Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution

1.   Back to Sustainability Through Spatial Planning and Examination of the Capacity of Spatial Planning Systems in Europe to Develop and Implement Policy for Sustainability (SPECTRA)

2.   Back to Instruments and strategies for sustainable regional development

3.   Back to Landscape and Life: Appropriate Scales for Sustainable Development - Summary Final Report

4.   Consensus Building for Sustainability in the Wider Countryside - Summary Final Report

5.   On to Environmental Protection, Subsidiarity Principe and Spatial Related Policies - Summary Final Report

6.   On to Regional Pathways to Sustainability - Executive Summary

APRIL 1999

Key-words :  biodiversity, nature management, sustainability, action-network theory, landscape

RESEARCH TEAM

Coordinator
Marc MORMONT
Fondation Universitaire Luxembourgeoise,
Socio-Economie Environement et Développement
Avenue de Longwy 185
6700 Arlon
Belgium

Partners
Paul SELMAN
Cheltenham and Gloucester College of Higher Education
Countryside and Community Research Unit
Francis Close Hall, Swindon Road
UK - CHELTENHAM GL50 4AZ (Gloucestershire)

Christian DEVERRE
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique
Unité d'Ecodéveloppement
Domaine Saint-Paul - Site Agroparc
F 84914 AVIGNON Cedex 9

I.   Objectives
The aim of this research was to understand how nature is managed in the ordinary countryside, that is to say, where socio-economic activities are carried out. This involves integrating ecological objectives into these activities. This integration is a priority of contemporary environmental policies, be they European, national, or regional. It means first of all extending protective measures beyond the protected areas devoted exclusively to wildlife preservation and fostering co-operation amongst the parties concerned. These developments lead to a very diverse range of "dispositifs " (without equivalent in English, it means both arrangements and equipments) to protect areas and wildlife.

These dispositifs, rather than policies, were the subject of this research. They mobilise knowledge, resources, and rules for inducing specific actions. Drawing upon the latest such actions we tried to answer the following questions:

- How is ecological knowledge produced and used in these processes?
- How are the natural stakes (re)defined locally?
- How are agreements on the measures and objectives built? What are the roles of the various forms of public participation?
- What social changes are involved in this local taking charge of nature?

The working hypothesis was that these dispositifs involved simultaneous changes in knowledge, rules, and social configurations. That is why the research relied on a methodology that could allow for the dynamics of these changes.

II.  Methodology
Conventional socio-political analyses generally revolve around decision-making per se and often take as givens the definitions of the nature to protect, which definitions derive from scientific data as well as political statements (Rio Conference, for example). However, observation reveals that the actions that are taken trigger controversy and polemics, even conflicts, concerning both the definitions of what must be protected and the rules to enforce, even the identities of the players concerned. To follow these discussions and transformations we developed an approach inspired by the socio-technical networks theory.

This approach focuses attention on the production and circulation of statements. For example, the finding of 'the erosion of biodiversity' is produced in a certain context by one or more scientific communities that have their own validation criteria. For this finding to be turned into action it must circulate in other places, which will cause it to change. For instance, if this general assertion is to affect agricultural practices it must be backed up by knowledge about local biotopes, then be transformed into a statement about agriculture's impact on these biotopes. However, at the same time it will have to adapt to the constraints on and possibilities of local farmers and tie in with a crop science statement concerning fertilisation methods. This process of changing the statements is called the translation process. Translation means the transformation of statements, not just the simple dissemination of a universal scientific statement.

This translation process involves the construction of chains to connect the different statements that differ by their content, ways they are produced, forms of validation, and forms of circulation. Most environmental diagnoses are thus local inventories that describe the state of the fauna and flora and can be connected to ecological function models. How are these diagnoses linked to the notion of biodiversity on the one hand and how can they be connected to local management practices on the other hand? This involves transforming certain types of knowledge into other types of knowledge and passing from knowledge to action.

Intermediate objects almost always arise in this translation process. These are data bases, maps, specifications, charters, manuals of guide practice, etc., that serve both to condense the forms of knowledge and to link them to other types of knowledge or practices. Far from treating them as simple technical outcomes, the methodology places them at the heart of the translation process, of the connections between the communities that they link. For example, a set of specifications concerning an environmentally-friendly agricultural practice establishes connections between natural objects (validated by a scientific or naturalists community) and a community of farmers whose skills and interests it simultaneously defines. How is this intermediary produced, used, and transformed? How does it transform at the same time the various other parties involved?

The method thus consisted in following these translation operations and reconstructing the chains of statements, associations and dissociations that arise in this process, and their effects. Unlike classical sociology, which focuses on the social identities, interests, and strategies concerning the environment, this method focused simultaneously on the production of the definitions of the nature to protect and the groups or communities that are formed to carry out this action. It involved lengthy, detailed monitoring of actual operations, which led to a focus on case studies. The cases we studied were thus selected because of the light that they could shed on one or the other steps in this translation process. Each case study concerns a specific dispositif that defines an objective, the resources, and the pertinent players in intervention. Our concern was to choose dispositifs that involved forms of participation and negotiation with local parties, as we hypothesised that the direct interactions fostered by participation might foster this translation process and the production of agreement on the actions to take.

Our criteria were thus to choose:

- local operations
- concerning biodiversity or water management
- that reflected major translation steps and
- were carried out by participatory or negotiated forms of implementation.

The method did not consist in comparing measures or national policies or making generalisations based on a few case studies that could not claim to be representative. Rather, our aim was to identify through these case studies the crucial processes that underpin these forms of taking charge of nature. The diversity of our case studies is thus an asset, for it can reveal different processes whereby the relationships between the natural environment and society are reconfigured.

III. Main Results
The results of this research can then be proposed around a few propositions drawn from what we have learnt from the case studies. The validity of these propositions has less to do with their degree of generalisation than their ability to shed light on other cases and provide avenues for both research and action.

1.       What is to be protected has no stable definition and triggers controversy

A protective dispositif relies on both a series of statements linked to each other (they define the problem: objects, players) and the resources that can be mobilised to treat this problem. So, a river contract states the degradation of water quality and need to treat the problem in terms of the watershed and institutes the means (river committee, financial means) to enable the parties concerned to act on the river. The dispositifs to protect the environment thus link general statements (the erosion of diversity, citizenship, and a European directive or programme) and statements concerning the local stakes (a given river, species, or site). They define 'what is to be protected' here as well as the framework of the action to undertake.

In some cases the starting point is a general statement to be implemented (for example, Natura 2000). In other cases, it is a 'local' aim (protecting a given site, controlling forest fires). However, in all cases the actions make use of scientific knowledge: for example, the knowledge required to demarcate and choose the sites to protect or knowledges about the hydrology of the watershed in order to be able to adopt the appropriate flood control measures. Now, unequivocal scientific data on which such practical problems can be founded do not always exist: the knowledge drawn from phytosociology does not explain how ecosystems work; existing hydrological models are partial or do not allow for the wetlands' role; and the national list of protected species does not stipulate which local habitats must be taken into account. What is more, local knowledge (that of the public at large, farmers, and hunters as much as that of naturalists) is mobilised. The corollary is that other definitions of what must be protected also come into play. This results in myriad areas of controversy in which scientific arguments, models and data mix with economic and social arguments. There is no stabilised definition of what must be protected based on a body of scientific knowledge. The dispositifs that are adopted thus generate new requests for scientific knowledge.

2.       The controversy does not stem merely from a simple opposition between the interests of Nature and socio-economic interests

The concern to protect a species and its habitat on a specific site leads to including specific human populations in the site's definition. To take the example of the Crau Plain, in France, this meant including the local shepherds, who are assumed to 'maintain' the site. This association forces the players to look for data to validate this proposition and to develop a programme to support sheep-herding in the region. If the link can be validated and farmers subscribe to the proposed programme of agricultural and farming measures, a new configuration of practices and knowledge develops that shifts the issue from one of protecting a given species to that of protecting the associated production system. This shift gives rise to new players (the hayfarmers associated with the shepherds) and new questions of scientific appraisal (impacts on water?). In this dynamics, scientific controversy, or simply uncertainty, reveals new social agents, while the social polemics (what form of tourism should be privileged?) generates new scientific questions (what is the site's potential value?). Protective dispositifs thus do not pit economic interests against environmental interests, or at least cannot be reduced to such a face-off. They also involve and simultaneously activate knowledge (about nature) and the players, i.e., groups, that are interested in the elements of nature and must be represented, meaning associations of knowledge and socio-economic practices.

3.       Nature conservation as a means of producing objects and collectives

The general statements can become protective actions only if they are translated, in a process that develops these associations of the widest ranges of knowledge, abilities, practices, and interests. Seen in this light, policies (especially European policies, but regional ones, too) are incentives for developing many new associations and new nature conservation configurations. The EU's agro-environmental measures, for example, call upon the players to formulate their own local protection aims. This means producing knowledge about the territory to protect and about the techniques and practices (e.g., herding practices) that will ensure such protection. The corollary is that the techniques and practices call for the formation of a new group of ranchers or farmers endowed with new powers.

What can this translation of general objectives into the formation of new protective configurations be based on? Scientific data rarely suffice to effect this translation, as the implementation of Natura 2000 in France has shown. In Great Britain, which already has an extensive network of protected sites, the problem concerns the development of regional biodiversity protection plans in order to extend protection beyond these sites. Which species must be given priority? Which practices should be encouraged? A version of the principle of precaution will be used to get the players to start acting without waiting for scientific certainty. In the southern part of Belgium (Walloon Region), the concern for biodiversity combined with the idea of citizenship has led to an ecological network rooted in voluntary local initiatives. In all cases one must produce new knowledge, exploit local expertise, and take new field inventories that will both transform knowledge and involve new players. However, this is not merely a problem of implementing 'policies from the top". When localities come together to form river contracts it quickly becomes obvious that the watershed is neither a scientific nor a social entity, i.e., it is not governed by common rules, is not an object shared by all the players. Data must thus be generated and models tested in order to produce a common area. Even the issue of flooding cannot be treated as a whole, for lack of data and rules. The object to protect thus becomes (in this particular case) the site on which an association between loggers and naturalists makes it possible to carry out a wetlands restoration project of an area that will be a natural site subject to flooding. The dynamics of nature protection thus creates the scope of the action, the relevant knowledge for action, the groups that will carry out the action or own the resulting property, and the rules that will apply.

4.       From protection to management

Developing wildlife protection policies aimed at the ordinary countryside has the following major consequence: as these policies are enforced, there is a shift from protection to management. Traditional protection, which is achieved primarily through regulations (accompanied by nature conservation measures concerning the protected area), supposes both a certain type of knowledge (definition of the object 'nature', identification of the threats, and characterisation of the sites) and a certain type of collective (conservation associations and regulatory institutions, often linked to each other in specialised forums). However, as several case studies show, the development of new configurations (ranching associated with fire control, active site management that includes tourism, etc.) is giving much more importance to management, that is to say, active interference in a biotope. This calls for other forms of knowledge and groups (with a more managerial bent). For example, new knowledge may be required concerning grazing on natural ranges. New socio-economic knowledge may also be required. In a word, there is a need for 'mixed knowledge', for knowledge turned toward manipulation, knowledge that enables one to assess the immediate impacts of actions, knowledge that is both wide-ranging and specialised, that depends on professional expertise and know-how.

With regard to the announced aim of decompartmentalising or desegmenting land management to include the interests of nature, the shift from protection to management is, on the contrary, an example of recompartmentalisation, of creating new specific objects that will come in for specialised management.

5.       Intermediaries and forums

The operations that allow the passage from the general objective of protection to specific objectives in a given area and on to management options entail intermediaries. The ecological map of the village's territory and stipulations contained in an agreement with a farmer are intermediaries between 'the thing to protect' and the practices of the players whom we try to involve in this protection. The ecological map, for example, is transformed from a simple inventory (a method associated with regulatory protection) into a map that anticipates both the players' practices (what the users will accept) and the natural site's future (the meadow will return to its former state as a wetland). The passage from protection to management entails new intermediaries that are produced by various players.

Three types of intermediary have been revealed by our case studies. Forums, the composition of which varies greatly, offer a space for interaction of the players concerned so as to create links between the various parties' expectations. They allow representation of naturalists' and socio-economic interests. However, these forums or think-tanks are effective (in building agreements) only if they can produce a second type of intermediary, i.e., technical materials. These are the maps, specifications, data bases, and legal agreements that will bind the players. These intermediaries are often defined as being technical, although they contain some social components, that is to say, postulates about the players' identities and abilities. This intermediation can be facilitated by the presence of professional agents, who have the specific ability to express the connections between, for instance, agricultural practices and nature's requirements. Such mediation is facilitated by referring to models (such as the ecological network or landscape ecology approaches) that represent and formalise (through methods) the relationships between natural objects (species, for example) and social practices.

These intermediaries are thus directly linked to (and produced by) managerial groups that negotiate over and take charge of the stipulated operations. Consensus can then be defined as the validation of these intermediaries by the forums. The absence of controversy about these intermediaries is what creates agreement, but this agreement often entails movements of interaction and exchanges within the forum so as to create trust amongst the partners.

6.      Reconfigurations

These processes lead to reconfigurations. The best example is provided by the study of the Crau Plain case. Here we see a redefinition of the territory, where the habitat of a species, sheep grazing lands, and water table are linked by a series of statements. The reconfiguration is both cognitive (the content of the notion 'territory' has changed) and social, in that the relations between the players and rules governing them are different. So, the area's hayfarmers have become the guarantors of water quality, for which they receive not only financial aid but also certification of their hay. Competitive relations with arboriculturists until now had been market-driven (based on real estate values); they have now become political, since land purchases are now subject to new rules.

The protection of the ordinary countryside is thus tending to reconfigure both the stake-holders (their identities) and the territories, that is to say, the determination of the various users' rights to use spaces for purposes of production, recreation, and nature conservation. The reconfiguration very often concerns how areas that have several functions are managed and by whom. What is at stake is less protecting nature from socio-economic interests than reconfiguring the links between land use and natural habitat. In other words, these dispositifs and actions produce rearrangements or recompositions of the various 'nature-society' associations.

7.      Sustainability and stabilisation

Sustainability can then be defined as the degree of stabilisation of these new configurations. Traditional nature conservation generally relied on legal norms (listing of protected sites, banned uses, etc.) that gave the protective arrangements a certain life-span. However, most of the dispositifs that we have examined lead to reconfigurations whose stability can be only partly guaranteed by legislations. Their stability is guaranteed by the players' relations with each other, and by the stability of socio-economic relations. The technical intermediaries also come into play, for the maps, guides to good practice, and other such materials can also contribute to the dispositifs' stability, especially if they are backed up by agents who are able to use them.

IV.  Scientific Interest and Novelty

1.       Sustainability means allowing for many time and spatial scales and various interests. It has become almost a commonplace to say that problem-solving approaches must be multisectoral and multilevel, getting the stakeholders involved is important, and concerted management is necessary. If we want to turn these terms into something more than slogans, we must give ourselves the analytical tools that will enable us to understand the real processes at work. Notions such as biodiversity and integrated management require the mobilisation of scientific knowledge, moral concepts, cultural values, and economic interests if they are to be operationalised. Exploring these elements' links, the myriad ways in which they can be interconnected, the procedures that lead to their reorganisation, and the effects that their reorganisation may have on practices is a reflexive task to which the social sciences can contribute.

2.       The novelty of this research lies in the unveiling of the role of the intermediaries that allow this operationalisation and the production of agreement. A systematic approach to the intermediaries, notably pragmatic models and their use in a variety of institutional contexts, should be encouraged to improve our understanding of how socio-economic activities take charge of nature. This implies a shift from opposition between nature and society to new associations betwwen natural beings and human activity.

3.      This project opens a new field of research. The processes of the translation of scientific knowledge into cultural and social values and interests have already been studied by the sociology of science and technology. Their application to environmental issues is recent and makes it possible to:

- analyse the transfers between knowledge and action (these translation processes are much less simple than the simple application or dissemination of knowledge); and
- identify the actual stages in these transfers by paying special attention to intermediate objects that are often considered to be secondary with regard to science and simple tools for action, whereas they are actually crucial mechanisms of these processes.

V.  Policy Relevance

Although this research leaves the analysis of policies, strategies, and the players' interplay in the background, it does reveal several processes that look very important for drawing up and implementing wildlife conservation policies. Three implications in particular are worth singling out:

1. With regard to objectives: Weighing ecological interests against socio-economic interests is not enough. It is a matter of recomposing them, that is to say, reconfiguring the relationships between the components of nature ('natural objects') and social practices. To achieve this, policies can no longer rely exclusively on stabilised ecological knowledge. On the contrary, they must encourage the creation and development of hybrid knowledge, of land management models and practices, including lay and local knowledge.

2. With regard to forms of organisation: Participatory dispositifs are important for producing, circulating, and exchanging the necessary knowledge. Forums have a series of important functions in validating agreements, but must be backed up by and create management and innovation groups that can produce the tools (intermediaries) required for intervention and action.

3. With regard to the State's role: The State's role is less that of a standards-setter than that of an organiser. The public authorities must formulate objectives, distribute resources, and support exchange so as to produce knowledge and rules for managing the ordinary countryside. The State's job is also to assess and stabilise the outcomes of these reorganisations.

In Preparation

Articles
- Fortier A. et Remy E., "La mise en directive de la nature : analyse des conflits autour du réseau " Natura 2000 "", Projet de publication dans la revue Economie Rurale.
- Mougenot C., "De la carte à l'action", submitted to, Etudes et Recherches sur les systèmes agraires et le développement.
- Selman P. and Wragg A., "Local Sustainability Planning ; From Interest-Driven Networks to Vision-Driven Supernetworks", submitted to Planning Practice and Research.
- Selman P. and Wragg A., "Networks of Co-operation and Knowledge in 'Wider Coutryside ' Planning", submitted to Journal of Environmental Planning and Mangement.
- Wragg A., "Towards Sustainable Landscape Planning : Experiences from an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty", submitted to Landscape Research.
- Publication de 10 articles issus du programme de recherche dans le numéro 32 de la revue Etudes et Recherches sur les Systèmes Agraires et le Développement, " La recherche face aux transformations des politiques de la nature " (Deverre, Christian, éd.). parution prévue début 2000.

In Press

Articles
- Dasnoy C., "Le contrat de rivière, un modèle de participation pour la gestion de l'eau ?", Environnement et Société, FUL, n°22, 1999 (à paraître).
- Mougenot C. et Mormont M, "Governing biodiversity", contribution to the European Symposium on Nature Valuation, Journal of Environment and Pollution (accepted).
- Parker G and Wragg A, Networks, "Agency and (De)stabilization. The issue of Navigation on the River Wye", Journal of Environmental Planning and Management (accepted).
- Remy E.,"Des mesures agri-environnementales au réseau N 2000 : une comparaison sur la méthode d'analyse", Séminaire d'Aussois : Science sociales et espaces protégés, 10/12 septembre 1997, pp 49-53, à paraître.
- Selman P., "Networks of Knowledge and Influence : connecting the planners  and the planned", Town Planning Review (accepted).

Published

Contribution to books
- Alphandéry, P., Deverre, C., Rémy, J. (1996) " Opérations locales agri-environnementales et émergence de nouvelles formes de territorialité ", pp. 9-21 in Allaire, G., Hubert, B., Langlet, A. (eds) Nouvelles fonctions de l'agriculture et de l'espace rural. Enjeux et défis identifiés par la recherche, INRA, Toulouse.
- Bovy M. & Dasnoy Ch, (1998), "Innovating ways to heighten public awareness", pp. 507-509 in IX Congrès Mondial de l'eau à Montréal, Perspectives sur les ressources en eau au 21ème siècle: conflits et opportunités, extended abstracts, n° 9 (hors série), vol. II, Collection environnement de l'Université de Montréal.
- Dasnoy C., (1998), "Un nouveau mode de gestion de la rivière ou la création d'un lieu de négociation", pp. 12-23 in Actes du colloque Gestion des territoires ruraux : connaissances et méthodes pour la décision publique,, Cemagref editions, Tome 1, Clermont-Ferrand.
- Deverre, C., Hubert, B., Meuret M. (1996) "The know-how of Livestock Farmers Challenged by New Objectives for European Farming. I. Rangelands Usages, Greatness and Decay", pp. 115-116 in West, N.E., Rangelands in a Sustainable Biosphere, Society for Range Management, Denver.
- Hubert, B, Deverre, C., Meuret, M. (1996), "The know-how of Livestock Farmers Challenged by New Objectives for European Farming. II. Reassigning Rangelands to New, Environment-Related Usages", pp. 251-252 in West, N.E., Rangelands in a Sustainable Biosphere, Society for Range Management, Denver.

Articles
- Deverre, C. (1998) " La nature mise au propre dans la steppe de Crau et la forêt du Var ", Etudes Rurales, 141-142 : 45-62.
- Mougenot C., (1998), "L'imprévisible P.C.D.N. de la commune de C.", Environnement et Société,, Arlon, n°21, pp. 81-97.
- Mormont M. (1997), "De Bruxelles à la ferme : environnement et agriculteurs en belgique", Etudes Rurales, 141-142 : 157-169.

Reports
- Micoud A. (Ss dir) : Dynamique et fonctionnement des associations de défense de l'environnement et de protection de la nature, rapport pour le Minsitère de l'Environnement, DGAD/SRAE, février 1998, Remy, E  : chapitre 4 "le CEEP en région PACA", pp113-145.
- Micoud A. (Ss dir) : Dynamique et fonctionnement des associations de défense de l'environnement et de protection de la nature, rapport pour le Minsitère de l'Environnement, DGAD/SRAE, février 1998, Mougenot C.  : chapitre 5 "Une citoyenneté nouvelle pour la nature ?", pp147-157.
- Dusoulier, A. (1996) La construction d'une carte pour l'action. L'élaboration du zonage d'éligibilité pour le redéploiement pastoral de l'opération locale des Baronnies. Université d'Orléans & Unité d'Ecodéveloppement INRA d'Avignon, 71 p.

Communications
- Dasnoy C., Le contrat de rivière - La création d'un espace de négociation ?, communication présentée aux Journées Expériences, information, idée pour la "Civilisation de l'Eau", Treviso (Italie), 18-21 juin 1997.
- Dasnoy C. et Bovy M., Des voies d'innovation pour sensibiliser le public, communication présentée au Congrès mondial de l'Eau, Montréal (Québec), 1-6 septembre 1997.
- Dasnoy C., Le contrat de rivière des possibilités d'implication pour la société civile, Conférence Internationale Eau et Développement, Paris, 19-21 mars 1998.
- Dasnoy C., Le contrat de rivière, un mode de gestion participatif ? communication au séminaire "Réseau Solidarité Europeé", Paris, 15-17 novembre 1998.
- Dasnoy C., Les conditions de la participation dans la gestion de l'eau - L'expérience des contrats de rivière en Région wallonne, communication au Congrès international de l'eau de Beyrouth "Droit international et droit comparé des cours d'eau internationaux - Education à une culture d'une eau partagée et protégée", 18-20 juin 1998.
- Fortier A. et Remy E., La mise en directive de la nature : analyse des conflits autour du réseau " Natura 2000 ", Intervention à la Société Française d'Economie Rurale, ENGREF, 12 mars 1999.
- Mougenot C., Conservation, gestion, ou re-création de la nature, Repères sociologiques, Journée Biodiversité, organisée le 27 mars 1997 à l'INRA à Paris.
- Mougenot C., A propos des Plans Communaux pour le Développement de la Nature, Les journées du Programme Environnement, Vie et Sociétés, PIREVS : "Les temps de l'environnement", Toulouse, 5-7 novembre 1997.
- Mougenot C., The ecological network: from planning to commitment, participation à la conférence électronique organisée par le European Working Group on Research and Biodiversity (EWGRB), août 1998.
- Mougenot C., Gestion de la nature dans les communes Wallonnes dans le cadre du réseau Cost Action A 12 Rural Innovation, Working Group 3 'Environment', Bruxelles, 5 novembre 1998.
- Mougenot C., Ecological Networks maps : from planning to action International Conférence on "Sustainable Development and Spatial Planning in the European Territory. Prospects for the 21 century in the European Union its Memnber States the Balkans and The Black Sea Countries", Athens, 13-16 mai 1999.
- Mougenot C. et Mormont M., Governing Biodiversity, Symposium on Environmental Valuation, Vaux de Cernay, 4-7 October 1997, à l'initiative de la DGII.
- Mougenot C & Mormont M, Environmental Policy in heterogeneous Contexts, Proceedings of the Conference Regions - Cornerstones for Sustainable Development, Graz, 29-30 october 1998.
- Remy E., Participation au comité d'organisation du colloque Paul Jovet sur Les inventaires naturalistes dans la ville, 21 et 22 octobre 1996.
- Remy E., : Les inventaires produisent des listes et des cartes qui sont autant de prises de position possibles pour la discussion entre les différents acteurs Communication aux Ateliers du Conservatoire du Littoral à l'Institut Océanographique de Paris, 1998.
- Remy E., (1998), "Hommes et bêtes de conserve ? La faune sauvage sur les sites du conservatoire", Publication dans le Compte rendu n°16 des Ateliers du Conservatoire du Littoral, pp5-6.
- Vanderborght P. et Dasnoy C., Les contrats de rivière en Région wallonne commnication présentée au séminaire "Partnerships as a tool to help achive sustainable management of Europe's inland water" organisé par the European Water Alliance, Bruxelles, le 14 novembre 1997.

Back to Index of evidence to the Environmental Planning Study