Making a difference. Constructing relations between organic and conventional agriculture in Finland in the emergence of organic agriculture

Abstract

This article analyses debates on the difference between organic and conventional agriculture. Departing from earlier accounts on the subject, it is argued that rather than conceptualising the subject as a case of diminishing differences, research should also focus on examining the making of these differences. This latter approach is connected to the notion that organic agriculture, understood as an alternative to conventional forms of agriculture, needs to justify its position by showing how it is different from them. To examine this issue, the article analyses the case of the emergence of organic agriculture in Finland. By analysing guidebooks, committee reports, and research publications the article analyses the construction of differences between organic and conventional. The case study shows that the difference between organic and conventional agriculture has been at the core of the debate, necessitating advocates of organic agriculture to actively construct it in different ways. This boundary making has operated differently depending on the various registers according to which organic agriculture and food have been assessed.

Beyond “mainstream” and “alternative” in organic food supply chains

“…However, patterns of organic sales may also be influenced by product type, but studies and data distinguishing between product categories are lacking. The blunt division of organic farmers into either 'purists' or 'pragmatists' (Morgan and Murdoch 2000;Guthman, 2004;Clark, 2015) has been challenged by some authors (Padel, 2008;Rosin and Campbell, 2009;Lehtimäki, 2019), who argue that it is difficult and potentially misleading to differentiate between farmers only in regard to their attitudinal viewpoints and the marketing channels they deal with. Rosin and Campbell (2009) explicitly criticised the traditional political economy approach employed by the supporters of the conventionalisation hypothesis and argued that the binary interpretation of the organic sector (alternative organic/mainstream organic) does…”

A relational perspective on the dynamics of the organic sector in Austria, Italy, and France

“…The dynamics thus emerged from a host of economic, material, technological, cultural, moral, and emotional relations tied with a variety of actors in the agrifood system. These relations are always under construction, are always being made, always unfinished, with actors involved in an ongoing process of building, strengthening, maintaining, weakeing and breaking relations, in their response to new possibilities and to unfolding meanings (Chia, 1999;Kjeldsen and Ingemann, 2009;Balducci et al, 2011;Allen, 2012;Lehtimäki, 2018). Thus, from a relational perspective, the organic sector is always changing and changing in different ways in each countries.…”

“…These relations emerge from past conflicts, strategic alliances, dominations, and collaborations. Social actors are thus understood as renegotiating their relations with others, not least by manipulating common understandings, by reconstructing narratives (King, 2000;Eacott, 2018;Lehtimäki, 2018). Indeed, relations not only have practical materiality, they also convey meaning, a meaning that is created and renegotiated through a coevolutionary dynamic (Chia, 1999).…”

Farming from a Process‐Relational Perspective: Making Openings for Change Visible

“…The essential characteristics can be used to define typologies and to make distinctions, allowing to convey clarity in an analysis. Yet, studies have been keen to expose the limitations of binary oppositions such as old/young farmer, modern/traditional, small/large farms, conventional/organic, pointing out hybridities and fluidity (Whatmore and Thorne ; Burton ; Rosin and Campbell ; Sutherland and Darnhofer ; Lamine ; Le Velly and Dufeu ; Lamine et al ; Lehtimäki ). These studies point out that distinctions between types of farmers or types of farms may be less clear‐cut at any point in time.…”