The debate on food sovereignty theory: agrarian capitalism, dispossession and agroecology

IF 4.4 1区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
K. Jansen
{"title":"The debate on food sovereignty theory: agrarian capitalism, dispossession and agroecology","authors":"K. Jansen","doi":"10.1080/03066150.2014.945166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution reviews recent critiques of the food sovereignty framework. In particular it engages with the debate between Henry Bernstein and Philip McMichael and analyzes their different conceptualizations of agrarian capitalism. It critically identifies tendencies in food sovereignty approaches to assume a food regime crisis, to one-sidedly emphasize accumulation by dispossession and enclosure and thereby to overlook the importance of expanded reproduction, and to espouse a romantic optimism about farmer-driven agroecological knowledge which is devoid of modern science. Alternatives to current modernization trajectories cannot simply return to the peasant past and to the local. Instead, they need to recognize the desires of farmers to be incorporated into larger commodity networks, the importance of industrialization and complex chains for feeding the world population, and the support of state and science, as well as social movements, for realizing a food sovereign alternative.","PeriodicalId":48271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peasant Studies","volume":"42 1","pages":"213 - 232"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03066150.2014.945166","citationCount":"112","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Peasant Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.945166","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 112

Abstract

This contribution reviews recent critiques of the food sovereignty framework. In particular it engages with the debate between Henry Bernstein and Philip McMichael and analyzes their different conceptualizations of agrarian capitalism. It critically identifies tendencies in food sovereignty approaches to assume a food regime crisis, to one-sidedly emphasize accumulation by dispossession and enclosure and thereby to overlook the importance of expanded reproduction, and to espouse a romantic optimism about farmer-driven agroecological knowledge which is devoid of modern science. Alternatives to current modernization trajectories cannot simply return to the peasant past and to the local. Instead, they need to recognize the desires of farmers to be incorporated into larger commodity networks, the importance of industrialization and complex chains for feeding the world population, and the support of state and science, as well as social movements, for realizing a food sovereign alternative.
粮食主权理论之争:土地资本主义、土地剥夺与农业生态学
这篇文章回顾了最近对粮食主权框架的批评。它特别涉及亨利·伯恩斯坦和菲利普·麦克迈克尔之间的争论,并分析了他们对农业资本主义的不同概念。它批判性地识别了粮食主权方法的趋势,即假设粮食制度危机,片面地强调通过剥夺和圈地积累,从而忽视扩大再生产的重要性,并支持对农民驱动的农业生态知识的浪漫乐观主义,这缺乏现代科学。当前现代化轨迹的替代方案不能简单地回到过去的农民和地方。相反,他们需要认识到农民融入更大的商品网络的愿望,工业化和复杂链条对养活世界人口的重要性,以及国家和科学以及社会运动对实现粮食主权替代方案的支持。
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
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
17.60%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: A leading journal in the field of rural politics and development, The Journal of Peasant Studies (JPS) provokes and promotes critical thinking about social structures, institutions, actors and processes of change in and in relation to the rural world. It fosters inquiry into how agrarian power relations between classes and other social groups are created, understood, contested and transformed. JPS pays special attention to questions of ‘agency’ of marginalized groups in agrarian societies, particularly their autonomy and capacity to interpret – and change – their conditions.
×
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