How does ecosystem services framework perform to link ecological, technical and social dimensions of the agroecological transition ? Proposed Topic : How can ecosystem services foster agroecological transitions ? Danièle MAGDA Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Département SAD, UMR AGIR 1248, Rue Borde Rouge 31326 Castanet-tolosan, France Introduction The ecosystem services concept is becoming increasingly prevalent as a new tool for, and sometimes, of agroecology. Ecosystem services framework has developed outside the agricultural context (Arnaud de Sartre, 2014), finding its origin in the issue of building more efficient politics for nature conservation. At the same time, it shares, with agroecology framework, the issue to found an ecological based approach of human activities and development. It is for that reasons that scientists but also policy makers promote ecosystem services as an opportunity to explore new dimensions and levers for agroecological transitions. However, this point of view is largely controversial and strong oppositions emerged from defenders of an agroecology anchored in an agricultural perspective and more globally from a resistance to the ecosystem services paradigms. Beyond this ontological debate, it is useful to question the potential value of ecosystem services for the agroecological transition in the way that it carries the promise of a better articulation between social and ecological dimensions at the core of the ecological transition. As pointed by Binder et al (2013), despite the general discourse and the plurality of conceptual frameworks the development of social-ecological approaches is still a very open issue as they focus generally only on one dimension with rather a perspective of impact rather than interactions for the link between social and ecological stances. In this presentation, I put in debate first insights of an on-going analysis on how ecosystem services framework could open up new dimensions and scales for agroecological transition and new paths of interactions with nature. Methods The approach is based on the analysis of how research defines scientific goals on ecosystem services in agriculture. I focus on research projects proposed, since 2014, to the INRA-MetaProgram Ecoserv. This MP-Ecoserv and its team animation to which I participate, has been set up to create a dynamic of interdiscipinary research on services in agriculture for agroecological transition. MP-ecoserv team promotes a social-ecological approach to managing multiple agro-ecosystem services and has built a conceptual framework in that way (Lescourret, Magda et al., 2015). The projects studied comes from a great panel of INRA research units and disciplines (ecology, agronomic sciences, modelisation, management sciences, social geography, economy, sociology..). Main Results The presentation will put in debate and illustrate by research case studies two example of insights from the first steps analysis : Ecosystem services framework (ESF) points out more explicitly the ecological dimension than in agroecology and active a stronger implication of ecological sciences. Facing a high level of complexity with the issue of multi-services, processual and multi-level approach is putting forward beyond the biodiversity-based approach of agroecology. ESF reinforces the territorial scale relatively little invested as a scale of transition in agroecological compared to farming systems and practices scales. Moreover, ESF proposes a new vision of the territory looking for new interdependencies both ecological and social. New scales, spatial arrangements and agricultural with non-agricultural spaces are redefined based on their ecological functionalities in multiple services approach building. In parallel, some social researchers expect with EFS new social features between actors who would otherwise not interact. They are supposed to explore new dimension for collective action with an ecosystemic approach of nature, and with new role assigned as beneficiaries or producers of ecosystems services. Conclusion If EFS provide deeper or new exploration of social and ecological dimensions within the ecological transition, it brings in the same time higher levels of complexities and uncertainties. Especially, the analytical approach developed by the ecological sciences could reinforced the intrinsic complexity of an ecosystemic-based approach. We can wonder if there is not a growing paradox between the ability offered by the EFS to explore potential levers for transition especially from a territorial point and that this exploration by research points out, at the same time, their limits as actionable levers. In this sense, EFS could foster the vision of possible pathways for agroecology but not the transition process itself. References Arnauld de Sartre, Xavier, Castro, Monica, Dufour, Simon et Oszwald, Johan (dir.), Political ecology des services écosystémiques, Bruxelles, Bern, Berlin, Frankfurt am Main, New York, Oxford, Wien, 2014, EcoPolis - volume 21, 288 p. Binder C.R., Hinkel J., Bots P.W.G., Pahl-Wost C. : Comparison of Frameworks for Analyzing Social ecological Systems. Ecology and Society 2013, 18. Lescourret F., Magda D. (first co-authors), Richard G., Adam-Blondon A.F., Bardy M., Baudry J., Doussan I., Dumont B., Lefebvre F., Litrico I., Martin-Clouaire R., Montuelle B., Pellerin S., Plantegenest M., Tancoigne E., Thomas A., Guyomard H., Soussana J.F. (2015). A social-ecological approach to managing multiple agro-ecosystem services. Current Opinion of Environmental Sustainability http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.04.001.