# Value pluralism, legitimacy, and agriculture models: A socio-agronomic approach to sustainable transitions

Gaël Plumecocq, Thomas Debril, Michel Duru, Marie-Benoît Magrini, Jean-Pierre Sarthou, Olivier Therond

► To cite this version:

Gaël Plumecocq, Thomas Debril, Michel Duru, Marie-Benoît Magrini, Jean-Pierre Sarthou, et al. Value pluralism, legitimacy, and agriculture models: A socio-agronomic approach to sustainable transitions. 11. International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE): Transformations, Jun 2015, Leeds, United Kingdom. 19 p. hal-01603477

HAL Id: hal-01603477

https://hal.science/hal-01603477

Submitted on 5 Jun 2020

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

# Value Pluralism, Legitimacy, and Agriculture Models: A Socio-Agronomic Approach to Sustainable Transitions

Plumecocq G. (gael.plumecocq@toulouse.inra.fr), Debril, T., Duru, M. Magrini, M-B., Sarthou, J.P. et Thérond O.

## Introduction

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

Transition toward a more sustainable agriculture

Objective: characterize different forms of agriculture

- ecological principles

- institutional and organizational principles

## Conclusion: what about transition(s)?

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

Lock-in as legitimacy-disqualification processes

- Significance of principles (moral ground, justice, organization)

- Rules prevailing in certain forms of agriculture are lock-in for other forms

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

Governing transitions: political tools as legitimate-disqualified means

- Against one "size fits all" policies

- Non neutrality of political tools

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

About transition themselves:

- Against the notion of "pathway": level of critiques (devices vs. directing values)

- Complementarity of forms of agriculture

ESEE conference - Leeds - 30 June-2 July 2015

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

## Agronomic typology

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

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

## Sociologic specification

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

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

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

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

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

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

## Socio-agronomic characterization
<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

# Value Pluralism, Legitimacy, and Agriculture Models: A Socio-Agronomic Approach to Sustainable Transitions

Plumecocq G. (gael.plumecocq@toulouse.inra.fr), Debril, T., Duru, M. Magrini, M-B., Sarthou, J.P. et Thérond O.

## Introduction

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

Transition toward a more sustainable agriculture

Objective: characterize different forms of agriculture

- ecological principles

- institutional and organizational principles

## Conclusion: what about transition(s)?

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

Lock-in as legitimacy-disqualification processes

- Significance of principles (moral ground, justice, organization)

- Rules prevailing in certain forms of agriculture are lock-in for other forms

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /></figure>

Governing transitions: political tools as legitimate-disqualified means

- Against one "size fits all" policies

- Non neutrality of political tools

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

About transition themselves:

- Against the notion of "pathway": level of critiques (devices vs. directing values)

- Complementarity of forms of agriculture

ESEE conference - Leeds - 30 June-2 July 2015

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

## Agronomic typology

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

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

## Sociologic specification

<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>

## Socio-agronomic characterization
# Agronomic classification of farming systems
## in current western economies

**Two criteria:**

1) Nature of inputs

2) Scale of food systems

Practices of actors are organized according to **principles** that are collectively accepted

**Six principles**

- efficiency (Saint-Simon)

- wealth (Smith)

- equity (Rousseau)

- fame (Hobbes)

- honesty (Bossuet)

- grace (Augustine)

**Corresponding modes of organization**

- industry

- market

- civic

- opinion

- domestic

- inspired

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

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

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

Individuals are able to make **compromises**
<figure><img src="image_33.png" /></figure>

Ecosystem services

Agro-forestry
+ CA + ICLS

3a- Biodiversity-
based FS

Conservation agriculture

Integrated Crop-Livestock
Systems

Integrated
Landscape project

3c- Biodiversity-based FS
in Local Food System &
collectively managed
multi-service landscape

3b- Biodiversity-based FS
in Local Food Systems

Local dynamics

Global food systems

Exchanges between
FS and other sectors

2b- Biological input-
based FS

2c- Biological input-based FS
in circular economy

Exchanges between
crop & livestock FS

2a- Synthetic input-
based FS

Specialized
crop/livestock systems

1- Conventional FS

Exogenous inputs
# Agronomic classification of farming systems
## in current western economies

**Two criteria:**

1) Nature of inputs

2) Scale of food systems

Practices of actors are organized according to **principles** that are collectively accepted

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

**Six principles**

efficiency (Saint-Simon)

wealth (Smith)

equity (Rousseau)

fame (Hobbes)

honesty (Bossuet)

grace (Augustine)

**Corresponding modes
modes of organization**

industry

market

civic

opinion

domestic

inspired

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

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

Individuals are able to make **compromises**
Grammar of common worlds: principles in practice

**Objects** and **persons** are qualified in regard to higher principles (and disqualified
in regard to others

Some persons are in charge of the common good (figure of greatness)

Greatness is acquired through a **test** (principles are then modes of evaluation)

Principles provide a form to particular ways of organizing collective action (**forms of organization**)

These organizations are developed in given **space** and **time**

Higher principles defines different **Human-Nature relationships**
# Socio-agronomic characterization

## 1- Historical form of conventional agriculture

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

* Principle of productivity (i.e. production potential of varieties)

* and market organization for retailing (supermarket distribution)

* Mass and standardize products and processes of production

industrial productivity + market organization

## 1- conventional

### FC 2a- chemical and global

### FC 2b- biological and global

### FC 2c- biological and local

### FC 3a- biodiversity and global

### FC 3b- biodiversity, and local

### FC 3c- biodiversity, local and landscape

Higher principle

Test

Form of organization

Qualified objects & persons

Time & space of formation

...

## 2a - FS based on chemicals & embedded into global food systems

Differences:

* Political inputs

* Increase of petrochemical input prices (insurance premiums)

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

Principle of efficiency to produce as much as in i, but cheaper

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /></figure>

industrial efficiency + market profitability

## 2b - FS based on biological inputs & embedded into global food systems

Differences:

* Reduction of the inputs of humidified environmental damage

* Greenhouses for salary inputs

New commodities for new markets (new commodities)

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

No proof of effect of a knowledge, effect of work

Funders adopt a domestic 'consent' (kite' / 'federate')

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

Biology/technology

domestic proximity + bio-technological industrial efficiency

## 2c - FS based on biological inputs & embedded into local food systems

Differences:

* Reduction that was from other action create new opportunities for production

* Territorial perspective

"Small processes of production (feedback, interdependence, form...)

Interactions often organized into 'projects'

Fundamentally, higher principle remains efficiency to maximize the losses of form

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

industrial efficiency (at local scale)

## 3a - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into global food systems

Differences:

* Environmental ethic (is productive)

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

Importance of productive functions of ecosystems

Significant cognitive aspects

* Knowledge exchanges

* Experimentation

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

Peer community

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

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

opinion + industrial efficiency

## 3b - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into local food systems

Differences:

* Need for autonomy (in retailing)

* Redefinition of norms and standards of production

* Reconnect with the 'consumer'

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

Requires new competencies (social & on the market)

* Significance of the contribution of agricultural sector to local development

Elements of opinion, domestic, and market worlds

## 3c - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into local food systems and landscape services

Differences:

* Recognize the unique status of living beings

* Recognize that agricultural activities are systemic by nature

Producing requires 'discussing' with Nature

Territorial organization imitate the organization(s) Nature (adaptive governance)

Elements of green, domestic, and civic worlds

All these forms are legitimate from a certain perspective

Currently, they coexist and coevolve

Socio-agronomic characterization
# 1- Historical form of conventional agriculture

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

* Principle of productivity (e.g. production potential of varieties)

* and market organization for retailing (supermarket distribution)

* Mass and standardize products and processes of production

industrial productivity + market organization
## 2a - FS based on chemicals & embedded into global food systems

### Differences:

* Political injunctions

* Increase of petro-chemical input prices (insurance practices)

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

Principle of efficiency: to produce as much as in 1, but cheaper

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

**industrial efficiency + market profitability**
## 2b - FS based on biological inputs & embedded into global food systems

### Differences:

* Realization of the impacts of localized environmental damages

* Consideration for sanitary impacts

### New opportunities for new markets (role of cooperatives)

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

* No proof (deficit of knowledge, deficit of test)

* Famers adopt a domestic environmental "ethic" (beliefs)

<figure><img src="image_52.png" /><figcaption>Biological technologies</figcaption></figure>

**domestic proximity**
+
**bio-technological industrial efficiency**
## 2C - FS based on biological inputs & embedded into local food systems

### Differences:

* Realization that wastes from other activities create new opportunities for production

* Territorial perspective

"Closed" processes of production (feedback, interdependence, flows...)

Interactions often organized in or by "projects"

Fundamentally, higher principle remains efficiency (to minimize the losses of flow)

**industrial efficiency (at local scale)**

<figure><img src="image_53.png" /></figure>

Source: King County, WA USA - Traduction et adaptation de Mydiane
## 3a - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into global food systems

### Differences:

- Environmental ethic (life is productive)

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

Importance of productive functions of ecosystems

### Significant cognitive aspects

- Knowledge exchanges

- Experimentation

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

Peer community

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

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

**opinion + industrial efficiency**
<figure><img src="image_58.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_59.png" /></figure>
## 3a - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into global food systems

### Differences:

- Environmental ethic (life is productive)

<figure><img src="image_60.png" /></figure>

Importance of productive functions of ecosystems

### Significant cognitive aspects

- Knowledge exchanges

- Experimentation

<figure><img src="image_61.png" /></figure>

Peer community

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

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

**opinion + industrial efficiency**
## 3b - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into local food systems

Differences:

* Need for autonomy (in retailing)

Redefinition of norms and standards of production

* Reconnect with the "consumer"

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

Requires new competencies (social & on the market)

* Significance of the contribution of agricultural sector to local development

**Elements of opinion, domestic, and market worlds**
3c - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into
local food systems and landscape services

Differences:

* Recognize the unique status of living beings

• Recognize that agricultural activities are systemic by nature

Producing requires "discussing" with Nature

Territorial organization imitate the organization(s) Nature (adaptive
governance)

Elements of green, domestic, and civic worlds
# Socio-agronomic characterization

## 1- Historical form of conventional agriculture

<figure><img src="image_65.png" /></figure>

* Principle of productivity (e.g. production potential of varieties)

* and market organization for retailing (supermarket distribution)

* Mass and standardize products and processes of production

industrial productivity + market organization

## 1- conventional

### FC 2a- chemical and global

### FC 2b- biological and global

### FC 2c- biological and local

### FC 3a- biodiversity and global

### FC 3b- biodiversity, and local

### FC 3c- biodiversity, local and landscape

Higher principle

Test

Form of organization

Qualified objects & persons

Time & space of formation

...

## 2a - FS based on chemicals & embedded into global food systems

Differences:

* Political inputs

* Increase of petrochemical input prices (insurance premiums)

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

* Principle of efficiency to produce as much as in i, but cheaper

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

industrial efficiency + market profitability

## 2b - FS based on biological inputs & embedded into global food systems

Differences:

* Reduction of the inputs of humidified environmental damage

* Green economics for nutrient inputs

New opportunities for new markets (new commodities)

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

* No proof of benefit of a knowledge, diff. of work

* Figures subject to a domestic consensus (like 'famine')

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

Biology/technology

domestic proximity + bio-technological industrial efficiency

## 2c - FS based on biological inputs & embedded into local food systems

Differences:

* Reduction that was from other action create new opportunities for production

* Territorial perspective

* 'Small' processes of production (feedback, independent development)

* Interactions often organized in a 'project'

Fundamentally, higher principle remains efficiency to maximize the losses of form

<figure><img src="image_70.png" /></figure>

industrial efficiency (at local scale)

## 3a - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into global food systems

Differences:

* Environmental ethic (diff is productive)

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

* Importance of productive functions of ecosystems

Significant cognitive aspects

* Knowledge exchanges

* Experimentation

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /></figure>

* Peer community

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

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

opinion + industrial efficiency

## 3b - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into local food systems

Differences:

* Need for autonomy (in retailing)

* Redefinition of norms and standards of production

* Reconnect with the 'consumer'

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

* Requires new competencies (social & on the market)

* Significance of the contribution of agricultural sector to local development

Elements of opinion, domestic, and market worlds

## 3c - FS based on biodiversity & embedded into local food systems and landscape services

Differences:

* Recognize the unique status of living beings

* Recognize that agricultural activities are systemic by nature

Producing requires 'discussing' with Nature

Territorial organization imitate the organization(s) Nature (adaptive governance)

Elements of green, domestic, and civic worlds

All these forms are legitimate from a certain perspective

Currently, they coexist and coevolve

Socio-agronomic characterization
* institutional and organizational principles

## Conclusion: what about transition(s)?

<figure><img src="image_76.png" /></figure>

### Lock-in as legitimacy-disqualification processes

* Significance of principles (moral ground, justice, organization)

* Rules prevailing in certain forms of agriculture are lock-in for other forms

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

### Governing transitions: political tools as legitimate-disqualified means

* Against one "size fits all" policies

* Non neutrality of political tools

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

### About transition themselves:

* Against the notion of "pathway": level of critiques (devices vs. directing values)

* Complementarity of forms of agriculture
<figure><img src="image_79.png" /></figure>

# Value Pluralism, Legitimacy, and Agriculture Models: A Socio-Agronomic Approach to Sustainable Transitions

Plumecocq G. (gael.plumecocq@toulouse.inra.fr), Debril, T., Duru, M. Magrini, M-B., Sarthou, J.P. et Thérond O.

## Introduction

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

Transition toward a more sustainable agriculture

Objective: characterize different forms of agriculture

- ecological principles

- institutional and organizational principles

## Conclusion: what about transition(s)?

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

Lock-in as legitimacy-disqualification processes

- Significance of principles (moral ground, justice, organization)

- Rules prevailing in certain forms of agriculture are lock-in for other forms

<figure><img src="image_82.png" /></figure>

Governing transitions: political tools as legitimate-disqualified means

- Against one "size fits all" policies

- Non neutrality of political tools

<figure><img src="image_83.png" /></figure>

About transition themselves:

- Against the notion of "pathway": level of critiques (devices vs. directing values)

- Complementarity of forms of agriculture

ESEE conference - Leeds - 30 June-2 July 2015

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

## Agronomic typology

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

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

## Sociologic specification

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

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

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

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

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

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

## Socio-agronomic characterization