The circulation of seed among farmers is central to agrobiodiversity conservation and dynamics. Agrobiodiversity, the diversity of agricultural systems from genes to varieties and crop species, from farming methods to landscape composition, is part of humanity's cultural heritage. Whereas agrobiodiversity conservation has received much attention from researchers and policy makers over the last decades, the methods available to study the role of seed exchange networks in preserving crop biodiversity have only recently begun to be considered. In this overview, we present key concepts, methods, and challenges to better understand seed exchange networks so as to improve the chances that traditional crop varieties (landraces) will be preserved and used sustainably around the world. The available literature suggests that there is insufficient knowledge about the social, cultural, and methodological dimensions of environmental change, including how seed exchange networks will cope with changes in climates, socio-economic factors, and family structures that have supported seed exchange systems to date. Methods available to study the role of seed exchange networks in the preservation and adaptation of crop specific and genetic diversity range from meta-analysis to modelling, from participatory approaches to the development of bio-indicators, from genetic to biogeographical studies, from anthropological and ethnographic research to the use of network theory. We advocate a diversity of approaches, so as to foster the creation of robust and policy-relevant knowledge. Open challenges in the study of the role of seed exchange networks in biodiversity conservation include the development of methods to (i) enhance farmers' participation to decision-making in agro-ecosystems, (ii) integrate ex situ and in situ approaches, (iii) achieve interdisciplinary research collaboration between social and natural scientists, and (iv) use network analysis as a conceptual framework to bridge boundaries among researchers, farmers and policy makers, as well as other stakeholders. (Résumé d'auteur

The importance of seed provisioning in food security and nutrition, agricultural development and rural livelihoods, and agrobiodiversity and germplasm conservation is well accepted by policy makers, practitioners and researchers. The role of farmer seed networks is less well understood and yet is central to debates on current issues ranging from seed sovereignty and rights for farmers to GMOs and the conservation of crop germplasm. In this paper we identify four common misconceptions regarding the nature and importance of farmer seed networks today. (1) Farmer seed networks are inefficient for seed dissemination. (2) Farmer seed networks are closed, conservative systems. (3) Farmer seed networks provide ready, egalitarian access to seed. (4) Farmer seed networks are destined to weaken and disappear. We challenge these misconceptions by drawing upon recent research findings and the authors' collective field experience in studying farmer seed systems in Africa, Europe, Latin America and Oceania. Priorities for future research are suggested that would advance our understanding of seed networks and better inform agricultural and food policy

This article employs multi-sited ethnography as a tool to explore the relationships among farmer seed exchange practices, intellectual property rights legislation, and biodiversity. Specifically, it investigates these issues in the historically, ecologically and culturally diverse contexts of the Costa Rican and Latvian organic agriculture movements, as these small countries negotiate their places in the economic trading blocs of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and the European Union (EU), respectively. The juxtaposition of two such different cases reveals the micro-processes whereby the imposition of intellectual property rights on seeds replaces the centrality of social kin networks through which seeds are exchanged with bureaucratic transactions. This shift from exchanging seeds among kin to tracing the genetic lineage of seeds is part of a global process of commodification and control of seeds. Increasing efforts to “harmonize” intellectual property rights on seeds and plant varieties throughout the world will have profound impacts on food production, small farmer livelihoods and social networks, and agricultural biodiversity.

No abstract

Implementation of a new system of geographical information system (GIS) maps based on aerial photos to administer EU agri-environmental support payments for organic farmers in Latvia in 2005 erupted into disputes over farm boundaries, cultural landscapes, good agricultural practices and regional power dynamics. Farmers whose land area had been changed along with the change in technology were deemed to be in breach of their support payment agreements and had to repay the difference, leaving many disillusioned with the EU and considering withdrawal from the organic agriculture support programme. I argue here that this case demonstrates the complexities of EU accession for new member states, revealing the unintended consequences of the implementation of European policies in post-socialist contexts. Disputes over the organic land area reflect deeper cultural issues tied to the history of foreign domination. Furthermore, they represent a conflict surrounding ideas of space versus place. Abstract 'maps from space' challenge farmers' place-based knowledge and national imaginaries of agricultural landscapes. On a broader level, this conflict reflects the tensions between the imagined 'return to Europe' and the reality of Europe as a political and bureaucratic space. 'Oh, dear God ... I am seeking and asking only this, that you make the honourable Master Surveyor of such mind that he grant me the meadow of the deep valley, the pea fields on the hill and the small area of [ forest] regrowth along the Slamste and Šmakānu borders'. Farmer Ķ encis' prayer from the novel Mērnieku laiki (Age of the surveyors) (Kaudzīte and Kaudzīte 2006 [1879] p. 225) O n a cold morning in January 2006 I went to the Latvian Ministry of Agriculture for an information session for organic farmers about the European Union's (EU)agri-environment support programme, expecting a straightforward, and perhaps even dry explanation of available programmes, application requirements and funding limits for the coming year. I arrived to find the room packed with farmers from all over the country. Once the question and answer session started, any preconceptions