Résumé
In Senegal, Lac de Guiers is a high-stakes zone where a variety of activities coexist, such as pastoralism, family farming, agro-industry, fishing and drinking water. The different uses of water resources are a source of tension between stakeholders and a major cause of the lake pollution (e.g., intensive use of chemicals). As a result, plant, animal, environmental and human health issues are currently receiving increasing attention from researchers, policymakers and development actors, justifying the need to design innovative systems anchored in an agro-ecological transition. Thus, to ensure the adoption of innovations, the living lab approach has been implemented, to guarantee genuine involvement of local stakeholders. The aim of this study is to analyze the empirical dynamics of implementing the living lab concept in the context of Sub-Saharan Africa. To do this, we followed a group of 38 farmers from the Lac de Guiers area during 2 years, through workshops and field surveys. These farmers were voluntarily involved with development actors and researchers from different disciplines (i.e., agronomist, economist, ecologist...), in the co-design of innovations adapted to their needs and territorial realities. The results show that 4 main innovations have been co-designed (i.e., agroforestry, organic fertilization, biopesticide and fish ponds), with variable adoption rates of up to 50%. This living lab also highlights the interdisciplinary joint effort of researchers through monitoring activities (e.g., socio-economic characteristics, human health and biodiversity). However, while the living lab is perceived as a structuring framework for knowledge sharing and learning, stakeholders fear that its governance and the lack of financial support will weaken collective achievements. A strengthened monitoring system, with responsibilities shared between local institutions and stakeholders, therefore appears to be an important factor for sustainability of the living lab. This study thus contributes to better informing the choice of policymakers, so that they can better support the setting up of living labs for more positive impact in the adoption of innovations.