Evolution of Social Ties around New Food Practices

Eating together thus implies grouping together around common practices, concerns and objectives, in particular by taking advantage of the opportunities for sharing and exchange provided by the Internet and social networks. The objective of Chapter 2, “Eating Together” Through the Internet: The Case of Online Weight Loss Support Communities ” is to show how users of online communities “eat together” by sharing recipes, photos of the dishes they have made or even tips and advice on nutrition. This sharing contributes to the diversification of their diet. The study particularly explores online weight loss support communities such as Weight Watchers or forums on Doctissimo and Aufeminin in which diet is at the heart of discussions. Bagozzi and Dholakia (2002, p. 3) define online communities as “social spaces in the digital environment that allow groups to form and be maintained primarily through ongoing communication processes”. The chapter focuses on the phenomena of social influences that take place in these communities (How do individuals see their food choices influenced by others?) based on rich and varied collected material. We analyze excerpts from discussions within communities, screen captures that highlight these exchanges, as well as individual interviews, partly conducted with nutrition experts (23) and partly with users of online weight loss support communities (25).

What are the psychological mechanisms that encourage sharing values rather than meals? Concern for the future consequences of our diet is one possible explanation, for example, in the case of individuals on diets. Chapter 3, “Eating Together”: With or Without the Dietary Constraints of Others? shows how forced or chosen dietary restrictions can constrain “eating together”. Firstly, the study highlights the distinction between the chronically ill and the healthy, and the perceived consequences of an unbalanced diet which are very different in these two cases. As a result, a diet constrained by a chronic illness may lead to difficulties in eating with people who do not have these constraints. This first section identifies the variables that explain these difficulties in “eating together” as well as the consequences on eating behaviors when meals are taken together. In a second step, the analysis is extended to “chosen” eating, through the notion of consideration of future consequences. Consideration of future consequences (CFC) is defined as an individual’s consideration of the potential and distant consequences of his or her current behaviors and the fact that these behaviors are influenced by the very anticipation of these potential consequences (Strathman et al . 1994). In the case of eating, these are individuals who impose “dietary constraints” on themselves because they are aware of the consequences their eating may have on them or others. This results in food restriction behaviors on their part that depend on the consequences they take into account (e.g. veganism, organic food, weight loss diet). Based on these observations, why and how does a person go against his or her dietary principles in a situation where he or she has to eat with others? Similarly, to what extent will a person who does not impose dietary restrictions on himself/herself bend to the dietary constraints of others when eating together? What about the perceived tolerance of the other towards ourselves? Through illustrations drawn from three focus groups, made up of about 30 people with diversified diets, this chapter provides some answers to these questions.

We thus witness a reconfiguration of the social environment of the food practice and adopting or retreating into the sharing community. This is particularly observable in vegetarianism and veganism, where social influences play an important role. Chapter 4, Eating Together, Yes, But Without Meat! Social Influences Related to Vegetarianism and Veganism analyzes this strong trend of vegetarianism today. This restrictive diet in a society that is still predominantly meat-based generally breaks with previous habits, with the probable consequence of generating numerous psychological and relational tensions for the people who adopt it. Beyond the practices and motivations that have already been widely documented, the purpose of this research is to identify the multiple influences leading to the adoption and maintenance of this diet and to better understand the relationships that surround them and the new adopted community. An exploratory study was conducted through individual interviews with 25 young adult vegetarians. The results show that relationships with the community may have more effect in maintaining behavior than in the original adoption process and only indirectly facilitate relationships with the environment. This could have implications in terms of support, supply and communication regarding these practices.

This can also be studied at the level of religious communities for which community, socialization and food have always gone hand in hand. Chapter 5, Eating Together and Differently: Halal Between Standardization and Segmentation paints a picture of the production and consumption of halal meat in France by examining the dynamics of differentiation and standardization. The significant development of this market over the last two decades has led to important transformations in terms of production systems, logistics, communication and distribution. The involvement of the main actors of the food system and the emergence of specialized companies account for the coexistence of these two strategic dynamics of standardization and differentiation of supply, and respond to an increasingly complex demand. Based on the exploitation of secondary data and those from recent surveys on this sector, the aim here is to present the specificities of the halal meat market based on an analysis of slaughtering and processing practices upstream and distribution and consumption downstream. Assuming a hyper-segmentation of supply, the issues related to the ritual slaughter of animals and the different systems guaranteeing the “halal” character of meat are discussed, as well as the way in which the production stage is structured and organized between the main actors. The study of standardization–segmentation phenomena then highlights the economic, regulatory and production issues underlying the “transformation” of the living animal into a halal meat product identifiable by consumers. The perceptions of the latter as to the credibility of the certifications or the “halal” character of the products make it possible to identify the link between the two levels of analysis (Upstream–Downstream). Finally, this question of standardization/differentiation of supply is studied from the point of view of demand, its characteristics, its evolution and the way it is articulated with supply.

Finally, another dimension of socialization around food, geography, through the valorization of proximity and terroir, reveals another social perimeter, that of communities at the local level. Chapter 6, From “Eating Together” to “Living Together Better”, the Case of Local Products addresses these links between local products and the local area, close links that are claimed as such, within a perimeter of sharing, and around signs of quality and values linked to the terroir, but which beyond that also qualify the territory. If the links between local products and territory illustrate the evolution of the values and representations attributed to these spaces for more than half a century, we cannot help but notice today the prevalence of local consumption, more convivial, more ethical, more responsible, more committed to the territories. The multiplication of short channels, “local” brands, “terroir” brands and territorial brands attest to this search for territorial anchoring in terms of proximity, territorial identity, belonging and attachment to the territory, often with the argument of better eating and health. If food plays a major role as a support for the construction and expression of identity, eating local food symbolizes belonging to a common cultural space, marking territorial roots, and in fine a form of living together better. Is this not the objective of the glocalized eater who is trying to achieve two complementary movements that modernization had made contradictory: to be attached to terroir, on the one hand, and to become globalized, on the other hand? In other words, the networked local and the conviviality of the terroir that favors the links between the place and the body. “I am what I eat” (Fischler 1990), on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the commitment of the digital consumer using global trends, which is expressed in their desire to give meaning to their consumption and the importance of doing something for ourselves, “I eat what is good for the body and the mind”, promoting the convergence of the values of the collaborative economy and those of sustainable and local development towards a desire to consume differently and better, in search of meaning and authenticity. Small daily gestures that give the feeling of taking part in the changes, of being a “hummingbird consumer”, connected, demanding and more enlightened in search of transparency, who wishes to change things by infusing new behaviors. Isn’t the modern local entrepreneur a digitalized actor, and the post-modern client an informed consumer, rooted in the territory and connected to the world? Isn’t local a responsible commitment, a guarantee of quality and origin, of eating better and healthier for ourselves, others and the planet, of eating connected?