In viticulture, the general dependency on external inputs such as fertilisers and especially pesticides is high. The use of these inputs increase the productivity but bear the risk of harming the environment.
The research project UNISECO aimed at investigating how to reduce dependency on external fertilisers and pesticides (especially glyphosate) through agro-ecological practices increasing soil ecological services while maintaining the economic viability of farms.
This case study is a network based case study involving several French farm machinery cooperatives (CUMAs) aiming at close collaboration between farmers (cf map).
An innovative aspect of the project is the aim to interconnect different territorial groups of farmers. It is therefore a network on two levels:
• at local level, farmers are engaged in each CUMA to share equipment and exchange knowledge;
• at regional level, a group of farmers from different CUMAs, boost the exchange of knowledge and the share of innovative practices and field experiments.
The diagnosis of sustainability conducted in UNISECO with SMART tool shows:
A good or average rating for the different sustainability criteria in the economic, social and environmental dimensions.
. The economic dimension exhibits the lowest performance due to internannual variabilities in quantities harvested and low prices in some areas;
. The ratings with regard to social well-being are in general satisfactory;
. With regard to the environmental dimension, the ratings concerning biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions are average (neither good nor bad). Some farms have also an average rating with regard to water quality.
The majority of current agricultural practices remain conventionnal with significant use of pesticides (herbicides and fungicides) and chemical fertilisers.
However, some farmers are already implementing agroecological practices.
To find out why agroecological practices are not very common, we developed an understanding of the barriers of implementing these practices together with farmers and others stakeholders. They identified five barriers:
• Economic barrier. Excepted for organic farmers, there is no positive price premium for farmers engaged in agroecology. To sell their grapes or wines, farmers should follow the requirements of the purchasers which are not, or rarely, environmental. With such market pressure, farmers are not willing to take the risk of reducing the economic sustainability by implementing more environmental practices that are often considered as less productive.• Governance barrier. Governance of viticulture and its products is separated in three levels: (1) agri-food value chain actors such as processors and purchasers which are in the position to impose prices and production conditions on the farmers; (2) transition towards agroecology is mainly promoted by authorities and public administrations; (3) technical advice for farmers involve agricultural advisors and farmers. At this level, farmers feel more concerned and remain suspicious of other levels. The problem is that there is not enough links and consistency between levels. Farmers face contradictory injunctions which are unmanageable at farm level.
• Technical barrier. Reducing the use of pesticides or chemical fertilisers is not so easy. This is especially true for the reduction of pesticides on steep slopes where mechanical weeding is often impossible or requires specific machineries. Vineyards on steep slope are very frequent and to progress on this subject needs research and experiments.
• The fourth factor is the insecurity related to an agro-ecological approach of vine diseases and pests. A management based on ecological services is more risky for the yield and the quality of grapes than a management based on chemical treatments. Moreover, farmers who try agro-ecological practices in a regional CUMA network share the collective observation that their results are not yet technically stable and clearly assessed. There is no "turnkey" solution to ensure the success of this transition.
• Finally, the last barrier is related to climate change. The current context with droughts and high temperature causes basic concerns for farmers for the future of their activity. Climate change has soon consequences on the quality and on the quantity of wines. In such a context, changing their practices towards agroecology without any information about their consequences in a new climatic context is a huge concern for numerous winegrowers.
The core idea of this double network of farmers (at local level in each CUMA and at regional level with the network of CUMAs) is to overcome certain barriers on the basis of exchanges between farmers.
This mode of operation can act on certain fears of farmers, help to share knowledge to handle technical obstacles, empower farmers to get public support but remains insufficient to tackle other difficulties as the economic barriers.
The local and regional networks act as extension services to farmers. They are based on participatory methods to empower farmers.
This approach comprises:
• Visits of farms;
• Exchanges and debates between farmers;
• Farm machinery demonstrations
At local and regional levels an agricultural facilitator is in charge of the life of the network.
I commit myself first of all out of conviction. No one pushes me to do it. I am a conventional farmer and it costs me to spend more time in the vineyards and I don't have recognition at the end. I really do it by inclination.
Today I use three times less phytosanitary products than twenty years ago.
I have a bed and breakfast activity next to my vines. It is better to say that they are organic than conventional. And my clients appreciate.
My objective is to do without fertilizer and without pesticides. The soil is naturally grassed without any tillage. I keep as possible natural areas around my vines
A majority of interested farmers intend to start implementing practices such as:
• Green manure to reduce external fertilisers use;
• Using combined cropping and mechanical weeding to reduce pesticides use (wine shrubs and other crops);
• Testing specific materials for slopes (i.e. rotary spade) to prevent erosion and reduce water evaporation
These emerging practices need to be encouraged and intensified
Developing and using resistant vine varieties. The use of resistant vine varieties is a major way to reduce the dependence to insecticides and pesticides. To introduce new varieties, it needs both:
• research to develop new varieties, based on two selection methods: massal selection versus clonal selection
• a change in list of authorised grape varieties related to designation of origin.
Closing the nutrient cycle with the re-use of wine-making residues:
• production of compost to fertilize fields
• production of animal feed for areas close to livestock areas.
• mixing the re-use of green residues from different activities: agriculture, gardens, green spaces, etc.
This needs a collective organization between a large set of stakeholders and relevant technical equipments (composting platform)
Landscape management: local projects should aim at managing landscape in order to increase their biodiversity to promote functional biodiversity for e.g. crop protection (i.e. natural biological control) and the attractiveness of landscape as an asset for local development.
This requires continuous research and experimentation and also strong local willingness to engage in collective action.
Given the market pressure, farmers are not willing to take the risk of reducing their economic sustainability by implementing agroecological practices.
But environmental concerns in society are more and more perceived as an economic opportunity. However, this trend is weak because the differentiation and the qualification of wines remain mainly based on the notions of “terroir” (the place) and the certification of origin (PDO, PGI certifications).
Consequently, as a main driver, there is a need to support this trend by designing:
• new sustainable food systems based on agro-ecological practices
• Labelling policy including agroecological practices in product specifications
Beside the labelling policies, other policies will need to be changed to promote the adoption of agroecological practices.
Agri-environmental measures
• support to use of cover crops and green manure in vineyard (between and under the rows).
• compensating the loss of income in the early years (3 to 5 years) of insecticides and fungicides suppression
• support for crop diversification at farm level, which remains low: e.g. planting peaches or other crops in vineyards.
Landscape management - Agro-environmental measures: the challenge is to promote agro-ecological practices at landscape scale and not only at field scale to amplify their impact.
Farm modernization and investment - Payments for investments
Payment for services provided to society with the help of financial incentives for farmers who implement environmental friendly practices.
Support to organic farming. In France a financial support for conversion to organic farming is available at national level, but after this period only some regions provide a permanent support to farmers. Make this permanent support available in all over the country is of main importance.
Diversification of on-farm non agricultural activities Incentives for other income relevant activities. Agro-tourism offers a complementary source of income and is often associated with a desire on the part of farmers to be exemplary and therefore to drastically reduce the use of inputs.
Support for vineyard restructuring - Payments for investments. Financial support should be targeted towards parcels where the planting of the vines prevents to the reduce reduction in the use of herbicides (eg. iIn plantations in close rows mechanical weeding is very difficult)
Support of circular economy : collective composting platform, exchanges of organic fertilisation and renewable energy generation. The challenge is to develop a closed-circuit or circular economy for:
• reintegration of distillery waste or other green residues into the wine-growing plots (input of organic matter);
• valorization in animal feed (i.e. grape marc in cattle feed) in cooperation with neighbouring livestock farms;
• disposal in biogas production plants.
The reduction of synthetic inputs use is a major agro-ecological issue. It could impact yields and many farmers fear economic consequences. Financial support through policy measures should be targeted towards deep changes in farming practices to avoid the use of synthetic herbicides or fungicides.
Farmers mainly adapt their practices to quality schemes production rules, purchasers' requirements and markets' expectations. Including the environmental expectations of consumers in purchasers' requirements is necessary to enable changes in farmers' practices at a broad scale. It can be done by relevant private and public product specifications (such as broadening rules for geographic indication).
Collective action, such as the CUMAs networks, fosters the experimentation of new practices and the exchange of good practices. There are different policy instruments already in place that enable to empower groups of innovative farmers. Instruments aiming to include in such networks the numerous farmers currently outside any network would be helpful..
Testing instruments to foster cooperation between farmers and non-farming stakeholders (local authorities,…) for implementing crop diversification or agri-environmental measures is a promising approach.
After a long period of reluctance of farmers, society is waiting for rapid changes in farming practices to preserve the environment. Now farmers are more aware about this issue but they need time to adapt their practices and systems. There is a need to rebuild trust through mutual exchanges and a better knowledge of each other.
We thank all farmers and stakeholders for sharing their knowledge and stories.
This project has received funding from the European Unions horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 773901
An error has occurred |