Les Associations pour le Maintien de l’Agriculture Paysanne (AMAP) constituent une forme organisationnelle qui interroge beaucoup la sphère académique. Les publications relatives à ce circuit court de distribution sont nombreuses et explorent de nombreuses facettes. L’objet du présent article est de réaliser une synthèse de la littérature afin de dégager les caractéristiques saillantes de cette organisation collective. Il en ressort que les AMAP sont des entreprises sociales collectives dont la mission entrepreneuriale est de créer de la valeur sociale. Sa cohésion communautaire et sa résilience s’appuient sur quatre formes de capital (politique, humain, économique et social. Leur téléologie peut différer selon l’orientation de leur identité (visée de changement sociopolitique, spiritualité et fondation d’une communauté ou pragmatisme économique).
This article conceptualizes a multi-territorial entrepreneurial ecosystem (MTEE), i.e. an entrepreneurial ecosystem which covers several territories. This article aims to reply to the following research question: How do territories interact within a multi-territorial entrepreneurial ecosystem? This article is based on a single case study involving 29 semi-structured interviews with different types of actors from the three territories concerned, as well as secondary data. The results show that there are converging forces, such as the actions each territory performs individually for the MTEE to function and the actions all the territories perform collectively, and diverging forces such as different political visions among territories, favoring individual interests and the lack of knowledge of actors in other territories. This article contributes to the spatial perspective of entrepreneurial ecosystems by providing a definition and model of the MTEE, and showing the interactions between territories.
Notre objectif est de comprendre comment et quand une méta-organisation (Ahrne et Brunsson, 2005) peut entrer en état de paralysie, et quels mécanismes peuvent la réveiller, notamment dans un contexte de crise. L'article présente une étude de cas unique de l'association régionale des agences de voyages de la région Marrakech-Safi (ARAVMS), considérée comme une méta-organisation. Les données ont été collectées à travers des données secondaires, de l'ethnographie virtuelle et des entretiens semi-directifs avec les membres de l'ARAVMS. En s'appuyant sur les apports de König et al. (2012), l'article met en évidence les causes de l'inertie de la méta-organisation et identifie également un ensemble de catalyseurs de changement qui peuvent compenser les forces d'inertie dans le cas de cette méta-organisation. La crise a eu un impact positif sur l'émergence de nouveaux catalyseurs pour le réveil de la méta-organisation et qui ont contribué à son passage d'un état d'inertie à un état plus évolutif.
Mots clés : Méta-organisation, crise, changement, inertie
Face aux nouvelles réglementations liées à la gestion des déchets, il semble essentiel de comprendre le processus organisationnel qui accompagne ce changement. Pour les acteurs et notamment dans le cadre du partenariat public-privé qui a été mis en place pour valoriser les biodéchets du Grand Reims (296 000 habitants), il faut mobiliser toutes les parties prenantes d’un tel projet selon une logique RSE.
Une des premières étapes est de solliciter les acteurs de ce projet et, ici particulièrement, les usagers afin de mesurer leur acceptabilité et leur comportement par rapport à ce changement de pratiques. Ce changement redéfinit les contours d’un nouveau management public.
Une étude qualitative basée sur des entretiens semi-directifs a été réalisée en juillet 2022 auprès de 83 usagers. Elle a permis d’identifier les motivations et les freins des usagers liés au tri des biodéchets.
This theoretical paper intends to propose a framework for identifying the power of meta-organizations, and how they use such power to support their members in adapting to emerging challenges. We built a framework out of two key theoretical foundations: the emerging theory of meta-organizations as proposed by Ahrne and Brunsson (2005, 2008); and a perspective on inter-organizational power developed by Huxham and Beech (2008). Our theoretical framework is tested through an exploratory single case study: a collective digital innovation project conducted by a collective of watershed organizations in North America. By analyzing the sources and dimensions of power at play along a 2-year project, we shed light on various forms of power which were activated by the meta-organizations, according to its own apprehension of the project’s evolving opportunities. Our theoretical framework can be particularly useful to understand meta-organizations’ strategic choices towards external challenges. It can help management scholars in developing a critical thinking about a commonly qualified “inertia” of meta-organizations, and recognizing the diversity of meta-organizations’ contributions in renewing a collective of organizations.
Ecosystems of Innovation Support Services appear as critical tools to accelerate innovations in agriculture and contribute to responding to the Grand Challenges for achieving the SDGs. Deepening our understanding of the drivers and models of service ecosystems’ emergence is needed to improve their efficiency. Our research builds on theoretical frameworks of service ecosystems, alignment and emergence in different activity sectors. Considering the specificities of innovation in the agricultural sector, we propose new insights on service ecosystems’ emergence through the evolving role of the hub organization along the innovation journey.
We took an abductive approach anchored in over 5 years of case study data regarding innovative labelling of organic farming in Sub-Saharan Africa (technical, social and organizational innovations mobilizing several innovation support services).
We identified three phases of emergence with several necessary preconditions, two different emergence models related to the nature of the hub organisation and two key drivers conditioning emergence.
The relationship between uneven development and the reconfigurations of agricultural production networks in the global South remains a prevalent topic of debate within social science disciplines and policy-making circles. This paper intervenes in this literature by proposing to examine small-scale producers as primary actors playing an instrumental role in (re)structuring a given global production network (GPN) and (re)producing geographies of uneven development in agricultural contexts. The authors deploy key concepts of the disarticulations perspective – dispossession, articulation, disinvestment, constitutive exclusion – and rely on the case study of argan oil production in Morocco to develop a reformulation of the GPN theoretical framework re-centered around these producers. The paper theorizes ‘alternative resourcing’, ‘‘collective mobilizing’ and ‘adaptive downgrading’ as three strategic actions adopted by producers from the bottom up, and are central to understanding uneven development processes in an agriculture-based GPN.
In recent years, there has been a noticeable trend towards connecting research with practical settings through approaches such as open science, action research or participatory research. Collaborations between academic researchers and societal actors are strengthening. Such collaborations will often find social innovation as a common ground to implement a socio-ecological transition. As the number of initiatives bringing together academic researchers and practitioners increases, it is important to identify how these actors coordinate to collaboratively generate knowledge. Our paper aims to understand how practices enable co-creation and co-production of solutions to face present-day socio-ecological challenges. Studying a Living Lab for Social Innovation (LLSI), where members strive to develop such practices, provides an opportunity to reflect on different ways of coordinating to co-produce these responses. We draw upon a single case study to explore coordination practices in LLSI when co-creating and co-producing knowledge.
