[go: nahoru, domu]

Rural sociology: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Europe: fmt
correction
(11 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 3:
{{Further|Role homogeneity}}
{{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}}
Line 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 <ref>See 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> grounded the field in methods that require community-level planning before technical change or community development can occur.<ref>Lowe, P., Enacting Rural Sociology: Or what are the Creativity Claims of the Engaged Sciences?, 50 Sociologia Ruralis 4 (2010)</ref> These differences somewhat receded the 1950s and 60s, when European rural sociology shifted away from sociocultural study and towards the facilitation of modern agricultural practices.<ref name="arc2020.eu">Wiskerke,{{Cite H.,web |last= |date=2022-07-14 |title=On Meaningful Diversity: Reflecting on 75 years of Rural Sociology at Wageningen University (July 14, 2022) available at |url=https://www.arc2020.eu/on-meaningful-diversity-reflecting-on-75-years-of-rural-sociology-at-wageningen-university/ |access-date=2024-03-07 |website=Agricultural and Rural Convention |language=en-US}}</ref> This shift was driven by government interest in policy change as well as the perception that “backward [European] farmers [are] backward not only socially and culturally, but also economically and technically.” <ref>Hofstee, E.W., Rural social organization, 1 Sociologia Ruralis 1, 105–117 (1960).</ref>
 
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, - Crises and the futurefutures of rural areas, Working Groups, (2023) available at |url=https://esrs2023.institut-agro-rennes-angers.fr/working-groups-0 |access-date=2024-03-07 |website=esrs2023.institut-agro-rennes-angers.fr |language=en}}</ref>
 
'''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">Ducros,{{Cite Helene D.,web |title=From Past Practices to Future Directions in European Studies, Council for European Studies, Europe Now Journal (2020), available at |url=https://www.europenowjournal.org/2020/06/02/from-past-practices-to-future-directions-in-european-studies/ |access-date=2024-03-07 |website=www.europenowjournal.org |language=en-US}}</ref>
 
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> European populations in urban areas are shrinking, with a noted uptick in migration back to rural and intermediary spaces over the last two decades, and especially since the end of COVID-19 lockdowns.<ref>Ducros, Helene D, From Past Practices to Future Directions in European Studies, Council for European Studies, Europe Now Journal (2020), available at https://www.name="europenowjournal.org"/2020/06/02/from-past-practices-to-future-directions-in-european-studies/</ref> These increasingly populated rural spaces are being met with greater economic development and tourism in the last two decades.<ref>Id.;{{Cite Europeanweb Commission,|date=2023-12-07 |title=Employment and growth in- ruralEuropean areas, available atCommission |url=https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/employment-and-growth_en |access-date=2024-03-07 |website=agriculture.ec.europa.eu |language=en}}</ref> As of 2020, 44% of Europe’s population was categorized as “intermediate”, and only 12% reside in urban space.<ref name="europenowjournal.org"/>
 
Despite these changes, focus on rural issues has been largely siloed within rural sociology programs. Between 2010 and 2019, the Council for European Studies hosted only one panel on Rural issues (Farm, Form, Family: Agriculture in Europe).<ref>Ducros,{{Cite Helene D.,web |title=Rurality in Europe, Council for European Studies, Europe Now Journal (2020) (noting the absence of “rural topics at Europeanists’ generalist conferences”) available at |url=https://www.europenowjournal.org/2020/11/09/rurality-in-europe/#:~:text |access-date=In%20the%20EU%2C%2044%20percent,is%20considered%20to%20be%20rural2024-03-07 |website=www.europenowjournal.org |language=en-US}}</ref> There are signs this may be changing. Europe Now, a widely distributed mainstream academic journal, recently devoting an entire article to the intersection of European and rural studies, including articles challenging the continued applicability of the urban-rural dichotomy, land access, food, resource use disparity, and culture. This move towards interdisciplinarity reflects the human and topographical geography of Europe writ large, and foreshadows possible integration of rural sociology into mainstream academic discourse.<ref>See Ducros, Helene D., Rurality in Europe, Council for European Studies, Europe Now Journal (2020) (noting the absence of “rural topics at Europeanists’ generalist conferences”) available at https://www.europenowjournal.org/2020/11/09/rurality-in-europe/#:~:text=In%20the%20EU%2C%2044%20percent,is%20considered%20to%20be%20rural.</ref>
 
===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 1950’s1950s, with sociologists taking on the subject beginning in the 1990’s1990s.<ref>Dempsey, K. 1990. Smalltown: A study of social inequality, cohesion and belonging. Sydney: Sydney University Press.</ref><ref>Dempsey, K. 1992. A man's town: Inequality between women and men in rural Australia. Melbourne: Oxford.</ref><ref>Gray, I. 1990. Politics in place: a study of power relations in an Australian country town. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</ref>
 
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 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] , with reading from scholars
* 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]