Managment: Marketing Strategy:

Is it Really an Authentic Taste of Jamaica?

The Branding of Ethnic Food and the Construction

of Migrant Identity

by Mauricio Palma-Gutiérrez, MA, MSc

Researcher, Instituto de Ciencia Política (Institute for Political Science)

Bogotá, Colombia

Lecturer, International Relations Faculty, Universidad del Rosario

Bogotá, Colombia

 

 

Key Words:

Ethnic Food, Migrant Identity, Jamaicans, London, Transnational Ethnogastronomy

                                                                                                                                     

“ [w]hen unfamiliar substances are taken up by new users,

 they enter into pre-existing social and psychological contexts and

acquire –or are given- contextual meanings by those who use them”

Sidney Mintz – Sweetness and power (1985:6)

 

Introduction

Food has a remarkable place within a broader set of factors that operate in the process of identification of a social group[1]. Origin, age, occupation, history, language and religion can be quoted as some of these elements, but it is food that is the most entangled amid each other as it is a basic feature that allows human life to exist. The results are specific types of dishes, diets and intake habits that acquire –or are given- contextual meanings, which serve to identify a social group amongst others[2]. A particular food is associated with a part or the whole of a determined group as a result of the combination of two or more of those factors. At large, it serves as a mechanism to relate or differentiate a group from another. With this in mind, the purpose of this article is to test this contextualisation of meanings and social identification through food in the case of immigrant communities using a specific methodology. The lenses of branding will serve then to analyse how market interactions upon immigrant dishes in host societies shape the construction of identity by reaching discursive categories such as Ethnic Food.

The present analysis undertakes to demonstrate how historically the process of construction of migrant identity has departed from market transactions and then turned into social characteristics, and not exclusively the other way around, as most of the existing literature has shown[3]. The major part of explanations on this issue emphasise how several negotiations between immigrants and hosts, relating social acceptation and the bargaining of imaginaries and stereotypes, are done in the pure socio-political level[4]. Following this idea, the manifestation of these transactions are hybrid goods such as Ethnic Foods in the market[5]. However, the example of Jamaican Jerk Chicken in London shows how it is possible to negotiate these identification mechanisms first as transactions that make a particular good to fit in the market, and then as a group characteristic in the socio-political level.

 

This contribution uses the concept of Branding, or the process of creating a brand, to address this puzzle. Issued from marketing theory, it applies several socio-economic criteria to design the interaction between immigrant and host groups in a society[6]. It explores how food commercialized by immigrants, largely in restaurants, fits the requirements of the host society, after a negotiation. It explores how the social identification of a determined immigrant group is influenced by practices that depart from market interactions. The branding of a specific dish, at large, of Ethnic Food, is the most visible result of this process. Thus, the case study of Jamaican Immigrants in London and the Jerk Chicken since the 1950s illustrates these concerns. Section one deals with the proposed Branding framework. Section two introduces the studied population. Section three and  four explain the production and consumption of Jerk Chicken in London. Section five analyses the role of intermediaries such as distributors, advertisers and institutions in this process. Section six merges these insights and assesses the transactions that led to the Branding of Jamaican Jerk Chicken and how it is related to the construction of migrant identity. Finally, a conclusion is provided.

 

1. Branding

A brand is the characteristic identity of a given good or service that serves as a means to distinguish it from another in the market[7]. Its emergence is one of the main mechanisms that make the marketing of a product successful[8]. The creation of brands was initially associated with the development of physical markers that made products distinct from others, by stimulating its consumption while offering an “experience” to the consumers[9]. Branding, then, is the process of creation of this experience. It is a practice that enhances a given set of peculiarities that a product has in order to make it attractive to the consumers[10]. However, this initial reasoning on Branding is extended, assuming that goods can be differentiated from others in the market not only through impositions from producers to consumers. Culinary specialities share a set of characteristics, like ingredients, taste, presentation, size or format. These are negotiated according to production specificities and consumption preferences. The initial outcome of this transaction is a generic good without a specific identity. In other words, a piece of grilled chicken with specific condiments is not a piece of Jerk Chicken until this category is discursively and materially negotiated. Still, the distinctiveness of the finished product is prone to mutate when a given degree of cultural representation is involved. An example illustrates this point. The heart-shaped Valentine’s Day edition of a chocolate bar x is offered in a format that associates the celebration of love among its consumers. The producers recreate a feeling while consumers identify it in the good. Nonetheless, the contents are exactly the same that are sold regularly in the traditional package or the Easter Bunny and Christmas Egg versions. It is the level of cultural representation in the good that embodies its identity. In short, a cultural practice is used to distinguish a particular good in the market.

 

This cultural representation has been influenced by immigrant experiences in their host societies. Entrepreneurial initiatives have served as one of the main mechanisms of immigrant economic interaction in host markets[11]. Besides retail trade, the most common forms of this business practice have been the commercialization of prepared food[12]. The former has evolved in, amongst others, “ethnic” or “national” restaurants, due to previously accumulated human capital by immigrants and the identification of business opportunities in destination[13]. This process has been supported in history by a specific type of branding, which explains partly the emergence of the brand Ethnic Food. It is called “Cultural Branding”[14].

 

This concept assumes that brand creation appeals directly to products that are valued as mechanisms to create cultural meanings instead of a physical distinction of one good from another. In culinary arts, eating and being can be related, as two symbiotic processes in which the border is difficult to locate[15]. Food and the related activity of eating are mechanisms that express intrinsic characteristics of individuals, namely, their culture. A traditional eat can be commercialized under this perspective, as well as clothes, leisure activities or life-style products. However, this is not an automatic process. It is both a material and discursive, intentional and unintentional practice in which producers, intermediaries and consumers interact by building some degree of reputation “that addresses acute [transactions] in society [16].

 

In the case of traditional eats commercialised by immigrant entrepreneurs, the construction of this reputation is basically performed when the good is seen as a means of group association. In an extended context, the latter is emulated to the representation of ethnicity. This term is understood as referring to “the common attributes related to cultural practices and [common] history”[17] that in this case, immigrant groups share. However, it is an incomplete process if a third party, or an outsider to the ethnic community, does not partake in[18]. It acts as the active witness of the whole process, allowing in-group association but also out-group categorisation. Furthermore, the members of the host community and of other immigrant communities provide a mirror to the immigrant community, which allows the emergence of cultural differentiation.

Holt, the author of the term, offers a theoretical frame on how to analyse the evolution of Cultural Branding[19]. He makes a typology to identify the main elements that interact in this process. He explains how a brand is the result of a process in which producers and consumers of the good negotiate categories that define the product identity in the market. This process is constrained by the role and availability of intermediaries, such as institutions of control, advertisers and distributors. Thus, actions as reputation-building and categorisation determine the evolution of this process, by enhancing cultural similarities or differences. This framework is applied to the example of “Ethnic Food” as it is proposed in this dissertation.

 

The personalisation of consumption is a subsequent process in the branding example. The “ethnic” category is reputed by both immigrants and outsiders using adjectives that in a larger understanding describe nationality, the provenance of a geographical region or the belonging to a religious group. The differentiation of the product is associated with these discursive or material conditions ending with the consolidation of the ethnic reputation a good[20]. Fried rice with scrambled eggs, peas and soya sauce is described as “Cantonese”, corn tortillas filled with bean puree, meat and salad are “Mexican” tacos and fried chicken is “Southern”. This shows how the placing of a brand in the minds of consumers responds to several market stimuli that shape the experience of consumers by mentally “positioning”[21]. In principle, Ethnic Food has experienced this progression.

 

Chart 1: “Ethnic Food” as a Brand

 

However, there is a component that makes this logic more complicated. The issuance of a new or an adapted version of a product in a market, which previously existed in another distant one, is prone to experience modifications as a means to adjust the expectations of the demand. In the case of dishes, the modification of ingredients, presentation or taste from the original recipes can be seen as an adaptation of the product in the market. Still, the product is sold and consumed as representing a given ethnic origin. This might not fit entirely with the original elements of group representation as in the departure society, but with a hybridised good[22]. The “ethnic” brand is the catalyst of a consuming experience by marketing a product that does not represent entirely the shared cultural practices and history of a given group[23].  Identity is then constructed departing from a market transaction through the branding process, by the negotiation of these categories.

 

The evolution of the concept of ethnicity as a brand has been largely debated in several sectors of the global market[24]. From macro-categories like Fair Trade, and Equitable Development to goods such as the Tahitian Noni, Brazilian Guaraná and  services such as Thai Massages, for example, the national and ethnic components have progressively gained an important role in the understanding of the issue. More important, this process is likely to affect the process of construction of immigrants’ identity in host societies as it involves the transformation and negotiation of pre-existent materially and discursively shared characteristics, whose result may last in time. Its effects on second and third generations of migrants are out of the reach of this study. However, the exemplification of the branding practice proves how these market-originated practices transcend into the socio-political sphere of the immigrant, which is shared by members of the host community and by members of other immigrant communities.

 

Hence, the following sections analyse how interactions of producers (mainly but not exclusively immigrants), have added their own pre-migration knowledge to produce a specific kind of good. This is commercialized in the market as a representation of self (“ethnic”), while it is physically and discursively modified to fit into the market[25]. A further analysis continues with the relation of consumers, who at the beginning are members of their own immigrant community, but increasingly become members of other communities including the host one (outsiders). Besides, it explores the perpetuation of these consuming links, thanks to the transformations of the good. The role of intermediaries (also outsiders) is analysed by looking at how these influence the decisions taken by both producers and consumers. The case of Jamaican immigrants in London and the commercialization of the Jamaican Jerk Chicken illustrate these concerns.

 

2. Population

 

According to the United Kingdom 2001 Census, some 160,000 Jamaican-born individuals lived in Britain[26]. About 80,000 of them were concentrated in London[27]. Besides, some 400,000 persons residing in the capital’s greater area declared their selves as ethnically “Caribbean” black or mixed in race, with one or two Caribbean-born parents[28]. A census done 60 years before did not classify individuals by race and determined that only 2,139 Jamaicans lived in London[29]. These numbers give some insights to understand the population. It arose from a recent migration flow, post World-War II, and became progressively significant. This condition suggests that it shares characteristics with other recently migrated groups to Britain and other OECD Countries such as the USA, Germany, France or Australia, like Latin-Americans, South-east Asians, Turkish and Middle Easterners[30]. It also suggests that the extent of Jamaican-born and Jamaican-rooted is substantial in the city (c. 4.2% of the total population in 2001)[31]. Thus, some hints are presented on the evolution of the Jamaican presence in London.

 

The arrival of the MV Empire Windrush to the port of Tilbury in 1948, with 492 invited Jamaican workers, inaugurated the studied period[32].  These individuals opened the large inwards flow that characterized the decades to come. During the next couple of years, the receiving rate of Jamaicans in Britain stabilized at some 200 per month[33]. However, from 1955 to 1962, some 8,000 entered the United Kingdom per year[34]. The fifties were a period in which economic push and pull factors shaped this movement, increasingly sustained by cumulative-causation effects produced by migrant networks that reduced costs of moving and settling[35].

 

The pushes out of Jamaica were a mix of lacking opportunities, inequality heir of the colonial plantation economy, unemployment, small salaries, inflation, the cost of living and the expectation of educational chances besides of improved social conditions[36]. At the same time, pulls into Britain were shaped by the post-war boom, which meant an opportunity for “indigenous workers […] to move into better-paying and higher-status jobs and creating openings on the lower rung of the occupational ladder” for guest workers[37]. The British government and the private industry replaced these labourers through “[c]ontracts made, informally via returning war recruits, media coverage of small scale recruitment, advertisements of travel agents and shipping lines”[38]. From Jamaica, the first to settle in Britain were labourers, recruited by the London Transport crew and by the emerging National Health Service–among others-[39].

 

The sixties were characterized by the increase of restrictions to the immigration of prospective labourers. However, the flow of women and dependants (children, women and elderly) continued. They arrived in great numbers to meet their male relatives who had immigrated before[40].The feminization of Jamaican immigration progressed as the absolute number of migrants increased, although the economy began to show signs of disruption, and the restrictive Commonwealth Immigrants Bill of 1962 and the Commonwealth Immigrants Act of 1968 came into force[41].

 

London remained the preferred destination for the Jamaican-born over time. The passengers of the Empire Windrush, were temporarily settled in the old air raid shelters of Clapham (in the South-Eastern borough of Lambeth) “and then directed to South London employment agencies to find work and accommodation”[42]. This was the origin of the Jamaican settlement in Lambeth where the district of Brixton is located, its main concentration focus until today[43]. In general, this also answered to London’s concentration of the big majority of employment opportunities, opened mostly in service related “long hours, low pay and shift” jobs[44]. Over time, the pattern remained constant due to the combination of job offers and the development of kinship relations among the present Jamaican-born stock of individuals.

 

During the seventies and eighties, the second generations of ethnically “Caribbean” –a large extent of them with Jamaican roots- were born in Britain, with the right to British citizenship[45]. Methodologically, the criteria of race and ethnic origin have been used from official spheres to understand the evolution of the “British Caribbean” population. It is important to mention this fact once the spatial location of Jamaicans in London from the seventies on is analysed taking into account both Jamaican-born and British-Jamaican stocks. The UK Censuses from 1981 on included the category British-Caribbean for the first time[46]. This criterion is used in this dissertation to typify the location of these individuals.Further, the geographical localization of Jamaican settlements in London was determined mainly by the proximity to the working place, kinship relations and cheap accommodation[47]. To exemplify this pattern, in the fifties and sixties, boroughs like Lambeth and Hackney were the most populated by Jamaican-born[48]. This distribution remains today, even when the figure of British-Jamaicans is added. In the seventies and eighties, the boroughs of Southwark and Lewisham and the suburb of Brent began to concentrate a significant proportion of Jamaican-born and British Caribbean. Beginning in the nineties and during the last decade, the suburbs of Waltham Forest and Croydon were composed as well by populations of more than 20,000 British Caribbean[49].

 

According to the Sample Census of 1966, most of the Jamaican-born residents in London had occupations in skilled-manual activities (43%), unskilled-manual occupations (27%) and semi-skilled-manual offices (24%)[50]. More importantly, only about 2% of this population were owners of businesses or entrepreneurs[51]. In 1991, this figure had changed to 14%[52]. This increase is associated to the creation of eating business[53]. Nevertheless, immigrant groups are hardly homogeneous, containing –for example- individuals separated by class, status, means, capital and access to loans, and from this observation a variety of business ventures should be expected[54]. In any case, the concentration of Jamaican-born and Jamaican-rooted in London has been shaped by labour opportunities, the influence of networks of kinship as well as the increasing feminization of the flow. A shortage in the employment offer or the increasing role of women’s economic activity, amongst other factors, probably contributed to the evolution of their economic activities as was the case with other immigrant groups[55]. In the next section, this is typified through the example of the Jerk Chicken.

 

3. Production

 

Today, after years of immigration, Jerk Chicken is sold in London as a taste of Jamaica. Although it is sold in more than 130 takeaways and restaurants and in uncountable street stalls, it is not as popular as Indian curries, Chinese dim sums or Fish and Chips[56]. However, it is part of the fifth most consumed ethnic cuisine by Londoners –categorized as Caribbean food- and the history of its production leads to an understanding of how the process of Branding works[57]. Etymologically, the word “Jerk” originated in the multi-ethnical context of 19th century Jamaica in which slaves, white Europeans, Indians and mixed creole populations converged[58]. The word is the noun for Jerking, “a method of preserving meat [that] has been traced back to the Maroons (runaway slaves in Jamaica), [which] falls somewhere between barbecued and smoked meat and is hot and spicy”[59]. It was initially destined to preserve hog meat, but with time (and as a result of transactions), it became increasingly popular for seasoning chicken. Thus, it is interesting to compare a 19th century Jamaican description of jerking:

 

“ […]the animal is disembowelled, split open down the back, the bones extracted and the carcase laid skin downwards upon the sticks and subjected to a slow grilling during which it is plentifully sprinkled with black pepper and salt. […] The adding of pimento leaves, or those of pepper elder an improved flavour to the meat, which, when properly done, is a gamey and toothsome a dish as a hungry man can desire”[60]

 

With a modern-day British recipe[61]:

 

The difference in the ingredients, the use of energy for cooking, the time-spent and the recourse to different technologies to achieve the process is both determined by space and time. In 19th Jamaica, once jerking changed from a conservation method to a cooking practice (what was adapted by upper classes from slaves), this dish was mostly consumed by upper-middle and high classes and only eventually by lower classes and slaves during special occasions[62]. Not only the availability of chicken but also the use of a non-efficient cooking technology (such as grilling and not boiling, as most of slave foods were consumed) determined the repeated consumption of the speciality[63].  Further, there are two specific issues to address. First, in sugar-based plantation colonial economies, the availability of non-indigenous crops and produce other than sugar (such as chicken in 19th century Jamaica) was a privilege for the colonisers[64]. The quantities were scarce and overpriced. The availability of meats for slaves and lower classes was subject to that of native species (such as Mackerel and eventually Wild Hog)[65]. On the other hand, the prices of chicken experienced a great change in the 20th century. During the 1960s, it became extensively cheaper to consume chicken in Britain, due to the implementation of mass production practices, which meant extended quantities and notorious decreases in the costs of production[66]. This process later extended to other regions of the world. However, it was from this point on that chicken was able to compete with other types of traditionally cheaper meat, such as fish and pork[67].

 

These precisions are important to analyse Jerk Chicken in 21st century London. The dish appears to be suitable for a working/middle-class meal, (different from 19th century Jamaica) without recurrence to sophisticated ingredients (taking into account that Scotch Bonnets  and  Allspice are massively available in the city since at least 25 years), valuing the use of modern technologies (such as the use of a food processor or a fridge)[68]. Besides, it is presented as an ethnic food (clearly identifiable by using the adjective “Jamaican”).

 

The history of this transition began with the ventures of private Jerk Chicken cooking in London during the 1950s. The gathering of Jamaican immigrants in South London parks during summer combined with the alikeness to British grilling during sunny days. The answer was the first trials to take the taste of Jamaican Jerk Chicken to London[69]. However, there was a logistical problem. The traditional seasoning included two indigenous Jamaican spices, Scotch Bonnets (capsicum chinense) and Allspice (pimento dioica), plus other tropical elements (among others cinnamon and nutmeg)[70]. The availability of these ingredients was reduced (in terms of prices and stock), and this led to the inclusion of some other spices in the recipe, available in London, hybridising the taste of jerk (notably curry, chillies and soy sauce)[71]. These first ventures were replied briefly in private contexts. Nevertheless, a combination of an incipient exposure of locals to the taste (notably British labourers who fraternized with Jamaican workers), plus the identification of an entrepreneurial opportunity, led to the constitution of the first street stalls that offered “Jamaican Jerk Chicken” (on its hybrid version) in the proximities of Caribbean workers’ concentrations, mainly in South London. Using the traditional half of a barrel as grill set and natural coal (as it is sold to-date in street stalls), those were primarily directed by workers of the same concentrations[72].

 

During the mid-1950s, few entrepreneurial initiatives, mainly family-ran, tried to introduce Jamaican cookery to a restaurant-like environment. The Jamaica Coffee House which exploited the Blue Mountain Coffee-taste and the Caribbean Restaurant were pioneers using the brand Jamaica in London to commercialize food and drinks[73]. However, it was the Restaurant The Ox in the Roof  in Chelsea, which first offered something similar to the taste of Jamaican Jerk: the “Scotch Bonnet Sauce”[74]. Still, this restaurant was not Caribbean-owned and the target of clients were middle and upper classes of the city, dissimilar with the majority of the Jamaican immigrants at the time[75]. In comparison, Chinese, Indian and Pakistani immigrants, with comparable migration traditions into London, made ethnic restaurants mechanisms of economic mobility since the beginning of their inflow, while labelling cultural identity to third parties through the production of prepared foods[76].  It was not until the 1960s, that Jerk Chicken was commercialized in some Jamaican-owned eateries mostly located in South London[77]. However, the main mechanism of commercialisation during the entire period remained in street stalls, while Asian restaurants already had more than 25% of the total share of the Eating-out market[78].

 

The 1960s feminisation of the Caribbean Migration and the roll-back of the British business cycle boosted the creation of ethnic restaurants by minorities in London[79]. Women took over kitchens and service, as more of these places opened. Jerk Chicken was being sold also in the northern districts of London, thanks to its popularization through events such as the Notting Hill Carnival, which began in 1964[80]. However, other ventures arose at the same time. Caribbean restaurants such as “Green Banana” alongside offering the dish, allowed the consumption in situ of alcoholic beverages until 3am[81]. This was a mechanism to attract prospective consumers, including, Jamaicans, white British and members of other immigrant groups, while offering besides the food, an experience that was not available in traditional restaurants. Soon, “Jamaican”, “Caribbean” and the images of tropical islands were associated with party and festivity[82]. It is important to inquire on the preparation of the product. The following chart illustrates the origin of the main ingredients in both Jamaican and British Recipes[83]:

 

Chart 2: Origin of the Ingredients of Jerk Chicken

Source: Self compiled based on Higman, B. W. (2008) and Stobart, T. (1998)

 

This chart shows that some ingredients are omitted in the British version of the recipe (5) and several others (3) are included. This is due to, first, the lack of availability of elements such as nutmeg, and cinnamon. In the 1950s and 1960s, these elements were considered both exotic and expensive[84]. Moreover, the inclusion of elements such as ginger and soy sauce into the British recipe might be related with the availability of these supplies at the time thanks to the active duty of British and Asian merchants and the entrepreneurial activity of these groups[85]. Second, the use of the Jamaican indigenous products in the British recipe was formalised from the mid-1970s on, when several companies (like Enco Products, Walkerswood and Troumassee House Foods) began to specialise in the import and distribution of Caribbean products[86]. At this moment, curry was apparently left aside on the British recipe, in opposition to soy sauce, which remained as a part of it. At large, the production of this speciality led to the rise of a global commodity chain.

 

Chart three shows spatially how the production of Jerk Chicken, first as a private venture, and then, as a part of an entrepreneurial initiative, contributed to the extension of global commodity links. Before the 1970s, the import of Jamaican spices was limited to a micro-sector of the market, dominated by private imports and expensive special requests to traders[87]. During the 1960s Jamaican spices were not even mentioned in the reports[88]. However, the commercial and private increase in the production of Jerk Chicken (and related specialities) led to the extension of the product lines of existing traders as well as the creation of several companies running this activity. In 1995, this industry was worth 10 million GBP[89]. Additionally, the hybridisation of the recipe allowed the adoption of supplies from other regions of the world (notably Asia) while also relying on the local market.

 

The total cost of producing Jerk Chicken in London decreased in time. At the very beginning the unavailability of the spices made the preparation of the dish an expensive practice. Also, the cost of chicken remained high during the 1950s[90]. This in fact limited the earlier expansion of the dish. However, with the intensification of mass production during the 1960s and 1970s as mentioned before, the availability of technology to store the meat longer (in fridges) and with the extension of distribution networks (for spices), this issue sharpened[91]. This cost-transition process replied in Jamaica with some delay[92]. This meant that Jerk Chicken there also experienced a transition from an upper-class meal, to a more popular one. In this respect, return migrants influenced this transition[93]. This might explain why 21st century Jamaican recipes include soy sauce[94].

 

 

Chart 3: Commodity Chain for the Preparation of Jerk Chicken in the UK (1970s – to date)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Self-compilation

Back to London, it should be noted that albeit Jerk Chicken is a cooked speciality that was (and is still) cheaper that some other dishes in the market (like Fish and Chips) it is not the cheapest. This place is reserved for Indian curries and Chinese noodles, whose main ingredients are rice and flour. Some authors mention this as one of the reasons for the limited success of Jerk as a mainstream ethnic dish[95]. In this and other respects, the position of consumers is analysed. Next, the evaluation of the taste of the product, its presentation, the reception by Jamaicans, locals and immigrant populations takes place.

 

4. Consumption

 

During the 1960s and 1970s, the popularity of takeaways of all kinds began to massively grow in London[96].  This market was dominated since the very beginning by Indian and Chinese Restaurants and traditional Fish and Chips bars. However, from the 1980s on, other types of specialities (largely ethnic) began to be significant in this change, which represented a transformation in the food intake habits of London’s Middle Classes[97]. Of these new specialities, Mexican and Caribbean foods (including Jerk Chicken) represented the most consumed ones, by the entire population (comprising immigrants and non-immigrant). During the first half of the 1980s, the consumption of ethnic foods included ones mostly bought in takeaways, dine-in restaurants and in ethnic groceries. The following chart illustrates the change of this trend during this period:

 

Table 1: Consumption of Ethnic Foods in Britain (in nominal GBP Millions)

This chart exemplifies a substantial change in the consumption patterns of British and London residents. In 1966, the market of ethnic foods only represented some 5 million GBP (in 1985 prices)[98]. When this is compared with the numbers of 1985, the consumption grew by more than 1,500%. The main factors that led to this process are exemplified through the evolution of the consumption of Jerk Chicken, approached next.

 

Three main groups of consumers of Jerk Chicken are identified. These play a differentiated role in the branding process. The first are Jamaican immigrants and British-Jamaicans (following the typology done in section 3). These were the first populations to regularly consume Jerk Chicken, sold in food stalls and the few eateries that existed during the 1950s and 1960s[99]. This responded directly to the level of cultural association that the dish represented to the immigrant community. It is then inferred, that the consumption of Jerk Chicken progressively extended in London, as Jamaican communities began to populate different zones of the city.

 

From Lambeth and Southwark, in other boroughs such as Brent, Lewisham, Haringey and Hackney, Jerk Chicken began to be sold during the 1970s and 1980s[100]. In this respect, the consumption of the speciality, responded mainly to the replication of a traditional habit present in the country of origin as well as the replication of manners by immigrant parents to their children. The level of income of the Jamaican Immigrants in London, arguably superior to their fellow nationals who stayed home, allowed them to afford its consumption more regularly. Still, this meant that the commercialization of prepared Jerk Chicken remained localized to these concentration zones. However, there are some other important factors in the consumption of Jerk Chicken that can only be analysed while taking into account two other sets of consumers: British and members of other immigrant groups. Those two groups of consumers are categorized next as outsiders, following the framework of branding suggested in section one.

 

For the British population, the consumption of Jerk Chicken and other ethnic specialities was not an automatic process. Rather, it was a practice that involved a few disruptions in its evolution. Some of them were the difficulty to adapt the taste and flavours, to overcome stereotypes and overall, to regularise the presence of whites in Immigrant owned businesses. For a significant extent of British-born in London during the 1950s, foods such as  Jerk Chicken were still not considered “exotic” or “fashionable” (as they began to be in the late 1960s and 1970s), but rather “unhygienic” and “uneatable” due to the mental representations of the immigrants and the spice load of the dishes[101]. In fact, “rarely, if ever, did an English customer cross the threshold. For whites living in cities with high rates of immigration, [immigrant] food was not what they consumed themselves; rather, it served as a key indicator of the newcomers’ presence and cultural distinctiveness”[102].

 

However, during the 1960s and 1970s the consumption logic of Jerk Chicken began to change among British consumers due to two main factors. The first one was the modification of the taste of the Jerk due to the ingredients used (analysed in the latter section) that resulted from a decrease in the level of spiciness. The second factor was the role played by the emerging lower and middle classes and university-level students during this decade[103]. The offer of dishes such as Jerk Chicken represented a cheaper option (albeit not the cheapest) when eating near labour concentrations (configured by British-born and Immigrants) than traditional dine-in specialities. Their purchase power had slightly risen during the post-war recovery years, and with it, the possibility of changing home-made meals (usually cold and tasteless at lunch time) for meals bought near job concentrations resulted in even cheaper for the average consumer[104]. However, albeit some part of this group consumed it, Jerk Chicken was not the most popular due to availability of even cheaper Chinese, Indian or traditional-snack options. For university students, mainly coming from middle classes and with a slightly higher purchase power than labourers, the calculation was similar. The positioning of street stalls near student concentrations during these years was if not massive, at least constant[105]. It is quite likely that as a result of the emergent number of British consumers, some of the producers decided to include forks and knives in their supply list[106]. However in time, both traditions, that of eating the chicken with the hand and that of using cutlery, remained as a matter of choice. Producers adapted the presentation of the product at the same time that consumers adapted to eat with their hands.

 

For these British consumers, the intake of the product was at a first glance more a result of a cost-saving decision, rather than a veritable wish to be nearer of exotic or new tastes. However, during the 1980s and the 1990s, a new factor changed the dynamic of the consumption of this dish. It was the level of exposure to ethnic cuisine[107]. During these decades the British were increasingly exposed to recipe leaflets and cookbooks that included exotic specialities, published mainly by distributors and traders[108]. They also travelled more overseas to not only Caribbean destinations but all over the world[109]. The results of these events were the increase in the awareness of the existence of specialities such as the Jerk Chicken. The indirect effect was the increase in the consumption of the dish locally, out of home, but also, in the interest for cooking it in private settings[110]. The role of the intermediaries in this specific point will be seen in depth in the next section.

 

On the third and last consumers group, immigrants of non-Jamaican origin, two precisions should be done. The first is that in the decision of consuming food prepared out of home the cost was important, but also the time-spent and cooking skills of the individuals. Most of the immigrants to London after the Second World War and until the early 1970s were single and male[111]. This in terms of eating habits meant that a fewer part of this population was prone to cooking at home complete meals, due to the role played by women in cooking in their source countries. Immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa were used to the cooked meals of mothers, wives and daughters[112]. Once in destination, the choice for a prepared meal was presented as an option to overcome this situation. The first ethnic meals to have this characterization were Chinese dishes and South-Asian curries[113]. Fish and Chips have already played its part with Londoners of the late 19th and early 20th centuries[114]. However, as the proportion of Jamaican immigrants grew in labour concentrations that were shared by other sets of immigrants and their purchase power slightly rose in time, the Jerk Chicken began to be a part of these specialities[115].

 

The second fact to mention is that with this new group of consumers, albeit not the majority, some religious constrictions on food began to be taken into account. For a good part of immigrant communities of Muslim origin, eating Halal was during the first years of immigration a constraint to eating-out[116]. However, during the 1980s and 1990s, as with fried chicken and Chinese foods, Jerk Chicken increasingly began to be prepared with poultry acceptable under the Muslim tradition. Still, this was not extended until the late 1990s and early 2000s, apparently because it meant an increase in the costs of production that would be replied in the price to the consumers[117]. With the expansion and diversification of Halal production in Britain during the 1990s, the availability and competitiveness of Halal Chicken as a supply for the dish, a higher number of non-Jamaican immigrants were able to taste the speciality[118]. In this respect, and in several others, the role played by advertisers, distributors and authorities was significant on the evolution of the branding of Jerk Chicken in London. This is analysed in the next section.

 

5. Intermediaries

 

For intermediaries in this context, three sets of actors that directly and indirectly mediated in the branding of Jerk Chicken other than producers and consumers are understood. These are the distributors of supplies and of the produce, the advertisers of the product and to a lesser extent, the authorities that regulated the production and consumption of the dish. Under the branding framework that was proposed before, these agents are either outsiders or insiders depending on their function. However this categorization will be part of the next section. Meanwhile, it is important to make some precisions on the actions taken by these groups.

 

The main actions of the distributors in the entire process were (and still are) the supplying of ingredients for the producers, the allocation of raw constituents, the eventual allotment of the prepared dish for the consumers in the market and to a lesser extent the aperture of new business opportunities related with the speciality. As it was noted before, during the 1950s and 1960s one of the main problems for the production of Jerk Chicken in London was the supply of spices. During these decades, no more than 10 suppliers of Caribbean spices existed in the city[119]. The prices were high, the stocks were insufficient and the quality was not optimal[120].

 

However, as the Jamaican population grew so did the market for these ingredients. The 1970s was a decade in which several new and existing trading Caribbean and British owned ventures decided to increase the import of these spices to Britain, inspired in the example given by South Asian and Chinese traders who had already consolidated an important market for soy sauce, ginger,noodles and rice[121]. However, it was not until the early 1980s that a company decided to specialize in the exclusive trading of Caribbean spices and seasonings[122]. Its name was Walkerswood. It is an interesting case of study, because it began as a Co-operative located in St. Ann’s Parish in Jamaica, and today is the leading importer to Britain of raw spices such as Allspice and Scotch Bonnets and of ready-to-eat seasonings, including jerk[123]. Other enterprises followed this example by extending their portfolio of products during the 1980s and 1990s, such as ECONA Products Ltd., Baxters of Speyside and Troumassee House Foods[124].

 

There are three important things to note from the role played by these distributors. The first is that from the 1970s on, the mass import of Jamaican spices allowed a new reduction of costs to both producers and consumers. The dish was cheaper for producers thanks to a larger availability of recently cheapened spices and so were the prices for consumers. At the same time, the enlargement of the business allowed several producers to make deals with local distributors of chicken and agricultural produce to mechanize a cost-effective strategy[125]. This summed up to the evolution of chicken costs, already discussed. Second, the success of this trading venture, resulted in the extension of business opportunities for distributors, who began to commercialize prepared jerk seasonings, directly imported from Jamaica, but adapted to the British taste[126]. This was effective from the 1980s on. It meant a change in Caribbean, British and further immigrant households’ categorizations of Jerk Chicken and other jerked meats as dishes of habitual consumption. The strategies used by these companies were at the beginning reduced to the interaction with local ethnic retailers[127]. However, during the 1990s, a significant extent of mainstream supermarkets in London (namely Sainsbury’s, Tesco and ASDA among others), were selling both spices and ready-to-eat sauces[128]. Thirdly, the success of these experiences resulted in a larger interest for advertisement, as the products were directed to a larger extent of the total population.

 

Here it is important to note that advertisers interacted constantly. Before trading companies were in the business of Jerk, the owners of takeaways and food stalls were those who tried to directly advertise their products. During the 1950s, those efforts were few and reduced to a bunch of leaflets and voice-to-voice publicity, very differently to their Chinese and Indian competitors who had already found in the images of otherness effective ways to publicize[129]. However, during the late years of this decade and the 1960s, more formal efforts to advertise, if well not Jerk Chicken at least Jamaican and Caribbean cookery, were done. The main resources used were the reproduction of ads in both telephonic directories and restaurant guides[130]. The most common techniques were the appropriation of Caribbean images (relating to tropical environments) and allusions to joy and gayness as well as to a lesser extent to the figure of black persons in service[131]. During the 1970s and 1980s, the constructed image persisted in those images and in leaflets that were distributed near the existent establishments and stalls, by using commonly associated figures such as palm-trees, joyful colours while associating exoticism to the of spiciness to the food[132].

 

Nevertheless, it was with the incurrence of trading companies that the image of Jerk Chicken advertisement took its modern form. Taking into account the boost given by the increased level of exposure, the dish “could easily be marketed by tying it into the attractive and colourful commodity fetish - of sun, sea, sand, palm trees, colonial scenes, reggae music and the 'relaxed spicy lifestyle' of Caribbean people[133]”. After this point, “the main bulk of advertising expenditure [was] concentrated on press advertisement and below-line activities such as free trial offers, récipe cards and cookery booklets[134]”. The association of Jerk Chicken to images including these characteristics persists today. Some regulating authorities took a part in this process. Since the 1950s, the production and consumption of Jerk Chicken had to comply with the sanitary regulations directed by London’s authorities. However, this issue was difficult to control, as a major extent of the commercial activity was done through informal food stands. In time, with the redaction of major regulations and with the simplification of norms through the creation of the Food Standards Agency, the consumers became conscious of several specificities and standards that prepared foods should have[135]. After this, Jerk Chicken stalls that did not accomplish these regulations on hygiene and food quality were not able to remain in the market. Still, it did not mean a significant transformation on its consumption, as the standardization of these practices was applied to the large extent of available prepared foods[136].

 

More important is that an extent of the self-presented Caribbean restaurants in the 1960s and 1970s London (where Jerk Chicken was a specialty) obtained a license to sell alcoholic beverages until early hours of dawn (usually followed by dance and live music)[137]. Also done by Spanish and Latin-American restaurants, this answered to the targeting of a share of the population who did not find these kinds of opportunities in traditional eateries[138]. This meant a huge investment once constituting a business of this category (related to the cost of taxes for the restaurants’ owners), while risking the unawareness or disapproval of other non-targeted groups, who were not interested in this kind of experience. Making further conjectures, there is a possibility that due to this specific kind of regulation, the construction of stereotypes around Jerk Chicken was possibly at work. These and other similar conjectures are going to be discussed in the next section while analysing the transactions that led to the branding of the product.

 

6. Transactions

 

The extent of the last three sections was dedicated to describe the history of what today is widely sold in London as Jamaican Jerk Chicken. Today this speciality is a dish that is embodied by the transactions developed between its producers, consumers and intermediaries on time. The main output is that Jamaican Jerk Chicken can be largely identified as a speciality that:

 

(a) is a working/middle class meal in Britain even if this condition was not true in the context were it was born

(b) is an acculturated spicy dish, composed by Jamaican, British and other regions’ ingredients, that did not fit into the taste of British consumers 60 years ago, but that would not fit either into the original taste of this dish when it was created

(c) is linked to an imaginary that embodies to a larger or lesser extent:

1. A condition of exoticness and joyfulness;

2. The dealing with stereotypes of uncleanness, association with alcohol intake, gayness and the like commonplaces;

3. The association of the dish to traditional images of the Caribbean, heirs of the Postcolonial British tradition

(d) has had a role in the developing of global commodity chains propelling the production, intermediation and consumption of a set goods in London

 

And whose:

 

(e) intake on its London version is a hybrid practice:

1.For Jamaican and British-born and other sets of immigrants, as they consume a speciality that has experienced several changes from its original form while absorbing some specificities found in the host society realm

2. For second and third generations of British-Jamaicans, as it is an artificial practice that tries to reply a habit form their relatives’ society

3. For specific groups of other sets of immigrants an inclusive practice, as its elaboration respects to some extent religious and cultural norms such as Halal cooking

 

Hybridization and acculturation are two terms used here to describe the mix and the cultural appropriation of practices that are normally attributed to a given social group by another[139]. In this case, this is an interactive relation between insiders to the immigrant group and outsiders that witness the entire process. Also, there is a strong relation between the imaginary (understood as a set of common practices attributed generally to a given social group by another) and the stereotype (understood as standardized preconceptions based on assumptions done by a given social group to another)[140]. In this respect, the use of the adjective “Jamaican” when naming the dish, embodies this entire set of hybridized, acculturated, imagined and stereotyped elements, and not only a national reference.

 

Besides, it refers to the entire set of market transactions that were described before. In this respect, it is important to note that “Jamaican” is then a label, and not a material and measurable variable. This was possible after insiders and outsiders dealt in-between with processes in which the cultural representation of the actions developed a given reputation and categorization of Jerk Chicken. In other words, this extends the point made by Holt with his model on cultural branding, assuming after this evidence that “Jamaican Jerk Chicken” is a physically and materially differentiated good in the London market, that appeals to a national origin, but that in fact, embodies a larger set of transactions that go further on its attributed material belonging. The product was branded then, and now is identified in the market as such. This can be clarified through the following chart.

 

Chart 4: Transactions between Jamaican Immigrants and Outsiders: The Branding of Jerk Chicken

While these transactions were set, the differentiation of the product became possible in the market. As “Jamaican” identity was branded, Jerk Chicken became a distinguishable good not only for prospect consumers, but for the public in general. The replication or not of its consumption appeared plausible for new individuals, as these decided or not to ingest the speciality based on the differentiation granted by the brand.

However, the biggest contribution of these transactions is the role played by branding in the construction of migrant identity. The social identification of a group within a host community departs from a set of factors that embody the contextualisation of meanings among certain practices[141]. One of these is eating, identifiable through ethnic dishes. Jamaican Jerk Chicken in London is a product that embodies an extent of discursively and materially modified elements, which makes it different from its original 19th century form. The meanings that are contextualised among it, indicators of social identification, refer to the result of the transactions and not to the original dish. In other words, the speciality under its label represents Jamaican identity, “a distinctive fixed essence which a person, a place or a group could possess”[142]. Then, as an item that experienced a mutation transacted in the market, it represents a constructed image of what Jamaican identity might be. The major part of the existent research on food and identity takes into account this precision around the contextualization of meanings of food in specific settings, as markers of immigrant identity[143]. However, this argument has been largely explored from a perspective in which market changes (such as the ones found through the transactions explored here) are outcomes and not inputs for socio-political transactions[144]. Without denying that depending on the specificity of each case this might be true, the example of branding presented here is to some extent differing from this position.

 

The concept of identity is taken in the case of Jamaican and other immigrants, as a part of their essence represented through their food and cookery manifesting their development as a social group[145].  However, if this food mutates on time, once the immigrant group gets in touch with outsiders in the host society, then this essence might experience several changes, namely social de-constructive and constructive processes[146]. Until now, these changes have been evaluated in terms of a top-to-bottom transition in which social constrains determine the changes, and then, these are represented in the market. However, through the example of Jamaican Jerk Chicken, it can be inferred that this relationship might undertake also a bottom-to-top direction, once the market-induced changes determine, or at least influence the (de)construction process of migrant identity. Chart five exemplifies this.

 

In this respect, it was shown how the branding of Jamaican Jerk Chicken dealt with both models on the configuration of Jamaican identity for immigrants in London. Some elements marking a determined essence were negotiated from the social sphere and then reverberated in the market (such as through the incipient British consumption of Jerk Chicken in stalls during the 1960s). Some others, and to a large extent, functioned the opposite way.  It is out of the reach of this paper to determine the resulting effect of this transaction among the individuals of each of the related groups. However, from a theoretical point of view, it is shown how the mechanization of social distinctions through ethnic food, that in large reassures the construction or deconstruction of social identity, was affected from inputs departing on market transactions between producers, consumers and intermediaries. In other words, Jerk Chicken, the relations of Jamaican immigrants and other individuals and its markers were branded to fit in the host society. This confirms how the process of construction of identity was affected.

 

Chart 5: Two models on transactions and the construction of migrant identity

Conclusion

 

Today, even if its popularity is higher than during the 1950s or 1960s, the consumption of prepared Jamaican Jerk Chicken remains highly localized in zones where Jamaican Immigrants and British-Jamaicans constitute a significant proportion of the population[147]. As it was shown, the ethnicity of its consumers differs, even if the big majority of them are part of middle and upper-lower London’s classes. The market for Jamaican foods (including prepared foods, ingredients and spices) has grown significantly during the last years. As a part of the Caribbean foods market, it is part of an industry valued more than 21 million GBP sharing about 2.3% of the Ethnic Foods market in Britain[148]. Its evolution will continue based on transactions between the agents identified in this text, while Jerk Chicken adapts itself in the form of wraps, salads and gourmet preparations as the taste and needs of the consumers change.

 

More important to note are the main contributions of this study. On the one hand, it was shown how the model of cultural branding proposed by Holt is extended to understand the branding of Ethnic Food. The example of the Jerk Chicken in London is only the tip of the iceberg to find links of causality in the process of understanding the configuration of Ethnic Foods’ market worldwide. This experience can be replied under other set of studies, with arguably similar results. The history of Pizza and its branding among Italians, Americans and American-Italians during the age of Mass Migration could be analysed under this scope. The case of the Döner Kebab, would passionately explain how transactions shape the branding of a speciality whose origin and evolution is well disputed between different ethnic communities[149]. However these and other specific cases are topics for further research.

 

It is also interesting to see how the history of Jerk Chicken in London states hints to find explanations in Global History. One of these is the subsequent process of re-localization of goods that after a branding process might occur. Specifically, linking cost relationships of chicken and spices with modernisation and mass production practices and return migration processes, might explain the rise in the popularity of this speciality in Jamaica. Albeit it is still difficult to prove, this study presents some insights that allow thinking in the possibility that Jerk Chicken popularisation in Jamaica as a middle class dish in the last decades might be linked with its development as a branded product in other latitudes. Also, this opens the prospect to evaluate the tracking of further global commodity chains in which immigrant individuals might play an important role.

 

On the other hand, the importance of understanding the branding of ethnic foods through transactions as a mechanism to explain the construction of migrant identity should be noted. This process can be influenced by market transactions that act as inputs and not exclusively as outputs. To continue the evolution of this framework, it is necessary to develop new related studies. Further, the applicability of branding as it was understood here and its relation with the construction of migrant identity is seen not only by studying the evolution of prepared foods, but virtually on the evolution of any other immigrant-host commercial interaction. Specifically, the opportunity found here opens the discussion among the possible existence of a theoretical field, namely “transnational ethno-gastronomy”. Its purpose should be to explain how transnational developments influence and shape the evolution and transformation of ethnic gastronomy, taking into account the contextualization of social meanings between immigrant and host communities. Additional discussions on identity and belonging could be addressed from this perspective, increasing the possibility to theorise this concept. Meanwhile, it’s time to enjoy a piece of Jamaican Jerk Chicken.

 

References

Ahmed, A. “Marketing of Halal Meat in the United Kingdom: Supermarkets versus Local Shops”. British Food Journal, 110:7 (2008), 655-670.

Allen, F. Secret Formula: How Brilliant Marketing and Relentless Salesmanship Made Coca-Cola the Best-Known Product in the World. (New York: Harper Business, 1994).

Alleyne, M. Roots of Jamaican Culture. (London: Pluto Press,1988).

Akumen Marketing Group. A Report on Takeaway Food in Britain. (London: Akumen Marketing, 1978).

Anderson, E. N. Everyone Eats: Understanding Food and Culture. (New York: University Press, 2005).

Anthony, D. “Migration in Archaeology: The Baby and the Bathwater”. American Anthropologist, 92:4 (1990), 895-915

Appadurai, A. Modernity at Large (7th ed.). (London: University of Minnesota Press, 2005).

Aroncsyk, M., & Powers, D. (Eds.). Blowing Up the Brand: Critical Perspectives on Promotional Culture. (New York: University Press, 2010).

Ashley, B., Hollows, J., & Jones, S. Food and Cultural Studies. (London: Routledge, 2004).

Baker, N. (comp) Where to Eat in London 1970. (London: Regents Press,1970).

Basu, A., & Altinay, E. Family and Work in minority Ethnic Business. (Bristol: The Policy Press, 2003).

Bauer, E., & Thompson, P. Jamaican Hands Across the Atlantic. (Kingston: Ian Randler Publishers, 2006).

Bayer, M. Jamaica: A Guide to the People, Politics and Culture. (Kingston: Ian Randler Publishers, 1993).

Beardsworth, A., & Keil, T. Sociology on the Menu: An Invitation to the Study of Food and Society. (London: Routledge,1997).

Belasco, W., & Scranton, P. Food Nations: Selling Taste in Consumer Societies. (New York City: Routledge, 2002).

Beriss, D., & Sutton, D. The Restaurants Book: Ethnographies of Where We Eat. (Oxford: Berg, 2007).

Bettell, C. Anthropology and Migration: Essays on Transnationalism, Ethnicity and Identity. (Walnut Creek: Altamira Press, 2003).

Bourdeau. Histoire de l'Alimentation. (Paris: Felix Alcan, 1894).

Bourne, S., & Kyriacou, S. A Ship and a Prayer: The Black Presence in Hammersmith and Fulham. (London: ECOHP,1999).

Brillat-Savarin, J. The Physiology of Taste or Meditations on Transcendental Gastronomy. (New York: Counterpoint, 2000).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - London January 1951. (London: British Telecom, 1951).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions November 1952. (London: British Telecom,1952).

British Telecom, B. Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions November 1954. (London: British Telecom,1954).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions April 1956. (London: British Telecom, 1956).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions October 1958. (London: British Telecom, 1958).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions January 1960. (London: British Telecom, 1960).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions March 1961. (London: British Telecom, 1961).

British Telecom Telephone Directory: Greater London Business. (London: British Telecom, 1962).

British Telecom Classified Telephone Directory - Traders & Professions November 1963. (London: British Telecom, 1963).

British Telecom London Classified Telephone Directory: Trades and Professions January 1966. (Farnborough: Thomson Directories Ltd.,1966).

Bryan, B. “Jamaican Creole: In the Process of Becoming”. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 27: 4 (2004), 641-660

Buckingham, I. Brand Champions: How Super Heroes Bring Brands to Life. (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011).

Buettner, E. ““Going for an Indian”: South Asian Restaurants and the Limits of Multiculturalism in Britain”. The Journal of Modern History, 80:4 (2008). 865-905

Bujis, G. O. Migrant Women: Crossing Boundaries and Changing Identities. (Oxford: Berg: 1993).

Bunter-Gabler, G., & Smith, S. Writing New Identities: Gender, Nation and Immigration in Contemporary Europe. (Oxford: Lexington Books, 1997).

Burett, J. England Eats Out: A Social History of Eating Out in England from 1830 to the Present. (Harlow: Pearson, 2004).

Burt, S., & Sparks, L. “Structural change in grocery retailing in Great Britain: A discount reorientation?” In J. Benson & S. Shaw (Eds.), The Retailing Industry: Post 1945-Retail Revolutions. (London: Tauris,1999), 93-113.

Byron, M. Post War Caribbean Migration to Britain: The Unfinished Cycle. (Aldershot: Avebury,1994).

Caglar, A. “McDöner: Döner Kebap and the Social Positioning Struggle of German Turks”. In J. Costa & G. Bamossy (eds.), Marketing in a Multicultural World: Ethnicity, Nationalism and Cultural Identity. (London: Sage,1995), 209-230.

Caplan, P. Food, Health and Identity. (London: Routledge, 1987).

Chamberlain, M. (Ed.). Caribbean Migration: Globalized Identity. (London: Routledge, 1998).

Chapman, P. The Good Curry Guide 1986/87. (London: Piatkus,1986).

Chevannes, B., & Ricketts, H. Return Migration and Small Business Development in Jamaica. In P. Pessar (Ed.), Caribbean Circuits: New Directions in the Study of Caribbean Migration. (New York: Center for Migration Studies, 1997), 161-196.

Comaroff, J., & Comaroff, J. Ethnicity Inc. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009).

Cook, I., Crang, P., & Thorpe, M. “Eating into Britishness: Multicultural Imaginaries and Identity Politics of Food”. In S. Roseneil & J. Seymour (eds.), Practising Identities: Power and Resistance. (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999), 223-248.

Cook, I., & Harrison, M. “Cross over Food: Re-Materializing Postcolonial Geographies”. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, 28:3 (2003). 296-317.

Couniham, C., & Kaplan, S. (eds.). Food and gender: Identity and Power. (Amsterdam: Hardwood, 1998).

Couniham, C., & Van Esterik, P. (eds.). Food and Culture: A Reader. (New York City: Routledge,1997).

Jamaican Travel and Culture. “Jerk Chicken”. (2009). Retrieved June 3, 2011, from http://www.jamaicatravelandculture.com/food_and_drink/jerk_chicken.htm

Davila, A. Latinos Inc: The Marketing and Making of a People. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001).

Davison, R. Black British: Immigrants to England. (London: Oxford University Press, 1966).

D'Cruz, C. Identity Politics in Deconstruction. (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008).

Delanty, G., & Wodak, R. Identity, Belonging and Migration. (Liverpool: University Press, 2008).

Derudder, B., & Witlox, F. (Eds.). Commodity Chains and World Cities. (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010).

Diner, H. Hungering for America: Italian, Irish and Jewish Foodways in the Age of Migration. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2001).

Dumenil, L. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. (New York: Hill and Wang, 1995).

Ehrman, E., Forsth, H., Peltz, L., & Ross, C. London Eats Out: 500 years of Capital Dining. (London: Philip Wilson Publishers, 1994).

Ellwood, I. The Essential Brand Book. (London: Kogan Page, 2002).

Federation of Restaurants’ Specialists. Sector Market Research Facts & Figures. (No Date) Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://www.fedrest.com/marketresearch.htm

Fenton, A., & Kisban, E. (eds.). Food in Change: Eating Habits from the Middle Ages to the Present Day. (Edimburgh: John Donald Publishers, 1986).

Ferguson, P. “Eating Orders: Markets, Menus, Meals”. The Journal of Modern History, 77:3 (2005), 679-700

Fomburn, C. Reputation: Realizing Value from Corporate Image. (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996).

Foner, N. “Male and Female: Jamaican Migrants in London”. Anthropological Quarterly, 49:1 (1976), 28-36.

Foner, N. Jamaica Farewell: Jamaican Immigrants in London. (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979).

Francis, V. With Hope in their Eyes: The Compelling stories of the Windrush Generation. (London: Nia, 1998).

Freedman, P. Food: The History of Taste. (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007).

Friedensohn, D. “Chapulines, Mole, Pozole: Mexican Cuisines and the Gringa Imagination”. In S. Iness (ed.), Pilaf, Pozole and Pad Thai:  American Women and Ethnic Food. (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press,2001), 165-174

Friedman, M., & Schultermandl, S. (eds.). Growing Up Transnational: Identity and Kinship in a Global Era. (London: Toronto University Press, 2011).

Fry, K., & Lewis, B. J. Identities in Context: Media, Myth, Religion in Space and Time. (Liesskil: Hampton Press, 2008).

Gabaccia, D. We Are What We Eat. (Cambridge, Massachusetts : Harvard University Press, 1998).

Gabaccia, D., Hoerder, D., & Walaszek, A. “Emigration and Nation Building During the Mass Migrations from Europe”. In N. Green & F. Weil (Eds.), Citizenship and Those who Leave. (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2007), 63-90.

Gabaccia, D., & Ruiz, V. (eds.). American Dreaming, Global Realities: Rethinking US Immigration History. (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2006).

Geissler, C., & Oddy, D. (eds.). Food Diet and Economic Change Past and Present. (Leister: University Press, 1993).

General Register Office (UK). Census 1951 England and Wales: General Report. (London: GRO, 1958).

General Register Office (UK). Sample census 1969 Great Britain: Commonwealth Immigrant Tables. (London: GRO,1969).

General Register Office (UK). Census 1951 England and Wales: County Report London. (London: GRO,1953).

General Register Office (UK).Census 1961 England and Wales: County Report: London. (London: GRO,1963).

General Register Office (UK). Census 1961 England and Wales: General Report. (London: GRO,1968).

Gereffi, G. & Korzeniewicz, M. (Eds.). Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism. (Westport: Praeger Publishers, 1994).

Gibson, S. “Food Mobilities: Traveling, Dwelling, and Eating Cultures”. Space and Culture, 10:4 (2007), 4-22.

Gilroy, P., Hall, S., & Getty Images. Black Britain: a Photographic History: (London: Saqi in association with Getty Images, 2007).

Glick-Schiller, N., Basch, L., & Szanton, C. “From Immigrant to Transmigrant: Theorizing Transnational Migration”. In L. Pries (ed.), Transnationale Migration (Baden-Baden: Nomos,1997), 121-140.

Goody, J. Cooking, Cuisine and Class. (Cambridge: University Press, 1982).

Goody, J. Food and Love: A Culture History of East and West. (London: Verso,1998).

Goulbourne, H., & Chamberlain, M. (Eds.). Caribbean Families in Britain and the Trans-Atlantic World. (London: MacMillan Education Ltd.,2001).

Goulbourne, H., & Solomos, J. The Caribbean Diaspora: Some introductory remarks. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 27:4 (2004), 533-544

Gowricharn, R. (Ed.). Caribbean Transnationalism: Migration, Population and Social Cohesion. (Oxford: Lexington Books, 2006).

Graham, M. “Narratives Great and Small: Neighbourhood Change, Place and Identity in Notting Hill”. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29:1 (2005), 67-89

Grew, R. (Ed.). Food in Global History. (Boulder: Westview Press, 1999).

Grove, P., & Grove, C. “Curry, Spice and All Things Nice”. (No Date). Retrieved June 14, 2011, from http://www.menumagazine.co.uk/book/curryhistory.html

Guthrie, J. “Role of Food Prepared Away from Home in the American Diet,1977-78 versus 1994-96: Changes and Consequences”. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34:3(1997). 140-150.

Hackley, C. “Theorizing Advertising”. In P. Maclaran, B. Stern, M. Tadajewski & M. Saren (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Marketing Theory. (London: Sage, 2009), 89-107.

Hall, S. Negotiating Caribbean Identities. New Left Review, 1:209, (1995), 209-222

Harbottle, L. Food for Health, Food for Wealth. Ethnic and Gender Identities. (New York: Routledge, 2000).

Hatton, T., & Williamson, J. The Age of Mass Migration: Causes and Economic Impact. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998).

Hattox, R. Coffee and Coffeehouses : the Origins of a Social Beverage in the Medieval Near East. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988).

Hives, L. Ethnic Foods in the UK. (London: Leatherhead Food RA, 1989).

Hoerder, D. Cultures in Contact. (Duke: University Press, 2002).

Holmes, C. “Cosmopolitan London”. In  A. Kershen (Ed.), London the Promised Land? The Migrant Experience in a Capital City. (Aldershot: Avebury,1997), 10-37

Holt, D. How Brands Become Icons: The Principles of Cultural branding. (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2004).

Holt, D., & Cameron, D. Cultural Strategy: Using Innovative Ideologies to Build Breakthrough Brands. (Oxford: University Press, 2010).

Howes, D. (ed.). Cross-cultural Consumption: Global Markets, Local Realities. (London: Routledge, 2000).

Hughes, A., & Reimer, S. (eds.). Geographies of Commodity Chains. (London: Routledge, 2004).

Humphries, S., & Taylor, J. The Making of Modern London 1945 - 1985. (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1986).

Ibrahim, V. “Ethnicity”. In S. Caliendo & C. McIlwain (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Race and Ethnicity. (London: Routledge, 2011), 12-20

Iness, S. Cooking Lessons: the Politics of Food and Gender. (Lahnam: Rowman and Littlefield, 2001).

Iness, S. (ed.). Kitchen and Culture in America: popular Representations of Food, gender and Race. (Philadelphia: University of Pensilvania Press, 2001).

Iness, S. (ed) Pilaf, Pozole and Pad Thai:  American Women and Ethnic Food. (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2001).

Inglis, D., & Gimlin, D. The Globalization of Food. (Oxford: Berg,2009)..

International Organization for Migration. Mapping Exercise: Jamaica. (London: IOM, 2007).

Itz Caribbean. London Caribbean Directory. Takeaways and Restaurants. (2011) Retrieved July 31, 2011 from: http://www.itzcaribbean.com/caribbeanrestaurantstakeaways

Jackle, J., & Sculle, K. Fast Food: Roadside Restaurants in the Automobile Age. (London: The John Hopkins University Press,1999).

Jamal, A. “Acculturation: the Symbolism of Ethnic Eating Among Contemporary British Consumers”. British Food Journal, 98:10, (1996), 12-26.

Jamaican Travel and Culture. Jerk Chicken (2009) Retrieved June 21, 2011 from http://www.jamaicatravelandculture.com/food_and_drink/jerk_chicken.htm 

James, A. “Cooking the Books: Global or Local identities in Contemporary British Food Cultures”. In D. Howes (ed.), Cross-Cultural Consumption. Global Markets, Local Realities (London: Routledge,1996), 77-91.

James, A. How British is British Food? In P. Caplan (ed.), Food, Health and Identity. (Oxon: Routledge, 1997), 71-87.

Jennings, P. The Local: A History of the English Pub. (Gloucestershire: Tempus Publishing, 2007).

Kalra, V. From Textile Mills to Taxi Ranks: Experiences of Migration Labour and Social Change. (Aldershot Ashgate, 2000).

Keldke, L. Exotic Appetites: Rumminations of a Food Adventurer. (London: Routledge, 2003).

Ken, C., & Lindley, J. “Immigrant Labour Market Assimilation and Arrival Effects: Evidence from the UK Labour Force Survey”. IZA Discussion Paper Series., 2228, (2006), 1-35

Kershen, A. (ed.). London the Promised Land? The Migrant Experience in a Capital City. (Aldershot: Avebury, 1997).

Kershen, A. (ed). Food in the Migrant Experience. (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002).

Key Note Publications. Key Note Report: Ethnic Foods An Industry Sector Overview. (London: Key Note,1986).

Key Note Publications. Key Note Report: Ethnic Food An Industry Sector Overview. (London: ICC Information Group,1988).

Key Note Publications. Ethnic Foods Market Report Plus. (London: Key Note, 2003). 

Kigman, B. W. Jamaican Food: History, Biology, Culture. (Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 2008).

Kittler, P., & Sucher, P. Food and Culture. (Boston: Walworth Publishing, 2007).

Knowles, C. “Theorising Race and Ethnicity: Contemporary Paradigms and Perspectives”. In P. Hill Collins & J. Solomos (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Race and Ethnic Studies. (London: Sage, 2009), 23-42.

Krebs, J. “ Establishing a Single, Independent Food Standards Agency: The United Kingdom's Experience” Food & Drug Law Journal 59:3 (2004), 387-398

Kumin, B., & Tlustly, A.The World of the Tavern: Public houses in Early Modern Europe. (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002).

Kurian, T. Ethnic Food from Abalone to Zomma an Encyclopaedia Society Book. (London: Scarecrow Press, 2006).

Lam, V., & Smith, G. African and Caribbean Adolescents in Britain: Ethnic Identity and Britishness. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32:7, (2009), 1248-1261

Lentz, C. (ed.). Changing Food Habits. (Amsterdam: Harwood,1999).

Levenstein, H. Paradox of Plenty: A Social history of Eating in Modern America. (New York City: Oxford University Press, 1993).

London Visitor and Convention Bureau. Where to Eat in London Winter 1985-86. (London: 3M Publications, 1985)

Long, E. The History of Jamaica or a Survey of the Ancient and Modern State of that Island. (London: T. Lowndes, 1774).

Lonn, M., & McBune, T. Imagining the Other. Essays on Diversity. (Lanham: University Press of America, 2010).

Lundberg, D. The Hotel and Restaurant Business. (Boston: Cahners Books,1974).

Lury, C. Brands: The Logos of the Global Economy. (London: Routledge, 2004).

MacWilliams, J. A Revolution in Eating: How the quest for Food Shaped America. (New York City: Columbia University Press, 2005).

Manning, P. Migration in World History. (London: Routledge, 2002).

Martin, J. “Food Recipes: Jerk Chicken”. (2001).   Retrieved July 20, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/jerkchicken_10680

Mavromaras, K. Economics and Obesity. . The Australian Economic Review., 41:1, (2008), 78-84

McCracken, G. Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988).

McCurdy, J. “Authentic Jamaican Jerk”. (2010).   Retrieved July 18, 2011, from http://www.fiery-foods.com/chiles-around-the-world/76-caribbean/1784-authentic-jamaican-jerk.

McLaran, P., Saren, M., Stern, B., & Tadajewski, M. (eds.). The Sage Handbook of Marketing Theory. (London: Sage, 2009).

Mclean Petras, E. Jamaican Labor Migration: White Capital and Black Labor 1850-1930. (Boulder: Westview Press, 1988).

Menell, S. All Manners of Food: Eating and taste in England and France from the Middle Ages to the Present. (New York City: Routledge, 1985).

Miller, S. Key Note Market Report: Ethnic Foods. (London: Key Note, 1995). 

Mintel. Ethnic Restaurants and takeaways, Leisure Intelligence. (London: Mintel International Group, 2006).

Mintz, S. Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History. (London: Penguin Books, 1985).

Montanari, M. The Culture of Food. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994).

Munro, R. “Identity: Culture and Technology”. In M. Whetherell & C. Talpade Mohanty (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Identities. (London: Sage, 2009), 201-215

Munz, R., & Ohliger, R. Diasporas and Ethnic Migrants. (London: Frank Lass Publishers, 2003).

Nanton, P.” The Caribbean Diaspora in the Promised Land”. In A. Kershen (ed.), London the Promised Land? The Migrant Experience in a Capital City  (Aldershot: Avebury, 1997), 110-127

Narayanm, U. Dislocating Cultures: Identities, Transfromations and Third-world Feminism. (London: Routledge, 1997).

Oddy, D. From Plain Fare to Fusion Food: British Diet from the 1890s to the 1990s. (Wolverhampton: The Boydell Press, 2003).

Office for National Statistics (UK). Family Spending 2000 (London:ONS.2000).

Office for National Statistics. (UK), Census 2001: Key Statistics for urban Areas in England and Wales. (London: ONS,2004).

Office for National Statistics (UK). Family Spending 2006.(London: ONS, 2007).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). Census 1971 England and Wales: County Report Greater London part I. (London: OPCS,1973).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). Census 1971 Great Britain: Country of Birth Tables. (London: OPCS,1974)..

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). County Report Grater London Part II. (London: OPCS, (1982).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). Country of Birth Great Britain. (London: OPCS,1983).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). Census 1981 County Report: Greater London. (London: OPCS,1982).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). Census 1981: Country of Birth Great Britain. (London: OPCS,1983).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). 1991 Census County Report Outer London. (London: OPCS,1993).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys(UK). 1991 Census County Report: Greater London. (London: OPCS,1993).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). 1991 Census County Report: Inner London. (London: OPCS,1993).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). 1991 Census: Ethnic Group and Country of Birth Great Britain. (London: OPCS,1993).

Office for Population Census and Surveys (UK). County Report: Greater London. (London: OPCS,1993).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). County Report: London. (London: OPCS, 1993).

Office for Population, Census and Surveys (UK). Ethnic Group and Country of Bith Great Britain. (London: OPCS,1993).

Palmer, R. (ed.). In Search for a Better Life: Perspectives on Migration from the Caribbean. (London: Praeger, 1990).

Parker, D. “The Chinese Takeaway and the Diasporic Habitus: Space, Time and Power Geometries”. In B. Hesse (ed.), Un/Settled Multiculturalisms: Diasporas, Entanglements "Transruptions". (London: Zed Books, 2000), 73-93.

Pastor, R. (ed.). Migration and Development in the Caribbean: the Unexplored Connection. (London: Westview Press, 1985).

Pessar, P. (ed.). Caribbean Circuits: New Directions in the Study of Caribbean Migration. (New York City: Center for Migration Studies, 1997).

Phillips, M., & Phillips, T. Windrush: The Irresistible Rise of Multi-Racial Britain. (London: Harper Collins, 1999).

Phoenix, A. “Ethnicities”. In M. Whetherell & C. Talpade Mohanty (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Identities. (London: Sage, 2009), 297-320.

Pilcher, J. Que Vivan los Tamales! Food and the Making of Mexican Identity. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1998).

Pilcher, J. "The Caribbean from 1492 to the Present. “. Kiple, K. & Conee Ornelas, K, (eds) The Cambridge World History of Food. (Cambridge: University Press, 2000), 1278-1288.

Pottinger, L. The Real Jerk New Caribbean Cuisine. (London: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2010).

Ram, M. African-Caribbean Enterprise and Business Support: Views from the Providers. In: Small Business Research Centre - University of Central England Business School Papers. (Birmingham: University of Central England, No Date).

Ram, M., Balihar, S., Abbas, T., Barlow, G., & Jones, T. “Ethnic Minority Business in Comparative Perspective: The Case of the Sector”. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 26:3 (2000). 495-511

Ram, M., & Deankins, D. African-Caribbean Entrepreneurship in Britain. In: Small Business Research Centre - University of Central England Business School Papers. (Birmingham: University of Central England, No Date).

Rapport, N., & Dawson, A. Migrants of identity: Perceptions of Home in a World in Movement. (Oxford: Berg,1998).

Ray, K. “Ethnic Succession and the New American Restaurant Cuisine”. In D. Beriss & D. Sutton (Eds.), The Restaurants Book: Ethnographies of Where we Eat. (Oxford: Berg, 2007), 97-114.

Rebora, G. The Culture of Fork. (New York City: Columbia University Press, 2001).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1953. (London: The Regency Press,1953).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1954. (London: The Regency Press, 1954).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1955. (London: The Regency Press, 1955).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1956. (London: The Regency Press, 1956).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1957. (London: The Regency Press, 1957).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1958. (London: The Regency Press, 1958).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1959. (London: The Regency Press,1959).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1960. (London: The Regency Press,1960).

Regency Press. Where to Eat in London 1970. (London: The Regency Press,1970).

Reynolds, T. “Family and Community Networks in the (re)Making of Ethnic Identity of Caribbean Young People in Britain”. Community, Work and Family, 9:3 (2006),  273-291

Riaz, M.“Hailing Halal”. Prepared Foods, 165:12 (1996), 53-54.

Robyn, E. Carnal Appetites: Food, Sex, Identities. (London: Routledge, 2000).

Rodriguez, M. Migration in History: Human migration in Comparative Perspective. (Rochester: University Press, 2007).

Roseman, C., Laux, H., & Thieme, G. EthniCity: Geographic Perspectives on Ethnic Change in Modern Cities. (Boston: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.,1996).

Rosen, A. The transformation of the British Life: A Social History. (Manchester: University Press, 2003).

Roseneil, S., & Seymour, J. (eds.). Practising Identities: Power and Resistance. (London: Palgrave Macmillan,1999).

Rushdie, S. Imaginary Homelands. (London: Penguin Books, 1992).

Sackmann, K., Peters, B., & Faist, T. Identity and Integration. (London: Ashgate, 2003).

Scholliers, P. (ed.). Food, Drink and Identity. (London: Berg, 2001).

Serow, M. The Handbook of International Migration. (Westport: Greenwood Press,1990).

Shepherd, V. “Indians, Jamaicans and the Emergence of a Modern Migration Culture”. In M. Chamberlain (Ed.), Caribbean Migration: Gloablized identities. (London: Routledge,1998), 170-181

Shortridge, B., & Shortridge, J. The taste of American Place: A Reader on Regional and Ethnic Foods. (Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998).

Smethursts Foods Ltd. The British Eating Out: A Report from Britain's National Catering Inquiry. (London: Smethrusts Food. Ltd.,1966).

Smith, A. Eating History: 30 Turning points in the Making of American Cuisine. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009).

Smith, R. Mexican New York: Transnational Lives of New Immigrants. (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2005).

Spang, R. The Invention of the Restaurant: Paris and Modern Gastronomic Culture. (London: Harvard University Press, 2000).

Spencer, I. British Immigration Policy since 1939: The making of Multi-Racial Britain. (London: Routledge,1997).

Stobart, T. Herbs, Spices and Flavourings. (London: Grub Street,1998).

Strak, J. & Morgan, W (eds). The UK Food and Drink Industry: A Sector by Sector Economic and Statistical Analysis. (Northborough: Euro PA & Associates,1995).

Sutton, C. “Celebrating Ourselves: the Family Reunion Rituals of African-Caribbean Transnational Families”. Global Networks, 4:3 (2004), 243-258.

Thomas-Hope, E. Explanation in Caribbean Migration. (London: Macmillan, 1992).

Thomas-Hope, E. “Globalization and the Development of a Caribbean Migration Culture”. In M. Chamberlain (Ed.), Caribbean Migration: Globalized identities. (London: Routldege,1998), 194-208.

Thompson, M. “Forty-and-One years on: An Overview of Afro-Caribbean migration to the United Kingdom”. In R. Palmer (Ed.), In Search of a Better Life: Perspectives on Migration from the Caribbean. (London: Praeger, 1990), 39-69.

Tuomainen, H. “Ethnic Identity, (Post)Colonialism and Foodways”. Food, Culture and Society. , 12:4 (2009), 526-554.

Turgeon, L., & Pastinelli, M. “"Eat the World": postcolonial Encounters in Quebec City's Ethnic Restaurants”. The Journal of American Folklore, 115:456, (2002), 247-268

Vasey, D. The Pub and English Social Change. (New York: AMS Press, 1990).

Vertovec, S. “Transnationalism and Identity”. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 27:4(2001), 573-582.

Vertovec, S. Transnationalism. (London: Routledge, 2009).

Vickers, R. The European Ethnic Foods Market. (London: Leatherhead Foods RA,1998).

Waldinger, R., Aldrich, H., & Ward, R. Ethnic Entrepreneurs : Immigrant Businesses in Industrial Societies. (Newbury Park: Sage, 1990).

Waldinger, R., & Lichter, M. How the other Half Works : Immigration and the Social Organization of Labor. (Berkley: University of California Press, 2003).

Walton, J. Fish and Chips and the British Working Class, 1870-1940 (Leicester: University Press, 1994).

Wang, G. Global History and Migrations.(Boulder: Westview Press,1997).

Warde, A. Consumption, Food and Taste. (London: Sage, 1997).

Whetherell, M., & Talpade Mohanty, C. (eds). The Sage Handbook of Identities. (London: Sage, 2010).

Wilk, R. “Difference on the Menu: Neophilia, Neophobia and Globalization”. In D. Inglis & D. Gimlin (eds.), The Globalization of Food. (Oxford: Berg, 2009), 185-196.

Winder, R. Bloody Foreigners: The Story of Immigration to Britain. (London: Abacus, 2005).

Worman, L. UK Ethnic Foods Report. (London: Leatherhead Foods RA, 1995).

Wu, D., & Cheng, S. (eds.). The Globalization of Chinese Food. (Richmond: Curzon, 2002)

 

 

 

Mauricio Palma-Gutiérrez received his BA in International Relations from the Universidad del Rosario, in Bogotá, Colombia, and went on to complete his MA in Global Studies at the Universität Leipzig, in Leipzig, Germany. He earned his MSc in Global History at the London School of Economics and Political Science, in London, England.

 

He is a researcher at the Instituto de Ciencia Política (Institute for Political Science) in  Bogotá, Colombia,  and serves as a lecturer at the International Relations Faculty at the Universidad del Rosario, also located in Bogotá. Additionally, he is currently working on a research project on the "Mutation of Revolutions" at the Centre for National Strategic and Defence Studies in Bogotá. His research interests are in the realm of  Global Migration and Global Security.