Response to ‘Combining sustainable agricultural production with economic and environmental benefits’
MetadataShow full item record
We suggest that a recent commentary piece in The Geographical Journal on Conservation Agriculture (CA) and the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) (Kassam and Brammer 2012 was misleading because it drew very selectively from the literature, and presented its conclusions as both widely accepted and uncontroversial. Kassam and Brammer’s intervention in the continuing debates around CA and SRI can be understood as a manifestation of the new ‘contested agronomy’. While Kassam and Brammer call on geographers to do research that will promote the spread of CA and SRI, we suggest that this misconstrues and devalues the potential contribution of geography and social science more generally to agricultural development.
CitationSumberg, J., Andersson, J, Giller, K, Thompson, J, (2013) 'Response to ‘Combining sustainable agricultural production with economic and environmental benefits’, The Geographical Journal, 179(2), pp 183-185 doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00472.x
- ESRC STEPS Centre