‘Smart’ Farming Techniques as Political Ontology: Access, Sovereignty and the Performance of Neoliberal and Not‐So‐Neoliberal Worlds

Abstract

This article draws from data collected through interviews with the following groups: big data and/or precision farm equipment firm employees from numerous countries; commodity farmers in the USA who use big data; individuals from the US-based Right to Repair movement; and farmers associated with Farm Hack from the USA and the UK. With this as the empirical backdrop, the author interrogates the concept of 'access' by way of the phenomena of justice, ontology, and claims making -emergent themes to come out of the qualitative data. This in turn allows the author to conceptually, analytically, and empirically unpack the concept into the following three categories: access, property, and sovereignty. A framework then emerges to talk about these socio-technical assemblages in terms of what they do and the political ontologies they engender, recognising, for instance, that while access can afford individuals and groups benefits it can also detract from an individual's and/or group's ability to flourish. Being able to identify those practices of agro-digital governance that afford sovereignty can inform policies and programmes by nurturing an understanding the worlds they make possible.

Economising the Rural: How New Markets and Property Rights Transform Rural Economies

“…339–344). Similar trends in the privatisation of knowledge and access can be found in other markets around agricultural production, as Carolan's () study of the booming but contested market for big data–driven precision agriculture has shown.…”

Framing Agri‐Digital Governance: Industry Stakeholders, Technological Frames and Smart Farming Implementation

“…Second, the current literature focuses on enhancing the digital agency of meso‐scale actors so that they are better able to ‘realise the value of digital tools and services’ (Ayre et al 2019, p. 11) and thereby support more effective uptake of smart farming innovations. We argue that while supporting the digital agency of meso‐scale actors is important, researchers also need to give attention to agency at an industry scale – what we have termed ‘sovereignty’ following the work of Carolan (2018). However, building industry sovereignty is not necessarily conducive to researcher efforts to enhance the digital agency of meso‐scale actors.…”

“…It does so through addressing two research questions: (1) how do meso‐scale actors frame smart farming technology implementation; and, (2) in what ways do those frames variously afford and/or constrain industry sovereignty over how technological change is implemented? We define sovereignty in this article as being the capacity of farming industries or communities to exercise ‘democratic control of datascapes so as to empower [them] to chart their own futures and define their aims’ (Carolan 2018, p. 759). A theoretical focus on frames and framing provides a conceptually coherent approach for engaging with these questions by enabling researchers to identify the interpretative schemas through which meso‐scale actors develop ‘particular assumptions, expectations, and knowledge’ of smart farming technology, ‘which then serves to shape subsequent actions toward it’ (Orlikowski and Gash 1994, p. 175).…”

The Politics of Digital Agricultural Technologies: A Preliminary Review

“…Other sectors have similarly seen a growing uptake of these precision technologies. In the Netherlands, for instance, 2015 saw precision techniques being used to manage ‘65 per cent of the nation’s arable farmland, up from 15 per cent in 2007’ (Carolan ). Big data is increasingly being used to monitor animal health, supporting early detection of animal disease, and preventing or minimising adverse health impacts.…”