Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Journal of Rural Studies
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud
Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution
of food discourse in Italy
Gianluca Brunori*, Vanessa Malandrin, Adanella Rossi
University of Pisa, Dipartimento di Agronomia e gestione dell’agroecosistema, via s.Michele degli Scalzi 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
a b s t r a c t
Keywords:
Food security
Discourse
Made in Italy
Public sphere
Market sphere
In this paper we analyse the role that ‘food security’ has played in the evolution of the food discourse in Italy,
a country with a strong and internationally recognized food culture. We identify three phases of this
evolution: in the first phase, from the end of the Second World War to the end of the 1980s, the ‘modernization’ frame, with its emphasis on productivity and the industrial organization of production, dominates in
a context populated mainly by agricultural actors. A second phase, characterised by the ‘turn to quality’,
encourages the development of a ‘Made in Italy food consensus’. In this phase, food security mainly concerns
food safety and conservation of national food identity. The third phase is characterised by a response to the
pressures generated by the 2006e2008 food crisis and the subsequent recession. In this phase food security
becomes a key element of a new consensus frame, which links together pieces of discourse that often existed
in separate fields of activity and policy. The analysis is carried out within a conceptual framework that focuses
attention on the co-evolution between discourse and discursive coalitions in a progressive overlapping
between ‘public sphere’ and ‘market sphere’.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
“For many Italians, their very sense of identity lies in the food, not just
of the region in which they were born, but of the town, village, hamlet,
even house. And they hold to the superiority of their local produce and
dishes with passion. That is why eating your way round Italy is such
a continual delight.” (Fort, 2010).
Italians are recognized internationally as having a sophisticated
culture of food. To Italians food security means much more than
mere availability and affordability, as food is one of the principal
ways for Italians to reassert their identity. This peculiarity has an
important influence on the characteristics of the food industry. As
Porter (1990) observed, sophisticated and demanding consumers
can be a factor of competitiveness for a nation. In fact, food is one of
the key competitive assets for the Italian economy, with ‘Made in
Italy’ food being a high value global brand.
Given these characteristics, the Italian food system is particularly
vulnerable. Problems relating to health, safety and taste create
emotional reactions among consumers and consequently have the
potential to destabilize the markets. Furthermore, a domestic crisis
of trust can have repercussions on export markets. Building trust in
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ39 (0) 502218979.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (G. Brunori), [email protected]
(V. Malandrin).
the system is therefore a strategic priority for the Italian agri-food
system. The way key Italian actors in the industry have decided to
build up this trust is somewhat different from other countries. While
important components of the European food industry advocate
communication to build trust in technology (ETP Food For Life,
2007), in Italy “constant reminders of the deep cultural value of
Italian gastronomy and of regional peasant traditions as well as the
regulation of the production of excellence is crucial to the way Italian
consumers, producers and regulators have responded . to issues of
food policies in the ages of food scares and globalization” (Sassatelli
and Scott, 2001, p. 224). Italian food culture has provided valuable
rhetorical resources both for developing marketing strategies and for
increasing trust in the system.
What does food security mean in this context? What contradictions does the concept of food security carry in an export-oriented
national industry? What are the relations between food security
and external competitiveness?
In this paper we will mainly concentrate on ‘domestic’ food
security rather than on ‘global food security’. We argue that in Italy
food security cannot be separated from the broader discourse on
quality. In other words, food security policies cannot avoid taking into
consideration consumers’ expectations and concerns about how food
is produced and processed, where it comes from, and its impact on
the environment and on society. Along with the recent history of the
Italian food system, both ‘quality’ and ‘food security’ meanings have
evolved, and a progressive integration of food security into
0743-0167/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
2
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
a comprehensive concept of food quality has been built, through
discursive coalitions that have reconciled positions initially very
different from each other.
To develop this thesis we will proceed as follows: Section 2 will
illustrate our conceptual framework. It is argued that the evolution
of the food system and the power distribution within it are largely
related to cognitive processes and linguistic games, which are
played between the market sphere and the public sphere and are at
the basis of the construction of discursive coalitions. Section 3 will
illustrate how the framework has been applied to analyse the food
security discourse in Italy. Sections 4e6 will illustrate respectively
the three phases we have identified to illustrate the evolution of the
Italian food security discourse. Section 6 will discuss the findings
and draw some conclusions.
2. Food security and the turn to quality: a theoretical
framework
Behind our theoretical framework lies the notion that, with the
‘turn to quality’ that characterised the food system in the late 1970s
(Goodman, 2003; Busch and Bain, 2004), cognitive aspects e the
link between how food is known and thought and how food is
produced, consumed and distributed (Goodman and DuPuis, 2002)
e have become crucial in the analysis of the food system. This has
opened a new research agenda: How do people change their
general attitude to food? Who is involved in these processes? What
strategies and tools are used to influence consumer thinking?
Broadly speaking, quality refers to the capacity of a product to
meet consumer expectations. The Fordist regime, having ensured the
availability and affordability of food in the West after a period of
profound insecurity, managed to keep consumer expectations clear
and limited in scope. In the transition from Fordism to the new
regime, a ‘competition on quantity’ has been countered by
a ‘competition on quality’. With the evolution of consumers’ expectations, the meaning of quality has extended its scope and has
become a contested field (Morris and Young, 2000). Not only have the
intrinsic and functional differences of food become objects of
competition (taste, nutrition, health, status), but also the characteristics external to individual utility, such as public health, environmental issues, ethics, and social justice have been increasingly
involved in defining the quality of food. When food scares, outbreaks
of disease or controversial new technologies populate the public
debate, concerns are translated into modified consumer attitudes and
identities.
As a consequence, competition regarding quality involves a higher
degree of communication complexity: it focuses more on images and
symbols than on technology and organization. Each competitor plays
a hegemonic game to attach consumers to his networks (and related
frames) and to detach them from competitors (Callon et al., 2002).
Commercial communication is increasingly fed with noncommercial issues, values and images. At the same time, to keep in
tune with consumers’ worldviews and concerns, corporations
increasingly participate in the public sphere.
Movements become a key player in the new competitive model
(Friedmann, 2005). Aware of the growing link between consumption and identities, food movements address issues that are at the
core of societal e and consequently, of media e concerns, including
health, environment, quality of life (Goodman, 1999) as well as
social justice, thus creating normative pressure on the regime
(Elzen et al., 2010). One of the particular features of food movements is that they have extended their activity to the market place,
identifying in consumer citizenship the transformative potential
that turns consumption behaviour into political action (Goodman
and DuPuis, 2002). They thus blur the distinction between public
sphere and private sphere (Tormey, 2007). This produces a change
both in the markets and in policies. Alternative food networks
(Renting et al., 2003; Goodman and Goodman, 2008; Goodman
et al., 2011) capitalize on consumer needs for consistency
between motivation and behaviour by experimenting with innovative production, distribution and consumption practices that
provide concrete alternatives while at the same time questioning
the legitimacy of the dominant system.
One of the effects of the turn to quality is that most corporations
have progressively dismissed a confrontational communication
strategy e such as the one used by McDonald’s in the famous McLibel1 case, which resulted in a bad image for the multinational e and
have started to interact with civil society, thus giving rise to hybrid
forums (Callon et al., 2002), ethical food standards (with reference to
labour conditions, environmental impacts, fair trade and animal
welfare) (Fulponi, 2006; Busch and Bain, 2004), and corporate social
responsibility strategies (Jenkins, 2005; Maloni and Brown, 2006).
Friedberg (2004) contends that the UK’s top retailers’ need to keep
a high brand profile has given non-profit advocacy groups power over
them, thus creating what she calls an ethical food complex.
In the study of these processes, a number of scholars have stressed
the importance of framing processes (Friedmann, 2005; Mooney and
Hunt, 2009; Bagdonis et al., 2009; Wilkinson, 2011). Frames are
mental structures that help people to make sense of the external
world. They operate by giving people rules to filter information and
by creating hierarchies of relevance. As frames select information,
they also operate as mechanisms of social inclusion and exclusion
(Wilkinson, 2011).
Frames develop through communication practices. As individuals belong to multiple spheres of interaction, there is a reciprocal
influence between collective frames e shared within a specific
sphere of interaction e and individual frames. Market and public
spheres are of particular relevance in this context. The market
sphere is the space where individuals make judgements regarding
commodities. According to Calıskan and Callon (2009), economic
institutions recommended by neoclassical economists are designed
to help individuals to facilitate their behaviour as rational maximizers. In other words, they frame consumers by shaping their
identity and behaviour, isolating the market sphere from other
spheres of interaction.
The public sphere, according to Fraser (1990, p. 57; see also
Calhoun, 1992), is “the space in which citizens deliberate about their
common affairs, hence, an institutionalized arena of discursive interaction” (Fraser, 1990, p. 57). In the original concept of Habermas
(Habermas et al.,1989), the public sphere encouraged people to freely
discuss the common good. But its role has changed with the emergence of the mass media, which has become the instrument of
control and the manipulator of public opinion. However, domination
generates resistance. Consequently, the public sphere can also be
seen as a battlefield where hegemonic struggles occur. It is thus
possible that ‘subaltern counterpublics’ (Fraser, 1990) emerge, which
are alternative frames to the dominant master frames. Fraser gives
the example of the late-twentieth century U.S. feminist movement
“.with its variegated array of journals, bookstores, publishing companies, film and video distribution networks, lecture series, research
centres, academic programs, conferences, conventions, festivals, and
local meeting places” (Fraser, 1990, p. 67).
1
“McDonald’s Corporation v Steel & Morris [1997] EWHC QB 366, known as “the
McLibel case” was an English lawsuit filed by McDonald’s Corporation against environmental activists Helen Steel and David Morris (often referred to as “The McLibel
Two”) over a pamphlet critical of the company. The original case lasted ten years,
making it the longest-running libel case in English history” (from http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/McLibel_Case#cite_note-0).
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
Discourse thus evolves into market and public sphere in relation
to the evolution of discursive coalitions. Discursive coalitions “are
not necessarily based on shared interests and goals, but rather on
shared terms and concepts through which meaning is assigned to
social and physical processes and the nature of the policy problem
under consideration is constructed” (Bulkeley, 2000, p. 734). In other
words, the concept helps to explain how actors with very different
interests and goals decide to play a collaborative game (Hajer,
2005).
With the quality turn, public and market spheres, as well as
private spheres, overlap significantly. Individuals and groups are
increasingly encouraged to translate frames to different spheres, so
that issues in the public sphere become rhetoric resources in the
market sphere. The overlapping of market and public spheres gives
an explanation why oppositional patterns (based on a dominantsubaltern pattern) are frequently replaced by dialogic patterns. In
fact, business actors need legitimization towards consumers/citizens,
and subaltern actors, when dealing with market logics, need to make
alliances and compromises. The development of ‘consensus frames’
(Mooney and Hunt, 2009) thus becomes the norm rather than the
exception. Consensus frames, in fact, are general and ambiguous
enough to be interpreted in different ways and to lead to very
different courses of action; however, they still have the capacity to
create a commonality, a space of exchange between fields. This does
not mean that conflicts are over: rather, it can be said that ‘food wars’
(Lang and Heasman, 2004) become more sophisticated, as they are
fought through complex linguistic games.
3. Food security discourse and consensus frames in Italy
If the concept of food security has ‘evolved, developed, multiplied
and diversified’ (Maxwell, quoted in Shaw, 2007), this is very much
true in Italy. In Italy ‘food security’ is translated into ‘sicurezza alimentare’, that stands e both in common language and in official
policy documents e for ‘food safety’. If one makes a search for the
keyword ‘sicurezza alimentare’ in an online newspaper’s database,
she/he would find the term associated with ‘controls’, ‘fraud’, ‘health’
and ‘labels’ much more than with ‘poverty’, ‘hunger’, ‘trade’ and ‘food
prices’. From this we tend to distinguish ‘domestic food security’ from
‘global food security’. Until recently, dominant frames have associated global food security with foreign policy, while domestic food
security issues have heavily influenced marketing strategies. After
the 2006e2008 crisis, increased awareness of the responsibility of
industrialized countries e and of western consumers e for global
food security has reduced the distance between the two concepts.
We identify three phases in the evolution of the discourse of food
security in Italy: in the first phase, from the end of the Second World
War to the end of the 1980s, the ‘modernization’ frame, with its
emphasis on productivity and the industrial organization of
production, dominates in a context populated mainly by agricultural
actors. This frame is challenged by the emergence of the organic
3
movement and Slow Food. A series of food scandals undermined its
legitimacy and marks the transition to a second phase, characterised
by the ‘turn to quality’, which facilitates the development of a ‘Made
in Italy food consensus’. This phase is based on the concept of artisanal quality (Murdoch and Miele, 1999; Tregear et al., 2007), which
embodies local and organic food as components of Italian food
identity. It gains consensus in the business sector thanks to its value
creation strategy that replaces the emphasis on the costcompetitiveness approach in the industry. In this phase, food security mainly concerns food safety, conservation of national food
identity and the survival of family farming. The third phase is characterised by a response to the pressures generated by the economic
crisis, with the emergence of food poverty, not only in developing
countries but also in the wealthy West. In this phase we can observe
a convergence between ‘domestic food security’ and ‘global food
security’ into a unifying concept of quality, linking together a variety
of pieces of discourse. In fact, in this phase we observe the development of a frame that links environmental, health, agricultural and
socio-economic issues, and that stimulates communication between
food companies, political parties, public administrations, food
movements and consumers.
We argue that subaltern counterpublics have had a crucial role
in putting food security issues on the agenda, challenging the
conventional food system on this ground. When security problems
have shaken the existing frames, a number of actors have operated
to bridge dominant and subaltern publics by addressing themes of
common interest, which we can identify with ‘boundary objects’
(Star and Griesemer, 1989).
Drawing on the insights of a DEFRA report (DEFRA, 2008), we
have taken into consideration five dimensions that in the Italian
case are relevant to characterise food security: availability, access
and affordability, safety, sustainability of the product/process, and
nutrition-related features. Table 1 shows the main consensus/
subaltern frames of the food discourse related to these dimensions
in the three phases. The sources we have used are mainly based on
newspapers, magazines and weblogs selected through an extensive
internet search.
4. The modernization consensus and its crisis
The post-war period was characterised by intense economic
growth. Italians, after the severe deprivation suffered during the war,
nearly doubled the quantity of food consumed and shifted to
a protein-rich diet: meat consumption increased from about 10 kg in
1951-55 to 85 kg in 1992, milk from 49.4 to 84, cheese from 6.3 to 14.1
(Zamagni, 1998). A few years after the introduction of the Common
Agricultural Policy, the problem of food scarcity was replaced by
overproduction. Price support generated unsold surpluses, dumped
on the international market or destroyed. However, with the removal
of trade barriers, Italy found itself vulnerable to competition in some
product markets. Imports of some products, such as milk, wheat, fish
Table 1
Food security frames in Italy.
Availability
Access/affordability
Safety
Sustainability of
product/process
Nutrition
1st phase: Challenge to modernization
2nd phase: The turn to quality
3rd phase: Food crisis and food security
Productivism, globalized production-distribution
system/Sustainability
Keeping food prices low/Giving a fair reward
to producers
Industrial quality/trust and local food systems
National systems of production/local food systems
Scarcity e waste/Neoproductivism
Quality has a cost/consumers’ right to quality
Right to quality/solidarity
Artisanal quality, national quality/appropriate
safety rules, organic methods, no GMO food
Small scale e traditional production
systems/Biodiversity and seasonality
Mediterranean diet/sustainable
consumption and lifestyles
Appropriate rules/trust and
local food systems
Biodiversity, freshness and
localness/post-organic
Sustainable diets/sufficiency
Standardization/Nature and place
Abundance as wealth/natural lifestyles
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
4
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
and meat increased. Modernization of the agricultural sector was
seen as a solution to both problems (Diana, 1973).
Food safety was also debated under the modernization frame. In
a context of rapid change, food adulteration was perceived as
a problem of public security in an industrial world. The press reported dozens of cases of food adulteration, made possible thanks
to unclear and contradictory regulations and an inefficient system
of public control, which led to what was perceived as a progressive
erosion of food quality (Pansa, 1972).
A radical critique of the food system and of the modernization
discourse emerged in the early 1970s with the birth of organic
farming. Excluded from access to institutions and to the conventional media, organic farmers developed a subaltern counterpublic
based on direct communication between producers and consumers.
They created local associations that soon developed into national
and international networks, linked to green movements. When the
Green Party was founded in 1986, these networks gained a voice in
the political sphere. This is not the place to illustrate in detail the
characteristics of the organic movement, since it has been amply
described in the literature (Brunori et al., 1988; Miele, 2001).
However, it is important to highlight that organic farmers promoted
organic farming as part of an alternative mode of development. They
also challenged the key point of modern agriculture, low food prices,
claiming that the prices of conventional food did not embody the
social costs of modern agriculture. These principles found their
expression in the markets, where organic products met the
demands of consumers e often belonging to wealthy groups e who
were willing to pay a premium for organic food.
The critique of agricultural modernization was strengthened by
the foundation of Slow Food. In 1989 Carlo Petrini and Folco Portinari issued the Slow Food Manifesto: We are enslaved by speed and
have all succumbed to the same insidious virus: Fast Life, which
disrupts our habits, pervades the privacy of our homes and forces us to
eat Fast Foods.2
There are many differences between Slow Food and the organic
movement. Slow Food focuses on taste and pleasure, while organic
farmers promote a vision of happiness based on lifestyles closer to
nature. However, they have in common a business model based on small
quantities and high quality for consumers willing to pay higher prices,
which helped to successfully introduce to the Italian food system the
concept of ‘value creation’ as a strategy for business development.
Although both movements can be politically classified as being on
‘the left’, the organic movement and Slow Food introduced themes
that created bitter conflicts in this field. For example, they were
among the pioneers of the anti-GMO campaign in Italy, in a phase
when most political parties and farmers’ organizations, heavily
influenced by modernization frames, were in favour or uncertain of
these technologies. The radicality with which they accused conventional farming led most of the actors linked to the dominant public to
try to isolate and marginalize them from the public sphere.
One of the strengths of the alternative subaltern public in this
phase was the capacity to integrate these themes in the market
sphere. There was a strong continuity between political and ethical
campaigns and marketing. Organic farmers’ markets were generally accompanied by cultural events, and organic shops became
places for the dissemination of leaflets on general themes (Brunori
et al., 1988). Organic farmers were very active in public debates, and
were held up as worthy examples of existing alternatives to the
dominant production system. When Slow Food developed, at
a local level Slow Food and organic farmers collaborated or were
part of the same networks. Local Slow Food units “act as ‘integrators’
between producers, local administrations, informed consumers and
2
http://www.slowfood.com/about_us/eng/manifesto.lasso.
specialised outlets, and to link local networks to broader networks”
(Brunori, 2007, p. 4).
5. After modernization: the Made in Italy consensus
In 1986 some low-price wine mixed with methanol killed
21 people. The scandal had a strong impact on the wine industry, one
of the most important Italian export industries: in the first five
months after the scandal Italian wine exports dropped by 18%
(Burato, 1986). The shock caused by the scandal triggered a reorganization in the food system. Stricter regulations were promoted as
well as controls by public authorities and a strong pledge by private
enterprises to adopt quality schemes. The methanol wine scandal has
become legendary, and is viewed as the turning point for the
renaissance of the Italian food system,3 the cornerstone of the Italian
‘turn to quality’.
But what quality? If interpreted within a modernization frame,
quality is nothing more than a further step in the modernization of
the industry, based on the application of appropriate management
schemes (Morris and Young, 2000). Often the consequence of the
introduction of food safety rules is that diversity (and a different
concept of quality) is sacrificed to achieve the goal of higher hygiene
standards. In Italy, EU regulations in the meat sector4 enforced in
1991 led to the closure of more than 1000 slaughterhouses, especially
in southern Italy (La Stampa, 14.02.1993), and as a consequence of the
lack of processing facilities, meat production in Italy relocated from
the south to the north and from the mountains to the plains.
The restructuring of the food system did not prevent the collapse
of consumer confidence in the system during the BSE crisis (Ansell
and Vogel, 2006). In the first few weeks after the BSE outbreak in
1996, there was a 70% reduction in beef consumption (La Stampa,
29.03.1996). Italians discovered that modernization of the food
system had not made food as safe as they expected. Given that BSE
occurred in countries where modernization had happened much
faster than in Italy, Italians were encouraged to acknowledge that
‘modernization’ of the food sector was not a guarantee for food
safety; in fact, the industrialization of agriculture might have been
part of the problem. Subaltern publics framed BSE as a failure of
industrial agriculture (La Stampa, 08.07.1997). In 1996, the demand
for local and organic beef increased significantly (Brunori et al.,
2008), and retailers organized themselves to fulfil this demand by
activating organic supply chains and other beef quality schemes
(Iacoponi et al., 1997). The gap in modernization in the Italian
system, once seen as a weakness, showed its possible strength.
The first Slow Food ‘Salone del gusto’ (Taste Fair) in 1996 was an
opportunity to show to a wide public a gastronomic heritage in
danger of extinction caused by modernization. The success of the fair
e 8000 visitors per day (La Stampa, 28.05.2002) e and the echo in the
national media showed that artisanal quality had gained a broader
audience. The growing success of traditional food was also mobilized
to create political pressure in order to adapt food standards introduced by EU regulations with respect to local specificities. The
emerging storyline was that a) quality is not only about safety, and
there is artisanal quality opposed to industrial quality; b) EU standards have created a trade-off between safety and quality, and some
of them are unnecessarily restrictive, putting in danger hundreds of
traditional local products; c) industrial large-scale production and
artisanal small-scale production have different characteristics, and
3
Apart from the quoted book (Padovani and Padovani, 2011) see for example
a recent speech of Giuseppe Politi, head of one of the Italian farmers’ unions (Politi,
2011). There is also an entry of Wikipedia on the scandal (http://it.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Scandalo_del_vino_al_metanolo_in_Italia).
4
EU directives 91/947 and 91/948.
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
therefore safety rules need to be tailored to the specific features of
small producers.
In 1999 Slow Food launched a petition “in defence of the Italian
gastronomic heritage” which was being jeopardized by the new food
safety regulations. Coldiretti, the largest farmers’ union in Italy,
supported the petition and encouraged its members to sign it
(La Stampa, 27.06.1999). Another Slow Food manifesto, in 2001, ‘In
defence of raw milk cheese’, protested against the closure of many
small dairies by Health Authorities. These campaigns involved
farmers’ unions at a local level, NGOs, local administrations, and were
also widely covered in the media (Brunori, 2007). The significance of
this movement was that it created alliances between producers and
consumers that spanned across the public and market spheres. The
Ministry of Agriculture responded positively to these requests, and in
1999 approved a national regulation that gave a special dispensation
of the safety rules for traditional products. In 2004 the benefits and
positive impact of the Italian system were acknowledged when the
EU approved a regulation (853/2004) that gave member states the
freedom to adapt food safety rules to local specificities.
The turn to quality shifted the balance of power within the food
system. Organic methods, traditions and local specificity, as
opposed to the industrial logic of production based on technological innovation and brand management, gave competitive assets to
farmers and small processing firms that were previously unimagined. EU Organic, PDO and PGI regulations, enforced in 1991 and
1992, created space for manoeuvre for local administrations and
local actors, opening new policy networks and clear marketing
rules. During this period, organic farms increased to over 47,000
over an area of more than 1 million ha (INEA, 2011).
Quality interpreted as local specificity e embodied in traditional
recipes, local biodiversity and artisanal manufacture e became
a policy priority. In 2011 in Italy there were 233 PDOs and PGIs and
511 wine geographical indications. Even more impressive, 4606
‘traditional products’ were recognized by the Ministry of Agriculture. Artisanal quality, in contrast to industrial quality, has become
the key to the Italian food strategy (Ventura et al., 2006).
Coldiretti was a decisive driver for the establishment of the new
consensus frame in this phase. Aware of the family farmers’ discontent at their progressive marginalization within the food system, and
of the increasing concern of public opinion for the outcomes of the
Common Agricultural Policy, it gradually abandoned the modernization discourse and corporatist defence of CAP price support, and
proposed a new business model based on multifunctionality and
a new agricultural policy. Tradition, locality and family farming
became common elements of Coldiretti’s concept of quality. In 2002,
it proposed a ‘pact with consumers’ centred on the quality of food and
the environment. One of the keywords of the new pact was ‘traceability’, which involved consumers being informed of the origin of
the product (La Stampa, 03.03.2002).
This frame gained bipartisan endorsement also in the political
field. In fact, the political landscape in Italy has been characterised
over the last 20 years by the growth in the Lega Nord, a party which
from time to time has manifested, and never denied, a separatist
goal. Parallel to this, the post-fascist right, in its search for cultural
roots, has restored and reworked a ‘blood and soil’ symbolism.
These parties perceive globalization not only as a threat to local
economies, but also as a threat to national or regional identity. In
some cases, these feelings have turned into an aggressive ‘defensive
localism’ (Allen, 1999; DuPuis and Goodman, 2005). Examples of
this trend are the initiatives of several municipalities of both
northern and central Italy that prohibit the opening of kebab fast
foods, which have blossomed over recent years, often replacing the
more local pizzerias (Corriere della Sera, 27.01.2009). When it
comes to local and national governments, Lega Nord supports the
development of local food in line with its localist approach.
5
As the Italian food system is increasingly identified with artisanal
quality, and given the success of the ‘value creation’ strategy, ‘local
food’ and ‘artisanal quality’ have become the boundary objects of the
consensus, and Coldiretti the most significant boundary organization. Coldiretti’s main endeavour was to associate ‘local’ with
‘national’, whereas ‘national’ is a sum of local specificities. In a survey
commissioned by Coldiretti in 2010, 91% of respondents declared
that they preferred Italian products. This perception was attributed
by consumers as a guarantee of more controls along with the
freshness and goodness of the products themselves. In the same
survey 53% of consumers declared that they preferred local and
traditional foods to industrial ones (Coldiretti, 2010).
5.1. Challenges to the Made in Italy consensus: affordability,
food safety, obesity, GMOs
The Made in Italy consensus emerged as a reaction to the crisis
of modernization. This consensus frame has been able to tackle
some of the emerging food security related issues.
In this phase critiques to value creation strategies came mainly
from supporters of industrial agriculture and of modernization of
the food system, who emphasized the need to keep costs and prices
low. To this critique, the consensus frame responded that food
prices are too low compared with other consumer goods (Petrini,
2001), and that prices of standard products do not cover the
social costs of food. Higher prices of ‘artisan quality’ food were also
purported as a strength to demonstrate consumer consensus over
alternative food and the possibility to pursue competitiveness
through sustainability.
While in other countries food safety issues have fostered the
modernization of the food industry, in Italy they have strengthened
the arguments of the Made in Italy consensus. In June 2010 for
several days the media published the story of ‘blue mozzarella’ found
in shops in northern Italy. Apparently it was being purchased in
discount stores and had been made in Germany and then exported to
Italy. The Italian food authorities confirmed once again that Italian
mozzarella was good and safe, thanks to the controls and quality that
characterised the Made in Italy brand (Il Secolo XIX, 22.06.2010).
Food risks were increasingly being associated with imported products or imported raw materials. Coldiretti was very active in
producing press releases linking food safety problems to imported
food. Legambiente, one of the biggest environmental NGOs in Italy,
stressed that there was an increasing quantity of food products
coming from Turkey and China with fake labelling (Legambiente,
2010). In general, such news items were accompanied by claims
for a stricter regime of controls of imports and for regulations
making traceability compulsory.
While food safety generally favoured the consolidation of the
Made in Italy consensus, other components of the food security
concept challenged it. For example, the emphasis of Slow Food on
‘the pleasure of food’ contradicted the increasing concern for
obesity. The Made in Italy consensus responded by framing obesity
as a threat coming from the outside. “Unless we do something about
it, we are destined to emulate the U.S.A., we’ll become ‘large-sized
people’” (Bosello O., quoted in De Bac, 2004). This argument was
supported by the wide recognition of the value of “our Mediterranean habits: fruits, vegetables, cereals and legumes, and a little meat,
fish and extra-virgin olive oil” (Cannella, 2008, p. 62). Coldiretti,
commenting on a survey carried out in 2009, argued that 60% of
Italians do not know exactly what the Mediterranean diet is and
linked the growing incidence of obesity in children to the demise of
traditional diets (Il Sole 24 Ore, 04.04.2011).
An important component of the Made in Italy consensus is an
anti-GMO position. GMOs are framed as a threat to Italian agri-food
quality and consequently to the ’Made in Italy’ brand. Carlo Petrini,
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
6
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
founder of the Slow Food movement, argued that: “.when the
contamination will be done, our ‘Made in Italy’ will become just an
empty label” (Petrini, 2010a). The arguments chosen by the antiGMOs coalition are economic: “Introducing products with no
history would weaken a system that ensures important economic
revenues from tourism” (Petrini, 2010b). The media highlighted that
even Greenpeace accepted using the Made in Italy consensus by
using the defence of Parmigiano Reggiano as an argument against
GMOs (Corriere della Sera, 25.06.2007). The economic point made
it easier for public institutions to be involved in the anti-GMO front.
In January 2005 the GMO-free Regions network was established,
which now comprises regions from 37 countries. Italian regions
were strongly represented in this network. In 2007 the alliance
“Free from GMOs” was established. It consists of 32 members e
including Slow Food, Coldiretti, AIAB (a national organic farmers’
association), CoopItalia (a network of consumers’ cooperatives, the
biggest supermarket chain in Italy), and Confartigianato (small
enterprises employers’ union). The alliance has had a strong
influence on the political field: all agriculture ministers have
backed an anti-GMO position. Moreover, among other initiatives, it
collected three million signatures in a petition against the introduction of GMOs (Cianciullo, 2007).
The anti-GMO front has also involved many components of the
food chain. CoopItalia has taken a clear anti-GMO position (Coop,
2008). Though less engaged in the public debate, many other
retailers, such as Auchan-SMA and Carrefour (Green Planet, 2010),
have followed a GMO-free policy. Barilla e one of the leading food
companies in Italy e aware that consumers are mostly against
GMOs, and that retail chains tend to become the interpreters of
their concerns (De Krom, 2009), has joined the emerging consensus
through its Centre for Food Nutrition (Barilla CFN, 2010b).
Paradoxically, in this phase the pro-GMO coalition acted as
subaltern counterpublic. One of the blogs on these issues, “salmone.org”, had in its banner the slogan ‘.for those who are not afraid to
swim against the current”.5 However, even these actors tried to play
within the consensus frame. For example, some scientists advocated
the use of genetic engineering to save some Italian local varieties,
such as the San Marzano tomato, from virus diseases (Del Vecchio and
Pitrelli, 2008).
universally viewed as the symbol of food globalization. McDonald’s
also represents the symbol against which the new Italian Food
Consensus has developed. There was thus surprise when McDonald’s
launched its McItaly campaign in partnership with the Ministry of
Agriculture, which belonged to the Lega Nord. McItaly is a sandwich
made with Italian ingredients, some of which are PDO products. With
this agreement, according to Zaia, “there would be a great opportunity
for the Made in Italy food brand to enter into a promising market
segment, the teenager population” (Zaia, 2010). This McDonald’s
initiative had a strong media impact. Giampaolo Fabris, one of the
best known scholars in consumer studies in Italy, deemed the
initiative of “unprecedented gravity”, as it legitimated a style of
consumption so distant from the image of Italian food culture (Fabris,
2010). Carlo Petrini of Slow Food, contended that McItaly would have
as its outcome the fading of Italian identity in favour of “homologation” (Petrini, 2010c). While criticism prevailed, this Ministry-driven
initiative created some disarray in the Made in Italy consensus.
6. After the food crisis: a new consensus frame?
The consensus frame opened the way to market alliances.
Although its image was related to small and traditional farming, Slow
Food established partnerships with the most important Italian food
companies such as Barilla, Lavazza, CoopItalia (Fonte, 2006), Ferrero,
and more recently, with Federalimentare, the employers’ association
of the food sector.
An excellent example of how ‘artisanal quality’ has been translated into conventional marketing strategies is Eataly. The Eataly
business model is centred on the supply of a large set of Italian local
specialties. As noted on its website, Eataly, which works in partnership with Slow Food, reconciles the best of Italian artisanal food
products with affordable prices by reducing the food chain to the
essential, and creating a direct relationship between producers and
the retailer. It does this by bypassing intermediate steps in the food
chain (http://eatalyny.com/how-to-eataly).
An indicator of the appeal of the ‘Made in Italy’ consensus
included a McDonald’s initiative. All over the world, a framework for
comparison between the ‘subaltern counterpublic’ and the dominant
public has been hamburger-based fast food chains. McDonald’s is
The strength of a consensus frame is the capacity to respond to
emerging societal problems with solutions that resolve possible
conflicts. The Made in Italy consensus has been an appropriate
response in a phase when internal food security concerns were
mainly focused on safety issues, while availability and access were
not regarded as problematic. The 2006e2008 food crisis dramatically changed this context. The Economist (2008) claimed that the
‘era of cheap food’ was over, and most international organizations
forecast that, after the peak in 2008, in the future food prices would
not get back to previous levels (OECD-FAO, 2010). When farmers’
markets were set up in the central squares of Milan and Florence,
important national newspapers highlighted the higher prices of
food in comparison with supermarkets (Il Sole 24 Ore, 18.09.2008;
La Repubblica, 07.09.2008). Since the crisis, Italians have discovered
the poverty in their country. A recent dossier of Caritas Italia,
a Catholic charity, claimed that the right to food is denied to
a growing number of people (Caritas Italiana, 2011). Several
newspapers have published stories of middle class people asking
charities distributing food for help. The media gave great coverage
to the “Day of food collection”, organized by a network of charities
with the help of thousands of volunteers.6 Retailers have gained
consensus by focusing their strategies on affordability, also urged
on by the growing competition of discount stores, and this created
tension with producers and farmers’ unions.
Before 2008, the issue of affordability of food was raised in the
context of foreign policy, and only subaltern groups called for
policies that would address the gap between western lifestyles and
hunger in the rest of the world. After 2008 some opinion-makers
raised criticism regarding the ‘elitism’ of value creation strategies
(Brunori and Guarino, 2009). The former European Commissioner
Emma Bonino, in an article in defence of GMOs, commented that
organic food was mainly consumed by wealthy consumers (Bonino,
2008). The 2008 crisis also showed the general public the interdependence between economic crises, energy crises (oil prices also
increased, and biofuels were held responsible for at least part of the
price increase), and ecological crises (climate change was considered among the causes of price volatility and productivity failures)
(Giovannini, 2011). The question ‘who will feed the world?’
emerged in the media as one of the central issues (Polidori, 2009),
and the ‘neo-productivist’ coalition, consisting of a group of life
scientists, agribusinesses and Confagricoltura (the organization of
5
See for example Manacorda (2004), Defez (2011), and more in general the
salmone.org blog.
6
To have an idea of the Media coverage of the initiative, go to http://www.
bancoalimentare.it/colletta-alimentare-2011/news.
5.2. The ‘Made in Italy’ consensus turns into marketing strategies
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
large-scale farms) received a higher audience. The neo-productivist
coalition frames food security issues as follows7: a) to defeat hunger
in a world with a growing population we need to produce more
food; b) organic and local foods are for the upper classes; c) organic
production is not safe, while technology can provide solutions to
important safety problems; d) the latest technologies e including
GMOs e enable more food to be produced with fewer resources;
e) science applied to food can provide solutions to important health
problems.
Food availability and affordability have become the biggest
challenges to the Made in Italy consensus. How to keep the legitimacy of ‘artisanal quality’ without being accused of neglecting food
security? After 2008 the value creation strategy of the preceding
phase appeared, in the public sphere, inappropriate. Consistency
between frames in the market and the public spheres has become
one of the necessary conditions of the resilience of a consensus
frame: if marketing strategies do not enjoy endorsement in the
public sphere, they lose effectiveness.
The need to reframe the consensus has activated a dialogue
between groups, NGOs and networks which are inspired by the antiglobalization movement. Agriculture and food provision are among
the key themes of the movement, framed in a way that has created an
alliance between the needs and the struggles in the South of the
world e availability and access to food, farmers’ livelihoods, the role
of multinational corporations and of technology e and the claims for
sustainable production and consumption emerging in the North.
These frames assume that resource scarcity is an inescapable
constraint, and that change in production and consumption styles is
the right way to build ‘another world’ (World Social Forum, 2001).
GAS (Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale, Solidarity purchasing groups) are
the most recent and significant expression of these frames. They are
linked in several ways to the anti-globalization movement. They
connect together consumers and post-organic farmers (Moore, 2006)
in the construction of systems of food provision that pursue social
justice and responsibility for the environment through collective
action (Brunori et al., 2012). They argue that the conventional system
of provision generates waste and overconsumption and harms the
environment. They recognize that farmers have the right to a fair
price, but are implicitly critical of the emphasis on the exceptionalism
of Italian food quality. Rather, they focus on the right of people to the
quality of everyday food as a component of consumption styles based
on ‘sufficiency’ (Princen, 2005; Segrè, 2008), that takes the awareness
of the ecologic constraint as a source of long-term economic security.
The systems of provision that GAS concur to build keep food prices
low by replacing commercial services with voluntary work and by
consuming seasonal food.
One of the first attempts to connect the no-global movement
and the Made in Italy consensus was the decision made by Claudio
Martini, the governor of the region of Tuscany, to host the European
Social Forum in Florence in 2002 (La Stampa, 07.11.2002). The
success of this event, which was peaceful and well attended, gave
the movement significant visibility in the media. On the eve of this
success, in 2003 Tuscany hosted and sponsored the International
Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture, chaired by the
activist Vandana Shiva, which launched a Manifesto on the future of
food declaring “our firm opposition to industrialized, globalized food
production, and our support for this positive shift to sustainable,
productive, locally adapted small-scale alternatives” (International
Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture, 2003, p. 9).
Carlo Petrini, who participated in the works of the Commission,
recounted that the idea of organizing Terra Madre, the biennial
7
See for example Manacorda (2004), Defez (2011), and more in general the
salmone.org blog.
7
meeting of ‘food communities’ from all over the world, came to him
during that meeting (Petrini, personal communication).
Terra Madre, which was held for the first time in 2004 in Turin
(Italy), was a turning point for the food movement in Italy and
probably elsewhere. It marked the shift of Slow Food from a focus
on pleasure to a focus on security. With the slogan ‘Good, Clean and
Fair’, Carlo Petrini launched Slow Food’s food security concept,
contending that, in principle, there is no contradiction between
quality and affordability, localism and multiculturalism, safety and
artisanal quality (Petrini, 2005), and security and pleasure. As
Sassatelli and Davolio (2010) showed, this is seen by the Slow Food
movement as a qualitative leap in their mission and in the way they
operate.
6.1. Developing the new food consensus: waste, resources,
sustainable diets, food sovereignty
The link between the Made in Italy consensus and parts of the
no-global movement has generated a flow of initiatives on themes
that have given substance to the emerging consensus of food
security.
Food waste has raised a lot of interest in the national media. It
has become emblematic of the limitations of dominant food
patterns. After that a series of studies have shown that the amount
of food wasted in Italy is up to 30% (Segré and Falasconi, 2011),
many actors of the consensus have been active on this issue. On one
hand, denouncing waste is a way to claim for a food system organized around a different set of values and consumption styles (“less
is more”).8 On the other hand, aware that this theme can undermine supermarkets’ legitimacy, retailers e and first of all CoopItalia
e are eager to activate projects to redistribute food e which
otherwise would be thrown away e to low-income people. These
projects, most of which have been initiated by a spin-off of
the University of Bologna, Last Minute Market (www.
lastminutemarket.it) show ways to improve the ecological and
ethical efficiency of the food system; as Segré (the founder of Last
Minute Market) says, they propose “a winewin solution” (La
Repubblica, 07.01.2011). On the eve of the success of these initiatives, a coalition of groups led by Last Minute Market is currently
campaigning to make 2013 the ‘European year against waste’, and
has managed to obtain the endorsement of the President of the
Agriculture Commission to the European Parliament, Paolo de
Castro. In September 2010, in partnership with among others Last
Minute Market, Caritas, Eataly, and CoopItalia, Slow Food organized
a “collective dinner for 1000 people” based on food recovered from
supermarket shelves, as an example of “concrete actions against
waste” (content.slowfood.it/upload/2010/.../files/ansa_25-09-2010.
pdf).
Water and land issues have been increasingly included in the
food security discourse. As for water, in 2011 in Italy there was
a referendum against the privatization of water services, promoted
by a large coalition of grassroots groups and organizations (http://
www.acquabenecomune.org/spip.php). The campaign for the referendum, while highlighting the theme of the importance of water as
a common good and linking it with the food crisis and climate
change, also ended up promoting the use of tap water instead of
bottled mineral water. CoopItalia endorsed this campaign and
launched their own communication campaign that encouraged
consumers to drink tap water or, as an alternative, water from
regional sources (http://www.casacoop.e-coop.it/acqua).
8
It is possible to have an idea of the amount of communication generated around
this issue by looking at the press review of the Andrea Segrè personal website
http://www.andreasegre.it/rassegna/stampa.
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
8
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
Regarding land, the 2010 census showed that Italy had lost 20%
of its agricultural land, about 1.5 million hectares (ISTAT, 2011).
National newspapers, such as La Repubblica, published editorials
on the state of the Italian landscape and on unregulated urban
sprawl (Settis, 2010).9 A TV programme, Report, followed by
millions of people, broadcast a story on land grabbing and the food/
fuel conflict for land use (www.report.it). This issue has strengthened the alliance between Coldiretti and environmental movements, such as Legambiente10 (Il Resto del Carlino, 07.11.2011).
Among the outcomes of the emerging discursive coalition was
the growing popularity of the concept of Food Sovereignty, used as
an alternative framing of food security. The Italian Food Sovereignty
coalition (CISA), set up in 2006, is a network of about 270 organizations (http://www.cisaonline.org). This includes environmentalists, food activists, farmers’ union representatives and international
cooperation NGOs. The concept of food sovereignty, counterpointed
to the neoliberal approach to food security by this vast alliance of
NGOs, stresses the need to keep local control over food production.
It prioritises “.local and national economies and markets and family
farmer-driven agriculture, artisanal fishing, pastoralist-led grazing
and food production, distribution and consumption based on environmental, social and economic sustainability” (Declaration of
Nyéléni, 2007, p. 1). CISA has an active role in talks with the FAO
Committee on World Food Security, and is also involved in the
preparation of Milano 2015, the universal expo, the theme of which
is “Nourishing the Planet, Energy for Life” (Expo 2015, 2011).
Even more relevant are local initiatives that develop the concept
of food sovereignty, linking together food and land planning issues.
One of the first examples is the Agricultural Park Milano Sud,
a Regional Park in the peri-urban ring of Milan aimed at preserving
agricultural activities (http://www.provincia.milano.it/parcosud).
Another example is the Agricultural Park between Florence and
Prato, an area adjacent to Florence Airport, created to preserve and
valorise the agricultural activities and defend the countryside from
urban sprawl (http://www.parcodellapiana.it). The innovative
concept of these two agricultural parks is to create synergies
between restrictions of land use and projects of land valorisation,
involving local administrations, civil society organizations, and
consumers/citizens around the food sovereignty principle. A third
example is the ‘Foodplan of the Pisa Province’ project, which has
issued a Food Charter signed by twenty municipalities, pledging to
promote sustainable diets and community food security through
the coordination of food education, public procurement, support
for short food supply chains, and land planning (pianodelcibo.ning.
com).
A decisive contribution to the creation of the new consensus
frame is the foundation of the “Barilla Centre for food and nutrition” (http://www.barillacfn.com), which has quickly become
a think-thank of international significance. The International Forum
on Food Nutrition organized by Barilla CFN, held in November 2011,
hosted the most important experts and activists on food and
developed issues such as access to food, water economy, food for
children, biotechnology, and sustainable diets. In its position paper
on food security, Barilla CFN called for a strengthening of global
governance, for an independent authority combating speculation
on food markets, and for an active policy of promoting healthy and
sustainable food styles (Barilla CFN, 2010a).
9
See also the press review on the theme on http://www.stopalconsumoditerritorio.
it/index.php?option¼com_content&task¼view&id¼38&Itemid¼68.
10
A forum of more than 30 national and 400 local organizations, promoted by Slow
Food, Legambiente, WWF and AIAB (Associazione Italiana Agricoltura Biologica, the
most important organic farmers’ association) among others, issue a manifesto ‘Save the
landscape e save the territory’, and organize a national assembly in October 2011.
Sustainable diets have become the new boundary object of
the renewed discursive coalition. Slow Food accepts the gastronomic challenge of sustainable diets. Roberto Burdese, head of
Slow Food Italy, says: “Reducing our meat consumption can still be
a free choice, but in the future it will become a necessity, an
obligatory choice (.) eating less meat and of better quality is still
possible, and it is gastronomically challenging, as it allows us to
discover alternatives, starting from legumes and forgotten recipes”
(Burdese R. quoted in Slow Food, 2011). Slow Food also launched
the ‘Slow fish challenge’, which consists of encouraging Slow
Food members to develop a repertoire of recipes based on
sustainable
fish
(http://newsletter.slowfood.com/slow_fish/
challenge.html).
6.2. The emerging new food consensus and the market
The emerging discursive coalition has also been developed in the
market sphere. Sustainable diets have become key to food education
policies and food public procurement. Already in 2000 the Italian
government introduced a law that supported the introduction of
organic meals in schools, and the Italian case became an example of
the ‘School food revolution’ (Morgan and Sonnino, 2008). In the
meantime, initiatives to create the conditions for local sourcing and
to link them to education, to biodiversity and seasonality have
blossomed. These initiatives have also involved private firms.
According to Biobank (Bertino, 2010), in 2010 there were 837 organic
canteens in schools and firms in Italy.
Coldiretti has developed a short food chain strategy based on the
principle that reducing the steps between farmers and consumers
could create a winewin situation. Its network of farmers’ markets
and farm shops, Campagnamica (friendly countryside), is intended to
provide an alternative outlet to farmers and an affordable alternative
to supermarkets for consumers. Coldiretti built its strategy on
a formula that keeps prices low while rewarding farmers with better
returns for their raw materials. ‘Local’, ‘fresh’ and ‘seasonal’ are
emphasized, in clear contrast with the supermarkets’ delocalized
formula. Coldiretti was also the promoter of integrating short food
supply chains into conventional markets. One example is the
agreement of Coldiretti with Autostrade per l’Italia (the company
that manages most Italian motorways) and Codacons (a consumers’
union) for the establishment of farmers’ markets in motorway
restaurants and shops (MF-Dow Jones News, 25.05.2011). Coldiretti
has also launched its “100% Italian food chain” project, involving
10,000 farms, 1300 cooperatives with 2000 outlets and 5000 ‘agricultural consortia’ (a network of input providers controlled by Coldiretti), aimed at relocalizing Italian food chains “from farm to fork”
(Marini, 2009).
Slow Food has also become involved in setting up farmers’
markets with their own brand, Mercati della terra (Markets of the
Earth). Partnerships with supermarkets have not been discouraged:
Slow Food Toscana, with the contribution of the Regional Government of Tuscany, holds a weekly farmers’ market in front of
a Carrefour supermarket (Il Tirreno, 14.06.2011).
CoopItalia is aware that its strategy of focusing on affordability is
gaining consensus among consumers, but at the same time it does
not want to lose ground on ethical issues. It has thus become active
in many food security initiatives, and has set up partnerships with
Greenpeace (on palm oil), Oxfam (Africa projects) Legambiente (on
water and deforestation) as well as with Slow Food (on fair trade
chocolate, Slow Food Praesidia,11 and food education). With
11
Praesidia are products for which Slow Food undertook projects aimed at saving
the related production systems from vanishing.
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
Coldiretti, CoopItalia has made an agreement to market a 100%
Italian pasta (Bernieri, 2011).
7. Concluding remarks
In this paper we have tried to show how the market and public
spheres have changed over the last few years in Italy as a consequence of the changing food discourse, and how this change has
progressed through the development of consensus rather than
confrontational frames. We have also tried to show how the new
food consensus has created new geometries in the political sphere,
creating alliances across traditional political fields.
By making different social worlds and different perspectives
meet, the Made in Italy consensus has created the conditions for the
development of a national food security concept. Alongside this
process, the main actors involved have each adapted their respective frames to benefit from the emerging consensus. Slow Food and
organic farmers have abandoned their elitism to work out a ‘fair
price’ approach; Coldiretti has reframed their original corporatist
approach; localist movements have become more benign in terms
of ecological thinking; ‘big food’ companies have made an effort to
engage in themes emerging into subaltern counterpublics. We have
also shown that the Made in Italy food consensus has linked
together actors that have a lot of unresolved contradictions, from
“local washing” to aggressive defensive localism. The consensus has
further evolved since the 2008 crisis, giving more space to issues
such as availability and affordability under the issue of scarcity, and
has sensibly reduced the distance between the meanings of ‘global’
and ‘domestic’ food security. Will the new food consensus be able
to create a logical discourse between ‘artisanal quality’ and food
security, which translate into national and regional food policies,
and to create a reasonable compromise with food corporations?
A consistent national food security concept, not in conflict with
a global food security approach, will be the latest and biggest challenge. Talking about food security as a whole implies a global vision,
overcoming defensive localism and defining a set of principles that
can apply both to developing countries and to the developed countries, to the rich and to the poor. Thus, the keywords that were largely
dominant in the past such as competitiveness, advanced technologies, free markets and free consumer choice will be contrasted with
other keywords such as resilience, governance, distributed knowledge, consumer education, food democracy, and sovereignty.
In this paper we also contend that, despite the fact that ethical
food (Goodman et al., 2010) is a small niche in the market, ‘alternative’ food discourses have had an important role in building food
consensus frames. In addition we argue that it will gain increasing
relevance in the new context, in which food security will be
a central concept in the debate. Through alliances with Slow Food
and Coldiretti, organic farmers (especially those associated with
AIAB) and environmental movements (such as Legambiente, WWF,
Greenpeace) have gained visibility and legitimacy in the food
discourse arena. In turn, Coldiretti and Slow Food, followed later by
regional governments and corporations, have played the role of
boundary organizations, linking together very distant sociotechnical worlds and encouraging communication and cooperation between them. Parts of the food industry have actively
promoted the food consensus, while other parts have benefited
from the consensus by building marketing strategies around it. The
analysis carried out in this paper highlights the importance of
‘boundary work’ for food movements, especially their capacity to
make alliances through discursive games and to impose certain
themes on the public agenda. It also shows that corporate businesses are increasingly active in these games, exchanging limitations in their freedom of action in the market sphere with an
increased legitimization in the public sphere.
9
The interpretive flexibility of the new food consensus has enabled
actors of different origins and ideologies, and with different interests,
to play discursive games throughout the public and market spheres.
This interpretive flexibility has implications for the evolution of the
food security concept in the public, market and policy spheres. In
Italy, food movements have come to tolerate defensive localist
approaches in order to strengthen a consensus based on artisanal
quality as opposed to industrial quality. This may limit the consistency of the discourse and its link to action and policies. However,
increasing attention towards food security issues has already shown
that contradictions emerge and all parties involved need to make
choices.
Further research is needed to explore how the food security
discourse is likely to evolve in future, including consolidation into
institutional modes of governance. Initiatives are also needed to
prevent corporations from tapping into the rhetoric and resources
created by food movements purely for marketing purposes, for
example by ensuring that civil society and subaltern publics have
a voice in the public sphere.
References
Allen, P., 1999. Reweaving the food security safety net: mediating entitlement and
entrepreneurship. Agriculture and Human Values 16 (2), 117e129.
Ansell, C.K., Vogel, D., 2006. What’s the Beef?: the Contested Governance of European
Food Safety. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
Bagdonis, J.M., Hinrichs, C.C., Schafft, K.A., 2009. The emergence and framing of
farm-to-school initiatives: civic engagement, health and local agriculture.
Agriculture and Human Values 26 (1e2), 107e119.
Barilla CFN, 2010a. Le sfide della food security. Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition
(accessed May 2011). http://www.barillacfn.com/uploads/file/72/1259610262_
PositionPaperBCFN_Food-Security.pdf.
Barilla CFN, 2010b. L’agricoltura OGM è sostenibile? Le colture transgeniche di
fronte ai problemi dell’accesso al cibo, dell’ambiente e della salute. Executive
Summary. http://www.salmone.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/bcfn-sintesiagricoltura-ogm.pdf.
Bernieri, D., 2011. Accordo Coop-Coldiretti sulla pasta. http://www.gdoweek.it/
articoli/0,1254,44_ART_4472,00.html.
Bertino, R.M., 2010. Bio Bank: mense scolastiche bio a quota 837. TuttoBio 2010.,
Biobank, Milano.
Bonino, E., 25 November 2008. Ogm, Perché la norma UE garantisce i consumatori.
La Repubblica, 26 p. http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/
2008/11/25/ogm-perche-la-norma-ue-garantisce-consumatori.html.
Brunori, G., Guarino, A., 2009. Security for Whom? Changing discourses on food in
Europe in times of global food crisis. In: Lawrence, G., Lyons, K., Wallington, T.
(Eds.), Food Security, Nutrition and Sustainability. Earthscan, London.
Brunori, G., 2007. Local food and alternative food networks: a communication
perspective. Anthropology of Food 2, 1e20.
Brunori, G., Cerruti, R., Medeot, S., Rossi, A., 2008. Looking for alternatives: the
construction of the organic beef chain in Mugello, Tuscany. International
Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology 7 (1e2), 126e143.
Brunori, G., Di Iacovo, F., Miele, M., 1988. Agricoltura biologica: aspetti tecnici, di
mercato e normativi. Rivista di Economia Agraria 3, 547e564.
Brunori, G., Rossi, A., Guidi, F., January 1 2012. On the new social relations around
and beyond food. Analysing consumers’ role and action in Gruppi di Acquisto
Solidale (Solidarity Purchasing Groups). Sociologia Ruralis 52 (1), 1e30.
Bulkeley, H., 2000. Discourse coalitions and the Australian climate change policy
network. Environment and Planning C 18 (6), 727e748.
Burato, L., 17.08.1986. I conti di metanolo e Cernobyl. La Stampa, n. 192, 11 p. http://
www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option,
com_lastampa/task,
search/
action, detail/id, 0994_01_1986_0192_0011_13697020/.
Busch, L., Bain, C., 2004. New! Improved? The transformation of the global agrifood
system. Rural Sociology 69 (3), 321e346.
Calhoun, C.J., 1992. Habermas and the Public Sphere. The MIT Press, Cambridge
(MA).
Çalışkan, K., Callon, M., 2009. Economization, part 1: shifting attention from the
economy towards processes of economization. Economy and Society 38 (3),
369e398.
Callon, M., Méadel, C., Rabeharisoa, V., 2002. The economy of qualities. Economy
and Society 31 (2), 194e217.
Cannella, C., 30.04.2008. Ma ci siamo dimenticati l’abc della dieta mediterranea.
La Repubblica, 62 p.
Caritas Italiana e Fondazione «E. Zancan», 2011. Poveri di diritti: rapporto 2011 su
povertà ed esclusione sociale in Italia. Il Mulino, Bologna.
Cianciullo, A., 2007. Tre milioni di firme contro gli Ogm “Gli italiani non li vogliono”.
http://www.repubblica.it/2007/06/sezioni/ambiente/ogm-prodotti-bio/tremilioni-firme/tre-milioni-firme.html.
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
10
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
Coldiretti, 2010. I valori dell’agroalimentare italiano: indagine Coldiretti/SWG e
October 2010. www.emilia-romagna.coldiretti.it.
Coop, 2008. Posizione Coop su aperture UE su Ogm. http://www.coopinforma.it/
notizia/posizione-coop-su-aperture-ue-su-ogm.
Corriere della Sera, 27.01.2009. http://www.corriere.it/cronache/11_ottobre_09/
forte-dei-marmi-ristoranti_106eee3e-f261-11e0-9a3e-cd32c10dad62.shtml.
Corriere della Sera, 25.06.2007. La svolta di Greenpeace: dalla lotta per le balene alla
difesa del Parmigiano. http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cronache/2007/06_
Giugno/25/greenpeace_parmigiano.shtml.
De Bac, M., 2004. Obesità, diventiamo come gli USA. Il Corriere della Sera,
8.05.2005, 20 p. http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2004/maggio/08/Obesita_
diventiamo_come_gli_Usa_co_9_040508062.shtml.
De Krom, M.P., 2009. Understanding consumer rationalities: consumer involvement
in European Food Safety Governance of Avian Influenza. Sociologia Ruralis 49
(1), 1e19.
Declaration of Nyéléni, 2007. Declaration of the Forum for Food Sovereignty.
Nyéléni, Mali. http://www.nyeleni.org/IMG/pdf/DeclNyeleni-en.pdf.
Defez, R., 2011. Una tranquilla giornata di paura. http://www.salmone.org/alimentipericolosi.
DEFRA, July 2008. Ensuring the UK’s Food Security in a Changing World. A Defra
Discussion Paper.
Del Vecchio, G., Pitrelli, S., 5.09.2008. Gli Ogm sono serviti. L’Espresso. http://
espresso.repubblica.it/dettaglio/gli-ogm-sono-serviti/2125900.
Diana, A., 8.07.1973. Eccedenze e carestia, vol. 159. La Stampa, 15 p. http://www.
archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task, search/action,
detail/id, 1116_01_1973_0159_0015_22012872/.
DuPuis, E.M., Goodman, D., 2005. Should we go ‘home’ to eat? Toward a reflexive
politics of localism. Journal of Rural Studies 21 (3), 359e371.
Elzen, B.E., Geels, F.W., Leeuwis, C., van Mierlo, B., 2010. Normative contestation in
transitions in the making: animal welfare concerns and system innovation in
pig husbandry. Research Policy 40, 263e275.
European Technology Platform Food For Life, 2007. Strategic Research Agenda
2007e2020. http://etp.ciaa.eu/documents/SRA_2007_2010.pdf.
Expo 2015, 2011. What is the Expo. http://en. expo2015.org/ht/en/expo_2015.html.
Fabris, G., 3.08.2010. Consumi. La Repubblica.
Fonte, M., 2006. Slow food’s Presidia: what do small producers do with big retailers?
In: Marsden, T.K., Murdoch, J. (Eds.), Between the Local and the Global. Confronting Complexity in the Contemporary Agri-food Sector. Elsevier, Oxford.
Fort, M., 2010. McDonald’s Launch McItaly Burger. http://www.guardian.co.uk/
lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2010/jan/28/mcdonalds-launch-mcitaly-burger?
INTCMP¼SRCH.
Fraser, N., 1990. Rethinking the public sphere: a contribution to the critique of
actually existing democracy. Social Text 25/26, 56e80.
Friedberg, S., 2004. The ethical complex of corporate food power. Environment and
Planning D: Society and Space 22, 513e531.
Friedmann, H., 2005. From colonialism to green capitalism: social movements and
emergence of food regimes. In: Buttel, F., McMichael, P. (Eds.), New Directions in
the Sociology of Global Development. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 227e264.
Fulponi, L., 2006. Private voluntary standards in the food system: the perspective of
major food retailers in OECD countries. Food Policy 31 (1), 1e13.
Giovannini, R., 11.10.2011. Fermate la folle crescita dei prezzi alimentari. Il rapporto
Onu: speculazione e biocarburanti affamano i poveri. La Stampa, 22 p.
Goodman, D., DuPuis, E.M., 2002. Knowing food and growing food: beyond the
production-consumption debate in the sociology of agriculture. Sociologia
Ruralis 42 (1), 6e23.
Goodman, D., Goodman, M.K., 2008. Alternative food networks. In: Kitchin, R.,
Thrift, N. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Elsevier, Oxford.
Goodman, D., 1999. Agro-food studies in the ‘Age of Ecology’: nature, corporeality,
bio-politics. Sociologia Ruralis 39, 17e38.
Goodman, D., 2003. The quality turn and alternative food practices: reflections and
agenda. Journal of Rural Studies 19 (1), 1e7.
Goodman, D., DuPuis, M.E., Goodman, M.K., 2011. Alternative Food Networks:
Knowledge, Practice and Politics, first ed. Routledge.
Goodman, M.K., Maye, D., Holloway, L., 2010. Ethical foodscapes? premises, promises, and possibilities. Environment and Planning A 42, 1782e1796. http://www.
envplan.com/abstract.cgi?id¼a43290 (accessed 02.04.11.).
Green Planet, 2010. Carrefour lancia il marchio “ogm free”. http://it.greenplanet.net/
agroalimentare/18-ogm/26679-carrefour-lancia-il-marchio-ogm-free.html.
Habermas, J., Burger, T., Lawrence, F., 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public
Sphere. An Inquiry into a Category of Burgeois Society. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
Hajer, M., 2005. Coalitions, practices, and meaning in environmental politics: from acid
rain to BSE. In: Discourse Theory in European Politics: Identity, Policy and Governance. Palgrave McMillan, London. http://www.spesaduepuntozero.it/2011/05/ifarmers-market-sbarcano-nelle-aree-di-servizio-di-autostrade-per-litalia/.
Iacoponi, L., Brunori, G., Colosimo, V., Loi, A., Miele, M., Moruzzo, R., Parisi, V., Rovai, M.,
Ventura, F., 1997. Meat Quality Policy in Italy Fair Project “Quality Policy and
Consumer Behaviour”. University of Pisa, Department of Agro-economics Studies.
Il Resto del Carlino, 07.11.2011. http://www.ilrestodelcarlino.it/ancona/cronaca/
2011/11/07/615176-legambiente_coldiretti_limitare_consumo_suolo.shtml.
Il secolo XIX, 22.06.2010. Mozzarelle blu, ecco le marche sotto accusa. Il ministro:
quelle italiane sono sane. http://www.ilsecoloxix.it/p/italia/2010/06/22/
AMKEIxnD-mozzarelle_marche_accusa.shtml.
Il Sole 24 Ore, 2011. Dieta mediterranea: il 60% degli italiani la ignora. http://
salute24.ilsole24ore.com/articles/13012-dieta-mediterranea-6-italiani-su-10ne-ignorano-i-principi.
Il Sole 24 Ore, 18.09.2008. Farmer market: il prezzo delude. http://www.banchedati.
ilsole24ore.com/doc.get?uid¼sole-SS20080918023CAA.
Il Tirreno, 14.06.2011. La spesa dai contadini, ora si può grazie al mercato della Terra.
http://iltirreno.gelocal.it/pisa/cronaca/2011/06/14/news/la-spesa-dai-conta
dini-ora-si-puo-grazie-al-mercato-della-terra-4435143.
INEA, 2011. L’agricoltura italiana conta. ESI, Napoli.
International Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture, 15 July 2003.
Manifesto on the Future of Food. San Rossore, Italy.
ISTAT, 2011. Censimento 2010 dell’agricoltura. Risultati provvisori. http://
censimentoagricoltura.istat.it/fileadmin/template/main/res/tav1-7nazionali.zip.
Jenkins, R., 2005. Globalization, corporate social responsibility and poverty. International Affairs 81 (3), 525e540.
La Repubblica, 07.09.2008. Spesa a km 0, buona ma salata. http://ricerca.repubblica.
it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2008/09/07/spesa-km-zero-buona-ma-salata.
html.
La Repubblica, 07.01.2011. Yogurt, verdure e bistecche Un miliardo in fumo col cibo
scaduto. http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2011/01/07/news/cibo_scade10933226/index.html?ref¼search.
La Stampa, 07.11.2002. Il Social Forum Europeo parte tra feste e polemiche, n. 305, 6 p.
http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task, search/
action, detail/id, 0312_01_2002_0305_0006_2858983/.
La Stampa, 08.07.1997. Mucca pazza, Regione al contrattacco, n. 186, 34 p. http://
www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task, search/action,
detail/id, 0603_01_1997_0186_0038_8256010/.
La Stampa, 14.02.1993. Sui macelli incombe la scure della Cee, n. 44, 31 p. http://
www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task, search/action,
detail/id, 0774_01_1993_0044_0031_10914506/.
La Stampa, 03.03.2002. Il patto per dare un nuovo ruolo all’agricoltura. n. 60.
La Stampa, 27.06.1999. Un appello di Slow Food a difesa della tradizione. http://www.
archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task, search/action, detail/
id, 0496_01_1999_0174_0202_6573620/.
La Stampa, 28.05.2002. Salone del Gusto già tutti in coda alla presentazione, n. 143,
17 p. http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task,
search/action, detail/id, 0280_01_2002_0143_0070_2383890.
La Stampa, 29.03.1996. «Mucche pazze» consumi di carne ridotti dell’80%, n. 88, 41
p. http://www.archiviolastampa.it/component/option, com_lastampa/task,
search/action, detail/id, 0637_01_1996_0088_0045_8692607/.
Lang, T., Heasman, M., 2004. Food Wars: the Global Battle for Mouths, Minds and
Markets. Earthscan, London.
Legambiente, 2010. Ambiente e sicurezza alimentare. L’impegno di Legambiente per
una alimentazione sicura, di qualità, garantita per tutti. http://www.legambiente.
it/contenuti/articoli/ambiente-e-sicurezza-alimentare.
Maloni, M., Brown, M., 2006. Corporate social responsibility in the supply chain:
an application in the food industry. Journal of Business Ethics 68 (1),
35e52.
Manacorda, F., 04.11.2004. Se potessi, mangerei solo Mais OGM, vol. 305. La Stampa.
Marini, S., 11/05/2009. Una filiera agricola tutta italiana. Il Punto Coldiretti. http://
www.ilpuntocoldiretti.it/editoriali/Pagine/Unafilieraagricolatuttaitaliana.aspx.
MF-Dow Jones News, 2011. Autostrade: Castellucci, con Coldiretti valorizzare il
territorio. http://www.milanofinanza.it/news/dettaglio_news.asp?id¼201105
251322001690&chkAgenzie¼PMFNW&titolo¼Autostrade:%20Castellucci,%
20con%20Coldiretti%20valorizzare%20territorio.
Miele, M. 2001. «Creating Sustainability». The Social Construction Of Market for
Organic Products. CERES, Wageningen University, The Netherlands (Thesis
176 p.). Wageningen Studies on Heterogeneity and Relocalisation 3.
Mooney, P.H., Hunt, S., 2009. Food security: the elaboration of contested claims to
a consensus frame. Rural Sociology 74 (4), 469e497.
Moore, O., 2006. What Farmers’ Markets Say about the Post-organic Movement in
Ireland. Sociological Perspectives of Organic Agriculture. CABI, Wallingford, UK.
Morgan, K., Sonnino, R., 2008. The School Food Revolution: Public Food and the
Challenge of Sustainable Development. Earthscan, London.
Morris, C., Young, C., 2000. ‘Seed to shelf’, ‘teat to table’, ‘barley to beer’ and ‘womb
to tomb’: discourses of food quality and quality assurance schemes in the UK.
Journal of Rural Studies 16, 103e115.
Murdoch, J., Miele, M., 1999. ‘Back to nature’: changing ‘worlds of production’ in the
food sector. Sociologia Ruralis 39 (4), 465e483.
OECD-FAO, 2010. Agricultural Outlook 2010e2019. OECD-FAO, Paris.
Padovani, C., Padovani, G., 2011. Italia buon paese. Gusti, cibi e bevande in 150 anni
di storia. Blu Edizioni, Torino.
Pansa, G., 25.07.1972. La frode strisciante, vol. 172. La Stampa.
Petrini, C., 11.09.2001. Il prezzo da pagare per una “mania” di massa, vol. 250. La
Stampa.
Petrini, C., 2005. Buono, pulito e giusto. Principî di nuova gastronomia. Einaudi, Torino.
Petrini, C., 2010a. Il transgenico è obsoleto, la modernità risiede altrove. La Repubblica.
http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2010/07/20/iltransgenico-obsoleto-la-modernita-risiede-altrove.html.
Petrini, C., 2010b. Perché dico NO dieci volte. L’Espresso. http://espresso.repubblica.
it/dettaglio/perche-dico-no-dieci-volte/2120670.
Petrini, C., 2010c. Lettera al panino McItaly. La Repubblica. http://ricerca.repubblica.
it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2010/02/03/lettera-al-panino-mcitaly.html.
Polidori, E., 6.10.2009. Novanta milioni di poveri in più. La Repubblica. http://ricerca.
repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2009/10/06/novanta-milioni-dipoveri-in-piu.html.
Politi, G., 2011. Vino, dallo scandalo metanolo alla scelta vincente della qualità. Speech
for the 25th anniversary of Italian Association ‘Città del vino’ (Wine towns)
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013
G. Brunori et al. / Journal of Rural Studies xxx (2012) 1e11
‘Venticinque anni di Città del Vino. 1987/2012’. http://www.terredelvino.net/it/
articolo/vino-dallo-scandalo-metanolo-alla-scelta-vincente-della-qualit%C3%A0.
Porter, M., 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Free Press, New York.
Princen, T., 2005. The Logic of Sufficiency. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
Renting, H., Marsden, T.K., Banks, J., 2003. Understanding alternative food
networks: exploring the role of short food supply chains in rural development.
Environment and Planning A 35 (3), 393e412.
Sassatelli, R., Scott, A., 2001. Novel foods, new markets and trust regimes: responses
to the erosion of consumers’ confidence in Austria, Italy and the UK. European
Societies 3 (2), 213e244.
Sassatelli, R., Davolio, F., 2010. Consumption, pleasure and politics: slow food and
the politico-aesthetic problematization of food. Journal of Consumer Culture 10
(2), 202e232.
Segrè, A., 2008. Elogio dello spreco. Formule per una società sufficiente. Emi, Bologna.
Segré A., Falasconi L. (2011), Il libro nero dello spreco in Italia: il cibo, Edizione
Ambiente, Milano.
Settis, S., 2010. Paesaggio, Costituzione cemento. La battaglia per l’ambiente contro
il degrado civile. Einaudi, Torino.
Shaw, D.J., 2007. World Food Security: a History since 1945. Palgrave Macmillan,
New York.
Slow Food, 2011. Diamoci un taglio e Slow Food e ActionAid presentano la guida al
consumo consapevole di carne. http://press.slowfood.it/press/ita/leggi.lasso?
cod¼C2744B880a15f1D809ooIV417673&ln¼it.
11
Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R., 1989. Institutional ecology, translations’ and boundary
objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology. Social Studies of Science 19 (3), 387e420.
The Economist, 17 April 2008. The Silent Tsunami.
Tormey, S., 2007. Consumption, resistance and everyday life: ruptures and continuities. Journal of Consumer Policy 30 (3), 263e280.
Tregear, A., Arfini, F., Belletti, G., Marescotti, A., 2007. Regional foods and rural
development: the role of product qualification. Journal of Rural Studies 23 (1),
12e22.
Ventura, F., Milone, P., De Roest, K., Brunori, G., Miele, M., Menghi, A., 2006. Food
matters-Revitalising tradition in Italy. In: Oconnor, D., Renting, H., Gorman, M.,
Kinsella, J. (Eds.), Driving Rural Development: Policy and Practice in Seven EU
Countries. Royal Van Gorcum, Assen, pp. 22e50.
Wilkinson, J., 2011. From fair trade to responsible soy: social movements and the
qualification of agrofood markets. Environment and Planning A 43 (9),
2012e2026.
World Social Forum, 2001. Charter of Principles. http://www.forumsocialmundial.
org.br/main.php?id_menu¼4&cd_language¼2.
Zaia, L., 26.01.2010. Da domani parte la linea McItaly, Zaia: i contadini italiani
invadono
McDonald’s.
http://www.lucazaia.it/it/index.php?s¼stampa&p¼
comunicati.
Zamagni, V., 1998. L’evoluzione dei consumi tra tradizione e innovazione. In: Storia
di Italia. Annali 13: L’alimentazione. Einaudi, Torino.
Please cite this article in press as: Brunori, G., et al., Trade-off or convergence? The role of food security in the evolution of food discourse in Italy,
Journal of Rural Studies (2012), doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.01.013