Agriculture and Human Values, (2006), 23: 75–88 
农民社区的连接和生态农业的未来
作者：作者：Sonja Sonja Brodt1, Gail Feenstra2, Robin Kozloff3, Karen Klonsky4, and Laura
Tourte5Tourte5
作者单位：1Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California, Davis, California, USA; 2Sustainable Agriculture
Research and Education Program, University of California, Davis, California, USA; 3Private Consultant, Davis, California, USA;
4Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Davis, California, USA; 5Santa Cruz County
Abstract .
While questions about the environmental sustainability of contemporary farming practices and the
socioeconomic viability of rural communities are attracting increasing attention throughout the US, these two issues
are rarely considered together. This paper explores the current and potential connections between these two aspects of
sustainability, using data on community members ’ and farmers  and farmers’’ views of agricultural issues in California agricultural issues in California’’s Central
Valley. These views were collected from a series of individual and group interviews with biologically oriented and
conventional farmers as well as community stakeholders. Local marketing, farmland preservation, and perceptions of
sustainable agriculture comprised the primary topics of discussion. The mixed results indicate that, while many
farmers and community members have a strong interest in these topics, sustainable community development and the
values翻译use of sustainable farming practices are seldom explicitly linked. On the other hand, many separate efforts around the
Valley to increase increase local local marketing marketing and and agritourism, agritourism, improve improve improve public public education about agriculture, and organize grassroots
farmland preservation initiatives were documented. We conclude that linking these efforts more explicitly to
sustainable agriculture and promoting more engagement between ecologically oriented farmers and their communities
could engender more economic and political support for these farmers, helping them and their communities to achieve
greater sustainability in the long run.
Key words: California Key words: California’’s Central Valley, Community development,
Farmer-consumer connections, Farmland preservation,
Local marketing, Sustainable agriculture
摘    要：要：    虽然关于现代农业实践的环境可持续性和农村社区社会经济的可行性在全美国引虽然关于现代农业实践的环境可持续性和农村社区社会经济的可行性在全美国引起了越来越多的关注，但这两个问题很少在一起考虑过。这篇论文运用加利弗尼亚州的中央谷的区民和农民在农业问题上的观点的数据探究这两方面现在和潜在的联系。区民和农民在农业问题上的观点的数据探究这两方面现在和潜在的联系。这些观点从一些个人和这些观点从一些个人和以生物为导向的一组和传统农民还有社区利益相关者中收集来的。地方行销、耕地保护和可持续发展农业观点组成主要的讨论话题综合结果表明，续发展农业观点组成主要的讨论话题综合结果表明，虽然许多农民和区民对这些话题有强烈的兴虽然许多农民和区民对这些话题有强烈的兴趣，但可持续社区发展和可持续农业实践的利用很少明确的联系到一起。在另一方面，许多单独的努力在提高地方行政和农业旅游，提高关于农业的公共教育和组织基层农田保护倡议都已用文件证明。我们推测将这些努力联系的更明确和促进以经济为导向的农民和他们的社区更多的参与能够为这些农民产生更多经济上和政治上的支持，帮助他们和社区长远地更加可持续性。能够为这些农民产生更多经济上和政治上的支持，帮助他们和社区长远地更加可持续性。
关键词关键词      ：加利弗尼亚州的中央谷，社区发展，农民—消费者关联，农田保护，地方行销，：加利弗尼亚州的中央谷，社区发展，农民—消费者关联，农田保护，地方行销，可持续发展可持续发展
1 Introduction
Two increasingly important areas of public concern have emerged around US agriculture. One is the environmental have suggested that environmental sustainability and community viability are inherently linked and are most effectively addressed together (Flora, 1990; Bird et al., 1995; Campbell, 1997). This paper draws from a study of community members and farmers farmers’’ views of prominent agricultural issues in California ’s Central Valley to explore possible beneficial connections between sustainable agriculture and rural community development, and to determine where this nationally important agricultural
region stands in terms of making these connections.
1 前言
公众关注的两个日益重要的领域出现在美国农业。一个是现代农业技术带来的环境危害，另
一个是农村社区和家庭农场的社会经济的持续性。一个是农村社区和家庭农场的社会经济的持续性。显然一些以前的拙作以表明环境可持续性和社显然一些以前的拙作以表明环境可持续性和社区可行性是内在ianxi 在一起的，并且最为有效地一起处理，但是这两个问题经常被分割地研究。这篇论文从研究加利弗尼亚州的中央谷的社区居民和农民在突出的农业问题方面的观点的课题中推测并研究可持续农业和农场社区发展之间所存在的可能的有利联系，中推测并研究可持续农业和农场社区发展之间所存在的可能
的有利联系，并依据这些联系来决定并依据这些联系来决定国家级重要的农业区的所在地。国家级重要的农业区的所在地。
2 Conceptual framework and local context
2.1 2.1 Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual framework: framework: framework: Sustainable Sustainable Sustainable agriculture agriculture agriculture and and and community community community development development The need for an agriculture that makes more sustainable use of natural resources has become increasingly clear. The pollution of our soil, water, and air are but a few of the detrimental environmental impacts of many agricultural practices still commonly used (Kegley et al., 1999; EPA, 2000; Griffin et al., 2002). At the same time, a need for improvements improvements in in the social and and economic economic economic sustainability sustainability sustainability of of of farming farming farming is is is also also also gaining gaining gaining publicity publicity publicity in in in the the the wake wake of the continuing loss of family farms; growth of suburban sprawl (Medvitz and Sokolow, 1995); high health risks and low compensation rates to
farmworkers (Villarejo et al., 2000); and resulting loss of vitality among rural communities nationwide (Allen and Sachs, 1993).
Some authors have begun to address these diverse issues holistically by linking sustainable agriculture to community development, suggesting that a shift to more sustainable farming practices – which rely more on natural ecological processes than on synthetic chemical
interventions – will not only protect the natural environment, but will also inherently benefit rural communities (Bird et al., 1995; Dobbs and Cole, 1992;
Flora,
1990, 2001). Proponents of this view have used socioeconomic as well as philosophical perspectives to argue for the community benefits of sustainable agriculture.
One socioeconomic argument relates to farm structure and rests on the
assumption that sustainable agriculture is more labor-, information-, and management-intensive.
Therefore, it is thought to favor smaller, family run farms over larger corporate farms (for summaries of these arguments see Dobbs and Cole, 1992; Lasley et al., 1993). To our knowledge, the argument that sustainable agriculture will lead to a predominance of smaller farms has yet to be empirically empirically substantiated substantiated substantiated and and and is is is likely likely likely to to to vary
vary vary by by by crop crop crop and and and region. region. region. However, However, the second part of the argument, that smaller farm size benefits rural
communities, has already been widely documented. Many scholars have shown that larger, more industrially organized farms with less personal (i.e., more corporate) forms of ownership tend to have negative socioeconomic consequences for local communities (Goldschmidt,1947; (Goldschmidt,1947; Lobao, Lobao, 1990; Welsh and Lyson, 2001). Tolbert et al. also demonstrate empirically that small and midsized firms of many types (not just farms) tend to be
more more ‘‘‘‘‘‘anchored to place by social and economic relationships anchored to place by social and economic relationships ’’’’ (1998:  (1998: 404) and thereby foster higher levels of civic engagement within rural communities. This engagement, in turn, enhances community welfare according to several standard socio-economic indicators. One additional economic argument is that sustainable farming practices tend to require more locally produced inputs, to replace agrochemicals obtained in distant markets, and so they they will will will increase increase increase local local local trade trade trade and and support support businesses businesses businesses within within within communities. communities.
Preliminary evidence, however, suggests that the latter cannot happen when local economies economies are are not yet set up to provide the types types of of inputs alternative farmers need (Dobbs and Cole, 1992). Some authors attribute community benefits to a presumed tendency of sustainable agriculture to bring about
a more communally minded style of farming through its very philosophy. According to Lasley et al. (1993) and Kirschenmann (1992), this philosophy advocates not only working in concert with nature, but also cooperating with one with one’’s neighbors and fostering a communal spirit.
Such claims suggest that because sustainable farmers must understand the relationships between their crops and the surrounding environment, they are also more predisposed to view themselves as embedded in local community relations that are essential to their well-being. Flora (1990) likewise argues that sustainable agriculture, with its food quality concerns, is inherently more consumer- oriented and more closely tied to local markets. Sustainable farmers, therefore, may be intrinsically more disposed towards civic
participation and working together to achieve regional self-sufficiency. Civic participation, in turn, can benefit the farmers themselves by helping them them to to to build build build social social social capit
al. capital. capital. According According According to to to Putnam Putnam Putnam (1995) (1995) (1995) and and and Coleman Coleman Coleman (1990), (1990), social capital is the set of resources inherent in interpersonal relationships and social organization that can be used to enhance cooperation for mutual benefit. These resources include not only family and community relationships, but also norms of reciprocity and relations of authority and trust. Social capital can facilitate effective resource mobilization and community-based problem solving (Flora, 1995). Sustainable farmers in particular need to facilitate such processes to develop alternative information
services and knowledge networks as well as alternative input sources and stable markets for their products. Social capital that extends into the wider, non-farming community can also help rural communities and farmers. A consuming public that understands how a healthy food system works and that sees the links between its own health and the health of farm communities is more likely to support policies beneficial to agriculture. Sustainable farmers especially need the support of educated consumers in order to survive within the dominant economic and policy framework that often still favors more industrial scale and conventional conventional modes modes of production production (Dahlberg, (Dahlberg, (Dahlberg, 1993). 1993). 1993). Consumers Consumers Consumers can can develop an understanding of agriculture through appropriate education and by engaging

版权声明：本站内容均来自互联网，仅供演示用，请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系QQ:729038198，我们将在24小时内删除。