Dimensions of Power in Regulatory Regime Selection: Shopping, Shaping, and Staying

Ipsen, Annabel

doi:10.1080/24694452.2016.1270190

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In agrifood systems research, the study of structural risk and precarity is hardly new, as scholars have documented how mergers and acquisitions have consolidated decision-making power among a few corporate actors, showing the consequences for the supply chain and its actors. Rural sociologists have pointed repeatedly to the fact that a handful of companies exert increasing control over the food system's structure, production strategies, regulation, and consumer options ( (Ipsen 2017) Hendrickson et al 2017;Howard 2016;Ipsen 2017). For example, farmers and consumers have fewer market choices, making it more difficult for newcomers to break into monopolized sectors.…”

Section: Structural Precarity Environmental Justice and Agrifood Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Worksites as Sacrifice Zones: Structural Precarity and COVID-19 in U.S. Meatpacking

Carrillo

Ipsen

2021

Sociological Perspectives

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As meatpacking facilities became COVID-19 hotspots, the pandemic renewed the importance of longstanding claims from environmental justice and agrifood scholars. The former asserts the perceived dispensability of marginalized populations sustains environmental injustices, whereas the latter stresses that decades of industrial consolidation created structural instability in the food supply chain. This article asks how industry and government leverage existing socio-ecological inequalities to ensure the continuity of the meatpacking supply chain during COVID-19, and the implications these actions hold for workers. To answer these questions, the authors perform case studies of meatpacking facilities in three Midwestern states. This article uses the critical environmental justice framework to expand research on sacrifice zones to include hazardous worksites such as meatpacking. We find that toxic employment flourishes through firms labor practices that pass socio-ecological risks onto workers in the name of efficiency, and through a complicit state that prioritizes accumulation and consumption over workers health.

show abstract

Section: Structural Precarity Environmental Justice and Agrifood Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Worksites as Sacrifice Zones: Structural Precarity and COVID-19 in U.S. Meatpacking

Carrillo

Ipsen

2021

Sociological Perspectives

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This spatial constraint encourages firms to develop relationships with local regulatory actors and communities as a way of shaping the local context to meet their needs and to ultimately protect their legal and social right to operate. Ipsen () finds that firms engage in shaping activities in three ways. First, firms take on “becoming local” strategies, incorporating locals into their workforce and molding the firm and its image to appeal to dominant local values about what local development and agriculture should look like and who should participate in it.…”

Section: Strategic Legalism: a Framework For Understanding When Firmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeat Players, the Law, and Social Change: Redefining the Boundaries of Environmental and Labor Governance Through Preemptive and Authoritarian Legality

Ipsen¹

2020

Law Soc Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Powerful corporations leverage the law to shape the regulatory environments in which they operate. A key strategy for achieving this is litigation. I ask under what conditions corporations litigate, and specifically, what happens when two repeat players, transnational agribusiness firms and local governments, face each other in court. I compare outcomes of two cases-Hawaii and Arica, Chile-documenting how different sociopolitical contexts and legal systems shape how actors engage the law. Interviews with firm managers, unions, government officials, lawyers, and advocacy organization leaders and document analysis reveal that firms seize on existing institutional norms and politics to define their localized legal strategies. Through strategic legalism, a defensive legal strategy that is outcome-oriented and context-specific, firms accomplish legal compliance and political containment of their opposition. In Hawaii, firms rely on preemptive legality, a strategy that moves controversial issues like pesticide safety from one domain of democratic politics to another that is largely incontestable because it is preempted by a higher authority. In Chile, firms use authoritarian legality, an approach that draws on authoritarian structures and policies within the state, to sway legal outcomes. These cases reveal the mechanisms that corporations draw on to institutionalize their power advantages through the law, offering a typology for future scholars to better understand how the strategic behavior of corporations shapes regulatory outcomes.Corporati ons rely heavily on the law as a tool to influence regulation and policies that affect them. Studies document corporate participation in lobbying (Yackee 2015), negotiated rulemaking I would like to thank Sida Liu, Joe Conti, Jane Collins, and Alexandra Huneeus for commenting on earlier drafts of this article. A special thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and the editors for their guidance. I take sole responsibility for any errors.

show abstract

Dimensions of Power in Regulatory Regime Selection: Shopping, Shaping, and Staying

Cited by 2 publications

References 15 publications

Worksites as Sacrifice Zones: Structural Precarity and COVID-19 in U.S. Meatpacking

Worksites as Sacrifice Zones: Structural Precarity and COVID-19 in U.S. Meatpacking

Repeat Players, the Law, and Social Change: Redefining the Boundaries of Environmental and Labor Governance Through Preemptive and Authoritarian Legality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About