Çoklu İstihdam, Çiftçiliğin Kimliği ve Bunların Çiftçi Hanehalklarının Sınıf Mevkii ile İlişkisi

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1, 1 - 18, 28.03.2023

Abdulkerim Sönmez

Öz

Bu metodolojik deneme, eşzamanlı olarak tarım içi ve tarım dışı istihdamda yer almanın çiftçi bireyler ve çiftçilikle uğraşan hane halklarının tarımsal üretim faaliyetlerinin toplumsal kimliği ve toplumsal sınıf konumlarının tefrik edilmesi bakımından doğurduğu metodolojik ve kuramsal sorunların neler oldukları ve bunların nasıl bir yaklaşımla aşılabileceği hakkındadır. Çalışmada önce bu sorunların soyut düzeydeki farklı toplumsal sınıf anlayışları, üretim ve istihdam faaliyetlerinin toplumsal sınıf kimliği ve bireylerin mesleki kimlikleri hakkındaki kavramlaştırmalar yanında ampirik araştırmalarda hane halkının sınırlarının nasıl çizildiğine dair tercihlerden niçin ve nasıl ortaya çıktığı incelenip, değerlendirilmektedir. Bunun ardından gelir getirici faaliyetlerin dahili bütünlüğünden nasıl bir aşkın kimliğin ortaya çıkmakta olduğunu incelemek suretiyle karşılaşılmakta olan sorunların nasıl aşılabileceğine dair öneriler sunulmaktadır. Çalışmanın temel iddiası şudur: Bireyler ve/veya hane halkları tarafından yürütülen üretim faaliyetleri ve içinde yer aldıkları istihdam biçimleri kimliklerini tek tek kendi ayrı kimliklerinden değil, “bizlik” ilkesi ile hareket bireylerin ve hane halklarının kendi emek ve kaynaklarını kullanmak suretiyle erişmek veya elde etmek istedikleri maddi, toplumsal ve kültürel amaçların geniş çerçevesi içinde şekillenen aşkın toplumsal kimlikten kazanmaktadırlar.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çoklu istihdam, çiftçilik biçiminin toplumsal kimliği, ideal-tip kavramlar, toplumsal sınıf, toplumsal sınıf kavramlaştırmaları, çiftçilerin toplumsal sınıf konumu, hane halklarının toplumsal sınıf konumu.

Pluriactivity, Identity of Farming and Their Relation to the Question of Class Location of Farming Households

Öz

This paper is a methodological one, addressing the issue of how to deal with questions of identity, of farming, and its relation to the class locations of households engaged in farming and off-farm employment concurrently, which is usually called “pluriactivity”. The paper first examines and assesses why and how this problem arises out of different abstract conceptions of class, the social-class-identities of productive activities, the occupational identities of individuals and how the household boundaries are drawn in empirical research. Next, the paper makes suggestions for how to overcome these problems by paying attention to the problem of emergence, that is, how to describe and decide the very unity and identity that several income generating activities and forms of employment bring about concerning the class location of individuals and households. The leading argument of this essay is that the same or similar types of activities or types of employment derive their identity not from within themselves as separate entities but from the larger scheme of material, social or cultural objectives which the individuals and households, acting on the principle of “we-intentionality”, try to achieve by using their labour and resources as instruments.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Pluriactivity, social identity of farming, ideal-typical conceptions, social class, conceptions of social class, class locations of farmers, class location of households.

Kaynakça

• Anderson, R. J., Hughes, J. A., & Sharrock, W. W. (1987). Introduction. In R. J. Anderson, J. A. Hughes & W.W. Sharrock (Eds.)., In Classic Disputes in Sociology (pp. ix-xiii). Unwin Hyman Ltd.
• Ashkenazy, A., Chebach, T. C., Knickel, K., Peter, S., Horowitz, B., & Offenbach, R. (2018). Operationalising resilience in farms and rural regions-Findings from fourteen case studies. Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 211-221.
• Bernstein, H. (2010). Class dynamics of agrarian change. Fernwood Publishing & Kumarian Press.
• Beyaz, C. (2019). Kırsal göçmenin kimlik, aidiyet ve bağlılık mücadelesi: Rizeli göçmenler üzerine bir çalışma [Doctoral dissertation] Hacettepe University.
• Bilton, T., Bonnett, K., Lawson, T., Skinner, D., Stanworth, M. & Webster, A. (2002). Introductory Sociology. Palgrave MacMillan.
• Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste. R. Nice (Trans.). Harvard University Press.
• Breen, R., (2005). Foundations of a neo-Weberian class analysis. In E. O. Wright (Ed.)., Approaches to Class Analysis (pp. 31-50). Cambridge University Press.
• Çolak Türe, E. (2022). Kökenlerden menzillere toplumsal hareketlilik stratejileri: Türkiye’de ve Almanya’da yaşayan emekli türk bireylerin durumlari üzerine niteliksel bir inceleme. Lykeion Yayıncılık.
• Darnhofer, I., Lamine, C., & Knickel, K. (2013). Rethink: Conceptual Framework. European Commission-RURAGRI ERA-NET.
• Darnhofer, I., Lamine, C., Strauss, A., & Navarette, M. (2016). The resilience of family farms. Towards a relational approach. Journal of Rural Studies, 44, 111-122.
• Davidova, S. & Thomson, K. (2014). family farming in Europe: Challenges and prospects. In-depth analysis. European Parliament Directorate General for Internal Policies Policy Department B: Structural Cohesion Policies Agriculture and Rural Development.
• Dobash, R.E. & Dobash, R. (1980) Violence Against Wives. Open Books.
• Galeski, B. (1972). Basic concepts of rural sociology. H.C. Stevens (Trans.). T. Shanin, P. Worsley & A. Allen (Eds.). Manchester University Press.
• Giovagnoli, R. (2021). Habituqal Behavior. Bridging the Gap between I-intentionality and We-intentionality. Academia Letters, Article 389, https://doi.org/10.20935/AL389.
• Goldthorpe, J. H., (1987). Social mobility and class structure in modern britain. Oxford University.
• Goldthorpe, J. H. (2007). On sociology, volume II: Illustration and retrospect, (2nd ed.) Stanford University Press.
• Gottschalk, P. (2001). Inequality, income growth, and mobility: The basic facts. In D. B. Grusky (Ed.), Social Stratification. Class, Race and Gender in Sociological Perspective (pp. 373-77). (2nd Ed.). Westview Press.
• Grusky, D. B and Galescu, G. (2005). Foundations of a neo-Durkheimian class analysis. In E.O. Wright (Ed.)., Approaches to Class Analysis. (pp. 51-81). Cambridge University Press.
• Grusky, D. B. (Ed.)., (2001a). Social stratification: Class, race and gender in sociological perspective (2nd ed.). Westview Press.
• Grusky, D. B., (2001b). Introduction. In D. B. Grusky (Ed.)., Social Stratification. Class, Race and Gender in Sociological Perspective (pp. 1-51) (2nd Ed.). Westview Press.
• Grusky, D. B. & Sorensen, J. B. (2001). Are there big social classes. In D. B. Grusky (Ed.)., Social Stratification. Class, Race and Gender in Sociological Perspective (pp. 183-194) (2nd Ed.). Westview Press.
• Hamilton, M. & Hirszowicz, M. (1993). Class and inequality. Comparative perspectives. Harvester Wheatsheaf.
• Kalaycıoğlu, S., Çelik, K., Çelen, Ü. & Türkyılmaz, S. (2010). Temsili bir örneklemde sosyo-ekonomik statü (SES) ölçüm aracı geliştirilmesi: Ankara kent merkezi örneği. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13 (1), 183-220.
• Karademir-Hazır, I. (2014). Boundaries of middle-class identities in Turkey. The Sociological Review, 62, 675-697.
• Karademir-Hazır. I. (2016). Wearing class: A study on clothes, bodies and emotions in Turkey. Journal of Consumer Culture, 17(2), 1–20.
• Lobley, M. & Potter, C. (2004). Agricultural change and restructuring: recent evidence from a survey of agricultural households in England. Journal of Rural Studies, 20, 499-510.
• Loughrey, J., Donnelan, T., Hennessy T. & Hanrahan, K. (2013). The role of pluriactivity in farm exit and labour supply decision. Centre for European Policy Studies, Factor Markets Working Paper, No: 67.
• Marshall, G. (1997). Repositioning class. Social inequality in industrial societies. Sage Publications.
• Martin, P. (1987). The concept of class. In R. J. Anderson, J. A. Hughes & W. W. Sharrock (Eds.)., Classic Disputes in Sociology (pp. 67-96). Unwin Hyman Ltd.
• Marx, K. (1998). On class. In R. F. Levine (Ed.). Social Class and Stratification. Classic Statements and Theoretical Debates (p. 47). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Mills, C. (2014). The great British class fiasco: A comment on savage et al. Sociology, 48 (3), 437-444.
• Niska, M., Vesala, H. T. & Vesala, K. M. (2012). Peasantry and entrepreneurship as frames for farming: reflections on farmers' values and agricultural policy discourse. Sociologia Ruralis, 52(4), 453-469.
• Oostindie, H. (2018). Unpacking Dutch multifunctional agrarian pathways as processes of peasantisation and agrarianisation. Journal of Rural Studies, 61, 255-264.
• Pakulski, J. (2005). Foundations of a post-class analysis. In E.O. Wright (Ed.)., Approaches to Class Analysis (pp. 152-179). Cambridge University Press.
• Savage, M., Cunningham, N., Devine, F., Friedman, S., Laurison, D., McKnenzie, L., Miles, A., Snee, H. & Wakeling, P. (2015). Social class in the 21st Century. Pelican Books.
• Sevgili, E. (2022). Aile çiftçiliğinde beka stratejileri: Nazilli’de incir üreticiliği örneği [Doctoral dissertation in progress]. Hacettepe University.
• Sorensen, A. B. (2005). Foundations of a rent-based class analysis. In E.O. Wright (Ed.)., Approaches to Class Analysis (pp. 119-151). Cambridge University Press.
• Sönmez, A., (1993). Peasant Household Survival Strategies: Rural Transformation in the Heartland of Turkey's Hazelnut Production Belt [Doctoral dissertation, University of Durham (UK)].
• Sönmez, A. (1998). Toplumsal araştırmalarda analiz birimleri olarak aile ve hanehalkının mahiyet ve yapılarının belirlenmesi sorunu. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 15 (1), 115-135.
• Sönmez, A. (2001). Doğu Karadeniz Bölgesi fındık üretim kuşağında toprak ağalığı, köylülük ve kırsal dönüşüm. Toplum ve Bilim, 88, 69-104.
• Suess-Reyes, J. & Fuetsch, E. (2016). The future of family farming: A literature review on innovative, sustainable and succession-oriented strategies. Journal of Rural Studies, 47, 117-140.
• Sunar, L., Kaya, Y. & Otrar, M. (2016). Türkiye sosyo-rkonomik statü endeksi geliştirme projesi, TÜBİTAK (Proje No: 113K506).
• van der Ploeg, J. D. (2013). Peasants and the art of farming. Fernwood Publishing.
• van der Ploeg, J. D. (2017). The importance of peasant agriculture: A neglected truth. Wageningen University & Research, doi:10.18174/403213.
• Weber, M. (1964). The theory of social and economic organization. A. M. Anderson & T. Parsons (Trans.). The Free Press. (Original work published 1947)
• Weber, M. (1996). Sosyoloji yazıları [From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology]. H. H. Geerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.)., T. Parla (Trans.). İletişim Yayınları.
• Weininger, E. B. (2005). Foundations of Pierre Bourdieu’s class analysis. In E.O. Wright (Ed.)., Approaches to Class Analysis (pp. 82-118). Cambridge University Press.
• Weltin, M., Zasada, I., Franke, C., Piorr, A., Raggi, M. & Viaggi, D. (2017). Analysing behavioural differences of farm households: An example of income diversification strategies based on European farm survey data. Land Use Policy, 62, 172-184.
• Woodhouse, P. (2010). Beyond industrial agriculture? Some questions about farm size, productivity and sustainability. Journal of Agrarian Change 10 (3), 437-453.
• Wright, E. O. (2001). A general framework for the analysis of class structure. In D.B. Grusky (Ed.)., Social Stratification: Class, Race and Gender in Sociological Perspective (pp. 116-128). (2nd Ed.), Boulder. Westview Press. Wright, E. O. (2005a). Foundations of a neo-Marxist class analysis. In E.O. Wright (Ed.)., Approaches to Class Analysis (pp. 4-30). Cambridge University Press. Wright, E.O. (2005b). Conclusion. If “class” is the answer, what is the question? In E.O. Wright (Ed.), Approaches to Class Analysis (pp.180-192). Cambridge University Press.