IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v19y2002i3p239-253.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ideology and discourse: Characterizations of the 1996 Farm Bill by agricultural interest groups

Author

Listed:
  • Kathryn Brasier

Abstract

The relationship betweendiscourse and ideology can be described as thatof process and effect [Purvis and Hunt (1993)British Journal of Sociology 44: 473–499].Discourse, used within relations of domination,can result in the formation of ideology. Tostudy this relationship systematically requiresa methodology that contextualizes discoursewithin social relations and examines when suchdiscourse becomes an ideology. I use Thompson'stheory/methodology of ``depth hermeneutics'' tostudy documents produced by agriculturalinterest groups concerning the 1996 FederalAgriculture Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Actand I assess the ideological status of thediscourses contained in these documents. Thefindings suggest that the organizationsrepresenting the small-to-medium-sized farmerstended to use more agrarian themes, fewermarket themes, and fewer linguistic strategiesindicative of ideology. The organizationsrepresenting more concentrated,vertically-integrated interests andagribusinesses use fewer agrarian themes, moremarket themes, and more linguistic strategies.Therefore, market themes, not agrarian themes,form an ideology in this context. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Suggested Citation

  • Kathryn Brasier, 2002. "Ideology and discourse: Characterizations of the 1996 Farm Bill by agricultural interest groups," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 19(3), pages 239-253, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:19:y:2002:i:3:p:239-253
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1019913920983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1019913920983
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1019913920983?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. Orden, David & Paarlberg, Robert & Roe, Terry, 1999. "Policy Reform in American Agriculture," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226632643, April.
    2. Herlihy, Michael T. & Young, C. Edwin, 1996. "Issues in Agricultural Commodity Policy," Staff Reports 278808, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shortall, O.K., 2013. "“Marginal land” for energy crops: Exploring definitions and embedded assumptions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 19-27.
    2. Mäkelä, Hannele & Laine, Matias, 2011. "A CEO with many messages: Comparing the ideological representations provided by different corporate reports," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 217-231.
    3. Sophie Payne-Gifford & C. S. Srinivasan & Peter Dorward, 2021. "Blunting EU Regulation 1107/2009: following a regulation into a system of agricultural innovation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 221-241, February.
    4. Robert Chiles, 2013. "If they come, we will build it: in vitro meat and the discursive struggle over future agrofood expectations," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(4), pages 511-523, December.
    5. Ferguson, John & Collison, David & Power, David & Stevenson, Lorna, 2009. "Constructing meaning in the service of power: An analysis of the typical modes of ideology in accounting textbooks," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 896-909.
    6. Mohamed Chelli & Yves Gendron, 2013. "Sustainability Ratings and the Disciplinary Power of the Ideology of Numbers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 187-203, January.

    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. Grace Skogstad, 2008. "Canadian Agricultural Programs and Paradigms:The Influence of International Trade Agreements and Domestic Factors," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(4), pages 493-507, December.
    2. Johan Swinnen & Alessandro Olper & Senne Vandevelde, 2021. "From unfair prices to unfair trading practices: Political economy, value chains and 21st century agri‐food policy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(5), pages 771-788, September.
    3. Tangermann, Stefan, 2001. "Has The Uruguay Round Agreement On Agriculture Worked Well?," Working Papers 14586, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    4. Hewitt, Joanna, 2008. "Impact evaluation of research by the International Food Policy Research Institute on agricultural trade liberalization, developing countries, and WTO's Doha negotiations:," Impact assessments 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2010. "The Political Economy of the Most Radical Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 59(Supplemen), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Lijuan Du & Li Xu & Yanping Li & Changshun Liu & Zhenhua Li & Jefferson S. Wong & Bo Lei, 2019. "China’s Agricultural Irrigation and Water Conservancy Projects: A Policy Synthesis and Discussion of Emerging Issues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Glauber, Joseph W. & Effland, Anne, 2016. "United States agricultural policy: Its evolution and impact:," IFPRI discussion papers 1543, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Liang, Yan & Miller, J. Corey & Harri, Ardian & Coble, Keith H., 2011. "Crop Supply Response under Risk: Impacts of Emerging Issues on Southeastern U.S. Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 1-14, May.
    9. Blandford, David & Orden, David, 2008. "United States: Shadow WTO Agricultural Domestic Support Notifications," IFPRI discussion papers 821, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. repec:lic:licosd:21508 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Matthews, A., 2007. "Good Governance in the Agri-Food Sector of Industrialised Countries," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 42, March.
    12. Kym Anderson & Gordon Rausser & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Political Economy of Public Policies: Insights from Distortions to Agricultural and Food Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 423-477, June.
    13. Jacobs, Keri L. & Thurman, Walter N. & Marra, Michele C., 2011. "How Farmers Bid Into the Conservation Reserve Program: An Empirical Analysis of CRP Offers Data," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103675, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Zulauf, Carl R. & Orden, David, 2009. "ACRE in the U.S. Farm Bill and the WTO," Working Papers 51821, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    15. Zulauf, Carl & Langemeier, Michael & Schnitkey, Gary, 2022. "U.S. Crop Profitability and Farm Safety Net Payments Since 1975," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2022.
    16. Nadine Lehrer, 2010. "(Bio)fueling farm policy: the biofuels boom and the 2008 farm bill," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(4), pages 427-444, December.
    17. Barrett E. Kirwan, 2009. "The Incidence of U.S. Agricultural Subsidies on Farmland Rental Rates," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(1), pages 138-164, February.
    18. Zulauf, Carl & Orden, David, 2014. "The US Agricultural Act of 2014: Overview and analysis:," IFPRI discussion papers 1393, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Pease, James W. & Lehman, John & Orden, David, 2001. "Proposed End Of Peanut Quota Program: Economic Effects On Virginia Producers," Report Papers 14845, Virginia Tech, Rural Economic Analysis Program (REAP).
    20. Nadine Lehrer & Dennis Becker, 2010. "Shifting paths to conservation: policy change discourses and the 2008 US farm bill," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(5), pages 639-655.
    21. Mykel R Taylor & Glynn T Tonsor & Nicholas D Paulson & Brenna Ellison & Jonathan Coppess & Gary D Schnitkey, 2017. "Is it Good to Have Options? The 2014 Farm Bill Program Decisions," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(4), pages 533-546.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:19:y:2002:i:3:p:239-253. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.