There’s certainly a lot of hurting out there: navigating the trolley of progress down the supermarket aisle
For the past decade, supermarket chains have been positioned as the pre-eminent actor in global and national food systems. Some agri-food scholars argue that their ever-expanding transnational supply chains have established an era of stable production-consumption relations (or Food Regime), while others point to the conflicts they are encountering with governments, social movements and ‘alternative’ consumers. However, remarkably little attention has been paid to their relationship with communities and to community system sustainability. Based on fieldwork conducted in the Goulburn Valley, Australia, we argue that supermarket operations are contributing to community tensions through contestation over valued symbols and narratives about what desirable ‘progress’ looks like. We identified three interrelated points of tension being intensified by supermarket chains: whether progress is encapsulated by being an agricultural production or a modern consumption centre; whether progress should be based on a model of corporate capital or the local small business; and to what extent modern citizens can and should support community shopping instead of convenience shopping. For long-time residents, supermarkets are paradoxical actors appealing to, as well as, challenging the narrative of a community whose economic strength was based on the surrounding natural environment and local people’s endeavours. The concepts of solastalgia and structural nostalgia are relevant, with the former referring to the place-based distress experienced by residents whose local area is changing profoundly and the latter describing a process amplifying that distress. Through exploring the political paradoxes of community solastalgia, we raise new questions about supermarket authority within contemporary Food Regimes. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 30 (2013)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10460|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- D. Wright, 2005. "Fields of Cultural Contradictions: Lessons from the Tobacco Patch," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 465-477, December.
- Stephan J. Goetz & Anil Rupasingha, 2006. "Wal-Mart and Social Capital," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1304-1310.
- Art Carden & Charles Courtemanche & Jeremy Meiners, 2009. "Does Wal-Mart reduce social capital?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 109-136, January.
- Linda Lobao & Curtis Stofferahn, 2008. "The community effects of industrialized farming: Social science research and challenges to corporate farming laws," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 219-240, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:30:y:2013:i:2:p:283-297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.