Abstract: Tropical forest and savannah landscapes are a particularly important theme in the environment / development paradigm, and countless projects are being conducted in the field. However, over the past few years, studies have been multiplying, that lead us to ask oneself whether our current approach of the dynamics of theses spaces and of their management by the local communities, does correspond to the actual development of these systems and of the practices involved. Could it not be that a subjective reality, our own reality, born of a specific sociocultural, economical and historical context, has been constructed then perpetuated ? Does this view of the various environments, modes of exploitation and organisation of space and production on which our interventions are based match the actual facts? Is it operative with regard to the development and durability of these environments? These few questions are addressed in this paper in the light of previous and sometimes fairly old studies more or less oblirated by various form of pensée unique, or recent works that radically question the postulates on witch the western views on the subject are based. The numerous interventions on these ecosystems are indeed based on a number of widely acknowledged and therefore not questioned ideas, whose origin often dates back to the beginnings of colonization, sometimes even in the very first explorations. This set of postulates, a construction belonging to a given political, economic and social context, has prevented and still prevents one from making out the actual interactions at work between these environments and these societies. Il is really important to try and blow away this smoke screen because, after all, if we are now trying to protect the biodiversity and much praised richness of these spaces, il is also because some societies have taken care to maintain or construct them despite the trials and tribulations of history. Local populations, even the most ‘primitives’ ones, have sophisticated management systems that are able to slowly but effectively modify the natural environment ; these systems, including and especially slash and burn cultivation are numerous, originals, evolutives and capable of intensification. Fallow land is not simply left to pedologic potential recover, it is a productive land and, if necessary, may develop into various forms of forest gardens or agroforests. Similary, the existence of dominant types of production systems should not hide the fact that the farmers manage multipurpose activities within the framework of multifonctionnal productions and plots. They do so empirically and with such flexibiliy / adaptability as demanded by their frailty in the face of an unforeseeable future. For having always viewed these environments and these societies throught stereotypes, maybe our views have remained frozen after all?

Résumé: Les paysages végétaux des milieux tropicaux, forêts et savanes, leurs modes de mise en valeur, sont un thème particulièrement important dans le paradigme environnement/développement. Mais la question se pose de savoir si l'approche de la dynamique de ces espaces, de leur gestion par les groupes locaux correspond bien à la réalité de l'évolution de ces systèmes et des pratiques qui y contribuent. On constate, en effet, que les nombreuses interventions sur ces écosystèmes se fondent sur des idées admises, non remises en cause, dont l'origine remonte bien souvent aux débuts de la colonisation, voire aux premières explorations. Véritable construction inscrite dans un certain contexte politique, économique et social, cet ensemble de postulats a empêché et empêche de voir ce que sont les réalités des interactions, beaucoup plus complexes et variées que ne le veut l'orthodoxie ≪ politiquement correcte ≫, entre ces milieux et ses sociétés. Or celles-ci, en dépit des vicissitudes de l'histoire, en ont, jusqu'ici, assuré la reproduction. Les populations locales, même les plus ≪ primitives ≫ ont des systèmes de gestion capables de modifier lentement mais efficacement le milieu ≪ naturel ≫ ; ces systèmes, et surtout la défriche-brûlis, sont multiples, originaux, évolutifs et sont capables d'intensification. Les friches ne sont pas abandonnées à la seule reconstitution du potentiel pédologique mais sont des espaces productifs et peuvent évoluer, en cas de besoin, vers différentes formes de jardins forestiers ou d'agroforêts. L'existence de types dominants de systèmes de production ne contredit pas le fait que les paysans gèrent, empiriquement et avec la souplesse qu'imposé l'insécurité du lendemain, de la pluriactivité agricole dans le cadre d'espaces multifonctionnels. Pour avoir considéré ces milieux et ces sociétés à travers des stéréotypes, est-ce que ce ne sont pas nos conceptions qui sont finalement restées figées ?

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Agronomie/explor/TerroirV1/Data/Main/Exploration

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 003250 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 003250 | SxmlIndent | more

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Agronomie
   |area=    TerroirV1
   |flux=    Main
   |étape=   Exploration
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     ISTEX:11C24765FF73FF673E91DBF577A385CCBE0CE6D2
   |texte=   Forêts tropicales entre mythes et réalités
}}