张克威的教育思想和办学经验--在50周年校庆之际对老院长的追思

张克威是中国著名的农学家、农业教育家 ,早年留学美国 ,抗日战争爆发他毅然回国投笔从戎 ,参加抗战和三年解放战争 ,新中国成立前后 ,开始筹办沈阳农学院 ,从此他把一生的精力和心血都倾注在高等农业教育事业上。他思路开阔 ,敢于创新 ,在办学过程中形成了自己的教育思想和办学经验。张克威的教育思想与办学经验有五个主要方面 :积极创办多科性农业大学 ;延揽人才 ,建设高水平的教师队伍 ;注重对学生理想教育 ,培养高素质人才 ;强调理论联系实际 ,推行教学、科研、推广三结合 ;发扬学术民主 ,培养勤奋求实校风。为此 ,“文化大革命”以前 ,沈阳农学院在国内外都享有很高声誉。     

金陵大学农学院农业推广及其效益

金陵大学农学院举世注目的科研成就,为农业推广提供了丰富的物质材料;完善的农业推广体制,保证了推广工作的顺利进行,从而增加了作物产量,促进了农村改良。建立的一套完善的农业推广体制,成为中国近代建立从中央到地方基层的全国农业推广体制的良好开端;从中摸索出的一套农业推广经验,为中国近代其它农业院校及农业机构在农业推广中所借鉴。对于我国当今的高等农林院校科研成果的推广也有借鉴意义。     

发展研究生教育的探讨

总结了沈阳农业大学恢复研究生招生制度以来的成绩和在学位与研究生教育过程中积累的丰富经验 ,指出了大力发展研究生教育 ,应对新世纪机遇和挑战的具体措施     

印度农业贸易自由化改革 ———基于粮食安全的视角分析

本文回顾了印度独立后农业发展所经历的四个阶段，并对这期间农业政策取得的成就和存在的主要问题进行了总结。然后重点探讨了印度贸易自由化改革的经验及其对农业增长、贫困削减和粮食安全的影响。研究发现，农业贸易自由化改革促进了农业的发展，并使农业内部的生产结构向增加高附加值产品生产的方向转变。贫困人口和贫困发生率在不断下降。在粮食安全方面，人们的粮食物质上的可获性已经得到满足，但粮食经济上的可获性还没有得到完全满足。今后可以通过大力发展农村非农部门来增加就业和削减贫困，并最终实现粮食安全的目标。     

我国金融支持农业发展的思考

金融促进农业发展，中国社会主义新农村建设离不开金融。由于城乡二元经济结构形成的城乡发展差距、农村信贷制度、统一标准的金融监管、支农资金风险高等原因，国家金融支持农业发展的力度不够，资金供给方向边缘化，农村金融主体自身服务与创新能力不足，民间信贷活跃但弊端多，农村金融服务和管理人才缺乏。提出要加强金融服务创新，优化农村金融服务，通过加强财政政策调控进一步促进农村发展；要根据农业贷款的特点，建立农业风险补偿机制，以降低和减少支农资金的风险和损失和促进信贷；同时完善《担保法》法规，加强农村金融管理和服务人才队伍建设，使金融更好地支持农业发展。     

在应对入世后我国农业面临的挑战中分析测试技术和科学仪器担负的重任

本文概叙了入世后中国农业面临的农产品品质 安全性及价格的三重冲击和应采取的应对措施 着重分析了农产品安全问题和食品安全保障体系的构建 论述了分析测试技术和科学仪器的七项重任     

隋炀帝时科技上的成就

本文提出了隋朝经济空前发展的又一重要原因，是隋炀帝时科技生产力重视的新观点，并论述了大业年间科技上的巨大成就。     

欧盟"多功能农业"探析

自20世纪90年代以来,“多功能农业”越来越引起世界的关注,欧共体/欧盟在“多功能农业”的发展过程中扮演着重要的角色,它积极支持、广泛推广这一新型的农业模式。本文在说明“多功能农业”的提出过程、内涵、具体措施的基础上,分析欧共体/欧盟提出“多功能农业”的原因。     

“Empowerment” as efficiency and participation: gender in responsible agricultural investment principles

Amidst global concern over the state of transnational large-scale agricultural investments, several efforts have been made to set global standards for “responsible agricultural investment.” While these efforts have received mixed reviews from the international community, very little attention has been paid to the gendered language of these principles. Through examining two separate sets of agricultural investment principles – one created by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the International Fund for Agricultural Development and the World Bank, and the other by the United Nations Committee on World Food Security – this article finds that, despite different processes and participants in the creation of these principles, they nonetheless share a language of “empowerment” targeted at women and marginalized groups. However, in contrast to early feminist discourses of empowerment, these principles instead perpetuate the notion that empowerment is to be found through efficiency, productivity and participation in land and labor markets. This article takes a critical look at this language of economic empowerment in each set of principles, and points to the dangers of equating efficiency, productivity and participation with feminist empowerment. By not acknowledging the broader gender dynamics of agricultural governance and markets, these discourses risk deepening existing inequalities rather than moving toward meaningful social change.     

Building ‘cowshed cultures’: A cultural perspective on the promotion of stockmanship and animal welfare on dairy farms

Improving animal welfare is an important part of the development of the agricultural industry, particularly at a time when intensification and the encroachment of factory-style production systems is making the maintenance of human-animal relations increasingly difficult. Animal science deals with the issue of improving stockmanship by focusing on the relationships between attitudes and behaviour, under the premise that improved attitudes will lead to improved behaviour. From an analysis of 42 interviews with owners, sharemilkers and workers on dairy farms in New Zealand we present a different view, seeing behaviour instead as part of a self-reinforcing culture in which animals, humans and the physical structure all contribute to the development of farm specific ways of doing and being. We further suggest that changing one stockperson's attitude alone is insufficient to ensure a change in the culture as other actors – including animals and non-human actors – reinforce any existing culture that has developed, making both attitudinal and behavioural change difficult. We conclude by discussing the key importance of designing farm systems and structures that promote positive interactions between animals and humans and suggest that this, rather than simply promoting knowledge and attitudinal change, is likely to be the most effective way of maintaining stockmanship in the face of an industrialising agriculture.