Abstract
This paper offers a critical examination of the narrative landscape that has emerged with a new movement of alternative proteins intended as substitutes for conventional meat, milk and other animal-based food products. The alternative protein approaches analysed include edible insects, plant-based proteins and cellular agriculture, the latter of which encompasses ‘cultured’ or ‘clean’ meat, milk and egg products produced in vitro via cell-science methods. We build on previous research that has analysed the promissory narratives specific to cultured/clean meat by examining the key promises that have worked across the broader alternative protein movement. In doing so, we develop a five-fold typology that outlines the distinct yet interconnected claims that have operated in alternative protein promotional discourses to date. The second part of the paper examines the counter-narratives that have emerged in response to alternative protein claims from different stakeholders linked to conventional livestock production. We offer a second typology of three counter-narratives that have so far characterised these responses. Through mapping this narrative landscape, we show how different types of ‘goodness’ have been ascribed by alternative protein and conventional livestock stakeholders to their respective approaches. Moreover, our analysis reveals a series of tensions underpinning these contested food futures, many of which have long histories in broader debates over what constitutes better (protein) food production and consumption. The paper's discussion contributes to ongoing research across the social sciences on the ontological politics of (good) food, and the key role of narratives in constructing and contesting visions of ‘better’ food futures.
Highlights
The central role played by narratives in shaping how and what we eat has been convincingly argued across social-science research on food (Eden, 2011; Evans and Miele, 2012; Goodman, 2004)
This paper offers a critical examination of the narrative landscape that has emerged with the recent alternative proteins (APs) movement
Building on recent studies that have concentrated on specific AP products (e.g. Jonsson, 2016; Mouat and Prince, 2018; Stephens and Ruivenkamp, 2016), our first aim has been to offer a broader analysis of the key promises that have worked across the movement
Summary
The central role played by narratives in shaping how and what we eat has been convincingly argued across social-science research on food (Eden, 2011; Evans and Miele, 2012; Goodman, 2004). Language of food labels and other forms of advertising across in-store and online media Their primary aim is often intended as a ‘knowledge fix’ (Eden, 2011) to help consumers make more informed and better food choices. Food narratives can evoke and invent more compassionate human–animal relationships (Miele, 2011), as well as stigmatise and revalorise entire dietary lifestyles, such as veganism (Doyle, 2016) Despite their influential role, food narratives can often fail in their intended purpose, instead causing confusion and even indifference on account of the sheer volume and contradictory nature of information that modern consumers must navigate within their everyday foodscapes (Eden et al, 2008)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.