Search

How to ensure resilience of food systems is a key concern in the wake of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Notably, there is a renewed interest in the role of local food systems from policy, academic, and third‐sector actors, who see those systems as a source of "bounce‐back" resilience, supporting existing structures, but also as sources of "bounce‐forward" transformative resilience. Both perspectives move debates around local food systems beyond the dominant focus on social exclusion (defensive localism). The capacity of the local food sector to provide either form of resilience depends on the resilience of the local food actors themselves, which has been little investigated to date. This paper addresses this important gap in scholarship through an investigation of the "bounce‐back" and the "bounce‐forward" resilience of local food actors in the UK during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic. We advance resilience scholarship by developing an analytical framework which combines attention to resilience characteristics ("what is there") and to the systemic forces that enable and constrain their development ("how things work"). Attention to social capital, we argue, is crucial to understanding transformative resilience. We present rich qualitative data to illustrate the multi‐faceted impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on local food system actors in the UK. This is complemented with a review of relevant policy and third‐sector publications which contextualise local food system efforts. We conclude that while strong bonding and bridging capitals support the local food sector's persistence and adaptability, a lack of linking social capital, most visible as a "middle‐class image problem," is preventing it from achieving a transformative role. We argue that the local food sector needs to form alliances which would move it beyond a single‐issue topic, and articulate local food as part of place‐centred community resilience strategies that foster social capacities. In the wake of the COVID‐19 pandemic there is a renewed interest in the role of local food systems from policy, academic, and third sector actors, who see those systems as a source of "bounce‐back" resilience, supporting existing structures, but also as sources of "bounce forward" transformative resilience. The capacity of the local food sector to provide either form of resilience depends on the resilience of the local food actors themselves, which has been little investigated to date. Drawing on 31 in‐depth interviews and analysis of 26 key policy and third sector reports, this article concluded that while strong bonding and bridging capitals support the local food sector's persistence and adaptability, a lack of linking social capital, most visible as a "middle class image problem", is preventing it from achieving a transformative role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the work that attentiveness can and can't do in generating more ethical relations with non‐humans. How to build better relations with non‐humans has been a central debate in geography and cognate disciplines. These concerns include ethical relations with non‐humans who both pervade and create liveable environments, such as soil biota. Scholars have specifically identified attentiveness as key in generating more‐than‐human ethics. However, how attentiveness may arise, and what work attentiveness may be able to do in generating ethical relations, has not been sufficiently explored. Additionally, soils as relational materialities remain underexplored in social sciences. In this paper, I address these two important gaps in scholarship. Investigating the rising concern with soil biota in conventional English farming, I propose the care network as a way of conceptualising and investigating the ethical potential of attentiveness. As concerns grow about soil degradation, and the dangers this is posing to food production and to human survival, land managers are attending to soil ecosystems as part of caring for their farm businesses. While this attentiveness is producing some transformative effects, its potential is limited by the configuration of the soil care network. As long as soil care is configured primarily as farmers' concern, the potential of attentiveness in generating ethical regard to the needs of soil biota will be limited. In the Conclusions, I suggest ways of expanding attentiveness to soils and of building a wider and practical relational ethic of soil care. I also argue we need more attention in geographic research to attentiveness and care as systemic, unequally distributed, and operating at multiple scales. Human life depends on the life of soil ecosystems. This paper draws attention to soils as underexplored in social sciences, and asks how we may form better ethical and practical relations with soil biota. In doing this, it shows the need for a more nuanced understanding of the work that attentiveness can do in generating more‐than‐human care ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How to embed reflexivity in public participation in techno-science and to open it up to the agency of publics are key concerns in current debates. There is a risk that engagements become limited to “laboratory experiments,” highly controlled and foreclosed by participation experts, particularly in upstream techno-sciences. In this paper, we propose a way to open up the “participation laboratory” by engaging localized, self-assembling publics in ways that respect and mobilize their ecologies of participation. Our innovative reflexive methodology introduced participatory methods to public engagement with upstream techno-science, with the public contributing to both the content and format of the project. Reflecting on the project, we draw attention to the largely overlooked issue of temporalities of participation, and the co-production of futures and publics in participation methodologies. We argue that many public participation methodologies are underpinned by the open futures model, which imagines the future as a space of unrestrained creativity. We contrast that model with the lived futures model typical of localized publics, which respects latency of materials and processes but imposes limits on creativity. We argue that to continue being societally relevant and scientifically important, public participation methods should reconcile the open future of research with the lived futures of localized publics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article contributes to the critical debate on the choreographies of care in farming ( Law) through an exploration of the inter-dependence of care and situated expertise in the context of vine work. It argues that care as the totality of those activities which enable the maintenance, continuation, and repair of the farming 'world', to paraphrase Fisher and Tronto's classic definition, depends on experiential knowledge. According to Dreyfus and Dreyfus attentiveness, responsiveness, and adaptation to the material environment are characteristic of high levels of expertise. Attentiveness, responsiveness, and adaptation are also what characterises good care ( Tronto; Mol). Through an autoethnographic account of acquiring competence in vine work, the article illustrates how through practical engagement with the material and social environment of the farm key elements of the logic of care ( Mol) are acquired. In conclusion, the article indicates some consequences of putting experiential knowledge at the heart of multi-scalar and multi-temporal cares farmers are increasingly asked to attend to. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Translation in cross-cultural research is being increasingly acknowledged as a serious methodological issue in geography. Translation dilemmas present researchers with incommensurabilities of meaning, thus providing insights into culturally specific ways of being as expressed in language. However, reflexivity around translation in the field can also highlight those moments of cultural practice where language falls short of experience. Engaging with Wittgenstein's late work on language, and with more-than-representational theories, I explore a personal experience of investigating the local relationship between expression and experience in ethnographic fieldwork. Translation dilemmas, I demonstrate, may highlight not only culturally specific areas of meaning, but may also point to where the local language fails to account for the fullness of locally significant ways of being. Translation in cross-cultural research, I argue, is less about the decoding of texts, and more about coming to understand a form of life. This understanding must include practical as well as linguistic aspects. Researchers-as-translators need thus to remain sensitive to the limits to verbal communication in meaning-making; this sensitivity is aided by reflexivity encouraged by translating in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper engages in a critique of Italian and EU agricultural bio-waste policy, taking a relational approach to understanding the role of these materials in socio-material networks of production. Specifically, I consider how the challenges posed by excess materials of agricultural production fit into larger concerns about rural sustainability, both social and environmental. Drawing on a number of case studies from the Italian winemaking industry, I demonstrate the legislative creation of waste from the by-products of winemaking such as grape marc and vine wood. By physically removing bio-wastes from the socio-material context of their production, the current legislation privileges capital and technologically intensive methods for the management of bio-wastes. This process results in environmental contradictions and an unequal distribution of economic and societal benefits from the utilization of these materials. What is needed, I argue, is the incorporation of excess materials into thinking about local agro-ecologies as environmentally, economically and culturally sustainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Europe has set out its plans to foster a ‘green economy’, focused around recycling, by 2020. This pan-European recycling economy, it is argued, will have the triple virtues of: first, stopping wastes being ‘dumped’ on poor countries; second, reusing them and thus decoupling economic prosperity from demands on global resources; and third, creating a wave of employment in recycling industries. European resource recovery is represented in academic and practitioner literatures as ‘clean and green’. Underpinned by a technical and physical materialism, it highlights the clean-up of Europe’s waste management and the high-tech character of resource recovery. Analysis shows this representation to mask the cultural and physical associations between recycling work and waste work, and thus to obscure that resource recovery is mostly ‘dirty’ work. Through an empirical analysis of three sectors of resource recovery (‘dry recyclables’, textiles and ships) in Northern member states, we show that resource recovery is a new form of dirty work, located in secondary labour markets and reliant on itinerant and migrant labour, often from accession states. We show therefore that, when wastes stay put within the EU, labour moves to process them. At the micro scale of localities and workplaces, the reluctance of local labour to work in this new sector is shown to connect with embodied knowledge of old manufacturing industries and a sense of spatial injustice. Alongside that, the positioning of migrant workers is shown to rely on stereotypical assumptions that create a hierarchy, connecting reputational qualities of labour with the stigmas of different dirty jobs – a hierarchy upon which those workers at the apex can play. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]