This study describes and analyses how practices organise temporality to reduce food waste. The study builds upon the material turn in practice theories and an ontological approach that together highlight emerging relations between humans and non-humans in practices. Three theoretical propositions are constructed that inform the empirical analysis. The study utilises empirical qualitative data from a Finnish blog campaign ‘From Waste to Delicacy’. The study identifies four bundles of practices organising temporality: scheduling, pausing, stretching and synchronising. Within these bundles of practices, potential food waste is enacted differently: as not realised food waste, revitalised food, refuted food waste and harmonised food (waste). The study produces novel understanding about temporal inter-relations between humans and non-humans – the dance of agency – in household food waste reduction.
AlexanderCGregsonNGilleZ (2013) Food waste. In: MurcottA (ed.) The Handbook of Food Research.
London, NY:
Bloomsbury Academic, pp.348–356.
2.
AtkinsP (2011)
The material histories of food quality and composition.Endeavour35(2–3): 74–79.
3.
BennettJ (2007)
Edible matter. New Left Review45(May–June): 133–145.
4.
BennettJ (2010) Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things.
London:
Duke University Press.
5.
BlichfeldtBSMikkelsenMGramM (2015)
When it stops being food: The edibility, ideology, procrastination, objectification and internalization of household food waste.Food, Culture & Society18(1): 89–105.
6.
BlueS (2017) Institutional rhythms: Combining practice theory and rhythm analysis to conceptualise processes of institutionalisation. Time & Society. Epub ahead of print 7 April 2017. DOI: 10.1177/0961463X17702165.
7.
BräutigamKRJörissenJPrieferC (2014)
The extent of food waste generation across EU-27: Different calculation methods and the reliability of their results.Waste Management & Research32(8): 683–694.
8.
D’AntoneSSpencerR (2015)
Organising for sustainable palm oil consumption: A market-based approach.Consumption, Markets & Culture18(1): 55–71.
9.
De LaetMMolA (2000)
The Zimbabwe Bush Pump. Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science30(2): 225–263.
10.
DomaneschiL (2012)
Food social practices: Theory of practice and the new battlefield of food quality.Journal of Consumer Culture12(3): 306–322.
11.
EvansD (2011)
Blaming the consumer - once again: The social and material contexts of everyday food waste practices in some English households.Critical Public Health21(4): 429–440.
12.
EvansD (2012a)
Beyond the throwaway society: Ordinary domestic practice and a sociological approach to household food waste.Sociology46(1): 41–56.
13.
EvansD (2012b)
Binning, gifting and recovery: The conduits of disposal in household food consumption.Environment and Planning D: Society and Space30(6): 1123–1137.
14.
EvansD (2017)
Rethinking material cultures of sustainability: Commodity consumption, cultural biographies and following the thing.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers43(1): 110–121.
15.
EvansDCampbellHMurcottA (eds) (2013) Waste matters: New perspectives of food and society.
Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell/The Sociological Review.
16.
HandMShoveE (2007)
Condensing practices: Ways of living with a freezer. Journal of Consumer Culture7(1): 79–104.
17.
HawkinsG (2013a)
The performativity of food packaging: Market devices, waste crisis and recycling.The Sociological Review,
2(60): 66–83.
18.
HawkinsG (2013b) Made to be wasted. PET and topologies of disposability. In: GabrysJHawkinsGMichaelM (eds) Accumulation: The Material Politics of Plastic.
London, NY:
Routledge, pp.49–67.
19.
HitchingsR (2012)
People can talk about their practices.Area44(1): 61–67.
20.
JasarevicL (2015)
The thing in a jar: Mushrooms and ontological speculations in Post-Yugoslavia.Cultural Anthropology30(1): 36–64.
21.
JespersenAPJensenTE (2012)
Making consultations run smoothly: An analysis of doctors’ skilful use of time inspired by science and technology studies.Time & Society21(3): 330–350.
LawJLienME (2012)
Slippery: Field notes in empirical ontology.Social Studies of Science43(3): 363–378.
24.
MilneR (2013)
Arbiters of waste: Date labels, the consumer and knowing good, safe food.The Sociological Review60(Suppl. 2): 84–101.
25.
MolA (1999)
Ontological politics. A Word and Some Questions.The Sociological Review47(Suppl. 1): 74–89.
26.
MolA (2002) The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice.
Durham:
Duke University Press.
27.
MoranC (2015)
Time as a social practice.Time & Society24(3): 283–303.
28.
NicoliniD (2012) Practice theory, work & organization.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
29.
Närvänen E, Mesiranta N, Sutinen UM and Mattila M (2018) Creativity, aesthetics and ethics of food waste in social media campaigns. Journal of Cleaner Production 195: 102–110.
30.
OzakiRShawIDodgsonM (2013)
The negotiated consumption of sustainability.Scandinavian Journal of Management29(2): 194–201.
31.
PapargyropoulouELozanoRSteinbergerJK, et al. (2014)
The food waste hierarchy as a framework for the management of food surplus and food waste.Journal of Cleaner Production76: 106–115.
32.
ParfittJBarthelMMacnaughtonS (2010)
Food waste within food supply chains: Quantification and potential for change to 2050.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences365(1554): 3065–3081.
33.
PickeringA (1993).
The mangle of practice: Agency and emergence in the sociology of science.American Journal of Sociology99(3): 559–589.
34.
PickeringA (2017)
The ontological turn: Taking different worlds seriously.Social Analysis61(2): 134–150.
35.
RamusKNielsenNA (2005)
Online grocery retailing: What do consumers think?Internet research15(3): 335–352.
36.
ReckwitzA (2002)
Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing.European Journal of Social Theory5(2): 243–263.
37.
RoeEJ (2006)
Things becoming food and the embodied, material practices of an organic food consumer.Sociologia Ruralis46(2): 104–121.
38.
SchäferH (2017) Relationality and heterogeneity: Transitive methodology in practice theory and actor-network theory. In JonasMLittigBWroblewskiA (eds) Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories.
Cham, Switzerland:
Springer International Publishing AG, pp.35–46.
39.
ShoveESouthertonD (2000)
Defrosting the freezer: From novelty to convenience.Journal of Material Culture5(3): 301–319.
40.
ShoveETrentmannFWilkR (2009) Time, Consumption and Everyday Life: Practice, Materiality and Culture.
Oxford:
Berg.
41.
SouthertonD (2003) ‘
Squeezing time’: Allocating practices, coordinating networks and scheduling society. Time & Society12(1): 5–25.
42.
SouthertonDandYatesL (2015) Exploring food waste through the lens of social practice theories: Some reflections on eating as a compound practice. In: KEkström (ed.) Waste Management and Sustainable Consumption: Reflections on Consumer Waste.
London:
Routledge, pp.133–149.
43.
SteinbergPPetersK (2015)
Wet ontologies, fluid spaces: Giving depth to volume through oceanic thinking.Environment and Planning D33(2): 247–264.
44.
van HeurBLeydesdorffLWyattS (2013)
Turning to ontology in STS? Turning to STS through ‘ontology’.Social Studies of Science43(3): 341–362.
45.
WaittGPhillipsC (2016)
Food waste and domestic refrigeration: A visceral and material approach.Social & Cultural Geography17(3): 359–379.
46.
WardeA (2014)
After taste: Culture, consumption and theories of practice.Journal of Consumer Culture14(3): 279–303.
47.
WardeA.WelchDPaddockJ (2017) Studying consumption through the lens of practice. In: KellerKHalkierBWilskaT, et al. (eds) Routledge Handbook of Consumption.
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.343–352.
48.
WatsonMMeahA (2013)
Food, waste and safety: Negotiating conflicting social anxieties into the practices of domestic provisioning.The Sociological Review60(Suppl. 2), 102–120.
49.
WoolgarSLezaunJ (2013)
The wrong bin bag: A turn to ontology in science and technology studies?Social Studies of Science43(3): 321–340.
50.
YngfalkC (2016) The milk in the sink: Waste, date labelling and food disposal. In: BCappelliniDMarshallEParsons (eds) The Practice of the Meal: Food, Families and the Market Place.
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.197–207.
