1 DIFFERENCES IN THE WAY INSTITUTIONS DEAL WITH KNOWLEDGE WITHIN A REGION The case of Ardèche Aurélie Trouvé Carine Lecœur Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

2 OUTLINE I.Methods, problems and their solutions II.Ardèche: Which institutional framework… III.…for what kind of relation to scientific knowledge? IV. Thoughts on WP1/WP3 Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

3 INTRODUCTION Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

4 INTRODUCTION 5 month training period WP1 : the 3 measures in Ardèche WP3 : first experiment in Ardèche Training period calendar Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

Bibliography WP1 interviews preparation WP1 interviews Analysis of WP1 results and preparation of WP3 WP3 interviews Analysis of WP3 and synthesis on WP1/WP3 Writing of the memo APRILMAYJUNEJULYAUGUST « End of studies » training period 2007 Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

6 I. Method, problems and their solutions Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

7 MethodInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts Method Searching for regulation texts within each measure and level. Studying regulation text in order to identify local writers. Phone contact to set a date for the interviews. Interviews. Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

8 The problems we met The links between the regulation texts are quite complex. « Translation » of the regulation text to interpret everyone’s function. Availability of the writers (distance and time). Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

9 The solutions we found Regulation texts : being patient and asking for details to the interviewed people. Example of natural spaces academy of Rhône- Alpes. Actually writers do have questions on the topics we discuss. Thus we generally observe an active participation and a certain involvement. Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

10 II. Ardèche: Which institutional framework… Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

11 The framework of the levels seen by the interviewed people MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 SCE : Surface en couvert environnemental N2000 : Natura 2000 CAD : Contrat d’agriculture durable

12 The framework of the local actors seen by the interviewed people SCE : fixed without a real local debate and locally adapted by the Département Direction of Agriculture.  Farmers do not really accept this measure. CAD : written by the Département Dir. of Agri. after coordination within a working party.  Farmers accept and request this measure. Natura 2000 : the implementation is done in 2 parts (the Région Direction of Environment performed a quick consultation of experts and now the Département Dir. of Agri. does a meticulous work through the coordination of the local participants.). The Département Dir. of Agri. is present on each measure. Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

13 Relations between agricultural and environmental actors SCE : an agricultural measure about the eligibility for subsidies under the responsibility of the Département Dir. of Agri. CAD : an agricultural measure with environmental issues under the responsibility of the Département Dir. of Agri. Natura 2000 : an environmental measure at first under the responsibility of the Région Dir. of Environment and now under the responsibility of the Département Dir. of Agri. This provides us some way of explanation and may have consequences on the balances of power and the way the scientific evidence are used. Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

14 III. …for what kind of relation to scientific knowledge? Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

15 Assessment of the difficulties to access to scientific knowledge MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 Cf Tableau

16 DIRENDRAFDDAF N° Survey Questions What was your general experience of finding relevant information to support your decision-making ? (opportu nisme) 7 40In your experience, how much published information is available to you to support your decision-making? Were you able to identify knowledge gaps that required further research ? OONNOO 48Did you search information enabling you to evaluate the outcome of the measure according to the farm size? NNNNNN 51Have you approached any person or organisation with a view to getting the research done? OONNOO 52If yes: Was this person an expert? A private consultant ? … Expert, université, institut de recherche, association stagiaireAssoci ation Conservatoire botanique, bureau d’étude 53Has any research subsequently been initiated? OOOO

17 Available Scientific evidence sources Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 At the Région level, resource centers are available in the workplace but the 3 interviewed people use them sparsely : « sometime » or « never ». At the Département level, there are no resource center. At best, the interviewed people have their own sources of scientific documents. All the offices are connected on the Internet for a period of 1 year. MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

18 Analysis of the local methods 2 factors restrict the direct access to scientific knowledge : the room for manœuvre and the lack of time. The recourse to working party which builds a compromise is kind of an answer to the lack of time : – No loss of time in the search of scientific evidence on each topic. – It saves a considerable amount of time in acceptance thanks to the openness and the implication of local participants it means. MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

19 The paradox of Ardèche The Région has put in place a huge research program on agricultural development. This program (« Pour et Sur le Développement Régional ») exists since The government (DRAF, DDAF) is associated with this program. However no one spoke to me about this program during the interviews and they confess that they do not consider the size of the farm for the writing of the measures. MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

20 IV. Thoughts on WP1/WP3 Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007

21 The recourse to working party… Within the working party, the access to scientific evidence is not direct anymore : the relations to scientific evidence interfere with the relations between stakeholders. The working party generates a compromise or consensus. MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

22 What is the balance of cause and effect between the scientific evidences access difficulties and the recourse to a working party? In another way : do the writers have recourse to the working party method because they have difficulties to access to scientific evidences? Or are there any other motivations (search for compromise, consensus)? …generates questions… MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts

23 This leads us to the central hypothesis of the project : how do writers evaluate and account the validity of scientific evidence? According to the recourse to a working party : What balance of power? What kind of argument are defended? What kind of scientific evidence/ quality of scientific evidence are called on? MethodologyInstitutionsEvidenceThoughts Séminaire EBP-BIOSOC Paris 18 et 19 juin 2007 …in the centre of the EBP-Biosoc analysis

24 Thank you for your attention