The global agrifood system is governed by a wide array of organic labels, certifications, and standards. Many of these labels are private, third-party certifications rather than strictly governmental standards; even many national organic standards such as the United States Department of Agriculture National Organic Program (USDA NOP) are actually a hybridization of state-led and private regulatory schemes. Both state-led and private agricultural regulations raise concerns over their relevance to local environments, consistent and transparent application, and extent of democratic stakeholder involvement. This study compares two organic regulations—the USDA NOP and Demeter International—in New Zealand's dairy industry on these key issues of relevance, consistency, transparency, and democracy. I find that the hybrid state/private regulation of the USDA NOP has replicated weaknesses of both state and private regulatory models: the monolithic and hegemonic nature of state regulation has combined with the lack of consistency, transparency, and democracy of private regulation. By comparison, Demeter International certification uses an international equivalency program to increase democratic stakeholder involvement from farmers and relevance to local environments, but has not fully addressed concerns of consistency and transparency associated with private regulations. By focusing on both the structural aspects of neoliberal regulations and farmers' and processors' lived experience of these disparate regulations, this research expands existing theories of neoliberalization to address the diversity of regulation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmentanoLDobsonWJesseEOlsonN, 2004, “The dairy sectors of New Zealand and Australia: a regional study”, discussion paper, Babcock Institute for International Dairy Research, Madison, WI, http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/dairyland/
BowenD, 2004, “Current mechanisms that enable international trade in organic products”, International Task Force on Harmonization and Equivalence in Organic Agriculture, International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, Bonn, http://www.unctad.org/trade_env/meeting.asp?MeetingID=96
BurawoyM, 1991, “Restructuring social theories”, in Ethnography Unbound: Power and Resistance in Modern Metropolis (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA) pp 8–28
8.
BuschLBainC, 2004, “New! Improved? The transformation of the global agrifood system”Rural Sociology69321–346
9.
CampbellH, 2005, “The rise and fall of EurepGAP: European (re)invention of colonial food relations?”International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food13 (2) 15–34
10.
CampbellHCoombesB, 1999, “Green protectionism and organic food exporting from New Zealand: crisis experiments in the breakdown of Fordist trade and agricultural policies”Rural Sociology64302–319
11.
CooperMCampbellHManhireJMollerHRosinCNortonSHuntL, 2010, “2009 New Zealand Organic Sector Report”, report commissioned by Organics Aotearoa New Zealand; copy available from H Campbell, Centre for the Study of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, University of Otago, Dunedin
12.
DabbertSHäringA MZanoliR, 2004Organic Farming Policies and Prospects (Zed Books, London)
Demeter New Zealand, 2008Organic Production Standards for Biodynamic AgricultureBiodynamic Farming and Gardening Association of New Zealand, Wellington, http://www.Biodynamic.org.nz/demeter.html
FriedmannH, 2005, “From colonialism to green capitalism: social movements and emergence of food regimes”, in New Directions in the Sociology of Global Development Eds ButtelF HMcMichaelP (Elsevier, New York) pp 227–264
19.
GonzálezA ANighR, 2005, “Smallholder participation and certification of organic farm products in Mexico”Journal of Rural Studies21449–460
20.
GuthmanJ, 2004Agrarian Dreams: The Paradox of Organic Farming in California (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
21.
GuthmanJ, 2008, “Neoliberalism and the making of food politics in California”Geoforum391171–1183
22.
KeskitaloCSandstromCTysiachnioukMJohanssonJ, 2009, “Local consequences of applying international norms: differences in the application of forest certification in northern Sweden, northern Finland, and northwest Russia”Ecology and Society14 (2) 1–14
23.
Le HeronRRocheM, 1999, “Rapid reregulation, agricultural restructuring, and the reimaging of agriculture in New Zealand”Rural Sociology64203–218
24.
LockieSKittoS, 2000, “Beyond the farm gate: production–consumption networks and agri-food research”Sociologia Ruralis403–19
MilesM BHubermanM, 1994Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook2nd edition (Sage, New York)
27.
MutersbaughT, 2002, “The number is the beast: a political economy of organic-coffee certification and producer unionism”Environment and Planning A341165–1184
28.
MutersbaughT, 2005, “Fighting standards with standards: harmonization, rents, and social accountability in certified agrofood networks”Environment and Planning A372033–2051
RichardsCBjørkhaugHLawrenceG, 2009, “Agrifood restructuring through quality assurance: proprietary and hybrid governance of the food supply chain in Australia and Europe”, paper presented at Agrifood XVI, University of Auckland; copy available from G Lawrence, School of Social Science, University of Queensland, St Lucia
