{"title":"政府政策和法规对意大利两个山区农村地区农民主观幸福感的影响","authors":"Sarah H. Whitaker","doi":"10.1007/s10460-024-10586-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The sustainable development of rural areas involves guaranteeing the quality of life and well-being of people who live in those areas. Existing studies on farmer health and well-being have revealed high levels of stress and low well-being, with government regulations emerging as a key stressor. This ethnographic study takes smallholder farmers in two rural mountain areas of Italy, one in the central Alps and one in the northwest Apennines, as its focus. It asks how and why the current policy and regulatory context of agriculture affects farmer well-being. Interviews and participant observation were conducted with 104 farmers. Three common scenarios emerged that negatively affect farmer well-being. First, policies and regulations designed for lowland areas do not always make sense when applied in the mountains. Second, when subsidies are put into effect at the local level, the reality of their implementation can veer away from the original goals of the funding program and have unintended effects on farmer well-being, agricultural practices, and the environment. Finally, when regulations are implemented on farms in rural mountain areas, the primacy of a techno-scientific knowledge system over other, local and place-based knowledge systems is exposed. These three scenarios affect well-being by eliciting feelings of stress, frustration, and disillusionment; by reducing farmer control over their work; and by fostering the perception that farming is not valued by society. They also create conditions of inequality and insecurity. The ways in which government policies and regulations play out on mountain farms can erode trust in government institutions, lead to an <i>us</i> versus <i>them</i> mentality, and contribute to the further abandonment of agriculture and rural areas.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7683,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture and Human Values","volume":"41 4","pages":"1791 - 1809"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10586-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of government policies and regulations on the subjective well-being of farmers in two rural mountain areas of Italy\",\"authors\":\"Sarah H. Whitaker\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10460-024-10586-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The sustainable development of rural areas involves guaranteeing the quality of life and well-being of people who live in those areas. Existing studies on farmer health and well-being have revealed high levels of stress and low well-being, with government regulations emerging as a key stressor. This ethnographic study takes smallholder farmers in two rural mountain areas of Italy, one in the central Alps and one in the northwest Apennines, as its focus. It asks how and why the current policy and regulatory context of agriculture affects farmer well-being. Interviews and participant observation were conducted with 104 farmers. Three common scenarios emerged that negatively affect farmer well-being. First, policies and regulations designed for lowland areas do not always make sense when applied in the mountains. Second, when subsidies are put into effect at the local level, the reality of their implementation can veer away from the original goals of the funding program and have unintended effects on farmer well-being, agricultural practices, and the environment. Finally, when regulations are implemented on farms in rural mountain areas, the primacy of a techno-scientific knowledge system over other, local and place-based knowledge systems is exposed. These three scenarios affect well-being by eliciting feelings of stress, frustration, and disillusionment; by reducing farmer control over their work; and by fostering the perception that farming is not valued by society. They also create conditions of inequality and insecurity. The ways in which government policies and regulations play out on mountain farms can erode trust in government institutions, lead to an <i>us</i> versus <i>them</i> mentality, and contribute to the further abandonment of agriculture and rural areas.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"volume\":\"41 4\",\"pages\":\"1791 - 1809\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10586-z.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10586-z\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture and Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10586-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The impact of government policies and regulations on the subjective well-being of farmers in two rural mountain areas of Italy
The sustainable development of rural areas involves guaranteeing the quality of life and well-being of people who live in those areas. Existing studies on farmer health and well-being have revealed high levels of stress and low well-being, with government regulations emerging as a key stressor. This ethnographic study takes smallholder farmers in two rural mountain areas of Italy, one in the central Alps and one in the northwest Apennines, as its focus. It asks how and why the current policy and regulatory context of agriculture affects farmer well-being. Interviews and participant observation were conducted with 104 farmers. Three common scenarios emerged that negatively affect farmer well-being. First, policies and regulations designed for lowland areas do not always make sense when applied in the mountains. Second, when subsidies are put into effect at the local level, the reality of their implementation can veer away from the original goals of the funding program and have unintended effects on farmer well-being, agricultural practices, and the environment. Finally, when regulations are implemented on farms in rural mountain areas, the primacy of a techno-scientific knowledge system over other, local and place-based knowledge systems is exposed. These three scenarios affect well-being by eliciting feelings of stress, frustration, and disillusionment; by reducing farmer control over their work; and by fostering the perception that farming is not valued by society. They also create conditions of inequality and insecurity. The ways in which government policies and regulations play out on mountain farms can erode trust in government institutions, lead to an us versus them mentality, and contribute to the further abandonment of agriculture and rural areas.
期刊介绍:
Agriculture and Human Values is the journal of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society. The Journal, like the Society, is dedicated to an open and free discussion of the values that shape and the structures that underlie current and alternative visions of food and agricultural systems.
To this end the Journal publishes interdisciplinary research that critically examines the values, relationships, conflicts and contradictions within contemporary agricultural and food systems and that addresses the impact of agricultural and food related institutions, policies, and practices on human populations, the environment, democratic governance, and social equity.