In recent years, both developing and industrialised societies have experienced riots and civil unrest over the corporate exploitation of fresh water. Water conflicts increase as water scarcity rises and the unsustainable use of fresh water will continue to have profound implications for sustainable development and the realisation of human rights. Rather than states adopting more costly water conservation strategies or implementing efficient water technologies, corporations are exploiting natural resources in what has been described as the "privatization of water". By using legal doctrines, states and corporations construct fresh water sources as something that can be owned or leased. For some regions, the privatization of water has enabled corporations and corrupt states to exploit a fundamental human right.Arguing that such matters are of relevance to criminology, which should be concerned with fundamental environmental and human rights, this article adopts a green criminological perspective and draws upon Treadmill of Production theory.
Public health advocates and policy makers have long considered how to translate the successes of tobacco control measures to address alcohol abuse and the excessive consumption of ultra-processed and nutrient-poor foods. Correspondingly, the strategies adopted by tobacco companies to prevent or delay regulation often parallel those adopted by the alcohol and food industries. Philip Morris, a leading tobacco company, has recently used investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms as a new strategy to hinder or prevent tobacco control measures in the form of plain packaging requirements. The cases that followed may have implications for the development of novel consumption-control measures, like plain packaging laws, aimed at preventing non-communicable diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease. This paper considers how the challenges to tobacco control measures through ISDS mechanisms could affect the development of consumption-control measures aimed at reducing alcohol abuse and unhealthy food consumption for non-communicable disease prevention. Using the recent ISDS challenges by Philip Morris as case studies, this paper draws out lessons and issues for the future development of consumption-control measures.
Background: One important way to transform food systems for human and planetary health would be to reduce the production and consumption of animals for food. The over-production and over-consumption of meat and dairy products is resource-intensive, energy-dense and creates public health and food equity risks, including the creation of superbugs and antimicrobial resistance, contamination and pollution of land and waterways, and injustice to animals and humans who work in the sector. Yet the continuing and expanding use of animals is entrenched in food systems. One policy response frequently suggested by parties from all sectors (industry, government and civil society) is voluntary or mandatory labelling reforms to educate consumers about the healthiness and sustainability of food products, and thus reduce demand. This paper evaluates the pitfalls and potentials of labelling as an incremental regulatory governance stepping-stone to transformative food system change. Methods: We use empirical data from a study of the regulatory politics of animal welfare and environmental claims on Australian products together with an ecological regulation conceptual approach to critically evaluate the potential of labelling as a regulatory mechanism. Results: We show that labelling is generally ineffective as a pathway to transformative food system change for three reasons: it does not do enough to redistribute power away from dominant actors to those harmed by the food system; it is vulnerable to greenwashing and reductionism; and it leads to market segmentation rather than collective political action. Conclusion: We suggest the need for regulatory governance that is ecological by design. Labelling can only be effective when connected to a broader suite of measures to reduce overall production and consumption of meat. We conclude with some recommendations as to how public health advocates and policy entrepreneurs might strategically use and contest labelling and certification schemes to build support for transformative food system change and to avoid the regressive consequences of labelling.
This review addresses food as a topic of sociolegal studies. We show that the divide between production and consumption in law and social science is increasingly untenable in the context of contemporary globalizing, industrializing food chains underpinned by a productivist ideology and supported by a consumptogenic cultural economy. Sociolegal studies of food are well-suited to grappling with the complexity of production–consumption dynamics through regulatory governance studies of hybridized (public and private) supply chain standards. Yet we argue for an expanded focus on the embeddedness of food chains in social, political, and, importantly, ecological food webs. We suggest that sociolegal studies into ecologically based regulation, countermovements, and an expansive version of the human right to food (that includes nature and animals) can particularly contribute to an understanding of the possibilities for regulating capitalism by seeking to constrain globalizing, industrialized food chains.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.