On-farm and collective ecological innovations Highlights from northern French case-studies

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "On-farm and collective ecological innovations Highlights from northern French case-studies"

Mariah Little
6 years ago
Views:

1 On-farm and collective ecological innovations Highlights from northern French case-studies Kevin Morel Kevin Morel Glinec Glinec Rufaux Resource efficient and innovative agriculture EU best practice (European Parliament 28/11/16) Kevin Morel Agricultural engineer, PhD student, UMR SADAPT, INRA, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, FR

Microfarmsin France: a growing neo-peasant movement

BecHellouinfarm, France A PhD work on 20

quantitative data) economic viability Bec Hellouin

ha per farmer) Low motorisation and investment Low

High crop density Intercropping Wildlife habitats

chains Kevin Morel Strong community anchorage Local

2 Microfarmsin France: a growing neo-peasant movement Scientific research A pilot study on the BecHellouinfarm, France A PhD work on 20 microfarmsin Northern France (qualitative and quantitative data) economic viability Bec Hellouin Rufaux Commercial market gardens Small scale (<1,5 ha per farmer) Low motorisation and investment Low input practices Agroforestery No or limited tillage High crop density Intercropping Wildlife habitats High crop diversity Organic produce Short supply chains Kevin Morel Strong community anchorage Local dynamics Morel et al. (2016); Morel and Léger (2016) Kevin Morel Kevin Morel Glinec

Low input practices, productivity and economic viability of microfarms Manual microagriculture Biointensive market gardening Diversified market gardening Qualitative results based on

and deep Commercial inputs Little Little High Biodiversity +++ +++ ++ Modelling outputs based on 1000 simulations per farming system (model calibrated and validated on farm data)

(<2500h and >1400 per month) for setting up farms** Cultivated acreage of viable scenarios ( m2 per worker) for 2500h* 47% 78% 28% 6% 9% 0% 3136±1445 5876±3035 12766±5525 Innovative

3 Low input practices, productivity and economic viability of microfarms Manual microagriculture Biointensive market gardening Diversified market gardening Qualitative results based on farms interviews from 20 microfarms(further investigation required) Motorisation (energy) No Medium High Soil tillage (soil erosion) No or superficial No or superficial Systematic and deep Commercial inputs Little Little High Biodiversity Modelling outputs based on 1000 simulations per farming system (model calibrated and validated on farm data) Family-size vegetables boxes per ha 97±19 67±15 26±5 Chances of economic viability (annual labour<2500h and monthly income>1400 ) for running farms Chances of economic viability (<2500h and >1400 per month) for setting up farms** Cultivated acreage of viable scenarios ( m2 per worker) for 2500h* 47% 78% 28% 6% 9% 0% 3136± ± ±5525 Innovative microfarms with ecological practices Classic control scenario *for"running farms" once bank loans for initial investment have been paid** while bank loans for initial investment are being paid

Community anchorage : toward efficient farms ecosystems?

(hives), firewood from hedges Cattle manure Building Land Tractor

(1.5ha) Wasted vegetables Hop Milk Brewery (renovated barn) Local

4 Community anchorage : toward efficient farms ecosystems? (A case study in Brittany) Farmers shop Apple juice, honey (hives), firewood from hedges Cattle manure Building Land Tractor Water drilling Conventional grassland based dairy farming (80 ha) Building Chestnuts +cows? Spent grain Collective delivery to limit energy Organic microfarm (1.5ha) Wasted vegetables Hop Milk Brewery (renovated barn) Local village Cultural and pedagogic events Village life People moved in Herbs Future cheesemaker? Glinec Kevin Morel Kevin Morel Glinec

Small farms, ecological innovations and rural development Innovative and resource efficient practices based on ecosystems understanding is strongly site-dependent and complex Require local systemic

2015a) Resource efficiency and innovations should be assessed and supported atawiderscalethanthefarmscale Territorial ecology Efficiency at the farm level can be supported by collective innovations

2015b) Implications for the CAP: Most of these innovative small-scale farmers receive less money from the CAP than bigger farmers and their farms are often more economically viable because they want

5 Small farms, ecological innovations and rural development Innovative and resource efficient practices based on ecosystems understanding is strongly site-dependent and complex Require local systemic on-farm experimentation, exchange of farmer s knowledge is key Collective and participatory research(duru et al. 2015a) Resource efficiency and innovations should be assessed and supported atawiderscalethanthefarmscale Territorial ecology Efficiency at the farm level can be supported by collective innovations (Duru et al. 2015b) Implications for the CAP: Most of these innovative small-scale farmers receive less money from the CAP than bigger farmers and their farms are often more economically viable because they want to do better with less! 1 st pillar: subsidiesperfarmratherthanperha? In Lorraine (FR) collective research on manual tools, green manures, low-input market gardening funded by from Ministry of Agriculture. created strong local dynamic 8 organic market gardeners in 2000; around120 now! 2 nd pillar: can improve indirectly farms and farms ecosystems efficiency supporting collective innovations and collaboration between farmers rather than competition for more land to get more subsidies. Collective innovations strengthen both local economy, social links and have a global positive impact on rural development. Allowing flexible research and innovation projects where it is not asked to know the results before applying for funds!

Thank you for your attention and looking forward to exchanging Kevin Morel Literature cited to go further Duru, M., Therond, O., Martin, G., Martin-Clouaire, R., Magne, M.-A., Justes, E., Journet, E.

6 Thank you for your attention and looking forward to exchanging Kevin Morel Literature cited to go further Duru, M., Therond, O., Martin, G., Martin-Clouaire, R., Magne, M.-A., Justes, E., Journet, E.-P., Aubertot, J.-N., Savary, S., Bergez, J.-E., Sarthou, J.P., 2015a. How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development doi: /s Duru, M., Therond, O., & Fares, M. hand. (2015ab). Designing agroecological transitions; A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 35(4), Morel, K., Guégan, C., & Léger, F. G. (2016). Can an organic market garden based on holistic thinking be viable without motorization? The case of a permaculture farm. Acta Horticulturae, (1137), Morel, K., & Léger, F. (2016). A conceptual framework for alternative farmers strategic choices: the case of French organic market gardening microfarms. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 40(5),

Can an organic market garden without motorization be viable through holistic thinking? The case of a permaculture farm

Can an organic market garden without motorization be viable through holistic thinking? The case of a permaculture farm Kevin Morel, Charles Guégan, François Léger To cite this version: Kevin Morel, Charles