ABSTRACT
As we saw in the previous chapter, a heated political exchange occurred in the pages of the academic journal Agriculture, Food and Human Values following Patricia Allen and Julie Guthman's (2006) characterization of farm-to-school (FTS) programs as neoliberal. In essence, the authors contended that this attempt to change food provisioning in schools championed individual responsibility and private initiative at the expense of broader ideas of social justice. In response, Jack Kloppenburg and Neva Hassanein (2006: 417) defended FTS programs, arguing that recognition of such food movement initiatives is essential if we are to understand “the achievements and potentials of such approaches.” For Kloppenburg and Hassanein, food movements are examples of governance fashioned from the ground up through experience, new practices, engagement, and experimentation. While they do not use the concept in their argument, discovering workable rules of governance through grassroots initiatives is a form of prefigurative politics, a way to try out new ways of living as a precursor to larger social change. To Guthman and Allen, on the other hand, the FTS emphasis on local governance reflected not change at all, just neoliberal politics as usual.
