Welcome to the Digital Village: Networking Geographies of Agrarian Change

References

• Ahearn, A. 2020. The new Mongolian state herder: Examining invocations and improvisations of the state in rural Mongolia. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 110 (3):882–98. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2019.1638750.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akram-Lodhi, A. H., and C. Kay. 2010. Surveying the agrarian question (Part 1): Unearthing foundations, exploring diversity. The Journal of Peasant Studies 37 (1):177–202. doi: 10.1080/03066150903498838.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amoore, L. 2018. Cloud geographies: Computing, data, sovereignty. Progress in Human Geography 42 (1):4–24. doi: 10.1177/0309132516662147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ash, J. 2019. Smart cities and the digital geographies of technical memory. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 109 (1):161–72. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2018.1489214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ash, J., R. Kitchin, and A. Leszczynski. 2018. Digital turn, digital geographies? Progress in Human Geography 42 (1):25–43. doi: 10.1177/0309132516664800.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baird, I. G. 2021. Catastrophic and slow violence: Thinking about the impacts of the Xe Pian Xe Namnoy Dam in Southern Laos. The Journal of Peasant Studies 48 (6):1167–86. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2020.1824181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beban, A., L. Schoenberger, and V. Lamb. 2020. Pockets of liberal media in authoritarian regimes: What the crackdown on emancipatory spaces means for rural social movements in Cambodia. The Journal of Peasant Studies 47 (1):95–115. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2019.1672664.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernal, V. 2005. Eritrea on-line: Diaspora, cyberspace and the public sphere. American Ethnologist 32 (4):660–75. doi: 10.1525/ae.2005.32.4.660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernstein, H. 2001. “The peasantry” in global capitalism: Who, where and why. Socialist Register 37:25–51.
   Google Scholar
• Bian, L. 2020. Introduction: Smart spaces and places. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 110 (2):335–38. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2019.1702810.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borras, S. M. 2009. Agrarian change and peasant studies: Changes, continuities and challenges—An introduction. The Journal of Peasant Studies 36 (1):5–31. doi: 10.1080/03066150902820297.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• boyd, d. 2015. Social media: A phenomenon to be analyzed. Social Media and Society 1 (1):1–2.
   Google Scholar
• Bronson, K., and I. Knezevic. 2016. Big data in food and agriculture. Big Data and Society 3 (1):1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Brooten, L., J. M. McElhone, and G. Venkiteswaran. 2019. Introduction: Myanmar media historically and the challenges of transition. In Myanmar media in transition: Legacies, challenges and change, ed. L. Brooten, J. M. McElhone, and G. Venkiteswaran, 1–56. Singapore: Yusof Ishak Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Burrell, J. 2009. The field site as a network: A strategy for locating ethnographic research. Field Methods 21 (2):181–99. doi: 10.1177/1525822X08329699.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carney, J. 2008. Reconsidering sweetness and power through a gendered lens. Food and Foodways 16 (2):127–34. doi: 10.1080/07409710802085999.
   Google Scholar
• Carolan, M. 2020. Automated agrifood futures: Robotics, labor and the distributive politics of digital agriculture. The Journal of Peasant Studies 47 (1):184–207. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2019.1584189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Central Statistical Organization. 2020. Myanmar living conditions survey 2017: Socio-economic report. Nay Pyi Taw and Yangon, Myanmar: Central Statistical Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Chung, Y. B. 2017. Engendering the new enclosures: Development, involuntary resettlement and the struggles for social reproduction in coastal Tanzania. Development and Change 48 (1):98–120. doi: 10.1111/dech.12288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, Y. B., S. L. Young, and R. B. Kerr. 2018. Rethinking the value of unpaid care work: Lessons from participatory visual research in central Tanzania. Gender, Place & Culture 9:1237–51.
   Google Scholar
• Dean, K. 2017. Myanmar: Surveillance and the turn from authoritarianism? Surveillance & Society 15 (3–4):496–505. doi: 10.24908/ss.v15i3/4.6648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Population. 2015. The 2014 Myanmar population and housing census: Highlights of the main results. Accessed December 15, 2020. http://myanmar.unfpa.org/census.
   Google Scholar
• Duggan, M. 2017. Questioning “digital ethnography” in an era of ubiquitous computing. Geography Compass 11 (5):e12313–212. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edelman, M., and W. Wolford. 2017. Introduction: Critical agrarian studies in theory and practice. Antipode 49 (4):959–76. doi: 10.1111/anti.12326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elwood, S., and A. Leszczynski. 2018. Feminist digital geographies. Gender, Place and Culture 25 (5):629–44. doi: 10.1080/0966369X.2018.1465396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faxon, H. O. 2020. Securing meaningful life: Women’s work and land rights in rural Myanmar. Journal of Rural Studies 76:76–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.03.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, J., and A. Gupta. 2002. Spatializing states: Toward an ethnography of neoliberal governmentality. American Ethnologist 29 (4):981–1002. doi: 10.1525/ae.2002.29.4.981.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fink, C. 2018. Dangerous speech, anti-Muslim violence, and Facebook in Myanmar. Journal of International Affairs 71 (1.5):43–52.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, A. 2019. Land grab/data grab: Precision agriculture and its new horizons. The Journal of Peasant Studies 46 (5):893–912. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2017.1415887.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frydenlund, S., and S. Lei. 2021. Hawkers and Hijabi cyberspace: Muslim women’s labor subjectivities in Yangon. Independent Journal of Burmese Scholarship 1. https://ijbs.online/?page_id=2961.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein, J. E., and H. O. Faxon. 2022. New data infrastructures for environmental monitoring in Myanmar: Is digital transparency good for governance? Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5 (1):39–59. doi:10.1177/2514848620943892
   Google Scholar
• Graham, M., M. Zook, and A. Boulton. 2013. Augmented reality in urban places: Contested content and the duplicity of code. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 38 (3):464–79. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00539.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, M. L. 2009. Out in the country: Youth, media, and queer visibility in rural America. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Griffiths, M. 2019. Networks of reciprocity: Precarity and community social organisations in rural Myanmar. Journal of Contemporary Asia 49 (4):602–25. doi: 10.1080/00472336.2018.1542450.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, G. 1991. Engendering everyday resistance: Gender, patronage and production politics in rural Malaysia. The Journal of Peasant Studies 19 (1):93–121. doi: 10.1080/03066159108438472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, G., and A. Sitas. 2004. Beyond the urban–rural divide: Linking land, labour, and livelihoods. Transformation: Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa 56 (1):31–38. doi: 10.1353/trn.2005.0020.
   Google Scholar
• Holton, M., and N. Harmer. 2019. “You don’t want to peer over people’s shoulders, It feels too rude!” The moral geographies of using participants’ personal smartphones in research. Area 51 (1):134–41. doi: 10.1111/area.12425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• hooks, b. 1984. Feminist theory: From margin to center. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
   Google Scholar
• International Republican Institute. 2019. Public opinion survey: Myanmar. Accessed December 2020. https://www.iri.org/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/public_opinion_survey_burma_june-july_2019_english.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Jack, M., S. Chann, S. Jackson, and N. Dell. 2021. Networked authoritarianism at the edge: The digital and political transitions of Cambodian village officials. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5 (CSCW1):1–25. doi: 10.1145/3449124.
   Google Scholar
• Kautsky, K. [1899] 1988. The agrarian question. Vol. 1. London: Zwan.
   Google Scholar
• Kelley, L. C., N. L. Peluso, K. M. Carlson, and S. Afiff. 2020. Circular labor migration and land-livelihood dynamics in southeast Asia’s concession landscapes. Journal of Rural Studies 73:21–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.11.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, P. F. 2011. Migration, agrarian transition, and rural change in Southeast Asia: Introduction. Critical Asian Studies 43 (4):479–506. doi: 10.1080/14672715.2011.623516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khadse, A., P. M. Rosset, H. Morales, and B. G. Ferguson. 2018. Taking agroecology to scale: The zero budget natural farming peasant movement in Karnataka, India. The Journal of Peasant Studies 45 (1):192–219. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2016.1276450.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitchin, R., and M. Dodge. 2011. Code/space: Software and everyday life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, J. 2010. Impeding dispossession, enabling repossession: Biological open source and the recovery of seed sovereignty. Journal of Agrarian Change 10 (3):367–88. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0366.2010.00275.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwet, M. 2019. Digital colonialism: U.S. empire and the new imperialism in the Global South. Race & Class 60 (4):3–26. doi: 10.1177/0306396818823172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyaw, P. P. 2020. The rise of online censorship and surveillance in Myanmar: A quantitative and qualitative study. Accessed August 2021. https://www.opentech.fund/news/information-controls-unprotected-legal-landscape/.
   Google Scholar
• Lally, N., K. Kay, and J. Thatcher. 2022. Computational parasites and hydropower: A political ecology of Bitcoin mining on the Columbia River. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5 (1):18–38. doi: 10.1177/2514848619867608
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. 2016. Smart divide: Paradigm shift in digital divide in South Korea. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 48 (3):260–68. doi: 10.1177/0961000614558079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leszczynski, A. 2012. Situating the geoweb in political economy. Progress in Human Geography 36 (1):72–89. doi: 10.1177/0309132511411231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leszczynski, A. 2019. Digital methods III: The digital mundane. Progress in Human Geography 44 (6):1194–1201. doi: 10.1177/0309132519888687.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, R., K. Chen, and D. Wu. 2020. Challenges and opportunities for coping with the smart divide in rural America. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 110 (2):559–70. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2019.1694402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcus, G. E. 1995. Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 24 (1):95–117. doi: 10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.000523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massey, D. 1993. Power geometry and a progressive sense of place. In Mapping the futures: Local cultures, global change, ed. J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, G. Robertson, and L. Tickner, 59–69. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, G. 2018. Cyber-spaces. In Routledge handbook of contemporary Myanmar, ed. A. Simpson, N. Farrelly, and I. Holliday, 92–105. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McKay, D. 2005. Reading remittance landscapes: Female migration and agricultural transition in the Philippines. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 105 (1):89–99. doi: 10.1080/00167223.2005.10649529.
   Google Scholar
• McKay, D. 2006. Translocal circulation: Place and subjectivity in an extended Filipino community. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 7 (3):265–78. doi: 10.1080/14442210600979357.
   Google Scholar
• Milbourne, P., and L. Kitchen. 2014. Rural mobilities: Connecting movement and fixity in rural places. Journal of Rural Studies 34:326–36. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.01.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, C. 2019. The combine will tell the truth: On precision agriculture and algorithmic rationality. Big Data & Society 6 (1). doi: 10.1177/2053951719849444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, D., and D. Slater. 2000. The Internet: An ethnographic approach. Oxford, UK: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Minkoff-Zern, L. A. 2018. Race, immigration and the agrarian question: Farmworkers becoming farmers in the United States. The Journal of Peasant Studies 45 (2):389–408. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2017.1293661.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montenegro de Wit, M. 2019. Beating the bounds: How does “open source” become a seed commons? The Journal of Peasant Studies 46 (1):44–79. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2017.1383395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nothias, T. 2020. Access granted: Facebook’s free basics in Africa. Media, Culture and Society 42 (3):329–48. doi: 10.1177/0163443719890530.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paprocki, K. 2018. Threatening dystopias: Development and adaptation regimes in Bangladesh. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 108 (4):955–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parham, A. A. 2004. Diaspora, community and communication: Internet use in transnational Haiti. Global Networks 4 (2):199–217. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0374.2004.00087.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasse-Freeman, E. 2021. Hate bait, micro-publics, and national(ist) conversations on Burmese Facebook. Independent Journal of Burmese Scholarship 2 (1):144–81.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, L. 2018. Feminist geographies of digital work. Progress in Human Geography 42 (2):244–63. doi: 10.1177/0309132516677177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rigg, J. 2019. More than rural: Textures of Thailand’s agrarian transformation. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. 2017. Posthuman agency in the digitally mediated city: Exteriorization, individuation, reinvention. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 107 (4):779–93. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2016.1270195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotz, S., E. Gravely, I. Mosby, E. Duncan, E. Finnis, M. Horgan, J. LeBlanc, R. Martin, H. T. Neufeld, A. Nixon, et al. 2019. Automated pastures and the digital divide: How agricultural technologies are shaping labour and rural communities. Journal of Rural Studies 68:112–22. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schissler, M. 2015. New technologies, established practices: Developing narratives of Muslim threat in Myanmar. In Islam and the state in Myanmar: Muslim–Buddhist relations and the politics of belonging, ed. M. Crouch, 202–28. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scoones, I. 2009. Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. The Journal of Peasant Studies 36 (1):171–96. doi: 10.1080/03066150902820503.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sentíes Portilla, G. 2017. Land concessions and rural youth in Southern Laos. The Journal of Peasant Studies 44 (6):1257–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siebert, A. 2020. Transforming urban food systems in South Africa: Unfolding food sovereignty in the city. The Journal of Peasant Studies 47 (2):401–19. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2018.1543275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinpeng, A. 2020. Digital media, political authoritarianism, and internet controls in Southeast Asia. Media, Culture and Society 42 (1):25–39. doi: 10.1177/0163443719884052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiegel, S. J. 2020. Visual storytelling and socioenvironmental change: Images, photographic encounters, and knowledge construction in resource frontiers. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 110 (1):120–44. doi: 10.1080/24694452.2019.1613953.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stecklow, S. 2018. Hatebook: Inside Facebook’s Myanmar operation. Reuters, August 15. Accessed December 15, 2020. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/myanmar-facebook-hate/.
   Google Scholar
• The-Thitsar, M. 2021. Empowering or endangering minorities? Facebook, language and identity in Myanmar. Asian Ethnicity, July 12. doi: 10.1080/14631369.2021.1951596.
   Google Scholar
• Tiwari, S., M. Lane, and K. Alam. 2019. Do social networking sites build and maintain social capital online in rural communities? Journal of Rural Studies 66:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tufekci, Z. 2017. Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg, J. D. 2020. Farmers’ upheaval, climate crisis and populism. The Journal of Peasant Studies 47 (3):589–605. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2020.1725490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vicol, M., B. Pritchard, and Y. Y. Htay. 2018. Rethinking the role of agriculture as a driver of social and economic transformation in southeast Asia’s upland regions: The view from Chin State, Myanmar. Land Use Policy 72:451–60. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace, C., K. Vincent, C. Luguzan, L. Townsend, and D. Beel. 2017. Information technology and social cohesion: A tale of two villages. Journal of Rural Studies 54:426–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., and M. A. Burris. 1997. Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education 24 (3):369–87. doi: 10.1177/109019819702400309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weng, X. 2020. Blockchain chicken farm: And other stories of tech in China’s countryside. New York: FSG Originals X Logic.
   Google Scholar
• Whitten-Woodring, J., M. Kleinberg, A. Thawnghmung, and M. T. Thitsar. 2020. Poison if you don’t know how to use it: Facebook, democracy, and human rights in Myanmar. The International Journal of Press/Politics 25 (3):407–25. doi: 10.1177/1940161220919666.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilmott, C. 2016. Small moments in spatial big data: Calculability, authority and interoperability in everyday mobile mapping. Big Data & Society 3 (2):1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zuboff, S. 2019. The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. New York: Hachette.
   Google Scholar