Beyond the EU: DORA and NIS 2 Directive's Global Impact
Combining Modelling Approaches for Participative Agricultural Assessment
1. Combining different modelling
approaches for a participative
assessment of alternative agricultural
systems at different scales
.
Delmotte S 1*, Lopez-Ridaura S1, Goulevant G1, Mouret JC1, Le Page C2, Chauvelon P3, Sandoz A3,
Barbier JM1, Wery J4
1INRA, UMR Innovation, 2 place Pierre Viala 34070 Montpellier Cedex 2.
Corresponding address :* delmotte@supagro.inra.fr
2CIRAD, UPR Green, Campus International de Baillarguet, 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
3Fondation Sansouire, Station Biologique de la Tour du Valat, Le Sambuc, F-13200 Arles, France
4SupAgro, UMR System, 2 place Pierre Viala, 34060 Montpellier Cedex 2, France
2. Introduction Participative Integrated Assessment of
Agricultural Systems
Multifunctionality of agriculture, importance of
social, economic and environmental aspects.
Evaluate alternatives systems and trade-offs
Need for tools that allow PIMPAAS:
Prospective (alternative systems and changing
environment)
Multiscale (different processes at different levels)
Farm-regional (territory) scale
Multicriteria assesment (different objectives)
Participative (local knowledge, support for
individual and collective decisions, negotiations)
3. Introduction La Camargue
Small and well delimited region (160 000 ha)
Several well identified actors
(farmers, syndicate, cooperatives, natural parcs)
Several constrasting objectives (agricultural
production, wildlife conservation…)
Concrete options for agricultural production (e.g. organic)
Participative Integrated Assessment (PIA) of scenarios of
future farming systems
4. 1. Engagement of the local stakeholders (1/2)
More than 20 individual meetings at the begining of the project
Identification of actors, scales of analysis and objectives
Application
Scenarios:
CAP reform: i.e. suppression of a rice coupled subsidy (2012)
and decrease of direct payment.
Pesticides reduction and OF development (national plan).
5. 1. Engagement of the local stakeholders (2/2)
Scales Indicators
Farm Costs of production (€)
Gross margin (€)
Gross margin including subsidies (€)
Application
Total working time per year (h)
Area organically managed (ha)
Farm, sub region, region Amount of subsidies (€)
Treatment Frequency Index (TFI)
Area of each crop on organic and conventional (ha)
Production of each crop on organic and conventional (t)
Proportion of area organically managed
Sub region, region Area of each crop
Total value of agricultural productions (€)
Proportion of irrigated area
3
Water used for irrigation (m )
Employment generating by agricultural activities (man year)
8. 3. Application of three approaches for
scenario building and assesment
Development of a retrospective Land Use Change
approach, discussion with local stakeholders
Development of an agent-based model (IMPASIAS -
Integrated and Multiscale Participative Assessment of
3 approaches
Scenarios and their Impacts on Agricultural Systems-) to
formalize and evaluate scenarios with farmers during
interactive simulation sessions, and discuss them with
local stakeholders.
Scenario definition with the local stakeholders and co-
construction of a bio-economic model
10. 3.1 LUC results
Main messages:
Different strategies to adapt to economic changes
Identifying farm types more probable to convert to OF: livestock
breeder and diversified cereal farmers
Quantifying variations and trends of land use at field/farm scale
Discussed with the stakeholders to make hypothesis on farm
evolutions and think of farm adaptability
11. 3.2 The IMPASIAS model
Agent-based model for interactive
simulation. Based on the dynamic
choice by individual farmer of land
use at farm scale.
Interactive sessions in two steps:
Decisions of land use (selection of
the agricultural activities)
Individual analysis of results at
farm and regional scales
3 sessions, 14 farmers of 8 types
12. 3.2 Results of scenario related to CAP reform
At farm level:
Diversified farms wont suffer much by CAP reform and could easily
convert to OF.
Farming systems based on rice production would suffer a decrease of
gross margin. Need to diversify, but none of the strategy tested gave
satisfactory result from the farmers’ point of view.
At regional level:
The suppression of specific payments could reduce the rice area
nearly by half issues related to processing industries and irrigation
water infrastructure maintenance.
14. 3.3 Bio-Economic model results
At farm level:
Adapting to the CAP reform means diversifying production
unless a specific payment at 150€.ha-1 is maintained.
Diversifying with sorghum appeared to be a good alternative for
either gross margin maintenance and pesticide reduction
At territorial level:
The pesticide used would
decrease by 30%
(ABM), however, with the
same decrease in rice
production, greater could
reduction could be attained
(BEM) with limited loss in
regional value of agriculture
Setting a new agri-
environmental measure?
15. 4. Combining the different approaches
for PIMPAAS ?
Projection using LUC allowed:
Improving knowledge on farming system functioning
Identifying probable spots for change
Interactive simulation (ABM) with farmers allowed:
Verifying and validating used data
Mutual learning and reflection about adaptive strategies,
Understanding land use decision making/constraints for farmers
Upscaling and enhancing discussion with local stakeholders
Simulations with local stakeholders and the BEM allowed:
Formalizing stakeholders objectives
Identifying conflicts and trade-offs.
Discussion
Improving knowledge on local policy impacts and ex-ante
assessment of technical alternatives and policies
16. 4. The need for a participative approach?
For PIMPAAS, we need to :
Follow an adaptive process (from engagement to
collaboration)
Engage stakeholders to get and legimate data
Identify sharing/conflicting objectives
Assume a neutral position
Improve our common understanding of issues related to
agriculture
Discussion
Listen to stakeholders claims to collective discussions