The UK farming industry is in the midst of rapid change: policy change, decoupling support payments from production; social change, affecting the food consumers buy and from where they buy it; greater awareness of issues of food safety and animal welfare; and greater concern about matters of environmental protection and countryside access. Farmers find such change problematic. To understand how change is being experienced and understood in the farming industry three empirical studies were undertaken: semi-structured interviews with farmers; narrative interviews with others in the agricultural public sphere; and a content analysis of Farmers Weekly, circulating in the agricultural industry, and The Times, circulating among the general public. Analysis was qualitative, using thematic and content analysis and incorporating the computer programmes ALCESTE and NVIVO. The results indicate that change is problematic for 3 reasons. Firstly, farmers' identity and self-esteem as producers are being challenged. Secondly, farmers are receiving contradictory messages as to what their role should be. Thirdly, government involvement in the farming industry has created a 'learned helplessness' which impedes farmers' agency to cope with change. The findings demonstrate the use of social representations theory in an applied social setting. They suggest that the structural approach places too much emphasis on the stability of the core of a representation. Observations made during the research are used to argue for a social psychology of change which will enable the discipline to become more adept at investigating and addressing the problems of contemporary society.

This thesis provides a sociological exploration of the politics of new agricultural technologies in the United Kingdom. It addresses some of the key issues involved in these politics, as well as how they are discussed and fought over. Conceptually it addresses these questions by focussing on issues of risk, science and governance. In doing so, this thesis situates the politics of GM crops and foods in relation to wider normative concerns about the cultural values, relationships and institutions shaping agriculture, and British society more generally. Empirically, this thesis applies a qualitative methodology, primarily relying on data generated from a series of in-depth interviews. Through these interviews active participants in the debate were able to express a variety of opinions about the risks and benefits of agricultural biotechnology. The interview data is further supplemented by some documentary evidence, particularly as relates to several government led initiatives addressing agricultural debates in terms of contestations over risk and knowledge. Key chapters in this thesis look at the way in which the debate over GM crops and foods has been shaped by perceptions of the role and values of the life-industry, science and the Government in developing and regulating biotechnology. Finally, this thesis also addresses how society, and practices of governance in particular, are able to accommodate these political issues in managing risk and regulating technological change.