No abstract

Citation for final published version:Pitt, Hannah 2017. Questioning care cultivated through connecting with more-than-human communities. AbstractThis paper challenges the proposition that connecting with nature through direct encounters with nonhumans promotes ethical regard for them. It probes the limits of more-than-human ethics founded on personal encounters which struggle to cross distance and difference. I consider how personal engagement influences ethical perspectives and attend to processes by which care for nonhumans is learnt.Empirical research in community gardens reveals diverse relationships with nonhumans and underlines the importance of attending to qualities of relating. I propose typologies for thinking through more-than-human relationships, organising them according to degree of care. The research finds limits to gardening's potential to promote more care-full relations with others, with care limited by the prevalence of instrumental relationships with nonhumans. Learning to care for nonhumans requires a sense of connection to combine with disconnection gained through reflection, setting specific encounters within the context of more extensive relations and their power dynamics. More important than encounters teaching care for specific nonhuman dependents are those promoting understanding of the interdependent nature of more-than-human communities, and that stimulate reflection on the cumulative impact of a human tendency to forget this.

This paper contributes to the understanding of sustainability transitions by analysing processes of scaling up and out as change pathway. It defines scaling up and out as a distinct form of policy transfer focused on programme implementation, with continuity of actors across jurisdictions. We detail how scaling up and out occurs, introducing a new mechanism to policy transfer frameworks. This is explicated through the case study of Food for Life (FFL), a civil society innovation programme promoting sustainable healthy food in public settings. We highlight why FFL was scaled up and out, how this was achieved, by whom, and the results and success factors. The case study demonstrates the importance of interrogating motivations for transferring policies, and how these influence whether successful outcomes are achieved. This requires a revised framework for analysing policy transfer, with greater attention to the links between motives and outcomes, and a less binary understanding of agents' roles. Where scaling is the mode of policy transfer, we suggest that continuous involvement of at least one transfer agent across the process is significant to success. We conclude by highlighting implications for future research into policy transfer and food system transitions.

No abstract