Rural sociology is examined as a case study in the social forces that shape and direct the production of knowledge. Knowledge production is viewed as the product of the nexus of three sets of forces. First, there are the rewards and punishments of any system of social control. While knowledge is produced under very different conditions than other commodities, concrete products (‘research’) are produced in a social milieu and in response to distinct forces. Forces that pull research in particular directions are represented by the availability of research funds and the clarity by which certain types of research are regarded as more important than others. Pushes are represented not only by the unavailability of research funds but also by discouragement of certain research trajectories. These range from friendly advice by senior faculty to graduate students, to impediments in career development, to active persecution. Second, the system of social control is embedded in an institutional network within which knowledge production occurs. Rural sociology is centrally linked to a clearly delineated institutional network composed of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the land-grant college complex. This complex constitutes a dense institutional network influencing the knowledge production system directly. Third, rural sociology is influenced by its institutional relationship to sociology as a discipline. In this case, as long as it does not involve the mission orientation of the subdiscipline (e.g. the pushes and pulls), the general discipline has effects on what can be termed the ‘autonomy’ of knowledge production within rural sociology.
How to Cite
ANDERSON, H.P. (1976) The Bracero Program in California. new York: arno Press.
BEAL, G.M. (1969) Some issues we face, Rural Sociology, 34(4), pp. 461–475.
BUSCH, L. and LACY, W.B. (1979) Sources of Influences on Problem Choice in the Agricultural Sciences: ‘The New Atlantis’ Revisited. Paper prepared for the 1979 meeting of the rural Sociological Society.
BUTTEL, F.H. (1980) agriculture, environment, and social change: some emergent issues, in: F.H. BUTTEL and H. NEWBY (eds) The Rural Sociology of the Advanced Societies: Critical Perspectives, montclair, nJ: allanheld, Osmun, pp. 453–488.
BUTTEL, F.H. and NEWBY, H. (eds) (1980) The Rural Sociology of the Advanced Societies: Critical Perspectives. montclair, nJ: allanheld, Osmun.
CAPENER, H.R. (1975) On a discipline in search for application, Rural Sociology, 40(4), pp. 398–410.
COPP, J.H. (1972) rural sociology and rural development, Rural Sociology, 30(4), pp. 515–533.
DAVIS, C.-L. (1976) The Farm Corporation, Bulletin no. 745. athens, Ga.: Cooperative extension, University of Georgia.
DRAPER, A. and DRAPER, H. (1968) The case of Henry anderson, in: The Dirt in California: Agribusiness and the University, Berkeley, Ca: independent Socialist Club of america, p. 32.
FAGIN, H. (1970a) Report on Phase 1: West Side San Joaquin Valley Project. irvine, Ca: Public Policy research Organization, University of California.
FAGIN, H. (1970b) Information for the Future: The West Side San Joaquin Valley Project, report no. 20. irvine: Water resources Center, University of California.
FLORA, J.L. and CONVERSE, J. (1978) Outreach Programs of the Land Grant University: Which Publics Should They Serve?. manhattan, KS: Kansas State University.
FORD, T.R. (1973) Toward meeting the social responsibilities of rural sociology, Rural Sociology, 38(4), pp. 372–390.
FRIEDLAND, W.H. (1982) The end of rural society and the future of rural sociology, Rural Sociology, 47(4), pp. 598–608.
FRIEDLAND, WH., BARTON, A.E. and THOMAS, R.J. (1981) Manufacturing Green Gold: Capital, Labor, and Technology
in the Lettuce Industry. new York: Cambridge University Press.
GOLD, D.A., LO, C.Y.H. and WRIGHT, E.O. (1975) recent developments in marxist theories of the capitalist state, Monthly Review, 27(5), pp. 29–43, 27(6), pp. 36–51.
GOLDSCHMIDT, W. (1978a) As You Sow. montclair, nJ: allanheld, Osmun & Co. GOLDSCHMIDT, W. (1978b) large-scale farming and the rural social structure, Rural Sociology, 43(3), pp. 362–366.
GOSS, K., RODEFELD, R.D. and BUTTEL, F.H. (1978) The Political Economy of Class Structure in U.S. Agriculture. Paper read at the 1978 meeting of the rural Sociological Society.
HANSEN, N.M. (1973) The Future of Nonmetropolitan America: Studies in the Reversal of Rural and Small Town Population Decline. lexington, ma: d.C. Heath.
HARDIN, C.M. (1946) The Bureau of agricultural economics under fire: a study in valuation conflicts, Journal of Farm Economics, 28(3), pp. 635–668.
HARL, N.E., O’BYRNE, J.C. and KRAUSZ, N.G.P. (1977) The Farm Corporation, north Central regional extension Publication no. 11. ames, ia: Cooperative extension, iowa State University.
HATHAWAY, D.E. (1972) The state of social science research in the United States department of agriculture and the state of agricultural experiment stations, in: national research Council Report of the Committee on Research to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Appendices B–R, national Technical information Service, pp. 400-431.
HOFFER, C.R. (1961) The development of rural sociology, Rural Sociology, 26(1), pp. 1–14.
HOFFSOMER, H. (1960) rural sociological and intradisciplinary relations within the field of sociology, Rural Sociology, 25(2), pp. 175–196.
JEHLIK, P.J. (1964) rural sociology and sociological reality: an appraisal, Rural Sociology, 29(4), pp. 355–366.
JOHN, M.E. (1962) rural sociology in the years ahead, Rural Sociology, 27(2), pp. 107–115.
KAUFMAN, H.F. (1963) a perspective for rural sociology, Rural Sociology, 28(1), pp. 1–17.
KIRKENDALL, R.S. (1964) Social science in the Central Valley of California, California Historical Quarterly, 43(4), pp. 195–218.
KIRKENDALL, R.S. (1979) Social science in the Central Valley: a rejoinder, Agricultural History, 53(2), pp. 494–505.
KOTZ, N. (1969) Jamie Whitten: the Permanent Secretary of agriculture, Washington Monthly, 1(9), pp. 8–19.
LARSON, O.F. (1959) The role of rural sociology in a changing society, Rural Sociology, 24(1), pp. 1–10.
LEVI, D.R. (1971) law affecting the organization and operation of the family farm business, in: Agricultural Law, Columbia, mO: lucas Brothers Publishers.
MAYER, A. and MAYER, J. (1974) agriculture: the island empire, Daedalus, 103(3), pp. 83–95.
MORRISON, D.E. and STEEVES, A.D. (1967) deprivation, discontent, and social movement participation: evidence in a contemporary farmers’ movement, the nFO, Rural Sociology, 32(4), pp. 414–434.
NELSON, L. (1969) Rural Sociology: Its Origins and Growth in the United States. minneapolis, mn: University of minnesota Press.
NFO REPORTER (1972) muzzling effort backfires: witness riddles USda corporate farm study, NFO Reporter, 16(march).
NICHOLSON, H.J. (1977) autonomy and accountability of basic research, Minerva, 15(1), pp. 32–61.
NOLAN, M.F., HAGAN, R.A. and HOEKSTRA, M.S. (1975) rural sociological research, 1966–1974: implications for social policy, Rural Sociology, 40(4), pp. 435–454.
RODEFELD, R.D. (1979) The Family-Type Farm and Structural Differentiation, mimeo. University Park, Pa: department of agricultural economics and rural Sociology, Pennsylvania State University.
ROGERS, E.M. (1962) Diffusion of Innovations. new York: Free Press.
ROSENBAUM, W.A. (n.d.) The Burning of the Farm Population Estimates, inter-University Case Program no. 83. indianapolis, in: Bobbs-merrill.
ROSENBERG, C.E. (1976) No Other Gods: On Science and American Social Thought. Baltimore, md: Johns Hopkins University Press.
ROSSITER, M.W. (1975) The Emergence of Agricultural Sciences: Justus Liebig and the Americans, 1840–1880. new
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
SCHRAG, P. (1978) The Bradfield file, Fresno Bee, 13 September, p. 14.
SEWELL, W.H. (1965) rural sociological research, 1936–1965, Rural Sociology, 30(4), pp. 428–451.
SMITH, T.L. (1969) a study of social stratification in the agricultural sections of the U.S.: nature, data, procedures, and preliminary results, Rural Sociology, 34(4), pp. 496–509.
STOKES, C.S. and MILLER, M.K. (1975) a methodological review of research in rural sociology since 1965, Rural Sociology, 40 (4), pp. 411–419.
TAYLOR, P.S. (1976) Walter Goldschmidt’s baptism by fire: Central Valley water politics, in: J.P. LOUCKY and J.R. JONES (eds) Paths To the Symbolic Self: Essays in Honor of Walter Goldschmidt, anthropology UCla Vol. 8, los angeles, Ca: University of California.
WARNER, W.K. (1974) rural society in a post-industrial age, Rural Sociology, 39(3), pp. 306–318.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
This license is acceptable for Free Cultural Works.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.