Family farming and gendered division of labour on the move: a typology of farming-family configurations
Agriculture and Human Values 34 (1):27-40 (2017)
AbstractFamily farming, understood as a household which combines family, farm and commercial activity, still represents the backbone of the world’s agriculture. On family farms, labour division has generally been based on complementarity between persons of different gender and generations, resulting in specific male and female spheres and tasks. In this ‘traditional’ labour division, gender inequality is inherent as women are the unpaid and invisible labour force. Although this ‘traditional’ labour division still prevails through time and space, new arrangements have emerged. This paper asks whether we are witnessing changes in the unequal structure of family farming and analyses the diversity of farming family configurations, using the Swiss context as a case study. The typology of farming-family configurations developed, based on qualitative data, indicates that inequalities are related to status on the farm and position in the configuration rather than to gender identity per se. This insight enables a discussion of equality and fairness in a new light. This paper shows that farming-family configurations are often pragmatic but objectively unequal. However, these arrangements might still be perceived as fair when mutual recognition exists, resulting in satisfaction among the family members. The paper concludes that although family farming presents challenges to gender equality, some types of farming-family configurations offer new pathways towards enhanced gender equality.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Front and Back of the House: Socio-Spatial Inequalities in Food Work. [REVIEW]Carolyn Sachs, Patricia Allen, A. Rachel Terman, Jennifer Hayden & Christina Hatcher - 2014 - Agriculture and Human Values 31 (1):3-17.
Quelques failles dans la sociologie de N. Elias.J. Déchaux - 1995 - Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie 99:36-45.
Citations of this work
Beyond ‘Hobby Farming’: Towards a Typology of Non-Commercial Farming.Lee-Ann Sutherland, Carla Barlagne & Andrew P. Barnes - 2019 - Agriculture and Human Values 36 (3):475-493.
Similar books and articles
What is so Disturbing About Jan Smiley's A Thousand Acres?Jim Bender - 1998 - Agriculture and Human Values 15 (2):153-160.
My Decision to Sell the Family Farm.Geoff Kuehne - 2013 - Agriculture and Human Values 30 (2):203-213.
Values and Policy Conflict in West German Agriculture.Max J. Pfeffer - 1989 - Agriculture and Human Values 6 (1-2):59-69.
Changes in Transition: Technology Adoption and Rice Farming in Two Indian Villages. [REVIEW]Arindam Samaddar & Prabir Kumar Das - 2008 - Agriculture and Human Values 25 (4):541-553.
A Rationale for the Support of the Medium-Sized Family Farm.Thomas L. Daniels - 1989 - Agriculture and Human Values 6 (4):47-53.
What Children Really Need: Towards a Critical Theory of Family Structure.Shelley Burtt - 2002 - In David Archard & Colin M. Macleod (eds.), The Moral and Political Status of Children. Oxford University Press. pp. 231--252.
New Avenues of Farm Corporatization in the Prairie Grains Sector: Farm Family Entrepreneurs and the Case of One Earth Farms.André Magnan - 2012 - Agriculture and Human Values 29 (2):161-175.
Liberal Family Law in the Making: Nordic and European Harmonisation. [REVIEW]Anu Pylkkänen - 2007 - Feminist Legal Studies 15 (3):289-306.
'Doing It with Men': Feminist Research Practice and Patriarchal Inheritance Practices in Welsh Family Farming.Linda Price - unknown
Differentiating Farmers: Opening the Black Box of Private Farming in Post-Soviet States. [REVIEW]Lee-Ann Sutherland - 2010 - Agriculture and Human Values 27 (3):259-276.
Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming. [REVIEW]Evelyn B. Pluhar - 2010 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (5):455-468.
Farming Systems Research: Flexible Diversification of a Small Family Farm in Southeast Michigan. [REVIEW]Michael Mascarenhas - 2001 - Agriculture and Human Values 18 (4):391-401.