Search

The article presents the author's comment on the paper "Planned Development via Project," by Dirk van Dusseldorp published in this issue of the journal "Sociologia Ruralis." The author welcomes Van Dusseldorp's concern for a more productive approach to planned development via projects. However he disagrees reasoning by which this argument is backed up. According to the author, the paper provides an inadequate theoretical background for the practical proposals which the writer advocates at the end and which are well worth consideration. The theoretical model of planning processes as 'linking loops' is unspecific. It is clearly an adaptation of economic and psychological theories of rational choice or decision-making. Even more sophisticated sociological models often remain extremely formal and tend to concentrate on the question of means of reaching and implementing decisions.

This paper will aim to demonstrate how a wider theoretical and conceptual landscape, based around environmental social theory, can help to assist contemporary rural sociology in progressing its agenda. Of particular relevance here is an assessment of rural sociology by Buttel, where he makes the point that in the past decades work on aspects of regulation and globalization, for instance, has tended to be quite the reverse of the earlier theoretical developments of the 1970s and 1980s. He argues for more theoretical innovation to be undertaken. While the past decade or so has demonstrated quite a flurry of rich empirically engaged work, actual theoretical development has reached, he argues, something of a hiatus; with various schools tending to adopt a position along the actor-oriented-political economy axis.

The 'new rural sociology' arguably represented the most significant watershed in the development of rural sociology during the 1970s and 1980s. I argue, however, that the new rural sociology, especially its dominant traditions of Chayanovian and neo-Leninist Marxism, has now been almost entirely superseded as a theoretical position in agrarian political economy by the international food regimes, commodity chains/systems analysis, regulationist, and actor-network traditions. In addition, Wageningen School research on `farming styles' and the 'cultural-turn' within rural sociology and rural studies have arisen, in part, as challenges to the more structuralist styles of reasoning within agrarian political economy. Parallel trends in the sociology of development are also discussed. The paper concludes with an appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of these new late twentieth century traditions in agrarian political economy, particularly in comparison with the new rural sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In reviewing some of the current developments in the economic restructuring literature, the paper examines the conceptual implications of the transition form Fordism for rural sociology. The author suggests the need for a stronger integration of social relations in the assessment of economic change. Two key dimensions for consideration are production-consumption relations and the reconstitution of labour relations. These considerations bring the author to the conclusion that rural sociology should focus on the integration of international and local processes and give more attention to the social contexts in which these processes are moulded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]