ISARA-Lyon Wageningen University 23 rue Jean Baldassini Droevendaalsesteeg 1
69364 LYON CEDEX 07 6708PB WAGENINGEN
Prospects for value chains of alternative crops to
support sustainable agriculture and preserve water
resources in the Rhône-Alpes region, France
Master thesis: FSE-80430
AGROECOS 7 (2013-2015) Gwladys Huctin
Student number: 910817371100
Date: 10/15/2015
ISARA tutor: Audrey Vincent External tutor: Maud Bouchet
WUR tutor: Dr Walter Rossing
This document was written by an ISARA student in the framework of a convention with Coop
de France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne. For all citing, communication or distribution related to
this document, ISARA has to be mentioned
Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Maud Bouchet for her help, her trust and the support she
showed me throughout this project. I would not have been able to complete my project
without her guidance.
I would also like to thank all the Coop de France team for their warm welcome that enabled a
rapid integration to the team. In particular, I am very grateful to Annie with whom I shared
the office during the six-month project period. Thank you for the valuable and nice exchange
we had. I am also grateful to Audrey Vincent my ISARA supervisor for her availability and
guidance, and to Dr Walter Rossing, Wageningen University for his valuable remarks and
advice.
Special thank you to all the other interns of the building, for all the nice relaxing moments we
shared.
Lastly, I am very grateful to my parents and sister for their encouragement and financial
support throughout my Master course.
Table of Content
Abbreviations
1 General context ............................................................................................................................. 1
2 State of the art ............................................................................................................................... 6
3 Research questions .................................................................................................................... 10
4 Material and method ................................................................................................................ 11 4.1 Identifying alternative crops ......................................................................................................... 12
4.1.1 List of criteria defining alternative crops ......................................................................................... 12 4.1.2 Literature review and conference attendance to identify alternative crops ........................... 13
4.2 Identifying project experiences at national scale on the French territory ......................... 13 4.2.1 Criteria for selecting the projects ....................................................................................................... 13 4.2.2 Expert consultancy on project experiences at national scale ..................................................... 15
4.3 Selecting case studies for an in-depth analysis .......................................................................... 16 4.4 Expert consultancy for the selected project examples ............................................................ 17 4.5 Feasibility assessment at Rhône-Alpes regional scale ............................................................. 20
4.5.1 Focus group interviews of expert consultancy ............................................................................... 20 4.5.2 Individual interviews of expert consultancy ................................................................................... 21
4.6 Initiating the next step of the study ............................................................................................. 22 4.7 Methodology summary time line .................................................................................................. 24
5 Results .......................................................................................................................................... 25 5.1 Defining alternative crops .............................................................................................................. 25 5.2 Alternative crops identified ........................................................................................................... 25 5.3 Project experience identified ......................................................................................................... 31
5.3.1 Identified projects .................................................................................................................................... 31 5.3.2 Selected projects ...................................................................................................................................... 31
5.4 Feasibility assessment regarding regional actors point of view ............................................ 37 5.4.1 Regional cooperatives point of view and concerns....................................................................... 37 5.4.2 Possible line of approach for project development in the Rhône-Alpes territory ............... 42 5.4.3 Example projects emerging in the coming years ........................................................................... 44
6 Discussion .................................................................................................................................... 47 6.1 Diversifying rotation system with alternative crops ................................................................ 47 6.2 Key elements for value chain development ................................................................................ 49
6.2.1 Stakeholders involved in the creation of supply chain for alternative crops ........................ 50 6.2.2 Financial dimension ................................................................................................................................ 52 6.2.3 Added value creation .............................................................................................................................. 53
6.3 Development potential of alternative crops in the Rhône-Alpes region ............................. 56 6.3.1 Delimitation scale of the action plan ................................................................................................. 57 6.3.2 Role of cooperatives ............................................................................................................................... 59
6.4 Methodological strengths and weaknesses ................................................................................. 61 6.5 Future perspectives .......................................................................................................................... 61
7 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 63
8 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 64
9 Bibliography appendix ............................................................................................................. 68
10 Appendix ................................................................................................................................... 72
Tables of illustrations
Figure 1: Map of pesticide pollution pressure in the Rhône-Alpes region and location of
measurement sites (ATMO Drôme-Ardèche et al. 2010) ............................................................ 2 Figure 2: List of agronomic characteristics used for the identification of alternative crops and
plant specificities. ................................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 3: Criteria for assessing the examples in order of importance at national scale. In red, it
corresponds to an eliminatory criterion. ......................................................................................... 15 Figure 4: Criteria for selecting the examples for interviews in order of importance. ................ 17 Figure 5: General agronomic and production characteristics for the final alternative crop
selection ................................................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6: Summary time line of the six-month research period (2015). ........................................ 24 Figure 7: List of the fifteen low input crop identified during the six-month study period. ...... 26
Table 1: General elements of the interview guideline for regional projects ................................. 18 Table 2: Mean TFI of wheat, peas, sunflower and malt barley in France 2011, (Agreste 2013)
.................................................................................................................................................................... 27 Table 3: Overview of the listed crop regarding the six agronomic criteria identified for
selecting alternative crops .................................................................................................................. 30 Table 4: Example of successful development of a supply chain from the cooperative
Coopedom (alfalfa production) and example of failure from the river basin Bièvre-
Valloire (hemp production)................................................................................................................ 32 Table 5: Regional agricultural cooperative point of view regarding the potential of
development of the alternative crops listed in this study .......................................................... 39
Abbreviations
CAP: Common Agricultural Policy
CDF RAA: Coop de France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne
Coop: Agricultural cooperative
DREAL Rhône-Alpes: Regional Directorates of Environment, Organization and
Accommodation
ERDF: European Regional Development Fund
Ha: Hectare
INRA: National Institute of Agricultural Research
MAET: Territorialised Agri-Environmental Measures
PAM: Aromatic plants
SDAGE: framework scheme for planning and managing the water
TFI: treatment frequency index
Water Agency RMC: Rhône-Mediterranean-Corsica Water Agency
1
1 General context
Water issues on the French territory
Over the past decades, agriculture practices had significant negative effects on quality of
surface and ground water worldwide. Significant contamination was linked to the increased
use of agricultural external inputs around the 1950s with the reduction in crop diversity,
specialization of the production systems and the desire of producing higher quantities in the
same amount of time (Meynard and Messéan 2014). The use of these external inputs,
comprising irrigation, fertilisation and pesticides rapidly spread and was generally adopted
due to their positive impact on crop productivity. Many different types of inputs can be
classified under the term pesticides, such as insecticides, herbicides, fungicides,
molluscicides, nematicides, rodenticides and other biocides (Edwards 2013).
The primary benefits of using external inputs are their labour-saving effects, economic
benefits of pest, disease and weed control and increase the nitrogen availability for the plant,
which may result in increased crop productivity. The main goal and use of pesticides is to be
lethal to the targeted pest but not to non-targeted species such as crops, beneficial insects or
humans. Unfortunately, this goal has not been reached, so the controversy about the use and
abuse of pesticides has emerged (Vinita and Veena 2015; Aktar et al. 2009). Pesticide
contamination of surface and ground water has become a major environmental issue.
In his study, Edwards (2013) drew attention to the rapid and alarming increase in pesticide
use throughout the world. Approximately 1,000 active ingredients are commonly used world
wide, including 250 in the agricultural sector. Every year, in the Rhône-Alpes region with 1
497,225 km2 of utilized agricultural area (Chambre de Commerce et d'Industrie de région
Rhône-Alpes 2015), approximately 6,100 tons of pesticides are being used by the agricultural
sector (DREAL Rhône Alpes 2014). The geographical areas in the region that are the most
affected by pesticide pollution were mapped in a study in 2008 by the Regional Unit
Observation and Prevention of Pollution from pesticides (Fig. 1) (ATMO Drôme-Ardèche et
al. 2010). The results showed that 3 areas were especially affected: the wine production sector
in the Beaujolais (Rhône department), the cereal sector in the plain of Bièvre (Isère
department) and the suburban area around the city of Valence (Ardèche department).
2
Figure 1: Map of pesticide pollution pressure in the Rhône-Alpes region and location of measurement sites (ATMO
Drôme-Ardèche et al. 2010)
Many studies have reported that pesticides applied to cropland have the potential to
contaminate drinking water supplies. This contamination is due to the fact that pesticides can
easily make their way into surface and ground water systems and then move along ground-
water flow paths to surface water (Van der Perk 2013; Winter et al. 1998). Excess application
of inorganic nitrogenous fertilizers and manures creates nitrogen leaching in the soil, and has
a direct impact on the water quality (Van der Perk 2013). Concerns regarding the acidification
of surface waters and soil caused by atmospheric nitrate deposition and the eutrophication of
lakes and streams have been reported since the last decade (Winter et al. 1998). Many factors
should be considered when determining the soil and water contamination by pesticides and
fertilizers such as climate, farming system, manure management, crop diversity and soil type.
There is now overwhelming evidence that some of these chemicals presents a potential risk to
human health, especially to farmers that are in direct contact with the pesticides. Other effects
have been noticed, pest and diseases are becoming resistant toward certain pesticides which
can lead to important yield and production losses and soil fertility has been affected as well as
air and non-targeted vegetation (Aktar et al. 2009).
Government policies on water resources
Over time The European and the French governments implemented laws and regulations in
order to preserve natural resources (Edwards 2013; Van der Perk 2013). Environmental
protection and pollution control measures were created and incorporated into legislation at
national and European level. In 1991, the Nitrate Directive (91/676/EC) was implemented.
3
This measure concerns the monitoring of surface and ground water, the designation of
vulnerable water catchment areas, the designing of protocols for good agricultural practice,
the adoption of action programs and the evaluation of the implemented actions (Eur-Lex
2013). In 2000, the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) of the European Commission
was created in order to organize public action and to address many other problems threatening
water ecosystems. The overall objective is to achieve, by the end of 2015, a good
environmental status of the water quality throughout Europe (Eau France, 2015).
In France, different types of organisations are present on the territory and conduct actions
regarding the preservation of surface and ground water quality. Since fifty year the French
Water Agency implement, within seven metropolitan watersheds, actions promoting efficient
management of water resources and aquatic environments, drinking water supply, flood
control and sustainable development of economic activities (Article L213-8-1 Environmental
Code; Water Act and aquatic environments of December 30, 2006 - Article 82) (Les Agences
de l’eau 2015). In 2009, the Water Agency set in place for every watershed a framework for
planning and managing surface and ground water resources (SDAGE). The main goal is to
identify the water catchment areas and deploy targeted action plans, which consist of specific
measures to reduce point source pollution. As an example, developing collective spraying
equipment washing areas and measures to reduce diffuse pollution (Agence de l’eau Rhône-
Méditerranée-Corse 2015). To achieve this objective, a guideline was implemented taking
into account the recommendations under the ‘Environmental Roundtable’ (Grenelle
d’Environnement) guidelines for good water quality status to be achieved by the end of 2015
and the European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), which is implemented in France
by the law on water and aquatic environments preservation. In the Rhône-Alpes region, 57
water catchment areas have been designated as priority water catchment zones (DREAL
Rhône-Alpes 2015).
The monitoring of the selected actions is coordinated between the Water Agency and the
DREAL (Regional Directorates of Environment and Accommodation Development) of each
French region. The DREAL is the regional service of the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable
Development and Energy and the Ministry of Housing, Equality Territories and Rural Affairs.
The DREAL implements and coordinates state policies regarding “sustainable development
and management; ecological transition; fight against climate change; preservation of the
environment (water, air, soil, nature), biodiversity and landscapes; prevention of pollution;
housing, construction, urban renewal; transport and infrastructure” (DREAL Rhône-Alpes
4
2014b). The project SDAGE is one of the main actions they have implemented at national
scale in favour of environment, biodiversity and landscape preservation, as well as pollution
prevention.
In 2009, the National Plan of Environmental Health have set into place the Ecophyto plan
2025 for reducing to 50% of the use of pesticides over the period 2009-2025 on the French
territory. One of the actions involved the design of efficient low input agricultural systems,
such as developing crop varieties that would be more adapted to the climatic change
(Direction régionale de l’alimentation de l’agriculture et de la forêt d’Auvergne 2015). Since
a few years the French Water Agency also seeks to promote farming practices that consume
less input in order to protect and restore the water quality in water catchment areas.
Financial support by governments & public institution
In 2013, the Water Agency established the 10th
action programme in which the agency plans
to spend 288 million euros to protect water catchments including 190 million euros for
fighting against agricultural pollution by targeting first the drinking water catchment areas
(Agence de l’eau Rhône-Méditerranée-Corse 2012).
Financial compensation from public authorities is accessible to farmers. The second pillar of
the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) offers financial support to farmers that voluntarily
adopt better environmental practices in their farming system such as reducing their pesticide
and fertilization use, the implementation of grass strips, etc (Fiches techniques sur l'Union
européenne 2015). This financial help is renewable every year and only accessible if the
farmers comply to 3 recommended criteria, which are developing ecological interests area in
their farming system (e.g. agroforestery, hedgerows), diversify their rotation system and
maintain permanent grassland. The average payment amount for farmers that adopt
agricultural practices favouring environmental preservation is 86 €/ha/year (Nouvelle PAC
2015 2015).
Since 2007, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) has created Territorialised
Agri-Environmental Measures (MAET) (Aten 2015). These measures are intended to
promote innovative environmentally friendly agricultural practices. They are intended to
compensate the additional costs and loss of profits generated by the introduction on farms of
more environmentally friendly agricultural practices. The agri-environmental measures are an
5
essential element of the system designed to integrate environmental concerns into the CAP.
Farmers who subscribe to executing agri-environment measures commit themselves to respect
for 5 years agri-environmental practices in exchange for remuneration. These measures
contribute to the preservation water resource, landscape, biodiversity and soil quality
(FEADER, 2015).
Involvement of agricultural cooperatives in water quality management
Since several years, the French Water Agency would like to create awareness and mobilise a
large number of farmers and industrials in the region to join their cause regarding the
preservation of surface and ground water resources. Their aim is to implement long-term
action in the agricultural sector on priority water catchment areas that are sustainable in time.
This goal can be reached by involving economical and technical actors of the region such as
agricultural cooperatives in the creation of adapted solutions. Agricultural cooperatives are
important drivers for sustaining practice change among farmers by bringing technical and
financial support. An agricultural cooperative (Coop) is defined as “an autonomous
association of persons united voluntarily to meet their aspirations and their economic, social
and cultural needs they have in common, by a company whose priority is collective and where
power is democratically controlled”. (Coop de France 2009). The farmers thus own their
cooperative and supply it with animal and plant products. Cooperatives can play an important
role in creating links between upstream and downstream actors of the supply chains due to
their intermediate and coordination position in the chain. They may also offer the possibility
to design long-term contracts between the different stakeholders of the chain to insure the
sustainability of the process.
Therefore, at the beginning of the year 2015 an agreement between the Water Agency Rhône-
Méditerranée-Corse (Water Agency RMC) and Coop de France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne (CFD
RAA) was signed. The objective is to develop and promote agricultural practices compatible
with the protection of water resources while taking into account the socio-economic stakes of
the agricultural sector. This project should allow initiating a change in practices, and
promoting long-term innovations and experimentation to achieve the protection of water
resources in the region. One of the measures for the amelioration of water quality that will be
promoted is lowering the external inputs by including alternative crops on farms and in
particular low input crops. In order to investigate further the development potential of these
crops, this study was initiated and will be continued in the following years.
6
2 State of the art
Sustainable solutions to preserve water quality
Alternative farming systems that are linked to the preservation of landscape and natural
resources are being analysed and monitored by scientific studies in France and all around the
world by research institutes. These researches can address alternative solutions to help and
advise farmers through the development of methods that might alter some of the negative
effects of external inputs on soil fertility and water resources (Liebman and Schulte 2015;
Winter et al. 1998). For example, at field level the introduction in the system of cover crops
(Maltais-Landry et al. 2015), grass strips (Le Bissonnais et al. 2004), or intercropping (Pelzer
et al. 2012) were investigated and at farm scale the conversion to alternative or organic
systems (Cambardella et al. 2015). The most relevant solution to limit water and soil
contamination by pesticides and nitrates must be by lowering the quantities to a minimum
(Edwards 2013). This goal can be used as a win-win approach to convince farmers to change
their practices while compensating production losses by diminishing their costs in pesticide
and fertilizer use and optimizing their risk management.
One of the solutions is to design a low input farming system (LIFS), which was defined by
Parr and al (1990) in a broad and qualitative definition: “LIFS seeks to optimize the
management and use of internal production inputs and to minimize the use of external
production inputs, such as purchased fertilizers and pesticides, wherever and whenever
feasible and practicable, to lower production costs, to avoid pollution of surface and
groundwater, to reduce pesticide residues in food, to reduce farmer's overall risk, and to
increase both short- and long-term farm profitability." A more recent definition was given by
Pointereau and al (2012) with a quantitative point of view at farm level: “The LIFS are a
combination between intensity (level of input used per hectare) and efficiency (level of input
used per quantity of product).” In this study, lowering the input needs will be analysed by
taking into consideration the rotation system and the possibility of diversifying it by inserting
alternative crops.
7
Crop diversification by the introduction of alternative crops
To achieve the restoration and preservation of surface and ground water quality resources,
several steps are required to modify the farming system resulting in limiting the amount of
external input use at the field level. Diversifying the rotation system by introducing
alternative crops such as low input crop can be implemented in farmers production systems
and limit the use of external inputs. These alternative crops can bring diversity to the system,
reduce the chances of appearance and proliferation of pest and diseases, increase biodiversity
and favour the presence of beneficial insects, fight against weed proliferation, improve the
soil fertility and in the long term ameliorate the water quality and increase the soil and
landscape biodiversity (Liebman and Schulte 2015; Hérault 2012; Power 1987). If the crop is
a legume, it may also lower the fertilizer needs of the following crops by acting as a primary
nitrogen resource. A degree of crop diversification might also have beneficial effects on crop
productivity (Bennett et al. 2012).
For low input farming system to be economically profitable to the farmer, crop production
needs to be connected to a regional supply chain with an identified market. To avoid the
lock-in effects in the structuration of a supply chain where one party is heavily dependant
upon the other party, strong connections between the producers, the consumers and industrial
or cooperative actors need to be established (Lonsdale 2001). Downstream economical
stakeholders need to be involved in the implementation of farmers practice change and help in
sustaining these changes regarding common long-term perspectives. Regional cooperatives
may help in designing sustainable systems where the production, financial and information
flows are fairly distributed between all the actors of the chain since they play an intermediate
role between producers and industrial or consumers in the supply chain (Meynard et al. 2014;
Magrini et al. 2012).
The role of agricultural cooperatives in implementing territorial supply chains
Sustainable production chains must result in the creation of quality product that the consumer
is willing and able to buy. This requires the ability to “communicate and cooperate across
cultural and ideological borders among the stakeholders of the chain, produce safe and
desirable products for a competitive price and to be open-minded to recognize that different
means can reach a jointly desired goal or that different goals may serve a common purpose”
(Van Dam and Van Trijp 2011). It also requires commitment from all the actors of the chain,
8
linking local producers to global markets, returning information and money from global
markets back into the chain and favour exchange between chain actors by either product,
finance or information flow.
Implementing a supply chain and creating value for a product requires coordination of
activities and services from upstream to downstream. Agricultural cooperatives can provide
these services, as well as technical support and assistance to farmers that are willing to change
their practices and the necessary coordination skills for structuring a supply chain.
Cooperatives are run democratically under the “one member, one vote” principle. The original
business model and regional attachment of the agricultural cooperatives means that they
cannot be moved to another country. In addition, the unique link between the farmers and
their cooperative guarantees a better economic return for producers by the creation of contract
between the stakeholders (Chomel et al. 2013). Nonetheless, some agricultural cooperatives
are involved in pesticide sales and act as multinational firm on the territory, which can thus
slow down or block change towards more alternative agricultural practices in some of their
members farming systems.
Scope of the study
Organic systems were not taken into account in this research since these types of systems only
represent a small percentage of the utilized agricultural area in the region. Conventional
production systems present greater needs in this sector to increase sustainable production and
bring change in priority water catchment areas. In 2014, cereal production occupied ¼ of the
utilised agricultural area of the region, with dominances of maize and wheat (Passion céréales
en région Rhône-Alpes 2015). The majority of the most sensitive water catchment areas are
currently dominated by cereal production (FNAB et al. 2015; Ministère de l’Écologie, du
Développement durable et de l’Énergie, Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de
la Forêt 2013). Cereal and vegetable production are based on a multi-annual rotation system,
which can be more easily restructured and adapted to different solutions than perennial
production systems. A large number of cooperatives present in the region are supply
cooperatives. They provide raw material, advice and consultancy to farmers and may create
add value to their product. Their direct link to farmer can be used as an asset in creating
awareness on a large number of regional farmers especially the ones from the cereals sector.
9
Project aim and approach
The aim of this project was to characterise alternative crops and estimate their production
potential among agricultural cooperatives of the Rhône-Alpes territory. This study should
lead to the assessment of alternative crops that would have the most potential to be produced
by farmer’s part of a regional cooperative. It should also lead to the creation of awareness
among regional cooperatives regarding the environmental and economical benefits that
diversification with alternative crops can bring to farmer’s rotation and farming system.
Several objectives were identified and three out of four were entirely fulfilled during this
research:
Objective 1: Identify and list alternative crops that are compatible with the preservation of the
water quality in water catchment areas and that are consistent with the maintenance of
practice changes already implemented in these zones. Identify the agronomic benefits and
constraints of these crops to be produced.
Objective 2: Identify at national scale examples of projects that have led to sustainable supply
chains and that can be reproduced in the Rhône-Alpes region. Analyse the difficulties faced
during the implementation of the project, as well as the tools used to overcome these
dilemmas.
Objective 3: Identify regional stakeholder opinion on feasibility of implementing different
alternative crops and their value chains on the Rhône-Alpes territory.
Objective 4: Study the economical and technical potential development of the supply chains
for selected alternative crops at medium and long term. Apply this project to one or several
targeted territories in partnership with local actors.
10
3 Research questions
The implication of agricultural cooperatives of the Rhône-Alpes region in the research for
solutions regarding the amelioration of surface and ground water quality on priority water
catchment areas, offers the possibility to create coordination among the different local actors
and encourage a large number of farmers to volunteer and participate to the project. The
diversification of farmers rotation system with development of alternative crops may offer an
interesting management solution to reduce the use of external input needs. These crops till
need to be identified and their development potential analysed. Nonetheless, facing the
necessity to impulse and sustain changes in agricultural practices, the development of supply
chains for alternative crops in the Rhône-Alpes region appears to be an interesting solution.
To implement this solution the following research questions will be addressed:
What criteria define alternatives crops? What type of crops can be considered
answering those criteria?
What are the success and failure factors that need to be considered for creating a
supply chain for alternative crops at medium and long-term?
What are the development potential of the listed alternative crops in being produced in
the Rhône-Alpes region? What are the roles of cooperatives in implementing these
supply chain?
To answer the questions, different assumptions were formulated:
None of the commonly produced crops such as low input crops can diversify farmers
rotation system and have a favourable impact on soil fertility and limiting water
pollution.
The creation of partnership between cooperatives and farmers can favour the
development at medium and large scale of alternative crops.
Similar projects in France can help identifying the essential elements to take into
consideration while creating a sustainable supply chain regarding the production of
low input crops, taking into account the local context specificities.
11
4 Material and method
A methodology made of defined steps was applied to the research in order to answer the
formulated study research questions:
•1° Literature review to define the term alternative crop to guide the research thanks to a precise terminology.
•2° Literature review and conference consultancy to identify alternative crops.
Objective 1
•1° Literature review and expert consultation to identify previous projects of alternative crop supply chain creation at national scale.
•2° Review criteria for selecting case studies towards an in-depth analysis.
•3°Expert consultation of the main project's skakeholders to identify elements explaining the success/failure of these selected experiences
Objective 2
•1° Expert consultancy to conduct feasibility assessment at regional scale regarding the development potential of the listed crops.
•2° Expert consultancy to identify potential development leads in the region.
Objective 3
•Literature review to identify the main production, processing constraints/opportunities and market juncture regarding four crops examples.
Initiate Objective 4
12
4.1 Identifying alternative crops
Literature review has been conducted to define alternatives crops and its associated criteria
that favour surface and ground water quality resource preservation by limiting the use of
external input.
4.1.1 List of criteria defining alternative crops
In order to identify and list the crops that can be considered as alternative crops, a set of
agronomic criteria and plant characteristics were defined and separated in 3 categories
presented according to the range of importance (Fig. 2). The crops should correspond to at
least 3 out of 6 criteria of the first column to be accepted as alternative crops for this study.
The other criteria were reported to collect information about the crops specificities, which will
be use in the future when the study will be continued in 2016.
Figure 2: List of agronomic characteristics used for the identification of alternative crops and plant specificities.
The agronomic characteristics and the plant specificities of each crop were identified during
website and literature research. A summary table for each identified crop was created and is
available in the Appendix 1. For a number of crops the treatment frequency index (TFI)
would be established, which is the number of times an agricultural area in rotation is treated
Primary set of criteria
• Low pesticide needs
• Low fertilizer needs
• Low irrigation needs
• Nitrogen fixing
• Good rooting system
• Weed control
Secondary set of criteria
• Main pest and disease resistance
• Drought sensitivity
• Sowing and harvesting date
• Place in the rotation
• Annual or perennial crop
Third set of criteria
• Minimum rotation space
• Gluten free
• Important amount of protein
• Possibility of Intercropping
• Other specificities
13
with a standard amount of pesticide per year. The calculation is based on a defined reference
dose and the amount of active ingredient used by the farmer. The surface implicated in the
treatment is also taken into consideration (Agreste 2013; Brunet et al. 2008). The TFI can
help confirming the low input needs of the alternative crops by comparing the TFI of the
crops to a reference crop, which is most of the time, a commonly produced crop. TFI of crop
such as wheat (TFI 3.8) can be used as comparison to identify alternative crops.
4.1.2 Literature review and conference attendance to identify alternative crops
This approach allows covering a broad-spectrum of crops that can be considered as having the
characteristics of low input crops and the abilities of diversifying a rotation. Most of these
diversification crops have not been produced on the territory before or are not well known.
The listed alternative crops were identified according to literature research and attended
conferences. The main literature resource was taken from the publication edited by Meynard
et al (2014) regarding crop diversification and how to remove agronomic and economic
obstacles. In their study they analysed 12 low input crops, which are the following: peas, faba
bean, lupin, chickpeas, soybean, alfalfa, Flax for fibber, linseed, sunflower, mustard, sorghum
and hemp. The French ministry of agriculture, agribusiness and forestry and the ministry of
ecology, sustainable development and energy requested this research. Faba bean, sorghum
and buckwheat were also identified during a conference orchestrated by the group Céréales
Vallée (2015) at the university Polytech Clermont-Ferrand on the theme, ‘What
characteristics for which innovations?’. Quinoa was suggested by several regional
cooperatives during the Agroecology conference organised by CDF RAA in 2015. In total 15
alternative crops were identified.
4.2 Identifying project experiences at national scale on the French territory
4.2.1 Criteria for selecting the projects
To have a better understanding of what is being done at national scale regarding the
production of alternative crops, an assessment of previous projects implementing the creation
of supply chain for alternatives crops productions was conducted.
14
The examples were identified during website research and interview exchange (presented in
the next section) where information was collected following the snowball procedure.
Different criteria were defined in order to select the examples during the research (Fig. 3).
The first criterion was based on the list of selected crop that were identified during the first
step in the research. Only project examples linked to the production of alternative crops were
selected. Secondly, only projects that were implemented medium or large-scale supply chains
were taken into account. Short supply chains were not considered relevant for this study as
the aim of the project commissioners CDF RAA and the Water Agency RMC is to create a
supply chain that will have an impact on the regional economy and will be competitive on
regional, national or global market. Therefore, niche markets were not included.
Thirdly, the project leaders were an important element to take into consideration for selecting
the experiences. They were identified during website review. Those people correspond to the
interviewed person and their expertise and point of view on the project is valuable
information for understanding how the project was created. Projects executed by agricultural
cooperatives were selected preferably to elucidate their motivation in supporting practice
change among their members and helping them in the transition and in the creation of a
sustainable supply chain for their new product. Other types of project leaders such as farmers,
community of commune, Chamber of Agriculture were also selected to have a diversity of
opinion in the sampling.
Finally, projects were selected based on their actual status, if the experiences are new cases,
long-standing cases and cases that failed. This diversity allowed understanding the different
steps in the creation of a supply chain, the benefits and the problems that can occur for it to be
operational and economically sustainable on the short and long term. The examples of supply
chains that did not survive in the long term or that stayed at the stage of preliminary ideas
played an important role in understanding the different issues to create a sustainable supply
chain. These difficulties were compared to the ones found for the Rhône-Alpes region. If
similarities were found, issues for creating a supply chain may be avoided and the research for
solution may be facilitated by applying solutions from the examples. In total 77 project
examples were identified and evaluated on the 4 criteria (Appendix 2).
15
Figure 3: Criteria for assessing the examples in order of importance at national scale. In red, it corresponds to an
eliminatory criterion.
4.2.2 Expert consultancy on project experiences at national scale
To understand the history of the various chain-development projects in the different regions
of France, interviews were conducted. The main actors involved were 6 Federations of
cooperatives: Coop de France from the Centre region, northern Parisian basin, Midi-Pyrénées
region, Poitou-Charentes Limousin region, CDF National and Invivo. They were selected due
to their ability to have an overview of the projects that are being implemented in the region
regarding alternative crops since they represented a large number of agricultural cooperatives
in their region. They were also interviewed regarding their experience in creating new supply
chain since they may have been implicated as technical support for cooperatives in the
implementation of the chain.
An interview guideline was developed in order to identify similar projects that are being
conducted in their region, the type of alternative crops that are being produced, the actors
involved in the projects and the key factors of success or failure. The questionnaire frame is
presented below:
Actual project status
New cases Long-standing cases Cases that do no longer exist
Project leaders
Preference for agricultural cooperatives Other
Size of the supply chain
Medium and large scale Short supply chains were not inclued
Crop produced
Alternative crops
16
1. Presentation of the project: why this type of project is being conducted and the link
between the implication of the agricultural cooperative in actions that favour surface
and ground water resource preservation.
2. Have you heard of similar projects being implemented in your region?
3. What type of diversification crop were involved?
4. At what development stage is the project currently? (Draft/operational on the
territory/no longer existing?)
5. What are the limits and the opportunities identified for the implementation of the
supply chain?
6. What types of market are targeted?
7. Is the project linked to water quality preservation?
8. Who is the project leader? May I have his contact details?
4.3 Selecting case studies for an in-depth analysis
Among the numerous examples that were identified, 15 study cases were selected for an in-
depth analysis. The selection criteria were based on 4 elements (Fig. 4). Firstly, the projects
were selected according to the alternative crops that were produced, especially low input
crops since they are more likely to contribute positively to water quality preservation.
Secondly, the type of project leader identified for the projects. As before, a preference for
examples conducted by agricultural cooperatives was undertaken during the research. This
particularity allowed understanding of their point of view on the essential elements needed to
encourage farmers in diversifying their rotation systems and creating a sustainable supply
chain for alternative crops in their action zone. Other types of project leaders such as farmers,
community of commune, Chamber of Agriculture were also selected to have a diversity of
opinion in the sampling.
Thirdly, the geographical localisation of the projects was used. Projects were favoured when
they were implemented near the Rhône-Alpes region or in areas presenting similarities in
climate and topography. If the projects were a success and are still functioning the results
from their experimental trials may help in assessing the development potential of the crops in
the Rhône-Alpes region and identify the varieties that are the most suitable for producing
quality products. Finally, the selection of the projects was based on the willingness of
candidate projects to participate during the research period.
17
Figure 4: Criteria for selecting the examples for interviews in order of importance.
In total 15 projects were selected with 9 projects led by agricultural cooperatives (with 4 on
alfalfa, 4 on soybean and 1 on hemp) and 6 projects led by different stakeholders such as
farmers, Chamber of Agriculture, community of commune and department associations (5 on
hemp and 1 on miscanthus).
4.4 Expert consultancy for the selected project examples
An interview guideline was created in order to exchange with the different stakeholders
implicated in the establishment of these supply chains for alternative crops. To facilitate the
interview and the data collection, 5 sections in the guideline were created. For each section,
qualitative questions were asked followed by quantitative questions regarding essential
figures linked to the creation of the supply chain. For projects led by a cooperative, the
numbers of workers and members of the cooperative and the cooperative’s turnover were also
asked (Table 1).
Response rate
Geographical localisation
Located near the Rhône-Alpes region Others
Project leaders
Agricultural cooperatives Others
Crop involed
Low input crops (especially low fertilizer needs) Others
18
Table 1: General elements of the interview guideline for regional projects
Sections Questions
Project history - Starting point of the project
o The crop was already produced in the region?
o Political decision?
o Farmers demand to diversify their rotation system?
o Market and consumer demand?
o Responding to water issues on the territory?
- Identify the actors implicated in the project
o Identify the project leader
o Economical & technical assistance
- The project leader’s motivation
- How did the development potential of the supply chain before its creation was assess? o Economical and technical feasibility analyse?
o Market identification?
Upstream (production steps) - Difficulties faced / Key of success
o Numbers of farmers involved in the project?
o Numbers of hectare?
o Numbers of hectors located on priority water catchment areas?
o The farmer’s income per Ha?
o Volume of business generated by the supply chain?
- Actions implemented
o Experimental trials?
o Work in collaboration with research institutes?
- Assess the evolution of practices
o Monitoring?
- Elements to guaranty traceability and product quality
o Multi-annual contracts?
o Trust?
19
Downstream (transformation and
marketing steps) - Difficulties faced/Key of success
o Maximum and minimum capacity of processing and storage?
o Volume collected and sold?
o Selling price?
o Market opportunities?
- Actions implemented
o Creation of a processing unit?
o Multi-annual contractual agreements between the actors of the supply chain?
- Targeted markets
Perspectives - What is needed to improve the system?
- What are you future perspectives?
o Increase the number of farmers that are part of the project?
o Increase the production rate and the number of hectares produced?
Other similar project in the region - Do you know if other project have been implemented on the territory?
- What type of crops are produce?
- Are the projects style in place?
20
After each exchange, interview transcripts were created in order to establish tractability sheets
regarding all the information collected. For each of the examples where sufficient information
and data were collected, synthesis leaflets were design (Appendix 3). Those leaflets were used
as information support to help creating awareness among regional cooperatives and their
members regarding the possibility to integrate alternative crops in farming system, which may
result in the creation of a new supply chain at the territory level.
4.5 Feasibility assessment at Rhône-Alpes regional scale
4.5.1 Focus group interviews of expert consultancy
In order to investigate current examples in the region and confront the local cooperatives with
the selected crops and examples, individual and group exchanges were organized. Some
regional cooperatives already initiated reflection on the possibility of development of supply
chains for low input crops. They requested the assistance of Coop de France regarding the
diversification of some of their members’ farming system through introduction of soybean or
alfalfa. This first exchange permitted understanding some of the regional needs and
constraints regarding the implementation of these two crops. It also showed the interest of
farmers in diversifying their cropping system with alternative crops and more specifically
with low input crops.
The second exchange took place during a meeting on Agroecology organized by Coop de
France RAA three months after the research study started. The study was presented to 6
regional cooperatives that were present at the meeting: cooperative Dauphinoise, Eurea,
Interrapro, cooperative Jura Mont Blanc, Natura’ pro and Terre d’Alliances. Objectives of this
presentation were to introduce the study to regional economical actors and show the
possibility of engagement they can have in the process. Encourage them to take an interest
regarding the economic and environmental benefits this type of practice change can offer to
their members. The overall objective was to interview collectively the regional cooperatives
regarding the potential development of each crop listed which helped identifying a small
number of crops that would have a development potential in the coming years regarding their
point of view. Their personal experience in producing certain crops in the past and by
knowing the actual market, some of the alternative crops did not present for now a potential
21
development in the region in the coming years regarding their point of view. Their concerns
and questioning regarding the development of these alternative crops were reported.
4.5.2 Individual interviews of expert consultancy
To identify possible approaches for project development in the Rhône-Alpes territory and
assess the usefulness of the leaflet examples that were created during the research, individuals
meetings with a selected number of regional cooperatives were organized. To facilitate the
exchange, the cooperatives that were selected for the interviews were local cooperatives that
were present at the Agroecology meeting and thus already aware of this project.
During the exchange, the results obtained after six months of study were presented. The
interest of Coop de France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne in working in a future collaboration with
regional cooperatives was mentioned and explained. The feedback of the local cooperatives
regarding the results was recorded. The needs and constraints the cooperatives might face if
they want to implement such project on their territory were mentioned by the cooperatives
present at the meeting. Finally, the future steps and perspectives of this study were
enumerated and presented to the cooperatives enabling them to see the importance CDF RAA
attributes to this project and for it to be continued. These exchanges allowed pointing out the
concerns regarding the development of the alternative crops, and which crop for them had the
best potential of being developed in the region in the coming years. It also permitted to collect
more concrete information regarding the specific needs of the cooperatives and the lack of
information needed to fully understand the environmental and economic benefits of a
potential agricultural production change. Finally, these exchanges allowed identifying the
cooperatives that would be interested in implementing this type of project to answer the
formulated demand of their members or by creating the interest among their members.
To help the cooperative in creating awareness among their members and studying the
potential development of certain low input crops on their territory, a guideline with an
overview of the most important steps and questions regarding the creation of a supply chain
was created and put at their disposal.
22
4.6 Initiating the next step of the study
The next step of the study consisted in an economical and technical analysis regarding the
potential development of the supply chain for selected alternative crops at medium and long
term. The first step to achieve this goal was initiated and consisted in identifying the
production specificities, the value creation characteristics and the market opportunities of
targeted crops. The crops that would benefit from additional information were selected. The
information was collected and classified in different information categories (Fig. 5). An
overview of the collected information is available in the Appendix 4.
23
Figure 5: General agronomic and production characteristics for the final alternative crop selection
Low input crops
Agronomic characteristic
Input needed
Pesticide
Fertiliser
Irrigation
Plant specificities
Place in the rotation system
Nitrogen fixing plant
Leguminous plant & protein content
Gluten free
Crop association
Other specificities
Pest and diseas resistance
Sowing and harvesting dates
Main geographic production sectors in
France
Production constrants
Specific equipement
Sowing and harvesting
Processing unit
Logistics
Storage space
Transportation
Others
Supply chain
Competitive position on the market
Optimising energy and natural resources
Create new product
Other
Product value creation & market types
Human consumption
Animal consumption
Other market sectors
24
4.7 Methodology summary time line
A time line overview of the different actions implemented during the six-month study period
is presented in Figure 6. It allows having a better understanding of the sequence of events that
occurred during the research and allowed answering the different objectives during the
allotted time.
Figure 6: Summary time line of the six-month research period (2015).
25
5 Results
5.1 Defining alternative crops
For this research, alternative crops were defined as crops that can bring diversity and
beneficial environmental services to a rotation, such as helping to control the pest and disease
dissemination, reducing weeds, act as nitrogen source, increase biodiversity and favour the
presence of beneficial insects (Liebman and Schulte 2015; Hérault 2012; Power 1987). Low
input crops can be classified under this definition based on to their agronomic specificities:
At the annual scale, low input crops need fewer external inputs compared to commonly
produced crops. This reduction could concern one or several elements: low irrigation,
fertilizer or pesticides. Lower needs can be explained by agronomic characteristics of the
crops such as deep rooting system, nitrogen fixing, pest and disease resistance and weed
control.
At the rotation scale (multi-annual), a low input crop is able to lower the input needs of the
entire rotation by enhancing soil fertility and limiting the dispersal of pests, pathogens and
weeds. For example, the introduction of nitrogen fixing crops in the rotation makes nitrogen
available in the soil for the next crop and therefore lowers its needs for external inputs. On the
long-term, they may contribute to the amelioration of the surface and ground water quality.
5.2 Alternative crops identified
During the research study fifteen crops were identified as matching the definition and
agronomic criteria of alternative crops (Fig. 7).
26
Figure 7: List of the fifteen low input crop identified during the six-month study period.
For the listed crops to be defined as alternative crops, their agronomic characteristics were
compared to 6 criteria (Table 3). The crops should present at least 3 out of the 6 criteria to be
identified as alternative crops. Under this limit the crop present less potential in having a
conclusive impact on the amelioration of surface and ground water quality and shows
practically comparable agronomical characteristics than commonly produced crops. The
selection criteria were related to their low external input needs, the capacity of fixing
nitrogen, limiting weed proliferation and having a good rooting system. For the crops that had
their TFI identified regarding the average dose used in France, such as peas (3.8 TFI),
sunflower (1.7 TFI), malt barley (3.1 TFI), their TFI was compared to the one used for wheat
(3.8 TFI) (Table 2). The TFI of wheat correspond to one of the basic references in the
literature to compare crops TFI since wheat and maize are the most common crops produced
in the Rhône-Alpes region (Ecophto 2018 2015; Passion céréales en région Rhône-Alpes
2015).
27
Table 2: Mean TFI of wheat, peas, sunflower and malt barley in France 2011, (Agreste 2013)
Wheat Peas Sunflowers Malt Barley
TFI herbicide 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.4
TFI without
herbicide 2.4 2.5 0.3 1.6
TFI total 3.8 3.8 1.7 3.1
The results revealed that sunflowers and malt barley crops need in general fewer treatments
than a commonly produced wheat crop. If they are introduced in a rotation system they might
have a better and favourable impact than wheat on soil fertility, fauna and flora biodiversity
proliferation and limit water pollution. However, the TFI for herbicides is identical to wheat,
which signifies that the crops might present important weed competition during their growth.
For peas, the mean TFI is similar to wheat, which indicate that regarding climatic and soil
conditions of the fields, peas might need to be treated a similar number of time than wheat the
same year. Therefore, diversifying rotation system by introducing peas may not always allow
lowering pesticide use during the time the crop is being produced. To obtain more precise
results regarding the TFI of each crop, the impact of agricultural practices needs to be
considered in relation to the farmers’ rotations system. Each system can bring variation in the
use of external inputs due to the type of soil, the climatic conditions, the agricultural practices
applied and the crops that are already present in the rotation system. TFI means that are
presented in this preliminary research allows having an idea of the general use of pesticides in
France regarding these crops. Specific calculation of TFI will have to be conducted at farm
level to have a precise understanding of the crop needs. This is also applicable for the other
crops, which TFI was not identified in the literature.
Nitrogen fixing plants & low fertilizer needs
The ability of the crops to fix nitrogen can be used as an interesting asset for nitrogen
management in a rotation system. The crops can be utilised as a primary nitrogen source for
the crop itself and the following crops in the rotation. Nitrogen fixing plants can enhance soil
fertility and limit water contamination by avoiding the use of external fertiliser during the
time the crop is produced and for the upcoming crop in farmers rotation system depending on
the release of the fixed nitrogen by the previous crop (Liebman and Schulte 2015; Power
1987). Different types of legumes were identified as alternative crops such as soybean, lentil,
28
peas, alfalfa, lupin and faba beans. Limiting water contamination by avoiding nitrogen
leaching is only possible if in the rotation system, the crop is followed by another crop to
capture the nitrogen.
Rooting system & low irrigation needs
A good rooting system is a valuable asset for producing crops and limiting the amount of
irrigation needed during the plant growth. Roots are important to plants for a wide variety of
processes, including nutrient and water uptake. It can also present many benefits in helping
structuring the soil, avoiding erosion and resisting the challenges posed by climate by helping
the plant to be drought resistant (Smith and De Smet 2012). Therefore, several crops were
selected as alternative crops for this agronomic characteristic, including alfalfa, linseed, Flax
for fibber, hemp, miscanthus, lupin, sunflower and sorghum.
Weed control & low pesticide needs
The capacity of a crop to limit the weed proliferation can be considered as an important factor
in reducing the use of external input such as herbicides during on the time the crop is
produced. Limiting the amount and use of pesticides might have a beneficial impact on the
surface and ground water quality. For example an interesting characteristic of the hemp is it
ability to control weeds by its rapid leaf growth. This characteristic may enable the farmer to
have a clean field after the crop is harvest (Réseau GRAB/FRAB 2009). Miscanthus also has
this ability to control weeds in autumn when the leaves of the plant cover the ground surface
by limiting their growth. Leaving the leaves covering the ground also allows at the same time
making nitrogen available for the plant for the following year, which limit the use of external
fertilization several years after the start of cultivation. Another weed control characteristic can
be seen in buckwheat. Since it is a high-density crop it can limit the weed proliferation by
suppressing them and limiting the access to the sun. The other listed crops are either slow-
growing plants such as quinoa or have a low density, thus they do not cover the entire ground,
which increases weed competition.
29
Quinoa
An exception in the selection of alternative crops was quinoa. Even though quinoa does not
represent specific low input needs or is a nitrogen fixing species, the development potential of
the crop was analysed in this study. This crop was taken into account to answer a common
demand formulated by the regional cooperative of Rhône-Alpes regarding the development
potential of this gluten free crop. This request was directly linked to the actual market
situation and the increase of consumer demands regarding gluten free products. Despite that
this crop is not a commonly produced crop in France since only short supply chains exist so
far. Introducing quinoa in a rotation can help diversifying systems, controlling the pest and
disease dissemination, increase biodiversity and favour the presence of beneficial insects.
These criteria are also valid for the 14 other listed crops.
Therefore, regarding the previous explanations and the results obtained in Table 3, all listed
crops have at least 3 out of 6 agronomic criteria to be considered as alternative crops in this
study.
30
Table 3: Overview of the listed crop regarding the six agronomic criteria identified for selecting alternative crops
Crops Low pesticide
needs
Low fertilisation
needs
Low irrigation
needs
Nitrogen fixing
species
Good weed
control
Good rooting
system
Criteria
identified
Soybean X X X 3/6
Alfalfa \ X \ X X 5/6
Linseed \ \ X 3/6
Flax for fibber \ \ X 3/6
Hemp X \ X X X 5/6
Miscanthus X \ X \
(Not the first year)
X 5/6
Faba bean \ X X \ 4/6
Peas (4.75 TFI)
X X X \ 4/6
Lupin \ X X \ X 5/6
Lentil \ X \ X 4/6
Sunflower (1.75 TFI)
\ \ \ \ X 5/6
Malt Barley \ \ \ \ 4/6
Buckwheat X X X 3/6
Sorghum X X \ X 4/6
Legend
X: Low or no external inputs needed; nitrogen fixing plant; good weed control and possess a good rooting system.
\ : Needs low external input; can sometimes limit the weed proliferation
31
5.3 Project experience identified
5.3.1 Identified projects
In total 77 project examples were pointed out related to the initiation of practice change by
diversifying farmers rotation system with alternative crops production, which led to the
implementation of a supply chain. The value chains identified included 20 on hemp, 15 on
miscanthus, 11 on alfalfa, 9 on flax for fibre, 8 on soybean, 5 on linseed, 1 on aromatic plants,
2 on lupin, 2 on malt barley, 1 on peas, 1 on lentil, 1 on quinoa, 1 on sunflower and 0 on
sorghum, buckwheat and faba bean. All projects that were identified during this study are
specified in Appendix 2.
During the interviews at national scale the most common crops associated with crop
diversification were legumes due to their ability to fix nitrogen (Groupe technique AB
Franche Comté 2012a; Groupe technique AB Franche Comté 2012b; Power 1987). The
second crop associated with crop diversification was hemp, which is also commonly linked
with crops that require low external input needs to be produced as well as miscanthus.
Therefore, more examples regarding these crops were identified during the website and
literature research rather than the other listed crops.
5.3.2 Selected projects
For this study, 15 experiences of similar cases have been selected to be in-depth analysed to
have a better understanding of the motivations the stakeholders had to create the supply chain
project as well as the actions that have been put into place to implement a supply chain and
the keys of success or constraints that may have occurred during the years of establishment.
One example of experience of success and one experience that have failed are presented in
Table 4. The other examples are shown in the Appendix 5
32
Table 4: Example of successful development of a supply chain from the cooperative Coopedom (alfalfa production) and example of failure from the river basin Bièvre-Valloire (hemp
production)
Sections Questions Cooperative Coopedom
(Success - Alfalfa)
Bièvre-Valloire
(Failure - Hemp)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: Farmers demand in 1969.
Twenty dairy producers decided to develop alfalfa
production to be able to maintain and improve the protein
content and quality of milk in winter. Producing
dehydrated alfalfa was the main project objective.
Started: Political decision in 2007.
Ended: 2010.
Following rural policy projects to improve water quality
and the environment in the territory of Briève-Valloire, a
supply chain for hemp production was created.
Identify the actors implicated in the
project Project leader: cooperative Coopedom
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative, some
food manufacturer in the region
Project leader: Joint Association of Bièvre-Valloire
Other stakeholders: Local farmers, public and especially
private investors.
The project leader’s motivation
The cooperative wished to meet the needs of their
members and help them obtain quality products.
Coordinate, advise and lead projects on the territory that
contributes to the amelioration and the preservation or
territorial resources.
How was the development potential
of the supply chain assessed before
its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted to estimate the quantity of alfalfa needed for
the farmers of the cooperative to be self sufficient in
animal feed. This determined the size of the processing
unit and the financial investment.
A person was designated to identify the stakeholders
willing to be part of this project, identify major constraints
regarding the implementation of the supply chain and a
technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted.
Market identification was carried out.
33
Up
stre
am (
pro
du
ctio
n s
tep
s)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop requires
new techniques and knowledge that the farmers may not
be acquainted to. Technical support needs to be set into
place to help the farmers during the transition period.
Environmental
/
Economic \
Technique & regulation
The appropriate harvesting equipment was not accessible
on the territory and was rented from Germany. Difficulties
to access the specific equipment during the harvesting
period.
The number of hectares cultivated was insufficient for the
processing unit to function all year long.
Environmental
\
Key of success Economic Solidarity of members helped maintain the industry during
crisis times in the 1980s after the oil crisis.
Reducing external input can be a cost saving measure.
Technique & regulation
Technical and advisory support by the cooperative to the
farmers.
Economic \
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Actions implemented
Experimental trials
No. ha produced: 2000 Ha
Average volumes collected: 12 T / year
Evaporation factory capacity: 44,000L/hour
Experimental trials.
No. ha produced: 40 Ha
For the fibber industry to be profitable, 600 ha of hemp
production should have been produced.
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring Monitoring
Elements to guaranty traceability
and product quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to produce
the crop and the cooperative needs to follow a set of
specifications for harvesting, collecting and processing the
crop.
Organic production (follow regulations, production and
processing specifications).
34
Do
wn
stre
am (
tran
sfo
rmat
ion
an
d m
ark
etin
g s
tep
s)
Difficulties faced
Economic Find financial support during the oil crisis.
Technique & regulation
Regulatory limits to increase the thermal capacity of the
processing unit.
Economic The upstream-downstream actors did not want to invest in
a processing unit
The financial investment was too high (3 million euros).
High market competition. Hemp products are not well
differentiated on the market. Industrials can find hemp at
lower price on the market compared to the one produced
locally.
Important transportation costs that need to be improved
for the all supply chain.
Technique & regulation
No existing processing unit on the territory
The volume collected and sold were inefficient.
Key of success Economic The choice to diversify production by the cooperative
allowed the processing unit to be profitable throughout the
year. In addition to the production of alfalfa in spring are
grown ryegrass, fescues and sometime corn, which are
also dried in the processing unit.
30% of the energy requirements of the processing unit are
provided by the production of 400 Ha of miscanthus.
Reduced transportation costs by setting up a harvesting
plan.
Technique & regulation
Implementation of a processing unit.
Multi-annual contract between the cooperative and
farmers.
Economic If the hemp is good quality and sold at an attractive price,
the production can be profitable for all the actors of the
supply chain.
Technique & regulation
\
35
Actions implemented
Implementation of a processing unit.
Multi-annual contract between the cooperative and the
industrials.
Approximately 65% of the production is carried out by
manufacturing alfalfa bales. The rest is processed in
pellets.
Targeted markets Part of the production is distributed to members as self-
consumption. The rest of the production is traded by the
cooperative and sold to farmers in the region who are not
members or traders and food manufacturers.
Eco building materials.
Per
spec
tiv
es
What is needed to improve the
system?
To increase the processing unit capacity of the cooperative
to answer farmers demand.
Find a second crop production that can be processed
during the time of the year were the hemp is not harvested.
This will enable the processing unit to be economically
profitable.
Invest in specific harvesting and processing equipment.
What are you future perspectives?
2015: a feasibility study to merge the processing unit with
another one located in the region is being conducted.
If the project should be restarted, regional cooperatives
could be an interesting project leader. Since private
industrials and community of communes do not want to
invest in specific equipment for hemp production. Maybe
cooperatives can have a different point of view on the
creation of the supply chain and can create awareness
among a large sample of farmer to produce high volume
for the processing unit to function.
36
These two projects introduce alternative crop as a way to diversify farmers rotation system
even thought the reasons linked to this practice change are different. On one hand, the project
leaded by Coopedom was started to answer an economical and technical issue. On the other
hand, the project leaded by the joint association of Bièvre-Valloire was implemented for
environmental reasons. However, both project lead to create coordination between the
upstream and downstream regional actors on the targeted territories. Farmers and economical
actors such as cooperatives and private investors participate to the implementation of the
project and the design of a new supply chain. For both projects, a technical and economical
feasibility analysis was conducted in order to estimate the agronomic development potential
of the crops by conducting experimental trials, the financial investment needed for production
and processing the crop and the identification of potential markets.
The project led by the cooperative Coopedom for producing dehydrated alfalfa was a success
for several reasons; technical and advisory support was brought to the farmers by the
cooperative. This support helped farmers to change their production practices and encouraged
them to modify their farming system. An economical insurance for farmers that their
production will be entirely bought by the cooperative helped in creating trust and encouraging
farmers to join the project. To guaranty a win-win situation between farmers and cooperative,
an agreement is signed and insures the quality and tractability of the product by the producers
and stable revenue by the cooperative to farmers. The creation of the alfalfa supply chain was
possible due to the investment of the cooperative in a processing unit. During hard time,
solidarity of members helped maintain the functioning of the processing unit. In addition to
the production of alfalfa in spring are grown ryegrass, fescues and sometime corn that are also
dried in the processing unit. The choice to diversify farmer’s production allows the processing
unit to be economically profitable throughout the year. Nevertheless, no specific actions in
this project are linked to the amelioration of surface and ground water quality.
The project led by the joint association of Bièvre-Valloire for the implementation of a supply
chain for hemp production was initiated to preserve the water quality of the priority water
catchment area. Unfortunately, the project did not remain in time. Several factors are
implicated in this failure. Firstly, the important financial investment needed to create a
processing unit that was necessary to process the crop production for it to be sold on the
market. No existing processing unit is present on the territory and none of the stakeholders
implicated in the project wanted to invest if the success was not guarantied. Secondly,
37
targeted market was identified but high competition between similar products was identified.
Concerns regarding hemp production characteristics to create added value to the product and
its low differentiation capacity on the market were pointed out. Thirdly, the number of hectare
involved in the project were insufficient to insure the profitability of a processing unit or the
transportation coast for the production to be processed in another industry in the region.
5.4 Feasibility assessment regarding regional actors point of view
5.4.1 Regional cooperatives point of view and concerns
During the Agroecology meeting several regional cooperatives exchanged their point of view
regarding the potential development of alternative crops that have been listed in this study. A
summary of the group interview exchange is presented in Table 5, which presents the
elements of success or failure that might occur during production of these crops and
implementation of a supply chain in the region. Several reasons regarding the lack of
alternative crops production in the region were pointed out.
Most of the crops are produced in small quantities and destined for niche markets. To have an
impact on water quality preservation agricultural change needs to be implemented on a
significant agricultural surface. Medium and large-scale production would need to be reached.
Isolated cases of alternative crop production already exist in the Rhône-Alpes region. If
higher importance were given to theses crops, their impact on soil and water preservation
would be more relevant. For now, the opportunities on the markets are limited and most of the
time there are no market opportunities to sell at medium and large-scale production for
alternative crops in the region. The main limiting factor might be due to the insufficient
competitiveness of the products on the markets regarding commonly produced crops that are
preferred since their selling price is lower for a similar product. Another limiting factor is the
absence of adapted sorting, harvesting and processing equipment. Without the correct
production and processing material the quantity produced stays at small scale for direct
selling or farmers own consumption. The quality of the product is not always matching the
industrials requirement standards. General concerns were raised among the cooperatives
regarding the availability of financial support to initiating practice change and implementing
new supply chains in the region, the presence of specific markets on the territory, as well as
the lack of information regarding the crop production characteristics and their ability to
38
produce quality product in sufficient quantity. Finally, on the difficulties they can have to link
theses agricultural change to exclusively farmers that are located on priority water catchment
areas if they want to benefit from the Water Agency financial support.
Nevertheless, elements that can help the development of the crop production in being a
success were also pointed out. Some of the crops are known to present agronomic production
characteristics that can match the soil and climatic conditions in the region such as alfalfa,
peas and linseed. The nutrition specificities of certain crops may present an interesting added
value to the final product and may help in differentiating it on the market. For example,
quinoa and buckwheat are gluten free crops and there is an increasing demand by consumers
for gluten free products. Buckwheat is mainly produced in the French Brittany region,
however other regions in France have been identified in having the appropriate soil and
climate for the production of the crop. For example, the region Bourgogne, Midi-Pyrénées
and Auvergne (Céréales Vallée 2015). Nitrogen fixing legumes also attracted large interest
among the cooperatives since several projects will be implemented in the region in the
coming years regarding alfalfa and soybean production by cooperatives that plays an
important role in the regional economy.
In the end, four alternative crops stood out from the list and further investigations were asked
to assess their potential on the Rhône-Alpes territory, quinoa, alfalfa, soybean and linseed. To
confirm the potential development of these crops, an economical study and market research
on the territory need to be done.
39
oTable 5: Regional agricultural cooperative point of view regarding the potential of development of the alternative crops listed in this study
Positive Negative
Indicators
Crops
Agronomic characteristics Production and market specificities Agronomic characteristics Production and market specificities
Quinoa -
- Significant amount of proteins,
phosphorus, magnesium and iron
- Majority of the production is
imported
- Diverse valorisation for human
consumption
- Gluten free
- Important weed competition
during early growth
- Few information regarding quinoa
varieties that are adapted to French
soil and climate has been reported
- Organic markets monopoly
Soybean - Nitrogen fixing
- Significant protein rate (40% seed)
- Can be used as green manure
- Good rooting system (act against
soil erosion) during short period of
time
- Provides many opportunities for
animal and human nutrition
- Regarding the production zone,
irrigation may be needed
Alfalfa - Nitrogen fixing
- Can be used as green manure
- Good rooting system
- Crop adapted to most of the soil
and climate of the Rhône-Alpes
region
- Provides many opportunities in
animal and human nutrition
- Can be used as food and protein
intake for farm animals: self-
sufficiency
- Perennial Crop (mobilizes the
ground during 3-4 years)
- May require a dehydration
processing unit
Linseed - Crop adapted to most of the soil
and climate of the Rhône-Alpes
region
- Good rooting system
- Provides many opportunities in
animal (e.g. oil cake) and human
nutrition
- Nutritional value in Omega 3
(human and animal food)
- Requires a primary processing unit
- Difficulties to sell the straw
without the presence nearby of a
processing unit
Peas - Nitrogen fixing plant
- Good yield potential
- Crop adapted to most of the soil and
- Provides many opportunities in
animal nutrition
- Culture perceived as sufficiently
competitive compared to other
crops (e.g. soya)
40
climate of the Rhône-Alpes region
-
Hemp - Good weed control (prevents the
development of weeds as the falling
leaves covers the soil)
- Low irrigation needed
- - No market opportunities at medium
and large scale in the region
- Niche market (producers - local
artisans)
- Not enough demand to use hemp as
a raw material in eco-building
- No primary processing unit in the
region
- Significant investment in sorting,
harvesting and processing
equipment
- Transportation cost to bring the
tools on farms is too high if nothing
is accessible in the region
- Specific machinery equipment not
available in the region
Miscanthus - Few irrigation needed
- High production of Biomass
- Perennial Culture (minimum 15-20
years) → mobilizes the ground
- Niche market
- No primary processing unit in the
region
- Specific machinery equipment
Malt Barley - Less demanding that the amount of
nitrogen needed for wheat
production
- Good weed control
- - Niche market in region
Sorghum - Nutritional composition
comparable to wheat
- - Main market opportunities in France
in animal feed (fodder)
- No interesting added value in
human food
Faba bean - Nitrogen fixing plant - - Requires a specific mechanization
for sowing and harvesting (the plant
has large seeds diameter)
- Market opportunities exclusively in
fodder (animal nutrition)
- Low nutrition value
41
Lupin - Gluten free
- High protein content
- - High irrigation needs
High weed competition
- Market opportunities exclusively
in fodder (beef production)
Flax for
fibber
- - Ability to use the same processing
units for Flax for fibber and hemp
- Market opportunities almost
exclusively in the Northwest of
France (Brittany and Normandy)
- Needs a primary processing unit,
mainly accessible in the northwest
of France
-
Sunflower - Good rooting system - High risk of ambrosia -
Lentil - High amount of iron - - Insufficiently competitive on the
market compared to other raw
materials like soybeans or lentils
that are grow under a regional
trademark label such as “Lentilles
verte du Puy en Velay”
Buckwheat - Gluten free
- High protein and vitamin content
- Many product added value (flour,
green fertilizers, herbicides,
pharmaceutical)
Can present heavy metal elements - Mainly produced in the French
region Centre and Brittany
- Need a primary processing unit to
remove the outer layer of the seeds
- Variable yield rate
-
42
5.4.2 Possible line of approach for project development in the Rhône-Alpes territory
Individual exchanges with Natura’ pro and the federation of cooperative Interrapro (that
regroup and represent 6 regional cooperatives) were undertaken to allow a better
understanding of their view on the potential of quinoa, linseed, soybean and alfalfa on the
territory.
Soybean
Natura’ pro and Interapro showed a large interest in the development of soybean crops since
the beginning of the year 2015. A financial bonus from the CAP is given to the farmers that
include and produce legumes in their rotation system. This financial help can be one of the
factors that can encourage farmers to diversify their system. The development of a supply
chain for soybean production by the cooperative Dauphinoise (which represent the biggest
cooperative in the region) has inspire them in developing their own chain. If the
Dauphinoise’s project is a success it signify that soybean varieties are adapted to the soil and
climatic conditions and targeted market have been found on the territory. This information
can help encourage farmers from other cooperative to diversify their rotation system with this
crop. This information needs to be verified with further research. Both cooperatives
formulated a demand regarding the possibilities of having more information on the production
areas that could be suitable for the crop and the types of market that are present in the
territory.
Alfalfa
The cooperatives seemed also interested in developing alfalfa production but for now the only
members of their cooperatives that are producing this crop are implementing it for their own
farm consumption. One of the limiting impacts of expanding alfalfa production is the
requirement of a processing unit, which is not present in the region. Alternative solutions
need to be designed to overcome this lack of equipment or avoid important financial
expenses. Similar solutions to the one implemented by the cooperative Dauphinoise could be
used by the cooperatives. Instead of dehydrating the alfalfa, dehumidification is applied to the
harvested crop, which seems to be a less expensive way to process alfalfa. Research for
different market opportunities also need to be done in the region to help encourage the
development of alfalfa in their members rotation systems.
43
Quinoa
Both of the two cooperatives have estimated that quinoa might have an interesting
development potential in the region in the coming years. There are already several French
industries that process quinoa seeds in the region and sell the product in organic shops.
However, it may seem that their entire seed supply comes from outside France and important
control and food safety tests are required to assess the quality of the product before it can be
processed and sold. Therefore, one of the solutions would be to introduce the quinoa
production in the region, which would bring added value to the final product and facilitate
the quality testing. On the medium and long term, many environmental, economic and
technical impacts could be favourably modified in the supply chain and beneficial for all the
chain stakeholders. Two geographical zones, the Ardèche and la Haute-Loire may be
interesting areas to produce quinoa. The soil, the climatic conditions and the topography may
correspond to the agronomic characteristic for the crop to be produced. Further investigations
need to be carried out to confirm this assumption and identify if these zones are priority water
catchment areas. Moreover, the cooperatives pointed out their lack of information regarding
the production of quinoa, the type of varieties that would suit best the targeted zone, etc. They
would like to be informed more on the subject to advice their field technician about the
modalities of production and the agronomic characteristics of the crop. This information can
help the cooperative to create awareness among their members by informing them with
concrete and precise information. In parallel, communication with the local industrials can be
establish to see if there might be a common opportunity for them and the cooperatives to
work in collaboration on the development of quinoa seeds in the region.
Linseed
Finally, the production of linseed could have a development potential on the territory but only
at small scale for now. Very few farmers are aware of the added value this crops may have
and the environmental benefits it can bring to the rotation system. To increase the production
potential development at medium and large scale, awareness among cooperatives and their
members need to be created as well as finding appropriate markets. The technical advisor
and field technician of cooperatives may play an important role in raising awareness among
all the members. Another way of diffusing the information can be by internal monthly
journal, which is sent to all the members of the cooperative.
44
Mutual assistance between cooperatives
The cooperative Natura pro mentioned facing the problem of finding storage space for the
new crop because their storage capacity has attained its maximum limit. Therefore, it might
be problematic for the cooperative if they want to encourage diversification in farmers
rotation system. This is a limiting factor for production expansion and for the moment they do
not have the finances to build a new storage unit. One of the solutions would be to create a
partnership between Natura pro and a bigger cooperative that is also interested in the
production of this crop and that would have the storage capacity to collect both of the
cooperatives production. This union may help volunteer members from the cooperative
Natura pro to change their practices and produce a new crop. Mutual assistance can also
reinforce communication and technical support among different economical actors of the
region. It can offer the possibility to smaller cooperatives to benefit from the influence of
bigger cooperatives, which can initiate and encourage practice change at higher scale.
5.4.3 Example projects emerging in the coming years
Two projects lead by the cooperative Dauphinoise and Eurea are being established in the
Rhône-Alpes region. Individual interviews with both cooperatives were carried out. The
conceptual model developed for the implementation of alfalfa and soybean production can be
used as inspiration for other regional cooperatives.
Alfalfa production
The project conducted by the cooperative Dauphinoise aims to create long term agreements
between cereal producers and livestock farmers. This contract insures the cereal producer that
his alfalfa production will be entirely taken into charge from the harvest, stocking, processing
step and the sale of the product by the cooperative. It also insures to livestock farmers that the
tractability and quality of the product matches the standardized norms and the farmer’s
quality requirements for a decent price. Since 2013 experimental trials were set up to select
the alfalfa species that best suits the soil and climatic conditions and offers good quality
product, and thus the development potential. In parallel a study conducted by an external
entrepreneur was undertaken to attest the development potential of this crop, its economical
benefits and the presence of targeted markets in the region.
45
The implementation of this project was linked to the willingness of the cooperative to help
local cattle breeders that are not self-sufficient in fodder resources and looked for local
quality feed at an affordable price. To meet the breeders feed requirements, a significant
portion of alfalfa was purchased externally. The development project carried out by the
cooperative Dauphinoise would allow to relocate the alfalfa production to the region and
offer the possibility to cereal producers to diversify their rotation systems. Experimental trials
in processing alfalfa by dehumidification will be carried out in 2015-2016 to insure the
quality of the product and the economical aspect to proceed this way instead of dehydrating
the product. Therefore, to secure the quality of the product, the price stability and at the same
time distribute the production risks among the stakeholders in the chain, a long-term contract
was signed between the farmers and the cooperative.
The secondary goal of this project is to target fields for the production of the alfalfa in
additions to the ones used for the experimental trials that are located on priority water
catchment areas. The cooperative is already implicated in actions in favour of the water
quality preservation on priority water catchment on the territory. Therefore, to facilitate
contact and identification of farmer located in those zones they will use their network. Their
next steps will be to set in place an action plan, which will consist in identify production
areas and locate surfaces where the crop may be produced based on risk of water pollution
and agronomic criteria, identify additional volunteers farmers than the one that participated to
the experimental trials to increase the production rate, determining the needs of farmers,
creating production protocols to help farmers that have never produced alfalfa before, monitor
the production, harvest quality forage, test the interest of dehumidification techniques and
promote and communicate the annual results in a scientific paper. In parallel, search for
financial support by public authorities has been engaged.
Soybean production
The cooperative Eurea decided to develop a project with the aim of relocate their soybean
production in the Rhône-Alpes region since their entire production is imported from outside
France. Eurea would like to produce their own primary material in order to have a better
return on investment regarding their production chain and in the same time create added value
to their final product. By producing their own seeds, they may assure a better quality and
tractability control since they desire to process only non-genetically modified crops. The
46
cooperative has already put into place in the region a sustainable supply chain with identified
market channels and consumers ready to buy their product. Therefore, their next step is to
determine the development potential of soybean crop in the region.
Since 2015, experimental trials are undertaken to confirm the hypothesis that the crop is
adapted to the soil and climatic conditions and to select the most adapted variety. A study was
conducted to estimate the cooperatives needs regarding the amount of seed that would have to
be produced in the region to fulfil the industrial unit’s actual requirements. Approximately 1
000 Ha would be necessary to produce the 3 600 tonnes of soybean seeds needed for the
Eurea industry to continue processing the same amount of seeds. If the experimental trials
were successful, the next steps would be to find financial support for their project and
conceive a campaign to create awareness among their members regarding the environmental
and economical benefits this crop diversification can bring to their farming system. To
consolidate the farmer’s commitment and divide the risk management, an agreement
between the farmers and cooperatives should be set into place.
Commonalities between the two examples
Many similarities can be found in the structuration of the action plan seeking for the
implementation of sustainable systems. Both projects required the establishment of
experimental trials to estimate the adaptability and production potential of the crop though
the climatic and soil conditions in the region and the resistance to pest and diseases. If the
experimental results are satisfying, finding volunteer farmers that are willing to initiate
practice change in their system by diversifying their rotation system with the introduction of a
new crop is essential. Creating awareness regarding the environmental and economic
benefits of the crop is necessary to initiate and involve farmers to the project. Technical and
financial support can be implemented by the cooperative towards their members.
Multi-year contracts can be created between the farmers and cooperatives to insure a stable
income for farmers, quantity and quality product for the cooperative, divide production risk
among the different stakeholders and insure sustainability of agricultural practice change.
Financial support can be identified and requests can be made for their acquisition to help
the cooperative in financing the equipment, the field technician and creating a backup solution
regarding production risk management during the setting up of the project.
47
6 Discussion
To initiate change in regional farmers rotation system, a prospective analysis was conducted
supported by three research questions in order to answer the objectives designed for this
study. Firstly, identify alternatives crops regarding a precise definition. Secondly, highlight
key elements to take into consideration for implementing a sustainable supply chain. Finally,
sound out regional cooperatives regarding the feasibility and development potential of
alternative crops in the Rhône-Alpes territory.
6.1 Diversifying rotation system with alternative crops
Defining alternative crops
In the literature reviews, there is no specific definition of crops that are exactly associated
with the preservation of the water quality in water catchment areas and that are consistent
with the maintain of practice change. Therefore, defining alternative crops was the first
essential step in this study. At field level, alternative crops were defined as crops that require
fewer external inputs compared to commonly used crops. Lower needs can be explained by
agronomic characteristics of the crops such as deep rooting system, nitrogen fixing, pest
and disease resistance and weed control. Even though the selected crops presented at least 3
out of 6 criteria, they offer more advantages than commonly produced crops to enhance
preservation of biodiversity as well as protection of water resources. At rotation scale,
alternative crops can play a role in lowering the input needs of the entire rotation by
enhancing soil fertility and limiting the dispersal of pests, pathogens and weeds. This
definition tries to take into consideration the agronomic and environmental benefits new crops
can bring to the field and to the other crops margin in the rotation. Nonetheless, each
alternative crop presents production specificities and constraints that need to be taken into
consideration when targeted production zones will be identified on the Rhône-Alpes territory.
Experimental trials will have to be conducted to confirm the production potential and
development of the crops in the chosen zone.
A study conducted by Paladian (2013) on the development potential of supply chain for low
input crops to meet the water resource protection issue, highlighted the importance of
considering the quantities of pesticides and fertilizer used regarding the different farmers
48
profile and farming system. For example, conventional system, integrated farming system
or organic system do not have the same external needs since their crop rotations are not
designed in the same way. For this current study, in retrospect of each project that will be
implemented on the territory, monitoring for checking of environmental performance will
have to be conducted. This evaluation will have to be assessed for each farmer that has a non-
common rotation system since the TFI varies according to the crops in the rotation system,
the soil type, the climate and the number of hectares produced.
Listing alternative crops
In total fifteen crops were listed as matching the criteria for alternative crops during this
study. Low input crops, nitrogen fixing crops and quinoa were identified as answering the
alternative crops selection criteria. This list is non exhaustive and can be modified according
to the future results obtained by a technical economic analysis that will be conducted for the
continuity of this study. The potential of the crop to reduce the environmental impact in
farmers rotation system will have to be analysed and will help confirming the reduction of
external input needs in their rotation system.
Among the listed crops, two crops present major specificities, miscanthus and quinoa.
Farmers that are wiling to diversify their rotation system with miscanthus will have to take
into consideration the increase of rotation length compared to the other listed crops.
Miscanthus is a perennial crops, it can be produced for a minimum of 15 consecutive years
(Besnard et al. 2009). This crop may presents technical difficulties for farmers to included the
crop in their rotation system pattern since it occupies the soil for at least 15 years. The
advantage of producing miscanthus is for its capacity of producing biomass and since the crop
is harvested once a year, less soil disturbance and erosion are noticeable than for conventional
arable crop (Defra 2007). Nonetheless, no specific literature research shows the beneficial
impact of the crop on water preservation even thought it is considered as a low input crop.
Quinoa does not present specific low input characteristic but offers several environmental
advantages identified for alternative crops, such as interrupting the life cycle of pests, diseases
and weed, which can reduce the needs in pesticides; reduce nitrogen leaching by covering the
soil. Therefore, producing quinoa can still have an impact on water quality preservation even
thought the impact might be less significant than for low input crops.
49
With the same intention of preserving natural resources from the impact of agricultural
practices a European project is being conducted. The project Inspia (European index for
sustainable productive agriculture) promotes sustainable practices that protect biodiversity,
soil and water and contribute towards maintaining ecosystems services. They want to design
the best management practices in agricultures to favour the preservation of natural resources.
They encourage the development of diversified crop patterns within rotation systems by
introducing alternative crops. These crops can offer several advantages such as interrupting
the conditions created by an ecosystem, which can have an impact on limiting pest, diseases
and weed proliferation, reduce external input needs, improve the structure and soil fertility
and reduce nitrogen leaching. They have observed that it can also optimise the crop margin
for farmers in a context of increasing input prices (Inspia 2015). Therefore, the development
of alternative crops in farmer’s rotation in the Rhône-Alpes territory may offer the possibility
to preserve the soil and water resources.
6.2 Key elements for value chain development
Before being able to evaluate the economical potential of the listed alternative crops in the
Rhône-Alpes region, an overview of similar projects implemented on the French territory
allowed to give an idea of the environmental, social and economical advantages and
limits alternative crop diversification might offer. Interviews were conducted to gather
information with the intention of having a better understanding of the project leaders
motivation when they decided to help farmers diversify their system and identify the key
elements for implementing a new supply chain for alternative crops. These elements were
essential to identify farmer’s needs and market opportunities in France for such products.
Several identical elements may be found for the Rhône-Alpes region and adapted solutions
will have to be provided to answer regional actors need from upstream to downstream level in
order to create new supply chains. Alternative crop production will also need to be adapted to
the willingness of farmers to change their practices, current market demand and soil and
climatic conditions of the region. The research did not cover all possible experiences
conducted on the French territory. No minimum or maximum project number was defined for
each listed crops. In general, commonalities have been found for the 15 case examples
regarding the motivation of the actors involved in the identified projects and the keys
elements that leaded to the implementation of a supply chain.
50
How to secure the supply chain?
Changing the production/farming system to produce new crops while at the same time
satisfying consumer’s quality and price requests, it can generate risk management for the
stakeholders of the supply chain. Therefore different solutions were identified during this
research in order to secure the sustainability of the supply chain, insure financial revenue and
maintain new crop production and practice change. Such as ameliorating upstream and
downstream actors communication and information flow; insure financial flow and profit
by implementing contacts between the chain actors; optimise geographical localisation of
stakeholders of the chain; create added value for product differentiation and favour market
opportunities.
6.2.1 Stakeholders involved in the creation of supply chain for alternative crops
For most of the project experiences identified during the study, the starting point was related
to market opportunities, increasing willingness of farmers to diversify their rotation system
and meeting the needs of regional farmers (e.g. fodder for livestock producers). Only very
few projects had as one of their main goals the preservation of the water quality on their
territory. When it was the case this initiative was drawn by political decisions from
community of commune or by farmers but never from downstream economical actors. The
Agreement signed between Coop de France RAA and the Water Agency RMC might change
this observation. Agricultural cooperatives due to their link to the territory, their bond to
farmers, their important role in terms of advice and assistance to farmers, their involvement
in the economic development of territorial agricultural production, can be considered as
important stakeholders to initiate and sustain actions for the maintenance of the water quality
on the territory (Paladian 2013).
For the majority of the cases that were studied, stakeholders involved in the implementation
of the supply chain are farmers and economical actors (mainly cooperatives). Lack of
information flows was pointed out between upstream and downstream stakeholders when no
industrial or cooperatives were linked to the projects. The market opportunities and crop
production does not always match if no industrial are interested by the product. All the actors
of the chain do not always embrace practice change. Each stakeholder has its own goals,
which are not always compatible with the ones of other actors of the chain. However,
51
common goal and agreements can be reach if communication between the stakeholders has
been installed and if they are ready to move beyond their fixed positions by enable the
possibility to innovate and design a strategy that will help creating a commonly desire
future. Implicating personally the different actors to a common mission can help in
coordinating and implementing the action of change towards the upstream and downstream
level of the supply chain. The aim is to find balance between individual and collective
interests by combining individual strengths to create chain strength in order to overcome
individual weaknesse.
A minority of projects work in partnership with research institutes. It has been pointed out
during the research and in scientific reviews (Meynard et al. 2014; Charrier et al. 2013;
Paladian 2013) that few experimentation and analysis are conducted on less commonly
produced crops. For farmers, the low availability of certified seeds and the reduced range of
varieties are one of the major constraints regarding the production of the majority of
diversification crops. However, the development of new markets can encourage research
on certain diversification species and results in the construction of networks and structures
bringing together institutional and private actors (Meynard et al. 2014).
- Coordination between upstream and downstream stakeholders
Efficient marketing of agricultural products requires working relationships between
upstream-downstream stakeholders of the supply chain. Quality and quantity standards
need to be coordinated between the producers and the buyers to insure selling the final
product. Commitment and coordination from all the actors is required to reach a sustainable
production chain and help the emergence of innovation processes. It will have a direct impact
on the organisation of the supply chain as well as the logistical and marketing function and
the distribution of value among the stakeholders (Van Dam and Van Trijp 2011). It also
implies linking local producers to global market and returning information and money
from global markets back into the channels flow.
- Technical support
Finally, technical support to farmers who initiates the production of a new culture can be
done by building networks of experimentation and consultancy but also by sharing
innovative experiences within the group of farmers. This seems to be essential elements to
52
ensure the maintenance of these crops on farms and areas where they have been introduced. It
also can help initiate farmers to new agricultural techniques.
6.2.2 Financial dimension
- Collective investment to initiate change
Some alternative crops may need adapted production and processing equipment for the crop
to be produced and sold on the market. Therefore, upstream and downstream stakeholders
may need to invest in material and change their infrastructure to match the quality and
quantity standards imposed on the final product by industrials or consumers. Most of the time,
the acquisition of a processing unit if needed to obtain the final product. For the processing
unit to be economically feasible all year long since the alternative crop is only produced
during a certain period of the year, a complementary crop that also require the need of a
processing step to be produced can be used. The production period of this crop need to
coincide with the time where the alternative crop is grown and cannot be harvested. For
example, the cooperative Sun Deshy optimised its alfalfa dehydrating processing unit by
alternating alfalfa and beetroots pulp processing during the year. These two crops have
different cultivation times and can be processed one after the other. The quantity of both crop
productions needs to be sufficient so the processing unit does not function to an economical
loss and to minimize the production coast.
- Quality product and price of interest
In the absence of quality differentiation recognized by markets and consumers, alternative
crops will be purchased based on their relative price compared to competing commonly
produced species. The product-selling price can be influenced by product added value, market
fluctuation and its quality. Most of the time, industrials and consumers require high quality
standards. Therefore, farmers and processors (e.g. cooperative) need to combine their
management strategies to sell final product that matches the expectations (Meynard et al.
2014). Sometimes, lack of knowledge regarding certain raw materials also influences the
choice of industrial supply.
53
- Financial subsidies
Little public financial help is provided to farmers that are willing to change their production
system towards a more environmentally friendly system that takes into consideration the
preservation of natural resources. CAP subsidies can help encouraging farmers to change their
practices but it is not sufficient to cover all risk management and equipment investment. To
help farmers during the transition period, the Water Agency RMC offers financial support.
This economical help is only however destined to farmers and not for the other actors of the
chain. It is also only accessible to farmers that are located in water catchment areas, which
might limit the number of farmers involved. For now, no other alternative solutions have been
identified.
- Economic interest of farmers at annual year scale
The evaluation of the economic interest of crops diversification is most of the time compared
to the data for wheat production on an annual basis, which shows nuanced results. The multi-
year scale is quantified less frequently but shows the economic benefit of introducing a crop
diversification in a rotation system, or on the following crop rotation by taking into account
the previous effects of the crop.
6.2.3 Added value creation
- Creation of added value for product differentiation
Creating added value to the product can act as a competitive advantage by delivering
superior value such as high quality and low price product. For example, nutritional
characteristics of the crops, low production cost and being locally produced can be
assimilated as an added value to the final product. Label creation and quality production
standards (e.g. terroir product) can also be linked to product added value. Quality control and
good product tractability can help creating added value to the final product. The creation of
value requires coordination of activities and cooperation among the actors to increase the
outcome. Competitiveness at all stages of the chain can be an important economic advantage.
The distribution of economic and financial constraints allows better preservation of farmers
margin. The distribution of added value can be similar to the distribution of cost, which can
be in some cases unequally spread across actors. Product differentiation can play an important
role against high market competition. Especially when the market is dominated by commonly
54
produced species. Nonetheless, sometimes the production of alternative crops may face the
lack of lucrative markets and the production stays at niche level or direct selling.
- Multiannual contracts
Medium and long-term agreements can be signed between farmers and downstream
economical actors such as cooperatives. This contract can insure that the farmers are
producing the crop at a certain quantity and quality standards and that the cooperative takes
care of harvesting, stocking and selling of the entire production. Combine risk management
among the different stakeholders of the supply chain can be implemented and comfort their
undertaken change initiative.
Another type of contract could be created between the farmers and the cooperative, which
would act as an economical insurance policy against climatic, environmental pressure
and change that could damage the crop production and its yield. For example, the
cooperative Axéréal bio works in collaboration with a insurance organisation that insure
farmers entire production against climatic conditions change that might impact the crops. The
financial compensation is calculated based on the percentage of contribution the value of the
culture can generate per hectare. A secondary financial additional help can be created for
farmers that just started producing the crop, if the crop is damaged by other external factor
than climate change. For example, if the competition between the weeds and the crop is too
strong and the crop cannot be harvest, the farmer will be compensated at least what he has
invested. Financial safety net may reassure farmers who want to engage them self in the
project. Financial help from public authorities or institutions can help actors of the supply
chain to change and maintain on the long term new agricultural practices and sustainable
supply chain.
- Optimise geographical localisation
To start a sustainable supply chains, the production sites need to be preferably located in the
surrounding of the processing sites. Plot dispersal can allow minimising the production
cost in transportation and help optimising the crop collect system itinerary. Local conditions
include taking into consideration soil and climatic conditions; socioeconomic dimensions in
terms of proximity and market opportunities regarding the different productions. For efficient
action on the territory, coordination among stakeholders in watershed, territorial changes in
55
cropping systems and biophysical processes of incorporation of water resource should be
taken into account (Benoit 2008).
Comparison to other findings in the literature
A study carried out by Baudrier and al (2015), on the identification of limits and opportunities
regarding the implementation of supply chain for low input crops located on water catchment
areas, established a similar methodology by interviewing several stakeholders to enhance their
literature review. It also allowed them to have a better understanding of the key points for the
implementation of a supply chain. The most recurrent criteria that were identified during their
study were: economic criteria (the search for financial support), scale criteria (territorial
actions regarding the location of the farmers farming system and water catchment areas)
related to the sets of actors (communication issues) or markets demand (localisation of
processing units) and finally, the diffusion of scientific knowledge. These results are similar
to the one’s obtained during this current study and no specific differences are noticeable.
To confirm these elements as key factors towards the implementation of supply chain for
alternative crops, similar results were also observed for the recent study conducted by
Meynard et al. (2014) at the National Institute of Agricultural Research (INRA). The research
was focused on diversification crops and the agronomic and economic keys of success and
failure they involve for each actor of the supply chain. Despite the similarities found for both
research, it has been noticed that some elements have not been approached during this current
study. More precise research has to be conducted on the importance of promoting
experimental trials on diversification crops by research institutes to increase the chances of
enhancing more scientific knowledge and in developing new markets adapted to the new
products. They also underline the fact that farmers know insufficiently about diversification
of crops and the information is not well spread to regional action regarding the beneficial
impact theses crops can offer. They also mention the importance of encouraging a standard
socio-technical system to evolve to better integrating supply chains for diversification. This
can be done by supporting the development of innovative niches; enhancing official
quality labels measures; increasing crop diversification through the settlement of the CAP
and encouraging the reduction of inputs.
Some stakeholders may have more difficulties to change practices by facing more constraints
than others. For examples, farmers faces uncertainty about the future due to the high
56
variability of the regulatory context, climate and cereal prices encourages short-term
strategies that do not favour the introduction of alternative crops. Therefore, the agronomic
and economic advantages to produce alternative crops on the medium and long term need to
be highlighted and awareness need to be created among the regional farmers and economical
institutions. Technical and advisory support has to be offered to farmers to consolidate their
technical and agronomic background regarding these new crops. Cooperatives and other
middleman may have infrastructure or logistic issues, which can fluctuate according to the
size of the production and the targeted markets (local, regional, national scale). However, the
development of innovation and creation of added value to alternative crop product can
facilitate the creation of new market opportunities. Therefore, increase the number of
producers that will have an impact on the produced quantity. The product quality and
tractability will be an essential element to consider among all the actors of the chain and can
be facilitated with good coordination and information flow.
6.3 Development potential of alternative crops in the Rhône-Alpes region
Presenting a divers list of alternative crops to cooperatives and their members can arouse their
interest and increase chances that one or several of these crops may met their needs or desire
in diversifying their system. Only a small number of regional cooperatives were interviewed
and helped identifying the crops that might have the best potential of being soon
development. In order to have a more accurate result, a larger number of cooperatives from
different agricultural sectors should be interviewed. The degree of precision regarding the
potential development in the region of the 15 low input crops identified stayed at a qualitative
level due to the limit of time imposed by the research period and the lack of interest in
producing certain crop by regional cooperatives.
Nonetheless, during this study some alternative crops showed a development potential in the
coming years form regional cooperatives point of view. Nitrogen fixing plant, especially
alfalfa and soybean present an increasing production demand. Two projects leaded by the
cooperative Dauphinoise on the development of supply chain for these two crops have created
interest regarding other cooperatives. The Dauphinoise is the most influential and biggest
cooperative of the region. If theses two projects are a success, it might reassure other regional
stakeholders regarding the economical potential of the crops and encourage their members to
57
diversify their rotation systems. It may also create new market opportunities in the region if
quantity and quality standards are reached. If these two crops are produced by the
Dauphinoise members, it also signify that adapted crop varieties were selected regarding the
soil and climatic conditions in their production zones. If other production zone in the region
presents the same topographic characteristics, it may increase the chances that the crops can
also be produced in those areas. Peas and lentil were also at first identified as interesting
diversification crops, but high market competition with soybean or other similar certified crop
produced in the region does not for the moment allow economical benefits for their
production.
Another market opportunity in the region linked to increasing consumers demand is related to
gluten free product. Production units for quinoa are already present on the territory, which
could facilitate implementing quinoa production in the region since market opportunities are
already identified. However, the agronomic characteristic of the plant have only been tested in
the North West of France were the soil and climatic conditions are different to the Rhône-
Alpes region. Experimental trials should be undertaken to identify the most appropriate
production zone in the region. Niche markets have been pointed out for miscanthus, malt
barley and linseed crops. These three crops present interesting agronomic and environmental
added value. The identification of targeted market and the development of agronomic
knowledge regarding crops production may help in developing their production number and
economical interest.
To attest with certainty the alternative crop production and value creation potential, an
economical and technical evaluation of their development possibilities should be carried out
in the coming year. This analysis should be conducted case by case for each project
experience that will be started and initiated by cooperatives. Precise agronomic crop potential
should be identified as well as targeted market opportunities, essential elements for
implementing a supply chain.
6.3.1 Delimitation scale of the action plan
For this study, the Water Agency RMC wanted to focus the implementation of action on
priority water catchment areas, since this scale has become a central position to the actions in
favour of the protection of water resources. Nonetheless, it may also present some obstacles
for cooperatives to encourage practice change among their members and the implementation
58
of a supply chain on the territory. First of all, the priority water catchment scale is not often
very relevant as it differs from farmers scale. Some farmers may only have a small percentage
of their field located on water catchment areas, which does not place water preservation issues
as one of their actual priority management. Similar results have been identified by Petit
(2013) in her research regarding the conversion of conventional farming system to organic
production systems on water catchment areas in the Ile-de-France region. The commitment of
farmers to change their practices did not necessarily depend on arguments regarding water
issues but on the size of the farming system and the technical and agronomic constraints
of the farmers.
Secondly, the partial localisation of a farmer production system on water catchment areas
might be problematic regarding his ability to access to Water Agency funding’s if he decides
to join the project and change his practices by diversifying his rotation system with alternative
crops. For now, the financial help brought by the Water Agency RMC is only available for
farmers that are located on priority water catchment areas. Cooperatives members that
volunteer to diversify their rotation systems but that are not located in the targeted zone will
not have access to the financial help. Therefore, new solutions to financially help the
farmers willing to take the risk of changing their system need to be found. Negotiations may
also be engaged with the Water Agency to redefine the terms regarding the access to their
financial support.
Even if cooperatives create awareness among their members by targeting farmers located in
water catchment zones, there is no guaranty that the farmers will be willing to change
their practice. A study conducted by Durpoix and Barataud 2014, regarding the
territorialised analysis of farming plot involved in a catchment feeding area has pointed out
that 50% of the utilized agricultural area of the farmer production system need to be located
on water catchment areas for the farmer to be willing to change his agricultural practices. In
parallel, if only a small group of farmers are willing to be part of this project, the amount of
cultivated product will not be sufficient to create a sustainable supply chain at medium or
large scale. Most of the time, water catchment area zones are to small to contain the entire
stakeholders of the supply chain. The production zones are not always located near the
collecting and stocking facilities or the processing unit necessary to obtain the finial product.
Limiting the study zone to priority water catchment areas in the region, can restrain the
possibilities of action to a small sample of farmers. It might also pass over the chance to work
with farmers that have already the interest in diversifying their rotation system but that are not
59
located in these targeted zones. Therefore, for this study, working at the scale of cooperative
rather than water catchment areas was easier to help creating awareness among a divers
sample of regional cooperatives. It also helped identifying leads regarding the development of
alternative crops that could bring environmental and economical benefits to the region and
answering in the best ways the market demands.
6.3.2 Role of cooperatives
Agricultural cooperatives can contribute to the development of these new supply chains, both
from a technical point a view by providing support to the farmers with the help of field
technicians, and from the economic point of view by helping in creating added value to the
product and insure farmers income. Cooperative model can help in coordinating up-stream
communication with farmers. Their direct contact can favour information circulation and
instate a better connection between market/consumers demand and farmer’s production and
product quality standards. It can also help ensuring mutualisation of prices and services
provided to farmers with multi-annual contracts. At down-stream level, coops can also help
establishing better information and economical flow by having an intermediate position in the
supply chain. They are also capable to adapt to market fluctuation, globalized or not that are
often led by the buying power of influential retailers, by creating strategies alliances
between cooperatives or creating added value to their product (Chomel et al. 2013).
The size of the cooperative can be a determining element in creation of a new supply chain,
due to it financial and equipment ability. Big cooperatives have more facilities regarding
logistical management and workforce available than smaller cooperatives. Their action
perimeter covers wide areas in the region, which offers bigger chances to find voluntary
farmers located on water catchment areas. However, financial subsidies are more incline to be
obtained by smaller cooperatives whishing to develop action in favour of environmental
services (Coop de France, 2009). For every cooperative, the most important element is the
geographical localisation of members regarding the location of different units and services
provided to them (e.g. logistical infrastructures, processing unit, ect). This will allow lowering
harvesting, transportation and processing cost and attract sufficient number of members
willing to change their practices to create regional sustainable supply chain.
Creating awareness among the cooperative members may allow some of them to take the time
to re-evaluate their systems in terms of profitability and environmental concerns.
60
Cooperatives should encourage farmers to see the benefits that practice change and crop
diversification of their rotation system may bring as a medium and long-term perspectives. To
help cooperatives to create awareness among their members, different tools may be used.
Tools designed to help cooperative
The cooperatives that have been interviewed expressed the need to have at their disposal
appropriate tools to create awareness among their members regarding the advantages of
diversifying their rotation systems and preserving water resources. Different tools and
network have been put into place to help accompanying cooperatives in creating awareness
and analysing the potential development of low input crops on their territory. In this study,
leaflets were created and put to their disposal. Those leaflets examples can be used as
information support to help creating awareness among regional cooperatives and their
members regarding the possibility to integrate low input crops in farming system, which may
result in the creation of a new supply chain. These concrete examples might help
Cooperatives and farmers of the region to understand the economic and environmental
benefits in diversifying their rotation system with low input crops. The issues on each
territory may not always be the same, such as soil and climatic conditions, the presence of a
processing unit on the territory or specific market channel, consumers demand, etc. Therefore,
these examples are only to be used as support information and not as case examples that need
to be identically reproduced.
If some farmers are interested in joining the project, different tools could be used to assess the
potential development of low input crops on their farms. Individual farm diagnostics can be
done to have a better understanding of farmers needs in logistic infrastructure and machinery
equipment, as well as the technical supported needed to produce this new crop. Other
elements can be considered, such as identifying the standards for establishing the production
of these new crops or assess a risk management study and research sustainable markets by
using the help of an external research firm. Many options are possible, it is mainly linked to
financial capacity of the cooperatives and the public institutional investments to the
elaboration of the project.
61
6.4 Methodological strengths and weaknesses
The methodology applied for this study was based on the desire to implement during the six-
month research period a prospective analysis. The literature review, internet research and
interviews allowed having a general overview of the French situation regarding crop
diversification and its link to water preservation with a diversity of opinion. The research was
not an exhaustive vision but it is a representative vision of national and regional French
actors’ point of view. To have more precise eyesight regarding the devolvement potential and
market opportunities of alternative crops, a more numerous number of people should be
interviewed.
Presenting this project to regional cooperatives helped to reinforce the link of CDF RAA
with cooperatives by establishing a common desired goal. The methodological approach was
adapted to the formulated objectives and information collection desired by Coop de France
RAA.
The different soil and climatic specificities of the Rhône-Alpes region have not been un-depth
analysed as well as the economical and market opportunities. The research period did not
offer sufficient time to analyse these criteria, however this research will be continued and
interviews and literature research will be used to determine the development potential of
selected alternative crops on the territory.
6.5 Future perspectives
This study will be continued in order to fulfil objective 4, firstly by studying the economical
and technical potential development of supply chains for selected alternative crops at medium
and long term. Secondly, by applying this project to one or several targeted territories in
partnership with local actors. An economical and technical analysis will be carried out in
order to estimate economical, agronomical and social feasibility of the project, identify
volunteer farmers, local stakeholders that would be willing to participate in the
implementation of the project and targeted market opportunities in the region. If one or
several projects emerge in the coming years, an action plan will have to be put into place to
ensure the sustainability of the crop production and supply chain implementation. For
example, asses cooperative members farming practices; establish a reflection group at the
62
basin scale to understand the knowledge and changing practices that need to be done; identify
tools and techniques to enable cooperatives to provide tailored counselling to members;
estimate the need for equipment and the financial investment needed; accompany members on
deploying decision support tools and the launch of experimental sites, etc.
Research regarding the possibility to target preferentially priority water catchment areas to
produce alternative crops and diversify farmers rotation system will have to be carried out.
Creating awareness among farmers located in those areas and experimental trial will have to
be done to estimate the development potential of the crops. The insertions capacity of the
crops to be introduced in farmers rotation system will have to be analysed in order to make
the best use of these diversification crop.
In 2015, a study conducted by the Water Agency RMC is being started regarding the
possibilities to identify or create solutions to sustain agricultural practice change in the
coming years and decades. This study may highlight the impotency of implicating
downstream economical actor such as cooperatives in the implementation of production
chains to sustain and link upstream and downstream stakeholders towards a common goal.
Finally, in 2016 at Coop de France RAA an internship position will be created in the
continuity of this study to investigate: What types of agroecological techniques and systems
examples are present on the Rhône-Alpes Cooperatives? This study will allow having an
overview of the actual situation regarding actions implemented to preserve natural resources
in the region. It will also allow monitoring the progress of this study regarding the
introduction of alternative crop in farmers rotation system.
63
7 Conclusion
This research allowed giving a prospective overview of what is being done on the French
territory regarding the implementation of supply chains for alternative crops and its link to
water resource preservation. Still a lot of work needs to be done to encourage farmers to
diversify their rotation systems with crops that requires less external input than commonly
produced crops. The analysis conducted regarding experiences at National level highlighted
key element to encourage the adoption of alternative cropping systems. It seems interesting to
develop information system to create awareness among regional actors regarding
environmental and economical benefits these crops may offer to farmers rotation system.
Even though they may require new agricultural production techniques and adapted equipment.
Experience exchange, and technical assistance can help developing economical and
environmental interest in these crops. Coordinating upstream and downstream stakeholders
can facilitate information, financial and production flow and help to secure the needs and
objective of every actor of the chain. Creating contracts between actors of the chain allow
combining risk management, which can encourage sustaining practice change overtime.
Encouraging research development on alternative crops and highlight products added value
potential can help in developing new market opportunities. In the Rhône-Alpes region,
agriculture cooperatives can help in providing these services due to their intermediate position
in the supply chain and their territorial anchorage.
The next step in promoting the development potential of alternative crops in the Rhône-Alpes
territory especially for alfalfa, soybean, linseed and quinoa, is to conduct a technical and
economical analysis. In parallel, agricultural cooperatives and their members that are willing
to initiate this type of agronomic and economic change should be identified. An action plan
should be conducted in order to test plant agronomic adaptation capacities, logistic and
equipment should be verified for producing and processing the new crop and market
opportunities should be targeted to insure the technical and economical potential of each new
alternative crop.
64
8 Bibliography
Agence de l’eau Rhône-Méditerranée-Corse, 2012. Programme d’action 2013-2018, Sauvons
l’eau!. http://www.eaurmc.fr/espace-dinformation/brochures-dinformation/programme-
dintervention-et-sdage/sauvons-leau-programme-daction-2013-2018.html (retrieved July
2015).
Agence de l’eau Rhône-Méditerranée Corce, 2015. Le SDAGE du basin Rhône-Méditerranée.
http://www.eaurmc.fr/le-bassin-rhone-mediterranee/le-sdage-du-bassin-rhone-
mediterranee.html (retrieved July 2015).
Agrest, 2013. Enquête Pratiques culturales 2011. Les traitements phytosanitaires sur les
grandes cultures. Agreste Les Dossiers. Numéro 18
Aktar, W., Sengupta, D., Chowdhury, A., 2009. Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their
benefits and hazards. Interdisciplinary Toxicology, 2(1), 1-12.
Aten, 2015. Mesures AgroEnvironnementales territorialisées (MAEt). http://www.espaces-
naturels.fr/Natura-2000/Mise-en-oeuvre-des-Docobs/Outils-contractuels/Mesures-
AgroEnvironnementales-territorialisees-MAEt (retrieved July 2015).
ATMO Drôme-Ardèche, COPARLY, SUP’AIR, 2010. Suivi des pesticides dans l’air
ambiant. http://www.air-
rhonealpes.fr/sites/ra/files/publications_import/files/rapport_mesures2007_2008.pdf
(retrieved July 2015).
Baudrier, M., Boussier, J., Tariel, C., 2015. Etude des freins et des leviers à l’implantation de
filières de cultures économes en intrants dans les aires d’alimentation de captage. Cas de la
luzerne et du chanvre. SAFEGE, AproParis Techn. p9.
Bennett, A.J., Bending, G.D., Chandler, D., Hilton, S., Mills P., 2012. Meeting the demand
for crop production: the challenge of yield decline in crops grown in short rotations.
Biological Reviews 87: 52–71.
Benoit, M., 2008. Maîtrise des phyto à l’échelle d’un territoire: mode d’emploi. Adour
Garonne 104, p23.
Besnard, A., Marsac, S., Défossez, E., Cadoux, S., 2009. Fiche culture, le miscanthus. RMT
Biomasse.
Brunet, N., Guichard, L., Omon, B., Pingault, N., Pleyber, É., 2008. L'indicateur de fréquence
de traitements (IFT): un indicateur pour une utilisation durable des pesticides. Le Courrier de
l'environnement de l'Inra, (56), 131-141.
65
Cambardella, C. A., Delate, K., Jaynes, D.B., 2015. Water quality in organic systems.
Sustainable Agriculture Research, 4(3), p60.
Céréales Vallée, 2015. Filières Millet, Sarrasin, Sorgho : Quelles caractéristiques pour quelles
innovations ?. Polytech Clermont-Ferrand.
Chambre de Commerce et d'Industrie de région Rhône-Alpes, 2015. http://www.rhone-
alpes.cci.fr/economie/panorama/4_8_a_agriculture.html (retrieved August 2015).
Charrier, F., Magrini, M. B., Charlier, A., Le Bail, M., Messéan, A., & Meynard, J. M., 2013.
Alimentation animale et organisation des filières: une comparaison pois protéagineux-lin
oléagineux pour comprendre les facteurs freinant ou favorisant les cultures de diversification.
OCL, 20(4), D407.
Chomel, C., Declerck, F., Filippi, M., Frey, O., Mauget, R., 2013. Les coopératives agricoles:
identité, gouvernance et stratégies.
Coop de France, 2009. Coopérative agricoles: les associés coopérateurs, un capital à cultivar.
Guide pratique, p25.
Defra, 2007. Planting and growing miscanthus, best practice guidelines for applicants to
Defra’s energy crops scheme. p17
Direction régionale de l’alimentation de l’agriculture et de la forêt d’Auvergne, 2015.
http://draaf.auvergne.agriculture.gouv.fr/AXE-3-recherche-conception-de,312 (retrieved July
2015).
DREAL Rhône Alpes, 2014b. Rapport d’Activité 2014. http://www.rhone-
alpes.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/201508-PUB-RapportActivite2014-Web-
VF_cle25fa93.pdf (retrieved July 2015).
DREAL Rhône-Alpes, 2015. Eau biodiversité et resources minerals. http://www.rhone-
alpes.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/protection-des-captages-prioritaires-r919.html
(retrieved July 2015).
Durpoix, A., Barataud, F., 2014. Intérêts de l'analyse territorialisée des parcellaires des
exploitations agricoles concernées par une aire d'alimentation de captage. Sciences eaux et
Territoires. 6 p.
Eau France, 2015. http://www.eaufrance.fr/comprendre/la-politique-publique-de-l-eau/la-
directive-cadre-sur-l-eau (retrieved July 2015).
66
Ecophto 2018, 2015. Réduire l’utilisation des phyto dans l’agriculture: moins, c’est mieux.
Indice de Fréquence des traitements (IFT) région Centre.
http://www.centre.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/documents/CRA_Centre/Environnement/Ecophyto/
Com_Ecophyto_aout_2012/Ecophyto_Centre_IFT_BD.pdf (retrieved February 2015).
Edwards, C. A., 2013. Environmental pollution by pesticides (Vol. 3). Springer Science &
Business Media.
Eur-Lex, 2013. Nitrates agricoles. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/FR/TXT/?uri=uriserv:l28013 (retrieved July 2015).
FEADER, 2015. Mesures agroenvironnementales territorialisées.
http://agriculture.gouv.fr/sites/minagri/files/documents//maet.pdf (retrieved July 2015).
Fiches techniques sur l'Union européenne, 2015. Second pilier de la pac: la Politique de
développement rural. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/fr/FTU_5.2.6.pdf (retrieved July
2015).
FNAB, ONEMA and AMF, 2015. Les zones de captages d’eau potable, Aires d’alimentation
de captages, Enjeu eau potable des collectivités et agriculture biologique: quelles synergies,
quelles opportunités possibles? http://www.devlocalbio.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/07/fiche-eau-AAC-12p-BD.pdf (retrieved February 2015).
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012b. Les fiches techniques la luzerne en Franche-
Comté. http://www.franche-
comte.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/images_docs/images_docs_contenu/espacepro/Agriculture_biol
ogique/fiches_cultures/Fiche_Culture_-_Luzerne.pdf (retrieved February 2015).
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012a. Les fiches techniques, le soja en Franche-
Comté. http://www.franche-comte.chambagri.fr/uploads/media/Fiche_Culture_-_Soja.pdf
(retrieved February 2015).
Hérault B., 2012. La diversification des assolements en France : intérêts, freins et enjeux.
Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de la Forêt
Inspia, 2015. http://www.inspia-europe.eu/ (retrieved Avril 2015).
Le Bissonnais, Y., Lecomte, V., Cerdan, O., 2004. Grass strip effects on runoff and soil loss.
Agronomie, 24(3), 129-136.
Les Agences de l’eau, 2015. http://www.lesagencesdeleau.fr/les-agences-de-leau/les-six-
agences-de-leau-francaises/ (retrieved July 2015).
67
Liebman, M., Schulte, L. A., 2015. Enhancing agroecosystem performance and resilience
through increased diversification of landscapes and cropping systems. Elementa: Science of
the Anthropocene, 3(1), 000041.
Lonsdale, C., 2001. Locked-in to supplier dominance: on the dangers of asset specificity for
the outsourcing decision. Journal of Supply Chain Management 37 (2), 22–27.
Magrini, M. B., Triboulet, P., 2012. Transition agroécologique, innovation et effets de
verrouillage: le rôle de la structure organisationnelle des filières. Cahiers Agricultures, 21(1),
34-45.
Maltais-Landry, G., Scow, K., Brennan, E., Vitousek, P., 2015. Long-term effects of compost
and cover crops on soil phosphorus in two California agroecosystems. Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 79(2), 688-697.
Meynard J.-M., Messéan A., Charlier, A., Charrier, F., Fares, M., Le Bail, M., Magrini, M.B.,
Savini, I., 2014. La diversification des cultures. Lever les obstacles agronomiques et
économiques. Expertise scientifique collective. Quae, 128 p.
Ministère de l’agriculture, de l’agroalimentaire et de la forêt, 2014. Consommation: manger
local partour en France. http://agriculture.gouv.fr/consommation-manger-local-partout-en-
france (retrieved March 2015).
Ministère de l’Écologie, du Développement durable et de l’Énergie, Ministère de
l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de la Forêt, 2013. Protection d’aire d’alimentation de
captage en eau potable contre les pollutions liées à l’utilisation de fertilisants et de pesticides.
http://www.developpementdurable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Guide_methodologique_Protectin_d_aire
_d_alimentation_de_captage_en_eau_potable-2.pdf (retrieved February 2015).
Nouvelle PAC, 2015. http://www.pac2015.fr/1er-pilier (retrieved June 2015).
Paladian, K., 2013. Le potential de développement de filières agricoles à bas niveau d’intrants
face à l’enjeu de protection de la resource en eau. AgroParis Tech, Agence de l’eau Seine
Normandie. p4.
Passion céréales en région Rhône-Alpes, 2015. La filière céréale, la production. http://rhone-
alpes.passioncereales.fr/filiere-cerealiere/la-production-16 (retrieved June 2015).
Pelzer, E., Bazot, M., Makowski, D., Corre-Hellou, G., Naudin, C., Al Rifaï, M., Baranger,
E., Bedoussac, L., Biarnès, V., Boucheny, P., Carrouée, B., Dorvillez, D., Foissy, D.,
Gaillard, B., Guichard, L., Mansard, M.C., Omon, B., Prieur, L., Yvergniaux, M., Justes, E.,
Jeuffroy, M. H., 2012. Pea–wheat intercrops in low-input conditions combine high economic
performances and low environmental impacts. European Journal of Agronomy, 40, 39-53.
68
Petit, C., 2013. Transitions des exploitations agricoles vers l'agriculture biologique dans un
territoire: approche par les interactions entre systèmes techniques et de commercialisation.
Application aux aires d'alimentation de captages en Île-de-France. Doctoral thesis,
AgroParisTech, 261 p.
Pointereau, P., Bochu, J.L., Doublet, S., 2012. Characterization and elements for a
definition and an analysis of low input farming system in EU-27. SOLAGRO.
Power, J.F., 1987. "Legumes : their potential role in agricultural production", Vol. 2, No. 2,
pp.69-73
Smith, S., & De Smet, I. (2012). Root system architecture: insights from Arabidopsis and
cereal crops. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,
367(1595), 1441-1452.
Van Dam, Y. K., & Van Trijp, H.C., 2011. Cognitive and motivational structure of
sustainability. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32(5), 726-741.
Van der Perk, M., 2013. Soil and water contamination. CRC Press.
Vinita, B., Veena, S., 2015. Impact of pesticides use in agriculture. International Journal, 2,
(2).
Winter, T. C., Harvey, J. W., Franke, O. L., Alley, W. M., 1998. Ground water and surface
water: a single resource. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1139, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Denver, Colorado, USA.
9 Bibliography appendix
Alfalfa
CIVAM Bio 09, GABB 32, FRAB Midi-Pyrénées, 2010. Les fiches cultures bios: Des
agriculteurs bios partagent leur savoir-faire, Luzerne un atout pour les rotations bios en Midi-
Pyrénées.
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012b. Les fiches techniques la luzerne en Franche-
Comté. http://www.franche-
comte.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/images_docs/images_docs_contenu/espacepro/Agriculture_biol
ogique/fiches_cultures/Fiche_Culture_-_Luzerne.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Buckwheat
Céréales Vallée, 2015. Filières Millet, Sarrasin, Sorgho : Quelles caractéristiques pour quelles
innovations ?. Polytech Clermont-Ferrand
69
Réseau GAB/FRAB, 2015. Sarrasin, Fagopyrum esculentum, Polygonacée. Grandes cultures
Fiches N°6. http://www.agrobio-bretagne.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Sarrasin.pdf
(retrieved March 2015).
Faba bean
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012e. Les fiches techniques, la féverole d’hiver et de
printemps en Franche-Comté. http://www.franche-
comte.chambagri.fr/uploads/media/Fiche_Culture_-_F%C3%A9verole.pdf (retrieved March
2015).
Hemp
Chambre Agriculture Centre, 2014. Structurer collectivement une filière locale autour du
chanvre. http://www.loir-et-
cher.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/documents/semaine_innovation/2014/41-
Chanvriers_Blaisois_.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Chambre d’Agriculture de l’Eure, 2013. Pôle d’Excellence Rurale Création d’une filière de
valorisation du chanvre.
http://www.normandie.chambagri.fr/detail.asp?card=511789&siteAppelant=cran&chambreOr
igine=cran#.VeLKN87UcoQ (retrieved March 2015).
Réseau GAB/FRAB, 2009. Grandes Cultures Fiche n° 8 Chanvre, Cannabis sativa L.,
Cannabaceae. Les fiches information du réseau GAB/FRAB.
Lentil
Agro bio Poitou-Charentes, 2015. Lentille bio fiche technique. Chambre d’agriculture Poitou
Charentes. http://www.penser-bio.fr/IMG/pdf/Fiche_tech_Lentilles.pdf (retrieved March
2015).
Frab Midi-Pyrénées, 2015. La lentille. Association pour la promotion de l’agriculture
biologique de l’Aveyron, Fédération régionale des agriculteurs biologiques.
http://www.aveyron-bio.fr/fr/produisez-bio/documents/MA5-Fiche-Itk-Lentille-Apaba-m.pdf
(retrieved March 2015).
Linseed & Flax for fibber
Cetiom, 2014. Guide de culture lin de printemps oléagineux.
http://www.terresinovia.fr/publications/guides-de-culture/guide-lin-de-printemps-oleagineux-
2014/
Gaumé J-F., Coulombel A., 2009. Fiche culture Lin oléagineux. Alter Agri n° 97.
Lupin
Réseau GAB/FRAB, 2013. Lupin de printemps, Fabacées. Cultures et Agronomie Fiche n°12.
http://www.agrobio-bretagne.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/FicheGC12_lupin.pdf
(retrieved March 2015).
70
Malt Barley
Gnis, 2008. Cultivons la diversité des plantes cultivées, Orge.
http://www.semencemag.fr/images/fiches_bo/cultiver-orge-fabriquer-malt.pdf (retrieved
March 2015).
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012d. Les fiches techniques l’orge de printemps en
Franche-Compté. http://www.franche-comte.chambagri.fr/uploads/media/Fiche_Culture_-
_Orge_Printemps.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Réseau GAB/FRAB, 2010. Grandes cultures fiche n°4 Orge Hordeum vulgare Poacée. Les
fiches techniques du réseau GAB/FRAB. http://www.agrobio-bretagne.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/09/Orge.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Miscanthus
Ditner M. et Delattre S., 2014. Du miscanthus pour préserver la ressource en eau à
Ammertzwiller. Syndicat Intercommunal Alimentation Eau Potable et Chambre d’Agriculture
Alsace.
RMT Biomasse Énergie Environnement et territoire, 2009. Fiche culture Miscanthus.
http://www.biomasse-territoire.info/monter-un-projet-biomasse/produire-et-mobiliser-la-
biomasse/biomasse-agricole.html (retrieved March 2015).
Peas
Chaillet I., Biarnès V., Fontaine L. et Chataignon M., 2014. Fiche technique Le pois
protéagineux en AB. Institut technique de l’agriculture biologique.
http://www.itab.asso.fr/downloads/Fiches-techniques_culture/fiche-pois.pdf (retrieved March
2015).
Chambre d’Agriculture Pays de la Loire, 2011. L’indice de fréquence de traitement. Ecophyto
2018. http://www.loire-
atlantique.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/documents_ca44/environnement/planecophyto2018/plaquet
te_IFT.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Chatain C., Dumoulin F., Gery E., Loy Q et Tournier A., 2015. Itinéraire technique du pois
protéagineux de printemps en Picardie. Protection intégrée et techniques alternatives des
Chambre d’agriculture de Picardie.
Quinoa
Benlhabib, O., 2005. Les cultures alternatives, Quinoa, amarante et épeautre. Ministère de
l’Agriculture, du Développement Rural et des Pêches Maritimes.
Sorghum
Loison J., 2015. Le sorgho. IDP ingénierie, Innovation Développement, Polytech. Céréales
Vallée
RMT Biomasse Énergie Environnement et territoire, 2013. Fiche culture, Le sorgho.
http://www.biomasse-
71
territoire.info/fileadmin/documents/publications/energie_biomasse/RMT_biomasse/511-
Fiche_culture_sorgho.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Sunflower
Chambre d’Agriculture Pays de la Loire, 2011. L’indice de fréquence de traitement. Ecophyto
2018. http://www.loire-
atlantique.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/documents_ca44/environnement/planecophyto2018/plaquet
te_IFT.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012c. Les fiches techniques le tournesol en Franche-
Comté. http://www.franche-
comte.chambagri.fr/fileadmin/images_docs/images_docs_contenu/espacepro/Agriculture_biol
ogique/fiches_cultures/Fiche_Culture_-_Tournesol.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Soybean
CETIOM, Institut de l’Elevage, 2009. Le soja, une culture à développer en Savoie. Chambre
d’agriculture de la Savoie. http://rhone-
alpes.synagri.com/synagri/pj.nsf/TECHPJPARCLEF/06235/$File/fiche technique soja 4 p
mars-09.pdf (retrieved March 2015).
Groupe technique AB Franche Comté, 2012a. Les fiches techniques, le soja en Franche-
Comté. http://www.franche-comte.chambagri.fr/uploads/media/Fiche_Culture_-_Soja.pdf
(retrieved March 2015).
Lieven, J., 2013. Typologie des pratiques de désherbage en culture de soja.
http://www.afpp.net/apps/accesbase/bindocload.asp?d=7485&t=0&identobj=YyQuqNZ6&ui
d=57305290&sid=..&idk=1 (retrieved March 2015).
72
10 Appendix
Appendix 1: Table of agronomic characteristics of the identified alternative crops
Low input needs and pest and disease resistance
Crop Low pesticide
needs
Low fertilizer
needs
Low
irrigation
needs
Treatment
Frequency
Index
(herbicides)
TFI without
herbicides
Main pest and
disease resistance
Soil cleaning crop *
Quinoa \ \ \ Pests: flea beetle and
caterpillars
Diseases: sclerotinia,
mildew, aschyta
hyalospora
Soybean X X High needs Pests: X
Diseases: shizoctonia
and sclerotinia
Alfalfa \ X
Exigent in
phosphors and
potassium
\ Pests: insects, nematodes
Diseases: Verse
Linseed &
Flax for
fibber
\ \ Pests: thrips, adult flea
beetle
Diseases: verse et
73
septoriose
Hemp X \ X Pest: Orobranch X
Miscanthus X \ X Pest: moths and wild
animals
X
Faba bean \ X Diseases: rust,
anthracnose and botrytis
Peas X X 1.3 2.5 Pest: thrips, aphids
Lupin \ X Pests: Sitones and slugs
Diseases: Anthracnose,
botrytis and sclerotinia
Lentil \ X \ Pest: midge, weevils,
aphids and budworms
Diseases: botrytis
Sunflower \ \ \ 1.7 0.3 Sensitive to many
diseases → resistant
varieties
Malt Barley \ \ \ 1.4 1.6 Disease: lodging
Buckwheat X X Pest: birds and small
animals
Disease: rust and mildew
Sorghum X X \ Diseases: lodging, rust
and mildew
* The density of the culture (N plants / m²) and plant height (more than 2m) limits the development of competing plants (weeds).
74
Agronomic specificities
Crop Annual /
Perennial
Place in the rotation Nitrogen fixing Important amount
of protein
Gluten
free
Good
rooting
system
Quinoa Annual ? X
X ?
Soybean Annual Beginning of the rotation
X X
Soybean with 40%
protein is an
excellent nitrogen
soil equalizer
Alfalfa Perennial: 3 to 4
years
Beginning of the rotation
Restores nitrogen to the
following crops
Precedes mainly straw
cereals of which it
significantly improves
yields
X X
Can bring food and
protein self-
sufficiency on
farming systems
X
Structuring
effect on the
soil
Fight against
erosion
Drought
resistant
Linseed & Flax for
fibber
Annual Beginning of the rotation
Precedes mainly cereals,
itself precede crops high in
protein
Avoid green manure for the
colza or mustered crop
family, which promotes the
flea beetle.
X
Hemp Annual
Precedes mainly cereals or
vegetables X
75
Miscanthus Perennial: 15 years
\
Faba bean Annual
Beginning of the rotation
Precedes wheat X X
Peas
Annual
End of rotation
Precede wheat or barley and
before canola
X X
Lupin Annual Precedes cereals X X X
Lentil
Annual
Precedes wheat
Avoid planting after
mustard and oats (difficult
for sorting out the seeds)
X X
Sunflower Annual
Follow and precede nearly
all crops X
Malt Barley
Annual
Precedes a corn, forage
kale, winter vegetable,
pasture land
Buckwheat
Annual
Avoid planting is before
spring crops due to crop
regrowth
X
Sorghum Annual
Follow and precede nearly
all crops X
76
Sowing/harvest dates and crop association
Crop Sowing date Harvest date Intercropping Other
Quinoa Legumes and cereals
(beans, red beans →
improves the nutritional
quality)
Significant amount of
phosphors, magnesium and
iron
The plant needs short days
and cool temperatures to
grow. Grows at high
altitudes.
Soybean Mid April – Mid May Seed moisture needs to be
between 14 and 16%
Active microbial soil life
Green manure
Alfalfa Spring: until mid April
End of summer: end of August
3 to 4 harvest per year
18 to 25% protein content to
be harvest
Legumes and grass
Good forage crop
Cover crop for cereal
production
Yield: 6 to 15 t of dry
matter/ha/year
Linseed & Flax for fibber Spring: mid February – mid
April
Winter: mid September- mid
October
Spring: August - mid
September
Winter: mid July- mid
August
Nutritional value: Omega 3
(human and animal sector)
Hemp Spring: beginning of May-
beginning of June
September Significant amount of
unsaturated fatty acids
77
(omega-3 and 6) and fibber
Miscanthus April Marsh-April (Dry)
Autumn (Green)
high biomass production
Faba bean Spring: end January – end
February
Winter: mid October – end
November
Ones a year at the end of
winter (70%-85% of dry
matter)
Peas February – mid Mars Spring peas: in the same
time as wheat
Winter peas: two to three
weeks before wheat
X
Lupin February – mid Mars End of July – mid September With cereals (e.g.: spring
barley)
Lentil March Mid July-August With camelina
Sunflower Mid April Humidity of the seed 9%
Malt Barley Spring: Mid February – mid
March
Winter: October
July
Buckwheat May September - October Nutritional composition of
the seed substantially
comparable to wheat
Plays a role in controlling
cholesterol and mimics the
power of insulin
78
Sorghum April - May August - September Biomass production (10 to
20 tonnes of dry matter per
hectares)
Presence of a toxin, wait ten
days after silage
(degradation of the toxin) to
use in animal feed
Agronomic production constraints
Crop Rotation High weed competition Drought sensitivity Other
Quinoa ? X
(Slow growing crop)
Soybean Minimum rotation space:
5 to7 years
Avoid planting after a
legumes, sunflower or colza
→ risk of sclerotinia
X X
(Less than the maize)
Random yields production
Alfalfa Minimum rotation space:
5 to7 years
Self toxic: do not plant
alfalfa after alfalfa
X Allow a minimum of 4 to 6
weeks between cuts and last
cut one month before the first
frost
Linseed & Flax for fibber Minimum rotation space:
Every 7 years
→ prevent the spread of
X
(Not very oppressing crop)
/
Sensitive during six weeks
Previous crop should be
limited to a biomass of 2.5 t
DM / ha. All dates respecting
79
Fusarium (10 days before the first
flower buds to 2 weeks after
flowering)
legal sowing and harvest of
the crop.
Hemp Avoid waterlogged soils
(sensitive to waterlogging)
Miscanthus \ \
(First year only)
X Productivity variable
according to soil and climate
conditions
Faba bean Minimum rotation space:
5 to 6 years
\ X Sensitive to asphyxiating,
moist soil
Peas Minimum rotation space:
5 years
\
Lupin Minimum rotation space:
4 to 5 years
\
Lentil Minimum rotation space:
5 years
X
Sunflower Minimum rotation space:
4 to 5 years
\
Malt Barley Minimum rotation space: \ Very sensitive to
hydromorphic soils
80
4 to 5 years
Buckwheat Minimum rotation space:
5 years
Plant capable of
accumulating heavy metals
Sorghum Minimum rotation space:
5 to 6 years
X High production potential but
low crop density
Good faculty of water and
soil minerals extraction
81
Appendix 2: List of all the project examples identified on the French territory
Hemp
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Champigny en
Beauce
Region Centre
Val de Loire,
department of
Loir et Cher
Denis CHAL Environmental advisor
to CMA41, (Chamber of
Trades and Crafts of
Loir et Cher)
Group of farmers +++ Local small scale
market /
CC du Canton de
Beaumesnil
Region Haute-
Normandie,
department of
Eure
Isabelle Ghestem, Agro-Resource
Development Officer
(Chamber of
Agriculture of the Eure) Group of farmers +++
In 2011 the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal (linseed
coop) acquires the
hemp processing
unit because it
wants to diversify
its production
/
Provence
d’Argens en
Verdon
Region Provence
Alpes Côtes
d’Azur,
department of Var
Julie PLAGNOL Economic development
officer (Provence
verdon)
Community of
communes
(Local
communities)
++
Implementation of
the project + They
are part of a label,
« Bâtiment
durable
méditerranéen »
Project to be
followed
Aouste, zone
d’activité Vicat
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Drôme
CCCPS (Community of
communes of
Crestois, Pays de
Saillans and
Biovallée)
Local
communities,
farmers, local
artisans and
partner
associations
+ Market sector :
eco-material
To be furthermore
analysed
82
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Drôme ?
Coop Eco Pertica
(Cooperative) +
Local supply
chain. Market
sector : insulation
material
/
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Auvergne
Auvergne Hemp Producers + local
artisan + Civam +
Local supply
chain /
Luberon Between the
department of
Alpes-de-Haute-
Provence and
Vaucluse
Hemp Luberon Hemp growers
association +
Local supply
chain /
L’usine Flax for
fibber Emanuel
Lang – Hirsingue
(ville)
Region Alsace,
department of
Haut-Rhin
http://www.lalsac
e.fr/actualite/2014
/10/18/hirsingue-
le-Hemp-et-l-
ortie-pour-
rehabiliter-la-
filiere-Flax for
fibber
? -
Relaunch of a
culture that did
not work
(valuation: Flax
for fibber fiber)
To be furthermore
analysed
Bièvre Valloire Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Isère
Patrick Denolly (Mixt syndicate Pays de
Briève Valloire)
Local
communities /
Failure of the
supply chain
(2010)
The major
problem was the
amount of
investment.
Creation and
dissolution of the
Association
HempRA
/
83
Vienne Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Isère
http://dauphinoise
.portagri.com/Par
utions/Documents
/Journal-Agir-
N19.pdf
Dauphinoise
(Cooperative) /
Feasibility study =
Failure regarding
the potential
development of
the crop on the
territory (2010)
/
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Haute-Garonne ?
Euralis
(Cooperative)
/
Closure of the
processing unit
(2014), produced
at a loss.
Stopped the
supply chain
/
Region
Champagne-
Ardenne,
department of
Aube ?
Chanvrière de
l’Aube
(Cooperative)
?
Valuation of
products in the
stationery and the
rope sector. Very
private
environment
The coop is part
of the Federation
of Cooperative
Festal.
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Île de
France,
department of
Seine et Marne
Cyril Flamin
(Cooperative
Coopenergie sur
la biomasse)
Farmer
(Association
Planète chanvre)
?
11 Farmer, Very
private
environment, hard
to exchange
information
/
Region Centre Gérard Gatay (Chamber of
Agriculture de Loir et
Cher) Farmer +
Project launch in
2015.
Investment in a
processing unit.
To be furthermore
analysed
84
Chartres Region Centre-
Val de Loire,
department of
Eure-et-Loir
? Valbiom Centre ?
1st processing step
of hemp and
linseed in the
region Centre
European project
Border-polymer
composite
materials
development of
hemp
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Midi-
Pyrénées
Department of
Haute-Garonne &
Region Provence-
Alpes-Côte
d’Azur,
department of
Vaucluse
Marie Bazet (Euralis)
Agrofribre,
Union between
Coopéval and
Euralis
(Cooperative)
/ Failure of the
supply chain /
Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
Monsieur Coulier
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal (Coop
Hemp & Lin)
+
Grouping 10
Cooperative of
Flax for
fibber/linseed et 1
coop of Hemp
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Poitou-
Charentes,
department of
Deux-Sèvres
Florian Bernier
Mixed Syndicate
Pays Mellois +
Creation of a
supply chain «
Construire en
chanvre »
Arc Les Gray Region Franche-
Comté,
department of
? Groupe Interval
(Cooperative) ++
« Usine
EuroHemp »,
Very private
To be furthermore
analysed
85
Haute-Saône environment.
Region des Pays
de la Loire,
department of
Vendée
?
CAVAC
(Cooperative
céréalière)
+++
Two processing
units (separation
of the straw +
panel creating
unit)
To be furthermore
analysed
Miscanthus
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Ammertzwiller Region Alsace,
department of
Haut-Rhin
Mathieu Ditner (Mayor of the town and
farmer)
Farmer & local
community +
Project
implementation
on water
catchment area &
use the biofuel for
a municipal boiler
/
Brumath Region Alsace,
department of
Haut Rhin Mathieu Ditner (Mayor of the town and
farmer)
Farmer & local
community +
Project
implementation
on water
catchment area &
use the biofuel for
a municipal boiler
/
Mulhouse Region Alsace,
department of
Haut Rhin Mathieu Ditner (Mayor of the town and
farmer)
Farmer & local
community +
Project
implementation
on water
catchment area &
use the biofuel for
a municipal boiler
/
Region Île de
France (Seine –
Cyril Flamin (Cooperative
Biomis G3,
General ++ ?
Implementation of
action in the
To be furthermore
analysed
86
Normandie) Coopenergie regarding
biomass) delegation
Parisian Region
following the
framework
directive on water
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Drôme Isère /
Working group
Drôme-Isère + ?
Difficult to find
information about
this working
group
« miscanthus
Drôme Isère »
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Picardie
/
Coop Agro
transfer
(Cooperative)
?
Member of the
competitiveness
cluster "Industries
and Agro-
Resources"
To be furthermore
analysed
Region
Bourgogne
Aline Lambert (Coop of Belgium, Nord
Parisian basin) Dijon céréale ?
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Centre-
Val de Loire,
department of
Eure-et-Loir
Gérard Gatay (Chamber of Agriculture
of Loir et Cher)
Farmer & Local
communities /
Valuation for
energy purposes.
No fulfilment in
the creation of the
supply chain.
/
Romans sur Isère Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Drôme
Caroline
Baconnier (in charge
of the experimentation)
Horticultural
college ‘Terre
d’horizon’
+ Experimental
trials
Project to be
followed
Saussay la
campagne
Region Haute-
Normandie
?
UCDV
(Cooperative
factory of
dehydration,
Vexin)
++ ? Replace the coal To be furthermore
analysed
87
Region Basse-
Normandie,
department of
Calvados
? NovaBiom (new
plant biomass) ?
Valorisation by
selling straw for
animal bedding
(140 Ha / year).
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Centre-
Val de Loire,
department of
Indre
? Chamber of
Agriculture -
Experimentation
pilot
Biomass Project
To be furthermore
analysed
Belgium ? Valbiom -
Biomass Project
from the 24th
of June
2015
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Pays de la
Loire, department
of Mayenne
Samuel Maignan
(Director) Coopédom ++
Product 30% of
energy needs of the
Cooperative is to
dehydrate the Alfalfa
To be furthermore
analysed
Montremond Region Bretagne,
department of
Morbihan
Laurent Point:
EARL de
Montremond
Enterprise + Composting platform
+ Valorisation of the
mulch for horticulture
To be furthermore
analysed
Alfalfa
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Region
Champagne -
Ardenne
Aline Lambert (Coop de France Nord
Parisian basin)
(Cooperative ?) +++?
http://www.draaf.champ
agne-
ardenne.agriculture.gou
v.fr/IMG/pdf/filiere_Alf
alfa_cle04e45f.pdf
To be furthermore
analysed
Region
Champagne -
Ardenne
Edouard Jannot (Technical adviser and
communications officer)
Sun Deshy (Société Cooperative
Agricole de
Déshydratation)
+++
Valuing the ball
dehydrated
Alfalfa (in
addition of the
granules)
/
88
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Tarn-et-Garonne
Guillaume
Dyrszka (Project Manager
regarding the
environment - CDF
Midi Pyrénées)
Qualisol + coop
of cereal supply
(Cooperative)
++ ?
Creating a
common
dehydration
factory to supply
the demand. +
Link between
cereal producers
and livestock
farmers
To be furthermore
analysed
Region
Bourgogne,
department of
Côte-d'Or
? Dijon cereals
(Cooperative) ?
To be furthermore
analysed
Beaurepaire
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Isère
Grégory Pinçon (Responsible livestock
market, Group
Dauphinoise)
Dauphinoise
(Cooperative) -
Feasibility study
and sector
development in
2015
Project to be
followed
Region Provence-
Alpes-Côte
d'Azur,
department of
Vaucluse
Marie Bazet Euralis
(Cooperative) /
Large market
competition with
Spain. Difficult to
secure the supply
chain. No
implementation of
the supply chain.
/
Domagné
Region Bretagne,
department of
Ille-et-Vilaine
Samuel Maignan
(Director)
Coopédom
Cooperative of
dehydration)
+++ /
Region Pays de la
Loire, department
of Mayenne
Samuel Maignan
(Director)
Codema
(Cooperative of
dehydration of
Mayenne)
+++
Project
dehydration
“Codema” set up
by Coopédom
/
89
Valuing the
biogas produced
by a landfill.
Chateaubriand
Region Pays de la
Loire, department
of Loire-
Atlantique
Samuel Maignan
(Director)
Coopédom
(Cooperative +
Group of farmers)
-
Creating a
dehydration
Cooperative. Only
50 Farmer out of
250 were ready to
commit.
The project is on
stand-by.
To be furthermore
analysed
Saussay la
campagne
Region Haute-
Normandie
?
UCDV
(Cooperative
factory of
dehydration,
Vexin)
++?
Organic &
conventional
production
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Bretagne,
department of
Ille-et-Vilaine
? Bleu-Blanc-Coeur + To be furthermore
analysed
Linseed
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Tarn-et-Garonne ? Coop Qualisol
(Cooperative) ++ ?
Organic
production
(Closed
environment,
difficult to
exchange
information)
To be furthermore
analysed
90
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
de l’Isère
Damien Ferrand Dauphinoise
(Cooperative) -
Ingoing feasibility
study in 2015
Project to be
followed
Region Bretagne,
department of
Ille-et-Vilaine Stephane Douabin (person in charge of
purchasing the products)
Bleu-Blanc-Cœur
(Valorex) +
(Closed
environment,
difficult to
exchange
information)
To be furthermore
analysed
Chartres Region Centre-
Val de Loire,
department of
Eure-et-Loir
? Valbiom Centre
(Association) ?
1st processing step
of hemp and
linseed in the
region Centre
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Bretagne,
department of
Finistère
? Lin and Hemp
(Association) ++
Process Linseed
and Hemp To be furthermore
analysed
Flax for fibber
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Villons-les-
buissons
Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
/
Flax field from the
north of Caen
(Cooperative)
?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
Cagny Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
/
Flax field from
Cagny
(Cooperative)
?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
91
Plateau du
Neubourg
Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
Pierre de
Francqueville (Responsible member
relationship and Quality
of Teillage from Plateau
du Neubourg)
Cooperative of
Teillage from
Plateau du
Neubourg
(Cooperative)
?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
Bourbourg Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
/ L.A. Flax field
(Cooperative) ?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
Martainneville Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
/ Calira
(Cooperative) ?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
(Grandvilliers) Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
/ Lin 2000
(Cooperative) ?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
Saint-Pierre-Le-
Viger
Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime /
Terre de Lin
(Cooperative) ?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
Yvetot Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime /
AGY Lin
(Cooperative) ?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
92
Saint-Andre-Sur-
Cailly
Region Haute-
Normandie,
Department of
Seine-Maritime
/
Cooperative
Teillage of Vert
Galant
(Cooperative)
?
The coop is
part of the
Federation of
Cooperative
Festal
/
Soybean
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Saint Lys
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Haute-Garonne
? Agricert
(Cooperative) + /
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Isère
Grégory Pinçon (Responsible livestock
market, Group
Dauphinoise)
Dauphinoise
(Cooperative) -
Feasibility study
in 2011 + new
feasibility study
and sector
development in
2015.
Desire to create a
label
« LocAlpes »
Follow project
development
Region
d'Auvergne,
department of
Loire and Haute-
Loire
Jean-François
Paris
Eurea
(Cooperative) ++ In progress
Follow project
development
93
Bassin Gimont
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Gers
? The company
« Badoit » ?
Soya and Maize
association on
water catchment
areas, Project « La
bulle verte »
To be furthermore
analysed
Region Provence-
Alpes-Côte
d'Azur,
department of
Vaucluse
Marie Bazet Euralis
(Cooperative) ++
Launch of the
sector since 2014
Follow project
development
Centre d’élevage
de Poisy
Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Haute-Savoie
Emily Vernay Jura Mont Blanc
(Cooperative) /
Experimental
trials started in
2015
Newsletter Coop
Jura Mont Blanc
N°21
Soybean (organic)
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Region Centre-
Val de Loire,
department of
Loiret
Adrien Saint-
Ellier (Technical sales
engineer - responsible
for development of
oilseed)
Axéréal Bio ++ Organic crops /
Region Île-de-
France,
department of
Seine-Saint-Denis ?
Nutrition et
Nature ?
SOY is the
trademark of
products
manufactured by
Nutrition &
Nature
To be furthermore
analysed
94
Quinoa
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Longué-Jumelles Region Pays de la
Loire, department
of Maine-et-Loire
Frédéric Truffaux (Field technician to
agricultural Coop from
Pays de la Loire)
Cooperative from
Pays de la Loire
(Cooperative) +
Only 1 seed
producer in
France
To be furthermore
analysed
Lentil
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Tarn-et-Garonne
? Qualisol
(Cooperative) + ? /
To be furthermore
analysed
Peas
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Tarn-et-Garonne
? Qualisol
(Cooperative) + ? /
To be furthermore
analysed
95
Malt barley
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Saint-Savin Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Isère
? Farmer + Organic niche
market /
Region
Bourgogne,
department of
Côte d’or
? ? ? Niche market? /
Sunflower
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Cologne Region Midi-
Pyrénées,
department of
Gers
? Gascogne Valley
Press Group
+
Organic market /
Aromatic plant
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Romans sur Isère Region Rhône-
Alpes, department
of Drôme
Caroline
Baconnier (person in
charge of purchasing the
experimetation)
Horticultural
college ‘Terre
d’horizon’
+ Experimental
trials /
96
Lupine
Localisation Region &
department Contact person Project leader
Size of the
project * Specificities
Project to be
furthermore
investigated
Region Pays de la
Loire, department
of Maine-et-Loire
Terrana http://www.terrena.fr/
index.php?page=filier
e-proteines-vegetales
Region Bretagne,
department of
Ille-et-Vilaine
? Bleu-Blanc-Coeur + /
Legend
Size of the project
- Project has not yet been implemented yet or is in stand-by
+ Direct selling/ short supply chain
++ Medium-scale supply chain regarding their ability level of production and valorisation of the product
+++ Large-scale supply chain with an important level of production and valorisation of the product
/ Supply chain that was not sustainable in time and that were stopped
? Lack of information
… Failure of the project / supply chain
… Project in stand-by
* The size of the project and its development impotency on the territory was estimated regarding a personal point of view and based on the
definition of the French ministry of agriculture regarding direct selling and small scale production: “Small-scale selling is a way marketing
agriculture product by either direct selling from producers to consumers or through indirect sales if there is only one intermediary” (Ministère
de l’agriculture, de l’agroalimentaire et de la forêt 2014)
97
Appendix 3: Synthetic sheet draft for the selected project examples
Title Localisation: (French region and department) …………
Project leader: ………… Crop : …………
Project starting date: …………
Project description
History/motivation
Organisation/ project structuration
Valorisation/commercialisation
Project partners:
Key figures
N° of farmer : …………
N° ha : …………
Collected crop volume: …………
Purchas price: …………
98
Constraints Opportunities E
con
om
ies
Tec
hn
iqu
e &
reg
ula
tio
n
En
vir
on
men
tal
Future perspectives
Ed
iting d
ate: ……
……
99
Appendix 4: creation value, production and supply chain characteristics for quinoa, soybean, linseed and alfalfa crops
Major crop production sector in France
100
Main production, processing and product valorisation constraints
Crop Production Processing and product valorisation
Quinoa ? ?
Soya Irrigation constraints
Research is needed:
→ improve yields
→ improving lodging resistance
Improved transformation process
→ increase the nutritional value of foods and eliminate anti-
nutritional factors
Obsolescence of processing capacity tools for soybeans for animal
feed
Dependent market quotations on the world market
Alfalfa The harvest schedule should allow sufficient replenishment of
root reserves of the plant for each harvest→ allows the plant to
grow properly
Main qualitative nutritional criterion → protein rate
Cost of dehydration → energy costs
Organization of harvesting sites → master supply and factory
management
Continue to improve the processes to optimize energy consumption
and increase the share of biomass in the energy mix.
Develop new products for animal and human nutrition.
Linseed Requires a specific mechanization for harvesting.
Research is needed:
→ improve yields
Insufficient production → limit the supply and demand
Requires a local processing unit
Straw valuation is challenging (except if there is the presence of
industrialists nearby)
Single use of the French seed (treatment and valorisation of the
whole seed)
Dependent market quotations on the world market
101
Product value creation & targeted market
Crop Humane nutrition Animal nutrition Other
Quinoa Seeds
Leaves
Raw or roasted flour
Flakes
Semolina and instant powder
Forage (whole plant)
Crop Residues
Medicine (leaves, stems and seeds)
Cosmetology
Soya Soya milk (tonyu)
Tofu ("curdled" soy)
Seeds
Oil cake
Alfalfa Diet slimming
Dietary supplement
Silage (dehydrated alfalfa)
Food additive
Pet food
Alfalfa protein concentrate (pressed
before drying)
Nitrogen fertilizer
Cosmetology
Linseed Omega 3 oil
Flour
Seeds
Oil cake
→ rich in nitrogen and amino acids
Straw → biomaterials
Solvent → soap, paint or varnish
basis
102
Appendix 5: Example of successful and failure development of a supply chain at National scale
Sections Questions Cooperative Dauphinoise
(Being implemented - Soybean)
Community of commune of Ammertzwiller
(Success- Miscanthus)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: 2014.
Started: Political decision in 2007.
Identify the actors implicated in
the project Project leader: Cooperative Dauphinoise
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative,
some food manufacturer in the region, Rhône-Alpes
region (financial help).
Project leader: Community of commune
Other stakeholders: Local farmers, Water
syndicate, Water Agency Rhin-Meuse (Diagnosis
agricultural practices + technical assistance), Alsace
region (combustion emissions testing and analysis).
The project leader’s motivation
Help farmers to be self sufficient in food and energy.
Insure the quality and tractability of the product by
producing it locally (non-GMO product).
Ameliorate the water quality on the priority water
catchment area located in the surroundings of the
city.
In parallel, the town had as project to change its
boiler system in municipal buildings and use
biomass as heating system instead of wood.
How was the development
potential of the supply chain
assessed before its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis is
being conducted.
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted.
103
Upst
ream
(pro
duct
ion s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop
requires new techniques and knowledge that the
farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support
needs to be set into place to help the farmers during
the transition period.
Economic \
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop
requires new techniques and knowledge that the
farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support
needs to be set into place to help the farmers during
the transition period.
The appropriate harvesting equipment was not
accessible on the territory. Farmers had to create or
modify their machineries to be able to harvest the
fibber and have good quality product.
Convince farmers that are located on the water
catchment area to be part of the project.
Key of success Economic Reducing external input can be a cost saving
measure.
Technique & regulation
Technical and advisory support by the cooperative to
the farmers.
Economic \
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Actions implemented
Experimental trials
Experimental trials.
No. ha produced: 24 Ha out off 1130 Ha priority
water catchment area.
Average volumes collected: 300 T/ year
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring Monitoring
104
Elements to guaranty traceability
and product quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop and the cooperative needs to follow
a set of specifications for harvesting, collecting and
processing the crop.
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop D
ow
nst
ream
(tr
ansf
orm
atio
n a
nd m
arket
ing s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
/
Economic /
Technique & regulation
Adapt the boiler system to miscanthus instead of
wood.
Key of success Economic Added value: non-GMO product with a guarantied
tractability
Technique & regulation
/
Economic The implementation cost of 3,000 €/ ha is taken care
in its entirety by the syndicate of water and the water
agency Rhine Meuse.
Reduced transportation costs by setting up a
harvesting plan.
Local valorisation and near the production site →
help local economy
Technique & regulation
Multi-annual contract between the cooperative and
farmers. Engagement for at least 15 years.
The transport of the crop to the storage place is a
mutualized service between 4 farmers.
Actions implemented
Multi-annual contract between the cooperative and
farmers.
Multi-annual contract between farmers and the
community of commune.
Share their agronomic and technical experience by
creating visiting days all year long and access to the
production site.
105
Targeted markets Part of the production is distributed to members as
self-consumption. The rest of the production is
traded by the cooperative and sold to farmers in the
region who are not members or traders and food
manufacturers.
Eco-fuel and made available for collective boiler
room of the city as miscanthus wafer.
Miscanthus can also be valued as horticultural
mulch. Experimental trials were set up at the CARA
in 2011 and 2014 by a landscaping company
Ettwiller.
Per
spec
tives
What is needed to improve the
system?
/ Invest in specific harvesting equipment.
What are you future
perspectives?
Implemented a processing unit.
Create awareness among their members to encourage
them to diversify their production with soybean.
Adapt the stocking facility that is reaching its
maximum capacities since the number of producers
is constantly increasing.
Sections Questions Cooperative Euralis
(Failure - Hemp)
Cooperative Euralis
(Being implemented - Soybean)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: 2011.
Started: 2014 due to favourable climatic conditions
of the region.
Identify the actors implicated in
the project Project leader: Cooperative Euralis
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative,
Water Agency Adour-Garonne, water syndicate of
the region.
Project leader: Cooperative Euralis
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative,
Water Agency Adour-Garonne, water syndicate of
the region.
106
The project leader’s motivation
A three-year agreement was signed between the
cooperative and the Water Agency with a common
goal to favour the development of low-input crops
like hemp, organic farming and forage crop allowing
a better preservation of the water quality of the
Adour-Garonne basin. During three years the
potential development of hemp was analysed.
A three-year agreement was signed between the
cooperative and the Water Agency with a common
goal to favour the development of low-input crops
like hemp, organic farming and forage crop allowing
a better preservation of the water quality of the
Adour-Garonne basin. During three years the
potential development of soybean was analysed.
How was the development
potential of the supply chain
assessed before its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted.
A technical and economical feasibility analysis is
being conducted.
Up
stre
am (
pro
duct
ion
ste
ps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop
requires new techniques and knowledge that the
farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support
needs to be set into place to help the farmers during
the transition period.
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop
requires new techniques and knowledge that the
farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support
needs to be set into place to help the farmers during
the transition period.
Key of success Economic Reducing external input can be a cost saving
measure.
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Technical and advisory support by the cooperative to
the farmers.
Economic Farmers can aske for financial support fro the CAP
and have supplementary since they insert in their
rotation a high protein content crop.
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Actions implemented
Experimental trials
No. ha produced: 2 000 to 3 000 Ha
Experimental trials.
107
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring Monitoring
Elements to guaranty traceability
and product quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop and the cooperative needs to follow
a set of specifications for harvesting, collecting and
processing the crop.
/ D
ow
nst
ream
(tr
ansf
orm
atio
n a
nd m
arket
ing s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic In 2014 the factory was shut down due to economic
concerns. The added value of the product and the
selling price was not profitable anymore for farmers
due to a wrong initial assessment of costs
Technique & regulation
/
Economic /
Technique & regulation
/
Key of success Economic Reduced transportation costs by setting up a
harvesting plan.
Technique & regulation
A processing unit was already present in the region.
This industrial unit was already processing hemp for
the textile industry and material for building
constructions on the territory
Economic Produce non-GMO crops can be an added value to
the product
Technique & regulation
/
Actions implemented
Multi-annual contract between the cooperative and
farmers.
Targeted markets Textiles market and insulation for construction in the
building sector.
Animal nutrition.
108
Per
spec
tives
What is needed to improve the
system?
Find a second crop production that can be processed
during the time of the year were the hemp is not
harvested. This will enable the processing unit to be
economically profitable.
What are you future
perspectives?
/ Create awareness among their members to encourage
them to diversify their rotation systems. Increase the
number of hectare produced.
Implement multi-annual contracts between farmers
and the cooperative.
Identify and target market opportunities.
Sections Questions Cooperative Euralis
(Failure - Alfalfa)
Community of commune Provence Verdon
(Being implemented- Hemp)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: 2011.
The aim of producing alfalfa was to create a
partnership between local cereals farmers that would
produce the crop and would deliver it to local animal
husbandry farmers.
Started: Initiated from a political decision in 2012.
Identify the actors implicated in
the project Project leader: Cooperative Euralis
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative,
Water Agency Adour-Garonne, water syndicate of
the region.
Project leader: Community of commune Provence
Verdon
Other stakeholders: Local farmers, Chamber of
Agriculture, SAFER and the Joint Union of Provence
Verdon and the PACA region.
109
The project leader’s motivation
A three-year agreement was signed between the
cooperative and the Water Agency with a common
goal to favour the development of low-input crops
like hemp, organic farming and forage crop allowing
a better preservation of the water quality of the
Adour-Garonne basin. During three years the
potential development of alfalfa was analysed.
How was the development
potential of the supply chain
assessed before its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted.
Up
stre
am (
pro
duct
ion s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop
requires new techniques and knowledge that the
farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support
needs to be set into place to help the farmers during
the transition period.
The harvesting machineries were not adapted to the
crop.
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The appropriate harvesting equipment was not
accessible on the territory and was rented from
Germany. Difficulties to access the specific
equipment during the harvesting period.
The introduction and production of a new crop
requires new techniques and knowledge that the
farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support
needs to be set into place to help the farmers during
the transition period.
The number of hectares cultivated is for the moment
insufficient for a processing unit to function all year
long.
110
Key of success Economic Reducing external input can be a cost saving
measure.
Technique & regulation
Technical and advisory support by the cooperative to
the farmers.
Economic Financial support from the CAP
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Technical support provided by the Chamber of
Agriculture.
Actions implemented
Experimental trials Experimental trials.
No. ha produced: 30 Ha
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring Monitoring
Elements to guaranty traceability
and product quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop and the cooperative needs to follow
a set of specifications for harvesting, collecting and
processing the crop.
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop.
111
Dow
nst
ream
(tr
ansf
orm
atio
n a
nd m
arket
ing s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic Its price was not competitive compared to the alfalfa
produced in Spain boarder.
Breeders were not ready to sign long-term contracts
since the alfalfa was cheaper and had a better quality
in Spain.
Technique & regulation
No processing unit was already present on the
territory
Investment in movable processing units. This
machinery would be brought directly on the farmer’s
field for the harvested product to be processed.
Logistic and climatic problem occurred since the
alfalfa bales needed to be homogeneous by having
the same size, density and humidity for the
machinery to function and produce quality product.
The quality of the final product did not meet the
requirements of local breeders
Economic High market competition.
Crop not well known by regional industrials.
Technique & regulation
/
112
Key of success Economic Producing and processing locally could have been an
important added value to the product.
Technique & regulation
/
Economic Financial support from the PACA region.
If the hemp is good quality and sold at an attractive
price, the production can be profitable for all the
actors of the supply chain.
Technique & regulation
A expertise is being conducted to estimate the
financial investment needed to create a processing
unit on the territory and its size to be able to process
approximately 300 to 500 ha of hemp production.
Actions implemented
Implementation of a mobile processing unit.
Expertise to estimate the possibility to implement a
processing unit.
Targeted markets Part of the production is distributed to breeders that
are members of the cooperative. The rest of the
production is traded by the cooperative and sold to
farmers in the region who are not members.
Eco building materials.
Per
spec
tiv
es
What is needed to improve the
system?
Production techniques need to be standardized to
allow mobile processing unit to be installed in the
region. This could lead to the amelioration of the
product quality.
Find a second crop production that can be processed
during the time of the year were the hemp is not
harvested. This will enable the processing unit to be
economically profitable.
Create awareness among regional industrials
regarding the benefits this crop can offer.
113
What are you future
perspectives?
/ Implement a local processing unit.
Find or create agricultural machines adapted for
harvesting hemp.
Identify the most promising sector for the
enhancement of the product.
Sections Questions Community of communes Canton de Beaumesnil
(Success- Hemp)
Chamber of Agriculture, Loire & Cher
department
(Being implemented- Hemp)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: Initiated by Farmers in 1977.
In 2011 the Federation of cooperative Festal buy the
processing unit used to produce the hemp. To
optimise the industrial unit all year long, Flax for
fibber is also produced and processed in the same
unit.
Started: 2015.
The crop was produced before during 20 to 30 years
but the supply chain failed because it was no longer
economically profitable for the farmers. Some years
later, an increasing demand by farmers to produce
this crop restarted its production in the region.
Identify the actors implicated in
the project Project leader: Farmers
Other stakeholders: Chamber of agriculture
Project leader: Local farmers
Other stakeholders: Local communities, Chamber
of agriculture, regional council for financial help.
The project leader’s motivation
Diversify farmers rotation system. Diversify farmers rotation system and create
employment.
114
How was the development
potential of the supply chain
assessed before its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted
/
Up
stre
am (
pro
duct
ion s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
/
Economic \
Technique & regulation
The appropriate harvesting equipment is not
accessible for every farmer.
The number of hectares cultivated is insufficient for
a processing unit to function all year long.
No processing unit is located in the region.
Key of success Economic Reducing external input can be a cost saving
measure.
Technique & regulation
Farmers use equipment from a farm equipment
cooperative. Internal organisation between the
farmers is created so each of them can harvest their
production in time.
Economic \
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Actions implemented
/ No. ha produced: 50 Ha
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring Monitoring
Elements to guaranty traceability
and product quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop to answer industrial quality
requirements.
115
Do
wn
stre
am (
tran
sform
atio
n a
nd m
arket
ing s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic Important transportation costs that need to be
improved between the geographical localisation of
the production plots and the processing unit.
High market competition. Hemp products are not
well differentiated on the market. Industrials can find
hemp at lower price on the market compared to the
one produced locally.
Technique & regulation
Producers and industrial join forces to facilitate the
transport, sorting and processing hemp seed to
society “Huile des Terres Normande”.
Plot dispersal far away from the processing unit.
The volume collected and sold is to small to be
competitive on the market.
Economic Upstream-downstream actors need to invest in a
processing unit.
High market competition. Hemp products are not
well differentiated on the market. Industrials can find
hemp at lower price on the market compared to the
one produced locally.
Important transportation costs that need to be
improved for the all supply chain.
Technique & regulation
No existing processing unit on the territory
The volume collected and sold is too small to be
competitive on the market for the moment.
Key of success Economic The choice to diversify production by the
cooperative allowed the processing unit to be
profitable throughout the year. In addition to the
production of hemp, Flax for fibber is produced,
which is also dried in the processing unit.
Technique & regulation
/
Economic If the hemp is good quality and sold at an attractive
price, the production can be profitable for all the
actors of the supply chain.
Technique & regulation
/
Actions implemented
/ /
116
Targeted markets Paper and textile industry.
Human nutrition: oil.
Eco building materials.
Per
spec
tives
What is needed to improve the
system?
Ameliorate the transportation issue: Distance
between the production plot and the processing unit.
Invest in specific harvesting and processing
equipment.
Improve the quality tractability.
Integrate economical actors to insure the economical
sustainability of the project. (e.g. agricultural
cooperatives).
What are you future
perspectives?
Increase the number of producers and quantity
produced to be competitive on the market.
Identify market opportunities.
Increase the number of producer and produced
quantity.
A technical and economical feasibility analysis needs
to be conducted.
Sections Questions Cooperative Sun Deshy
(Success - Alfalfa)
Chamber trades and artisans form Loir et Cher
(Success- Hemp)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: Initiated by the cooperative in 2006.
Alfalfa has been produced since 1960’s in the region.
Started: Initiative from a farmer group in 2008.
In parallel an entrepreneur from the building site
sector was looking to use ecological materials for his
constructions.
117
Identify the actors implicated in
the project Project leader: Cooperative Sun Deshy
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative,
Wood National Federation.
Project leader: Local farmers
Other stakeholders: Chamber trades and artisans
form Loir et Cher, public and especially private
investors and Chamber of agriculture
The project leader’s motivation
Due to an increasing demand of farmers to produce
alfalfa and consumers request, processing units need
to increase in size since they are reaching their
maximum production capacities. 80% of alfalfa
produced in France comes from Sun Deshy
production.
Diversify their rotation systems with alternative
crops.
How was the development
potential of the supply chain
assessed before its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was
conducted to estimate the quantity of alfalfa needed
for the farmers of the cooperative to be self sufficient
in animal feed. This determined the size of the
processing unit and the financial investment.
Up
stre
am (
pro
duct
ion
ste
ps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
Stabilize yields and production volumes with
varieties adapted to the climate and topography of
the region
The production areas are spread over 4 sites
Need appropriate equipment for harvesting
Economic During one year, farmers were the only financial
investors in the project.
Technique & regulation
The appropriate harvesting equipment was not
accessible on the territory and is rented to an external
company. Difficulties to access the specific
equipment during the harvesting period.
The number of hectares cultivated was insufficient
for a processing unit to function all year long.
118
Key of success Economic Solidarity of members helped maintain the industry
during crisis times in the 1980s after the oil crisis.
Technique & regulation
Technical and advisory support by the cooperative to
the farmers.
Economic /
Technique & regulation
Crop variety adapted to the production zone.
Technical support by the different Chambers of the
region.
Actions implemented
Experimental trials
No. ha produced: 11 000 Ha
Average volumes collected: 4 x 2500 Ha/ year
Final production volume (pellets and balls): 160 000
T/ year
Experimental trials.
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring Monitoring
Elements to guaranty traceability
and product quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to
produce the crop and the cooperative needs to follow
a set of specifications for harvesting, collecting and
processing the crop.
/
119
Dow
nst
ream
(tr
ansf
orm
atio
n a
nd m
arket
ing
step
s)
Difficulties faced
Economic High market competition for the production of
pellets.
Technique & regulation
The maximum production capacities of the
processing units are almost reached.
Economic High market competition. Hemp products are not
well differentiated on the market. Industrials can find
hemp at lower price on the market compared to the
one produced locally.
For now, no industrials in the region are interested in
this material. Only private individual are interested
but only at small scale.
Technique & regulation
No existing processing unit on the territory
The volume collected and sold is small.
Industrials have high quality standards for their eco-
materials.
120
Key of success Economic 3 cooperatives merged to help each other during the
crisis and increase their production and position on
the market.
Added value in producing alfalfa balls instead of
pellets
Technique & regulation
4 processing units on the territory for the production
of significant volumes of alfalfa
Production of balls help maintain the fibers of the
culture that is not retained for pelletizing
Production plots are located in a maximum 30 km
round near the processing units.
Economic At the beginning the community of commune bought
farmers entire production in support for their project
and built several buildings with the produced
material.
Technique & regulation
Publicity and awareness among the regional
stakeholders is created and supported by the regional
Chambers and the farmers.
Actions implemented
Implementation of a processing unit.
Multi-annual contract between the cooperative and
farmers.
The majority of the production is carried out by
manufacturing alfalfa bales. The rest is processed in
pellets.
/
Targeted markets Half of the production is sold in France and the
remainder in Germany, Switzerland, Belgium,
Netherlands and Arab Emirate and may be in years
to come to China.
Animal food markets.
Eco building materials.
121
Per
spec
tives
What is needed to improve the
system?
/ Invest in specific harvesting and processing
equipment.
Secure the financial revenue with identified targeted
market opportunities.
What are you future
perspectives?
Increase the number of famers and the production
quantity of balls.
Create awareness regarding hemp benefits in
production and utilisation in eco-material sector
among the regional industrials.
Creating a company "Chanvrier Blésois." Each
farmer is a shareholder and brings hemp. Their
outlook is to find funding and engage multi-annual
contract with local industrial
Sections Questions Cooperative Axéréal Bio
(Success - Soybean)
Pro
ject
his
tory
Starting point of the project
Started: Initiated by the cooperative in 2013.
Identify the actors implicated in the project Project leader: Cooperative Axéréal Bio
Other stakeholders: members of the cooperative, research institute (Cetium, work
on seed development)
The project leader’s motivation
Search for autonomy and traceability in supply factories that make organic food,
especially the cooperative processing units. Relocate in the region soybean
production.
122
How was the development potential of the supply
chain assessed before its creation?
A technical and economical feasibility analysis was conducted by a intern and in
partnership with Bio Centre (organic interprofession of the Central region). U
pst
ream
(pro
duct
ion s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
The introduction and production of a new crop requires new techniques and
knowledge that the farmers may not be acquainted to. Technical support needs to
be set into place to help the farmers during the transition period.
Lack of technical knowledge regarding the crop production.
Key of success Economic
Reducing external input can be a cost saving measure.
Technique & regulation
Sufficient storage infrastructure and adapted harvesting material are already
present at the cooperative.
Technical and advisory support by the cooperative to the farmers.
Actions implemented
Experimental trials
No. ha produced: 10 Ha in 2013 and up to 400 to 450 Ha in 2015
Average volumes collected: 23 quintals/ year/ farmer
Assess the evolution of practices Monitoring
Elements to guaranty traceability and product
quality
Farmers need to follow a set of specifications to produce the crop and the
cooperative needs to follow a set of specifications for harvesting, collecting and
processing the crop.
123
Do
wnst
ream
(tr
ansf
orm
atio
n a
nd m
arket
ing s
teps)
Difficulties faced
Economic /
Technique & regulation
Plot dispersal.
Key of success Economic Financial help by the region.
Economical benefits by ameliorating the tractability and product quality. Less
control measures are needed.
Cooperative buys farmers production each year at a fixed price (650 to 700 €/ T).
The selling price is higher than conventional soybean products.
Technique & regulation
Implementation of a processing unit.
Multi-annual production and collecting contract between the cooperative and
farmers.
Multi-annual climatic safety contract between the cooperative and farmers.
Actions implemented
Implementation of a processing unit.
Targeted markets Part of the production is distributed to food industrials or organic shops.
Per
spec
tiv
es
What is needed to improve the system?
The number of hectares involved need to be increase in order to obtain 3000 T of
soybean, which is the maximum capacity of the processing units.
What are you future perspectives?
Increase the number of farmers willing to diversify their rotation system with
soybean. Continue to create awareness among their members.
Find a new market opportunity in human nutrition.
Confidential: No
Author: HUCTIN GWLADYS Year: 2015 Topic category:
Prospects for value chains of alternative crops to support sustainable agriculture and
preserve water resources in the Rhône-Alpes region, France
Key-words: Low input crops, crop rotation diversification, sustainable supply chain, change and
innovation
Mots clés: Cultures à bas niveau d’intrants, diversification des cultures, filières durables, innovation et
changement
Résumé: Dans le prolongement de la signature de l’accord cadre en début d’année 2015 entre les
fédérations de coopératives de la région et l’Agence de l’Eau Rhône-Méditerranée Corse, Coop de
France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne a lancé une étude sur le potentiel de développement des filières
alternatives dans les systèmes de production des grandes cultures. Une première phase de l’étude a été
réalisée et a permis de lister une quinzaine de cultures dites « alternatives», c'est-à-dire des cultures
qui nécessites de par leurs propriétés agronomique un apport d’intrants moins important que certaines
cultures majeure et/ ou qui par leurs insertion vont modifier l’ensemble des besoins de la rotation. Des
enquêtes réalisées à l’échelle nationale ont ensuite permis de recenser plus de soixante-dix d’exemples
de mise en place ou de développement de filière suite à l’introduction de cultures alternatives. Les
enjeux socio-économiques et environnementaux liés au développement de ces filières ont été recensés.
Des échanges avec les acteurs de la région ont été réalisés, permettant une meilleure compréhension
du potentiel de développement de ces filières sur le territoire. Suite à ces recherches, quatre cultures
ont été identifié comme aillant dans les années à venir un potentiel de développement dans la région :
le soja, la luzerne, le quinoa et le lin oléagineux.
Abstract: In the beginning of the year 2015, an agreement between the French Water Agency and
Coop de France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne (CDF RAA) was sign with a common goal to design an
action plan in favour of ameliorating the water quality management in the region. CDF RAA decided
to purchase a research study regarding the potential development of supply chain linked to the
production of alternative crops on the territory. Fifteen crops were identified and listed as alternative
crops. Their agronomic characteristics were selected according to crops ability to be produced with
less input than commonly produced crops and on the medium and long term modify the inputs needs
of the entire rotation system. Surveys were conducted at national level to identify more than seventy
experiences of supply chain implementation after the introduction of crops with low inputs needs.
Essential key of success and failure were identified regarding the development of alternative crop
supply chains. Exchanges with regional stakeholders have been conducted, allowing a better
understanding of the development potential of alternative crops in the territory. Further to this
research, four cultures were identified as having a development potential in the region in the coming
years: soybeans, alfalfa, quinoa and linseed.
Total number of volumes: 2
Number of pages of the main document: 130
Host institution: Coop de France Rhône-Alpes Auvergne