We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This concluding chapter summarises the key arguments of the book and sets out the primary theoretical contributions of the work and how future glasshouse agrifood futures could be configured in ways that more centrally position the importance of labour rights in the value chain and a fairer deal for the role of growers and workers.
This chapter examines the system of post-Brexit labour migration and the glasshouse agrifood labour regime in the UK. It highlights the risks in the current labour regime for poor working conditions and exploitation.
This chapter examines the critical role that innovations relating to the rolling out of hydroponic technologies have played in the glasshouse agrifood labour regime. It focuses on the role that hydroponics has played in allowing growers to intensify the labour process in the face of the exacting conditions of production and tight margins that they have faced over time.
This chapter introduces the post-War labour regime that has been dominant in the glasshouse agrifood sector. It highlights the important, but regionally differentiated, role of migrant labour. It examines the organisation of the labour regime and the labour process in the two regions up until the UK’s departure from the European Union.
This chapter introduces the two regional contexts through which the book’s analysis proceeds. It positions these regions over time with respect to the role that glasshouse agrifood production has played in each region and how the industry has developed over time.
This chapter sets out the concept of ‘agrarian biopolitical articulations’ as a framework to understand the enduring food security crises faced by the UK and how these are articulated with the role that organisations play in the value chain. It brings together research on labour, technology and value chains to establish this theoretical framing for the book.
This chapter examines the changing nature of the glasshouse agrifood value chain and the dominant role played by powerful lead-firm supermarkets. It highlights the tight margins that growers operate under and the consequences for their sustainability and food security before turning to the types of upgrading strategies that growers have deployed in the value chain over time.
This introductory chapter sets out the enduring food security crisis that the UK has faced over the post-War period and positions it in relation to how the UK is situated with respect to global value chains of food supply, labour provisioning and the adoption of new technology. It introduces the core concept of the ‘total ecology’ as a way of understanding attempts to enhance food security through glasshouse agrifood production, but highlights the fragilities of this system of food production.
This chapter examines the most recent sets of technological interventions in the glasshouse agrifood value chain centred on the adoption of digital technologies and digital automation in the labour process. It explores the limits to their development and the ‘boundedness’ of technological innovations today.
This chapter turns to examine the role that technological development has played in the glasshouse agrifood value chain and how this has changed over the post-War period. It highlights the restructuring of the state-funded techno-science based and its increasing marketisation and fragmentation.
What is the relationship between technology and labour regimes in agrifood value chains? By deploying the concept of agrarian biopolitical articulations, Field of Glass formulates new perspectives that bridge the hitherto distinct worlds of value chain research, agrarian political economy, labour regime theory, and agrarian techno-science to explain the enduring insecurity of food systems in the United Kingdom. Using both historical and contemporary research, Adrian Smith explores how the precarity and exploitation of migrant labour intersects with ecology and techno-science/innovation, such as hydroponic and robotic technologies, to explain the development and changing nature of glasshouse agrifood value chains in the UK. Smith concludes by reflecting on how agrarian bio-politics have shaped the glasshouse agrifood sector and the emergence of contemporary 'high road' and 'low road' strategies, highlighting their contradictions and negative consequences for local development and food supply security.
The Hippoboscidae are ectoparasites of birds and mammals, which, as a group, are known to vector multiple diseases. Avipoxvirus (APV) is mechanically vectored by various arthropods and causes seasonal disease in wild birds in the United Kingdom (UK). Signs of APV and the presence of louse flies (Hippoboscidae) on Dunnocks Prunella modularis were recorded over a 16·5-year period in a rural garden in Somerset, UK. Louse flies collected from this site and other sites in England were tested for the presence of APV DNA and RNA sequences. Louse flies on Dunnocks were seen to peak seasonally three weeks prior to the peak of APV lesions, an interval consistent with the previously estimated incubation period of APV in Dunnocks. APV DNA was detected on 13/25 louse flies, Ornithomya avicularia and Ornithomya fringillina, taken from Dunnocks, both with and without lesions consistent with APV, at multiple sites in England. Collectively these data support the premise that louse flies may vector APV. The detection of APV in louse flies, from apparently healthy birds, and from sites where disease has not been observed in any host species, suggests that the Hippoboscidae could provide a non-invasive and relatively cheap method of monitoring avian diseases. This could provide advanced warnings of disease, including zoonoses, before they become clinically apparent.