No abstract

a b s t r a c tIn the now extensive literature on alternative food networks (AFNs) (e.g. farmers' markets, community supported agriculture, box schemes), a body of work has pointed to socio-economic problems with such systems, which run counter to headline claims in the literature. This paper argues that rather than being a reflection of inherent complexities in such food systems, the continued uncertainties about the fundamental nature and development of AFNs are, at least in part, a function of how AFNs are often conceptualised and investigated, which ultimately impedes progress in knowledge of such systems. After introducing the main theoretical perspectives of research in the field, and setting out what is known currently about AFNs and their characteristics, the paper goes on to articulate four features of AFN research which, it is argued, give rise to problems in this field. In particular, the paper identifies inconsistent use of concepts and terms, conflation of the structural characteristics of food systems with desired outcomes and/or actor behaviours, insufficient acknowledgement of the problems of marketplace trading, and a continued lack of a consumer perspective. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for future research into AFNs that seeks to break current boundaries and encourage greater progress in knowledge in this field.

No abstract

A postal survey was sent to 150 supermarkets and 112 wholefood shops in the UK; response rates were 53 and 67 per cent, respectively. A telephone survey with 242 members of the general public was conducted in Scotland; there was a 63 per cent positive response. Research found that 29 per cent of the general public bought organic foods at some time.

To pursue development goals, policymakers and scholars alike have proposed that actors in rural areas may usefully engage in collective actions, e.g. by forming community groups, producer associations or multi-actor networks. One proposed benefit of such collaborations is the enhanced knowledge exchange and learning which may be created, and in the literature the dynamics of this are often explained via the concepts of embeddedness and/or social capital. To date however, studies tend towards a somewhat narrow, territorial, interpretation of these concepts, with the result that current understanding of how collaborations and learning evolve between rural actors is rather constrained. This paper aims to explore a broader interpretation of these concepts, through case analysis of a producer cooperative in the Scottish shellfish sector. In the case, the realities of member and management relations are revealed, along with the types of knowledge generated and the processes by which these are, or are not, shared between actors. In terms of embeddedness, our analysis reveals that, rather than the local community context which tends to dominate the literature, it is sectoral norms and habits which shape actor relations and learning most significantly in this case. In terms of social capital, we identify that tension-fuelled social relations are not in themselves a barrier to collaboration, again in contrast to existing claims, particularly where key actors have appropriate interpersonal skills, and where a values-based mindset ('cooperative know-how') is held in common. The findings therefore challenge popular assumptions about how embeddedness and social capital shape collective action and learning in rural areas, and illustrate the value of interpreting these concepts more expansively.