**9. References**

372 Sociological Landscape – Theories, Realities and Trends

uneasiness, urging people to use a variety of viewpoints, to release imaginations and clear the ground for new beginnings, for re-arrangements. Ericsson, by contrast, proceeded in a bureaucratic, un-reflexive and un-playful, manner. In order to generate innovation, it formulated a problem and divided it into parts, rigidly organized the exchange of information among competitive offices in its established organizational formats and rigid procedures. Without confronting real issues, offices protected their turf, hoarding

In this chapter it has been argued that a key problem in sociology, as in any science, is that sociologists are all too often unaware of the ambivalence of their theorizations of society since they all too often fail to take into account the ambiguity inherent to social existence. In this sense, scientific activities can fail to fulfil their promise of enlightenment, that is, the promise of the liberation from ignorance, and instead reinforce ideologies, sociology's mortal enemy; as well as the enemy of genuine innovation, renewal and revitalization. The deliberate or unconscious ignorance of ambiguity leads to the imposition of models of society on social existence, through bureaucratic implementations and enforcements. In order to develop a truthful sociology or genuine scientific knowledge, that is, one that is true to its own promise, scientific processes such as enquiry, argumentation, clarification and reflection cannot be separated from a broad erudition, empathic understanding and sociological wisdom; only then can sociology be kept out of bureaucratic structures of organizations, in which ambivalence and ambiguity are denied. Instead it must promote dialogue, both within science and within the organizations of society at large, as the appropriate social form for doing sociology. It is the only form that prevents sociologists from alienating themselves from social life, and consequently, from contributing towards reification. Only through dialoguing is it possible to develop degrees of reflexivity, and to keep theory or theorizing about society, and practice or the social consequences of theory together. Only through dialoguing can sociology manifest, and realize its commitment to the European values of Socratic reason and freedom. At the same time, this commitment is a sine qua non if sociology is not to become the handmaid of power holders; and used as a lethal instrument for manipulating (rationalizing) social existence and for promoting some ideological form of existence in states, corporations, civil society, families, and so forth (like promoting a neo-liberal way of living). In his call for strengthening what he calls 'public sociology', Michael Burawoy (2005a) has ardently voiced the need to reconcile the different sociologies in new sociologies needed for new worlds. Burawoy stresses the urgent need for sociology's presence in the publics, in particular in protest movements that organize themselves to resist neo-liberalized bureaucracies. And indeed, in global capitalist worlds, as contrasted with the more democratic worlds, the social foundations or preconditions for being and doing sociology, and for generating reflexivity, are shaky; universities, in such contexts, tend to become dependent on, and inseparable from, ideological entities. Such entities create their own priorities in which the public mission of representing and realizing both Socratic reason and freedom of action is ignored. The European values are, as always, at risk in social existence, and sociologists face a tough battle to contribute towards the creation of reflexivity, the intellectual sensibility behind theory and practice, so much

information. Hence, Ericsson proved less renewing.

needed to defeat ideologies and live up to the promise of sociology.

**8. Conclusion** 


**20** 

*Italy* 

Valeria Sodano

*University Federico II of Naples,* 

**Food Policy Beyond Neo-Liberalism** 

For millennia food has been one of the central elements around which human civilizations have evolved. In pre-capitalistic societies food-related activities were at the core of all the material, cultural and institutional structures which shaped social relations. Besides being the adherent factor of society, food has always been a weapon and an instrument of power. Along with the development of capitalism, food-related activities have become increasingly integrated into the economic sphere, which has gained importance with respect to the sociocultural and political spheres. Food has become nothing more than a commodity, its trade has become a way of wealth accumulation and the market, instead of self-production in peasant societies, has become its main way of procurement for urban dwellers and the workforce required by industrialization. The "domestication" of food habits and trade has been an important leverage for capital accumulation. As a matter of fact, as the literature on food regimes has clarified, different stages of capitalistic development have required

This paper analyses the particular features of food governance under neoliberalism, considered the most recent stage of capitalistic accumulation. The main goal is to identify the political and theoretical constraints which seem to prevent food policy from becoming an effective tool for promoting a just and sustainable food system. A basic argument of this paper is that the analysis of the food case may give important insights for identifying the 'ideological' powers that have hitherto guided the neoliberal political-economic design. The

The first section describes the neoliberal global food system starting from the recent literature on food regimes and shows how it has so far been unable to achieve the goals of

The second section directly addresses the issue of food policy. It compares the future challenges facing the system with the neo-liberal strategies of interventions, demonstrating how neoliberal food policy is a useless weapon against the increasing food safety and

The third section illustrates the main traits of food policy programs alternative to neoliberalism. The focus is on the concept of food sovereignty, which encompasses the

security risks. Particular attention is paid to the issue of private governance.

**1. Introduction** 

different features of food governance.

discussion is organized as follows.

sustainability, hunger eradication and social justice.

concepts of food as a human right and sustainability.

