Cosmopolitan risk community in a bowl: a case study of China’s good food movement

Abstract

Ulrich Beck fundamentally transformed our way of thinking about human interdependence through his three core theses on risk, individualisation and cosmopolitanisation. However, two commonly observed deficiencies in Beck's grand theory were its Eurocentric orientation and a lack of empirical grounding. Based on 5 focus groups and 14 interviews with participants of the emerging Clean Food Movement in China, this paper extends the Beckian discussion outside Europe. Through examining how individuals understand both 'traditional' and 'new' risks associated with contemporary food consumption, this paper demonstrates that in the face of unpredictable and incalculable harms, risks are not seen as a 'thing' , but are translated into 'causal relations' . Subsequently, for Chinese stakeholders, the best way to safeguard food risks is to enact more visible and functioning interdependent relations in the food system. This in turn has given rise to new forms of communities which cut across conventional geographic, socio-economic and political boundaries. The paper deepens a Beckian theorisation in two ways. First, it demonstrates that the 'enabling' effect of risk towards a cosmopolitan society is not limited to obvious global crises, such as climate catastrophes and financial meltdown. In fact, the mundane yet intimate concern of putting 'good' food in one's dinner bowl already presses actors to form new social solidarities that are cosmopolitan in nature. Second, it goes beyond Beck's assertion that the risk society has culminated in a cosmopolitan moment, and explores how a performative cosmopolitan community reshapes the 'relations of definition' to mitigate risks on the ground.

The transformative power of commoning and alternative food networks

“…Given this background, many AFNs in China provide an antidote to a weakening of institutionalised trust. AFNs permit more personal contact and face-toface provision of food, allowing individual and organisational trust to help mitigate safety concerns (Wang et al 2015, Krul and Ho 2017, Zhang 2018. As previous studies have pointed out, trust in AFNs is often not a reflection of the properties of the product, but an endorsement of the configuration of social relations within the network (Thorsoe and Kjeldsen 2015).…”

“…As we have discussed elsewhere (Zhang 2018), currently AFNs can be found in at least 20 major cities in China. While these grassroots AFNs share the aim of establishing a more socio-ecologically responsible food system, there is no hierarchy of command among this group of closely networked but independently run grassroots AFNs.…”

“…The scope of many of the 'local' food movements in China, for example, is not confined to a specific geographic proximity, but involves contributions from committed providers and activists across municipal, provincial and even national borders (Zhang 2018). To some extent, the food commons created by AFNs 'reterritorise' the bonds and boundaries of the food system (Holloway et al 2007).…”

The Metamorphosis of the World: Society in Pupation?

“…Thus 'banal cosmopolitanism' constitutes a modern way of being which cannot be eschewed (see Sierakowski, 2015;Zhang, 2018). Moreover, cosmopolitan ways of being are not only reproductive but are, moreover, transformative.…”

The Organization of Practices for Instituting Economic Processes: Alternative Food Networks in Beijing

“…The organizers construct specific small systems of production and consumption by carefully selecting trustworthy organic farmers, attracting consumer members and organizing consumer-producer interaction or specific delivery schemes. Zhang (2018) argues that these consumers draw on experiences of AFNs in other countries to construct a local food community in the face of globalizing food risks. Zhang and Barr (2018) further illustrate the networks’ “commoning” strategy in aligning diverse personal interests into a common pursuit.…”