This thesis analyzes the evolution of European social policy via focusing on the unfolding contentions between two different notions that disagree over Europe&rsquo / s direction regarding the best social-economic system in Europe. Taking its point of departure in the ratification crisis and the impasse surrounding the Constitutional Treaty, the thesis argues that the contrasting interpretations of the Treaty and the attendant cleavages in the European polity are illustrations of such ongoing ideological struggles among alternative paradigms and approaches. Naming these contending approaches as &ldquo / project of neoliberalism&rdquo / and &ldquo / project of regulated capitalism&rdquo / , the evolution of European social policy is investigated with a focus on interplays between these projects / the self-transformation of the projects in the course of integration / and the relations between economic and social governance in the construction of an &ldquo / ever closer Union&rdquo / . To this purpose, the thesis theoretically employs Polanyian conceptual framework of &ldquo / double movement&rdquo / alongside theoretical approaches of Streeck, Hooghe&amp / Marks, and Pochet that view the evolution of European social policy in conflictual encounters between two opposing notions. Against this theoretical background, the thesis surveys the integration history from the Treaty of Rome until the Lisbon Treaty of 2007. It concludes that the European social policy has evolved within interplays among projects of neoliberalism and regulated capitalism and there has always been an asymmetric relationship between the economic and social governance in Europe as the social governance has always had a secondary and even a subservient position with regard to economic governance in the European polity.

This thesis argues from a contrarian point of departure that the successes of GMO agriculture have thus far been limited or underwhelming. It thus asks what accounts for the limitedness of the GMO food economy. From this overarching question, the research is divided into three further questions that consider the roles of law, the structural requirements of the capitalist system, and the use of discourses of nature amongst activists respectively as factors influencing the underdevelopment of GMO agriculture. These questions form the basis for three chapters that comprise the thesis. Chapter one draws on the work of Antonio Gramsci and Karl Polanyi in evaluating the consequences of legal regimes that regulate GMOs. Against the tide of neoliberalism, I discuss how a binding, precautionary agreement over international trade in GMOs emerged through the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. I argue that this Protocol is an example of what Polanyi termed the “self-protection of society,” the second phase of his double movement. Chapter two uses Marxist theories of agrarian capitalism to understand both the early successes and later setbacks of GMOs as a capital accumulation strategy. I argue that the successes and failures of GMO agriculture are partly circumscribed by the structural requirements of the capitalist system, as well as by the materiality of GMO crops themselves. The chapter builds on the work of Gabriela Pechlaner and David Goodman to show how processes of appropriationism, expropriationism and the logic of capital more generally can explain not only why some innovations have succeeded but also why so many others have been unsuccessful. Innovations that are geared at consumers rather than farmers have largely failed due to their status as value-added products (whose value is subjective and market-driven) rather than capital goods. Chapter three considers the role played by nature narratives in structuring the cultural politics of GMO agriculture. It argues that natural purity discourses have been central to the success of GMO activism as they have mobilized widely resonant nature-culture dualisms that separate the natural world from the human world. However, though strategically effective, these discourses hold dubious political implications, as they entrench or naturalize unequal power relations in the social world and deflect attention away from the problematic political economic consequences of GMOs under neoliberalism. The chapter argues that activist campaigns that directly target the political economic, neocolonial, and class implications of GMOs within the context of neoliberalism have also had successes without resorting to appeals to the purity of nature, an approach that I argue ought to frame opposition struggles against GMOs going forward. The thesis uses a mixed methods approach that includes document analysis, historical analysis, discourse analysis and literature review. It incorporates a wide lens approach, drawing on a range of case studies from multiple scales to animate the conceptual arguments being analyzed. By problematizing how GMO agriculture has evolved as a capital accumulation strategy for large transnational corporations, this thesis seeks to critically evaluate the practical social justice implications of anti-GMO resistance efforts for those opposed to neoliberal globalization. / Graduate / 0366 / 0615 / mylesc@uvic.ca

No description available.

This thesis aims to analyze the social reactions against neoliberalism by using the Polanyian concept of double movement. The goal is to first to understand the nature of alternative globalization movement and provide a better framework of analysis for theorizing these social reactions. The criticisms of the alternative globalization movement against the World Trade Organization will be analyzed in order to provide a specific case example for the concerns and goals of the movement regarding the global political economy. It has been found out that the alternative globalization movement, which signalled a growing concern over the implications of the efforts to form a global free market on the state-society-market relations since the 1980s, forms the second counter-movement that resists the expansion of contemporary self-regulating market.

Policy regime shift through popular societal resistance in developing countries, advocating a state-regulated economic model, has been a frequent occurrence in the 21st century, during a period where neoliberalism has dominated the world market. Scholars have brought up the framework of double movement to explain these social, economic, and political changes from free-market regimes to state-controlled regimes, claiming that it is a societal reaction to the commodification of land, labor, and money. This research poses the question of how political change can be interpreted through the lens of the concept of double movement even though a government can show positive social and economic development records, where a left-wing state-regulated market has ruled the economy. Bolivia underwent political turmoil in 2019, where the former president Evo Morales, who had brought high socioeconomic development through a state-regulated economy, was ousted by a nationwide protest. An interim conservative government took office, imposing a harsh neoliberal agenda with authoritarian features, handing over the presidency to Morales’ former party only a year later, as the party won the election. Looking at the case of Bolivia through the lens of the double movement, this research found that commodification of land, labor, and money can explain popular societal resistance in Bolivia during Morales's presidency. However, the case also proved that commodification was not the only, and potentially not even the main, reason for the overthrow of Morales. Political motives and actions, clientelism, social cleavages, respect for democratic principles, and more theoretical perspectives need to be considered to comprehend regime change by popular resistance further.

The main objective of my dissertation is to analyze and compare the socio-ecological implications of the adoption of genetically modified (GM) seeds and alternative agroecological farming methods for farming communities in Alberta, Canada and Andhra Pradesh, India localities situated in contrasting geopolitical, socio-cultural, and structural-institutional contexts in the global economy. For this research, the adoption of GM canola in Alberta and GM cotton in Andhra Pradesh are used as comparative case studies to explore the qualitative impact of agricultural biotechnology on farming communities. Many studies have examined the potential impact of GM crops, but few have looked beyond economic cost-benefit analysis. In this dissertation, I examine social and cultural aspects of farmer decision-making in the adoption of the new seed technology, farmer receptivity to new cropping methods, knowledge translation between laboratory and farmer, and the impact of global knowledge-based technology on local knowledge systems, socio-cultural practices, the nature-society relationship, and gender relations. I use a global ethnography methodology and draw on a series of field interviews with farmers to provide sociological insight into how global processes of the Gene Revolution impact different farming communities in different localities in the world-economy. In this dissertation I argue that the debate about the new agricultural technologies (e.g. GM seeds), the environment and agrarian crises should not be narrowed to the question of new technologies per se. Rather it should be understood from an agrarian political ecology perspective articulating political economy (neoliberal governance at global, national and provincial levels, and the processes of dispossession of primary agricultural producers from their means and conditions of production), socio-cultural systems (the construction of hegemonic discourse about genetically modified organisms, agricultural deskilling, gender relations), and ecosystems (a process of mastering nature, monoculturization, environmental risks, metabolic rift) in the context of neoliberal globalization. My fieldwork study of the Gene Revolution provides closer, more fine-grained research and analysis of its impacts with sensitivity to local class and status, gender and cultural issues, and the ways in which farmers technology adoption decisions can dramatically alter overall quality of life, local knowledge systems, community development, the sustainability of agriculture and the ecosystem itself.

No description available.