Organizing organic : conflict and compromise in an emerging market

133 Pages·2017·3.284 MB·English

by  Haedicke, Michael A.

r
o

.
S
.
U

r
e
d
n
u

d
e
t
t
i
m
r
e
p
uses
fair

t
p
e
c
x
e

,
r
e
h
s
i
l O R G A N I Z I N G
b
u
p
the
from
n O RG A N IC
o
i
s
s
i
m
r
e
p

t
u
o
h
t
i
w
form
any
in

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p
e
r
be
not
May

.
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
r
s MICHAEL A. HAEDICKE
t
h
g
i
r
All

.
s
s
e
r
P

y
t
i
s
r
e
v
i
n
U

d
anforlaw.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

ht ble
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
Stanford University Press
Stanford, California

r
o ©2016 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. All rights reserved.

.
S
.
U
No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
r
de photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system without the prior written permission of
n
u
Stanford University Press.
d
e
t
t
mi Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, archival-quality paper
r
e
p
uses NLiabmraersy: oHfa Cedoincgkree, sMs Cicahtaaelol gAin.,g a-uinth-Poru.blication Data
fair Title: Organizing organic : conflict and compromise in an emerging market / Michael A. Haedicke.
Description: Stanford, California : Stanford University Press, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
t
p
ce Identifiers: LCCN 2016000333 (print) | LCCN 2016000801 (ebook) | ISBN 9780804795906 (cloth : alk. paper) | ISBN
x
e
9780804798730 (ebook)

,
er Subjects: LCSH: Natural foods industry—United States—History. | Food industry and trade—United States—History. |
h
is Industrial organization—United States—History.
l
b
u Classification: LCC HD9005 .H24 2016 (print) | LCC HD9005 (ebook) | DDC 338.4/76413020973—dc23
p
the LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2016000333
from Typeset by Bruce Lundquist in 10.5/15 Adobe Garamond Pro

n
o
i
s
s
i
m
r
e
p

t
u
o
h
t
i
w
form
any
in

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p
e
r
be
not
May

.
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
r

s
t
h
g
i
r
All

.
s
s
e
r
P

y
t
i
s
r
e
v
i
n
U

d
anforlaw.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

e
tl
hb
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 2
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
ORGANIZING ORGANIC

r
o

S. Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
.
U

r
e
d
n
u

d
e
t
t
i
m
er MICHAEL A. HAEDICKE
p
uses
fair

t
p
e
c
x
e

,
r
e
h
s
i
l
b
u
p
the Stanford University Press
from Stanford, California

n
o
i
s
s
i
m
r
e
p

t
u
o
h
t
i
w
form
any
in

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p
e
r
be
not
May

.
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
r

s
t
h
g
i
r
All

.
s
s
e
r
P

y
t
i
s
r
e
v
i
n
U

d
anforlaw.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

e
tl
hb
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 3
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
Contents

r
o

.
S
.
U
r List of Tables
e
d
n
u Acknowledgments

d
e
tt List of Abbreviations
i
m
r
e
p Introduction: Visions of Transformation and Growth
uses 1. Breaking Ground for a New Agriculture: Transformation and Expansion during the Organic
fair Sector’s Early Years
t 2. Stabilizing the Market, Dividing the Field: Federal Regulation, Field Settlement, and the Emergence
p
e
xc of Conflict
e

r, 3. The Rise of Big Organic: Market Convergence and the Elaboration ofthe Expansionary Vision
e
h
s
li 4. The Politics of Organic Integrity: Reasserting Transformative Ideals from the Margins
b
u
p
5. Caught in the Middle: Negotiating Compromise in Organic Co-op Stores
the
from 6. Institutional Logics and Social Processes Revisited: Insights from the Organic Sector
Appendix 1 : Research Methods and Data
n
o
i
ss Appendix 2: List of Interviews
i
m
r
pe Notes

t
u References
o
h
t
i
w Index
form
any
in

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p
e
r
be
not
May

.
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
r

s
t
h
g
i
r
All

.
s
s
e
r
P

y
t
i
s
r
e
v
i
n
U

d
anforlaw.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

e
tl
hb
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 4
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
List of Tables

r
o

.
S
.
U
r Table I. 1. Two Cultural Visions of the Organic Foods Sector
e
d
n
u Table 2. 1. Appointees to the Initial National Organic Standards Board

d
e
tt Table 3. 1. Growth of the Organic Market, 1998-2014
i
m
r
pe Table 3.2. Sales Channels for Organic Foods, 1991-2006
uses
fair

t
p
e
c
x
e

,
r
e
h
s
i
l
b
u
p
the
from

n
o
i
s
s
i
m
r
e
p

t
u
o
h
t
i
w
form
any
in

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p
e
r
be
not
May

.
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
r

s
t
h
g
i
r
All

.
s
s
e
r
P

y
t
i
s
r
e
v
i
n
U

d
anforlaw.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

e
tl
hb
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 5
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
Acknowledgments

r
o

.
S
.
U
r I DEPENDED ON the support, advice, and good spirits of many people while writing this book. First,
e
d
un thanks are due to the many members of the organic foods sector who shared their time and knowledge

ed with me. Although most of these individuals remain anonymous in the text, I hope that my respect for
t
t
mi their work is clear. I would especially like to thank Elizabeth Henderson, whose decision to share her
r
e
p personal archive of documents related to the development of federal organic regulations greatly
uses increased my understanding of this important time in the sector’s history. Also, I am grateful to the
fair staff and directors of the store that I refer to as Pacific Foods Co-op, who welcomed me as an observer
at board meetings and other events during this research.

t
p
ce Mentors of mine at the University of California, San Diego guided this project while it was in its
x
e
early stages, and many of them have remained involved in its later development. Richard Biernacki
,
r
he kindled my interest in the intersection of culture and economic life and provided unwavering support
s
i
bl through research and writing. Amy Binder was my guide through the world of organizational theory
u
p
and helped me see this book’s potential when I was in doubt. Maria Charles applied her careful reading
the and rigorous logic to the improvement of my drafts, and Kit Woolard and David Serlin showed me how
from to enrich my scholarship with insights from anthropology and cultural theory.
n More recently, Tim Hallett has given valuable advice and provided opportunities for collaboration
o
i
ss that deepened my understanding of contemporary institutional theory. I have also benefited from the
i
m
er support of my colleagues in the Department for the Study of Culture and Society at Drake University
p
t and from comments that attendees at the Drake University Center for the Humanities Colloquium
u
o
th offered on versions of chapters. Melisa Klimaszewski, Kevin Lam, and Amahia Mallea—fellow book
i
w
form wCroiltleergse, aolfl— Aartlss oa pnrdo vSicdieedn ceensc, otuhrea gOefmficeen t oafn dth aed Pvricoev.o Tsth, ea wndo rtkh ew Case natlseor sfourp pthoer teHdu bmya gnriatinetss afrt oDmr atkhee
any University.
in Margo Beth Fleming, my editor at Stanford University Press, guided me through the Press’s

d
e submission, revision, and publication process with aplomb. She has a gift for setting a high bar and
c
u
d
o providing a novice writer with the encouragement and guidance needed to clear it. James Holt
r
p
e
r contributed able editorial assistance and much-needed help when it came to the technicalities of
be formatting, documentation, and permissions. Jeffrey Haydu, Paul-Brian Mclnerney, and one
not anonymous reviewer read drafts of the manuscript and provided rigorous and important critical
May feedback. I have also given presentations based on this work at meetings of the American Sociological

d. Association, the Midwest Sociological Society, the Association for the Study of Food and Society, the
e
v
er Law and Society Association, and the Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction. Audiences at
s
e
r these venues helped me sharpen my arguments in multiple ways.

s
ht Writers live in a world of metaphor, and many of those metaphors have to do with the process of
g
i
r writing itself. Anne Lamott compares writing to bathing a cat, while for E. L. Doctorow it is like
All driving at night, and for Katherine Cowley, like taking care of sick kids. None of these things are fun to

.
ss do alone, and I am grateful for the support of many friends, near and far. My parents, David and Susan
e
r
P Haedicke, have provided inspiration, encouragement, and good advice, as have my brothers, Stephen

y
t Oshyn and Daniel Haedicke, and their families. My wife, Kathleen Gillon, has managed to challenge
i
s
r
e and support me at the same time, which as any good teacher knows, is how you grow. It would take
v
i
n
U another book to express my love, gratitude, and admiration for her. For now, I will just say thank you.

anfordlaw. Let’s keep on creating.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

e
tl
hb
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 6
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
List of Abbreviations

r
o

.
S
.
U
r CCOF California Certified Organic Farmers
e
d
n
u FTC Federal Trade Commission

d
e
tt FVO Farm Verified Organic
i
m
r
pe IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements
uses MOSES Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service
fair NCGA National Cooperative Grocers Association (later National Co+op Grocers)
t NCSA National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture
p
e
c
ex NOFA Natural Organic Farmers Association (later Northeast Organic Farming

r, Association)
e
h
s
li NOP National Organic Program
b
u
p
NOSB National Organic Standards Board
the
from OCA Organic Consumers Association
OCIA Organic Crop Improvement Association

n
o
si OFAC Organic Farmers Associations Council
s
i
m
er OFPA Organic Foods Production Act
p

ut OFPANA Organic Foods Production Association of North America
o
h
it OGF Organic Gardening and Farming
w
form OTA Organic Trade Association
any UNFI United Natural Foods, Inc.
in USDA United States Department of Agriculture

d
e
c WFM Whole Foods Market
u
d
o
r
p
e
r
be
not
May

.
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
r

s
t
h
g
i
r
All

.
s
s
e
r
P

y
t
i
s
r
e
v
i
n
U

d
anforlaw.
Stt
2016. opyrigh
c
©

ht ble
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 7
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
INTRODUCTION
Visions of Transformation and Growth

r
o

.
.S Institutional Logics and Social Processes in the Organic Sector
U

r
e
d
n
u

d
e
tt IN EARLY 2004, an organic farmer named Elizabeth Henderson gazed out into a crowded hall at the
i
m
er Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service (MOSES) annual meeting and issued an
p
uses ua ltpiomsaittiuomn . aHt eBnodsetrosno nU hnaidv emrsaintyy yanedar sm oofv eexdp weriitehn chee ri ny tohuen ogr gsaonni ca nfide ldse. vIenr athl ef rlaieten d1s9 7to0 sa, sdhiela hpaidda lteefdt
fair dairy farm in rural Massachusetts. The group gradually restored the farm, and Henderson cobbled

t together a living from selling the farm’s produce and teaching mail correspondence classes. She also
p
e
c
ex attended meetings of a small group known as the Natural Organic Farmers Association (NOFA), which

r, at the time was working to develop a shared definition and set of standards for organic foods
e
h
is production. As consumer demand for organic foods grew during the 1990s, Henderson published
l
ub several books about sustainable farming and frequently contributed to The Natural Farmer, NOFA’s
p
the quarterly newsletter. Now, facing an audience of small-scale farmers and community food activists, as
from well as pioneers in the organic farming world, she focused on a theme that had often appeared in her
writing. “We need to make a decision,” she explained. “Are we an industry? Or are we a movement?”

n
io Henderson’s questions came at a pivotal moment in the history of the organic foods sector. Barely
s
s
mi one year earlier, the U.S. Department of Agriculture had implemented its National Organic Program
r
e
p (NOP), a set of rules for the production and processing of foods marketed as organic in the United

t
ou States. The federal rules were meant to facilitate trade in organic foods by eliminating variations in
h
t
wi state and regional definitions of organic production, by curtailing instances of fraud in which
form conventionally grown products were marketed as organic, and by enhancing consumers’ confidence in
any organic marketing claims. When Henderson gave her speech, the NOP had begun to accomplish these
in goals. In 2004, the value of organic foods sales in the United States amounted to $11.9 billion, up from
$3.5 billion in 1997, according to statistics collected by the Organic Trade Association (OTA), an
d
e
c
u industry group. While just over 2 percent of the food products sold in the United States were organic,
d
o
r
p the market’s growth during the preceding decade had attracted investments from mainstream food
e
r
be companies and from venture capital firms. Farmers who had previously grown only conventional crops
not were turning to organic cultivation, and processed, brand-name organic products were appearing on
May store shelves in greater numbers. It was a dramatic change for a sector that had historically emphasized
its opposition to and difference from the mainstream food and agriculture industry.
.
d
ve The preceding years had also witnessed a number of challenges to these developments in the organic
r
e
es sector. In 1998, hundreds of thousands of angry organic farmers and consumers had written to the
r
s Department of Agriculture to protest a proposed version of the NOP. Among other things, they claimed
t
h
ig that the rules would open the door for the use of genetically engineered seeds and sterilizing irradiation
r
All in organic foods production. Additionally, there were underlying concerns about the viability of
regional organic foods systems, farmer-run certification groups, and alternative organizational ideals in
.
s
s
re a federally regulated organic sector. The outcry led the agency to withdraw the draft and devote several
P
more years to its revision. Even once the revised rules were finally implemented, they faced a court
y
t
si challenge from an organic farmer named Arthur Harvey. A number of agricultural and consumer
r
e
iv advocacy groups signed on to support Harvey’s lawsuit, which was making its way through the courts
n
U
at the time of Henderson’s speech.
d
anforlaw. By asking her audience to consider whether they thought of themselves as members of an industry or
Stt as participants in a movement, Henderson was joining her voice with the voices of those who
2016. copyrigh qinudeisctaiotende db yth rea isseicntgo rt’hse girr ohwanthd sa nthda ct otnhveyer gtheonucgeh wt iothf tthheem msaeilnvsetsr eaasm m feomodb eirnsd uosft rayn. oWrghaenni ct hme oavuedmieenncte,
©

e she explained that the agricultural practices associated with organic farming, such as the use of
tl
hb
ga
ic
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 8
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
composted fertilizers and complicated crop rotations, were only one part of a deeper transformation
that would substitute the principles of democracy and decentralization for those of industrial efficiency.
She offered an ambitious program of social change to the MOSES audience:

r
o
. As organic farmers it behooves us to be radicals. Our anchoring taproot connects us with the indigenous farmers who
S
.
U over millennia built up the seed stock for domestic grains and vegetables, domesticated livestock, and discovered that

er rotations, composting and biodiversity make it possible to provide adequate harvests to feed their families and
d
n
u communities . . . While it may be more efficient in industrial terms to grow food on a few thousand high-tech farms,

ed organic agriculture offers an alternative vision of prosperous, self-reliant villages with trade only in surpluses and
t
t
i regional specialties . . . One of my daydreams is that our movement will somehow find a democratic and participatory
m
r
pe way to create a set of holistic goals for our future, so that we can grow into a great healthy tree, spreading our branches
uses over all the people, uniting, nourishing and enriching.1
fair LikTew Ho eynedaerrss olant,e Jr,o ea nSomthiellri eo rhgaadn iecn tpeiroende tehre f aocregda nainc faiuedldie bnyc e“ datr oap pdiinffge roeuntt” oorgf amnaicin fsotroedasm c osonfceieretyn.c eA.

t
ep Canadian native, he had moved to rural Québec in 1974 and started a company that provided
c
x
e composted fertilizer to organic farmers. He also traveled to New England to participate in NOFA

,
er conferences during the early 1980s. By the 1990s, his career path had diverged from Henderson’s.
h
s
li After leaving the fertilizer company, Smillie began to work as an organic inspector, examining the
b
u
p operations of farms and companies that produced organic foods for long-distance trade and making
the sure that they were in compliance with formal rules of organic production. This led to a job with
from Quality Assurance International, an inspection and certification company that provided services to
some of the largest organic producers in the United States and Mexico.
n
o
i
s Smillie offered his thoughts about the organic foods sector to a group at the Natural Products Expo
s
i
m
r West, an annual meeting of manufacturers, retailers, and others involved in the natural and organic
e
p
foods industry. The expo was far larger than the MOSES meeting that Henderson had addressed, and it
t
u
ho also differed in atmosphere. While the MOSES group had met in gritty La Crosse, Wisconsin, the expo
t
i
w took place in the glittering Anaheim Convention Center, across from Disneyland in Anaheim,
form California. The business suits and corporate advertising in evidence at the expo contrasted with the
any jeans and political messages that appeared at the MOSES meeting. While a highlight of the MOSES
in meeting was a buffet meal created from items donated by local organic farms, the expo featured a

ed three-day trade show, where attendees could sample the latest innovations in retail-ready branded
c
u
od organic foods. And finally, Smillie’s message about the nature and potential of the organic sector
r
p
re differed from Henderson’s in important ways. He explained:
be
not Magyri cwulhtuorlee . pIut risp oasne aigs rtiocu slttuorpe -tbhaes epdo issyosnteinmg, oanf tahger icpulaltnuerta. l Imt’se trheoadlloyl ofgoyr . m. e. Athnadt esivmenp lteh. oFuogrh moreg aonrigca insi ce xitsr eamboeulyt
May successful the planet is still being poisoned by the use of chemicals. So that is why I do what I do every day. That’s

d. why I love my work and that is why I’m committed to it. So as a consumer, as a person on this planet, anything that
e
rv helps convert acreage away from chemical use is good ... I believe that our main purpose in organics is to change the
e
es ways of farming on the planet and I believe that organic supports that. So I tend to lean towards ways that allow
r
s conventional farmers to enter the organic field. I really believe that we have to move all farmers, conventional farmers,
t
gh to organic.2
i
r
All Set side by side, these two speeches offer a snapshot of cultural divisions in the contemporary
. organic sector. Henderson and Smillie both justified organic foods production in moral terms, rather
s
s
re than in purely commercial ones, by asserting that the benefits of organic farming transcend the success
P
or failure of organic products on the market. However, the details of their arguments differed. While
y
t
i
s Henderson suggested that organic farming promises a “democratic and participatory way” to
r
e
v
i accomplish “holistic goals,” Smillie characterized organic farming as an “agricultural methodology”
n
U
that mainly seeks to “convert acreage away from chemical use.” Smillie sought to bring conventional
d
anforlaw. (i.e., non-organic) farmers into the organic fold, while Henderson, judging by her vision of a food
Stt system based on “prosperous, self-reliant villages,” wished to revolutionize the structure of agriculture
2016. copyrigh eonrgtiarnelicy . sIenc tothre sismpeuclitfainceso oufs lyth ewire lmcoomrael cvoisnivoennst, iothnea l sfpaeremcehress acnodn tardadviocctaetde eraecvho luottihoenr.a rHy ocwh acnagne st hien
©

t le the food system as a whole? If chemical use is the main problem, as Smillie suggested, why is a radical
hb
ga
ic vision like Henderson’s necessary at all?
ri
yl
pp
op
Ca
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 9
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677
What This Book Is About
This book examines how these different cultural understandings of organic agriculture have developed
r over the history of the organic sector, as well as how they inform identities and interactions of people
o
. who make a living from producing and selling organic foods. It devotes particular attention to how
S
.
U
people in the organic sector create cultural meanings in economic and organizational settings and to

r
e
nd how they bring those meanings to bear in everyday life and during periods of sector-level change. The
u
book is anchored in qualitative data that I collected during a six-year period, including interviews with
d
e
t
t a spectrum of sector participants, archival material ranging from records of regulatory meetings to
i
m
r
e documents from private collections, and notes from observations at trade conferences and business
p
uses meetings. Taken together, these data provided me with the means to create a rich portrait of the sector’s
fair tohragta enxizisatt iwonit hainnd i to.3f the patterns of conflict and compromise between different cultural understandings

pt My study differs from many popular books about organic foods because its goal is not to determine
e
c
x
e which vision is “right” or, to put it differently, more worthy of popular support. As the sector expanded

r, in the early 2000s, Michael Pollan’s best seller The Omnivore’s Dilemma questioned whether the
e
h
is growing number of large, market-oriented farmers and retailers in the sector had “cost organic its soul”
l
b
pu (2006c, 139). Barbara Kingsolver, in a memoir of her family’s year of homesteading and eating locally
the on a Virginia farm, noted soon afterward that “the rising consumer interest in organic food has inspired
from most of the country’s giant food conglomerates to cash in . . . [but] the larger the corporation, the more
distant its motives are apt to be from the original spirit of organic farming” (2007, 121-122). Maria
n
o
si Rodale (2010), the granddaughter of the indefatigable organic foods booster J. I. Rodale, fired back
s
i
rm with a book that praised the ability of voracious organic shoppers and savvy businesspeople to convert
e
p
ever-increasing acres of farmland to more environmentally sustainable organic management. These

t
u
o ongoing efforts to define the story of the organic sector—whether tragic or triumphant—testify to its
h
t
i
w cultural significance and growing economic importance. Yet, they simplify the ways in which different
form visions of organic production have shaped the sector’s history and contributed to its trajectory of
any economic and institutional development. This book aims to offer an analytic contribution that looks
in beneath the dramatic and engaging stories that circulate in the public sphere.4
d The analysis that I develop relies on—but also extends—the important scholarly work about organic
e
c
du agriculture and the organic movement that began to emerge in the late 1990s. In addition to numerous
o
r
ep articles, scholars in this area have produced two book-length studies. Julie Guthman’s (2004a)
r
be landmark Agrarian Dreams applied a conceptual framework derived from agricultural political
not economy to the evolution of organic farming in California. Guthman demonstrated that the state’s
May history of specialized, market-oriented agriculture, as well as the inflated land values that this history
. produced, has pushed organic farmers to employ some of the same intensive techniques used by
d
e
v conventional growers. She also argued that private and state-level certification programs that
r
e
s
e emphasize technical compliance have supported this trajectory toward conventionalization. More
r
s recently, Brian K. Obach, in Organic Struggle (2015), used insights from the sociology of social
t
h
g
ri movements to track the coalition-building and political work of organic farming advocates during the
All decades that preceded and followed the creation of the NOP. Focusing on the tensions that emerged
. around the federal regulations, Obach divided advocates into growth-seeking “spreaders” and locally
s
s
re oriented “tillers.” Like Guthman and Obach, I am interested in patterns of market and institutional
P
y development within the organic sector, but I extend their work by exploring how sector members who
t
i
rs are immersed in the day-to-day concerns of doing business and running organizations interpret these
e
v
ni changes and how their interpretations shape their interactions with others.
U
d Through this focus, the book links an analysis of the organic sector to discussions that are occurring
anforlaw. in the academic subfields of organizational studies and economic sociology. Researchers in these areas
Stt have increasingly conceptualized markets and businesses as sites of complex moral reasoning
2016. opyrigh (Fourcade and Healy 2007), negotiation between multiple rationalities (Townley 2002), and
c contentious social interaction (King and Pearce 2010). Markets and businesses are not simply
©

t le economic institutions, these arguments run, but they are also cultural ones, and cultural templates,
hb
ga
riic alongside economic forces, shape patterns of interaction and organization in market settings (DiMaggio
yl
pp
Coap 1994; Spillman 1999). These insights raise important questions. How do multiple rationalities persist in
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 11:53 AM via BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE 10
AN: 1219466 ; Haedicke, Michael A..; Organizing Organic : Conflict and Compromise in an Emerging Market
Account: s8474677