Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In California, conventional agro‐food firms are beginning to appropriate the most lucrative aspects of organic food provision and to abandon the agronomic and marketing practices associated with organic agriculture's oppositional origins. Echoing the uneasy and complex dialectic between nature and capital in the American West, organic farming is becoming more akin to farming off of nature's image, as the idiom of a “purer” nature is deployed to sell what is increasingly commodified nature. The direction of organic agriculture in California can be understood as reflecting global trends in agro‐food provision and regulation, but it is also uniquely grounded in the context of California's regional history: on the one hand, a product of the counterculture, bolstered by a strong climate of environmental regulation; on the other hand, a legacy of California's exceptional agriculture, characterized in part by the dominance of growers' organizations and a focus on high‐value specialty crops. This paper also discusses three ways in which the political construction of the meaning of “organic” and its institutionalization in regulatory agencies such as private certification organizations have facilitated both the proliferation of agribusiness entrants and their adoption of questionably sustainable practices: first, certification agencies have their own institutional logic and are most beholden to their client‐growers; second, regulation requires the definition of enforceable standards out of complicated ecological, economic, and even sociocultural concerns; third, the certification process, by conferring a legal right to market food as organic, has created distinct incentives that shape participation in the sector.
Julie Guthman (Wed,) studied this question.