THE GAME OF PYRAMIDS
MOVEMENTS HEALTH GUIDELINES Suela Aksoy Luc Fransen June 2014 ‘Master thesis Political Science’ and Global Politics of SustainabilityCONTENT 1. Food matters
1.1 Methodology 2. Nutritionism paradigms
2.1 Good and bad era – mainstream dietary guidelines 2.1.1 Food Guide Pyramid
2.2 Functional nutritionism 2.3 Counter-movements
3. Theoretical framework: Transition theory 3.1 Regime, niche and landscape
3.2 Conceptual framework of transitions 3.3 Niche conceptualisation
3.3.1 Grassroots initiatives
3.3.2 Grassroots innovative potential 3.3.2.1 Simple niches
3.3.2.2 Strategic niches
4. Empirical analysis I: The Food System
4.1 Landscape
4.2 Regime
4.2.1 Corporate influence on governments, science and consumers 5. Empirical analysis II: Alternative Food Movements as Niches
5.1 Paleo and Het Oerdieet 5.2 Voedselzandloper 5.3 Vegetarians and Vegans 5.4 Raw food
5.5 Youth Food Movement 5.6 Food Guerrilla
5.7 Food Watch
6. Conclusion empirical analysis: How do alternative food movements tackle is-sues?
6.1 AFM: Alternating the conventional guidelines
6.2 AFM: Alternatives to tackle issues concerning health and other food related issues
7. Discussion 8. References 9. Appendix
1. FOOD MATTERS
Food is the number one cause of premature death in the Western world. Over-consumption has become a global problem. Unhealthy food is everywhere, widely available and promoted, easy to consume and often cheaper than a healthier alterna-tive. Governments facing with the human health consequences have put more empha-sis on the governance of food as a result of more diets containing fat, salt and sweet (Fuchs & Kalfagianni, 2010: 21). They have been telling people what to eat for more than a century. The advice promoted eating more vegetables and to avoid being over-weight, as a means to promote health (Nestle, 2013: 31). Still, since 1980 worldwide obesity has nearly doubled and 65% the population in world live in countries where overweight and obesity kills more people than underweight. In addition, 44% of the diabetes, 23% of the heart diseases, and between 7% and 41% of certain cancer bur-dens are consequences of overweight and obesity.1
However, there are numerous ini-tiatives around the globe that strive to make food sufficiently available, safe and nutri-tious, and in an honest and sustainable manner. This might also be the reason of an increase in so-called food movements, coming up with alternatives in order to tackle issues concerning dietary patterns, health and other food related issues.
Obviously, there is an academic gap in studies on these alternative food
move-ments (AFM), their dynamics and developmove-ments, but also their motivations. Scholars
mainly refer to obesity as an epidemic, its socio-economical burdens, and the role of the food industry and governments on obesity (Ludwig & Nestle, 2008; Lawrence, 2004; Guthman & Dupuis: 2006). Besides, existing studies on activist movements are often within production-centred perspective (Goodman & Dupuis, 2002: 9). Dahlberg states that if we were serious about food and about laying the groundwork for sustain-ability (locally, nationally, globally), then ‘we must go beyond the typical narrow fo-cus on production [agriculture] to a broad analysis of complete food systems’ (in De-lind, 2011: 273).
The focus on food and sustainability is often manifested in an ecological perspec-tive (McMichael et al. 1999). However, as broader interpretation it could also involve the sustainability of human health. Many scholars have studied the dangers of sugar and sweeteners (Lustig et al. 2012; Popkin, 2012; Pomeranz, 2012); and good and bad fats (McClain et al, 2007; Clouston & Powell, 2004; Ascherio & Willet, 1997). Yet, it is academically relevant to ease the lack of studies in political science and interna-tional relations by focusing on how alternative food movements deal with dietary pat-terns, influenced by the government’s dietary guidelines, in order to promote health. Therefore the research question is as follows:
‘How do alternative food movements tackle issues concerning dietary guidelines and health in the food system?’
The AFM will be approached as a niche within the framework of transition theory (Grin et al. 2010), because this theoretical framework provides the research to explore AFM, and create a better understanding of how and why they operate in a certain way. Obviously, the proposition that comes with this framework – when answering the research question – is the exploration of a certain transformative power of the AFM. The aim of the paper, however, is to emphasize and understand the multitude of AFM, which in turn might imply that some of them might be a part of transition and
some of them are consciously or unconsciously not involved. Therefore, the core em-phasis lies within the aim to analyse and create a better understanding of (a) of the multitude of niches within the food system, and (b) their development regarding how they tackle issues concerning health and dietary guidelines and why they do what they do.
As the cover shows, the research question implies three concepts: movements, guidelines and health. I refer to movements as niches, because – within the context of the theoretical framework – niches can be divided into different forms, such as a per-son or group introducing an alternative guideline for a better health or an organisa-tion/movement who serves an alternative to tackle issues in the food system. I did not prefer to use the term niche in research question, because the term is popularly known as a specialized and profitable segment of the market. However, the transition theory allows conceptualising the niche within the context of (social) movements. Therefore, in order to avoid misunderstandings the research question refers to motivations as niches (within the framework of transition theory).
Furthermore, when analysing AFM as movements, it is important to be clear about the notion of alternativeness. Since movements imply specific forms of seize and activities, it might be contrasting to the nature of alternativeness. In this thesis I adhere to the meaning of alternative as the dictionary states, ‘(one of more thing) available as a possibility or choice’ or ‘relating to activities that depart from or chal-lenge traditional norms’. Finally, health is related to diseases such as diabetes, certain cancer burdens and cardiovascular burdens.
The societal relevance of this research implies for readers a better understanding of the role of AFM en their importance in a food system, characterised by an increas-ing need to take action in order to tackle health related diseases. Finally, it has to be said that this paper does not aim to state what is good or bad. It is up to the reader to interpret individually the alternative, which means to determine whether and alterna-tive would work for them or not.
1.1 Methodology
The unit of analysis in my research will be alternative food movements, involving nine samples:
• Het Oerdieet (Remko Kuipers, The Primal Diet)
• De Voedselzandloper (Kris Verburgh, The Food Hourglass) • Veganism
• Vegetarianism • Paleo
• Raw food
• Youth Food Movement • Food Guerrilla
• Food Watch
This thesis is a qualitative research, which involved data gathering through observa-tions (website and documents) and interviews. I gained knowledge on the AFM by, firstly, analysing the form and seize of AFM, which refers to the amount of members or followers, the popularity or impact on people. Secondly, I have focused on the AFMs environment, which implies their commonalities, interlinks or differences with each other, their criticisms, and their relation to the government and corporate actors.
Furthermore, I have conducted the interviews in order to orientate, but also to gain insight on the movement’s vision and beliefs, and the personal experiences of the spokesperson. The focus of the research question is on health issues. Therefore, some question were asked as clear as possible in order to gather information that shows the relevance of these AFM concerning health issues. I have asked the questions in semi-structured way (see appendix 1.) in order to conduct interviews that are comparable, but still with the openness for interviewees to give useful information.
The selection of the AFM was based on the criteria that it is an innovative prac-tice, it is not merely focused on a weight-loss program, it is globally known or it is a globally known organisation. This implies a variety of niches with a large n. It has been not feasible for this research to do a large n study, but to reduce validity threats I have approached AFM that differ from each other and also some movements that seem to have similar visions but differ in their actions.
In order to reduce the chance of biased responses I, consciously, did not use ‘niche’ in the questions, nor did I explore the theoretical framework to the interview-ees. Yet, in order to increase reliability I also analysed the available and popular books of AFM. Most of the AFM exist less than five years and others can be de-scribed as communities. Therefore I have also analysed all the AFMs websites or searched for the pioneers within the movements. Unfortunately, I could not arrange an interview with Food Watch and some email contact with the Vegetarian movement (Vegetariërsbond), but their websites and literature offered sufficient information in order to make statements.
Finally, the locus of this research was mainly the Netherlands. However, food policies are regulated by European legislation. European dietary guidelines are highly influenced by the guidelines of United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Therefore, I will pay attention to the developments in the US and at the European lev-el. However, there is some space for states to translate these guidelines for their own populations. Sweden, for example is the first western country that it is in favour of the low-carb and high-fat nutrition advice and it is willing to adjust dietary guidelines for obesity treatment.2
The Dutch government has received many critiques concerning the expiration date of the Dutch food guidelines. Therefore, it is an interesting case to look at, since there is an important role to be played by the AFM.
I will start exploring the historical outline of the relation between dietary advice and the role of different actors through the ideology and paradigms on nutritionism as it is described by Scrinis (2013). As I advance through the theoretical framework, I will adjust the transition theory through conceptualising the multitude of niches. Sub-sequently, the empirical section is divided in two parts with the first showing the re-sults of document and literature analysis; and the second part shows rere-sults empirical analysis obtained from each alternative food movement. Then I draw conclusion from this empirical analysis related to an updated transition theory, which is also suitable for studying alternative food movements as niches in other countries. Finally the dis-cussion will evaluate the research and I will make recommendations for future re-search.
2 Website of the famous Swedish nutrition expert:
2. NUTRITIONISM PARADIGMS
Scrinis describes the relation between dietary advice and the role of different actors through the ideology and paradigms on nutritionism. The purpose of this section is twofold. On the one hand I will expand on nutritionism, which will serve as a histori-cal explanation of dietary advice and the food system. On the other hand I will touch on the pitfalls of the nutritionism paradigm on the role of AFM. Therefore, this sec-tion serves as a starting point to posisec-tion the AFM in the food system, which will be done through the theoretical framework in the following section.
In Nutritionism (2013) Scrinis argues that since the late nineteenth century nutri-tion science research is framed and shaped by the ideology of nutrinutri-tionism. Nutrinutri-tion- Nutrition-ism – or nutritional reductionNutrition-ism – is characterised by ‘a reductive focus on the nutri-ent composition of foods as the means for understanding their healthfulness’ (p. 2). He says that this ideology of nutritionism has informed dietary advice, food-labelling regulations, food engineering and marketing practices, and the public understanding of food. Nutrition science translated this into nutritionally reductive dietary guide-lines, which has resulted in the de-contextualization, simplification, and exaggeration of the role of nutrients in determining bodily health (p. 5-6).
Scrinis refers to nutritionism not only as an ideology, but also as a paradigm. The paradigms of nutritionism systematically frame scientific research over the past centu-ry and a half. The first era, that of quantifying nutritionism, roughly between 1850 and 1950, was characterised by discovering and quantifying the nutrients in foods and the nutritional requirements of bodies. The key actors establishing and controlling this paradigm were individual scientists by dominating scientific research and controlling the nutritional agendas (p. 12). The USDA was responsible for ensuring a sufficient and reliable food supply and to promote ‘eat more’ in order to prevent dietary defi-ciencies (Nestle, 2013: 33). The two following eras were: the era of good-and-bad nutritionism, and the era of functional nutritionism (Scrinis, 2013: 11). Hence, this chapter provides a historical outline to explore the developments of the food guide-lines through Scrinis’ paradigms. These paradigms clarify the developments in the food system while linking it to the key actors and it helps to distinct the alternative movements. In the following subsections the focus will be more on the two recent paradigms, because they have a clarifying contribution to the analysis of AFM.
2.1 Good and bad era – mainstream dietary guidelines
From the beginning of 1960 the era of good-and-bad nutritionism emphasized the avoidance or reduction of bad nutrients in particular to reduce the risk of chronic dis-eases. The key actors of this era, the government (USDA) and public health institu-tions (American Health Association), established and promoted dietary guidelines and food-labelling regulations through negatively phrased messages (Scrinis, 2013: 12-13). These dietary guidelines and mainstream nutritional advice discouraged the con-sumption of the bad nutrients – particularly fat, saturated fat and cholesterol – and implicitly the bad foods that contained them (p. 73).
The Dietary Goals for the United States in 1977 were the first guidelines to em-body a number of characteristics of the era of good-and-bad nutritionism. These char-acteristics include the shift in orientation from tackling nutritional deficiencies to ad-dressing dietary risks to chronic diseases and obesity, and the shift from ‘eat more’ to ‘eat less’ dietary advice (p. 87; Nestle, 2013: 38). The guidelines emphasized that
people had to increase their consumption of carbohydrates and unsaturated fats and to decrease their consumption of fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, salt, and sugar (p. 88). There are two editions of the Dietary Goals released by the federal agencies that I will elaborate on with the contributions of Scrinis and Nestle. Both describe the develop-ment of the guidelines in a common way on several matters. Nevertheless, their dif-ferent perspectives give some useful insights. Where Nestle comprehensively anal-yses the interactions between the nutrition scientists, public officials and the industry, Scrinis’ focus lays within the nutricentric realm of these guidelines.
Scrinis argues that the guidelines are simplified and centrally focused on nutrients. He calls it a black-and-white and one dimensional understanding which ignores that nutrients may be involved – either in isolation or combination with other nutrients and food components – in multiple and complex metabolic processes that cannot easily be reduced to simplistic characterizations as bad and good (p. 76). Moreover, he also re-fers to seven food-level goals that serve as a translation of the six nutrient-level food goals (see Appendix 2). Scrinis argues that despite the separation of nutrient-level and food-level recommendations, even most of the food selection goals were qualified in terms of the nutrients they contained (p. 88).
Nestle explains this within a more political context. She describes that the food in-dustry, especially meat and dairy producers registered strong protest at the idea that the public officials might be telling that their products were bad for health (Nestle, 2013: 40). She shows how public servants and health institutions attempt to mobilise support and seek consensus with food producers and argues that it is achieved at the expense of clarity. Namely, late in 1977 a revised version of the guidelines strength-ened the advice about obesity and alcohol, and altered the wording of some guidelines to make them more positive and less restrictive. Nestle states that the guidelines trans-formed some goals from of a negative ‘eat less’ message into a more positive ‘choose’ message designed to placate food producers. For example, the statement ‘re-duce consumption of meat’ was replaced with the less offensive ‘choose meats, poul-try, and fish which will reduce saturated fat intake’ (Nestle, 2013: 42-50). Scrinis adds, ‘the revised guideline was consistent with the scientific evidence regarding satu-rated fat rather than meat and was therefore justified in its focus on nutrients rather than foods’ (Scrinis, 2013: 91-92). Thus, the revised wording pushed the dietary goals even further in the direction of nutricentric language and away from the food industry.
2.1.1 Food Guide Pyramid
Both Nestle and Scrinis argue that the guidelines do not explicitly refer to processed foods or to the level of refining and processing of the depicted foods that are a part of many peoples diets (Scrinis, 2013: 96; Nestle: 54). Scrinis goes further and analytical-ly divides the first guidelines as nutricentric and the famous Food Guide Pyramid – released in 1992 by the USDA – as whole food-centric (p. 93). He explains that alt-hough the Pyramid refers primarily to foods rather than nutrients and in this sense ap-pears to be a food-based dietary guide; it still visually illustrates and translates into the high-carb/low-fat diet (p. 96). Again, Nestle serves a more politically promising analysis of the formation of the Pyramid (see Appendix 3.). She starts with elaborating from the very first edition, the Eating Right Pyramid. The meat and dairy producers opposed to this as well, because of the placement of their food groups in the narrower eat less sectors of the pyramid that caused their products to be stigmatized. Nestle, shows how the revised version, the Food Guide Pyramid, differing in only minor
de-tails sufficiently appeased the producers and led to the removal of their overt objec-tions3
(Nestle, 2013: 52).
To sum up, Nestle and Scrinis do emphasize the role of the governments as key ac-tors in controlling the food production and consumption, how they shape and modify both the form and content of dietary guidelines. Yet, they also acknowledge the influ-ence of the powerful industries within the food system ((Scrinis, 2013: 97; Nestle, 2013: 53). Nestle highlights that the Pyramid is an icon nowadays that has become highly influential for consumers worldwide. She argues that it has led to numerous offshoots illustrating the dietary pattern of one or another cultural or ethnic group, and that there are Mediterranean, Asian, vegetarian, kosher, soul food, and other pyramids to suit almost any dietary preference. She adds that the serving number became a standard for dietary intake patterns, the quality of foods advertised on children’s tele-vision programs (p. 66). Although Scrinis does not explicitly emphasize the
Pyra-mid’s influence as such, he does explain its influential role related to its key actors
from the 1970s and onwards as referring to the era of functional nutritionism.
2.2 Functional nutritionism
Scrinis sums the developments of the eras thoroughly as ‘from being told to eat more of the protective and growth-promoting nutrients in the quantifying era and to eat less of the bad and fattening nutrients in the good-and-bad era, we are now being urged by nutrition experts and popular commentators to eat smarter (p. 162). He explains that in the 1970s and 1980s, the food industry also began to recognize the commercial po-tential and the benefits of promoting foods on the basis of their nutrient contents (p. 97). They seemed to recognize that this would be less damaging to the consumer de-mand for their products and they also realized the commercial potential of exploiting these nutrient-level messages (p. 93). In this order, Nestle explores their lobby prac-tices and their co-optation of nutrition scientist (p. 111), but Scrinis emphasizes first the era of functional nutritionism and goes further in detail about corporate nutrition-ism and nutritional marketing in subsequent chapters.
Functional nutritionism appears from the mid-1990s as a more positive and pre-cisely targeted view of nutrients and foods as functional in relation to bodily health. It involves that particular nutrients, foods, and dietary patterns can enhance and opti-mize our state of health or particular bodily functions (p. 12). Although experts kept on using the language of good and bad nutrients, they incorporated a broader range of more differentiated and nuanced distinctions. Such distinctions were between good and bad fats (transfats and saturated fats against omega-3 fats and polyunsaturated fats), and good ‘whole carbs (whole grans, and starchy vegetables) and bad ‘refined’ carbs (refined cereals and sugars) (p. 160). Yet, the emphasis within mainstream die-tary guidelines was on the more positive and beneficial attributes of good nutrients, which also created the emergence of wonder nutrients. This nutrients are not just good, but functional and almost having medicinal or therapeutic qualities referring to
superfoods, nutritionally engineered foods, and dietary supplements (p. 161/164). The
imperative, now, is to seek out nutrient-dense foods, which are actually perceived as scarce, to attain the functional nutrients required for optimal health. This has also led
3 The term ‘Eating Right’ had been changed to ‘Food Guide’ in response to complaints from Kraft Foods that the title infringed on its copyrighted line of prepared meals, and to complaints from ConAgra that the Pyramid might give Kraft a marketing advantage. The most important change also was designed to appease food producers. The numbers of recommended servings had been moved outside the design and set in boldface type to suggest that the diet should include at least 2-3 servings of meat and dairy foods each day. This change also implied an increase in servings from the Basic Four (p. 63-64) (See Appendix 3).
to the marketization of nutritionally modified or nutritionally enhanced whole foods or processed foods as well as dietary supplements as alternative and necessary sources of these nutrients (p. 174-175).
As follows, Scrinis jumps in to showing alternating dietary patterns that take a step away from the single-food nutritionism, such as the Mediterranean, DASH4
and the prudent diet, which is identified in direct opposition to the stigmatized western dietary pattern. His point is, however, that these diets tend to closely resemble mainstream dietary guidelines because they are defined as high in plant-based foods and low in red meat (p. 178). However, it is difficult to relate this issue to functional nutrition-ism. Instead of outlining whether these dietary patterns are a characterisation of the era of functional nutritionism, he explains it as being part of the mainstream guide-lines, whereas Nestle similarly put them under the Pyramid’s influence. Scrinis does pay attention to countertrends and devotes a couple pages to explain vegetarian diets and the traditional Palaeolithic diets. In the next section I will explain his shortcom-ings in emphasizing their role and dynamics in the food system.
2.3 Counter-movements
Scrinis emphasizes that researchers lack in examining the quality of the foods them-selves in dietary pattern studies, particularly in terms of the levels of processing the foods have undergone (p. 180). He argues that this has led to limitations and contra-dictions that subsequently have created a crisis of legitimacy for nutritionism (p. 21). He adds that ‘the loss of legitimacy of conventional nutritional theories and main-stream dietary advice has manifested in the growth of counternutritional or counterdi-etary movements since the 1990s, such as the low-carb and Paleo diet movements’ (p. 21) that challenge the status quo and that have been enabled and fuelled by the growth of the Internet and the availability of diverse sources of information (p. 14).
However, Scrinis falls short in explaining and analysing the concept of counter-movements. Rather, he serves another paradigm that seems to be a recommendation for recent and future nutrition science. He argues that nutrition science and dietary advice have obscured food processing quality and blurred the qualitative distinction between minimally and highly processed foods. This alternative paradigm shifts the focus from nutrients to foods and dietary patterns (p. 216). The so-called food quality
paradigm emphasizes the evaluation of foods in terms of their production and
pro-cessing quality, and appreciation of the wisdom embedded in traditional and cultural-ly contextualized dietary patterns, and the knowledge of food quality gained from our own sensual and practical engagement with growing, preparing, and consuming food (p. 236).
Scrinis does pay attention to the alternativeness of dietary guidelines. He says that an alternative message – rather than reductionism – is that nutrition science implies that instead of telling people what to eat, or giving them rules to eat by, it has to pro-vide more detailed nutrient-level and food-level information (p. 248). However, even in the food quality paradigm there is a lack of a comprehensive conceptualisation of the alternative or countermovements, their characteristics and role or influence in the food system. The theoretical framework in the next section serves a broader concep-tualisation and a better understanding of the role of these movements in the food sys-tem.
Besides, it is important to expand on AFM for another reason. Namely, although Scrinis recommends the food quality as an alternative paradigm, it seems that he un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un- un-
derestimates the influence of corporate power. He does acknowledge - in his introduc-tion – that it is important to understand their strategies to combat the power of such corporations that exploit the nutritional knowledge and shape government policies. However, he does not elaborate sufficiently on the ways to do this. Therefore, the the-oretical section serves as a framework that outlines the position of each key actor at any level within the food system.
3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: TRANSITION THEORY
The theoretical framework that will be used in this thesis is derived from the transi-tion theory (Grin et al., 2010). Grin et al. have developed a theory that deals with rad-ical transformation towards a sustainable society. They argue that transformation could be realised through innovative practices and structural adaptation embedded in the processes of societal structures (p. 2-3). Transition is defined as a shift from one socio-technical system to another, which is characterised by the level of societal do-mains or functions such as transport, energy, housing, agriculture and food, commu-nication, and health care (p. 11). There is an inherent connection between technical and social aspects. Technology development is described as heterogeneous engineer-ing, which refers to the development of knowledge and prototypes, the mobilization of resources, the creation of social networks, the development of visions, the con-struction of markets, and new regulatory frameworks (idem: 12).
The core argument of the transition theory is that transitions come about through interactions between processes at three levels that entails (a) niche-innovations build-ing up internal momentum, (b) changes at the landscape level creatbuild-ing pressure on the regime, and (c) destabilisation of the regime creating windows of opportunity for niche-innovations (Geels & Schot, 2007: 400). The relationships between the three levels can be understood as a nested hierarchy, meaning that regimes are embedded within landscapes and niches within regimes. However, they provide different kinds of coordination and structuration to activities in local practices and differ in terms of stability and size (Grin et al, 2010: 18). In the next section I will elaborate on each level.
Furthermore, Grin et al. focus on tracing and managing transitions (p. 126). As ar-gued in the previous section alternative food movements lack a profound conceptuali-sation and as, Grin et al. mention, little work has been done on multi niche analysis. Most work looks at one radical-innovation that breaks through while many transitions involve multiple niche-innovations. Multiple niches interact with regimes, but they also interact with each other, frustrating or stimulating each other’s development (p. 78). In order to do a multi niche analysis, I will conceptualize the niche within the framework of transition theory and by using the insights of scholars on social move-ments and grass roots initiatives (Seyfang & Smith, 2007). The framework of transi-tion allows also future research to manage transitransi-tions in order to influence the food regime.
The next section gives an explanation on regime, landscape and niche. Subsequent-ly, the conceptual framework provides a better positioning of the niche relating to the context of transition, and the last section provides a conceptualization of niches in or-der to unor-derstand their dynamics.
3.1 Regime, niche and landscape
A socio-technical regime offers a structure that stabilises a system in many ways. Grin et al. derive its definition from Rip and Kemp (1998) and cite:
A technological system is the rule-set or grammar embedded in a com-plex of engineering practices, production process technologies, product characteristics, skills and procedures, ways of handling relevant artefacts and persons, ways of defining problems; all of them embedded in institu-tions and infrastructures (Rip & Kemp, 1998: 340 in p. 20:).
The social networks of regimes are large and stable. There is a dominant design, and amalgamation of government institution, market structures, science and professionals, and a supporting civil society. Actors have aligned their activities; they have stabi-lized market structures with well-articulated rules, and provide structuration to actions in local practices (Grin et al, 2010: 27). It can be characterised as a stabilized lock-in of the existing system, which makes it also difficult for actors in local practices to turn away from regime-rules, although not impossible. Namely, ‘niche-innovations can become regimes when social networks grow larger and rules become more stable and constraining, leading to reversal in their relation to agency’ (idem).
Grin et al. explain that ‘at this level there is much resistance to transformative change and innovation, because existing institutions, networks and organizations want to maintain the status quo, i.e. the existing configuration of regulation, working practices and vested interests’ (p. 132). An example of a regime given by Grin et al. is the Dutch Energy system that has an energy system based on fossil fuels with a large do-mestic supply of natural gas. The system that had to liberalize in the past two decades under from national and European government is dominated by large energy compa-nies that had to. There is an increasing urge to change the system into a sustainable energy system, because of a changing energy balance (for example climate change, increasing demand of global energy and the Middle East conflict). So far, numerous technological and other innovations, such as bio-energy, wind and solar energy, and energy saving policies, challenge the energy regime. Not only new technologies which might be close to the regime, but also alternative visions, approaches and life-styles, etc. outside the regime (p. 181-182).
Niches are innovative practices of networks of actors that share certain rules and
provide structuration to actions in local practices. However, in contrast with regime these networks are unstable, in the making and uncertain, with actors entering and leaving. This also implies that their rules are vague and imprecise. They provide loose structuration, because the economic structures are not well developed. Moreover, structures are not well articulated and disagreements exist about design specifications, user preferences and regulations. It implies also that a lot work has to be done by ac-tors to sustain structuration (p. 27). Besides, the niche phase lasts a long time: the pe-riod between invention and innovation is about often 20-30 years.
The socio-technical landscape forms ‘a broad exogenous environment that as such is beyond the direct influence of regime and niche actors’ (p. 23). Grin et al. describe the landscape as factors that change slowly or not and they develop highly autono-mous, such as globalization, individualization, changes in the political arena, culture, transnational actors such as the UN and the WTO and global agreements such as the Kyoto protocol (p.131). Thus, actors cannot influence in the short run. However, they argue that it does not mean that landscape development occurs without human agen-cy. It means that changes come about through a great number of actions (p. 24). Moreover, the socio-technical landscape is a different kind of structure: it provides a broad context from which it is more difficult to deviate than from regimes. It implies that it does not determine, but provides deep-structural gradients of force that make some actions easier than other (p. 27-28).
Figure 1. Transition theory visual explanation
3.2 Conceptual framework of transition
Grin et al. note many concepts and characterizations while referring to transition theo-ry. They thoroughly devote a chapter to serve a description of a conceptual frame-work that is used for the exploration of transition patterns, pathways and underlying mechanisms. Even though their focus is on analysing and managing transitions, it is useful for this thesis to outline the concepts in order to understand the positioning of niches in the (food) system. In other words, how they relate to each other and the oth-er levels. The conceptual framework consists of the following transition concepts:
• The multi-phase concept • The multi-level concept • The multi-pattern concept
3.21 Multi-phase concept
This concept refers to the dynamics of transitions in time as a sequence of relatively fast and slow alternating phases. It can describe the direction, speed and size of a tran-sition (Grin et al, 2013: 126). It can be divided in four phases: (i) the pre-development phase of a dynamic state in which the status quo of the system changes in the back-ground, but these changes are not visible; (ii) the take-off phase, the phase during which the regime in place starts to absorb the transition impulses and shows a visi-ble—be it cautious—start of a change process (Laes et al, 2014: 1132); (iii) the accel-eration phase is characterised by structural changes and translated into mainstream practice of many actors; it is caused by an accumulation of mutually reinforcing so-cio-cultural, institutional, technological, economical, etc., moves. The new ways of working, thinking, and learning get “anchored” or “embedded” (idem); (iv) the stabi-lization phase is where a new dynamic state of equilibrium is achieved (Grin et al, 2013: 126).
Grin et al. explain this framework as descriptive and ordering regarding the chang-es in phaschang-es. The framework, also servchang-es as an explanatory framework for explaining the driving forces and mechanisms behind the phases and their changes (p. 129-130). However, the focus of the paper is not the study on transition an sich. It might be use-ful in understanding the development of the niche and for future research in order to improve the prediction on the developments of the niches and their ability to change the system.
Figure 2. Different phases of a transition
(Source: Laes, Gorissen and Nevens, 2014: 1132)
3.2.2 Multi-level concept
This concept describes the dynamics of transition as the interactions between three different scale levels: the macro, meso and the micro levels, representing functional relationships between the regime- and niche-actors, each with their own structure, cul-ture and practices. The macro level represents the landscape, which as said before changes slowly. Regimes operate at the meso level characterized by systems of domi-nant structures, beliefs and culture, and practices shared by a social network. At the micro-level niches may develop within new initiatives, new techniques and new forms of culture and management. Within niches, there are learning processes regard-ing innovations, new practices and behaviour that might develop – as a result – of ideas to alternatives (p. 132). Grin et al. emphasize the role of frontrunners by charac-terizing them as key aspect, ‘because they are the agents with the capacity to generate dissipative structures and operate within these deviant structures. They can only do that without being (directly) dependent on the structure, culture and practices of the regime’ (p. 144). Further, they argue that Frontrunners are energetic go-getters with and with enthusiasm to combat the many obstacles within the regime. They need sup-port and especially space and resources (financial, mental, organization, juridical) for their innovation activities (p. 218-219). Moreover, ‘from a micro-perspective this means that a number of individual actors, so called frontrunners can create stepping
stones that make it possible for these actors to function as a catalyst for supporting transition process’ (idem).
Grin et al. state existing regimes at the meso level often slow down the processes of change, but their power may also be utilized to bring about a transition (p. 132). Often in the early period of a transition, the regime act as an inhibiting factor, and lat-er on, once a niche becomes successful and comes, act as an unleashing factor. Within this context it is interesting to look at whether innovative practices in the food system are inhibited or unleashed and whether they are embraced, remain as a countermove-ments or as alternative groups who distance themselves explicitly from the regime. Finally, developments at the macro-level speed up or slow down a transition, or changes in worldviews and macro policies might produce a transition.
3.2.3 Multi-pattern concept
The multi-pattern concept describes the nature of the dynamics of transition in terms of generic, irreversible patterns that is manifested in a pathway. A transition pathway describes the initial state of the system and the end state of the system.
Grin et al. show that – although multiple patterns are involved – ‘a key pattern is the following: niches emerge and cluster, and by empowering a niche cluster a niche-regime unfolds; the niche niche-regime becomes more powerful, whereas the niche-regime is weakening, and in the end the niche-regime takes over the incumbent regime that is transformed’ (p. 137). Yet, the authors aim to explore ‘a transition pathway in order to make statements about whether a particular transition has resulted in a more or less sustainable state’ (p. 135). The aim of this thesis, however, is to explore multi-niche developments and their internal dynamics.
However, they do refer to the role of the niche relating to the regime. As they have explained, in certain patterns the regime gets weak, while a transition is associated with the process of overthrowing the incumbent regime. Yet, they argue, ‘some niches may exist very close to the regime, and therefore both benefit from the support of the regime and they can be constrained by it, while other niches may be protected from the influence of the regime in some way (through support or of political actors in landscape)’. The point is that competitive as well as symbiotic relationships between the niche and regime are possible (p. 137) and, also, that the niche may explicitly stay away from the regime due to other worldviews for example. Thus, Grin et al. empha-size the role of the regime and its importance to realize transition, but lack in analys-ing the development and dynamics of multiple niches. Followanalys-ing section will provide a conceptualization of niche in order to gain a better understanding of their character-istics and dynamics.
3. 3 Conceptualizing the Niche
Grin et al. explain thoroughly that dynamics at regime and landscape levels influence social networks and visions in niches, since emerging radical innovation in a niche has much uncertainty and fluctuation. Three reasons that keep novelties in niches for a long time are technological developments and trouble-shooting that lasts long; mis-matches with the existing regime; and actively opposing existing regimes. Stable ex-isting regimes inhibit novelties to break through. Novelties may remain stuck in nich-es or disappear (p. 24-25). Niche-innovations take advantage of windows of opportu-nities when a regime becomes weak and they diffuse more widely when they are able to stabilize and have performance improvements.
The most important development in a niche is their ability to stabilize and tighten their structuration: niches alone will not seed wider change, because in an embryotic
state, they do not pose a threat to the regime and will not take advantages of windows of opportunity. However, Grin et al. emphasize that novelty is always present alt-hough it might be a ‘hidden novelty’, carried by relative outsiders, unorthodox actors or enthusiasts invisible to the outside world (p. 54-55). This assumption is important for understanding the dynamics of multiple niches instead of merely focusing on the ones that break through. The conceptualisation shifts the attention from single projects
and their success or failure to sequences of projects. Sequences of projects lead to networking and learning, and serve as test beds for diffuse and broad ideas, and spac-es for the elaboration of new ideas. If the learning procspac-essspac-es aggregate, rulspac-es can be more articulated, specific and stable. Therefore, also hidden or ‘failed’ novelties can contribute to the success of the overall sequence (p. 86).
As argued in the introduction, scholars focus mainly on the production side. The tran-sition theory is also criticized for the fact that it is focusing too much on corporate, technology and policy actors and other important actors, particularly consumers as represents of the demand side, are largely neglected and under-conceptualised (p. 330). However, scholars have recognised the importance of social movements as sources of cultural innovation and contesting and actually changing new organiza-tional forms (Schneiberg & Lounsbury, 2008; Davis et al. 2005; Rao et al. 2000).
The most organised for of collective action are social movements. Rao et al. di-vide them from panics, riots, fad and fashions that ‘are evanescent forms of collective behaviour with few structured roles, collective action refers to a broad range of pur-posive collective behaviour’ (Rao et. Al, 2000: 242). Social movements that occur over longer time stretches, are driven by long-term goals, and develop formal organi-zations in order to solve social problems (idem). However, another approach for the role of consumers and their ability to influence regimes lies within the emphasis on social practices where consumers are actors who integrate a whole range of social practices related to food, energy, mobility, tourism, etcetera into specific lifestyles. This emphasis – also according to Grin et al. – is close to the work of Seyfang and Smith (2007) who analysed the importance of small community-based or grassroots initiatives.
3.3.1 Grassroots initiatives
Seyfang and Smith (2007) make use of the niche framework as a bridge between analyses of grassroots initiatives as civil society activities and a role for them in sus-tainable innovation policy. They extend and translate the conceptual model of green niches to the grassroots realm and distinguish the social economy from the market economy (p. 590). They consider the grassroots as a neglected site of innovation for sustainability, and by viewing community-level activities as innovative niches they provide a better understanding of the potential and needs of grassroots initiatives (p. 585).
Seyfang and Smith define these initiatives as networks of activists and organisa-tions generating novel bottom–up soluorganisa-tions for sustainable development. These are solutions that respond to the local situation and the interests and values of the com-munities involved. Thus, they are often more beneficial, because they utilize contex-tualized knowledge (Grin et al, 2010: 330-331; Seyfang & Smit, 2007: 593-594). Grassroots initiatives have many forms, from cooperatives to voluntary associations and social enterprises. This distinction is relevant for the niche developments in the food system, because they might be diffuse and at varying stages as innovative prac-tice or niche.
Besides, niche situations (such as unusual applications, demonstrations or social movements) provide space for new ideas and practices to develop without positioning their selves to the processes of regime development (Seyfang & Smith, 2007: 588). However, social movement agitations against regimes might contribute to pressures and open niche opportunities that drive transformation. Seyfang and Smith argue that these are distinct activities from the grassroots innovations (p. 589). In the sustainable innovation niches are spaces where ‘the rules are different’, but still within the con-ventional rules of the market. Grassroots innovations, in contrast, exist within the so-cial economy of community activities and soso-cial enterprise. Seyfang and Smith add to their niche perspective, therefore, the importance of how grassroots initiatives also emphasise different social, ethical and cultural rule (p. 591).
3.3.2 Grassroots innovative potential
Seyfang and Smith distinguish between simple niches that do not seek regime change and strategic niches that are seeds for wider transformation. The first values the niche for its own sake, and the latter as a means to an end (p. 593).
3.3.2.1 Simple niches
These are groups that aim to improve life in local communities. However, they do not consciously practice ‘strong’ sustainability to impact for example the creation of jobs, health improvements and social capital. These are groups doing ‘simple’ activities like running a volunteering project and perceive this as significant sustainability prac-tices. Seyfang and Smith argue that it is important to appreciate empirically the di-mensions of sustainability. Yet, in this thesis it will be important to look at the dimen-sions regarding guidelines and health issues, developed or encouraged by niches in the food system. It is also relevant to look at what is missing out or obtaining more relevance in niches (idem).
Furthermore, simple niches can also be the place where ‘unpopular’ or ‘fringe’ is-sues not taken up by mainstream actors come to the fore. They become a demonstra-tion of another possible way, building alternative infrastructures to the existing re-gime. Both Grin et al. and Seyfang and Smith emphasize the diversity and multilevel practices of the niche developments. However, Grin et al. also argue that too much diversity may hamper developments because it creates uncertainty, which prevents full commitments, fragments resources and impedes the emergence of a stable set of rules. At the same time, it might be difficult to increase this knowledge, because the local character and the sense of being alternative in its solutions draws people in, and makes mainstreaming a suspicious goal (p. 87).
However, Grin et al. assume that the alternative aims to be a symbolic embodi-ment. Seyfang and Smith make an important contribution here to the alternativeness of these niches. Radical action and unfunded issues may regenerate continuously at the grassroots for several reasons (p. 594). Therefore, it is important to divide them from strategic niches, understand their ideological commitments and, even more im-portant, to be aware of their contribution to the sequences of projects and so the suc-cess of overall sequence. Hence, elements of niche practice that do not ‘work’ can be just as informative for developments as those aspects that operate successfully (p. 590).
The niche may explicitly stay away from the regime due to other worldviews for ex-ample.
3.3.2.2 Strategic niche
Seyfang and Smith define alternative green niches as sites where people’s motivations for action are based upon different values from the mainstream (p. 594). This implies a bottom–up generation of activists seeking to mobilise communities to create alterna-tive or new systems of provision, in which a particular pattern of production is linked to a particular pattern of consumption. As a consequence, they create the potential to generate transformations in production-consumption systems in a way that is difficult to reach for individuals. According to Seyfang and Smith, communities of citizens participate in that (radical) creative process by joining small, everyday decisions about food, for reasons as taste, health concerns, and food miles supporting local growers (p. 594-595). As the transition framework shows, relations between regime and niche could be competitive or symbiotic. Countermovements are sites where con-testing happens, but the regime could also be challenged through a symbiotic strategy.
Finally, the authors refer to Church and Elster (2002) who have identified a wide set of indirect environmental and social impacts from grassroots innovations that may result in individuals and communities benefitting in terms of greater empowerment and confidence, skills and capacity for further community-based action (Seyfang & Smith, 2007: 595). These impacts formulated as environmental awareness-raising, education and promotion, changing the attitudes of local policy-makers, engaging people in sustainability issues in their daily lives, and developing new ways of work-ing towards sustainable development are also relevant to look for within the food niche.
Hence, conceptual distinction can be made between mainstream dietary guide-lines, countermovements and symbiotic movements, and the alternative that is distin-guished from the mainstream guidelines wherein people step away from the main-stream.
Regime Niche/regime Niche
Mainstream The Food Guide Pyramid and dietary advice promot-ed by the current system. It is stable and conventional, it is a universal claim and science-based.
Strategic Symbiotic, the niche aims
change through interacting with the regime and benefit from the support of the re-gime.
‘Countermovements’ and competitive striving to change the regime and criti-cize the regime. They aim a replacement of the conven-tional system.
Simple ‘Alternative’, (loosely
struc-tured) communities or indi-viduals step away from the mainstream, aim to improve lives.
4. EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS: The Food system?
4.1 Landscape
Within the context of transition theory the landscape of the food system is generally rooted in globalisation, leading to changes in nutrition and the food system in the past century, and socio-economic changes.
In other words, the food system has undergone the economic processes of trade liberalization, tariff reduction, harmonization of standards and deregulation or self-regulation. Globalisation also required a change of mind-set, encouraging farmers to expand and to increase the size of their holdings or herds not just to compete with other farmers locally but also globally (Lang, 1999: 336). New institutions were cre-ated or adapted while having a dramatic effect on the international food governance. Lang recalls the WTO, the World Bank, the Food and Agriculture Organization and WHO as important actors in food politics, social policies of education, health and nu-trition (p. 337).
Moreover, Popkin states that as incomes rise and populations become more ur-ban, societies enter a certain nutrition transition (Drewnowski & Popkin, 1997: 31). The nutrition transition has affected health profiles and distinctive national diets through a decline in the consumption of traditional foods; increased intakes of fat, sugar, salt and often animal foods; an increase in the consumption of processed foods, as well as an overall reduction in dietary diversity (Fuchs & Kalfagianni, 2010: 21). Lang emphasizes also the export of processed food styles from North to South and implies that ‘consumers in the developing world are encouraged to think of food and drink as coming not from farmers or the earth but from processed food corporations’ (p. 338). Nowadays, every country that has adopted the so-called Western diet has witnessed rising rates of obesity and related diseases, which has resulted in 30% more people obese than undernourished (Lustig et al, 2012: 27). Besides, the demographic factors have led to socio-economic changes as well in (Kearney, 2010; Nestle; 2013). Women entering the work force since the last quarter of the 20th
century are unable or unwilling to spend time on grocery shopping, cooking, and cleaning up after meals. Nestle explains that due to these changes nearly half of all meals are consumed out-side the home, the rise of pre-packaged goods and ‘home meal replacements’ (Nestle, 2013: 19).
Another important aspect of globalisation, mentioned by Lang, is the inherent oppositional dynamic, wherein emerging new forces question or even oppose global-izing tendencies in general (in: Raghavan, 1990; Mander & Goldsmith, 1997; Martin & Schumann, 1997; Gray, 1998), and the food dimension in particular (Lang, 1992; Magdoff et al. 1998). The opposition refers to the dynamic of globalization itself, be-cause it is human-created and, therefore, it can also be resisted and deflected by the population into different directions (Lang, 1999: 337-338). Although Lang does not explain the processes in which population do resist and deflect, he does resemble Grin et al. in the sense that landscape developments do not necessarily occur without hu-man agency. Yet, Grin et al. do refer to counter-tendencies that are triggered by the economic globalization. They argue that a rising transnational civil society has led to several provisions of corporate social responsibility at the regime level (p. 244-246).
4.2 Regime
Every five years dietary guidelines are scientifically revised and serve as corner-stones.5
Next year, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee will make recom-mendations for Americans. In Europe, as well, national authorities such as the Dutch Gezondheidsraad (Health Council) announce that it will use the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2010 for their revised guidelines in 2015 (Gezondheidsraad, 2014: 29). Voedingscentrum (the Dutch Nutrition Centre) translates the guidelines to practical advice for consumers. The Schijf van Vijf (Disc Five), resembling the Food Guide Pyramid, is the best-known example.6
Moreover, Voedingscentrum is the authority and source for many institutions in terms of knowledge and information about health and dietary guidelines.
Voedingscentrum has been criticized in recent years because of potential conflicts of interest with the food industry. For example, the board members come from the indus-try itself. Although, it does not necessarily imply that they will represent the interests of the industry in their current position, they are perceived as such. In addition, the criticism also focused on subsidizing professorships, which has been sponsored for many years by a voluntary contribution of food companies, such as Ahold, Kellogs Benelux and Suikerstichting Netherlands. On this basis, since 2011, Voedingscentrum decided to accept no fund of the industry in order to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest.
The point here is that, as previous section has showed, the conventional dietary guidelines are a result of the standards and rules set by the ‘food regime’, character-ised as an infrastructure of institutions, corporations and scientists. However, the larg-est corporations have obtained a dominant role, influencing scientific research and the nutritional agenda. The guidelines created by each state depend also on their relation with the corporate actors. The Dutch government, who is subsidizing Voedingscen-trum, has been criticized for its close ties with the food industry and the high amounts of subsidies to the sugar, dairy and meat industries.7
4.2.1 The corporate influence in the government…
The relation of governments and corporations is best explained through the govern-ance of food and agriculture, which is not just influenced but also more and more ‘created’ by the latter via private governance mechanisms (Fuchs et al. 2011: 335). Private governance implies that the food industry has the power and authority to gov-ern (Fuchs & Kalfagianni, 2010: 1). Many scholars argue that the food industry be-came a rule and standard setter, the implementer of corporate social responsibility and a service provider (Fuchs & Kalfagianni, 2010; Fuchs et al, 2011; Börzel & Risse, 2005; Scrinis, 2013). The power to govern derives from the strategic positions in
ma-terial structures, which refers to the domination of a few corporations and their ability
to limit the choices available to actors who desire entry in the supply chain (Fuchs & Kalfagianni, 2010: 12). The authority to govern lies within ideational structures that allow acquiring legitimacy as rule setters and the strategic presentation as superior regulator compared to public actors in global food governance (p. 24). Food compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa- compa-
5 Website Food Navigator, a daily online news service available as a free-access:
http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/R-D/Who-will-decide-what-s-in-the-2015-Dietary-Guidelines-for-Americans 6 Website Gezondheidsraad:
http://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/nl/Richtlijnen-Goede-Voeding 7 The website on decreasing milk consumption illustrates the critiques: http://melkjekanzonder.nl/de-melkfeiten/uitgemolken-consument/
nies are often accepted guardians and ‘educators’, who help to improve – through their public-private relations – the correspondence between the ‘rulers’ and the ‘ruled’ (Reinicke & Deng, 2000). However, even nutrition scientists, practitioners and some civil society organisations believe that these rent-seeking food companies are genu-inely interested in improving health (Fuchs & Kalfagianni, 2010: 18; Nestle, 2013: 2).
The sources of this ideational legitimacy are (a) (neo-) liberal norms promoting economic growth and efficiency together with the assumption that corporations also pursue societal well-being beyond the provision of jobs through CSR-practices; (b) corporations are perceived as possessors of ‘expertise’ and technical authority; and (c) regarding health concerns, food corporations encourage healthy lifestyles by describ-ing how they offer the choice of ‘low fat and low calories’ products and through the display of nutritional information on own-brand products. Healthy eating campaigns, advertising and their marketing strategies form an integral part of their commitment to consumers’ well being in order to brand loyalty and install trust (Fuchs & Kalfagian-ni, 2010: 19-23; Scrinis, 2013).
The industry’s power and authority is recalled by Scrinis as a corporate food
re-gime that, since the 1980s, controls the production, processing, trade, and retailing of
food within and across borders (Scrinis, 2013: 48). This also fits in the concept of re-gime of the theoretical framework that is characterised by a stabile network operating within a dominant design, sharing certain rules and providing structuration to actions in local practices. This clarifies also that agriculture policy and the Dutch Voedsel en Warenautoriteit (VWA, the Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority) is covered by the Ministry of Economic Affairs rather than Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. The latter refers simply to Voedingscentrum regarding health and dietary pat-terns.8
National authorities are highly linked to the European level, because most leg-islation of food and food safety is derived from the European Commission. Therefore, I will elaborate on the European food authorities and, also, the corporate food regime within the European infrastructure.
The governmental institution that deals with food and feed safety on a regional level is the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). However, the EFSA has been criticized many times because of its problematic independence, with numerous con-flicts of interest with industry among its scientific panels and heated controversies about the quality of its scientific output. A report of the monitoring organisation Cor-porate Europe Observatory (CEO) shows that the agency has implemented a new pol-icy, designed to ensure the independence of its scientific panels, following controver-sy over its close ties with industry. Yet serious conflicts of interest remain. Over half of the 209 scientists sitting on the agency's panels have direct or indirect ties with the industries they are meant to regulate (Horel & CEO: 2013: 3).
Another organisation is The European Food Information Council (EUFIC), which is co-funded by the European Commission. EUFIC describes itself as ‘a non-profit organisation, which communicates science-based information on nutrition and health, food safety and quality, to help consumers to be better informed when choosing a well-balanced, safe and healthful diet.’9
It states that it does not act as the spokesper-son of industry and does not wish to be perceived as such. Moreover, it claims that it does not promote individual companies' views or brands or any other information ma-terial, which is not based on peer reviewed science. Their website shows also that it is
8 Website of the Dutch Government: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/voeding/gezonde-voeding 9 Website of EUFIC: http://www.eufic.org/page/en/page/ONEUFIC/
funded by the food industry.10
EUFIC is therefore perceived as a lobby by different organisations, such as Powerbase and CEO. 11
Obviously, the food and drink industry is the largest manufacturing sector in terms of turnover, value added and employment. According, to the report of Food Drink Europe, their lobby group, the industry remains stable, resilient and robust, even in times of economic downturn (Food Drink Europe data & trends, 2013-2014: 5). Nestle shows, for example, how the sugar industry strenuously rejected a report of the WHO that advised restricting intake of ‘free’ added sugars to 10% or less daily calorie. Although this percentage was similar to the 1992 Pyramid (7-13% of calo-ries), when released in 2004 the report omitted any mention of 10% sugar recommen-dation: it could hardly say ‘eat less sugar’ (Nestle: 379-380). In Europe as well the food industry spends millions of euros lobbying politicians as a means of more direct-ly influencing government food policies and regulations. It is reported that the food industry has spent €1 billion euros lobbying the EFSA to reject proposals to help consumers make 'healthy meal' choices with a system of red, green and amber labels on the front of food packaging.12
Within this context, the manifestation of a corporate food regime implies that ‘the industry has taken the lead in promoting nutritionism, through the nutritional market-ing and nutritional engineermarket-ing of their food products, their fundmarket-ing of scientific re-search and of expert organizations, and their promises of health-enhancing and target-ed foods’ (Scrinis, 2013: 13). Next section elaborates briefly on nutritional marketing mechanisms and the role of scientists and scientific advice in the corporate food re-gime in dealing with health issues and dietary recommendations. It is relevant to ex-plore how the corporate food regime tackles issues concerning health related diseases in order to understand how it is related to alternative food movements.
…and on science and consumers
The corporate food regime as Penders and Nelis (2011) show implies that the interac-tions of governments, corporate actors, and experts have led a certain unavoidable interdependency. The scientists refer to the credibility engineering of the food indus-try – Unilever in their case – that leads to the support of health claims on products. Namely, the research and development (R&D) department uses scientific articles to create credit for itself amongst peers and regulators, while marketing strategies con-nect these scientifically approved health claims to a specific public through linking that public to a health issue and a food product (Penders & Nelis, 2011: 487). Credi-bility is obtained through a variety of means: peer-review accreditation by interna-tional food agencies, advertising, key opinion formers, and endorsement by celebrities (p. 490).
Yearly Unilever scientists publish hundreds of articles in peer-reviewed journals, which serves a strategic goal (p. 493). Penders and Nelis state that (a) publications construct the reputation as a knowledge producer; (b) publications provide support for product claims in the market place; (c) they enable network building; (d) and increase
10 Idem
11 Powerbase is a free encyclopaedia of people, issues, and groups shaping the public agenda that is being written collaboratively. The statement of Powerbase and CEO on EUFIC can be found at:
http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/European_Food_Information_Council
http://corporateeurope.org/pressreleases/2013/12/european-commission-nominates-food-lobbyist-eu-food-safety-agencys-management
12 Website of the Ecologist and CEO websites:
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/511976/industry_lobbying_sees_eu_reject_traffic_light_food_l abelling.html http://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/files/article/ceo-food-labelling.pdf
