Books (co)edited/directed (and introductions) by Delphine Thivet
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Agricultures traditionnelle, conventionnelle, intensive, productiviste, raisonnée, écologique, bi... more Agricultures traditionnelle, conventionnelle, intensive, productiviste, raisonnée, écologique, biologique, biodynamique… Pluralité des agricultures, des agriculteurs aussi. Pluralité des enjeux, car les pratiques agricoles sont incontestablement devenues des questions de société, des enjeux de concurrences, de conflits, de rapports de force et de légitimité autour d’une question centrale : quelle agriculture et quelle alimentation voulons-nous pour demain ?
De nombreuses formes d’agricultures alternatives au modèle productiviste existent et leurs dynamiques d’émergence, de structuration et de développement dépendent étroitement des contextes sociaux, historiques et géographiques dans lesquels elles se déploient et qu’elles participent à transformer. Comment prenons-nous en compte ces configurations spécifiques qui influent sur les dynamiques sociales agricoles étudiées ? Dans quelle mesure nos terrains d’étude nous permettent-ils de mettre à jour des régularités sociales alors que nous constatons une multitude de facteurs agissants ? Autrement dit, comment parvenir à cerner, hiérarchiser mais aussi articuler les facteurs d’influence qui expliquent les pratiques observées (tels que les modes d’organisation historique du milieu agricole, des intermédiaires professionnels et marchands, le degré et le volume de soutien apporté par les pouvoirs publics, associatifs, etc.) ? Et à quelle(s) échelle(s) doit-on les étudier ?
Cet ouvrage cherche à comprendre les conditions sociales (dans leur double dimension spatiale et temporelle) de développement et d’exercice des agricultures biologiques, c’est-à-dire les modes d’émergence, de transmission, de circulation et plus encore d’appropriation de l’« agriculture biologique ». Il met en commun les analyses de chercheurs issus d’horizons divers (université, Inra, CNRS, EHESS…) et couvrant des approches disciplinaires relevant de l’anthropologie, de la sociologie, de la géographie, de l’agronomie, ou encore des sciences de l’éducation.
Public : formateurs, producteurs, chercheurs, consommateurs, étudiants, conseillers, associations, collectivités territoriales.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Calls for Papers by Delphine Thivet
Since the late 1980s, many international organizations (IOs) have been subject to transnational s... more Since the late 1980s, many international organizations (IOs) have been subject to transnational social movement and advocacy NGO protest campaigns. These organizations are periodically confronted with resistance, symbolic actions and critical counter-expertise that question the paradigms on which their policies are based – for instance on human rights promotion, social justice and market regulation, environment and climate, democracy, indigenous peoples' rights, transparency or public debt cancellation. In response to the pressure from coalitions of social actors, IOs have introduced multiple participation procedures in order to ensure that NGOs and civil society organisations are involved in policy development, while at the same time seeking to channel their expression and discipline their modes of action. Through these procedures, they co-opt and empower some social leaders in public forums, establish deconfliction mechanisms and filter social grievances, resulting in the incorporation of certain demands into the institutional agenda.
This panel brings together contributions that focus on the knowledge-building activities aiming at neutralizing and incorporating social advocacy in the context of international institutions. It examines the formatting and censorship work by which experts in institutions assimilate and reframe social demands, in such a way as to eliminate their most critical content and make them compliant with the normative views of the organization. It examines the formatting and censorship work by which experts in institutions reframe social demands in such a way as to eliminate their most critical content and make them compliant with the dominant views of the organization. In this process, IOs seize upon counter-hegemonic discourses and convert critical advocacy into political orthodoxy.
The panel stands at the crossroads of the sociology of mobilizations, the sociology of expertise and the study of international institutions.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
APPEL A COMMUNICATION
Colloque international France - Bordeaux 18 & 19 mars 2021
Organisé par l... more APPEL A COMMUNICATION
Colloque international France - Bordeaux 18 & 19 mars 2021
Organisé par le Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116) et le CEREP (EA 4692) Les vulnérabilités au travail Regards croisés des sciences sociales en Europe
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Innovations. Journal of innovation, economics and management , 2019
Guest Editors:
Véronique Saint-Ges, INRA, UMR SADAPT, France
Corinne Tanguy, CESAER AgroSup D... more Guest Editors:
Véronique Saint-Ges, INRA, UMR SADAPT, France
Corinne Tanguy, CESAER AgroSup Dijon, France
Delphine Thivet, Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116), Université de Bordeaux, France
Fragiskos Gaitis, Department of Food Analytical and Research laboratories of Athens at Hellenic Food Authority (EFET), Greece
Georgia Ouzounidou, Directorate of Research and Technological Development Activities, ELGO DEMETER, Greece
The agricultural and agri-food sector are currently confronted with many challenges influencing all the stakeholders of the value chain (Galliano, Raynaud, 2015): consumers, citizens, firms, farmers and policymakers behaviour. This follows various societal and food crises in recent years, as well as an increasing awareness of environmental issues. This in turn involves public health issues, social issues, economic issues, international issues calling for a transformation towards agri-food systems that are ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable. This evolution takes place in a context where, on the one hand, consumers are more and more demanding in terms of quality, safety, traceability, sustainability of products (Murdoch, Marsden and Banks 2000; Trobe 2001; Dubuisson-Quellier 2009), but at the same time in terms of prices (Aschemann‐Witzel and Zielke 2017); on the other hand, highly specialized farms and food firms actively seek to enhance their market competitiveness and profitability (Capitanio, Coppola and Pascucci 2009). As a consequence, the agri-food sector has to deal with often contradictory requirements and has to innovate to square that circle. This raises a central question regarding the extent to which and in what ways the process of innovation itself has to change so as to reorganize and redefine the agri-food system as a whole (Bock 2012).
While the need to change the conventional agri-food systems is becoming nearly unanimous, the modification of existing practices and the introduction of new farming systems (urban farming for example), new forms of consumption (Seyfang 2006) and distribution, are disrupting the existing productive patterns and thus are often blocked. The unlocking of socio-technical systems aiming at pesticide reduction, for example, shows the importance of the processes of coordination of actors throughout the supply chains, the role of changes in advisory practices but also in logistics or marketing (Meynard et al., 2013; Picard, Tanguy, 2016). It also suggests the need to consider innovation as an interactive system rather than a linear process. Furthermore, it is important that an approach, taking into account that these changes might have an impact on food safety, is followed in order to predict the increased likelihood of the occurrence of safety incidents, so as to be better prepared to prevent, mitigate and manage associated risks (Gaitis and Ouzounidou, 2017)
This special issue has the following objectives:
1. To identify the various agri-food system actors from production to consumption: firms, farms, new stakeholders like urban consumers, governments, and civil society organizations, involved in innovative activities and in transforming the agri-food sector;
2. To provide a full overview of the innovative activities and different types of innovations, technological, organizational, social, institutional and policy innovations, at play in the transformation of agri-food system, including the development of new agricultural and agri-food practices (low-tech or high-tech), quality certification schemes, new distribution channels, new processes and the development of a circular economy;
3. To offer a better understanding of the interactions between technological innovations and other forms of innovations in transforming the agri-food sector: how diverse type of innovations can foster positive synergies among themselves? What are the major factors fostering these synergies among innovations and leading to wider transitions?
4. To understand and identify how actors (public and private organizations, financial organizations, researchers and trainers) can respond to the major challenges posed by innovations in the agri-food system in terms of regulation and supportive norms: implementation of cooperative projects, training, funding, etc.
5. To implement measures to better understand and limit the risks and environmental impacts, to better respond to changing conditions and exploit opportunities for new ways of production and consumption, including the prevention, rapid detection and effective addressing of emerging risks for food safety and quality.
How sustainability-orientedinnovations can encourage actors to rethink their organizations and develop cross-sectors collaboration and experimentation? How to sustain and finance innovations and new modes of food production and distribution? How can we develop a multidimensional approach necessary for the implementation of these types of innovations? Exploring these different issues, from market-based technological innovations to civil-society-based social innovations, aims to shed light on the currentfood innovation dynamics towards quality, safety and sustainability.
Papers may address several kinds of issues, such as:
- Local and sustainable modes of production and distribution (short supply chains such as Community Supported Agriculture, local farmers’ markets, basket delivery systems, urban agriculture)
- Global value chains versus local value chains in the agri-food sector
- Agro-food supply chains and territorial development
- Agro-innovation in digital times
- Climate change, agro-innovation and food quality
- Sustainable innovation and corporate social responsibility
- Consumer food trends and food safety challenges
- Citizen’s involvement and grassroots social innovations (local food networks,
cooperatives, Participatory Guarantee Systems...)
- Emerging food safety threats
- Health and nutritional claims in food labelling: a puzzle game
- Food Fraud
- Food security: Contributions of a sustainable bioeconomy
1st October 2019 : Deadline for complete manuscripts through online paper submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/innovations/default.aspx
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This panel aims to explore the tensions within the organic farming movement in a historical persp... more This panel aims to explore the tensions within the organic farming movement in a historical perspective. Its main objective is to contextualize the birth, development, institutionalization of sustainable agriculture in time and space.
The deadline for paper submissions is 1st February 2019.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The 25th European Conference on South Asian Studies (ECSAS) is scheduled for 24-27 July 2018 at t... more The 25th European Conference on South Asian Studies (ECSAS) is scheduled for 24-27 July 2018 at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, (54 and 105, Blvd. Raspail, 75006 Paris). It is organized by the Centre d’Etudes de l’Inde et de l’Asie du Sud (UMR 8564, CNRS-EHESS).
The call for papers is now open and closes on 30 November 2017 at midnight (GMT). Decisions will be communicated to authors by mid-January, 2018.
P25
Who Speaks for the Village? Representations of the “Rural” in India from the Colonial to the Post-Colonial Era
This panel will explore the representations of the village and its different social groups in India by colonial and postcolonial administrations, political parties, scholarship and literature from the colonial to the post-colonial era. It will focus on the transformations undergone by rural society.
Long panel abstract The idea of the village has been central throughout Indian history. Since colonial times, Indian villages have been pictured as “small republics” and as a relevant microcosm for understanding the Indian society at large. This panel will explore the representations of the village and its different social groups in India, constructed by colonial and postcolonial government administrations, political parties, social movements, NGOs, scholarship and/or literature from the colonial to the post-colonial era: who speaks for/about/of/against the village and for the so-called “peasant classes”? In providing a broad and long-term historical perspective on the different representations of the Indian countryside, it will identify the significant changes that the Indian rural society has undergone over time, notably its changing power relationships and the consequences of the transformations of its primarily agrarian economy. It will also analyse, against the idea of a harmonious whole, the heterogeneity of Indian rural society, its stratification and deeply entrenched economic and social divisions. For instance, papers might investigate the actors, external or internal to rural society, who have claimed to represent the interests of the “village” and how its internal social differentiation has been addressed; how the gram panchayat has contributed or not to renew the representation of various categories of rural society; the transformation of agrarian struggles through the lens of dispossession-related resistances; etc. These different aspects of the representation of the “rural” and its social components could be studied from the point of view of history, political science, sociology, anthropology, or any other relevant discipline.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Nous invitons les doctorants pratiquant l’ethnographie – sociologues, anthropologues, politistes,... more Nous invitons les doctorants pratiquant l’ethnographie – sociologues, anthropologues, politistes, géographes, ethnologues… - à proposer des thèmes d’ateliers. La seule condition est d’être inscrit en doctorat, ou d’avoir soutenu sa thèse il y a moins de deux ans sans être en poste permanent. Les équipes doivent comprendre au moins une personne affiliée à l’EHESS. Les candidats sont appelés à questionner la démarche ethnographique. Les textes retenus manifesteront une pratique ethnographique rigoureuse qui ne se fonde pas uniquement sur l’analyse d’entretiens ou de documents.
Les propositions doivent présenter comment les candidats mobilisent l’ethnographie et ce qu’ils souhaitent discuter par leur thème en 2 500 signes maximum. Elles sont à envoyer à l’adresse suivante avant le 30 janvier 2016 : orga_rae2015@ehess.fr
Calendrier :
- limite de réception des propositions d’ateliers : 30 janvier 2016
- sélection des propositions d’ateliers et réponse aux candidats : fin février 2016
- première réunion du nouveau comité d’organisation : mars 2016
- dates à fixer des Rencontres Annuelles d’Ethnographie de l’EHESS – troisième édition : octobre ou novembre 2016
Bien cordialement,
Le comité d'organisation 2015
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Peer-Reviewed Articles by Delphine Thivet
ALTER - EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DISABILITY RESEARCH - REVUE EUROPÉENNE DE RECHERCHE SUR LE HANDICAP, 2021
Different policies relating to the employment of disabled people coexist in France. They rely on ... more Different policies relating to the employment of disabled people coexist in France. They rely on various mechanisms, such as quotas, non-discrimination, professional rehabilitation that corresponds to concurrent, or even antagonist, definitions of disability and participation in the labor market. Based on two original qualitative sociological surveys conducted by semi-structured interviews, this article explores how disability officers grasp, or do not grasp, the different legal tools available to implement employment policies for people with disabilities in public sector work organizations. Despite the strong persistence of an individual, medical, and defective approach to disability in employment, we show that disability officers strive to build a more ambitious, proactive, and systemic policy. They are sensitive to the environmental dimension of disability and to the prevention of disability at work, but do not make reference to the antidiscrimination law and its injunction to pursue equality and inclusion.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal (SAMAJ) , 2019
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Terrains & Travaux, n°20, 2012
Cet article revient sur l’apparition de la notion de la « souveraineté alimentaire » sur la scène... more Cet article revient sur l’apparition de la notion de la « souveraineté alimentaire » sur la scène internationale et sur son lien étroit avec le mouvement paysan international La Vía Campesina. Alors que les solutions apportées à la « faim dans le monde » demeuraient centrées, sous l’influence des instances internationales, sur des considérations liées à l’augmentation de la production agricole et à la libéralisation des politiques agricoles, les militant-e-s de La Vía Campesina ont en effet réussi à opérer un déplacement majeur dans le « cadrage » historiquement institué de ce problème public. En posant en effet deux questions n’ayant jusqu’alors pas reçu à leurs yeux de réponses satisfaisantes : « qui produit l’alimentation ? » et « comment la nourriture est-elle produite ? » – deux questions ayant pour objectif de refocaliser l’attention vers le rôle joué par les « petits paysans » dans la production d’alimentation et vers un mode de production écologiquement viable – cet article montre qu'ils ont contribué à reconfigurer les liens habituellement tissés dans l’arène publique internationale entre alimentation et agriculture autour du problème de la « faim dans le monde » . En s'appuyant sur la perspective des « cadres de l’action collective » croisée avec une approche en terme de problèmes publics, on s'efforce dans cet article de saisir le processus de construction d’une cause paysanne transnationale dans le contexte d’une situation définie comme problématique par de multiples agents, puis d’examiner les contraintes découlant pour un mouvement social de l’adoption d’un cadre plutôt que d’un autre, l’opportunité de suivre une voie juridique en vue de faire reconnaître un « droit à la souveraineté alimentaire » s'étant trouvée au coeur des questions stratégiques du mouvement La Vía Campesina.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Critique Internationale, Jun 2015
In recent years, the international peasant movement, La Vía Campesina, has sought to transcribe t... more In recent years, the international peasant movement, La Vía Campesina, has sought to transcribe the “peasant cause” into law. In response to rights violations in the countryside – civil and political as well as economic, social and cultural – an effort was launched to demand that the Human Rights Council adopt an “International Convention on Peasants Rights”. By studying the case of La Vía Campesina, one may underscore the kind of skills and alliances needed by activists (who are initially wary of the risk of dispossession that is entailed by recourse to a more expert and institutional repertory of action) in order to implement their advocacy strategy within UN bodies. Light is thus shed on the ways in which this strategy of collective action may benefit from the involvement of La Vía Campesina members, even as it creates tensions and dilemmas relating to the possible de-radicalization of the cause.
***
Depuis quelques années, le mouvement paysan international La Vía Campesina s’efforce de transcrire la « cause paysanne » dans la langue du droit. Face à la violation des droits civils et politiques, mais aussi économiques, sociaux et culturels dans les campagnes, le projet est né en effet de réclamer l'adoption par le Conseil des droits de l’homme d'une « Convention internationale sur les droits des paysannes et des paysans ». L’étude du cas de La Vía Campesina permet de souligner le travail non seulement d’apprentissage des compétences spécifiques par des acteurs sociaux initialement méfiants à l’égard du risque de dépossession induit par le recours à un répertoire d’action plus expert et institutionnel, mais aussi de tissage d’alliances nécessaire à la mise en œuvre de cette stratégie de plaidoyer dans les instances onusiennes. Les potentialités de succès offertes par l’investissement des membres de La Vía Campesina dans cette stratégie d’action collective sont ainsi mises en lumière sans oublier les tensions et les dilemmes qui en résultent quant à la possible déradicalisation de la cause.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Cahiers de la Recherche sur l'Education et les Savoirs, Dossier Élites et savoirs, n°14, May 20, 2015
The “École Centrale of Paris” has established itself, over the past two centuries, as a leader in... more The “École Centrale of Paris” has established itself, over the past two centuries, as a leader in educating the private-sector executives. This “grande école” has progressively reform its educational system so as to adapt its pedagogy to what is seen as the “market’s constraints”. One of the most visible effects of its new educational programs, as regards the curriculum, is the relative reduction of technical and scientific teachings and the increase of knowledge management and leadership development courses. The study of the transformation of legal education during the last century appears particularly relevant for understanding the ECP’s successive views concerning elite education. From law serving the “honnête homme” to law as a “business science”, the examination of legal education at the ECP allows us to understand how the legitimate competences are defined and distributed so as to provide access to positions of power. This is precisely the strategic contemporary role played by legal knowledge in accessing to elites that this paper aims to enlighten, concentrating on how knowledge is transmitted, creates “common sense” and socializes students with an economic elite.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Cahiers de la Fonction Publique, Jan 2017
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Territoire en Mouvement, Des campagnes en mouvement pour "mieux vivre ensemble", 2014
To download this article: http://tem.revues.org/2461
This paper is off-centred on peasant and ru... more To download this article: http://tem.revues.org/2461
This paper is off-centred on peasant and rural struggles in social forums between 2000 and 2010. It explores the diversity of protagonists, protests, claims and counter-claims made on national, regional, continental and international arenas about the issues relating to food security, independence and sovereignty, agrarian reform and "Common Earth". Since the 2000s, community leaders, unionists and activists from the countryside have indeed occupied social forums at various workshops, plenary sessions, seminars, showcasing their struggles organized around challenging the exploitative relationships of class, caste, race and gender, demanding access to land and natural resources (water, seeds, forests, etc.), and highlighting the problems of "landless", daily laborers, small farmers, fishermen, indigenous peoples, displaced peoples, discrimination of women, etc. They mobilized to defend their rights to existence, especially by denouncing the negative effects of liberal globalization, leading to over-exploitation of natural resources, privatization of land and/or “land-grabbing”, concentration and transnationalization of land ownership, agribusiness development, the patenting life, the destruction of local communities, forced migration, and the repression of social movements. The purpose of this paper is to examine how such issues are being internationalized and how peasant and indigenous - but also rural and urban - people’s struggles are converging. The paper also looks at the achievements of such efforts to assert the interdependence of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and to get acknowledged the collective rights and duties of all towards the "Common Earth".
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
British Journal for The History of Philosophy, 2008
Along with Machiavelli, Hobbes is usually regarded as the pre-eminent representative of the ‘powe... more Along with Machiavelli, Hobbes is usually regarded as the pre-eminent representative of the ‘power-politics’ school of classical realism. He is frequently quoted for his pessimistic depiction of the state of nature that he so famously described as a brutal and anarchic arena in which each individual seeks his own advantage to the detriment of all other individuals, in a perpetual struggle for power. As reflective of this, political realism is sometimes even named the ‘Hobbesian tradition’. Yet there is reason to question whether the standard characterization of realism as a form of moral scepticism which ‘resists the application of morality to war’ provides an accurate description of Hobbes’s political philosophy. In this essay I examine Hobbes’s conception of war, in order to show how, in some fundamental respects, it deviates from this ‘realism’.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Cités (PUF), 2006
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Book Chapters by Delphine Thivet
Le tournant social de l’international. Les organisations internationales face aux sociétés civiles, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Le tournant social de l’international. Les organisations internationales face aux sociétés civiles, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Books (co)edited/directed (and introductions) by Delphine Thivet
De nombreuses formes d’agricultures alternatives au modèle productiviste existent et leurs dynamiques d’émergence, de structuration et de développement dépendent étroitement des contextes sociaux, historiques et géographiques dans lesquels elles se déploient et qu’elles participent à transformer. Comment prenons-nous en compte ces configurations spécifiques qui influent sur les dynamiques sociales agricoles étudiées ? Dans quelle mesure nos terrains d’étude nous permettent-ils de mettre à jour des régularités sociales alors que nous constatons une multitude de facteurs agissants ? Autrement dit, comment parvenir à cerner, hiérarchiser mais aussi articuler les facteurs d’influence qui expliquent les pratiques observées (tels que les modes d’organisation historique du milieu agricole, des intermédiaires professionnels et marchands, le degré et le volume de soutien apporté par les pouvoirs publics, associatifs, etc.) ? Et à quelle(s) échelle(s) doit-on les étudier ?
Cet ouvrage cherche à comprendre les conditions sociales (dans leur double dimension spatiale et temporelle) de développement et d’exercice des agricultures biologiques, c’est-à-dire les modes d’émergence, de transmission, de circulation et plus encore d’appropriation de l’« agriculture biologique ». Il met en commun les analyses de chercheurs issus d’horizons divers (université, Inra, CNRS, EHESS…) et couvrant des approches disciplinaires relevant de l’anthropologie, de la sociologie, de la géographie, de l’agronomie, ou encore des sciences de l’éducation.
Public : formateurs, producteurs, chercheurs, consommateurs, étudiants, conseillers, associations, collectivités territoriales.
Calls for Papers by Delphine Thivet
This panel brings together contributions that focus on the knowledge-building activities aiming at neutralizing and incorporating social advocacy in the context of international institutions. It examines the formatting and censorship work by which experts in institutions assimilate and reframe social demands, in such a way as to eliminate their most critical content and make them compliant with the normative views of the organization. It examines the formatting and censorship work by which experts in institutions reframe social demands in such a way as to eliminate their most critical content and make them compliant with the dominant views of the organization. In this process, IOs seize upon counter-hegemonic discourses and convert critical advocacy into political orthodoxy.
The panel stands at the crossroads of the sociology of mobilizations, the sociology of expertise and the study of international institutions.
Colloque international France - Bordeaux 18 & 19 mars 2021
Organisé par le Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116) et le CEREP (EA 4692) Les vulnérabilités au travail Regards croisés des sciences sociales en Europe
Véronique Saint-Ges, INRA, UMR SADAPT, France
Corinne Tanguy, CESAER AgroSup Dijon, France
Delphine Thivet, Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116), Université de Bordeaux, France
Fragiskos Gaitis, Department of Food Analytical and Research laboratories of Athens at Hellenic Food Authority (EFET), Greece
Georgia Ouzounidou, Directorate of Research and Technological Development Activities, ELGO DEMETER, Greece
The agricultural and agri-food sector are currently confronted with many challenges influencing all the stakeholders of the value chain (Galliano, Raynaud, 2015): consumers, citizens, firms, farmers and policymakers behaviour. This follows various societal and food crises in recent years, as well as an increasing awareness of environmental issues. This in turn involves public health issues, social issues, economic issues, international issues calling for a transformation towards agri-food systems that are ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable. This evolution takes place in a context where, on the one hand, consumers are more and more demanding in terms of quality, safety, traceability, sustainability of products (Murdoch, Marsden and Banks 2000; Trobe 2001; Dubuisson-Quellier 2009), but at the same time in terms of prices (Aschemann‐Witzel and Zielke 2017); on the other hand, highly specialized farms and food firms actively seek to enhance their market competitiveness and profitability (Capitanio, Coppola and Pascucci 2009). As a consequence, the agri-food sector has to deal with often contradictory requirements and has to innovate to square that circle. This raises a central question regarding the extent to which and in what ways the process of innovation itself has to change so as to reorganize and redefine the agri-food system as a whole (Bock 2012).
While the need to change the conventional agri-food systems is becoming nearly unanimous, the modification of existing practices and the introduction of new farming systems (urban farming for example), new forms of consumption (Seyfang 2006) and distribution, are disrupting the existing productive patterns and thus are often blocked. The unlocking of socio-technical systems aiming at pesticide reduction, for example, shows the importance of the processes of coordination of actors throughout the supply chains, the role of changes in advisory practices but also in logistics or marketing (Meynard et al., 2013; Picard, Tanguy, 2016). It also suggests the need to consider innovation as an interactive system rather than a linear process. Furthermore, it is important that an approach, taking into account that these changes might have an impact on food safety, is followed in order to predict the increased likelihood of the occurrence of safety incidents, so as to be better prepared to prevent, mitigate and manage associated risks (Gaitis and Ouzounidou, 2017)
This special issue has the following objectives:
1. To identify the various agri-food system actors from production to consumption: firms, farms, new stakeholders like urban consumers, governments, and civil society organizations, involved in innovative activities and in transforming the agri-food sector;
2. To provide a full overview of the innovative activities and different types of innovations, technological, organizational, social, institutional and policy innovations, at play in the transformation of agri-food system, including the development of new agricultural and agri-food practices (low-tech or high-tech), quality certification schemes, new distribution channels, new processes and the development of a circular economy;
3. To offer a better understanding of the interactions between technological innovations and other forms of innovations in transforming the agri-food sector: how diverse type of innovations can foster positive synergies among themselves? What are the major factors fostering these synergies among innovations and leading to wider transitions?
4. To understand and identify how actors (public and private organizations, financial organizations, researchers and trainers) can respond to the major challenges posed by innovations in the agri-food system in terms of regulation and supportive norms: implementation of cooperative projects, training, funding, etc.
5. To implement measures to better understand and limit the risks and environmental impacts, to better respond to changing conditions and exploit opportunities for new ways of production and consumption, including the prevention, rapid detection and effective addressing of emerging risks for food safety and quality.
How sustainability-orientedinnovations can encourage actors to rethink their organizations and develop cross-sectors collaboration and experimentation? How to sustain and finance innovations and new modes of food production and distribution? How can we develop a multidimensional approach necessary for the implementation of these types of innovations? Exploring these different issues, from market-based technological innovations to civil-society-based social innovations, aims to shed light on the currentfood innovation dynamics towards quality, safety and sustainability.
Papers may address several kinds of issues, such as:
- Local and sustainable modes of production and distribution (short supply chains such as Community Supported Agriculture, local farmers’ markets, basket delivery systems, urban agriculture)
- Global value chains versus local value chains in the agri-food sector
- Agro-food supply chains and territorial development
- Agro-innovation in digital times
- Climate change, agro-innovation and food quality
- Sustainable innovation and corporate social responsibility
- Consumer food trends and food safety challenges
- Citizen’s involvement and grassroots social innovations (local food networks,
cooperatives, Participatory Guarantee Systems...)
- Emerging food safety threats
- Health and nutritional claims in food labelling: a puzzle game
- Food Fraud
- Food security: Contributions of a sustainable bioeconomy
1st October 2019 : Deadline for complete manuscripts through online paper submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/innovations/default.aspx
The deadline for paper submissions is 1st February 2019.
The call for papers is now open and closes on 30 November 2017 at midnight (GMT). Decisions will be communicated to authors by mid-January, 2018.
P25
Who Speaks for the Village? Representations of the “Rural” in India from the Colonial to the Post-Colonial Era
This panel will explore the representations of the village and its different social groups in India by colonial and postcolonial administrations, political parties, scholarship and literature from the colonial to the post-colonial era. It will focus on the transformations undergone by rural society.
Long panel abstract The idea of the village has been central throughout Indian history. Since colonial times, Indian villages have been pictured as “small republics” and as a relevant microcosm for understanding the Indian society at large. This panel will explore the representations of the village and its different social groups in India, constructed by colonial and postcolonial government administrations, political parties, social movements, NGOs, scholarship and/or literature from the colonial to the post-colonial era: who speaks for/about/of/against the village and for the so-called “peasant classes”? In providing a broad and long-term historical perspective on the different representations of the Indian countryside, it will identify the significant changes that the Indian rural society has undergone over time, notably its changing power relationships and the consequences of the transformations of its primarily agrarian economy. It will also analyse, against the idea of a harmonious whole, the heterogeneity of Indian rural society, its stratification and deeply entrenched economic and social divisions. For instance, papers might investigate the actors, external or internal to rural society, who have claimed to represent the interests of the “village” and how its internal social differentiation has been addressed; how the gram panchayat has contributed or not to renew the representation of various categories of rural society; the transformation of agrarian struggles through the lens of dispossession-related resistances; etc. These different aspects of the representation of the “rural” and its social components could be studied from the point of view of history, political science, sociology, anthropology, or any other relevant discipline.
Les propositions doivent présenter comment les candidats mobilisent l’ethnographie et ce qu’ils souhaitent discuter par leur thème en 2 500 signes maximum. Elles sont à envoyer à l’adresse suivante avant le 30 janvier 2016 : orga_rae2015@ehess.fr
Calendrier :
- limite de réception des propositions d’ateliers : 30 janvier 2016
- sélection des propositions d’ateliers et réponse aux candidats : fin février 2016
- première réunion du nouveau comité d’organisation : mars 2016
- dates à fixer des Rencontres Annuelles d’Ethnographie de l’EHESS – troisième édition : octobre ou novembre 2016
Bien cordialement,
Le comité d'organisation 2015
Peer-Reviewed Articles by Delphine Thivet
***
Depuis quelques années, le mouvement paysan international La Vía Campesina s’efforce de transcrire la « cause paysanne » dans la langue du droit. Face à la violation des droits civils et politiques, mais aussi économiques, sociaux et culturels dans les campagnes, le projet est né en effet de réclamer l'adoption par le Conseil des droits de l’homme d'une « Convention internationale sur les droits des paysannes et des paysans ». L’étude du cas de La Vía Campesina permet de souligner le travail non seulement d’apprentissage des compétences spécifiques par des acteurs sociaux initialement méfiants à l’égard du risque de dépossession induit par le recours à un répertoire d’action plus expert et institutionnel, mais aussi de tissage d’alliances nécessaire à la mise en œuvre de cette stratégie de plaidoyer dans les instances onusiennes. Les potentialités de succès offertes par l’investissement des membres de La Vía Campesina dans cette stratégie d’action collective sont ainsi mises en lumière sans oublier les tensions et les dilemmes qui en résultent quant à la possible déradicalisation de la cause.
This paper is off-centred on peasant and rural struggles in social forums between 2000 and 2010. It explores the diversity of protagonists, protests, claims and counter-claims made on national, regional, continental and international arenas about the issues relating to food security, independence and sovereignty, agrarian reform and "Common Earth". Since the 2000s, community leaders, unionists and activists from the countryside have indeed occupied social forums at various workshops, plenary sessions, seminars, showcasing their struggles organized around challenging the exploitative relationships of class, caste, race and gender, demanding access to land and natural resources (water, seeds, forests, etc.), and highlighting the problems of "landless", daily laborers, small farmers, fishermen, indigenous peoples, displaced peoples, discrimination of women, etc. They mobilized to defend their rights to existence, especially by denouncing the negative effects of liberal globalization, leading to over-exploitation of natural resources, privatization of land and/or “land-grabbing”, concentration and transnationalization of land ownership, agribusiness development, the patenting life, the destruction of local communities, forced migration, and the repression of social movements. The purpose of this paper is to examine how such issues are being internationalized and how peasant and indigenous - but also rural and urban - people’s struggles are converging. The paper also looks at the achievements of such efforts to assert the interdependence of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and to get acknowledged the collective rights and duties of all towards the "Common Earth".
Book Chapters by Delphine Thivet
De nombreuses formes d’agricultures alternatives au modèle productiviste existent et leurs dynamiques d’émergence, de structuration et de développement dépendent étroitement des contextes sociaux, historiques et géographiques dans lesquels elles se déploient et qu’elles participent à transformer. Comment prenons-nous en compte ces configurations spécifiques qui influent sur les dynamiques sociales agricoles étudiées ? Dans quelle mesure nos terrains d’étude nous permettent-ils de mettre à jour des régularités sociales alors que nous constatons une multitude de facteurs agissants ? Autrement dit, comment parvenir à cerner, hiérarchiser mais aussi articuler les facteurs d’influence qui expliquent les pratiques observées (tels que les modes d’organisation historique du milieu agricole, des intermédiaires professionnels et marchands, le degré et le volume de soutien apporté par les pouvoirs publics, associatifs, etc.) ? Et à quelle(s) échelle(s) doit-on les étudier ?
Cet ouvrage cherche à comprendre les conditions sociales (dans leur double dimension spatiale et temporelle) de développement et d’exercice des agricultures biologiques, c’est-à-dire les modes d’émergence, de transmission, de circulation et plus encore d’appropriation de l’« agriculture biologique ». Il met en commun les analyses de chercheurs issus d’horizons divers (université, Inra, CNRS, EHESS…) et couvrant des approches disciplinaires relevant de l’anthropologie, de la sociologie, de la géographie, de l’agronomie, ou encore des sciences de l’éducation.
Public : formateurs, producteurs, chercheurs, consommateurs, étudiants, conseillers, associations, collectivités territoriales.
This panel brings together contributions that focus on the knowledge-building activities aiming at neutralizing and incorporating social advocacy in the context of international institutions. It examines the formatting and censorship work by which experts in institutions assimilate and reframe social demands, in such a way as to eliminate their most critical content and make them compliant with the normative views of the organization. It examines the formatting and censorship work by which experts in institutions reframe social demands in such a way as to eliminate their most critical content and make them compliant with the dominant views of the organization. In this process, IOs seize upon counter-hegemonic discourses and convert critical advocacy into political orthodoxy.
The panel stands at the crossroads of the sociology of mobilizations, the sociology of expertise and the study of international institutions.
Colloque international France - Bordeaux 18 & 19 mars 2021
Organisé par le Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116) et le CEREP (EA 4692) Les vulnérabilités au travail Regards croisés des sciences sociales en Europe
Véronique Saint-Ges, INRA, UMR SADAPT, France
Corinne Tanguy, CESAER AgroSup Dijon, France
Delphine Thivet, Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116), Université de Bordeaux, France
Fragiskos Gaitis, Department of Food Analytical and Research laboratories of Athens at Hellenic Food Authority (EFET), Greece
Georgia Ouzounidou, Directorate of Research and Technological Development Activities, ELGO DEMETER, Greece
The agricultural and agri-food sector are currently confronted with many challenges influencing all the stakeholders of the value chain (Galliano, Raynaud, 2015): consumers, citizens, firms, farmers and policymakers behaviour. This follows various societal and food crises in recent years, as well as an increasing awareness of environmental issues. This in turn involves public health issues, social issues, economic issues, international issues calling for a transformation towards agri-food systems that are ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable. This evolution takes place in a context where, on the one hand, consumers are more and more demanding in terms of quality, safety, traceability, sustainability of products (Murdoch, Marsden and Banks 2000; Trobe 2001; Dubuisson-Quellier 2009), but at the same time in terms of prices (Aschemann‐Witzel and Zielke 2017); on the other hand, highly specialized farms and food firms actively seek to enhance their market competitiveness and profitability (Capitanio, Coppola and Pascucci 2009). As a consequence, the agri-food sector has to deal with often contradictory requirements and has to innovate to square that circle. This raises a central question regarding the extent to which and in what ways the process of innovation itself has to change so as to reorganize and redefine the agri-food system as a whole (Bock 2012).
While the need to change the conventional agri-food systems is becoming nearly unanimous, the modification of existing practices and the introduction of new farming systems (urban farming for example), new forms of consumption (Seyfang 2006) and distribution, are disrupting the existing productive patterns and thus are often blocked. The unlocking of socio-technical systems aiming at pesticide reduction, for example, shows the importance of the processes of coordination of actors throughout the supply chains, the role of changes in advisory practices but also in logistics or marketing (Meynard et al., 2013; Picard, Tanguy, 2016). It also suggests the need to consider innovation as an interactive system rather than a linear process. Furthermore, it is important that an approach, taking into account that these changes might have an impact on food safety, is followed in order to predict the increased likelihood of the occurrence of safety incidents, so as to be better prepared to prevent, mitigate and manage associated risks (Gaitis and Ouzounidou, 2017)
This special issue has the following objectives:
1. To identify the various agri-food system actors from production to consumption: firms, farms, new stakeholders like urban consumers, governments, and civil society organizations, involved in innovative activities and in transforming the agri-food sector;
2. To provide a full overview of the innovative activities and different types of innovations, technological, organizational, social, institutional and policy innovations, at play in the transformation of agri-food system, including the development of new agricultural and agri-food practices (low-tech or high-tech), quality certification schemes, new distribution channels, new processes and the development of a circular economy;
3. To offer a better understanding of the interactions between technological innovations and other forms of innovations in transforming the agri-food sector: how diverse type of innovations can foster positive synergies among themselves? What are the major factors fostering these synergies among innovations and leading to wider transitions?
4. To understand and identify how actors (public and private organizations, financial organizations, researchers and trainers) can respond to the major challenges posed by innovations in the agri-food system in terms of regulation and supportive norms: implementation of cooperative projects, training, funding, etc.
5. To implement measures to better understand and limit the risks and environmental impacts, to better respond to changing conditions and exploit opportunities for new ways of production and consumption, including the prevention, rapid detection and effective addressing of emerging risks for food safety and quality.
How sustainability-orientedinnovations can encourage actors to rethink their organizations and develop cross-sectors collaboration and experimentation? How to sustain and finance innovations and new modes of food production and distribution? How can we develop a multidimensional approach necessary for the implementation of these types of innovations? Exploring these different issues, from market-based technological innovations to civil-society-based social innovations, aims to shed light on the currentfood innovation dynamics towards quality, safety and sustainability.
Papers may address several kinds of issues, such as:
- Local and sustainable modes of production and distribution (short supply chains such as Community Supported Agriculture, local farmers’ markets, basket delivery systems, urban agriculture)
- Global value chains versus local value chains in the agri-food sector
- Agro-food supply chains and territorial development
- Agro-innovation in digital times
- Climate change, agro-innovation and food quality
- Sustainable innovation and corporate social responsibility
- Consumer food trends and food safety challenges
- Citizen’s involvement and grassroots social innovations (local food networks,
cooperatives, Participatory Guarantee Systems...)
- Emerging food safety threats
- Health and nutritional claims in food labelling: a puzzle game
- Food Fraud
- Food security: Contributions of a sustainable bioeconomy
1st October 2019 : Deadline for complete manuscripts through online paper submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/innovations/default.aspx
The deadline for paper submissions is 1st February 2019.
The call for papers is now open and closes on 30 November 2017 at midnight (GMT). Decisions will be communicated to authors by mid-January, 2018.
P25
Who Speaks for the Village? Representations of the “Rural” in India from the Colonial to the Post-Colonial Era
This panel will explore the representations of the village and its different social groups in India by colonial and postcolonial administrations, political parties, scholarship and literature from the colonial to the post-colonial era. It will focus on the transformations undergone by rural society.
Long panel abstract The idea of the village has been central throughout Indian history. Since colonial times, Indian villages have been pictured as “small republics” and as a relevant microcosm for understanding the Indian society at large. This panel will explore the representations of the village and its different social groups in India, constructed by colonial and postcolonial government administrations, political parties, social movements, NGOs, scholarship and/or literature from the colonial to the post-colonial era: who speaks for/about/of/against the village and for the so-called “peasant classes”? In providing a broad and long-term historical perspective on the different representations of the Indian countryside, it will identify the significant changes that the Indian rural society has undergone over time, notably its changing power relationships and the consequences of the transformations of its primarily agrarian economy. It will also analyse, against the idea of a harmonious whole, the heterogeneity of Indian rural society, its stratification and deeply entrenched economic and social divisions. For instance, papers might investigate the actors, external or internal to rural society, who have claimed to represent the interests of the “village” and how its internal social differentiation has been addressed; how the gram panchayat has contributed or not to renew the representation of various categories of rural society; the transformation of agrarian struggles through the lens of dispossession-related resistances; etc. These different aspects of the representation of the “rural” and its social components could be studied from the point of view of history, political science, sociology, anthropology, or any other relevant discipline.
Les propositions doivent présenter comment les candidats mobilisent l’ethnographie et ce qu’ils souhaitent discuter par leur thème en 2 500 signes maximum. Elles sont à envoyer à l’adresse suivante avant le 30 janvier 2016 : orga_rae2015@ehess.fr
Calendrier :
- limite de réception des propositions d’ateliers : 30 janvier 2016
- sélection des propositions d’ateliers et réponse aux candidats : fin février 2016
- première réunion du nouveau comité d’organisation : mars 2016
- dates à fixer des Rencontres Annuelles d’Ethnographie de l’EHESS – troisième édition : octobre ou novembre 2016
Bien cordialement,
Le comité d'organisation 2015
***
Depuis quelques années, le mouvement paysan international La Vía Campesina s’efforce de transcrire la « cause paysanne » dans la langue du droit. Face à la violation des droits civils et politiques, mais aussi économiques, sociaux et culturels dans les campagnes, le projet est né en effet de réclamer l'adoption par le Conseil des droits de l’homme d'une « Convention internationale sur les droits des paysannes et des paysans ». L’étude du cas de La Vía Campesina permet de souligner le travail non seulement d’apprentissage des compétences spécifiques par des acteurs sociaux initialement méfiants à l’égard du risque de dépossession induit par le recours à un répertoire d’action plus expert et institutionnel, mais aussi de tissage d’alliances nécessaire à la mise en œuvre de cette stratégie de plaidoyer dans les instances onusiennes. Les potentialités de succès offertes par l’investissement des membres de La Vía Campesina dans cette stratégie d’action collective sont ainsi mises en lumière sans oublier les tensions et les dilemmes qui en résultent quant à la possible déradicalisation de la cause.
This paper is off-centred on peasant and rural struggles in social forums between 2000 and 2010. It explores the diversity of protagonists, protests, claims and counter-claims made on national, regional, continental and international arenas about the issues relating to food security, independence and sovereignty, agrarian reform and "Common Earth". Since the 2000s, community leaders, unionists and activists from the countryside have indeed occupied social forums at various workshops, plenary sessions, seminars, showcasing their struggles organized around challenging the exploitative relationships of class, caste, race and gender, demanding access to land and natural resources (water, seeds, forests, etc.), and highlighting the problems of "landless", daily laborers, small farmers, fishermen, indigenous peoples, displaced peoples, discrimination of women, etc. They mobilized to defend their rights to existence, especially by denouncing the negative effects of liberal globalization, leading to over-exploitation of natural resources, privatization of land and/or “land-grabbing”, concentration and transnationalization of land ownership, agribusiness development, the patenting life, the destruction of local communities, forced migration, and the repression of social movements. The purpose of this paper is to examine how such issues are being internationalized and how peasant and indigenous - but also rural and urban - people’s struggles are converging. The paper also looks at the achievements of such efforts to assert the interdependence of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and to get acknowledged the collective rights and duties of all towards the "Common Earth".
3ème vendredi du mois de 11 h à 13 h. Entrée libre, dans la limite des places disponibles.
Louis Pinto, La vocation et le métier de philosophe. Pour une sociologie de la philosophie dans la France contemporaine, coll. "Liber", Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2007, 312 p.
Le concept de « rural », central dans les outils des sciences sociales, fait en effet actuellement l’objet d’investissements multiples, aussi bien scientifiques que politiques, à des fins d’en redéfinir les contours, mais également pour mettre en œuvre des politiques d’intervention. Pour comprendre les conditions de production des travaux contemporains, la situation actuelle gagne dans un premier temps à être comparée avec la période précédente d’effervescence intellectuelle autour de cet objet, durant les années 1960-1970.
Dans cette perspective, l’EHESS apparaît comme l’un des observatoires privilégiés, pour différentes raisons. Tout d’abord, deux principes inspirateurs de son projet scientifique porté par Fernand Braudel – l’interdisciplinarité et la longue durée – ont longtemps trouvé dans les études rurales un terrain d’élection. En effet, les recherches autour du « rural » sont intrinsèquement pluridisciplinaires, et croisent histoire, anthropologie, sociologie et géographie. En outre, en tant que lieu de rencontres et d’échanges à l’échelle internationale, l’EHESS est un lieu qui permet de saisir les courants des évolutions disciplinaires en les appréhendant à partir de réseaux internationaux. De multiples recherches sur les mondes ruraux, tant dans une perspective historique que sociologique et anthropologique, ont en effet été menées par des équipes et des centres de la VIème section de l’EPHE d’abord et de l’EHESS ensuite : parmi eux, on peut citer le Centre de Recherches Historiques (CRH) fondé en 1949 par Fernand Braudel et destiné à devenir un terrain de rencontre entre l’École des Annales et les anthropologues ; le Groupe d’Anthropologie des Sociétés Paysannes du Laboratoire d’Anthropologie Sociale (LAS) créé en 1960 et dirigé par Isac Chiva ; le Centre de Sociologie Rurale de l’EPHE (VIème section) puis de l’EHESS fondé en 1960 et dirigé par Placide Rambaud.
Dans ce contexte d’effervescence et d’échanges interdisciplinaires naît, en 1961, la revue Études Rurales qui constitue encore aujourd’hui une référence sur le sujet, par son effort de mise en dialogue de chercheur.e.s venu.e.s d’horizons scientifiques différents, tant des sciences humaines et sociales, que des sciences de la nature. Actuellement, les « études rurales » figurent toujours parmi les mots-clés des séminaires annuels, dont Ruralités contemporaines, animé par une équipe collective et qui se poursuit depuis plusieurs décennies. Cependant, aucun centre de l’EHESS ne se réclame plus du rural ni n’en comporte l’intitulé. Quant aux groupes de recherche, seule l’Équipe de recherches pour l’histoire du monde rural (ERHIMOR) du CRH fait exception, les autres préférant mettre l’accent sur d’autres aspects : le territoire et l’environnement par exemple.
Conséquence de la fin d’un « âge d’or » tant de l’histoire que de la sociologie rurales, de la relative dispersion à la fois institutionnelle et disciplinaire des études rurales, de l’épuisement des paradigmes, les terrains d’enquête ruraux semblent en outre avoir été délaissés à partir de la fin des années 1980. Pourtant, malgré cet apparent déclin, les études rurales sont demeurées un domaine de recherche actif et dynamique, quoique discret au sein de l’EHESS. Nombre de séminaires, de thèses, de mémoires et de numéros de revue continuent à traiter de la ruralité sous différents aspects et contribuent à élaborer des formes d’investigation et des approches théoriques renouvelées dans les études portant sur le rural.
La journée d’étude s’organisera en deux temps : d’une part, il s’agira de faire retour sur la genèse et l’évolution des études rurales – dans leur double dimension institutionnelle et intellectuelle (approches théoriques et méthodologiques) mais aussi dans une perspective comparative. D’autre part, nous nous interrogerons sur les transformations du regard porté par les sciences sociales sur un objet (le « rural ») dont les frontières n’ont eu de cesse de fluctuer, et nous explorerons les diverses tentatives récentes contribuant à renouveler les études du rural en France à travers notamment une attention portée aux comparaisons internationales mais aussi aux transformations induites par le processus de mondialisation. Cette journée d’étude permettra enfin d’apprécier l’impact cognitif des études rurales sur les sciences sociales et éventuellement d’envisager les conditions de possibilité d’une « re-institutionnalisation » des études du « rural ».
Colloque international
France - Bordeaux
18 & 19 mars 2021
Organisé par
le Centre Emile Durkheim (UMR 5116) et le CEREP (EA 4692)
Les vulnérabilités au travail
Regards croisés des sciences sociales en Europe
Paris - campus Gérard-Mégie, auditorium Marie-Curie
Présentation ppt complète en ligne : http://www.cnrs.fr/mi/IMG/pdf/fillion_thivet_2017_colloque_cnrs_fiphfp.pdf
Cette ST rassemble des contributions qui se concentrent sur les activités de neutralisation et d’incorporation de la critique sociale dans le cadre des institutions internationales. Elle s’intéresse au travail de censure et de mise en forme par laquelle les experts des institutions assimilent les revendications sociales, mais aussi les reformulent de manière à les délester de leurs contenus les plus critiques et à les rendre compatibles avec les vues normatives de l'organisation. Les intervenants pourront discuter notamment les processus de « captation épistémique », c’est-à-dire les activités par lesquelles les OI captent des idées critiques, puis les réinterprètent et les détournent de manière à en épuiser la dimension agonistique, pour finalement rendre ces idées conformes aux cadres normatifs de l'institution. Ce faisant, les OI s’emparent des discours contre-hégémoniques et convertissent les plaidoyers critiques en orthodoxie politique.
La ST se situe à la croisée de la sociologie des mobilisations, la sociologie de l’expertise et les études des institutions internationales.