A major challenge for livestock farming systems (LFSs) is to reconcile production with the management of natural resources, especially biodiversity and ecosystem services. Based on a review of research conducted on grassland-and rangeland-based LFSs, this paper addresses this challenge by analysing biodiversity as a product of and a key resource for LFSs. Although most studies reveal antagonisms between biodiversity and production, our findings show that it is possible to move towards synergies. The literature review sheds light on five points: (i) moving beyond an antagonistic view of biodiversity and production by considering biodiversity as a resource requires new criteria for biodiversity categorization from a taxonomic view to a functional one; (ii) functional biodiversity (both domestic and wild) considered as a resource provides beneficial properties (e.g. stability and resilience) to LFSs; (iii) links between production and biodiversity cannot be simply summarized as having a negative impact of production intensity as management practices have various impacts on the different components of biodiversity; (iv) impact assessment studies linking management of LFSs and biodiversity reveal complex multi-level interactions between grassland or rangeland management and biodiversity; (v) a large range of management options are available to move towards biodiversitybased LFSs. We conclude that future research should address the challenge of collective management of wild biodiversity at higher levels of organization (landscapes, territories, etc.) and that such collective management would greatly benefit from the experience of domestic biodiversity.
Summary ― In a coppice, under conditions of low grass availability and high stocking rate (300 ewes-ha-I ), the time spent eating bushes reaches 60% of grazing time and increases with flock size (stocking rates of 50 ewes-ha-1 vs i50 ewesoha-1 ). ).
Les connaissances que les acteurs mobilisent dans des pratiques routinières peuvent-elles servir à élaborer des connaissances scientifiques ? Voilà une question dont on s'attendrait qu'elle soit traitée par des spécialistes des sciences cognitives. Mais ce n'est pas le cas ici. L'intérêt de l'article qui suit vient, nous semble-t-il, du travail réflexif d'un collectif de scientifiques de disciplines différentes sur leur rapport aux connaissances d'acteurs. Qu'ils relèvent des sciences sociales, de celles de la nature ou de l'action, les auteurs de ce texte ont en commun de travailler avec des acteurs pour faire émerger, par enquête ou observation, les connaissances issues de la pratique. Qu'en ont-ils fait ? C'est à cette question qu'ils ont réfléchi, en confrontant leurs expériences. La Rédaction Mots-clés :interdisciplinarité ; sciences sociales ; sciences techniques ; connaissance ; enquête Résumé -Cet article est le fruit d'une analyse réflexive d'un collectif pluridisciplinaire de chercheurs qui travaillent par enquête auprès des professionnels de l'agriculture et de la nature. L'objectif est d'apporter des éléments de réflexion sur le rôle des connaissances d'acteurs dans la construction des connaissances scientifiques. La façon de les utiliser varie selon les disciplines, mais plus encore suivant la finalité des recherches. Trois idéaux types sont distingués : décrire et analyser les connaissances des acteurs (1) pour comprendre une situation, (2) pour produire de nouvelles connaissances sur des processus biotechniques, (3) pour accompagner des processus d'action. Cette exploration méthodologique montre combien le recours à l'enquête modifie profondément le contenu cognitif des connaissances agronomiques, étholo-giques, écologiques et zootechniques produites et permet aux chercheurs d'innover dans leurs champs disciplinaires respectifs. L'analyse transversale conduit à une réflexion sur le potentiel heuristique de l'enquête. Keywords:interdisciplinarity; social sciences; biotechnical sciences; knowledge; surveys Abstract -Using professional knowledge in building scientific knowledge; a comparative analysis of several case studies. This paper results from cross-disciplinary reflection by social and biotechnical researchers engaged in surveys with experts from the agriculture and nature spheres: farmers: technical advisors, managers of nature conservation programmes and biologists. The purpose was to analyse the way professional knowledge is used by researchers to enrich their body of scientific knowledge. How professional knowledge is used depends in part on each scientific discipline, but far more on the final research aims. We first identified three ideotypes based on whether professional knowledge is used (1) in a comprehensive way to understand its origins, (2) to build new biological knowledge complementary to the one produced on an experimental basis, or (3) to build operational knowledge to help professionals manage their problems. A cross-analysis of the survey methods used then led to discussing t...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.