The advent of rBGH (recombinant bovinegrowth hormone) has spurred the establishment of anorganic milk industry. The food systems/commoditychain analytical framework cannot fully explain therise of this new food. An adequate understanding ofthe consumer's role in the food system/commodity chainrequires more attention to consumption as a form ofpolitics. One way to do this is to look at thepolitics of other new social movements, especiallythose contesting mainstream notions of risk. From thisapproach, organic milk consumption challenges rBGHfrom a ``Not-in-my-Body'' or ``NIMB'' politics of (...) refusal,similar to the political refusal of neighborhoodresidents in ``Not-in-My-Backyard'' or ``NIMBY''environmental movements. The NIMB form of politics isnot a social movement of politically consciousconsumers, yet it is still a political activity inwhich consumers participate in the formation of theindustry through a process of ``reflexive consumption.''An analysis of producer-consumer discourse on milkcartons reveals the nature of this political formation. (shrink)

The history of the controversy overrecombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) is exploredin terms of the issue of the potential robustness ofa consumption-driven ``new'' politics of food andagriculture. It is noted that while the dominanthistorical traditions in the social sciences haveserved to discount the autonomous role that consumersand consumption play in modern societies, there hasbeen growing interest in consumption within foodstudies as well as other bodies of scholarship such aspostmodernism, social constructivism, socialcapital/social distinction, and environmentalsociology. A review of the shifting pattern (...) ofdiscourses during the rBGH controversy shows thatconsumption-driven claims and politics played atangible, but relatively minor role. Even so, it issuggested that the rBGH experience along with paralleltrends in food politics (e.g., anti-pesticidecampaigns such as the ``Alar scare,'' agribusinessattempts to intimidate opponents through fooddisparagement laws, conditions-of-productionprovisions of the World Trade Organization agreement)could make the consumption/consumer dimension of foodpolitics more important in the future. (shrink)

Despite concerns of consumer protection andenvironmental groups that the use of geneticallyproduced growth hormone in milk-producing cows mayadversely impact the safety of the milk supply,scientific evidence and governmental findings from theUSA appear to indicate that milk fromtreated cows is identical in quality, taste, andnutritional value to milk from untreated cows. Limitedexperience to date in the USA demonstrateslittle consumer resistance to milk from cows that havereceived the growth hormone, which can lead to a 15%increase in milk production. In fact, if there (...) is noperceived differentiation between the two forms ofmilk, the issue offers little choice to consumers atlarge, and may result in economic benefit only toselected dairy farmers, as well as the producers ofthe genetically produced growth hormone. Thissituation in the USA may be an example ofdysfunctional technology transfer, with desirablebenefits to a few, and as yet unknown benefits to thesociety. The USA has taken a bold move inapproving the use of bovine growth hormone in milk-producing cows, while the European Union has takena divergent approach by enacting lengthy moratoriumsagainst its use. The basic lesson to be learned fromthe bST case is that lack of awareness amonggovernment officials and the public at large serves asa significant impediment to the adoption of newtechnologies. Accordingly, delays may occur indelivery of significant social benefits to thepopulation as a whole. Obviously, the issue extendsbeyond bST. (shrink)