Search

Friedmann and McMichael's work, through their concept of the 'food regime', has been foundational to our thinking about the relation between capitalism, the state, and agriculture. Given the thirtieth anniversary of the publication of their seminal 1989 paper in this journal (Agriculture and the State System: The Rise and Decline of National Agricultures, 1870 to the Present) it seems very appropriate to commemorate this event by undertaking a reassessment of that paper. This article undertakes such a reassessment by examining and critiquing: the theoretical assumptions underlying the paper, particularly in relation to capitalism, class, and the state. This directs attention particularly to: the authors' (implicit) definition of capitalism; the relation between capitalism and the modern state; their treatment of 'class' and 'class struggle'; and their periodisation of food regimes and the dynamics underlying them, these being premised on their theoretical assumptions. The second, third, and, fourth sections occupy the bulk of the paper. The second section develops a significantly revised theoretical foundation for thinking about the dynamics underlying food regimes, while the third section deploys this as the basis for a new periodisation of food regimes. This periodisation includes a proposed Fifth, or 'Post‐Neoliberal' Food Regime, and the final section examines this in detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the concept of prosumption in the world of food. Prosumption is a combination of production and consumption: food prosumers are people who actively produce food for self‐consumption. Besides reflecting on sociological conceptualisations of prosumption, this exploratory study uses an online survey (N = 835) and semi‐structured interviews (N = 12) to examine prosumption empirically. Respondents, living in Almere, the Netherlands, have mostly personal and pragmatic reasons, such as the enjoyment of gardening and the pleasure of producing food, to engage in some form of prosumption. Respondents are hardly motivated by profound concerns about sustainability or a wish to create a 'radical' alternative food system. We argue, therefore, that a more pragmatic approach to the concept of prosumption in the field of food is more appropriate than sociological interpretations linking prosumption to such grand themes as power, capitalism and activism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims at the critical review of the studies concerning family farming in Greece by looking both at more general treatments of family farming issues connected with its integration into the wider economy and at specific empirical research on family farm operation. First, the paper discusses the definition and theoretical underpinnings of the family farm as developed in western literature. Then it provides the contextual information for the discussion following on Greek family farming. The next parts are devoted to a review of the debate over the development of capitalism in Greek agriculture and a critical evaluation of the work produced on family farming in the post-1980 period in the country. This review deals mainly with methodological and theoretical arguments rather than actual empirical research on Greek family farming. Finally, a discussion is developed in search of a more holistic treatment of family farming in Greece. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the pessimistic predictions of the classical theories of capitalist development, simple commodity production (SCP) has continued to persist under capitalism. While some, following the classic Marxist-Leninist interpretation, insist that SCP is only a transitional phenomenon and will disappear eventually, others argue that necessary conditions for the reproduction of simple commodity producing families may exist within capitalist formations and as long as these conditions exist, persistence of SCP will not be an anomaly. There are also significant differences between those who argue that SCP can survive under capitalism, in explaining the reasons for its persistence in agriculture. For this reason significant variations occur throughout the world, depending on the way it relates to the dominant capitalist mode of production. This paper will examine the post-World War II transformation in the tobacco sector that led to the consolidation of small ownership and simple commodity production in the Aegean region of Turkey. Within the given historical and commodity context, this paper will examine the natural imperatives of tobacco production, characteristics of family production, the tobacco market and state policies and their roles in the emergence and persistence of SCP in tobacco production in Aegean, Turkey.

This paper is a theoretical critique and empitical examination of the Mann-Dickinson thesis concerning obstacles to capitalist development in agriculture Mann and Dickinson contend that the noncoincidence of labor time and production time in the production process of certain agricultural commodities poses, along with perishability, an impediment to capitalist penetration Neither of these characteristics is found to actually impede the development of capitalism in U.S. agriculture. The labor/production time hypothesis is given greater consideration as it has apparent theoretical primacy in the Mann and Dickinson argument. The thesis is criticized on several theoretical points The empitical refutation consists of analysis of data concerning the variance of total monthly labor and the use of hired labor Eight commodities and/or commodity groups are analyzed for the period 1944-1974. The paper concludes that the labor/production time thesis is not supported by the evidence and that research on the capitalist penetration of agriculture must not be restricted to the view that capitalism penetrates simple commodity production only in the form of the hired labor relation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a comparative perspective of class formation and decomposition in modern capitalist agriculture. This paper is concerned with setting out the general features of class formation and decomposition in modern capitalist agriculture irrespective of nation, region, or commodity. A critical part of this task, if comparative analysis is to be developed, is to avoid being bogged down in the particularities of specific historic and national circumstances. As soon as specific historical developments are asserted, the particularities of nation, region and commodity begin to dominate analysis. Thus the comparative analysis to be set out takes modern capitalist agricultures--in locations such as North America and Western Europe--and considers their class structures. While income and size are useful ways of thinking about agricultural class structures, they are limited in their analytical power. They possess one major advantage in that, because of the way in which census and other data are collected, they permit the development of extensive empirical indicators. Their limitation for purposes of class analysis is that the knowledge of variables such as income and/or size of production units rarely predicts class behavior very well.

The article focuses on theoretical and methodological consideration for the identification of capitalist farms. Analysis of the nature of agricultural production has been a major concern among scholars of agrarian studies. Both Marxist and non-Marxist scholars have spent much time and effort distinguishing different types of farm units. Some have argued that the nature of production and relations of production differ vastly between capitalist and non-capitalist agricultural units. While the distinction between capitalist and non-capitalist enterprises has played a crucial role in the analysis of agrarian structures, there is as yet no agreement upon what constitutes a capitalist farm unit. Instead, a number of different theoretical and methodological approaches have been adopted to identify a capitalist farm. The paper reconsiders the concept of a capitalist unit as it applies to agriculture in an attempt to arrive at a basic unit of analysis essential for theory construction. The first section argues that farmers in advanced capitalist countries are operating capitalistic farms and are integrated into the capitalist economy. The second section proposes and defends a particular conception of capitalist farm units.

Although Marx and Engels wrote relatively little about agriculture the subsequent discussion has been in inverse proportion to the amount they wrote. This paper analyses recent contributions to this body of theory, notably the problems presented by simple commodity production in agriculture, arguing that many of these problems originate in specific historical situations. It is suggested that other distinctions in Marx's work are more rewarding to pursue, such as the distinction between formal and real subsumption under capitalism. The limits of sal subsumption depend on the extent to which various capitals are able to drive technology into revolutionising the labour process. Finally, the role of ideology is considered as essential to the legitimation of these processes in Western capitalist societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the debates in the sociology of agriculture concerning the viability of family farms and related public policy issues can be understood by examining the fundamental assumptions of two different approaches to understanding the totality of society: the expressive and structured orientations. The different orientations to totality provide two distinct formulations of the relationship of agricultural sector to the wider society. Examples are given of the two ways of perceiving agricultural social structure and its relation to the polity and economy. We argue that the structured orientation is most appropriate for the sociology of agriculture and discuss derivate concepts that can strengthen theory and direct substantive research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents, in a modified Weberian framework, an approach to the study of capitalist farmers in the British class structure. Their market situation is principally analysed in terms of the outcome of pressure group activity vis-a-vis the state. A typology is derived for their work situation based upon the degree of market-orientation and the degree of direct involvement in husbandry. This typology can be related to the legitimating strategies which farmers choose to operate over their employees. The analysis of their status situation emphasises the declining coherence of the evaluating criteria on which status is based and illustrates the limitations of existing occupational prestige studies with regard to farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]