Research on the geography of agricultural change: redundant or revitalized?

Morris, Carol; Evans, Nick

doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.1999.tb00101.x

Cited by 60 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The existence of multiple "agri-cultures" with different attitudes and approaches to farming has long been acknowledged in the literature (Morris and Evans, 1999) and can be readily observed in the context of organic agriculture where researchers have noted that 'committed organic' producers hold different attitudes and values than conventional farmers (Fairweather, 1999;Darnhofer et al, 2005). Darnhofer et al (2005) observes that committed organic farmers in Austria are rooted in the founding philosophy of organic farming (closed nutrient cycles, rejection of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, etc.)…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating culturally sustainable agri-environmental schemes

Burton

Paragahawewa

2011

Journal of Rural Studies

261

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tEvidence is emerging from across Europe that contemporary agri-environmental schemes are having only limited, if any, influence on farmers' long-term attitudes towards the environment. In this theoretical paper we argue that these approaches are not 'culturally sustainable', i.e. the actions are not becoming embedded within farming cultures as part of conventional 'good farming' practice. We propose (following Bourdieu) that, in order to culturally embed the environmental values, beliefs and knowledges that underlie such schemes, policy-makers need to devise approaches that allow the creation of cultural and social capital within farming communities e rather than simply compensating for economic capital lost. We outline the theoretical basis of our position and discuss how the contemporary agri-environmental approach of paying for specified environmental management services restricts the ability of such schemes to generate cultural and, thereby, social capital. Finally, we outline two possible ways of accounting for cultural capital in scheme creation: either through the development of measures of cultural capital that enable its incorporation into contemporary economic models or through a major revision to the way we construct and apply agri-environmental schemes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating culturally sustainable agri-environmental schemes

Burton

Paragahawewa

2011

Journal of Rural Studies

261

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This denies the very differentiation of rural space that is being created 4 , and is certainly a long way from being sensitive to fundamental variations in cultural interpretation and constructions of prevailing conditions, both between nations and localities within those nations (Morris and Evans, 1999). Political emphasis on the need for farmers to be able to compete in a liberalised global market seems to place greater emphasis worldwide on the continuation of productivist principles (Le Heron, 1993;Moran et al, 1993).…”

Section: Questioning the Empirical Basis Of Post-productivismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Post-productivism seems to meet all the criteria which have recently been criticised as particularly problematic in geographical research, being generalistic, dualistic and a distraction from theorising. As Morris and Evans (1999) have suggested, given the discussion in rural geography on the use of dualistic notions of Fordism and post-Fordism, it is rather surprising that a similar debate and critique has not been forthcoming in relation to the notion of a shift from "productivism"…”

Section: Beyond Post-productivism: Reinterpreting Agrarian Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing agriculture: a critique of post-productivism as the new orthodoxy

Evans

Morris

Winter

2002

Progress in Human Geography

305

243

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has become fashionable to conceptualize recent shifts in agrarian priorities as a ‘postproductivist’ transition from a previously ‘productivist’ agriculture. This notion became more popular throughout the 1990s as a way to capture in one convenient package the complex changes experienced by both the agricultural sector specifically and within rural areas more generally. However, the widespread and uncritical use of such an all-encompassing term is rather surprising given debates elsewhere in human geography on the rejection of dualistic thinking. Yet, in agricultural and rural studies, the active creation and reinforcement of a productivist/post-productivist dualism has emerged as a means of explaining the uneven development of rural areas. This paper develops a critique of post-productivism to demonstrate its invalidity, presenting empirical evidence to refute five supposed characteristics relating to quality food, pluriactivity, sustainability, production dispersion and regulation. It is argued that future progress in agricultural research will only be made if post-productivism is abandoned. Effort should be refocused upon understanding deeper processes underpinning agricultural change using existing theoretical perspectives developed in human geography but which lack application in the agricultural context. Ecological modernization is provided as a brief exemplar of how such progress may be achieved.

show abstract

“…women farmers, market vendors, seed company representatives) are legitimate concerns (see, e.g. Morris & Evans, 2005). With any investment at the scale of SAGCOT there will be winners and losers and it is important that communities that will be negatively impacted are identified early in the process to mitigate adverse impacts.…”

Section: Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%