{"title":"Enhancing capacities for sustainability transition policy design: Lessons from French pesticide reduction plans","authors":"Viviane Trèves, Mourad Hannachi, Jean-Marc Meynard","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Reducing pesticide use has become an important policy objective in several countries, yet many have failed to reach their goals. Policies need to be more systemic to address lock-ins hindering pesticide reduction. To do so, policymakers must improve policymaking processes, while ensuring active stakeholder participation. This requires specific policy capacities, which have not yet been characterized.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>This article aims to identify policy capacities needed to improve the collective elaboration of pesticide reduction policies and integrate a systemic approach.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>We studied the collective elaboration of the French pesticide reduction plans. We built a narration of the policy process organized by policymakers, based on semi-structured interviews and an analysis of grey literature. We then reflected on which policy capacities policymakers needed to better manage the policy design process, using the “management situation” concept.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>Our results show that to better design pesticide reduction policies, policymakers lacked four types of interdependent “policy capacities”: capacities to support collective sensemaking about lock-ins, to co-design interdependent and multi-level instruments, to co-design suitable implementation structures and to ensure learning. These results highlight an issue of dynamic capabilities in public organizations.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>Our results provide concrete proposals to improve design processes for pesticide reduction policies aiming at systemic transformations: there is a need to develop new methods, tools, analytical resources and training programs for policymakers, to support the development of the policy capacities identified. These results also suggest avenues for future action-research between public management, systemic agronomy, sustainability and design sciences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"223 ","pages":"Article 104175"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Systems","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X24003251","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
CONTEXT
Reducing pesticide use has become an important policy objective in several countries, yet many have failed to reach their goals. Policies need to be more systemic to address lock-ins hindering pesticide reduction. To do so, policymakers must improve policymaking processes, while ensuring active stakeholder participation. This requires specific policy capacities, which have not yet been characterized.
OBJECTIVE
This article aims to identify policy capacities needed to improve the collective elaboration of pesticide reduction policies and integrate a systemic approach.
METHODS
We studied the collective elaboration of the French pesticide reduction plans. We built a narration of the policy process organized by policymakers, based on semi-structured interviews and an analysis of grey literature. We then reflected on which policy capacities policymakers needed to better manage the policy design process, using the “management situation” concept.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Our results show that to better design pesticide reduction policies, policymakers lacked four types of interdependent “policy capacities”: capacities to support collective sensemaking about lock-ins, to co-design interdependent and multi-level instruments, to co-design suitable implementation structures and to ensure learning. These results highlight an issue of dynamic capabilities in public organizations.
SIGNIFICANCE
Our results provide concrete proposals to improve design processes for pesticide reduction policies aiming at systemic transformations: there is a need to develop new methods, tools, analytical resources and training programs for policymakers, to support the development of the policy capacities identified. These results also suggest avenues for future action-research between public management, systemic agronomy, sustainability and design sciences.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural Systems is an international journal that deals with interactions - among the components of agricultural systems, among hierarchical levels of agricultural systems, between agricultural and other land use systems, and between agricultural systems and their natural, social and economic environments.
The scope includes the development and application of systems analysis methodologies in the following areas:
Systems approaches in the sustainable intensification of agriculture; pathways for sustainable intensification; crop-livestock integration; farm-level resource allocation; quantification of benefits and trade-offs at farm to landscape levels; integrative, participatory and dynamic modelling approaches for qualitative and quantitative assessments of agricultural systems and decision making;
The interactions between agricultural and non-agricultural landscapes; the multiple services of agricultural systems; food security and the environment;
Global change and adaptation science; transformational adaptations as driven by changes in climate, policy, values and attitudes influencing the design of farming systems;
Development and application of farming systems design tools and methods for impact, scenario and case study analysis; managing the complexities of dynamic agricultural systems; innovation systems and multi stakeholder arrangements that support or promote change and (or) inform policy decisions.