Sustainable cropping systems that balance agricultural productivity and ecological integrity are urgently needed. Overreliance on soil tillage and herbicides to manage weeds has resulted in a number ...of major environmental problems including soil erosion and degradation, biodiversity loss, and water quality impairment. Combining organic farming and conservation agriculture is a viable alternative to address these challenges. In particular, mulch-based no tillage systems can be used to reduce tillage in organic production, improving soil quality while decreasing labor and fuel requirements. This technique involves planting cash crops directly into terminated cover crops that remain on soil surface and serve as mulch to prevent weeds establishment and protect soil from erosion. Despite potential benefits, adoption of organic mulch-based no tillage is limited due to challenges with cover crop termination, weed suppression, and yields. Here, we (i) review international research on organic mulch-based no tillage systems (soybean and maize), (ii) identify production issues that limit the success of this technique, and (iii) outline research priorities. As result, organic mulch-based no tillage is knowledge intensive and requires advanced planning and careful management of the cover crop. Primary challenges include timely cover crop establishment and termination, nutrient management, reduced soil temperature and moisture at planting, and achieving adequate seed-to-soil contact when planting into thick mulch on soil surface. Long-term research is needed to better understand the effects of this technique production on soil health and on the broader environmental and economic impacts. To increase adoption of organic mulch-based no tillage, future research should focus on (i) screening species and cultivars to identify cover crop and crop combinations that optimize cropping system performance and (ii) developing equipment for improving cover crop termination and seed placement. Research conducted in partnership with farmers will be valuable for developing guidelines and increasing adoption of this technique.
The limits of numerous agricultural systems developed on principles set after the Second World War are increasingly identified and highlighted. Meanwhile, agricultural and food systems associated ...with agroecological principles are progressively institutionalized in various countries. Whereas a dominant research production by agronomists consists in deduction of "agroecological practices" from fundamental agroecological principles, a gap remains between those principles and the specific management actions on farms that allow to build new agroecological framing systems. In this study, we stem from an analysis of management actions in eight different case studies corresponding to farmers' collectives engaged in an evolution of their practices towards agroecology. We review the agroecological scientific literature to identify shared principles and system properties deduced from them, that we iteratively compared to the practices implemented by farmers, making the transition in our case studies. Our proposal is then to describe agroecology "in the making" as 4 interconnected ways of acting, each corresponding to specific relations between management actions and the systems' properties. Lastly, the analysis of agroecology from the actors' management practices allows us to support a new viewpoint about a research agenda for agronomists, giving reflexive benchmarks to relocate research activities within the institutionalization dynamics of agroecology.
Cereal-legume intercropping is known to improve the sustainability of crop production. However, it remains uncommon on commercial farms in Europe due to a number of socio-technical lock-ins and the ...many practical issues raised when integrating intercrops in cropping systems (e.g. which species, cultivars, sowing densities). Crop modelling is an option to explore integration scenarios and support farmers’ decisions. However, available crop models are not able to simulate bundles of ecosystem services provided by a large diversity of binary cereal-legume intercropping scenarios. To address this challenge, we developed a hybrid modelling chain that combines process-based, statistical and knowledge-based models to benefit from the strengths of these three different modelling approaches. The chain (i) simulates potential biomass of the sole cereal and legume crops independently using the crop model STICS; (ii) uses statistical interaction models built in R to convert potential biomass in sole cropping into attainable biomass in intercropping by considering competition effects among species, using a field trial database; (iii) converts attainable biomass into actual biomass by considering pest damage using a knowledge-based multi-attribute DEXi model, and also assesses control of pests (i.e. weeds, insects and diseases); and (iv) uses another set of multi-attribute models to assess five additional ecosystem services (i.e. cereal and legume grain yields, cereal protein content, nitrogen supply to the following crop and impact on soil structure) from the actual biomass of the intercrop at harvest and/or cropping system features. The chain was calibrated for grain cereal-legume intercrops sown simultaneously in a random pattern under low-input French conditions. We used an expert-based approach to assess the performances of each model and evaluate the accuracy of the entire modelling chain. In 18 simulated scenarios, 79% of the predicted levels of ecosystem services were consistent with experts’ opinion. Predictions were more accurate for intercropping scenarios that included species from the trial database used to build linear interaction models (relative RMSE of 27–31%) but remained satisfactory for other intercropped species (relative RMSE of 32–37%). This is the first modelling chain able to assess bundles of ecosystem services provided by multiple cereal-legume intercrops in function of their cropping system contexts. This chain is intended to be included in an educational tool that is used face to face with farmers or students to design cropping systems that include intercrops.
Steps of the modelling chain developed to predict ecosystem services provided by a diversity of intercrops according to the production-level model of van Ittersum et al. (2013) Display omitted
•Simulation tools are needed to support farmers’ thoughts about intercropping.•A modelling chain was developed that combines process-based, statistical and knowledge-based models.•The modelling chain predicts levels of ecosystem services provided by intercrops.•This modelling chain can simulate a large diversity of intercropping scenarios.•Predicted levels were correct for 79% of the services assessed in 18 scenarios.
Transition to sustainable agriculture is in many cases hindered by a web of interconnected barriers across agricultural system levels (cropping, farming and agrifood systems), involving a diverse ...range of stakeholders (e.g., farmers, marketing companies, input providers, R&D). This calls for the coordinated design of innovations across levels to bring about major changes towards agroecological practices.
In this study, we devised and tested a method for the design of coupled innovations on soil health management in sheltered vegetable cropping systems, in south-eastern France.
We developed a workshop-based approach grounded on 4 principles: (1) innovation design relying on generativity, combination of independent knowledge sources, and creation of open social spaces; (2) participatory design with researchers-facilitators and stakeholder-experts; (3) progressive exploration of the problem complexity; and (4) use of intermediary objects to facilitate linkages across levels and stakeholders, and the evaluation of the innovations. Following a 3-steps approach, we explored innovations at increasing levels of complexity and diversity in participants, with each step's outcomes feeding the next one.
With the participation of 34 stakeholders, we progressively designed three final coupled innovation prototypes targeting three key areas for innovation in our case study: (1) crop diversification; (2) application of biologically active amendments; and (3) integration of agroecological techniques and its optimization. We asked the participants to evaluate these three prototypes based on stakeholder criteria that we had previously characterized. We also produced complementary resources to move from the refined innovation concepts to their implementation: (a) 16 ‘simple’ innovations and 37 complementary ‘coupled’ innovations, both original and adapted to the context of our case studyand (b) knowledge gaps to be filled. Examples of designed coupled innovations are: (i) organic mulching cropping system combined with on-farm organic mulch production (farm coupled innovation); (ii) crop diversification combined with plot exchange with neighboring farmer (farmer-farmer coupled innovation); and (iii) making soil health status explicitly transparent in field transactions combined with agroecological soil health management (agrifood system coupled innovations).
This workshop-based method is the last component of an original approach to support the agroecological transition of agrifood systems, initiated by a sociotechnical analysis and a tracking for coupled innovation. It enables the coordination of the innovation design across system levels and the agrifood system's stakeholders.
Display omitted
•Transition to agroecology is hindered by a lack of coordination between agrifood system stakeholders•We tested a method to coordinate the design of agroecological innovation across stakeholders, on vegetable production•Our method is based on innovative design, participatory approach, progressive exploration, and object-based intermediation•With the participation of 34 stakeholders, we designed 40 coupled innovations both original and adapted to our context
CONTEXT: Reducing pesticide use is a challenging issue in the construction of sustainable agrifood systems. It requires innovations of various kinds at different scales. Reaching the objective of ...reduced pesticide use means that the different stakeholders which compose agrifood systems have to coordinate their actions in order to innovate. Dealing with the transformation process in agrifood systems therefore focuses attention on the context of the interactions between stakeholders. OBJECTIVE: This article sheds light on the dynamics and modes of interaction between stakeholders in order to help us to understand how agrifood systems may evolve in the context of agroecological transitions. Agrifood systems connect human and non-human dynamics from which production, processing, distribution and regulation activities emerge. Agrifood systems are therefore networks of stakeholders linked to agroecosystems and embedded in complex ecological, economic and social processes. We argue that the territorial scale is particularly relevant in describing the relational and spatial dynamics in agrifood systems and for understanding the diverse initiatives that emerge from stakeholders. This article therefore aims to provide a deeper understanding of the inter-relationship between the dynamics of stakeholders and the dynamics of ecosystems in agroecological transitions, and more specifically in the perspective of reduced pesticide use. METHODS: Surveying the literature, we identified and compared three key frameworks that handle ecological and social issues, and help formalise the capacity for action to promote sustainable systems. The three approaches refer to (i) ecosystem services, (ii) socio-ecological systems and (iii) socio-technical systems. Each approach offers a partial analysis for unravelling specific scales of actions and fails to fully scrutinise the spatiality and temporality of stakeholder interventions. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: From these three approaches, we developed an integrative conceptual framework that relies on systemic, multi-stakeholder and multi-scale reasoning. The suggested approach grasps agrotechnical and socioeconomic concerns, links micro, macro and mesoeconomic levels, and enables a relational and spatial analysis of the dynamics of the ecologisation of agroecosystems to reduce pesticide use. SIGNIFICANCE: By identifying stakeholders and their roles in conceiving and implementing innovations, the suggested framework helps to understand the current sociotechnical lock-ins in agrifood systems and how such systems could be unlocked by coupling innovations implemented at different levels of agrifood systems. This means our approach should be useful in reinforcing capacity building and providing the support needed to improve transition processes.
The forecasted 9.1 billion population in 2050 will require an increase in food production for an additional two billion people. There is thus an active debate on new farming practices that could ...produce more food in a sustainable way. Here, we list agroecological cropping practices in temperate areas. We classify practices according to efficiency, substitution, and redesign. We analyse their advantages and drawbacks with emphasis on diversification. We evaluate the potential use of the practices for future agriculture. Our major findings are: (1) we distinguish 15 categories of agroecological practices (7 practices involve increasing efficiency or substitution, and 8 practices need a redesign often based on diversification). (2) The following agroecological practices are so far poorly integrated in actual agriculture: biofertilisers; natural pesticides; crop choice and rotations; intercropping and relay intercropping; agroforestry with timber, fruit, or nut trees; allelopathic plants; direct seeding into living cover crops or mulch; and integration of semi-natural landscape elements at field and farm or their management at landscape scale. These agroecological practices have only a moderate potential to be broadly implemented in the next decade. (3) By contrast, the following practices are already well integrated: organic fertilisation, split fertilisation, reduced tillage, drip irrigation, biological pest control, and cultivar choice.
Western agricultural practices for crop protection are still heavily dependent on pesticides, even though they cause major human health and environmental hazards. In France, public incentives for ...pesticide reduction have failed to achieve their goal, and agroecological practices are still seldom implemented. In this study, we hypothesized that a systemic analysis of the determinants of current farming practices could serve to characterize (i) the impediments to change in farming practices; (ii) the resources supporting the change; (iii) the underpinning sociotechnical processes; (iv) the stakeholders’ involvement; and (v) levers to facilitate agroecological transition. We therefore designed the first analytical framework that supports a systemic, multi-level (field, farm, territorial, and supra-territorial), multi-actor (including private actors and policymakers), and transformation-oriented analysis of the determinants of farming practices. We applied this analytical framework to the management of root-knot nematodes in sheltered vegetable systems in south-eastern France, jointly analyzing conventional and organic systems. We conducted this comprehensive analysis based on complementary data collection methods: interviews with stakeholders, analysis of written material, participant observation, and participatory workshops. We show that strongly interconnected determinants of farming practices fostered drastic soil disinfection and locked out agroecological soil health technology (e.g., product quality and economic constraints from marketing firms and from regulations; lack of knowledge; unavailability of agroecological inputs). However, this sociotechnical lock-in was being undermined by societal pressures and increasing actions of the stakeholders in favor of the agroecology paradigm. On the other hand, the conventionalization process of the organic regime was simultaneously threatening the further development of agroecological practices
.
Finally, this analysis revealed levers that could be used to support innovation design and enable changes in farming practices toward agroecology (e.g., facilitate access to agroecological inputs, develop multi-stakeholder platforms). The framework, successfully applied to the Provençal vegetable sector, could be used in other production and territorial contexts.
High pesticide use causes environmental and human health hazards. Yet, the change to alternative crop protection practices faces a web of interacting barriers that results in a sociotechnical ...lock-in. Designing “coupled innovation” has been proposed by agricultural scientists to overcome the barriers that prevent change in practices. Coupled innovations consist of developing jointly innovations both at the farm and the agrifood system level to overcome the lock-in.
In this study, we aim at characterizing how existing coupled innovations foster the implementation of agroecological crop protection in French vegetable systems.
‘Tracking down coupled innovation’ method consisted of six steps: (i) identification of the existing coupled innovations in vegetable systems across France; (ii) interview of their stakeholders; (iii) identification, based on the interviews and an analytical framework, of the sociotechnical levers involved in the coupled innovations and the functions the levers perform to foster agroecological crop protection; (iv) characterization of the conditions for the coupled innovation implementation based on 20 categorical variables; (v) typology of the innovations based on the lever functions they performed, using a multiple correspondence analysis followed by hierarchical cluster analysis on principal components; (vi) comprehensive analysis of one typical innovation per cluster, to understand in-depth how it was implemented.
We identified 40 coupled innovations, 17 sociotechnical lever functions and 5 consistent clusters of coupled innovations each implementing a specific combination of lever functions. The five clusters consist of: (1) co-developing and diffusing new inputs and related knowledge through specific knowledge infrastructure, (2) facilitating farmers' peer-exchange of knowledge, (3) (re)structuring the food value chain to support the implementation of agroecological crop protection, (4) pooling material and cognitive resources and (5) renting or exchanging fields to support crop diversification. Key conditions for innovation success were the support of intermediaries, a shared vision and trust between stakeholders, their active involvement, and a limited physical distance between them. The comprehensive analysis of the typical innovations illustrated, for each cluster, the complex relation between the sociotechnical levers, the functions they perform, the network involved, the ACP practices implemented and the conditions for successful implementation.
Tracking down coupled innovation produced knowledge that can support the coupled innovation design in other contexts, hence the sustainability transition of the agrifood systems. It can complement the study of innovative farmers' practices with capitalizing knowledge on the means to overcome barriers to the implementation of these practices.
Display omitted
•The change of farming practices towards agroecological crop protection is confronted with a web of interacting barriers.•We aimed at characterizing coupled innovations from field to agrifood system that foster agroecological crop protection in French vegetable farms.•40 coupled innovations, divided into 5 types, were fostering change in practices using specific combinations of 17 sociotechnical levers.•Key conditions for innovation success were: support of intermediaries, shared vision, trust, active involvement, and proximity between actors.•The characterization of existing coupled innovations produces relevant knowledge to design coupled innovations adapted to other contexts.
In a context of global change involving uncertainty in agricultural production, agroecological systems need to reduce their dependency on inputs and increase their resilience. Biodiversity-based ...techniques are promising, as they provide production services based on biological processes. Tracking farmer practices is an original approach aiming at identifying and analysing alternative systems and supporting the development of these techniques. We studied, for the first time, the on-farm implementation of six biodiversity-based techniques: (i) agroecological infrastructures, (ii) cropped varietal mixtures, (iii) agroforestry, (iv) intercropping, (v) cover cropping and (vi) crop rotation diversification. We first analysed the combinations of these techniques in a large sample of 194 French farmers. A multiple correspondence analysis followed by a hierarchical cluster analysis on principal components resulted in groups of farms with different combinations of these techniques. Then, deeper interviews were conducted with 29 farmers across three regions to analyse the various methods of applying the techniques in the context of their farm and to identify the conditions for their successful implementation. Taking advantage of this large and rare sample of almost 200 interviewed farmers, we identified six different groups of farms. From farms applying mainly cover cropping to comply with European regulations to much diversified farms implying the redesign of the farming system, we support the idea that different strategies of implementation of such biodiversity-based techniques co-exist. The in-depth interviews demonstrated that the level of diversification is related to farm characteristics and four factors mainly favoured the development of such techniques on farms: (1) available labour force and (2) specialised machinery (internal factors) as well as (3) access to market opportunities and (4) the exchange of knowledge through networking (external factors). Surprisingly, the conservation agriculture farmers of our sample did not apply significantly more biodiversity-based techniques. However, our results indicated that organic farmers applied significantly more of these techniques. Our results suggest that enhancing knowledge exchange through networks would favour the broader application of such techniques. It could also be relevant to gather farmers, industries and public authorities to favour the emergence of market opportunities.
French and EU policies have been only partially successful in promoting the restoration of groundwater quality. The currently proposed measures are scientifically valid but ineffective in encouraging ...farmers to change their practices over the longer term. Participatory approaches have been developed for co-designing scenarios at cropping system or catchment area level, to improve groundwater quality. Farmers are one of several types of stakeholders who make contributions in this respect. In this context, we propose a similar participatory approach, although with two key differences: only farmers take part in the co-design process, and a farm-scale systemic perspective is applied. Our method, inspired by co-development, involves five steps, including groundwater quality pressure assessment. Within this method, we generate farmer-to-farmer suggestions aimed at improving farm management from an economic, social, and environmental perspective, with an emphasis on reducing pollution in catchments. The co-design groundwater-friendly farm management combines re-designed elements (e.g., changing agricultural practices or cropping systems or machinery or labor) that are consistent with the project specified by the farmer and that simultaneously decrease pressure on groundwater quality. We tested our method using two groups of farmers from southeastern France, located in areas concerned by groundwater quality issues related to nitrate and pesticide pollution. Our results show that our method based on farmer-to-farmer exchanges with a systemic approach constitutes an interesting and viable solution. In the months following the co-design process, the farmers in the test groups implemented some of the innovations suggested by their peers, thus creating a new groundwater-friendly farm management. This approach could be used in regions with other environmental challenges since the ultimate goal is to encourage sustainable farming practices. However, in the proposed methodology, the knowledge provided only by farmers might be too homogeneous, thus limiting the scope of changes in farming practices.
PDF
