Toward thick legitimacycreating a web of legitimacy for agroecology

Legitimacy is at the heart of knowledge politics surrounding agriculture and food. When people accept industrial food practices as credible and authoritative, they are consenting to their use and existence. With theirthick legitimacy, industrial food systems paralyze the growth of alternative agricultures, including agroecology.Questions of how alternative agricultures can attain their own thick legitimacy in order to compete with, and displace, that of industrial food have not yet attracted much scrutiny. We show that both agroecologicaland scientific legitimacy grow out of a web of legitimation processes in the scientific, policy, political, legal, practice, and civic arenas. Crucially, legitimation often comes through meeting what we call €˜credibility tests’.Agroecologists can learn to navigate these co-constituted, multiple bases of legitimacy by paying attention to how credibility tests are currently being set in each arena, and beginning to recalibrate these tests to openmore room for agroecology. Using a schematic of three non-exclusive pathways, we explore some possible practical interventions that agroecologists and other advocates of alternative agricultures could take. These pathways include: leveraging, while also reshaping, the existing standards and practices of science; extending influence into policy, legal, practical, and civic arenas; and centering attention on the ethical legitimacy of food systems. We conclude that agroecologists can benefit from considering how to build legitimacy for their work.

ຂໍ້ເມູນ ແລະ ແຫຼ່ງທີ່ມາ

ຂໍ້ມູນເພີ່ມເຕີມ

ຊ່ອງຂໍ້ມູນ ມູນຄ່າ
ປະເພດຜະລິດຕະພັນຂອງອາລິເຊຍ ບໍ່ມີ
ຊື່ເລື່ອງ Toward thick legitimacycreating a web of legitimacy for agroecology
ຄຳອະທິບາ Legitimacy is at the heart of knowledge politics surrounding agriculture and food. When people accept industrial food practices as credible and authoritative, they are consenting to their use and existence. With theirthick legitimacy, industrial food systems paralyze the growth of alternative agricultures, including agroecology.Questions of how alternative agricultures can attain their own thick legitimacy in order to compete with, and displace, that of industrial food have not yet attracted much scrutiny. We show that both agroecologicaland scientific legitimacy grow out of a web of legitimation processes in the scientific, policy, political, legal, practice, and civic arenas. Crucially, legitimation often comes through meeting what we call €˜credibility tests’.Agroecologists can learn to navigate these co-constituted, multiple bases of legitimacy by paying attention to how credibility tests are currently being set in each arena, and beginning to recalibrate these tests to openmore room for agroecology. Using a schematic of three non-exclusive pathways, we explore some possible practical interventions that agroecologists and other advocates of alternative agricultures could take. These pathways include: leveraging, while also reshaping, the existing standards and practices of science; extending influence into policy, legal, practical, and civic arenas; and centering attention on the ethical legitimacy of food systems. We conclude that agroecologists can benefit from considering how to build legitimacy for their work.
ໝວດໝູ່ນິເວດກະສິກຳ
  • ລະບົບປະສົມປະສານ
  • ຫຼຸດຜ່ອນປັດໄຈການຜະລິດ ແລະ ນຳກັບມາໃຊ້ໃໝ່
  • ສຸຂະພາບດິນ
  • ເສດຖະກິດ ແລະ ລາຍຮັບ
  • ສຸຂະພາບ ແລະ ໂພສະນາການ
  • ລະບົບອາຫານທີ່ຍືນຍົງ
  • ຊີວະນາໆພັນ
  • ສະພາບອາກາດ
  • ການຄຸ້ມຄອງຊັບພະຍາກອນທຳມະຊາດ
  • ການຮ່ວມມື
  • ທຶນ
  • ນະໂຍບາຍສະໜັບສະໜູນ
  • ຄວາມຮູ້ ແລະ ຄຸນຄ່າ
ຄໍາສໍາຄັນດ້ານນິເວດວິທະຍາ
  • ກະສິກຳອິນຊີ
  • ກະສິກຳແບບຍືນຍົງ
  • ຝຸ່ນບົ່ມ
  • ຊີວະມວນ
  • ຄວາມອຸດົມສົມບູນຂອງດິນ
  • ຄວາມຍຸດຕິທຳໃນການຈ້າງງານ
  • ຄວາມປອດໄພຂອງອາຫານ
  • ສຸຂະພາບຂອງມະນຸດ
  • ສານອາຫານ
  • ໃບຢັ້ງຢືນ
  • ຄວາມໝັ້ນຄົງດ້ານສະບຽງອາຫານ
  • ຊີວະນາໆພັນ
  • ການປົກປັກຮັກສາສິ່ງແວດລ້ອມ
  • ທີ່ຢູ່ອາໄສ
  • ການປ່ຽນແປງຂອງສະພາບອາກາດ
  • ພະລັງງານທົດແທນ
  • ສິດນຳໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
  • ສະຫະກອນ
  • ສື່ສັງຄົມອອນລາຍ
  • ຄວາມຍຸດຕິທໍາດ້ານອາຫານ
  • ນະໂຍບາຍເປີດກ້ວາງ
  • ລະບົບຂະຫຍາຍ
  • ຄວາມເຊື່ອ
  • ມໍລະດົກ
ອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະກອບສ່ວນ University of Berkeley, California, US
ຜູ້ຂຽນ Maywa Montenegro de wit and Alastair Iles
ປີ 2016
ປະເພດຂອງເອກະສານ ບົດສັງລວມ
ພາສາ ພາສາອັງກິດ
ຂໍ້ມູນພື້ນທີ່
ປະເທດ Global
ລະດັບບໍລິຫານ 1
ລະດັບບໍລິຫານ 2
Web Link