Epsilon Archive for Student Projects

Abstract

With increasing demands on governments and private companies to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases, changed land management is viewed as a possible way forward to sequester carbon. When it comes to agriculture a popular idea has been to increase soil organic carbon in cropland and pastures by multiple methods gathered under the umbrella term “carbon farming”. In this setting soil becomes the centrepiece that governments, companies and farmers hope to relieve them of their respective challenges. The capacity and success for farming to achieve carbon sequestration is however highly dependent on local contexts such as climate and soil properties, making the efficiency of carbon farming as a climate change mitigation tool questioned. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate carbon farming in a Swedish context, highlighting the farmer's perspective on the practice and understanding their reasoning for entering the practice. Furthermore, an aim for this thesis is to unpack the soils role in carbon farming, stressing the soils agency in affecting the farmer as the farmer tries to affect the soil in return. Questions were investigated using qualitative methods relying on semi-structured farmer interviews. Theoretically the study is guided by Social Practice Theory in combination with utilizing the soil as a lens for analysis. Results show that farmers are not adopting carbon farming due to climate-related goals or economic subsidies, but instead improved soil capacities. Increasing capacities such as drainage, water retention and nutrient availability build long-term stability both economically and biophysically. Although material motivations were primary, they must be seen in the light of meanings and competences attached, such as biodiversity, soil health and curiosity. Moreover the interviews highlight how farmers are facing peer pressure from other farmers and actors due to negative meanings associated with carbon farming. Peer pressure forces “carbon farmers” to redefine themselves as they also redefine their soil as a living entity. Soil was central, as it was not an passive agent in these processes, creating the frames of the choice-set farmers could act within. This study adds to the knowledgebase on carbon farming, especially as there is a lack of studies covering farmer perspectives on carbon farming in Sweden. Furthermore the study is significant as it combines Social Practice with a soil perspective which illuminates how materials, competences and meanings works in tandem with soil-human relations.