We suggest that a recent commentary piece in The Geographical Journal on Conservation Agriculture
(CA) and the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) (Kassam and Brammer 2012 was misleading
because it drew very selectively from the literature, and presented its conclusions as both widely
accepted and uncontroversial. Kassam and Brammer’s intervention in the continuing debates
around CA and SRI can be understood as a manifestation of the new ‘contested agronomy’. While Kassam and Brammer call on geographers to do research that will promote the spread of CA and SRI, we suggest that this misconstrues and devalues the potential contribution of geography and social science more generally to agricultural development.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.