Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Contested agri-food futures: Introduction to the Special Issue.Mascha Gugganig, Karly Ann Burch, Julie Guthman & Kelly Bronson - 2023 - Agriculture and Human Values 40 (3):787-798.
    Over recent decades, influential agri-food tech actors, institutions, policymakers and others have fostered dominant techno-optimistic, future visions of food and agriculture that are having profound material impacts in present agri-food worlds. Analyzing such realities has become paramount for scholars working across the fields of science and technology studies (STS) and critical agri-food studies, many of whom contribute to STSFAN—the Science and Technology Studies Food and Agriculture Network. This article introduces a Special Issue featuring the scholarship of STSFAN members, which cover (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • New but for whom? Discourses of innovation in precision agriculture.Emily Duncan, Alesandros Glaros, Dennis Z. Ross & Eric Nost - 2021 - Agriculture and Human Values 38 (4):1181-1199.
    We describe how the set of tools, practices, and social relations known as “precision agriculture” is defined, promoted, and debated. To do so, we perform a critical discourse analysis of popular and trade press websites. Promoters of precision agriculture champion how big data analytics, automated equipment, and decision-support software will optimize yields in the face of narrow margins and public concern about farming’s environmental impacts. At its core, however, the idea of farmers leveraging digital infrastructure in their operations is not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • The doctors of agrifood studies.Douglas H. Constance - 2023 - Agriculture and Human Values 40 (1):31-43.
    The Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society and the journal _Agriculture and Human Values_ provided a crucial intellectual space for the early transdisciplinary critique of the industrial agrifood system. This paper describes that process and presents the concept of “The Doctors of Agrifood Studies” as a metaphor for the key role critical agrifood social scientists played in documenting the unsustainability of conventional agriculture and working to create an alternative, ethical, sustainable agrifood system. After the introduction, the paper details the “Critical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Who and what gets recognized in digital agriculture: agriculture 4.0 at the intersectionality of (Dis)Ableism, labor, and recognition justice. [REVIEW]Michael Carolan - 2024 - Agriculture and Human Values 41 (4):1465-1480.
    This paper builds on prior critical scholarship on Agriculture 4.0—an umbrella term to reference the utilization of robotics and automation, AI, remote sensing, big data, and the like in agriculture—especially the literature focusing on issues relating to equity and social sustainability. Critical agrifood scholarship has spent considerable energy interrogating who gets what, how decisions get made, and who counts as a “stakeholder” in the context of decision making, questions relating to distributive justice, procedural justice, and representative justice, respectively. Less attention, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Citizen views on genome editing: effects of species and purpose.Gesa Busch, Erin Ryan, Marina A. G. von Keyserlingk & Daniel M. Weary - 2021 - Agriculture and Human Values 39 (1):151-164.
    Public opinion can affect the adoption of genome editing technologies. In food production, genome editing can be applied to a wide range of applications, in different species and with different purposes. This study analyzed how the public responds to five different applications of genome editing, varying the species involved and the proposed purpose of the modification. Three of the applications described the introduction of disease resistance within different species, and two targeted product quality and quantity in cattle. Online surveys in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies.Garrett M. Broad - 2023 - Agriculture and Human Values 40 (3):929-938.
    At a time when agri-food biotechnologies are receiving a surge of investment, innovation, and public interest in the United States, it is common to hear both supporters and critics call for open and inclusive dialogue on the topic. Social scientists have a potentially important role to play in these discursive engagements, but the legacy of the intractable genetically modified (GM) food debate calls for some reflection regarding the best ways to shape the norms of that conversation. This commentary argues that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A social and ethical game-changer? An empirical ethics study of CRISPR in the salmon farming industry.Hannah Winther, Torill Blix, Lotte Holm, Anne Ingeborg Myhr & Bjørn Myskja - 2024 - Environmental Values 33 (5):476-494.
    The genome editing technology CRISPR is described as a technological game-changer because of its flexibility and precision, and as an ethical game-changer due to its ability to engineer traits in living organisms without crossing species, avoiding a significant objection to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In salmon farming, applications of CRISPR in breeding hold the promise of handling environmental and fish welfare challenges yet require social acceptance. Adopting an empirical bioethics framework, this stakeholder interview study shows that respecting species borders is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Strategic framing of genome editing in agriculture: an analysis of the debate in Germany in the run-up to the European Court of Justice ruling.Robin Siebert, Christian Herzig & Marc Birringer - 2022 - Agriculture and Human Values 39 (2):617-632.
    New techniques in genome editing have led to a controversial debate about the opportunities and uncertainties they present for agricultural food production and consumption. In July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union defined genome editing as a new process of mutagenesis, which implies that the resulting organisms count as genetically modified and are subject, in principle, to the obligations of EU Directive 2001/18/EG. This paper examines how key protagonists from academia, politics, and the economy strategically framed the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark