Abstract
How have the discourses of ‘trade-oriented food security’ and ‘food sovereignty’ contributed to a politics of international agri-food policy? Discourse is understood as the meanings given to phenomena (both social and physical) and the practices associated with those meanings. Consequently, metaphors are regarded as powerful sense-making constructs. In their classic forms, these two discourses constitute seemingly irreconcilable paradigms: one representing a hegemonic assertion of neoliberal economic rationalism, the other an oppositional and populist social movement. Analysis of public-facing discourse reveals distinctive meanings and metaphors concerning the role of trade in food security and in the conceptualisation of nature (particularly in reference to agricultural biotechnology) along with elements of co-construction. While both forms of discourse face challenges in retaining coherency, trade-oriented food security enunciates a poorly specified and increasingly arcane vision, relatively unconcerned with ecological sensitivities and resource constraints. New opportunities for the discourse of food sovereignty may involve continuing to specify and exemplify a politics of the particular founded on agro-ecological practices.
Notes
1. See Patel (2007) on the connections between obesity and malnourishment.
2. At the time of writing the ISI Web of Knowledge database returned 53 journal articles featuring the term ‘food sovereignty’ and categorised as social science, 47 of which were published in 2009 or after.
3. The IBRD would be superseded by the World Bank, comprising the IBRD and the International Development Association (IDA). The former organisational component focuses upon ‘credit-worthy’ middle-income states, e.g. Turkey, whilst the latter is concerned with the financially-poorest states, e.g. Senegal, Tajikistan.