Les citoyens peuvent-ils participer à produire des connaissances pour réconcilier élevage et société ? Une expérimentation dans le Massif central

Open Access

Publication ahead of print
Journal		Nat. Sci. Soc.


DOI		https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2026012
Published online		06 May 2026

Barré R., 2020. L’intermédiation : un dispositif de coproduction d’innovations élargies : Synthèse des enseignements des séminaires, Cahiers de l’action, 55, 1, 69-78, https://doi.org/10.3917/cact.055.0069. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Barré R., Jollivet M., 2023. Interdisciplinarité et recherche participative : deux régimes de recherche pour la transition écologique et solidaire. Une mise en perspective programmatique, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 31, 1, 110-119, https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2023015. [Google Scholar]
Bedessem B., 2024. Rapport de recherche sur les impacts de la participation à Ecovitisol en côtes-de-Provence, INRAE, Département ACT, https://hal.science/hal-04624602v1. [Google Scholar]
Berthet E.T.A., Barnaud C., Girard N., Labatut J., Martin G., 2016. How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59, 2, 280-301, https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2015.1009627. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Boix Mansilla V., Lamont M., Sato K., 2016. Shared cognitive -emotional-interactional platforms: markers and conditions for successful interdisciplinary collaborations, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41, 4, 571-612, https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915614103. [Google Scholar]
Callon M., Lascoumes P., Barthe Y., 2001. Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique, Paris, Seuil. [Google Scholar]
Challéat S., Lapostolle D., Milian J., Bénos R., Barré K., Farrugia N., Renaud M., Maisonobe M., Morvan S., Ronzani C. et al., 2022. Construire et travailler un objet de recherche en interdisciplinarité : l’exemple de l’environnement nocturne à La Réunion, Tracés. Revue de sciences humaines, 22, 23-45, https://journals.openedition.org/traces/14581. [Google Scholar]
Cournut S., Houdart M.M., Rapey H., 2019. Apports d’un atelier participatif conduit dans le Livradois-Forez concernant la place de l’élevage dans le territoire, Revue d’Auvergne, 281-286. [Google Scholar]
Dedieu B., 2023. Introduction. Recherches sur la question animale : entre mobilisations sociétales et innovations technologiques, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 31, 2, 162-165, https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2023029. [Google Scholar]
Delgado A., Åm H., 2018. Experiments in interdisciplinarity: responsible research and innovation and the public good, PLoS biology, 16, 3, e2003921, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2003921. [Google Scholar]
Della Rossa P., Mottes C., Cattan P., Le Bail M., 2022. A new method to co-design agricultural systems at the territorial scale − Application to reduce herbicide pollution in Martinique, Agricultural Systems, 196, 103337, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103337. [Google Scholar]
Demeulenaere É., Rivière P., Hyacinthe A., Baltassat R., Baltazar S., Gascuel J.-S., Lacanette J., Montaz H., Pin S., Ranke O. et al., 2017. La sélection participative à l’épreuve du changement d’échelle. À propos d’une collaboration entre paysans sélectionneurs et généticiens de terrain, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 25, 4, 336-346, https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2018012. [Google Scholar]
Dewey J., 1939. Theory of valuation, in Nagel E., International encyclopedia of unified science, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
Doidge C., Ånestad L.M., Burrell A., Frössling J., Palczynski L., Pardon B., Veldhuis A., Bokma J., Carmo L.P., Hopp P. et al., 2024. A Living Lab approach to understanding dairy farmers’ technology and data needs to improve herd health: Focus groups from 6 European countries, Journal of Dairy Science, 107, 8, 5754-5778, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-24155. [Google Scholar]
Doré A., Girard N., Gallino-Visman S., Lamothe L., 2023. Production et circulation des connaissances relatives au Bien-Être Animal au sein d’un Living-Lab : le cas du Living-Lab Lapin (3L), 19^es Journées de la recherche cunicole, Le Mans, https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04187491v1/document. [Google Scholar]
Guétat-Bernard H., Lapeyre N., 2017. Les pratiques contemporaines de l’empowerment, Cahiers du Genre, 63, 2, 5-22, https://doi.org/10.3917/cdge.063.0005. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Hache E., 2011. Ce à quoi nous tenons. Propositions pour une écologie pragmatique, Paris, La Découverte. [Google Scholar]
Hatchuel A., Weil B., 2009. C-K design theory: an advanced formulation, Research in Engineering Design, 19, 181-192, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-008-0043-4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Hache E., 2019. Ce à quoi nous tenons. Propositions pour une écologie pragmatique, La Découverte. [Google Scholar]
Jaeger M., 2017. L’implication des HUC (Habitants-usagers-citoyens) dans la recherche, Vie sociale, 20, 4, 11-29, https://doi.org/10.3917/vsoc.174.0011. [Google Scholar]
Jollivet M., 2020. L’intermédiation, un dispositif pour la transition écologique et solidaire, Cahiers de l’action, 55, 1, 61-67, https://doi.org/10.3917/cact.055.0061. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Joly P.-B., Kaufmann A., 2008. Lost in translation? The Need for ‘upstream engagement’ with nanotechnology on trial, Science as Culture 17, 3, 225-247, https://doi.org/10.1080/09505430802280727. [Google Scholar]
Knickel K., Redman M., Darnhofer I., Ashkenazy A., Calvão Chebach T., Šūmane S., Tisenkopfs T., Zemeckis R., Atkociuniene V., Rivera M. et al., 2018. Between aspirations and reality: Making farming, food systems and rural areas more resilient, sustainable and equitable, Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 197-210, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.04.012. [Google Scholar]
Labatut J., Hooge S., 2016. Renouveler la gestion de ressources communes par la conception innovante ? Le cas d’une race locale au Pays basque, Natures Scieences Sociétés, 24, 4, 319-330, https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2016037. [Google Scholar]
Lévy J., Lussault M., 2004. Le moment-dictionnaire, Espaces Temps, 84-86, 62-73, https://doi.org/10.3406/espat.2004.4239. [Google Scholar]
Loconto A., 2023. L’intermédiation des connaissances : le passage d’un état de savoir à un état de faire pour une transition agroécologique, Innovations, 70, 1, 153-179, https://doi.org/10.3917/inno.070.0153. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Nez H., 2011. Nature et légitimités des savoirs citoyens dans l’urbanisme participatif. Une enquête ethnographique à Paris, Sociologie, 2, 4, 387-404, https://doi.org/10.3917/socio.024.0387. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Nguyen T., Graham I.D., Mrklas K.J., Bowen S., Cargo M., Estabrooks C.A., Kothari A., Lavis J., Macaulay A.C., MacLeod M. et al., 2020. How does integrated knowledge translation compare to other collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge? Learning from experts in the field, Health Research Policy and Systems, 18, 35, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-0539-6. [Google Scholar]
Mouret S., Porcher J., 2007. Les systèmes industriels porcins : la mort comme travail ordinaire, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 15, 3, 245-252, https://doi.org/10.1051/nss:2007054. [Google Scholar]
Quinio M., Guichard L., Salazar P., Détienne F., Jeuffroy M.-H., 2022. Cognitive resources to promote exploration in agroecological systems design, Agricultural Systems, 196, 103334, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103334. [Google Scholar]
Romera A.J., Bos A.P., Neal M., Eastwood C.R., Chapman D., McWilliam W., Royds D., O’Connor C., Brookes R., Connolly J., et al., 2020. Designing future dairy systems for New Zealand using reflexive interactive design, Agricultural Systems, 181, 102818, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102818. [Google Scholar]
Sauvant D., 2022. Perception sociétale de l’élevage, Bulletin de l’Académie Vétérinaire de France, 175, 395-397, https://doi.org/10.3406/bavf.2022.70990. [Google Scholar]
Schneidewind U., Singer-Brodowski M., Augenstein K., 2016. Transformative science for sustainability transitions, in Brauch H.G., Spring U.O., Grin J., Scheffran J. (Eds), Handbook on sustainability transition and sustainable peace, Cham, Springer, 123-136. [Google Scholar]
Shirk J.L., Bonney R., 2018. Scientific impacts and innovations of citizen science, in Hecker S., Haklay M., Bowser A., Makuch Z., Vogel J. (Eds), Citizen science: innovation in open science, society and policy, London, UCL Press. [Google Scholar]
Stengers I., 2009. Au temps des catastrophes. Résister à la barbarie qui vient, Paris, La Découverte/Les Empêcheurs de penser en rond. [Google Scholar]
Šūmane S., Kunda I., Knickel K., Strauss A., Tisenkopfs T., Rios I. des I., Rivera M., Chebach T., Ashkenazy A., 2018. Local and farmers’ knowledge matters! How integrating informal and formal knowledge enhances sustainable and resilient agriculture. Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 232-241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.01.020. [Google Scholar]
Syahrun L.N., Suraya RS, Jers LOT, Laxmi A., Aso L., 2023. Local knowledge of farmer communities in the use of organic fertilizers to increase cashew production in Buton Utara Regency, Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia, Sociology Study, 13, 4, 188-195, https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5526/2023.04.002. [Google Scholar]
Taverne M., Clément S., Prost L., Barcellini F., 2019. Evaluation of the operationalisation of the TATA-BOX Process, in Bergez J.-É., Audouin É., Therond O. (Eds), Agroecological transitions: from theory to practice in local participatory design, Cham, Springer, 229-259. [Google Scholar]
Toffolini Q., Jeuffroy M.H., Mischler P., Pernel J., Prost L., 2017. Farmers’ use of fundamental knowledge to re-design their cropping systems: situated contextualisation processes. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 80, 37-47, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2016.11.004. [Google Scholar]
Toffolini Q., Jeuffroy M.-H., Meynard J.-M., Borg J., Enjalbert J., Gauffreteau A., Goldringer I., Lefèvre A., Loyce C., Martin P. et al., 2020. Design as a source of renewal in the production of scientific knowledge in crop science, Agricultural Systems, 185, 102939, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102939. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Tosunlu H.B., Guillaume J.H.A., Tsoukiàs A., Hassenforder É., Chrii S., Braiki H., Pluchinotta I., 2024. Integrating problem structuring methods with formal design theory: collective water management policy design in Tunisia, Cahier du Lamsade, 410, www.lamsade.dauphine.fr/fileadmin/mediatheque/lamsade/documents/Cahiers/tunisiacahier410.pdf. [Google Scholar]
Wezel A., Herren B.G., Kerr R.B., Barrios E., Gonçalves A.L.R., Sinclair F., 2020. Agroecological principles and elements and their implications for transitioning to sustainable food systems. A review, Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 40, 40, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00646-z. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.