Time Magazine about multifunctional agriculture, some thoughts about the farmers’ identity

While waiting for my train at Utrecht Central station – I tend to kill my time looking around in the book/magazine shop – the cover of the latest Time Magazine struck my eye, heading: “France’s Rural Revolution, traditional French farmers are dying. Can farmers make money from town dwellers’ love of the land?”. Interested about the heading – and teased by the astonishing landscape on the cover – I bought a copy for the second part of my trip to Rotterdam.

Bruce Crumley (the author) poses the question what eventually will save rural France. French farmers are hit by a shrinking agricultural sector, falling food prices (globalization) and tightening E.U. support (so called CAP reforms (Common Agricultural Policy) in 2013). These developments are not exclusive to France, farmers in many other E.U. member states are facing these problems. However, future CAP reforms are considered to be critical especially to French farmers, since the French receive nearly 20% of the total CAP funding.

By illustrating the developments on three French farms the author focuses on one of the ways to get out of this tightening trap by diversifying the farm business with new (‘non-farming’) activities. A strategy also known as multifunctional agriculture. The farmers mentioned in the article developed new activities in rural tourism and the production and selling of regional products like beer and ham. Interestingly, the article has many parallels with the conversations I had myself (in relation to our research project on (Dutch) multifunctional agriculture). Apparently, many farmers (eventually) don’t regret their step on the multifunctional pathway. On the contrary, many farmers say to enjoy the new farm dynamics, contacts with new people and some even claim to have reinvented entrepreneurship. However, we needn’t to underestimate the step of ‘just’ diversifying your farm to survive. In the article colleague rural sociologist François Purseigle argues many farmers simply refuse to find new sources of income as they see diversification as a betrayal of the agricultural profession they took on. As a parallel, I experienced many interviewed Dutch farmers – who have made the step or are still hesitating in some way – have or are still struggling with their identity of being a ‘real farmer’: “It’s not just running a business” – one farmers stressed – “it’s a way of life!”. I think the notion of multifunctional agriculture has matured but still often perceived as something for losers or nothing ‘real farmers’ should deal with. Often the environments of hesitating farmers aren’t ready for this new way of farming, yet.  

The article can be found on the Time website. The page also offers a great picture gallery about the topic.

Balancing between governing styles – participatory processes in Galicia

By Marlies Meijer, graduated MSc-student

In previous blogs (see e.g. my second post on Planning realities in Galicia) I have written about my journey to Galicia and the difficulties and interesting views I came across while investigating planning and rural development practices there. In June this journey came to an end, I finished my master thesis and graduated (full thesis report ‘Balancing between governing styles: participatory practices in rural Galicia‘   is available online).

When writing my thesis I spent a lot of time on untangling the complex background of problems experienced in rural Galicia. Now I have been asked to write shortly about the conclusions to introduce the thesis. It is not an easy task, but I will try. 

One of the main problems in Galicia is land abandonment. Many people own land, but most parcels are too small and dispersed to manage. Due to many reasons most owners are not willing or able to maintain or sell their land. A great deal of these parcels have been afforested, with EU-subsidies. Unfortunately also forested parcels turned out to be ill-managed and not economically viable. With the implementation of forest management units the government of Galicia (Xunta) tried to tackle these problems. Within these units parcels are managed jointly, as one area. This makes forestry more economic viable and diverse; and forest fire safety measures or road construction more feasible. The most important precodition and goal of this project is the active involvement of citizens. Though this is the first participatory project in Galicia, many have been implemented in the EU. Galicia followed this example.

The problem with citizen involvement (or participatory processes) is that it takes two to tango, and sometimes even the ability of citizens to dance on their own. In Galicia the Xunta was a step ahead. Citizens did not show an endogenous will to participate actively, they were involved on paper and felt that maintenance was the task of Xunta. The Xunta conversely was very willing to make this policy a succes. Setting good examples and attracting as many owners as possible dominated. By overtaking responsibilities of owners (like administratory tasks and costs) and with charisma this process was streamlined. Nonetheless, as many interviewees responded, a participatory approach was also “the only way” to deal with problems like land abandonment or ill-managed forests. And it is true, inactive ownership forms the root of these problems and needs to be dealt with.

By studying this project it became clear that Galicia’s government was balancing between different style of governance. On the one hand are the old, clientalistic, ways of policy making in which the governments are in charge and take care of everything. On the other hand there is the new participatory approach that the Xunta aimed for when implementing the uxfor-policy. While looking for a balance, several areas of tensions emerged:

  • The policy-makers wanted to establish success quickly. By taking care of almost all aspects of implementation, it was possible to found uxfors in an efficient and quick way. However, creating active citizenship takes usually much more time and patience.
  • It was difficult to involve the citizen actively. The Xunta wanted to create active citizenship, but citizens expected the government to take care of common affairs. Citizens felt this was out of their responsibilities.
  • Land abandonment and depopulation are deep-rooted problems at the Galician countryside. The uxfor-policy tried to deal with these developments. But how can active citizenship be stimulated if the largest part of the population is well over 65, and most landowners live in other regions?

These conclusions hold close relations with other parts of Europe. Also here the participatory approach is gaining ground and are governments and citizens struggeling (in different ways) with its implementation. Depopulation and land abandonment also prevail in other marginal rural areas.

Despite the above mentioned comments on participatory processes in Galicia I respect the Xunta highly for their ability to ‘just’ do something, to start a project and not getting diluted by all kinds of problems (like bureaucracy) that might rise in the beginning.

Food initiatives in Amersfoort

 

eemlook website

 “Eating is an agrarian act” said Bart Pijnenburg at a meeting last Thursday in Amersfoort. So we ate together with 50 people a meal based on regional products and lots of garlic from the farm Eemlook. The meeting was organized by Transition Town Amersfoort, the Eemlook and two consultancies Mensenland and Eemstad Lab.

“We” were all those interested in progressing new thinking about regional and urban food production and consumption. The Amersfoort food strategy; this was the topic. There is no such a thing yet, and the meeting was meant to inspire each other and the city government to undertake action.

There were lots of ideas; after a few brainstorm sessions at least 25 ideas were presented – in an elevator pitch situation. From community gardens to Meatless Monday, and mobile cooking units to dine in a field, the variety of ideas surprised many people. Maybe some of these ideas can be submitted to the “Sustainable Food” call of the Ministry of Agriculture it was concluded. Well then, be prepared for heavy competition.

At the launch of this grant-funding on the 9th of June at least a hundred people were present to explore their opportunities for submitting a project. This high interest is starkly contrasting the amount of funding available; half a million euro with individual project limits up to 75.000 euros. This funding is – according to the explanation that day – an experiment which may or may not be repeated. The piecemeal funding is underlying one of the three policy goals; to enable Dutch consumers to choose for sustainable food products. A bit meager I thought given the huge ambition to become ‘world leader in sustainable food production in 15 years’.

Through a Food Lens…

By Simone Plantinga – MSc student

For the Dutch version of this text follow this link

A year ago, I started with the research for my MSc Thesis in Rural Sociology. The research was carried out in Tilburg, a city in the Province of Noord-Brabant, in the south part of the Netherlands. After a couple of explorative meetings within the chair group of Rural Sociology of Wageningen University, with the Brabantse Milieufederatie (Environmental Federation Brabant) and the Provincie Noord-Brabant (Province of Nood-Brabant) this research has been defined. The research is about the preconditions, possibilities and restrictions for the set up of a Food Policy Council, a particular form of food policy. A FPC is a broad social network or platform which consists of multiple actors which have an interest in well developed food system. A successful example is the Toronto Food Policy, which formed in 1991 in Canada. In this blog I’ll explain the (conceptual) background of the research, as well as the key results and conclusions.   Continue reading

Als door een voedselbril…

Door Simone Plantinga – MSc student

For the English version follow this link.

Mijn afstudeeronderzoek naar Food Policy Councils, is gestart naar aanleiding van een aantal verkennende gesprekken binnen de vakgroep Rurale Sociologie van Wageningen Universiteit, met de Brabantse Milieufederatie in Tilburg en de Provincie Noord-Brabant en gaat over de randvoorwaarden, mogelijkheden en de beperkingen van het opzetten van een ‘Food Policy Council’(FPC), een bijzondere vorm van voedselbeleid. Een FPC is een breed maatschappelijk netwerk of platform waarin verschillende personen plaatsnemen die belang hebben bij een goed ontwikkeld voedselsysteem. Een succesvol voorbeeld is de in 1991 opgerichte Toronto Food Policy Council in Canada. In deze blog beschrijf ik de (conceptuele) achtergrond van het onderzoek en de belangrijkste resultaten en conclusies (klik hier voor de volledige thesis). Continue reading