New Farmer Identity: The Emergence of a Post‐Productivist Agricultural Regime in China

Abstract

The back‐to‐the‐land migration has become an emerging phenomenon in the developing countries over recent years. In this context, more and more people go to the countryside to practice peasant‐like agriculture, which gives rise to the ‘repeasantisation’. This research aims to understand the relations between new farmer identity and an emerging agricultural regime in recent years in China. It investigates how the new farmer identity is (re)constructed in their interactions with organic farming. Drawing on identity theory and concepts of ‘post‐productivism’ and ‘new peasantry’, empirical evidence shows that by performing a new agricultural regime, farmer identity has been redefined. On the one hand, the new farmer identity is shaped by their farm as a ‘significant symbol’, and is maintained and reinforced by their interactions with the farm and consumers. On the other hand, the new farmer identity is contested by common social thoughts of ‘farmer’. However, they fashion new boundaries to differentiate themselves from traditional farmers with stereotypes and elite discourses. Contributing to the post‐productivism debates, this research argues that the shifting meanings of farmer and farming in this new agricultural movement show the emergence of a post‐productivist agricultural regime in China.

Becoming a Young Farmer in the Digital Age—An Island Perspective*

“…Third, recent farm entry studies capture a “new farm identity” construction mechanism among farm successors (Chiswell and Lobley 2018). As discussed within the “new farmer identity” (Xie 2021) concept, which is mainly based on identity theory (Stryker 1994), individuals' perception toward their behavior cannot be separated from their self‐conception, and these perceptions play an important role in understanding how cognitive dimensions shape attitudes toward careers. Rising literature on the development of a cognitive perspective of agri‐entrepreneurship provides insights on where youth want to be in their farming careers (Fitz‐Koch et al 2017).…”

“…This change in the nature of career intension—that is also supported by the impact of digital communication technologies on the working world‐ brings flexibility in the career landscape, and as an outcome we observe more and more in‐migrants to rural regions with self‐employed businesses (Herslund 2019; Martins and Partidário 2020). As studied within the context of back‐to‐the‐land movements, individuals leave the urban to go to the rural with the aim of adopting an alternative lifestyle, and some even get involved with full‐time or part‐time farming careers (Góngora et al 2019; Xie 2021).…”

‘We're out, so wtf do we do now?’: Brexit and rural identity in the era of online agricultural communities

“…TFF provides an opportunity for those who wish to pursue this identity to easily hide behind the anonymity of online personality but which is also displaced from the real‐world political context. Other authors have demonstrated that identities constructed from stereotypes (Xie, 2020) often lead to the contestation of how these characteristics are performed. In response to questions, members would deny their relevance as if none of them wanted to step out of the normative structure or put their own reputation as a forum member at risk by speaking against the others (Hirvonen & Pennanen, 2018).…”

Productivism and Post-Productivism: An Analysis of Functional Mixtures in Rural China

“…To ensure food security, the agricultural space is shaped into a single-function agricultural production space by defining basic farmland and modern agriculture demonstration districts, with the support of the central and local governments [21]. On the other hand, to increase the income of farmers, rural land functions have become more diverse, including farming, leisure consumption, and so on, which is called a post-productive transition [1,2,22]. Through analysis of the rural functions in Guangdong, we find that productivism and post-productivism are not in binary opposition.…”