15 pages, via online journal, Purpose
Literature contends that not much is known about smallholder farmers’ perceptions of climate variability and the impacts thereof on agricultural practices in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Africa in particular. The purpose of this study is to examine the perceptions of smallholder farmers from Botlokwa (a semi-arid region in South Africa) on climate variability in relation to climatological evidence.
Design/methodology/approach
The study area is in proximity to a meteorological station and comprises mainly rural farmers, involved in rain-fed subsistence agriculture. Focus group discussions and closed-ended questionnaires covering demographics and perceptions were administered to 125 purposely sampled farmers. To assess farmers’ perceptions of climate variability, their responses were compared with linear trend and variability of historical temperature and rainfall data (1985-2015). Descriptive statistics were used to provide insights into respondents’ perceptions.
Findings
About 64% of the farmers perceived climate variability that was consistent with the meteorological data, whereas 36% either held contrary observations or were unable to discern. Age, level of education, farming experience and accessibility to information influenced the likelihood of farmers to correctly perceive climate variability. No significant differences in perception based on gender were observed. This study concludes that coping and adaption strategies of over one-third of the farmers could be negatively impacted by wrong perceptions of climate variability.
Originality/value
This study highlights discrepancies in perceptions among farmers with similar demographic characteristics. To guarantee sustainability of the sector, intervention by government and other key stakeholders to address underlying factors responsible for observed discrepancies is recommended.
21 pages, Surging interest in urban agriculture has prompted cities across North America to adopt policies that give gardeners access to publicly owned land. However, if not carefully designed, these policies can exacerbate existing racial inequities. Drawing on theories of urban and environmental justice, we use a contextualized case comparison to explore the radical potential and practical constraints of garden land policies at two distinct institutions: the City of Minneapolis and the independently elected Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Based on participant observation, document review, and interviews with a range of policy actors, we argue that what appear to be minor, common-sense policy details systematically shape who benefits from the garden land policies, sometimes in surprising ways. Compared to the City, the Park Board goes substantially further in addressing racial equity. Furthermore, though both cases included public participation, we argue that the more intensive participation during the Park Board policy development process—particularly in determining the details—was pivotal in crafting a policy that reduced barriers to racial equity. The present study contributes to the growing scholarship on urban agriculture and environmental governance and offers concrete insights for actors working toward more just policies.
11pgs, Across the European Union, the receipt of agricultural subsidisation is increasingly being predicated on the delivery of public goods. In the English context, in particular, these changes can be seen in the redirection of money to the new Environmental Land Management scheme. Such shifts reflect the changed expectations that society is placing on agriculture—from something that provides one good (food) to something that supplies many (food, access to green spaces, healthy rural environment, flood resilience, reduced greenhouse gas emissions). Whilst the reasons behind the changes are well documented, understanding how these shifts are being experienced by the managers expected to deliver on these new expectations is less well understood. Bourdieu’s social theory and the good farmer concept are used to attend to this blind spot, and to provide timely insight as the country progresses along its public goods subsidy transition. Evidence from 65 interviews with 40 different interviewees (25 of whom gave a repeat interview) show a general willingness towards the transition to a public goods model of subsidisation. The optimisation and efficiency that has historically characterised the productivist identity is colouring the way managers are approaching the delivery of public goods. Ideas of land sparing and land sharing (and the farming preference for the former over the latter) are used to help understand these new social and attitudinal realities.
