28 resultados para Agroecology. Sustainable agricultural practices. Family farm. Intercrop.Sustainable rural development
em QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast
Resumo:
Reference: ECA: WPW/02/CASE NORTHERN IRELAND W/X0000/e
Resumo:
Rural areas are recognised for their complex, multi-functional capacities with a range of different interest groups claiming their rights to, and use of, different rural spaces. The current rural development paradigm that is evident across the globe is epitomised by the European LEADER approach. Using evidence from the proposed National Park in Northern Ireland, we ask the question: what is the potential of sustainable rural tourism to contribute to rural development? Within our analysis we consider the scope for adaptive tourism to overcome some of the ongoing challenges that have been identified within the LEADER approach. Four themes are revealed from this analysis: institutional (in)capacity; legitimacy of local groups; navigating between stakeholder interests; and sustainable tourism in practice. These issues, discussed in turn, have clear implications for the new rural development programme.
Resumo:
Sustainable development could provide a critical foil for individual
and especially collective reflection on the normative
direction, ends and means employed by societies, particularly
around the economy, its technology and resource-intensive
orientation and configuration with ecosystems. However,
although sustainable development is a constitutional objective
of the EU, its implementation in strategies and policies reveals
a much narrower meaning. By framing sustainable development
as ecological modernisation on the basis of technoscientific
innovation, and by imagining citizens as entrepreneurs in a
knowledge-based European economy, openings for democratic
experimentation and social innovation are limited and even
forestalled. In addition, the disruptive and transformational
potential of citizenship is stymied. Still, sustainable development
has resonance within citizenship and human rights
discourses that provide important resources for the fashioning
of common understanding. These are valuable supplements to
the repertoire of European citizenship that could help to embed
sustainable development in the social fabric and generate
alternative imaginaries and futures of a sustainable Europe.
Resumo:
‘Rural stress’ and ‘farming stress’ are terms that have become commonly appropriated by British health-based academic disciplines, the medical profession and social support networks, especially since the agricultural ‘crises’ of B.S.E. and Foot and Mouth Disease. Looking beyond the media headlines, it is apparent that the terms in fact are colloquial catch-alls for visible psychological and physiological outcomes shown by individuals. Seldom have the underlying causes and origins of presentable medical outcomes been probed, particularly within the context of the patriarchal and traditionally patrilineal way of life which family forms of farming business activity in Britain encapsulate. Thus, this paper argues that insufficient attention has been paid to the conceptualization of the terms. They have become both over-used and ill-defined in their application to British family farm individuals and their life situations. A conceptual framework is outlined that attempts to shift the stress research agenda into the unilluminated spaces of the family farming ‘way of life’ and focus instead on ‘distress’. Drawing upon theorization from agricultural and feminist geography together with cultural approaches from rural geography, four distinct clusters of distress originate from the thoughts of individuals and the social practices now required to enact patriarchal family farming gender identities. These are explored using case study evidence from ethnographic repeated life history interviews with members of seven farming families in Powys, Mid Wales, an area dominated by family forms of farming business. Future research agendas need to be based firmly on the distressing reality of patriarchal family farming and also be inclusive of those who, having rejected the associated way of life, now lie beyond the farm gate.
Resumo:
The everyday lives of many farm workers in eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century England were intricately and often intimately bound with the lives of animals, the ebb and flow of human life being inseparable from that of animal life. Farmyards, fields, folds as well as barns and stables were all spaces where animals transcended being the mere instruments of capital to instead being obvious co-constituents of the rhythms of existence. Living and working in such close proximity meant that the ‘species barrier’ was crossed and intimacies developed in everyday agricultural practices. Still, the relationship was based upon, if not reducible to, the workings of capital: the animal enrolled as a form of embodied capital, the labourer engaged by the farmer to act upon the animal. And in such relationships intimacies are mirrored by violences: the keeping captive, slaughter, and – occasionally – abuse. In this formative period in which the discourses and policies that continue to inform animal welfare were first formulated, the declining economic and material fortunes of farm workers when juxtaposed to farm animals’ fortune as increasingly ‘cosseted capital’ gave a particular charge to these abuses. Farm animals, and especially horses and cattle, so it is shown, were subjected to a series of violences. Many cases of animal maiming parodied tenderness in their brutality, whilst other attacks on the sexual organs of animals represented complex statements about the ways in which agrarian capitalism regulated all culture. Analysing the changing relationship between humans and animals therefore also helps us to better understand how capitalism mediates – and is mediated by – the non-human as well as the human, and how it defines cultural relations.
Resumo:
This article is concerned with how men and women on farms socially construct their gender and work identities through interaction with each other and public representations of themselves. It is argued that identity is a process, and like gender, it is socially constructed through ‘doing’ identity.
Farming has changed tremendously over the last forty years in Europe. The position of women in the labour market and on the family farm has also undergone significant changes. In Western Europe, women in general and women on family farms are more likely to be active in the labour market than they were forty years ago. While it remains the case that all of their labour on the farm is not properly recorded, they now also have visible, paid employment. Scholars have been surprised that farm women’s gender identity has not changed more significantly with this changed labour market presence. This article argues that in order to understand this limited change we need to understand how men and women in family farms verify and reinforce farming work identities and farming gender identities. It is argued that while off-farm work does not ‘look’ like gender deviant work, it is because it questions the male breadwinner role. An analysis of this helps us understand why the discourse of the family farm remains so dominant and so persistent. In 2012 and 2013, a qualitative study was undertaken in Northern Ireland to examine the gender implications of the EU rural development programme on farms and rural areas. Some of the data gathered as part of this study is interpreted to shed light on how and why particular work and gender identities are constructed within the farm family.
Resumo:
This article examines the interaction between development control and economic development in the countryside within the context of contemporary debates on shifts in the agricultural sector from productivism to multi-functionality. Using planning application decisions from the case of Northern Ireland for the period 1994–95 to 2005–06, together with insights from high-level key informants with planning, economic development and environmental management expertise, the article critiques a perception that regulatory planning is in line with rural development ambitions to foster a multi-functional countryside. While the quantitative data indicate a high approval rate for economic development projects, the qualitative evidence points to limitations within the policy content and operational practices of the planning system. The article argues that regulatory planning must engage more deeply with rural development objectives.