The debate on food sovereignty theory: agrarian capitalism, dispossession and agroecology

References

• Agarwal, B. 2014. Food sovereignty, food security and democratic choice: Critical contradictions, difficult conciliations. Journal of Peasant Studies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.876996.
   Google Scholar
• Altieri, M.A. 1987. Agroecology: The scientific base of alternative agriculture. London: IT Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Altieri, M.A. 1999. Applying agroecology to enhance the productivity of peasant farming systems in Latin America. Environment, Development and Sustainability 1, no. 3–4: 197–217.
   Google Scholar
• Altieri, M.A. 2009. Agroecology, small farms, and food sovereignty. Monthly Review 61, no. 3: 102–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altieri, M.A., and V.M. Toledo. 2011. The agroecological revolution in Latin America: Rescuing nature, ensuring food sovereignty and empowering peasants. Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 3: 587–612.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin, S. 2012. The implosion of the contemporary global capitalist system (abridged version for second South South forum). International Conference on Sustainability and Rural Reconstruction, 12 December 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Badgley, C., J. Moghtader, E. Quintero, E. Zakem, M.J. Chappell, K. Avilés-Vázquez, A. Samulon, and I. Perfecto. 2007. Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22, no. 2: 86–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barraza, D., K. Jansen, B. Van Wendel De Joode, and C. Wesseling. 2011. Pesticide use in banana and plantain production and risk perception among local actors in Talamanca, Costa Rica. Environmental Research 111, no. 5: 708–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjaminsen, T.A., and I. Bryceson. 2012. Conservation, green/blue grabbing and accumulation by dispossession in Tanzania. Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 2: 335–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentley, J.W., Gonzalo Rodríguez, and Ana González. 1994. Science and people: Honduran campesinos and natural pest control inventions. Agriculture and Human Values 11, no. 2/3: 178–82.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, H. 1990. Taking the part of peasants?. In The food question, eds. H. Bernstein, B. Crow, M. Mackintosh, and C. Martin, 69–79. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, H. 2006. Is there an agrarian question in the 21st century?. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 27, no. 4: 449–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernstein, H. 2013. Food sovereignty: A sceptical view. Paper presented at the Conference on Food Sovereignty: A Critical Dialogue, Yale University, September 14–15, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, H. 2014. Food sovereignty via the 'peasant way': A sceptical view. Journal of Peasant Studies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.852082.
   Google Scholar
• Bijman, J., C. Iliopoulos, K.J. Poppe, C. Gijselinckx, K. Hagedorn, M. Hanisch, G.W.J. Hendrikse, R. Kühl, P. Ollila, P. Pyykkönen, and G. Van Der Sangen. 2012. Support for farmers’ cooperatives: Final report: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Borras, S.M.Jr., C. Kay, S. Gómez, and J. Wilkinson. 2012. Land grabbing and global capitalist accumulation: Key features in Latin America. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 33, no. 4: 402–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brass, T. 1990. Peasant essentialism and the agrarian question in the Colombian Andes. Journal of Peasant Studies 17, no. 3: 444–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunch, R. 1990. Low input soil restoration in Honduras: The Cantarranas farmer-to-farmer extension programme: IIED Gatekeeper series no.23 London.
   Google Scholar
• Byres, T.J. 1979. Of neo-populist pipe-dreams: Daedalus in the Third World and the myth of urban bias. Journal of Peasant Studies 6, no. 2: 210–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castellanos-Navarrete, A., and K. Jansen. 2013. The drive for accumulation: Environmental contestation and agrarian support to Mexico's oil palm expansion. The Hague: LPDI Working Paper 43, The Land Deal Politics Initiative/IDS/ISS.
   Google Scholar
• Connor, D.J. 2008. Organic agriculture cannot feed the world. Field Crops Research 106, no. 2: 187–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conway, G.R. 1985. Agroecosystem analysis. Agricultural Administration 20: 31–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordoba, D., and K. Jansen. 2014. The return of the state: Neocollectivism, agrarian politics and images of technological progress in the MAS era in Bolivia. Journal of Agrarian Change, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joac.12036.
   Google Scholar
• De Ponti, T., B. Rijk, and M.K. Van Ittersum. 2012. The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture. Agricultural Systems 108: 1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, E.F., and P. Benson. 2006. Broccoli and desire: Global connections and Maya struggles in postwar Guatemala. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedmann, H. 2006. Focusing on agriculture: A comment on Henry Bernstein's ‘Is there an agrarian question in the 21st century?’. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 27, no. 4: 461–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garnies, E., and M.-L. Navas. 2012. A trait-based approach to comparative functional plant ecology: Concepts, methods and applications for agroecology. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 32, no. 2: 365–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giller, K.E., M.H. Beare, P. Lavelle, A.-M.N. Izac, and M.J. Swift. 1997. Agricultural intensification, soil biodiversity and agroecosystem function. Applied Soil Ecology 6, no. 1: 3–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover, D. 2010a. The corporate shaping of GM crops as a technology for the poor. Journal of Peasant Studies 37, no. 1: 67–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover, D. 2010b. Is Bt cotton a pro-poor technology? A review and critique of the empirical record. Journal of Agrarian Change 10, no. 4: 482–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover, D. 2010c. Exploring the resilience of Bt cotton's ‘pro-poor success story’. Development and Change 41, no. 6: 955–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover, D., and P. Newell. 2004. Business and biotechnology: Regulation and the politics of influence. In Agribusiness and society: Corporate responses to environmentalism, market opportunities and public regulation, eds. K. Jansen, and S. Vellema, 200–31. London: Zed.
   Google Scholar
• Goulding, K.W.T., A.J. Trewavas, and K.E. Giller. 2009. Can organic farming feed the world? A contribution to the debate on the ability of organic farming systems to provide sustainable supplies of food. Proceedings-International Fertiliser Society 663: 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Guthman, J. 2004. Room for manoeuvre? (In)organic agribusiness in California. In Agribusiness and society: Corporate responses to environmentalism, market opportunities and public regulation, eds. K. Jansen and S. Vellema, 114–42. London: Zed.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. 2003. The new imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, M. 2004. The appearance and disappearance of the GM tomato: Innovation strategy, market formation and the shaping of demand. In Agribusiness and society: Corporate responses to environmentalism, market opportunities and public regulation, eds. K. Jansen, and S. Vellema, 68–90. London: Zed.
   Google Scholar
• Hecht, S.B. 1987. The evolution of agroecological thought. In Agroecology. The scientific basis of alternative agriculture, ed. M. Altieri, 1–20. Boulder: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Herring, R.J. 2007a. The genomics revolution and development studies: Science, poverty and politics. Journal of Development Studies 43, no. 1: 1–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herring, R.J. 2007b. Stealth seeds: Bioproperty, biosafety, biopolitics. Journal of Development Studies 43, no. 1: 130–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, K. 1998. Political ecology, mountain agriculture, and knowledge in Honduras. Amsterdam: Thela Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, K. 2000. Labour, livelihoods, and the quality of life in organic agriculture in Europe. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 17, no. 3: 247–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, K. 2003. Crisis discourses and technology regulation in a weak state: Responses to a pesticide disaster in Honduras. Development and Change 34, no. 1: 45–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, K. 2004. Greening bananas and institutionalizing environmentalism: Self-regulation by fruit corporations. In Agribusiness and society: Corporate responses to environmentalism, market opportunities and public regulation, eds. K. Jansen and S. Vellema, 145–75. London: Zed.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, K. 2006. Banana wars and the multiplicity of conflicts in commodity chains. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 81: 97–113.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, K. 2011. ‘Generics’ versus ‘brands’: Corporations, ownership of knowledge and justice claims in pesticide risk governance. Paper presented at the WASS Research Day ‘Knowledge in Society: Contestation, Boundaries and Bridges’, 1 November 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, K., and A. Gupta. 2009. Anticipating the future: ‘Biotechnology for the poor’ as unrealized promise?. Futures 41, no. 7: 436–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, K., C. Leeuwis, S. Mani, E. Roquas, M. Skutsch, and G. Verschoor. 2004. Unpacking and re-packing knowledge in development. In Globalization and development. Themes and concepts in current research, eds. D. Kalb, W. Pansters, and H. Siebers, 163–90. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Kitching, G. 1989. Development and underdevelopment in historical perspective. Populism, nationalism and industrialization. revised ed. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, J. 2010. Impeding dispossession, enabling repossession: Biological open source and the recovery of seed sovereignty. Journal of Agrarian Change 10, no. 3: 367–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lammerts Van Bueren, E.T., G. Backes, H. De Vriend, and H. Østergård. 2010. The role of molecular markers and marker assisted selection in breeding for organic agriculture. Euphytica 175, no. 1: 51–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latorre, S. 2014. Resisting environmental dispossession in Ecuador: Whom does the political category of ‘ancestral peoples of the mangrove ecosystem’ include and aim to empower?. Journal of Agrarian Change, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joac.12052
   Google Scholar
• Levien, M. 2011. Special economic zones and accumulation by dispossession in India. Journal of Agrarian Change 11, no. 4: 454–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, N., and J.D. Van Der Ploeg. 1989. Demythologizing planned intervention: An actor perspective. Sociologia Ruralis 29, no. 3/4: 226–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez-Torres, M.E., and P. Rosset. 2014. Diálogo de saberes in la Vía Campesina: Food sovereignty and agroecology. Journal of Peasant Studies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.872632
   Google Scholar
• Marx, K. 1887. Capital: A critique of political economy, volume I. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• McMichael, P. 2006. Reframing development: Global peasant movements and the new agrarian question. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 27, no. 4: 471–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMichael, P. 2013a. Historicizing food sovereignty: A food regime perspective. Paper presented at the Conference on Food Sovereignty: A Critical Dialogue, Yale University, September 14–15, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• McMichael, P. 2013b. Food regimes and agrarian questions. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• McMichael, P. 2014. Historicizing food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies, http://dxdoi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.876999
   Google Scholar
• Novo, A., K. Jansen, and M. Slingerland. forthcoming. The novelty of simple and known technologies and the rhythm of farmer-centred innovation in family dairy farming in Brazil. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, DOI:10.1080/14735903.2014.945320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Otero, G. ed. 2008. Food for the few: Neoliberal globalism and biotechnology in Latin America. Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oya, C. 2013. The land rush and classic agrarian questions of capital and labour: A systematic scoping review of the socioeconomic impact of land grabs in Africa. Third World Quarterly 34, no. 9: 1532–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel, R. 2009. Food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies 36, no. 3: 663–706.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelaez, V., and W. Schmidt. 2004. Social struggles and the regulation of transgenic crops in Brazil. In Agribusiness and society: Corporate responses to environmentalism, market opportunities and public regulation, eds. K. Jansen, and S. Vellema, 232–60. London: Zed.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg, J.D. 2013a. Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty. Paper presented at the Conference on Food Sovereignty: A Critical Dialogue, Yale University, September 14–15, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg, J.D. 2013b. Peasants and the art of farming. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg, J.D. 2014. Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polanyi, K. 1957. The great transformation. Boston: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ríos-González, A., K. Jansen, and H.J. Sánchez-Pérez. 2013. Pesticide risk perceptions and the differences between farmers and extensionists: Towards a knowledge-in-context model. Environmental Research 124: 43–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosset, P., and M.E. Martínez-Torres. 2013. Rural social movements and diálogo de saberes: Territories, food sovereignty, and agroecology. Paper presented at the Conference on Food Sovereignty: A Critical Dialogue, Yale University, September 14–15, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Scoones, I. 2008. Mobilizing against GM crops in India, South Africa and Brazil. Journal of Peasant Studies 8, no. 2/3: 315–44.
   Google Scholar
• Stadlinger, N., A.J. Mmochi, S. Dobo, E. Gyllbäck, and L. Kumblad. 2011. Pesticide use among smallholder rice farmers in Tanzania. Environment, Development and Sustainability 13, no. 3: 641–56.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, G.D. 2007. Agricultural deskilling and the spread of genetically modified cotton in Warangal. Current Anthropology 48, no. 1: 67–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toledo, V.M. 1990. The ecological rationality of peasant production. In eds. M. Altieri and S. Hecht, 51–58 Florida: Agroecology and Small Farm Development. CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Toleubayev, K., K. Jansen, and A. van Huis. 2010. Knowledge and agrarian de-collectivisation in Kazakhstan. Journal of Peasant Studies 37, no. 2: 353–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trusler, J. 1810 [1st edition 1799]. Practical husbandry, or, the art of farming, with a certainty of gain; as practised by judicious farmers in this country. The result of experience and long observation. London: Brockwell.
   Google Scholar
• Veuthey, S., and J.-F. Gerber. 2012. Accumulation by dispossession in coastal Ecuador: Shrimp farming, local resistance and the gender structure of mobilizations. Global Environmental Change 22, no. 3: 611–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watts, M. 1983. “Good try, Mr. Paul”: Populism and the politics of African land use. African Studies Review 26, no. 2: 73–83.
   Google Scholar
• Weis, T. 2010. The accelerating biophysical contradiction of industrial capitalist agriculture. Journal of Agrarian Change 10, no. 3: 315–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, E.M. 2000. The agrarian origins of capitalism. In Hungry for profit. The agribusiness threat to farmers, food, and the environment, eds. F. Magdoff, J. Bellamy Foster, and F.H. Buttel, 23–41. New York: Monthly Review Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woodhouse, P. 2010. Beyond industrial agriculture? Some questions about farm size, productivity and sustainability. Journal of Agrarian Change 10, no. 3: 437–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar