The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowing food and growing food: Beyond the production–consumption debate in the sociology of agriculture
Open accessAbstract
What does the rise of organic food as a social phenomenon mean politically? What political impact does this form of consumption have on society? Is it a small and unimportant “blip” in the overall march of globalized, industrialized food and rationalized consumption systems. Is it even, perhaps, complicit in this process? Or is it a radical break ? The array of answers to these questions forms the “production–consumption debate” currently taking place in the examination of agro–food systems. If agro–food networks are conceptualized as interactive, socio–ecological metabolic circuits linking agricultural nature, social labor, the corporeal and the symbolic, then this paper argues that analytical concern in agrofood studies has focused overwhelmingly on the production ‘moment’ in these circuits. Despite the lessons of numerous ‘food scares’, anti–GMO movements and the mad cow disease pandemic, an asymmetry now holds sway in agro–food studies between production and consumption even though in other fields, as Jackson (1999) notes, consumption has been “duly acknowledged” (p. 95). As this asymmetry is addressed, a contemporary reformulation of the ‘agrarian question’ might investigate the potential for new forms of progressive food politics, ranging from ‘weak’ struggles over the modes of social orderings, such as knowledge systems, to more formal alliances between producers and consumers
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Introduction: commodities and the politics of value
Appadurai, A. (1986) · The Social Life of Things · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511819582.003 · Cited by 4,001 · cited 10×
“From Appadurai’s perspective, consumption activity has always contained within it significant power to change society, no matter the economic period. To find this power, however, one has to look at consumption with different eyes than those of Marx. One has to see the mutual constitution of social relationships betwee…”
BackgroundInfluentialNotes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity
Law, J. (1992) · Systems Practice · doi:10.1007/bf01059830 · Cited by 3,244
Cited by
Third-party certification in the global agrifood system
Hatanaka, M., Bain, C., & Busch, L. (2005) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2005.05.006 · Cited by 686
Rural Europe Redux? Reflections on Alternative Agro‐Food Networks and Paradigm Change
Goodman, D. (2004) · Sociologia Ruralis · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9523.2004.00258.x · Cited by 585
Self-citationConsumer/Producer Links in Fair Trade Coffee Networks
Raynolds, L. T. (2002) · Sociologia Ruralis · doi:10.1111/1467-9523.00224 · Cited by 473
Embodying Neoliberalism: Economy, Culture, and the Politics of Fat
Guthman, J., & DuPuis, M. (2006) · Environment and Planning D: Society and Space · doi:10.1068/d3904 · Cited by 391
Holloway, L., Kneafsey, M., Venn, L., Cox, R., Dowler, E., & Tuomainen, H. (2007) · Sociologia Ruralis · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9523.2007.00427.x · Cited by 314
Metadata
- Authors
- Goodman, D., & DuPuis, E. M.
- Venue
- Sociologia Ruralis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-22
- ISSN
- 0038-0199 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9523
- OpenAlex
- W2034015424
- Cited by
- 490
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 77.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Knowing food and growing food: Beyond the production–consumption debate in the sociology of agriculture. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-9523.00199
- The paper
- Goodman, D., & DuPuis, E. M. (2002). Knowing food and growing food: Beyond the production–consumption debate in the sociology of agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00199
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.