A research infrastructure for the social sciences & humanities

@article{Loconto2018,

title = {The land sparing – land sharing controversy: Tracing the politics of knowledge},

author = {Allison Loconto and Marion Desquilbet and Théo Moreau and Denis Couvet and Bruno Dorin},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.014},

doi = {10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.014},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

urldate = {2019-01-01},

journal = {Land Use Policy},

volume = {96},

abstract = {Feeding 9 billion people by 2050 on one hand, and preserving biodiversity on the other hand, are two shared policy goals at the global level. Yet while these goals are clear, they are to some extent in conflict, because agriculture is a major cause of biodiversity loss, and the path to achieve both of them is at the heart of a public controversy around ‘productive’ land use and biodiversity conservation. Over the years, the scientific, policy, civil society and agri-business communities have been engaged in producing evidence that can support a land sparing policy (separating intensive agricultural production from biodiversity conservation) or a land sharing policy (integrating the two in larger and more extensive landscapes). This paper contributes to this debate by analyzing land sparing and land sharing (LSS) as a socio-technical controversy. Through the analysis of large and small corpora of scientific, policy, corporate social responsibility and sustainability standards documents we explore the ethical underpinnings and social networks that support the opposing sides of this controversy. We explore these linkages in order to explain how the concept of land sparing achieved dominance in the scientific literature and how the concept has been taken up in international policy, business and civil society circles. We examine the convergences and divergences in alliances between actors in this controversy in order to map how specific actors have promoted the concept of land sparing as the best way to used land for biodiversity and food production.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Nicot2018,

title = {The European networks of research, education and training stakeholders in agroecology},

author = {Rose Nicot and Stéphane Bellon and Allison Loconto and Guillaume Ollivier},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/opag-2018-0058},

doi = {10.1515/opag-2018-0058},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-12-05},

urldate = {2018-12-05},

journal = {Open Agriculture},

volume = {3},

number = {1},

pages = {537–552},

abstract = {In Europe, agroecology has become the center of many debates that animate political and professional arenas, particularly regarding the definition and scope of the concept itself. This paper attempts to understand the ways that the term agroecology is conceptualized by different participantsparticipants and how these concepts circulate so as to explore the interests at stake in the institutionalization of agroecology within the research and education institutions of Europe. We address the core research question of: what dynamics emerge in the networks of European stakeholders of agroecology? By combining different approaches of institutionalization based on network and discourse analysis, we study the dynamics of research, education and training organizations. We identify 10 different concepts of agroecology, distributed among 103 organizations. The significant difference that has been observed between the agroecological concepts in research and those in education/training emphasizes the gap between these two disciplines. The latter support a more political, transdisciplinary and holistic view of agroecology when compared to the former. Moreover, collaboration among European agroecology stakeholders is limited in both research and education/training. We also found that in most cases, collaboration between scholars does not guarantee a shared notion of agroecology, and conversely, sharing the same notion of agroecology does not assure collaboration. This led us to question the feasibility of institutionalizing agroecology and the missing link between a shared vision and the collective mobilization of stakeholders around a strong agroecology programme.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Réchauchère2018,

title = {An Innovative Methodological Framework for Analyzing Existing Scientific Research on Land-Use Change and Associated Environmental Impacts},

author = {Olivier Réchauchère and Monia El Akkari and Sophie Le Perchec and David Makowski and Benoît Gabrielle and Antonio Bispo},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96289-4_1},

doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-96289-4_1},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-12-04},

urldate = {2018-12-04},

journal = {Sustainable Agriculture Reviews},

volume = { 30},

pages = {1-13},

abstract = {This article describes an original approach to surveying and analyzing the existing body of scientific research on (1) the effects of various forms of reorganization in agriculture, forestry, and spatial planning on land-use change (LUC) and (2) the impacts of that LUC on the environment. Our approach consisted of four principal steps: (i) identification of references using a bibliographic search process; (ii) description of the references’ key features (publication date, journal of publication, etc.); (iii) textual analysis of the articles and identification of thematic sub-groups; (iv) systematic examination of a subset of the corpus using an reading grid followed by an analysis of the results. Our findings show that the majority of publications relating to the environmental impacts of LUC were published after 2000, and amount to a corpus of more than 5700 articles. The scientific journals involved are diverse in nature, with some being general in focus and others more specialized and technical. A lexical analysis performed using the digital platform CorTexT, developed by IFRIS (Institute for Research and Innovation in Society, a research consortium based in the Paris region. http://ifris.org/), enabled us to identify several themes within this corpus, in terms of both the types of reorganizations considered and the types of impacts examined. A more detailed analysis was conducted on a subset of articles dealing with the production of non-food biomass. The results show that, within this sub-group, the environmental impacts most often studied are those relating to climate, soil, and water. Our approach demonstrates the utility of textual analysis as a partially automated method for identifying, in broad outline, the topics addressed within a large-scale corpus. As with a search by keywords, however, this type of textual analysis cannot guarantee that all the articles classed within a category genuinely address the corresponding topic. Among those articles assigned by CorTexT to the sub-group on non-food biomass (1785 articles), the majority proved not relevant to our chosen topic, and only 241 articles were ultimately selected. This selection phase could not be fully automated and required a close reading of titles, abstracts, and often main texts by human experts. The use of precise criteria for selection and a formal reading grid are helpful in limiting the risk of bias and ensuring a level of transparence in the analytical process. Implementation of such an approach is time-consumptive, however, and requires considerable human effort.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Poletti2018,

title = {Smart cities, social media platforms and security: online content regulation as a site of controversy and conflict},

author = {Chiara Poletti and Marco Michieli},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-018-0096-2},

doi = {10.1186/s40410-018-0096-2},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-11-13},

urldate = {2018-11-13},

journal = {City, Territory and Architecture},

volume = {5},

number = {20},

abstract = {Smart, technologically managed city-regions are one of the main characteristics of the contemporary world. Since the attack to the Charlie Hebdo offices, city-regions and social media digital technologies have increasingly been changing the definition of ‘territory of security’ and ‘security governance’. What are the characteristics of the security architecture created by the interaction of smart city-regions and digital technologies? Drawing from Actor-Network theory and Science and Technology Studies, we provide an empirical account of the shape of this new territory, by presenting a study of the controversy concerning security and social media in UK, the role of cities in this changed security space, and how social sciences can help better understand and respond to the opportunities and threats of smart cities.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}