Small Farming and Food and Nutrition Security

Brunori, Gianluca; Avermaete, Tessa; Bartolini, Fabio; Brzezina, Natalia; Grando, Stefano; Marsden, Terry; Mathijs, Erik; Moragues‐Faus, Ana; Sonnino, Roberta

doi:10.1108/s1057-192220200000025004

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Gathala et al, 2020(Gathala et al, , 2021. Achieving sustainability in this large number of small farms will not only play an essential role in ensuring global food and nutritional security (Cui et al, 2018;Brunori et al, 2020; but also present a means to secure inclusive economic growth, reduce the vulnerability of rural communities, and rapidly reduce poverty (Apata et al, 2020;Gomez y Paloma et al, 2020). Since small-scale farms often cannot access the same external resources as well-off farms, the existing resources on small farms must be used strategically to move toward sustainability, irrespective of external interventions.…”

Section: Ethics Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable intensification of smallholder farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia

2024

Frontiers Research Topics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frontiers is more than just an open access publisher of scholarly articles: it is a pioneering approach to the world of academia, radically improving the way scholarly research is managed. The grand vision of Frontiers is a world where all people have an equal opportunity to seek, share and generate knowledge. Frontiers provides immediate and permanent online open access to all its publications, but this alone is not enough to realize our grand goals. Frontiers journal seriesThe Frontiers journal series is a multi-tier and interdisciplinary set of openaccess, online journals, promising a paradigm shift from the current review, selection and dissemination processes in academic publishing. All Frontiers journals are driven by researchers for researchers; therefore, they constitute a service to the scholarly community. At the same time, the Frontiers journal series operates on a revolutionary invention, the tiered publishing system, initially addressing specific communities of scholars, and gradually climbing up to broader public understanding, thus serving the interests of the lay society, too. Dedication to qualityEach Frontiers article is a landmark of the highest quality, thanks to genuinely collaborative interactions between authors and review editors, who include some of the world's best academicians. Research must be certified by peers before entering a stream of knowledge that may eventually reach the public -and shape society; therefore, Frontiers only applies the most rigorous and unbiased reviews. Frontiers revolutionizes research publishing by freely delivering the most outstanding research, evaluated with no bias from both the academic and social point of view. By applying the most advanced information technologies, Frontiers is catapulting scholarly publishing into a new generation. What are Frontiers Research Topics?Frontiers Research Topics are very popular trademarks of the Frontiers journals series: they are collections of at least ten articles, all centered on a particular subject. With their unique mix of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Frontiers Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area.

show abstract

Section: Ethics Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable intensification of smallholder farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia

2024

Frontiers Research Topics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, these practices can also be interpreted in cultural terms that serve as a mechanism to cope with and process the effects of climate change or as a political tool to guarantee the rights of self-governance (92). These practices could also be understood in terms of the notions of self-sufficiency and food sovereignty which are not in alignment with the logic of productivity (93,94). Similarly, the logic of production is at odds with the concept of resilience (95).…”

Section: Kinds Of Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Examining knowledge and epistemic justice in the design of nature-based solutions for water management

Arango-Quiroga¹,

Boyle²,

Kuhl³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade, Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for water management have gained traction as triple-win options for climate action due to their ability to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. Recent developments in the literature of NbS have resulted in a body of work addressing questions about knowledge and justice. In line with these developments, this paper proposes the Knowledge and Epistemic Injustice for NbS for Water Framework (KEIN Framework) to identify the production of epistemic injustices in the design of NbS for water management. The KEIN framework draws on questions about knowledge and power raised by Avelino (2021) and five mechanisms that lead to epistemic injustice based on the work by Fricker (2007) and Byskov (2021). We apply the framework to examine a proposal presented to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) that included NbS for water management and Indigenous Peoples in South America. Rather than being an analysis of the project or the GCF per se, the goal of this analysis is to demonstrate the utility of the framework to analyze proposals during the design stage. We argue that proposals submitted to the GCF are reflective of a broadly held international environmental logic. We also identified indications that knowledge was organized and treated in a way that favored external actors at the expense of local actors.  Our analysis also revealed prejudices against people&rsquor;s epistemic capacities, with potential implications for how the generation of local knowledge is adopted on the ground. The framework illustrates how the design of NbS may minimally disrupt power relations due to the influential role that some actors have in generating knowledge. This study contributes to the operationalization of epistemic justice in designing NbS. Through the application of the proposed framework, the study contributes to future work advancing the construction of epistemically just NbS.

show abstract

“…For instance, these practices could also be interpreted in cultural terms that serve as a mechanism to cope with the effects of climate change or as a political tool to guarantee the rights of selfgovernance [97]. They could also be understood in terms of self-sufficiency and food sovereignty, which are not in alignment with the logic of productivity [98,99]. Similarly, the logic of production can be at odds with the concept of resilience [100].…”

Section: Plos Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

Examining knowledge and epistemic justice in the design of nature-based solutions for water management

Arango-Quiroga,

Kinol,

Kuhl

2023

PLOS Clim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade, Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for water management have gained traction as triple-win options for climate action due to their ability to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. Recent developments in the literature of NbS have resulted in a body of work addressing questions about knowledge and justice. In line with these developments, this paper proposes the Knowledge and Epistemic Injustice in NbS for Water Framework (KEIN Framework) to identify the production of epistemic injustices in the design of NbS for water management. The KEIN framework draws on questions about knowledge and power raised by Avelino and five mechanisms that lead to epistemic injustice based on work by Fricker and Byskov. We apply the framework to examine a proposal presented to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) that included both NbS for water management and Indigenous People in South America. Rather than being an analysis of the project or the GCF per se, the goal of this analysis is to demonstrate the utility of the framework to analyze proposals during the design stage. We argue that proposals submitted to the GCF are reflective of a broadly held international environmental logic. We also identify indications that knowledge was organized and treated in a way that favored external actors at the expense of local actors. Our analysis also revealed prejudices against people’s epistemic capacities, with potential implications for how the generation of local knowledge is adopted on the ground. The framework illustrates how the design of NbS may minimally disrupt power relations due to the influential role of some actors in generating knowledge. This study contributes to the operationalization of epistemic justice in designing NbS. Through the application of the proposed framework, the study contributes to future work advancing the construction of epistemically just NbS.

show abstract

Small Farming and Food and Nutrition Security

Cited by 6 publications

References 39 publications

Sustainable intensification of smallholder farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia

Sustainable intensification of smallholder farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia

Examining knowledge and epistemic justice in the design of nature-based solutions for water management

Examining knowledge and epistemic justice in the design of nature-based solutions for water management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About