[en] The purpose of this paper is to examine the viewpoints of stakeholders in the management and conservation of farm animal biodiversity in Niger. The research applies Q methodology in order to reveal consensual and divergent discourses. After the development of the set of items on the topic of biodiversity (Q sample), the statements were sorted by the respondents through a 7-grade scale, from −3 to +3. The analysis of Q-sort data with the qmethod package under the R software highlighted three distinct stakeholder viewpoints on the importance of biodiversity in agriculture and animal husbandry, the balance between progress and preservation and the effectiveness of different methods of conservation. The study shows an apparent consensus on the importance of biodiversity that is obviously a promoted topic in the country. Behind the consensus, different discourses are defined that all appear divided by the same dilemma between conservation and economic development. Understanding the different answers and weight attributed to each of the components of the dilemma will guide awareness-raising campaigns and help to pinpoint divergent interests among stakeholders.
Disciplines :
Life sciences: Multidisciplinary, general & others
Author, co-author :
Hamadou, Issa
Moula, Nassim ; Université de Liège > Scientifiques attachés au Doyen (F MV)
Siddo, Seyni
Moumouni, Issa
Marichatou, Hamani
Leroy, Pascal ; Université de Liège > Département des productions animales (DPA) > Biostatistique, économie, sélection animale
Antoine-Moussiaux, Nicolas ; Université de Liège > Département des productions animales (DPA) > Biostatistique, économie, sélection animale
Language :
English
Title :
Mapping stakeholder viewpoints in biodiversity management: an application in Niger using Q methodology
Akhtar-Danesh N, Dehghan M, Morrison KM, Fonseka S (2011) Parents’ perceptions and attitudes on childhood obesity: A Q-methodology study. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract 23:67–75
Biber-Klemm S, Temmerman M (2011) Rights to animal genetic resources-basic facts and debates. NCCR Trade working paper N°2011/67 June 2011
Boettcher PJ, Tixier-Boichard M, Toro MA, Simianer H, Eding H, Gandini G, Joost S, Garcia D, Colli L, Ajmone-Marsan P (2010) Objectives, criteria and methods for using molecular genetic data in priority setting for conservation of animal genetic resources. Anim Genet 41(Suppl. 1):64–77
Brown SR (1980) Political subjectivity applications of Q methodology in political science. Yale University Press, New haven, London
Delgado C, Rosegrant M, Steinfeld H, Ehui S, Courbois C (1999) Livestock to 2020. The next food revolution. IFPRI, FAO paper, Washington, D.C.
FAO (2007) Global plan of action for animal genetic resources and the interlaken declaration. Commission on genetic resources for food and agriculture food and agriculture organization of the united nations Rome
FAO (2008) L’état des ressources zoogénétiques pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture dans le monde, édité par Barbara Rischkowsky et Dafydd Pilling. Rome
FAO (2009) Livestock keepers—guardians of biodiversity. Animal production and health paper. No. 167. Rome
Farquhar LK, Meeds R (2007) Types of fantasy sports users and their motivations. J Comput Mediat Commun 12:1208–1228
Gruber JS (2011) Perspectives of effective and sustainable community-based natural resource management: an application of Q methodology to forest projects. Conservat Soc 9:159–171
Hajer M, Versteeg W (2005) A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives. J Envl Policy Plann 7:175–184
Karugia TJ, Okeyo AM, Kaitho R, Drucker AG, Wollny CBA, Rege JOE (2000) Economic Analysis of Crossbreeding Programs in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Conceptual Framework and Kenyan Case Study. http://www.femi.it/web/activ/_activ.html (20 avvril 2016)
Keneni G, Bekele E, Imtiaz M, Dagne K (2012) Genetic vulnerability of modern crop cultivars: causes, mechanism and remedies. Int J Plant Res 2:69–79
Lauvie A, Danchin-Burge C, Audiot A, Brives H, Casabianca F, Verrier E (2008) A controversy about crossbreeding in a conservation programme: the case study of the flemish red cattle breed. Livest Sci 118:113–122
Lazard L, Capdevila R, Roberts A (2011) Methodological pluralism in theory and in practice: the case for Q in the community. Qual Res Psychol 8:140–150
Leroy G, Baumung R, Boettcher P, Scherf B, Hoffmann I (2016) Review: sustainability of crossbreeding in developing countries; definitely not like crossing a meadow. Animal 10:262–273
Madalena F, Agyemang K, Cardellino R, Jain G (2002) Genetic improvement in medium—to low—input systems of animal production. Experiences to date. 7th WCGALP, vol 33
M.E.A. (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Moriniere LCE, Hamza M (2012) Environment and mobility: a view from four discourses. Ambio 41:795–807
NGonogoni NT, Mapiye C, Mwale M, Mupeta B (2007) Effect of supplementing a high-protein ram press sunflower cake concentrate on smallholder milk production in Zimbabwe. Trop Anim Health Prod 39:297–307
Previte J, Pini B, Haslam-McKenzie F (2007) Q methodology and rural research. Sociol Rural 47:135–147
Rastogi A, Hickey GM, Badola R, Hussain SA (2013) Diverging viewpoints on tiger conservation: a Q-method study and survey of conservation professionals in India. Biol Cons 161:182–192
Ray L (2011) Using Q-methodology to identify local perspectives on wildfires in two Koyukon Athabascan communities in rural Alaska. Sustainability. Sci Pract Policy 7:18–29
Rege JEO, Gibson JP (2003) Animal genetic resources and economic development: issues in relation to economic valuation. Ecol Econ 45:319–330
Roosen J, Fadlaoui A, Bertaglia M (2005) Economic evaluation for conservation of farm animal genetic resources. J Anim Breed Genet 122:217–228
Sandbrook C, Scales IR, Vira B, Adams WM (2011) Value plurality among conservation professionals. Conserv Biol 25:285–294
S.C.D.B (Secrétariat de la Convention sur la Diversite Biologique) (2009) Biodiversité, développement et réduction de la pauvreté: reconnaitre le rôle de la biodiversité pour le bien-être humain. Montréal, 52 pages
Shabila NP, Al-Tawil NG, Al-Hadithi TS, Sondorp E (2014) Using Q-methodology to explore people’s health seeking behavior and perception of the quality of primary care services. BMC Public Health 14:2
Shinebourne P (2009) Using Q Method in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods 8:93–97
Shrestha JNB, Crow GH, Soysal MI (2010) Managing genetic variation to conserve genetic diversity in goats and sheep. J Tekirdag Agric Fac 7:1–12
Simon A (2003) Animal genetic resources and sustainable livelihoods. Ecol Econ 45:331–339
Tisdell C (2003) Socioeconomic causes of loss of animal genetic diversity: analysis and assessment. Ecol Econ 45:365–376
Van Exel NJA, De Graaf G (2005) Q methodology: a sneak preview. www.jobvanexel.nl]
Watts S, Stenner P (2005) Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation. Qual Res Psychol 2:67–91
Zabala A (2014) Q method: a package to explore human perspectives using Q Methodology R J 6/2