The Rise of the Organic Foods Movement as a Transnational Phenomenon - The Oxford Topic of Food, Politics, and Society - page 739

seeking to create and sustain “alternative” forms of community and profit-seeking mul-
tinational corporations has been made possible, in part, by the fact that “organic” foods
are defined not by the characteristic of the final products (such as their nutritional val-
uesandwholesomeness)butratherbytheirproduction,whichfollowsasetoftechnical
standards that, frequently, have been defined by state authorities in ways that do not
fully express core “organic” values. Although the hypothetical organic Twinkie that was
thefocusofconcerneddebateinthe1990sappearstoneverhavemadeittomarketand
organicCoca-Colaremainsaictionalproduct(Mensvoort2008),organic“junkfoods”
such as chipotle barbecue potato chips and chocolate fudge brownie ice cream fill super-
market shelves.3
In addition, “organic foods” displays a considerable “frame-bridging capacity”
(Tarrow2002,p. 243),suchthatthedesignationhasbeenfoundusefulbyactorspush-
ing a range of different agendas and issues. Whereas “organic foods” was initially almost
exclusively concerned with methods for cultivating the soil, it has since come to extend
to entirely new areas of food production, principally relating to dairy and meat. The
organic frame was extended to these areas in response, in part, to rising concerns with
the welfare of animals in these industries.4 Some countries have also incorporated fish
intotheorganicframebyembracingtheideathataquaculture—seenasapotentialsolu-
tiontoglobaloverishing—canalsobedoneinaccordancewith“organic”principles.5
Inaddition,“organic”hasbeenextendedtoincorporatethecollectionof“wild”foods,
such as berries, mushrooms, nuts, and honey. The organic frame has also been made
relevantforsocial-justiceissuessuchas“fairtrade,”women'srights,theempowerment
ofindigenouspeoples,and“foodsovereignty.”Likewise,therealorimagineddangersof
newtechnologicaldevelopments,suchastheutilizationoftransgenicorganismsinfood
production, provided an opportunity to present “organic foods” as the safer alternative.
More recently, a bridge has been built between “organic foods” and the threat of global
warming, with organic agriculture touted as a means by which climate change can be
mitigated(KotschiandMüller-Sämann2004).Organicfoodsareproferedasapoten-
tial solution not only to local environmental problems, but to planetary-scale challenges
as well.
The wide range of issues that “organic” is assumed to be able to address is indicated
by the U.S.-based Organic Consumers Association declaration, on its webpage, which
states that it is “campaigning for health, justice, sustainability, peace and democracy.”6In
all these cases, “organic foods” serves as a bridge between extrinsic and intrinsic values
that have become increasingly central to modern individuals, as they seek to develop
and live by an ethic that balances care for personal health and for the natural and social
environment in its local and global dimensions. Because of the remarkable ability of
organic food ideologues and marketers to link organic foods to narratives of the mul-
tiple ways in which organic foods production and consumption improves ourselves
and our world, it would be a mistake to conceive of the organic foods movement as a
single-issue movement.
The frame-bridging capacity of “organic” is evident also in its embrace by political
parties with disparate ideological profiles and political agendas. Historically, organic