Presentation
The chambers of agriculture are a key player in agricultural development, at the heart of the social, economic and environmental challenges facing the sector today. Since the previous professional elections in 2019, their governance has been the subject of streamlining and modernization efforts, however their role in promoting agroecological transition remains ambivalent, which calls for the continued alignment of their governance with their statutory missions.
Key Messages
- The chambers of agriculture are an important player in agricultural development, including the agroecological transition, both through their mission of supporting farmers and through their contribution to the definition and implementation of public policies. However, their action in favour of the transition is rarely evaluated by the State; its impact therefore remains to be proven.
- The governance of the network of French chambers of agriculture must achieve a synthesis between sometimes divergent principles:
- the chambers are public establishments under the supervision of the State, but directed by elected representatives from unions whose vision of agricultural development sometimes opposes State decisions;
- the technical role of the chambers means that they need to be as close as possible to the farmers, while their political role means that they need to be present where the agricultural policy expertise is concentrated, which is in line with the regionalization of the network and the strengthening of its leadership at the national level.
- Calls for reform of this governance have been regularly made by institutional actors and agricultural and non-agricultural stakeholders. They focus on two areas in particular:
- the effectiveness of the chambers' action in terms of transition and their accountability for the public funding received;
- their internal democratization, particularly with a view to improving transparency and their ability to represent the agricultural sector in all its diversity.
- However, the reforms that would have the most structuring effects on the governance of the chambers are not currently on the political agenda due to their sensitivity, insofar as they would destabilize an organisation historically conceived in a logic of stability and co-management with the leading union of the sector.
