Purpose: To highlight the way a public policy aiming to achieve a 50% decrease of pesticides use in France reframed advice provision in public and private networks. Design/methodology/approach: We developed a framework to analyze intermediation in a public funded network, a farmers' association, and a network of co-operatives. The framework captures how advice provision is organized for supporting farmers in redesigning their cropping systems and achieving large-scale farmer participation in such change processes. Findings: (1) All three networks recognize the value of on-farm redesign for pioneers, and the role of farmers' groups but significant differences appear between the networks' intermediary practices and objects; (2) These differences can be related to their way to balance between evidence-based knowledge and farmer's practical experience and ownership of the target; (3) The public DEPHY farm network appears to be an arena in which different advisory models compete; (4) Also specific intermediary practices and objects to involved new farmers in a transition towards less pesticide use were designed, scaling up and out issues are still challenging both public and private advisory organizations. Practical implications: intermediation skills and objects are still to be developed to support on-farm redesign alongside with largescale farmer participation, and to identify and overcome systemic barriers. Policy makers and advisory boards should clarify their underlying assumptions regarding the triggers for change. Theoretical implications: The framework is a relevant contribution to understand transition in the making and the way AKIS players fail to reassess their underlying assumptions regarding the way to achieve scaling up and out processes. Originality/value: Analyzing relations between public and private networks by exploring the way such networks design and perform intermediation to implement a public policy.