Abstract
Agroecological spaces have developed in the last few decades in different countries, not only through the commercialization of healthy products in farmers markets but also through the valorization of a sustainable production chain, which considers both the technical care with the cultivation and processing of the products and the health and respect to the ways of life of the men and women who do the farming. Its basis is organized in the field of agroecology, which is structured through the promotion of food sovereignty and family agriculture. This text is about a research-action experience that develops through community and political-pedagogical action, aiming to commercialize and consume agroecological food from the interactions between inhabitants of an urban neighbourhood and families of farmers from rural communities in the Northeast of Brazil. The interpretation presented here is theoretically and methodologically based on social community psychology, popular education, citizenship and human rights. In this text, the analysis of the activities achieved is directed to the interaction between the rural and the urban and the organization of clients to the production units and the commercialization of products at agroecological fairs. The reflections here can help situate how, considering the sociocultural particularities, such experiences can promote autonomy and foment solidarity networks and the common production between family farmers and urban clients, dislodging them from their conventional fields of knowledge as to favour the interchange of knowledge, effects and mutual knowledge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Our emphasis.
- 2.
The first EAV action took place on March 3, 2018, when the fair opened. This date is celebrated annually, including online, in 2021.
- 3.
Source: CENSO Demográfico, 2010. Results of the universe: characteristics of the population and households. Available at http://www.ibge.gov.br. Accessed in April.2021.
- 4.
This name was produced from a pun with the acronym PF, which is generally used in Brazil to refer to “Prato Feito”, which designates a relatively cheap basic meal served and enjoyed in medium- and low-quality bars and restaurants; it consists, in general, of beans, rice and/or pasta, salad and some type of animal protein.
References
Altieri, M. (2008). Small Farms as a Planetary Ecological Asset: Five Key Reasons Why We Should Support the Revitalisation of Small Farms in the Global South. Environment E Development Series 7, Third World Network.
Altieri, M. (2012). Bases científicas para uma agricultura sustentável. Editora Expressão Popular/AS.PTA.
Altieri, M. A. (2010). Agroecologia, agricultura camponesa e soberania alimentar. Revista Nera, 13(16), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.47946/rnera.v0i16.1362
Amaral, L. S., Santos, C. J., Souza, C. R., Penha, T. A. M., & Araújo, J. P. (2020). O papel das cadeias curtas de comercialização na construção de um modelo de desenvolvimento rural sustentável no semiárido nordestino: o caso da Central De Comercialização Da Agricultura Familiar Do Rio Grande do Norte (CECAFES). Desenvolv. Meio Ambiente, 55, Edição especial – Sociedade e ambiente no Semiárido: controvérsias e abordagens, pp. 494–516.
Caporal, F. R. (2009). Agroecologia: uma nova ciência para apoiar a transição a agriculturas mais sustentáveis. Brasília:The authors
Chonchol, J. (2005). A soberania alimentar. Estudos Avançados, 19(55), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142005000300003
Costa, M. G., Dimenstein, M., & Leite, J. F. (2019). Feminismos e agroecologia: lutas contemporâneas na cidade. In M. L. M. Bosi, S. D. Prado, & L. A. Santos (orgs.), Cidade, corpo e alimentação: aproximações interdisciplinares (pp. 69–98). EDUFBA.
de Marcos, V. (2007). Agroecologia e campesinato: uma nova lógica para a agricultura do futuro. Agrária, 7, 182–210. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1808-1150.v0i7p182-210
de Moraes, L. L., Jalil, L. M., dos Santos, J. H., Costa, M. A. G., & Oliveira, M. S. L. (2018). Pedagogia Feminista como processo educativo para a reflexão da política pública de ATER no Nordeste. Revista Interritórios, 4(6), 05–29.
de Oliveira, A. L. A., da Cruz, F. T., & Schneider, S. (2019). Sustentabilidade e escolhas alimentares: por uma biografia ambiental dos alimentos. Sustentabilidade em Debate, 10(1), 146–158. https://doi.org/10.18472/SustDeb.v10n1.2019.19280
Freire, P. (1999). Educação como prática da liberdade. Paz e Terra.
Freitas, M. F. Q. (2007). Intervenção psicossocial e compromisso: desafios às políticas públicas. In A. M. Jacó-Vilela & L. Sato (Eds.), Diálogos em Psicologia Social (pp. 329–344). Evangraf.
Gracia-Arnaiz, Mabel (2019). Itinerarios alimentarios en contextos de precarización: otras formas de comer, otras formas de vivir. In M. L. M. Bosi, S. D. Prado, & L. A. Santos (orgs.), Cidade, corpo e alimentação: aproximações interdisciplinares (pp. 257–278). EDUFBA.
Graeub, B., Chappell, J., Wittmand, H., Ledermann, S., Kerr, R. B., & Gemmill-Herrena, B. (2016). The state of family farms in the world. World Development, 87, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.012
Krenak, A. (2020). Ideias para adiar o fim do mundo. Companhia das letras.
Martín-Baró, I. (1986/2011). Para uma psicologia da libertação. In R. S. L. Guzzo & F. Lacerda Jr. (Eds.), Psicologia social para América Latina: O resgate da psicologia da libertação (pp. 181–198). Campinas.
Pretty, J., Morrison, J. I. L., & Hine, R. E. (2003). Reducing food poverty by increasing agricultural sustainability in developing countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 5, 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(02)00087-7
Reis, J. (2015). Território e políticas do território. A interpretação e a ação. Finisterra, L, 100, 107–122. https://doi.org/10.18055/Finis7868
Santos, B. S. (2007). Para além do pensamento abissal: das linhas globais a uma ecologia de saberes. Novos Estudos – CEBRAP. São Paulo, 79, 71–94. Retrieved from: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-33002007000300004&lng=en&nrm=iso. Acesso em: 02/04/2021.
Schneider, S. (2016). A presença e as potencialidades da agricultura familiar na América Latina e no Caribe. Redes, 21(3), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.17058/redes.v21i3.8390
Schneider, S., & Ferrari, D. L. (2015). Cadeias curtas, cooperação e produtos de qualidade na agricultura familiar – o Processo de relocalização da produção agroalimentar em Santa Catarina. Organizações Rurais & Agroindustriais, 17(1), 56–71. Recuperado de: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=87838281006
van der Ploeg, J. D. (2013). Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41, 999–1030.
Wanderley, M. N. B. (2014). O campesinato brasileiro: uma história de resistência. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 52(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-20032014000600002
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Medrado, B., Lyra, J., Leite, J.F., Vilton, W. (2021). Urban and Rural Articulations in an Agroecological Space in the Brazilian Northeast. In: Leite, J.F., Dimenstein, M., Dantas, C., Macedo, J.P. (eds) Psychology and Rural Contexts. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82996-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82996-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-82995-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-82996-4
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)