4.5 Article

The transformation of trust in China's alternative food networks: disruption, reconstruction, and development

期刊

ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY
卷 20, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

RESILIENCE ALLIANCE
DOI: 10.5751/ES-07536-200219

关键词

alternative food networks; China; food systems; social theory; trust transformation

资金

  1. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Food safety issues in China have received much scholarly attention, yet few studies systematically examined this matter through the lens of trust. More importantly, little is known about the transformation of different types of trust in the dynamic process of food production, provision, and consumption. We consider trust as an evolving interdependent relationship between different actors. We used the Beijing County Fair, a prominent ecological farmers' market in China, as an example to examine the transformation of trust in China's alternative food networks. We argue that although there has been a disruption of institutional trust among the general public since 2008 when the melamine-tainted milk scandal broke out, reconstruction of individual trust and development of organizational trust have been observed, along with the emergence and increasing popularity of alternative food networks. Based on more than six months of fieldwork on the emerging ecological agriculture sector in 13 provinces across China as well as monitoring of online discussions and posts, we analyze how various social factors-including but not limited to direct and indirect reciprocity, information, endogenous institutions, and altruism-have simultaneously contributed to the transformation of trust in China's alternative food networks. The findings not only complement current social theories of trust, but also highlight an important yet understudied phenomenon whereby informal social mechanisms have been partially substituting for formal institutions and gradually have been building trust against the backdrop of the food safety crisis in China.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据