Teletrabajo como concepto reciente

The present research aims firstly at providing some insights on the internal dynamics of collective action for the provision of public goods through agriculture. More in details, the study aims at exploring the main determinants and drivers that allow collective action of effectively providing agri-environmental public goods at landscape scale.

The two case studies analysed here differ to large extent in terms of the type of collective action involved, since in the first case study (Custodians of the Territory) the local action was mainly developed and coordinated by a local public agency (coordination), whilst in the second case study (Valdaso TAEA) the collective action was directly led by farmers and later institutionalised and supported by the local institutions (cooperation). Moreover, there are also several differences between the two territorial contexts and, above all, between the agri-environmental issues addressed and the strategies implemented.

The main difference is related to the different institutional arrangements of the two initiatives but also to the different agri-environmental issues addressed. ‘Custodians of the Territory’ is a project led by a local public body that has set incentives and supported a collective approach to the hydro-geological management of the district. This approach has resulted highly dependent on the institutional role of the local agency (Mountain Community Media Valle del Serchio) and in its capacity of setting and managing efficacy the PES with farmers. This institutional role, together with the

130

increasing use of IT tools (i.e. IDRAMAP) has resulted in a more technocratic approach to the delivery of environmental services, with great efforts of implementing a structured and efficient information and communication system.

On the opposite, in the case of Valdaso, public institutions have been indirectly involved in a farmer-led collective action, by supporting a bottom-up approach in order to facilitate the adoption of integrated agriculture at territorial scale.

Nevertheless, it is possible also to recognise several common points between the two case studies, such as the strong focus on the knowledge and learning dimensions and the efforts of the local institutions in involving farmers in the decision making process. Table 7.1 synthesises the key determinants for the two collective actions analysed in the study.

Table 7.1 – The determinants of success of the collective action in the two case studies

Factors Custodians of the Territory Valdaso TAEA

Social Capital Strong bonding social capital, weak bridging and weak linking social capital

Strong bonding, bridging and linking social capital

Leadership Re-skilling farmers, intermediary person between local and regional institutions

Coordinating activities, creating learning opportunities for farmers

Right scale Action implemented to provide environmental services at district level

Action implemented to protect environmental public goods at territorial level (NVZ)

Institutional arrangements

Co-production of knowledge and services Coordination mechanisms and learning opportunities for the actors involved. Role of

Nuova Agricoltura and project leader

Information and communication

2.0 web tools and meetings, participatory events with local communities

Emails, meetings, bulletin

As described in section 3.4, social capital is a crucial factor for successful grass roots initiatives. Indeed, social capital can help to overcome several problems associated to the implementation of collective action, especially in initiative where a large and heterogeneous number of stakeholders is involved (Paavola and Adger, 2005; Pretty, 2003). The present research shows that a collective approach may foster trust and reciprocity amongst the local stakeholders and how this, in some cases, may result in reducing transaction costs and increasingly the effectiveness of the agri-environmental strategies.

In particular, in Media Valle del Serchio (Tuscany), through the project Custodians of the Territory, the local agency strengthened the bonding social capital amongst the farmers, technicians and the local community but, as observed in section 5.8, in some ways failed to increase the bridging and linking social capital, and this resulted in a

131

weaker scaling up of the project, which did not emerge as model of intervention in the surrounding areas and it was not replicated in other areas.

On the opposite, in Valdaso area the association Nuova Agricoltura encouraged both

bonding as well as bridging and linking social capital and this determined a broader

transition to more sustainable agricultural practices at territorial level. This confirms what has been observed by Berkes (2009), namely that there is a potential for producers organisations to play a role as bridging organisations, by facilitating open dialogue between producers at the farms level and policy makers at the government level. The case of Valdaso also highlights that with an appropriate capacity building programme also the less formal and structured organisation may provide platforms for information exchange and, above all may enable self-organisation and collective action among local producers.

The cases studies also show that the cultivation of trust and reciprocity amongst the participants of the collective action is usually the results of a strong leadership. The key role of a leader was especially observed in the case of Valdaso TAEA, where the project leader (the ASSAM technician) acted not only as an extensionist who promotes new technologies but also a key actor who was able to bringing about the environmental re-skilling of farmers and, above all, acted as intermediary between farmers and local institutions. This crucial role of the project leader enhanced farmers’ confidence on the possibilities to undertake a collective action for adopting sustainable practices at territorial level. Similarly, the role of the project coordinator in ‘Custodians of the Territory’ was crucial in managing the advisory system of the project, as well as in coordinating the collective action and in enabling the technicians of the local agency to provide technical and administrative advices to local farmers for the delivery of environmental services.

Another important key factor that determines the success of collective action is the issue of right scale. Indeed, the effectiveness of the environmental action usually depends on the achievement of sufficient scale, such as the size of the areas interested and the continuity of the action across the territory. Since single landholders cannot satisfy these two conditions, in many cases a collective and a territorial approach is needed. The case studies analysed here demonstrate that the success of collective action is due to an approach which go beyond not only to the boundaries of single farms, but also to the administrative boundaries of the territory where the collective action take place. Indeed, in order to provide public goods through collective action it is necessary to adopt a landscape approach, where the coordinated action is tailored to the natural resources to be managed and to the agri-environmental public goods to be provided and not to the administrative boundaries and to the administrative roles of the different public bodies. It should be observed that this condition was not fully achieved in the two case studies for several reasons, related to the lack of efficient

132

coordination mechanisms amongst local institutions, to the high transaction costs that would have incurred in an increasing monitoring and enforcing as well as to the lack of flexibility of the policy tools used to support the collective actions.

In spite of these limitations, the case studies show that successful collective actions for public goods may be supported by innovative institutional arrangements. Indeed, as described in section 3.2, the success of collective action is usually base on co- management and co-production, where the allocation problem of public goods is not totally left to the market or to the government, but mixed solution are experimented. From this perspective, the Custodians of the Territory project shows that innovative PES schemes, based on co-production, may represent an example of mixed public- private arrangements which may deliver environmental services more efficiently. This approach is aimed at developing a pro-active role amongst farmers, by changing the logic of the PES by developing a system based on co-production that was perceived as a more effective way to deal to the flooding risks problems rather than systems based on centralised information systems and on pricing.

In the case of Valdaso TAEA, on the opposite, the participation of a broad set of rural stakeholders determined a territorial strategy for public goods protection, based on shared responsibility and co-management amongst private and public actors.

The coordination and the cooperation between the actors involved in collective action are particularly important also with regard generation, validation and exchange of information. Indeed, as highlighted through the case studies, the success of collective action is usually related to an efficient information and communication system specifically addressed to increase the effectiveness of the collective action concerned. This system must make clear the innovation needed, the new practices to be adopted as well as the distinction between private and public goals and the way such actions are coordinated and financed at territorial level.

Table 7.2 - The information systems in place in the two case studies

Custodians of the Territory Valdaso TAEA

Communication local institutions/farmers

Meetings and IT tools (IDRAMAP) Meetings and IT tools (bulletins, newsletters)

Communication within the farmers communities

Meetings, workshops Meetings, in-farm visits

Advisory system Public agency technicians: joint inspections. IDRAMAP

Specific technical assistance (ASSAM)

133

It may be argued that an efficient exchange of information and innovative communication system allows mobilising the intelligence and the creativity of the rural stakeholders, by determining an increased provision of public goods. From this perspective new information technologies (IT tools such as 2.0 web sites, social networks, emails, etc.) may facilitate the information exchanges, new forms of education and training and, above all, increasing the transparency and the effectiveness of the strategies specifically implemented for increasing the provision of agri- environmental public goods at landscape level. Indeed, the case studies show that IT tools may provide farmers and citizens with clear information regarding the action undertaken.

Finally, as will be discussed in next section, an important factor that determines the success of collective action is also related to the capacity of the involved actors of making better use of the knowledge and the experience of farmers for policy design and implementation.