TY - JOUR
T1 - Becoming In-visible
T2 - Family Farms in Rural Latvia in the Framework of the EU Common Agricultural Policy
AU - Thiemann, André
AU - Rolle, Kristīne
N1 - Funding Information:
André Thiemann received funding from the European Regional Development Fund, research grant No. 1.1.1.2/VIAA/2/18/271, Agreement No. 9.‐14.5/87. Kristīne Rolle received funding from The Latvian Council of Science, No. lzp‐2018/2‐0070.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American Anthropological Association.
PY - 2022/7/30
Y1 - 2022/7/30
N2 - Historically, Latvia has been integrated into several (multi-) national state formations that have shaped agricultural practices. Beginning in 1991, newly independent Latvia reintroduced a family farming model and prepared to join the European Union. The ability of small farmers to adapt to and implement the new EU regulations that support farming either as efficient food production or alternatively as cultural landscaping has been contingent upon many socio-economic and cultural factors. Today, most family farmers have only reluctantly formalized their practices to satisfy the requirements of the EU, while others have readily embraced the current discourses, policies, and laws to strategically access agricultural funds and scale up operations. We discuss these agricultural tensions by contrasting two forms of selective formalization: the reluctant “projectification” of a subsistence farm by founding a cultural NGO vs. the strategic founding of an “entrepreneurial” cooperative of sea buckthorn producers to access transnational markets and development subsidies.
AB - Historically, Latvia has been integrated into several (multi-) national state formations that have shaped agricultural practices. Beginning in 1991, newly independent Latvia reintroduced a family farming model and prepared to join the European Union. The ability of small farmers to adapt to and implement the new EU regulations that support farming either as efficient food production or alternatively as cultural landscaping has been contingent upon many socio-economic and cultural factors. Today, most family farmers have only reluctantly formalized their practices to satisfy the requirements of the EU, while others have readily embraced the current discourses, policies, and laws to strategically access agricultural funds and scale up operations. We discuss these agricultural tensions by contrasting two forms of selective formalization: the reluctant “projectification” of a subsistence farm by founding a cultural NGO vs. the strategic founding of an “entrepreneurial” cooperative of sea buckthorn producers to access transnational markets and development subsidies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85135165366&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/cuag.12286
DO - 10.1111/cuag.12286
M3 - Article
SN - 2153-9553
VL - 44
SP - 41
EP - 52
JO - Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment
JF - Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment
IS - 1
ER -
