Benessaiah K. (2021). Reconnecting to nature amidst crisis: harnessing capacities and mobilities for livelihood and land transformations in the Greek back-to-the-land trend. Journal of rural studies, 01/05/2021, vol. 84, p. 76-89.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.02.005
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.02.005
Titre : | Reconnecting to nature amidst crisis: harnessing capacities and mobilities for livelihood and land transformations in the Greek back-to-the-land trend (2021) |
Auteurs : | K. Benessaiah |
Type de document : | Article |
Dans : | Journal of rural studies (vol. 84, May 2021) |
Article en page(s) : | p. 76-89 |
Langues : | Anglais |
Langues du résumé : | Anglais |
Catégories : |
Catégories principales 04 - DEVELOPPEMENT LOCAL ET REGIONAL ; 4.2 - FoncierThésaurus IAMM INSTALLATION A LA TERRE ; SYSTEME AGROALIMENTAIRE ; MIGRATION URBAINE ; CRISE ECONOMIQUE ; RESILIENCE ; GRECE |
Résumé : | The 2008 Greek crisis has resulted in unexpected social-ecological transformations, including a back-to-the-land trend whereby people seek to reconnect to land-based activities. While it's been theorized that back-to-the-land trends contribute to enhancing people's resilience and may play a role in the growth of sustainable farming and rural revitalization, much remains unknown regarding the processes involved. Based on a qualitative and quantitative analysis of 76 interviews of Greek back-to-the-landers, this article provides an in-depth assessment of the resources mobilized to go back-to-the-land as well as livelihood and land management outcomes. This article argues that using a livelihood approach contributes to further understanding counterurbanisation and back-to-the-land movements by shedding light on how people transform their livelihoods. The article posits that back-to-the-land trends need to be approached as livelihood transformations that are linked to a diverse set of mobilities and assets, rather than solely a migration process. The research shows that the Greek back-to-the-land trend is not homogeneous, ranging from subsistence to market-oriented small-scale farms and involves both rural and urban spaces; yet it is mostly invisible to the State. These different types of back-to-the-land strategies reflect different initial starting points and may shift once capacity is acquired, illustrating the dynamic nature of back-to-the-land transformations. For instance, people with limited initial land knowledge experimented on urban plots before farming in rural areas. Most opted to engage in small-scale organic farming, hinting at the importance of the back-to-land trend for the growth of sustainable food systems in Greece. While going back-to-the-land helped households cope with crisis, there were limits to their ability to make a living and enhance their capacity without external support, especially in the context of a long-term crisis. Different back-to-the-land strategies require targeted support at different stages to ensure their viability and long-term sustainability. |
Cote : | Réservé lecteur CIHEAM |
URL / DOI : | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.02.005 |