Moving from "matters of fact" to "matters of concern" in order to grow economic food futures in the Anthropocene

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Agrifood scholars commonly adopt “a matter of fact way of speaking” to talk about the extent of neoliberal rollout in the food sector and the viability of “alternatives” to capitalist food initiatives. Over the past few decades this matter of fact stance has resulted in heated debate in agrifood scholarship on two distinct battlegrounds namely, the corporate food regime and the alternative food regime. In this paper I identify some of the limitations of speaking in a matter of fact way and of focusing on capitalist and neoliberal economies as the yardstick by which to assess all food economy initiatives. Using stories of bananas in Australia and the Philippines I advocate for a new mode of critical inquiry in food scholarship that focuses on matters of concern. Following Bruno Latour I use the term critical inquiry to refer to research methods and thinking practices that multiply possible ways of being and acting in the world. The new mode of critical inquiry I propose centers on enacting three broad research matters of concern. These are (1) gathering and assembling economic diversity (2) human actancy and (3) nonhuman actancy. I argue that through becoming critical minds in the Latourian sense researchers can play a key role in enacting economic food futures in the Anthropocene
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)551-563
Number of pages13
JournalAgriculture and Human Values
Volume32
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

economics
research methods
Philippines
bananas
researchers
viability

Cite this

@article{281cd0d64eb84dd2a77a56e7e67a0977,
title = "Moving from {"}matters of fact{"} to {"}matters of concern{"} in order to grow economic food futures in the Anthropocene",
abstract = "Agrifood scholars commonly adopt “a matter of fact way of speaking” to talk about the extent of neoliberal rollout in the food sector and the viability of “alternatives” to capitalist food initiatives. Over the past few decades this matter of fact stance has resulted in heated debate in agrifood scholarship on two distinct battlegrounds namely, the corporate food regime and the alternative food regime. In this paper I identify some of the limitations of speaking in a matter of fact way and of focusing on capitalist and neoliberal economies as the yardstick by which to assess all food economy initiatives. Using stories of bananas in Australia and the Philippines I advocate for a new mode of critical inquiry in food scholarship that focuses on matters of concern. Following Bruno Latour I use the term critical inquiry to refer to research methods and thinking practices that multiply possible ways of being and acting in the world. The new mode of critical inquiry I propose centers on enacting three broad research matters of concern. These are (1) gathering and assembling economic diversity (2) human actancy and (3) nonhuman actancy. I argue that through becoming critical minds in the Latourian sense researchers can play a key role in enacting economic food futures in the Anthropocene",
keywords = "AFNs, anthropocene, community-food-economies, latourian, post-capitalist-food-economies, food-regimes, diverse-economies, bananas, Anthropocene, Alternative, Community food economies, Latourian, Bananas, Food regimes, Post-capitalist food economies, Diverse economies",
author = "Ann HILL",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1007/s10460-014-9576-5",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "551--563",
journal = "Agriculture and Human Values",
issn = "0889-048X",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Moving from "matters of fact" to "matters of concern" in order to grow economic food futures in the Anthropocene

AU - HILL, Ann

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Agrifood scholars commonly adopt “a matter of fact way of speaking” to talk about the extent of neoliberal rollout in the food sector and the viability of “alternatives” to capitalist food initiatives. Over the past few decades this matter of fact stance has resulted in heated debate in agrifood scholarship on two distinct battlegrounds namely, the corporate food regime and the alternative food regime. In this paper I identify some of the limitations of speaking in a matter of fact way and of focusing on capitalist and neoliberal economies as the yardstick by which to assess all food economy initiatives. Using stories of bananas in Australia and the Philippines I advocate for a new mode of critical inquiry in food scholarship that focuses on matters of concern. Following Bruno Latour I use the term critical inquiry to refer to research methods and thinking practices that multiply possible ways of being and acting in the world. The new mode of critical inquiry I propose centers on enacting three broad research matters of concern. These are (1) gathering and assembling economic diversity (2) human actancy and (3) nonhuman actancy. I argue that through becoming critical minds in the Latourian sense researchers can play a key role in enacting economic food futures in the Anthropocene

AB - Agrifood scholars commonly adopt “a matter of fact way of speaking” to talk about the extent of neoliberal rollout in the food sector and the viability of “alternatives” to capitalist food initiatives. Over the past few decades this matter of fact stance has resulted in heated debate in agrifood scholarship on two distinct battlegrounds namely, the corporate food regime and the alternative food regime. In this paper I identify some of the limitations of speaking in a matter of fact way and of focusing on capitalist and neoliberal economies as the yardstick by which to assess all food economy initiatives. Using stories of bananas in Australia and the Philippines I advocate for a new mode of critical inquiry in food scholarship that focuses on matters of concern. Following Bruno Latour I use the term critical inquiry to refer to research methods and thinking practices that multiply possible ways of being and acting in the world. The new mode of critical inquiry I propose centers on enacting three broad research matters of concern. These are (1) gathering and assembling economic diversity (2) human actancy and (3) nonhuman actancy. I argue that through becoming critical minds in the Latourian sense researchers can play a key role in enacting economic food futures in the Anthropocene

KW - AFNs

KW - anthropocene

KW - community-food-economies

KW - latourian

KW - post-capitalist-food-economies

KW - food-regimes

KW - diverse-economies

KW - bananas

KW - Anthropocene

KW - Alternative

KW - Community food economies

KW - Latourian

KW - Bananas

KW - Food regimes

KW - Post-capitalist food economies

KW - Diverse economies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938745425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/moving-matters-fact-matters-concern-order-grow-economic-food-futures-anthropocene

U2 - 10.1007/s10460-014-9576-5

DO - 10.1007/s10460-014-9576-5

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 551

EP - 563

JO - Agriculture and Human Values

JF - Agriculture and Human Values

SN - 0889-048X

IS - 3

ER -