Scope I

1. Combined micro-economic andecological assessment tools for sustainable rural development in the context of Farming Systems Analysis andMultifunctionality Concept of Agriculture

2. Scope I • 9 papers were presented, covering: • Innovation and the role of science • Impact of policy instruments • Evaluation of production costs of externalities (environmental goods, ...) • Evaluation of environmental impacts of agriculture • Matter flows and biodiversity • Versus improvement of policies • Versus improvement of production systems

3. Scope II • Policy instruments • Often not effective and not efficient • Combined micro-economic – ecological models • 4 approaches, more or less integrated • 1 directed versus farmers as end users • 3 versus definition or evaluation of policies • Application of results in decision making ? • Expected • But no direct links

4. Final discussion • Application of the socio-technical root system • An exercise • facilitated by Cees Leeuwis • Statements are relative

5. The methodology of the socio-technical root system( a tool for expert rounds ) • Identification of a core problem • Identify stakeholder • Specify technical and social practices • Identify reasons for current practices • Identify possiblities for change

6. Core problem Two core problems, depending on the specific objectives of agricultural research: Limited uptake or use of models and research results by decision makers: • by farmers and • by policy makers

7. Analysis of stakeholders, actions and reasons for action

8. Stakeholders • Policy-makers (regional and others) • Bureaucrats (implementers) • Scientists • Research Funding Agencies • Extension services (public and private) • Farmers

9. Activities of stakeholders I • Bureaucrats (implementers) • Act as if they have no influence • Policy-makers (regional and others) • Decisions depend more on budgets and popular policy issues than scientific reasoning (non-scientific criteria). • Unclarity about roles / weighing of interests • Not enough linkages between policy-makers, bureaucrats, and scientist (different time horizon and spatial orientation). • Scientists • Tend not to involve stakeholders in the problem solving process. • Need simplifications and generalisations. • Tend to focus on isolated problems within their own research area (reductionism) • Don’t question their own scientific methods and goals.

10. Activities of stakeholders II • Research Funding Agencies: • Don’t fund dissemination. • Don’t know the practical problems of stakeholders. • Want clearly defined outputs. • Extension (public and private): • Farmers: • Don’t trust models. • Need a multicriteria evaluation, adapted to their own very specific situation.

11. General conclusion Scientist have models that allow all sort of answers But • Not at the right time for the right problem • Not specific enough for the problem owner

12. Solutions • More communication with stakeholders As funding agencies want defined outputs, communication should be institutionalized and regular interaction should be organized by scientists • Change the system of scientific merits and evaluation and develop clear criteria for good inter- and trans-disciplinary work • More continuity in model development • Focus on knowledge rather than models • Focus on the process not the goal • Forget about reports