A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Impossible solutions: Competing values in marketing alternative proteins for sustainable food systems
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9608-2914
Abstract Creators of alternative proteins (APs) claim to provide solutions, so-called promissory narratives, to the messy and complex problems in our food system. Through these promissory narratives APs are said to offer responsible consumption. Our article uses convention theory to explore how justifications by AP companies change and expand from primarily using civic concerns (e.g. the environment, animal welfare) to focusing on a much wider range of justifications, including financial, status, and traditions or trust as these products move into the marketplace. This work makes an original contribution by extending convention theory and the broader theory of regimes of engagement to the marketization of APs. Marketization refers to the creation of new market relations around new goods. Our results also challenge the rapidly expanding AP literature that has claimed these companies seek to encourage people to care about civic concerns, like the environment and animal welfare. Despite these results, we argue APs can contribute to responsible consumption through distributed responsibility, but there is always the danger that non-market values may be subsumed under market values, thereby stunting the transformative potential of APs.
Highlights AP companies use multiple justifications in the marketization of APs to be accepted by buyers as legitimate and useful. Less emphasis is given to the civic convention during marketization. APs create a supportive environment, while also attaching their product to a wider-range of consumers. Participation by disparate actors in the food system suggests the possible emergence of a distributed responsibility.
Impossible solutions: Competing values in marketing alternative proteins for sustainable food systems
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9608-2914
Abstract Creators of alternative proteins (APs) claim to provide solutions, so-called promissory narratives, to the messy and complex problems in our food system. Through these promissory narratives APs are said to offer responsible consumption. Our article uses convention theory to explore how justifications by AP companies change and expand from primarily using civic concerns (e.g. the environment, animal welfare) to focusing on a much wider range of justifications, including financial, status, and traditions or trust as these products move into the marketplace. This work makes an original contribution by extending convention theory and the broader theory of regimes of engagement to the marketization of APs. Marketization refers to the creation of new market relations around new goods. Our results also challenge the rapidly expanding AP literature that has claimed these companies seek to encourage people to care about civic concerns, like the environment and animal welfare. Despite these results, we argue APs can contribute to responsible consumption through distributed responsibility, but there is always the danger that non-market values may be subsumed under market values, thereby stunting the transformative potential of APs.
Highlights AP companies use multiple justifications in the marketization of APs to be accepted by buyers as legitimate and useful. Less emphasis is given to the civic convention during marketization. APs create a supportive environment, while also attaching their product to a wider-range of consumers. Participation by disparate actors in the food system suggests the possible emergence of a distributed responsibility.
Impossible solutions: Competing values in marketing alternative proteins for sustainable food systems
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9608-2914
Abstract Creators of alternative proteins (APs) claim to provide solutions, so-called promissory narratives, to the messy and complex problems in our food system. Through these promissory narratives APs are said to offer responsible consumption. Our article uses convention theory to explore how justifications by AP companies change and expand from primarily using civic concerns (e.g. the environment, animal welfare) to focusing on a much wider range of justifications, including financial, status, and traditions or trust as these products move into the marketplace. This work makes an original contribution by extending convention theory and the broader theory of regimes of engagement to the marketization of APs. Marketization refers to the creation of new market relations around new goods. Our results also challenge the rapidly expanding AP literature that has claimed these companies seek to encourage people to care about civic concerns, like the environment and animal welfare. Despite these results, we argue APs can contribute to responsible consumption through distributed responsibility, but there is always the danger that non-market values may be subsumed under market values, thereby stunting the transformative potential of APs.
Highlights AP companies use multiple justifications in the marketization of APs to be accepted by buyers as legitimate and useful. Less emphasis is given to the civic convention during marketization. APs create a supportive environment, while also attaching their product to a wider-range of consumers. Participation by disparate actors in the food system suggests the possible emergence of a distributed responsibility.
Impossible solutions: Competing values in marketing alternative proteins for sustainable food systems
Ransom, Elizabeth (author)
Journal of Rural Studies ; 86 ; 694-701
2021-06-10
8 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Direct Marketing: Towards sustainable local food systems?
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2008
Sustainable development: impossible without women's development
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2008
Sustainable Development Analysis: Measuring the Impossible?
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1996