Where do the conceptual ambiguities of food sovereignty lie and how can they be overcome? This article identifies a total of five challenges that underlie these ambiguities, namely the challenge of determining how food sovereignty as a research framework can address the tensions between: (a) state–movement relationships, (b) local–national interests, (c) rural–urban conflicts, (d) individual–collective choices and (e) political intermittence–organizational continuity. Using the method of integrative review, I argue that these challenges could be overcome if the criteria for addressing these tensions were based on the interests of the classes of labour by re-envisioning food sovereignty as a social mobilization outcome that potentially leads to agrarian class formation. A class-analytical approach to food sovereignty is thus deployed to study the case of Argentina in order to contribute to a more in-depth theoretical refinement and resolution of the conceptual ambiguities of food sovereignty.
AgarwalB. (2014). Food sovereignty, food security and democratic choice: Critical contradictions, difficult conciliations. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1247–1268.
2.
Akram-LodhiA. (2015). Accelerating towards food sovereignty. Third World Quarterly, 36(3), 563–583.
3.
Alonso-FradejasaA., HolmesT., Holt-GiménezE., & RobbinsM. J. (2015). Food sovereignty: Convergence and contradictions, conditions and challenges. Third World Quarterly, 36(3), 431–448.
4.
AndréeP., AyresJ., BosiaM. J., & MassicotteM. J. (Eds.). (2014). Globalization and food sovereignty: Global and local change in the new politics of food. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
5.
ArancibiaF. (2013). Challenging the bioeconomy: The dynamics of collective action in Argentina. Technology in Society, 35(2), 79–92.
6.
BernsteinH. (2006). Is there an Agrarian question in the 21st century?Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 27(4), 449–460.
7.
BernsteinH. (2010). Class dynamics of Agrarian change. Halifax and Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing.
8.
BernsteinH. (2014). Food sovereignty via the ‘peasant way’: A sceptical view. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1031–1063.
9.
BeucheltT. D., & VirchowD. (2012). Food sovereignty or the human right to adequate food: Which concept serves better as international development policy for global hunger and poverty reduction?Agriculture and Human Values, 29(2), 259–273.
10.
Blanco-CanquiH., & LalR. (2010). Principles of soil conservation and management. London, UK and New York, NY: Springer.
11.
BorrasS. M.Jr., EdelmanM., & KayC. (Eds.). (2008). Transnational Agrarian movements confronting globalization. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
12.
BorrasS. M.Jr., FrancoJ. C., & SuárezS. M. (2015). Land and food sovereignty. Third World Quarterly, 36(3), 600–617.
13.
BrentZ. (2015). Territorial restructuring and resistance in Argentina. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 42(3–4), 671–694.
14.
BrentZ., SchiavoniaC. M., & Alonso-FradejasaA. (2015). Contextualising food sovereignty: The politics of convergence among movements in the USA. Third World Quarterly, 36(3), 618–635.
15.
BurnettK., & MurphyS. (2014). What place for international trade in food sovereignty?The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1065–1084.
16.
CáceresD. M. (2015). Accumulation by dispossession and socio-environmental conflicts caused by the expansion of agribusiness in Argentina. Journal of Agrarian Change, 15(1), 116–147.
17.
ChappellM. J., WittmanH., BaconC. M., FergusonB. G., BarriosL. G., BarriosR. G., & PerfectoI. (2013). Food sovereignty: An alternative paradigm for poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation in Latin America. F1000Research, 2(235), 1–18.
18.
ClaeysP. (2014). Food sovereignty and the recognition of new rights for peasants at the UN: A critical overview of La Via Campesina’s rights claims over the last 20 years. Globalizations, 12(4), 452–465.
19.
ClaeysP. (2015). Human rights and the food sovereignty movement: Reclaiming control. New York, NY: Routledge.
20.
ÇelikÖ. (2014). Urban neoliberalism, strategies for urban struggles, and ‘the right to the city’. Capital & Class, 38(2), 414–451.
21.
DeLoughreyE. (2011). Yam, roots, and rot: Allegories of the provision ground. Small Axe, 11(1), 58–75.
22.
DesmaraisA. A. (2007). La Vía Campesina. globalization and the power of peasants. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
23.
DesmaraisA. A., & WittmanH. (2015). Farmers, foodies and First Nations: Getting to food sovereignty in Canada. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1153–1173.
24.
EdelmanM. (2014). Food sovereignty: Forgotten genealogies and future regulatory challenges. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 959–978.
25.
EdelmanM. (Ed.). (2015). Critical perspectives on food sovereignty: Global Agrarian transformations. New York, NY: Routledge.
26.
EdelmanM., WeisT., BaviskarA., BorrasS. M.Jr., Holt-GiménezE., KandiyotiD., & WolfordW. (2014). Introduction: Critical perspectives on food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 911–931.
27.
EleyG., & NieldK. (2000). Farewell to the working class?International Labor and Working-Class History, 57(1), 1–30.
28.
FAO (2003). Food security: Concepts and measurement. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4671e/y4671e06.htm
29.
FigueroaM. (2015). Food sovereignty in everyday life: Toward a people-centered approach to food systems. Globalizations, 12(4), 498–512.
30.
FrayssinetF. (2015). The dilemma of soy in Argentina. Retrieved from http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/03/the-dilemma-of-soy-in-argentina/
31.
García-LópezG. A., & ArizpeN. (2010). Participatory processes in the soy conflicts in Paraguay and Argentina. Ecological Economics, 70(2), 196–206.
32.
GiarraccaN., & TeubalM. (2001). Crisis and Agrarian protest in Argentina: The movimiento mujeres agropecuarias en lucha. Latin American Perspectives, 28(6), 38–53.
33.
GodekW. (2015). Challenges for food sovereignty policy making: The case of Nicaragua’s Law 693. Third World Quarterly, 36(3), 526–543.
34.
GürcanE. C. (2011). Food crisis and beyond: Locating food-sovereign alternatives in a post-neoliberal context. Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies, 26(1–2), 482–496.
35.
GürcanE. C. (2014a). Cuba’s agro-ecological movement. In KrullC. (Ed.), Cuba in a global context: International relations, internationalism and transnationalism (pp. 192–207). Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
36.
GürcanE. C. (2014b). Cuban agriculture and the four pillars of food sovereignty policies. Latin American Perspectives, 41(4), 129–146.
37.
HerreraR., & LauK. C. (Eds.). (2015). The struggle for food sovereignty: Alternative development and the renewal of peasant societies today. London, UK: Pluto.
Holt-GiménezE., & PatelR. (Eds.). (2009). Food rebellions: Crisis and the hunger for justice. Oakland, CA: Food First.
40.
HospesO. (2014). Food sovereignty: The debate, the deadlock, and a suggested detour. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(3), 119–130.
41.
IlesA., & De WitM. M. (2015). Sovereignty at what scale? An inquiry into multiple dimensions of food sovereignty. Globalizations, 12(4), 481–497.
42.
JansenK. (2015). The debate on food sovereignty theory: Agrarian capitalism, dispossession and agroecology. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 42(1), 213–232.
43.
KumarD., & RahaB. (Eds.). (2016). Tilling the land: Agricultural knowledge and practices in Colonial India. Delhi: Primus Books.
44.
LapegnaP. (2014). Global ethnography and genetically modified crops in Argentina: On adoptions, resistances, and adaptations. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 43(2), 202–227.
45.
LeninV. I. (1974). Collected works (Vol. XXIX). Moscow: Progress Publishers.
46.
LesterF. K. (2005). On the theoretical, conceptual, and philosophical foundations for research in mathematics education. ZDM, 37(6), 457–467.
47.
LittleD. (2007). Marxism and method. In GlaserD. & WalkerD. M. (Eds.), Twentieth-century Marxism: A global introduction (pp. 239–245). London, UK and New York, NY: Routledge.
48.
MarxK. (1973). The poverty of philosophy. New York, NY: International Publishers.
49.
McKayB., NehringR., & Walsh-DilleyM. (2014). The ‘state’ of food sovereignty in Latin America: Political projects and alternative pathways in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1175–1200.
50.
McMichaelP. (2006). Peasant prospects in the neoliberal age. New Political Economy, 11(3), 407–418.
51.
McMichaelP. (2008). Peasants make their own history, but not just as they please… In BorrasS. M.Jr., EdelmanM., & KayC. (Eds.), Transnational Agrarian movements: Confronting globalization (pp. 37–60). Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
52.
McMichaelP. (2009a). A food regime genealogy. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(1), 139–169.
53.
McMichaelP. (2009b). Food sovereignty, social reproduction and the Agrarian question. In Akram-LodhiA. & KayC. (Eds.), Peasants and globalization (pp. 288–312). London, UK and New York, NY: Routledge.
54.
McMichaelP. (2014). Historicizing food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 933–957.
55.
McMichaelP. (2015). The land question in the food sovereignty project. Globalizations, 12(4), 434–451.
56.
MenonR., & SpruytH. (1999). The limits of neorealism: Understanding security in Central Asia. Review of International Studies, 25(1), 87–105.
57.
Nyéléni Declaration (2007). Nyéléni Declaration. Retrieved from https://nyeleni.org/IMG/pdf/DeclNyeleni-en.pdf
58.
OteroG. (1989). The new Agrarian movement: Toward self-management and democratic production. Latin American Perspectives, 16(4), 28–59.
59.
OteroG. (1999). Farewell to the peasantry? Political class formation in Rural Mexico. Boulder, CO: Westview.
60.
OteroG. (Ed.). (2008). Food for the few: Neoliberal globalism and bio- technology in Latin America. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
61.
OteroG. (2012). The neoliberal food regime in Latin America: State, agribusiness transnational corporations and biotechnology. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 33(3), 282–294.
62.
OteroG., PechlanerG., & GürcanE. C. (2013). Political economy of ‘food security’ and trade: Uneven and combined dependency. Rural Sociology, 78(3), 263–289.
63.
PatelR. (2009a). Food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3), 663–706.
64.
PatelR. (2009b). What does food sovereignty look like?The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3), 663–706.
65.
PechlanerG., & OteroG. (2008). The third food regime: Neoliberal globalism and agricultural biotechnology in North America. Sociologia Ruralis, 48(4), 351–371.
66.
PechlanerG., & OteroG. (2010). The neoliberal food regime: Neoregulation and the new division of labor in North America. Rural Sociology, 75(2), 179–208.
67.
PerfectoI., & VandermeerJ. (2009). Nature’s matrix: Linking agriculture, conservation and food sovereignty. New York, NY: Routledge.
68.
PetrasJ., & VeltmeyerH. (2011). Social movements in Latin America: Neoliberalism and popular resistance. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
69.
PoulantzasN. (1976). Classes in contemporary capitalism. London, UK: NLB.
70.
Reuters (2015). Dry weather seen keeping Argentina on track to record soy crop. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/argentina-soybeans-harvest-idUSL2N0X417P20150407
SchanbacherW. D. (2010). The politics of food: The global conflict between food security and food sovereignty. New York, NY: Praeger.
73.
ShattuckA., SchiavoniC. M., & Van GelderZ. (2015). Translating the politics of food sovereignty: Digging into contradictions, uncovering new dimensions. Globalizations, 12(4), 421–433.
74.
SkocpolT. (1979). States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
75.
ThiemannL. (2015). Operationalising food sovereignty through an investment lens: How agro-ecology is putting ‘big push theory’ back on the table. Third World Quarterly, 36(3), 544–562.
76.
TorracoR. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367.
77.
TraugerA. (2014). Toward a political geography of food sovereignty: Transforming territory, exchange and power in the liberal sovereign state. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1131–1152.
78.
TraugerA. (Ed.). (2015). Food sovereignty in international context: Discourse, politics and practice of place. New York, NY: Routledge.
79.
VeltmeyerH. (1997). New social movements in Latin America: The dynamics of class and identity. Journal of Peasant Studies, 25(1), 139–169.
80.
VeltmeyerH. (2001a). Decentralization and local development. In VeltmeyerH. & O’MalleyA. (Eds.), Transcending neoliberalism (pp. 46–66). Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
81.
VeltmeyerH. (2001b). The dynamics of community and class. In VeltmeyerH. & O’MalleyA. (Eds.), Transcending neoliberalism (pp. 35–45). Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
82.
Vía Campesina (1996). Food sovereignty: A future without hunger. Retrieved from http://www.acordinternational.org/silo/files/decfoodsov1996.pdf
83.
Vía Campesina (2003). Peoples’ food sovereignty—WTO out of agriculture. Retrieved from https://viacampesina.org/en/peoples-food-sovereignty-wto-out-of-agriculture
84.
WaldN. (2015a). Hidden no more: Organised Campesinos in Northwest Argentina. Journal of Iberian and Latin American Research, 21(3), 325–344.
85.
WaldN. (2015b). In search of alternatives: Peasant initiatives for a different development in Northern Argentina. Latin American Perspectives, 42(2), 90–106.
86.
WhittemoreR., & KnaflK. (2014). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553.
87.
WilsonF. A. (2013). Dialectical research methods in the classical Marxist tradition. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
88.
WittmanH., DesmaraisA. A., & WiebeN. (Eds.). (2010). Food sovereignty: Reconnecting food, nature and community. Halifax: Fernwood.
89.
WrightE. O. (1997). Class counts: Comparative studies in class analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
