Regulating Food Consumption : Studies of change and variation in Europe

The role of people as buyers and eaters of food has changed significantly. From being protected by a paternalistic welfare state, people appear to be accorded more freedom and responsibility as individuals, where attention is redirected from the state towards market relations. Many have asserted that these changes are accompanied by fragmentation, individualisation, and privatisation, leading to individual uncertainty and lack of confidence. But empirical observations do not always confirm this, distrust is not necessarily growing and while responsibilities may change, the state still plays an active role. This dissertation explores changing relationships between states and markets, on the one hand, and ordinary people in their capacities as consumers and citizens, on the other. Do we see the emergence of new forms of regulation of food consumption? If so, what is the scope and what are the characteristics? Theories of regulation addressing questions about individualisation and self-governance are combined with a conceptualisation of consumption as processes of institutionalisation, involving daily routines, the division of labour between production and consumption, and the institutional field in which consumption is embedded. The analyses focus on the involvement of the state, food producers and scientific, first of all nutritional, expertise in regulating consumption, and on popular responses. Two periods come out as important, first when the ideas of “designing the good life” emerged, giving the state a very particular role in regulating food consumption, and, second, when this “designing” is replaced by ideas of choice and individual responsibility. One might say that “consumer choice” has become a mode of regulation. I use mainly historical studies from Norway to analyse the shifting role of the state in regulating food consumption, complemented with population surveys from six European countries to study how modernisation processes are associated with trust. The studies find that changing regulation is not only a question of societal or state vs individual responsibilities. Degrees of organisation and formalisation are important as well. While increasing organisation may represent discipline and abuses of power (including exploitation of consumer loyalty), organisation can also, to the consumer, provide higher predictability, systems to deal with malfeasance, and efficiency which may provide conditions for acting. The welfare state and the neo-liberal state have very different types of solutions. The welfare state solution is based on (national) egalitarianism, paternalism and discipline (of the market as well as households). Such solutions are still prominent in Norway. Individualisation and self-regulation may represent a regulatory response not only to a declining legitimacy of this kind of interventionism, but also increasing organisational complexity. This is reflected in large-scale re-regulation of markets as well as in relationships with households and consumers. Individualisation of responsibility is to the consumer not a matter of the number of choices that are presented on the shelves, but how choice as a form of consumer based involvement is institutionalised. It is recognition of people as “end-consumers”, as social actors, with systems of empowerment politically as well as via the provisioning system. ‘Consumer choice’ as a regulatory strategy includes not only communicative efforts to make people into “choosing consumers”, but also the provision of institutions which recognise consumer interests and agency. When this is lacking we find distrust as representing powerlessness. Individual responsibility-taking represents agency and is not always a matter of loyal support to shared goals, but involves protest and creativity. More informal (‘communitarian’) innovations may be an indication of that, where self-realisation is intimately combined with responsibility for social problems. But as solutions to counteract existing imbalances of power in the food market the impacts of such initiatives are probably more as part of consumer mobilisation and politicisation than as alternative provisioning.

Effect of colostrum feeding method and presence of dam on the sleep, rest and sucking behaviour of newborn calves

"In rats, sucking milk reduces anxiety and promotes non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep, and in calves it induces resting but the effect on sleep is unknown. Here, we investigated how calves' sleep was affected by colostrum feeding methods. Forty-one calves were blocked by birth date and randomly allotted within blocks to the experimental treatments. Calves were housed for four days either with their dam (DAM) or individually with warm colostrum feeding (2 L four times a day) from either a teat bucket (TEAT) or an open bucket (BUCKET). DAM calves suckled their dam freely. Calves' sleeping and sucking behaviour was filmed continuously for 48 h at the ages of two and three days. Behavioural sleep (BS) was defined as calves resting at least 30 s with their head still and raised (non-rapid eye movement) or with their head against their body or the ground (rapid eye movement, REM). Latency from the end of colostrum feeding to the start of BS was recorded. We compared behaviour of TEAT calves with that of DAM and BUCKET calves using mixed models. Milk meal duration was significantly longer for TEAT calves than for BUCKET calves (mean +/- S.E.M.; 8.3 +/- 0.6 min vs. 5.2 +/- 0.6 min), but equal to that of DAM calves. We found no effect of feeding method on the duration of daily BS (12 h 59 min I h 38 min) but we found a tendency for the daily amount of NREM sleep; BUCKET calves had less NREM sleep per day than TEAT calves (6 h 18 min vs. 7 h 48 min, S.E.M. = 45 min) and also longer latencies from milk ingestion to BS (21.9 +/- 2.0 min vs. 16.2 +/- 2.0 min). DAM calves slept longer bouts than TEAT calves (10.8 +/- 1.0 min vs. 8.3 +/- 1.0 min) and less often (78 +/- 4 vs. 92 +/- 4). Sucking colostrum from a teat bucket compared with drinking from an open"