Resilience in Mountain Farming in Norway

Daugstad, Karoline

doi:10.3390/su11123476

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such studies often use in-depth interviews to ask farmers what disturbances they have perceived in the past, and how they have coped with and adapted to changes. Some studies have compared case studies from several countries (e.g., [63][64][65]), whereas others focus on a specific type of farm within a region (e.g., [60,61,[66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77]). Such studies have identified various 'rules of thumb' or principles that farmers use to guide their choices, such as autonomy, cooperation, or being flexible by adapting production practices, which can be linked to principles of resilience derived from theoretical frameworks (see [40,78]).…”

Section: Conventional Approaches To Farm Resilience: Substantialism Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Farming Resilience: From Maintaining States towards Shaping Transformative Change Processes

Darnhofer

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resilience is a concept that focuses on change: it includes the ability of a system to maintain its current state despite disturbances, its ability to adapt, and to transform. While resilience covers both stability and change, conceptual developments and empirical studies have put more emphasis on identifying what enables a farm to cope with the impact of a shock, such as a shift in markets or an extreme weather event, while remaining essentially unchanged. Much less emphasis has been put on what enables a farm to shape change, especially transformative change. I argue that this bias is partly due to the ecological roots of the concept, and partly to the use of conventional methods and their underlying substantialist worldview. A process-relational approach might be better suited to capture change. This approach shifts the conceptualization of a ‘farm’ as a stable material structure, to ‘farming’ as an open process of becoming, composed of heterogenous relations that are continuously made and remade. By exploring the differences between these two approaches to farm/farming resilience, I show how a process-relational approach displaces the presumption of structural determination and thus allows to highlight the ever-present openings for change.

show abstract

Section: Conventional Approaches To Farm Resilience: Substantialism Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Farming Resilience: From Maintaining States towards Shaping Transformative Change Processes

Darnhofer

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other strategies reported in the literature are: engaging in on-farm processing and off-farm employment, renting out or selling part of the land and rescheduling on-farm tasks, cautious and conservative investment decisions, introduction of niche crops, and diversification of market opportunities. All the strategies we identified fall under the reprofiling strategies [37][38][39][40]. Depending on the progress of the COVID-19 pandemic, the observed coping strategies might have to evolve into adaptation strategies if the crisis were to last much longer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

COVID-19 Effects and Resilience of Vegetable Farmers in North-Western Nigeria

Yegbemey

Ahihou

Olorunnipa³

et al. 2021

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has particularly affected the supply of perishable foods such as vegetables, which could adversely affect food and nutrition security. Here, we study the mechanisms by which COVID-19 has affected vegetable production and the coping strategies adopted by smallholder farmers. We use cross-sectional data collected through individual interviews on a random sample of 521 vegetable producers in north-western Nigeria. The perceptions of respondents, measured on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1—not affected, to 5—severely affected), shows that COVID-19 had an average effect of 3.07 (±1.23) on vegetable production. Farmers also reported challenges in accessing farm inputs and storing or selling fresh vegetable produced. In response, farmers reduced market-oriented vegetable production, produced more vegetables for own consumption, added value through own home processing and storage, explored new markets, and accepted lower farmgate selling prices. A multivariate probit regression shows that socio-economic factors such as age, household size, marital status, challenges in accessing inputs, and perceptions of the effects of COVID-19 influenced farmers’ decisions to adopt particular coping strategies. To sustain vegetable supplies, policy makers should consider investing more in market-oriented strategies such as vegetable processing and storage, which individual farmers may not be able to afford due to high costs, lack of information and required knowledge on good agronomic practices, postharvest handling, storage and market. Public extension services can contribute to help farmers to adapt better.

show abstract

“…Inherent in this work is the need to better understand how researchers and practitioners can utilize paired objective and subjective measures to understand current and emerging issues, and the broader types of investments and interventions that contribute to farm resilience at different scales. Since farm resilience studies incorporating subjective measures have largely been qualitative (Daugstad 2019;Perrin et al 2020), our study provides an example of how objective and subjective measures can be combined in the same quantitative study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second limitation is connected to the contradiction and mismatch in the scale at which challenges and resilience indicators are measured. While much of the farm resilience research focuses on macro-level challenges, studies tend to emphasize the micro-level variables associated with vulnerability and resilience, such as farmers socio-demographic characteristics, farm operation characteristics, farmers' actions and pre-disposition, and their adaptation strategies (Darnhofer et al 2016;Daugstad 2019;Diserens et al 2018;Greenhill et al 2009;Kangogo et al 2020). As scholars critiquing the resilience lens have argued (speaking about the application to agriculture and other topics), the de facto interpretation of this micro-level focus is to interpret resilience through an individual's deficits (Calo 2020;Cote and Nightingale 2012;Hall and Lamont 2013;Joseph 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medical economic vulnerability: a next step in expanding the farm resilience scholarship

Becot

Inwood

2022

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the long-standing questions of why, how, and which farm families continue farming in the face of ongoing changes have increasingly been studied through the resilience lens. While this body of work is providing updated and novel insights, two limitations, a focus on macro-level challenges faced by the farm operation and a mismatch between the scale of challenges and resilience measures, likely limit our understanding of the factors at play. We use the example of medical economic vulnerability, a micro-level challenge traditionally confined to the household sphere of the agri-family system, as a way to call attention to these limitations. Focusing on United States (U.S.) farm households, we assess: (1) To what extent are they experiencing medical economic vulnerability when using objective and subjective outcome measures? (2) Which demographic and farm characteristics are associated with experiencing medical economic vulnerability? (3) What is the association between institutional arrangements and medical economic vulnerability? Our analysis of over 900 surveys coupled with a conceptual framework merging complementary insights from three bodies of literature revealed seemingly large differences in the prevalence of medical economic vulnerability across the objective and subjective measures with the subjective measure indicating a general sentiment of medical economic vulnerability in a majority of respondents. Conversely, limited variations were noted in who experiences medical vulnerability on the basis of demographic and farm characteristics, with stronger associations being connected to the households’ health insurance arrangements. We conclude with three implications of our findings for the farm resilience literature.

show abstract

Resilience in Mountain Farming in Norway

Cited by 10 publications

References 20 publications

Farming Resilience: From Maintaining States towards Shaping Transformative Change Processes

Farming Resilience: From Maintaining States towards Shaping Transformative Change Processes

COVID-19 Effects and Resilience of Vegetable Farmers in North-Western Nigeria

Medical economic vulnerability: a next step in expanding the farm resilience scholarship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About