When processed foods become a worry…
“Processed” foods are a cause for concern for a large part of the French population. They raise questions related to health, but also ecological, social and political issues. What are the different emotions surrounding “processed” foods? What do these concerns tell us about today’s society?
-
Thiron S., 2024, Ressentir l’industrialisation des transformations alimentaires. L’émotion, un fait social et politique. Thèse de doctorat en sociologie de l’Université Toulouse Jean Jaurès. 519 p.
Sophie Thiron est membre du Laboratoire CERTOP, Université Toulouse Jean Jaurès : sophie.thiron@univ-tlse2.fr
A long-standing concern
Fears regarding “processed” foods have been around since the early days of food industrialisation in the 19th century. For example, the first canned foods raised mistrust and suspicion among soldiers in the French army. But while criticisms of processed food are long-standing, they have only really been heard since the end of the 20th century. Health scandals such as the “mad cow” crisis in 1996, combined with rising environmental concerns, have led people to question whether we can control nature at any cost. In the 21st century, industrial food processing is a source of concern for 83% of the French population1. But what emotions do processed foods evoke? How do these vary socially? And what challenges accompany these emotions?
Analysing the variability of definitions and practices
This relationship with “processed” foods and the emotions they evoke has been the subject of recent doctoral research. Different people were interviewed about their diet, meals were observed in households in the Toulouse region and in Ovalie, an experimental restaurant at the University of Toulouse Jean Jaurès. Quantitative analysis on food practices data was also conducted. In order to analyse the relationship with “processed foods”, it is first necessary to examine how this category of food is defined by different social groups. In what different ways is the “processed” food category delineated? How do these different definitions reveal different conceptions of industrialisation, cooking or “processing”?
Defining “processed” food: multiple challenges
The vocabulary used to characterise food processing is incredibly varied. The terms “processed” or “industrial” foods have many different interpretations. In some cases, “processing” refers to cooking, food prepared in a factory, the addition of additives, or quite simply picking or cutting. In fact, in some social circles, the term “food processing” doesn’t even refer to the same foods, processes or symbols. For some, the term “industrial” characterises certain agri-food brands, while for others, it refers to the place of purchase or the production method. Similarly, some consider the term “homemade” to apply only to food prepared at home, while others feel it can also apply to food prepared by a caterer or be served in a restaurant. The vocabulary is therefore important and highlights the many different ways of thinking about food processing. Examining this vocabulary helps us to better understand the ideas and conceptions behind the use of each word.
To this end, a typology of the different ways of categorising food processing has been developed. In this typology, legal, paramedical, culinary, technological, actorial and quantitative concepts interact, oppose or converge. The plurality of perspectives, reference systems and definitions of what a “processed food” actually helps to explain the ambiguities and debates surrounding “processed foods” in contemporary society. Different conceptions coexist or clash in the social world and are alternately employed by the different actors, which sometimes creates misunderstandings. They reveal the different views on industrialisation
Rise of the “NOVA classification”
One of these methods for classifying food processing is now becoming increasingly popular. Called the “NOVA classification”, it uses the term “ultra-processed foods” to distinguish between different levels of food processing. Within this classification, so-called “industrial” foods are generally categorised under the highest processing levels. This concept combines industrialisation and processing, and is spreading alongside the growing critique of industrialisation in contemporary society and the increased focus on the composition of food and the presence of additives. For example, the European “INCO” regulation, which requires all components to be listed came into force in 2016, the Yuka app was launched in 2017, while the first French scientific articles on the concept of “ultra-processed foods” were published in 2018. Therefore, it seems that the growing success of this classification is closely linked to the emergence of a new paradigm in our approach to food: it is no longer just a question of the effect of nutritional composition on health, but also of the underlying chain of processing steps, including the potential addition of additives.
From a variety of emotions…
Health and social scandals, increased environmental concerns and debates among scientific, political, media and industrial actors all contribute to the dissemination of a standard of disgust regarding agro-industrial processing in contemporary French society. It is becoming more and more “fashionable” to be disgusted by “processed” food and to enjoy “home” cooking. However, this disgust is not unanimous. The emotions surrounding “processed” foods vary according to the social characteristics of the individuals and their environment. Feelings of anxiety, anger, disgust, despair, pleasure, guilt and fascination are all expressed. A conceptual framework has been developed to explain the social construction of emotion, linking collective imagination and social representations, emotional norms, the emotions expressed, and the effects of socialisation and context. Emotions provide insight into relationships with different types of food processing, highlighting systems of symbols, values and social representations
… to social and political issues
Higher social categories tend to monopolise the definition of the right way to behave. In the face of this dispossession, and although also critical themselves towards those foods, the popular classes often reject a discourse they deem to be moralising or even intrusive. The refusal to adopt these new emotional norms denounces the spread of new forms of social inequality. These reactions are related to the difficulty of implementing certain behaviours, the feeling of powerlessness and exclusion from consumer society that it can generate, and a certain mistrust of technology, public authorities and institutions in general. For the higher social categories, monopolising the definition of emotional norms is a way of retaining and exercising power, as well as of legitimising an expression of contempt for practices, preferences and feelings that do not correspond with social expectations. It’s a matter of reproducing a social order based on a logic of domination, through emotions. However, this dual logic between the upper classes and the working classes needs to be nuanced. Rejecting the moralisation of emotions is something that is also sometimes seen among educated populations, with ideological and political aims, to promote alternative societal models. Today, the phenomena regarding the support or rejection of emotional norms concerning the industrialisation of agro-food chains open up debates and confrontations that can be severe due to the strength of the emotions felt by the different parties involved: on the one hand, an unbearable anxiety about the future and the conviction that action must be taken, and on the other hand, a feeling of social injustice.
Food tastes and commitments
Emotions related to “processed” foods have both social and political dimensions. Even emotions (which have long been considered irrational, instinctive, wild or natural, and have always thought to be individual and deeply intimate) are social and political. Expressing fear, anger, pleasure, disgust or fascination with food is a way of connecting with others, marking one’s social affiliation, affirming moral and ideological values, or even communicating political convictions. Expressing pleasure or disgust becomes a way of advocating for a different food system, or more generally, a different social model. This emotion-driven approach enables us to identify tension points between different collective visions for the future of food systems, with the long-term goal of encouraging the development of inclusive and common narratives. Emotion allows us to understand what engages people, while also taking into account conflicting interests, providing food for thought as we move towards a shared future.
- Bruegel M., 1995, « « Un sacrifice de plus à demander au soldat » : l’armée et l’introduction de la boîte de conserve dans l’alimentation française, 1872-1920 », Revue historique, 294, 2.
- Lepiller O., 2012, Critiques de l’alimentation industrielle et valorisations du naturel : sociologie historique d’une « digestion » difficile (1968-2010). Thèse de doctorat de sociologie, Université de Toulouse II-Le Mirail.
To see more of her drawings, https://adelehuguet.wordpress.com/
- Icon by dDara
- Icon by andinur
- Icon by Freepik
- Icon by Nikita Golubev
- Suspicious icons created- Flaticon
- Icon by tulpahn
- Icon by Freepik
- Icon by Freepik
- Icon by Freepik
- Nutritiocreated by Flat Icons – Flaticon
- Icon by Freepik
- Icon by Freepik
- Potato chips icons created by Freepik – Flaticon
- Salad icons created by Freepik – Flaticon
- Soda icons created by Freepik – Flaticon
- Banana icons created by Freepik-Flaticon
- Figures from the InquietAlim survey, Crédoc, Ocha, Certop, 2022 [↩]
OpenEdition vous propose de citer ce billet de la manière suivante :
Sophie Thiron (6 octobre 2025). When processed foods become a worry…. Mondes Sociaux. Consulté le 15 novembre 2025 à l’adresse https://doi.org/10.58079/14uy3








