The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Framing the future of food: The contested promises of alternative proteins
Open accessAbstract
This paper offers a critical examination of the narrative landscape that has emerged with a new movement of alternative proteins intended as substitutes for conventional meat, milk and other animal-based food products. The alternative protein approaches analysed include edible insects, plant-based proteins and cellular agriculture, the latter of which encompasses ‘cultured’ or ‘clean’ meat, milk and egg products produced in vitro via cell-science methods. We build on previous research that has analysed the promissory narratives specific to cultured/clean meat by examining the key promises that have worked across the broader alternative protein movement. In doing so, we develop a five-fold typology that outlines the distinct yet interconnected claims that have operated in alternative protein promotional discourses to date. The second part of the paper examines the counter-narratives that have emerged in response to alternative protein claims from different stakeholders linked to conventional livestock production. We offer a second typology of three counter-narratives that have so far characterised these responses. Through mapping this narrative landscape, we show how different types of ‘goodness’ have been ascribed by alternative protein and conventional livestock stakeholders to their respective approaches. Moreover, our analysis reveals a series of tensions underpinning these contested food futures, many of which have long histories in broader debates over what constitutes better (protein) food production and consumption. The paper's discussion contributes to ongoing research across the social sciences on the ontological politics of (good) food, and the key role of narratives in constructing and contesting visions of ‘better’ food futures.
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
Douglas, M. (2003) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203361832 · Cited by 5,078
Turner, F. (2006) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226817439.001.0001 · Cited by 1,818
The sexual politics of meat: a feminist-vegetarian critical theory
(1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-3347 · Cited by 1,417
A Sociology of Expectations:Retrospecting Prospects and Prospecting Retrospects
Brown, N., & Michael, M. (2003) · Technology Analysis & Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/0953732032000046024 · Cited by 956
Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects
Post, M. J. (2012) · Meat Science · doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008 · Cited by 780
Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., & Sexton, A. (2018) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010 · Cited by 768
Self-citationThe place of food: mapping out the ‘local’ in local food systems
Feagan, R. (2007) · Progress in Human Geography · doi:10.1177/0309132507073527 · Cited by 758
Hoek, A. C., Luning, P. A., Weijzen, P., Engels, W., Kok, F. J., & de Graaf, C. (2011) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.02.001 · Cited by 757
Lorimer, J. (2010) · University of Minnesota Press eBooks · doi:10.5749/9781452944289 · Cited by 624
Self-citationPOST-PASTEURIAN CULTURES: The Microbiopolitics of Raw-Milk Cheese in the United States
PAXSON, H. (2008) · Cultural Anthropology · doi:10.1111/j.1548-1360.2008.00002.x · Cited by 609
Cited by
Sustaining Protein Nutrition Through Plant-Based Foods
Langyan, S., Yadava, P., Khan, F. N., Dar, Z. A., Singh, R., & Kumar, A. (2022) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2021.772573 · Cited by 361
The promised land: contrasting frames of marginal land in the European Union
Muscat, A., de Olde, E. M., Candel, J. J. L., de Boer, I. J. M., & Ripoll-Bosch, R. (2022) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105860 · Cited by 33
Metadata
- Authors
- Sexton, A. E., Garnett, T., & Lorimer, J.
- Venue
- Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-02-06
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 47-72
- ISSN
- 2514-8486 (ISSN-L)
- 2514-8494
- OpenAlex
- W2913712680
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 53
- FWCI
- 13.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Framing the future of food: The contested promises of alternative proteins. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/2514848619827009
- The paper
- Sexton, A. E., Garnett, T., & Lorimer, J. (2019). Framing the future of food: The contested promises of alternative proteins. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619827009
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.