How Political Cultures Produce Different Antibiotic Policies in Agriculture
HPRU EZI PhD student Stephanie Begemann wanted to provide an understanding of how different countries formulate and regulate antibiotic use in animals raised for human consumption.
She undertook a comparative case study, analysing historical documents from the 1950s to the 1990s from the UK, the first country to produce a scientific report on the public health risks of agricultural antibiotic use; and Sweden, the first country to produce legislation on the growth promotor use of antibiotics in food animals.
Stephanie uses Sheila Jasanoff's concepts of ‘co‐production’ and ‘political cultures’ to explore how both countries used different styles of scientific reasoning and justification of the risks of agricultural antibiotic use. For example, UK's political culture used ‘expert committees’ to remove the issue from public debate and to inform agricultural antibiotic policies. In contrast, the Swedish ‘consensus‐oriented’ political culture made concerns related to agricultural antibiotic use into a cooperative debate that included multiple discourses.
Understanding how national policies, science and public knowledges interact with the risks related to agricultural antibiotic use can provide valuable insights in understanding and addressing countries agricultural use of antibiotics.
For the full article, entitled: 'How Political Cultures Produce Different Antibiotic Policies in Agriculture: A Historical Comparative Case Study between the United Kingdom and Sweden', see: Sociologia Ruralis: Journal of the European Society for Rural Sociology.
Posted on: 06/02/2018