At present, the hegemonic consideration of food in the dominant industrial food system is that food is just a commodity, and thus it is best governed by market mechanisms. As a commodity, the tradeable features prevail and obscure the non-economic considerations of food as (a) an essential resource for humans, (b) produced by nature, (c) considered largely as a human right, (d) undoubtedly being a cultural determinant at individual and societal level, and (e) being governed and subsidized throughout history and at present in most countries as a sort of public good with a public interest. The consideration of food as a commodity is a social construct that has been built by a combination of corporate interest and academic support from the neoclassical economists after WWII. This consideration privileges specific policy solutions and locks policy and legal alternatives that do not conform with the commoditized vision of food. In order to tackle the paramount difficulties the global food system will certainly face during the XXI century, the diversity of value-based narratives of food has to be accepted and legitimized, recognizing that food has multiple meanings (most of them non economic) and that can be governed as a commons or public good based on other moral grounds (not purely based on profit maximization and utilitarian mores).

I would appreciate your insights on these valuations of food (as a commodity, commons or public good) and/or examples where non-commoditized narratives of food prevail or substitute the commoditized vision. Thanks in advance.