252 Fabien Girard and Manohisoa Rakotondrabe
diagnosis of climate change adaptation issues at both sites (MAEP et al., 2017;
Ministère de l’environnement et al., 2016, p. 18). The study helped identify challenges of climate adaptation and opened the way for discussions on the development of climate-resilient agricultural and seed systems. At this juncture, it is not
hard for the Ministry to (re)align its agenda to the aims of the Darwin Initiative
project; it is enough to conveniently cast the BCP as a tool for accessing, through
the MLS, “climate-resilient varieties”.
27
Infrapolitics: From the Art of Resistance to the Risk of Subversion
The reference to “infrapolitics” (Scott, 2009) is meant to convey three main
ideas: subaltern actors, who are the target of environmental policies, do not have
scripts
28 – they are “actors”, i.e. they are subject to scripts and, as such, exposed
to “enrolment”; but scripts never succeed in fully “conquering”. At best, they
“enrol” through encountering resistance, and this resistance – which is the politics of the subaltern – is unobtrusive, unorganised, unstructured and is therefore
difficult to detect.
At this juncture, two further caveats are needed. The first is that there is a fine
line between genuine resistance and elite capture (Platteau, 2004, p. 228), and
there may be doubts as to the proper meaning of subaltern manoeuvres, as will
shortly be illustrated. The second is that the fuzzier the aims, the greater the odds
of communities escaping the grip of the scripts.
With this in mind, we may now turn our attention back to Analavory
and address the main argument of this section: as the development process
was never geared towards a clear objective (e.g. the creation of a value chain
around a shared resource and the strengthening of community preparedness
to bioprospecting), the “community” in the community protocol is somewhat
“caught in the making”. In other words, the community is unable to selfidentify as a community and is constantly compromised by disengagements
and defiance. Ultimately, a collective ends up forming around a local elite who
takes ownership of the development process and seizes the opportunity to roll
out a cooperative that gradually takes control of the community seed bank and
the community registry.
In practice, the Analavory development process was encumbered by issues
pertaining to the scope of the BCP, in particular those touching on the precise contours of the communities involved in the protocol. The process was
first deployed at the rural commune level, but all boundary work was directed
towards the Fokontany, as the smallest administrative divisions in Madagascar,
that make up the commune of Analavory. That the whole project revolved
around the Fokontany should not come as a surprise: these are the administrative
embodiments, as it were, of what has always been considered in Madagascar as
the flesh and bones of “communities”: the Fokon’olona (Condominas, 1961).
29
The first working meeting at the community level thus began with a general
assembly of the Fokontany, held on 7 September 2016. This meeting also involved
diagnosis of climate change adaptation issues at both sites (MAEP et al., 2017;
Ministère de l’environnement et al., 2016, p. 18). The study helped identify challenges of climate adaptation and opened the way for discussions on the development of climate-resilient agricultural and seed systems. At this juncture, it is not
hard for the Ministry to (re)align its agenda to the aims of the Darwin Initiative
project; it is enough to conveniently cast the BCP as a tool for accessing, through
the MLS, “climate-resilient varieties”.
27
Infrapolitics: From the Art of Resistance to the Risk of Subversion
The reference to “infrapolitics” (Scott, 2009) is meant to convey three main
ideas: subaltern actors, who are the target of environmental policies, do not have
scripts
28 – they are “actors”, i.e. they are subject to scripts and, as such, exposed
to “enrolment”; but scripts never succeed in fully “conquering”. At best, they
“enrol” through encountering resistance, and this resistance – which is the politics of the subaltern – is unobtrusive, unorganised, unstructured and is therefore
difficult to detect.
At this juncture, two further caveats are needed. The first is that there is a fine
line between genuine resistance and elite capture (Platteau, 2004, p. 228), and
there may be doubts as to the proper meaning of subaltern manoeuvres, as will
shortly be illustrated. The second is that the fuzzier the aims, the greater the odds
of communities escaping the grip of the scripts.
With this in mind, we may now turn our attention back to Analavory
and address the main argument of this section: as the development process
was never geared towards a clear objective (e.g. the creation of a value chain
around a shared resource and the strengthening of community preparedness
to bioprospecting), the “community” in the community protocol is somewhat
“caught in the making”. In other words, the community is unable to selfidentify as a community and is constantly compromised by disengagements
and defiance. Ultimately, a collective ends up forming around a local elite who
takes ownership of the development process and seizes the opportunity to roll
out a cooperative that gradually takes control of the community seed bank and
the community registry.
In practice, the Analavory development process was encumbered by issues
pertaining to the scope of the BCP, in particular those touching on the precise contours of the communities involved in the protocol. The process was
first deployed at the rural commune level, but all boundary work was directed
towards the Fokontany, as the smallest administrative divisions in Madagascar,
that make up the commune of Analavory. That the whole project revolved
around the Fokontany should not come as a surprise: these are the administrative
embodiments, as it were, of what has always been considered in Madagascar as
the flesh and bones of “communities”: the Fokon’olona (Condominas, 1961).
29
The first working meeting at the community level thus began with a general
assembly of the Fokontany, held on 7 September 2016. This meeting also involved