Search results

The chapter analyses Chinese and Russian hybrid warfare and their strategies. Although still under debate, it is increasingly recognised that both countries integrate and apply hybrid warfare in their strategic thinking. In doing so, they are able to increase their sphere of influence, promote authoritarian regimes and weaken democracies. It is therefore vital that we better understand their strategies in order to identify and bring to light the processes that encourage today’s rise of nationalism and populism, withdrawal from international organisations and an overall distrust in the global institutional order. Approaching the puzzle from current weaknesses in the EU and the United States, the chapter proposes a framework to analyse Chinese and Russian hybrid warfare. The chapter demonstrates that Western liberal democracies are not only unprepared for these new forms of warfare, but appear unwilling to take the necessary measures. In doing so, these countries leave the door open for (further) destabilisation and a risk of increased domestic polarisation.

Agricultural trade has generated more than its share of disputes in the past fifty years. Lack of a clear structure of rules to constrain government activity in these markets, coupled with the particularly sensitive nature of trade in basic foodstuffs, has been the main cause of this disproportion. New rules agreed in the Uruguay Round provided an improved framework for government policy in this area, and a temporary exemption was given to certain subsidies from challenge in the WTO (the Peace Clause). However, the expiry of the Peace Clause in 2003 and a growing willingness on the part of exporters to challenge domestic farm programs in other countries through action under the Dispute Settlement Understanding has once again stirred the agricultural pot. Now trade disputes are frequently leading to litigation, encouraged by the slow progress in the Doha Round of trade negotiations. In particular, the scope for domestic subsidies, under the Agreement on Agriculture and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, has increasingly become the subject of litigation. Countries may have to further modify their domestic policies so as to reduce their vulnerability to challenge in the WTO.

Consumer resistance has been a popular research area in the previous decades, and concepts such as boycotting, brand avoidance, voluntary simplicity and anti-consumption appeared to be hot topics in exploring the ways the consumers resist market dominance in the postmodern culture. However, research on this topic in the Turkish (and partly Eastern) context is very limited, inhibiting our understanding of the topic in different economic and cultural settings. Through a comprehensive discussion that provides institutional-, structural- and community-level perspectives relating to consumer resistance phenomena in Turkey, a developing country with historical and cultural roots in both the East and the West, the chapter intends to equip scholars and practitioners with a better insight to conceptualise this phenomenon as well as to formulate further studies and marketing strategies.

Our global food system today is characterised by an unprecedented scale of centralisation, intensification and concentration. The record‐high food supplies are supposed to suffice the mouths of seven billion and famines become something in history, which is ironically not the case today. The purpose of this paper is to study whether the globalised food system in the current form is sustainable for all and whether the alternatives are available.

The paper will discuss the benefits of, as well as challenges facing, a localised food system. It will also analyse how the “Food Empire” undermines universal “food security” and “food sovereignty”, especially the way the underprivileged in the south are being exploited.

Created by several transnational corporations, the “Food Empire” dominates the global agri‐food industry, from agricultural inputs to food retails, under intensive globalisation of agri‐production and liberalisation of international trade. Instead of a globalised food system, this paper argues that it is better to have localised food systems as they can offer people an equitable access to food and ensure long‐term productivity of our farmlands as part of the agenda for sustainable development.

We have to review trade rules and stop the food war against nature, the poor and justice. “Free market” and “green revolution” in which many believe are not whole of the answers to achieve a sustainable food system, but only the “political will” to change the way food is produced and consumed from now on.