L'activité agricole des ménages ruraux et la cohésion économique et sociale

Abstract

[fre] Les fonctions de l'activité agricole relatives à la cohésion économique et sociale deviennent à part entière des éléments des politiques nationales et communautaires. Des enquêtes auprès des ménages ayant une activité agricole ont été réalisées dans plusieurs régions françaises. La diversité des formes d'exercice de l'activité agricole a été résumée sous forme d'une typologie et il est possible de préciser les diverses fonctions de l'activité agricole (économiques, d'intégration sociale, hédonistes) pour trois domaines distincts : vie professionnelle, vie personnelle et sociale, vie familiale et domestique. Cette analyse permet de mieux saisir les mécanismes par lesquels l'activité agricole contribue à la cohésion économique et sociale du monde rural ; elle fait aussi ressortir que les mesures de politique agricole ne sont adaptées qu'à une fraction des ménages ayant une activité agricole. [eng] Agricultural activity of rural households and economic and social cohesion . The functions of agricultural activity relating to economic and social cohesion are becoming fullyfledged components of national and eu policies. Surveys have been carried out in several French regions in households exercising an agricultural activity. The diversity of the forms of exercise of this activity was condensed into a typology. The various functions of household agricultural activity (economic functions, social integration functions, hedonistic functions) can be assigned in three major areas: professional life, personal and social life, family and domestic life. This analysis provides an insight into the mechanisms by which agricultural activity plays a role in the economic and social cohesion of rural society. It also highlights that agricultural policy measures are adapted to only a fraction of households having an agricultural activity.

Analyzing farming systems diversity: a case study in south-western France

“…Despite the small size of the study area, we observed a wide range of systems that revealed different farming practices and functions assigned to agriculture. We found traits in common with a typology elaborated in other French regions (Laurent et al, 1998;Van der Ploeg et al, 2009). The main ways of practicing agricultural activity identified by these authors (i.e.…”

Numerical Simulation of Time-Harmonic Waves in Inhomogeneous Media using Compact High Order Schemes

“…Its sole purpose may be the generation of income, it may be an activity designed primarily for family consumption, or a leisure activity. Hence, certain forms of agricultural activity are occupational activities while others are rather influenced by 'non-professional' and lifestyle considerations (hobby farms, subsistence farms) (Laurent and Remy, 1998). The role of changing identities in the shaping of agricultural activity, on the one hand, has been influenced by transformation processes within the agricultural sector, such as the gradual disappearance of 'agriculture as a lifestyle' and the growing engagement of farm households in new, non-productive activities.…”

Socio-economic Characterisation of Agriculture Models

“…Lastly, another set of research addresses the multifunctionality of agriculture (Laurent et al 2003;Wilson 2008;Renting et al 2009;van der Ploeg et al 2009). For example, the typological approach developed by Laurent et al (1998) highlights 11 types of agricultural activity model based on the domains in which the activity in question is embedded, the professional standard systems to which it refers, and the negotiation bodies mobilised to resolve difficulties related to the agricultural activity. This typology allows us to discuss three principal social functions of agricultural activities (providing professional income, insertion within a regime of social transfers, and own consumption and bartering).…”

“…correspond to specific organisational structures with specific goals (agricultural income, increasing equity, subsistence and trade, etc. ), the social relations of which are mediated by different forms of legitimate institutions (Laurent et al 1998;van der Ploeg et al 2009). However, nothing is said about the source of these institutions' legitimacy or of the principles and values underpinning the organisational forms described.…”