Niches for transformative change within dominant territorial pathways: Practices and perspectives in a Nicaraguan agricultural frontier

IF 8.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
{"title":"Niches for transformative change within dominant territorial pathways: Practices and perspectives in a Nicaraguan agricultural frontier","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2024.102890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In many places around the world, the continuing expansion of agricultural land into forested areas is a context which urgently needs transformative change towards more sustainable pathways. Defining and implementing such transformations requires critical reflection to avoid reproducing business-as-usual practices. Transformative alternatives need to be capable of challenging detrimental power structures underlying social injustices and environmental degradation. Implementing such alternatives therefore needs a deeper and plural understanding of the historical processes underpinning the interrelation between social and environmental dynamics. In this paper we focus on the northeastern Nicaraguan agricultural frontier to analyze the historical emergence and consequences of a dominant cattle-based territorial pathway and to unveil local actors’ practices and perspectives on possible transformative change. We thereby aim to enrich the debates on Transformations to Sustainability and the identification of<!--> <!-->alternatives capable of challenging hegemonic dynamics.<!--> <!-->Our methodological contribution lies in adopting an original mixed-methods strategy based on the joint use of agrarian diagnoses and Q-method. First, our results provide an in-depth understanding of the historical evolution of agricultural practices and processes of social differentiation, and how these processes relate to techno-economic conditions influencing farmers' strategies. Second, we identify four perspectives within a specific network of actors regarding the processes of social-environmental change and analyze the perceived opportunities and limitations of actual and imagined alternatives. Based on these insights, we show that certain alignment of practices and motivations generally reinforces the dominant cattle-based territorial pathway. We also indicate that the most commonly promoted alternative strategies (often by external organizations) tend to reinforce the incumbent pathway rather than addressing the related social and environmental concerns. Yet, we also identified a subaltern niche of perspectives and practices from which a bottom-up actor coalition could emerge, addressing power imbalances and re-assembling ideas and practices towards transformative change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environmental Change","FirstCategoryId":"6","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000943","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In many places around the world, the continuing expansion of agricultural land into forested areas is a context which urgently needs transformative change towards more sustainable pathways. Defining and implementing such transformations requires critical reflection to avoid reproducing business-as-usual practices. Transformative alternatives need to be capable of challenging detrimental power structures underlying social injustices and environmental degradation. Implementing such alternatives therefore needs a deeper and plural understanding of the historical processes underpinning the interrelation between social and environmental dynamics. In this paper we focus on the northeastern Nicaraguan agricultural frontier to analyze the historical emergence and consequences of a dominant cattle-based territorial pathway and to unveil local actors’ practices and perspectives on possible transformative change. We thereby aim to enrich the debates on Transformations to Sustainability and the identification of alternatives capable of challenging hegemonic dynamics. Our methodological contribution lies in adopting an original mixed-methods strategy based on the joint use of agrarian diagnoses and Q-method. First, our results provide an in-depth understanding of the historical evolution of agricultural practices and processes of social differentiation, and how these processes relate to techno-economic conditions influencing farmers' strategies. Second, we identify four perspectives within a specific network of actors regarding the processes of social-environmental change and analyze the perceived opportunities and limitations of actual and imagined alternatives. Based on these insights, we show that certain alignment of practices and motivations generally reinforces the dominant cattle-based territorial pathway. We also indicate that the most commonly promoted alternative strategies (often by external organizations) tend to reinforce the incumbent pathway rather than addressing the related social and environmental concerns. Yet, we also identified a subaltern niche of perspectives and practices from which a bottom-up actor coalition could emerge, addressing power imbalances and re-assembling ideas and practices towards transformative change.

占主导地位的领土途径中的转型变革空间:尼加拉瓜农业边疆地区的实践与观点
在世界许多地方,农业用地不断向林区扩展,迫切需要进行转型变革,走更可持续的道路。界定和实施这种变革需要进行批判性反思,以避免重复 "一切照旧 "的做法。转型替代方案必须能够挑战社会不公正和环境退化背后的有害权力结构。因此,实施这种替代方案需要对社会和环境动态之间相互关系的历史进程有更深入和多元的理解。在本文中,我们以尼加拉瓜东北部的农业边疆为重点,分析了以牲畜为基础的主导性领土途径的历史兴起和后果,并揭示了当地行动者对可能的转型变革的实践和观点。因此,我们的目标是丰富有关向可持续性转型的辩论,并确定能够挑战霸权动态的替代方案。我们在方法论上的贡献在于,在联合使用农业诊断法和 Q 方法的基础上,采用了一种独创的混合方法策略。首先,我们的研究结果提供了对农业实践的历史演变和社会分化过程的深入理解,以及这些过程与影响农民战略的技术经济条件之间的关系。其次,我们在一个特定的行动者网络中确定了有关社会环境变化过程的四种观点,并分析了实际和想象中的替代方案所带来的机遇和限制。基于这些见解,我们表明,某些做法和动机的一致性通常会强化以养牛为基础的主导领土途径。我们还指出,最常推广的替代战略(通常由外部组织推广)倾向于加强现有的途径,而不是解决相关的社会和环境问题。然而,我们也发现了一些次等的观点和实践,自下而上的行动者联盟可以从这些观点和实践中产生,从而解决权力不平衡问题,并重新组合思想和实践,实现变革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Environmental Change
Global Environmental Change 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
18.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
146
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Global Environmental Change is a prestigious international journal that publishes articles of high quality, both theoretically and empirically rigorous. The journal aims to contribute to the understanding of global environmental change from the perspectives of human and policy dimensions. Specifically, it considers global environmental change as the result of processes occurring at the local level, but with wide-ranging impacts on various spatial, temporal, and socio-political scales. In terms of content, the journal seeks articles with a strong social science component. This includes research that examines the societal drivers and consequences of environmental change, as well as social and policy processes that aim to address these challenges. While the journal covers a broad range of topics, including biodiversity and ecosystem services, climate, coasts, food systems, land use and land cover, oceans, urban areas, and water resources, it also welcomes contributions that investigate the drivers, consequences, and management of other areas affected by environmental change. Overall, Global Environmental Change encourages research that deepens our understanding of the complex interactions between human activities and the environment, with the goal of informing policy and decision-making.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信