TRANSPORTE Y ALMACENAMIENTO

For the four years of my undergraduate program in biology, I was taught the importance of objectivity and rationality in my work. I was trained to carry out research where, as long as I provided the correct inputs, developed control variables for my experiments, and eliminated my own biases, I could arrive at predictable and replicable results. I heard horror stories from my professors about researchers who had inadvertently skewed their experiments to produce specific results, and, although clearly communicated as undesirable, we were not truly taught to reflect on

how or why this could happen. For each of my courses, I can remember having at most one class where we discussed ethical concerns related to scientific research; the rest of the time was dedicated to learning what mitochondria do in the cell or memorizing the chemical formulas for organic compounds.

It was an initially shocking transition, then, when I started the Sustainable Communities program and began to learn of the value of subjectivity as well. I read about and discussed the importance of considering my own place and privilege in the world, along with that of other people, and how these realities influence our interactions with others. In our various work and research, we were encouraged to identify and reflect on the different aspects of our identities to understand that they could and would influence our findings, along with how that in itself was an important part of the process of learning and understanding more nuanced views of the world.

This is not to say that natural science or social science, qualitative or quantitative research, is better than the other. I value and treasure the knowledge that I gained while completing my biology degree, and I think the work that natural scientists do is incredibly important. It is also a disservice to say that everything I learned in my undergraduate program was based only on rational and linear thought; however, my more advanced classes where we discussed quantum mechanics or the emergent properties of ecosystems could only come after we thoroughly learned the orderly building blocks that create these complex systems. During this master’s program, on the other hand, I have come to understand the importance of reflecting on positionality and its influences on research, which I briefly explore here.

Takacs (2003) explains how his own students, trained in natural science, have experienced a similar mental unease when considering how a researcher’s positionality can influence their work:

They are not comfortable with the possibility of the subjectivity of knowledge. They’ve been taught that truths are discovered irrespective of the discoverer’s identity… But any science student can study how scientific knowledge is constructed and how the scientific process works if she examines how what a scientist knows—or how what “science” knows—is shaped by the positionality of the scientist… [and] can lead to more balanced, accurate knowledge about the world. (p. 37-38)

It is that balance that I intend to achieve in this thesis and in my future work. This research is based upon an acknowledgement of the importance of both natural and social systems, which I have demonstrated in each chapter. Indeed, my thesis is oriented around varying conceptions that all point in the same direction: that objective, rational, and reductive forms of viewing the world can be problematic and that we must explore alternative ways of bridging the dualisms that Western civilization has been built upon (Ellis & Bochner, 2000). In understanding the issues that have resulted from an ideological divide between humans and nature, along with the traditional ways of studying them, I have explored the problems of industrial agriculture and its unsustainability in the face of climate change. My political ecology lens serves as a useful and insightful approach to look at the interconnected scales and histories that have produced this issue. To study how different agricultural systems may be more suitable for this challenge, I have explained how social-ecological resilience and adaptive capacity serve as important theoretical tools. Through using a situated resilience approach to look at the interrelated environmental and social conditions and processes for adaptation, I have aimed for a balanced and nuanced study. In this chapter, I show how my methodological approach further strengthens the social-ecological foundation of my work.

Here, I briefly explore my positionality in this research to address my own subjectivity, as “research represents a shared space, shaped by both researcher and participants… [whose] beliefs, political stance, cultural background (gender, race, class, socioeconomic status,

educational background) are important variables that may affect the research process” (Bourke, 2014, p. 1). In Chapter 3, I have already acknowledged some of my beliefs and assumptions about the undesirable resilience of industrial agricultural systems and associated dominant paradigms. Although I have provided evidence and information to support my claims, I still recognize that I am biased towards encouraging alternative agricultural systems based upon ideologies that reconnect humans and nature. Along with that assumption, I developed a positionality statement based on those categories described by Bourke (2014) above: I am a young, white, progressive, middle-class woman in a master’s program who has lived in the southwestern U.S. for most of my life. Before doing this research, I had little knowledge about agriculture and the social-ecological conditions of the Verde Valley.

Based on these personal characteristics, there are several thoughts that I have when reflecting on how they may have influenced my interactions with the growers in the Verde Valley. The vast majority of the participants in this research were white, middle-class men over the age of 35, with diverse educational and work backgrounds. Before beginning my interviews, I was concerned about specific aspects of my positionality that could limit the responses I received and trust that was developed between each grower and myself. I was most aware of my role as a student researcher and my progressive stances on many issues, as I thought that they may be wary of being a part of a research study, especially if they did not ideologically or politically agree with the subject of climate change. I felt that I would be viewed as an outsider due to these positions and due to my lack of prior knowledge about agriculture.

However, nearly all of the growers were incredibly gracious, respectful, and helpful both when I approached them for the research and when I met them for the interviews. They often welcomed me into their home or onto their land, telling me personal stories and providing insight

into their daily lives. Typically, we were able to chat and build trust before beginning the actual interviews, which I think was incredibly helpful for both the interviewer and participant.

Although sometimes there was discomfort throughout the interview as I asked questions about their beliefs on climate change or their ability to adapt, there was always respect maintained from each side.

Some growers also critiqued their own knowledge or perspective as being uneducated in science or research, reflecting on the juxtaposition of our two separate positionalities. However, when reflecting on the process, I felt that we overcame this tension as I expressed my interest in learning as much as possible about their perspectives on growing in the Verde Valley. Again, because I did not know much about the subject when beginning the interviews, these growers were truly the experts that I wanted to learn about this subject from. They were often as eager to teach as I was to learn, which I felt I was able to communicate through earnest curiosity. As Takacs (2003) notes, “When all are experts, because their knowledge comes in part through life experience, all can learn—but only if you listen” (p. 32). By acknowledging my own

positionality and subjectivity, I realize that these various characteristics have influenced the formation of my project, the themes that I have identified, the findings I report, and the interpretations and conclusions that I arrive on.