Map controversies
Subtitle / abstract
Didactic approach putting forward controversy mapping to address the complexity of an agroecological issue
Domain of activity
- Animation of group
Objective of the tool/method
Agroecology is a notion, which is undeniably popular with politicians, professionals and consumers but which is also the object of a certain degree of ambiguity and divergence with regards to the interpretations and applications related to the term. We envisage agroecology and a socially vibrant issue, one which necessarily develops controversy and uncertainty with regards to the reference skills and their social impact. Such controversy is expressed by scientists, expert professionals, the media and society in general.
If the teaching of socially vibrant issue requires the understanding of the underlying controversies, through what Legardez and Simonneaux (2006) call a socio-epistemological study, such a study can itself be an object of learning thanks to the fact that it offers an approach towards the complexity of agroecology and the way learners view this complexity.
The study explores statements made by researchers and publications in the media. It must enable the construction of a map that presents the challenges and controversies associated with the issue in hand. It aims to enable the development of a critical through process with regards to skills and their legitimacy, the ethics applied and also the promotion of citizenship expertise.
The map of controversies can be used in different educational strategies :
(1) it can be proposed to the learner to enable him/her to take a position and develop awareness of other points of view that exist.
(2) It can enable the learner to make comparisons of the agroecological question in different contexts (in a territorial context, or as seen through certain media).
(3) It can be built by the learner to enable him/her to explore the complexity of the question and to take a wider look at his/her own point of view.
Description of the tool
The isn’t a model as such for mapping controversies which may highlight points of political, scientific, technical, ethical tension. The method can in no way claim to be exhaustive and remains highly dependent on persons who build it, the sources of information which have been used and also the directions taken by its author, even if the latter is aiming for a maximum of objectivity. Callon and Latour (1990) invite us to call upon the theory of actor-networks (Callon and Latour, 1990) to develop controversy mapping. The network is all the stakeholders, human or non-human actors in relation with each other. The reconstitution of the network may suppose highlighting controversies which lead the actors to take a position in the network. The relationship between the actors supposes operations of translation, an operation of transformation aimed at becoming understandable to another party, but also legitimising his/her position and convincing. Controversy mapping should therefore enable the highlighting of the different roles, alliances or oppositions which connect them and the main points of controversy. The mapping evolves over time, which justifies the proposal of a diachronic representation.
More information
We will give an example of two training approaches which integrate controversy mapping and where the representations differ notably, our aim being to invite creativity rather than reproduction which could run the risk of becoming a model.
The first example is the fruit of a course carried out with student-engineers. They were required to carry out a controversy mapping exercise relative to the notion of agroecology. They based their work on texts from scientific reviews and publications available on the web.
This first map showed the different stakeholders intervening in the process and certain key points of controversy with regards to the subject of agroecology. It did not, however, show the diachronic evolution of the actor-networks system.
This exercise did enable the students to question their own colleagues of their opinion about agroecology and to develop a critical vision of the teaching being given.
The second example presents the evolution of the agroecological issue of reintegration of the wolf. This map was created on the basis of a media analysis on a local level using the weekly newspaper ‘La Lozère Nouvelle’. Its construction was based on the actor-network theory. It was aimed at visualising interactions between human stakeholders and also non-human actors and to highlight the points of controversy and conflict mentioned in the local press. It consequently highlighted the key actors and the media based controversies with a view to developing pedagogical tools (cf. the CLIM file) that favour impartiality from the trainer.
Contact
Michel Vidal
Contact email
michel.vidal@supagro.fr
Address
9 rue Célestin Freinet
Town
FLORAC
Author of the index card
Marie-Laure Girault
Author structure
Institut d'éducation à l'agro-environnement de Florac
Author email
marie-laure.girault@supagro.fr