Compte-rendu des dicussions

1" Jean-Pierre Prod'homme took as his starting point his expérience of a study group formed by fairmer leaders in one département'. His analysis shows that the farmers' organisations (les organisations professionnelles agricoles, OPA) fall between two stools - a farming world to which they no longer altogether beong and a society outside whose négociation techniques and language it borrows. Hence one may ask whether all-purpose OPAs can really take the pluralism of farming into account - whether this pluralism is due to economid interests or idéologies. He underlines the risk of deviation that these organisations run when they speak to farmers from outside. This risk is increased by the material and cultural gap between the leaders and the rank 2° and Médard file. Lebot then vigorously denounced the conflicts in the farmers' organisations between the 'machine' and the rank and file. At first these organisations were authentic voluntary groups where information circulated and where decisions were reached democratically. Then with the creation of the 'machine', with the arrival of the executives and technocrats, conflicts arise between the 'machine' that is now living an independent life, and the rank and file. At the same time conflitcts appear between the different groups and schools of thought and this marks the end of the leader fromed by union work and his replacement by a leader who is just one more notability. The debate concerns this gap between the rank and file and the organisation. The representatives of the OPA defend the united character of their organisations. They underline the deep-rooted desire for unity that overcomes the pluralism of interests and ideologies. Moreover the OPAs that claim to be all-round organisations are in fact made up of a number of satellite structures which enable this pluralism to be expressed. 3° Then the sociologists give their opinion. They underline the contradiction between the busy leaders accumulating responsibilities (chairmen, advisors, national representatives) and the incredible waste of their energy amid the 'machinery' where conflicts between individuals and conflicts between groups increase the possibility of deadlock. They give examples, of other societies showing the importance of open discussion in the démocratisation of information and decision-taking. They emphasise that the basic communities, beginning with the 'commune', should be given more importance. Finally the group showed interest in the realisation of monographies like that by J.-P. Prod'homme, which would enable methods of analysis to be perfected, techniques to be elaborated, and the machine to function properly. But it is clear that techniques alone would not make this possible if the farmers are not politically motivated to this end.