Research Proposal
Nobody seems to deny that Asian carp in America are a serious problem. They pose an environmental threat to diverse native fish populations, an economic threat to recreational and commercial fisheries, and a safety threat to boaters. In response to the clear need to reduce invasive carp populations, a number of researchers have convincingly argued they could be substantially cut back by commercial fishing. Yet Asian carp meat, though incredibly popular with foreign consumers, is virtually absent from the American market. I have never once seen it in a store or restaurant, nor have I been able to buy it online.
The usual explanation for the lack of Asian carp on the American market is that Americans consider carp a trash fish, and are unwilling to eat it. They supposedly associate it with the common carp, a bottom-feeder said to have a "muddy" flavor. However, in my research I aim to find out whether the people of the U.S. are really so reluctant to eat Asian carp, or whether they could easily be persuaded to try it.
I plan to gather a small sample of people who regularly consume seafood, and show each of them a short video or slideshow presentation about Asian carp, and then ask them about their willingness to try Asian carp themselves. The presentation would take into account some of the analyses of participation in social movements that I read about in Passionate Politics, a volume edited by Jeff Goodwin, James M. Jasper, and Francesca Polleta. The book's introduction, written by its editors, simultaneously emphasizes the way emotions spur participation in social movements and questions the dichotomy often drawn between emotion and more "rational" thought. It aims to be rid of "nineteenth-century images of the mob" as a mysterious force that robbed people of their reason (2), early 20th century impressions that people joined movements because of their own personal demons (3-4), and more recent suggestions that protest is not driven by emotion, but is simply "an extension of normal everyday politics, [or] 'politics by other means'" (5). Therefore, my presentation would make direct, "'rational" claims about the dangers of Asian Carp, but still communicate a sense of urgency that could evoke an emotional response from my test subjects. Specifically, it might rely on statistics, which the 12th chapter of Passionate Politics, written by Julian McAllister Groves, emphasizes as a credible alternative to emotional appeals that come off as "amateurish or feminine" (216). Groves's chapter, written about the animal rights movement, points out that even though the majority of participants in the movement are female, most of its leaders are male (227), because, in her estimation, men are not only seen as more rational, but also are less criticized when they do show emotion. Yet while it is problematic that such a double standard exists, as long as it does, it is most likely wise for me to keep my distance from the feminized, irrationally emotional image that animal rights groups are struggling to shed. Therefore, I could give statistics of carp numbers and declines in fishing success, which could function to both educate and alarm my test subjects.
However, I would not necessarily aim to create deep and passionate concern about Asian carp in my test subjects. After all, as Randall Collins, author of the book's first chapter, puts it, "for a movement to accept the purist stance of accepting the support only of those who have principled long-term commitments is to doom itself to never winning any large victories" (32). Therefore, my presentation would not present eating Asian carp as a necessary sacrifice, but as a "pleasure" of participation in the vein of those mentioned in the book's introduction (20). I would mention favorable assessments of the carp's taste, its low levels of contaminants, and its probably low prices, aiming to make its consumption sound easy and desirable.
After showing the brief presentation, I would have the test subjects say whether or not they would be willing to try Asian carp if it were readily available. I would then take the percentage of people who responded "yes" and compare it to the amount of seafood consumed in the U.S., attempting to estimate how much carp would be consumed if the rest of the nation felt similarly. I would then compare the numbers I came up with to the amount of carp currently in the country. If my numbers suggested that seafood eaters could substantially reduce carp populations, then the suggestion would be that the introduction of carp into grocery stores, combined, perhaps, with a few TV ads to fill the same role as my short presentation, would be a productive control for Asian carp. If not, then the suggestion might be that carp are unlikely to be successful on the American market, and that alternative methods of control should be studied. "Suggestion," of course, is the appropriate word, since such a small data sample can by no means be assumed to represent the feelings of the entire nation.
My experiment would not be able to predict, however, the potential snowballing of interest in consuming Asian carp. The introduction to Passionate Politics, as I mentioned, talks about "pleasure" as a factor in social movements, but it specifically focuses on "the pleasures of being with people one likes," or "the joys of collective activities" (20). The first chapter makes a similar point with an analogy to cafes, saying that it can be "uncomfortable" to attend a quiet one, but that popular ones "are the places to go, not just to eat and drink, but to be on the scene, to feel the energy, to feel you are where things are happening" (27). The implication of both texts is that people are more likely be interested in acting along with a group than in acting alone. Thus, if some people started eating Asian carp, or even served it to dinner guests, then other people might wish to join in and start buying it themselves--even if they would have originally been reluctant to try it. Therefore, even if the data I gather happen to yield an accurate estimate of the number of people who would be willing to try Asian carp, the estimate of the amount of carp that could be consumed overall might be low.
The usual explanation for the lack of Asian carp on the American market is that Americans consider carp a trash fish, and are unwilling to eat it. They supposedly associate it with the common carp, a bottom-feeder said to have a "muddy" flavor. However, in my research I aim to find out whether the people of the U.S. are really so reluctant to eat Asian carp, or whether they could easily be persuaded to try it.
I plan to gather a small sample of people who regularly consume seafood, and show each of them a short video or slideshow presentation about Asian carp, and then ask them about their willingness to try Asian carp themselves. The presentation would take into account some of the analyses of participation in social movements that I read about in Passionate Politics, a volume edited by Jeff Goodwin, James M. Jasper, and Francesca Polleta. The book's introduction, written by its editors, simultaneously emphasizes the way emotions spur participation in social movements and questions the dichotomy often drawn between emotion and more "rational" thought. It aims to be rid of "nineteenth-century images of the mob" as a mysterious force that robbed people of their reason (2), early 20th century impressions that people joined movements because of their own personal demons (3-4), and more recent suggestions that protest is not driven by emotion, but is simply "an extension of normal everyday politics, [or] 'politics by other means'" (5). Therefore, my presentation would make direct, "'rational" claims about the dangers of Asian Carp, but still communicate a sense of urgency that could evoke an emotional response from my test subjects. Specifically, it might rely on statistics, which the 12th chapter of Passionate Politics, written by Julian McAllister Groves, emphasizes as a credible alternative to emotional appeals that come off as "amateurish or feminine" (216). Groves's chapter, written about the animal rights movement, points out that even though the majority of participants in the movement are female, most of its leaders are male (227), because, in her estimation, men are not only seen as more rational, but also are less criticized when they do show emotion. Yet while it is problematic that such a double standard exists, as long as it does, it is most likely wise for me to keep my distance from the feminized, irrationally emotional image that animal rights groups are struggling to shed. Therefore, I could give statistics of carp numbers and declines in fishing success, which could function to both educate and alarm my test subjects.
However, I would not necessarily aim to create deep and passionate concern about Asian carp in my test subjects. After all, as Randall Collins, author of the book's first chapter, puts it, "for a movement to accept the purist stance of accepting the support only of those who have principled long-term commitments is to doom itself to never winning any large victories" (32). Therefore, my presentation would not present eating Asian carp as a necessary sacrifice, but as a "pleasure" of participation in the vein of those mentioned in the book's introduction (20). I would mention favorable assessments of the carp's taste, its low levels of contaminants, and its probably low prices, aiming to make its consumption sound easy and desirable.
After showing the brief presentation, I would have the test subjects say whether or not they would be willing to try Asian carp if it were readily available. I would then take the percentage of people who responded "yes" and compare it to the amount of seafood consumed in the U.S., attempting to estimate how much carp would be consumed if the rest of the nation felt similarly. I would then compare the numbers I came up with to the amount of carp currently in the country. If my numbers suggested that seafood eaters could substantially reduce carp populations, then the suggestion would be that the introduction of carp into grocery stores, combined, perhaps, with a few TV ads to fill the same role as my short presentation, would be a productive control for Asian carp. If not, then the suggestion might be that carp are unlikely to be successful on the American market, and that alternative methods of control should be studied. "Suggestion," of course, is the appropriate word, since such a small data sample can by no means be assumed to represent the feelings of the entire nation.
My experiment would not be able to predict, however, the potential snowballing of interest in consuming Asian carp. The introduction to Passionate Politics, as I mentioned, talks about "pleasure" as a factor in social movements, but it specifically focuses on "the pleasures of being with people one likes," or "the joys of collective activities" (20). The first chapter makes a similar point with an analogy to cafes, saying that it can be "uncomfortable" to attend a quiet one, but that popular ones "are the places to go, not just to eat and drink, but to be on the scene, to feel the energy, to feel you are where things are happening" (27). The implication of both texts is that people are more likely be interested in acting along with a group than in acting alone. Thus, if some people started eating Asian carp, or even served it to dinner guests, then other people might wish to join in and start buying it themselves--even if they would have originally been reluctant to try it. Therefore, even if the data I gather happen to yield an accurate estimate of the number of people who would be willing to try Asian carp, the estimate of the amount of carp that could be consumed overall might be low.