Abstract:What role do science and scientists play in the transition between food regimes? Scientific communities are integral to understanding political struggle during food regime transitions in part due to the broader scientization of politics since the late 1800s. While social movements contest the rules of the game in explicitly value-laden terms, scientific communities make claims to the truth based on boundary work, or efforts to mark some science and scientists as legitimate while marking others as illegitimate. In doing so, scientific communities attempt to establish and maintain the privileged position of science in contests over policy. In this paper, we situate scientific boundary work within its world historical context in order to ask two key questions: (1) how does scientific boundary work vary across food regimes; and, in turn, (2) what role does scientific boundary work play in the political contestation that drives transitions between food regimes? We explore these questions through the case of one scientific community—the AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Communities)—involved in food safety regulation across the British, US, and corporate food regimes. We argue that scientific boundary work is shaped by historically specific patterns of social conflict within food regimes and, in particular, the double-movement dynamics that Polanyi (The great transformation: the political and economic origins of our times. Boston: Beacon, 1957[1944]) theorizes. Moreover, as scientific communities reconstruct their internal rules, norms, and procedures to claim their own legitimacy in relation to prevailing forms of social conflict, they also reshape who sets scientific agendas and thus the knowledge available for making new rules within periods of food regime transition. To elaborate this argument in theoretical terms, we build on recent efforts to integrate a neo-Polanyian perspective into food regime analysis and link this to research on scientific boundary work by scholars in science and technology studies.

“Wicked Problems,” Public Policy, and Administrative Theory

Problem structuring, wrong-problem problems and metagovernance as the strategic management of intractable positions: The case of the EU GM Crop Regulatory Framework controversy

The wicked city: Genealogies of interdisciplinary hubris in urban thought

The Deadlock in European Decision-Making on GMOs as a Wicked Problem by Design: A Need for Repoliticization

Public marketing to face wicked problems: theoretical essay for conceptual model construction

The Challenge of Regulating Genetically Modified Organisms in the European Union: Trends and Issues

Science and Power in Global Food Regulation: The Rise of the Codex Alimentarius

The Political Economy of Biotechnology

The EU legislation on "GMOs" between nonsense and protectionism: An ongoing Schumpeterian chain of public choices

“Pioneers” of Managerial Thought: Woodrow Wilson Case

Regulating gene editing in agriculture and food in the European Union: Disentangling expectations and path dependencies

The politics and science behind GMO acceptance

In Whose Interest? Pressure Group Politics, Economic Competition and Environmental Regulation

Navigating the Wicked Policy Problem: An In-Depth Analysis of Policy Dilemmas and Innovative Approaches for Effective Problem Solving

Managing Wicked Environmental Problems as Complex Social-Ecological Systems: The Promise of Adaptive Governance

Genetically Engineered Foods and Moral Absolutism: A Representative Study from Germany

Scientific boundary work and food regime transitions: the double movement and the science of food safety regulation

Populism and Public Administration: Confronting the Administrative State

Deconcentrated global governance, transnational administration, and the public administration discipline

Artificial Public Administration – Myth or Reality?

Removing politics from innovations that improve food security