Strategic Diagnosis in an export monoculture area
Dulcire Michel, Agronomist, CIRAD, Département Territoires, Environnement, Acteurs (CIRAD-TERA).
Cattan Philippe, Agronomist, CIRAD, Département Productions fruitières et horticoles (CIRAD-FLHOR).
Abstract
Banana production in the French West Indies is currently facing an economic, environmental and social crisis. Several factors are damaging the image of social advancement previously associated with banana production: fluctuations in the sales price of the fruit, the planned end of European subsidies, the considerable damage caused to the environment, and finally, the debt overload of producers. The new plan recently introduced by the French administration for the recognition of the multifunctionality of agriculture provides stakeholders in banana production areas with a unique opportunity to establish sustainable agriculture. However the influx of public funds to achieve this aim should not be standardised. This study presents a diagnosis that is strategic in the sense that it reveals how the various systems of activity in which agricultural activities are rooted can give rise to differentiated proposals for public support aimed at sustainable agriculture. As a consequence, the way in which research proceeds must also change, i.e. the links between laboratory and fieldwork, and the negotiation of research protocols with the stakeholders involved. These are the new ways of thinking that the research community will have to invent, pilot and adapt in itinere.
Keywords: Action Research, French Indies, Multifunctionality, Sustainability
introduction
Sustainable development in the French West Indies must reconcile economically feasible agriculture with conservation of the ecosystem in a densely populated island environment. Currently banana production occupies 60% of the useable farm area in Basse Terre island of Guadeloupe and structures not only production systems and agricultural income but also the landscape. However, the contribution banana cultivation makes to local development is not only unsatisfactory, is also suspected affecting several different aspects of the environment (soil, water, landscape) as a result of unreasonable agricultural practices: monoculture, high levels of inputs, badly managed mechanisation, an increase in the number of soil-borne parasites that has led to the increased use of pesticides (Dulcire-Cattan, 2002). Because the banana is cultivated for export and receives subsidies for this purpose, the amount of land used to grow other non-subsidised food crops has been reduced and the island now has to import them to satisfy its own, which is both an economic and social aberration (Rouget, 2001). In addition, high production costs and the irregular quality of the banana mean producers cannot rely on a stable income from the highly competitive international market (Mallessard, 1998). The result is that farms are currently facing an alarming debt overload (Cnasea, 1997), which is four times higher than French fruit-tree farms, and producers and their families are increasingly unable to ensure a satisfactory functioning of their unit.
These considerations together with the proven pollution of drinking water by the pesticides used for the past 40 years (Grugeaux-Etna, 2000), led us to propose a project to help define alternatives reconciling the need for a stable family income and the sustainable management of natural resources through agricultural activity. The activities proposed by this project respect the framework of the CTE (territorial farm contracts) defined by the LOA (Law on the Orientation of French Agriculture, MAP-1999). The LOA allows the administration to support farmers who undertake innovations that satisfy functions that are not directly productive for agriculture; these may be environmental, social, economic, or cultural aspects, i.e. “non-trade concerns”. This paper reports on the results of the exploratory stage of the project, as a strategic diagnosis that highlights the variety of functions and projects of the rural economic units as well as the need to provide alternatives.
Strategic Action Research
This project emerged from the encounter between a desire for change and the need to produce new knowledge. The desire for change is the result of society’s demand for better food as well as for environmental conservation, the demand for a higher income by banana growers, and an engagement on the part of the French state in favour of sustainable development, as represented by the LOA, (Dulcire & Cattan, 2002). At the same time, the scientific research community and the administration have expressed a need for new knowledge concerning decision-making and interactions at different levels, i.e. the plot, chain, farming system and territory (territory understood as the interaction between space and society). The resulting project “attributes equal importance to action as a means of transforming existing reality as to research as a means of understanding this reality and of increasing knowledge” (Verspieren, 1990). This type of Action Research has been called “strategic” (id.) because it aims to help each partner improve his/her capacity to anticipate his/her future. It has three types of objectives (fig. 1): production of knowledge, the formulation of technical, economic or organisational ways of improving the existing situation, and finally the reinforcement of stakeholders’ decision-making autonomy. This type of “pledge to knowledge-building” within the framework of an action that has been defined in collaboration with those involved, and that aims to find solutions to often complex problems in an uncertain context, requires a conscious commitment and intense deliberation on the part of stakeholders, irrespective of whether or not these are researchers, and can be described as the desire for controlled change of the existing situation.
IFSA Florida 2002, Dulcire – Cattan, p. 1
IFSA Florida 2002, Dulcire – Cattan, p. 1
This process differs from participatory research, which is much more linear and where the expected result is validation by the stakeholders of the solutions proposed by the researchers, rather than, as in our case, the stakeholders being associated with the process right from the initial stage when the problematic itself is defined (fig. 1).If researchers are to contribute effectively to socio-technical change, they must be directly involved in the concerns of the development stakeholders (Dulcire, 1996). However, it is equally important that the researcher’s Action Research project should have received the approval of the scientific community (“scholarship before commitment”, Bourdieu, 2001). This is one of the functions of the scientific validation stage (fig.1). It may take a very long time to achieve if the researcher(s)’ project does not follow the recognised course of action in a context which is very complex and where the stakes are high. Nevertheless recognition, which is linked to the negotiation of the scientific project (fig. 1), is indispensable because it guarantees the seal of scientific approval for the conscious participation of the researcher in a process of change.
A negotiated and shared diagnosis
The drawing up of a preliminary diagnosis corresponds to the desire to understand and describe the reasoning of the other territorial stakeholders before the defining the problematic. It also enables a shared analysis by the researchers, i.e. the wish to not limit the field of investigation to technical aspects (starting hypothesis), and the need to account for the level of awareness and the preoccupations of the other stakeholders (producers, institutions, consumers, neighbours), and this implies a confrontation between theory and practice on the part of the different researchers involved in the scientific project (fig. 1). Finally and most importantly, the diagnosis is shared by the stakeholders and results in the definition of the problem, the field of application, the formulation of the hypotheses to be applied to research and action, and the identification of protocols to reply to these preoccupations. The results presented are based on qualitative interviews with 70 territorial development stakeholders, individuals and organisations, producers, administrators, and neighbours held in 2000 (Amoravain, 2000; Julien, 2000; Premsing, 2000).
Typology of FARMING SYSTEMS & THE DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIONS
The agricultural component alone cannot satisfactorily account for the functioning of family economic units. The factors that determine banana strategy are not only to be found within the chain. Only analysis of the systems of activity and of all the activities undertaken by the family to achieve its socio-economic objectives enables their strategies to be characterised. In our case there were three descriptive components (fig. 2): banana production for export, other crops and cattle, and off-farm activities. Their relative importance and the interactions between these three poles explain the existing system of organisation, its results, and also indicate the potential for change. Five different types of systems of activities were characterised (fig. 3).
Public sectional agricultural subsidies discriminated its sole productive function in favour of banana exportation (97% of total aids for 25% of final agricultural value). As a result, the environmental (reproducibility), micro-economic (contribution of agricultural activity to the family income) and social functions of agriculture were artificially disassociated. The recommendations for universal technical systems based on banana monoculture are often delicate and ill adapted to the diversity of needs and conditions, and are opposed to society’s demand for sustainability. This institutional discourse and these practices discriminated particularly in favour of different and even opposing expectations about the relations between agriculture and the environment, which varied with the stakeholder (table 1). Even more alarming, they reinforced the opposition between “noble” agriculture for export with its active social representation, and “peasant” agriculture for the satisfaction of domestic needs, which remains concealed but continue to fight for its survival. Here we refer to studies by Amin (1973) and Fanon (1961) who discuss the problem of the dialectics of the dominator/dominated. Table 2 summarises the opposition between these two worlds, “planter and farmer”, that coexist without mixing, often in the same individual (Dulcire & Cattan, 2002).
Quality of product / Product process / Environment / Assessment criteriaConsumers / Grade; Spots; Pes-ticides residues; Diversified supply. / Not well targeted: biological, redu-ced treatments. / Global: respects human needs; Environment; Landscape. / Gustatory; Emotio-nal; Ethical; Typicality; Cost.
Purcha-sing groups / Standard: grade; Spots; Residues. / Control for identification purposes; Verifiable. / Global: respects human needs; Environment. / Commercial;
Ethical.
Administration / Residues. / Traceability. / Control of externalities. / Toxicity; Employment; Economic.
Neighbours / Collateral nuisan-ce: smells; noise; phytotoxicity. / Living environment: fishing, river bathing, landscape, plastic gains / Quality of life.
Farmers / Grade; Spots. / Ease of application; Profitability. / Prod. capacity of soil; Phytotoxicity for crops. / Yield; Economic.
Table. 1. Comparative expectations regarding banana "products".
Export agriculture /"Resistance agriculture"
Administration / Territorial value.
Exportation.
Jobs.
Modern agriculture. / Socio-economic moderator.
Non-professional.
«Peasant».
Farmers / Alienation, producing for others.
Social recognition.
Economic security (guaranteed market, public subsidies). / Autonomy, producing for oneself.
Value of Identity.
Social links (gift & reciprocity)
Non-guaranteed market.
Tab. 2 Banana production and diversification: contrasting and ambiguous representations.
stakes & proposals to be adapted depending on the type of unit
Analysis of the different reactions to changes in their socio-economic environment by the 4 types of family unit in the banana production zone (fig. 4) enabled identification of different possible courses of action for change. The mixed-cropping-livestock type, whose transmission takes place over a long period of time, is theoretically the most respectful of the environment (few inputs, agricultural diversity), is less sensitive to uncertainties, and more autonomous. Agricultural activity only supplements the family income but nevertheless contributes to the viability of the family unit and to the sustainability of the whole territory. The stakes involved here are recognising this type of agriculture and protecting it against intensive cropping in the immediate vicinity of the farms. The diversified type is also less sensitive to uncertainties, and is autonomous. Its structural capacity to adapt to other crops than banana is an advantage. It has high labour requirements. Banana cultivation techniques and management of animal wastes affect the environment. The stakes involved here are the introduction of other cropping systems with the aim of reducing these negative effects through crop rotation and fertility transfer. The second priority is providing subsidies for the production and marketing of crops other than banana, together with financial support for the recruitment of temporary labour. The family banana type is the most sensitive. These units are deeply in debt, highly sensitive to uncertainties, and are not autonomous. They have little access to information and distribution networks. They have developed two distinct strategies depending on whether the farmers come from a farming background or not, i.e. disengagement (reduction in inputs, labour, cultivated land, together with a search for other sources of income), or intensification (investments) and/or an increase in land (renting). The latter approach is frequently a form of flight. These two options reduce the transmissibility of the farm and increase the risk of bankruptcy followed by a departure from the agricultural sector. This type is highly sensitive to fluctuations in the sales price of the banana and requires financial support for reorganization. Quality standards must be respected to avoid exclusion from the market. Income diversification (agricultural or not) may be one way to reduce market dependence. Finally, the banana entrepreneur type is characterised by good transmissibility, average sensitivity to uncertainties, and a relatively high level of autonomy. Management of natural resources is not reproducible due to the intensification of banana cultivation. Its monoculture means that future improvement will depend on the introduction of crop rotation (sugar cane) on mechanisable land, the stabilization of agricultural income, and the limitation of damage to the environment. If particular attention is paid to quality labelling rather than to merely satisfying standard fruit-quality requirements, it should be possible for banana entrepreneurs to have stable and privileged access to the market and to reinforce their economic viability.
conclusion
Sustainable development depends firstly on the ability of those involved to assume their own destiny. This means constructing a cultural capital (fig. 1) that goes beyond developing proposals on how to change the existing situation (finding solutions to problems), and provides the means for improved conscious prediction of the future. If one considers that agricultural science, like all sciences, contributes “to the development of critical capacity and judgement, thanks to which individuals construct their own indicators of position, thought, action and adaptation to a less and less stable environment” (Comets, 1997), in this case it can quite legitimately support local initiative for the development and diffusion of socio-technical alternatives that ensure the viability of the family/farm duo.