environmental aspects, as well as urban and professional impacts33. Gastronomic law, in turn, analyzes dogmatically, propositionally, and critically the norms, decisions, and other sources that regulate and shape these processes. It should be noted that the structuring elements of gastronomic law, which justify it as both concept and science, are present in the “global food chain,” in “geographical indications for the protection of origin products,” and in the “cultural identity of gastronomic communities.” These elements must be inserted into the system of norms and related regulations, or, where gaps exist, addressed through multidisciplinary strategies. In reality, these three elements are ontological and axiological, and they are being incorporated into this specific and emerging doctrine, without prejudice to other assumptions not necessarily bearing the same weight. It is not appropriate, therefore, to rely on traditional, partial, and linear scientific knowledge, which is based on the strategy of analysis by the knowing subject over the known object for the “discovery of knowledge” — a method long surpassed. Monodisciplinary knowledge ignores social transformations, proposes dogmatic intolerance toward divergent ideas, individualizes complex issues to present insufficient solutions, and prioritizes isolated techniques to the detriment of legal sensitivity34. On the contrary, the proposal is the “construction of the concept” through the convergence of “multicausalities” by means of circular processes and complex epistemology, aiming at a holistic vision. This approach considers circumstances and factors beyond the object and the subject35, adequate for the protection of human needs, without losing sight of social dilemmas36. Thus, gastronomic law is an interdisciplinary branch encompassing aspects of other fields (legal and extra-legal), such as food safety, geography, history, international food trade, tourism, and rights (intellectual property, civil liability, consumer rights, human rights, fundamental rights, etc.). It also carries the mark 33 Franco, Ariovaldo. De caçador a gourmet: uma história da gastronomia. Brasília: Thesaurus, 1995. 34 PERLINGIERI, Pietro. O direito civil na legalidade constitucional. Trad. Maria Cristina De Cicco. Rio de Janeiro: Renovar, 2008, p. 19. 35 MORIN, Edgar. O problema epistemológico da complexidade. Lisboa: Biblioteca Universitária. Publicações Europa-América, 2002, p. 32. Explains: “It may make us aware of the limits of knowledge, which is progress, because the knowledge of limits is always progress in knowledge. We must conceive the biological limits, the cerebral limits, the anthropological limits, the sociological limits, the cultural limits of all knowledge, which will at the same time allow us to know our knowledge, make it advance into new territories, and comfort ourselves with the unsayability and undecidability of reality.” 36 RODOTÀ, Stefano. El derecho a tener derechos. Madrid: Editorial Trotta, 2014, p. 44. Menciona: “el constitucionalismo de las necessidades como marco de las capacidades entendido como espacio más idóneo en el que poder evaluar la calidad de la vida”. 75 ‘STOMACH RULES’ AND CONSUMER PROMOTION
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==