コンテンツに飛ぶ | ナビゲーションに飛ぶ

  • 日本語
  • English
現在位置: ホーム ja シラバス(2020年度) 文学研究科 英語授業 JK17007Research 1~3-Seminar (SEG)(Lecture)

JK17007Research 1~3-Seminar (SEG)(Lecture)


  • G-LET36 6JK17 LE36
開講年度・開講期 2020・後期集中
単位数 2 単位
授業形態 特殊講義
対象学生 大学院生
使用言語 英語
曜時限 集中 火金集中(11月/1月)
  • 久野 秀二(経済学研究科 教授)
授業の概要・目的 This course consists of two different, but mutually intersecting sessions.

The first session “Modernity and Crisis: Four Key Theorists” aims at providing students with an overview of the theories of ‘modernity’ that have been foundational to sociological thinking since the earliest emergence of the discipline. Max Weber, in particular, characterised modern society as efficient, productive and rational, and yet also increasingly prone to crisis and the gradual de-humanisation of its citizens. This course explores the work of four key theorists of modernity (George Ritzer, Robert Putnam, James C Scott, and Hannah Arendt) – each one of which illuminates a particular crisis of modernity.

The second session “Rural Development and Local Food in the Transition Toward a Sustainable Food System” aims at offering students a room to discuss different frameworks for the analysis of the current "turn" and "transition" in rural development and the global agro-food economy. What is wrong with the present agro-food system? What is the future food system we would like to aim at? What strategies and forms of governance may be better suited to lead us to the desirable future? The articles proposed to consideration offer different theoretical perspectives on how to direct agro-food economy toward sustainability and social justice. The course wants to stimulate students' participation in order to develop a comparative perspective at global level on these topics.
到達目標 Students participating in this course are expected to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to analyse the complex and dynamic processes of development and modernity. It is our educational goal that participating students enhance their understanding and critical sense of reality of the ecological, economic, social and political systems from a multidimensional and multidisciplinary perspective.
授業計画と内容 The first session (Hugh Campbell, University of Otago, New Zealand) explores the work of four key theorists of modernity – each one of which illuminates a particular crisis of modernity.

1) The McDonaldization of Society: George Ritzer, a neo-Weberian who examines the way in which bureaucratic logics and rationalities have combined with capitalist profit-seeking to create ‘controlled’ worlds of consumption that dehumanise us as individuals and increasingly constrain our lives. His theory describes what he calls the ‘McDonaldization’ of society.
-- Reading: selected from George Ritzer - The McDonaldization of Society

2) Individualization and Loss of Community: Robert Putnam, also a neo-Weberian, is most known for his work on social capital and loss of community in modern societies. His celebrated book Bowling Alone examines changes in the way that American citizens have engaged in wider social worlds. His argument is that we are losing our connectedness to diverse communities and our lives are becoming more ‘individualized’ and more alienated and intolerant of difference.
-- Reading: selected from Robert Putnam – Bowling Alone: the collapse and revival of American community.

3) Modernity, Nature and State Control: James C Scott is a neo-Marxist scholar (who also draws on Weber) who has examined the way in which the modernist state took a particular form during the 20th Century and how the state (and modernity) have increasingly come into tension and conflict with ecological forces. In his book Seeing Like A State, he describes some of the mechanisms of control that the state uses to constrain citizens and how – using examples like the promotion of modernist agriculture - those mechanisms have increasingly failed to control and dominate nature.
-- Reading: Selected from James C Scott – Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed.

4) The Authoritarian State and the De-Humanization of Citizens: Hannah Arendt is a political philosopher who has become increasingly adopted by sociologists seeking to understand some of the political pathologies of modernist society. Arendt argued that the rational apparatus of the state has evolved in ways that have not been constrained by values or ethics and that ‘servants of the state’ can easily transition into becoming ‘servants of evil intentions’. Her compelling example of the holocaust in Nazi German (which she herself narrowly escaped) is now considered a classic study of the rise of authoritarianism in modernist societies and has had a revival of interest in the age of Donald Trump.
-- Reading: Selected readings by Hannah Arendt.

In combination, these four theorists bring to light four key crises of modernity: 1) bureaucratic and rationalized systems of social control, 2) Individualization and the loss of social bonds, 3) the conflict between modernity and nature, and 4) the rise of authoritarianism and the de-humanization of vulnerable groups.

The second session (Maria Fonte, American University of Rome, Italy) reviews various practices, discourses and policies on sustainable development and transitions in the agro-food economy, with special attention to Europe, from rural sociology and/or economic geography approaches.

1) Recent themes and concepts in the development of agriculture and rurality: new rurality, quality turn and civic food networks
-- Jan Douwe van der Ploeg, Ye Jingzhong, Sergio Schneider, 2010. Rural development reconsidered: building on comparative perspectives from China, Brazil and the European Union. Rivista di Economia Agraria, 2: 163-190.
-- Fonte, M. and Quieti, Maria Grazia 2018. Food Production and Consumption Practices Toward Sustainability: The Role and Vision of Civic Food Networks. Reference Module in Food Science, Elsevier 2018.

2) Towards sustainable diets: the role of consumers
-- The Lancet Commissions, 2019. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems, pp.1-7.
-- Ray, C. 1998. Culture, intellectual property and territorial rural development, Sociologia Ruralis, 38(1): 3-20.
-- Henk Renting, Markus Schermer and Adanella Rossi, 2012. Building Food Democracy: Exploring Civic Food Networks and Newly Emerging Forms of Food Citizenship. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 19(3): 289-307.

3) How to conceptualise transitions to sustainability: Multi-level Perspective and Social Practices Theory
-- Geels, F.W., Schot, J., 2007. Typology of socio-technical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36: 399-417.
-- Fonte, M. 2013. Food consumption as social practice: Solidarity Purchasing Groups in Rome, Italy. Journal of Rural Studies, 32: 230-239.
-- Crivetis, M and Paredis E., 2013. Designing an explanatory practice framework: Local food systems as a case. Journal of Consumer Culture, 13(3): 306-336.

4) Democratising food: Real Utopias projects, food councils and new forms of governance
-- Fonte, M. and Ivan Cucco 2018. The centrality of food for social emancipation: Civic food networks as real utopias projects. Jose Luis Vivero-Pol, Tomaso Ferrando, Olivier De Schutter and Ugo Mattei, eds., Routledge Handbook of Food as a Commons, Routledge.
-- Blay-Palmer, A., 2009. The Canadian pioneer: the genesis of urban food policy in Toronto. International Planning Studies, 14(4): 401-416.

Both sessions will be offered in an intensive way, such as every morning (1-2 periods) in a week, or two classes (1-2 periods for each) for two weeks. The detail will be announced when it is confirmed.
成績評価の方法・観点 Grading will be done on the basis of attendance, class participation and a final presentation and/or assignment essay by each student.
履修要件 There are no special requirements for this course. This course is designed for any and all students with an interest in international development, rural development and interdisciplinary approaches.
授業外学習(予習・復習)等 Participating students will be assigned to read chapters of textbooks and relevant articles beforehand. Since classes are very interactive, well-preparation for each class is very important for students to participate in discussions. Also, at the end of the course students will be assigned to present their report on whatever relevant to the topics discussed in the classes.
Regarding the preparation, which is also a part of student assignments, the registered participants are required (and all other participants are encouraged) to well prepare each class by reading required materials and bring (if possible, submitting beforehand) an analytical summary of the assigned readings.
Analytical summary of two assigned readings for each class must be 400-500 words (one-page A4) consisting of three parts:
1) Summary --- identify and summarise the key arguments or main points of the assigned reading(s). Not descriptive, but analytical. Not exhaustive, but picking out three or four of the important key arguments or main points, and briefly explain them.
2) Integration --- pick one or two ways in which the authors' arguments or the topics of the assigned readings relate to one another or relate to something that has been ever studied by the students or also to the reality of their own country or region. Look for similarity or difference, and generate connections, contrasts or comparisons between them.
3) Question/Reactions --- identify questions the readings raise for students that we could discuss in the class. Also, students can raise specific questions about which parts of the reading did not make sense. Possible to raise objections (to content, style, politics, methods, etc), argument, praise, or any other reactions the students have while reading.
  • Readings will be made available through a Cloud system (e.g. GoogleDrive). See course schedule (t.b.a.) for a detailed reading list.
  • Readings will be made available through a Cloud system (e.g. Dropbox). See course schedule (t.b.a.) for a detailed reading list.