Abstract Search Find and explore abstracts from the RSS Annual Meeting

International Development and Studies

Beyond Ideology: Farmers’ Plural Values and the Limits of Modernization, Agroecology, and Food Sovereignty Daniel Tobin*, Daniel Tobin, Leland Glenna,

Agricultural modernization has succeeded at increasing crop yields, but the social, economic, and environmental costs may outweigh the benefits. Although there have been impressive scientific and technological innovations, there has also been growing market concentration in the seed and input sectors, farmland consolidation, an overreliance on chemical inputs, and general declining innovation over time. One important explanation for these problems is that agricultural modernization is premised on an overly homogenous view of farmers as self-seeking utility maximizers, rather than as people embedded in households, communities, and other institutional contexts. In response to the problems associated with agricultural modernization, social movements such as food sovereignty and agroecology have emerged, aiming to transition agrifood systems toward more sustainable and equitable futures. Yet even these movements risk reproducing similar ideological assumptions, overestimating what farmers (should) want and underestimating the diversity of their motivations and priorities. In this paper, we argue for an alternative approach to agricultural development that integrates the benefits of science and technology while centering the plural values, preferences, and rationalities of farmers. Drawing on Alexander Chayanov’s theory of peasant economy, we propose a framework that emphasizes empirical documentation of farmers’ motivations and the design of policies and programs that respond to these realities. This approach, which we situate in the lineage of democratic pragmatism, contrasts with top-down ideological models and aims to promote resilience, sustainability, and humanitarian outcomes in agricultural systems. By highlighting the gaps in both modernization and its counter-movements, and by grounding interventions in the actual preferences of farmers, this research contributes a rural sociological perspective on sustainable agricultural transitions that is both theoretically informed and practically oriented.