IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/roafes/v103y2022i2d10.1007_s41130-022-00170-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-producing better land management? An ethnographic study of partnership working in the context of agricultural diffuse pollution

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Vetter

    (University of Neuchâtel)

Abstract

Partnership working has become a normative principle within agri-environmental governance. With more and more benefits becoming attributed to closer multi-stakeholder collaboration, more public monies are being directed towards this cause. These benefits have been studied widely and are usually presented in terms of their contributions to environmental, economic and/or social objectives. However, in contrast to these reported outcomes of partnership working, the practical ways towards them have received little attention. What does it mean to work together on a day-to-day basis? More specifically, how do stakeholders become trusted partners, bridge interests and coordinate their actions? What collaborative working culture becomes established within partnerships and how does this in turn affect wider governance outcomes, expectations and aspirations? Answers to these questions are not only important to better understand the factors that contribute to successful ways of partnership working, but also to account for its limitations. This paper responds to this research need by drawing on the example of Farm Herefordshire. This cross-organizational partnership promotes profitable farming, healthy soils and clean water to address the problem of diffuse pollution from agricultural practices within the Wye catchment in the UK. The insights from this case study contribute to the literature in two major ways: firstly, the paper follows prompts to study such modes of collective action holistically and bottom-up to capture all their contributions and implications. It does so by employing an ethnographic research approach to investigate the social interactions and struggles that characterize joint working. This commands attention to the backstories, the actual work meetings, the discussions, the processes of consensus building, and the joint actions undertaken; secondly, the paper connects with wider social science concerns around the underlying processes and practices of governmentality that are essential for establishing social and ecological orders. Thus, the paper explores how everyday practices of partnership working contribute to the co-production of institutions, discourses, identities, and representations—which in this case become strategically deployed to nudge—rather than revolutionise—better land management practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Vetter, 2022. "Co-producing better land management? An ethnographic study of partnership working in the context of agricultural diffuse pollution," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 117-141, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:roafes:v:103:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s41130-022-00170-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s41130-022-00170-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41130-022-00170-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41130-022-00170-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janet Dwyer, 2014. "Policy Integration for Sustainable Agricultural Landscapes: Taking Stock of UK Policy and Practice," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 174-189, April.
    2. Jeremy Franks, 2011. "The collective provision of environmental goods: a discussion of contractual issues," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(5), pages 637-660.
    3. Ingolfur Blühdorn & Michael Deflorian, 2019. "The Collaborative Management of Sustained Unsustainability: On the Performance of Participatory Forms of Environmental Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Jean McGuire & Lois Morton & Alicia Cast, 2013. "Reconstructing the good farmer identity: shifts in farmer identities and farm management practices to improve water quality," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(1), pages 57-69, March.
    5. Nigel Curry & Michael Winter, 2000. "EUROPEAN BRIEFING: The Transition to Environmental Agriculture in Europe: Learning Processes and Knowledge Networks," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 107-121, February.
    6. Inman, Alex & Winter, Michael & Wheeler, Rebecca & Vrain, Emilie & Lovett, Andrew & Collins, Adrian & Jones, Iwan & Johnes, Penny & Cleasby, Will, 2018. "An exploration of individual, social and material factors influencing water pollution mitigation behaviours within the farming community," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 16-26.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jérémie Forney, 2016. "Blind spots in agri-environmental governance: some reflections and suggestions from Switzerland," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Westerink, Judith & Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico & Prager, Katrin & Franks, Jeremy & Dupraz, Pierre & Mettepenningen, Evy, 2017. "Collaborative governance arrangements to deliver spatially coordinated agri-environmental management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 176-192.
    3. Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Sagebiel, Julian & Olschewski, Roland, 2019. "Bringing the neighbors in: A choice experiment on the influence of coordination and social norms on farmers’ willingness to accept agro-environmental schemes across Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 200-215.
    4. Ouellet, F. & Mundler, P. & Dupras, J. & Ruiz, J., 2020. "“Community developed and farmer delivered.” An analysis of the spatial and relational proximities of the Alternative Land Use Services program in Ontario," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    5. Yoder, Landon & Roy Chowdhury, Rinku, 2018. "Tracing social capital: How stakeholder group interactions shape agricultural water quality restoration in the Florida Everglades," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 354-361.
    6. Okumah, Murat & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Chapman, Pippa J. & Novo, Paula & Cassidy, Rachel & Lyon, Christopher & Higgins, Alex & Doody, Donnacha, 2021. "The role of experiential learning in the adoption of best land management practices," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    7. Xie, Jinhua & Yang, Gangqiao & Wang, Ge & Song, Yan & Yang, Fan, 2021. "How do different rural-land-consolidation modes shape farmers’ ecological production behaviors?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John, 2021. "An evaluation of public initiatives to change behaviours that affect water quality," Papers WP696, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    9. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Felicetti & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Participatory governance in megaprojects: the Lyon–Turin high-speed railway among structure, agency, and democratic participation," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 259-273.
    10. Nick Hanley & Simanti Banerjee & Gareth D. Lennox & Paul R. Armsworth, 2012. "How should we incentivize private landowners to ‘produce’ more biodiversity?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 93-113, Spring.
    11. Targetti, Stefano & Schaller, Lena L. & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2021. "A fuzzy cognitive mapping approach for the assessment of public-goods governance in agricultural landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Jane Mills & Peter Gaskell & Julie Ingram & Janet Dwyer & Matt Reed & Christopher Short, 2017. "Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, June.
    13. Eirini Triantafyllidou & Anastasia Zabaniotou, 2022. "From Theory to Praxis: ‘Go Sustainable Living’ Survey for Exploring Individuals Consciousness Level of Decision-Making and Action-Taking in Daily Life Towards a Green Citizenship," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    14. Akimowicz, Mikaël & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Gallai, Nicola & Képhaliacos, Charilaos, 2022. "The leader, the keeper, and the follower? A legitimacy perspective on the governance of varietal innovation systems for climate changes adaptation. The case of sunflower hybrids in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    15. Lucie Newsome, 2021. "Disrupted gender roles in Australian agriculture: first generation female farmers’ construction of farming identity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 803-814, September.
    16. Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario & Arriaza, Manuel & Gomez-Limon, Jose A., 2015. "Matching supply-side and demand-side analyses for the assessment of agri-environmental schemes: The case of irrigated olive groves of southern Spain," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211919, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Clements, Jen & Lobley, Matt & Osborne, Juliet & Wills, Jane, 2021. "How can academic research on UK agri-environment schemes pivot to meet the addition of climate mitigation aims?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    18. Siddharth Sareen & Steven Wolf, 2020. "Accountability and Sustainability Transitions," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-07, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Jana Poláková, 2018. "Sustainability—Risk—Resilience: How Does the Case of the Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions Measure up?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    20. Christopher D. Murakami & Mary K. Hendrickson & Marcelle A. Siegel, 2017. "Sociocultural tensions and wicked problems in sustainable agriculture education," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 591-606, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:roafes:v:103:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s41130-022-00170-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.