supply chains. Another current project is participative plant breeding of tomatoes (Bauernparadeiser-Projekt): farmers are breeding adapted varieties prioritising taste and plant health.

The association is well connected to similar initiatives; they have been working very closely with ProSpezieRara in the last decades. They are collaborating with different gene banks, BioAustria, BOKU, and the horticultural school in Schönbrunn (HBLFA) on many projects.

KEY FEATURES

* **Main goal:** preservation of seed diversity

* **Founded in:** 1989

* **Type of organisation:** non-profit association

* **Farming sectors:** market gardening – mainly vegetables seeds

* **Scale of the organisation:** national and international
<figure><img src="image_197.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_198.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 8:** "Fruits of diversity" (left) – Source: ARCHE NOAH Früchte der Vielfalt; "Diversity of beans" (right) – Source: ARCHE NOAH Bohnenvielfalt.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The ARCHE NOAH aims to preserve vegetable crop diversity by collecting traditional and rare crops or crop variety seeds and making them available to farmers and civil society. The initiative is over 30 years old and has been successful in influencing different political decisions and to ensure that seeds remain available to all. The ARCHE NOAH also provides education opportunities on many different topics related to agroecology.

### POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_199.png" /></figure>

**HEALTH:** The initiative produces and sells organic certified seeds.

<figure><img src="image_200.png" /></figure>

**TRADITIONAL FOOD AND HERITAGE CONSERVATION:** ARCHE NOAH promotes the breeding of traditional and rare crops and crop variety seeds. Through the large seed collections, seeds are made available to everyone.

<figure><img src="image_201.png" /></figure>

**EDUCATION:** Training and accompaniment is an important part of the initiative's objectives. This is done through a series of workshops and lectures on agroecology related topics.

### LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_202.png" /></figure>

**GOVERNANCE:** An external challenge remains the European regulations on seeds (selling non-classified seeds) and the important influence of the agri-business lobby for patents.
<figure><img src="image_203.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_204.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_205.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_206.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_207.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

INITIATIVE N°8 – VIENNA FOOD POLICY COUNCIL

# VIENNA FOOD POLICY COUNCIL

The Ernährungsrat Wien (Vienna Food Policy Council, Vienna FPC) aims to connect, understand, and change the Viennese food system. Their motto is "networking-understanding-changing". The civil society platform was created in 2018 with around 40 active members.

The initiative wants to relocalise the food system, not just in terms of promoting local food production but also bringing decision making processes to the citizens of Vienna. For this, the initiative is in constant dialogue with the city and political representatives, as policies are often fragmented and do not consider the food system as a whole from production to waste management and health. The members are all volunteers and governance is based on sociocratic principles, meaning that everyone can express their ideas and opinions on specific proposals and decisions are taken in groups.

The Vienna FPC has four different working groups on urban agriculture and spatial planning, alternative market chains, public food procurement, and nutritional awareness-raising and education. Current projects are the development of a food strategy with the environmental department of the city of Vienna. Another project that opened in September 2021 is a 0.35 ha field (called WeltTellerFeld) representing the yearly food consumption per person, with different areas showing the necessary arable land and pasture needed to produce all based food products. This field will give citizens a concrete sense of where their food comes from and what is needed for the production of the food (e.g. on the working conditions or necessity of pollinators). At the heart of the initiative is the idea to consider the food system as a whole, and understand the interconnectedness of every part of the system. Through their action, the members of the Vienna FPC aim to involve all relevant stakeholders from the production, processing, consumption, and disposal of food. Social and cultural norms as well as the environment are recognised as integral parts of this system. This approach is not necessarily labelled as agroecology by the initiative, but it is definitely in complete agreement with its worldview.

Specific projects are getting funded by the city. The commitment of the volunteers makes the work of the Vienna FPC possible. The initiative is actively working to get long-term financing. The Vienna Food Policy Council takes part in annual meetings of all German-speaking (Austria, Germany, and Switzerland) food councils. This event permits the exchange of ideas and sharing of experiences. A lot of initiatives exist in Vienna, therefore, to avoid starting new projects in parallel to other initiatives, collaboration and networking is a major objective for the Vienna FPC. The initiative has well established connections to institutions and organisations as its members have relations to different institutions and organisations like the FiBL and FIAN.

<figure><img src="image_208.png" /></figure>

Ernährungsrat Wien

https://ernaehrungsrat-wien.at/

## KEY FEATURES

* **Main goal:** democratisation and relocatisation of Viennese food system

* **Founded in:** 2018

* **Type of organisation:** association

* **Farming sectors:** all

* **Scale of the organisation:** local
<figure><img src="image_209.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 9:** Members of the Vienna Food Policy Council (left) and the Vienna FPC and cooperation partners present the WeltTellerFeld at a first public event (right). Source: WeltTellerFeld.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_210.png" /></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

This initiative is a civil society platform aiming to design and promote a sustainable food system for Vienna, thereby creating a socially just as well as an ecological resilient food system. An important aspect is the participative objective of the initiative, bringing citizens together to (re)-design the food system. All parts of the food system are considered and the food council intends to be inclusive.

## POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_211.png" /></figure>

**GOVERNANCE:** The main approach of the Vienna FPCs is to involve citizens and create links with all actors of the food chain. This is done through different projects with the aim to design a resilient food system.

<figure><img src="image_212.png" /></figure>

**EDUCATION:** Education is key to raise awareness, the initiative is regularly invited to events and has a working group on the topic. The "WeltTellerFeld" project is a good example on the food councils approach, providing information to everyone.

## LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

<figure><img src="image_213.png" /></figure>

**COOPERATION:** A challenge for the initiative is to reach out to more citizens and local producers and farmers. Most members of the food council have an academic background and don't have many direct contacts to farmers. Another limit is that farmers often don't have the time to go into the city to discuss and collaborate on projects. The initiative is working to diversify its members and cooperate more with local producers. The cooperation with political representative can also be challenging and demands a lot of time and knowledge on how to best approach which actors.

<figure><img src="image_214.png" /></figure>

**COMMERCIALISATION IS LOCAL, FAIR AND/OR COLLECTIVE:** The Vienna FPC aims to create a fair food system, where food is sustainable, healthy and easy to access. In order to achieve this goal, funding is necessary, for the moment all members are doing voluntary work and only specific projects get funded by the city or other organisations. A better recognition of the initiative's values by the city could lead to the creation of a full-time position (or more) and considerably increase the positive impacts.
<figure><img src="image_215.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_216.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_217.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_218.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_219.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

INITIATIVE N°9 – ENP

<figure><img src="image_220.png" /></figure>

ENP

ERGEBNISORIENTIERTER

NATURSCHUTZPLAN

http://www.suske.at/projekte/
alle-projekte/ergebnisorientierter-
vertragsnaturschutz

ENP – RESULT-ORIENTED
NATURE CONSERVATION
PLANNING

The 'Ergebnisorientierter Naturschutzplan' (ENP - result-oriented nature conservation planning) is an agri-environmental measure giving farmers the possibility to determine their own conservation actions to achieve specific results regarding biodiversity and nature conservation. This result-oriented approach changes from the usual list of strict measures that are subsidised (action-oriented approach). In 2012-2013 a first pilot project with 15 farmers was tested to see how this approach works and determine the indicators and criteria that were relevant. This permitted the creation of the measure to be integrated in the nature conservation measure of the ÖPUL (AgrarMarkt Austria 2015) starting from 2015. The project executing organisation is a nature conservation private office called Suske Consulting.

The concrete goals, like creating nesting places for certain
species, are established by an advisor together with the
farmer in a first site inspection step. Then specific control
criteria are explained, enabling the farmer to link their
practice to the expected result (e.g. occurrence of a specific plant linked to late mowing or reduced
mowing frequency). These criteria are then controlled like any measure by an inspection service (AMA
in Austria). In the current phase, 150 farmers take part in the ENP. The area specificities are included
in the criteria, however, certain regions have specific environmental goals or management instructions
for biodiversity and habitat conservation.

The initiative works at the interface of agriculture and ecology and aims to adapt agri-environmental measures, however the word agroecology is not really used. An essential part of the project is networking meetings, were farmers can exchange their experiences and learn from others. A future objective is to increase the number of farmers participating and also to consider soil and climate protection as specific goals. The new version of the measure is being worked out, by BOKU researchers, the chamber of agriculture of lower Austria and Suske Consulting, and should be integrated in the next subsidy period. The initial criteria were determined in the first pilot phase in a learning-by-doing process, with the accumulated experience can be more standardised and regrouped to help advisors. A web application will also be developed allowing farmers to write down their observations and take pictures in the field to facilitate the whole monitoring process.

KEY FEATURES

* Agroecological practices concerned: not specific

* Founded in: 2012

* Leading organisation: Suske Consulting (project funded by EU and the Austrian state)

* Farming sectors concerned:
  grassland and arable land

* **Number of stakeholder** involved: 150 farmers and 12 advisors

* Scale of the initiative:
  national
<figure><img src="image_221.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_222.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 10:** "Heupferd" (left) Source: Katharina Bergmüller; ENP-farmer and advisor (right) Source: Barbara Depisch.</figcaption></figure>

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

Instead of the fixed maintenance and management requirements found in most agri-environmental measures, the result-oriented approach permits farmers to choose their own management to reach defined goals and results. Thus, responsibility and flexibility is given back to farmers. Every farmer learns about their specific field and farm characteristics, and multiple criteria are determined and monitored to give an indication when the target is achieved. This approach has been successful as its flexible premise permits adapted management plans, which is not only attractive to farmers but also promotes innovative practices that help conserving biodiversity and protecting the environment.

### POSITIVE IMPACTS

<figure><img src="image_223.png" /></figure>

**NATURAL RESOURCES AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT:** Through its result oriented approach, the initiative promotes the implementation of agroecological practices, favouring biodiversity conservation and protection of the environment.

<figure><img src="image_224.png" /></figure>

**COOPERATION:** The measure is only feasible with the cooperation of farmers and since its beginning has been tested and adapted, making it an attractive measure. Scientists, advisors and farmers work together to provide an improved measure that will be integrated in the next ÖPUL.

### LIMITATIONS & CHALLENGES

A general limitation with result-oriented measure is that farmers are not remunerated if results are not achieved, for the reasons that farmers are not responsible for (e.g. weather conditions, pest outbreaks).
## 5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE

Despite the word agroecology being rarely named by different stakeholders in Austria, agroecology has been implemented since many years and many different initiatives already exist. The concept of agroecology is closely related to the principles of organic agriculture that are well recognised in Austria, as well as the strong and longer history of organic agriculture in the country. This report gives a non-exhaustive overview of the current state of agroecology, highlighting a selection of initiatives and examples.

Key informants identified different barriers for the development of agroecology. Economic barriers were the first and most mentioned barrier, especially the fact that externalities are not taken into account in the food prices and farmers are not remunerated fairly. Alternative agricultural practices are well accepted and implemented in Austria, when considering the high number of organic farmers compared to other European countries. Current policies were also mentioned as barrier and the influence of agri-businesses on these policies. The ÖPUL was considered by all key informants as a programme promoting agroecology. The third type of barrier is linked to the awareness and education of civil society (and farmers). Some key informants also believed that the biggest barrier is the land use, as it becomes more and more profitable to use the land for energy production instead of food production and land pressure on agricultural land is rising because of urbanisation and artificialisation.

Overcoming these barriers and the current trend of consumers asking for local and sustainable products, accentuated during the COVID-19 pandemic, represent good opportunities to further develop agroecology in Austria. More and more people are aware of the climate change threat and the loss of biodiversity, indicated by a change of consumption habits of some consumers and a readiness to support (organic) farmers. A few ideas for the development of agroecology were raised by key informants, starting with the improvement of the image of agriculture, reconnecting consumers to producers and the need to demonstrate the economic viability of agroecology. A key informant was adamant about the risk to develop agroecology in parallel to organic agriculture, instead of continuing to develop and better organic farming. These two concepts are compatible (Migliorini and Wezel 2017) and at least in Austria, where organic farming has been well established, organic agriculture is still understood as a systemic approach going beyond regulations and prescribed practices.

The different initiatives presented here have different scales and specific aims, which also explain their positive impacts and limitations. All are working towards either sharing knowledge or educating farmers and civil society on topics related to agroecology (organic farming, permaculture, biodiversity conservation, seed preservation, and food waste). Overall, these initiatives are over three years old, active in many networks, linking different stakeholders, and will probably continue to inspire others and contribute to transforming the current food system.
ABBREVIATION

AGES: Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, Agentur für Gesundheit und
Ernährungsicherheit

BMLRT: Ministry of agriculture, regions and tourism, Bundesministerium für Landwirtschaft, Regionen und Tourismus

BOKU: University of Life Science, Universität für Bodenkultur

FiBL: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Forschungsinstitut für biologischen Landbau

FIAN: FoodFirst Information and Action Network

ÖKL: Austrian board of trustees for agricultural engineering and rural development, Österreichisches Kuratorium für Landtechnik und Landentwicklung

ÖPUL: Austrian programme for environmentally friendly agriculture,
Österreichisches Programm für Umweltgerechte Landwirtschaft

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Many thanks go to all the participants of this study, key informants and initiative representatives were essential in the establishment of this document. Additionally, thanks go to Jakob Katzlinger who did the first mapping of Austria and BOKU-students who proposed many other initiatives. Finally, thank you to all the reviewers who helped enrich this document.

This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No101000478.

REFERENCES

AgrarMarkt Austria. 2015. 'Ergebnisorientierter Naturschutzplan. Maßnahmenerläuterungsblatt'. https://www.ama.at/getattachment/84609631-6a37-4596-afe9-f65572e7c50d/MEB_Oepul2015_Ergebnisorientierter_Naturschutzplan_4-0.pdf.

Agroecology Europe. 2020. 'Agroecology Initiatives in Europe'. Corbais, Belgium.
https://www.agroecology-europe.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/AEEU-Mapping-Report-agroecological-practices-November-version.pdf.

BMLRT. 2020. 'Grüner Bericht 2020'. 61. Bundesministerium für Landwirtschaft, Regionen und Tourismus. https://gruenerbericht.at/cm4/jdownload/download/2-gr-bericht-terreich/2167-gb2020.

CERAI. 2019. 'Sistemas Alimentarios Territorializados En España: 100 Iniciativas Locales Para Una Alimentación Responsable y Sostenible.' https://cerai.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/publicaci%C3%B3n_100iniciativasSATenEspa%C3%B1a-CERAI.pdf.

Eichberger, Christian, CI Wolkerstorfer, Stefan Brameshuber, Ingrid Eichberger, Verena Gfrerer, Hemma Gressel, Patrick Gros, et al. 2019. 'Challenges for OEPUL Nature Conservation Measures in Austria and Recommendations for Future Funding Programs from an Ecological Perspective. Herausforderungen Bei ÖPUL-Naturschutz-Maßnahmen Und Naturschutzfachliche Empfehlungen Für Künftige Förderprogramme.' 25 (January): 5-70.

Eurostat. 2019. 'Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery Statistics — 2019 Edition'.
Publications Office of the European Union, Statistical books, . https://doi.
org/10.2785/798761.

FIAN Österreich. 2017. 'Mit Agrarökologie Für Das Recht Auf Nahrung. Vielfalt Gegen Mangel Und Hunger.' https://fianat-live-7318544636224c40bb0b0af5b09-745b6a8.divio-media.net/filer_public/1b/0a/1b0a427c-ff8c-4aa4-8657-85f6d56f38ee/mit-agraroekologie-fuer-das-recht-auf-nahrung.pdf.

Grandl, Isabella, Lukas Weber-Hajszan, and Thomas Neudorfer. 2016. Agrarumweltprogramm ÖPUL 2015 Landwirtschaft, Umwelt und Natur.

HLPE. 2019. 'Agroecological and Other Innovative Approaches for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems That Enhance Food Security and Nutrition, A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome'. 14. http://www.fao.org/cfs/cfs-hlpe/en/.

Kurzemann, Felix R., Ulrich Plieger, Maraike Probst, Heide Spiegel, Taru Sandén, Margarita Ros, and Heribert Insam. 2020. 'Long-Term Fertilisation Affects Soil Microbiota, Improves Yield and Benefits Soil'. Agronomy 10 (11): 1664. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10111664.

Machold, Ingrid, and Michael Groier. 2020. 'Landwirtschaftliche Kleinbetriebe in Österreich zwischen Nachhaltigkeit und Globalisierung' 29: 7. https://doi.org/DOI 10.15203/OEGA_29.22.

Migliorini, Paola, and Alexander Wezel. 2017. 'Converging and Diverging Principles and Practices of Organic Agriculture Regulations and Agroecology. A Review'. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 37 (6): 63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0472-4.

Mirtl, Michael. 2010. LTER-Austria White Paper 'Next Generation LTER' in Österreich: zu Lage und Ausrichtung von prozessorientierter Ökosystemforschung, Biodiversitäts- und Naturschutzforschung sowie sozio-ökologischer Forschung in Österreich.

Mollison, B. C., and Reny Mia Slay. 2013. Introduction to Permaculture.

Moraine, Marc, Sarah Lumbroso, and Xavier Poux. 2016. 'A Comprehensive Outlook on the Diversity of Agroecological Initiatives in Europe, TYFA'. EFNCP, IDDRI. https://www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/import/publications/rapport-tyfa.pdf.

Sieveking, Annelie. 2019. 'Food Policy Councils as Loci for Practising Food Democracy? Insights from the Case of Oldenburg, Germany'. Politics and Governance 7 (4): 48–58. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v7i4.2081.

Steinwidder, Andreas, and Walter Starz. 2020. 'Landwirtschaft 2030 - Herausforderungen für die Biologische Landwirtschaft in Österreich', 6.

Strauss, A, and I Darnhofer. 2015. 'Enabling Diversity: The "Organic Hay Region"', 2.

Wezel, Alexander, Marion Casagrande, Florian Celette, Jean-François Vian, Aurélie Ferrer, and Joséphine Peigné. 2014. 'Agroecological Practices for Sustainable Agriculture. A Review'. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 34 (1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-013-0180-7.

Wezel, Alexander, Barbara Gemmill Herren, Rachel Bezner Kerr, Edmundo Barrios, André Luiz Rodrigues Gonçalves, and Fergus Sinclair. 2020. 'Agroecological Principles and Elements and Their Implications for Transitioning to Sustainable Food Systems. A Review'. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 40 (6): 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00646-z.

networks, and alternative food systems. Sustainability. 10, 1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/su100
MAPPING AGROECOLOGY IN
BOSNIA
AND HERZEGOVINA

**AUTHOR:** Maria Hetman and Igor Kalaba, Agroecology Europe

**REVIEWERS:** Karla Škorjanc, Agroecology Europe; Baptiste Grard and Alexander Wezel, ISARA; Vasileios Gkisakis, ELGO-DIMITRA

**EXTERNAL REVIEWER:** Dimitrije Markovic, University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Agriculture

**TO CITE:** Hetman M. and Kalaba I. (2023). Mapping agroecology in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In: Wezel, A., Grard, B. and Gkisakis, V. (eds). Mapping agroecology in Europe. Country Reports Series, Vol. 1, ISARA, Lyon, France; Agroecology Europe, Corbais, Belgium.

<figure><img src="image_225.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_226.png" /></figure>

This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No101000478. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. More information about the H2020-Agroecology for Europe project can be found here: www.ae4eu.eu

<figure><img src="image_227.png" /></figure>
BOSNIA
AND HERZEGOVINA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Agroecology has a weak presence in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) across all sectors and is a largely unrecognised concept. Nevertheless, the current study demonstrates how many sectors are dealing with various issues that could be viewed as forming a basis for the future emergence of agroecology on different levels from farm to policy. Those issues include organic farming, environmental protections, direct relationships between producer and consumer, circular economies, fair economic practices, and social inclusion.

This report focuses on describing the context of agroecology in BiH, and highlights the positive impacts, limitations and challenges of a number of promising initiatives that relate to key agroecological principles and concerns. Those initiatives include two innovative ecological farms – a 70-person collective with aims to develop the first fully organic village in BiH and a small family farm rooted in permaculture and aspiring to a community-supported model. Other examples presented are an international NGO influencing national-level policy and engaging in farmer training especially in organic practices, natural resource protection and efficient energy use; a local business offering community education in ecological beekeeping; a vocational high school providing basic courses in agroecology; and two universities engaged in the science of environmentally-friendly agriculture.

Further initiatives include a community resource centre focused on permaculture, and a local association dedicated to maintaining the country's only crowd-sourced heirloom seed bank. Much development regarding agroecology as a concept and practice is needed for BiH – a highly rural country with a fragmented political system and struggling economy, both of which combined are perceived as the main barriers to progress, not only in agroecology.
# BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

## EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (IN BOSNIAN/CROATIAN/SERBIAN)

Agroekologija je slabo prisutna u Bosni i Hercegovini (BiH) u svim sektorima i uglavnom je slabo poznat koncept. Ipak, ovaj izvještaj pokazuje koliko se sektora bavi različitim pitanjima koja se mogu smatrati osnovom za budući razvoj agroekologije na različitim nivoima, od poljoprivrednih imanja do razvoja zakonodavstva i strategija. Ta pitanja uključuju organsku poljoprivredu, zaštitu životne sredine, direktne veze između proizvođača i potrošača, cirkularnu (kružnu) ekonomiju, pravedne ekonomske prakse i socijalnu uključenost.

Ovaj izvještaj se fokusira na opisivanje stanja agroekologije u BiH, te naglašava pozitivne uticaje, prepreke i izazove koji se nalaze pred nizom obećavajućih inicijativa koje su u vezi sa ključnim agroekološkim principima i problemima. Te inicijative uključuju dvije revolucionarne ekološke farme – kolektiv od 70 ljudi koji ima za cilj razvoj prvog potpuno organskog sela u BiH, te malu porodičnu farmu koja je ukorijenjena u permakulturi i koja teži modelu koji se temelji na konceptu uvezane zajednice.

Drugi predstavljeni primjeri su: međunarodna nevladina organizacija koja utiče na zakonodavstvo i strategije na nacionalnom nivou i koja se bavi obukom farmera, posebno u oblasti organske poljoprivrede, zaštite prirodnih resursa i efikasnog korištenja energije; lokalni biznis koji nudi obrazovanje u ekološkom pčelarstvu; srednja stručna škola sa osnovnim predmetima iz agroekologije; dva univerziteta koji se bave naukom o ekološki prihvatljivoj poljoprivredi. Druge inicijative uključuju resursni centar fokusiran na permakulturu i lokalno udruženje posvećeno održavanju jedine banke starih sorti sjemena u zemlji.

Potrebno je još puno rada na razvoju agroekologije kao koncepta i prakse u BiH, izrazito ruralnoj zemlji sa kompleksnim političkim sistemom i nestabilnom ekonomijom - dva faktora koji se percipiraju kao glavne prepreke napretku, ne samo u agroekologiji.
# 1. METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The information regarding key informants in Bosnia and Herzegovina are summarised in Table 1.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** List of key informants in Bosnia and Herzegovina.</caption><thead><tr><th>Key informant n°</th><th>Type of organisation</th><th>Main sector of involvement</th><th colspan="2">ACTIVITY CATEGORY CONCERNED</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>NGO</td><td>Sustainable rural development</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>NGO</td><td>Permaculture design, education, and community-building</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Agriculture Ministry</td><td>Agricultural governance</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_228.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_229.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_230.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_231.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_232.png" /></figure>

# 2. CONTEXT

The political and geographical structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) plays a role in the way agroecology, along with agriculture and environmental policy has developed, and are important to take into consideration in this analysis. The country's structure is deeply fragmented and thus often functions inefficiently. There are four tiers of governance: the state, entity, canton, and municipal levels. The two entities, "Republika Srpska" (RS) and the "Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina" (FBiH), are often working at counter-purposes due to fundamental political differences. They respectively represent 49% and 51% of the country's surface. In 1999, a small separate autonomous district was created: the "Brčko District" (BD). It has many autonomous features similar to RS and FBiH<fnref n="32" />, further complicating the country's governance. The two entities plus BD often maintain separate statistics, and depending on how the statistics have been integrated may sometimes require separate figures and descriptions for an accurate picture of agriculture in the country.

Rural areas are dominant across BiH, covering 85% of the territory of FBiH, 95% of RS, and 95% of BD, with agriculture being the major activity in them (FAO 2021; Puška et al. 2021). There are 57,943 registered farms in FBiH covering 93,095 ha, of which 54,600 are family farms. In RS there are 25,005 farms, covering 129,137 ha, with 24,504 family farms. In BD, there are 3,107 farms (FAO 2021). It can be assumed, based on the trend from the other territories that the majority of farms in BD are family-run as well. The average size of family farms across BiH is 2 ha (50%), and 80% of farms in the country are less than 5 ha (FAO 2021).

The rural areas of BiH are described as having weak social and economic infrastructure, with a deficiency of employment opportunities, while also suffering from outmigration and brain drain. Agriculture does play an important role in the overall economy of each entity, with its share

<footnote n="32">³² https://portal.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/Pages/Bosnia-Herzegovina.aspx</footnote>
in GDP being 5.1% in FBiH, 10% in RS, and 7.5% in BD (FAO 2021). 17.9% of the population (147,000 people) were employed in the sector across the country in 2015 (Mujčinović et al. 2017), but this probably does not include those working in the informal economy. More than half of rural households are engaged in agriculture production on some level. However, less than 10% of them earn revenue from their agricultural production, with over 90% producing food primarily for their own needs (FAO 2021). The structure of farms is often divided across several parcels that are frequently distant from each other. Most of these family farms are mixed production, focusing on securing various household food requirements.

On the one hand, the size and production model of family farms in BiH present challenges for market-oriented specialisation and classical models of economic development, which has prompted various modernisation strategies by the government and international NGOs to make the country more competitive (BIH-KI-1). The fact that most farms contribute to rural livelihoods may be perceived differently when viewed through the lens of agroecology, and may offer other opportunities within and outside market-oriented development models.

Though agroecology may theoretically have potential in this highly rural country, where most farms are small-scale and mixed production, there is hardly any related literature in BiH. One of the only existing scientific publications on this topic suggests that awareness about agroecology as a term is hardly recognised, and that its practical realisation is likewise almost non-existent (Šeremešić et al. 2021). The literature also suggests that agroecology sometimes may have negative associations in the country. This was also a point mentioned by a key informant in an interview, who noted that the term "agroecology" may be viewed negatively in BiH insofar as it may be associated with peasant lifestyles or subsistence, i.e., the antithesis of what is popularly considered modern and developed (BIH-KI-1, Table 1). Likewise, another key informant noted that the economic uncertainty faced by the rural households may discourage experimentation and the uptake of new or alternative models of production, unless they are perceived as strongly proven by successful practical examples (BIH-KI-1, Table 1; Initiative Informant later cite as "II" - II-4, 9 & 10, 2021).

Local/municipal associations, such as producer associations and cooperatives, dedicated to utilising principles which could be said to intersect with agroecological values (e.g., organic/chemical free farming, GMO-free production and local crop varieties) are present even if limited, according to some of the interviewees (II-06; II-09; II-10). However, the impact of their activities is unknown, and appears to be limited mostly to the direct exchange of information among members, and the organisation of talks/workshops featuring external speakers (II-09; II-06). In the Strategic Plan for Rural Development in Bosnia and Herzegovina<fnref n="33" /> agroecology is not mentioned, and there is a significant variety of environmental viewpoints between the members who developed the plan (II-06).

BiH is at the same time facing a phenomena of heavy rural outmigration since the 1990s. This may further hinder the development of agroecological practices in the country. The ageing of the remaining rural population also has a negative impact on the possibility of uptake of agroecology (Šeremešić et al. 2021). However, both RS and FBiH, sometimes in cooperation with international NGOs like UNDP<fnref n="34" /> and FAO, have implemented a number of initiatives that intersect with the key ideas of agroecology, even if the term "agroecology" is hardly ever used. Those initiatives are working to create policies and practices for the agricultural sector through

<footnote n="33">³³ http://www.mvteo.gov.ba/data/Home/Dokumenti/Poljoprivreda/Strategic_Plan_for_Rural_Development_of_BiHEng.pdf</footnote>

<footnote n="34">³⁴ https://www.undp.org/</footnote>
environmental protection and land conservation measures, short value chain support, investment in green business practices, and the preservation of local genetic material (Šeremešić et al. 2021; BIH-KI-1, Table 1; II-4).

The small number of market-oriented farms, relative to the number of family farms in BiH, appears to be the priority concern driving national agricultural activities aimed at improving the efficiency, business models, and production of farms in the country, with UNDP and FAO leading the charge in that area. In some cases, that priority also intersects with environmental issues (II-4). Other associations are also active in the country such as the Slow Food movement. Slow Food's presence in BiH focuses on its "Ark of Taste initiative"<fnref n="35" /> – an international registry of endangered heritage foods which are "sustainably produced, unique in taste, and part of a distinct ecoregion". There are 23 Ark of Taste products listed for Bosnia and Herzegovina. Farms in BiH are also part of World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms<fnref n="36" /> (WWOOF), which links global volunteers with organic farmers for cultural and educational exchanges, and aims to "build a global community conscious of ecological farming and sustainability practices." There are five farm sites registered on WWOOF BiH accepting volunteers. The presence of organic agriculture and exchange on slow food and sustainable farming is relatively modest in BiH, but it does exist, and intersects with agroecological elements.

Despite the lack of widespread recognition of agroecology across sectors in Bosnian-Herzegovinian society, the concept has existed at an academic level since 1983 at least, first mentioned in the university textbook "Opće ratarstvo" ("General Agronomy"; Šeremešić et al. 2021). The author of the textbook also initiated a graduate-level course which covered the principles of agroecology. Currently different courses related to agroecology are offered in several agriculture faculties in BiH (Šeremešić et al. 2021).

Organic farming in concept and practice has more widespread recognition in BiH than agroecology, according to the literature and interviewees (Šeremešić et al. 2021; BIH-KI-1, Table 1; II-1). Furthermore, different initiatives described in this report, even if they align with values and principles that intersect with agroecology, did not define themselves as agroecological per se (II-06; II-10). Instead, "sustainable", "ecological" and "organic" were the most mentioned terms. 1,273 ha in BiH were under organic agricultural production as of 2019, representing 0.1% of total farmland in the country, farmed by 304 organic producers, which is low in comparison with neighbouring countries in the Western Balkan region (e.g., Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia) and in most EU countries overall (Lernoud and Willer 2019). However, the number of hectares under organic production has grown by 271% since 2011, when only 343 ha were reported as being under organic production (Mujčinović et al. 2017). Meanwhile, as of 2011, another 78,550 ha of land was utilised for the wild harvesting of medicinal plants, berries, other fruits, and mushrooms. Most organic farmers in BiH sell around 75% of their products on the domestic market (Mujčinović et al. 2017). There are two organic producer associations, each corresponding to the entity level, and both relatively new. The Organic Producers Association of the FBiH exists since 2019 and gathers 2,000 agricultural producers (Šeremešić et al. 2021). The Association of Organic Producers and Processors in the RS has existed since 2015, and appears to have at least 50 certified producers. Acting across entity levels is the Centre for Economic and Rural Development (CERD), a local NGO which is active in the development and promotion of organic production and awareness in BiH (Šeremešić et al. 2021).

<footnote n="35">³⁵ https://www.fondazioneslowfood.com/en/nazioni-arca/bosnia-and-herzegovina-en/</footnote>

<footnote n="36">³⁶ https://wwoof.net/</footnote>
# 3. CURRENT SITUATION OF AGROECOLOGY

## 3.1. EDUCATION AND TRAINING

<figure><img src="image_233.png" /></figure>

Despite the existence of vocational high schools dedicated to agronomy, along with long-standing research and teaching at universities, agroecology is only weakly presented in these contexts. In the curriculum of the vocational high-school in Republika Srpska, the term agroecology is not used (II-09). However, topics related to it are taught, either as self-standing courses in ecological agronomy, or as a part of a larger curricula in other broader courses.

In vocational high school courses used for training agricultural technicians in RS, the closest classes to agroecology are called "ekološka poljoprivreda" ("ecological agriculture"; II-09). In one vocational school in FBiH however, the word "agroecology" is directly mentioned in the curriculum for agricultural technicians as a part of "plant production" classes which take place during the first year of the course, as one of four teaching modules, under the title "agroecology and pedology" (Department of secondary vocational education FBiH 2009³⁸).

In vocational high schools, there is often resistance to ecological agriculture from students due to a lack of trust that this type of agriculture is practicable and/or profitable (II-09). Since many of the students come from traditional farming families, the resistance may be deeply ingrained. In these contexts, agroecological tools and approaches in the curriculum would likely be introduced only by more forward-looking and motivated teachers (II-09).

Informal agricultural education is mostly performed either by dedicated farmers' associations, and/or NGOs – both domestic as well as international (such as UNDP, USAID, World Vision, EkoDizajn; II-10). Despite limited reference and use, the concept of agroecology and some of its principles are implied through a growing number of initiatives with an emphasis on sustainability and the environment, as well as social diversity to some degree (II-02; II-07 2021; II-10). One initiative, for example – EkoJasmina – has educated at least 70 producers for ecological vegetable and fruit production (II-07), and another one – Košnica – regularly trains youth, the disabled, and offers opportunities for international knowledge exchange (KI-2, Table 1).

In terms of applied learning, farmers' acceptance of principles intersecting with agroecology is low, the main obstacle being a lack of trust that sustainable approaches are financially feasible. Interviewees have concluded that this can be best counteracted via real-life examples which illustrate the financially and practically successful application of such approaches (II-10; II-06). Education was also recognised as one of the main tools preventing the use of illegal and harmful substances in agriculture, even if at the same time, due to corruption, inspections and sanctions fail to hold those who are breaking laws and agreements accountable. Finally, rural out-migration and ageing are also considered to be a heavily restricting factor in terms of building sustainable informal education and training networks.

<footnote n="38">³⁸ http://www.vetbih.org/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=100&Itemid=370&lang=en</footnote>
## 3.2. LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_234.png" /></figure>

Living labs are not yet identified as such in BiH. However, through informant interviews two examples of initiatives which include aspects of living labs can be mentioned (BIH-KI-1 & 2, Table 1). The first is "EkoDizajn" in Mostar, which is a socially responsible company that operates as a multi-functional resource centre and community-influencer. Its focus is on offering ecological farming and permaculture education, ecological design consultation, and opportunities to grow organic food in community with others. Revenue is reinvested in employment opportunities for young people. The second example is 'Factory of Joy' in Čelinac which maintains a crowd-sourced heirloom seed bank and seed library, engages in community outreach and education on the importance of seed collection and preservation as well as permaculture, and creates networks between local producers and consumers. Both examples represent innovative work that cross-cuts sectors and inspires action and the replication of agroecological ideas in the community.

## 3.3. MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_235.png" /></figure>

Native and locally-grown agroecology initiatives which could be characterised under the movement category were not identified during this research. This may give a good indication about the situation of agroecology, as well as of grassroots movements in the country. Nevertheless, some of the examples of practical initiatives found had some movement-like qualities, with 'Factory of Joy' taking on the role of articulating the need to preserve indigenous seed varieties and engaging the community in the work, and 'EkoJasmina' aiming to create the first village in the country which is based on 100% ecological farming (KI-2, Table 1; II-7).

In place of movements which are rooted in grassroots mobilisation (either local, regional or transnational) and articulate a social conflict, NGOs, especially international ones, may be considered to be partially filling the role of movements. They often do the work of developing, promoting and implementing mission-driven work at a national scale, and work with policymakers to get their buy-in of policy frameworks and other tools which could lead to long-term, systemic change. This may be considered a legacy of the post-war period (i.e., 1995 and beyond) in which international NGOs have played a strong role in the peace-building process and other aspects of societal reconstruction. However, their role in post war-BiH has been criticised by being limited by provisional, short-term project-specific funding and the overall context in which they do their work is namely a fragmented political system (Carey and Richmond, 2003).

Today, international NGOs could arguably be viewed as playing a major role. For example, UNDP is a key player in agricultural development in BiH, and its activities are focused in four fields: circularity, competitiveness of the agricultural sector, sustainability of the agricultural sector, and finally the strengthening and diversification of the rural economy (II-4). They also currently play a leading role when it comes to the development of strategic frameworks and policies related to the EU Green Deal, and can be considered to be an actor promoting regenerative agriculture at the policy level. While UNDP rarely uses the term "agroecology", the work they undertake encompasses some of the principles behind it, such as biodiversity protection, renewable energy sources, short value chains, and social issues such as gender in the agriculture sphere (II-4).
3.4. PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_236.png" /></figure>

Most producers and farmers in the country seem to operate independently, outside the frame of any formal association or cooperative, though one example, 'EkoDizajn', which has the structure of a local NGO and also has community education goals (KI-2, Table 1), can be mentioned here. Other examples such as 'Košnica' and 'EkoJasmina', are doing work that furthers the cooperative, community elements of agroecology, such as knowledge exchange, although they are not acting formally as a cooperative or as part of an established network.

The examples found agroecology in practice are mostly small-scale undertakings. The production is largely oriented toward local markets, often selling directly to customers, and often starting and operating via social networks which seem to play a central role as means of advertising in small-scale production, alongside word of mouth (II-06). The communities in which the practices are embedded are not necessarily formally registered or recognised bodies, but rather operate as informal, tightly-knit groups (KI-2, Table 1; II-06). The products are usually of local character, relating in personal ways to the communities of which they are a part, and they operate in what they consider to be a more cooperative, transparent and fair way compared with the commercial norm (II-07; II-10).

Agroecology seems to be not a term often used by farmers (BIH-KI-1, Table 1), but some initiatives such as 'EkoJasmina', 'Žabac Povrće' and 'Košnica d.o.o' use approaches and practices related to agroecological principles, especially around safeguarding soil and water quality, biodiversity conservation, the use of organic fertilisers and pesticides (including hand-removal, nets, and plant-based formulas for pests), community-building, and concern about fair labour relations (II-06; II-07; II-10).

Government support for farming seems to be mostly reserved for larger producers who work in classical ways, for example in the form of subsidies, such as those for fuel (II-06). This, as well as large amounts of imported produce, makes small ecological-oriented farmers feel that they are less competitive in the market. However, international NGOs, such as UNDP, USAID, and Caritas, provide support on some occasions, either through the organisation of workshops and seminars, programmes for employment, or through financial support for infrastructure and machines (II-06; II-10). Another major issue is brain drain, which impacts farms insofar as it causes labour shortages and interrupts community-building (II-06; II-09; II-10). Alongside financial issues for farmers, another stumbling block is the complicated legislative scenery, which makes it challenging to obtain certain inputs which are in line with ecological farming (II-06). It also makes finding sale channels difficult at times, and the high taxes for small producers seem to take a larger part of the earnings which could otherwise be reinvested in the business and local community. Due to these financial challenges, many farmers have another job on the side, which further constrains the creation and exchange of agroecological knowledge, practices and the development of networks such as producer associations and cooperatives (II-07; II-06; II-09; II-10).
3.4. SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_237.png" /></figure>

Academia has a considerable share in shaping future developments in BiH related to agroecology. An overview of higher education related to agroecology is provided in Šeremešić et al. (2021).

<table><caption>**Table 2:** Agroecology courses and curricula in Bosnia and Herzegovina (adapted from Šeremešić et al. 2021)</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Universities with Agroecology related courses</th><th rowspan="2">Agroecology courses total</th><th colspan="3">AGROECOLOGY CURRICULA</th></tr><tr><th>BSc</th><th>MSc</th><th>PhD</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>6</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>3</td></tr></tbody></table>

There is very limited literature available regarding agroecology as a science in BiH. In addition, according to key informants, agroecology still seems not to be perceived as a notable topic in the sphere of science and university education, even if the subject of ecology has a place in university agricultural departments. At the Faculty of Agriculture in Banja Luka, the term "ecological efficiency" is used in research activities (II-08) while the Agroecology course has existed in this specific faculty for more than ten years. This course has been the foundation for the development of other courses related to Agroecology on a master and PhD level. Additionally, at the Agro-Mediterranean Faculty in Mostar, courses exist in ecology and environmental management, nature protection, urban agriculture, water and waste management, among other topics – all of which theoretically link up with agroecology to different degrees, but do not refer specifically to agroecology (II-5).

In recent years, the Agro-Mediterranean Faculty in Mostar has developed cross-sector cooperation, offering practical training opportunities in the development of urban agriculture, has participated in environmental protection campaigns, and has cooperated with NGOs and other institutions to raise awareness about the environment and the green economy (II-05). Others, such as the aforementioned Faculty of Agriculture in Banja Luka, joined international research consortiums in order to develop technology which would lower the environmental impact of farming, such as water and pesticide use (II-08).
## 4. AGROECOLOGY INITIATIVES, CASES AND EXAMPLES

<table><caption>**Table 3:** An overview about initiatives, cases and examples described and analysed.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE N°</th><th rowspan="2">INITIATIVE NAME</th><th rowspan="2">SCALE</th><th rowspan="2">TYPE OF STRUCTURE</th><th rowspan="2">AIM</th><th colspan="5">ACTIVITY CATEGORIES</th></tr><tr><th>EDUCATION</th><th>LIVING LAB</th><th>MOVEMENT</th><th>PRACTICE</th><th>SCIENCE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>Gradiška Vocational high School<br>Gradiška Srednja Stručna Tehnička Škola</td><td>Local to regional</td><td>Public high school</td><td>Educating the future workforce as well as experts in several fields, including agriculture, animal husbandry, veterinary sciences</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Košnica d.o.o</td><td>Local to international</td><td>Private company</td><td>Providing expert education and guidance in order to promote healthy and sustainable beekeeping practices</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Bosnia and Herzegovina</td><td>National</td><td>UN organisation/ Inter-governmental organisation</td><td>Mission-driven work at a national scale mostly focused on economic circularity, increasing the competitiveness of the agriculture sector by focusing on improving its sustainability, and strengthening and diversifying the rural economy</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>EkoJasmina</td><td>Local</td><td>Small-scale cooperative business</td><td>Production of organically farmed vegetables and fruits, as well as education through practice</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Žabac Povrće</td><td>Local</td><td>Small-scale organic farm</td><td>Organic farming for minimum-impact, environmentally responsible farming and a healthy and nutritious product</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Smart Water - Promoting smart agricultural water management in BiH</td><td>National and international</td><td>An international research consortium, headed by Banja Luka, Faculty of Agriculture</td><td>Developing smart-sensing technologies to minimise water use in agriculture in order to adapt to climate change and decrease resource use and environmental consequences, while raising the capacities of universities and of scientific workers in the field</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_238.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_239.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_240.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_241.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_242.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_243.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_244.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_245.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_246.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_247.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_248.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_249.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_250.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_251.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

<figure><img src="image_252.png" /></figure>

Gradiška Srednja Stručna Tehnička Škola
http://ssts.gradiska.com/

INITIATIVE N°1 – GRADIŠKA VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

# GRADIŠKA VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

The "Gradiška Vocational High School" is a public school offering vocational training for agricultural and veterinary technicians, but also for others (e.g., medical staff, cooks or tourism workers). For 2021/2022, around 144 students were enrolled, and the school had 49 teachers. The school's programme is aimed at educating skilled workers who can either start their careers as entry-level or mid-level managers and workers, or continue their education further. The education itself combines theory and practical work. The practical work takes place in the school-owned orchard/farm and/or in privately owned farms/orchards, depending on the type of work, since the school covers fruit, vegetables, and arable crop production.

## KEY FEATURES

* **Type of education and training:** vocational high school

* **Main topic:** agriculture, farming, and veterinary related directions.

* **Training duration:** 4 years

* **Type of legal entity:** public high school

* **Founded in:** 1945

* **Accessible to:** high school students

Most of the course is focused on standard approaches to plant and livestock breeding, farming, and management. The concept and practice have links with agroecology, but the latter is not at the centre of the training material provided during the 4 years. Two courses<fnref n="41" /> spanning over two semesters have introduced environmental topics. One is called "Ecological agriculture" ("Ekološka poljoprivreda") and is divided in two general segments. One segment is a more general introduction to the environment and pollution, while the second is dedicated to environmental issues in agronomy, with only a few classes related more closely to agroecology: ecological farming of fruit, ecological farming of vegetables, ecological farming of cattle and ecological beekeeping.

Some practical parts of the courses are done in tandem with commercial enterprises (farming businesses, veterinary science and other practices) and at times, students work with the city's maintenance service on duties related to the city's greenery, however, these activities do not relate more specifically to agroecology.

## WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The advantage of this institution is the potential it has in reaching out to youth, the future workforce, and emerging experts in the field in the early days of their professional development, as well as its credibility as a state institution. The students in this institution and similar schools in other cities, have an opportunity to learn a very wide base of agricultural knowledge. However, in its current state, agroecology's presence in the curriculum is quite limited, as it relies on the students' motivation and uptake of lessons taught. Theoretically, since it is a state institution affiliated with the Ministry of Education, it could also be easier to attract large donors necessary for widening and improving their work, compared to local NGOs and other informal education services.

<footnote n="41">⁴¹ The programme is a 3-4 years' education module, which, after completed, provides a high school student with a qualified title, such as that of agricultural technician in this example. A course is a set of classes, taking place over the timespan of one, two or more semesters.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_253.png" /></figure>

EDUCATION

<figure><img src="image_254.png" /></figure>

MOVEMENT

<figure><img src="image_255.png" /></figure>

PRACTICE

<figure><img src="image_256.png" /></figure>

LIVING LAB

<figure><img src="image_257.png" /></figure>

SCIENCE

INITIATIVE N°2 – KOŠNICA D.O.O.

KOŠNICA D.O.O.

**Košnica d.o.o.** ('Društvo sa ograničenom odgovornošću') is a privately owned enterprise, which was founded in 2004, and is a business specialised in all things related to bees – from manufacturing and sales of beekeeping equipment to bee-related products (e.g., honey, propolis), as well as in providing expert advice and consulting services, mostly by its founder and owner. Currently, the team consists of at least 5 members (including support staff, such as designers, marketers, and others).

Next to its commercial operations, Košnica's activities are also in consulting and education. When not taking place within their own organisation, the workshops are organised by beekeeping organisations or groups such as USAID, World Vision, Farma, OIM, CRS, MPDL and others, with

Košnica representatives acting as educators. Most of these workshops take one to three days, depending on the organiser and are mostly attended by practising beekeepers. The workshops where they teach transcend BiH boundaries as they have joint events in BiH, Czech Republic, North Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, and Montenegro.

Next to general technical knowledge of beekeeping, a strong aspect of the work is promotion of environmentally responsible beekeeping approaches. The term "agroecology" is not necessarily used, but organic farming ("ekološki uzgoj") is at the heart of the practice, which includes organic certification, proper placement of beehives in order to avoid pollution, as well as social responsibility and sensibility, along with dedication to the highest quality standards (as is also stated by RS's law on beekeeping). Moreover, there is a strong emphasis on cooperative approaches to the market in which good practices are shared.

<figure><img src="image_258.png" /><figcaption>**Picture 1:** KOŠNICA D.O.O. headquarters.
Source: Igor Kalaba.</figcaption></figure>

MED
MEDENI

<figure><img src="image_259.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_260.png" /></figure>

KOŠNICA

https://kosnicagradiska.com/

KEY FEATURES

* **Type of education and training:** workshops and activities on bee-keeping related knowledge and skills

* **Main topic:** bee keeping

* **Training duration:** one to several days

* **Type of legal entity:** private company

* **Founded in:** 2004

WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The promotion of cooperation in different aspects (market, knowledge, etc.) between producers is one of the major strengths of this initiative. It allows for an increase in the communication between farmers and other stakeholders and experts. Additionally, being well-established and successful practitioners themselves, the educators are more likely to attract attention and inspire confidence. However, conducting workshops and disseminating information must be constantly done if a wider uptake in practice is to be achieved.