Sylvain Quiédeville
email: sylvain.quiedeville@fibl.ch

Dominique Barjolle
email: barjolle@ethz.ch.

Jean-Marc Touzard
email: jean-marc.touzard@supagro.inra.fr.

Matthias Stolze
email: matthias.stolze@fibl.ch.

Agathe Devaux

Jean-Claude Mouret
email: mouret@supagro.inra.fr.

Mathias Stolze

Petya Slavova
email: pslavova@phls.uni-sofia.bg.

OF THE SECOND WORKSHOP IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY D. COMPREHENSIVE IMPACT PATHWAY OF THE RESEARCH IN THE CAMARGUE CASE E. TABLE OF LINKS OF THE INNOVATION PATHWAY IN THE CAMARGUE CASE

Keywords: Evaluation, Program Theory, Innovation Process, Ex-post Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis, Social Network Analysis, Actor Network Theory Evaluation, Science-based research, Program theory, Innovation process, Expost Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis, Camargue rice systems Actor Network Theory, Research Evaluation, Innovation Process, Bulgaria, Camargue

Evaluation ex-post des impacts de la recherche sur les innovations pour l'agriculture biologique : enjeux, méthodes, outils et instruments

List of figures

Acknowledgments

First of all, I would like to thank Dominique, Matthias, and Jean-Marc for offering me the opportunity to perform this thesis and to work on the EU IMPRESA3 (Impact of Research on EU agriculture) project. I would like to thank in particular Dominique as main supervisor of this thesis but also as supervisor of the third Work Package (WP3) of the EU IMPRESA project. This thesis would not have been possible without your knowledge and experience! Dominique was replaced for the latest phases of the EU IMPRESA project by Otto Schmidt (FiBL), whom I also thank very much for our very fruitful collaboration! I also would like to thank very much all members of the thesis committee, who were volunteer to co-supervise this work -Many thanks to Jean-Marc, Matthias, Ludovic, Egizio and Agathe for your interest and the insightful discussions with you! I am also very grateful to all partners who were involved in the EU IMPRESA project for the substantial synergies with them, which appeared very useful to complete this thesis. Special thanks to researchers who were involved in WP3, including Dominique, Matthieu, Otto, Matthias, Clémentine, Petya, Simone and Susan.

Still, I would like to thank again all of the respondents from the Camargue territory. Many thanks to farmers, rice traders, respondents from CIRAD (French Agricultural Research and International Cooperation Organization), CFR (French Center of Rice), Tour du Valat, Natural Reserve of the Camargue, Rice-traders Union, as well as researchers from INRA (National Institute of Agronomic Research) with in particular Jean-Claude and Roy who were keys to the success of the Camargue case study! The success of the Camargue case study was also made possible with the particular help of Dominique, Clémentine, Matthias, Heidrun and Hélène -Thank you! I also thank very much the Bulgarian researchers and especially Petya who worked on the Ecostop case study, which is used in the third paper of this thesis (part 6).

As host institutions, my warm gratitude goes to FiBL (Research Institute of Organic Agriculture) and to the joint UMR Innovation INRA/CIRAD -Particular thanks to Dominique, Matthias, and Urs for FiBL; and Jean-Marc, Pascal and Guy for the UMR Innovation. I also thank all of my other colleagues from FiBL, CIRAD and INRA for their insights and friendliness. Moreover, I thank the School SupAgro and the doctoral school EDEG (Doctoral School Economics and Management) for their support. Finally, I would like to thank all of the other persons who supported me during the research and writing process, including my relatives and friends.

(Remerciements)

En premier lieu, j'aimerais dire un grand merci à Dominique, Matthias, et Jean-Marc qui m'ont offert la possibilité de réaliser cette thèse ainsi que de travailler sur le projet Européen (UE) IMPRESA4 . J'aimerais remercier tout particulièrement Dominique en tant que directrice de la thèse et du troisième package (WP3) du projet IMPRESA. Cette thèse n'aurait pas été possible sans tes connaissances et ton expérience ! Dominique a été remplacée pour les dernières phases du projet IMPRESA par Otto Schmidt (FiBL), lequel je remercie aussi grandement pour notre collaboration très fructueuse ! J'aimerais par ailleurs remercier chaleureusement tous les membres du comité de thèse qui se sont portés volontaires pour encadrer ce travail -Merci beaucoup Jean-Marc, Matthias, Ludovic, Egizio et Agathe pour votre intérêt et les fructueuses discussions avec vous ! Je suis également très reconnaissant envers les partenaires ayant participé au projet IMPRESA pour les synergies importantes avec eux, lesquelles se sont avérées précieuses pour l'accomplissement de cette thèse. Un merci particulier aux chercheurs ayant été impliqués dans WP3, incluant Dominique, Matthieu, Otto, Matthias, Clémentine, Petya, Simone et Susan.

Aussi, j'aimerais remercier toutes les personnes du territoire camarguais ayant été interrogées.

Merci beaucoup à tous les agriculteurs, aux metteurs en marché du riz, aux interlocuteurs du CIRAD (Centre International de la Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement), du CFR (Centre Français du Riz), de la Tour du Valat, du Parc de réserve naturelle de Camargue, du syndicat du riz ; de même qu'aux chercheurs de l'INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique), en particulier Jean-Claude et Roy qui ont été les clés du succès du cas d'étude camarguais ! Le succès de ce cas d'étude a aussi été rendu possible grâce à l'aide précieuse de Dominique, Clémentine, Matthias, Heidrun et Hélène -Merci ! Je remercie aussi chaleureusement les chercheurs bulgares et Petya en particulier, qui ont travaillé sur le cas d'étude Ecostop, lequel fait partie intégrante du troisième papier de cette thèse (partie 6). Enfin, je souhaite remercier toutes les autres personnes m'ayant aidé au cours du processus de recherche et d'écriture, incluant mes proches et amis.

Comme institutions d'accueil, ma gratitude va au FiBL (Institut de Recherche de l'Agriculture

(Résumé)

Cette thèse a pour objet d'évaluer, de développer et de tester différentes méthodes qualitatives et manières d'évaluer ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, par rapport à la transition à l'agriculture biologique.

Nous avons réalisé deux cas d'études traitant de la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Le premier est le cas camarguais (en France) englobant un ensemble d'innovations techniques.

Le second concerne le développement du produit biologique Ecostop pour protéger les abeilles contre la maladie de la varroatose en Bulgarie.

Nous évaluons le potentiel d'une approche globale basée sur l'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) mais adaptée et complémentée par de nombreuses autres méthodes (premier article, partie 4), ainsi que le potentiel de l'analyse du réseau social (SNA) (deuxième article, partie 5) et de la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT) (troisième article, partie 6) pour l'évaluation ex-post des impacts et de la contribution de la recherche. Nous étudions les impacts de la recherche en Camargue et la manière dont ils ont été générés. Le cas Bulgare est seulement utilisé pour évaluer le potentiel d'ANT (avec le cas camarguais).

L'approche basée sur PIPA permet d'évaluer avec succès les impacts et la contribution de la recherche. Nous avons pu mettre en évidence que la recherche a contribué au changement en Camargue à travers le développement d'interactions de co-apprentissage avec les producteurs bien que cela ne se soit pas avéré crucial pour le succès de l'innovation dans son ensemble.

Les politiques agricoles, facteurs économiques, tests conduits indépendamment par les agriculteurs, et le cadre institutionnel, ont été les facteurs les plus importants et ayant eu le plus d'effets. En ce qui concerne SNA, il est apparu utile pour valider les dires des parties prenantes sur les relations entre acteurs ainsi que leurs implications sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Par exemple, le rôle grandissant joué par l'INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique) au sein du réseau d'acteurs a été confirmé de même que sa contribution à la transition vers l'agriculture biologique. Quant à l'approche ANT, elle permet de mettre en avant les relations interpersonnelles d'acteurs et leurs effets sur le développement de l'innovation. Nous soulignons en particulier l'importance des leaders d'opinion au cours des phases d'implémentation et de diffusion ; et montrons également l'importance de problématiser les questions devant être traitées afin d'améliorer le succès des programmes de recherche.

Mots clés -Evaluation ; Théorie du Programme ; Processus d'Innovation ; Analyse Ex-post et Participative du Chemin de l'Impact ; Analyse du Réseau Social ; Théorie de l'Acteur Réseau.

Extended Summary

General introduction and state of the art (part 1 & 2)

The rationale of evaluating ex-post innovation processes and research programs is mainly to report to stakeholders on the profitability and/or the social utility of the investments, as well as to increase the impacts of the research. But the question of how innovation processes and the contribution of the research should be assessed remains a complex and highly debated issue.

Available methods for evaluating impacts of research are often of quantitative nature and fail at highlighting the complex mechanisms involved in innovation processes.

This thesis intends to evaluate, develop and test different qualitative methods and ways of expost assessing the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, concerning the transition to organic agriculture. The general objectives of the thesis are as follows:

(1) To assess ex-post the impacts of the research program as well as the role and contribution of this research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. A qualitative mixed-method is developed for this purpose. This objective is addressed in the first article in part 4.

(2) To study the interest of performing a Social Network Analysis (SNA) in ex-post evaluating the impacts of the research on innovation processes and the society, regarding the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. This objective is addressed in the second article in part 5.

(3) To evaluate the interest of the Actor Network Theory (ANT), used as theoretical framework, in orienting evaluative questions for assessing ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes linked to the transition to organic farming. This objective is addressed in the third article in part 6.

(4) To question the global relevance and contribution of the different methodological developments (resulting from the objectives 1, 2, and 3) in understanding ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, with respect to the transition to organic agriculture. This objective is addressed in the discussion part (part 7).

A state of the art on the evaluation of the research based innovation and on impact assessment is made in part 2. We take account of a "dynamic" view to innovation, which focuses us on qualitative impact evaluation approaches. Two case studies are explored in this thesis. First is the Camargue case which is about the transition to organic rice farming systems in the Camargue territory in France. Second is the Bulgarian case study that deals with a specific and radical innovation, i.e. the Ecostop product to treat bees organically against the varroatosis disease.

Methodology (part 3)

The objectives of the thesis are discussed in more details together with the research questions and hypothesis. We also specify the conceptual and theoretical framework, which is based on the observation that innovations are increasingly complex and on the fact that we focus on the transition to organic farming. In order to better understand the "black box" of the innovation and how research outputs do generate outcomes and impacts, we take an interactive view and, more importantly, an evolutionary perspective to innovation, considering the latter as a "system". Furthermore, a short description of the two case studies is made (French Camargue and Bulgaria) and the rationale of selecting them is specified. The Camargue case is about the transition to organic rice farming systems. It was primarily chosen as it tackles a radical innovation and also because of the availability of numerous publicly documents on the research program as well as of the presence of a key informant from INRA (National Institute of Agronomic Research). As to the Bulgarian case, it was mainly chosen as it deals with a specific radical innovation, i.e. the Ecostop product, which has become one of the most important product against the varroatosis disease in Bulgaria. Finally, the structure of the thesis on the following parts is specified: the three articles (part 4, 5 and 6), the general discussion (part 7), and the general conclusion (part 8).

First article (part 4)

The first paper assesses the contribution, role, and impacts of the Science-Based Research and Innovation Program (ISRIP) on farmers' transition to organic production in the Camargue. The Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) approach is used to enlighten complex mechanisms in the innovation process; the Outcome Harvesting (OH) method to adapt PIPA to the requirements of an ex-post evaluation; and SNA to emphasize actors' relationships in relation to the development process. Other methods are also used in combination to deepen the analysis. We demonstrate that the research contributed to change by developing co-learning interactions with farmers, although this was not critical to the success of the innovation. Rather, we highlight that agricultural policies, economic factors, testing conducted independently by farmers, and the institutional framework, are the most important and influential factors.

Second paper (part 5)

The second paper evaluates the relevance of undertaking a SNA in deepening the understanding on the network of actors and the role it plays during the innovation process. Most importantly is the analysis of stakeholders' views, by taking the Camargue case study (in France) on the transition to organic farming as example. The analysis confirms the growing role played by INRA over the actor network as well as its contribution to the transition to organic agriculture.

The study also corroborates the importance of the institutionalization of the supply chain (creation of the specialized firm BIOSUD) that took place in 2003. SNA is able to validate stakeholders' views on actors' relationships and their implications on the transition to organic farming.

Third paper (part 6)

The third paper explores the potential of ANT in understanding the contribution of the actors and how they interact during the different phases of innovations linked to the transition to organic farming. The study relies on the French Camargue and Bulgarian case. We show that ANT is able to identify the role played by human actors and objects. Key actors are identified while highlighting interpersonal actors' relationships and their effects on the innovation development. We underline the importance of opinion leaders in the phases of implementation and diffusion; and also show the importance of problematizing the issues to be tackled in order to increase the success of research programs. We advocate that the role played by opinion leaders and individual actors should be further questioned when planning and implementing research programs.

(Résumé approfondi) Introduction gé é ale et état de l'a t pa tie &

L'intérêt d'évaluer ex-post les processus d'innovations et programmes de recherche est principalement de faire part aux parties prenantes de la rentabilité et/ou de l'utilité sociale des investissements, ainsi que d'améliorer les impacts de la recherche. Mais la question de comment les processus d'innovations et la contribution de la recherche pourrait être évalués reste un sujet complexe et très débattu. Les méthodes disponibles pour évaluer les impacts de la recherche sont souvent de nature quantitative et ne permettent pas de faire la lumière sur les mécanismes complexes opérant au cours du processus d'innovation.

Cette thèse a pour objet d'évaluer, de développer et de tester différentes méthodes qualitatives et façons d'évaluer ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et impacts sociétaux liés, concernant la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Les objectifs généraux de la thèse sont les suivants :

(1) Evaluer ex-post les impacts du programme de recherche ainsi que le rôle et la contribution de cette recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue. Une méthode qualitative mixte est développée à cette fin. Cet objectif est traité dans le premier article à la partie 4.

(2) Etudier l'intérêt de réaliser une Analyse du Réseau Social (SNA) pour évaluer ex-post les impacts de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, vis-à-vis de la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue. Cet objectif est traité dans le deuxième article à la partie 5.

(3) Evaluer l'intérêt de la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT), utilisée comme cadre théorique, dans l'orientation des questions évaluatives pour analyser ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations lies à la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Cet objectif est traité dans le troisième article à la partie 6.

(4) Interroger la pertinence globale et l'apport des différents développements méthodologiques (résultant des objectifs 1, 2 et 3) dans la compréhension, ex-post, des impacts et de la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et impacts sociétaux liés, en ce qui concerne la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Cet objectif est traité dans la partie discussion (partie 7).

Un état de l'art sur l'évaluation de la recherche en matière d'innovation et d'évaluation de l'impact est réalisé dans la deuxième partie. Nous retenons une vision « dynamique » de l'innovation, nous amenant à nous focaliser sur des approches qualitatives de l'évaluation de l'impact. Deux cas d'études sont explorés dans cette thèse. Le premier est le cas de la Camargue concernant la transition vers des systèmes rizicoles biologiques (en France). Le deuxième est le cas Bulgare, traitant d'une innovation radicale et spécifique, à savoir le produit Ecostop pour protéger biologiquement les abeilles contre la maladie de la varroatose.

Méthodologie (part 3)

Les objectifs de la thèse sont discutés plus en détails avec les questions de recherche et hypothèses. Nous précisons également le cadre conceptuel et théorique, qui se base sur l'observation que les innovations sont de plus en plus complexes et sur le fait que nous nous focalisons sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Afin de mieux comprendre la « boite noire » de l'innovation et comment les « outputs » de la recherche génèrent des « outcomes » et impacts, nous nous basons sur une vision interactive, et plus important encore, sur une perspective évolutionniste de l'innovation, considérant cette dernière comme un « système ».

De plus, une courte description des deux cas d'études est réalisée (la Camargue en France et

le cas Bulgare), et la raison de leur sélection spécifiée. Le cas de la Camargue concerne la transition à des systèmes rizicoles biologiques. Il a notamment été choisi car il traite d'une innovation radicale, mais aussi du fait de la disponibilité de nombreux documents sur le programme de recherche et de la présence d'un informateur clé de l'INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique). Quant au cas Bulgare, les raisons principales de sa sélection ont trait à l'accent mis sur une innovation radicale, c'est-à-dire sur le produit Ecostop, qui est devenu l'un des produits les plus importants contre la maladie de la varroatose en Bulgarie.

Enfin, la structure de la thèse pour les parties subséquentes est spécifiée : les trois articles (partie 4, 5 et 6), la discussion générale (partie 7), et la conclusion générale (partie 8).

Premier article (partie 4)

Le premier article évalue la contribution, le rôle, et les impacts de la recherche scientifique & programmes d'innovations liés, sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue. L'approche de l'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) est adoptée afin de faire The agricultural sector is facing important and growing challenges, particularly to answer the increased food demand and to tackle environmental and climatic issues. The agricultural sector accounts for biodiversity erosion, health problems, and pollution issues. It contributes to around 24% to greenhouse gas emissions worldwide (IPCC, 2014), mainly due to emissions of nitrous oxide and methane. It is generally recognized that the more intensive the farming production system is, the highest the greenhouse gas emissions are (e.g. [START_REF] Küstermann | Emission of Climate-Relevant Gases in Organic and Conventional Cropping Systems[END_REF][START_REF] Crosson | A review of whole farm systems models of greenhouse gas emissions from beef and dairy cattle production systems[END_REF]. That is the reason the call for developing alternative agricultural modes of production is of upmost importance, especially concerning the transition to organic farming systems.

These observations lead to a growing public awareness on the main challenges to be tackled in relation to agriculture and in order to preserve life on the planet, which calls for more accountability of firms and research organizations. The role of agricultural research in supporting innovations towards a more sustainable world thus becomes more important [START_REF] Fischer | Citizens, Experts, and the Environment: The Politics of Local Knowledge[END_REF]. Further agricultural research efforts are needed to achieving more sustainable farming systems and in turn to preserve life on the planet. Research on organic farming appears especially central as this production system is less intensive. Furthermore, several challenges in terms of scientific research still need to be solved regarding the transition to organic farming since no synthetic chemical inputs can be used according to regulations on organic agriculture.

As the agricultural sector presents market failures due to the relative inelasticity of the demand and offer and to the numerous number of economic agents, the non-perfect circulation of information and the presence of social and ecological externalities; economic markets cannot be sufficient by themselves to drive agriculture in a way that fulfills sustainable economic, social, and environmental goals. In absence of clear economic incentives, the private research within the agricultural sector is thereby insufficient. Public research is intended to fill that gap, including for sustainability and organic driven research.

However, public expenditures into agricultural research are called into question in the context of repeated financial and economic crisis and of the diminishing role of the states. Such expenditures have to be increasingly justified through scientific evidences. That is the reason evaluation issues, including ex-post assessments (evaluation taking place once the project / research program is terminated) have gained importance during the last decades. The development of evaluation studies is a response to a demand of transparency and accountability expressed by citizens and the society as a whole. The European Commission (EC) and international organizations have led this movement and required provision of evidences for the effects of research and development programs. Two main objectives of evaluating impacts5 of research are to measure the efficiency of interventions for accounting (CGIAR, 2000) and to bring out improvements in research policies and programs [START_REF] Mackay | Expanding the use of impact assessment and evaluation in agricultural research and development[END_REF].

In the case of the conversion to organic farming, Lamine et al. (2009) underlined the importance of extension services, collective actions and learning processes to impulse changes of farmers' practices. Social and technical innovations towards sustainable farming are complex and figure out a "black box" where research and innovation are supporting processes of change at individual, collective and institutional levels. Therefore, evaluating impacts of research programs on innovations linked to the transition to organic farming is even more complex as for other types of innovations.

Several approaches have been developed in the literature to ex-post evaluate impacts of research programs. But the question of how innovation processes driven by research should be assessed remains unanswered. Methods in the literature often fail at disentangling the "black box", that is, the complex process taking place between research investments on the one hand and the adoption of innovations and achievement of related impacts on the other [START_REF] Penfield | Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: A review[END_REF]. Such quantitative approaches include econometric models, non-monetary approaches, as well as multi-criteria and cost-benefit analysis.

Quantitative approaches are in fact not very suitable because of the non-exploration of the complex pathway by which results are obtained. This type of practice, based on a linear view of innovation, is still dominant in evaluation studies [START_REF] Cozzens | Knowledge to Policy[END_REF]. It relies on two hypothesis [START_REF] Matt | Opening the black box of impact -Ideal-type impact pathways in a public agricultural research organization[END_REF]: (1) a straightforward relation from investments leading to an increased stock of knowledge, which in turn leads to an increased productivity, and (2) the postulate that economic expansion necessarily implies social improvement. These hypotheses are no longer valid due to the shift from AKS (Agricultural Knowledge System) to AKIS (Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System) and from the Mode 1 to the Mode 2 of knowledge production by [START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF]. AKS and the Mode 1 do not recognize the role of complex interactive relationships nor intend to support sweeping changes [START_REF] Eu Scar | Agricultural knowledge and innovation systems in transition -a reflection paper[END_REF][START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF]. Therefore, evaluation methods based on a linear framework do not allow complex and dynamic underlying mechanisms to be taken into account, nor to recognize systems of reflexive, learning and network interactions (Knickel et al. 2009a).

Furthermore, the computation of internal rates of return in the agricultural sector has been central for research impact evaluation for many years [START_REF] Alston | The Economic of Agricultural R&D[END_REF]. This situation has somewhat caused an oversimplification of the understanding of the process of innovation and to a misleading or incomplete interpretation of its drivers. Additionally, quantitative approaches using the Total Factor Productivity (TFP) as outcome of research projects are often called into questions as regard to the consistency of the results obtained. The TFP growth calculation is faced with methodological issues in relation to its level and in understanding the sources of productivity [START_REF] Byerlee | Sense and sustainability revisited: the limits of total factor productivity measures of sustainable agricultural systems[END_REF][START_REF] Midmore | The Science of Impact and the Impact of Agricultural Science[END_REF]. The TFP is actually not sufficient to capture all the complexity of the dynamics involved in agricultural innovation processes, especially when it comes to sustainability issues [START_REF] Byerlee | Sense and sustainability revisited: the limits of total factor productivity measures of sustainable agricultural systems[END_REF].

The movement of privatization of agricultural extension services and the growing complexity of the agricultural innovation system, in the frame of a knowledge economy, calls for the development of another type of approach than the use of rates of return for evaluating the impacts of research. There is in particular a need to take better account of the role of coproduction and exchange of knowledge among an increasing diversity of stakeholders driving innovation at local level. This also implies that local stakeholders should be further involved in decision-making on agricultural research and projects related in order to increase their knowledge on innovation development and adoption behaviors & drivers, as well as for empowering them towards a more sustainable agriculture. Furthermore, the increasing complexity of agricultural innovations makes it difficult to conduct an attribution analysis by undertaking a quantitative method. The focus should rather be on a contribution analysis, for which qualitative approaches, theory-driven, appear more suitable. The idea is thereby to look for the contribution of the research on both the innovation process and achievement of impacts.

Qualitative theory-driven approaches also seem more suitable for the purpose of understanding the pathway to impacts in that they are more operating in reflecting the complex learning interactions as well as the composite and causal underlying mechanisms [START_REF] Hall | From measuring impact to learning institutional lessons: an innovation systems perspective on improving the management of international agricultural research[END_REF], Colinet et al. 2014). These methods include for example the SIAMPI approach [START_REF] Spaapen | SIAMPI final report[END_REF]) and the Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) [START_REF] Alvarez | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: a practical method for project planning and evaluation[END_REF]. That said, these approaches need to be significantly adapted and combined with others to be able to (1) evaluate impacts of research on agricultural innovation processes and by extension on the society, in an ex-post manner, while involving stakeholders into the process, and (2) to evaluate the contribution of the research in driving agricultural innovations and in achieving impacts.

We therefore identified the need to develop a new approach to ex-post evaluate the impacts and contribution of research programs on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming; and to go a step further towards developing non-traditional ways of evaluating impacts that take account of the new knowledge production paradigm.

This thesis intends to evaluate, develop and test different qualitative methods and ways of expost assessing the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic agriculture. As already said, this implies focusing on complex innovations characterized in particular by dynamic processes of knowledge cocreation. This is why a strong emphasis needs to be put on the role played by the network of actors on innovation processes and in achieving economic, social, and environmental impacts.

This thesis contains four objectives, which are further discussed in part 3 together with the specific research questions and hypothesis. The first three objectives are each tackled in a scientific article (part 4, 5, and 6), whilst the last objective is addressed in a general discussion part (part 7). The general objectives of the thesis are as follows:

(1) To assess ex-post the impacts of the research program as well as the role and contribution of this research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. A qualitative mixed-method is developed for this purpose. This objective is addressed in the first article in part 4.

(2) To study the interest of performing a Social Network Analysis (SNA) in ex-post evaluating the impacts of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. This objective is addressed in the second article in part 5.

(3) To evaluate the interest of the Actor Network Theory (ANT), used as theoretical framework, in orienting evaluative questions for assessing ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes linked to the transition to organic farming. This objective is addressed in the third article in part 6.

(4) To question the global relevance and contribution of the different methodological developments (resulting from the objectives 1, 2, and 3) in understanding ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, with respect to the transition to organic agriculture. This objective is addressed in the discussion part (part 7).

(Partie 1 : Introduction générale)

Le secteur agricole fait face à d'importants et croissants défis, en particulier pour répondre à la demande alimentaire grandissante et pour tenir compte des questions environnementales et climatiques. Le secteur agricole a une responsabilité en matière d'érosion de la biodiversité, de problèmes de santé, et de pollution. Il contribue d'environ 24% aux émissions de gaz à effet de serres au niveau mondial (IPCC, 2014), principalement à cause des émissions de méthane et d'oxyde d'azote. Il est généralement reconnu que, plus le système de production agricole est intensif, plus les émissions de gaz à effet de serre sont élevées (p.ex. [START_REF] Küstermann | Emission of Climate-Relevant Gases in Organic and Conventional Cropping Systems[END_REF][START_REF] Crosson | A review of whole farm systems models of greenhouse gas emissions from beef and dairy cattle production systems[END_REF]. C'est pourquoi il est d'autant plus important de développer des modes de productions agricoles alternatifs, comme la transition vers des systèmes agricoles biologiques.

Ces observations amènent à une plus grande prise de conscience publique des principaux challenges à relever dans le domaine de l'agriculture afin de préserver la vie sur la planète, ce qui appelle à davantage de responsabilité des entreprises et des organismes de recherche. Le rôle de la recherche agricole dans le développement d'innovations pour un monde plus durable apparait de plus en plus important [START_REF] Fischer | Citizens, Experts, and the Environment: The Politics of Local Knowledge[END_REF]. Des efforts supplémentaires en matière de recherche agricole sont nécessaires pour la mise au point de systèmes agricoles plus durables et en corolaire pour préserver la vie sur la planète. La recherche sur l'agriculture biologique semble particulièrement décisive dans la mesure où ce système de production est moins intensif.

De plus, de nombreux défis en matière de recherche scientifique doivent encore être résolus en ce qui concerne la transition à l'agriculture biologique puisque les produits chimiques de synthèse ne peuvent y être utilisés selon les régulations en la matière.

Dans la mesure où le secteur agricole présente des imperfections de marché du fait de la relative inélasticité de la demande et de l'offre ainsi que de l'atomicité des agents économiques, de l'imparfaite circulation de l'information ou encore de la présence d'externalités sociales et écologiques ; les marchés ne suffisent pas à amener l'agriculture dans une voie qui puisse répondre aux défis de la durabilité en termes économique, social et environnemental. En l'absence d'incitations économiques claires, la recherche agricole privée apparait insuffisante.

La recherche publique est appelée à remplir ce vide, notamment en ce qui concerne l'agriculture durable et biologique.

Cependant, les dépenses publiques dédiées à la recherche agricole sont remises en question dans un contexte de crises économiques et financières répétées et de diminution du rôle des états. Ces dépenses doivent de plus en plus faire l'objet de justifications scientifiques. C'est pourquoi le sujet de l'évaluation, notamment de type ex-post (réalisée une fois que la recherche / le programme de recherche est terminé), a gagné en importance au cours des dernières décennies. Le développement d'études d'évaluations est une réponse à la demande de transparence et de redevabilité exprimée par les citoyens et la société dans son ensemble. La Commission Européenne (EC) et les organisations internationales ont poussé ce mouvement et demandent des éléments de preuves scientifiques quant aux effets de la recherche et des programmes de développement. Deux objectifs principaux de l'évaluation de l'impact de la recherche sont de mesurer l'efficience des interventions pour rendre des comptes (CGIAR, 2000) ainsi que d'apporter des améliorations aux politiques et programmes de recherche [START_REF] Mackay | Expanding the use of impact assessment and evaluation in agricultural research and development[END_REF].

Dans le cas de la conversion à l'agriculture biologique, Lamine et al. (2009) [START_REF] Penfield | Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: A review[END_REF]. De telles approches quantitatives comprennent les modèles économétriques, les approches non-monétaires, de même que les analyses multicritères et de coûts-bénéfices.

Les approches quantitatives sont en fait peu appropriées du fait de l'absence d'exploration du chemin complexe par lequel les résultats ont été atteints. Ce type de pratique, basé sur une compréhension linéaire de l'innovation, est encore dominant dans les études d'évaluations [START_REF] Cozzens | Knowledge to Policy[END_REF]. Cela repose sur deux croyances de causalité [START_REF] Matt | Opening the black box of impact -Ideal-type impact pathways in a public agricultural research organization[END_REF]): (1) d'abord que les investissements amèneraient à une augmentation du stock de connaissances qui à son tour entraînerait une augmentation de la productivité, et (2) que la croissance économique implique nécessairement un meilleur environnement social. Ces hypothèses ne sont plus valides du fait du passage du cadre AKS ("Agricultural Knowledge System") vers le cadre AKIS ("Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System") et du Mode 1 vers le Mode 2 de la production de connaissances de Gibbons et al (1994). AKS et le Mode 1 ne reconnaissent pas le rôle des relations complexes d'interactions et ne permettent pas la réalisation de changements substantiels [START_REF] Eu Scar | Agricultural knowledge and innovation systems in transition -a reflection paper[END_REF][START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF]. Les méthodes d'évaluations basées sur ce cadre linéaire ne permettent pas de prendre en considération les mécanismes sous-jacents et complexes, ni ne reconnaissent les systèmes de réflexion et les interactions d'apprentissages et de réseau (Knickel et al. 2009a).

De plus, le calcul de taux de rentabilité interne dans le secteur agricole a longtemps été central dans les évaluations des impacts de la recherche [START_REF] Alston | The Economic of Agricultural R&D[END_REF]). D'une certaine manière, cette situation a conduit à une simplification excessive de la compréhension des processus d'innovations et à une interprétation erronée ou incomplète de ses déterminants. Aussi, les approches quantitatives utilisant la productivité totale des facteurs (TFP), comme impact des programmes de recherche, sont souvent remises en question eu égard à la consistance des résultats obtenus. Le calcul du taux de croissance du TFP fait face à des difficultés méthodologiques par rapport à son niveau et à la compréhension des sources de productivité [START_REF] Byerlee | Sense and sustainability revisited: the limits of total factor productivity measures of sustainable agricultural systems[END_REF][START_REF] Midmore | The Science of Impact and the Impact of Agricultural Science[END_REF]. Le TFP est en fait insuffisant pour capturer toute la complexité des dynamiques évoluant au cours des processus d'innovations agricoles, en particulier lorsque ces derniers traitent d'enjeux de durabilité [START_REF] Byerlee | Sense and sustainability revisited: the limits of total factor productivity measures of sustainable agricultural systems[END_REF].

Le mouvement de privatisation des activités de vulgarisation agricole de même que la complexité croissante du système d'innovation agricole, dans le cadre d'une économie de la connaissance, appellent au développement d'un autre type d'approche que les taux de retour pour évaluer les impacts de la recherche. Il y a en particulier un besoin de mieux prendre en compte le rôle de la co-production et des échanges de connaissances au sein d'une diversité croissante de parties prenantes qui soutiennent les innovations au niveau local. Cela signifie également que les parties prenantes locales devraient être plus impliquées dans les prises de décision sur la recherche agricole et des projets relatifs afin d'accroître leurs connaissances sur le développement des innovations, sur les comportements d'adoption et les leviers, ainsi que pour les responsabiliser à une agriculture plus durable. De plus, la complexité croissante des innovations agricoles rend difficile la réalisation d'une analyse d'attribution via l'emploi d'une méthode quantitative. L'accent devrait plutôt être mis sur une analyse de contribution, pour laquelle les approches qualitatives, basées sur la théorie, semblent plus appropriées.

L'idée est ainsi d'étudier la contribution de la recherche à la fois sur les processus d'innovations et à la fois sur l'obtention d'impacts.

Les approches qualitatives, basées sur la théorie, paraissent également plus adaptées pour comprendre le chemin emprunté vers l'obtention d'impacts en ce sens qu'elles sont plus à même de faire la lumière sur les interactions complexes d'apprentissage et les mécanismes causaux sous-jacents [START_REF] Hall | From measuring impact to learning institutional lessons: an innovation systems perspective on improving the management of international agricultural research[END_REF], Colinet et al. 2014). Ces méthodes comprennent par exemple l'approche SIAMPI [START_REF] Spaapen | SIAMPI final report[END_REF]) et l'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) [START_REF] Alvarez | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: a practical method for project planning and evaluation[END_REF] (2) Etudier l'intérêt de réaliser une analyse du réseau social (SNA) pour évaluer ex-post les impacts de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, vis-à-vis de la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue. Cet objectif est traité dans le deuxième article à la partie 5.

(3) Evaluer l'intérêt de la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT), utilisée comme cadre théorique, dans l'orientation des questions évaluatives pour analyser ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations liés à la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Cet objectif est traité dans le troisième article à la partie 6.

(4) Interroger la pertinence globale et l'apport des différents développements méthodologiques (résultant des objectifs 1, 2 et 3) dans la compréhension ex-post des impacts et de la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en ce qui concerne la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Cet objectif est traité dans la discussion générale à la partie 7.

Part 2: State of the art Abstract

In this part, we make a state of the art on the evaluation of the research based innovation and on impact assessment. We first show how the concept of innovation has evolved from a linear to a more interactive and then to an evolutionary perspective. This shift towards a "dynamic" conceptualization of innovation occurs in parallel to the shift from the classical economic paradigm to the evolutionary economic paradigm. We take account of a "dynamic" perspective to innovation, which focuses us on qualitative impact evaluation approaches. We show how the concept of evaluation has emerged and developed, before we present the most relevant qualitative impact assessment approaches. The Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) is seen as one of the most suitable one to evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society.

(Partie 2 : Etat de l'a t) (Résumé) Dans cette partie, nous faisons un état de l'art sur l'évaluation de la recherche en matière d'innovation ainsi que sur l'évaluation de l'impact. Nous montrons en premier lieu comment le concept d'innovation a évolué d'une vision linéaire à une perspective plus interactive puis évolutionniste. Ce mouvement vers une conceptualisation « dynamique » de l'innovation a évolué en parallèle du mouvement allant du paradigme de l'économie classique à une vision évolutionniste de l'économie. Nous tenons compte d'une perspective « dynamique » de l'innovation, ce qui nous amène à considérer les approches qualitatives de l'évaluation de l'impact. Nous montrons comment le concept d'évaluation a émergé puis s'est développé, avant que nous ne présentions les approches qualitatives les plus pertinentes pour l'évaluation de l'impact. L'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) est regardée comme l'une des plus pertinentes pour évaluer les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société.

Outline

In this part, we first make a literature review on innovation theories by presenting the main paradigms, especially on aspects of socioeconomics transition. The investigated theories are intended to help comprehend the concept of innovation and its evolution over time, in order to focus on the most suitable approaches for evaluating the impacts and contribution of the research on agricultural innovation processes and by extension on the society. In a subsequent section, we trace back the historical development of programs evaluation, from the emergence of the concept of measure & evaluation to the most recent evolutions, e.g. in terms of impact evaluation. Existing types of programs evaluation are then outlined before focusing on the most relevant qualitative methods for evaluating research programs based innovation.

Rationale for evaluating research programs

The rationale of evaluating research programs is as follows: (1) to report to stakeholders (public or private) on the return to their investments and whether the intended effects have been achieved or not, (2) to prove the achievement of impacts on populations, (3) to encourage accountability on allocation of resources across research programs, (4) to bring out improvements in policies and programs, and (5) to assess likely future impacts of the programs (CGIAR, 2000;[START_REF] Mackay | Expanding the use of impact assessment and evaluation in agricultural research and development[END_REF]OECD, 2008).

Furthermore, agricultural research based innovation appears to be of high interest to foster innovation development in the agricultural sector. Three main reasons are identified. Firstly, agricultural farms are relatively small enterprises and have limited capacities to engage in financial investments. A second reason is linked to the "homogeneous nature" of agricultural products, which makes it difficult to differentiate products on market and thus to obtain a substantial return on investment through higher prices or additional sales. A third reason is that the agricultural sector is relatively well protected compared to others. This may limit inducements to invest as farmers are a priori more guaranteed to remain in the agricultural economic sector. Furthermore, because of market failures (e.g. ecological externalities), economic markets cannot be sufficient by themselves to drive agriculture in a way that fulfills sustainable economic, social and environmental goals. In absence of sufficient economic incentives, the private research within the agricultural sector is thereby insufficient. Public research is intended to fill that gap, including for sustainability and organic driven research.

In summary, agricultural research, including the public one, is of great importance for developing wide-ranging and sustainable innovations in agriculture, but until now no clear evidences have been described in the literature on how research contributes to the development of agricultural innovations and in turn to the achievement of outcomes (changes in behaviors, adoptions and actions undertaken) and impacts (mid and long-term effects), including for the transition to a more sustainable and/or organic agriculture.

Economic theories 2.3.1 Definition of innovation

We call innovation the first commercialization of an invention, which is the first occurrence of an idea for a new product or process. Progress from invention to innovation requires different types of knowledge, competences, resources and capabilities to be combined [START_REF] Fagerberg | Innovation: A Guide to the Literature[END_REF]).

An innovation occurs within the market, companies or societies when new routines are emerging while current habits start losing ground [START_REF] Bianchi | Innovation and collective action: The dynamics of change[END_REF]. The notion of innovation has evolved over time in the way it is understood as a global concept. This issue is discussed after presenting in the subsequent section the main economic paradigms.

Main paradigms

Neoclassical perspective

It is not a long time ago that agricultural innovations were viewed as linear processes of public research and extension organizations leading to new goods and services. This view is in line with the neo-classical economy, which is based on the perfect rationality [START_REF] Arrow | Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy[END_REF]. This means that the decision to adopt innovations is driven by the meeting of the supply and demand (prices) within the framework of a perfect market [START_REF] Romer | Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth[END_REF]. In effect, market prices implicitly contain all the information needed to allow economic agents making the most efficient choices. In other words, this allows agents to adequately use the resources at their disposal to obtaining the highest possible profit. Mode1 by [START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF] reflects this intellectual current by considering innovation as a linear and relatively uncomplicated process.

In that model, the stakeholders involved in the knowledge transfer do not actively interact with the research system nor influence the creation of knowledge. Later, a deep revisiting of the linear model of innovation occurred. This paradigm shift is well enlightened by [START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF] with the shift from the Mode1 to the Mode2.

New Institutional Economics

The New Institutional Economics (NIE) is a set of schools of economic thought that emerged in the 70s. The development of NIE was based on pioneering work done by American institutionalists until 1945. The NIE questions the role of the institutions in the economy, that is, how they emerge and develop and what their objectives are. An institution can be defined as a set of norms and rules that frames and regulates behaviors.

The article "The Nature of the Firm" by [START_REF] Coase | The Nature of the Firm[END_REF] has been a crucial milestone in the development history of NIE, where the notion of transaction cost was introduced. Coase explained the existence of firms by the presence of transaction costs in exchanges between companies. The presence of a firm, as an intermediary and specialist actor, allows reducing the transaction costs through decreasing the number of transactions and/or improving their efficiency. Other economists' work contributed to this movement: Hayek and his work on the "knowledge" [START_REF] Hayek | Economics and Knowledge[END_REF][START_REF] Hayek | The Use of Knowledge in Society on JSTOR[END_REF]; but also the research efforts made by [START_REF] North | Institutional Change and Economic Growth[END_REF] and [START_REF] Williamson | The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach[END_REF][START_REF] Williamson | The economics of governance: framework and implications[END_REF], among others.

Williamson makes the hypothesis that economic agents are opportunists: they endeavor to ameliorate their personal situations by all possible means. However, this type of behavior increases transaction costs as there is a need of negotiating ex-ante and controlling the respect of the contracts. Furthermore, Williamson puts special emphasis on the specificity of assets, which implies changes in economic actors' relationships as well as modifications and more uncertainty in the transaction frequency (unique, occasional or sustained). An asset is supposed to be specific when a long-term investment is required and when investments cannot be redeployed to another activity. Moreover, North argues that contrary to what the neoclassical perspective suggests, the capital and technical progress factors cannot be described as economic growth determinants but as simple manifestations of it. North advocates that exchanges can only occur when there are both limited transaction costs and a low uncertainty.

To sum up, NIE places enterprises and firms at the core of the economic system, recognizes the presence of transaction costs, and thus underscores how complex economic agents' relationships are as well as the difficulty of finding the most efficient form of governance (market, firm, or hybrid).

Evolutionary economics

The neo-classical economy has left room for a more complex intellectual current, the evolutionary theory. Innovation processes are non-linear and characterized by the presence of feedback-loops. They can even be described as learning or cognitive processes implying incremental improvements. This perspective is based on the bounded rationality considering individuals' capabilities are limited by their restricted access to information (the market is not perfect) and by their partial cognitive abilities due to unpredictable risk (uncertainty). This view is opposite to the neo-classical economic thought, which considers the risk as predictable. These elements imply that individuals fail at making full use of the resources at their disposal and do not maximize profits accordingly. Furthermore, while Schumpeter viewed innovation as a linear process, from invention leading to innovation and in turn to diffusion [START_REF] Guellec | Économie de l'innovation[END_REF], he also advocated that economic agents are not "cold and calculating" and may have irrational behaviors through adventurer and pride considerations. This brings more complexity into innovation processes, which become unforeseeable, with speeding up, slowing down and crisis [START_REF] Leeuwis | Communication for Rural Innovation[END_REF]. Contrary to the proponents of the neoclassic economic thought, Schumpeter argued that the economic stationarity cannot exist because economic agents are not fully rational and also because the entrepreneur breaks out the "routine" of the Walras' general equilibrium [START_REF] Schumpeter | The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits[END_REF][START_REF] Marty | Analyse critique de l'oeuvre de Joseph Schumpeter[END_REF]. From a neo-classical perspective, the stationary equilibrium can only deviate very temporarily from its gravity center when an innovation emerges. However, according to Schumpeter, the entrepreneur follows a strategy of imperfect competition, as it needs to be protected from competitors by filling patents or creating monopolies [START_REF] Schumpeter | The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits[END_REF].

Towards an interactionist and evolutionary view of innovation

Towards an interactionist view of innovation

The model of the Technology push (or Research push) was developed in the 50s and constituted the most common innovation model during the 20 th century. The Technology push is a linear model, which considers innovation as directly arising from industry and scientific discoveries. This model is made of four different and successive phases: invention, study, implementation, and marketing. The Demand-pull model was later developed by Jacob [START_REF] Schmookler | Invention and economic growth[END_REF].

Contrary to the Technology push that emphasizes the role played by science, the Demand-pull underlines the "sovereignty" of the consumer on innovation development. In other words, the innovation is triggered by the demand that affects the speed of the technological diffusion. The Technology-push and Demand-pull models are still dominant in the way innovations are conceptualized and understood. These straightforward models were elaborated following Schumpeter's ideas, which focused on technological aspects of innovation. However, these models are of linear nature, where all the complexity involved in innovation processes is excluded. [START_REF] Kline | An overview of innovation[END_REF] enounced four important critics in that respect: (1) innovation processes start in the field of science, but Kline and Rosenberg stated that they result from successive development objectives of new products and processes, (2) the role of technology for science is omitted, (3) a direct link is established between innovation development and new scientific knowledge whereas most of the innovations are initiated by available scientific knowledge, and (4) process innovations are not evaluated accurately.

To answer critics on the very linear conception of innovation processes, [START_REF] Kline | An overview of innovation[END_REF] have developed the so-called Chain-linked model. Under this model, both the demand and technology are expected to play an important role in fostering innovations, which are hence understood as dynamic processes and not only as a set of multiple independent and successive phases. The different phases of the Chain-linked model are as follows: (1) identification of a market opportunity or of new relevant scientific and technological data, (2) the invention, detailed conception, and trials, (3) the final conception and production, and (4) the distribution and commercialization. This model is characterized by the presence of feedback loops and interactions by the means of systemic linkages between phases but also through recognizing interconnections between market, science, and technology. The Actor Network Theory (ANT) emerged later (together with managerial approaches) as a more complex type of innovation stressing the importance of knowledge and information sharing.

ANT, also known as sociology of associations or translations, was developed in the 80s in the field of sociology of sciences and technics [START_REF] Matos | The translations and the organizing of scientific practices in R&D biotechnology[END_REF]. It is an interdisciplinary approach, seeing the world as composed by essence of networks [START_REF] Law | Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity[END_REF]. ANT gained recently in popularity in the area of innovation research [START_REF] Hoholm | Studying innovation processes in real-time: The promises and challenges of ethnography[END_REF][START_REF] Ramírez | How Shell's Domains Link Innovation and Strategy[END_REF][START_REF] Du Preez | Actor Network Theory and Technology Innovation: Advancements and New Concepts[END_REF]. It aims at investigating the way networks of actors and social effects come into being and develop, the process of actors' enrollment, the mechanisms of persuasion and influence acting over these networks [START_REF] Mouritsen | Intellectual capital and the 'capable firm': narrating, visualising and numbering for managing knowledge[END_REF], as well as how technology favors the organization of the actions undertaken [START_REF] Chen | An actor-network perspective on evaluating the R&D linking efficiency of innovation ecosystems[END_REF]. ANT examines how actors are seen by their peers and themselves, what they obtain or abandon to get involved, and what their objectives and motivations are [START_REF] Lockie | Deliberation and Actor-Networks: The 'Practical' Implications of Social Theory for the Assessment of Large Dams and Other Interventions[END_REF]. Economic agents' interactions stabilize the knowledge network by the means of "boundary objects" e.g. codes of practice (Šūmane, 2010). This process of stabilization is not simple given the different actors' interests that need to align with each other. This process is known as process of translation [START_REF] Callon | Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge[END_REF]. The designers of ANT share the view that innovation is no longer triggered by an isolated actor; rather ANT sees innovation as a novel combination of knowledge and as a non-linear and interactive process in which actors are transformed during translations [START_REF] Callon | Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge[END_REF][START_REF] Latour | Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society[END_REF][START_REF] Law | Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion[END_REF]. Moreover, it should be emphasized that ANT is based on the principle of "symmetry", by giving to human and non-human actors, also referred as "actants", equal analytical priority [START_REF] Law | Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity[END_REF][START_REF] Walsham | Actor-Network Theory and IS Research: Current Status and Future Prospects[END_REF][START_REF] Akrich | Sociologie de la traduction : Textes fondateurs[END_REF].

Towards an evolutionary perspective of innovation

The evolutionist perspective of economics then developed, considering the economy in terms of disequilibrium. Innovation is hence seen as a system. According to [START_REF] Bergek | Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis[END_REF], this system presents seven functions: (1) knowledge development and diffusion, (2) influence on direction of search and identification of opportunities, (3) entrepreneurial experimentation and management of risk and uncertainty, (4) market function, (5) resource mobilization, (6) legitimation, and (7) development of positive externalities. Nelson and Winton are two crucial contributors to the evolutionary economics. These authors underline the important role played by organizational routines, drawing on the idea that firms permanently recombine routines depending on existing dynamics [START_REF] Nelson | An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change[END_REF]. This highlights the need to consider firms on different temporal steps and selection processes that depend on the technical regime as well as on organizational and institutional changes in progress [START_REF] Dosi | Technological paradigms and technological trajectories[END_REF][START_REF] Lazaric | Les théories économiques évolutionnistes[END_REF]).

An innovation system can be defined as "all important economic, social, political, organizational, and other factors that influence the development, diffusion, and use of innovations." (Edquist, 1997, p14). It is composed of institutions and actors' network which foster, diffuse and utilize innovations (e.g. [START_REF] Malerba | Sectoral systems of innovation and production[END_REF]. The approach of innovation system takes its roots in the work of Freeman. In the 80s, the collaboration between Freeman and the IKE group (Innovation, Knowledge and Economic dynamics) from the department of business studies at the Aalborg University was considered important to combining the different work other scholars previously made on this topic [START_REF] Freeman | Technological infrastructure and international competitiveness[END_REF][START_REF] Lundvall | Product Innovation and User-Producer Interaction[END_REF]. According to [START_REF] Carlsson | Research policy. Research Policy[END_REF], this concept aims at understanding how a set of various organizations, institutions and actors (embedded in networks) interact with each other for developing innovations (national, regional or sectoral level). This development was based on the observation that the success of innovations can be due to networks and institutions that facilitate learning processes and information sharing.

The concept of innovation system has been broadly used so far, not only by research actors but also by international development organizations like the World Bank and the EU. Yet, this concept is not unidimensional but encompasses different approaches. These include Systems of Innovation (SI) as well as Technological and Sociotechnical Systems (TSS).

o

Systems of Innovation

The approach of SI was widely used in the 90s [START_REF] Edquist | The Systems of Innovation Approach and Innovation Policy: An account of the state of the art[END_REF], following the pioneering explorations of [START_REF] Freeman | Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lesson from Japan[END_REF], [START_REF] Lundvall | National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning[END_REF] and [START_REF] Nelson | National Innovation Systems : a Comparative Analysis[END_REF]. SI has been inspired from the evolutionary theory, and views innovation process as evolutionary. National Systems of Innovation (NSI) emerged first, before sectoral and regional declinations were developed.

 National Systems of Innovation

The objective of NSI is to help comprehend innovation and process of learning as well as to address political recommendations. The chain-linked model we presented earlier also acted as a bridge towards the development of NSI since it further elaborated linear models like the Demand Pull. Furthermore, it was increasingly recognized that markets do not only rely on prices and quantities but also on actors' connections as well as on knowledge and interactive learning processes. These interactions are seen as organized markets shaped by elements of trust, power and loyalty [START_REF] Lundvall | Product Innovation and User-Producer Interaction[END_REF]. Another element that gave impetus to the development of NSI is the significant differences between nations e.g. in terms of habits, routines and rules ("simple" SI are not suitable for all countries).

 Sectoral and Regional Systems of Innovation During the last decades, new models highlighting the systemic nature of innovation were developed, focusing at other geographical scales. These new models are alternative sectoral and regional SI, which concentrate on diverse local products or technologies [START_REF] Mowery | Sources of industrial leadership : studies of seven industries[END_REF]. It was observed an increasing importance of more sectoral systems like technological districts, local clusters and production systems. [START_REF] Porter | The competitive advantage of nations[END_REF], a well-known author, has shown that international competitiveness relies on specialized clusters or districts. The opening of commercial and financial borders in the 80s and 90s has been giving increasing importance to product quality (the "differentiation"). Furthermore, [START_REF] Krugman | Geography and trade[END_REF] and [START_REF] Audretsch | Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation and production[END_REF], have described four advantages regarding such local organizations: (1) shared labor market composed of qualified employees with specific competencies, (2) increased information flow and knowledge spillovers due to the internalization of the tacit knowledge within the localized technological system, (3) possible expansion of specific intermediate good industries, and (4) less expensive provision of non-exchangeable inputs exclusive to the industry.

Actually, all SI approaches, either national or sectoral / regional, are complementary, considering learning as interactive amongst organizations (formal structures like private firms, governmental and non-governmental agencies, associations, with clear goals) [START_REF] Edquist | Systems of innovation : technologies, institutions, and organizations[END_REF][START_REF] Markard | Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework[END_REF]. Still, institutions (set of routines, habits, rules, technical and sociocultural norms, regulations and laws, etc.) are seen as fundamental components, shaping organizations' activities and the way they interact with each other [START_REF] Edquist | Systems of innovation : technologies, institutions, and organizations[END_REF][START_REF] Markard | Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework[END_REF]. Organizations develop under the umbrella of institutions. Institutions can also be influenced by organizations insofar as they sometimes arise within organizations like firms.

Institutions and organizations are strongly connected together in a complex and interactive way, which in turn influences SI [START_REF] Edquist | Institutions and organisations in systems of innovation[END_REF].

o Technological and Sociotechnical Systems A Technological System (TS) can be defined as: "networks of agents interacting in a specific technology area under a particular institutional infrastructure to generate, diffuse and utilize technology" (Carlsson and Stankiewicz, 1991, p94). TS are defined in terms of knowledge or competence flow rather than flow of ordinary goods and services. As for NSI, the approach of TS refers to an evolutionary view of economics and takes a system perspective while attempting to explicate innovation processes and economic growth. An important critic addressed to earlier models is the omission of the "technical" parameter as an endogenous factor to the production function and therefore to innovation and economic growth. The nation level recognized in NSI is in fact not necessarily the right level of delimitation to analyze innovations. Sectoral and regional models were developed to focus on particular products and technologies. The rationale of taking a TS perspective is in line with this; the boundaries of a TS are not necessarily those of a nation. Therefore, there is a need to focus on TS as such, without considering the geographical level. "TS involve market and non-market interaction in three types of networks: buyer-supplier relationships, problem-solving networks, and informal networks. TS] capture and enhance technological spill-overs and] create favorable conditions for market exchange" (Carlsson, 1997, p5).

Technologies play a key role within sociotechnical systems. Technologies can improve the efficiency of a given production system by reducing the use of natural, capital and labor inputs (OECD, 2005). Sectoral SI focus considerably on knowledge development but much less on technological diffusion and wide changes. The latter rely not only on technological innovations but more generally on new sociotechnical systems. This is due to the strong embeddedness of technologies into sociotechnical systems. Technologies themselves are not able to develop and diffuse without appropriate social functions in terms of communication, housing, transport and so on [START_REF] Geels | From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems[END_REF].

o The Quintuple Helix Model

The Quintuple Helix Model represents a cooperation and knowledge system composed of social interactions and highlighting the role of the know-how in developing innovations for a sustainable development. It highlights the perspective of social ecology of the society, and considers the natural environment as a system of knowledge creation by itself.

This model was developed from previous models of knowledge creation and innovation creativity, following a continuous development series:

 a) The Mode1 by [START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF] focused on the role of university research in the frame of a linear view of innovation;  b) The Mode2 by [START_REF] Gibbons | The new production of knowledge : the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies[END_REF] started to recognize the role of complex interactive relationships. The Mode2 is characterized by "(1) knowledge produced in the context of application, (2) transdisciplinarity, (3) heterogeneity and organizational diversity, (4) social accountability and reflexivity, (5) and quality control" (Carayannis et al. 2012, p3);  c) The Triple Helix combined the perspectives of knowledge creation from the Mode1 and Mode2reflexive communications and user-producer interactionsas subdynamics of the whole system. It emphases on university-industry-government relations and on the knowledge economy, and is "a model of "trilateral networks and hybrid organizations" of "university-industry-government relations" " (Carayannis et al. 2012, p3);  d) The Quadruple Helix is similar to the Triple one but add an additional Helix, the "media-based and culture-based public".

In mode details, the Quintuple Helix Model is "interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary at the same time: the complexity of the five-helix structure implies that a full analytical understanding of all helices requires the continuous involvement of the whole disciplinary spectrum, ranging from the natural sciences (because of the natural environment) to the social sciences and humanities (because of society, democracy and the economy)" (Carayannis and Campbell, 2010, p30). This model is useful in solving problems in relation to sustainable development and to the socio-ecologic transition. This transition is made possible by the means of knowledge coproduction for the "natural". The latter is conceptualized by the new Helix, called "the natural environment". The five helix of the model are as follows:

(1) Political system: this helix refers to the "political and legal capital", e.g. ideas and laws;

(2) Education system: this helix comprises academia, universities, higher education systems, and schools. It refers to the "human capital";

(3) Economic system: this helix is composed of industry / industries, firms, services and banks. It refers to the "economic capital";

(4) Natural environment: this helix is relevant to promote a more sustainable development. It refers to the notion of "natural capital";

(5) Media-based and culture-based public: this helix comprises and associate together two forms of capital: "social capital" and "capital of information".

Transition theories

The notion of transition has often been used in the literature to characterize the shift from communist to capitalistic regimes in the 90s. This paradigm shift towards capitalist regimes gave rise to the emergence of this notion of transition [START_REF] Dobry | Democratic and Capitalist Transitions in Eastern Europe: Lessons for the Social Sciences[END_REF].

a) Socio-Technical Transitions

The theory of transitions encompasses different approaches aiming at assessing how Socio-Technical Transitions (STT) are being developed. STT represents changes in technological and social relationships dynamics towards a new system. Four approaches of STT are as follows:

(1) the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) by Geels ( 2005), (2) the IS [START_REF] Jacobsson | Innovation system analyses and sustainability transitions: Contributions and suggestions for research[END_REF], (3) the complex systems (Loorbach, 2010), and (4) the evolutionary systems [START_REF] Safarzyńska | Evolutionary models in economics: A survey of methods and building blocks[END_REF]. The paradigm shift from communist to capitalistic regime is a good illustration of a radical innovation that is able to destabilize the pre-existing regime.

The regime or the "deep structure" accounts for the stability of an existing STT [START_REF] Geels | From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems[END_REF].

This system is sheltered by the presence of lock-in mechanisms, anchored institutions, established technologies, social networks, routines, etc. These elements, that constitute the regime, should evolve to facilitate the emergence and development of radical changes. Only incremental innovations can develop without much hindrances [START_REF] Kemp | Constructing Transition Paths Through the Management of Niches[END_REF][START_REF] Schot | Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy[END_REF]. "Niches" can destabilize a regime. A "niche" can be defined as a "discrete application domain (habitat) where actors are prepared to work with specific functionalities, accept such teething problems at higher costs, and are willing to invest in improvements of new technology and the development of new markets" (Hoogma et al. 2005, p4). In other words, a niche refers to a protected space (with its own rules, institutions, habits, etc.), where new technologies and socio-technical practices emerge from the selection pressures of "normal" markets of regimes [START_REF] Geels | Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective[END_REF] and which could replace the existing regime [START_REF] Schot | Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy[END_REF]. At a higher level, we observe the "landscape", which represents the general structuration of the socio-economic system with its own laws, robust principles, and so on [START_REF] Markard | Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework[END_REF][START_REF] Geels | From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems[END_REF]. Changes in the regime are supposed to bring incremental modifications in the "landscape", which can in turn open windows of opportunity for the development of "niches". Yet, the development of these "niches" is likely to alter the regime.

b) Sustainability transitions

STT can be framed towards achieving sustainable objectives ("sustainability transition").

According to [START_REF] Raven | Transitions and strategic niche management: towards a competence kit for practitioners[END_REF], this process is made of four steps: (1) problematization, (2) development of a vision of sustainability, (3) mobilization of actors, and (4) monitoring, evaluating, and learning.

Moreover, the transition towards a more sustainable agriculture aims at achieving general sustainability goals rather than only exploring new technologies, innovations, and so on [START_REF] Smith | The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions[END_REF]. This implies that farmers may not have direct financial benefits and therefore incentives to adopt "sustainable" innovations. The improvement of the sustainability at a global level does not necessarily affects positively farms' profitability. As a result, public intervention is fundamental for internalizing externalities such as environmental damages as well as for creating "artificial" incentives to increase farmers' adoption of sustainable innovations.

However, this implies revisiting the global economic conditions (subsidies, taxes, etc). The sustainability transition is a complex process, which is situated at the interface between innovations, new technologies, policy goals, and the economic environment. Results are highly dependent from institutions and public authorities' will, and on how they perceive the notion of sustainability.

c) Actor Network Theory

The Actor Network Theory (ANT) is an approach that emerged in the 90s in the field of sociology. This approach was first discussed in section 2.3.3. Here we highlight the process of translation of ANT. This process is understood as "a vague initial idea [that] is shaped, diverted and consolidated, to build up a network of allies who believe in, test, and carry forward the development of the innovation" (Arnaboldi and Spiller, 2011, p642). The transition process is made of 4 stages:

(1) Problematization: it allows interested actors to delineate the problem and to become essential in solving it. These actors then raise awareness in the network as to the importance of the problem to be tackled in order to convince other actors to take part in the process;

(2) Interessement: this phase aims at enrolling additional actors, either humans or objects, by the means of discourses and negotiation processes. The more the number of enrolled actors, the more the network is potentially viable;

(3) Enrollment: this can be defined as the strategies and set of tactics used for creating a stable network of alliances. That said, this stability depends on the process of negotiation taking place in the network;

(4) Mobilization of allies: the level of mobilization of allies is linked to their degree of acceptance on the innovation development.

Throughout this part on economic theories, it was recalled that innovation processes shifted from a linear perspective, e.g. with the Technology push model, to a more interactive and systemic approach. The Quintuple Helix Model is of particular interest since it takes a system perspective and shows how a socio-ecological transition is being materialized. We also reminded how complex this transition is.

Historical development of programs evaluation

This section aims to better comprehend why and how programs evaluation have emerged, in general and within the agricultural sector.

Until the year 2000

The notion of the measure goes back to the antiquity period. It steadily developed with the implementation of academic tests, which were the first attempts of evaluating programs in the history. The 19 th century was also that of evaluation development, with in particular the development of an empirical approach of programs evaluation [START_REF] Madaus | Program Evaluation[END_REF]. This evolution was encouraged by the development of social associations that were created in the second half of the 19 th century [START_REF] Madaus | Program Evaluation[END_REF].

The effectiveness and testing were the major features of the first third of the 20 th [START_REF] Madaus | Program Evaluation[END_REF], in which the concept of evaluation arised (in the 30s). The period from 60s to 80s was that of the "Science-Driven Wave", which saw the "triumph" of the so-called "radical rationalism" [START_REF] Vedung | Four Waves of Evaluation Diffusion[END_REF]. There was a demand for public policy to be more functional and scientific [START_REF] Hajer | Deliberative policy analysis : understanding governance in the network society[END_REF]. "To become more rational, public decision-making bodies should exploit the full arsenal of methods for program budgeting, zero-based budgeting, multi-annual planning, future studies, systems analysis and cost-benefit analysis, which are sometimes jointly called 'policy analysis' " (Vedung, 2010, p265). The radical rationalism implied that any public intervention should not occur before scientific evidences on the problem to be tackled are found (description of the problem, goals and likely impacts, diverse costs, etc).

From the 70s, the field of evaluation has increasingly become a specialty, and several methodologies, training materials, and so on, have developed. The 70s were those of the "Dialogue-Oriented Wave", being materialized by an increasing involvement of various stakeholders (not only politicians) into evaluation procedures [START_REF] Vedung | Four Waves of Evaluation Diffusion[END_REF]. This type of evaluation is also named as "stakeholder evaluation" and sometimes as "democratic evaluation" since the process was "supposed to be conducted by discussion dialogue and communication among equals, even deliberation avant la lettre" (Vedung, 2010, p268). During the "Dialogue-Oriented wave", [START_REF] Guba | Fourth generation evaluation[END_REF] have pushed forward the constructivist paradigm, which has dissimilarities compared to the positivist approach at ontological level (the objective reality is refuted as realities are socially built) but also at epistemological level (subjectivity of evidences: the inquirer cannot be separated from the inquired person) and methodological level (the way the objective reality occurs cannot be determined because this reality is denied).

The 80s were those of a formalist type of approach with the development of several standards to assess evaluation [START_REF] Rossi | Standards for evaluation practice[END_REF]. This period was also that of the "Neo-Liberal Wave" [START_REF] Vedung | Four Waves of Evaluation Diffusion[END_REF], with a shift from public intervention to a more market and customer oriented economic system. "What was novel was not that goal achievement, effectiveness, efficiency and productivity became catch phrases but that these objectives were to be achieved by government marketization instead of stakeholder involvement or scientification from the top down" (Vedung, 2010, p270). The neo-liberal movement is known as New Public Management (NPM) and has led to new evaluation practices in relation to three elements:

(1) the "victory" of the leadership concept, with the conviction that giving more freedom to managers fosters the development of more efficient companies; leaders should thus be evaluated for their performance, competence, and so on;

(2) the development of a more indirect control of enterprises by the state due to the movement of privatization; and the increasing use of outsourcing created a new relation of principal-agents, which requires these agents to be supervised by the principal for their reliability and performance (with the help of accountability tools);

(3) The reform of organizations that calls for a better consideration of customers' needs and preferences; the evaluation helping to assess the degree of satisfaction of these customers (with consumers' surveys).

Several evaluation approaches were developed, e.g. the transactional model [START_REF] Rippey | Studies in transactional evaluation[END_REF], the case study [START_REF] Stake | The Case Study Method in Social Inquiry[END_REF] and the responsive model of evaluation [START_REF] Guba | Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches[END_REF].

The latter aims at evaluating the usefulness of local programs and to formulate recommendations for their improvements. As to the transaction model, it focuses at changes in the way people are affecting with each other [START_REF] Wallis | Evaluation Theory, Models, and Applications[END_REF]. [START_REF] Fischer | Politics, Values, and Public Policy[END_REF] also has contributed to the development of evaluation, based on critics of the so-called "positivist approach" in the domain of public policy evaluation. Fischer developed a more comprehensive approach, the "levels model", focusing on the way of tackling questions related to policy evaluation. This model contains 4 levels (with sub-questions at each level): (1) technical verification of program's objectives (intentions, empirical consequences, unanticipated effects, alternative means), (2) situational validation of policy goals (relevance, context, multiple goals, and precedence), (3) vindication of political choice (system consequences, equity, ideological conflicts), and (4) choice of social order (alternative social orders). From the point of view of Fischer, this model allows broadening the "narrow technocratic orientation of conventional policy evaluation" (Fischer, 1996, p17) by involving in particular a sufficient diversity of actors in the evaluation process.

After the year 2000

Since early in the 21 th century, a considerable and growing attention is paid to program evaluation and impact assessment. This change finds its roots in two events: (1) the failure of the Washington consensus, and (2) the Lisbon Strategy (2001). The Washington consensus aimed at finding solutions to the important debt problems encountered in several developing countries during the 80s. The Latin America was particularly affected by this problem, which was due to the important rise of their external debt in dollar caused by an important decline of their domestic currencies' exchange rate. Several measures were programmed in order to solve this situation. They were promoted by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and were largely inspired by the economist John Williamson in 1989. The ideas coined by Williamson were strongly in line with the economic liberalism, especially concerning the abolishment of economic borders and the liberalization of the domestic economic market. But the Washington consensus did not produce the expected results. The international funding institutions have recognized this failure. It followed a contentious debate on the success of liberal prescriptions on the one hand and on the effectiveness of international supports on the other. As an example, [START_REF] Easterly | The Lost Decades: Developing Countries' Stagnation in Spite of Policy Reform 1980-1998[END_REF] advocated that the policies conducted in 80s and 90s did lead to economic stagnation in developing countries. Significant methodological issues were posed regarding the way Washington consensus' impacts should be evaluated. Furthermore, the funding institutions did not plan evaluating the impacts of the program, whether in an initinere or ex-post manner. The publication "When will we ever learn? Improving lives through impact evaluation" lies in this frame of reproaches (Evaluation Gap Working Group, 2006). As to the Lisbon Strategy, the main goals were to make the EU the most competitive and dynamic knowledge based economy before the year 2010, with a view to generating a sustainable economic growth together with a continued improvement in the job market and a greater societal cohesion. Innovation and research were seen as the main strategic drivers for reaching this objective. A clear focus was put on the improvement of the socio-economic impacts of the EU research.

The European Commission has developed a long-term research strategy in order to enhance impacts of the European agricultural research and innovation (European Commission, 2015a).

The Commission is devoting an increasing budget for this purpose since the dramatic surge in food prices in 2008 and following FAO's prospective scenarios regarding nutrition and food security issues (European Commission, 2015a). These issues are raising more awareness on the need to support agriculture and develop innovations. At the same time, a growing attention is paid to the effectiveness and efficiency of research programs in a context of scarce financial resources. Results need to be evidence-based and therefore indicators of performance and impacts are being developed. This is the "evidence movement", also known as the "evidence wave". The task of developing "Horizon 2020 indicators" highlights this process (European Commission, 2015b), as it intends assessing results and impacts of the EU Horizon 2020 Value Mapping [START_REF] Bozeman | A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective[END_REF], the SIAMPI i.e. Social Impact Assessment Method [START_REF] Spaapen | SIAMPI final report[END_REF], and the Payback Framework [START_REF] Donovan | The 'Payback Framework' explained[END_REF]. In the agricultural sector, three important organizations are involved in this movement: the CGIAR (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) [START_REF] Walker | Strategic Guidance for Ex Post Impact Assessment of Agricultural Research[END_REF], the CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) (Acil Tasman, 2010), and the EMBRAPA (Brazilian Corporation of Agricultural Research) [START_REF] Avila | EMBRAPA Experience on the Impact Assessment of Agricultural R&D: 15 Years Using a Multidimentional Approach[END_REF]).

Existing programs and evaluation approaches 2.5.1 Current concept of evaluation

According to the OECD (2002), the term of evaluation can be defined as "the systemic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, program or policy, its design, implementation and results. The aim is to determine the degree of relevance and fulfillment of the objectives, as well as the development efficiency, the effectiveness, the impacts and the sustainability. An evaluation should provide information that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both recipients and donors". Moreover, the concept of evaluation is generally well distinguished from the concept of research [START_REF] Weiss | Evaluation : methods for studying programs and policies[END_REF], and from that of monitoring. Research is a systemic investigation, with the objective to set up principles and laws. The research aims at identifying scientific explanations on how variables interact with each other. The objective is to draw conclusions upon these findings, to allow researchers generalizing results and making hypothesis, principles and laws. Monitoring specifically aims at collecting data during on-going programs in order to bring improvements directly in the process advancement, and to help achieve the expected results. Furthermore, monitoring is not intended to determine whether impacts are attributable to the program but only if they are attained and why. TABLE 1 summarizes the most important differences between the concept of monitoring and evaluation.

Monitoring Evaluation

To clarify the objectives of the program.

To analyze whether the expected objectives have been reached. To link inputs and activities to the objectives.

To assess specific causal contributions of activities to results.

To set performance indicators and targets, based on the objectives.

To investigate the implementation process.

To regularly gather data on these indicators and evaluate whether the targets have been reached or not.

To identify the unexpected results.

To report advancements to leaders and warm them in case of a problem.

To draw conclusions on the success or potential of the program, identify the main lessons learned and provide avenues for improvements.

Source: [START_REF] Kusek | Ten Steps to a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System[END_REF].

TABLE 1: MONITORING VS. EVALUATION
Furthermore, according to the OECD (2008), the concept of evaluation presents five important criteria:

(1) Relevance: to estimate the pertinence of the program with respect to the local or national objectives and priorities;

(2) Effectiveness: to identify whether the objectives have been achieved and to what extent results answer the expected goals;

(3) Efficiency: to assess whether the objectives were efficiently achieved. The ratio spending / results can inform this;

(4) Impact: to evaluate the impacts being attributable to the program;

(5) Sustainability: to evaluate the sustainability or permanence of the intervention.

Time period of the evaluation

The evaluation can be carried out at different periods: ex-ante; in-itinere; ex-post; or a combination between ex-ante, in-itinere, and ex-post.

Ex-ante evaluation [START_REF] Dufumier | Les projets de de ́veloppement agricole : manuel d'expertise[END_REF]OECD, 2008;[START_REF] Gertler | L'évaluation d'impact en pratique[END_REF][START_REF] Joly | Agricultural research impact assessment[END_REF]): an ex-ante evaluation mainly aims at measuring the expected impacts of a future intervention as well as understanding the mechanisms by which the program will or could achieve the desired impacts. It can also serve to build scenarios, anticipate potential risks and particular needs, and therefore to adapt a future intervention. In general, such an evaluation is conducted via economic modelling, scenario development, or structural models. Structural models describe the different "elements" constituting a system and how they are interrelated. Examples of such "elements" are a package, an interface, and an object.

In-itinere evaluation (OECD, 2008;[START_REF] Gertler | L'évaluation d'impact en pratique[END_REF][START_REF] Joly | Agricultural research impact assessment[END_REF]: the objective of an in-itinere evaluation is to adjust the innovation, when on-going, to increase its chances of success and reach the expected impacts. To do so, the evaluation sheds light on the first effects of the program by identifying its actual weaknesses and strengths. Moreover, an initinere evaluation can only be performed when the evaluator has sufficient knowledge on the innovation and related mechanisms, as well as on the different actors being involved in the program.

Ex-post evaluation [START_REF] Maredia | Ex Post Evaluation of Economic Impacts of Agricultural Research Programs: a Tour of Good Practice[END_REF][START_REF] Boardman | Cost-benefit analysis : concepts and practice[END_REF]OECD, 2008;[START_REF] Walker | Strategic Guidance for Ex Post Impact Assessment of Agricultural Research[END_REF][START_REF] Gertler | L'évaluation d'impact en pratique[END_REF]): an ex-post evaluation takes place after the program is completed.

It assesses the observed effects and impacts of the intervention, positive or negative and expected or not, while seeking to understand the underlying mechanisms. Depending on the delay between the end of the program and the evaluation; short, mid or long-term impacts may be considered. Such an analysis requires the innovation to be at an advanced stage. An ex-post evaluation may require significantly more financial resources than an ex-ante evaluation, as numerous data have to be collected on all changes caused by the intervention.

Also, the identification and assessment of the full set of impacts can be very timeconsuming.

Both ex-ante and ex-post evaluation (OECD, 2008;[START_REF] Gertler | L'évaluation d'impact en pratique[END_REF]): the aim is to compare the results of an ex-ante or in-itinere analysis with an ex-post evaluation, with a view to better understand the route the innovation is being undertaken, as well as for improving current or future programs. The comparison is intended to generate a wealth of knowledge, which can be used to adjust the way programs are implemented.

Categories of evaluation a) Positivist approach

The positivist approach is a scientific method that can be used when quantitative evidences are available. In other words, the effects of the program should be quantifiable [START_REF] Potter | Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences[END_REF]. The evaluator uses observable information instead of gathering data through interviewing actors.

The positivist approach can take many forms: Program-Theory (PT) assessment, efficiency or impact assessment, and needs assessment [START_REF] Rossi | Evaluation : a systematic approach[END_REF]).

b) Interpretive approach

The interpretive approach analyzes how humans interpret activities. The researcher studies and interprets varied lived experiences and their subjective evidences. The evaluator seeks to understand the needs and experiences of the different stakeholders to better evaluate the effects of the program [START_REF] Potter | Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences[END_REF]. Qualitative data are collected by undertaking focus groups, indepth interviews, and through observations.

c) Critical and emancipatory approaches

Critical and emancipatory approaches have to be differentiated from positive and interpretive research approaches. The two latter approaches usually seek to solve a particular problem or to improve the way of tackling it, as well as proposing the best practices with a view to transform social relationships [START_REF] Potter | Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences[END_REF]. The critical and emancipatory approaches are focused on participation, empowerment, and social power structures [START_REF] Potter | Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences[END_REF]. They can be described as participatory methods since stakeholders are actively involved in the process. The critical approach specifically focuses on social issues and relies on assumptions on human interests and knowledge. This approach is opposed to the positivist science. The positivist thinking was strongly criticized by researchers from the "critical" school of thought, arguing the positivist science is undemocratic, too narrow, and non-humanist. These researchers also criticize the interpretive approach which should concentrate more on social issues from their viewpoint.

d) Empowerment approach

Empowerment approaches aim at improving programs or policies as well as training the different stakeholders and communities involved so that they may monitor, evaluate, and improve their own existing and future programs by themselves or with the assistance of the evaluator [START_REF] Fetterman | Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment & Accountability Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment & accountability[END_REF]. Empowerment is "a construct that links individual strengths and competencies, natural helping systems, and proactive behaviors to social policy and social change" (Perkins and Zimmerman, 1995, p569). With respect to empowerment evaluation, it can be defined as an approach that aims "to increase the probability of achieving program success by (a) providing stakeholders with tools for assessing the planning, implementation, and self-evaluation of their program, and (b) mainstreaming evaluation as part of the planning and management of the program / organization" (Wandersman et al. 2005, p28). Empowerment evaluation can also be defined as a democratic approach [START_REF] Fetterman | Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment & Accountability Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment & accountability[END_REF] contrary to positivist approaches.

e) Operational evaluation

An operational evaluation [START_REF] Khandker | Handbook on impact evaluation : quantitative methods and practices[END_REF]) aims at identifying if the program unfolded as planned, that is, to evaluate whether the results delivered are in line with the objectives defined before the program started. Another objective is to draw conclusions and to identify the main lessons learned to better implement future programs. Operational evaluation is part of project implementation. Even though a difference is made between operational and impact evaluation, these methods are complementary rather than substitutes.

f) Impact evaluation

In the literature, the term "impact" often refers to long-term effects of a program. The OECD bears witness to this, and defines an impact as "positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended" (OECD, 2002). As to "impact evaluation", it can be defined as "an assessment of how the intervention being evaluated affects outcomes (changes) in the actions, relationships, and behaviors of enterprises, individuals or communities, whether these effects are intended or unintended" (OECD, 2002). Impact evaluation assesses impacts in relation to the objectives set before the research activities were launched. Its originality is to focus on causal mechanisms of the impacts generated by the intervention.

The evaluation of impacts is applied in several sectors like energy, transportation, education, development projects, health, or agriculture. By the way, the existence of the international association for impact assessment is no mere coincidence. It organizes an annual conference on this topic. This association distinguishes "impact assessment" into 5 main disciplinary lines:

environmental impact assessment, social impact assessment, health impact assessment, risk assessment and strategic impact evaluation (CGIAR, 2000).

Two types of impact evaluation can be conducted: a contribution analysis and an attribution analysis [START_REF] Mayne | Addressing Attribution Through Contribution Analysis: Using Performance Measures Sensibly[END_REF]. The latter refers to a counterfactual situation to investigate the causality. As to the contribution analysis, it attempts to decompose the different causal steps of the process under study.

Counterfactual scenario:

A comparison is made between the situation studied and a situation with no intervention.

The question posed is what the outcomes (changes) and impacts would have been in absence of the intervention. This comparison allows establishing causalities between variables by attributing changes to the program intervention. However this type of evaluation requires the innovation to be relatively simple, stable over time, and that the potential beneficiaries are easily identifiable [START_REF] Devaux-Spatarakis | La méthode expérimentale par assignation aléatoire : un instrument de recomposition de l'interaction entre sciences sociales et action publique en France ?[END_REF]. Those characteristics fit into the frame of a classical or neo-classical economy.

Contribution analysis:

By contrast, a contribution analysis decomposes the whole process of change, from intervention to impacts, while highlighting the complex and underpinning causal mechanisms. Under this concept, we seek to determine the set of factors which have led to changes instead of attributing the effects of separate variables to the observed results.

Although this is not a requirement, the innovation investigated is generally of a complex nature, non-linear, and potential beneficiaries are more difficult to predict.

Qualitative methods for evaluating research programs a) Public Value Mapping

The Public Value Mapping (PVM) is a conceptual tool that aims to comprehend causes of social outcomes [START_REF] Bozeman | Public values and public failure in US science policy[END_REF]. Outcomes stand for changes in the behavior, relationships, activities and/or actions of the stakeholders [START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF]. PVM also endeavors to estimate the contribution of the research to reaching social outcomes; and looks at the underlying causal logic of programs through applying a "churn" model of knowledge value and innovation [START_REF] Bozeman | A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective[END_REF]. This model specifically focuses on "Knowledge Value Collectives (KVC) and "Knowledge value alliances" which are used and/or developed by actors from a network for enhancing and using scientific knowledge. PVM makes the assumption that science is only part of the process leading to social outcomes and is not necessarily the most important factor. That is the reason PVM explores alternative explanations to the underlying causal logic of programs. Also, PVM assumes that complex relationships occurring between research and social outcomes cannot be understood without examining the way KVC are operationalized. However, a weakness of PVM in relation to our objective is that it only explores the public (social) value, which is generated by science as well as the set of actors and institutions that together transform knowledge into social changes.

b) SIAMPI approach

The SIAMPI approach [START_REF] Spaapen | SIAMPI final report[END_REF]) aims at evaluating the social impacts of research by overcoming limitations regarding suitable instruments of measure as well as attribution problems (multi causal impacts, long time span). Impacts are the effects produced by the outcomes in a long-term perspective and can be intended or unintended (OECD, 2002). SIAMPI stands for Social Impact Assessment for research and funding instruments through the study of productive interactions between science and society. The method focuses on learning instead of judging and accounting, as it concentrates on productive interactions (direct, indirect and financial interactions between researchers and other involved actors) which helps understand the "black box" between research and impacts. The good understanding of the process generating impacts, in turn, allows defining more relevant indicators of measurement.

Nonetheless, the SIAMPI approach is not of participatory nature and does not provide a clear template or stepwise approach for ex-post reconstructing ISRIP. Furthermore, factors linked to the research are not distinctly distinguished from external causes; thus, contribution of research remains unclear. Finally, SIAMPI does not tackle economic and environmental impacts.

c) Outcome Mapping

Outcome Mapping (OM) is a method that was developed by [START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF] and aiming at designing projects in an ex-ante manner. Projects designers are involved in a participatory workshop in order to define the way it should or will be undertaken to reach the expected goals.

Boundary partners, that is, actors with whom the project has direct contacts or on which it may have influences, should also participate to the meeting. It must be emphasized that the frontier between boundary partners and final beneficiaries is not very strong. A boundary partner can also be a final beneficiary.

All of the attendants are asked to draw the expected chain of progress from inputs and activities to outputs and outcomes. Impacts are omitted in this method and replaced by the concept of "Vision". The Vision represents changes in terms of human, social and environmental development that a project intends to encourage and to which it aims to contribute. Furthermore, the "Mission" describes how the project is expected to contribute to the Vision through activities, outputs, and outcomes. In other words, the Mission describes how the project fulfills its role in relation to the Vision, how it encourages boundary partners to reach their objectives, and how it attains the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance and viability. The Mission is supposed to encourage potential beneficiaries to adopt new innovation(s) arising from the project. The approach advocate conducting monitoring activities, but it is not designed to perform an expost evaluation of the project. That is the reason the Outcome Harvesting (OH) approach was developed to overcome the shortfalls of OM.

d) Outcome Harvesting

OH was developed by Wilson [START_REF] Wilson Grau | Outcome Harvesting[END_REF] to overcome the shortcomings of the OM approach [START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF] interviews. The method is therefore not of participatory nature.

f) Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis

The Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) [START_REF] Douthwaite | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A pratical application of Programme Theory in Research for Development[END_REF]) is derived from the approach of Impact Pathway Analysis (IPA). PIPA looks at the detailed process generating impacts from activities, outputs and outcomes. This approach is inspired from the Program-Theory (PT), which is often referred as theory of change, theory-based evaluation [START_REF] Weiss | Evaluation : methods for studying programs and policies[END_REF], intervention logic [START_REF] Nigel | Evaluating EU Expenditure Programmes: A Guide : Ex Post and Intermediate Evaluation[END_REF]. PT refers to a set of possibilities for developing a comprehensive impact logic model (from activities to outputs leading to outcomes and then to impacts) of the program with the aim to guide evaluation of an intervention [START_REF] Rogers | Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities[END_REF]. Logic model development is the centerpiece of rebuilding PT, which intends to link investments in projects' inputs with observed or intended direct results or outputs, indirect effects or outcomes, and impacts.

However, PIPA is not very participatory. The workshops are guided by a draft problem tree, previously prepared by a few project designers with the purpose of tackling current problems and related causes and thus clarify the program's logic model [START_REF] Renger | A Three-Step Approach to Teaching Logic Models[END_REF][START_REF] Douthwaite | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A pratical application of Programme Theory in Research for Development[END_REF]). Moreover, only the designers i.e. the actors who imagined the program before it started are usually involved [START_REF] Douthwaite | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A pratical application of Programme Theory in Research for Development[END_REF][START_REF] Alvarez | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: a practical method for project planning and evaluation[END_REF]; thus, diversity in group discussions is not sufficient. We advocate diversity is important for two main reasons [START_REF] Mathie | Stakeholder participation in evaluation: How important is diversity?[END_REF]: (1) to balance power with the different types of stakeholders (researchers, knowledge brokers, beneficiaries), and (2) to take all experiences and views into account.

Furthermore, we face the problem that PIPA is not designed for ex-post reconstructing the impact pathway. No template is provided in that respect. Additionally, ex-post reconstructing the pathway story requires participants to remember how events occurred and necessitates doing an exhaustive reflection exercise. However, several crucial elements are not considered by PIPA: (1) stakeholders can have a lack of memories on innovation story components, (2) the available time in workshops is restrained, as stakeholders are usually not willing to participate for a long time, (3) a power game may occur among participants [START_REF] Mathie | Stakeholder participation in evaluation: How important is diversity?[END_REF], which means that the discussions can be dominated by important actors or even influenced merely by their presence, (4) the actor network is not very well studied (scarcity of time in workshops), and (5) causes with little or no link to the research projects are not tackled by PIPA although a PT usually offers this possibility to avoid attributing the whole impact to projects' investments [START_REF] Rogers | Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities[END_REF].

The PIPA method appears to be the most suitable existing one for evaluating research programs while focusing on the underlying and complex mechanisms along innovation processes.

3 Part 3: Methodology

Abstract

The objectives of the thesis we mentioned in the general introduction are discussed in more details together with the research questions and hypothesis. We also specify the conceptual and theoretical framework, which is based on the observation that innovations are increasingly complex and on the fact that we focus on the transition to organic farming. In order to better understand the "black box" of the innovation and how research outputs do generate outcomes (changes) and impacts, we take an interactive view and, more importantly, an evolutionary perspective of innovation, considering the latter as a "system". Furthermore, a short description of the two case studies is provided (the French Camargue and Bulgarian case) and the rationale of selecting them specified. The Camargue case is about the transition to organic rice farming systems. It was primarily chosen for the reason that it tackles a radical innovation and also because of the availability of numerous publicly documents on the research program as well as of the presence of a key informant from INRA (National Institute of Agronomic Research). As to the Bulgarian case, it was mainly selected as it deals with a specific radical innovation, i.e.

the Ecostop product, which has become one of the most important product against the varroatosis disease in Bulgaria. Finally, the structure of the remaining parts of the thesis is indicated: the three articles (part 4, 5 and 6), the general discussion (part 7), and the general conclusion (part 8).

(

Context

This thesis falls into the EU IMPRESA project, which stands for "Impacts of Research on EU agriculture". "The overall aim of IMPRESA is to measure, assess and comprehend the impact of all forms of European SRA (Scientific Research on Agriculture) on key agricultural policy goals, including farm level productivity but also environmental enhancement and the efficiency of agro-food supply chains" (IMPRESA Website, 2017). Furthermore, IMPRESA undertakes "a broad qualitative meta-analysis of the volume and categorization of current research, including recent trends, exploring specific quantitative and qualitative means of assessment of its impact in specific cases, and engaging with relevant interest networks through multiple channels and throughout the project" (IMPRESA Website, 2017). Synergies were therefore generated and helped, under the Work Package 3 (WP3), in developing a qualitative method to assess the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society.

In IMPRESA WP3, case studies were conducted to test and refine the developed qualitative method. The rationale of taking a case study approach was to analyze innovations and research programs in-depth by shedding light on the complex process stirring the impact pathway. Six cases were selected with a view to covering a distinct range of agro-climatic, socio-economic and sectoral conditions. I had an important involvement in IMPRESA WP3. Furthermore, many questions and demands of supports were inquired by partners, which was very time consuming but at the same time highly interesting and fruitful.

In this thesis, we analyze two cases that were selected in IMPRESA WP3: the Camargue and Bulgarian case. The Camargue case concerns a process of transition towards organic rice farming systems in the French Camargue (South-East of France). It covers a broad range of technical and managerial innovations (more details in part 3.4). The Bulgarian case is about the development of a technical innovation, the product Ecostop, which has been developed in Bulgaria to combat the varroatosis (pest) in organic beekeeping (more details in part 3.4). We use case studies, which are increasingly popular in the literature to draw lessons. They allow exploring specific situations in a thorough manner [START_REF] Eisenhardt | Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges[END_REF]. The conduct of these case studies is intended to answer the different research questions and to test the hypothesis in relation to the different objectives set.

Objectives, research questions, and hypothesis of the thesis

The different research questions as well as the hypothesis in relation to the four objectives are specified in

First objective (in article)

The first objective is primary to develop a qualitative method for ex-post evaluating the impacts and contribution of agricultural research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming, while uncovering the different mechanisms that lead to these impacts. In a second step, the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, linked to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue territory, are evaluated.

Although qualitative methods for evaluating research impacts are available in the literature they are not well suited for ex-post assessment, nor do sufficiently studying the complex mechanisms along innovation processes and identifying the contribution of the research (see part 4). We develop a methods-mix, revolving around the Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA).

This method is tested in the Camargue case study that focuses on the transition to organic rice farming from 1999 to 2014. Our first hypothesis is that PIPA can be successfully combined with other methods from social sciences and thus identify ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, concerning the transition to organic method applied in the case of farmers' transition to organic production in the Camargue".

Second objective (in article)

The objective is to study the relevance of undertaking a Social Network Analysis (SNA) in expost evaluating the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, concerning the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. Particularly, it will be explored whether SNA can validate stakeholders' statements on relationships issues in order to better evaluate ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. The rationale of this is that participatory approaches, including the PIPA approach, are faced with limitations calling into question their scientific robustness (see part 5 and 7). By extension, it will be evaluated whether SNA can deepen ex-post the understanding of the impacts and contribution of the research actors on innovation processes and related societal impacts, in relation to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue.

We make the hypothesis that SNA allows validating ex-post stakeholders' statements by the help of indicators of centrality and intensity of relationships between actors in the innovation network. We also hypothesize that SNA permits a deepening ex-post of the understanding of the role played by the different research actors in the innovation process.

This objective is addressed in the form of an article in part 5. This article is entitled "Using Social Network Analysis to evaluate the Impact of the Research: On the transition to organic farming in the Camargue".

Third objective (in article)

The objective is first to evaluate the interest of the Actor Network Theory (ANT), used as theoretical framework, in orienting evaluative questions for understanding ex-post negotiation processes among researchers and the other types of actors during the transition pathway to organic farming in the Camargue and in Bulgaria. We also evaluate what brings ANT in orienting evaluative questions for assessing ex-post the contribution of the research in that transition pathway towards organic farming in the Camargue and in Bulgaria.

Our first hypothesis is that ANT is able to deepen ex-post the understanding on the role of interpersonal relationships between actors within innovation networks linked to the transition to organic farming in Camargue and in Bulgaria. We also hypothesize that ANT allows reinforcing the methodological developments, addressed by the first two objectives, to evaluating the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, regarding the transition to organic farming.

This objective is addressed in the form of an article in part 6. This article is entitled "Role of the research in the transition to organic farming using the Actor Network Theory".

Fourth objective (in a general discussion part)

The objective is to question the global relevance and contribution of the different methodological developments (resulting from the objectives 1, 2, and 3) in understanding expost the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, with respect to the transition to organic agriculture. We hypothesize that the methodological developments proposed in this thesis to evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, regarding the transition to organic farming, allow highlighting the complex process by which outcomes and impacts are generated and thus to reduce the size of the "black box" of such innovation processes. We also make the hypothesis that social sciences have weaknesses in identifying the exact contribution of the research in achieving outcomes and impacts during innovation processes linked to the transition to organic farming. The rationale of this is linked to the high and increasing complexity of innovation processes, as it was recalled in part 2 (state of the art).

Innovation processes imply involving several factors and complex dynamics.

This objective is addressed in the form of a general discussion part (part 7). This part is called "General discussion and lessons learned".

Theoretical and conceptual framework

It was recalled in the part on the state of the art that innovations are increasingly complex. They rely on several aspects such as interactive knowledge, actors' behaviors, and the economic and institutional environment. This increasing complexity implies that changes are less and less attributable to research. In other words, there is an increasing attribution gap between research on the one hand and social, economic, and environmental changes on the other [START_REF] Springer-Heinze | Impact pathway analysis: an approach to strengthening the impact orientation of agricultural research[END_REF]. In order to better understand the "black box" of the innovation and how research outputs do generate outcomes and impacts, we take an interactive view and, more importantly, an evolutionary perspective to innovation, considering the latter as a "system".

This perspective is also considered given the relatively complex nature of the agricultural sector compared to others. That is because the development and adoption of agricultural innovations rely not only on research outputs but also on numerous and further other aspects like interactive knowledge (farmers have usually not the capacity to make research on their own), trust (limited number of advisers and extension services), risk aversion (dependence on meteorological conditions, etc.), system of values, and so on.

Quintuple Helix Model

The quintuple Helix Model represents a cooperation and knowledge system composed of social interactions and highlighting the role of the know-how in developing innovations for a sustainable development. "The Quintuple Helix Model is interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary at the same time: the complexity of the five-helix structure implies that a full analytical understanding of all helices requires the continuous involvement of the whole disciplinary spectrum, ranging from the natural sciences (because of the natural environment) to the social sciences and humanities (because of society, democracy and the economy)" (Carayannis and Campbell, 2010, p30). In the adapted FIGURE 2, the research interacts with all the different helices (political system, education system, economic system, natural environment as well as mediabased and culture-based public). For the purpose of this thesis, we consider explicitly all public and private research as part of the global system and not only from the education system. Still, in the adapted FIGURE 2, the research contributes into developing innovation processes and in enhancing agricultural sustainability.

in an interactive way, outputs (first and tangible results), outcomes (changes related to adoption)

and impacts (long-term effects of the research). IPA recognizes the occurrence of possible feedback loops as well as the dynamic role of the actor network along the impact pathway.

IPA is inspired from the theory of change or Program-Theory (PT). In general, this approach is used ex-ante, i.e. before the research program is implemented, in order to develop a causal model summarizing the way the innovation pathway is intended to or should occur. This causal model can be constructed by the researcher who is in charge of conducting the evaluation; or in a participatory way, i.e. together with the different actors who have been involved in the research program. These actors, also referred as stakeholders, can be funders, researchers, institutions either public or private, extension services, and beneficiaries (e.g. farmers).

A participatory approach is followed with a view to get stakeholders more involved and active in the evaluation process as well as making results more helpful for future use. The Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) [START_REF] Douthwaite | Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis: A pratical application of Programme Theory in Research for Development[END_REF], which is similar to IPA, fits with this thinking and will form the basis of our approach (further details in part 4).

Furthermore, the Outcome Harvesting7 (OH) is seen as a method of interest (further details in part 4) in that it provides a framework for ex-post reconstructing the innovation pathway. It suggests to reconstruct it backwards, i.e. in identifying outcomes before going further back to outputs and activities. Also, it suggests not only getting information from stakeholders' workshops (as PIPA) but also in the course of semi-structured interviews or based on the project's documentation.

Complementary approaches are used (developed in-depth in the next parts): the process tracing, the counterfactual approach, and the Social Network Analysis (SNA) and Actor Network Theory (ANT). The process tracing approach has the interest of both triangulating and valuing the information collected by evaluating whether the diverse components of the hypothesized links (e.g. event "A" leading to event "B") was actually present. The counterfactual approach seems interesting to eliminate inaccurate pathway links. Finally, the network is studied in-depth to better understand the role played by actors over time during innovation processes linked to the transition to organic farming.

Case studies and data collection

As this thesis falls into the EU IMPRESA project, we should first emphasize how the case studies were selected in that project. Six case studies were selected in five different countries in order to provide scope for detailed and in-depth comparison. They cover a wide range of agro-climatic, socio-economic and sectoral conditions. To achieve this diversity, each team produced an initial shortlist of three cases. These proposed cases were tabulated for their different characteristics (agricultural sector, geographical level, type of innovation and research program, advantages and disadvantages) for review and discussion. In addition to variations across the final set, other considerations included the availability of data, the length of the innovation cycle, and the scope for collaborating with stakeholders from the case studies (at territory, regional or country level). The case studies selected are as follows: the dairy sector in the United Kingdom (fertility index), crop production in Germany (precision farming), sustainable olive production and on-farm biogas in Italy, organic production in the Camargue in France, and organic beekeeping in Bulgaria.

For the purpose of this thesis, we selected two case studies focusing on the transition to organic farming, that is, the Camargue case concerning the conversion to organic of a whole crop production system with rice as main crop; and the Bulgarian case on the development of the Ecostop product to protect bees against the varroatosis disease in an organic way. The Camargue case is the main one utilized in this thesis, while the Bulgarian case is essentially used for comparison and differentiation of results in the third paper (part 6) and questions the interest of ANT in evaluating the impacts and contribution of the research.

The Camargue case study

The Camargue territory is located in the south east of France and extending to 145,300 ha. In the frame of this thesis, we mainly focus on rice production for three key reasons: (1) rice is the main crop production in the Camargue, (2) cultivation of rice significantly contributes to the pollution of the Rhône River, and (3) rice helps to diminish the rate of salt (paddy fields are flooded) in the soil and thus allows crop productions to develop in the territory.

Source: reflectim.fr.

Rationale of selecting this case study

The Camargue case study was selected since it shows a typical situation where agriculture and natural areas have to coexist. The question of achieving environmentally sustainable innovations is tackled by the IAASTD (International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge and Technology for Development). In particular the importance of developing innovative technologies is advocated to answer specific consumers' wishes, including environmental concerns, within the context of more globalized and complex agro-food systems (IAASTD, 2009). The Camargue territory is subject to protective measures aiming at preserving the flora and fauna. Furthermore, the cumulative effect of the severe winds (the Mistral), the insolation and the temperature causes a strong evaporation, leading to salinity from the groundwater, which in turn sterilizes agricultural lands [START_REF] Chataigner | Activités de recherche sur le riz en climat méditerranéen[END_REF]. The cultivation of rice is therefore very important in that it allows this phenomenon to be reduced: the flooding of the paddy fields reduces the salinity, but rice production in the Camargue has to be undertaken with sensitivity due to environmental issues in the territory (e.g. pollution of the Rhône).

Furthermore, this case concerns a radical innovation towards better sustainability, which requires significant supports from the whole AKIS (Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System). In fact, AKIS is intended to promote radical innovations contrary to the former AKS (Agricultural Knowledge system) which did not recognize the role of complex interactive relationships nor intend to support sweeping changes (EU SCAR, 2012). Furthermore, it was demonstrated that LINSA 8 , representing a "network of producers, customers, experts, NGOs,

SMEs, local administrations and components of the formal Agricultural knowledge System

[(AKS)]", can actually facilitate the achievement of sustainable agricultural goals [START_REF] Moschitz | Learning and Innovation Networks for Sustainable Agriculture: Processes of Co-evolution, Joint Reflection and Facilitation[END_REF].

Still, the specific subject of the conversion to organic farming was considered because it represents a paradigm shift [START_REF] Wynen | Research Implications of a Paradigm Shift in Agriculture: The Case of Organic Farming[END_REF][START_REF] Pretty | The sustainable intensification of agriculture[END_REF][START_REF] Edwards | The Sustainability Revolutions: Portrait of a Paradigm Shift[END_REF], which typically implies developing various innovations including different technical advancements.

Consequently, the role of AKIS appears to be even more important to reflect, especially as technical agricultural innovations are faced with numerous potential barriers (Kouplevatskaya-8 LINSA stands for "Learning and Innovation Network for Sustainable Agriculture". [START_REF] Kouplevatskaya-Buttoud | Barriers to institutional learning and innovations in the forest sector in Europe: Markets, policies and stakeholders[END_REF][START_REF] Long | Barriers to the adoption and diffusion of technological innovations for climate-smart agriculture in Europe: Evidence from The Netherlands, France, Switzerland and Italy[END_REF] that the actor network system may prevent of limit. An example of barriers is the strong presence of routines [START_REF] Argyris | Knowledge for Action: A Guide to Overcoming Barriers to Organizational Change[END_REF][START_REF] Faber | Co-constructing a sustainable built environment in the Netherlands-Dynamics and opportunities in an environmental sectoral innovation system[END_REF].

The actor network may play a positive role through the presence of knowledge brokers (Klerkx et al. 2009b), cluster organizations [START_REF] Omta | Effectiveness of cluster organizations in facilitating open innovation in regional innovation systems: the case of Food Valley in the Netherlands[END_REF], collective actions e.g. to foster leadership capacity [START_REF] Devaux | Collective action for market chain innovation in the Andes[END_REF], and so on.

Data collection

Interviews/workshops Purpose In-depth interviews with respondents from INRA, CFR, Natural Park of Camargue, private traders (the SARL Thomas, the Comptoir Agricole du Languedoc and Biocamargue) and 15 farmers (4 organic, 7 partially-organic, and 4 conventional).

Identification of general enabling and disabling factors on the impact pathway.

To collect data for the Social Network Analysis (SNA) (conventional farmers were not interviewed).

A group discussion was organized (11 persons attended).

To undertake a review concerning general factors that positively or negatively influenced farmers' transition to organic rice production. We organized one workshop (20 persons attended).

To reconstruct the theory of change of the program and to draw the related impact pathway.

In depth interviews with 12 organic farmers and 1 researcher from INRA.

To further understand the pathway links for which the necessary conditions (including the identification of a relevant underlying mechanism) were not satisfied. To ask counterfactual questions. To estimate the importance of the validated pathway routes output-outcome, outcomeoutcome, external factor-outcome, and activity 6 (experimentations made by farmers)outcome. To measure impact pathway indicators.

Final feedback-round with stakeholders (9 persons attended).

To present findings, secure the agreement from stakeholders and acknowledge their contribution to the study.

The Bulgarian case-study

The Bulgarian case study focuses on the development of the Ecostop product in Bulgaria (country level). Ecostop is an organic product that aims at treating bees against the varroatosis disease. Numerous products have been developed since the year 1973 where the disease was officially recognized. But they appeared to be ineffective a couple of years after their first use.

In fact, the regular use of the same products made them non-operational due to the appearance of resistance. Ecostop was developed in the company Primavet that was created in 1994. The product was developed between 1998 and 2006 and was available on the market in 2007.

Ecostop is made of natural substances contrary to the vast majority of the medicines presently commercialized. In the year 2014, the product Ecostop was already adopted by around 20 to 25% of the population of beekeepers in Bulgaria.

Source: Primavet.com.

FIGURE 4: ECOSTOP PLATES

Rationale of selecting this case study

The Bulgarian case is only used in the third article of this thesis (part 6). This case was mainly chosen as it deals with a specific radical innovation, i.e. the Ecostop product, which has become one of the most important product against the varroatosis disease in Bulgaria. Also, the Ecostop product represents an important medicine, allowing the transition from the use of chemical products to organic ones. This is all the more important in that chemical molecules develop resistance to the varroa mite. Still, the development of the innovation (the product Ecostop) was funded privately contrary to the Camargue case, and key researchers were available and willing to share information with the evaluators. It was also selected because it presents a different network configuration, as well as a different context from the Camargue case study. The French case is characterized by a relatively complex actor network (more details in part 5 and 6). The Bulgarian case seems of less complexity at first glance i.e. with fewer challenges in terms of cooperation building and conflicts.

Data collection

Interviews/workshops Purpose Key stakeholders interviewed (4 interviews): researchers and first organic beekeepers in the country (Bulgaria).

Initial screening.

Identification of general enabling and disabling factors on the impact pathway.

Key stakeholders involved in a first workshop (10 attendants): researchers, beekeepers, representatives of organic beekeeping associations.

Initial in-depth discussions on the innovation pathway.

To undertake a review concerning general factors that positively or negatively influenced farmers' transition to organic.

Semi-structured interviews with beekeepers, researchers, owners of veterinarian pharmacies or agro-drug stores (10 interviews).

Further in-depth discussions on the innovation pathway.

To clarify questions arising from the analysis of the discussions in focus group. To reconstruct the theory of change of the program.

Survey with beekeepers (116 structured interviews).

Further in-depth discussions on the innovation pathway. Final feedback-round with stakeholders (20 attendants).

To present findings, secure the agreement from stakeholders and acknowledge their contribution to the study. In the first article a mixed qualitative method was developed to evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. The impacts of the research as such in the Camargue were also evaluated.

The Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) was identified as the most relevant existing method to assess the impacts and contribution of the research. However, we also identified shortcomings with respect to this approach, especially in relation to its participatory nature. As it was said, a participatory approach can help to enhance impacts of the research by mobilizing actors and intermediate changes, however there is a debate in the scientific community on whether the use of participatory instruments for evaluation is scientifically robust or not. To overcome limitations of this participatory approach we complemented it with other methods, tools and instruments, e.g. the process tracing and the use of counterfactual questions, and the Social Network Analysis (SNA). The interest of SNA in exploring and validating stakeholders' statements was examined to a very little extent. Furthermore, the contribution of SNA in informing the influence of the different research activities on the structure of the actor network and in turn on the adoption process and generation of impacts has not yet been discussed. Lastly but not least, the relevance of SNA in telling what the most important actors are, and their influence on the network during the innovation process, should be further discussed.

We therefore identified the need to reexamine the interest of using SNA, in a second article.

Our goal is to reassess the capacity of SNA to validate impact pathway links on actors' relationships issues and to better understand the impacts and contribution of the different research actors over time on innovation processes linked to the transition to organic farming in Camargue. Still, SNA is quite a comprehensive approach by itself; its characteristics, rationale and usefulness, could not be explored and discussed in-depth in the first article.

Moreover, the second article offers the possibility to show how the table of links, which classify all the information collected on the different pathway links, is used in practice (here by focusing only on links describing actors' relationships).

(Mots de transition : Du premier au deuxième article)

Une méthode qualitative mixte a été développée dans le premier article pour évaluer les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Les impacts de la recherche en tant que tels, en Camargue, ont aussi été évalués.

L'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) a été identifiée comme la méthode la plus pertinente pour évaluer les impacts et la contribution de la recherche. Cependant, nous avons identifié des limites par rapport à cette approche, en particulier vis à vis de sa nature participative. Comme il a été dit, une approche participative peut aider à améliorer les impacts de la recherche en mobilisant les acteurs et changements intermédiaires, cependant il y a un débat dans la communauté scientifique quant à la robustesse ou non, scientifiquement parlant, de l'utilisation d'instruments participatifs pour l'évaluation. Afin de dépasser les limites de cette approche participative, elle a été complétée par d'autres

Introduction

This second paper was aiming at re-examining the rationale of conducting a SNA to evaluate ISRIP. The objectives were to assess:

(1) The interest of SNA in exploring in-depth stakeholders' statements on actors' relationships and understanding the role played by economic agents;

(2) What the limitations of SNA are in evaluating the impacts and related contribution of the research and whether SNA can be generalized for this purpose.

Here we question a third objective, which is as follows:

(3) The relevance of performing a SNA to ex-post evaluate ISRIP on the resilience of the innovation system.

Rationale for focusing on the resilience

The degree of resilience of a system can determine the maintenance of innovations over time and therefore be considered as an impact of the research program. The concept of resilience has been broadly debated in the last 50 years since it can refer to different fields and be interpreted from different perspectives i.e. human-environment system and natural hazards, social science, and ecological science [START_REF] Zhou | Resilience to natural hazards: a geographic perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Norris | Community Resilience as a Metaphor, Theory, Set of Capacities, and Strategy for Disaster Readiness[END_REF][START_REF] Walker | Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social-ecological Systems[END_REF]). [START_REF] Walker | Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social-ecological Systems[END_REF], in the context of socio-ecological systems, defined the resilience as "the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks-in other words, stay in the same basin of attraction". The authors defined four critical attributes of the resilience: the latitude (the maximum level to which a system can be modified while remaining able to recover), the resistance (degree of facility to change the system), the precariousness (referring to the trajectory of the system i.e. good or critical) and the Panarchy. The latter refers to how the other three attributes mentioned "are influenced by the states and dynamics of the (sub) systems at scales above and below the scale of interest" [START_REF] Walker | Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social-ecological Systems[END_REF]). According to [START_REF] Tyler | Indicators of urban climate resilience: A contextual approach[END_REF], an actor network should continuously adapt itself to external uncertainties or risks in order to quickly react and take strategic decisions accordingly, as well as being able to cope with internal difficulties such as the bankruptcy of a commercial actor.

Methods to evaluate the resilience

The resilience of the innovation network can be estimated by survivability indicators such as the Robustness (the larger the structure's central core, the more robust the whole actor network is), and the Responsiveness [START_REF] Talamini | Merging netchain and social network: Introducing the social netchain concept as an analytical framework in the agribusiness sector[END_REF]. The latter allows for the diffusion speed of information within the network and thus for its resilience (the more the actors are reactive to the vagaries of their environment, the more viable the innovation network is). These can be estimated by measuring factors of network quality:

Responsiveness: it can be estimated by calculating the distance between actors, as a little distance is likely to increase the flow of relevant information within the innovation network [START_REF] Suire | Théorie économique des clusters et management des réseaux d'entreprises innovantes[END_REF] and consequently leads to a higher responsiveness [START_REF] Talamini | Merging netchain and social network: Introducing the social netchain concept as an analytical framework in the agribusiness sector[END_REF].

Robustness: the Clustering coefficient can be used for identifying the "central core" of the network structure, whose the size can be estimated 40 by dividing the aggregate Degrees of the involved actors to the sum total of Degrees from the overall network [START_REF] Bassenne | Organisation en réseau et durabilité systémique de deux filières alimentaires (riz biologique et petit épeautre en France)[END_REF]). 40 The formula calculation has been developed by the author. [START_REF] Talamini | Merging netchain and social network: Introducing the social netchain concept as an analytical framework in the agribusiness sector[END_REF] have developed other indicators of resilience: the Flexibility and the Adaptability. However, they were not considered here because SNA is not appropriate to their estimation. We consider that the Responsiveness and Robustness offer an acceptable estimation of the degree of resilience of a system.

It should however be emphasized the limitations of considering the strength of relationships between actors to inform the resilience of the innovation system. An increase in social links among actors may lead to a certain homogeneity within the network in terms of knowledge, norms and behaviors, and at the same time diminish the interactions with individuals from outside of that network [START_REF] Barnes-Mauthe | What Determines Social Capital in a Social-Ecological System? Insights from a Network Perspective[END_REF]. Also, an increased intensity of relationships in the network could only benefit to actors who are already well connected to the rest of the network in qualitative terms [START_REF] Maertens | Measuring Social Networks' Effects on Agricultural Technology Adoption[END_REF]. Still, the information theory discusses the link between the quality of the actor network on the one hand and the resilience of the innovation system on the other. This theory advocates that overdeveloped relationships among actors could lessen the resilience of an innovation system as maintaining high quality relationships may require significant resources to be mobilized, thus limiting the capacity to face disturbances (Ulanowicz et al. 2009).

Data collection

In order to estimate the resilience of the network with the indicators of Responsiveness and Robustness, we utilized data from the ILLIAD (local or localized initiatives, innovative for sustainable foods) project [START_REF] Bassenne | Organisation en réseau et durabilité systémique de deux filières alimentaires (riz biologique et petit épeautre en France)[END_REF]. Ten levels of intensity of relationships (from 0 to 10) were set and the different types of relationships (information flow, cooperation and financial links) were not considered. Sixteen farmers (four organic, three partially-organic 41 , 41 The partially-organic farmers were only included in the organic network.

and nine conventional), all research and advisory institutes including INRA (French National

Institute of Agronomic Research), the Rice-Farmers Union, the Natural Reserve of the Camargue, and five rice traders (all of them) were interviewed 42 .

Result

The Camargue organic network appears to have a better resilience than the conventional one, as the Responsiveness and Robustness indicators are higher for the organic network compared to the conventional one. The distance between the different actors, which we took into account for estimating the Responsiveness, was 15% lower in the organic network (1.8 compared to 2.1). With respect to the Robustness, no clear focal organization could be found within the conventional network, whereas the organic one is strongly organized around the pole "BIOSUD-SudCéréales-Thomas". A Clustering coefficient of 8.14 was found for this pole compared to 4.14 for the entire organic network. We estimated the theoretical Robustness of the organic network to be 76% in 2013. As a result, the organic network is likely to sustain over time but also to support a better resilience of the whole agricultural system.

Conclusion

We could demonstrate, by using SNA indicators, that the organic network is a priori more resilient than the conventional one and that the organic agricultural system is more likely to sustain over time. The organic network is strongly organized around the pole "BIOSUD-SudCéréales-Thomas", characterized by close links between actors. This enhances the capacity of these actors to quickly react and adapt to face disturbances, risks or uncertainties. The concept of resilience thus reflects an important mid and long-term impact of a research program.

161

We advocate this concept should be considered for future studies on impact evaluation of agricultural programs based innovation.

That said, this estimation of the Resilience of the innovation system could be overestimated. In effect, the innovation system could be very resilient now but at the same time be highly dependent on one actor. The innovation system could collapse in case this actor leaves the network. To avoid this problem, the indicators of Flexibility and Adaptability that quantify the number of alternative pathways, and that were developed by [START_REF] Talamini | Merging netchain and social network: Introducing the social netchain concept as an analytical framework in the agribusiness sector[END_REF], could be of high interest. They were not considered here because SNA is not appropriate to their estimation.

Transition words: From the first & second article (with its appendix) to the third paper

In the first article, an original qualitative and comprehensive approach was proposed to evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the This thesis has been built on the observation made that quantitative methods fail at highlighting complex mechanisms along the innovation pathway from research intervention to outputs, outcomes and impacts achievement. The concept of innovation was understood as a complex and dynamic system, as opposed to the former linear and simple view of it. It was decided to take account of qualitative methods, tools and instruments, as they are supposed to enlighten the complexity of innovation processes as well as the role and contribution of the research along the pathway from research activities to impacts, with respect to the transition to organic farming.

It was developed in the first paper a general framework to assess qualitatively the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, regarding the transition to organic farming. This approach was applied in the Camargue case study.

The second paper intended to demonstrate the interest of performing a Social Network Analysis (SNA), in its ability in particular to validate the impact pathway links on actors' relationships and to deepen our understanding on the role of the research actors during innovation processes related to the transition to organic farming.

Finally, the third paper studied the rationale of completing our evaluation toolkit with the Actor Network Theory, used as a theoretical framework, in its capacity in particular to orient evaluative questions and to detail the role of interpersonal relationships, individual persons and objects, during innovation processes associated to the transition to organic farming.

In the next part of the thesis, i.e. the general discussion, we discuss, based on our experience from the three articles (part 4, 5 and 6), the contribution of the different methodological developments, taken together, in evaluating ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. We also question the contribution of this approach to a better understanding of how the research operates along the impact pathway towards the conversion to organic agriculture.

(Mots de transition : Vers une discussion générale sur les résultats) 7 Part 7: General discussion and lessons learned

Abstract

In this discussion part, we question the contribution of the three articles (see part 4, 5 and 6) in developing a qualitative mixed-method that is suitable for evaluating ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, with respect to the transition organic farming. We also question the contribution of this approach to a better understanding of how the research operates along the impact pathway towards organic agriculture.

A suitable approach to ex-post evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming, was developed in this thesis. This approach successfully adapts existing methods and especially the Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) to the requirements of an ex-post evaluation.

Also, the reconstruction of the network of actors at different periods in the innovation pathway is of interest for identifying the most important actors as well as the research activities that have had the most important impacts. Other elements of great interest are the table of links to identify underlying mechanisms to pathway links and what that this entails; the "scoring system" for identifying the key pathway components; the counterfactual instrument to establish causal inferences; and the Actor Network Theory (ANT) for highlighting the role of interpersonal relationships, individual actors, and negotiation processes. Moreover, we show that the limitations of participatory instruments are well overcome by our approach as it offers the possibility to reexamine the accuracy of all pathway links using the process tracing approach in combination with other methods, tools, and instruments.

We also show that the approach developed helps to understand the transition process towards organic farming. Nevertheless, we suggest a way of deepening this approach to be more precise on the contribution of both the research and pathway components in achieving outcomes and impacts. We then show the strong interest of the comprehensive approach (including the amendments suggested in this part) for evaluating the effects of the research intervention in the Camargue case and subsequently for improving the pathway of the transition to organic farming. The research program on the transition to organic farming in the Camargue played an

Introduction

In this thesis, we focus on qualitative methods in order to evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. It was shown that quantitative approaches do not shed light on complex mechanisms that operate along innovation pathways linked to the transition to organic farming, from research investments to impacts achievement. Similar weaknesses, but less important, were also identified for existing qualitative methods. These elements have justified the need to elaborate a further developed approach. This issue was addressed in the three articles included in this thesis (in part 4, 5 and 6). Moreover, the choice was made to use participatory instruments in order to mobilize actors and changes.

It was decided to develop a new approach to (1) overcome weaknesses of existing qualitative methods in ex-post assessing the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, concerning the transition to organic farming, and (2) to mobilize more participatory instruments and controlling for their disadvantages in order to empower stakeholders on sustainability issues.

Also, existing approaches underexplore the contribution of the research along the impact pathway as well as the key elements and linkages acting in the innovation "black box".

Nevertheless, the Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) appeared to be the most suitable approach. PIPA has been considerably adapted by the help of several methods, instruments and tools. These are as follows: (1) the Outcome Harvesting, (2) the process tracing,

(3) the use of counterfactual situations, (4) the payback framework, (5) the Social Network Analysis, and (6) the Actor Network Theory.

A first section discusses the contribution of the thesis in elaborating an approach that is able to evaluate the impacts and contribution of the research based innovation in agriculture, with a particular emphasis on the transition to organic farming in the Camargue.

A second section discusses the contribution of this approach to a better understanding of the transition to organic farming while suggesting ways of improving the impacts of the research by enhancing this transition. The Bulgarian case is only discussed with respect to the interest of the Actor Network Theory since this case study was not used in the first and second article included in the thesis (in part 4 and 5).

Methodological aspects 7.2.1 Understanding the contribution of the research within innovation processes

The PIPA approach was taken as basis to set-up our mixed qualitative approach. Here we take a step back as to the interest of the methodological developments made, presented in the three papers included in this thesis (part 4, 5, and 6), in understanding ex-post the role played by and the contribution of the research within innovation processes. -Better understanding of the role of the interpersonal relationships, elements of influence & lobbying, and negotiation processes that make the impact pathway happen.

Methodological developments

Interests in understanding ex-post the role of the research -Better understanding of the role of the "boundary objects" in the pathway that make the impact pathway happen.

-Help to uncover the black box of the innovation process and to identify the enabling & disabling factors that occur in the process.

effects of the research at the beginning of the second workshop, that is, when they were asked to list the different changes (outcomes) in relation to the transition to organic farming. Examples of outcomes were previously presented by the organizers to the attendants (before the "exercise"), but it may have been better to present preliminary results on the basis of the first workshop (more details in the first article, part 4) and the face-to-face interviews already done.

In a second step, stakeholders may have been asked to revise the list of outcomes. It may also have been preferable to ask outcomes that happened in the personal situations of the stakeholders rather than in a general way (for all of the farms). This may have rendered the exercise more concrete and easier to understand.

More Surprisingly, SNA contributes well in adapting PIPA to the requirements of an ex-post evaluation (further information in the second article, part 5). In the Camargue case, we observed that is was indeed possible with SNA to reconstruct the actor network in an ex-post manner i.e.

to reconstruct the actor network that most probably occurred at different periods along the innovation pathway. In the literature, there are many examples of studies using SNA to reconstruct network dynamics (e.g. [START_REF] Cho | Legislative Success in a Small World: Social Network Analysis and the Dynamics of Congressional Legislation[END_REF]. They rely on data that are either collected regularly during the whole period of analysis or after but on the basis of tangible and dated documents such as emails, reports, events, etc. The originality of our approach is that actors were asked to detail what their relationships with others were in the past, at different periods (more details in the second article, part 5). Therefore, the actors had to remember well what happened in the past. This worked well, probably because the network is small, with a limited number of members. The actors were asked to estimate the strength of their relationships with others according to a scaling from 0 to 3 but also the underlying mechanisms and reasons of change over time, so that it was possible to validate, at least partially, the accuracy of their statements.

This reconstruction of the network has particularly allowed to understand dynamic relationships among actors over time and a better understanding of their contribution in structuring the network and therefore in driving the adoption process and facilitating the achievement of mid and long-term impacts.

Participatory ex-post impact evaluation PIPA and OH should preferably be used together (further information in the first article, part 4). PIPA and OH are not very relevant, when used individually, to ex-post evaluate, in a participatory manner, the impacts and contribution of the research. OH provides ideas on how to reconstruct the pathway, as a general procedure, but does not make use of participatory stakeholders' workshops nor take account of the impacts of the intervention. Also, OH does not make reference to impacts contrary to PIPA. In the Camargue case, the impacts were collected during face-to-face interviews because of a lack of time in workshops. These in-depth interviews only concerned the beneficiaries, i.e. the farmers. Researchers may indeed have overestimated the number and significance of the impacts obtained from the intervention because they were the implementers of the research program under review. In other words, they may have a personal interest to overestimate the positive impacts of the research conducted and to underestimate negative ones [START_REF] Scheirer | Program Participants' Positive Perceptions: Psychological Conflict of Interest in Social Program Evaluation[END_REF]. At the same time, general impacts, e.g. on the level of biodiversity, were not considered by the interviewed farmers, probably because these impacts do not directly concern them (global impacts that do not directly affect their farms).

Citizens may be involved in the process to avoid this problem and consider more the impacts that affect the society.

Contribution of the research activities and interest of the table of links

An activity that is implemented from the year t to t+2 may not have impacted the configuration of the actor network, for example at t+4. But, this becomes more complex when different activities are implemented at the same time and/or when an activity continues producing effects on the mid and long-term. When different research activities are implemented at the same time, the effects arising from these activities can hardly be attributable to one or another of these activities. This situation is known as problem of attribution, in other words as the difficulty of inferring the respective contribution of different variables to the impacts [START_REF] Alston | A metaanalysis of rates of return to agricultural R & D: ex pede Herculem? Research reports[END_REF][START_REF] Mayne | Addressing Attribution Through Contribution Analysis: Using Performance Measures Sensibly[END_REF][START_REF] White | A Contribution to Current Debates in Impact Evaluation[END_REF].

By the help of the table of links, which we present in the first and second paper (part 4 and 5), it is possible to trace back the underlying mechanisms and infer what was the contribution of the different activities in structuring and/or changing the configuration of the actor network at different periods. More generally, this table of links helps to identify all underlying mechanisms to pathway links and to explain the role played by the research in the innovation process. The related milestones, i.e. the elements that must be fulfilled to achieving goals, can be identified using this table of links.

Strength of the different pathway links

Another limitation of the PIPA method, but also of the other identified qualitative methods being designed to evaluate the impacts of the research based innovation, is that the extent to which pathway components contribute to subsequent ones is not well considered (further information in the first article, part 4). In other words, there is no precise reading grid, e.g. a scale of values, which may help characterize the contribution of the different pathway components in reaching subsequent ones.

We propose in this thesis to evaluate the strength of the different links (for example an output leading to an outcome), constituting the impact pathway, by a scoring from 0 to 3. This helps to identify the most important elements in the pathway e.g. an activity A which is important to reach a milestone, and without which the adoption process would not have taken place. The interest is also to estimate the importance of the factors which are not linked to the intervention but that influence the innovation process the research is aiming to develop. In doing so, the role played by the research on the observed impacts can be estimated more precisely. This corresponds to an analysis in terms of contribution [START_REF] Mayne | Addressing Attribution Through Contribution Analysis: Using Performance Measures Sensibly[END_REF][START_REF] Delahais | Applying contribution analysis: Lessons from five years of practice[END_REF]. However, a limit of our "scoring system" is that it does not directly inform the extent to which a particular research activity contributes to the process of adoption and impacts achievement. In most of the cases we are unable to draw conclusions on how far, for example, a particular impact is being driven by a specific activity. This is due to the fact that these components (here, an activity and an impact) are not directly linked together (there are steps inbetween). There is a need to deepen our methodology on this point, which is discussed later in this part.

Crucial Research Points and exclusion of non-valid pathway links

The use of counterfactual situations allows to identify not only important factors from the impact pathway but also crucial ones i.e. elements that cannot be withdrawn without calling into question the occurrence of other components in the pathway (further information in the first article, part 4). The counterfactual mechanism can be used to identify the so-called Crucial Research Points (CRP) i.e. the elements in the pathway that would not have happened without the research. Still, this can inform on how research programs should be designed (discussed later in this part). Another use of the counterfactual instrument is to eliminate the hypothesized pathway links which have in reality not affected the impact pathway. In other words, the pathway does not suffer from removing these links. The exclusion of these links allows a more accurate estimation of the role played by research, either in a direct or indirect way (by deduction).

Interpersonal relationships and boundary objects

The Actor Network Theory (ANT) also contributes significantly to a better understanding (expost) of the contribution of the research on innovation processes related to the transition to organic farming by (1) orienting evaluative questions, (2) highlighting the role of interpersonal relationships and negotiation processes, and (3) assessing the role of the "boundary objects" in the pathway (further information in the third article, part 6). Particularly, the use of ANT as a theoretical framework to conduct a program evaluation, is of interest to identify the contribution of key actors ("individuals") and of the opinion leaders along innovation processes related to the transition to organic farming. Three types of objects were identified: (1) the "undesired objects", (2) the objects representing the "solutions", and (3) the objects supporting the adoption of the identified solutions. The "undesired objects" are especially crucial as other actors need to negotiate with them for problem-solving purpose.

The "solution object" in the Bulgarian case is the combination between essential oils and carrier, which is represented by the product Ecostop on market. Furthermore, in the Camargue, the "solution objects" are a set of technical and managerial innovations: introduction of new crops in the rotation such as alfalfa and temporary pastures, and adapted use of materials like disc harrows to combat weeds (e.g. increased number of passages and adaptation of the application dates to soil conditions). A third type of object, the so-called "support", is identified as necessary to help develop these innovations and increase their rate of adoption. Leaflets and scientific articles, in which the new knowledge is represented, were important in Camargue to share this knowledge as well as raising funding and enrolling relevant international partners.

Coalitions of opinion leaders and "solution actors" have become the most important channels to diffuse and adopt the innovation.

All this information, in turn, is of great interest for drawing recommendations to stakeholders, researchers and policy makers on how to enhance impacts of such research programs (these recommendations are specified in section 7.3.3).

By taking only into consideration humans, objects, or the "institutional pathway" of an innovation, it would be difficult to understand (1) the reasons for which and how an innovation is being initiated, implemented and diffused, and (2) why and in what way actors' objectives are changing during innovation processes. Moreover, ANT allows to complement the previous methodological developments. ANT further develops the following elements: (1) how crucial the phase of problematization is, (2) the key role played by only a few "individuals" and by "opinion leaders" during the implementation and diffusion innovation phases, (3) the key factor of "trust" at the beginning of the process to allow a suitable enrollment of the actors, (4) the utility of leaflets and scientific articles, in getting funded and to enroll international partners, and (5) the specific role played by different types of objects.

Contribution of the research and identification of major pathway components

The different methodological developments excel at uncovering the mechanisms of the pathway as well as estimating the extent to which the different components of the pathway contributed to the achievement of subsequent components. However, the contribution of the research in the pathway remains difficult to estimate as well as the identification of the major components. This situation is due to the complexity of the impact pathway investigated and to the presence of numerous explanatory factors, especially external ones. As already said, the identification of CRP was of interest in that respect. The fact that only a few CRP were identified in the Camargue case and that they were exclusively situated along the linkages from activities to outputs, has confirmed our conclusion that the contribution of the research on innovation processes linked to the transition to organic farming, in that specific case, was limited (further information in the first article, part 4). Having said that, there was no evidence whether the rate of adoption would have been significantly different without the research as "limited contribution" does not mean "non-useful" or "non-crucial" contribution. "Innovation does not only involve adaptation to prevailing contextual conditions, but also the active influencing, redesign, or destruction of pre-existing conditions and institutional frameworks. Such change is affected by complex interdependencies between actors, organizations and artefacts, unintended and unforeseen developments, and coincidence and dynamics of conflicts that challenge linear approaches and reductionist understanding." (Klerkx et al. 2012, p54). The research is not necessarily a direct contributor to the achievement of impacts but could only be a facilitator since research is no longer a linear, non-dynamic, and external process [START_REF] Klerkx | Advances in Knowledge Brokering in the Agricultural Sector: Towards Innovation System Facilitation[END_REF]. links [START_REF] Mahoney | After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research[END_REF]; and the use of the counterfactual instrument appears to be of high value to complete the analysis (more details in the first article, part 4).

In the Camargue case, if the majority of the stakeholders argued the first event of a pathway's link might be removed without calling into question the subsequent incidence, the link was eliminated. The combination of the hoop test with reflections in terms of counterfactual situations is greatly useful. In the same way as for the hoop test, the only use of counterfactual situations is not sufficient to make an accurate analysis. The counterfactual instrument is not able by itself to confirm pathway links because the underlying mechanisms on stake are not considered. Taking the example of an output x that hypothetically leads to an outcome y; if y would not have occurred in absence of x, this does not necessarily mean that x is directly linked to y. In effect, the component y may not have occurred in absence of x because x is connected to another event, for example to the event s, which is connected to y.

Methodological developments

Interest in reducing the shortcomings of participatory evaluation procedures (1a) Table of links (

TABLE 17: INTEREST OF THE METHODOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN REDUCING THE SHORTCOMINGS OF PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION PROCEDURES

Validation of the path ay li ks focusi g o actors' relatio ships

The use of SNA is of interest during the validation process of the hypothesized pathway links focusing on actors' relationships. In the same way as the other pathway links, those focusing on actors' relationships are validated undertaking the hoop test, i.e. by confirming the presence of the necessary conditions making these links happening. The table of links specifies the list of and helps to identify the types of pathway links and related underlying mechanisms (more information in the last section and in the second article in part 5). SNA is useful in that process to explore evidences with respect to the type, structural patterns, and intensity of social relationships between network's actors [START_REF] Casieri | Framework of economic institutions and governance of relationships inside a territorial supply chain: The case of organic olive oil in the Sierra de Segura (Andalusia)[END_REF]. Therefore, SNA helps to (1) confirm the occurrence of the two events constituting each of the explored links and (2) their respective underlying mechanisms. The underlying mechanisms are fully confirmed when there is no evidenced alternative explanations. Alternative explanations are identified by the help of a series of iterative SNA explorations and of logical reasoning. An alternative explanation can be for example the increasing importance of a research center over time that may also explain why for instance the clustering coefficient of the innovation network (degree of close relationships between actors) has increased from the time t to t+2. SNA indicators, i.e. the Degrees, Betweenness and Clustering coefficient, are all of interest to validate pathway links focusing on actors' relationships (more details in the second article, part 5). The actors with a high Betweenness (degree of intermediation of an actor) can be considered as knowledge brokers [START_REF] Scott | Social Network Analysis: A Handbook[END_REF]. The Clustering coefficient allows a deepening of the understanding of the actors' position evolvement in the network by calculating the level of connectivity between the neighbors of a particular actor (the so-called neighbors are directly connected to the actor studied). This coefficient also shows the extent to which the network is being clustered overall.

Finally, the Degrees allow examining the relationships' strength within an actor network and to better comprehend the dynamic of the innovation.

Role & description of the network, and origin of the data SNA is a structured approach that allows making a thorough analysis of the role of the network in the whole innovation process (further information in the second article, part 5). SNA also helps preparing the workshops by knowing in advance the position of the different actors in the network and what the eventual conflicts between them are (further information in the second article, part 5).

Misleading results

Participatory approaches can generate "incidental results". In other words, the reproduction of the same "exercise" with another group of stakeholders may produce quite different results [START_REF] Hisschemöller | The relevance of participatory approaches in integrated environmental assessment[END_REF]. We answered this challenge by splitting the group of stakeholders (in the second workshop in Camargue) into three homogeneous sub-groups (see first article, part 4). We obtained three slightly different pictures of the impact pathway of the research (on posters), which were combined afterwards. The pathway links that were raised by only one subgroup and/or considered as minor were not withdrawn at that stage, but they passed later into the "validity check procedure" (process tracing approach and counterfactual instrument). There is also a debate on whether actors' statements in workshops are shared by the others. In effect, some of the participants may not react to avoid criticisms or simply because they are timid. This makes the analysis even more complex and time consuming.

Stakeholders' co ser atis

Another challenge we are faced with is the conservatism of the stakeholders. "Suppose that the King of Spain in 1490 had established a focus group in order to find out whether to subsidy the expedition of Columbus. This proposal may well have been evaluated as silly and rejected, because the lay population at that time believed the earth is flat. Stakeholders may formulate their own criteria for evaluating the usability of science, one cannot know whether they may hinder what experts consider as progress, or stimulate what scientists think unnecessary" (Hisschemöller et al, 2001, p64). This raises a broader critic on objectivity. It is often criticized that the evaluator takes account of the opinions of the actors with only little consideration of the self-perception of those actors that use their own criteria of evaluation [START_REF] White | A Contribution to Current Debates in Impact Evaluation[END_REF].

However, problems of value conflicts, for example on the meaning of the concepts of worth, merit, standard or interest, cannot be easily solved. (1997) argues that, under a participatory approach, actors can be asked numerous questions by the evaluator in order to inform impacts of the program intervention. This thesis partially supports this position. A participatory approach can inform on the different changes (impacts but also outcomes) resulting from the program intervention. Changes can be asked directly to actors, but all the more important is the possibility of tracing back the detailed pathway by which outcomes and impacts were generated. The study of this detailed pathway allows confirming that the outcomes and impacts acknowledged by stakeholders effectively resulted from the research intervention, either directly or indirectly. That said, we should also emphasize the difficulty of measuring the impacts as such, in a participatory way. In the Camargue case, this issue was not tackled in a participatory way as it would have been hardly difficult to add a specific and extensive session on impact measurement during the first or second workshop. Additionally, a third workshop would most probably have failed, with a low participation from participants. Indeed, with the completion of the two workshops, stakeholders already contributed significantly to the study; and the second workshop was already quite challenging in terms of keeping the participants involved and concentrated.

Measuring impacts

Chambers

Scientific quality and dominance biases

The scientific quality of participatory approaches is sometimes called into question [START_REF] Ryan | Advantages and challenges of using inclusive evaluation approaches in evaluation practice1[END_REF][START_REF] Cleaver | Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approachers to development[END_REF]. In our view, however, the evaluator remains responsible for the quality of the work performed; and the same means as those used for non-participatory approaches may be used. That is the reason we endeavored in the Camargue case, for instance, to triangulate as much as possible the different information collected and thus to obtain more robust results. The information triangulated came from workshops, in-depth individual interviews, and from the literature and publicly available documents. The information collected out of the workshops served to validate the different pathway links using the hoop test (process tracing approach), that is, through identifying additional evidences on the occurrence of the diverse pathway links.

These evidences are the necessary conditions making the respective pathway links happening.

We also attempted, during the whole procedure of evaluation, to solve challenges that were not clearly addressed by our general approach. These challenges concerned in particular the way workshops are moderated (see next section).

Moreover, the literature stresses that discussions can be dominated and biased when diversity in workshops is lacking, due to two reasons: (1) non-balanced power among the different involved stakeholders (implementers and beneficiaries or targeted actors), and (2) not all experiences and views are taken into account [START_REF] Mathie | Stakeholder participation in evaluation: How important is diversity?[END_REF]. However, we should emphasize that [START_REF] Leeuw | Reconstructing Program Theories: Methods Available and Problems to be Solved[END_REF], in the context of impact assessment and pathway drawing, rather advocates for a minimization of the actors' diversity within sub-discussion groups, in order to maximize convergence of opinions while maximizing divergence between the sub-groups. The

Implementation of workshops

The implementation of workshops requires the presence of a good facilitator. This appeared particularly important in the Camargue case given the level of conflict within the territory.

Tensions were expected between local actors during the workshops, which effectively happened to some extent [between INRA and the French Center of Rice (CFR)]. Significant resources were invested to get an excellent facilitator involved in the second workshop in which a wide range of actors was invited. This facilitator had to be very well skilled but also thoroughly informed on the aim of the workshop in order to face with probable conflicts but also to limit potential dominance biases. The facilitator tried to moderate the discussions by undertaking diverse strategies: (1) announcing clearly in advance the agenda as well as the time needed for each of the subjects and their aims, (2) summarizing the discussions at key stages (after each extensive discussions), (3) temperate people who already talked considerably, (4) asking stakeholders at the beginning of each session if everything was clear and whether they agree on the topic to be discussed, (5) suggesting alternatives to the original plan. All of these strategies appeared useful to drive the discussions, temperate some of the people, and minimizes dominance biases; but have remained insufficient. Despite all these efforts, producers have dominated the discussions over researchers from INRA, CIRAD (International Agricultural Center for Development) and CFR. The level of participation from farmers was higher than expected in terms of the number of attendants. Results were probably biased to some extent because researchers' views were not satisfactorily expressed compared to farmers' statements, and with calm and serenity.

The conduct of the Hoop test (process tracing approach), later in the evaluation process, was crucial to reduce or prevent these biases. This test allows confirming pathway links by identifying evidences of their validity. These evidences are the necessary conditions required to make these pathway links happen.

7.3 Contribution of the approach in understanding the transition to organic farming

In this section, we first discuss a way of deepening our approach, based on the critics made in the last section. Then, we question the contribution of the approach in understanding the pathway undertaken by the research intervention.

7.

3.1 Towards a way of deepening the approach to better understand the contribution of the research in the pathway

It was identified the need to deepen our knowledge on the extent to which the activities, outputs and outcomes are explaining the process of adoption and achievement of impacts. There is also a need to generate more knowledge on the extent to which the research as such (the research can be represented in every component of the pathway) did contribute in achieving the different constituents of the pathway. The rationale of this is to inform better stakeholders, researchers and policymakers on how to improve the innovation process and impacts by focusing on key activities, producing suitable outputs, and enabling a favorable environment e.g. in developing markets. In the next paragraphs, we discuss how our approach can be ameliorated by using a "scoring system", which was developed to characterize the strength of the different pathway links (scoring from 0 to 3). We first present a way of calculating the contribution of the research in achieving the different components of the pathway; before proposing a way of calculating the contribution of the different components (whatever the role played by the research) in reaching subsequent ones and in turn the aggregated outcome8 "adoption of the organic production mode" and impacts. The calculations made have then been converted into words according to a Likert scale [START_REF] Brown | Likert Scale Examples for Surveys[END_REF] and a scoring from 0 to 4. 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 17%

Of little importance (1/4).

Activity 2: Experimentations in plots 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 19%

Of little importance (1/4). Activity 4: Training sessions (ORPESA) 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 13%

Of little importance (1/4). Activity 5: Experimentation of crop management techniques 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 3%

Of little importance (1/4).

Activity 6: Experimentations made by farmers 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

24%

Of average importance (2/4).

Activity 7: International conference on rice in 2011 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

Activity 8: Experimentations made by CIRAD 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 2%

Of little importance (1/4).

Output 1: Typology of farms; farmer's problems and constraints known 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 15%

Of little importance (1/4).

Output 2: Relevant techniques to fight weeds represented in leaflets 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 9%

Of little importance (1/4).

Output 3: ORPESA leaflets 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 4%

Of little importance (1/4). Output 4: Knowledge on weeds 33% Of average importance (2/4). 5%

Of little importance (1/4). Outcome 1: Growing influence of INRA 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 6%

Of little importance (1/4). Outcome 2: Stronger relationships between CIRAD and SudCéréales 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

Outcome 3: Growing influence of CIRAD 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 3%

Of little importance (1/4). Outcome 4: More exchanges and links in the network 100% Absolutely essential (4/4). 10%

Of little importance (1/4).

Outcome 5: Development of crop rotation 33% Of average importance (2/4). 13%

Of little importance (1/4). Outcome 6a: False seed-bed techniques 48%

Very important (3/4).

9%

Of little importance (1/4). Outcome 6b: Seeding and flooding at a later period 48%

Very important (3/4).

9%

Of little importance (1/4).

Outcome 6c: Increased level of water in rice fields 48%

Very important (3/4).

9%

Of little importance (1/4).

Outcome 6d: Increased plant density 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

4%

Of little importance (1/4). Outcome 7: Growing awareness on environmental issues 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

4%

Of little importance (1/4).

Outcome 9: Institutionalisation of the supply chain 9%

Of little importance (1/4).

13%

Of little importance (1/4).

Outcome 10: Evolution scenarios for organic rice area 9%

Of little importance (1/4).

0%

Not important at all (0/4).

Initial farmers' skills about crop rotations 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

4%

Of little importance (1/4). Good selling price for organic rice 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

13%

Of little importance (1/4). Demand Growth for organic rice 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

26%

Of average importance (2/4). CAP payments for organic surfaces 0%

Not important at all (0/4).

13%

Of little importance (1/4 These calculations will be considered in the next sections of this discussion part in order to illustrate the importance of the different components of the impact pathway. TABLE 19 is a scoreboard where it can easily be identified the components in the pathway for which the research has the most contributed to, as well as the most important elements that drive the innovation process and achievement of impacts. We observe for example that the contribution of the research to the development of crop rotations systems was of average importance (2/4).

Regarding the contribution of the different components of the pathway in reaching the aggregated outcome 8 "adoption of the organic production mode" and the impacts, the most influential research activities seems to be the CEBIOCA project ("of little importance" -1/4), the first experimentations ("of little importance" -1/4), and the training sessions between researchers and farmers -ORPESA ("of little importance" -1/4). That said, the calculations show a higher importance of the farmers' trials conducted independently ("of average importance" -2/4). External economic factors are also quite influential compared to the other elements: the good selling price for organic rice ("of average importance" -2/4), the demand growth for organic rice ("of little importance" -1/4), and the CAP payments for organic surfaces ("of little importance" -1/4).

These calculations provide an estimation of the contribution of the research along the impact pathway as well as on the extent to which the diverse pathway components determine outcomes and impacts. This quantitative assessment may help to communicate results, especially to policy makers. Although qualitative research is worth in explaining the complex, the use of a "simple language" and "point estimates" may be easier to communicate to policy makers [START_REF] Marmot | Can scientists and policy makers work together[END_REF][START_REF] Brownson | Researchers and Policymakers: Travelers in Parallel Universes[END_REF]. There are different and sometimes opposite goals, expectations, perceptions, and attitudes towards information between scientists and policy makers. The research is a long-term effort, but policy makers do not work to the same time scale as researchers. "Policy makers usually have short tenure managing projects, and will move on quickly to other files, to build up their repertoire of expertise in a wide variety of different areas" (Marmot et al. 2004, p633).

The results indicated in TABLE 19 are potentially easier to communicate but should be interpreted with cautious. For example, a pathway component could only marginally contribute to outcomes and impacts according to the calculations made, but be in reality crucial to the process. This situation could happen when several pathway components contribute to the same outcomes and impacts. The extent to which a pathway component determines a subsequent one is informed by our approach, according to a scale from 0 to 3 (stakeholders were asked in faceto-face interviews to inform this). However, there is doubts regarding of whether the former event was crucial or not to the process (a crucial component cannot be removed from the process without breaking it up). Counterfactual questions were asked to stakeholders with the aim to solve this issue but stakeholders in the Camargue, especially farmers, encountered difficulties in interpreting "imaginary situations". The literature also stresses the difficulty to predict the situation that would have taken place in case a particular event would not have happened. "It is extremely difficult to ask counterfactual questions in interviews or focus groups; try asking someone who is currently participating in a public program: "What would you be doing now if this program did not exist?" […] It is unlikely to provide a credible evaluation on its own" (Baker, 2000, p21). [START_REF] Whitehead | The Use of Contingent Valuation in Benefit-Cost Analysis[END_REF] also underscored the difficulty for respondents to answer counterfactual questions given that they are placed in a "fictional situation".

We must also emphasize that the calculations made are not sufficient by themselves; they need to be complemented by qualitative information to help explain how the impact pathway is being developed and for which reasons. Finally, the calculations made are quite time consuming as no model is yet available to compute results automatically. It could be interesting to elaborate such a model in the future to facilitate and quicken the process. The calculations are especially difficult to make when there are feedback loops between pathway components, i.e. when two components are interrelated.

These results raise two important social aspects (further information in the first article, part 4).

First is the type of communication support (orally, leaflets, documents) utilized. Second is the way by which farmers receive the information (door to door talking; through plenary sessions;

and by phone, post or mail). In the present case, the fact that INRA did not send leaflets to farmers, but left them at the CFR for free consultation, may explain the lack of outreach to producers. In addition to this, there was a lack of precision in the advices provided in leaflets 52 Reminder: CRP are the pathway links that would not have been "activated" without the research.

 The growing influence of INRA and CIRAD in the network would not have occurred without the CEBIOCA project and the first experimentations in farming plots (2005)(2006). In fact, these two activities were crucial in the chain of events leading to the increasing influence of INRA and CIRAD in the network;

 The increasing volume of interactions in the network (more exchanges and links) would not have happened, or to a very limited extent, without the growing influence of INRA over time.

From the above, three crucial events are: (1) the CEBIOCA project, (2) the results of the CEBIOCA project, and (3) the first experimentations conducted in farming plots. By contrast, the incremental technical and institutional innovations (false seed-bed techniques, seeding and flooding at a later period, increase in the level of water in paddy fields, extended crop rotations, and institutionalisation of the supply chain) would probably have occurred to some extent in absence of the research, in the same way as for the conversion to organic production. This conclusion cannot be fully confirmed but we observed that the CRP are only situated within the research system and between activities and outputs. This emphasizes that even though the research produced outputs, the latter have led to outcomes and impacts to a relatively minor extent.

Furthermore, the transition to organic farming appears to be a long process in the Camargue (further information in the first & third article, part 4 & 6). After 15 years of significant research on organic rice systems, the rate of adoption was not exceeding 14% in 2014. Also, a few farmers converted to organic farming before the research program under review was launched so that it was also not a completely new phenomenon.

Then, the understanding of the contribution of the research can be deepened on the basis of the calculations presented in the previous section. The research has fully contributed to output1

(typology of farms, farmers' problems and constraints known), output2 (relevant techniques to control weeds, embodied into leaflets) and to output3 (ORPESA leaflets). The evidence is that in absence of the research these pathway components would not have happened. Furthermore, the research contributed very significantly ("very important" -3/4) in developing most of the technical innovations (false seed-bed techniques, seeding and flooding at a later period, increased level of water in paddy fields). The research contributed less ("of average importance" -2/4) in developing crop rotations, and has not contributed at all to the increase in the plant density of rice. If the CRP would not have been present, the consequences on the impact pathway would have been relatively limited, in the sense that the outcomes and impacts would still somewhat take place. However, it is difficult to say to what extent their magnitude (rate of adoption, degree of impacts, etc.) would have been different; we can only affirm that their magnitude would be lower. We are not able to conclude that if the research would not have happened the rate of adoption of the technical innovations mentioned above would have been two times lower. In effect, the absence of the research may not have allowed those technics to develop sufficiently and therefore the rate of adoption could be null ( 53). It is also not possible to say for example that the technical innovations developed would have been two times less relevant. The Problematizing is crucial in the process of translation at the initiation phase but also during the phase of implementation.

Participatory training sessions (ORPESA project) were useful for participants (ideas shared, new relevant scientific experiments suggested). That said, only a few farmers attended.

Enrollment of partners from the international community.

Trust between farmers and INRA's researchers at the beginning, for the implementation of the on-farm trials.

Leaflets, scientific articles and various documents in which the knowledge created is represented in order to get funded and enroll international partners.

On-farm trials for direct visualization of the results. o The decrease in nitrogen requirements of about 24% at the farm level;

Lack

54 TFI equals the ratio of the dose sprayed to the highest authorized dose. The approved doses were found on the official website: e-phy.agriculture.gouv.fr. 55 We asked farmers to report their technical itineraries with the material used. We then calculated the consumption of fuel based on the "barème d'entraide" (scoring grid) of the French Chamber of Agriculture.

o An increase in net margins per hectare (higher selling prices) of about 111% on organic crop productions, without taking account of the single payment entitlements;

o A reduction in the total surface devoted to rice (conventional and organic) of about 45% at the farm level.

Our approach vs. the models used by Lopez et al in "Multi-Scale Integrated Assessment of Regional Conversion to Organic Farming (OF)"

The paper of Lopez et al (2014) aims at answering two important questions, from an exante perspective: (1) whether the conversion to organic agriculture in the Camargue is possible, and ( 2) what the social, economic and ecological impacts, at different scales, could be. The authors discuss the potential of three different methods: the Agent-Based Models (ABM), Bio-Economic Models (BEM), and the models of Land-Use Change (LUC).

The combined use of these models shows that the transition to organic farming in Camargue may mostly happen on diversified cereal farms. It also shows that the productivity would be maintained and the negative impacts on the environment be decreasing. These models are very interesting and show different possible trajectories in terms of economic performance, depending on market prices scenarios. LUC allows identifying, where in the Camargue, changes would most probably occur. Also, the ABM "makes it possible to study the interaction between the resources and the agents' decisions in a dynamic manner and to calculate the impact of these decisions at different aggregation levels" (Lopez-Ridaura et al. 2014, p456).

These models appear more suitable than econometric models using for example the Total Factor Productivity (TFP), but are somewhat weak in describing the detailed mechanisms by which rice producers are being converted their farms to organic farming.

Particularly, it must be emphasized the absence of the scientific research in the models considered. Is the scientific research not helping farmers to convert? Is the process only driven by economic and/or militancy motivations? The answer given by this thesis is "no". Scientific research, by the help of scientific experimentations, on-farm trials in close collaboration with farmers, training sessions and informal talks with potential adopters, contributes to the transition towards organic rice farming systems. TABLE 19 indicates that the research intervention in the Camargue has contributed relatively well to the process from 2000 to 2014.

There is a potential for future research to investigate how our comprehensive approach may feed the combined models used by Lopez et al, in order to predict (ex-ante) the pathway of the transition to organic farming and its impacts. This, in turn, may help setting up more suitable agricultural policies and designing well ex-ante research programs. A possible way of integrating the different approaches may be to consider the "research" as a resource as such; this may be done with the ABM. However, the research produces by essence unpredictable results. Examples of variables that could be used to characterize the research, but that need to be further elaborated, are: number of researchers working at full time on the topic; level of aptitude of the researchers (e.g. ability to do relevant searches); degree of usefulness of what the researchers produced in terms of outputs so far; degree of interactions between farmers and researchers; degree of involvement of the CFR (exchanges, research); etc. This area of research would however require a very significant additional amount of work in order to set up an appropriate approach. This is an opportunity for future research.

Recommendations on how to improve the pathway of the research intervention

The literature on the transition from intensive to organic farming is scarce. Furthermore, this literature often focuses on the motivations, attitudes, and impacts of the conversion as compared to conventional agricultural systems (Lamine and Bellon, 2009). Studies often lead to a simplistic antagonism between militancy motivations or value-oriented farmers on the one hand and farmers determining themselves depending on market opportunities on the other [START_REF] Fairweather | Understanding how farmers choose between organic and conventional production: Results from New Zealand and policy implications[END_REF][START_REF] Darnhofer | Converting or not converting to organic farming in Austria:Farmer types and their rationale[END_REF][START_REF] Best | Organic agriculture and the conventionalization hypothesis: A case study from West Germany[END_REF]. This relatively simple opposition is also represented by the difference made between motivated and "pragmatic" farmers; the latter being more likely to abandon organic farming in case of economic disturbances and to revert to a conventional production mode [START_REF] Fairweather | Understanding how farmers choose between organic and conventional production: Results from New Zealand and policy implications[END_REF][START_REF] Darnhofer | Converting or not converting to organic farming in Austria:Farmer types and their rationale[END_REF]). These studies do not allow a very good understanding of the conversion process and its determinants, and underestimate the significance of the intermediate and long-term elements along trajectories (Lamine and Bellon, 2009).

Through the different methodological developments made in this thesis (further information in the first, second and third article; part 4, 5 and 6), we bring a more comprehensive and alternative way of understanding the pathway from intensive to organic agriculture. In effect, we trace back the complex process, emphasize the trajectories and detailed mechanisms along the pathway towards organic farming systems. In addition, we integrate the role played by the research actors all along the pathway and not only in terms of productivity e.g. in calculating the TFP. Finally, the trajectories are being formalized in a pathway diagram, which allows identifying key milestones, when they happen, and how they can be triggered.

Based on the knowledge generated by the approach developed, nine recommendations are proposed thereafter with a view to enhancing the adoption process and increasing the impacts of the transition to organic agricultural systems. These recommendations apply for policy makers, researchers, and stakeholders. We take account of both the French Camargue and Bulgarian case study. The latter is however only considered on the basis of the third paper of the thesis (part 6).

implementation and diffusion phases, and (5) the function of the economic environment and markets.

Furthermore, we could determine how to identify the contribution of the research in the impact pathway, applied to the case of the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. Particularly, it was presented in the general discussion part, in quantitative terms, how to affine the analysis with respect to the contribution of the different pathway components on the adoption process and achievement of impacts.

Based on the application of the approach developed in two case studies focusing on the transition to organic farming, in the French Camargue and in Bulgaria (see part 4, 5 and 6), 13 recommendations for policy makers, researchers, and stakeholders, were drawn and discussed. o To conduct an ex-post participatory impact pathway evaluation.

We also suggest to conduct, when possible, an ex-post evaluation of research program tackling the issue of the transition to organic farming. This informs on the quality of the program's results in relation to the objectives set and to the needs of the targeted population. This, in turn, helps to elaborate avenues for improvements for current and future similar programs.

This thesis contributed to a better understanding of the transition to organic farming, especially in the Camargue case. At a broader scale, the recommendations made to increase the impacts of the research feed into theories of innovations. Some of the recommendations we made appear to be very much in line with the literature background while others contribute to a scarce amount of references and/or bring some new aspects.

The importance of the factors of "observability" and "trialability" in facilitating the adoption process, as expressed in the work of [START_REF] Rogers | Diffusion of innovations[END_REF], was confirmed in this thesis for the specific case of the transition to organic farming. An innovation that can be experimented and easily visualized represents less uncertainty for the potential beneficiaries.

However, the importance of the variable "compatibility", as formulated by [START_REF] Rogers | Diffusion of innovations[END_REF], is somewhat called into question. In effect, we observed in the Camargue case that what counted was not the system of values but the economic benefit of producing organically. Farmers' motivations were generally of economic nature, and the environmental concerns only counted to a very little extent in decisions-making. What is important for farmers in Camargue is the survivability of their farm given the difficulties encountered in the conventional production mode. Moreover, this is no mere coincidence if the outcome "growing awareness on environmental issues" contributed only to a low extent to the adoption of organic farming and achievement of impacts.

Then, as it was underlined, the transition to organic farming is a complex process, considered as a radical innovation requiring creation of new knowledge (Šūmane, 2010), with substantial investments in resources to develop adapted technics, and to deepen the network of actors and the mobilization of opinion leaders [START_REF] Darnhofer | Assessing a farm's sustainability: insights from resilience thinking[END_REF][START_REF] Bellon | Organic Farming, Prototype for Sustainable Agricultures[END_REF][START_REF] Lamine | Transitions Towards Organic Farming at the Farm and at the Local Scales: The Role of Innovative Production and Organisational Modes and Networks[END_REF]. The transition to organic farming questions existing anchored practices, the system of values, and cannot only be explained by individual farmers' characteristics. Innovation models and the diffusion model in particular should consider more the economic, market and institutional dimensions. More attention should also be paid to changes that affect the conventional production mode (e.g. changes in selling prices) because it can explain, at least partly, the transition to organic farming. The importance of this factor was observed in the Camargue case.

Furthermore, traditional models of innovation often focus on farmers' barriers to conversion, which implicate a pro-innovation bias. It should be paid more attention to the inherent quality of the innovation investigated. In our approach, the quality of the technical and institutional innovations on the one hand and the channels of knowledge transfer on the other are considered.

We take account of the different research outputs; and the different links in the impact pathway are weighted depending on their "strength".

Finally, the top down view of an innovation, which refers to approaches like the Demand pull or the Research push should perhaps be replaced, concerning the transition to organic farming, not only by a more dynamic vision (e.g. AKIS or chain-linked model) with several interactions between actors and phases, but also by a more bottom-up perspective. This means changing the governance paradigm and to increase the capacities of the local actors in developing networks of innovation as well as creating original ideas by themselves; and to have the research only as support and not as main driver. A lesson learned from the Camargue case study is that farmers perceive the research as too "far" from their problems. Also, innovation brokers did not appear to be a solution in a territory where the conservatism of the actors, including from some research actors, is relatively important, and the trust in institutions limited.

Such an approach of innovation could have several advantages with respect to the transition to organic farming: (1) to avoid 'brutalizing' actors, (2) to meet the specific needs of the beneficiaries, (3) to increase the level of innovativeness by increasing actors' responsibility and actors' capacity building, (4) to orient research in relation to local actors' aspirations and not the opposite, and (5) to increase the chance that opinion leaders emerge naturally and share ideas and concepts as well as the knowledge created within the farmer community. This type of approach has especially been developed in African countries.

A study focusing on 8 African countries aimed at evaluating whether a decentralized approach to innovation favors innovation processes [START_REF] Pamuk | Do decentralized innovation systems promote agricultural technology adoption? Experimental evidence from Africa[END_REF]. This decentralized approach is named as "innovation platform" in which stakeholders are intended to contribute in a participatory manner. They are expected to problematize the issues to be investigated and define strategies accordingly. Not only research experts are involved but also diverse public and private organizations, customers, producers and intermediaries. The concept of innovation platform refers to mobilization of social, human and financial capital through the notion of learning. [START_REF] Pamuk | Do decentralized innovation systems promote agricultural technology adoption? Experimental evidence from Africa[END_REF] have shown that this approach could boost the acceptance and uptake of managerial innovations for crop productions, even though the results were less evident for other types of innovations. Furthermore, they underline the high stakeholders' heterogeneity and related needs and aspirations within such innovation platforms, as well as differences in terms of social capital, which can both explain results' variability. This is also due to the lack of hindsight on these platforms whose the concept is relatively recent.

At the same time, [START_REF] Black | Extension theory and practice: a review[END_REF] who explored the pros and cons of four main models or strategies for agricultural extension, underlines that none of these strategies (taken independently) is sufficient by itself. The strategies investigated are as follows: top down, bottom-up, one to one information flow, and formal learning or educational process. "Despite criticisms of linear technology transfer models, there is still a need for access to reliable scientific information, just as there is a need to provide for active participation by farmers in research and development processes" (Black, 2000, p493).

Further research is needed to tackle this issue in relation to the transition to organic farming and more generally for agricultural innovations. Also, this issue should be more studied in "industrialized" countries.

(

13h40-13h50

Presentation of the objectives:

(1) To identify changes in technics, behaviors, and actors' relationships in relation to the conversion to organic farming. (2) To identify the causes of these changes (the outputs or "means") and try to define to what extent the different research activities undertaken for 15 years have contributed to these causes.

To get actors interest and actively involved.

Speech.

Sylvain.

Moderator.

-Slide PowerPoint (N°1) showing the objectives.

-Computer 1.

13h50-15h10

To engage actors in formulating changes.

13h50-13h57

Presentation of the definition of "outcome". Presentation of the types of changes (technics, behaviors, relations, others). Examples are given.

To guide the workshop and especially the next exercise.

Speech.

Sylvain.

Moderator.

-1 slide PowerPoint (n°1): table .  -Computer 1.

13h57-14h03

By group of two persons, the participants are asked to reflect on the changes -what (description of the change), who (who change?), when (when the change occurred?).

In small groups of two persons to make the exercise simpler, interactive and fruitful.

Group exercise.

Sylvain.

Moderator. All.

14h03-14h30

Each group tell the different changes, for each question (what, who, and when) under each type (technics, behaviors, relations, others).

To link these changes with the activities and outputs or "means".

Round table.

-Table PowerPoint (PPT n°1), with the example, remains visible for all.

-Computer 1.

2.4

To classify the stakeholders' statements in the different categories (subcategories of outcomes, i.e. technics, behaviors and relations).

Participants can visualize the results.

Sylvain. Blackboard N°1.

N° Timing Activity Goal Type of discussion

Persons mobilized

Materials used

2.5

At the same time, the outcomes raised by stakeholders are written down on cards (3 copies).

These cards are distributed later to 3 different groups, in order to reconstruct the impact pathway.

Assistant A. Assistant B.

-Cards of color1.

-Pencils.

14h30-14h40

Presentation of the definition of "outputs" and "activities". Taking over the previous table with the different categories of outcomes, 2 columns are added to show example of stakeholders' statements on how changes may have happened thanks to activities, outputs, or other factors.

To guide the workshop and especially the next exercise.

Speech. Sylvain.

Moderator.

-2 slides PowerPoint (PPT n°1).

-Computer 1.

14h40-15h10

The actors are invited to tell how the outcomes occurred thanks to outputs, activities, and other factors.

To link all of these elements afterwards and therefore obtain the socalled impact pathway.

Group discussion (3).

Sylvain.

All. Assistant A. Assistant B.

Moderator.

-Table .  -PowerPoint (PPT n°1), with the example, remains visible for all.

-Computer 1.

2.8

The outputs, activities, and other factors are written down on cards (3 different copies).

These cards are distributed later to 3 different groups, in order to reconstruct the impact pathway. -Cards of color2.

-Cards of color3.

-Pencils.

2.9 Note-taking. Sylvain.

-Paper n°1.

-Pencils. 15h10-15h25 BREAK

15h25-18h30

Impact pathway.

15h25-15h35

Presentation of an example of simple impact pathway.

To give an idea to participants as to how the pathway may look like.

Sylvain.

Moderator.

-Blackboard n°2: poster "pathway".

15h35-16h15

The participants are asked to reconstruct the pathway by linking all the different cards together. Participants are asked to start with the outcomes before going backward to outputs, activities, and other factors.

Reconstruction of the impact pathway.

Exercise. Sylvain. Assistants.

Moderator.

All.

-Blackboard n°1.

-Blackboard n°3.

-Blackboard n°4.

N° Timing Activity Goal Type of discussion

Persons mobilized

Materials used

3.3

Note-taking. Sylvain.

-Paper n°2.

-Pencils.

16h15-16h45

Break "King cake" (Galette des rois).

16h45-17h30

Presentation of each of the impact pathway by each group.

To understand the story behind the pathway.

Discussion. Sylvain. Assistants.

Moderator.

-Blackboard n°1.

-Blackboard n°3.

-Blackboard n°4.

3.5 Note-taking.

To have a summary of the discussions.

Assistants.

-Paper n°3.

-Pencils.

17h30-17h50

Presentation of the impact pathway of the researcher (made in advance by a key researcher from INRA).

To discuss the differences. Speech. Key researcher from INRA.

Moderator.

-Blackboard n°2.

3.7

Note-taking. Assistants.

Sylvain.

-Paper n°4.

-Pencils.

17h50-18h20

The participants are asked to discuss the perspectives. This discussion is guided by one general question: What should be improved in research programs? Sub-questions:

(1) Should research projects be withdrawn?

( (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004).

Output 1: Typology of farms; farmers' problems and constraints known (2004)(2005).

INRA, CIRAD, FranceAM (France AgriMer), CFR.

INRA, European partners.

The CEBIOCA project allowed the INRA to be aware on organic production systems and the main issues to be studied.

INRA.

No.

2 Activity 1: Cebioca project: participative approach and diagnosis about agronomic conditions (2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004). Activity 2: Experimentation in farming plots (2005)(2006). Activity 5: Experimentation of crop management techniques (2011). Activity 4: ORPESA "Table " (2006)(2007).

Outcome (2001).

The "degrees" (SNA) between CIRAD and SudCéréales have increased from 0 in 1999 to 2 in 2015 (breeding activities). In fact, few researchers from CIRAD work at the CFR, and the later developed stronger relationships with the cooperative. The cooperative was granted the exclusive right to sell varieties selected by the CFR.

Glossary

Activities Actions taken or work performed through which inputs, such as funds, technical assistance and other types of resources are mobilized to produce specific outputs (UNAIDS, 2017).

Assessment

We use in this thesis the term assessment as equivalent to evaluation.

Beneficiaries

The individuals, groups, or organizations, whether targeted or not, that benefit, directly or indirectly, from the development intervention (UNAIDS, 2017).

Counterfactual

The situation or condition which hypothetically may prevail for individuals, organizations, or groups were there is no development intervention [START_REF] Collins | Causation and Counterfactuals[END_REF][START_REF] Bigaj | Causes, Conditions and Counterfactuals[END_REF].

Diffusion

The way in which innovation spreads, through market or non-market channels, from their very first implementation to different consumers, countries, regions, sectors, markets and firms. Without diffusion, an innovation has no economic impact (Anandajayasekeram et al. 2009, p305).

Evaluation

It should provide information that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both recipients and donors. Evaluation also refers to the process of determining the worth or significance of an activity, policy or program (OECD, 2016;[START_REF] Baehr | Program Assessment Handbook[END_REF].

Ex-ante evaluation Evaluation that is performed before implementation of a development intervention (OECD, 2002).

Ex-post evaluation Evaluation of a development intervention after it has been completed (OECD, 2002).

Ex-post Impact Evaluation / Assessment Specific type of evaluation designed for identifying and measuring impacts resulting from a program or project's earlier interventions [START_REF] Walker | Strategic Guidance for Ex Post Impact Assessment of Agricultural Research[END_REF].

Impact

Positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended (OECD, 2002).

Impact Evaluation

Assessment of how the intervention being evaluated affects outcomes (changes) in the actions, relationships, and behaviors of enterprises, individuals or communities, whether these effects are intended or unintended (OECD, 2002).

Impact Pathway Characterization of actors that interact during the innovation process on the one side and dimensions of impacts on the other side [START_REF] Walker | Impact Assessment of Policy-Oriented International Agricultural Research: Evidence and Insights from Case Studies[END_REF]. It provides a global view of the change processes that may be linked to a program research [START_REF] Springer-Heinze | Impact pathway analysis: an approach to strengthening the impact orientation of agricultural research[END_REF].

Innovation

It can be defined as the implementation of a new or significantly improved product (good or service) or process, a new marketing method or a new organizational method in business practices, workplace organization or external relations (OECD, 2016).

Incremental innovation

It can be defined as the refinement, improvement, and exploitation of existing innovations. Incremental innovations build on and reinforce the applicability of existing knowledge, and subsequently strengthen the dominance and capabilities of incumbent firms and the dominant design. Incremental innovations are characterized by reliability, predictability, and low risk [START_REF] Narayanan | Encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation Management[END_REF].

Knowledge broker Person or organization that, from a relatively impartial third-party position, purposefully catalyze innovation through bringing together actors and facilitating their interaction. Innovation brokering expands the role of [traditional] agricultural extension from that of a one-to-one intermediary between research and farmers to that of an intermediary that creates and facilitates many-to-many relationships (Klerkx et al. 2009).

Radical innovation It can be defined as innovations with features offering dramatic improvements in performance or cost, which result in transformation of existing markets or creation of new ones. They involve fundamental technological discoveries for the firm, and thus are new to the firm and/or industry, and offer substantially new benefits and higher performance to customers [START_REF] Narayanan | Encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation Management[END_REF].

Outcome

The likely or achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention's outputs (OECD, 2002). Outcome implies changes in the behaviors, relationships, activities and/or actions of a boundary partner that can be logically linked to a program [START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF].

Outcome

The likely or achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention's outputs (OECD, 2002). Outcome implies changes in the behavior, relationships, activities and/or actions of a boundary partner that can be logically linked to a program [START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF].

Outcome Harvesting

It is an utilization-focused, highly participatory tool that enables evaluators, grant makers, and managers to identify, formulate, verify, and make sense of outcomes they have influenced when relationships of cause-effect are unknown [START_REF] Wilson Grau | Outcome Harvesting[END_REF].

Output

The products, capital goods and services which result from a development intervention; may also include changes resulting from the intervention which are relevant to the achievement of outcomes (OECD, 2002). Outputs are directly achievable and observable [START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF][START_REF] Byrne | The SAGE Handbook of Case-Based Methods[END_REF].

Process tracing

It seeks to uncover the causal link by focusing on the intervening steps in a hypothesized causal process [START_REF] Bennett | Process Tracing and Causal Inference[END_REF].

  ......................................................................................... TABLE 11: COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF SNA DATA ...........................................................TABLE 12: TABLE OF LINK" ON ACTOR"' RELATIONSHIPS ...................................................... TABLE 13: RESEARCH PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW .................................................................. TABLE 14 : DATA COLLECTION PROCESS IN THE CAMARGUE AND BULGARIAN CASE .......... TABLE 15 : PROJECTS CONSTITUTING THE RESEARCH PROGRAM FOR ORGANIC FARMING SYSTEMS IN CAMARGUE .................................................................................................. TABLE 16: INTERESTS OF THE METHODOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN UNDERSTANDING EX-POST THE ROLE OF THE RESEARCH ................................................................................. TABLE 17: INTEREST OF THE METHODOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN REDUCING THE SHORTCOMINGS OF PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION PROCEDURES ................................. TABLE 18: CONVERSION INTO WORDS OF THE CALCULATIONS MADE ON THE CONTRIBUTIONOF THE RESEARCH ........................................................................................................... TABLE 19: CONTRIBUTION OF THE RESEARCH AND PATHWAY COMPONENTS ALONG THE TRANSITION TO ORGANIC FARMING ............................................................................... TABLE 20: SUMMARY ON CRP AND KEY ENABLING & DISABLING FACTORS IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY .....................................................................................................................

FIGURE 1 :

 1 FIGURE 1: KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION AND INNOVATION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE KNOWLEGE ECONOMY, KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY, AND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS OF SOCIETY ..............................................................................................................................

FIGURE 2 :

 2 FIGURE 2: QUINTUPLE HELIX MODEL AND ROLE OF THE KNOWLEDGE & RESEARCH FOR SUSTAINABLE INNOVATIONS .............................................................................................

FIGURE 3 :

 3 FIGURE 3 : OVERVIEW OF THE CAMARGUE TERRITORY IN FRANCE ........................................ FIGURE 4: ECOSTOP PLATES .....................................................................................................

FIGURE 5 :

 5 FIGURE 5: STRUCTURE AND DIFFERENT STEPS COMPLETED .................................................

FIGURE 6 :

 6 FIGURE 6: SIMPLIFIED IMPACT PATHWAY OF THE CONVERSION TO ORGANIC FARMING IN THE CAMARGUE ..............................................................................................................

FIGURE 7 :

 7 FIGURE 7: MAP OF ACTORS IN 1999 ......................................................................................

FIGURE 8 :

 8 FIGURE 8: MAP OF ACTORS IN 2003 ......................................................................................

FIGURE 9 :

 9 FIGURE 9: MAP OF ACTORS IN 2014 ......................................................................................

FIGURE 10 :

 10 FIGURE 10: EXAMPLE OF CALCULATION: CONTRIBUTION OF THE RESEARCH ACTIVITIES 2, 5 AND 8 IN ACHIEVING THE OUTPUT 2 ..............................................................................

FIGURE 11 :

 11 FIGURE 11 : COMPREHENSIVE IMPACT PATHWAY FROM THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY .....

  Biologique) et à l'UMR Innovation jointe INRA/CIRAD -Un merci tout particulier à Dominique, Matthias et Urs pour le FiBL ; ainsi qu'à Jean-Marc, Pascal et Guy pour l'UMR Innovation. Je remercie également tous mes autres collègues du FiBL, du CIRAD et de l'INRA pour nos échanges d'idées et pour leur convivialité. Par ailleurs, je tiens à remercier l'école SupAgro et l'école doctorale EDEG (Ecole Doctorale Economie et Gestion) pour leur soutien.

  la lumière sur les mécanismes complexes dans le processus d'innovation ; la méthode « Outcome Harvesting » (OH) pour adapter PIPA aux conditions d'une évaluation ex-post ; et l'analyse du réseau social (SNA) pour souligner les relations d'acteurs en relation avec le processus de développement. D'autres méthodes sont également utilisées en combinaison afin d'approfondir l'analyse. Nous montrons que la recherche a contribué au changement en développant des interactions de co-apprentissage avec les agriculteurs même si cela n'a pas été primordial pour le succès de l'innovation. Nous montrons en revanche que les politiques agricoles, les facteurs économiques, les « tests » conduit indépendamment par les producteurs, et le cadre institutionnel, sont les facteurs les plus influençant et importants. Deuxième article (partie 5) Le deuxième article évalue la pertinence d'effectuer une analyse du réseau social (SNA) pour approfondir la compréhension du réseau d'acteur et du rôle qu'il joue au cours du processus d'innovation. Le plus important est l'analyse des opinions des parties prenantes, en prenant le cas de la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue (en France) pour exemple. L'analyse confirme le rôle grandissant joué par l'INRA au cours du temps au sein du réseau d'acteurs ainsi que sa contribution à la transition vers l'agriculture biologique. L'étude corrobore également l'importance de l'institutionnalisation de la chaîne de valeur (création de la firme spécialisée BIOSUD) ayant eu lieu en 2003. L'analyse du réseau social est à même de valider les opinions des parties prenantes sur les relations d'acteurs et leurs implications sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Troisième article (partie 6) Le troisième article explore le potentiel de la théorie de l'acteur réseau dans la compréhension de la contribution des acteurs et comment ils interagissent durant les différentes phases de l'innovation, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. L'étude se base sur le cas de la Camargue en France et sur le cas Bulgare. Nous montrons que la théorie de l'acteur réseau est à même d'identifier le rôle joué par les acteurs humains et les objets. Les acteurs 1 Part 1: General introduction

  ont souligné l'importance des activités de vulgarisation, des actions collectives et des processus d'apprentissage pour impulser des changements de pratiques auprès des agriculteurs. Les innovations sociales et techniques vers une agriculture durable sont complexes et représentent une « boite noire » où la recherche et l'innovation supportent les processus de changement au niveau individuel, collectif et institutionnel. Ainsi, l'évaluation des impacts des programmes de recherche sur des innovations en lien avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique parait encore plus complexe que pour d'autres types d'innovations. De nombreuses approches ont été développées dans la littérature pour évaluer ex-post les impacts de la recherche. Néanmoins, la question de comment les processus d'innovations soutenus par la recherche devraient être évalués reste en suspens. Les méthodes exposées dans la littérature faillissent souvent à faire la lumière sur la « boite noire », c'est à dire sur le processus complexe opérant entre les dépenses de recherche d'un côté et l'adoption des innovations et l'obtention d'impacts d'un autre côté

  program 6 . At Member State level and in France in particular, INRA (French National Institute of Research Agriculture) and CIRAD (French Agricultural Research and International Cooperation Organization) started to develop indicators of impacts to assess innovation from their own research programs. More generally, INRA and CIRAD are looking with growing importance at scientific evidences of results of their research programs. The movement around the failure of the Washington Consensus as well as the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy have been encouraging the conduct of numerous impact assessment studies and the development of several methodologies. Examples of methods are the Public

  farming. A second hypothesis is that the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, regarding the transition to organic farming in the Camargue, are important. The rationale is that the research program launched by INRA (National Institute of Agronomic research) in 1999 has a clear and ambitious focus on organic rice farming systems and comprised a set of several projects from 1999 to 2014 in investigating crucial issues on that topic. Also, the research program has been driving by a very motivated and skilled researcher from INRA, and also in close contacts with a few farmers from Camargue and important local organizations like the Rice Farmers Union. This objective is addressed in the form of an article in part 4. This article is entitled "Ex-post evaluation of the impacts of the Science-Based Research and Innovation Program: A new

A

  step back is taken on the usefulness of the different methodological developments made, in enlightening ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue. It is also questioned in what the different methodological developments made in the three articles inform us on the transition process towards organic farming in terms of the diverse drivers on stake.

FIGURE 3 :

 3 FIGURE 3 : OVERVIEW OF THE CAMARGUE TERRITORY IN FRANCE

  society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. The impacts and contribution of the research as such in the Camargue were also evaluated. Using the Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) with complementary methods, tools, and instruments, the different mechanisms occurring along the innovation pathway could be detailed well in the Camargue case study. Still, the contribution of the research was studied with a certain degree of success. Furthermore, diverse types of indicators of change, covering the three dimensions of the sustainability, could be identified, measured, and linked to the research activities and outputs. The Social Network Analysis (SNA) was further explored in the second article and appeared very beneficial. It could validate impact pathway links on actors' relationships, better identify the role and contribution of the different research actors over time, as well as deepening our understanding as to the influence of the different research activities on the structure of the network and in turn on the adoption process. However, the microeconomic mechanisms by which for example research activities have impacted the structure of the network, were underexplored. If we could tell the extent to which a research activity X was affecting the network and what the general underlying mechanisms were (e.g. strengthened relationships between farmers and researchers); the question of why and how the latter have developed was mostly unconsidered.The third paper further addresses the role of interpersonal links, power relationships, influence and negotiation processes, in their capacity to trigger innovation processes related to the transition to organic farming. We test the relevance of the Actor Network Theory (ANT) in informing these elements. It is applied in two case studies which were selected in order to cover two different types of innovation, and for their diversity in terms of network configurations and local contexts. The first case is a broad range of different technical and social innovations which are leading the transition to organic rice farming systems in the French Camargue. The second case is a technical innovation, i.e. the development of a new organic product (Ecostop) in Bulgaria to protect bees from the varroatosis disease.

  methods we used in combination with PIPA (Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis) as well as their interests in understanding ex-post the role and contribution of the research based innovation in agriculture. Methodological developments Interests in understanding ex-post the role of the research (1) Outcome Harvesting -Adapt PIPA to the requirements of an ex-post evaluation, allowing tracing back the role played by the research along the innovation pathway. -Further consider factors with little or no connection to the research program, since they may also influence outcomes and impacts (better evaluation of what the research produced). -Help to uncover the black box of the innovation process and to identify the enabling & disabling factors that occur in the process. (2) Consider the strength of the pathway links (also visible in the pathway graph) -Identification of elements derived from the research in the pathway and which were the most important in reaching milestones and thus the outcomes and impacts. -Estimation of the importance of external factors i.e. unrelated to the research. (3) Counterfactual situations -Identification of Crucial Research Points (CRP), in other words of elements in the pathway which would not have happened without the research. -Eliminate pathway links, derived from the research or not, which have not affected the outputs, outcomes or impacts. (4) Table of links -Identification of the underlying mechanisms to pathway links, explained by the role of the research, directly or indirectly. -Help to uncover the black box of the innovation process and to identify the enabling & disabling factors that occur in the process. (5) Social Network Analysis -Adapt PIPA to the requirements of an ex-post evaluation, in reconstructing the actor network at different points of time along the innovation pathway. -Better understanding of the contribution of the different actors in structuring the network, enhancing in turn the adoption process and the achievement of outcomes & impacts. -Identification of the most important research activities. -Help to uncover the black box of the innovation process and to identify the enabling & disabling factors that occur in the process. (7) Actor Network Theory -Orienting evaluating questions for assessing ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes.

  1b) Process tracing & Hoop test -To confirm pathway links by the identification of evidences. -To eliminate pathway links which in fact did not affect the impact pathway. (2) Counterfactual situations -Identification of Crucial Research Points (CRP), in other words of elements in the pathway which would not have happened without the research. The related pathway links were fully validated. -To eliminate pathway links which were in fact not necessary to the impact pathway. -To complete the hoop test, which is unable to fully confirm the pathway links (the hoop test only looks at the presence of necessary conditions, which is insufficient to fully explain the occurrence of the respective links). (3) Social Network Analysis (SNA) -To study in-depth the role of the network (the time available in workshops is too limited for this). -To identify the most important actors to invite in advance, thus facilitating the preparation and the elaboration of strategic answers for the workshops. -To confirm pathway links on actors' relationships. (4a) Outcome Harvesting (OH) (4b) Actor Network Theory (ANT) (4c) Public Value Mapping (PVM) -To utilize other ways of collecting data and to deepen the analysis done (no time in workshops to analyze the pathway in-depth).

  although the recommendations were more precise, farmers said. The crux of the problem are the very specific and heterogeneous local conditions in the Camargue, which reduce the effectiveness of generalized information to all the farms. Moreover, INRA is more acknowledged by farmers who hosted a part of its scientific experimentations (they rated a double score of relationships with INRA when asking information for SNA). They recognized more the relevance of the techniques developed and their appropriateness to local conditions. Several CRP 52 were identified in the impact pathway (further information in the first article, part 4):  The whole research program would probably not have taken place without one key researcher from INRA;  The first experimentations (2005-2006) would not have happened without the CEBIOCA project (identification of agronomic problems) and related results;  The ORPESA "Table" (training sessions) would not have occurred without the first experimentations made (2005-2006), and therefore without the CEBIOCA project and related results; The ORPESA leaflets and the international conference on organic rice systems in Montpellier would respectively not have been produced and held without the ORPESA project and thus without CEBIOCA, its results, and the first experimentations;  The advanced experimentations (2011) on crop management techniques would not have been conducted without the ORPESA project. By extension, they would not have been done in absence of the CEBIOCA project and its results as well as of the first experimentations(2005)(2006);

Finally, the identified

  impacts of the research are as follows (further information in the first article, part 4): o The surface under organic rice production has steadily increased and attained 1400 ha in 2014; o The number of organic rice producers has reached 16% of the total number of rice producers by 2014; o The fall in the use of pesticides with a decrease in the Treatment Frequency Index (TFI 54 ) of around 51% at the farm level; o The reduction in the water used was about 45% at the farm level; o The diminution in fuel 55 consumption of about 17% at the farm level;

8o

  key recommendations are as follows: o To problematize the challenges to be tackled before implementing a research program as such, and refine this problematic all along the process; o The interests of the different actors from research should primarily be aligned around goals that are beneficial for everybody; o To enable farmers to conduct experimentations on their farms, preferably in close collaboration with the research; o To enroll opinion leaders to make a closer link between research and the farmer community; To enable a favorable economic and institutional environment to make the research intervention more successful; o To allow flexibility into research programs to adapt to unexpected developments during innovation processes; o To regularly monitor research outputs and outcomes during the time span of the research program;

Table of content

 of List of tables

TABLE 1 :

 1 MONITORING VS. EVALUATION ................................................................................

TABLE 2 :

 2 OBJECTIVES, RESEARCH QUESTIONS, AND HYPOTHESIS ..........................................

TABLE 3 :

 3 DATA COLLECTION IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY ................................................

TABLE 4 :

 4 DATA COLLECTION IN THE BULGARIAN CASE STUDY ................................................

TABLE 5 :

 5 RESEARCH PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW REGARDING THE TRANSITION TO ORGANIC FARMING IN THE CAMARGUE .........................................................................................

TABLE 6 :

 6 ACTORS INTERVIEWED AND RELATED OBJECTIVES ................................................

TABLE 7 :

 7 PATHWAY LINKS ARISING FROM THE FIRST STEP, AND OPINIONS CONSIDERED ..

TABLE 8 :

 8 THE FOUR STAGES OF PROCESS TRACING IN THE METHOD APPLIED ....................

TABLE 9 :

 9 INDICATORS OF IMPACTS ........................................................................................

TABLE 10 :

 10 BLANK TABLE OF LINKS .

TABLE 21 :

 21 NEEDS OF NITROGEN/HA ......................................................................................

TABLE 22 :

 22 GUIDELINE OF THE SECOND WORKSHOP IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY .........

TABLE 23 :

 23 TABLE OF LINKS FROM THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY .........................................

pour évaluer la contribution de la recherche au développement des innovations agricoles et à la génération d'impacts. Il a donc été identifié le besoin de développer une nouvelle approche pour évaluer ex-post les impacts et la contribution des

  . Cela dit, ces approches doivent être significativement adaptées et . Comme déjà évoqué, ceci signifie que l'accent est mis sur des innovations complexes, caractérisées notamment par des processus dynamiques de co-création de connaissances. C'est pourquoi il apparait nécessaire de mettre l'accent sur le rôle joué par le réseau d'acteurs sur les processus d'innovations et dans la production des impacts économiques, sociaux et environnementaux.

	combinées avec d'autres pour être à même (1) d'évaluer les impacts de la recherche sur les
	processus d'innovations agricoles, de façon ex-post, en y impliquant les parties prenantes dans
	le processus, et (2) programmes de recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en relation avec la
	transition à l'agriculture biologique ; et d'aller plus loin vers le développement de façons non
	traditionnelles d'évaluer l'impact, tenant compte du nouveau paradigme de la production de
	connaissances.
	Cette thèse a pour objet d'évaluer, de développer, et de tester différentes méthodes qualitatives
	et manières d'évaluer ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus
	d'innovations et par extension sur la société, en lien avec la transition à l'agriculture

biologique

Cette thèse comprend quatre objectifs, lesquels sont davantage discutés à la partie 3 avec les questions de recherche spécifiques et les hypothèses. Les

	trois premiers objectifs sont chacun
	traités dans un article scientifique (partie 4, 5 et 6), tandis que le dernier objectif est adressé
	dans une discussion générale (partie 7). Les objectifs généraux de la thèse sont les suivants :
	(1) Evaluer de manière ex-post les impacts du programme de recherche ainsi que le rôle et
	la contribution de cette recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en
	rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue. Une méthode
	qualitative est développée à cette fin. Cet objectif est traité dans le premier article à la
	partie 4.

  in terms of ex-post evaluating programs. OM aims to implement projects by constructing expected pathways. OH presents the major interest to be designed for ex-post analysis and is an "evaluation approach in which evaluators, grant makers, and/or program managers and staff identify, formulate, verify, analyze and interpret 'outcomes' in option and can hardly be described as a participatory approach. Rather, OH recommends to collect data through publicly available documents, surveys, questionnaires, and in-depth interviews. on the one hand and dissemination on the other. The model allows exploring a research program from the idea or invention developed within the research process to the dissemination phase. The research process is non-linear and characterized by the presence of several feedback loops occurring between the different phases, and the role of intermediaries and beneficiaries in the interface of dissemination is emphasized. Research programs are explored by collecting information through surveys, analysis of various documents, and

	e) Payback Framework
	The payback framework (Donovan and Hanney, 2011) is a logic model representing the
	different elements operating from research to impacts and composed of two interfaces: project
	specification and selection

programming contexts where relations of cause and effect are not fully understood"

[START_REF] Wilson-Grau | Outcome Harvesting[END_REF]

. Under OH, changes (outcomes) related to the intervention are identified before going further back to outputs and research activities. However, OH does not propose organizing workshops as primary

  Les objectifs de la thèse que nous avons cités dans l'introduction générale sont discutés plus en détails avec les questions de recherche et hypothèses. Nous précisons également le cadre conceptuel et théorique, qui se base sur l'observation que les innovations sont de plus en plus complexes et sur le fait que nous nous focalisons sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique.

	Partie 3 : Méthodologie)
	(Résumé)
	Afin de mieux comprendre la « boite noire » de l'innovation et comment les « outputs »
	(éléments tangibles) de la recherche génèrent des « outcomes » (changements) et impacts, nous

nous basons sur une vision interactive, et plus important encore, sur une perspective évolutionniste de l'innovation, considérant cette dernière comme un « système ». De plus, une courte description des deux cas d'études est réalisée (la Camargue en France et le cas Bulgare), et la raison de leur sélection spécifiée. Le cas de la Camargue concerne la transition à des systèmes rizicoles biologiques. Il a été principalement choisi car il traite d'une innovation radicale, mais aussi du fait de la disponibilité de nombreux documents sur le programme de recherche et de la présence d'un informateur clé de l'INRA (Institut National de la Recherche

Agronomique). Quant au cas Bulgare, les raisons principales de sa sélection reposent sur le caractère radical de l'innovation considérée, le produit Ecostop, qui est devenu l'un des produits les plus importants contre la maladie de la varroatose en Bulgarie. Enfin, la structure de la thèse sur les parties restantes de la thèse est indiquée : les trois articles (partie 4, 5 et 6), la discussion générale (partie 7), et la conclusion générale (partie 8).

TABLE 2 .

 2 The first and third objectives comprise each two sub-objectives.

	Objectives	Sub-objectives	Research questions	Hypothesis	Where?
	1) To ex-post	1.1) To develop a	a) What are the limits of	a) PIPA can be successfully	-Part 4, in
	assess the impacts	qualitative method to	existing qualitative	combined with other	the form of
	of the research	ex-post evaluate the	methods in ex-post	methods from social	an article.
	program as well as	impacts and	evaluating science-based	sciences and therefore tell
	the role and	contribution of the	innovation processes in	ex-post what the impacts	-Part 7
	contribution of this	agricultural research	agriculture?	and contribution of the	(general
	research on	on innovation		research on innovation	discussion)
	innovation	processes and the	b) Can the Participatory	processes and the society	in which all
	processes and the	society, in relation to	Impact Pathway	are, in relation to the	main
	society, in relation	the transition to	Analysis approach	transition to organic	results are
	to the transition to	organic farming.	(PIPA) be successfully	farming.	summarize
	organic farming in		combined with other		d and
	the Camargue.	1.2) To ex-post assess	methods from social	b) The impacts and	further
		the impacts and	sciences and ex-post	contribution of the research	discussed.
		contribution of the	analyze well the impacts	in Camargue on the
		research program on	and contribution of the	development of innovation
		innovation processes	research on innovation	processes and related
		and the society, linked	processes and the	societal impacts,
		to the transition to	society, with respect to	concerning the transition to
		organic farming in the	the transition to organic	organic farming, are
		Camargue.	farming in the	important. The research is
			Camargue?	the most important factor in
				the process.
	2) To study the interest of performing a Social Network Analysis (SNA) in ex-post evaluating the impacts and contribution of	(a) Is SNA suitable in validating stakeholders' statements on	(a) SNA is able to ex-post validate stakeholders' statements on relationships	-Part 5, in the form of an article.
	the research on innovation processes and the	relationships issues in	by the help of indicators of
	society, in relation to the transition to organic	order to better evaluate	centrality and of the	-Part 7
	farming in the Camargue.	ex-post the impacts and	characterization of the	(general
			contribution of the	intensities of relationships	discussion)
			research on innovation	in the innovation network.	in which all
			processes and the		main
			society, in relation to the	(b) SNA can help to	results are
			transition to organic	understand ex-post how	summarize
			agriculture?	new techniques or products	d and
				are spreaded and thus to	further
			(b) Can SNA deepen ex-	help draw conclusions on	discussed.
			post the understanding	the role the research actors
			of the impacts and	have played during the
			contribution of the	innovation process.
			research actors on
			innovation processes
			and the society, in
			relation to the transition
			to organic farming in the
			Camargue?

TABLE 3 :

 3 DATA COLLECTION IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY

TABLE 4 :

 4 DATA COLLECTION IN THE BULGARIAN CASE STUDY(Partie 4 -Article : Evaluation ex-post des impacts de la recherche scientifique et programmes d'i ovatio s liés : U e ouvelle éthode appli uée da s le as de la t a sitio à l'ag i ultu e

	biologique en Camargue)

Sylvain Quiédeville 1 , Dominique Barjolle 2 , Jean-Claude Mouret 3 , et Mathias Stolze 1

	1 Institut de Recherche de l'Agriculture Biologique (FiBL), Département des Sciences
	Economiques et Sociales, Ackerstrasse 113 -Postfach 219, 5070 Frick, Suisse ;
	sylvain.quiedeville@fibl.ch, matthias.stolze@fibl.ch.
	2 ETH Zürich, Institut des Sciences Agricoles, TAN F1, Tannenstrasse 1, 8092 Zürich, Suisse ;
	barjolle@ethz.ch.
	3 Institut National de la Recherche Agricole (INRA), UMR Innovation, 2 Place Pierre Viala,
	34000 Montpellier, France ; mouret@supagro.inra.fr.

Article publiée dans le "Journal of Innovation Economics and Management" en Janvier 2017

  Cet article a pour objectif d'évaluer la contribution, le rôle et les impacts de la recherche scientifique et programmes d'innovations liés (ISRIP) par rapport à la transition vers l'agriculture biologique en Camargue. Nous avons appliqué une méthode mixte en se focalisant sur la manière dont les acteurs de la recherche ont contribué au chemin de l'innovation et dans quelle mesure. Une analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) a été réalisée afin de faire la lumière sur les mécanismes complexes dans le processus d'innovation ; la méthode "Outcome Harvesting" pour adapter PIPA aux conditions d'une évaluation ex-post, et l'analyse des réseaux sociaux (SNA) pour mettre en avant les relations d'acteurs en parallèle du processus de développent. Nous démontrons que la recherche a contribué au changement par le développement d'interactions de co-apprentissage avec les producteurs, bien que ceci n'ait pas été décisif pour le succès de l'innovation. Nous soulignons plutôt le fait que les politiques agricoles, les facteurs économiques, les essais conduits de manière indépendantes pas les agriculteurs, et le cadre institutionnel, sont les facteurs les plus importants et influents.Transition words: From the first to the second article

	P
	r o t e
	c
	t e
	d
	f
	o r
	(Résumé)	r e a
		s
		o n
		s
		o f
		c
		o
		p y
		r i g
		h t

Mots clés -Evaluation ; Recherche scientifique ; Théorie du programme ; Processus d'innovation ; Analyse Ex-post et participative du chemin de l'impact ; Systèmes rizicoles camarguais.

Article soumis dans « Cahier d'agriculture » en Avril 2017

  méthodes, outils et instruments comme le « process tracing », l'utilisation de questions contrefactuelles, et l'analyse du réseau social (SNA). L'intérêt de l'analyse du réseau social, pour étudier et valider les dires d'acteurs, n'a été exploré que dans une mesure très limitée. De plus, la contribution de SNA pour renseigner sur l'influence des différentes activités de recherche sur la structure du réseau d'acteurs, et par extension sur le processus d'adoption et la génération d'impacts, n'a pas encore été évoquée. Dernier point, mais non moins important, la capacité de SNA à informer quels sont les acteurs les plus importants et leur influence sur le réseau au cours du processus d'innovation, devrait être davantage discutée. Nous avons donc identifié le besoin de réexaminer l'intérêt de faire une analyse du réseau social, dans le cadre d'un second article. Notre but est de réévaluer la capacité de SNA à valider les liens du chemin de l'impact sur les relations d'acteurs, et de mieux comprendre les impacts et la contribution des différents acteurs de la recherche au cours du temps. Aussi SNA est une approche globale en elle-même ; ses caractéristiques, son intérêt, et son utilité ne pouvaient être explorés et discutés en profondeur dans le cadre du premier article. Par ailleurs, le deuxième article offre la possibilité de montrer comment la table des liens, qui classifie toutes les informations collectées, est utilisée en pratique (ici on se focalise uniquement sur les liens décrivant les relations entre acteurs). Appendix to the second article (not submitted in the scientific journal)

	5.9
	5 Part 5 -Article: Using Social Network Analysis to evaluate
	the Impact of the Research: On the transition to organic
	farming in the Camargue Sylvain Quiédeville 1 , Dominique Barjolle 2 , et Mathias Stolze 1
	1 Institut de Recherche de l'Agriculture Biologique (FiBL), Département des Sciences
	Economiques et Sociales, Ackerstrasse 113 -Postfach 219, 5070 Frick, Suisse ; Sylvain Quiédeville 1 , Dominique Barjolle 2 , and Mathias Stolze 1 sylvain.quiedeville@fibl.ch, matthias.stolze@fibl.ch.
	1 Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Ackerstrasse 113 -Postfach 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland; sylvain.quiedeville@fibl.ch, matthias.stolze@fibl.ch. 2 ETH Zürich, Institute for Agricultural Sciences, TAN F1, Tannenstrasse 1, 8092 Zürich, 2 ETH Zürich, Institut des Sciences Agricoles, TAN F1, Tannenstrasse 1, 8092 Zürich, Suisse ; P barjolle@ethz.ch. r o t e
	c Switzerland; barjolle@ethz.ch. t e
	(Résumé)	d
		f
		o r
		r e
		a
		s
		o n
		s
		o
		f
		c
		o
	p y confirms the growing role played by INRA (National Research Agronomic Institute) over time réalisée en 2003. SNA est à même de valider les opinions des parties prenantes par rapport aux r i g within the actor network and its contribution to the transition towards organic agriculture. The study also corroborates the importance of the institutionalization of the supply chain, which relations d'acteurs et leurs implications sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique. SNA h t
	happened in 2003. SNA is able to validate stakeholders' views with respect to actors' pourrait être utilisée plus largement pour évaluer les impacts de la recherche de tous types
	relationships and their implications on the transition to organic farming. SNA could be used d'innovations, particulièrement lorsque des procédures participatives sont mobilisées.
	more broadly in evaluating research impacts for all types of innovations, especially when participatory procedures are mobilized. MOTS CLES -Evaluation de l'impact ex-post ; Innovation ; Réseau de recherche ; Flux d'information ; Riz

Article submitted in "Cahier d'agriculture" in April 2017

Abstract

This paper evaluates the relevance of undertaking a Social Network Analysis (SNA) in deepening the understanding on the network of actors and the role it plays during the innovation process. Most importantly is the analysis of stakeholders' views, taking as example the Camargue case study (in France) tackling the transition to organic farming. The method SNA, whose we evaluate the interest, is part of a set of methods that form a comprehensive participatory approach that was developed to evaluate ex-post the impacts of the research based innovation in the frame of the European research project IMPRESA. The analysis particularly KEY WORDS -Ex-post impact assessment; Innovation; Research networks; Information flow; Rice (Partie 5 -Article : L'a al se des Réseau So iau pou évalue les I pa ts de la Recherche : Sur la t a sitio à l'ag i ultu e iologi ue e Ca a gue) Cet article évalue la pertinence de réaliser une analyse du réseau social (SNA) afin d'approfondir la compréhension du réseau d'acteurs et du rôle qu'il joue au cours du processus d'innovation. Le plus important est l'analyse de l'opinion des parties prenantes, en prenant comme exemple le cas d'étude de la Camargue (en France) traitant de la transition à l'agriculture biologique. La méthode SNA, dont nous évaluons l'intérêt, fait partie d'un ensemble de méthodes formant une approche participative globale laquelle a été développée pour évaluer ex-post les impacts de la recherche axée sur l'innovation dans le cadre du projet de recherche Européen IMPRESA. L'analyse confirme en particulier le rôle croissant joué par l'INRA (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique) au cours du temps au sein du réseau d'acteur et sa contribution à la transition vers l'agriculture biologique. L'étude corrobore également l'importance de l'institutionnalisation de la chaine d'approvisionnement, qui s'est

Sylvain Quiédeville 1 , Petya Slavova 2 , Jean-Marc Touzard 3 , et Dominique Barjolle 4

  (Mots de transition : Du premier & deuxième article (avec son annexe) au troisième papier)Nous avons proposé dans le premier article une approche originale, globale et qualitative pour évaluer les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Les impacts et la contribution de la recherche en tant que tels en Camargue ont également été évalués. À travers la conduite d'une analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA), associée à d'autres méthodes, outils, et instruments, les différents mécanismes opérant au long du chemin de l'innovation ont pu être bien détaillés dans le cas d'étude de la Camargue. De même, la contribution de la recherche a été étudiée avec une certaine réussite. De plus, divers types d'indicateurs de changement, couvrant les trois dimensions de la durabilité, ont pu être identifiés, mesurés, et reliés aux activités de recherche et « outputs ». Nous testons la pertinence de la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT) pour informer ces éléments. Celle-ci est appliquée dans les deux cas d'études sélectionnés dans cette thèse, pour couvrir deux types d'innovation et avoir une diversité en termes de configurations de réseau et de contextes locaux. Le premier cas est un ensemble de diverses techniques et innovations sociales ayant accompagné la transition à l'agriculture biologique

	1 Institut de Recherche de l'Agriculture Biologique (FiBL), Département des Sciences
	Economiques et Sociales, Ackerstrasse 113 -Postfach 219, 5070 Frick, Suisse;
	sylvain.quiedeville@fibl.ch, matthias.stolze@fibl.ch.
	2 Université Sofia, Département de sociologie, 125 Tzarigradsko Shose Blvd, 1113 Sofia,
	Bulgarie; pslavova@phls.uni-sofia.bg.
	3 Institut National de la Recherche Agricole (INRA), UMR Innovation, 2 Place Pierre Viala,
	34000 Montpellier, France; jean-marc.touzard@supagro.inra.fr.
	4 ETH Zürich, Institut des Sciences Agricoles, TAN F1, Tannenstrasse 1, 8092 Zürich, Suisse;
	barjolle@ethz.ch.

L'analyse du réseau social (SNA) a été davantage explorée dans le deuxième article et est apparue très bénéfique. Elle a pu valider les liens du chemin de l'impact sur les relations d'acteurs, de mieux identifier le rôle et la contribution des différents acteurs de la recherche au cours du temps, et d'approfondir notre compréhension de l'influence des différentes activités de recherche sur la structure du réseau et ainsi sur le processus d'adoption.

Cependant, les mécanismes microéconomiques par lesquels les activités de recherche ont impacté la structure du réseau n'ont pas été suffisamment explorés. S'il a été possible de dire dans quelle mesure une activité de recherche X a pu affecter le réseau et quels ont été les mécanismes globaux sous-jacents (ex : relations renforcées entre producteurs et chercheurs) ; la question de pourquoi et comment ces dernières se sont développées a été insuffisamment considérée.

Le troisième article interroge le rôle des liens interpersonnels, des relations de pouvoir, d'influence, et des processus de négociation, dans leur capacité à « piloter » le chemin de l'innovation.

en Camargue en France. Le second cas est une innovation technique, c'est à dire le développement d'un nouveau produit biologique en Bulgarie (Ecostop) pour protéger les abeilles contre la maladie de la varroatose.

(Partie 6 -Article : Rôle de la recherche dans la t a sitio à l'ag i ultu e biologique selon la Théorie de l'Acteur Réseau)

Article soumis en octobre 2017 dans le journal "Economics of Innovation and New Technology"

  Transition words: Towards a general discussion on the results

	P
	r o t e
	c
	t e
	d
	f
	o r
	(Résumé)	r e a
		s
		o n
		s
		o f
		c
		o
		p y
		r i g
	sur les interactions d'acteurs aide à mieux comprendre les dites « incertitudes » et « moments charnières » pendant le développement de l'innovation, et de les interpréter comme éléments h t
	essentiels du processus d'innovation. Par ailleurs, nous concluons que les défis à relever
	devraient être problématisés pour augmenter le succès des programmes de recherche. Nous
	soulignons également l'importance des leaders d'opinion au cours des phases

Ce papier explore le potentiel de la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT) pour comprendre comment le processus d'interaction et de translation entre acteurs humains et non-humains contribue au développement, à l'adoption et à la diffusion d'innovations fondées sur la science et axées sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique. L'étude se base sur deux cas d'études, avec le cas de la Camargue couvrant un ensemble d'innovations techniques et sociales, et le cas Bulgare axé sur le développement d'une innovation technique et de produit, c'est-à-dire un produit vétérinaire pour l'apiculture biologique. L'article montre les limites des approches classiques pour l'étude d'innovations dans la mesure où elles sous-estiment le rôle des acteurs hétérogènes, leurs statuts, et comment ils interagissent entre eux. Nous arguons que se focaliser d'implémentation et de diffusion de l'innovation. MOTS CLES -Théorie de l'Acteur Réseau; Evaluation de la Recherche; Processus d'Innovation ; Bulgarie ; Camargue.

  Nous nous sommes appuyés sur des méthodes, outils, et instruments qualitatifs, supposés faire la lumière sur la complexité des processus d'innovations de même que sur le rôle et la contribution de la recherche au long du sentier allant des activités de recherche aux impacts, vis-à-vis de la transition à l'agriculture biologique.

	Cette thèse a été élaborée à partir de l'observation que les méthodes quantitatives ne
	permettent pas d'expliciter les mécanismes complexes opérant au long du chemin de
	l'innovation, de l'intervention de la recherche à l'obtention « d'outputs », « outcomes » et
	impacts. Le concept d'innovation s'entend dans cette thèse comme un système à la fois
	dynamique et complexe, à l'inverse de l'ancienne vision linéaire et simplifiée de
	l'innovation. Dans la partie suivante, c'est à dire la discussion générale, nous interrogeons, sur la base
	de notre expérience et à partir des trois articles (partie 4, 5, et 6), la contribution des
	différents développements méthodologiques, pris dans leur ensemble, à l'évaluation ex-post
	des impacts et de la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la
	société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. La contribution de cette

Nous avons développé dans le premier article un cadre général pour évaluer qualitativement les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Cette approche a été appliquée au cas d'étude de la Camargue.

Le second article avait pour objet de démontrer l'intérêt de conduire une analyse du réseau social (SNA) dans sa capacité en particulier à valider les liens du chemin de l'impact sur les relations d'acteurs et à approfondir notre connaissance sur le rôle des acteurs de la recherche dans les processus d'innovations en lien avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique.

Finalement, le troisième article a étudié l'intérêt de compléter notre boite à outils d'évaluation avec la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT), utilisée comme un cadre théorique, dans sa capacité en particulier à orienter les questions évaluatives et à renseigner le rôle des relations interpersonnelles, personnes individuelles et objets, au cours des processus d'innovations liés à la transition à l'agriculture biologique. approche à une meilleure compréhension de la manière dont la recherche opère au long du chemin de l'impact vers la contribution à l'agriculture biologique sera également interrogée.

  Dans cette partie discussion, nous questionnons la contribution des trois articles (voir partie 4, 5 et 6) au développement d'une méthode qualitative à même d'évaluer ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Nous questionnons aussi la contribution de cette approche à une meilleure compréhension de comment la recherche opère au long du chemin de l'impact vers la conversion à l'agriculture biologique. approche appropriée pour évaluer ex-post les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, par rapport à la transition à l'agriculture

	(Partie 7 : Discussion générale et enseignements tirés)
	(Résumé)
	Une instruments.
	Nous montrons aussi que l'approche développée aide à comprendre le processus de transition
	vers l'agriculture biologique. Néanmoins, nous suggérons une manière d'approfondir cette
	approche afin de gagner en précision vis à vis de la contribution de la recherche et des
	composantes du chemin dans l'atteinte des « outcomes » et impacts. Nous montrons ensuite le

biologique, a été développée dans cette thèse. Cette approche adapte avec succès les méthodes existantes et particulièrement l'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) aux conditions d'une évaluation ex-post. Aussi, la reconstruction du réseau d'acteurs à différentes périodes dans le chemin de l'innovation est d'intérêt pour identifier les acteurs les plus importants ainsi que les activités de recherche ayant eu le plus d'impacts. D'autres éléments de grande importance sont la table des liens pour identifier les mécanismes sous-jacents des liens du chemin et ce que cela implique ; le « système de notation » pour identifier les composantes essentielles du chemin ; l'instrument contrefactuel pour établir les inférences causales ; et la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT) pour mettre en avant le rôle des relations interpersonnelles, des acteurs individuels, et des processus de négociations. De plus, nous montrons que notre approche permet de répondre assez bien aux limites des instruments participatifs dans la mesure où elle offre la possibilité de réexaminer l'exactitude des liens du chemin grâce au « process tracing » en combinaison avec d'autres méthodes, outils, et fort intérêt de l'approche globale (incluant les amendements suggérés dans cette partie) pour évaluer les effets de l'intervention de la recherche dans le cas camarguais et subséquemment d'améliorer le chemin de la transition vers une agriculture biologique. Le programme de

  TABLE 16 outlines the different

  TABLE 18 explains how this conversion was done. The rationale is to avoid making interpretations with very precise numbers expressed in percentage, which should rather be considered as estimations. Results of the calculations are presented in TABLE 19.When at least one event separates the event xj to outcome 8 and impacts; the below formula should then be used to calculate the contribution of the event xj to outcome 8 and impacts. In the opposite case, the previous formula must be used.

	Pathway component	(A) Contribution of the research	(B) Contribution in reaching the
					outcome 8 and impacts
		%	Into words / Scoring	%	Into words / Scoring
	Activity 1: Participative approach and
	diagnosis on agronomic conditions o In reaching the outcome 8 and impacts (CEBIOCA)
	CCt = ∑ CCyt [ CCyu + CCyv + CCyw + CCyx + … ]
	; Where,
	CCt is the contribution of the event xj in achieving the outcome 8 and impacts;
	CCy is the contribution of the event y (t, u, v, w, x, etc) in achieving outcome 8 and
	impacts;
	And where yu, yv, yw, yx, etc, are the events that are directly connected to yt.
	Contribution of the research /		Conversion into words	Scoring (/4)
	contribution of pathway
	components in reaching the
	outcome 8 and impacts
	= 0	Not important at all.	0
	< or = 20	Of little importance.	1
	]20 to 45]	Of average importance.	2
	]45 to 70]	Very important.	3
	]70 to 100]	Absolutely essential.	4
	TABLE 18: CONVERSION INTO WORDS OF THE CALCULATIONS MADE ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE
	RESEARCH

research program on Camargue organic production systems would probably not have taken place without one key scientist from INRA. Experimentations in farming plots (in 2005-2006) would not have happened without the CEBIOCA project and related results

  TABLE 19 also shows that the research contributed well ("of average importance" -2/4) to the adoption of organic farming and the achievement of impacts. Again, it is difficult to tell exactly what the situation would have been in absence of the research intervention. We can however conclude that there is a non-negligible contribution of the research on the whole process.

	Influence of the research	CRP (the links that would not have research) been "activated" without the	Enabling factors	Disabling factors
	Rather direct	The . INRA would not have set
		up suitable experimentations
		without being aware of organic
		production systems and the main
		issues to be studied.
		The ORPESA table would not
		have occurred if the CEBIOCA
		project and experimentations in
		farming plots had not taken
		place. INRA would not have been
		able to participate without being
		aware on organic rice production
		systems, issues to be studied, and
		possessing significant knowledge.

TABLE 20 :

 20 SUMMARY ON CRP AND KEY ENABLING & DISABLING FACTORS IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY

des différents acteurs de la recherche devraient en première instance être alignés

  Partie 8 : Conclusion générale)Cette thèse a contribué à l'élaboration d'une approche à même d'évaluer les impacts et la contribution de la recherche sur les processus d'innovations et la société, en rapport avec la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Elle a également contribué à rendre compte des impacts de la recherche dans le cas d'étude camarguais (France) et Bulgare, et de la manière dont ces impacts ont été atteints. L'analyse participative du chemin de l'impact (PIPA) a été utilisée comme fil conducteur et significativement adaptée et complétée par de nombreuses méthodes, instruments et outils, afin d'adapter cette approche à de l'évaluation ex-post, faire la lumière sur les mécanismes complexes sous-tendant le chemin de l'impact et le rôle que la recherche y , ainsi que des leaders d'opinion dans les phases de mise en oeuvre et de diffusion, et (5) la fonction de l'environnement économique et des marchés. plus, nous avons pu déterminer comment identifier la contribution de la recherche dans le chemin de l'impact, appliqué au cas de la transition à l'agriculture biologique en Camargue.

	De En outre, nous avons présenté dans la discussion générale, en termes quantitatifs, comment
	affiner notre analyse vis-à-vis de la contribution des différentes composantes du chemin de
	l'impact au processus d'adoption et à la génération d'impacts.
	Sur la base de l'application de l'approche développée dans les deux cas étudiés qui se
	focalisent sur la transition à l'agriculture biologique, en Camargue (France) et en Bulgarie
	(voir partie 4, 5 et 6), 13 recommandations pour les décideurs politiques, chercheurs, et parties
	prenantes, ont été exposées et discutées. 8 recommandations clés sont :
	En prenant une perspective plus large, nous confirmons l'hypothèse faîte que les différents
	développements méthodologiques réalisés dans cette thèse permettent de réduire la taille de la
	« boite noire » du processus d'innovation en relation avec la transition au bio. Quelques
	aspects ont contribué à cela, à savoir la reconnaissance de (1) l'importance de la
	problématisation dans le processus d'innovation, (2) l'importance de quelques personnes clés
	dans ce processus et jouant un rôle clé d'initiateur, (3) le rôle décisif de la confiance entre

joue, mais aussi pour limiter les problèmes liés à l'utilisation d'approches participatives. Nous confirmons l'hypothèse faite que PIPA peut être combiné avec succès à d'autres méthodes venant des sciences sociales, et donc à même d'informer sur les impacts et la contribution de la recherche dans le chemin de l'impact. Cependant, il n'a pas été confirmée que la contribution de la recherche dans le cas de la Camargue est importante ; elle était utile mais dans le même temps d'une portée relativement limitée. Une autre hypothèse qui est confirmée est que l'analyse du réseau social (SNA) peut aider à comprendre comment les nouvelles techniques et nouveaux produits sont diffusés, d'aider à tirer des conclusions sur le rôle des acteurs de la recherche, et de valider les dires des parties prenantes sur les relations d'acteurs. Il est aussi établi que la théorie de l'acteur réseau (ANT) peut effectivement renforcer notre approche en orientant les questions évaluatives et en approfondissant la compréhension et le rôle des relations interpersonnelles entre acteurs dans le réseau d'innovation. acteurs pour disséminer la connaissance avec succès, (4) l'importance de la « trialabilité » (réalisation d'expérimentations / tests), objectivité (visualisation directe des résultats des tests et expérimentationso Problématiser les challenges à considérer avant de mettre en oeuvre un programme de recherche en tant que tel, et réviser cette problématique tout au long du processus ; o Les intérêts autour d'objectifs s'avérant bénéfiques pour tout le monde ; o Permettre aux agriculteurs de mener des expérimentations sur leurs fermes, de préférence en étroite collaboration avec la recherche ; o Enrôler les leaders d'opinion pour établir un lien étroit entre la recherche et la communauté des agriculteurs ; o

Permettre un environnement économique et institutionnel favorable pour

  que l'intervention de la recherche ait plus de chances de succès ;

	o Accorder de la flexibilité aux programmes de recherche pour s'adapter aux
	évènements imprévus au cours des processus d'innovations ;
	o Suivre régulièrement les « outputs » et « outcomes » au cours du programme de
	recherche ;
	o Réaliser

une évaluation participative ex-post du chemin de l'impact.

  des résultats du programme par rapport aux objectifs fixés et aux besoins de la population ciblée. Ceci, à son tour, aide à définir les pistes d'améliorations pour des programmes similaires, actuels et futurs. En effet, nous avons observé dans le cas de la Camargue que peu importe le système de valeurs, ce qui a compté est le bénéfice économique de produire de façon biologique. La majorité des agriculteurs ont clairement expliqué que leur motivation est de nature économique et que les problèmes environnementaux comptent seulement dans une mesure limitée dans leur prise de décision. Ce qui est important pour les agriculteurs en Camargue est la pérennité de leur ferme étant donné les difficultés rencontrées par le mode de production conventionnel. D'ailleurs, ce n'est pas un hasard si le changement « conscience croissante des enjeux environnementaux » n'ait contribué que de manière très limité à l'adoption du bio et à la production d'impacts.Ensuite, comme nous l'avons souligné, la transition à l'agriculture biologique est un processus complexe, considéré comme une innovation radicale nécessitant la création de nouvelles connaissances(Šūmane, 2010), des investissements substantiels dans des ressources pour développer des techniques adaptées, et de renforcer le réseau d'acteurs et mobiliser les leaders d'opinion[START_REF] Darnhofer | Assessing a farm's sustainability: insights from resilience thinking[END_REF][START_REF] Bellon | Organic Farming, Prototype for Sustainable Agricultures[END_REF][START_REF] Lamine | Transitions Towards Organic Farming at the Farm and at the Local Scales: The Role of Innovative Production and Organisational Modes and Networks[END_REF]. La transition au bio questionne les pratiques ancrées existantes, le système de valeurs, et ne peut être expliquée seulement par les caractéristiques individuelles des producteurs. Les modèles d'innovations et le modèle de diffusion en particulier devraient considérer davantage les aspects économiques, le marché et les facteurs institutionnels. Une attention plus importante devrait être portée aux changements affectant le mode de production conventionnel (par exemple des changements dans les prix de ventes) car ceci pourrait expliquer, au moins partiellement, la transition à l'agriculture biologique. L'importance de ce facteur a été observée dans le cas de la Camargue.De plus, les modèles traditionnels de l'innovation se focalisent souvent sur les barrières à laconversion du côté des producteurs, ce qui implique un biais pro-innovation. Une attention plus importante devrait être accordée à la qualité intrinsèque de l'innovation investiguée. Dans notre approche, la qualité des innovations techniques et institutionnelles d'une part et les canaux de transfert du savoir d'autre part sont pris en compte. Nous prenons en compte les différents « outputs » de la recherche ; et les différents liens dans le chemin de l'impact font l'objet d'une notation en rapport avec leur « force ». Finalement, la vision « top down » d'une innovation, qui renvoie à des approches telles que « demand pull » ou « research push » devrait probablement être remplacée, en ce qui concerne la transition à l'agriculture biologique, pas seulement par une vision plus dynamique (par exemple AKIS ou le modèle « chain-linked ») avec de nombreuses interactions entre acteurs, mais aussi par une perspective davantage « bottom-up ». Cela signifie un changement du paradigme de gouvernance et le renforcement des capacités des acteurs locaux à développer des réseaux d'innovations et à générer des idées originales par eux-mêmes ; et d'avoir la recherche seulement comme support et non comme principal levier. Un enseignement tiré dans le cas de la Camargue est que les producteurs perçoivent la recherche comme trop « loin » de leurs problèmes. Aussi, les « brokers » de l'innovation ne sont pas apparus comme une solution dans un territoire où le conservatisme des acteurs, y compris de certains acteurs de la recherche, est relativement important, et la confiance dans les institutions limitée.Une telle approche de l'innovation pourrait avoir de multiples avantages vis-à-vis de la transition à l'agriculture biologique : (1) éviter de « brutaliser » les acteurs, (2) être en ligne avec les besoins spécifiques des bénéficiaires, (3) améliorer le niveau de l'innovation en responsabilisant davantage les acteurs et en renforçant leurs capacités, (4) orienter la recherche par rapport aux aspirations des acteurs locaux et non l'inverse, et (5) accroître les chances que des leaders d'opinion émergent naturellement et puissent partager les idées, concepts, et les connaissances générées au sein de la communauté des producteurs. Ce type d'approche a particulièrement été développé dans les pays africains. étude se concentrant sur 8 pays africains a tenté d'évaluer si une approche décentralisée de l'innovation favorise les processus d'innovations[START_REF] Pamuk | Do decentralized innovation systems promote agricultural technology adoption? Experimental evidence from Africa[END_REF]. Nous appelons cette approche décentralisée « plateforme d'innovation », dans laquelle les parties prenantes contribuent de manière participative. Elles sont supposées problématiser les problèmes devant être étudiés et de définir en parallèle les stratégies à suivre. Pas seulement les expertschercheurs sont impliqués mais aussi diverses organisations publiques et privées, les consommateurs, et les producteurs et intermédiaires. Le concept de plateforme d'innovation se réfère à la mobilisation du capital social, humain et financier à travers la notion d'apprentissage. et al. (2014) ont montré que cette approche pouvait améliorer l'acceptabilité et l'adoption d'innovations de management concernant les productions végétales, même si les résultats étaient moins évidents pour d'autres types d'innovations. De plus, ils soulignent la grande hétérogénéité des parties prenantes et de leurs besoins et aspirations au sein de telles plateformes d'innovations, aussi bien que des différences en termes de capital social, qui peuvent tout deux expliquer la variabilité des résultats. Ceci est aussi dû au manque de recul sur ces plateformes dont le concept reste relativement récent. Dans le même temps, Black (2000), qui a exploré les avantages et inconvénients de quatre modèles principaux ou stratégies pour la vulgarisation agricole, souligne qu'aucune de ces stratégies (prisent individuellement) n'est suffisante par elle-même. Les stratégies étudiées sont les suivantes : « top down », « bottom-up », flux d'information « un à un », et apprentissage ou processus d'éducation formel. « En dépit des critiques des modèles linéaires de transferttechnologique, il y a encore un besoin pour l'accès à des informations scientifiques pertinentes, tout comme il y a un besoin d'amener une participation active des agriculteurs dans la recherche et les processus de développement »(Black, 2000, p493).

	Cette thèse a contribué à une meilleure compréhension de la transition à l'agriculture biologique, en particulier dans le cas de la Camargue. À une échelle plus large, les recommandations faites pour améliorer les impacts de la recherche alimentent les théories de l'innovation. Quelques recommandations sont fondamentalement en ligne avec la littérature tandis que d'autres contribuent à une quantité de références assez faible et/ou apportent quelques nouveaux aspects. Timing Activity Goal 13h20-14:00 Welcome, round table, and presentation of the objectives. To get actors actively involved. 13h30-Initial words. -Une Pamuk N° 1.1 1 13h40 1.2 Presentation of the participants. To get know each other.	Type of discussion --Round table.	Persons mobilized All. Sylvain. All.	Materials used --Slide -Computer 1. PowerPoint (N°1) (welcome words).

Nous suggérons également de réaliser si possible une évaluation ex-post des programmes de recherche traitant du sujet de la transition à l'agriculture biologique. Ceci informe sur la qualité L'importance du facteur « d'observabilité » et de « trialabilité » dans la facilitation du processus d'adoption, comme énoncé dans les travaux de Rogers (1995), a été confirmée dans cette thèse pour le cas spécifique de la transition au bio. Une innovation qui peut être expérimentée et facilement visible représente moins d'incertitude pour les bénéficiaires potentiels.

Cependant, l'importance de la variable « compatibilité », comme exprimé par

[START_REF] Rogers | Diffusion of innovations[END_REF]

, est quelque peu remise en question.

Table n°3 .

 n°3 2) What research projects should be improved? (3) What research projects should be created? (4) What are your expectations for the future? TABLE 22: GUIDELINE OF THE SECOND WORKSHOP IN THE CAMARGUE CASE STUDY E. Table of links of the innovation pathway in the Camargue case

		Link		Mechanism (explanation of the underlying link)	Alternative explanations	Validity of the alternative
	N	Variable	Actor	Description of the mechanism	Origin Inf	of the mechanism	explanations / Measure of the
	Origin	Destination	Origin	Destination	(information)		impacts
	1 Activity 1: Cebioca
	project: participative
	approach and
	diagnosis about
	agronomic conditions
				To propose		Moderator.
				solutions/options to		All.
				improve research projects
				in the future.
		Writing down in tables what the stakeholders state. Each table is		Assistant 1.	Table n°1
		dedicated to one question.				Assistant 2.	Table n°2.
						Key researcher
						from INRA.

The overall aim of IMPRESA is to « measure, assess and comprehend the impacts of all forms of European SRA [Scientific Research on Agriculture] on key agricultural policy goals, including farm level productivity but also environmental enhancement and the efficiency of agrifood supply chains » (IMPRESA Website,

2017).

L'objectif général d'IMPRESA est de « mesurer, évaluer et comprendre les impacts de toutes formes de RSA européennes [Recherche scientifique sur l'Agriculture] sur les questions clés de politiques agricoles, incluant la productivité au niveau des exploitations agricoles mais aussi l'amélioration environnementale et l'efficience des chaines d'approvisionnement alimentaires » (IMPRESA Website, 2017).

The overall aim of IMPRESA is to « measure, assess and comprehend the impacts of all forms of European SRA [Scientific Research on Agriculture] on key agricultural policy goals, including farm level productivity but also environmental enhancement and the efficiency of agrifood supply chains » (IMPRESA Website, 2017).

L'objectif général d'IMPRESA est de « mesurer, évaluer et comprendre les impacts de toutes formes de RSA européennes [Recherche scientifique sur l'Agriculture] sur les questions politiques agricoles clés, incluant la productivité au niveau des exploitations agricoles mais aussi l'amélioration environnementale et l'efficience des chaines d'approvisionnement alimentaires » (IMPRESA Website, 2017).

TheOECD (2002) defines impacts as the effects produced by outcomes in a long-term perspective, and that can be either intended or unintended.

"Horizon 2020 is the financial instrument implementing the Innovation Union, a Europe 2020 flagship initiative aimed at securing Europe's global competitiveness" (European Commission, 2016).

The Outcome Harvesting approach has been developed by[START_REF] Wilson Grau | Outcome Harvesting[END_REF] in order to overcome the limitations of the « Outcome Mapping »[START_REF] Earl | Outcome Mapping: building learning and reflection into development programs[END_REF] for ex-post evaluating programs.

The perception of the beneficiaries on counterfactual situations can be called into question given the difficulty to imagine hypothetical scenarios.

This thesis was written to comply with the requirements of the school SupAgro and the Doctoral School of Economic and Management (EDEG) from Montpellier (France), this thesis started in March of 2014. This thesis was done in the frame of the EU project IMPRESA 1 (Impacts of Research on EU agriculture) and was accomplished at FiBL (Research Institute of Organic Agriculture) in Switzerland and in the lab Innovation at INRA (National Institute of Agronomic Research) in Montpellier. Cette thèse a été rédigée selon les exigences dCette thèse s'est déroulée dans le cadre du projet Européen (UE) IMPRESA 2 (

Abbreviations

ABM Agent-Based Model

Source : Carayannis et al (2012, p4)

Structure

The following parts are constructed by the form of three scientific articles (part 4, 5 and 6), complemented by a general discussion and conclusion (part 7 & 8). FIGURE 5 thereafter shows the different steps accomplished and the way they are interrelated with each other. The articles respectively address the first, second and third objective of the thesis (see section 3.2). A short transition is made between each article and before the general discussion part (part 7).

The first article (part 4) endeavors to develop and presents a mixed-qualitative method to assess the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. The method developed is presented through the example of the Camargue case study. The impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, with respect to the transition to organic farming in the Camargue case, are also evaluated. This article is entitled "Ex-post evaluation of the impacts of the Science-Based Research and Innovation Program: A new method applied in the case of farmers' transition to organic production in the Camargue" and was published in the "Journal of Innovation Economics and Management" in January 2017.

The second and third article articles (respectively in part 5 and 6) are more specific, addressing respectively the interest of SNA and ANT in assessing ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. The second article is called "Using Social Network Analysis to evaluate the Impact of the Research: On the transition to organic farming in the Camargue" and has been submitted

in "Cahier d'agriculture" in April 2017. As to the third article, it is named "Role of the research in the transition to organic farming using the Actor Network Theory" and has been submitted in the journal "Economics of Innovation and New Technology" in October 2017.

The general discussion part (part 7) will then question the global relevance and contribution of the different methodological developments (resulting from the objectives 1, 2, and 3) in understanding ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, with respect to the transition to organic agriculture. We then give specific recommendations to researchers and policy makers for evaluating and for increasing the impacts of the agricultural research on innovation processes and the society, concerning the transition to organic farming. Finally, we will draw the general conclusions of the thesis (part 8).

Maps of actors

NB: Agri ea s far er . Adaptation to ex-post evaluation

The first limitation we have been facing with respect to the PIPA approach was its nonadaptation to ex-post evaluation (further information in the first article, part 4). In that respect, the use of the Outcome Harvesting (OH) but also more surprisingly of the Social Network Analysis (SNA) are of high interest. OH, an approach which was developed by [START_REF] Wilson Grau | Outcome Harvesting[END_REF] to overcome the limitations of the Outcome Mapping (OM) method (a method used to design research programs ex-ante), provides us with a procedure to reconstruct ex-post the pathway of an intervention.

The different types of changes are collected i.e. the outcomes, outputs, and activities; before linking outcomes to the other components, in a "reverse way". The question asked is how outcomes have occurred and not what the research activities have produced. This allows taking all factors into account, either related or not to the research, thus leading to a better estimation of the contribution of the research on the innovation development. From our experience, reconstructing the pathway in reverse allows the analysis not to be restricted to the only effects of the research activities. Outcomes may also arise from other factors than research or from research activities that were not identified or considered [START_REF] Rogers | Theory-based evaluation: Reflections ten years on: Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future[END_REF][START_REF] Mayne | Contribution analysis: An approach to exploring cause and effect[END_REF]. Taking the example of the Camargue case; the second workshop, which endeavored to reconstruct the pathway by representing it on posters, has allowed alternative paths to be discussed as we did not only focus on the effects of the research program under review (on the transition to organic farming).

In the Camargue case, it appeared easier to start thinking out of the changes (outcomes), probably because they are more "visible" in the eyes of the actors. In this case study, farmers stated during the second workshop, in first instance, that the research done (under review) had not produced any effects; but when the pathway of the innovation was being reconstructed (in a reverse way), they recognized or realized that research activities and outputs affected to some extent the different changes identified. In fact, stakeholders were too much focused on the and the exchanges between farmers and CIRAD as "minor". The discussions with INRA were however indicated as "informal" by farmers. The main reason is that these discussions were not based on "evidences" 49 derived from "real" 50 scientific experimentations nor in relation with specific local conditions of each farm. Farmers think the information provided was too vague for immediate up-taking.

The adoption of the technical incremental innovations was principally derived from the "tests"

set by farmers (refinement and optimization of the rice production system) and, to a more limited extent, from leaflets produced by INRA (further information in the first article, part 4).

These leaflets were built on the basis of the experimentations and the ORPESA "Table " 51 . The latter could occur thanks to the involvement of international partners (further information in the third article, part 6). This enrolment was made possible by the help of the leaflets produced, in which the scientific knowledge is represented and that were distributed to potential partners worldwide. Later on, one partner from Spain contacted INRA, which allowed the ORPESA project to be developed (project consisting of training sessions between farmers and researchers). Interestingly, farmers emphasized that the research did not influence at all the decision of increasing the plant density whereas this technique was also described in the leaflets produced by INRA. Similarly, all incremental techniques for controlling weeds were the subject of an INRA communication orally but farmers did not much recognize this (further information in the first article, part 4).

8 Part 8: General conclusion

This thesis contributed to the elaboration of a comprehensive approach with a view to evaluating the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic farming. It also reported the impacts of the research in the Camargue (France) and Bulgarian case, and the way these impacts have been achieved. The Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) has been used as basis and significantly adapted and complemented by several methods, instruments and tools, in order to adapt this approach to ex-post evaluation, shed light on the complex mechanisms underpinning the impact pathway and the related role played by the research, but also to limit problems linked to the use of participatory approaches.

We confirm the hypothesis made that PIPA can be successfully combined with other methods from social sciences and therefore able to inform on the impacts and contribution of the research in the impact pathway. However, it is not confirmed that the contribution of the research in the Camargue case was important; it was useful but at the same time limited in scope. Another hypothesis which is confirmed is that the Social Network Analysis (SNA) can help to understand how new techniques or products are spreaded, to help draw conclusions on the role of the research actors, and to validate stakeholders' statements on actors' relationships. It is also established that the Actor Network Theory (ANT) can actually reinforce our approach by orienting evaluative questions and by deepening the understanding and role of interpersonal relationships between actors in the innovation network.

Taking a broader view, the hypothesis is confirmed that the different methodological developments made in this thesis allow to reduce the size of the "black box" of the innovation process in relation to the transition to organic farming. Some aspects contributed to this, with the recognizing of (1) the importance of the problematizing in the innovation process, (2) the importance of a few key persons in that process and playing a key role of initiator, (3) the decisive role of the trust among actors to disseminate the knowledge with success, (4) the importance of the "trialability" (conduct of experimentations / testing), "objectivity" (direct visualization of testing / experimentation's results), as well as opinion leaders in the

Farmers.

Farmers.

(1) Transition to organic production requires lengthening the rotations (for fighting weeds) and this automatically reduces the total surface devoted to rice.

(2) As longer rotations reinforces the problem of the salt concentration in the lands; it is not possible anymore to cultivate rice in the lands having a low altitude compared to the sea level. Therefore, this phenomenon also leads to a reduction of the surface devoted to rice.

Farmers, INRA.

No.

The conversion to organic production has led to a reduction of the surface devoted to rice about 45% for the organic and partial organic farmers. At the level of the Camargue region, the decrease of the surface rice (due to the conversion) is about 8%.

42 EF5: Political changes (new CAP).

EU.

Farmers.

Abolishment of aids specifically dedicated to rice, for the last 2 years.

Farmers.

No.

Scaling out Spread of project output from farmers to farmers, community to community, within the same stakeholder groups [START_REF] Douthwaite | Impact pathway evaluation: an approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems[END_REF].

Scaling up

Institutional expansion, from adopter and their grassroots organizations to policy makers, donors, development institutions, and the other stakeholders key to building a more enabling environment for the scaling-out process [START_REF] Douthwaite | Impact pathway evaluation: an approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems[END_REF].

Theory of change Theory of how and why an initiative works; conceptual model linking the activities, all changes, and the context of the initiative [START_REF] Weiss | Evaluation : methods for studying programs and policies[END_REF][START_REF] Connell | Applying a Theory of Change Approach to the Evaluation of Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Progress, Prospects, and Problems[END_REF].

This thesis intends to evaluate, develop and test different qualitative methods and ways of ex-post assessing the impacts and contribution of the research on innovation processes and the society, in relation to the transition to organic agriculture. We have conducted two case studies focusing on the transition to organic farming. First is the Camargue case (in France) that encompasses a broad range of technical innovations. Second is on the development of the organic product Ecostop to protect bees against the varroatosis disease in Bulgaria.

We evaluate the potential of a broad approach based on the Participatory Impact Pathway Analysis (PIPA) and adapted & complemented by several other methods (first article, part 4), as well as the potential of the Social Network Analysis (SNA) (second paper, part 5) and of the Actor Network Theory (ANT) (third paper, part 6), in evaluating ex-post the impacts and contribution of the research. We study the impacts of the research in the Camargue and how they were generated. The Bulgarian case is only used to evaluate the potential of ANT (together with the Camargue case).

The approach based on PIPA allows assessing successfully the impacts and contribution of the research. We could show that the research contributed to change in the Camargue by developing co-learning interactions with farmers although this was not critical to the success of the innovation as a whole. The agricultural policies, economic factors, the testing conducted independently by farmers, and the institutional framework, were the most important and influential factors. With respect to SNA, it was of interest to validate stakeholders' views on actors' relationships and their implications on the transition to organic farming. For example, the growing role played by INRA (National Research Agronomic Institute) within the actor network was confirmed as well as its contribution to the transition. As to ANT, it allows highlighting interpersonal actors' relationships and their effects on the innovation development. We particularly underline the importance of opinion leaders in the phases of implementation and diffusion; and also show the importance of problematizing the issues to be tackled in order to increase the success of research programs.