4.4 Article

Beyond agriculture: the counter-hegemony of community farming

期刊

AGRICULTURE AND HUMAN VALUES
卷 30, 期 4, 页码 629-639

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10460-013-9437-7

关键词

Civil labor; Community supported agriculture; Liquid leisure; Co-production

资金

  1. Connected Communities Programme [AH/1507612/1]
  2. Arts and Humanities Research Council [AH/I507612/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. AHRC [AH/I507612/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper we seek to understand the interplay between increasingly widely held concerns about the hegemony of industrialized agriculture and the emergence of counter-hegemonic activities, such as membership of community supported agriculture (CSA) initiatives. Informed by Blackshaw's (Leisure, Abingdon, Routledge, 2010) work on liquid leisure, we offer a new leisure-based conceptualization of the tactics of counter-hegemony, arguing in the process that food politics offers a rich site for new, transitional identity formation. Using a case study of a well-established community farm in southeast England, we demonstrate how the community members devote themselves to transient and inconsequential activities as a means of attempting to realize a larger self-related identity project. We also demonstrate how the seemingly close inter-personal bonds typical of CSA may not reflect the permanence accorded to them, with members able willingly to leave these communities once they can no longer progress their identity project. We conclude by arguing that our findings are emblematic of society in transition, with people moving well beyond the work/leisure activity into a world in which they embody the idea and the practice of being an active co-producer-in our case, of food. While recognizing that this does not necessarily mean that there is simple causality between practice and identity formation, we do argue that there is evidence of an increasing relationship between activity, time, and the performance of a new form of civil labor practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据