Is it only the richer regions that can afford the agroecological transition ?

The accessibility of the ecological transition is a thorny and recurring issue in scientific and social debates alike: is organic food only for the rich? Aren’t organic farmers just poor farmers producing for rich consumers? And at our local level, is the ecological transition only accessible to rich regions or territories? It is impossible to give a simple answer to this question, because the criteria by which we judge wealth and ecological transition are highly variable and debated. But we can suggest some points for consideration.

In France, there are poor regions and areas, in terms of the average income of the population, that seem to have made little headway in the agro-ecological transition if we refer to the proportion of organic farming (a totally inadequate indicator), as in the north of France. Conversely, other rural areas with a high level of poverty are well advanced in the agro-ecological transition, such as Biovallée (in the Drôme) or the southern Ardèche (ATTER case)… The same paradoxes can be found in urban areas, although it is more difficult to observe the level of progress in the agro-ecological transition there, as the organic surface area indicator is (still) less relevant. Indicators based on consumption patterns could be more useful for urban areas (e.g. proportion of direct sales), but are undoubtedly insufficient.

Other indicators could reveal heterogeneous dynamics, depending in particular on the history of the area and practices that go “under the radar”: self-production for towns with an industrial past, for example (Brest or Alençon).

Rennes Métropole (ATTER case study) is a relatively wealthy area (average income > the French average) with an advanced agro-ecological transition according to the organic farming indicator (13% of the UAA compared with 9% for France as a whole). A priori, this is the case for other major cities such as Bordeaux, Lyon, Nantes, Clermont Ferrand, Angers, etc.

This lack of correlation between the wealth of regions and their commitment to the transition can also be seen in Italy, but also in other climates such as Brazil. For instance, the Borborema region (ATTER case) has developed a series of initiatives that have strengthened the agro-ecological transition process for poor farmers and local residents.

There are a number of factors that explain why some areas (albeit ‘poor’ ones) have a strong agro-ecological transition dynamic: natural conditions that have historically made it difficult to intensify farming and favoured a certain diversity of production; initiatives to enhance the value of local products (quality labels, short circuits, etc.) that have favoured more ecological practices, whether in terms of production systems, distribution, consumption or agricultural networks. But also through a diversity of players who have supported changes in practices or networks of civil society players who are lobbying and/or acting for this transition, or institutional players such as local authorities who have the human resources and skills to set up projects and finance ambitious projects.