Nothing to hide: How governments justify the adoption of ag‐gag laws

Abstract

Mainstream practices for producing meat, eggs, and dairy raise numerous concerns regarding public health, animal welfare, and environmental integrity. However, governments worldwide have expanded anti-whistleblower legislation that constrains informed public debate. Since 2019, several Canadian provinces have adopted so-called "ag-gag" laws designed to prevent hidden-camera investigations on farms and meat processing facilities. How do governments across Canada justify ag-gag laws as serving the public interest? To what extent do agricultural industry interests shape government adoption of ag-gag laws? Using Freedom of Information requests and debate records from provincial legislatures, we find that biosecurity is the most prominent justification for ag-gag laws, and that governments exhibit a close, collaborative relationship with industry actors. This case demonstrates that when it comes to contested sites of capital accumulation, governments are drawing on new spatial-legal tools to protect the status quo interests of private industry by dissuading dissent, debate, and public scrutiny.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.