# Identification of the public policy framework on pastoralism – Key measures, orientations and priorities

Sergio Dario Magnani

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

## To cite this version:

Sergio Dario Magnani. Identification of the public policy framework on pastoralism – Key measures, orientations and priorities. INRAE - Corse; PRIMA Pastinnova. 2023, 20 p. hal-05300116

HAL Id: hal-05300116

https://hal.science/hal-05300116v1

Submitted on 6 Oct 2025

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_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
PASTINNOVA

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

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

PRIMA
PARTNERSHIP FOR RESEARCH AND INNOVATION
IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AREA

PASTINNOVA – Innovative models for sustainable
future of Mediterranean pastoral systems

D5.1 Identification of the public policy framework on
pastoralism – Key measures, orientations and priorities

Lead beneficiary: All the partners of PASTINNOVA

Responsible partner: INRAE

Date: 27/11/23

Version: Final

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

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

The PRIMA programme is supported under Horizon 2020, the European Union's Framework
Programme for Research and Innovation
## BASIC PROJECT INFORMATION

<table><tr><td>Project name:</td><td>PASTINNOVA – Innovative models for sustainable future of Mediterranean pastoral systems</td></tr><tr><td>Programme call:</td><td>PRIMA programme 2021, The European Union's Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, HORIZON 2020.</td></tr><tr><td>Thematic area:</td><td>2. Farming systems</td></tr><tr><td>Topic:</td><td>1.2.1: Increasing the environmental and socio-economic performance of small-scale farming systems through improvements in organizational aspects and new value chain governance models</td></tr><tr><td>Project number:</td><td>2113</td></tr><tr><td>Project duration:</td><td>36 months (01/05/2022 – 30/04/2025)</td></tr><tr><td>Project budget:</td><td>2.750.000,00 EUR</td></tr><tr><td>Lead partner:</td><td>ELGO-DIMITRA, Agricultural Economics Research Institute – Hellenic Agriculture Organisation (Greece)</td></tr><tr><td>Project webpage:</td><td><a href="https://pastinnova.eu">https://pastinnova.eu</a></td></tr></table>

## DOCUMENT INFORMATION

<table><tr><td>Version</td><td>D5.1, version 1</td></tr><tr><td>WP</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Dissemination level (public/confidential)</td><td>Public</td></tr><tr><td>WP Leader</td><td>INRAE</td></tr><tr><td>Deliverable lead</td><td>INRAE</td></tr><tr><td>Authors</td><td>Sergio Magnani (INRAE – France)</td></tr><tr><td>Reviewers</td><td>Athanasios Ragkos (ELGO – Greece)</td></tr><tr><td>Disclaimer</td><td>This paper is supported by the PRIMA program under grant agreement No: 2113, project PASTINNOVA. The PRIMA program is supported by the European Union. The content of the presentation is the sole responsibility of the PASTINNOVA project partners and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position and opinion of the PRIMA Foundation and or HORIZON authorities.</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>Date of the deliverable (due):</td><td>October 2023</td></tr><tr><td>Date of the deliverable (submitted):</td><td>November 2023</td></tr></table>
Introduction 3

1. Work Package 5 instruction process (tasks 5.1, 5.2) 5

1.1 WP5 launching seminar : Policy and public action issues for the future of pastoralism in the Mediterranean (INRAE, Corte, France, 23th – 24th of November 2022) 5

1.1.1 Problematization and objectives 5

1.1.2 Trends of comparative analysis of policy frames in Europe, North Africa and Middle East and their effects on pastoralism 6

1.1.3 Contribution to Pastinnova WP5 (Tasks 5.1, 5.2) 7

1.2 Concept Note : Proposal and methods for Pastinnova WP5 Tasks 5.1, 5.2 (Sergio Magnani, Jean-Paul Dubeuf and Jacques Lasseur, INRAE, France) 9

1.2.1 Policy analysis and pastoralism dynamics in the Mediterranean : what do we start from and where do we want to go? 9

1.2.2 Research context and key pastoralism features for dealing with uncertainty and initiate 'desirable' changes 10

1.2.3 Descriptions of the current trends of public policy and the dynamics of transformation of pastoralism at a relevant scale with regard to Pastinnova IBMs (T5.1) 13

2. Key points and main policies and frameworks detected 14

2.1 European Union region 14

2.1.1 Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics in connection to policy frameworks 14

2.2.2 Key measures, orientations and priorities 15

2.2 Northern African region 16

2.2.1 Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics in connection to policy frameworks 16

2.2.2 Key measures, orientations and priorities 17

2.3 Middle East region 17

2.3.1 Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics in connection to policy frameworks 17

2.3.2 Key measures, orientations and priorities 17

2.4 Conclusion 17
## Introduction

This deliverable refers to Pastinnova Task 5.1 - **Identification of the public policy framework on pastoralism - Key measures, orientations and priorities** (Leader: INRAE; Deputy: REAP; Participants: CIRRD, LU, other partners; Duration: M1-17).

In the first part, we trace back the instruction and problematization process of Task 5.1. Proceedings of the starting WP5 seminar provide key elements to problematize the task as well as relevant analysis on how public policies affect pastoralism at macro-regional and national levels (1.1). In part 1.2, we recall WP5 context of operation and hypotheses, sketch a theoretical frame that could serve as a base for conducting comparative research, and formulate a proposal to the Pastinnova collective to produce analytical and empirical knowledge through a two-step process : i) carry out detailed descriptions of policy processes and effects on pastoral systems dynamics of change for each region surrounding our fields of studies (T5.1); ii) get deeper in the comprehension of contemporary on-going dynamics and interactions with policy around the selected innovations (Innovation Business Models – IBMs) through specific policy meetings, one per each Regional Living Lab (T5.2).

In the second part, we present first elements of analysis drawn from national or micro-regional case studies developed by Pastinnova partners as well as from interviews realised within the Pastinnova framework. Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics linked to policy frameworks as well as key measures, orientations and priorities for policy action and reforms are identified and briefly discussed. We conclude by pointing to cross-cutting themes which are relevant for the policy analysis to be conducted in relation to Regional Living Labs activities (T5.2).

# 1. Work Package 5 instruction process (tasks 5.1, 5.2)

## 1.1 WP5 launching seminar: *Policy and public action issues for the future of pastoralism in the Mediterranean* (INRAE, Corte, France, 23rd – 24th of November 2022)

The seminar called for a collective reflection on the stakes and challenges for the future of pastoralism in the Mediterranean in a context of great uncertainty in terms of environmental transformation, economic upheavals and evolution of policy frameworks. Presentations by Michele Nori (European University Institute) provided insights into the links between agrarian and pastoral dynamics of change and public policies in the Mediterranean region, and the resulting orientations and perspectives.

The Seminar covered the following topics: Agricultural and development policies and the practice of pastoralism in Europe, Maghreb and Middle-East ; Public policy and pastoral systems dynamics of change ; Public action initiatives in Pastinnova fields of work. It was participated by all the Pastinnova partners as well as by relevant stakeholders from Corsica and Sardinia (see Annex 1 – *Proceedings of the launching seminar of Pastinnova Work Package 5*).
### 1.1.1 Problematization and objectives

The practice of pastoralism in the Mediterranean is affected by a deep-rooted disarticulation between social, political and ecological relationships underlying the capability of this production system to take advantage of highly variable resources and environments. Public policies play a central role in this dynamic. Incentives for the privatisation of land, for productive specialisation and fragmentation of landscapes, as well as extensive bureaucratic control over commons inhibit the establishment of functional relationships among agroecosystems and favour the collapse of political institutions allowing for flexible resource management. Simultaneously, sectoral policy promotes the artificialization of livestock systems by encouraging sedentarization and the use of animal feeds, thereby increasing dependency on international markets and public subsidies.

Large-scale transformations are at stake under the effects of related phenomena. The Covid 19 pandemic and the effects of climate change are both the result and the evidence of the unsustainability of dominant food systems and models of development. These triggers produce powerful effects (increased volatility of markets, breakdown of supply chains, frequency of droughts, floodings or mega-fires etc.) which are differently experienced depending on the characteristics of the contexts in which they occur.

While presenting tremendous challenges, these phenomena also pragmatically engage a plurality of actors within societies in a change of perspective on the environment and the economy in which pastoralism can play a leading role and on which its future closely depends.

This seminar calls for a collective reflection on the stakes and challenges for the future of pastoralism in the Mediterranean in a context of great uncertainty in terms of environmental transformation, economic upheavals and evolution of policy frameworks. The work of Michele Nori, agronomist, researcher and European officer, enlightens links between agrarian and pastoral dynamics of change and public policies in the Mediterranean region, and the resulting orientations and perspectives.

We assume a need to move away from a sectoral approach for many reasons. Firstly because a large array of policies<fnref n="1" /> combine in a complex way and concur to produce change on and around pastoral systems. Secondly because pastoralism relies on a broad range of social, political, economic and ecological relationships in order to valorize environmental variability and complementarity within heterogeneous agroecosystems. Building upon the concept of public action<fnref n="2" /> participants will identify and discuss experiences of organisation and collective action, especially around territorial policies, which try to reverse socio-economic and environmental trends perceived as problematic, and to renew the place of pastoralism in landscapes and food systems.

<footnote n="1">¹ Agricultural, environmental, land, trade, labour, social policies, etc.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Which allows to enlarge analysis by including a larger panel of actors (associations, international organisations, local authorities, private sector, etc.) and initiatives contributing to the delivery of public goods and services (territorial non sectoral policies, local institutions and agreements, etc.).</footnote>
How do these experiences contribute to a dynamic revival of pastoralism, of its capacity to develop social, economic, spatial and environmental synergies in and across territories ? How do they fit into larger societal movements redefining cultural and productive relationships to the environment?

How do they interact with public policy frameworks, often sectoral in focus, between friction, co-existence and co-construction? How do they bring about proposals for reform and improvement?

The seminar aimed at :

- Opening the collective work of the Pastinnova project team on public policy and action, dynamics of change of pastoral systems, territorial integration modalities, possibilities for reform and innovation;

- Sharing a diagnosis of the links between public policies in their diversity, and agrarian and pastoral transformations within the identified regions;

- Proving the interest of a multi-sectoral, multi-actor and multi-scale approach to study policy and collective action processes;

- Having feedbacks from Pastinnova partners and stakeholders on how regional policy trends translate into local contexts and generate specific key dynamics;

- Identifying key cross-cutting themes in different contexts which focus on in the WP5 of Pastinnova.

### 1.1.2 Trends of comparative analysis of policy frames in Europe, North Africa and Middle East and their effects on pastoralism

Michele Nori started his presentation by introducing the paradox underlying the relation between public policy and pastoralism in the Mediterranean : a relevant but decreasingly practised activity, undermined by public policies.

Nori then focused specifically on ongoing dynamics in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region. Were firstly introduced the following regional features : a limited regional economic integration (sometimes closed borders, often impossibility for pastoralists to move from one country to another); no common policy frame but a strong convergence despite diverse ideological and institutional settings; pastoralists as national minorities on the forefront of frontiers and conflicts.

Nori then sketched the main trends and outcomes of policy frameworks in the MENA region. Investments in water infrastructures, individualization of land property rights, livestock production intensification and social control policies have produced a huge decrease in pastoral mobility, detached stocks from environmental and local resource dynamics, induced a strong dependency on external inputs and public subsidies, often distributed through co-opted customary and associative institutions. While cereals and milk production has been protected and subsidised, as well as irrigated agriculture especially for export, pastoralist productions and practices have received little attention.

Impacts have been significant and multi-dimensional : social and economic (vulnerability to market prices and subsidy volatility, growing geographic and social inequality, out migration, problematic generational renewal), political (financial costs for States, dependency on global markets, weakening of local networks and institutions), environmental (end of land use mosaics through mobility, shift from 'mise en valeur' to 'mise en defens', growing livestock on shrinking lands).
The presentation subsequently moved to policy trends in the European mediterranean region. European Union Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) theoretically supports pastoralism, including mobility. However, in practice the outcomes and effects of public policies on pastoralism appear as problematic. As a result of compromise with international environmental and trade engagements, CAP has progressively switched the role assigned to pastoralists from food production to landscape and environmental management. Accordingly, CAP provides through different schemes income support for people working in rural marginal areas (labelled as *Less Favoured* or *High Nature Value Areas*). Subsidies account for an average of about 50% of pastoralists' revenues raising questions of dependency and sustainability. Nevertheless, the more substantial CAP payments concern land rights (property or use) and disproportionately benefit large landowners and intensive systems. The reform of 2015 has granted payments for extensive use of rangelands and so drained significant financial resources to pastoral systems. However, this has been producing contradictory and undesirable effects in terms of speculation, benefit fraud, increasing concentration of livestock and land ownership or rights to get payments, and further specialisation discouraging diversity in local activities and socio-ecosystems.

Nori finally described the main shortcomings and problematic trends regarding pastoralism practice in the EU Med area: economic (dependence on CAP support mechanisms, farm and land concentration, huge decrease of small ruminant flocks and farms), social (bureaucratization of the profession, demographic ageing and generational renewal, out migration from rural areas), environmental (decrease of mobility, widening land abandonment, shrub encroachment, densifying forest areas, risk of fires, biodiversity loss, difficult coexistence with wildlife, i.e. wolves, bears, deers...), political (inconsistencies between sectoral policies and objectives, high level of inefficiency).

In conclusion, Nori highlighted that despite very different settings and policies between MENA and UE Med regions common trends and dynamics emerge in terms of dependency, social inequality, outmigration and generational renewal, loss of mobility, and problematic environmental dynamics. In this sense, large policy frameworks are still unfavourable to pastoralism, they don't recognise or fit with its specificities, constrain crucial flexible resource management, and mainly serve the interest of other more powerful actors and set of activities.

#### 1.1.3 Contribution to Pastinnova WP5 (Tasks 5.1, 5.2)

Participants raised and insisted on several important complementary issues. These different elements constitute a starting point to guide the activities and reflections to be conducted in WP5.

- In spite of the high diversity of social, environmental and political contexts, trends and challenges are common whether in the European, Northern African and Middle East countries and we should get away from a dichotomic North/South view.

- Participants underlined the weight and discrepancies of administrative tasks and the lack of rigour of controls with often unfair and suspicious attitudes towards pastoral activities, in addition to structural forms of exclusion from subsidies and development orientations.

- Key points for a renewal of pastoralism have been identified in self-organisation, autonomy, collective action and political representation, in a context where sectoral policies lack
connection between them. Trade and agricultural policies are disconnected and possibly conflicting with the other key environmental, social or territorial objectives and dedicated policies. It would be possible to link subsidies to performance and ecosystemic services and also to simplify procedures. Governments should better value pastoral production systems and remunerate the services that they provide (fire prevention, links between performances and ecosystem services...), while allowing rural actors more participation in the deliberations.

- Regarding specifically the European policy framework, the last orientations of the CAP are in theory more favourable to pastoralism and the subsidiarity principle gives a large responsibility to national States. However, due to a lack of representation of the pastoralists and their claims in professional organisations, National Strategic Plans often adopt unfavourable and unsuited measures. This means that we should focus more on territorial, multi-purpose policies as well as on the alliances between pastoralists and other citizens, groups and associations and the collective actions they promote at the territorial level. The future of pastoralism lies in alliances with other actors at the territorial level. Subsidiarity is important, the choices of implementation are decisive, a real public debate at the territorial level can thus be decisive.

- Several cross-cutting themes have emerged from the discussions : i) pastoral mobility in connection with trends of homogenization of landscapes, fragmentation of socio ecosystems, privatisation and conversion of rangelands for crop production, environmental conservation, renewable energy production, etc. ; ii) agroforestry and silvopastoralism practices in connection with sectorialised, incoherent and restrictive environmental policy frameworks ; iii) gender relations in connexion with power dimensions, professional and labour organisation and dynamics of political representation ; iv) education, training, social and extension services in favour of pastoralism professionals.

Deliverable 5.1_ Identification of the public policy framework on pastoralism – Key measures, orientations and priorities_Final
## 1.2 Concept Note: Proposal and methods for Pastinnova WP5 Tasks 5.1, 5.2 (Sergio Magnani, Jean-Paul Dubeuf and Jacques Lasseur, INRAE, France)

### 1.2.1 Policy analysis and pastoralism dynamics in the Mediterranean: what do we start from and where do we want to go?

From the Pastinnova "ancestor" project Pactores (Pastoral Actors, Ecosystem Services, and Society), as a collective we have "inherited" different papers analysing policy frames and their effects on pastoralism at variable scales overlapping with the fields of work of Pastinnova.

We dispose of macro-regional analyses covering respectively European Union (EU) and Middle-East and Northern Africa Mediterranean countries (MENA) (Ragkos and Nori, 2016; Nori, Ragkos and Farinella, 2017; Nori 2022, a and b)<fnref n="3" />. These documents at the centre stage during the WP5 launching seminar of November 2022 in Corte have marked the starting point of our collective reflections on how to go further. They provide an assessment of how multi-sectoral policy frames inform dynamics of change in landscapes, agricultural and pastoral systems at a large scale and over an extended and relevant temporal frame (from the 1960's to nowadays). These papers give useful insights for cross-cutting analysis of dynamic changes across the macro-regions concerned. As we have seen and discussed, policy frames pursuing different objectives (i.e. "food sovereignty" – EU/"self-sufficiency" – MENA) more or less successfully promoted a trend of intensification of livestock production systems and progressively increased the gap between livestock systems working within protected and strongly subsidised environments (milk and cereals) and pastoral systems mainly operating outside policy standards and whose main outputs (small ruminant meat) suffered from international competition after the free trade agreements of the 1990's. Even under very different sectoral and multi-sectoral policy settings (i.e. EU – CAP/diverse national sectoral policies in MENA region) and rationales (pastoralists as "environment keepers" or "food producers"), and despite some important specific trends (i.e. expanding (MENA)/shrinking (EU) small ruminant stocks), many common trends emerge and illustrate how public policies have largely contributed to the destructuring of key social, political and environmental relationships underlying pastoralism in practice. Land and environmental policies have encouraged the privatisation or the bureaucratic management of public and common land, contributing to the collapse of local socio-political institutions allowing for flexible, non-exclusive multi-actor management. In this context, sectoral policies have encouraged the specialisation and fragmentation of agroecosystems, and the sedentarisation of mobile pastoralists engendering the loss of agroecological and economic functional relationships at different scales. As a consequence, contrasted but convergent dynamics have resulted in undesirable environmental effects either in

<footnote n="3">³ Nori, M. (2022a). Assessing the policy frame in pastoral areas of Europe. Working Paper, EUI.</footnote>

<footnote>Nori, M. (2022b). Assessing the policy frame in pastoral areas of West Asia and North Africa. EUI.</footnote>

<footnote>Ragkos, A., & Nori, M. (2016). The multifunctional pastoral systems in the Mediterranean EU and impact on the workforce. *Options Méditerranéennes, Série A Séminaires Méditerranéens, 114*(15), 325-328.</footnote>

<footnote>Nori, M., Ragkos, A., & Farinella, D. (2017). Agro-pastoralism as an asset for sustainable Mediterranean Islands. In *Imagining the Mediterranean: challenges and perspectives* (Vol. 1, pp. 135-147). Institute of Social Sciences Ivo Pilar-VERN Group.</footnote>
terms of high pressure on rangelands due to livestock concentration and permanent grazing or in terms of shrub encroachment and closure of forest environments due to the abandonment of land. The recent growing investments (irrigation and agri-business, renewable energy supplying, environment conservation, eco-tourism and leisure, residential real estate, etc.) that are reshaping even the more "marginal" Mediterranean areas (inlands, mountains, drylands, etc.) risk to increase already strong social inequalities and problematic environmental dynamics (loss of biotopes and biodiversity, mega-fires, floodings, etc.).

The problematic picture that emerges from macro-regional policy analysis invites us to focus on a complex array of interconnected policy domains and measures (agricultural, food, trade policy; land, environmental, development policy), and on their effects on landscapes, livelihoods, political institutions, power relations. Social and environmental dynamics of change emerge as the product of the ways policies and development models interconnect, circulate at different scales, encounter and translate into highly diverse local contexts, and so forge diverse trajectories of change, political configurations, constraints and opportunities for different groups of actors.

With regard to WP5, develop a better understanding of complex dynamics of change at play at a regional (intended as a relevant administrative or historical spatial entity) and a territorial scale around Pastinnova fields of work is a useful way to empirically describe contemporary political, socio-economic and environmental trends, identify alternative practices and forms of public action and envision levers for policy reform.

Our proposal to the Pastinnova collective is to build on this basis by producing more analytical and empirical knowledge through a two-step process : i) carry out detailed descriptions of policy processes and effects on pastoral systems dynamics of change for each region surrounding our fields of studies (T5.1); ii) get deeper in the comprehension of contemporary on-going dynamics and interactions with policy around the selected innovations (Innovation Business Models – IBMs) through specific policy meetings, one per each Regional Living Lab (T5.2). Before stepping into the proposal, in the next section we briefly recall our context of operation and hypotheses, and sketch a theoretical frame that could serve as a base for conducting comparative research.

### 1.2.2 Research context and key pastoralism features for dealing with uncertainty and initiate 'desirable' changes

Large-scale transformations are at stake under the effects of related phenomena. The Covid 19 pandemic and the effects of climate change are both the result and the evidence of the unsustainability of dominant food systems and models of development. These triggers produce powerful effects (increased volatility of input and output markets, breakdown of supply chains, frequency of droughts, mega-fires, etc.) which are differently experienced depending on the characteristics of the contexts in which they occur. While bearing existential challenges for pastoralism in the Mediterranean these dynamics pragmatically engage a plurality of actors within societies in a change of perspective on the relationships to the environment and the economy, in which pastoralism can play a driving role and on which its future closely depends.

Within the Pastinnova WP5 we will aim at documenting and discussing experiences of organisation and collective action which try to reverse socio-economic and environmental trends locally perceived
as problematic, and to renew the place of pastoralism in landscapes and food systems by
demonstrating that pastoral dynamics play a central role in their building and sustainability. By doing
so, we'll try to answer the following questions:

i) How do these experiences contribute to pastoralist capacity to develop social, economic, spatial and environmental synergies in and across territories ?

ii) How do they fit<fnref n="4" /> into wider societal, political movements redefining cultural and productive relationships to the economy and the environment?

iii) How do they interact with key public policy frames between friction, co-existence and co-construction? What do they bring out in terms of proposals for reform and improvement?

Even if uncertainty is a structural component of life, we are now experiencing times of accelerated environmental transformation, economic upheaval and uncertain evolution of policy frameworks at a global scale. In this context, resilience in the form of capacity to deal with change and multi-dimensional uncertainty is going to play a key role. Pastoralists have always been confronted and under certain conditions well equipped to deal with these issues. The point is to understand how strong levels of constraints (to mobility, to resource access at different scales, etc.) or inertia (strong dependence on external inputs and solutions, subsidies, markets, etc.) set up the conditions to which this capacity can be deployed or inhibited. In this respect, Sen's concept of "capability" (Sen, 2005)<fnref n="5" /> ("... (i) whether a person is actually able to do things she would value doing, and (ii) whether she possesses the means or instruments or permissions to pursue what she would like to do") better grasps what we are going to look into.

To be able to collectively adapt to accelerate changes implies transformation not only within a given social entity (i.e. pastoralist social units) but also in the larger context in which this navigates. Linking the concepts of “adaptability” (“capacity to deal with change”...”to control the trajectory of the system”) and “transformability” (“capacity to create a new system when ecological, economic or social (political) conditions make the existing system untenable”), as defined in Social-Ecological Systems studies (Walker et al. 2004; Berkes et al. 2003)<fnref n="6" /> allows to envision key dimensions of pastoralist capability to deal with uncertainty and change (diversity, flexibility, autonomy, self – (political) organisation), that can be useful for the understanding of policy impacts and potential for reform.

Before illustrating these dimensions, we want to introduce a basic general definition of pastoralism.
Even if this definition is taken from a document of policy of the Republic of Kenya and refers to arid
environments, it has the advantage of pointing to internal characteristics and dynamic processes
inherent to the practice of pastoralism across different fields and contexts (and therefore prevent
outdated and inconclusive debates on agro-pastoralism, agro-livestock keeping, nomadic or
transhumant, subsistence or market-oriented pastoralism, etc.).

<footnote n="4">⁴ This implies that: i) pastoralism can contribute to public concerns and ii) these public concerns and movements can have an effect on the different forms that pastoralism takes.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Sen, A. 2005. Human Rights and Capabilities. Journal of Human Development, Vol. 6, No. 2, July 2005</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.), 2008. *Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change.* Introduction, p 1-24. Cambridge university press.</footnote>

<footnote>Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems. *Ecology and society, 9*(2).</footnote>
...« As an economic activity, pastoralism is an animal production system which takes advantage of the characteristic instability of rangeland environments, where key resources such as nutrients and water for livestock become available in short-lived and largely unpredictable concentrations. Crucial aspects of pastoralist specialisation are: 1. The interaction of people, animals and the environment, particularly strategic mobility of livestock and selective feeding; and 2. The development of flexible resource management systems, particularly communal land management institutions and non-exclusive entitlements to water resources » (Republic of Kenya, 2012)<fnref n="7" />.

- Diversity

A fundamental feature of pastoralism is taking advantage of environmental variability and complementarities within heterogenous agroecosystems. This can be achieved by matching external with internal variability and diversity. Following the diversity of contexts and pastoral systems this can consist of : mobility practices allowing for tracking scattered seasonal patches of resources following specific rainfall patterns, topography, soil characteristics, etc. ; encouraging selective feeding through shepherding of locally-adapted breeds in order to increase the diversity of grazed plants (grass, shrub, tree leaves...); keeping different animal species in order to cover for the diverse needs of pastoral families and related markets as well as to minimise multi-dimensional risks (volatility of markets, diseases, environmental changes) ; different patterns of integration of livestock - crop production within and outside the farm scale (for example in drylands livelihood specialisation offer several advantages and diversity can be obtained through exchange and complementarities among specialised systems) ; diversification of livelihood options (it's important to keep in mind that not all the options are equivalent and depend on actor's economic and social status, social network, availability of capital and workforce...); diversity in marketing options and networks, etc. (Krätli, 2015)<fnref n="8" />.

- Flexibility

This refers to the ability to keep a high level of optionality in order to deal with multi-
dimensional uncertainty (resource availability and accessibility, dynamics of conflict or change
in political contexts, volatility of market prices, etc.). Examples include : keeping open multiple
mobility itineraries; cultivating a large array of social - political and economic relationships in
different places allowing for flexible and negotiated land and resource management ;
switching from different input and output markets following changing trends and
opportunities ; being able to prioritise multiple livelihood options to maintain the viability of
the overall system.

- Autonomy

Drawing from the analysis of Van Der Plough (2008)<fnref n="9" />, this refers to a certain degree of autonomy in the basis of resources and the means of production allowing a distance to the market as an ordering principle. Van Der Plough identifies ‘co-production’ as a key feature : the process of producing at an optimum level while ensuring the use, reproduction and the improvement of the ecological capital through a supply of skilled labour in order to take advantage of the specificities of the agroecosystem as a whole (which implies an empirical

<footnote n="7">⁷ Republic of Kenya, Ministry of State for Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands. *Releasing Our Full Potential*. Sessional Paper n° 8, on National Policy for the Sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and other Arid Lands. Nairobi, 2012, 42 p.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Krätli, S. (2015). Valuing variability: New Perspectives on climate resilient drylands development. IIED. Edited by de Jode, H.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ Van der Ploeg, J. D. (2018). *The new peasantries: rural development in times of globalisation*. Routledge.</footnote>
knowledge of the interdependency and interactions among the living elements within it). This allows for maximising production in a context of given constraints while aiming for the sustainability and the transmission of the activity in the long term. Other features of autonomy are the possibility to obtain labour outside of markets, pluri-activity to diversify revenue sources, reciprocity and cooperation to increase the base of resources outside markets.

- Self – (political) organisation

The anthropology of development approach drawing on the concept of ‘agency’ (Long and Long, 1992)<fnref n="10" /> assumes that even under the most extreme conditions of asymmetry in power relations, social actors and groups retain a certain degree of margins of manoeuvre. This can take the form of ‘silent resistance’, refusal of compliance to external injunctions, diversion of inputs and objectives. The political nature of these actions has to be considered. Other and potentially more transformative initiatives rely on the construction of forms of collective self-awareness and political engagement around common aspirations and interests, shared norms and beliefs, leading to the formalisation and pursuit of a political agenda claiming for a change of unfavourable dynamics and constraints. Many examples exist in the form of cooperation initiatives calling for the establishment and recognition of locally conceived norms, evaluation standards, forms of intervention and innovation within the EU-CAP framework (see for example “eco-schemes” in the Burren national Park in Ireland and NFW farmers’ cooperative initiatives in the Netherlands). Taking seriously into account the self-organisation capacity dimension of social groups demands to study the forms of inequality and asymmetry in power that structure political interactions both within and outside pastoralist societies and groups.

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ LONG, Norman, LONG, Ann. *Battlefields of knowledge. The interlocking of theory and practice in social research and development.* London & New York : Routledge, 1992.</footnote>
### 1.2.3 Descriptions of the current trends of public policy and the dynamics of transformation of pastoralism at a relevant scale with regard to Pastinnova IBMs (T5.1)

As first step of WP5 analysis (T5.1), we propose that all the partners carry out a as much as possible detailed description of dynamics of change that have intervened in pastoral systems in the last decades at a regional scale, here intended as an administrative or territorial entity which is relevant with regard to Pastinnova IBMs (for example, Corsica or Sardinia regions, Wilaya of Sétif, etc.; partners have the latitude to opt for non-administrative entities following cultural, socio-economic or geographic relevant and endogenous territorial categories).

The objective is to be able to link these changes to the effects of the successive and overlapping implementation of an array of public policies, namely: agricultural, food and trade policy; land, environmental and development policy. The grid proposed by Frazer (2007, Frazer and Stringer, 2009)<fnref n="11" /> to study socio-ecological systems vulnerability to climate change, and used by Dong et al. (2011)<fnref n="12" /> with regard to pastoralism, can be an example of an analytical support to be mobilised. This grid invites to look at agroecosystems dynamics (including trends in land/resources property and management, diversity/homogeneity, connectivity/fragmentation of agroecosystems), livelihoods (changes in and viability of alternative livelihood strategies) and institutions (what pertains to the effects of multi-scale political dynamics and institutions). Through this exercise, we should be able to identify major international and national policy frameworks and understand how they interweave and enroot in local contexts. Another issue for us is to be able to 'capture' the diversity of pastoral systems and their convergent or divergent trajectories of change<fnref n="13" />. Descriptions could get into the social and political regional history (political and power relationships, patterns of inclusion and development within national State frameworks, socio-cultural or professional groups, local norms and institutions), in order to provide key elements of comprehension of what is the current situation in terms of pastoral systems dynamics and policy trends, what is at stake nowadays and what is coming up in the future.

To complete this first step partners can mobilise their own knowledge and experience while also relying on bibliographic sources, and eventually enrich analysis and diversify perspectives through interviews and workshops with relevant actors and stakeholders.

Following the discussions of the concept note at the yearly PASTINNOVA meeting in Tanger (10 - 12th of May 2023), INRAE (France) and IRA (Tunisia) have provided a specific template to organise the collection of information for T5.1 (see Annex 2 - Inputs for Pastinnova deliverable 5.1 - Template).

<footnote n="11">¹¹ Fraser, E. D. (2007). Travelling in antique lands: using past famines to develop an adaptability/resilience framework to identify food systems vulnerable to climate change. *Climatic change, 83*(4), 495-514.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Dong, S., Wen, L., Liu, S., Zhang, X., Lassoie, J. P., Yi, S., ... & Li, Y. (2011). Vulnerability of worldwide pastoralism to global changes and interdisciplinary strategies for sustainable pastoralism. *Ecology and society, 16*(2).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Fraser, E. D., & Stringer, L. C. (2009). Explaining agricultural collapse: Macro-forces, micro-crises and the emergence of land use vulnerability in southern Romania. *Global Environmental Change, 19*(1), 45-53.</footnote>
## 2. Key points and main policies and frameworks detected

The following elements of analysis have been drawn from case studies developed by Pastinnova partners (see Annex 3 – Case studies for T5.1 – Catalonia - Spain, Corsica - France, Croatia, Greece and Cyprus, Marche - Italy, Sardinia - Italy, Slovenia; Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia; Lebanon and Turkey) and from interviews realised within Pastinnova framework (see Annex 4 – Interviews on public policy and pastoralism, Algeria, Greece, Morocco).

### 2.1 European Union region

#### 2.1.1 Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics in connection to policy frameworks

* Decline in mobility, land abandonment and fragmentation, loss of functional complementarities

All the case studies in the European Pastinnova fields attest to a sharp decrease in pastoral mobility. Transhumance is described as being less practised than in the past and currently restricted to movements to summer mountain pastures. Pastoral mobility doesn't connect anymore the lowlands that have historically played a key role in animal feeding during the winter season. This process was initiated in the first half of the XXth century when 'marginal' rural areas were more effectively integrated into national States' political and economic space. It became general after the second world war when agricultural modernization policies were implemented within the CAP policy framework. It has coincided with a deep restructuring of agricultural activities that has led both to the abandonment of land in mountainous areas and to the intensification of agriculture in the plains and lower lands. These trends has engendered landscape fragmentation and a consequent loss of complementarities between agricultural, forestry and pastoral activities that historically provided mutual advantages in terms of animal feeding over season (stubble, fallow resources, fruits, foliage...), soil fertility renewal, cleaning of land and maintaining of open landscapes key for biodiversity and mosaics of ecosystems. Case-studies argue for a strong correlation with policy frameworks aiming at settling and intensifying livestock systems (both through regulations and support systems), converting grasslands into arable and tree crops, implementing restrictive conservation management of common lands and forested areas, and suppression of pastoral burning. As a result, in the last decades, a strong dynamic of shrub and forest encroachment on the grasslands has been observed in all the fieldworks (maquis and forests currently cover around 50% of the total surface of Sardinia, Corsica and Marche regions), with negative effects in terms of degradation of pastoral resources, loss of biodiversity and landscapes, risks of occurrence of catastrophic fires, etc.

* Decline of the historical forms of livestock keeping

A second trend across European fields is a huge decline in the historical forms of pastoralism notably around the keeping of small ruminants. Case-studies point to the heavy workload needed in these systems in a context of shortage and relatively high average cost of labour. Cattle and pork livestock keeping have become more attractive because they are less labour demanding activities that equally
ensure valuable entitlements to CAP subsidies. Small ruminant numbers are stable in Greece and Sardinia where dairy value chains are more structured and have led to a broader and relatively more important intensification of systems. Nevertheless, also in these contexts, a large decrease in the number of farms suggest a strong dynamic of concentration of stocks and land.

* Problematic sustainability and profitability of relatively intensive livestock systems

Even in regions (Sardinia) and countries (Greece) where dairy sheep production holds a consistent share in the agricultural economy, problematic trends have been pointed out by Pastinnova partners. Trade and agricultural policy have sustained the intensification of dairy systems allowing for the free import of animal feeds and the development of fodder crops. Nevertheless, market polarisation towards export production (namely under Pecorino Romano and Feta PDO) have induced challenging dynamics. Cyclical volatility of sheep milk prices linked to the offer of Pecorino Romano, non-respect of PDO requirements for Feta cheese associated to highly fluctuating but tendentially growing costs of inputs expose livestock farms to economic instability and force them to frequently work at a loss.

* Social and economic restructuring of rural territories

Even if pluri-activity and economic diversification both in and off agriculture is a widespread strategy of livestock farmers to gain autonomy from markets, increase and broaden revenues, on-going economic restructuring process in rural areas boost the cost of production factors for pastoralism and strengthens competing sectors (tourism, energy production, real estate, etc.). Associated social dynamics (counter-urbanization, influx of pensioners and secondary residents, etc.) often contribute to the marginalisation of pastoralists by reducing the social and political audience for their claims and needs.

### 2.2.2 Key measures, orientations and priorities

European Pastinnova partners highlight the following priorities and measures in order to counter the problematic trends mentioned above :

* Develop alternative labelling, production and commercialization processes

Some general measures have been pointed in case-studies, namely a better understanding of the effects of trade agreements on livestock products and inputs and a better regulation of labelled productions (regulation of dairy production within Pecorino Romano value chain in Sardinia; respect of the requirements of PDO like Feta and Halloumi cheese in Greece and Cyprus, AOP Brocciu in Corsica). Furthermore, partners claim that public policy should actively sustain alternative certification processes recognising the multiple qualities of pastoral productions, for example through labels for "grass-fed" and "mountain pasture" livestock production in connection with environmental measures envisaged in the European Union's Green Deal framework<fnref n="14" />. Additionally, partners point to a better support for the development of direct selling and short circuits. This requires adapting technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures to the realities and characteristics of pastoral production as well as to actively promote social recognition of its multiple qualities.

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ EC. (2020). A Farm to Fork Strategy, For a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system. European Commission, Brussels.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0381
EC. (2021). Inception Impact Assessment.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13174-Sustainable-EU-food-system-new-initiative_en</footnote>
* Recognise the positive role of pastoralism in the environment and renew policy regulations and incentives

European partners point to the urgent need to effectively recognise the functional and mutually beneficial synergies between pastoral systems and Mediterranean environments. This recognition opens the field to explore options for policy reform, notably in terms of new forms of environmental regulation and management, and coherent policy subsidies and incentives. Measures drastically constraining or excluding the practice of pastoralism in forest environments, common lands and conservation areas should be reconsidered (exclusion of goat grazing is a relevant example). Instead of defining separate spaces for specific functions and uses, more holistic forms of management could be designed. Agroforestry and silvopastoralism practices (pruning and pollarding of diversified tree species, tree density reduction, ligneous, shrub and herbaceous grazing, etc.) can create synergies between forestry, conservation and pastoral activities. Such a productive multifunctional environment provides valuable resources while also sustaining the biodiversity, vegetal and soil dynamics that render ecosystems more resilient to fire, drought, and more generally to climate change dynamics and effects. Partners stress the importance of organising land management at a landscape scale through territorial policy tools (access to and management of pastures, stocking rates, grazing calendars, etc.). Such renewed policy orientations must be coupled to measures and schemes that value the socio-ecosystems services generated by pastoral systems. Several options are proposed such as tying CAP basic payments to environmental performance, extend eligibility to shrub and forest grazing, setting up adapted and well-funded agro-environmental measures and eco-schemes (see for example "eco-schemes" in the Burren national Park in Ireland and NFW farmers' cooperative initiatives in the Netherlands).

## 2.2 Northern African region

### 2.2.1 Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics in connection to policy frameworks

* Settling of pastoralist, destructuring of common property institutions, agricultural encroachment on rangelands

Partners point to the major impact of colonial policy on land management and pastoral mobility. Both Tunisia and Algeria have experienced large colonial settlements in the more humid northern parts of the country in the first half of the XXth century. Since then, these regions have become inaccessible for pastoralists historically practising south-north mobility leading to the abandonment of important forms of transhumance. Colonialism also has brought significant changes on common property management either by suppression of tribal land ownership or by the creation of neo-customary institutions that deeply changed management practices and forms of land tenure. After independence, new national authorities improved top-down policies aimed at promoting agricultural development in the steppes as well as at settling pastoralists' populations. Incentives for land privatisation and development have been initiated in this period and reproduced until nowadays. Participation in land titling processes has been a prerequisite to access subsidies and credits allowed for developing dry or irrigated crops (olive tree monoculture, almond, cereals...). Driven by urban investments these new forms of land development have been largely contributing to reduce and fragment grasslands in the
steppes as well as to increase competition for resource access and social inequalities. In parallel, pastoralists have been encouraged to settle by policies mixing incentives, namely subsidies for feed inputs (barley, fodder, concentrates) and credits, and constraints, especially hard restrictions to pastoral mobility (grazing restricted to collectively managed local areas, prohibition to cross borders...). These measures, ill-adapted to semi-arid environments, have disconnected livestock from vegetation dynamics thus resulting in overexploitation of pastures by sedentary herds heavily relying on subsided external inputs. Furthermore, partners stress that like in the case of agricultural development, external actors from urban areas have heavily invested in livestock production. Thanks to their capital and assets, they are able to access pastures by moving animals and water resources by trucks, thus exerting unfair competition on small family pastoralism.

*   **Policy frameworks ill-adapted to semi-arid environments and pastoral systems characteristics**

    Within this context, collective land management and pastoral development policies still have a strong environmental orientation. Forestry services retain a central authority on public and collective rangelands in addition to forest and conservation areas where grazing is forbidden. They also play a key role in development interventions. "Regeneration" by exclusion of grazing and resowing of pastures, grassland fencing, water conservation are central but controversial measures, in relation to pastoralism practice and rationales, reproduced overtime in connection to animal feed subsidies.

*   **Co-existence of small farming and goat livestock keeping in a context of land competition and forest clearing (Northern Morocco)**

In several wetter regions of Northern Africa like in the Northern Moroccan mountainous province of Chefchaouen, the pressure of small farming implementing subsistence agriculture, small goat herding and above all agribusiness for cannabis cultivation increases land competition and induces major forest clearing with strong impacts on shrinking grazing areas thus subjected to overgrazing. The local populations being excluded from the management of the forests, to find solutions for forage autonomy and preservation of small farmers' land is a major regional challenge.

### 2.2.2 Key measures, orientations and priorities

MENA region partners stress the following priorities:

*   Defining effective strategies to preserve collective lands and rangelands, and to limit its fragmentation (Tunisia, Algeria).

*   Improving policy really intended at developing pastoral practice in coherence with rural and intersectoral development frameworks (Tunisia, Algeria).

*   Promoting pro-pastoral attitudes, narratives and actions within public institutions in connection with different stakeholders involved in rangeland and pastoral management (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco).

*   Supporting a deep restructuring of livestock keepers' organisations in order to make them more operational and representative of the interests of disadvantaged groups (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco).
* Improving economic diversification (eco-tourism, etc.), forest management and regeneration, and reducing feed costs for small livestock farmers (Morocco).

Deliverable 5.1_ Identification of the public policy framework on pastoralism – Key measures, orientations and priorities_Final
## 2.3 Middle East region

### 2.3.1 Problematic trends for pastoral systems and territorial dynamics in connection to policy frameworks

Partners from Turkey and Lebanon point to the following trends:

* Highly centralised but poorly effective land governance.

* Agricultural encroachment on grasslands.

* Hard restrictions on pastoral mobility (animal health and environmental regulation, obligation to move. livestock on trucks, etc.) and prohibition of grazing in forests with authority relying on forestry services and regulations.

### 2.3.2 Key measures, orientations and priorities

* Updating rangeland management laws by taking into account local needs.

* Developing marketing channels for local pastoral products.

* Easing environmental and health regulations in order to facilitate pastoral mobility and allow for small ruminant access to forests and protected areas.

## 2.4 Conclusion

During the last WP5 meeting (9th of November 2023), partners have collectively agreed the following:

* T.5.2 will be realised in strong connection with regional living labs (RLLBs) activities and materials. WP5 coordinator will get in contact with RLLBs facilitators in the next week in order to define the approach and the roadmap to meet the goals of T5.2.

* A new WP5 meeting will be held the 12th of January 2024 (from 11 AM to 1 PM, CET time) in order to discuss the outcomes and implications of the first deliverable D5.1 for the following activities of WP5.

The following themes are cross-cutting and could be subject of investigation among Pastinnova fields of work:

* Dynamics and orientations to improve common property management and pastoral mobility on rangelands in semi-arid and temperate environments.

* Agro-environmental policies and regulations allowing pastoralism to develop functional relationships within the environment and address societal challenges.

* Policy and regulation priorities for developing alternative labelling, production and commercialization of pastoral products.

* Dynamics of professional organisation in pastoral contexts and policy measures to make them more operational and representative of the interests of disadvantaged groups.