Post-Exceptionalism Goes to Emerging Economies: The Case of GMO Policies in India and Turkey

Agrifood policies and politics have been regarded as ‘exceptional’ policy sector which was characterized by the domination of farmers’ interest and heavy state involvement with its specific political, administrative and economic institutions in agricultural markets. However, since the 1980s, exceptional status of agrifood policies has been increasingly challenged by neoliberalism, globalization and technological advancement. The post- 1980s period, which Daugbjerg and Feindt describes as ‘post exceptionalist’, have paved the way for the emergence of new actors, ideas, institutions and issues in agrifood policies. This study purports that policies managing genetically modified organisms in agrifood production are manifestations of post-exceptionalism in which state is still the key actor in promoting new policies under the increasing influence of new policy actors namely, transnational companies, social movements and international organizations with their competing discourses. This study brings post-exceptionalism into the context of emerging economies and specifically explain policy divergences pertaining to GMO regulations in India and Turkey. Based on the preliminary research, it is contended that domestic political considerations (the role of governing party ideology and state organisations) and trade-related factors per se (economic relations with the EU and US) do not suffice to account for policy divergence in emerging economies with regard to GMO regulations. As opposed to the rationalist approaches to public policy and political economy literature, the main argument of this study is that GMO discourses are precursors to the policy outputs since they have the power to circumscribe the policy options available to policy makers. More specifically, taking into account the policy context characterised by uncertainty and novelty resulted from technological innovations, I postulate that divergent policies concerning to GMOs in emerging economies are the result of the competitions between discourse coalitions (Pro and anti coalitions) aiming to define GMO-related policy problems. In other words, the explanation with regard to GMO policy divergence in this study puts together structural factors with an ideational understanding of how coalitions make use of discourses to interpret and articulate their interests about GMOs and exert influence on policy makers. Accordingly, I argued that pro-GMO discourse coalition is likely to influence the policies where pro-GMO production sector is concentrated whereas anti-GMO discourse coalition is likely to exert influence on policy makers where pro-GMO production sector is fragmented. Drawing on the interviews conducted in India and Turkey between 2017 - 2018 and secondary resources, and employing the discourse coalitions and argumentative discourse analysis (Hajer 1995), I aim at comparatively examining the discourses of two different coalitions thoroughly, contributing to the understanding of GMO debate in India and Turkey, explaining the divergent policies of GMOs in these countries and ultimately better grasping the emergence of post-exceptional agrifood policies in the context of emerging economies.