Debating Food Security Policy in Two Different Ideational Settings: A Comparison of Australia and Norway |
| |
| Authors: | Arild Aurvåg Farsund Carsten Daugbjerg |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Media, Culture and Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, Norway;2. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Australia and Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark |
| |
| Abstract: | Food security has emerged as a relatively new policy issue in agricultural policy making in developed countries. This policy problem is addressed within an institutional landscape in which agricultural ideas and institutions are well‐established. In this article, food security policy making in Australia and Norway is compared. In Australia, agricultural normalism (agricultural markets and production are considered to be similar to those of other economic sectors) has been dominant since the mid‐1980s, while Norwegian agricultural policy making has been dominated by agricultural exceptionalism (agriculture is considered a unique economic sector with special market and production conditions). It is demonstrated in the article how these two opposing institutionalised ideational foundations have influenced the nature of the food security debate in the two countries. In Australia, the debate emphasises the positive role of the market and trade in providing global food security. In Norway, the debate highlights the need to regulate market forces and restrict trade in order to allow countries to develop their own agricultural sectors. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
