Exploring the ‘localisation’ dimension of food sovereignty

Abstract

The 'localisation' narrative is at the heart of food sovereignty in theory and practice, in reaction to the 'distance' dimension in the dominant industrial food system. But while it is a central element in food sovereignty, it is under-theorised and largely unproblematised. Using the theoretical concepts of food regime analysis, uneven geographical development and metabolic rift, the author presents an exploratory discussion on the localisation dimension of food sovereignty, arguing that not all local food systems are a manifestation of food sovereignty nor do they all help build the alternative model that food sovereignty proposes. The paper differentiates local food systems by examining character, method and scale and illustrates how local food systems rarely meet the ideal type of either food sovereignty or the capitalist industrial model. In order to address five forms of distance inherent in the global industrial food system, localisation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for food sovereignty. A more comprehensive food sovereignty needs to be constructed and may still be constrained by the context of capitalism and mediated by the social movements whence it comes.

Converging social justice issues and movements: implications for political actions and research

“…22 One effect of this is the rise of transport, processors, packaging and refrigeration industries associated with the industrial food system that in turn burn more fossil energy and increase exponentially the production of and trade in single-use plastics, among many other things. This has highlighted the importance of taking seriously the 'localisation' pillar of food sovereignty, as Robbins 23 has argued. Distance has also produced an inherent problem in the system: food waste and loss, estimated to be the fate of at least a third of the total food produced.…”

Social work and sustainable rural development: The practice of social economy in China

“…Aside from selling products, the store also provides a platform for fostering a consumers’ network to promote and sustain green consumption. One of the criticisms of the corporate food regime is the lack of connections between producers and consumers (Robbins, 2015). By marketing locally and acquainting consumers directly with the producers and production methods, the disconnection between production and consumption can be ameliorated.…”

Food sovereignty: shifting debates on democratic food governance

“…Although local can be an alternative space of political engagements (Ayres and Bosia 2011; Dekeyser and Korsten 2015), spatial proximity does not necessarily mean political accessibility. Localisation does not equal FS, even if large-scale agriculture is generally more connected to larger distribution networks and distant markets (Robbins 2015). Localisation could impact the food and nutritional security of many households that depend on food that is spatial ever more distant (Clapp 2014b(Clapp , 2015.…”

“…To build a local food system is not enough to overcome tensions such as an urban-rural divide or class differences within a community. Localising food is only one piece of the larger project of food system reform and is not enough in itself (Robbins 2015).…”