Rethinking Jurisdiction

This manuscript utilizes data from policy stakeholder interviews and a systematic search of government websites to identify how the federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments in Canada address food loss and waste (FLW) and how stakeholders interpret jurisdiction over this issue. The findings show that government policies related to this issue represent a patchwork of disparate and overlapping actions that have been enacted by governments at different levels and across a variety of departments and agencies (e.g., environmental, agricultural, economic). Of these policies, only a few were identified as having the explicit objective to reduce the generation of this waste and/or divert it from landfill. Most policies, in fact, had non-FLW related objectives (e.g., to improve the profitability of the agricultural sector), but still had a potential or actual impact on the generation and/or management of this type of waste. Despite it being unclear who has jurisdiction over FLW in the country, an examination of interview transcripts reveals that policy stakeholders have limited views of which government entities have the authority to address FLW. This manuscript argues that the lack of jurisdictional clarity presents a barrier to a more comprehensive governance of FLW. While it may be possible to clarify who has jurisdiction over this issue, this manuscript contends that policy stakeholders need to rethink their understanding of jurisdiction itself. This manuscript operationalizes Valverde’s “work of jurisdiction” to present an alternative way to interpret jurisdiction that opens new possibilities for the governance of FLW

CLARITY · Corporate governance · Jurisdiction · Stakeholder · Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development · Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability · Organic Food and Agriculture