IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v105y2021ics0264837721001381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Broiler battles: Contested intensive poultry unit developments in a policy void

Author

Listed:
  • Caffyn, Alison

Abstract

Intensive livestock production in the UK is spatially concentrated in certain counties where its proliferation has triggered increasing controversy over multiple impacts and externalities. Planning authorities have struggled to handle the increasing contestation within a policy void and weakened institutional context, under the influence of the longstanding agricultural hegemony which normalises intensive farming. In the first significant UK study of such planning contestations this paper presents data on the rapid growth of the poultry industry in Herefordshire and Shropshire and how this triggered conflict during the 2010s between the agri-industrial sector and increasing numbers of objectors. Poultry farmer motivations are explored and a typology of farming situations is suggested. The paper reveals how a new public of objectors mobilised to campaign against intensive livestock developments on multiple environmental, economic, health and quality of life grounds. Tracing the power relations within and between the groups of actors reveals multiple uncertainties over impacts, particularly cumulative water and air pollution and a lack of trust in both technocratic planning processes and politicised decision making. The research suggests the planning authorities should address the policy void, acknowledge the uncertainties and take a more open, proactive and strategic approach to locating intensive livestock operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Caffyn, Alison, 2021. "Broiler battles: Contested intensive poultry unit developments in a policy void," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:105:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721001381
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721001381
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105415?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elizabeth Taylor & Andrew Butt & Marco Amati, 2017. "Making the Blood Broil: Conflicts Over Imagined Rurality in Peri-Urban Australia," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 85-102, January.
    2. Weis, Tony, 2013. "The Ecological Hoofprint," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9781780320977, Febrero.
    3. Hendrickson, Mary K. & Howard, Philip H. & Constance, Douglas H., 2017. "Power, Food and Agriculture: Implications for Farmers, Consumers and Communities," EconStor Preprints 171171, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Philip Lowe & Neil Ward, 2009. "England's Rural Futures: A Socio-Geographical Approach to Scenarios Analysis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(10), pages 1319-1332, December.
    5. Lewis Holloway & Christopher Bear, 2011. "DNA Typing and Super Dairies: Changing Practices and Remaking Cows," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(7), pages 1487-1491, July.
    6. Linda Lobao & Curtis Stofferahn, 2008. "The community effects of industrialized farming: Social science research and challenges to corporate farming laws," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(2), pages 219-240, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Strauser & William P. Stewart, 2023. "Landscape Performance: Farmer Interactions across Spatial Scales," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Connor, Dylan Shane & Berg, Aleksander K & Kemeny, Tom & Kedron, Peter, 2023. "Who gets left behind by left behind places?," SocArXiv nkydt_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Anna-Mara Schön & Marita Böhringer, 2023. "Land Consumption for Current Diets Compared with That for the Planetary Health Diet—How Many People Can Our Land Feed?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-35, May.
    4. Jill Harrison & Christy Getz, 2015. "Farm size and job quality: mixed-methods studies of hired farm work in California and Wisconsin," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(4), pages 617-634, December.
    5. Rafał Blazy & Jakub Błachut & Agnieszka Ciepiela & Rita Łabuz & Renata Papież, 2021. "Thermal Modernization Cost and the Potential Ecological Effect—Scenario Analysis for Thermal Modernization in Southern Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Pangbourne, Kate & Roberts, Deborah, 2012. "What multipliers don’t tell you: A spatial analysis of farm household linkages," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 134718, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. Abel Duarte Alonso & Julie Nyanjom, 2016. "Volunteering, paying it forward, and rural community: A study of Bridgetown, Western Australia," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 481-495, July.
    8. Petri Kahila & Daniel Rauhut, 2015. "Labour Demand And Labour Market Institutions In Rural Areas," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 20-38, December.
    9. Enrico Gottero & Claudia Cassatella & Federica Larcher, 2021. "Planning Peri-Urban Open Spaces: Methods and Tools for Interpretation and Classification," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, July.
    10. Donna Hornby & Adrian Nel & Samuel Chademana & Nompilo Khanyile, 2018. "A Slipping Hold? Farm Dweller Precarity in South Africa’s Changing Agrarian Economy and Climate," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-25, March.
    11. John Strauser & William P. Stewart, 2024. "Moving beyond production: community narratives for good farming," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 1195-1210, September.
    12. Margaret Carrel & Sean G. Young & Eric Tate, 2016. "Pigs in Space: Determining the Environmental Justice Landscape of Swine Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in Iowa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, August.
    13. André Magnan, 2012. "New avenues of farm corporatization in the prairie grains sector: farm family entrepreneurs and the case of One Earth Farms," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(2), pages 161-175, June.
    14. Dominik Noll & Christian Lauk & Veronika Gaube & Dominik Wiedenhofer, 2020. "Caught in a Deadlock: Small Ruminant Farming on the Greek Island of Samothrace. The Importance of Regional Contexts for Effective EU Agricultural Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    15. Cristian Vasco & Diego Salazar & Darío Cepeda & Gustavo Sevillano & Juan Pazmiño & Shirley Huerta, 2022. "The Socioeconomic Drivers of Ethical Food Consumption in Ecuador: A Quantitative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-14, October.
    16. Laure-Elise Ruoso, 2020. "Can land-based and practice-based place identities explain farmers’ adaptation strategies in peri-urban areas? A case study of Metropolitan Sydney, Australia," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(3), pages 743-759, September.
    17. Ramona Bunkus & Ilkhom Soliev & Insa Theesfeld, 2020. "Density of resident farmers and rural inhabitants’ relationship to agriculture: operationalizing complex social interactions with a structural equation model," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(1), pages 47-63, March.
    18. Krithika Srinivasan, 2017. "Conservation biopolitics and the sustainability episteme," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(7), pages 1458-1476, July.
    19. Arulingam, Indika & Brady, G. & Chaya, M. & Conti, M. & Kgomotso, P. K. & Korzenszky, A. & Njie, D. & Schroth, G. & Suhardiman, Diana, 2022. "Small-scale producers in sustainable agrifood systems transformation," IWMI Reports 329171, International Water Management Institute.
    20. von Gall, Philipp & Luy, Jörg & Köder, Moritz & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, 2022. "How – and How Much? An Analysis of Options for a Transformation of German Animal Farming towards Sustainability," 62nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 7-9, 2022 329602, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:105:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721001381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.