...
首页> 外文期刊>Rural Sociology >Food Security: The Elaboration of Contested Claims to a Consensus Frame
【24h】

Food Security: The Elaboration of Contested Claims to a Consensus Frame

机译:粮食安全:对有争议的主张达成共识框架的阐述

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This article demonstrates Gamson's claim that behind the apparent agreement implied by "consensus frames" lies considerable dissensus. Ironically, the very potency of consensus frames may generate contested claims to the ownership of a social problem. Food security is a potent consensus frame that has generated at least three distinct collective action frames: food security as hunger; food security as a component of a community's developmental whole; and food security as minimizing risks with respect to an industrialized food system's vulnerability to both "normal accidents" as well as the "intentional accidents" associated with agriterrorism. We show that each collective action frame reflects internal normative variation identified here with Goffman's "keying" concept. These keys suggest power differentials in the endorsement or critique of dominant institutional practices. Each frame and associated keys reflect distinct sets of interests by collective actors, such as demands for substantively different applications of science and technology. The prognostic framing of the community food security movement coincidentally holds potential for reducing not only the accidental risks of productivist agriculture but also the uncertainty induced by the risk of terrorist exploitation of those vulnerabilities. The article explores power differentials and variable levels of oppositional consciousness as mechanisms by which keys generate contentious politics within frames while serving as potential bridges between frames. This contested ownership of food security has implications for the associated movements' and organizations' capacity to influence the structure of the agrifood system as well as the broader socioeconomic organization of rural regions. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
机译:本文证明了加姆森的主张,即“共识框架”所隐含的明显协议背后存在着相当大的分歧。具有讽刺意味的是,共识框架的强大功能可能会引起对社会问题所有权的质疑。粮食安全是一个有效的共识框架,已至少产生了三个不同的集体行动框架:粮食安全即饥饿;粮食安全是社区发展整体的组成部分;以及粮食安全,将工业化粮食系统易受“正常事故”以及与恐怖袭击相关的“故意事故”的脆弱性的风险降至最低。我们表明,每个集体行动框架都反映了在这里用Goffman的“键控”概念确定的内部规范变化。这些关键暗示了对主流制度实践的认可或批判中的权力差异。每个框架和相关的键反映了集体行为者的不同兴趣集,例如对本质上不同的科学和技术应用的需求。社区粮食安全运动的预后框架恰巧具有潜力,不仅可以减少生产性农业的偶然风险,而且可以减少恐怖主义分子利用这些脆弱性的风险所引起的不确定性。本文探讨了权力差异和对立意识的可变水平,这些机制是密钥在框架内产生有争议的政治同时充当框架之间潜在桥梁的机制。粮食安全所有权的争夺对相关运动和组织影响农业食品体系结构以及农村地区更广泛的社会经济组织的能力产生了影响。 [出版物摘要]

著录项

  • 来源
    《Rural Sociology》 |2009年第4期|p.469-497|共29页
  • 作者单位

    Patrick H. MooneyDepartment of SociologyUniversity of KentuckyScott A. HuntDepartment of Criminal Justice and Police StudiesEastern Kentucky University;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号