Fringe heroines: situated struggles of women scientists in Brazilian agriculture

References

• Alves, Eliseu, Elisio Contini, and José Garcia Gasques. 2008. “Evolução da produção e produtividade da agricultura brasileira.” In Agricultura tropical: quatro décadas de inovações tecnológicas, institucionais e políticas, edited by Ana Christina Sagebin Albuquerque and Aliomar Gabriel da Silva, 67–99. Brasília: Embrapa Informação Tecnológica. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.embrapa.br/acre/busca-de-publicacoes/-/publicacao/507674/agricultura-tropical–quatro-decadas-de-inovacoes-tecnologicas-institucionais-e-politicas.
   Google Scholar
• Åsberg, Cecilia, and Nina Lykke. 2010. “Feminist Technoscience Studies.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 17 (4): 299–305. doi:10.1177/1350506810377692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, Robert. 2002. “The Life Story Interview.” In Handbook of Interview Research: Context & Method, edited by Jaber F. Gubrium and James A. Holstein, 121–140. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Blau, Francine D. 2013. Gender, Inequality, and Wages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bustamante, Patricia Goulart, Rosa Lia Barbieri, and Juliana Santilli. 2017. Conservação e uso da agrobiodiversidade: relatos de experiências locais. Brasília: Embrapa.
   Google Scholar
• Cabral, Lídia. 2021. “Embrapa and the Construction of Scientific Heritage in Brazilian Agriculture: Sowing Memory.” Development Policy Review 39: 789–810. doi:10.1111/dpr.12531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabral, Lídia, Poonam Pandey, and Xiuli Xu. 2021. “Epic Narratives of the Green Revolution in Brazil, India and China.” Agriculture and Human Values 39 (1): 249–267. doi:10.1007/s10460-021-10241-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collard, Andree. 1989. Rape of the Wild: Man’s Violence against Animals and the Earth. London: The Women’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conway, Janet M. 2018. “When Food Becomes a Feminist Issue: Popular Feminism and Subaltern Agency in the World March of Women.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 20 (2): 188–203. doi:10.1080/14616742.2017.1419822.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cremaq, Piauí. 2010. “Brazilian Agriculture: The Miracle of the Cerrado.” The Economist, August 26. Accessed March 20, 2023. http://www.economist.com/node/16886442.
   Google Scholar
• Dias, Terezinha, Jane Simoni Eidt, and Consolacion Udry. 2016. Diálogos de saberes: relatos da Embrapa. Brasília: Embrapa.
   Google Scholar
• Döbereiner, Johanna. 1997. “Biological Nitrogen Fixation in the Tropics: Social and Economic Contributions.” Soil Biology and Biochemistry 29 (5): 771–774. doi:10.1016/S0038-0717(96)00226-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dosi, Giovanni. 1982. “Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change.” Research Policy 11 (3): 147–162. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eidt, Jane Simoni, and Consolacion Udry. 2019. Sistemas agrícolas tradicionais no Brasil. Brasília: Embrapa.
   Google Scholar
• Embrapa (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária). 2018a. Relatório de gestão. Brasília: Embrapa. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.embrapa.br/documents/10180/1549626/Relat%C3%B3rio+de+Gest%C3%A3o+2018/600af295-9241-9094-1f76-d2e30b846417.
   Google Scholar
• Embrapa (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária). 2018b. Visão 2030: o futuro da agricultura brasileira. Brasília: Embrapa.
   Google Scholar
• FAEAB (Federação das Associações de Engenheiros Agrônomos do Brasil) and AERJ (Associação dos Engenheiros Agrônomos do Estado do Rio de Janeiro). 1984. Anais do II encontro brasileiro de agricultura alternativa. Petrópolis: FAEAB & AERJ.
   Google Scholar
• Gaard, Greta. 2011. “Ecofeminism Revisited: Rejecting Essentialism and Re-Placing Species in a Material Feminist Environmentalism.” Feminist Formations 23 (2): 26–53. doi:10.1353/ff.2011.0017.
   Google Scholar
• Garrity-Bond, Cynthia. 2018. “Ecofeminist Epistemology in Vandana Shiva’s The Feminine Principle of Prakriti and Ivone Gebara’s Trinitarian Cosmology.” Feminist Theology 26 (2): 185–194. doi:10.1177/0966735017738660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goh, Amelia, Helga Recke, Dee Hahn-Rollins, and Laura Guyer-Miller. 2008. “Successful Women, Successful Science.” CGIAR Gender Diversity Working Paper, No. 48. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10947/2753/48_Successful%20Women,%20Successful%20Science_genderdiversityWP.pdf?sequence=1.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, Judith. 1987. “I Feel Therefore I Am.” Women & Politics 7 (3): 99–114. doi:10.1080/1554477X.1987.9970497.
   Google Scholar
• Grisa, Catia, and Sérgio Schneider. 2015. Políticas públicas de desenvolvimento rural no Brasil. Editora da UFRGS: Porto Alegre.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, Donna. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies 14 (3): 575–599. doi:10.2307/3178066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harding, Sandra. 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women’s Lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hargittai, Magdolna. 2015. Women Scientists: Reflections, Challenges, and Breaking Boundaries. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hillenkamp, Isabelle. 2020. “Women, Agroecology and ‘Real Food’ in Brazil: From National Movement to Local Practice.” In Food System Transformations: Social Movements, Local Economies, Collaborative Networks, edited by Cordula Kropp, Irene Antoni-Komar, and Colin Sage, 23–41. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila, and Sang-Hyun Kim. 2015. Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kesavan, P. C. 2017. M. S. Swaminathan: Legend in Science and Beyond. London: World Scientific Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, Melissa. 2007. “Earth Mother Myths and Other Ecofeminist Fables: How a Strategic Notion Rose and Fell.” Development and Change 38 (1): 67–85. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00403.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, David. 2008. “Using Life Histories in Social Policy Research: The Case of Third Sector/Public Sector Boundary Crossing.” Journal of Social Policy 37 (4): 559–578. doi:10.1017/S0047279408002213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maathai, Wangari. 2019. “Nobel Lecture.” In Green Planet Blues: Critical Perspectives on Global Environmental Politics, sixth edition, edited by Geoffrey D. Dabelko and Ken Conca, 109–114. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Machado, Altair Toledo, Luciano Lourenço Nass, and Cynthia Torres de Toledo Machado. 2011. Manejo sustentável da agrobiodiversidade nos biomas Cerrado e Caatinga com ênfase em comunidades rurais. Planaltina: Embrapa Cerrados.
   Google Scholar
• Maso, Tchella, Linda Terena, Valdelice Veron, and João Nackle Urt. 2022. “Decolonial Portraits: News from the Frontline, Mato Grosso Do Sul, Brazil.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 24 (1): 156–173. doi:10.1080/14616742.2021.1981143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mengel, Aléx. 2015. Modernização da agricultura e pesquisa no Brasil: a Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária – Embrapa. Rio de Janeiro: Programa de Pós-Graduação de Ciências Sociais em Desenvolvimento, Agricultura e Sociedade, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro. Accessed March 20, 2023. http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/955133.
   Google Scholar
• Merchant, Carolyn. 1982. The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution. London: Wildwood House.
   Google Scholar
• Mies, Maria. 2014. “The Need for a New Vision: The Subsistence Perspective.” In Ecofeminism, edited by Marie Mies and Vandana Shive, 297–322. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Mies, Maria, and Vandana Shiva. 2014. Ecofeminism. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Monosson, Emily. 2008. Motherhood, the Elephant in the Laboratory: Women Scientists Speak Out. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mormina, Maru, and Romina Istratii. 2021. “‘Capacity for What? Capacity for Whom?’ A Decolonial Deconstruction of Research Capacity Development Practices in the Global South and a Proposal for a Value-Centred Approach.” Wellcome Open Research 6 (26): 129. doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16850.1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Navarro, Zander. 2013. “Agroecologia: as coisas em seu lugar (a agronomia brasileira visita a terra dos duendes).” COLÓQUIO – Revista Do Desenvolvimento Regional 10 (1): 11–45. doi:10.26767/coloquio.v10i1.23.
   Google Scholar
• Niederle, Paulo André, Eric Pierre Sabourin, Claudia Job Schmitt, Mario Lúcio de Ávila, Paulo F. Petersen, and William Santos de Assis. 2019. “A trajetória brasileira de construção de políticas públicas para a agroecologia.” Redes 24 (1): 270–291. doi:10.17058/redes.v24i1.13035.
   Google Scholar
• Pereira, Pedro Arraes, Geraldo B. Martha Jr, Carlos A. M. Santana, and Eliseu Alves. 2012. “The Development of Brazilian Agriculture: Future Technological Challenges and Opportunities.” Agriculture & Food Security 1: 4. doi:10.1186/2048-7010-1-4.
   Google Scholar
• Ploeg, Jan Douwe van der. 2014. “Peasant-Driven Agricultural Growth and Food Sovereignty.” Journal of Peasant Studies 41 (6): 999–1030. doi:10.1080/03066150.2013.876997.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabourin, Eric. 2018. “Erosão, crise e desmonte de políticas para a agricultura familiar e agroecologia na America Latina.” Paper presented at CPDA-UFRRJ (Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências Sociais em Desenvolvimento, Agricultura e Sociedade-Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, December. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://agritrop.cirad.fr/589798/.
   Google Scholar
• Sauer, Sergio. 2020. “Interview with João Pedro Stédile, National Leader of the MST – Brazil.” Journal of Peasant Studies 47 (5): 927–943. doi:10.1080/03066150.2020.1782892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmalzer, Sigrid. 2016. Red Revolution, Green Revolution: Scientific Farming in Socialist China. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, Vandana. 1989. Staying Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, Vandana. 1991. The Violence of the Green Revolution: Third World Agriculture, Ecology and Politics. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, Vandana. 2014. “Women’s Indigenous Knowledge and Biodiversity Conservation.” In Ecofeminism, edited by Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva, 164–173. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Siliprandi, Emma. 2015. Mulheres e agroecologia: transformando o campo, as florestas e as pessoas. Rio de Janeiro: Editora UFRJ. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://www.slideshare.net/bioterra/mulheres-e-agroecologia-transformando-o-campo-as-florestas-e-as-pessoas.
   Google Scholar
• Stine, Adrian W., Lea Skewes, and Nete Schwennesen. 2018. “Introduction to Feminist STS at Work: Challenging Dichotomies and Privileges.” Kvinder, Køn & Forskning 27 (June): 3–14. https://tidsskrift.dk/KKF/article/view/106340/155333.
   Google Scholar
• Sumberg, James, Dennis Keeney, and Benedict Dempsey. 2012. “Public Agronomy: Norman Borlaug as ‘Brand Hero’ for the Green Revolution.” Journal of Development Studies 48 (11): 1587–1600. doi:10.1080/00220388.2012.713470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sumberg, James, and John Thompson. 2012. Contested Agronomy: Agricultural Research in a Changing World. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Warren, Karen. 2000. Ecofeminist Philosophy: A Western Perspective on What It Is and Why It Matters. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, John, and Bernardo Sorj. 1992. “Structural Adjustment and the Institutional Dimensions of Agricultural Research and Development in Brazil: Soybeans, Wheat and Sugar Cane.” OECD Development Centre Working Papers, No. 76. Paris: OECD. Accessed March 20, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1787/18151949.
   Google Scholar