IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v41y2024i2d10.1007_s10460-023-10501-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biotechnology activism is dead; long live biotechnology activism! The lure and legacy of market-based food movement strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriela Pechlaner

    (University of the Fraser Valley)

Abstract

Scholarly debate over the transformative potential of neoliberal, market-based, food movement strategies historically contrasts those who value their potential to reform the food-system from the inside against those who argue that their use concedes the primacy of the market, creates citizen-consumers, and undermines overall movement goals. While narrow case studies have provided important amendments, the legacy of such strategies requires impacts to be evaluated both contextually and more broadly than the specific activism. This study thus conceptualizes the ‘case’ of U.S. biotechnology market activism expansively, drawing on interviews with 25 activists from diverse organizations to investigate the legacy of two food-labeling movement strategies (one public and mandatory, one private and voluntary). The results support that the legacy of market strategies extends more broadly than the immediate initiative. They also confirm that the consequences of such neoliberalized strategies are most productively assessed contextually and applied, rather than categorically—as most clearly illustrated by the counterintuitive results of the failed mandatory labeling effort. Of the two market strategies, voluntary labeling demonstrated the most problematic relationship to broader movement goals of food system transformation, in part because of the greater potential for overlapping credence claims and in part due to the risks of niche market logic.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriela Pechlaner, 2024. "Biotechnology activism is dead; long live biotechnology activism! The lure and legacy of market-based food movement strategies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(2), pages 583-597, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:41:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10501-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-023-10501-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-023-10501-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-023-10501-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julia M. L. Laforge & Colin R. Anderson & Stéphane M. McLachlan, 2017. "Governments, grassroots, and the struggle for local food systems: containing, coopting, contesting and collaborating," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 663-681, September.
    2. Isaac Sohn Leslie, 2017. "Improving farmers markets and challenging neoliberalism in Argentina," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 729-742, September.
    3. Myles Carroll, 2016. "The new agrarian double movement: hegemony and resistance in the GMO food economy," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 1-28, February.
    4. Robin Roff, 2009. "No alternative? The politics and history of non-GMO certification," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(4), pages 351-363, December.
    5. Marygold Walsh-Dilley, 2009. "Localizing control: Mendocino County and the ban on GMOs," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(1), pages 95-105, March.
    6. Robin Roff, 2007. "Shopping for change? Neoliberalizing activism and the limits to eating non-GMO," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(4), pages 511-522, December.
    7. Alison Alkon & Teresa Mares, 2012. "Food sovereignty in US food movements: radical visions and neoliberal constraints," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(3), pages 347-359, September.
    8. Klara Fischer & Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen & Lotta Rydhmer & Karin Edvardsson Björnberg, 2015. "Social Impacts of GM Crops in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, July.
    9. Harriet Friedmann, 2009. "Discussion: moving food regimes forward: reflections on symposium essays," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(4), pages 335-344, December.
    10. Carmen Bain & Tamera Dandachi, 2014. "Governing GMOs: The (Counter) Movement for Mandatory and Voluntary Non-GMO Labels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Kent D. Messer & Marco Costanigro & Harry M. Kaiser, 2017. "Labeling Food Processes: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 407-427.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carmen Bain & Theresa Selfa, 2017. "Non-GMO vs organic labels: purity or process guarantees in a GMO contaminated landscape," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 805-818, December.
    2. Amaranta Herrero & Fern Wickson & Rosa Binimelis, 2015. "Seeing GMOs from a Systems Perspective: The Need for Comparative Cartographies of Agri/Cultures for Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-24, August.
    3. Marina Masso & Christos Zografos, 2015. "Constructing food sovereignty in Catalonia: different narratives for transformative action," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(2), pages 183-198, June.
    4. Jessica Clendenning & Wolfram Dressler & Carol Richards, 2016. "Food justice or food sovereignty? Understanding the rise of urban food movements in the USA," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(1), pages 165-177, March.
    5. Edward Royzman & Corey Cusimano & Robert F. Leeman, 2017. "What lies beneath? Fear vs. disgust as affective predictors of absolutist opposition to genetically modified food and other new technologies," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(5), pages 466-480, September.
    6. Sara A. L. Smaal & Joost Dessein & Barend J. Wind & Elke Rogge, 2021. "Social justice-oriented narratives in European urban food strategies: Bringing forward redistribution, recognition and representation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 709-727, September.
    7. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    8. Ronja Teschner & Jessica Ruppen & Basil Bornemann & Rony Emmenegger & Lucía Aguirre Sánchez, 2021. "Mapping Sustainable Diets: A Comparison of Sustainability References in Dietary Guidelines of Swiss Food Governance Actors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    9. Julia Jouan & Aude Ridier & Matthieu Carof, 2019. "Economic Drivers of Legume Production: Approached via Opportunity Costs and Transaction Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, January.
    10. Mark Christopher Navin & J. M. Dieterle, 2018. "Cooptation or solidarity: food sovereignty in the developed world," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 319-329, June.
    11. Ellen J Van Loo & Carola Grebitus & Rodolfo M Nayga & Wim Verbeke & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "On the Measurement of Consumer Preferences and Food Choice Behavior: The Relation Between Visual Attention and Choices," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 538-562, December.
    12. Savchenko, Olesya M. & Kecinski, Maik & Li, Tongzhe & Messer, Kent D. & Xu, Huidong, 2018. "Fresh foods irrigated with recycled water: A framed field experiment on consumer responses," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 103-112.
    13. Michelson, Hope & Fairbairn, Anna & Ellison, Brenna & Maertens, Annemie & Manyong, Victor, 2021. "Misperceived quality: Fertilizer in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    14. Katie Henderson & Bodo Lang & Joya Kemper & Denise Conroy, 2024. "Exploring diverse food system actor perspectives on gene editing: a systematic review of socio-cultural factors influencing acceptability," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(2), pages 883-907, June.
    15. Thiago Lima, 2021. "Brazil’s Humanitarian Food Cooperation: From an Innovative Policy to the Politics of Traditional Aid," Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, Centre for Agrarian Research and Education for South, vol. 10(2), pages 249-274, August.
    16. Carmen Bain & Tamera Dandachi, 2014. "Governing GMOs: The (Counter) Movement for Mandatory and Voluntary Non-GMO Labels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-21, December.
    17. Michael J. Weir & Thomas W. Sproul, 2019. "Identifying Drivers of Genetically Modified Seafood Demand: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-21, July.
    18. Kecinski, Maik & Messer, Kent D. & Peo, Audrey J., 2018. "When Cleaning Too Much Pollution Can Be a Bad Thing: A Field Experiment of Consumer Demand for Oysters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 686-695.
    19. Olson, Julia & Clay, Patricia M. & Pinto da Silva, Patricia, 2014. "Putting the seafood in sustainable food systems," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 104-111.
    20. Stephanie Walton, 2024. "Transforming the food system in ‘unprotected space’: the case of diverse grain networks in England," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 989-1006, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:41:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10501-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.