Content deleted Content added
No edit summary Tags: Reverted references removed Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
correction |
||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Branch of sociology}}
{{For|the academic journal|Rural Sociology (journal)}}
{{Further|Role homogeneity}}
'''Rural sociology''' is a field of [[sociology]] traditionally associated with the study of social structure and conflict in rural areas. It is an active academic field in much of the world, originating in the [[United States]] in the 1910s with close ties to the national [[United States Department of Agriculture|Department of Agriculture]] and [[land-grant university]] colleges of agriculture.▼
{{use American English|date= November 2017}}
[[File:Boy plowing with a tractor at sunset in Don Det, Laos.jpg|alt=Boy plowing with a tractor at sunset in Don Det, Laos.|thumb|300x300px|Boy plowing with a tractor at sunset in [[Don Det]], [[Laos]]]]
{{sociology}}
{{Rural society}}
▲'''Rural sociology''' is a field of [[sociology]] traditionally associated with the study of social structure and conflict in rural areas. It is an active academic field in much of the world, originating in the [[United States]] in the 1910s with close ties to the national [[United States Department of Agriculture|Department of Agriculture]] and [[land-grant university]] colleges of agriculture.<ref>Nelson, 1969</ref>
While the issue of natural resource access transcends traditional rural spatial boundaries, the sociology of [[food]] and [[agriculture]] is one focus of rural sociology, and much of the field is dedicated to the economics of [[agriculture|farm production]]. Other areas of study include [[rural migration]] and other [[demography|demographic patterns]], [[environmental sociology]], [[resort town|amenity-led development]], public-lands policies, so-called "[[boomtown]]" development, [[social disruption]], the sociology of [[natural resources]] (including forests, mining, fishing and other areas), [[rural culture]]s and [[Identity (social science)|identities]], [[rural health]]-care, and educational policies. Many rural sociologists work in the areas of [[development studies]], [[community studies]], [[community development]], and [[environmental studies]]. Much of the research involves [[developing countries]] or the [[Third World]].
Line 15 ⟶ 20:
Though Europe included more agricultural land than the United States at the turn of the twentieth century, European rural sociology did not develop as an academic field until after World War II.<ref>Hofstee, E.W., Rural Sociology in Europe, Annual Meetings of the Rural Sociological Society (Washington, D. C., 1962); Kötter, Herbert, The Situation of Rural Sociology in Europe, 7 Sociologia Ruralis 3, 254-294 (1967).</ref> This is partially explained by the highly philosophical nature of pre-war European sociology: the field’s focus on broad scale generalizations largely erased rural-urban difference. European sociology in the early 1900s was also almost entirely siloed within European academia, with little cross Atlantic pollination. Practical applications and research methods employed by Land Grant Colleges,<ref>Act of July 2, 1862 (Morrill Act), Public Law 37-108; Friedland, W.H., Who killed rural sociology? A case study in the political economy of knowledge production, 17 International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food 1, pp. 72–88 (2010).</ref> the Country Life Commission,<ref>Bailey, H et al., Report on the Country Life Commission (1909), available at https://www.fca.gov/template-fca/about/1909_Report_of_The_Country_Life_Commission.pdf</ref> and early American rural sociologists like W.B. Du Bois <ref>See Rubaka, Reiland, Du Bois and the Early Development of Urban and Rural Sociology, in W.E.B. Du Bois (2017).</ref> were also well beyond the strictly academic sphere in which European sociologists resided.<ref>E.W. Hofstee, Rural Sociology in Europe, Annual Meetings of the Rural Sociological Society (Washington, D. C., 1962); Lowe, P., Enacting Rural Sociology: Or what are the Creativity Claims of the Engaged Sciences?, 50 Sociologia Ruralis 4 (2010).</ref> The concerns of rural people, farmers, and agriculture were simply outside the attention of most European sociologists at that time.
Post war, European academic institutions began to understand that “there was something useful in the activities of those queer people who called themselves rural sociologists.”
The United States’ influence was reflected in pedagogical changes to include rural sociological methods pioneered by American rural sociologists, particularly statistics. Education met increased government demand for sociological expertise brought by European reconstruction and a growing understanding of the importance of sociological understanding to policy making.<ref>Lowe, P., Enacting Rural Sociology: Or what are the Creativity Claims of the Engaged Sciences?, 50 Sociologia Ruralis 4 (2010); Hofstee, E.W. The relations between sociology and policy, Sociologia Ruralis 331–345 (1970)</ref>
Line 23 ⟶ 28:
"In Europe, not only between the different nations but also between an infinite number of regional and even local groups within every country, there are differences in culture, which influence the behaviour of those groups considerably.... it will take a long time before Europe will show the same basic culture everywhere, and I must say that, from a personal point of view, I hope that it will take a very long time."<ref name="Hofstee, E.W pp. 329">Hofstee, E.W. Rural sociology in Europe. Rural Sociology 28 pp. 329–341 (1963).</ref>
This departure from America’s more homogenous treatment of rural culture
After relatively united beginnings, European rural sociology faced internal disagreements about pedagogy, focus, and direction in the 1970s.<ref>Benvenuti, B et al, The Current Status of Rural Sociology, 15 Sociologia Ruralis 1 (1975).</ref> Many felt the field had strayed too far from its sociocultural roots, become too empirical, and overly aligned with government.<ref name="ReferenceA"/> Critics were particularly concerned by the field’s seeming disregard for consideration of social interaction and culture, and encouraged a return to earlier modes of rural sociology that centered community structure. Ultimately, the field regained it balance between empiricism and sociocultural and institutional study in the 1980s.<ref name="arc2020.eu"/> Considerations of European rural sociologists have since expanded to include food systems, rural-urban interface, urban poverty, and sustainable development.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>
Outside formal academic programs, rural sociology organizations and journals were founded in the 1950s, including Sociologia Ruralis—which still publishes today— and the European Society for Rural Sociology (ESRS). Founded in 1957 by E.W. Hofstee, the ESRS welcomes international membership, including professional rural sociologists as well as those interested in their work and holds regular congresses that promote cross boundary collaboration and the growth of rural sociology research.<ref name="Hofstee, E.W pp. 329"/> Its liberal internationalism and inclusivity makes it a unique interdisciplinary organization that stands somewhat apart from academia and splits its focus between theory and applied research.<ref>Lowe, Phillip, Enacting Rural Sociology: Or what are the Creativity Claims of the Engaged Sciences?, 50 Sociologia Ruralis 4 (2010).</ref> For example, in 2023, the ESRS’s congress included working groups on diverse topics, including rural migration, population change, place making, mental health, and the role of arts and culture in sustaining rural spaces.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Working groups {{!}} ESRS2023 - XXIXth European Society for Rural Sociology Congress
'''Rural Spaces in Europe'''
The relevance of Rural Sociology to the European continent is undeniable. 44% of the EU’s total land is considered “rural,” with the Union’s newest countries including even higher percentages (upwards of 50%). More than half the population of several member states, including Slovenia, Romania, and Ireland, live in rural spaces.<ref name="europenowjournal.org">
While the definition of rurality in Europe has traditionally included all “non-urban” spaces academia’s definition of the term is in flux as more residents move to liminal spaces (sub-urban, peri-urban, ex-urban).<ref name="ReferenceA"/> Unlike the United States,<ref>Sun L, Chen J, Li Q, Huang D., Dramatic uneven urbanization of large cities throughout the world in recent decades. Nat Commun. 2020 Oct 23;11(1):5366. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-19158-1. PMID 33097712; PMCID: PMC7584620.</ref>
Despite these changes, focus on rural issues has been largely siloed within rural sociology programs.
===Australia and New Zealand===
Rural sociology in Australia and New Zealand had a much slower start than its American and European counterparts. This is due to the lack of land grant universities which heavily invested in the discipline in the United States and a lack of interest in studying the “peasant problem” as was the case in Europe.<ref name="Lawrence, Geoffrey 1997">Lawrence, Geoffrey. 1997. “Rural Sociology – Does It Have a Future in Australian Universities?” Rural Society 7(1):29–36. doi: 10.5172/rsj.7.1.29.</ref> The earliest cases of studying rural life in Australia were conducted by anthropologists and social psychologists <ref>Oeser, O., & F. Emery 1954. Social structure and personality in a rural community. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.</ref> in the
Attempts were made between 1935-1957 to bring an American style rural sociology to New Zealand. The New Zealand department of Agriculture, funded by the Carnegie Foundation, tasked Otago Universities economist W.T. Doig with surveying living standards in rural New Zealand in 1935.<ref name="Carter, Ian 1988">Carter, Ian. 1988. “A Failed Graft: Rural Sociology in New Zealand.” Journal of Rural Studies 4(3):215–22. doi: 10.1016/0743-0167(88)90098-8.</ref> The creation and funding of such a report mirrors America's Commission on Country Life. Additional Carnegie funds were granted to the Shelly Group who conducted the countries first major sociological community study and endorsed the creation of land grant institutions in New Zealand. Ultimately, these attempts to institutionalize rural sociology in New Zealand failed due to the departments lack of organization and failure to publish impactful survey results.<ref name="Carter, Ian 1988"/>
Line 44 ⟶ 49:
Early studies of rural sociology in the region focused on the influence of transnational agribusiness, technological changes effects on rural communities, the restructuring of rural environments, and social causes of environmental degradation.<ref name="Lawrence, Geoffrey 1997"/> By the mid 2000's researchers focus had shifted towards broader sociological questions and variables such as the construction and framing of gender among Australian and New Zealand farmers,<ref>Liepins, Ruth. 2009. “Making Men: The Construction and Representation of Agriculture-Based Masculinities in Australia and New Zealand*.” Rural Sociology 65(4):605–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.2000.tb00046.x.</ref> governmental policies impacts on rural spaces and studies,<ref>Loveridge, A. (2016). Rural sociology in New Zealand: Companion planting? New Zealand Sociology, 31(3), 207–229. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.280312863833958</ref> and rural safety and crime.<ref>Panelli, R., Little, J., & Kraack, A. (2004). A community issue? Rural women's feelings of safety and fear in New Zealand. Gender, Place & Culture, 11(3), 445-467.</ref> Scholars have additionally focused on rural residents, particularly farmers, opinions of environmentalism and environmental policies in recent years.<ref>Fairweather, John R., Lesley M. Hunt, Chris J. Rosin, and Hugh R. Campbell. 2009. “Are Conventional Farmers Conventional? Analysis of the Environmental Orientations of Conventional New Zealand Farmers*.” Rural Sociology 74(3):430–54. doi: 10.1526/003601109789037222.</ref> Such a focus is particularly salient in New Zealand where livestock farming has historically been a major national source of income and environmental policies have become increasingly strict in recent years.
Though early scholars of rural sociology in Australasia tout it for its critical lens, publications in the 2010’s and 2020’s have accused the discipline of omitting the experiences of indigenous peoples,<ref name="Sullivan, S. 2013 pp. 139">O’Sullivan, S. (2013) ‘Reversing the Gaze: Considering Indigenous Perspectives on Museums, Cultural Representation and the Equivocal Digital Remnant’, in L. Ormond-Parker, A. Corn, C. Fforde, K. Obata and S. O’Sullivan (eds) Information Technology and Indigenous Communities. Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 139–50.</ref> failing to account for class based differences,<ref>Houghton, R.M. (1980) Lower Waitaki Communities Study. Technical Report. Dunedin: Ministry of Works and Development.</ref> discounting the importance of race and ethnicity,<ref>Scott, K., J. Park and C. Cocklin (2000) ‘From “Sustainable Rural Communities” to “Social Sustainability”: Giving Voice to Diversity in Mangakahia Valley, New Zealand’, Journal of Rural Studies 16: 433–46.</ref> and only recently incorporating in studies of women in rural places.<ref>Mahar, C. (1991) ‘On the Moral Economy of Country Life’, Journal of Rural Studies 7(4): 363–72.</ref><ref>Pini, Barbara, Laura Rodriguez Castro, and Robyn Mayes. 2022. “An Agenda for Australian Rural Sociology: Troubling the White Middle-Class Farming Woman.” Journal of Sociology 58(2):253–69. doi: 10.1177/1440783321999830.</ref> Work on rural women in the region has often incorporated white feminism and used a colonial lens. As a response, scholars, particularly in New Zealand (Aotearoa), have begun to focus on the experiences of the Māori in rural areas,<ref>Pomeroy, Ann. 2022. “Reframing the Rural Experience in Aotearoa New Zealand: Incorporating the Voices of the Marginalised.” Journal of Sociology 58(2):236–52. doi: 10.1177/14407833211014262.</ref><ref>Pomeroy, A. and S. Tapuke (2016) ‘Understanding the Place of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Building Enduring Community Resilience: Murupara Case Study’, New Zealand Sociology 31(7): 183–204.</ref><ref>Te Aho, L. (2011) ‘Waikato River of Life’, pp. 145–57 in J. Ruru, J. Stephenson and M. Abbott (eds) Making our Place: Exploring Land-use Tensions in Aotearoa New Zealand. Dunedin: Otago University Press.</ref> while likewise shifting from solving issues of farmers to rural residents. A few scholars in Australia have likewise begun to incorporate the experiences of Aboriginal peoples into their scholarship, some of whom are indigenous scholars themselves.<ref>Ramzan, B., B. Pini and L. Bryant (2009) ‘Experiencing and Writing Indigeneity, Rurality and Gender: Australian Reflections’, Journal of Rural Studies 25(4): 435–43</ref><ref>Marika, R., Y. Yunupingu, R. Marika-Mununggiritj and S. Muller (2009) ‘Leaching the Poison: The Importance of Process and Partnership in Working with Yolngu’, Journal of Rural Studies 25(4): 404–13.</ref><ref name="Sullivan, S. 2013 pp. 139"/> In particular
Today many prominent scholars do not belong to a department of rural sociology, but rather related disciplines such as geography in the case of Ruth Liepins, Indigenous Studies in the case of Sandy O'Sullivan,<ref>“Sandy O’Sullivan (0000-0003-2952-4732) - ORCID.” Retrieved October 12, 2023 (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2952-4732).</ref> or Arts, Education, and Law in the case of Barbara Pini.<ref>“Barbara Pini Profile | Griffith University.” Retrieved October 12, 2023 (https://experts.griffith.edu.au/18572-barbara-pini).</ref> Today courses in the discipline can be studied at a small number of institutions: University of Western Sydney (Hawkesbury), Central Queensland University, Charles Sturt University, and the Department of Agriculture at the University of Queensland. Additionally, academics who publish in the discipline, such as Ann Pomeroy, Barbara Pini, Laura Rodriguez Castro, and Ruth Liepins, can be found at University of Otago, Griffith University, and Deakin University.
Line 127 ⟶ 132:
* [[William H. Friedland|Friedland, W. H.]] "The End of Rural Society and the Future of Rural Sociology." ''Rural Sociology'' (1982) 47(4): 589–608.
* Desai, A.I. ''Rural Sociology in India'' (1978) [https://archive.org/details/ruralsociologyin0000unse/page/n6/mode/1up online]
* Desai, Akshaya R. ''Introduction to Rural Sociology In India'' (1953) [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.268227 online]
* Goreham, Gary A. ed. ''The Encyclopedia of Rural America: The Land and People'' (2 Volume, 2nd ed. 2008), 1341pp
* Hanson, Victor Davis. ''The Other Greeks: The Family Farm and the Agrarian Roots of Western Civilization'' (1999) [https://www.amazon.com/Other-Greeks-Agrarian-Western-Civilization/dp/0520209354/ excerpt and text search]
| |||