reField

collecting and commenting on future agriculture

Agri-Tech Catalog: tractor

leave a comment »

Agri-Tech Catalog: tractor

After some initial research on Agri-Technologies it became very apparent that the introduction of the tractor marked a huge turning point in the history of Agriculture.   There are some competing opinions about the actual origin of the tractor; I have selected the time at which the “traction engine” became mobile and thus useful as a source of mobile power on the field.

The tractor represents a generic technology capable of increasing a farmers capabilities on the field through numerous add-ons or “implements” (as they are called in the industry).

In the U.S.A. the most popular brand of tractors (ranging from personal backyard work to large scale industrial farming) is John Deere.

Advertisements

Written by Matthew

April 24, 2010 at 19:36

Agri-Tech Catalog – FORMAT

leave a comment »

Here is a first crack at what the Agri-Tech Catalog may look like. The template is a standard Letter (8 1/2″ x 11″) page size so that the catalog can be easily output as a printed reference.

Agri-Tech Catalog: Sample

As noted in my prior post, the classification-tags are important in providing a quick reference for the technology.  However, I find this is labeled more effectively as an attribute taxonomy. This taxonomy is a basic interpretation of the technology about what scale it is used on, what bio-material it is focused on operating on, what action it performs, and how it is interacted with/deployed.

Agri-Tech Catalog: Legend

Legend:

title – the popular name for the technology

global origin – where the technology was first developed

global deployment – where the technology is being used (dark = used, light = unused or N/A)

invention date – when the technology was invented (in its most recognizable state)

duration of use – how long (or during what period of time) the technology was used

attribute taxonomy – the 4-attribute classification of the technology

attribute index – a comparative reference indicating which attributes define the technology

description – a brief description of what the technology was meant for and how it is being used

annotated drawing – a drawing visually describing how the technology works towards its agri-function, a figure is included for scale reference

tags – a collection of some of the most popular keywords from a Google search of the technology name

reference – the key reference of the research data

Written by Matthew

April 23, 2010 at 21:35

Agri-Tech Catalog – understanding the technology of production

leave a comment »

As my thesis research continues it has become apparent that an interesting level of intervention in agriculture will occur at the level of the employed/deployed technology.  Some kind of intervention infused with performance, product, space and experience.  Thinking on a broad theoretical level, it is the technology of agriculture that symbiotically developed the technologies behind settled habitation and city making; Food shapes our Cities.  Thus, the examination and rethinking of these tactics and technologies becomes the fertile ground in which to speculate on a Town & Country 2.0, through the very mechanism that enables Town; namely Agriculture.

So…what I need is an Agri-Tech Catalogue. My vision of an “Agri-Tech Catalogue” is a series of researched technolgies that deal with the production of plant or protein related products for human use.  And while I cannot currently find a definition simply for the production of plant/protein material (as a science or discipline) I have labeled the catalogue as simply Agri-Tech.

In the effort of producing this catalogue the need to organize these Agri-Technologies with a useful classification or tagging system became crucial in the implications of how it might be a useful design resource later.

The classification tags are organized as follows:

SCALE
indicates how the technology/tool/tactic is deployed in/over a given area

– XS (<10cm)
– S  (10cm-10m)
– M  (10m-100m)
– L  (100m-1000m)
– XL (>1000m)

BIO-MATERIAL
indicates what bio-material the technology is acting upon

– P (plant/vegetable product, i.e. corn)

– A (animal/protein product, i.e. beef)

ACTION
indicates the type of action the technology is perfoming upon/for the bio-material

– Sc (Soil cultivation)
– Es (Environmental system)
– S  (Seeding)
– GA (Growth/Augmentation)
– MO (Monitoring/Organization)
– P  (Protection)
– H  (Harvesting)
– P- (Processing-x…the stage of processing the bio-material)

…this category is expected to expand with more genres/sub-genres

DEPLOYMENT
indicates the level of human involvement or participation with the technology

– M  (Manual, direct human engagement, i.e. digging a hole with a spade)
– Sa (Semi-automatic, human assisted engagement, i.e. driving a GPS guided tractor)
– A  (Automatic, human initiated/maintained but self organized, i.e. robotic dairy milking)
…I am considering further sub-dividing this category into an energy-input set to compliment the level of deployment

Written by Matthew

April 22, 2010 at 20:28

Accumulation Crisis as Ecological Crisis: The End of Cheap Food, Cheap Energy, and Cheap Labor

leave a comment »

This was a talk I attended at the Munk Centre For International Studies at Trinity College (University of Toronto-Mar.19.2010), as part of their 2010 CIS Development Seminar Series.  The speaker, Jason W. Moore is a historian (Department of Historical Studies, Umeå University in Sweden) studying “…the relations between economic, ecological, and social change in the modern world-economy, from its origins in the long 16th century.” The discussion was based on his The Monthly Review paper.

Does the present socio-ecological impasse – captured in popular discussions as the ‘end’ of cheap food and cheap oil – represent the latest in a long history of limits and crises that have been transcended by capital, or have we arrived at an epochal turning point in the relation of capital, capitalism, and agricultural revolution? [source]

Moore first outlined the world currently organized under a capitalist world-ecology, which is fundamentally a socio-ecology or a way of knitting humans and their activities with each other and the world.  The predominant contemporary ecology has been capitalism, and operates by removing social/political constraints for the accumulation of capital.  Capitalism has developed various faces over time and today we recognize it strongly as neoliberalism.

However, unlike other previous modes of capitalism, neoliberalism is failing its predecessors.  Neoliberalism’s notorious resource/territory hoarding tactics are a sign of technological stagnation, which has traditionally been the instrumental tool to advance capitalist endeavors.  While innovation is occurring there are no major technological revolutions that promise a progressive future together with capitalism. Further, there is no one more telling system (and symptom) of capitalism’s agency than agriculture; more specifically the production of food.

For the better part of six centuries, the relation between world capitalism and agriculture has been a remarkable one. Every great wave of capitalist development, it seems, has been paved with ‘cheap’ food. Beginning in the long sixteenth century, capitalist agencies pioneered successive agricultural revolutions, yielding a series of extraordinary expansions of the food surplus. [source]

Previous advances in agriculture have moved the world into a Marxian “overproduction” organization where our machines and food processing systems have become larger than the inflow of raw resources can feed!  These advances included labor reducing technology and land productivity increases. Traditionally this accumulation has lead to lower food prices and thus lower wages, further propagating proletarianism and allowing for reallocation of capital accumulation.   Yet, today we are in a precarious position of diminishing returns.  2008 marked the “signal crisis” for neoliberalism (according to Moore), where the trend of lower food prices from the ’70s suddenly stopped and began a sharp incline.

In this wake of diminished returns there are three major obstructions to continue capitalism’s traditional trajectory of agri-abundance and capital reallocation. The first is the lack of farmable land; expanded agri-potential frontiers has left all but sub-Saharan Africa unexploited.  Even if global agriculture tapped into Africa it is projected to only solve a fraction of the world’s food allocation-hunger crisis. The second is the lack of technology; biotech has been around for a little over three decades and yet has not been able to fundamentally increase a crop-yield! Protection and pest/weed resistance is the most biotech companies are admitting to offer. Further, today’s GM companies and farmers are dealing with the ‘superweed’ effect of resistant natural weed mutations that grow faster than science can address them. The third is capital; the world has just economically collapsed and while recovery packages leave the world in limbo about the future, very little money may be left to pioneer new state-headed capitalist agri-enterprises.

…So where does this leave us?  According to Jason, capitalism may have too many current obstructions to be effective in continuing its world-ecology.  Perhaps it becomes a question of rethinking capitalism as our very engine for organization and development. Further, if we are approaching a global food crisis it is going to have to be addressed not in the poor countries who do not have capital to reallocate, but by reorganizing the money in the heartland of our current hegemonic powers.  Thus, the United States is a prime candidate for this reorganization.

Can we think of post-capitalist agriculture? What new technologies become more effective in a world without capital accumulation and the production of cheap food? Will agriculture further expand it’s spectrum of resource potential under new organization? Is it time to rethink the farm?

Written by Matthew

April 7, 2010 at 16:32