**6. References**


farmer adaptation to be able to offer explanations on how structures influence on actors and groups differently, and how actors possess different interests in changing their current situation. Classical structural theories certainly have much to offer in understanding some parts of the political economy of agriculture. This study has however shown some of their shortcomings in relation to understanding the survival of the Norwegian family farm system.

Almås, R. (ed.) (2004). *Norwegian Agricultural History.* Trondheim, Tapir Academic

Almås, R. (1994). The rise and fall of agricultural policy cycles: from planned economy to

Almås, R. (1984). Norwegian agricultural policy and the family farm, 1945-1982. *Sociologia* 

Almås, R. (1983). *Maskulint og feminint på bygda i dag.* Bygdeforskning notat no. 3, 1983.

Almås R. and M.S. Haugen, 1991. Norwegian Gender Roles in transition. The Masculinization Hypothesis in the Past and in the Future. *Journal of Rural Studies,*7:79-83. Bjørkhaug, H. and A. Blekesaune (2008): Gender and Work in Norwegian Family Farm

Bjørkhaug, H. (2007). Agricultural Restructuring and Family farming in Norway. *Strategies* 

Bjørkhaug, H. (2006): Sustainable agriculture in the Norwegian farmers' context: Exploring

(eds.): *Bygdeforskning gjennom 20 år.* Trondheim: Tapir Academic Publisher. Blekesaune, A. (1996a). *Family Farming in Norway. An analysis of structural changes within farm households between 1975 and 1990*. R-6/96. Trondheim: Centre for Rural Research. Blekesaune, A. (1996b). *Agrarsosiologien og dens bidrag til de samfunnsvitenskapelige perspektiver* 

Buttel, F. H., O. F. Larson and G. W. Gillespie (1990). *The Sociology of Agriculture*. New York:

Buttel, F. H. (1983). Beyond the Family Farm. Pp. 87-107 in G. Summers (ed.) *Technology and* 

Chayanov, A. V. [1909-1929] (1986). *The Theory of Peasant Economy.* Madison: The University

De Janvry, A. (1981). *The Agrarian Question and Reformism in Latin America.* Baltimore: Johns

De Janvry, A. (1980). Social differentiation in agriculture and the ideology of neopopulism.

Pp: 155-168 in Buttel, F. H. and H. Newby (eds.) *The Rural Sociology of Advanced* 

*på dagens samfunn*. P-7/96. Trondheim: Centre for Rural Research. Brandth, B. (2002). Gender Identity in European Family Farming*. Sociologia Ruralis* 42/3:181-200. Buttel, F. H. (2001). Some Reflections on Late Twentieth Century Agrarian Political

*Social Change in Rural Areas.* Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

*Societies: Critical Perspectives.* Montclair: Allanhood, Osmun.

farming habitus and practice on the Norwegian agricultural field. *The International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability* 4/2 123-131. Blekesaune, A. and R. Almås (2002). Fra regulergingsgiver til markedslogikk – bondehusholdets

ulike strategier for å overleve. Pp: 19-44 in R. Almås, M. S. Haugen and J. P. Johnsen

*for sustainable practices*. Trondheim: Centre for rural research.

NLVF's bygdeforskningsgruppe, senter for samfunnsforskning. University of

green liberalism. *Journal of Rural Studies* 10:15-25.

Trondheim: Centre for Rural Research.

Business. *Sociologia Ruralis* 48/2:152-165.

Economy. *Sociologia Ruralis* 41/2: 165-181.

Greenwood Press.

of Wisconsin Press.

Hopkins University Press.

**6. References** 

Publisher.

*Ruralis* XXIV/2:120-131.


**16** 

*Brazil* 

**Climate Change and Shifting** 

Fabricio Neves1 and João Vicente Costa Lima2

The social studies in science and technology assume the perspective that knowledge and technology are built and legitimized in a certain context. A context that encompasses machines, texts, scientists, laboratories, imagination, power, interest. Considering any human construct, science and technology also embrace several social elements, and without a thorough observation in the practice itself, some might say that these elements would disappear from its composition. Science and technology would appear as necessary, functional, detached from the worldly concerns. The traditional epistemology and technology's philosophy guided us the belief that the real knowledge and its working

However, Thomas Kuhn (1995) in his study foresaw the sunset of these perspectives. As it is a common sense, the dynamics of conflicts and consensus in the scientific communities define the luck from different paradigms on the definition concerning the model of science. This definition presented the development of restrict groups, inserted in determined places from situated scientific practice, even though, it was considered the generalized symbolic dimension. Based on this, David Bloor (1991) assume that knowledge is what the community considers as knowledge. A community in which the cognitive content, values

Harry Collins (1992) characterizes this context based on the local general expectations of how the world functions. These expectations appear, for example, by the moment in which the scientist has to decide the way he/she should decide for an interpretation among several allowed by the experimental data. In other words, the practical problem of the interpretative flexibility caused by the data, the context of the practice argues with the generalized expectations around the given knowledge endorsed. The price of the defection of a group is

Bruno Latour (2000) argues that the context of the scientific practice subscribes itself in the laboratories, or, better saying, in the calculus centers, from where the knowledge is purified from its extra-scientific elements and it is shown in the format of articles and

technologies would not be related with these listed elements.

and practices are constructs grounded on the context.

the loss of referrals and political support.

books.

**1. Introduction** 

**Technoscientific Agendas** 

*1Federal University of Santa Maria, 2Federal University of Alagoas,* 

 http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1899/devel/index.htm (02.02.2007)

