Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
how they provide incentives for their participation, or lack thereof.
Actors in California agriculture operate in many different networks
simultaneously, and successful partnerships have been able to enhance
multiple relationships among these actors. Some growers, extensionists,
and institutions within existing networks found agroecological partner-
ships to be a powerful vehicle for them to be able to express their vision
for a different kind of relationship between nature and society, guided by
an alternative agriculture.
Organizations hosting partnerships substantively shape them through
the primary dyadic relationship. These types of partnerships are complex
undertakings with multiple goals, components, and participants, all of
whom necessarily bring some of their own interests to the shared proj-
ect. Thus, partnerships are networks that demand political skills to be
able to manage their stated and explicit goals, as well as their assumed
and competing goals. Networks can become stronger by taking on
multi-faceted projects, but they can also become more difficult to man-
age than centrally organized institutions. The progress that these some
partnerships have been able to make in helping growers re-orient their
production practices is a tribute to their leading growers, but also the
creativity and organization-building skills demonstrated by partnership
leaders.
Most agroecological partnerships struggle to re-shape the larger mar-
ket and regulatory institutions to favor partnership practices. Processing
and marketing companies express verbal, but generally limited financial
support for partnership activities, with winery funding of winegrape
partnerships the important and notable exception. Commodities with
successful partnerships owe their accomplishments in part to their abil-
ity to circulate knowledge broadly among all the principals, which the
next chapter will discuss.
