IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joafsc/360375.html

Rethinking farmer knowledge from soil to plate through narrative inquiry: An agroecological food systems perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Bendfeldt, Eric
  • McGonagle, Maureen
  • Niewolny, Kim

Abstract

This paper illustrates how farmer knowledge is generatively constructed and framed within an agroecological context to address the complexities of our food system more fully. For some, farmer knowledge is a hidden asset below the surface that acts as a reserve for sustaining and fortifying food system possibilities. We interviewed 12 self-identified smallholder farmers in Virginia using narrative inquiry as a dynamic methodology to explore the rhizomatic quality and mycorrhizal nature of smallholder farmers’ knowledge and experiences of soil, conservation, and place. The narrative inquiry method offered a participatory research approach to analyze how farmers perform their work in ways that extend across and are entangled with other domains of the food system that reflect agroecological values. Five primary themes were identified from the narrative inquiry data analysis by drawing upon the whole measures of community food systems as a values-based framework. Our findings illustrate how farmer praxis is reflective of and influenced by the ecological and sociopolitical ethos of land, food, health, and liberation. For scholar-practitioners, this research emphasizes the current claim for reevaluating and reconceptualizing research and outreach responses to mounting food system crises. The construction and expansion of farmer knowledge are not linear but rhizomatic and mycorrhizal in quality; therefore, scholar-practitioner responses to understanding and engaging with farmer knowledge systems should be amenable to a diversity of culturally dynamic sys­tems of knowing that embody socio-eco relations and networks. Like others, we argue that an over­emphasis on essentialist “best practices” and tech­nocratic problem-solving does not adequately help us see these generative possibilities from soil to plate. Thus, we recommend that food system practitioners and researchers emphasize engaged listening, storytelling, and generative—not extrac­tive—approaches as an epistemological frame for expanding our understanding of agroecology and food systems change.

Suggested Citation

  • Bendfeldt, Eric & McGonagle, Maureen & Niewolny, Kim, 2021. "Rethinking farmer knowledge from soil to plate through narrative inquiry: An agroecological food systems perspective," Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, Center for Transformative Action, Cornell University, vol. 11(1).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:joafsc:360375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/360375/files/1006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreas Neef & Dieter Neubert, 2011. "Stakeholder participation in agricultural research projects: a conceptual framework for reflection and decision-making," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(2), pages 179-194, June.
    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. Pawera, Lukas & Manickam, Ravishankar & Wangungu, Carolyne & Bonnarith, Uon & Schreinemachers, Pepijn & Ramasamy, Srinivasan, 2024. "Guidance on farmer participation in the design, testing and scaling of agricultural innovations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    2. Ion Lucian Ceapraz & Fatma Fourati & Loïc Sauvée, 2023. "Prospects For The Transfer Of Innovation In The Rural World €“ The Case Of The Innovation Platform €Œchamps D’Innovation†In Normandy Region, France," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 17(1), pages 83-108, June.
    3. Aurélie Cardona & Cristiana Carusi & Michael Mayerfeld Bell, 2021. "Engaged Intermediaries to Bridge the Gap between Scientists, Educational Practitioners and Farmers to Develop Sustainable Agri-Food Innovation Systems: A US Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Fieldsend, Andrew F. & Varga, Eszter & Biró, Szabolcs & Von Münchhausen, Susanne & Häring, Anna Maria, 2022. "Multi-actor co-innovation partnerships in agriculture, forestry and related sectors in Europe: Contrasting approaches to implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    5. Ricart, Sandra & Gandolfi, Claudio, 2017. "Balancing irrigation multifunctionality based on key stakeholders’ attitudes: Lessons learned from the Muzza system, Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 461-473.
    6. Ingram, Julie & Dwyer, Janet & Gaskell, Peter & Mills, Jane & Wolf, Pieter de, 2018. "Reconceptualising translation in agricultural innovation: A co-translation approach to bring research knowledge and practice closer together," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 38-51.
    7. Robert Chiles, 2013. "If they come, we will build it: in vitro meat and the discursive struggle over future agrofood expectations," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(4), pages 511-523, December.
    8. Tian Guo & Sandra T. Marquart-Pyatt & G. Philip Robertson, 2025. "Building ties at multi-stakeholder engagement events to facilitate social learning about contentious issues in natural resource management," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(2), pages 983-996, June.
    9. Schmidt, Laura & Falk, Thomas & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2020. "The Objectives of Stakeholder Involvement in Transdisciplinary Research. A Conceptual Framework for a Reflective and Reflexive Practise," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. Hermans, Frans & Sartas, Murat & van Schagen, Boudy & van Asten, Piet & Schut, Marc, 2017. "Social network analysis of multi-stakeholder platforms in agricultural research for development: Opportunities and constraints for innovation and scaling," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21.
    11. Srinivasan, M.S. & Jongmans, C. & Bewsell, D. & Elley, G., 2019. "Research idea to science for impact: Tracing the significant moments in an innovation based irrigation study," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 181-192.
    12. Julia Höhler & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Mikołaj Czajkowski & François J. Dessart & Paul J. Ferraro & Tongzhe Li & Kent D. Messer & Leah Palm‐Forster & Mette Termansen & Fabian Thomas & Katarzyna Zagórsk, 2024. "Perspectives on stakeholder participation in the design of economic experiments for agricultural policymaking: Pros, cons, and twelve recommendations for researchers," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(1), pages 338-359, March.
    13. Kipling, Richard P. & Bannink, André & Bellocchi, Gianni & Dalgaard, Tommy & Fox, Naomi J. & Hutchings, Nicholas J. & Kjeldsen, Chris & Lacetera, Nicola & Sinabell, Franz & Topp, Cairistiona F.E. & va, 2016. "Modeling European ruminant production systems: Facing the challenges of climate change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 24-37.
    14. Klerkx, Laurens & Nettle, Ruth, 2013. "Achievements and challenges of innovation co-production support initiatives in the Australian and Dutch dairy sectors: A comparative study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 74-89.
    15. Ravichandran, Thanammal & Teufel, Nils & Capezzone, Filippo & Birner, Regina & Duncan, Alan J., 2020. "Stimulating smallholder dairy market and livestock feed improvements through local innovation platforms in the Himalayan foothills of India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    16. Ton, Giel & Klerkx, Laurens & de Grip, Karin & Rau, Marie-Luise, 2015. "Innovation grants to smallholder farmers: Revisiting the key assumptions in the impact pathways," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-23.
    17. Busse, Maria & Zscheischler, Jana & Zoll, Felix & Rogga, Sebastian & Siebert, Rosemarie, 2023. "Co-design approaches in land use related sustainability science – A systematic review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    18. Müller, Anna & Steinke, Jonathan & Dorado, Hugo & Keller, Salome & Jiménez, Daniel & Ortiz-Crespo, Berta & Schumann, Charlotte, 2024. "Challenges and opportunities for human-centered design in CGIAR," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    19. Andrieu, N. & Sogoba, B. & Zougmore, R. & Howland, F. & Samake, O. & Bonilla-Findji, O. & Lizarazo, M. & Nowak, A. & Dembele, C. & Corner-Dolloff, C., 2017. "Prioritizing investments for climate-smart agriculture: Lessons learned from Mali," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 13-24.
    20. Seifu, Mikinay & van Paassen, Annemarie & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2020. "Anchoring innovation methodologies to ‘go-to-scale’; a framework to guide agricultural research for development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:joafsc:360375. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.