Using the 'good farmer' concept to explore agricultural attitudes to the provision of public goods. A case study of participants in an English agri-environment scheme

被引:32
作者
Cusworth, George [1 ]
Dodsworth, Jennifer [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Oxford Martin Sch, 34 Broad St, Oxford OX1 3BD, England
[2] Univ Oxford, Sch Geog & Environm, S Parks Rd, Oxford OX1 3QY, England
关键词
Public goods; Good farmer; Bourdieu; Land sharing; Land sparing; Environmental Land Management; POST-PRODUCTIVISM; ORGANIC FARMERS; HABITUS; POLICY; MARKET; LANDSCAPES; REFORM; BREXIT; EU;
D O I
10.1007/s10460-021-10215-z
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Across the European Union, the receipt of agricultural subsidisation is increasingly being predicated on the delivery of public goods. In the English context, in particular, these changes can be seen in the redirection of money to the new Environmental Land Management scheme. Such shifts reflect the changed expectations that society is placing on agriculture-from something that provides one good (food) to something that supplies many (food, access to green spaces, healthy rural environment, flood resilience, reduced greenhouse gas emissions). Whilst the reasons behind the changes are well documented, understanding how these shifts are being experienced by the managers expected to deliver on these new expectations is less well understood. Bourdieu's social theory and the good farmer concept are used to attend to this blind spot, and to provide timely insight as the country progresses along its public goods subsidy transition. Evidence from 65 interviews with 40 different interviewees (25 of whom gave a repeat interview) show a general willingness towards the transition to a public goods model of subsidisation. The optimisation and efficiency that has historically characterised the productivist identity is colouring the way managers are approaching the delivery of public goods. Ideas of land sparing and land sharing (and the farming preference for the former over the latter) are used to help understand these new social and attitudinal realities. The policy implications of these findings are discussed, with reference to the new scheme's 'priority themes'.
引用
收藏
页码:929 / 941
页数:13
相关论文
共 83 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2018, GREEN FUT 25 YEAR PL
[2]   Vulnerability of British farms to post-Brexit subsidy removal, and implications for intensification, extensification and land sparing [J].
Arnott, David ;
Chadwick, David R. ;
Wynne-Jones, Sophie ;
Jones, David L. .
LAND USE POLICY, 2021, 107
[3]   Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes [J].
Arriaza, M ;
Cañas-Ortega, JF ;
Cañas-Madueño, JA ;
Ruiz-Aviles, P .
LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, 2004, 69 (01) :115-125
[4]   Nature™ Inc.: Changes and Continuities in Neoliberal Conservation and Market-based Environmental Policy [J].
Arsel, Murat ;
Buscher, Bram .
DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE, 2012, 43 (01) :53-78
[5]  
Barber J., 2009, ANNU M AM EDUC RES
[6]   Public funding for public goods: A post-Brexit perspective on principles for agricultural policy [J].
Bateman, Ian J. ;
Balmford, Ben .
LAND USE POLICY, 2018, 79 :293-300
[7]   Member Checking: A Tool to Enhance Trustworthiness or Merely a Nod to Validation? [J].
Birt, Linda ;
Scott, Suzanne ;
Cavers, Debbie ;
Campbell, Christine ;
Walter, Fiona .
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 2016, 26 (13) :1802-1811
[8]   THE FIELD OF CULTURAL PRODUCTION, OR THE ECONOMIC WORLD REVERSED [J].
BOURDIEU, P .
POETICS, 1983, 12 (4-5) :311-356
[9]  
Bourdieu P, 1990, LOGIC PRACTICE
[10]  
Bourdieu P., 1986, Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, P241