ArticleCanadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie2025
Nothing to hide: How governments justify the adoption of ag-gag laws.
Article in Canadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nothing to hide: How governments justify the adoption of ag-gag laws.Canadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mainstream practices for producing meat, eggs, and dairy raise numerous concerns regarding public health, animal welfare, and environmental integrity. However, governments worldwide have expanded anti-whistleblower legislation that constrains informed public debate. Since 2019, several Canadian provinces have adopted so-called "ag-gag" laws designed to prevent hidden-camera investigations on farms and meat processing facilities. How do governments across Canada justify ag-gag laws as serving the public interest? To what extent do agricultural industry interests shape government adoption of ag-gag laws? Using Freedom of Information requests and debate records from provincial legislatures, we find that biosecurity is the most prominent justification for ag-gag laws, and that governments exhibit a close, collaborative relationship with industry actors. This case demonstrates that when it comes to contested sites of capital accumulation, governments are drawing on new spatial-legal tools to protect the status quo interests of private industry by dissuading dissent, debate, and public scrutiny.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.