Suchergebnisse

The UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD) is one of the newest global climate change counteraction programs. REDD proposes to redefine standing forests as financial value to create financial incentives for which forest users would be eligible if they forwent further exploitation. However, a number of significant concerns have arisen since the program's introduction. By interconnecting a structural analysis of REDD with a place-based analysis of domestic forest politics in the Philippines, this paper aims to clarify these concerns. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractDigital agricultural technologies are promoted for increasing productivity, environmental sustainability and transparency in farming. Critical perspectives on digital agriculture are necessary to frame opportunities and challenges for agricultural communities. However, the ways in which digital agricultural technologies are contributing to land financialisation—bringing land into the global market exchange—remains unexplored. Historically, farmland has been difficult to incorporate into global markets; the complex environments of family ownership have made farms difficult to condition, discipline and control, which has deterred investors. While the outright ownership of farmland has been unappealing to investors until recently, land ownership is becoming increasingly attractive due to technological change and shifts in land management. We use a responsible research and innovation framework to examine the movements in land via digitalisation asking: Who benefits and who loses due to these processes? And what are the consequences? We bring together the agro‐food financialisation scholarship, critical data studies and responsible innovation literature to bear on an analysis of farmer interviews and content from institutional investors. Ultimately, we argue that digital technologies, through their connection with land assetisation, are fostering growing inequities with respect to land access and farmer autonomy, and thus do not presently constitute responsible innovation.

AbstractDigital technologies are being developed and adopted across the agro‐food system, from farm to fork. Within decision‐making spaces, however, little attention is being paid to political factors arising from such technological developments. This review draws from critical social sciences to examine emerging technologies and big data systems in agriculture and assesses some key issues arising in the field. We begin with an introduction and review of the so‐called 'digital revolution' and then briefly outline how political economy is effective for understanding major challenges for governing technologies and data systems in agriculture. These challenges include: (1) data ownership and control, (2) the production of technologies and data development, and (3) data security. We then use literature and examples to consider the extent to which the political and economic landscape can be shifted to support greater equity in agriculture, while reflecting on structural challenges and limits. In doing so, we emphasise that while there are significant systemic tensions between digital ag‐tech development and agroecological approaches, we do not see them as mutually exclusive per se. This article intends to provide decision‐makers, practitioners and scholars from a wide range of disciplines with a timely assessment of agro‐food digitalisation that attends to political economic factors. In doing so, this article contributes to policy and decision‐making discussions, which, from our perspective, continue to be rather technocentric in nature while paying little attention to how digital technologies can support agroecological systems specifically.

Numerous tools for addressing gender inequality in governmental policies, programs, and research have emerged across the globe. Unfortunately, such tools have largely failed to account for the impacts of colonialism on Indigenous Peoples' lives and lands. In Canada, Indigenous organizations have advanced gender-based analysis frameworks that are culturally-grounded and situate the understanding of gender identities, roles, and responsibilities within and across diverse Indigenous contexts. However, there is limited guidance on how to integrate Indigenous gender-based frameworks in the context of research. The authors of this paper are participants of a multi-site research program investigating intersectoral spaces of Indigenous-led renewable energy development within Canada. Through introspective methods, we reflected on the implementation of gender considerations into our research team's governance and research activities. We found three critical lessons: (1) embracing Two-Eyed Seeing or Etuaptmumk while making space for Indigenous leadership; (2) trusting the expertise that stems from the lived experiences and relationships of researchers and team members; and (3) shifting the emphasis from 'gender-based analysis' to 'gender-based relationality' in the implementation of gender-related research considerations. Our research findings provide a novel empirical example of the day-to-day principles and practices that may arise when implementing Indigenous gender-based analysis frameworks in the context of research.

Numerous tools for addressing gender inequality in governmental policies, programs, and research have emerged across the globe. Unfortunately, such tools have largely failed to account for the impacts of colonialism on Indigenous Peoples' lives and lands. In Canada, Indigenous organizations have advanced gender-based analysis frameworks that are culturally-grounded and situate the understanding of gender identities, roles, and responsibilities within and across diverse Indigenous contexts. However, there is limited guidance on how to integrate Indigenous gender-based frameworks in the context of research. The authors of this paper are participants of a multi-site research program investigating intersectoral spaces of Indigenous-led renewable energy development within Canada. Through introspective methods, we reflected on the implementation of gender considerations into our research team's governance and research activities. We found three critical lessons: (1) embracing Two-Eyed Seeing or Etuaptmumk while making space for Indigenous leadership; (2) trusting the expertise that stems from the lived experiences and relationships of researchers and team members; and (3) shifting the emphasis from 'gender-based analysis' to 'gender-based relationality' in the implementation of gender-related research considerations. Our research findings provide a novel empirical example of the day-to-day principles and practices that may arise when implementing Indigenous gender-based analysis frameworks in the context of research.