农民身份和公共物品供给的观念

IF 5.7 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Peter G. Matthews , Robert D. Fish , Joseph Tzanopoulos
{"title":"农民身份和公共物品供给的观念","authors":"Peter G. Matthews ,&nbsp;Robert D. Fish ,&nbsp;Joseph Tzanopoulos","doi":"10.1016/j.jrurstud.2025.103836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Agricultural policy discourse highlights the role of farmers as providers of public goods to justify agri-environmental measures. England's post-Brexit agricultural policy reform, with its originally stated aim of ‘public money for public goods’, presented an opportunity to assess how farmers respond to this idea. Informed by social psychological accounts of how farmer management reflects their identities, our thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with farmers in south-east England examines their interpretations of public goods and willingness to identify as public good providers. Farmer interpretations of public goods as both commodities and benefits helped them categorise certain farming outputs as distinct public goods. Views of public goods were also linked to the context in which farmers saw the concept being used. Farmer scepticism reflected familiar arguments for why farmer identities may resist change: farmers linked appeals to public goods to concerns over lost opportunities to generate symbolic capital underpinning good farmer identities and external challenges to productivist identities represented by a narrative around farming's environmental harms. While many farmers sought to reject this narrative, some saw opportunities to shift the narrative provided they could secure more direct public recognition of farming's diverse benefits. To achieve this, the interviews highlighted the value of making signals of farmer quality more accessible to non-farming audiences. Despite the challenges involved, we suggest this is worth pursuing for the potential benefits in reducing farmers' sense of disconnection from wider society, increasing receptiveness to measures for enhancing agricultural public good provision and engagement with alternative good farming ideals.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17002,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Studies","volume":"120 ","pages":"Article 103836"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Farmer identities and perceptions of public good provision\",\"authors\":\"Peter G. Matthews ,&nbsp;Robert D. Fish ,&nbsp;Joseph Tzanopoulos\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jrurstud.2025.103836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Agricultural policy discourse highlights the role of farmers as providers of public goods to justify agri-environmental measures. England's post-Brexit agricultural policy reform, with its originally stated aim of ‘public money for public goods’, presented an opportunity to assess how farmers respond to this idea. Informed by social psychological accounts of how farmer management reflects their identities, our thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with farmers in south-east England examines their interpretations of public goods and willingness to identify as public good providers. Farmer interpretations of public goods as both commodities and benefits helped them categorise certain farming outputs as distinct public goods. Views of public goods were also linked to the context in which farmers saw the concept being used. Farmer scepticism reflected familiar arguments for why farmer identities may resist change: farmers linked appeals to public goods to concerns over lost opportunities to generate symbolic capital underpinning good farmer identities and external challenges to productivist identities represented by a narrative around farming's environmental harms. While many farmers sought to reject this narrative, some saw opportunities to shift the narrative provided they could secure more direct public recognition of farming's diverse benefits. To achieve this, the interviews highlighted the value of making signals of farmer quality more accessible to non-farming audiences. Despite the challenges involved, we suggest this is worth pursuing for the potential benefits in reducing farmers' sense of disconnection from wider society, increasing receptiveness to measures for enhancing agricultural public good provision and engagement with alternative good farming ideals.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17002,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rural Studies\",\"volume\":\"120 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103836\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rural Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016725002773\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016725002773","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

农业政策话语强调农民作为公共产品提供者的作用,以证明农业环境措施的合理性。英国脱欧后的农业政策改革,其最初宣称的目标是“公共资金用于公共产品”,提供了一个评估农民如何回应这一想法的机会。通过对农民管理如何反映其身份的社会心理学解释,我们对英格兰东南部农民的定性访谈进行了专题分析,考察了他们对公共产品的解释以及作为公共产品提供者的意愿。农民对公共产品既是商品又是利益的解释,帮助他们将某些农业产出归类为独特的公共产品。对公共产品的看法也与农民看待使用这一概念的背景有关。农民怀疑主义反映了人们熟悉的关于为什么农民身份可能抵制变革的论点:农民将对公共产品的呼吁与对失去产生支撑好农民身份的象征性资本的机会的担忧联系起来,以及对以农业环境危害为代表的生产主义身份的外部挑战。虽然许多农民试图拒绝这种说法,但一些人看到了改变这种说法的机会,只要他们能让公众更直接地认识到农业的各种好处。为了实现这一目标,访谈强调了让非农业受众更容易获得农民质量信号的价值。尽管存在挑战,但我们认为这是值得追求的,因为它可以减少农民与更广泛社会脱节的感觉,提高对加强农业公共产品提供和参与替代性良好农业理想措施的接受程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Farmer identities and perceptions of public good provision
Agricultural policy discourse highlights the role of farmers as providers of public goods to justify agri-environmental measures. England's post-Brexit agricultural policy reform, with its originally stated aim of ‘public money for public goods’, presented an opportunity to assess how farmers respond to this idea. Informed by social psychological accounts of how farmer management reflects their identities, our thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with farmers in south-east England examines their interpretations of public goods and willingness to identify as public good providers. Farmer interpretations of public goods as both commodities and benefits helped them categorise certain farming outputs as distinct public goods. Views of public goods were also linked to the context in which farmers saw the concept being used. Farmer scepticism reflected familiar arguments for why farmer identities may resist change: farmers linked appeals to public goods to concerns over lost opportunities to generate symbolic capital underpinning good farmer identities and external challenges to productivist identities represented by a narrative around farming's environmental harms. While many farmers sought to reject this narrative, some saw opportunities to shift the narrative provided they could secure more direct public recognition of farming's diverse benefits. To achieve this, the interviews highlighted the value of making signals of farmer quality more accessible to non-farming audiences. Despite the challenges involved, we suggest this is worth pursuing for the potential benefits in reducing farmers' sense of disconnection from wider society, increasing receptiveness to measures for enhancing agricultural public good provision and engagement with alternative good farming ideals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
286
期刊介绍: The Journal of Rural Studies publishes research articles relating to such rural issues as society, demography, housing, employment, transport, services, land-use, recreation, agriculture and conservation. The focus is on those areas encompassing extensive land-use, with small-scale and diffuse settlement patterns and communities linked into the surrounding landscape and milieux. Particular emphasis will be given to aspects of planning policy and management. The journal is international and interdisciplinary in scope and content.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信