Dossier n°22

Johannesburg

INRA faced with Sustainable Development :

Landmarks for the Johannesburg Conference

(South Africa, from August 26th to September 4th 2002)

Sustainable development is not a research object amongst others ; it is a general finality assumed in the same way than knowledge production, and it is a fundamental dimension of progress, a dimension to which the scientific research aims to contribute. It is an essential criteria for research orientation, programming and evaluation. It is related to every projects, methods, programmes, structures and institutions.

INRA, which integrated environment stakes, is about to do the same for sustainable development, and none of its programs can escape being called into question. Clarifying which agricultures the Institute does take care of, developing interdisciplinary studies, dealing with scientific or technical policies for what they are - i.e. a comprehensive societal stake -is a permanent challenge we have to face.

This File essentially gathers articles published in the "Courrier de l'Environnement de l'INRA", and constitutions elements for any internal or external, national or international debate. These texts have been translated in English for this File, without any adaptation. The original articles in French are available here.

Preface
Summary
Abstracts
Postface

(L) = on line

Summary

Preface: Beyond the Cape of Good Hope (L)
by Patrick Legrand

Perspectives

Sustainable Development : a Necessity to Feed the World ?  by Bertrand Hervieu

Sustainable Farming: the Foundations of a New Social Contract ?  by Etiennes Landais

Sustainable Development : think forward and act now  by Bernard Hubert

Problematics

What is the Link between Environmental Issues and Agronomy ?  (L) by Gilles Lemaire and Jean-Marc Meynard

Environmental Conservation: from Concepts to Actions  by Jacques Lecomte

Searching for Nature  by Jacques Lecomte

The Assets and Vulnerability of French Agriculture by Dominique Dron

Defining what is a Living Organism: from Biology to Social Debates  by Bernard Chevassus-au-Louis

Decision, Expertise, Arbitrariness and Transparency : Elements of Sustainable Development  by Pierre-Frédéric Ténière-Buchot

Non-governmental Associations and Organisations: Complex and Constructed Expectations  by Patrick Legrand

Lightings

The Fallow and its Agronomic, Economic and Environmental Functions  by Michel Sébillote, Sophie Allain, Thierry Doré and Jean-Marc Meynard

Livestock Farmers, Researchers and Scrub  by Jean-Paul Chabert, Elisabeth Lécrivain and Michel Meuret

The Management of Sensitive Natural Areas- the Way it works and the Perspectives it offers  by Catherine Proffit

The Land, the Environment and Cheese Production: the Example of cheese produced in the Nothern Alps
by Jean-Marcel Dorioz, Philippe Fleury, Jean-Baptiste Coulon and Bruno Martin

Agronomic Research faced with Greenhouse Effect Gas
by Bernard Seguin

The Background of the Kyoto Protocol, Stakes that go beyond the Fight against Climatic Change by Michel Robert

Sustainable Farming, Terroir and Food Traditions  by Christian Brodhag

Postface: Researches on Farming in the Sustainable Development Problematics (L) by Catherine Laurent

[R]

Preface

Beyond the Cape of Good Hope

By Patrick Legrand
INRA-ME&S
147 rue de l'Université, 75338 Paris cedex 07
legrand@paris.inra.fr

Deep down, there is often a certain uneasiness about modern scientific research when the latter is confronted with obvious yet fleeing facts. Doubt is often the first reaction when researchers deal with events or observations that are not included in their theories and results.

Disorder often creeps in when scientific research deals with socio-political phenomena linked to the aspirations of society - so-called "civilian" phenomena - which is out of touch with its results, problematics and methods.

When this given society begins to question the options and long-term choices made by researchers (one can only admit that researchers produce certain aspects of the future, i.e. frameworks of development, some possible, others less probable), a feeling of discontent settles in and increases along with the development of the movement. Therefore, in the best of times, research is constantly calling itself into question and feeling its way. At the worst of times, it denies the affair, buries its head in the sand and ignores or refuses the facts… In our Western or "Westernised" societies, research certainly has the means, tools, power and reflex.

Although this autistic attitude never really lasts, it often does enough so to induce an unequal development of knowledge, a development which benefits dominant options, thus encouraging the present certitudes and giving a temporary but decisive advantage to their application. Therefore the question moves from the more or less silent field of scientific controversy to the field of social debate, which is all the more animated as it intervenes at a later time and in a hostile context.

Nowadays, the trial of strength does not systematically favour dominant ideas. In Europe, the case of genetically modified organisms and genetic engineering are the most recent examples of this resistance and its consequences: citizen are suspicious of science and defy researchers, research builds its own opposition and covers it with a mask of obscurantism, researchers are often seen in courts and parliaments - not in the role of experts but rather as defendants or the defended - technologic options are durably depreciated, certain industrial groups are ill-treated, etc.

When taking a close look, we can see that the precautionary principle - one of the principles of sustainable development, recognized at Rio de Janeiro, in 1992 - is a regulation tools which can be used to go beyond such situations. Incompatible with this autistic attitude, it can be used both to assume definitive uncertainties and to fill in the gaps left by the deadlocks of research. We now know more about the fortuitous scattering of genetic information, the risks associated with GMOs and conditions or methods of an anticipated and complex evaluation… due to the fact that orientations and research programs have been disrupted by the social debate.

As regards active positions, faced with a society which opposes its own projects and desires, researchers can schematically adopt three kinds of more or less voluntaristic attitudes.

The first, minimalist, consists in considering everything as epiphenomena - possibly aberrant - and thus which does not deserve more than a marginal curiosity. In France, for instance, it was long the case of organic farming. This attitude is generally considered as a social practice, by sociologists and economists, rather than as a mode of production and has only recently entered the scope of agronomists (due to the risk of marginalisation) and institutional research programmes.

The environment long suffered the same fate and sustainable development could possibly suffer the same. At the worst, an internationalised collective aberration, at the best, a pleasant planetary curiosity, sustainable development would nevertheless remain a minor object for unimportant studies or studies denying its specificity and an opportunity for validating and extending theories produced at others times. It would be research on sustainable development…

The second attitude is more active and consists in considering sustainable development as a field of research amongst others - recognized, autonomous and legitimate, characterised by specific finalities and built with the participation of researchers. Comprehensively, in such a situation, the "sustainable" would mix with the "unsustainable", while considering all the handicaps that a new project is confronted with when faced with an older, better-established process. Here, we are talking about research for sustainable development, possibly confined in a compartment, programme or even a discipline… the efficiency of which randomly depends on the strength of political incentive, intensity of competition, extent of financial subsidies and academic recognition.

The third attitude is more comprehensive and is located at the level of stakes. It considers sustainable development as a general finality - taken into consideration in the same way as knowledge - and as a fundamental dimension of progress, to which scientific researchers claim they contribute. Sustainable development is thus a determining component of all main issues and concerns every project, method, programme, structure and institution, and is an essential orientation, programming and evaluation criteria: research adapted to sustainable development. To one extent or another, nothing can possibly escape being called into question, not even fundamental issues. Indeed, the issues of sustainable development -just like those of the environment - are not included in the studies that explicitly concern the latter and it is not in the nature of scientific research to be more oriented towards what is considered to be right rather than towards sustainable development.

It must be added that the Agenda 21 recommendations, action programme validated at Rio de Janeiro, neither explicitly decide between the two last attitudes nor suggest finalised dispositions. However chapter 31, dedicated to the scientific and technical Community, incidentally recommends that governments should examine "how to adapt scientific activities and national techniques to the needs of sustainable development" ( Action 21, Rio Declaration on environment and development. CNUED, New York, 1993, p.209)

The paradigmatic trinomial of sustainable development - society, economy, environment - the four principles - responsibility, prevention, precaution, debate - and the long-term features associated to the latter, already suggest an analysis grid as well as method orientations. Therefore, it is unnecessary to possess a finalised project in order to become involved in the process.

Following a first evolution which led INRA to structurally integrate the stakes of environment, the Institute is now preparing itself to do the same for sustainable development. INRA has basically "three major programmatic fields" (food and food safety, sustainable agriculture production, environment and territories) and definitely intends these "orientations to be in keeping with the major international thematics, amongst which the search for sustainable development has a central position". At present, the institute is evaluating "the way [this problematic] is presently taken into consideration in [its] main programmes". All our programmes should be submitted to questioning…

This file - Johannesburg, INRA faced with Sustainable Development, Landmarks for the Johannesburg Summit - contributes to a debate which is both internal and global. It is also a means of making official the commitment taken by a public research institution. And finally, it is a way of exploring the new frontier with which is faced scientific research.

Patrick Legrand is director of the "Mission Environnement Société de l'INRA"

Translated from French by Ingrid Kem

[R]

Abstracts

Sustainable Development : a Necessity to feed the World? (L)
In order to guarantee "the right for people to feed themselves" (the only solution to reach any kind of sustainable development), it is imperative to control the globalisation process by regulating the farm product world offer and by permitting each country -or group of countries- to protect its agriculture. It is just as necessary to promote sustainable development frameworks via adequate agricultural policies. In the South, the aim is to carry out a controlled agricultural modernisation in order to increase production without disturbing social and environmental balances. In the North, the objective is to reconcile consumers with their food and agriculture by preferring environment-friendly quality and practices. Finally, we must put an accent on the public aid for development and a renewal of our ways of cooperating.
By Bertrand Hervieu.

Sustainable farming: the foundations of a new social contract?
First used in 1987, the term "sustainable development" generally refers to the means used to conciliate development dynamics and resource and natural environment protection, in the long term. Sustainable development has now progressed towards the autonomisation of environment protection imperatives. How does this approach apply to agriculture? Up to now, farmers have been hostile to this method, however they are starting to consider sustainable development as a new social contract and the idea of sustainability may be as good a driving force as productivity was in the past. Scientists are often ill at ease when faced with a complex long-term "extra-scientific" topic and they find this approach rather problematic.
At the farm level, sustainability implies several qualities: viability, liveability, transmissibility and reproductibility. As for the development modalities, such as those of intensive pig farming, they may reveal to be unsustainable.
By Etienne Landais
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'environnement n° 33", April 1998.

Agricultures and sustainable development: the stakes of knowledge and research attitudes (L)
Think forward and act now.
How can we approach agriculture or the different types of agriculture while considering the issues raised by the notion of sustainable development, with its three aspects - economic, ecological and social - that can be declined on three levels: the farm, local agriculture and development models? How can we take into consideration the strategic and political dimension, the "normative" dimension and the analytical dimension? How are the two major opinions found in literature - one privileging the availability of resources as such and the other privileging the functioning of biological systems and social systems - integrated in the current discussions and debates around sustainability? What does Badwen's grid (made up of four quadrants and delimited by two orthogonal axes: a vertical axe opposing the reductionist visions of the world, towards the bottom, and the holistic visions, towards the top, and a horizontal axe, which distinguishes an objectivist (positivist) vision, to the right, and a constructivist vision, to the left) teach us about the different visions of the world amongst the research and agriculture actors?
By Bernard Hubert.

Sustainable farming: the foundations of a new social contract?
First used in 1987, the term "sustainable development" generally refers to the means used to conciliate development dynamics and resource and natural environment protection, in the long term. Sustainable development has now progressed towards the autonomisation of environment protection imperatives. How does this approach apply to agriculture? Up to now, farmers have been hostile to this method, however they are starting to consider sustainable development as a new social contract and the idea of sustainability may be as good a driving force as productivity was in the past. Scientists are often ill at ease when faced with a complex long-term "extra-scientific" topic and they find this approach rather problematic.
At the farm level, sustainability implies several qualities: viability, liveability, transmissibility and reproductibility. As for the development modalities, such as those of intensive pig farming, they may reveal to be unsustainable.
By Etienne Landais
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 33 ", April 1998.

Environmental conservation: from concepts to actions (L)
Fundamental research and conservation practices are the foundations of environmental conservation and must in no case be dissociated. Reflections on the preservation, restoration and management of an ecosystem often turn around three essential points: biodiversity, functionality and naturality. Biodiversity is the easiest notion to understand as it is obvious that it is necessary to preserve the wide and varied species that exist, whether these species are essential or simply emblematic. Functionality is basically the entire ecological functions that are needed to maintain an ecosystem or habitat; however, this notion is harder to grasp and is not the subject of as many debates as naturality. Naturality involves time, past knowledge of the ecosystem and understanding just how disturbed this ecosystem is. In any case, the preservation of the environment is a complex task and requires different complementary actions to be carried out wherever they are needed.
By Jacques Lecomte
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 43 ", May 2001.

Searching for nature (L)
Natural nature, set nature, manmade nature, created nature, artificial nature… there are many kinds of "nature" and it isn't always easy to find one's way amongst them all.
Jacques Lecomte recently tried to show the importance of the three attributes of the ecosystem: biodiversity, naturality and functionality. Naturality is generally the least respected of these elements and is extremely rare in metropolitan France.
It is for everyone to decide what he/she considers to be Nature. A certain amount of intellectual honesty is nevertheless required, especially as regards the background history of habitats.
"I (J. Lecomte) sincerely believe in the importance of the grasslands that have replaced forest environments following human activities. But I refuse to consider them as the last remnants of an ancestral steppe!"
By Jacques Lecomte
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 45 ", February 2002.

The assets and vulnerability of French agriculture (L)
In France, agriculture represents far more than its share of the gross domestic product (GDP) or of demography, for that matter. Due to the present uncertainties, a strategic analysis of the assets and vulnerability of the "French farming enterprise" is needed, taking into account the context and perspectives and considering, all the while, that the French farming community have the same perception as French citizens and consumers in general.
The article is focussed on economic aspects, based on three statements: 1) the main assets of French agriculture are still going strong. 2) However, the production systems are vulnerable (structure of the agricultural fabric, its relationship with the land), which is worrying. 3) The present context is particularly fragile and it is necessary to use all the assets in order to overcome the vulnerability of production systems.
By Dominique Dron
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 43 ", May 2001.

Defining what is a living organism: from biology to the social debate (L)
Possessing living organisms, whether they are animals or plants, has always been considered as a limited right: these property rights are only strictly applied to the individuals themselves, and can be suppressed in certain cases; moreover, there is no certitude of the property rights being carried over to the progeny. Thus, if a domesticated male animal rambles off and breeds with the female of another herd, the owner of the male cannot claim the progeny as being his property.
The wish to claim overall property rights over "living organisms", i.e. an indefinite group of individuals and their progeny, only appeared in the twentieth century and became particularly strong with the development of biotechnologies. The emergence of this demand is the result of a conjunction between technical possibilities and economic stakes at a worldwide level.
The author first examines the scientific and technical genesis of this "generation control" and shows that the processes contested by today's society (transgenese, cloning, "Terminator-gene") are the logical outcome of a long quest, the aim of which was to understand and control life-transmission processes. He especially evokes three aspects of this long study:
- defining character transmission laws, which led to the progressive discovery and manipulation of genes;
- understanding the laws of character recombination and obtaining an identical reproduction;
- monitoring reproduction, so as to produce living organisms that cannot reproduce.
Secondly, he presents the different aspects of the social debate (legal, economic, political or ethical) about concretely applying this new technology.
- the legal aspect: Bernard Chevassus-au-Louis shows how over the last twenty years, the status of "living organisms" has gone from that of "common heritage of humankind" to that of "living material" that can be patented.
- the economic aspect: the author examines the relationship between the protection of intellectual property and innovation dynamism: in the short term and long term, which would be the best protection system to carry on the creation of adapted animal and plant species?
- the ethical aspect: he then shows what is at the base of ethics as regards human action on nature, and what measures should be taken when new technological discoveries occur that are not taken into account by traditional ethical systems.
The examples used are mainly of animal and plant species used in farming, as the issues concerning human beings have been approached in other seminars.
By Bernard Chevassus-au-Louis
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 40 ", June 2000.

Decision, expertise, arbitrariness and transparency: elements of sustainable development (L)
A seminar on "the values and representations of the environment" was held in the Abbaye de Royaumont, in May 2001.
On a similar basis, a workshop called "Communication and representations of water" will be organised (by the "club ECRIN" - Society and Environment Club) to confront the different points of view and powers involved, to allow the participants to express their thoughts and orient them towards a common vision, but also to assemble them in networks and improve communication, a vital element in water management.
This article was presented at Royaumont and constitutes an introduction to the project. There are four parts to the article: a reminder of what exactly is sustainable development, a few words on the decision, a cynical glance on the nature of the different experts and a few suggestions on how to move from arbitrariness to a more controlled organisation.
"The conclusion of the article is followed by an appendix analysing the structure of the last part of the Royaumont seminar. The aim of this appendix is to see, beyond the terms used, which words, notions and concepts overrule the others, but also to acknowledge why it is important to consider such questions and what should be said about them".
By Pierre-Frédéric Ténière-Buchot
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 44 ", October 2001.

Non-governmental Associations and Organisations : Complex and Constructed Expectations (L)
"Beyond the definition of sustainable development that everybody now knows (association of societal, environmental and economic factors, the biosphere as a whole, reversibility of choices, governance modes, prevention and precaution, long-term and future generations, amongst other features) and by considering society's expectancies from a voluntaristic point of view, what are the objectives and roles of NGOs and associations -ill-known, sometimes deplored but ever-evolving actors- faced with the industrial world?"
A long introduction and the translation of PL's communication at the first "Forum pour le développement durable et une entreprise responsible" (FEDERE 2002), organised by Les Echos at Paris on 5-6 March 2002, during the session devoted to "the expectations of society in Europe". PL is at the head of the ME&S, president of honour of France Nature Environnement and member of the National Commission of Public Debate.
By Patrick Legrand.
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 45 ", February 2002.

Fallows, set-aside and their Agronomic, Economic and Environmental Functions; a Diagnosis (L)
The CAP has reintroduced fallowing into agriculture although the evolution of the latter led to rejecting it. Its main aim is now to limit production in a framework of particularly rigid constraints.
This raises a range of agronomic problems: these are examined in the light of an analysis of the traditional functions of fallows and the results obtained over the years. Besides, the consequences on the functioning of farms, and in particular their structural costs, cannot be neglected.
Research must help farmers to overcome the most negative effects of the CAP regulations, but must also contribute to their evolution. Therefore, it is also important to examine the advantages of long-term or fixed fallows.
By M. Sébillotte, S. Allain, T. Doré, and J.-M. Meynard
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 20 ", September 1993. (authors' abstract translation)

Livestock farmers, researchers and scrub (L)
Over the last thirty years, due to the decline of agriculture, many well-maintained grasslands have been overgrown by enclosing scrub. Ewes, goats and cows have been called in to keep up these areas and to prevent them from turning into forest. However, these pleasant biological brushcutters are not yet the norm. To cut out all the possible risks of this new livestock farming method, researchers need to study the way these animals find and choose their food in a complex heterogeneous environment.
By Jean-Paul Chabert, Elisabeth Lécrivain and Michel Meuret
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 35 ", November 1998.

The management of sensitive natural areas - the way it works and the perspectives it offers (L)
Since the 1970's, in France, structures have been set up to manage sensitive "natural areas", i.e. national parks, natural reserves, regional nature parks, coast protection structures and regional bodies for the protection of natural areas. Their main aim is to prevent these areas from being overrun by forest or scrub. The administrators have had to find a compromise between totally natural areas (wildlife) and entirely agricultural areas (livestock). Several ecological management programmes for grasslands are studied in this article, such as the sensu stricto naturalist management, the aim of which is to increase biodiversity inexpensively, and the traditional naturalist management. Both these schemes are based on cultural references.
By Catherine Proffit
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 37 ", August 1999.

The land, the environment and cheese production: the example of cheese produced in the Northern Alps (L)
In the case of milk and cheese, the land can be considered as a specific geographical area characterised by the environment conditions and the type of animals that are farmed there and that produce specific products. In a specific area of production, the physical environment, the pastures and forage, as well as the humans-beings and animals form a living system that has an effect on the products produced in the area. In the Alps, the land is characterised by specific plant species and particularly key species that have certain secondary metabolites; it is also characterised by the modifications that this particular environment induces on widespread species. The author especially gives the example of the Beaufort and Reblochon cheeses produced in the Northern Alps to illustrate these facts.
By Jean-Marcel Dorioz, Philippe Fleury, Jean-Baptiste Coulon and Bruno Martin
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 40 ", June 2000.

Agronomic Research faced with Greenhouse Effect Gas (L)
by Bernard Seguin

The background of the Kyoto protocol, stakes that go beyond the fight against climatic change… (L)
"The discussions that occurred at the Sixth Session of the Conference of the Parties on the Convention on Climate Change (CO P 6), in The Hague, in November 2000 mainly concerned the "limitation" of emission sources of greenhouse gases and the possible compensations by CO2 sinks located in forest ecosystems or in agriculture. [...] The mitigation or compensation effect of greenhouse gases by forests and farming really does exist and is tangible and measurable. Its main advantage is to have an immediate effect (if the area is not deforested) and becomes effective after 3 to 5 years when forests are replanted or when changes occur in agricultural practices. It is thus directly complementary with the limitation of emissions which, due to problems linked to its implementation, will only become beneficial in several decades."
By Michel Robert
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 41 ", October 2000.

Sustainable farming, local products and food traditions (L)
Globalisation consists in standardising consumption and production modes and rapidly growing new economic activities in the sector of tourism, food processing and the craft industry are based on products and services with a high patrimonial and cultural potential.
On a worldwide scale, these activities may conserve cultural and social differences if they are integrated into a local strategy of sustainable development and if consumers are made aware and are informed of these differences through a clear labelling system. The French A.O.C. (Appellation d'Origine Côntrolée) is a good example of sustainable development.
By Christian Brodhag
Article taken from the " Courrier de l'Environnement n° 40 ", June 2000.

[R]

Postface

Researches on Farming in the Sustainable Development Problematic

by Catherine Laurent
INRA-PARIS
SAD
16 rue Claude-Bernard, 75005 Paris
laurent@inapg.inra.fr

Dealing with agriculture in a sustainable development problematic amounts to place it at the crossroads of two heterogeneous rationales:
- a sector-based development rationale that relies on possibilities of accumulation and of reproduction of agriculture (considered as an economic sector) allowed by agricultural income,
- a territorial development rationale (that does not refer to any special scale),where is at stake the capacity of a localised social system to maintain some economic and social activities on its territory and to protect its natural resources in the long run. The sustainable development concept assumes that the requirements of these two rationales can be conciliated.

However this is not so simple. Experience shows that knowledge elaborated to sustain a sector-based rationale are most often inadequate, too much fragmented, and therefore unable to take up the complex questions raised by sustainable development. Hence, insistent demands referred to institutes implementing applied research, such as INRA. The articles of this special issue show that we now have some experience. But, they reveal too the need of considerable revision of research programs to deal with agriculture in a perspective of sustainable development. Even if these articles have not been chosen to present an exhaustive inventory of these revisions, some questions suffusing those texts, may be underlined.

1. Redefining what "Agriculture" is

First statement, for researchers dealing with agriculture, research questions and observation objects are radically changing. For example, the "agriculture" of the sustainable development problematics is a much more large and varied social entity than the "agriculture" analysed in a sector-based perspective.

Through a simplifying vision, into which agriculture regulation is mainly thought as market regulation, it is logical to define "agriculture" as the set of farms which have a significant contribution to market supply. It is mainly from this standpoint that negotiations at the WTO are handled. But by defining agriculture in such a way, countless millions of small-scale farms, whose main finalities differ (in particular subsistence farms where people farm for home-consumption), are deliberately ignored¹. But these farms contribute to feed poor rural households, they use land and play a role in the ecological structuring of landscapes; they cannot be ignored in a sustainable development perspective. By definition sustainable development cannot be confined in the commercial aspects of the activities (contrarily to WTO perspective), and the objective is not to endow only few farmers with the responsibility to feed the world (cf. B Hervieu). Therefore, every households having a farming activity, whatever the aim of this activity is, must be included in the analysis.

But this statement, which seems trivial, raises unsuspected difficulties for researchers who wish to extend the population of their studies. These two last decades, numerous works have been built according to models based on representative agent, eluding the question of farmers' diversity. On the statistic level, a part of the small-scale farms is often ill described, if not ignored, by statistic conventions. It is thus a real disruption in the basic population's definition and in the data creation, which must be done, if we wish to carry on a precise analysis about the economic, social and environmental functions of agriculture. At this moment, we must recognize that the revision of statistic apparatus remains at the level of a preliminary thinking². Therefore it makes difficult to generalise monographic works' results which analyse the different functions of agriculture in a sustainable development perspective, or indicators which permit to compare some environmental characteristics of national agricultures.

2. Assessing Effectiveness in a Different Way

However, a new conceptualisation of agriculture's functioning is systematically elaborated. Thus in order to understand and to conciliate, in a same area, the objectives of agricultural production with the objectives of environmental protection, some studies are carried on to assess farm performances according to these two goals. The difficulty does not result from the need to consider simultaneously different objectives (there do exist models to do that)³ but rather from the necessity to specify what should be the evaluation criteria, the relevant geographic levels and time scales, for apprehending the environmental performances of production systems.

As E. Landais reminds us, the vagueness of sustainable development objectives does not make the task easier. And J. Lecomte shows, through the instance of biodiversity, that when there is no accurate and coherently organized objectives, it becomes very difficult to define what can be judged satisfying, and to determine the most appropriate indicators for assessing the effectiveness of a given action.

This does not prevent researchers from selecting themselves some objectives, as model, to make joint assessment of agricultural and environmental performances. But several authors (Lecomte, Landais, Lemaire & Meynard, Sebillotte et al.) underline the necessity of articulating spatial and temporal scales which differ from those taken in account in the classical analysis of farm production. They also stress the difficulty to study the distanced effects (in space) and differed effects (in time) of farming practices. In the same time, they notice the limits of works trying to predict the consequences of long-term changes of farm practices for farm functioning (Sebillotte et al.) or for the biodiversity (Lecomte), while the pressures to obtain long-term predictive models for helping policy decisions are extremely strong.

This new kind of performances assessment may involve formal or informal institutions little known by technical disciplines. For instance, to improve the environmental performances, new networks of dialogues may be required to help collaboration between neighbours and not only between colleagues. Beyond the definition of evaluation criteria, the question of the social organisation of farm performance assessment is raised in new terms. Thus, as other sustainable development problematic related questions, it leads to the issue of the renewal of the collaborations between scientific disciplines.

3. Developing Interdisciplinarity

Most of the authors in this special issue underline that, in order to apprehend the questions regarding sustainable development, it is necessary to connect varied disciplinary scientific-rooted knowledge. This proposition is developed by Lemaire & Meynard who show that it is necessary to mobilize knowledge from varied corpuses, in order to rethink agronomy through its link with the environmental problematic. But they also notice that there is really nothing new in this. Interdisciplinarity is a current practice for researchers in applied research. In this line, the article of Dorioz et al. shows that it would be illusory to try to understand what the final quality of any production and what its link with a given territory does consist in, without mobilizing some knowledge built according to varied disciplinary standpoints. However, social demand for better interconnected knowledge reinforces the former requirement of interdisciplinarity and extends the field of knowledge that should be mobilised.

Logically, the sustainable development concept invites to deepening reflections above the conditions of possibility for an interdisciplinarity that would go beyond a mere juxtaposition of knowledge and would rely upon a real undertaking of methodological and theoretical integration. But… the interdisciplinarity is badly reputed in academic world and remains an area of epistemological obscurity.

The problem is that scientific disciplines are -also- institutions.

A scientific discipline is an entity with a dual perspective, both intellectual and professional, built on both a field of research and a set of practical rules, as any other profession. Thus, even if interdisciplinarity seems to be justified on a logical standpoint, it is not enough for being recognized in the profession. As noticed by E.Landais, part of the difficulty of translating into scientific questions the sustainable development concept, stems from this state of fact. Indeed, researchers of applied research institutes are increasingly submitted to a paradoxical injunction. They are asked, on the one hand, to deal with questions implying that they integrate knowledge from varied disciplines (and often, knowledge built by the sciences of nature and of society), and that they integrate their analysis in some comprehensive visions on agriculture and on society. But, on the other hand, their studies are increasingly evaluated according to academic and disciplinary criteria, and in several scientific journals a reductionist approach is the most secured way for being recognized by peers, chosen because of their competency in a specialised field.

These rigidities deserve to be analysed by the research institutions because it does not seem reasonable to endow individual researchers with the responsibility of the interdisciplinarity integration, and of the methodological and conceptual renewal implied by the sustainable development concept, all programming and evaluation measures being equal.

4. Recognizing the Importance of Tacit Knowledge

Another example of this need of a methodological renewal is given by the questions related to tacit knowledge.

Thinking in terms of sustainable development supposes to better take into account the specificity of local situations, as several authors notice it. Indeed, the irruption of sets of constraints linked to ecological, cultural and socio-economic dimensions, and to physical environment, increases the variability, which must be taken into account to elaborate relevant descriptions of the situations of activities. But this variability reduces the possibility of using generic knowledge for each of these singular situations.

After several decades, aiming at referring any production situation to standard situations, the translation from "generic" to "specific" appears through new terms. It questions the links between scientific knowledge (i.e. knowledge produced according to methods considered as scientific), with other shapes of knowledge.

At first, as B. Hervieu reminds us, there is farmers' practical knowledge that must be taken into account. It largely results from implicit analyses. However, as shown by Chabert, Lécrivain & Meuret for shepherds grazing practices, this knowledge can be formalised, assessed and in this specific case, validated and processed into new scientific knowledge. The models built this way consider categories used by stakeholders for reasoning their exploitation of resources (in this example, the time and space structure of grazing routes). Thus they permit a better understanding of the data on which people rely on for making the best of the resources' specificity they dispose of. In turn, they make easier the dialogues between researchers and shepherds for conceiving new principles of pasture management.

Here it is a huge source of new learning for making the most of this local experience of using combined resources. Other studies, based on practical observation (in particular with farming-system or agrarian systems approaches), have permitted a formalisation of these tacit knowledge in several domains (crops, cattle husbandry,...). This is often assimilated to the analysis of "traditional knowledge". It is not relevant: tacit knowledge is constantly renewed. It is created with every innovation in a singular context, including high technology industrial sectors⁴. So the point is not to collect once for all fixed traditional knowledge. On the reverse, the results of tacit knowledge analysis invite to seriously consider the role of interactions (between farmers, local stakeholders and researchers) in the elaboration of new knowledge, and to make sure that ad hoc measures permit these permanent interactions.

5. Connecting Research Frameworks and Farmers

Technical Support Frameworks

But if D. Dron highlights the need of a diversified and renewed technical training for farmers, if B. Hervieu recalls the stakes of a scientific production adapted to particularities and local needs, it is because access to knowledge is decreasingly guaranteed for farmers.

Focusing on the question of the patentability of "living material", the debate on knowledge production and spreading "forgets" the disappearance of farmers technical support frameworks.

In the sixties, organisms for farmer's technical support had been settled worldwide, and their costs were partly supported by public funds or tax. Since the beginning of the eighties, a wave of economic liberalisation induced the disappearance of these institutions in many North and South countries⁵. Thus, millions of poor farmers cannot pay anymore for technical services, which formerly were free. Thus they are isolated from information networks and technical advice. At the same moment, because of the sustainable development objectives, they face increasing complex constraints (being competitive in an open economy, and respecting the environmental and quality standard in the same time) for which their former knowledge may be little adapted. When technical advice is no more available, it is up to the individual farmer to find integrated solutions for complex problems, on which researchers and major consulting companies stumble.

Moreover, after several years, it appears that relying on the sole market regulations for production and spreading of knowledge brings unsuspected perverse effects. Farmers technical support frameworks, even when they did not function very well, were a place of interactions between researchers and extensionnists. After they have disappeared, even when punctual support are financed, farmers cannot clearly formalise a precise technical demand anymore, and in turn, training or extension projects that are settled meet difficulties to conceive and propose any adapted offer.

Yet, researchers alone will not be able to produce knowledge endowed with the level of specificity required by farmers' situation. The whole agricultural knowledge system must be put into perspective. But strangely enough, while all other economic sectors consider technical support to small enterprises as a key-issue for the future, in agriculture this question is often absent in the debate.

6. Distinguishing scientific reasoning and policy decision making

But as B. Chevassus reminds us, there is also the question of scientific knowledge status in policy decision making to consider.

Scientific knowledge proceeds from methodological reduction and can only provide simplified and incomplete visions of reality. This acknowledgement of the scientific knowledge non-fulfilment must be stressed on: in the debate on sustainable development and on agriculture future, it would be illusory to consider that public action may have only scientific foundations. Such a belief would amount to estimate that there is no specificity of political action with regard to the explicative system of a given theory⁶ (for instance theory in economics or ecology). Such approaches, which set up into categorical imperative, endowed with universal claim, a functional continuity between moral, knowledge and action, would strictly define the normative horizon of politics.

But whatever the quality of available scientific knowledge is, we must recognize that logics sustaining policy making and scientific production are not of the same nature⁷. A scientific model, whatever sophisticated it is, cannot have the ambition to identify and to take in account the infinite number of causes of a real event. Scientific knowledge can only constitute help for policy decision making.

However, from a general standpoint, there is no doubt that, given the reshaping complexity induced by the sustainable development concept, knowledge production and spreading will be a key-issue in the twenty first century. But it is now possible to go beyond the traditional -a bit incantatory- wish to develop "more" research.

We have seen with the question of the definition of "agriculture", that applied research remains submitted to explicit policy decisions expressing societal objectives. These objectives remain still to be clarified. Concretely speaking, it will be impossible to produce adequate knowledge for poor farmers, taking care of both productive and environmental issues, if these farmers are excluded from the primary data collection by statistic apparatus, and if they are isolated from interactions with research because of the disappearance of technical support institutions.

Besides, the sustainable development concept implies development of interdisciplinarity, and a renewal of some the theoretical and methodological frameworks. This implies an evolution of research planning and evaluation procedures, and a highlighting of the interdisciplinarity epistemological situation. Here again, if no restructuring occurs, the production of adequate knowledge will be limited.

But most of all, like access to land and to capital, access to knowledge and its elaboration modalities determine the relationship between persons and between persons and things. Thus, discussions on research and technology policies must not be confined to the research world, in fact these policies should be dealt with for what they are: a comprehensive societal stake.

The sustainable development issue is a real opportunity to carry out such a debate.

Translated from French by Ingrid Kem.

[R]

Notes

1. 1 In Europe, these small scale farms represent about 50% of the total number of agricultural holdings; cf. Laurent C., Rémy E. 1998. Agricultural holdings : hindsight and foresight. Etudes et Recherches sur les Systèmes Agraires et le Développement. Numéro spécial, J.Brossier et B.Dent ed., n°31, pp. 415-430.

2. Cf. Conference on Agricultural Statistics 2000. Washington, 17-20 March 1998.

3 .Cf. Laurent C., Maxime F., Mazé A., Tichit M.,2002. Multifonctionnalité de l'agriculture et modèles de l'exploitation agricole. Enjeux théoriques et leçons de la pratique. Communication au Colloque SFER "La multifonctionnalité de l'activité agricole et sa reconnaissance par les politiques publiques", 21-22 Mars. Paris.

4. See for example: Kenney M., Florida R., 1994. The organisation and geography of Japanese R&D: results from a survey of Japanese electronic and biotechnology firms. Research policy, 23, 3, pp.305-324.

5. OCDE. 2000. Agricultural knowledge systems. AGR/CA (2000) AGR/CA (2000)1/FINAL

6. For instance, no specificity of economic theory regarding a normative conception of State intervention, whose mechanisms can be entirely described by this economic theory (for instance rational choice theory), or ecology according to a conception of political action results from a normative model of nature.

7 Cf. Weber M., 1959. Le savant et le politique. (texts 1919) Preface R. Aron, 222 p.

[R]

Realization : Arnaud Vignal
with the help of Ingrid Kem for rereading
directed by Alain Fraval  fraval@paris.inra.fr

with the support of Claire Brenot for graphs and illustrations.
Acknowledgements to Laurence de Bonneval for rereading.
Original texts in French.
Translations by Nicole Scott and Ingrid Kem.
ISBN : 2-7380-1049-0
ISSN : 1257 - 4627

Quotation in bibliography :
Legrand P., Fraval A., Laurent C., 2002. Johannesburg. INRA faced with Sustainable Development: Landmarks for the Johannesburg Conference. Dossiers de l'environnement de l'INRA n°22, Paris, 206 p. (under press)

This file is distributed by INRA Editions. It can be acquired on written request. Please add a cheque of 22,85 € (+ 4,55 € carriage costs if necessary),
Send it to :
INRA Éditions
route de Saint-Cyr, 78026 Versailles cedex.
Tél. : +33 130 833 406 ; fax : +33 130 833 449 ; INRA-Editions@versailles.inra.fr

[R] Le Dossier n°22 "Johannesbourg" en français