Abstract

Increasingly, European member states are using remote sensing technologies to determine if farmers comply with measures of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Member states use satellite images, aerial photographs and geotagged pictures, and combine this with advanced algorithms and machine learning to determine if farmers comply with requirements that they have set out in their CAP strategic plans. Our research analyses the use of satellite images and the software used to process this data at paying agencies to understand how these technologies are enabling new forms of governance and what these technologies mean for how farmers are seen (literally and figuratively) by government agencies. This research is based on 12 semi-structured interviews with the developers of the technologies used to monitor compliance, which includes people working for paying agencies as well as people working at research institutes and companies where they provide technical support to the development and use of remote sensing at paying agencies. This research reveals that the governance of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), facilitated by remote sensing, fosters an audit culture characterized by strict control and compliance. The emphasis on mapping, quantifying, and representing agriculture underpins this governance model and drives further technological advancements. However, participants highlight the shortcomings of remote sensing technologies in effectively controlling farming practices. By integrating theories of bureaucracy and governance with a critical perspective on techno-utopianism, we examine these dynamics. Our findings indicate that the current application of remote sensing within the CAP is constrained not only by technical limitations but also by the existing governance framework. The push for quantification leads respondents to advocate for the further adoption of technical innovations to enhance control over agriculture. In conclusion, we suggest that a policy shift is necessary to break free from this technology trap.