Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

“Trust us, we feed this to our kids”: women and public trust in the Canadian agri-food system

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public (dis)trust of conventionally produced food is now a pivotal issue for the Canadian food supply chain as consumers are increasingly demanding traceability, transparency and sustainability of the agri-food system. To ensure that Canadians understand what farmers do, how they do it, and why—there has been significant human and financial investment by both the agri-food industry and government over the last decade. Farmers, civil servants, and non-farming agricultural professionals alike are being encouraged to join the national conversation promoting the legitimacy of conventional agriculture. As part of this large-scale effort, women in agriculture (both on and off farm) are advocating, in gendered ways, for the safety and legitimacy of the agri-food system and its conventional farming practices. This is being done by utilizing their motherhood capital. This motherhood capital legitimizes the authority granted to mothers as expert decisionmakers regarding their children’s food consumption. Through the usage of their motherhood capital, women are being positioned—and are positioning themselves—as an important voice in re-narrating the story of conventional agriculture through the circulation of their maternal foodwork experiences. Using their authority as mothers (and feeders or caretakers of families) they are advocating for the safety, necessity, and trustworthiness of conventional agriculture to counter narratives of mistrust and risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source The Real Dirt on Farming II. Food and Farm Care Ontario, 2010

Fig. 2

Sourcehttps://farmfoodcaresk.org/ag-month/food-stories/

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a complete history of women’s active involvement in the development of Prairie agriculture, see: Carter (2016). Imperial Plots: Women, Land and the Spadework of British Colonialism on the Canadian Prairies. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

  2. Agriculture in the Canadian Prairies is somewhat different than other regions in Canada, as they rely heavily on cereals and grains for exports. These types of crops (like wheat, canola, barley, soy) make up the vast majority of what is grown in this region. https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/ca2016.

  3. Saik, Robert. Conference Presentation, “The Future of Agriculture” Royal Society of Agriculture of the Commonwealth International Conference, Edmonton, Alberta. November 2018.

  4. See for example http://www.realdirtonfarming.ca/.

  5. See for example “Canada Agriculture Day” https://www.agriculturemorethanever.ca/cdn-ag-day/.

  6. See for example http://licensetofarm.com/.

  7. See for example http://www.saskatchewan.ca/business/agriculture-natural-resources-and-industry/agribusiness-farmers-and-ranchers/agriculture-awareness/building-public-trust-in-agriculture.

  8. See for example http://www.aitc-canada.ca/en/.

  9. ‘Life Science’ is a new term that refers to the consolidation of chemical, seed, and biotechnology companies into ‘life science’ enterprises, for example, Monsanto, Syngenta, and DuPont (Fennell 2009).

  10. Conventional farming, industrial farming or modern agricultural systems vary from farm to farm and from country to country. However, for the purposes of this paper, it is defined as farm practices characterized by rapid technological innovation, large capital investments in equipment and technology, large-scale farms, single crops (monocultures); uniform high-yield hybrid crops, dependency on agribusiness, mechanization of farm work, and extensive use of pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides. In the case of livestock, it is when animals are highly concentrated and confined. (taken from https://openoregon.pressbooks.pub/envirobiology/chapter/9-3-conventional-agriculture/).

  11. These three provinces are considered the ‘bread basket’ of Canadian agriculture and their economies rely significantly on their agricultural exports (Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation 2015).

  12. See for example: (https://cahrc-ccrha.ca/programs-services/agridiversity/agriwomen/fast-facts).

  13. The results from this study will be made available to the research participants, and the author intends to write several non-academic publications (i.e. blog posts, agricultural newspaper/magazine articles) presenting this research for a larger, popular audience.

  14. It should be noted that this position/sector delineation is very generic because of the desire to protect the identity of my participants. There are so few women in high level leadership/management positions, it would be quite easy for someone to identify some of these women by their position description alone.

  15. http://www.realdirtonfarming.ca/.

  16. www.agintheclassroom.org.

  17. https://aitc-canada.ca/en-ca/who-we-are/our-staff.

References

  • Alston, M. 2000. Breaking Through the Grass Ceiling: Women, Power, and Leadership in Agricultural Organizations. Australia: Harwood Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, M., J. Clarke, and K. Whittenbury. 2018. Contemporary Feminist Analysis of Australian Farm Women in the Context of Climate Changes. Social Sciences 7 (2): 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7020016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annandale, E., and J. Clark. 1996. What is Gender? Feminist Theory and the Sociology of Human Reproduction. Sociology of Health & Illness 18 (1): 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep10934409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beagan, B., G.E. Chapman, A. D’Sylva, and B.R. Bassett. 2008. It’s Just Easier for me to do it: Rationalizing the Family Division of Foodwork. Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508091621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. 1997. The forms of Capital. In Education: Culture, Economy and Society, ed. A. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, and A. Wells. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P., and L. Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicage: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandth, B. 1995. Rural Masculinity in Transition: Gender Images in Tractor Advertisements. Journal of Rural Studies. https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-0167(95)00007-A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewis, J., and S. Warren. 2001. Pregnancy as Project: Organizing Reproduction. Administrative Theory and Praxis 23 (3): 383–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L. 1999. The Detraditionalization of Occupational Identities in Farming in South Australia. Sociologia Ruralis 39 (2): 236–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L. 2003. Gendered Bodies, Gendered Knowledges: Information Technology in Everyday Farming. Social Science Computer Review 21 (4): 464–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439303256098.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L., and B. Pini. 2006. Towards an Understanding of Gender and Capital in Constituting Biotechnologies in Agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00417.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bugge, A., and R. Almas. 2006. Domestic Dinner Representations and Practices of a Proper Meal Among Young Suburban Mothers. Journal of Consumer Culture 6 (2): 203–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, K., and J. Johnston. 2015. Food and Femininity. New York: Bloomsbury.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Agriculture Human Resource Council. 2016. Agri-Women Fast Facts. Retrieved June 5, 2018, from AgriWoman Profile website: https://cahrc-ccrha.ca/programs-services/agridiversity/agriwomen/fast-facts.

  • Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation. 2015. State of Rural Canada Report 2015. http://www.sorc.crrf.ca.

  • Carter, P. 2003. ’Black; Cultural Capital, Status Positioning and Schooling Conflicts for Low income African American Youth. Social Problems 50 (1): 136–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, S. 2016. Imperial Plots: Women, Land and the Spadework of British Colonialism on the Canadian Prairies. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coldwell, I. 2007. New Farming Masculinities: “More than just Shit-Kickers”, we’re “Switched-on” Farmers Wanting to “Balance Lifestyle, Sustainability and Coin”. Journal of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783307073936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corse, S.J. 1990. Pregnant Managers and Their Subordinates: Effect of Gender Expectations on Hierarchal Relationships. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science 26 (1): 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVault, M. 1991. Feeding the Family: The Social Organization of Caring as Gendered Work. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennell, D. 2009. Marketing Science: The Corporate Faces of Genetic Engineering. Journal of Communication Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859908325144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, A.J. 2015. Trading Futures: Economism and Gender in a Changing Climate. International Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872814556825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, B. 2009. When Couples Become Parents: The Creation of Gender in the Transition to Parenthood. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gatrell, C.J. 2008. Embodying Women’s Work. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatrell, C. 2011. Managing the Maternal Body: A Comprehensive Review and Transdisciplinary Analysis. International Journal of Management Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00286.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatrell, C.J. 2013. Maternal Body Work: How Women Managers and Professionals Negotiate Pregnancy and new Motherhood at Work. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712467380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gueutal, H., and E. Taylor. 1991. Employee Pregnancy: The Impact on Organizations, Pregnant Employees and Coworkers. Journal of Business and Psychology 5 (4): 459–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakim, C. 2011. Feminist Myths and Magic Medicine: The Flawed Thinking Behind Calls for Further Equality Legislation. London: Centre for Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, K. 2012. Body Beautiful? Gender, Identity and the Body in Professional Services Firms. Gender, Work and Organization 19 (5): 489–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2011.00583.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hays, S. 1996. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heather, B., D.L. Skillen, J. Young, and T. Vladicka. 2005. Women’s gendered identities and the restructuring of rural Alberta, Canada. Sociologia Ruralis. 45 (1–2): 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2005.00292.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huppatz, K. 2009. Reworking Bourdieu’s Capital: Feminine and Female Capitals in the Field of Paid Caring Work. Sociology 43 (1): 45–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinman, D., and J. Kloppenburg Jr. 1991. Aiming for the Discursive High Ground: Monsanto and the Biotechnology Controversy. Sociological Forum 6 (3): 427–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lareau, A. 2002. Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black Families and White Familites. American Sociological Review 67: 747–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leckie, G.J. 1996. They Never Trusted Me to Drive: Farm Girls and the Gender Relations of Agricultural Information Transfer. Gender, Place & Culture. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663699625586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liepins, R. 1998. The Gendering of Farming and Agricultural Politics: A Matter of Discourse and Power. Australian Geographer 29 (3): 371–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liepins, R. 2000. Making Men : The Construction and Representation of Agriculture-Based Masculinities in Australia and New Zealand*. Rural Sociology 65 (4): 605–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2000.tb00046.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, M.-C.M. 2016. Cultural Capital, Motherhood Capital, and Low-Income Immigrant Mothers’ Institutional Negotiations. Immigrant Adaptation 59 (3): 694–713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackendrick, N. 2014. More Work for Mother: Chemical Body Burdens as a Maternal Responsibility1. Gender and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243214529842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. 2016. Building Public Trust in Food and Farming. Ottawa: Canadian Wheat Symposium.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, L. 1997. Capital Culture, Gender at Work in the City. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullin, A. 2005. Reconceiving Pregnancy and Childcare: Ethics, Experience and Reproductive Labour. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Hara, P. 1998. Partners in Production? Women, Farm and Family in Ireland. Oxford: Bergham Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, J. (2014). Cheese and Chips out of Styrofoam containers: An Exploration of Taste and Cultural Symbols of Appropriate Family Foodways. M/C Journal, 17(1).

  • Pini, B. 2005. The Third Sex: Women Leaders in Australian Agriculture. 12(1).

  • Riley, M. 2009. Bringing the “Invisible Farmer” into Sharper Focus: Gender Relations and Agricultural Practices in the Peak District (UK). Gender, Place and Culture.. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663690903279138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, C. 1983. The Invisible Farmer. Totowa: Rowman & Allanheld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shilling, C. 2008. Changing Bodies: Habit, Crisis and Creativity. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortall, S. 1999. Women and Farming Property and Power. Houndsmill: MacMillian.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skeggs, B. 1997a. Formations of Class and Gender. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skeggs, Beverly. 1997b. Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, W. 2017. GMO Doublespeak: An Analysis of Power and Discourse in Canadian Debates over Agricultural Biotechnology. Canadian Food Studies/La Revue Canadienne Des Études Sur l’alimentation 4 (1): 108–138. https://doi.org/10.15353/cfs-rcea.v4i1.208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whatmore, S. 1991. Life Cycle or Patriarchy? Gender Divisions in Family Farming. Journal of Rural Studies. 7 (1–2): 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-0167(91)90043-R.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, N. 1996. Chapter 6 Farm Women: Cultivating Hope and Sowing Change. In Changing Methods Feminists Transforming Practice, ed. S. Burt, 137–162. Peterborough: Broadview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witz, A. 2000. Whose Body Matters? Feminist Sociology and the Corporeal Turn in Sociology and Feminism. Body and Society 6 (2): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding was provided by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, The King’s University, 9125 50 St NW, Edmonton, AB, T6B 2H3, Canada

    Jennifer Braun

  2. Faculty of Extension, University of Alberta, 10230 Jasper Ave, Edmonton, AB, T5J 4P6, Canada

    Mary Beckie

  3. Department of Sociology, University of Alberta, 4-25 Henry Marshall (HM) Tory Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E5, Canada

    Ken Caine

Authors
  1. Jennifer Braun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mary Beckie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ken Caine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Braun.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Braun, J., Beckie, M. & Caine, K. “Trust us, we feed this to our kids”: women and public trust in the Canadian agri-food system. Agric Hum Values 37, 495–507 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-10002-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-10002-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation