In this paper we argue 1. That assetization of food products is an emerging approach in food policies in Greece since 1997; 2. Assetization has been emerged as part of the research politics in securing the entrepreneurial activities of research labs and the role of research communities and scientists in the making of the agrifood system; 3. Assetization is introduced as a way to redefine, reinvent agrifood products and in the same time to create new niche markets. Yet the emphasis in the making of niche innovation and relevant markets can result in concealing the quest of sustainability since sustainability is not a clearly stated matter of concern. By using recent approach from the STS scientific field and by focusing on the role of science in assetization processes we study the way research labs are transformed to knowledge infrastructures with aspirations for participating in the country’s development and the making of the agrifood transitions. In the paper we study cases from three different scientific labs and different agrifood products like the Ω3 fatty acid eggs and chickens and the olive oil with high concentration in polyphenols. The concept of “assetization” has been introduced by Birch and Muniesa (2020) in an attempt to identify the dynamic role of science in enhancing the value or even give value to products, processes and things. Science, and technology can attribute values where they did not exist before. Through the process of identifying the genetic profile of agrifood products they respond to pressures in relation to the identity and authenticity of the product. Furthermore, by identifying methodologies in boosting the antioxidant function of specific agrifood products and converting the in functional food. Processes of accetization are represented as ways of securing the fulfilment of the responsibility that research lab can have towards regional and national economy. The paper explores the way that knowledge politics shape new transition pathways in food production by partially medicalizing food, creating repertoires of regional development and industrial growth. The paper is based on research and extensive interviews with researchers and scientists from specific labs. Furthermore, we are using published materials, reports and articles while we are comparing activities and approaches of three different labs from the Universities of Athens, Thessaloniki and Thessaly.  

This paper delves into the construction of Greek olive oil to a health protective product through the dynamics of assetization practices. It accentuates the proactive involvement of networks comprising scientists, farmers, and market stakeholders, who champion the health-preserving qualities of olive oil and contribute to the formation of novel entities and product identities. Conceptually, we merge Science and Technology Studies (STS) perspectives on sociotechnical imaginaries (Jasanoff and Kim, 2015), assetization (Birch and Muniesa, 2020) with those that scrutinize the material and moral politics of protocols of care (Mol et al., 2010). We posit that these new assets are forged through the cognitive, material and ethical politics of expertise.

Our investigation delves into how olive oil undergoes a multifaceted transformation shaped by social, cultural, scientific, and technological factors within historical contexts. This evolution has spurred innovations expanding its traditional utility, particularly in the realm of health promotion, influenced by EU health regulations. Emerging practices emphasizing bodily well-being and metabolic health have led to the establishment of new standards and concepts like nutraceuticals and superfoods.

We contend that the politics of expertise drive an agrifood transition in olive oil production, guided by a sociotechnical imaginary that blends discourses on olive oil’s dietary importance with notions of rural development, ontological integrity and just transition. Methodologically, the paper draws upon the analysis of archival agrifood and biochemical sources, supplemented by a series of semi-structured interviews with scientific experts, market stakeholders and a series of focus groups involving Greek farmers.

Ιn recent years the Greek energy sector has undergone significant changes happening with the invocationof the need to address climate change and to secure country’s energy security. The emblematic rapidlignite phase out, the extension of national grid to island regions, the interconnection of the Greek electricgrid with Asia and Africa, the rapid deployment of giant RES projects, the rapid deployment ofphotovoltaics in agricultural/rural regions like Thessaly, the research for possible hydrocarbons depositsin the country’s western and south-western marine areas, new natural gas projects (electric generation,extension of transmission and distribution grids, and new storage units) and the visionary green hydrogenprojects constitute a fabric of developments aiming in the entire transformation for the Greek energysystem. These developments are deployed in the context of overlapping legitimizing imaginaries(Jasanoff and Kim, 2015) that present Greece as pioneer in the ‘green’ development, utilizing indigenousenergy sources to secure energy supply, and empowering country’s geopolitical status. In this paper weuse the notion of incumbency (Stirling 2019, Turnheim & Sovacool 2020) and deep incumbency(Johnstone et al 2017) as an analytical entry point (Turnheim 2023) in order to explore how actors,practices, coalitions, interests, infrastructures, institutions and cultures are configured in the specificpolitical setting so as incumbents maintain and enahance their dominant position (Johnstone et al 2017,Roberts et al 2018). Our focus is the electricity system where we study the developments in the enormousdeployment of RES projects through activities of incumbents who play a dominant and parallel role inthe fossil fuel industry. We argue that these developments are driven by the coalition of policy-makingand regulatory authorities with energy incumbent actors, both national and transnational, which havingambidextrous capabilities and acting co-jointly in many instances, seek to further establish and enhancetheir dominant position in a context of rapid privatization of the Greek energy regime and morespecifically of the electricity system. The same time incumbent actors reinvent and relaunch themselvesas ‘green’ and innovative players capable to drive country in the ‘new era’ (Johnstone et al 2017). Thesedevelopments, although compatible with low-carbon imaginaries and policies in the short term, createadditional carbon lock-ins that in the medium term may jeopardize the low-carbon transition itself. Atthe same time reinforce politics of exclusion and marginalization of less dominant players who want tocollaborate and set energy communities as the case of farmers in agriculture regions denotes. The paperis based on analysis of published resources and reports of the last 10 years and a series of interviews withstakeholders (regulators, NGOs, engineers, farmers).

Olive oil stands as a quintessential element in Mediterranean civilizations, playing a pivotal role in both culinary practices and cultural traditions. Our study takes a novel perspective, viewing olive oil not merely as a food product but as a materiality  undergoing a multifaceted transformation shaped by social, cultural, scientific, and technological factors rooted in historical contexts. This paper delves into the construction of Greek olive oil as a health protective product through examining the involvement of networks of scientists, farmers, and market stakeholders. The research examines the narratives surrounding the health-protective properties of olive oil, with a particular emphasis on phenols, since these chemical compounds are considered key drivers in the ongoing assetization (Birch and Muniesa, 2020) of olive oil. We explore the evolution of olive oil, moving forward from its traditional utility towards the enhancement of health protective aspects, influenced by the health regulations and health claims of the European Union, the overall high olive oil quality and the new roles attained by University labs and academics. Through Science and Technology Studies (STS) perspectives on sociotechnical imaginaries (Jasanoff and Kim, 2015), assetization (Birch and Muniesa, 2020), expertise (Collins & Evans, 2009) and the material and moral politics of protocols of care (Mol et al., 2010), we view that the politics of expertise drive an agrifood transition in olive oil production, guided by a sociotechnical imaginary that blends discourses on olive oil’s dietary importance with notions of sustainability, rural development, and just transition. The examination of those dynamics can shed light on the intersection of health and environment through assetization in shaping the contemporary construction of olive oil as food moving from the food stand to the pharmacy’s counter while questioning whether aspects of sustainability are taken into account, as such a shift could influence current cultivation practices and radically change livelong geographies and material entanglements.

Over the past several years, the olive oil industry has been transitioning towards niche markets and developing novel product categories. This paper examines the shifts within the olive oil sector from 1990 to the present, with a particular focus on how industry actors have redefined and reconceptualized the notion of “quality” over the past 34 years. Methodologically, the study is based on an extensive review of relevant literature, regulatory and corporate publications, sector-specific press, as well as a series of interviews and focus groups with stakeholders. We argue that, from the 1950s to the mid-1980s, state and corporate actors primarily focused on global competitiveness and productivity. However, a shift occurred in the mid-1980s, led by the EEC (European Economic Community), towards a production system that emphasized higher quality and pro-environmental measures in response to emerging environmental challenges. Beginning in the early 1990s, the Greek government embarked on a quest for quality, strengthening standardization processes, limiting the circulation of bulk olive oil, and promoting pro-environmental production methods, such as organic and integrated farming. EU legislation supported these efforts by introducing stricter acidity limits and providing subsidies for the adoption of organic and integrated farming practices. This period saw the development of a new concept of quality, one that incorporated chemical, commercial, and environmental factors. In response to these changes, incumbent actors in the olive oil industry introduced new product categories designed to maintain the commodity aspect of olive oil while simultaneously addressing environmental concerns. A second transition followed, focusing on adding value to olive oil by highlighting its health-protective properties, geographical indications, and local origins. Over the course of 14 years, scientific research focused on quantifying phenolic compounds in olive oil and genetically characterizing olive varieties, which further contributed to authenticity determinations and worked synergistically with geographical indications. We analyze this transition and the associated actions through the lens of Kean Birch’s (2020) concept of assetization. Developed within the Science and Technology Studies (STS) field, assetization distinguishes between commodities and assets. While commodities are stable, standardized, and homogeneous products traded in global markets, assets are unique objects that gain added value through the involvement of various actors, including scientists, marketers, and managers. These assets establish a distinct relationship between the producer and the rights holder. However, this process may not necessarily address potential injustices for the environment, cultivators, and consumers.

In the paper we study the historical process of the destabilization of traditional seeds and breeds and the dominance of foreign genetic resources, in three different agri-food systems between 1920 and 2020s: Wheat, tomato & poultry production. We try to link and interrelate the just transitions literature and analysis with the destabilization and systems’ displacement approach. We show and argue for the role of historical lock-ins to foreign genetic materials in shaping contemporary pathways in agri-food systems and more specifically in enhancing systemic injustices (mostly recognition and distributional injustices). In our paper we utilize the analytical tools from energy justice (Sovacool & Dworkin 2015, Jenkins et al 2016) in its three dimensions (distributional, recognition and procedural) in order to assess the (un)just character of agrifood transitions. We adapt De Laurentis & Pearson’s (2018) approach to the material dimensions of the transition, to show how issues of justice are embedded in the very structure of particular socio-material configurations. Furthermore, we explore the role of incumbents (Turnheim & Sovaccol 2020, Geels 2011) and the role of coalitions (Roberts et al 2018) in order to highlight the dynamics of the transition under study. Our paper is based on multiple archives as well as on field work with 50 interviews and three workshops of co-creation pathways.

Agriculture has been at a turning point for the past 30 years, following the introduction of pro-environmental measures aimed at more sustainable production. This has been especially evident in the past decade, as the devastating effects of climate change have become more pronounced and the European Union has introduced a series of legislations and strategies for mitigation and adaptation. However, these measures have often been met with distrust, as expressed by farmers. The recurring protests of farmers in Brussels and at the national level illustrate this sentiment. This study originates from the transformation pressures currently exerted on rural communities by EU policy targets—particularly the Farm to Fork strategy and the Green Deal—and examines how these pressures are not only perceived and prioritized but also responded to through mechanisms of selection pressures and governance of resources. In this context, we operationalize the framework proposed by Smith et al. (2005) on the governance of sustainable transitions. Specifically, we analyze mechanisms of selection pressures, resource allocation, and stakeholders’ adaptive responses to endogenous and exogenous challenges.

The study focuses on Greece, with a particular emphasis on Thessaly, a predominantly agricultural region facing pressures to align with EU policy objectives while simultaneously experiencing extreme weather events linked to the climate crisis. The devastating floods of 2020 and 2023 have highlighted the vulnerability of both the region’s farming communities and its agrifood system. Critical events such as Cyclone Janus (2020) and Cyclone Daniel (2023) have triggered ongoing discussions regarding destabilization and the transformative capacities necessary for building a more sustainable and resilient agrifood system. This study explores perceptions of both the challenges and opportunities involved in adopting sustainable practices and technologies within rural communities, with a focus on economic viability and environmental sustainability. Drawing on the literature on just transitions (Tribaldos & Kortetmäki, 2021; Kuhmonen & Siltaoja, 2022), we examine how perceptions of injustices shape resilience strategies and the transformative capacities of socio-ecological systems. Our research focuses on key socio-technical aspects, including crop types, seed and tree varieties, and the implementation of quality certification and environmental management systems. Considering existing research on farmers’ outlook and agency in relation to climate change adaptation, we investigate the extent to which farmers in Greece—particularly in Thessaly—are shifting towards the practices proposed in the EU Farm to Fork strategy and how they envision the future of agriculture. We underscore the importance of these perspectives and argue that farmers’ perceptions of injustices stemming from EU pro-environment policies can foster a “resistance culture” within rural communities, which may create barriers to policy implementation. Alternatively, the performativity of these perceived injustices may shape the adaptability and transformability of the system. We contend that this “resistance culture” is an enactment of farmers’ agency in transition politics (Avelino, 2017) and reflects their conceptualizations of transformation, resilience, and sustainability.

Methodologically, the study employs discourse and thematic analysis, drawing on interviews and focus groups conducted with farmers in the Thessaly region. The research is based on 50 interviews and 10 focus groups. It unfolds in two phases: (a) mapping perceived injustices and (b) analyzing actors’ adaptive responses to these injustices, as well as their efforts to transform the system toward sustainable futures. The study highlights the value of bottom-up approaches in agricultural policy, aligning with broader goals such as community support, carbon farming, and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Ultimately, we emphasize the importance of integrating farmers’ voices into policymaking to ensure more effective and just transitions in agriculture.

References

Avelino, F. (2017), Power in Sustainability Transitions: Analysing power and (dis)empowerment in transformative change towards sustainability. Env. Pol. Gov., 27:  505–520

Kuhmonen, Irene & Siltaoja, Marjo. (2022). Farming on the margins: Just transition and the resilience of peripheral farms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 43. 343-357.

Smith, Adrian, Andy Stirling, Frans Berkhout (2005), The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Research Policy, Volume 34, Issue 10, 1491-1510.

Tribaldos, T., & Kortetmäki, T. (2021). Developing principles and criteria for just transition in food systems: a transdisciplinary endeavor. In Justice and food security in a changing climate (pp. 158-163). Wageningen Academic.

Devastating floods—attributed to climate change—have struck Thessaly, Greece, in recent years, severely disrupting the region’s social and economic life and shocking the nation with their intensity, consequences, and environmental and societal impacts. Thessaly, the principal agricultural hub of Greece and the second-largest plain in the country, serves as the focus of our analysis.
We argue that the concept of agricultural competitiveness and productivity became closely linked with practices and farming systems, including monocultures, chemicalization, mechanization of production, and the introduction of new plant varieties. The imaginary of productivism was materially, symbolically, and ideologically co-produced alongside national and regional conceptions of water and land resource exploitation and control. We claim that water exploitation and the expansion of water infrastructure in Thessaly has created linkages and de-linkages (with the unavailability of water) with what we refer as ‘cultivar zones’.
The study’s historiographic entry is the integration of the history of infrastructures with the history of commons. We argue that the understanding and contextualizing water infrastructures and natural commons necessitates a close examination of the social, economic, political, and technical dimensions of the water-networks. We want to distance our approach from the conception of natural commons as pristine entities. We follow Hess who is arguing that “A commons is a resource shared by a group where the resource is vulnerable to enclosure, overuse and social dilemmas. Unlike a public good, it requires management and protection in order to sustain it.” (Hess, 2008, 37) We argue that this management in the modern era involves technological infrastructures that configure and re-configure natural commons to resource spaces that shape new “natures” (Disco and Kranakis, 2013). The environmental impact, degradation, and construction of new “natures” are historicized through the linking and de-linking of sociotechnical systems from extraction to the end use (Arapostathis & Veraart, 2023). In this context we attempt to link the historical reconstruction of resources and natural commons with the historiographic agenda of sustainability history. We study and explore the interplay between the international circulation of expertise and local state enactments and how these configure concepts and practices of sustainable past, present and futures while shaped regime of management of natural commons.