“How to Not Win Friends”

IF 0.4 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY
Rebecca Tally
{"title":"“How to Not Win Friends”","authors":"Rebecca Tally","doi":"10.1215/00021482-10154317","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In the mid-twentieth century, both public and private US development agencies organized a variety of global agricultural development programs based on various interpretations of modernization theory. In much of the existing historical literature about modernization theory and practice, these public and private agencies are often seen as closely coordinating with each other to achieve both development goals and US global hegemony. This article questions how closely coordinated such efforts were through an analysis of Rockefeller Foundation interactions with other US-based agricultural modernization programs and activities in Colombia in the 1950s and 1960s. Where the Rockefeller Foundation promoted Colombian wheat production, the USDA and other US-based agencies criticized that production and instead promoted the importation of US-grown wheat through the PL 480 program. The article utilizes Rockefeller Foundation records to examine how disparate meanings of modernization manifested themselves in mundane conflicts. Seemingly petty squabbles among US development actors in Colombia reveal the contours of their distinct views of modernization and demonstrate the need for more analysis of the practice of modernization and development programs rather than just the theories that underlay them.","PeriodicalId":50838,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00021482-10154317","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the mid-twentieth century, both public and private US development agencies organized a variety of global agricultural development programs based on various interpretations of modernization theory. In much of the existing historical literature about modernization theory and practice, these public and private agencies are often seen as closely coordinating with each other to achieve both development goals and US global hegemony. This article questions how closely coordinated such efforts were through an analysis of Rockefeller Foundation interactions with other US-based agricultural modernization programs and activities in Colombia in the 1950s and 1960s. Where the Rockefeller Foundation promoted Colombian wheat production, the USDA and other US-based agencies criticized that production and instead promoted the importation of US-grown wheat through the PL 480 program. The article utilizes Rockefeller Foundation records to examine how disparate meanings of modernization manifested themselves in mundane conflicts. Seemingly petty squabbles among US development actors in Colombia reveal the contours of their distinct views of modernization and demonstrate the need for more analysis of the practice of modernization and development programs rather than just the theories that underlay them.
《如何不赢得朋友》
20世纪中期,美国公共和私营发展机构根据对现代化理论的各种解释,组织了各种全球农业发展计划。在现有的许多关于现代化理论和实践的历史文献中,这些公共和私人机构往往被视为相互密切协调,以实现发展目标和美国的全球霸权。本文通过分析洛克菲勒基金会与20世纪50年代和60年代哥伦比亚其他美国农业现代化项目和活动的互动,质疑这些努力的协调程度。在洛克菲勒基金会促进哥伦比亚小麦生产的地方,美国农业部和其他美国机构批评了这种生产,而是通过PL 480计划促进了美国种植小麦的进口。这篇文章利用洛克菲勒基金会的记录来考察现代化的不同含义是如何在世俗冲突中表现出来的。美国在哥伦比亚的发展行为体之间看似微不足道的争吵揭示了他们对现代化的不同看法,并表明需要对现代化和发展计划的实践进行更多的分析,而不仅仅是对其背后的理论进行分析。
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
Agricultural History
Agricultural History 农林科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
58
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Agricultural History is the journal of record in the field. As such, it publishes articles on all aspects of the history of agriculture and rural life with no geographical or temporal limits. The editors are particularly interested in articles that address a novel subject, demonstrate considerable primary and secondary research, display an original interpretation, and are of general interest to Society members and other Agricultural History readers.
×
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