Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Coast Vineyard Team for the idea of developing a tool and the Farm*A*Syst pro-
gram in Wisconsin for the concept of a four-category evaluation suggesting a
“growers' action plan.” For more on the accomplishments of the Lodi winegrape
partnership, see Ohmart 2001 and chapter 7 below. The workbook is designed
to challenge and stimulate Lodi growers regardless of their present practices, but
also to provide recognition for the district and serve as a basis for future third-
party certification.
33. The diversity of crop and animal yields from agroecological farming in
developing countries increases food security in a subsistence context. See Holt-
Giménez 2002. On cropping diversity and risk management, see Uphoff 2002.
34. Bentley et al. 2001 is one of the few examples of incorporating risk into the
evaluation of BIOS or BIFS practices.
Chapter 6
1. See Division of Agricultural Sciences 1978.
2. The states included Washington, Oregon, California, and Colorado. Sources
of data on CAMP: Calkins and Faust 2003, Welter et al. 2005.
3. Most previous work has concentrated only on the individuals or exclusively
on institutions and social structures. Social scientists generally deploy either
micro- or macro-analytic techniques to interpret society. Both of these method-
ological approaches fail to convey the relational dimension of partnerships.
Macro approaches, such as political economy, reveal the structures and institu-
tions in society and how they shape the way people think about the world, but
too often present reality as already constituted and immutable. They also tend to
filter out the agency of individuals seeking to effect change within their world.
Micro approaches tend toward positivism and behavioralism, and fail to
adequately reveal the importance of social relationships and associations.
4. My work does not deploy a full actor-network-theory methodology. For an
introduction to actor-network theory, see Latour 1987 and Callon and Law
1989. As developed, ANT is really more a method to flesh out how actors build
networks of knowledge, practice, and political influence than a theory (Latour
1999). ANT offers a sprawling assemblage of methods, but there are at least two
other currents in network analysis: sociometric approaches (Wasserman and
Faust 1994) and the actor-oriented approach (Long and Long 1992). These
approaches to networks do not give accord sufficient voice to the non-human,
nor adequately consider the epistemological controversies that emerge from
hybrid nature-society networks. Latour in particular has studied networks of sci-
entific knowledge and the strategies of various social actors to use knowledge to
influence the behavior of others. His work implies that all scientific enterprises
have had a politics, that is, have managed people and institutions—as well as
biological and technological objects—through persuasion. For another example
of ANT methodology in the agrofood system, see Whatmore 1997.
5. See Hassanein 1999.
