Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

Gastronomic cosmopolitanism: Supermarket products inFrance and the United Kingdom

Rahsaan Maxwella,*, Michaela DeSouceyb

aDepartment of Political Science at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United StatesbAssistant Professor, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, United States

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:Received 9 December 2015Received in revised form 2 March 2016Accepted 14 March 2016Available online 26 March 2016

Keywords:CosmopolitanismGastronomyEuropeFranceUKCultural diversityImmigrationGlobalizationCultural sociology

A B S T R A C T

In this article, we explore whether contemporary European cosmopolitanism is a deep orsuperficial trend. We do so by examining prepared meals in mainstream French and UnitedKingdom (UK) supermarket chains. First, we ask to what extent are foreign culturalinfluences present in these grocery outlets? Then, we explore which foreign culturalinfluences are present and, finally, how they are presented in this mainstream marketsetting. Our results are mixed. We find evidence of significant cultural diversity in theofferings of both French and UK supermarket chains. Supermarkets in both countries offersizeable percentages of products from foreign countries in and outside of Europe. Inaddition, most of these products are presented without exoticization, suggesting a level ofcomfort and familiarity with the foreign gastronomic products among consumers, and apromising indicator of robust cosmopolitanism. However, the range of foreign gastronomicinfluences, in both countries, is both limited and stratified. We argue that this partiallyreflects standardizing logics and trends of globalizing consumer markets. This suggests thateveryday cosmopolitanism may continue to develop in Western Europe, but will likelyinvolve an uneven set of cultural influences.

ã 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Contemporary West European societies are considered more cosmopolitan than ever. The European Union’s decades-longproject of market and political integration has transformed how people of different nations interact (Fligstein, 2008).Growing percentages of their inhabitants have origins external to their country of residence and to Europe (Alba & Foner,2015). Europeans are also more mobile within and outside of Europe and are increasingly likely to identify as ‘Europeans’ asopposed to citizens of their nation-state (Stoeckel, Forthcoming). Popular culture and consumer products produced inEurope have increasingly diverse influences, and foreign cultures are increasingly likely to add novel twists to otherwisecommonplace products and experiences (Janssen & Peterson, 2005; Miller, 2008; Rudolph & Hillmann, 1998; Wise &Velayutham, 2009). Additionally, the circulation of the products of different cultural and consumer industries is increasinglyaccepted as global (Featherstone, 1990). Together, these developments have led some scholars to argue that newcosmopolitan societies are emerging, where Europeans primarily look beyond their nation-state borders and embracebroader values and norms (Beck & Grande, 2007; Fligstein, 2008).

* Corresponding author.E-mail address: rahsaan@email.unc.edu (R. Maxwell).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2016.03.001

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Poetics

journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate /poe t ic

0304-422X/ã 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

86 R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

Despite these indicators of growing cosmopolitanism, there is also significant evidence of countervailing trends. Ideally,cosmopolitanism offers a life ethic that balances commitment to universal human values, an aptitude for worldliness, andrespect for, if not embracement of, cultural differences (Appiah, 2006; Pollock, Bhabha, Breckenridge, & Chakrabarty, 2000).The cosmopolitan individual is a citizen of the world (Skrbis & Woodward, 2007). Yet in Europe, there are many signs thatthese philosophical ideals are not being met. For starters, some argue that cosmopolitanism values and practices are mainlyconcentrated among the highly-educated European elite in large urban centers or those who work for multi-nationalbusinesses (Favell, 2008; Fligstein, 2008; Mau, 2010). In addition, even if a wide range of Europeans acknowledges theimportance of cosmopolitan values, their actual behaviors are more parochial and nationalistic (Calhoun, 2007; Pichler,2008). Moreover, the global financial crisis and its aftermath, as well as recent terror events, have exacerbated backlashamong both the extreme left and right toward institutions that otherwise promote cosmopolitanism (Berezin, 2015).

One of the most dramatic examples of the limits of European cosmopolitanism is the continued reluctance to accept non-European-origin immigrant groups as full and legitimate community members (Bail, 2008; Joppke, 2004; Vertovec &Wessendorf, 2010). Many Western Europeans fear that immigrants from outside of Europe have attitudes towards mainstreamnormsthatare unacceptablyconservative,evena threat (Sniderman& Hagendoorn,2007). Many wantto preventnon-Europeanimmigrants from physically displaying their cultural differences (for example via traditional clothing or religious architecture)or distorting the character of European public spaces (Carol, Helbling, & Michalowski, 2015). Concerns about immigrants fromoutside of Europe have even bolstered recent support for far-right political parties with extreme nationalist platforms (Berezin,2009; Givens, 2005), which have become increasingly polarized toward anti-immigrant sentiments (Holmes, 2011).

We address two questions that arise from these simultaneous trends of European cosmopolitanism and provincialism. First,is European cosmopolitanism is a deep or superficial trend? Second, to the extent that cosmopolitanism does exist, how does itstructure everyday culture and practices? We respond to these questions by exploring the reach and shape of cosmopolitanismincontemporaryEuropeanconsumermarkets.Consumer marketsareoftenusedtostudycosmopolitanism,becauseassitesandvehicles of the fabric of everyday life, they comprise the ‘stuff’ of cultural consumption, giving symbolic value to objects ofmaterial culture (Crane & Bovone, 2006; Miller, 2012; Peterson & Kern,1996; Prieur, Rosenlund, & Skjott-Larsen, 2008). Much ofthis research focuses on which people are more likely to express cosmopolitan identities (Meuleman & Savage, 2013; Rössel,2015; Warde & Gayo-Cal, 2009). We take a different tack and examine products offered by large, mainstream retail chains as away of charting the cosmopolitan European consumer market landscape. Our approach is based on two assumptions: first, thatlarge retail chains’ product offerings are evidence of mainstream cultural consumption and, second, that consumers do not takeup cosmopolitan attitudes in a straightforward or non-reflexive manner. While we extend research that uses retailing as a lensfor understanding mass cultural trends (Cochoy, 2007), we do not wish to suggest that all consumers experience or respond toproducts similarly. People develop their own reasons for consuming products with diverse cultural origins that do notnecessarily reflectopenness to cosmopolitanvalues(Bookman,2013;Cappeliez& Johnston,2013).Nonetheless, ourfocuson theavailabilityand promotionof mass consumer products indicates general trends and allows us to avoidthe trap of onlyexaminingelite cultural spaces for evidence of cosmopolitanism, such as cutting-edge restaurants (Binnie & Skeggs, 2004; Young, Diep, &Drabble, 2006).

Our empirical focus is prepared meal products in mainstream French and United Kingdom (UK) supermarket chains, guidedby the following research questions. First, we ask to what extent are foreign cultural influences present in mainstream Europeangroceryoutlets? Broadlyspeaking, moreproductswith foreigncultural influences may be moreevidence for cosmopolitanism.Herewe focus Beck’s conceptof “banal cosmopolitanism” (2006) applied to mainstream food culture. While scholars posit that‘exotic,’ ‘adventurous,’ or otherwise ‘omnivorous’ eating is an important 21st century means of accruing cultural capital(Johnston & Baumann, 2010; Warde & Gayo-Cal, 2009), it may also undergird the creation of cosmopolitan identities. As Beck(2003, p. 37) argues, everyday food practices can precipitate cosmopolitan consciousness among people. Second, we explorewhich foreign cultural influences are present. While recognizing that globalization practices are necessarily shaped byhistorical patterns and events, we posit that influences coming primarily come from neighboring European countries wouldoffer only moderate evidence of cosmopolitanism. If more global influences are present, that may be evidence of more robustcosmopolitanism. Finally, we ask how foreign cultures are promoted in European consumer markets. Presentations ofproducts’ ordinariness and familiarity would be evidence of successful cosmopolitanism. Conversely, if foreign culturalinfluences are labeled as exotic and unfamiliar, that could indicate a lack of cosmopolitanism.

Together, these empirical questions permit us to examine how the cultural diversity of supermarket products relates to theshape and depth of European gastronomic cosmopolitanism and cultural change as it manifests in consumer markets. Scholarsincreasingly identify foods, cuisines, and gastronomies as rich and cognitively-accessible sources of cultural and politicalmeaning in globalizing markets (DeSoucey, 2010; Inglis & Gimlin, 2009; Ray & Srinivas, 2012) and as aspects of culturalproduction that are relevant to everyday life (Inglis, 2005; Watson & Caldwell, 2005). For our purposes, mainstream foodpractices – supported by institutions like supermarkets – help to create and reproduce symbols and behaviors suggestive ofcosmopolitan attitudes.

Scholars who have examined multicultural culinary changes in France and the UK typically focus on trends in restaurants,from high cuisine (Lane, 2014; Warde, 2009) to ethnic establishments (Cwiertka, 2005; Jamal, 1996; Pottier, 2014) to fastfood (Fantasia, 1995; Wright & Annes, 2013). We focus on supermarkets as a socio-material and institutional setting wherecultural assumptions translate into a different type of offering (Newman, 2013). Supermarkets are a key element of massconsumer culture in advanced industrial societies (Burch & Lawrence, 2007; Deutsch, 2010). As opposed to specialty foodstores that concentrate on specific niche demographics (e.g. vegetarians, ethnic enclaves, or high-end ‘foodies’),

R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97 87

supermarkets attempt to appeal broadly to a large range of customers and are thus indicative of banal shopping andconsumption habits (Deutsch, 2010; Falk & Campbell, 1997; Featherstone, 1997). Moreover, the supermarket industry hasrecently undergone a sea change toward greater control over global supply chains, as well as concentrated growth by largerretail chains and ‘hypermarkets’ (Ferni, Sparks, & McKinnon, 2010). The increasing standardization of supermarket productsreinforces their value for our analysis as indicators of mainstream, and mainstreaming, cultural consumption.

Our results are mixed. We find evidence of significant cultural diversity in the offerings of both French and UK supermarketchains. Supermarkets in both countries offer sizeable percentages of prepared meal products from foreign countries and fromcountries outside of Europe. In addition, most of these products are presented in a straightforward manner withoutexoticization, suggesting a level of familiarity with foreign gastronomic products. These findings are promising signs of robustcosmopolitanism. However, there is a fairly limited range of foreign gastronomic influences in both countries. This suggests thatgastronomic cosmopolitanism involves an uneven set of cultural influences and reflects, we argue, standardizing logics of globalconsumer markets.

2. Case selection

France and the UK are useful cases for examining gastronomic cosmopolitanism for two reasons. First, both are among themost politically, socially, and economically global countries in the world (Beck & Grande, 2007). Both are populous countrieswith demographically diverse populations due to long histories of immigration from multiple European and non-Europeanlocales (Messina, 2007). Both are thus countries where we would expect relatively high levels of cosmopolitanism in general,making them useful indicators of levels of gastronomic cosmopolitanism in Western Europe.

France and the UK also have crucial differences that allow us to explore how gastronomic cosmopolitanism may manifestdifferently across national contexts. We expect greater evidence of cosmopolitanism in UK supermarket product offerings. Inpart, this is because UK food culture has tended to be relatively open to outside influences and not as reliant on domestic cuisineas a source of national pride as in some other European countries (Collingham, 2006; Mennell,1996). In addition, the broad UKpolicy approach towards immigrant integration legitimizes racial, ethnic, and religious diversity and encourages immigrants toexpress their homeland cultures while joining mainstream society (Bleich, 2003; Favell,1998; Maxwell, 2012). Therefore, if wedo not find evidence of cosmopolitanism in UK supermarket products, such influence most likely does not exist in WesternEurope.Moreover, totheextent thatgastronomiccosmopolitanism is limitedinthe UKit is likelyto beevenmorelimitedinotherEuropean countries that are less open to immigrant and global cultural influences.

France also possesses relatively high levels of demographic diversity as well as openness to global capitalism and politicalintegration. Yet, France also has one of the strongest traditions of national culinary pride in the world (Ferguson, 2004; Mennell,1996). In addition, the French policy approach towards integrating immigrants requires that immigrants reject their homelandvalues and adopt French cultural norms (Noiriel,1988; Weil, 2005). These two dynamics should lead to less cosmopolitanism inFrench as opposed to UK supermarket products. As such, France may be an especially instructive case because of the competingforces that predict both openness and limitations on gastronomic cosmopolitanism.

Table 1Overview of data on supermarket prepared meals.

Supermarket chain # of Products Start Date End Date

FranceAuchan 453 November 4, 2014 November 10, 2014Carrefour 142 November 14, 2014 November 16, 2014Intermarché 343 December 30, 2014 January 5, 2015Leclerc 658 December 17, 2014 December 28, 2014Système U 335 January 7, 2015 January 9, 2015

United KingdomAsda 539 November 18, 2014 November 21, 2014Morrisons 255 November 23, 2014 November 30, 2014Sainsbury’s 432 November 30, 2014 December 2, 2014Tesco 603 December 5, 2014 December 17, 2014

Note: ‘Start Date’ and ‘End Date’ are the dates of data collection from each supermarket website.

88 R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

3. Data

The data in this article come from the largest supermarket chains in France and the UK � the only chains with more than10 percent (each) of domestic grocery markets. In France that is Carrefour, Leclerc, Intermarché, Système U and Auchan. Inthe UK that is Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons. In each country, these chains together make up 70–75 percent ofdomestic grocery markets.1

Within each chain, we collected and analyzed data on the ‘prepared meals’ (traiteur in French) sections. We chose theseitems because prepared meals offer better indicators of contemporary demand for certain cultural food practices thanindividual grocery products.2 Additionally, single ingredients are often used in multiple cultural or national food traditionsdepending on how the customer prepares (and cognizes) the product (e.g. cornmeal can be used to make American grits,Italian polenta, or African fufu) (Belasco & Scranton, 2002). In comparison, prepared meals are complete, finished dishes thatclearly demarcate available choices for supermarket customers. The precise categories of prepared meal products vary acrosssupermarkets, but each offers a combination of appetizers, main courses, side dishes, and desserts.

Our data on prepared meal products comes from the websites of each supermarket chain (see Table 1 for an overview).3

Collecting data from supermarket websites is particularly useful for our purposes because it provides one selection ofproducts that is available to the whole country and therefore represents a national cultural expression, as opposed to thevariable product selections potentially available in individual stores.4 We define a ‘product’ as the individual unit of foodavailable for purchase on the prepared meals section of the website. This includes a diverse array of items ranging from sidedishes of sliced breads to main course dishes of meat with vegetables to party platters with assorted snacks.

Prepared meals are attractive for their convenience, and industry trends show that their modal consumer is young, urban,and single (Datamonitor, 2003; Harris & Shiptsova, 2007). These are some of the population subgroups that are also mostlikely to self-identify as cosmopolitan (Hill, 2011), so in some respects our analysis could be seen as biased towards findingevidence of cosmopolitanism. However, the archetypical consumer of mass supermarket chains is not defined by high socio-economic status or high cultural capital, which helps mitigate against the common bias of over generalizingcosmopolitanism from evidence among elite subpopulations (Binnie & Skeggs, 2004; Young et al., 2006). In addition,recent trends in European prepared meals include a greater diversity of product ranges, with more emphasis on lower cost,healthy, as well as higher-quality offerings (Scott-Thomas, 2014). This expands the market for prepared meals to a widerrange of consumers – including families and the working class – and further supports our usage of these products as ameasure of gastronomic cosmopolitanism in everyday life.

4. Analytical strategy

We began by coding the main national reference for all prepared meal products in these supermarkets to examine theprevalence of foreign cultural influence. To code the main cultural reference, we focused on the central item in each ‘product,’and not the spices or the additional ingredients. For example, pasta and pizza are always coded as Italian, couscous andtajines as North African, quiche as French, cottage pie as British and sushi as Japanese. This choice was based upon thehistorical cultural origins of dishes and was designed to be as objective as possible.

When coding these dishes, we used a combination of country and broader regional categories because not all productscan be clearly associated with one specific country or cultural influence. For example, couscous is historically identified withmultiple North African countries. East Asia is another common regional coding, as many supermarkets offer spring rolls orvarious noodle or rice dishes flavored with soy sauce and/or ‘chilli’, none of which can be attributed to a specific country.Intermarché and Leclerc include a Mixed category because each store offers a product that is a platter of various smallerdishes from multiple regions around the world.

Our coding approach was chosen for simplicity, but numerous complications arise when prepared meal productscombine multiple cultural influences.5 This was primarily an issue for the pizza and pasta dishes, because the globalpopularity of Italian ingredients and cuisine has generated more extensive local variants of pizza and pasta than have otherforeign cuisines. Nonetheless, we opted to code all pizza and pasta as Italian to avoid inconsistencies about which dishesretain their Italian origins and which do not. Later in the article, we return to the issue of how to interpret the extensiveItalian influences on French and UK supermarket products, and in doing so we also highlight the relationship and fusion

1 More details on supermarket chains in each country are in the methodological Appendix.2 For example, Sainsbury’s stocked Indian spice mixtures as early as the 1920s in recognition of the consumer market for those products. However,

Sainsbury’s did not expand those offerings into more comprehensive meal products until the 1990s (Hamlett, Bailey, Alexander, & Shaw, 2008).3 The data were collected between November and January when five of the nine supermarkets offer special holiday products. The online methodological

Appendix examines the concern that this may bias our findings.4 For more on the distinction between website and in-store selections see the online methodological Appendix.5 One could argue that almost all dishes are cultural fusion because so many ingredients have traveled from their indigenous homes to mix with

ingredients from elsewhere (e.g. ‘Italian’ tomato sauce with tomatoes from the Americas). However, we focus on the culture where the dish initiallyemerged, even if ingredients or techniques within the dish originated elsewhere.

6 The concept of baking pasta with a creamy sauce has existed in Italy for centuries, but Americans began developing their own version in the 18thcentury. In the 1930s, the American food company Kraft began selling boxed elbow macaroni with powdered cheese, which helped institutionalize the dish

as a mainstream American one (Spieler, 2013).

R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97 89

between Italian and American food cultures (Gabaccia, 1998). For example, we coded macaroni and cheese as Italian thoughmany would argue that the dish is culturally American.6 In addition, over the last half-century Italian-American cuisine hasbecome globally significant (Capatti et al., 2003; Helstosky, 2008). Therefore, some pasta and pizza products (e.g. macaroniand cheese or pepperoni pizza) that we code as Italian because of their deeper origins are likely to have entered French andUK supermarkets due to American popular influence.

In short, we acknowledge the complexities of assigning singular cultural origins to food products and do not claim thatour coding captures all aspects of a product’s origins. Regardless, re-coding the ambiguous cases does not change the overallanalysis. Therefore, our coding scheme provides a general overview of which foreign cultural influences are most prevalentin these supermarket chains. Later in the article, we offer more detail on the various and overlapping ways in which differentcultural influences are used in the prepared meals. Full details on each product and its coding can be found in the Appendix.

5. How prevalent are foreign cultural influences?

Tables 2 and 3 present the results of our coding. At the top of each table is a summary of the percentage of prepared mealproducts with domestic origins. Table 2 indicates that those with foreign cultural origins are a minority of the products ineach of the five French chains (ranging from 9 to 50 percent, with an average of 26.3 percent). Table 3 shows prepared mealswith foreign cultural influences are a majority of the products offered in each UK chain (ranging from 63 to 67 percent, withan average of 65.3 percent).7

These initial results are consistent with some of our expectations. Given the different histories of domestic culinary prideand the different political approaches to integrating members of immigrant groups, we expected to find more openness toforeign gastronomical influences in the UK than in France. However, even in France a non-trivial percentage (roughly one-quarter) of prepared meal products have foreign cultural origins. This suggests encouraging – if preliminary – evidence ofgastronomical cosmopolitanism in both countries. In the following sections we examine which foreign cultures are mostprevalent and how those foreign cultures are represented in each country. The results suggest similarities, albeit with a fewkey differences, between France and the UK in which and how foreign cultural influences are present among prepared mealsupermarket products.

6. Which foreign cultures are most prevalent?

Our next step in evaluating gastronomic cosmopolitanism was to examine which foreign cultures are present in Frenchand UK supermarket chains. This yielded two key findings. First, French and UK supermarkets all have significantpercentages of products with non-European cultural origins. However, supermarkets in both countries also have very limited

Table 2Foreign influences on french supermarket prepared meals.

Auchan (N = 453) Carrefour (N = 142) Intermarché (N = 343) Leclerc (N = 658) Système U (N = 335)

Origin %Prod.

%For.

N Origin %Prod.

%For.

N Origin %Prod.

%For.

N Origin %Prod.

%For.

N Origin %Prod.

%For.

N

French 85.2 – 386 French 81.0 – 115 French 60.6 – 207 French 91.2 – 600 French 50.4 – 175Euro 4.8 32.4 22 Euro 4.3 22.6 6 Euro 23.8 60.4 85 Euro 4.6 52.3 30 Euro 31.3 63.1 99NonEuro 10.0 67.6 45 NonEuro 14.7 77.4 21 NonEuro 15.6 39.6 51 NonEuro 4.2 47.7 28 NonEuro 18.3 36.9 61Italy 3.5 23.9 16 E. Asia 6.3 33.3 9 Italy 22.2 55.5 78 Italy 3.7 41.4 24 Italy 26.9 56.3 90US 3.1 20.9 14 Italy 2.8 14.8 4 N. Africa 5.8 14.8 20 US 1.7 19.0 11 N. Africa 5.7 12.0 19China 1.6 10.4 7 Vietnam 2.8 14.8 4 US 3.5 8.9 12 N. Africa 0.9 10.3 6 US 5.4 11.4 18N. Africa 1.3 9.0 6 N. Africa 2.1 11.1 3 Vietnam 1.8 4.4 6 E. Asia 0.5 5.2 3 E. Asia 3.3 7.0 11Japan 1.1 7.5 5 China 1.4 7.4 2 Spain 1.5 3.7 5 Spain 0.5 5.2 3 Spain 1.8 3.8 6Vietnam 0.9 6.0 4 US 1.4 7.4 2 China 1.2 3.0 4 India 0.3 3.4 2 Vietnam 1.5 3.2 5E. Asia 0.7 4.5 3 Carib. 0.7 3.7 1 Turkey 1.2 3.0 4 Japan 0.3 3.4 2 China 1.2 2.5 4Greece 0.7 4.5 3 Greece 0.7 3.7 1 E. Asia 0.6 1.5 2 Vietnam 0.3 3.4 2 Greece 0.9 1.9 3India 0.7 4.5 3 Spain 0.7 3.7 1 Greece 0.6 1.5 2 Greece 0.2 1.7 1 India 0.9 1.9 3Spain 0.7 4.5 3 India 0.6 1.5 2 Mixed 0.2 1.7 1 Turkey 0.3 0.6 1Brazil 0.2 1.5 1 Carib. 0.3 0.7 1 Norway 0.2 1.7 1Carib. 0.2 1.5 1 Lebanon 0.3 0.7 1 Thailand 0.2 1.7 1Mexico 0.2 1.5 1 Mexico 0.3 0.7 1 UK 0.2 1.7 1

Mixed 0.3 0.7 1

Note: ‘% Prod.’ is the percent of products from the respective origin among all prepared meal products in the supermarket. ‘% For.’ is the percent of productsfrom the respective origin among prepared meal products with foreign origins.

7 The percentage difference between foreign and domestic cultural influences is statistically significant (at p < 0.001) in eight of the nine supermarkets.Système U is the one exception, where foreign cultural influences account for 49.6 percent of the prepared meal products and the difference betweenforeign and domestic cultural influence percentages is not statistically significant (at p < 0.05). (This is based on a series of one-sided binomial probability

tests where the null hypothesis is that foreign and domestic cultural influences are equal).

90 R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

ranges of foreign cultural influence. This suggests a more cautious and nuanced assessment of cosmopolitanism andintercultural gastronomic encounters.

6.1. Influence from non-European foreign cultures

One crude distinction is between the presence of European and non-European foreign cultural influences. Tables 2 and 3indicate a tilt in this balance toward non-European cultural influences. In France, non-European influences account for anaverage of 53.8 percent of all foreign cultural influences across the five supermarket chains (and are as high as 77 percent ofthe foreign cultural influences in Carrefour). In the UK, non-European influences account for an average of 69.6 of all foreigncultural influences across the four chains.8

Further evidence of gastronomic cosmopolitanism is the extent of cultural influences from non-European immigrantcommunities that are usually considered the most challenging to integrate (Brouard & Tiberj, 2005; Maxwell, 2012). InFrance, North Africa is always in the top four regions of foreign influence and accounts for an average of 10.8 percent of thetotal products with foreign influences. In the UK, India is always the primary region of foreign influence and, among theproducts with foreign influences, accounts for an average of 25.7 percent.

In many respects, the presence of North African products in France and Indian products in the UK is an expected result ofhistorical, and post-colonial, ties. Yet, the fairly high levels of influence in mainstream market venues are nonethelessremarkable because North Africans in France and Indians in the UK have historically been stereotyped as culturally inferior(Collingham, 2006; Durmelat, 2015; Guy, 2010). In addition, in both countries, these non-native communities facediscrimination and stigmatization from those who do not welcome their presence and consider their foreign religions and

Table 3Foreign influences on United Kingdom supermarket prepared meals.

Asda (N = 539) Morrisons (N = 255) Sainsbury’s (N = 432) Tesco (N = 603)

Origin % Prod. % For. N Origin % Prod. % For. N Origin % Prod. % For. N Origin % Prod. % For. N

UK 34.4 – 190 UK 36.8 – 94 UK 33.1 – 141 UK 36.5 – 217Euro 20.7 31.6 107 Euro 16.1 25.5 41 Euro 23.0 34.4 100 Euro 19.2 30.2 117NonEuro 44.9 68.4 242 NonEuro 47.1 74.5 120 NonEuro 43.9 65.6 191 NonEuro 44.3 69.8 269India 17.4 27.0 94 India 16.5 26.1 42 India 17.8 26.6 77 India 14.6 23.0 88Italy 16.5 25.6 89 China 12.2 19.3 31 Italy 17.6 26.1 76 Italy 14.3 22.5 86US 10.6 16.3 57 Italy 12.2 19.3 31 E. Asia 9.7 14.5 42 China 8.1 12.8 49China 7.6 11.8 41 US 10.6 16.8 27 US 6.5 9.6 28 US 7.3 11.4 44E. Asia 3.2 4.9 17 Spain 2.8 4.3 7 Thailand 2.8 4.2 12 E. Asia 4.0 6.3 24Mexico 2.2 3.4 12 Mexico 2.0 3.1 5 Mexico 2.3 3.5 10 Thailand 3.5 5.5 21Spain 1.7 2.6 9 E. Asia 1.6 2.5 4 Spain 2.3 3.5 10 Spain 2.3 3.7 14Thailand 1.7 2.6 9 Thailand 1.6 2.5 4 China 2.1 3.1 9 Mexico 2.0 3.1 12France 0.9 1.4 5 Africa 0.8 1.2 2 France 2.1 3.1 9 France 1.8 3.9 11Africa 0.6 0.9 3 France 0.8 1.2 2 Greece 0.9 1.4 4 Carib. 1.7 2.6 10Carib. 0.6 0.9 3 Carib. 0.4 0.6 1 Japan 0.9 1.4 4 Morocco 0.7 1.0 4Greece 0.6 0.9 3 Greece 0.4 0.6 1 Malaysia 0.5 0.7 2 Africa 0.5 0.8 2Hungary 0.2 0.3 1 Japan 0.4 0.6 1 Singap. 0.5 0.7 2 Greece 0.5 0.8 2Japan 0.2 0.3 1 M. East 0.4 0.6 1 Africa 0.2 0.3 1 Japan 0.5 0.8 2Malaysia 0.2 0.3 1 Morocco 0.4 0.6 1 Carib. 0.2 0.3 1 Malaysia 0.5 0.8 2M. East 0.2 0.3 1 Turkey 0.4 0.6 1 Korea 0.2 0.3 1 M. East 0.5 0.8 2Morocco 0.2 0.3 1 Medit. 0.2 0.3 1 Czech 0.2 0.3 1Singap. 0.2 0.3 1 Morocco 0.2 0.3 1 Hungary 0.2 0.3 1S. Amer. 0.2 0.3 1 Vietnam 0.2 0.3 1 Medit. 0.2 0.3 1

Singap. 0.2 0.3 1S. Africa 0.2 0.3 1S. Lanka 0.2 0.3 1Switz. 0.2 0.3 1Vietnam 0.2 0.3 1

Note: ‘% Prod.’ is the percent of products from the respective origin among all prepared meal products in the supermarket. ‘% For.’ is the percent of productsfrom the respective origin among prepared meal products with foreign origins.

8 In France, one-sided binomial probability tests (where the null hypothesis is that European and non-European cultural influences are equal amongproducts with foreign cultural influences) indicate that the larger percentage of non-European influences is statistically significant (at p < 0.01) in Auchan,Carrefour and Système U and the larger percentage of European influence is statistically significant (at p < 0.01) in Intermarché. There is no statisticallysignificant difference (at p < 0.05) in Leclerc. In the UK, the larger percentage of non-European influences is statistically significant (at p < 0.001) in all foursupermarkets.

R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97 91

cultural norms threats to French or UK society (Maxwell, 2012). Therefore, the fact that North Africa and India are among themost prominent culinary influences on prepared meal supermarket products is evidence of how facets of non-Europeanimmigrant communities have become a de facto part of cosmopolitan French and UK consumer culture, despite seriousintegration challenges (Alba & Foner, 2015).9

East Asia is another prominent source of non-European cultural influences in both French and UK supermarkets. This cansignal cosmopolitanism because it encompasses several different nations that are all geographically and culturally distantfrom Europe. In part, this reflects the fact that East Asian cultures have longstanding immigrant communities in France andthe UK resulting from colonization and empire (Laudan, 2013; Messina, 2007). Additionally, the late-20th century emergenceof a number of East Asian nations and cities as centers of transnational capital accumulation has likely influenced the globalcultural valuation of those locales’ consumer and culinary products. This relationship between economic capital and culturalcapital could explain why East Asian ingredients and flavors have resonated more soundly in mainstream food media than,for example, those from the Caribbean. Indeed, in both countries, East Asian ingredients and dishes have become familiar andpopular at home and in food and cooking magazines, television programming, and at a broader range of restaurants (Hill,2012). These developments have occurred alongside greater rates of distribution of East Asian food products to French andUK supermarket chains such as those examined in this article (Roberts, 2002).

However, many East Asian-influenced products cannot be traced to colonial histories or purely economic ties; we alsonote clear evidence of growing interest among French and UK consumers for stylistically new and interesting tastes writlarge (Warde & Gayo-Cal, 2009). Creative trendsetters in elite gastronomic settings often borrow extensively from otherculinary styles, yet they do so in ways that are patterned and derive from the hierarchical status of those who serve as earlyadopters (Leschziner, 2015), and in time such trends often extend well beyond niche gastronomic cultures. For example,French chefs in the emergent nouvelle cuisine movement of 1960s and 70s adopted both ingredients and cooking techniquesfrom Japan (Rao, Monin, & Durand, 2005), making it easier for those flavors to be considered broadly complementary toFrench dishes today. Further, a recent New York Times magazine article reported on the prevalence of pluraliste culinarytrends in the contemporary high-end Parisian food scene (Gollner, 2016). In short, the qualitative and quantitative array ofwhich national influences are prominent in both countries denotes further evidence of status and cultural hierarchies withingastronomic cosmopolitanism, as well as the simultaneous symbolic and material entwining of global taste preferencesthrough media and networks of capital accumulation.

6.2. A limited range of foreign cultural influences

The presence of foreign (and more specifically non-European) cultural influences may suggest cosmopolitanism, but inexamining the countries and regions represented among these products, we have a more cautious assessment. Tables 2 and 3indicate that for each chain, over 80 percent of the prepared meal products with foreign origins come from four sources: Italy,the United States, East Asia, and the region that is each respective country’s main source of post-colonial migration (NorthAfrica for France and India for the UK). In both countries, there are very few prepared meal products with origins in EasternEurope, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East or Central or Southern America. This uneven distribution of foreign influences isevidence of the limits of cosmopolitanism in Western Europe, showing how gastronomic cosmopolitanism is a product ofhistorically-embedded markets and their unequally distributed cultural and economic resources.

Perhaps the best example of how globalized markets and firms promote a narrow range of particular cultural influences isthe prominence of Italian and US influences among these offerings in both France and the UK. Together, these two countriesaccount for an average of 50.3 percent of foreign-influenced products in France and an average of 36.4 percent of foreign-influenced products in the UK. This indicates both the independent influence of each county’s food on global market trends,as well as the strong assimilation of Italian cuisine into American culinary repertoires (Capatti et al., 2003). While thecategory of ‘Italian food’ itself comprises a wide variety of specialized and regional culinary practices (Parasecoli, 2014), formuch of the 20th century it was a low-status ethnic cuisine in France and the UK (and much of Western Europe). As its statusgrew in those countries, it entered most, if not every, main street, shopping mall, airport, train station, and supermarket(Mariani, 2011). However, Italian cuisine’s global popularity has also benefited from its earlier deep assimilation into 20thcentury American food culture (Gabaccia, 1998; Helstosky, 2008). Dishes like pastas and pizzas have been re-introduced tothe world via American global prowess, helping to explain, for instance, why the French supermarket chain Intermarchéoffers five versions of baked pasta in different cheese sauces under the menu category ‘Les Box.’

This strong US presence links to broader trends in which America has served as a dominating force in global consumerculture and cultural flows (Appadurai, 1990; Tomlinson, 1999). Gastronomically, and to the dismay of those promoting‘traditional’ food cultures, the US has been particularly successful at exporting its fast food and snack culture and brands

9 Another possibility is that North African and Indian products are offered on the supermarket websites primarily to appeal to members of those specificcommunities, while being ignored by the rest of the population. This would suggest that non-European immigrant communities have not become part ofmainstream French and UK consumer culture. However, this dynamic is unlikely because the websites are standardized for the entire country and theseimmigrant communities are only roughly 6 percent of the population in their respective countries (more details on immigrant demographics are below).

92 R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

(Fantasia, 1995; Inglis & Gimlin, 2009). This helps explain why the US-influenced prepared meal products in French and UKsupermarkets overwhelmingly signify fast-food or snack-type options—transatlantic clichés. Most notably, both countriesoffer extensive variations on hamburgers and hot dogs.10 In addition, French supermarkets offer chicken wings, cole slaw,club sandwiches, bagel sandwiches, and wraps.11 UK supermarkets also offer chicken nuggets, onion rings, and a range of USSouthern, Southwestern and Tex-Mex inspired dishes like pulled pork, barbecue ribs, and many variations on chili.

Global markets may generate opportunities for new foreign cultural influences to enter a country, but for large retailchains that serve broad consumer bases they also involve rationalized supply chains and product standardization (Freidberg,2004). Food retailers in France and the UK are among the most sophisticated in the world, using increasingly complexfinancial and operations techniques within their supply chain and distribution logistics and consumer tracking programs(Burch & Lawrence, 2007; Newman, 2013). This helps partially explain why a fairly narrow set of global ‘cosmopolitan’influences dominates the prepared meal offerings in French and UK supermarket chains.

Another example of how global markets limit culinary diversity is the narrow range of non-European immigrant culturesthat are represented in these supermarkets. In France, the largest non-European origin immigrant communities are NorthAfricans (roughly 6 percent of the population), followed by Caribbeans, Turks, and Sub-Saharan Africans, who are eachroughly 1.5 percent of the population.12 All of these groups are conspicuous in French cities and as subjects of public andpolitical debates about immigrants (Brouard & Tiberj, 2005), signaling potential status differentiations by race, ethnicity, andsocial class that could affect gastronomic offerings.13 While each supermarket offers a selection of North African-inspiredcouscous, tajines, and tabbouleh dishes, influences from the other groups are barely present. Sub-Saharan Africa is never theprimary cultural source of a single prepared meal in any of the five supermarkets. In three of them, there is exactly oneCaribbean-influenced dish (cod fritters/accras de morue), and in two supermarkets there are zero. Finally, while Turkish dönerkebab takeaway restaurants have proven extremely popular and numerous throughout Western European cities thus far inthe 21st century, there is only one Turkish kebab dish in Système U and a mere three Turkish-influenced dishes inIntermarché.

In the UK, India is the largest source of non-European immigration with 2.5 percent of the population, followed byPakistanis (2 percent), black Africans (1.8 percent), Caribbeans (1.1 percent) and Bangladeshis (0.8 percent).14 All of thesegroups are prominent in British public life, but India is overwhelmingly the most prominent influence on supermarketprepared meals. In some respects, the prominence of Indian influences as opposed to Pakistani or Bangladeshi, despite onlybeing a slightly larger percentage of the UK population, reflects India’s historical dominance as the name utilized to signifythe South Asian subcontinent.15 Yet, the dramatic drop-off in influence for Sub-Saharan African or Caribbean gastronomiccultures in the UK is noteworthy. The only African dish that appears in the UK supermarket product lists we analyzed is piripiri chicken, and even that was a European-African fusion dish from its inception.16 Asda, Morrisons and Sainsbury’s eachonly offer one Caribbean-influenced prepared meal product. While Tesco offers a slightly more extensive selection, with tendifferent Caribbean-influenced items (mainly different Jamaican curries and patties), even that is less than 2 percent of theiroverall prepared meal products.

The fact that cultural influences from non-European immigrant communities are mainly from North Africa in France andIndia in the UK reveals tentativeness toward cosmopolitanism in everyday food practices. East Asia is a prominent non-European culinary influence in both countries, but East Asians are less than three percent of each country’s population, andthus unlikely to be reflecting demand from demographic presence. Instead, these influences are more likely a reflection ofthe economic, political, and cultural prominence of East Asia globally (Dicken, 2015; Shambaugh, 2014). In short, the fact thatalmost all products with foreign influences come from the same four sources (Italy, the United States, East Asia and the mainsource of post-colonial migration) indicates similarly imbalanced consumer market logics.

7. How are foreign cultural influences portrayed?

Our final question, following the above evidence of foreign cultural influence on France and UK prepared mealsupermarket products – which is an encouraging sign of cosmopolitanism – concerns the ways in which foreign culturalinfluences are presented and promoted by these chains, and how these products are described and promoted differently

10 France and the UK adapt iconic American dishes to their own domestic tastes (Inglis, 2005). Auchan sells American ‘hot dogs’ and ‘burgers’ in the shapeof traditional French petit fours. Asda sells burgers with a side dish of baked beans. Yet the US influence is clear.11 For more on our coding decisions see the online appendices about coding cole slaw and wraps.12 These population percentages are rough minimums because of the limited data availability on second-generation immigrants in France. Estimates arebased on the most recent analyses available (Maxwell, 2012; Tribalat, 2004, 2009).13 The lack of influences from Caribbean and Sub-Saharan African cultures could be interpreted as evidence of racial hierarchies with blacks at the bottom.However, contemporary racial stratification in France and the UK is structured with Muslims as opposed to blacks on the bottom of the hierarchy. As such,the non-European groups who are represented in supermarket chains (North Africans and Indians) are considered the most problematic for culturalintegration and arguably face more stigmatization than blacks in France and the UK (Brouard & Tiberj, 2005; Maxwell, 2012).14 Source: Census 2011, Office for National Statistics.15 We follow these supermarket chain labels in using the code ‘Indian,’ even though several products in that category could also qualify as Bangladeshi orPakistani (e.g. bhuna, dopiaza, pasanda, or rogan josh).16 Piri piri (or peri peri) is a spice mixture with a chili pepper base originally brought to East Africa from the Americas and developed as a dish by

Portuguese settlers there.

R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97 93

across the two countries. As a relevant note, the term ‘authentic’ appears sparsely in our data. This finding is somewhatcounterintuitive, as a number of sociological and marketing studies predict a purposive quest for authentic products byconsumers seeking cultural and culinary capital, and gastronomic institutions responding accordingly (see among others:Beverland & Farrelly, 2010; Johnston & Baumann, 2010; Warde, 1997). We conjecture that large mainstream supermarketchains, which reinterpret and market products for mass audiences, may know they are not where consumers seek out‘authentic’ culinary products. Moreover, the few times we do find authenticity referenced, it is done so quite differentlyacross the two countries. In French supermarkets, the language of ‘authentic’ dishes is reserved only for French products (i.e.an authentic cheese platter, or a description of an authentic Breton cake recipe for Far Breton aux pruneaux), never forforeign-origin products. In UK supermarkets, on the other hand, the language of authenticity is occasionally used to describeforeign-origin ingredients or dishes (i.e. ‘authentic tasting lasagne’ or an ‘authentic Middle Eastern recipe’), but not forBritish-origin dishes.

7.1. Post colonial immigrant influences

Given a long and politically fraught history of cultural marginalization, one might expect North African culinaryinfluences in France and Indian influences in the UK to be exoticized or ‘Other’-ized (Johnston & Baumann, 2010). However,North African-influenced meal items in France and Indian-influenced meal items in the UK are all presented as familiar,relatively ordinary products that will meet consumer expectations. As a caveat for what follows, we acknowledge thatincorporating ‘ethnic’ dishes into ‘mainstream’ diets, historically, often requires their physical conversion into formsconsidered more acceptable and appealing to consumers (Lu & Fine, 1995), and the search for ‘exotic’ tastes perpetuatesother status-seeking processes tied to food consumption, namely cultural omnivorism (Johnston & Baumann, 2010).

The closest French supermarkets come to exoticizing North African items is Intermarché, which has three couscous dishesunder the menu sub-heading ‘Exotic dishes.’ However, while this category is mostly comprised of non-European dishes fromaround the world, it also includes Greek moussaka and three Spanish paella dishes. This suggests that to the extent theseproducts are seen as exotic, it is because they are not of French origin. Moreover, North African dishes are not confined to this‘Exotic dishes’ sub-heading. There are tabbouleh dishes in the general ‘Salad’ menu sub-heading and one couscous dish in theWeight Watchers sub-heading. In Auchan and Carrefour, the closest acknowledgement of the foreignness of North Africandishes is reference to them as ‘Oriental’ or ‘traditional,’ but with no additional adjectives or descriptors. In Leclerc andSystème U, North African-inspired dishes are presented without any such descriptors.

In the UK, each supermarket includes a wide range of Indian-inspired prepared meal dishes. These include multipletandoori and curry dishes (various kormas, jalfrezis, and vindaloos, as well as more generic ‘curries’), biryanis, and varioussnacks (e.g. samosas, bhajis, pakoras). There are also several long-established British-Indian fusion dishes (e.g. balti,mulligatawny, phal, and chicken tikka masala, which was declared Britain’s national dish by foreign secretary Robin Cook in2001 (Cook, 2001)). Each UK supermarket has a menu category for Indian dishes, which could potentially reflect segregationor stigmatization of Indian cultural influences. Yet, the presentation of Indian dishes uses no exoticizing or otherwise-detached language of symbolic boundaries. Instead, the websites described these dishes only using adjectives like ‘rich,’‘creamy,’ ‘aromatic,’ or ‘hot.’

A further example of Indian cuisine’s integration into UK gastronomy is the occasional use of Indian spices in what wouldotherwise be called ‘British’ dishes. This was not a common occurrence, perhaps in part because there are already extensiveproduct offerings for Indian dishes. Yet, Asda sells chicken breasts flavored with lime and coriander as well as baked potatoesseasoned with chilis. Sainsbury’s sells lamb patties flavored with ginger and cumin, and Tesco sells potato wedges flavoredwith cumin, curry powder, and fenugreek. These findings are consistent with research on general trends in contemporaryBritish cuisine over the last half-century, which finds growing popular acceptance of Indian-origin flavors and ingredients(Collingham, 2006; Hall, Hayes, & Pratt, 2003; Panayi 2008).

7.2. East Asian exoticization

The presence of East Asian communities in France and the UK has several notable historical and cultural differences fromthe North African and Indian communities there. First, the populations of East Asian immigrants in France and the UK aremuch smaller in number.17 In addition, East Asian immigrants have remained more geographically segregated and culturallydistant from mainstream French and UK society, with less civic, political, and cultural integration than other non-Europeangroups (Chan, Cole, & Bowpitt, 2007; Hassoun, 1997; Tribalat, 1995). This can help explain why East Asian influences onsupermarket prepared meal products are more likely to be presented as exotic and foreign.

French supermarkets are more explicit in this regard and, for the most part, such language is solely used for East Asiandishes. Carrefour has a menu category that translates as ‘Voyage to Asia’ and Système U has the category of ‘Exotic Asian.’Intermarché has a category named ‘Exotic Dishes,’ which includes dishes from all over the world outside of France, but of the

17 In France, Vietnamese minorities are roughly 0.5 percent of the population and the combined total of other East Asian minorities (Cambodians, Laotians,Chinese) is even smaller (Tribalat, 2004, 2009). In the UK, the Chinese are only 0.7 percent of the England and Wales population and the combined Chinese

and other Asian population (excluding South Asians) is 2.2 percent. Source: Census 2011, Office for National Statistics.

94 R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

26 products in this category, twelve are from Vietnam, China, or generically East Asia. Auchan pitches their Vietnamesespring rolls as ‘ideal for your exotic aperitifs.’ Intermarché calls a platter with assorted Vietnamese and generically Asianstarters ‘The Discovery Platter.’ In each case, the phrases describing these products evokes literal and cultural distance fromFrench society.

Menu categories in the UK similarly use language of exoticism and adventuring in marketing their East Asian dishes. Forexample, Asda describes a Chicken Thai Red Curry with ‘Discover exotic spices and coconut, with a zesty lime squeeze . . . ’

and a King Prawn Thai Red Curry with ‘Savour exotic spiciness, with chilli and zingy lime . . . ’ There is also a UK-brand of tofusold at Asda and Tesco that depicts its product as ‘perfect for adventurous cooks who love to try different recipes and flavoursfrom the Far East.’ As in France, these phrases indicate geographic and cultural distance from the mainstream and suggestthat East Asian food occupies a qualitatively different position in UK society than South Asian or American influencedproducts. Therefore, while the presence of East Asian influences may indicate a cosmopolitan opening to the world, thepurposeful ways in which the dishes are depicted also indicates ongoing French and UK gastronomic parochialism withregard to East Asia and, for some scholars, is representative of elitist tendencies in such systems of cultural valuation orcolonization (Bell & Valentine, 1997).

7.3. Italian and US gastronomic integration

Italian and US influences on prepared meal supermarket products tend to be presented straightforwardly withoutexoticizing or stigmatizing language. What is most distinctive about these influences is that they are the most likely to gobeyond their own cultural-origin dishes and appear in otherwise-traditionally French or British dishes.

In both countries, Italian cheeses (e.g. mozzarella, parmesan, ricotta, grana padano, and mascarpone) are commonadditions to salads, sandwiches, and meat dishes that are categorized as French or British. Similarly, Italian ingredients likepesto, pancetta, and balsamic vinegar, and a wide-range of Italian-inspired tomato and basil flavorings, are used for variousmeat and vegetable dishes. American ingredients like butternut squash and cranberries are included in several appetizer andmain course dishes that are otherwise traditionally French in the French supermarket chains. Stereotypical Americandesserts like brownies and cupcakes are transformed into modern versions of French petit fours. Additionally, Frenchsupermarket chains have adopted the recent French invention of savory ‘cakes.’ These cakes are based on the Americanmuffin recipe, and are named with an English word, but are a French version of savory bread loaves with added ingredients(Sigal, 2010). In UK supermarket chains, American ingredients like barbeque sauce and Monterey Jack cheese are added tootherwise-British sandwiches and meat dishes.

The incorporation of Italian and American ingredients into traditional French and UK dishes is cultural fusion that couldbe considered evidence of gastronomic cosmopolitanism. However, this same fusion is much more likely than with Asian orAfrican culinary influences. Admittedly, it may be easier to combine culinary influences from Italian and Americangastronomic repertoires for their baseline similarities in ingredients, flavor profiles, and cooking styles. Yet, Asian andAfrican influences have been embraced by numerous high-level restaurant chefs (Lane, 2014). Our supermarket product dataindicate a broader mass market that may be less cosmopolitan and more parochial than the more creative, cutting-edgerestaurants.

8. Discussion

Over the past few decades, the dual projects of European integration and of internationalizing consumer markets havefollowed complex cosmopolitan agendas. Global culture is assumed to be a mechanism for articulating and developingcosmopolitan, as oppositional to nationalist, mindsets. This is especially pertinent for modes of everyday consumption �cosmopolitanism entails literal and symbolic engagement with cultural differences at the level of the mundane, whereconsumption is essentially framed as a civic act (which indubitably comes with its own ideological tensions) (Beck, 2006;García Canclini, 2001). This article adds a comparative perspective to the study of cosmopolitan tastes as expanding beyondthe social world of urban elites. We focused on prepared meal products in large supermarket chains in France and the UK toexamine forms of banal cosmopolitan in mainstream gastronomic practices. Our results are mixed and suggest thatgastronomic cosmopolitanism is both filtered through market mechanisms and irreducible to ‘global cultural diffusion’ as aconceptual construct. While the unevenness in culinary origins that we find denotes historically embedded, and oftendisenfranchising, relationships between nations, we also suggest that real culinary interactions potentially have the capacityto facilitate other forms of interethnic belonging and trust.

On the positive side, we find significant percentages of foreign cultural influences in both French and UK supermarkets.These foreign influences are not limited to neighboring European countries and, in many cases, are more likely to be non-European. Many of these products are presented straightforwardly and without exoticizing language, which suggestscustomers are familiar with the dishes and have achieved a certain level of gastronomic cosmopolitanism. This lack ofexoticization is especially notable for North African influences in France and Indian influences in the UK, two of the mostprominent – and at times controversial – immigrant groups.

Yet, there is also strong evidence of parochialism and unevenness parsed from the gastronomic patterns that we identify.Although North African and Indian influences are well-represented, there are very few prepared-meal products with culturalinfluences from the many other immigrant groups in both countries. In addition, foreign influences in both French and UK

R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97 95

supermarkets are overwhelmingly dominated by the same four sources: Italy, the US, East Asia and each country’s main non-European immigrant community. This limited range is evidence of consumer markets’ political economic underpinnings andcommodifying logics. Moreover, it suggests that even as cosmopolitan ideals becomes more developed and robust, they arevery likely to be distributed unevenly and in ways that reproduce categorically-derived inequalities, reifying stereotypicaltropes of distance between groups, especially those struggling with integration into host communities.

As we posited earlier, the UK is one of the most likely West European countries to develop robust gastronomiccosmopolitanism. As such, the limits on cosmopolitanism that we observe in the UK cases are likely to be even morepronounced elsewhere. We expected more limitations on gastronomic cosmopolitanism in France, and indeed we observefewer products with foreign cultural influences than in the UK. However, the evidence of North African-influenced productsbeing presented as commonplace and ordinary in France are suggestive of the possibilities for a more cosmopolitan andinclusive future.

As Western Europe becomes increasingly pluralistic and flirts with emergent cosmopolitan ideals, food will likely be animportant vehicle and metric of those cultural exchanges (Cappeliez & Johnston, 2013). Such patterns relate to ongoingtrends in social boundary maintenance – how people re-define cultural membership and worth – and are particularlypressing in our current neoliberal era, where social identity processes derive many of their resources and status distinctionsfrom consumer-oriented marketplaces (Parker, 2013). Here, we do not claim to analyze the totality of gastronomiccosmopolitanism in either country. Rather, we use supermarket prepared meal food products as an indicator of culturalinfluence on mainstream retail and consumer practices, as opposed to various specialized niche cultures where non-European influences may be more prevalent. Charting the interactions, and especially the contestation, between mainstreamand niche gastronomic subcultures is yet another direction for future research on how foreign culinary cultures are diffusingwithin and among contemporary European nations.

Acknowledgements

Previous versions of this article were presented at the Council for European Studies annual conference and the Universityof North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Funding was provided by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Center for EuropeanStudies. The authors would like to thank Christopher Bail, Kim Ebert, Christian Joppke, Ines Michalowski, Richard Ocejo, theanonymous reviewers and Poetics editor Shyon Baumann for helpful comments.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2016.03.001.

References

Alba, R., & Foner, N. (2015). Strangers no more: immigration and the challenges of integration in north America and western Europe. Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture and Society, 7(2), 295–310.Appiah, K. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Bail, C. (2008). The configuration of symbolic boundaries against immigrants in Europe. American Sociological Review, 73(1), 37–59.Beck, U. (2003). Conversations with ulrich beck. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Beck, U. (2006). The cosmopolitan vision. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Beck, U., & Grande, E. (2007). Cosmopolitan Europe. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Bell, D., & Valentine, G. (1997). Consuming geographies: we are where we eat. London: Routledge.Berezin, M. (2009). Illiberal politics in neoliberal times: culture, security and populism in the new Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.Berezin, M. (2015). Globalization backlash. In S. Robert, & S. Kosslyn (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciencesHoboken, NJ: John Wiley and

Sons.Beverland, M., & Farrelly, F. J. (2010). The quest for authenticity in consumption: consumers purposive choice of authentic cues to shape experienced

outcomes. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 838–856.Binnie, J., & Skeggs, B. (2004). Cosmopolitan knowledge and the production and consumption of sexualized space: manchester’s gay village. The Sociological

Review, 52(1), 39–61.Bleich, E. (2003). Race politics in Britain and France: ideas and policymaking since the 1960. New York: Cambridge University Press.Bookman, S. (2013). Branded cosmopolitanisms: ‘global’ coffee brands and the Co-creation of ‘Cosmopolitan cool’. Cultural Sociology, 7(1), 56–72.Food nations: selling taste in consumer societies. In W. Belasco, & P. Scranton (Eds.). New York: Routledge.Brouard, S., & Tiberj, V. (2005). Français Comme les Autres? Enquête Sur les Citoyens Issus de lImmigration Africaine et Turque. Paris : Presses de Sciences-

Po.Supermarkets and agri-food supply chains: transformations in the production and consumption of foods. In D. Burch, & G. Lawrence (Eds.). Cheltenham, UK:

Edward Elgar Publishing.Calhoun, C. (2007). Nations matter: citizenship, solidarity, and the cosmopolitan dream. Oxford, UK: Routledge.Capatti, A., Montanari, M., & O'Healy, Á. (2003). Italian cuisine: a cultural history. New York: Columbia University Press.Cappeliez, S., & Johnston, J. (2013). From meat and potatoes to ‘Real-deal’ rotis: exploring everyday culinary cosmopolitanism. Poetics, 41(5), 433–455.Carol, S., Helbling, M., & Michalowski, I. (2015). A struggle over religious rights? How muslim immigrants and christian natives view the accommodation of

religion in six european countries. Social Forces, 94(2), 647–671.Chan, C. K., Cole, B., & Bowpitt, G. (2007). ‘Beyond silent organizations’: a reflection of the UK chinese people and their community prganizations. Critical

Social Policy, 27(4), 509–533.Cochoy, F. (2007). A sociology of market-things: on tending the garden of choices in mass retailing. Sociological Review, 55, 109–129.Collingham, L. (2006). Curry: a tale of cooks and conquerors. New York: Oxford University Press.

96 R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97

Cook, R. (2001). ‘Robin Cook’s Chicken tikka Masala Speech.’ The Guardian. April 19.Crane, D., & Bovone, L. (2006). Approaches to material culture: the sociology of fashion and clothing. Poetics, 34(6), 319–333.Cwiertka, K. (2005). From ethnic to hip: circuits of japanese cuisine in europe. Food and Foodways, 13(4), 241–272.Datamonitor. (2003). Consumer Trends in Prepared Meals: Market Impact and Future Direction. A Datamonitor Report (DMCM0790).DeSoucey, M. (2010). Gastronationalism: food traditions and authenticity politics in the european union. American Sociological Review, 75(3), 432–455.Deutsch, T. (2010). Building a housewife’s paradise: gender, politics, and American grocery stores in the twentieth century. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North

Carolina Press.Dicken, P. (2015). Global shift: mapping the changing contours of the world economy, 7th ed. New York: Guilford Press.Durmelat, S. (2015). Introduction: colonial culinary encounters and imperial leftovers. French Cultural Studies, 26(2), 115–129.Fantasia, R. (1995). Fast food in France. Theory and Society, 24(2), 201–243.Favell, A. (1998). Philosophies of integration: immigration and the idea of citizenship in France and Britain. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave-Macmillan.Favell, A. (2008). Eurostars and eurocities: free movement and mobility in an integrating Europe. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Featherstone, M. (1990). Global culture: nationalism, globalization and modernity. London: Sage.Featherstone, M. (1997). Consumer culture and postmodernism, 2nd ed. London: Sage.Ferguson, P. (2004). Accounting for taste: the triumph of french cuisine. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Ferni, J., Sparks, L., & McKinnon, A. (2010). Retail logistics in the UK: past, present and future. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 38(11),

894–914.Fligstein, N. (2008). Euroclash. The EU, European identity and the future of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Freidberg, S. (2004). French beans and food scares: culture and commerce in an anxious age. New York: Oxford University Press.The shopping experience. In P. Falk, & C. Campbell (Eds.). London: Sage Publications.Gabaccia, D. (1998). We are what we eat: ethnic food and the making of americans. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.García Canclini, N. (2001). Consumers and citizens: globalization and multicultural conflicts. Translated by G. Yudice. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota

Press.Givens, T. (2005). Voting radical right in western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.Guy, K. (2010). Imperial feedback: food and the french culinary legacy of empire. Contemporary French and Francophone Studies, 14(2), 149–157.Gollner, A. (2016). The New Nouvelle Cuisine. The New York Times T Magazine, p. M2102. March 6.Hill, S. (2012). Vindawho? Chicken Tikka Masala Knocked Off Top Spot by Chinese Stir–fry as Britain’s Favourite Dish. Daily Mail, January 21.Hall, C., Hayes, J., & Pratt, J. (2003). Recipes for the nation’s favourite food: Britain’s top 100 dishes. London: BBC Worldwide Publishing.Hamlett, J., Bailey, A., Alexander, A., & Shaw, G. (2008). Ethnicity and consumption: south asian food shopping patterns in Britain, 1947–75. Journal of

Consumer Culture, 8(1), 91–116.Harris, J., & Shiptsova, R. (2007). Consumer demand for convenience foods: demographics and expenditures. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 38(3), 22–

36.Hassoun, J.-P. (1997). Pratiques alimentaires chez les Vietnamiens et les Cambodgiens en France. Ethnologie Franc aise, 27(1), 113–117.Helstosky, C. (2008). Pizza: a global history. London: Reaktion Books.Hill, J. (2011). Becoming a cosmopolitan: what it means to be a human being in the new millennium. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Holmes, D. (2011). Integral europe: fast-capitalism, multiculturalism, neofascism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.The globalization of food. In D. Inglis, & D. Gimlin (Eds.). New York: Berg.Inglis, D. (2005). Culture and everyday life. London: Routledge.Jamal, A. (1996). Acculturation: the symbolism of ethnic eating among contemporary British consumers. British Food Journal, 98(10), 12–26.Janssen, S., & Peterson, R. (2005). Comparative research on cultural production and consumption. Poetics, 33(5–6), 253–256.Johnston, J., & Baumann, S. (2010). Foodies: democracy and distinction in the gourmet foodscape. New York: Taylor & Francis.Joppke, C. (2004). The retreat of multiculturalism in the liberal state: theory and policy. British Journal of Sociology, 55(2), 237–257.Lane, C. (2014). The cultivation of taste chefs and the organization of fine dining. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Laudan, R. (2013). Cuisine and empire: cooking and world history. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Leschziner, V. (2015). At the chef’s table: culinary creativity in elite restaurants. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Lu, S., & Fine, G. (1995). The presentation of ethnic authenticity: chinese food as a social accomplishment. The Sociological Quarterly, 36(3), 535–553.Mariani, J. (2011). How italian food conquered the world. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Mau, S. (2010). Social transnationalism: lifeworlds beyond the nation-state. London: Routledge.Maxwell, R. (2012). Ethnic minority migrants in britain and France: integration trade-offs. New York: Cambridge University Press.Mennell, S. (1996). All manners of food: eating and taste in england and France from the middle ages to the present. Champaign, IL: Illini Books.Messina, A. (2007). The logics and politics of post-WWII migration to western europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.Meuleman, R., & Savage, M. (2013). A field analysis of cosmopolitan taste: lessons from the Netherlands. Cultural Sociology, 7(2), 230–256.Miller, D. (2012). Consumption and its consequences. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Miller, T. (2008). Cultural citizenship: cosmopolitanism, consumerism, and television in a neoliberal age. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Noiriel, Gérard. 1988. Le Creuset Français: Histoire de l’Immigration, XIXe–XXe siècles. Paris: Éditions Seuil.Newman, K. (2013). The secret financial life of food: from commodities markets to supermarkets. New York: Columbia University Press.Panayi, P. (2008). Spicing up Britain: the multicultural history of british food. London: Reaktion Books.Parasecoli, F. (2014). Al dente: a history of food in Italy. London: Reaktion Books.Parker, C. (2013). Voting with your fork? Industrial free-range eggs and the regulatory construction of consumer choice. The Annals of the American Academy

of Political and Social Science, 649(1), 52–73.Peterson, R., & Kern, R. (1996). Changing highbrow taste: from snob to omnivore. American Sociological Review, 61(5), 900–907.Pichler, F. (2008). How real is cosmopolitanism in europe? Sociology, 42(6), 1107–1126.Pollock, S., Bhabha, H., Breckenridge, C., & Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Cosmopolitanisms. Public Culture, 12(3), 577–589.Pottier, J. (2014). Savoring the authentic: the emergence of a Bangladeshi cuisine in east London. Food, Culture and Society, 17(1), 7–26.Prieur, A., Rosenlund, L., & Sjkott-Larsend, J. (2008). Cultural capital today: a case study from Denmark. Poetics, 36(1), 45–71.Rössel, J. (2015). Cosmopolitan cultural consumption: preferences and practices in a heterogeneous, urban population in Switzerland. Poetics, 50, 80–95.Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. (2005). Border crossing: bricolage and the erosion of categorical boundaries in French gastronomy. American Sociological

Review, 70(6), 968–991.Roberts, J. A. G. (2002). China to chinatown: chinese food in the west. London: Reaktion Books.Rudolph, H., & Hillmann, F. (1998). How turkish is the donar kebab? turks in Berlin’s food sector. Scottish Geographical Magazine, 114(3), 138–147.Curried cultures: globalization, food, and south Asia. In K. Ray, & T. Srinivas (Eds.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Shambaugh, D. (2014). China goes global: the partial power. New York: Oxford University Press.Skrbis, Z., & Woodward, I. (2007). The ambivalence of ordinary cosmopolitanism: investigating the limits of cosmopolitan openness. The Sociological Review,

55(4), 730–747.Sniderman, P., & Hagendoorn, L. (2007). When ways of life collide: multiculturalism and its discontents in the Netherlands. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

Press.Scott-Thomas, C. (2014). European Ready Meal Market Dominated by France, Germany and the UK: Report FoodNavigator.com, September 24 http://www.

foodnavigator.com/Market-Trends/European-ready-meal-market-dominated-by-France-Germany-and-UK-Report.Sigal, J. (2010). The Hors d’Oeuvres That the French Call Cake. New York Times, July 13.

R. Maxwell, M. DeSoucey / Poetics 56 (2016) 85–97 97

Spieler, M. (2013). Macaroni & cheese. San Francisco, CA: Chronicle Books.Stoeckel, F. (2016). Contact and community: the role of social interactions for a political identity. Political Psychology (Forthcoming).Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Tribalat, M. (1995). Faire France: Une Enquete sur Les Immigres et Leurs Enfants. Paris: La Découverte.Tribalat, M. (2004). An estimation of the foreign-origin populations of France in 1999. Population, 59(1), 49–80.Tribalat, M. (2009). Mariages ‘Mixtes’ et Immigration en France. Espaces Populations Societes, 2, 203–214.Multiculturalism backlash: european discourses, policies and practices. In S. Vertovec, & S. Wessendorf (Eds.). New York: Routledge.The cultural politics of food and eating: a reader. In J. Watson, & M. Caldwell (Eds.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Everyday multiculturalism. In A. Wise, & S. Velayutham (Eds.). London: Palgrave MacMillan.Warde, A. (1997). Consumption, food and taste: culinary antinomies and commodity culture. London: Sage.Warde, A. (2009). Imagining british cuisine: representations of culinary identity in the good food guide, 1951–2007. Food, Culture and Society, 12(2), 151–171.Warde, A., & Gayo-Cal, M. (2009). The anatomy of cultural omnivorousness: the case of the United Kingdom. Poetics, 37(2), 119–145.Weil, P. (2005). La Republique et Sa Diversite: Immigration, Integration, Discriminations. Paris: Seuil, La République des Idées.Wright, W., & Annes, A. (2013). Halal on the menu? Contested food politics and french identity in fast-food. Journal of Rural Studies, 32, 388–399.Young, C., Diep, M., & Drabble, S. (2006). Living with difference? the ‘cosmopolitan city’ and urban reimaging in manchester. UK Urban Studies, 43(10), 1687–

1714.

Rahsaan Maxwell is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He received his PhD in2008 from the Department of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. His research explores the politics of racial, ethnic, religious, andimmigrant-origin minorities, often focusing on Western Europe. He has examined numerous issues including minority cultural integration, politicalattitudes, identity, representation, and acceptance in mainstream society.

Michaela DeSoucey is Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at North Carolina State University. She received her PhD in2010 from the Department of Sociology at Northwestern University. Her research and teaching centers on how varied relationships among markets, socialmovements, and state systems shape the cultural and moral politics of food.