The Biopolitics of Industrial Chicken: Accumulation, Health and Disease in Capitalist Poultry Production

2019冠状病毒病大流行再次表明，人类和非人类的生命总是已经在我们所谓的“社会”中联系在一起（Haraway，2008）。对这种构成性关系的认识推动了包括社会学在内的各个学科最近的“超越人类”的发展，这些学科试图挑战根深蒂固的二元分类。本研究旨在通过对“家禽”产业、生物安全论述和人畜共患病的批判性审查，为这一不断发展的研究领域做出贡献。每年，家禽产业中至少有750亿只鸟类被杀死（FAOSTAT，2022）。家禽的集约化饲养/屠宰有助于人畜共患病病原体如禽流感、沙门氏菌、弯曲杆菌、大肠杆菌等的出现和进化。大肠杆菌和抗生素耐药性。甲型流感大流行的“迫在眉睫”的威胁和广泛的抗菌素耐药性意味着这些病原体对公共卫生构成威胁。该行业对疫情的反应是宣传基于科学知识的生物安全论述（“家禽3science”），强调工业经营的“免于疾病”。这种论述可以在家禽公司/协会的指南和广告中观察到，甚至粮农组织提供的报告（2013）。它伴随着一系列生物技术的“修复”，包括密集的限制，使用抗生素，以及为提高效率和假定的卫生收益而采用的自动化屠宰。然而，家禽科学的生物安全是有争议的和模糊的，一个空间，不同的知识主张的斗争和制定。本研究将追踪这种模糊性，以探讨家禽业生物安全话语和相关知识实践的本体论-认识论政治。它将严格审查该行业是否/如何能够部分吸收或吸收科学，以及在何种程度上和通过何种方式能够影响知识的形成，并通过自我陈述获得公众的支持。与此分不开的是工业的资本主义性质。在与越来越多的关于“动物资本”的文献（Shukin，2009）的对话中，本研究还将探讨鸟类对家禽资本的具体价值，以及它们对积累的占用如何与人类劳动联系在一起。它将追踪该行业的做法如何将鸟类纳入比人类更有价值的电路中，并询问这些做法如何在生物安全话语中出现。修改班尼特等人。（2018）关于肉鸡全球生物量是“人类世”的决定性标志的挑衅性观点，我将问“家禽”如何被视为“资本世”的“标志物种”（摩尔，2016）。

The Covid-19 pandemic has shown again that human and nonhuman lives are always already bound together within what we call the 'social' (Haraway, 2008). Recognition of this constitutive relationality has driven recent 'more-than-human' developments across various disciplines including sociology that have sought to challenge entrenched dualistic categories. This research aims to contribute to this growing research area through a critical examination of the 'poultry' industry, biosecurity discourse and zoonoses.Each year, at least 75 billion birds are killed within the poultry industry (FAOSTAT, 2022). It has been suggested that intensive rearing/slaughter of poultry contributes to the emergence and evolution of zoonotic pathogens such as avian influenza, Salmonella, Campylobacter, E. Coli, and antibiotic resistance. The 'imminent' threat of an Influenza A pandemic and wide-range antimicrobial resistance mean that these pathogens are dangers to public health. The industry's response to outbreaks has been to propagate a discourse of biosecurity based on scientific knowledge ('poultry 3science'), with an emphasis on the 'freeness from disease' of industrial operations. This discourse can be observed within the guides and advertisements of poultry companies/associations and even reports provided by the FAO (2013). It has been accompanied by a range of biotechnological 'fixes', including intensive confinement, use of antibiotics, and automated slaughter employed for both efficiency and putative sanitary gains. Yet biosecurity in poultry science is contested and ambiguous, a space where differing knowledge claims are struggled over and enacted. This research will trace this ambiguity in order to explore the ontological-epistemic politics of biosecurity discourse and associated knowledge-practices in the poultry industry. It will critically examine whether/how the industry is able to partially enrol or co-opt science, and to what extent and by what means it is able to influence knowledge-making and gain public support through its self- representations. Inseparable from this is the capitalist nature of the industry. In conversation with the growing literature on 'animal capital' (Shukin, 2009), this research will therefore also probe the specific value of birds to poultry capital and how their appropriation for accumulation is linked to human labour. It will trace how the practices of the industry incorporate birds into more-than-human circuits of value, asking how in turn do these practices figure in the biosecurity discourse. Modifying Bennett et al. (2018)'s provocative points about the global biomass of broiler chickens being a definitive marker of the 'Anthropocene', I will ask how 'poultry' can instead be problematised as a 'marker species' of the 'Capitalocene' (Moore, 2016).