Standard quality as a boundary object—A conceptual study

Abstract

This is a conceptual article that uses the concept 'boundary object' in order to discuss what role the loosely defined notion 'standard product quality' plays with regard to coordination and controversies in the Norwegian agrifood market. The boundary object theory offers a unique approach to exploring the boundaries (shared spaces) between standard and non-standard product qualities as framed by the involved actors. This theory emphasises the difference between doing and being: Analysing what quality does in social settings is a more informative approach than discussing what quality is. The core arguments are illustrated by a review of available studies of the Norwegian agrifood market. The first part of the article concludes that standard quality coordinates the hegemonic stakeholders (producers, retailers, regulators and consumers) without presupposing consensus between them. The second part of the article addresses the controversies in the boundaries between the hegemonic agricultural agrifood system and competing alternatives related to organic, terroir and animal welfare qualities. The study discerns no signs of any transformative quality turn-away from the Norwegian hegemonic agrifood system and the inherent emphasise on 'standard product' quality.

Confronting standards-making in food safety: Standards recalibration and regulatory reforms in China’s dairy industry

“…10 This translation, I argue, is better understood as transduction (conversions involving transformations associated with changes in media or context) as a mode of translation more attuned to what standards do as opposed to what they are. 11 Employing a transductive approach sheds light on the material-semiotic process of (re)contextualization as regulatory information and practices move through and create connections across sites and modalities. 12 Zhao's open government case serves as the central thread to understand this recontextualization: how a standard about raw milk (an indicator of safety and quality) comes to be seen as something else (indexing accountability and transparency).…”