From Food Insecurity to Food Sovereignty: Rational or Irrational?

• In Event: 240 - Section on Consumers and Consumption Roundtable Session (one-hour).
  In Paper Session: Table 05. Institutions & Networks of Consumption

Abstract

In this paper I closely examined the co-existence of the growth of food insecurity and the increase of efficiency and productivity in the contemporary food industry from a classical sociological perspective. Specifically, I discussed two types of rationality in Weber’s theory of rationalization—substantive rationality and formal rationality—and situated them in a specific context to explain how the presence of food insecurity is considered formally rational in a modern capitalist society where the ultimate goal is maximization of profits. Marx’s anti-capitalism critique has also been included in this paper to further explore the irrationality of capitalism.

Based on my analysis of the irrationality of formal rationalization, I argued that such a rationalizing process is not irreversible. Instead, recent Weberian scholars offered a positive interpretation of Weber’s rationalization theory. That is, aside from impersonizing human relationships and limiting human freedom, to some extent formal rationalization also allows people to take control of their own life choices, restore social connections and ultimately promote human welfare. The food sovereignty movement serves as an example, where participants make rational food choices with an aim to decommodify food through the implementation of alternative food systems. However, such a systematic transformation is only possible when the underlying political, economic, and social constraints are recognized and challenged by society.

Author

• Hui Qian, Michigan State University