has led to important transformations in terms of production systems, logistics, communication and distribution. The involvement of the main actors of the food system and the emergence of specialized companies account for the coexistence of these two strategic dynamics of standardization and differentiation of supply, and respond to an increasingly complex demand. Based on the exploitation of secondary data and those from recent surveys on this sector, the aim here is to present the specificities of the halal meat market based on an analysis of slaughtering and processing practices upstream and distribution and consumption downstream. Assuming a hyper-segmentation of supply, the issues related to the ritual slaughter of animals and the different systems guaranteeing the “halal” character of meat are discussed, as well as the way in which the production stage is structured and organized between the main actors. The study of standardization–segmentation phenomena then highlights the economic, regulatory and production issues underlying the “transformation” of the living animal into a halal meat product identifiable by consumers. The perceptions of the latter as to the credibility of the certifications or the “halal” character of the products make it possible to identify the link between the two levels of analysis (Upstream–Downstream). Finally, this question of standardization/differentiation of supply is studied from the point of view of demand, its characteristics, its evolution and the way it is articulated with supply.
Finally, another dimension of socialization around food, geography, through the valorization of proximity and terroir, reveals another social perimeter, that of communities at the local level. Chapter 6, From “Eating Together” to “Living Together Better”, the Case of Local Products addresses these links between local products and the local area, close links that are claimed as such, within a perimeter of sharing, and around signs of quality and values linked to the terroir, but which beyond that also qualify the territory. If the links between local products and territory illustrate the evolution of the values and representations attributed to these spaces for more than half a century, we cannot help but notice today the prevalence of local consumption, more convivial, more ethical, more responsible, more committed to the territories. The multiplication of short channels, “local” brands, “terroir” brands and territorial brands attest to this search for territorial anchoring in terms of proximity, territorial identity, belonging and attachment to the territory, often with the argument of better eating and health. If food plays a major role as a support for the construction and expression of identity, eating local food symbolizes belonging to a common cultural space, marking territorial roots, and in fine a form of living together better. Is this not the objective of the glocalized eater who is trying to achieve two complementary movements that modernization had made contradictory: to be attached to terroir, on the one hand, and to become globalized, on the other hand? In other words, the networked local and the conviviality of the terroir that favors the links between the place and the body. “I am what I eat” (Fischler 1990), on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the commitment of the digital consumer using global trends, which is expressed in their desire to give meaning to their consumption and the importance of doing something for ourselves, “I eat what is good for the body and the mind”, promoting the convergence of the values of the collaborative economy and those of sustainable and local development towards a desire to consume differently and better, in search of meaning and authenticity. Small daily gestures that give the feeling of taking part in the changes, of being a “hummingbird consumer”, connected, demanding and more enlightened in search of transparency, who wishes to change things by infusing new behaviors. Isn’t the modern local entrepreneur a digitalized actor, and the post-modern client an informed consumer, rooted in the territory and connected to the world? Isn’t local a responsible commitment, a guarantee of quality and origin, of eating better and healthier for ourselves, others and the planet, of eating connected?
This local focus has suddenly been placed at the heart of current events, along with the strengthening of relational ties around meals and questions about food issues, with the Covid-19 health crisis and the experience of lockdown. Chapter 7, By Way of an Epilogue: “Eating Together” in the Time of Covid-19, sheds light on what this current period has changed and contributed to the book’s reflections and research conducted, for the most part, before the crisis broke out. Four main points structure what the health crisis has generated and revolutionized in our eating habits and in the social influences at play. This chapter first describes the main changes in our eating habits and practices. It shows how digital tools have allowed us to maintain the link and overcome the difficulties generated by physical confinement, as well as their limits. It explores the changes or reinforcements of convictions and principles of life following the awareness of health, societal and environmental issues provoked or reinforced by the crisis. Finally, it returns to the question of locality, social proximity and reinforced ties within groups or communities in response to the challenges imposed by the experiences of lockdown.
The Conclusion summarizes the contributions of the book in a cross-functional manner and proposes new avenues. The academic reflections and research presented aim to better understand the current evolution of socialization and the influence of communities on food practices, and to draw enlightening perspectives for the different actors, food companies or distributors, consumer associations and groups, or public authorities.
I.1. References
Bagozzi, R.P. and Dholakia, U.M. (2002). Intentional social action in virtual communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16(2), 2–21.
Casabianca, F., Sylvander, B., Noël, Y., Béranger, C., Coulon, J.B., Giraud, G., Vincent, E. (2006). Terroir et typicité : propositions de définitions pour deux notions essentielles à l’appréhension des Indications Géographiques et du développement durable. Actes du VIème Congrès International des Terroirs Viticoles, 3–7.
Fischler, C. (1990). L’Homnivore. Odile Jacob, Paris.
Rozin, P. (1994). La magie sympathique. In Manger magique : aliments sorciers, croyances comestibles, Fischler, C. (ed.). Editions Autrement, Paris.
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D.S., Edwards, C.S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 742–775.
1 1. See Baromètre santé nutrition, available at: http://www.ireps-picardie.fr/News/News_Cres_OR2S/Newsletters2010/17newsavril2010/Barometre_nutrition.pdf.
2 2. A French acronym designating the Association for the Preservation of Local Farming. It usually involves a partnership between a group of consumers and a local farmer.
3 3. “Terroir” is a French term that derives from the Latin terra, meaning earth, land or soil. In this book, we use this term as there is no direct English translation. A terroir refers to “a delimited geographical area defined by a human community that has built up, over the course of its history, a set of distinctive cultural traits, knowledge and practices, based on a system of interactions between the natural environment and human factors. The know-how brought into play reveals an originality, confers a typicality and allows recognition for the products or services originating from this space and therefore for the people who live there” (Casabianca et al. 2006)”. See Chapter 6 for further details on this term and its usage.
1
Eating Together, a PNNS
