Introduction
In contemporary approaches to sustainable development, human sustainability is increasingly framed as communities’ capacity to sustain livelihoods, knowledge, and everyday practices amid long-term environmental and institutional change (Folke et al., 2016). In this study, the concept is used in a broader analytical sense—not reducible to livelihood resilience or social sustainability alone—but as a broader analytical concept encompassing material practices of everyday life, freedom of choice, and the distribution of power within governance mechanisms. From this perspective, traditional livelihood activities embedded in local ecosystems are not merely economic practices, but function as human-environment systems in which ecological knowledge, material technologies, and social institutions interact to sustain everyday life (Berkes et al., 2000; Ostrom, 2009). Examining historically situated cases is therefore essential for understanding how communities have adapted to, negotiated with, and responded to shifts in technology, institutions, and power—an aspect that remains relatively underexplored in much contemporary sustainability scholarship.
In Vietnamese history, nuoc mam production constitutes a paradigmatic example of such a system. Formed and reproduced over centuries within coastal ecological settings, nuoc mam production is grounded in indigenous ecological knowledge of fish resources, sea salt, climatic conditions, and fermentation timing, while remaining deeply embedded in Vietnamese culinary and cultural life (Ngo et al., 2004; Trinh, 2009). More than an essential condiment, nuoc mam is the product of a traditional food system in which production techniques, storage materials, circulation, and consumption reflect enduring relationships between humans and the natural environment. Notably, even when Vietnamese nuoc mam enterprises in the early twentieth century began to operate as modern companies or commercial associations modeled on Western forms, their core production practices continued to rely largely on traditional methods (Vo, 2021, p. 28).
From the late nineteenth century onward, however, as Vietnam became a French colony, this traditional food system was increasingly reshaped by the introduction of Western science, technology, and regulatory mechanisms. In the case of nuoc mam, these interventions were most visible in efforts to standardize hygiene and quality, particularly through biochemical research conducted by the Pasteur Institute on protein content, as well as through colonial decrees that sought to define and regulate nuoc mam production and trade (Rose, 1918; Guenel, 1999; Guillerm, 1931). On the one hand, such interventions opened new possibilities for improving product quality, combating adulteration, and protecting public health. On the other hand, they generated tensions over control of value chains, occupational livelihoods, and the degree of autonomy retained by indigenous producer communities.
It was within this context that a multi-layered process of "dialogue" emerged—between local ecological knowledge and Western scientific expertise, and between aspirations for improved hygiene and quality and the risk of power reconfiguration within the food system. This process reached a critical point in 1933, when a proposal was advanced to mandate the centralized bottling of nuoc mam in glass bottles across Indochina. Framed in the language of hygiene and technical progress, the project nevertheless provoked widespread concern within Vietnamese society, as it became closely associated with the potential establishment of monopolistic control over packaging and distribution—key nodes in the food system—thereby directly threatening the livelihoods and freedom of choice of both producers and consumers (La Tribune Indochinoise, 1933; Tieng Dan, 1933).
From a human sustainability perspective, debates surrounding nuoc mam under colonial rule cannot be reduced to a simple opposition between "tradition" and "modernity." Rather, they constituted a process of social negotiation over how sustainable livelihoods could be maintained within an environment increasingly restructured by colonial power (Brocheux and Hemery, 2009; Trinh, 2013). The strong reactions of Vietnamese producers, intellectuals, and the press in 1933 demonstrate that colonial society did not categorically reject new science or technology. On the contrary, such elements were accepted when they served to protect product quality and community livelihoods. Resistance emerged only when "modernization" was deployed as a coercive and monopolistic mechanism that undermined the sustainability of the traditional food system.
Building on this perspective, the present article examines nuoc mam production in colonial Vietnam as a historically grounded case of a human-environment system in which ecological knowledge, material infrastructures (earthenware jars and glass bottles), scientific testing, and regulatory institutions interacted—and, at times, came into conflict. Through an analysis of Pasteur Institute research, colonial decrees governing nuoc mam, and the public debates of 1933 in the press and representative bodies, the article addresses three central questions: (i) the respective roles of ecological knowledge and science in shaping quality standards; (ii) how Vietnamese enterprises and producer communities appropriated "modernity" as a strategy for livelihood protection; and (iii) the limits of modernization when it evolved into a monopolistic mechanism threatening human sustainability within a coastal food system. By doing so, the article advances human sustainability scholarship by demonstrating the fragile boundary between standardization as a negotiated public-good mechanism—supporting quality, public health, and livelihoods—and standardization as a coercive form of governance that redistributes power and erodes community choice within colonial food systems.
In doing so, this study contributes not only to the history of nuoc mam and to Vietnam’s colonial economic and social history, but also to broader discussions on human sustainability, environmental memory, and food system governance, from historical inquiry to contemporary debate (Ericksen, 2008). The nuoc mam case underscores that choices concerning technology, materials, and food governance are inseparable from issues of power and livelihood, highlighting how historical analysis can illuminate the social conditions under which traditional food systems are sustained or destabilized.
Research Methods
Conceptual Framework
This article conceptualizes the Vietnamese nuoc mam industry during the colonial period as a human-environment system, in which livelihood practices, indigenous ecological knowledge, material technologies, scientific interventions, and governing institutions coexisted and interacted over time (Berkes et al., 2000; Ostrom, 2009). This perspective allows nuoc mam production to be analyzed not merely as a traditional economic activity, but as a complex social-ecological configuration in which technical decisions are inseparable from questions of livelihoods, freedom of choice, and power.
On this basis, the analysis is structured around three interrelated concepts: human sustainability, ecological knowledge, and the food system.
First, human sustainability is understood as the capacity of communities to maintain livelihoods, knowledge, cultural practices, and meaningful choices in the face of environmental, technological, and institutional change (Folke et al., 2016). Here, human sustainability is treated as an integrative concept encompassing livelihoods, everyday material practices, meaningful choice, and power relations within governance mechanisms. In a colonial context, this concept is closely linked to questions of normative authority—specifically, who defines what counts as "hygienic", "scientific", or "modern", and how such definitions reshape everyday practices and the autonomy of local nuoc mam producers (Brocheux and Hemery, 2009). Human sustainability is therefore not treated as a purely technical or outcome-based condition, but as a socially negotiated process unfolding within asymmetrical power relations.
Second, ecological knowledge in this study refers primarily to indigenous coastal ecological knowledge accumulated over generations of nuoc mam production. This knowledge encompasses understandings of fishing seasons and fish species, salt ratios, fermentation duration, climatic conditions, as well as the selection of containers and materials adapted to local environments (Berkes, 2012). Such ecological knowledge constitutes the foundational layer of the nuoc mam food system, shaping production, storage, and circulation practices prior to the introduction of modern scientific and institutional interventions. With the arrival of Western science in early twentieth-century Vietnam—most notably through biochemical testing and hygienic standards promoted by the Pasteur Institutes—this knowledge was not simply displaced. Rather, it entered into processes of interaction, translation, and adjustment with new forms of expertise (Rose, 1918; Guenel, 1999). Accordingly, science is approached here not as an external or inherently oppositional force, but as a mediating arena through which ecological knowledge was rendered legible, contested, and selectively institutionalized.
Third, the article adopts the concept of the food system to analyze nuoc mam production as an integrated whole encompassing production, testing, packaging, circulation, and consumption, together with the institutions and social discourses governing these processes (Ericksen, 2008). This perspective moves beyond treating nuoc mam as a commodity alone and instead highlights its role as a vital infrastructure of everyday life, in which technical decisions—such as protein testing, hygienic certification, or packaging requirements—are inseparable from broader issues of power, equity, and community livelihoods.
Building on these three concepts, colonial debates over nuoc mam are examined as processes of social bargaining among multiple actors, including colonial authorities, scientific experts, French commercial interests, Vietnamese enterprises, and producer communities. These negotiations centered on how a traditional food system should be organized, regulated, and controlled amid profound institutional transformation. Crucially, such bargaining did not generate uniform outcomes. Instead, it produced divergent pathways of standardization, with contrasting implications for human sustainability.
On this basis, the article proposes an analytical framework to clarify how human sustainability was formed, maintained, or eroded within the colonial nuoc mam food system under the combined influence of indigenous ecological knowledge, scientific mediation, and colonial governance. As summarized in Fig. 1, interactions among these elements could result either in negotiated forms of standardization that reinforced livelihoods and freedom of choice, or in coercive forms of standardization that undermined community autonomy and precipitated social conflict.
Methods
This study adopts an interdisciplinary approach within the social sciences and humanities, combining historical analysis, historical sociology, and cultural-environmental studies to reconstruct and analyze transformations in Vietnamese nuoc mam production between 1914 and 1933. This approach is particularly appropriate to the research objectives, as it enables the systematic linkage of technical and institutional change with social responses, power relations, and community livelihood strategies within a colonial food system.
To ensure methodological rigor and analytical transparency, the research design is organized into distinct analytical layers, each corresponding to a specific dimension of the research questions and source materials. Table 1 summarizes the overall research design, methods employed, source bases, and analytical objectives.
Historical methods are employed to collect, classify, and critically evaluate a wide range of primary sources. These include colonial administrative documents—such as decrees issued by the Governor-General of Indochina and related regulatory files governing nuoc mam production and trade—alongside scientific publications produced by physicians and laboratories affiliated with the Pasteur Institutes. In addition, contemporary Vietnamese- and French-language newspapers are analyzed as key sources for tracing public debate and social reactions, particularly during the controversy of 1933. Systematic cross-referencing of these materials enables the simultaneous reconstruction of policy frameworks and societal responses.
Historical sociology is applied to examine the roles, interests, and power relations among different actor groups within the nuoc mam food system. This perspective facilitates analysis of the emergence and transformation of Vietnamese nuoc mam enterprises, French capitalist interests, professional associations, and their interactions with colonial authorities and scientific institutions. Conflicts over standardization, control, and monopoly are thus situated within broader transformations of colonial social and economic structures, rather than treated as isolated technical disputes.
Discourse analysis is used to investigate how key concepts—such as "hygiene", "science," "progress", "monopoly", and "public interest"—were mobilized in policy documents and press writings (Fairclough, 2010). This method makes it possible to identify the argumentative strategies and normative frameworks through which different actors sought to legitimize or contest interventions in nuoc mam production, thereby revealing competing conceptions of sustainable life and legitimate governance.
Finally, the study adopts a case-study approach centered on the 1933 controversy over the proposed mandatory bottling of nuoc mam in glass bottles to replace traditional earthenware jars. This episode functions as an analytical focal point in which indigenous ecological knowledge, scientific expertise, colonial governance, and community livelihoods directly intersected. Examining this conflict makes visible the limits of modernization when technical and institutional interventions were experienced as coercive and when they directly undermined human sustainability within a traditional food system (Yin, 2018). Methodologically, this combined historical and interdisciplinary approach allows standardization to be examined not as a purely technical outcome, but as a social process through which scientific knowledge was translated into governance practices with uneven consequences for human sustainability.
Results
Coastal Ecological Knowledge and Pasteurian Scientific Intervention in Nuoc Mam Production
Prior to the introduction of Western science and technology into Vietnam, nuoc mam production functioned as a long-established system of coastal ecological knowledge accumulated over generations. This knowledge system encompassed detailed understandings of fishing seasons and marine resources, species-specific characteristics, salt ratios, climatic conditions, fermentation duration, as well as the selection of appropriate containers and preservation materials. Within this system, nuoc mam production was not oriented solely toward the manufacture of a food product; it constituted a foundational livelihood practice that sustained coastal communities and contributed directly to everyday food security.
Historical sources indicate that nuoc mam occupied a significant place in Vietnam’s socio-economic life from an early period, functioning not only as a widely consumed condiment but also as a fiscal and administrative resource embedded within state structures and everyday practices. Both Vietnamese historical records and early Western accounts emphasize its close integration with fishery production, rice-based diets, and household storage practices—most notably the widespread use of earthenware jars—positioning nuoc mam as a central node within a long-standing coastal food system.
A major transformation occurred in the early twentieth century, when the French colonial administration began to reconceptualize nuoc mam not simply as a popular consumer product, but as an object requiring scientific standardization. In this process, the Pasteur Institute of Saigon played a pivotal role in transforming nuoc mam from an object of artisanal knowledge into an object of biochemical inquiry. According to Guenel (1999, p. 22), Albert Calmette had already shown interest in data concerning nuoc mam production in Cochinchina as early as 1914 through scientific exchanges originating in Saigon. This process of scientification became more fully articulated in 1918 with the publication of Recherches sur la composition chimique du nuoc-mam by M. E. Rose, head of the biochemical laboratory at the Pasteur Institute of Saigon. Drawing on field investigations in Phu Quoc and Mui Ne, Rose analyzed production techniques and chemical composition, defining nuoc mam as the product of protein decomposition in a highly saline environment and establishing protein content as the key scientific indicator of quality (Rose, 1918). Guillerm (1931, p. 7) later systematized this formulation, emphasizing nuoc mam as a saline solution dissolving albuminoid substances at a controlled degree of decomposition, with salt concentrations sufficient to regulate fermentation and prevent putrefaction.
From a food systems perspective, Pasteurian scientific intervention produced at least three interrelated shifts. First, it introduced a new quantitative language of quality, in which sensory criteria such as "ripeness", "maturity", or aroma were supplemented—and increasingly challenged—by measurable indicators such as grams of protein per liter. Second, it enabled comparison and standardization across batches and regions, strengthening quality control in a colonial market increasingly affected by adulteration and commercial fraud. Third, and most significantly, this scientific language became the epistemic foundation upon which the colonial state subsequently institutionalized and legalized nuoc mam production. Together, these shifts transformed scientific testing from a descriptive analytical tool into a shared epistemic language that could subsequently be mobilized within regulatory and legal frameworks.
These shifts unfolded gradually through a layered sequence of scientific and institutional interventions, as the roles of the Pasteur Institutes, local laboratories, and the colonial administration expanded over time. Table 2 summarizes the major interventions between 1914 and 1933, highlighting how scientific research, testing practices, and governance mechanisms became progressively intertwined within the colonial nuoc mam industry. As shown in Table 2, scientific research, laboratory testing, and administrative oversight did not emerge simultaneously but became progressively aligned, laying the groundwork for the later institutionalization of standardization as a form of governance.
From 1916 onward, drawing directly on biochemical research conducted by the Pasteur Institutes, the colonial administration progressively constructed a legal framework to govern nuoc mam production according to scientific standards. As summarized in Table 3, this regulatory trajectory moved from initial legal definition, through regionally differentiated adjustments and acknowledged implementation difficulties, toward a more unified framework in 1930 grounded in biochemical thresholds, hygiene requirements, and laboratory-based inspection (Guillerm, 1931, pp. 31–33).
Importantly, available sources indicate that scientific testing practices were implemented prior to the full formalization of the legal framework. The establishment of the Phan Thiet laboratory in 1929, documented by Guillerm, illustrates how biochemical testing functioned as a form of experimental governance, providing empirical precedents that later informed regulatory codification (Guillerm, 1931, p. 10). In this sense, laboratory practices preceded and actively shaped legal codification, rather than merely executing it.
From a human sustainability perspective, developments in the early twentieth century thus reveal a pattern of selective engagement with Western science and technology. Pasteurian intervention did not generally displace indigenous ecological knowledge; rather, it translated and standardized pre-existing practices into a scientific register (Rose, 1918). In many instances, laboratory testing functioned as a resource for consumer protection and for distinguishing certified products within an increasingly competitive market. At the same time, this emerging scientific-institutional infrastructure created the conditions under which standardization could later be mobilized for alternative governance objectives, particularly when linked to mechanisms of value-chain control. These latent tensions crystallized in the 1933 controversy over mandatory bottling, examined below.
Scientific Standardization, Vietnamese Enterprises, and Livelihood Strategies in the Colonial Food System
Following the establishment of a standardized biochemical language for nuoc mam through Pasteur Institute research, many Vietnamese producers and business communities appropriated this new institutional space as an adaptive livelihood strategy. Rather than remaining passive objects of regulation, they actively mobilized scientific testing and certification to (i) distinguish certified products from counterfeit or substandard goods, (ii) strengthen market credibility, and (iii) mitigate livelihood risks within an increasingly competitive colonial economy. These practices illustrate that standardization, when selectively appropriated, could function as a resource for sustaining human livelihoods rather than as an externally imposed constraint.
The case of the Lien Thanh Company in Phan Thiet illustrates how indigenous enterprises effectively "localized" scientific tools to protect their position within the nuoc mam value chain. Founded in the early twentieth century amid the rapid expansion and intensification of competition in the Cochinchina nuoc mam market (Vo, 2021, pp. 27–28), Lien Thanh not only expanded production capacity and distribution networks, but also early identified biochemical testing as a critical instrument for building and maintaining market trust. Confronted with the widespread circulation of counterfeit nuoc mam, particularly in major urban centers, the company proactively collaborated with Pasteur Institute specialists to train laboratory personnel and establish in-house testing procedures, focusing on protein content as a key indicator of product quality (Ho, 1984, p. 57).
From a food systems perspective, this strategy functioned as a form of collective self-protection rather than mere commercial differentiation. Scientific criteria were deployed to establish transparent and verifiable benchmarks of quality, thereby safeguarding consumers while simultaneously erecting institutional barriers against unfair competition. As Trinh (2009) has observed, it was precisely this combination of indigenous entrepreneurial initiative and selective engagement with modern scientific practices that enabled Lien Thanh to sustain its operations and resilience across decades of economic and political upheaval. Importantly, scientific testing in this context did not displace traditional production knowledge; instead, it translated existing practices into a form legible within emerging colonial regulatory and market frameworks.
Beyond firm-level strategies, scientific standardization also stimulated the emergence of collective, community-based mechanisms of self-regulation through labeling and certification. In 1926, under the auspices of the Dong Phap Ham nghiep tuong te hoi (Indochinese Fish Sauce Mutual Aid Association), a group of producers agreed to adopt the "Red Cross" (Chu thap do) label as a quality mark for products that had passed scientific testing. Crucially, this label was not merely a commercial device; it operated as an internal governance mechanism within the producer community. The label was administered through a numbered registration system, allocated to members according to quotas, and legally protected by the Saigon Commercial Court. Unauthorized use was treated as impersonation and subject to sanction, even when facilitated by association members themselves (Indochinese Mutual Occupational Aid Association, 1926, p. 5). Institutionally, this arrangement constituted a form of community co-produced standardization that reinforced market confidence while preserving a degree of producer autonomy.
Fig. 2 illustrates how scientific certification was appropriated as a community-based mechanism of negotiated standardization, reinforcing market trust while preserving producer autonomy.
Viewed through the lens of human sustainability, these practices demonstrate that Vietnamese producers did not reject standardization per se. Rather, they actively shaped its objectives in ways that aligned with the shared interests of producers and consumers. Standardization was accepted when it (i) enhanced the capacity to combat counterfeiting, (ii) protected occupational reputation, and (iii) contributed to livelihood stability. In this phase, scientific testing functioned as a collectively negotiated resource rather than as a mechanism of dispossession or external domination.
This adaptive pattern was not confined to Lien Thanh. The Huynh Huong company, also based in Phan Thiet, submitted its products for testing at the Pasteur Institute and publicly announced the results in the press as evidence of quality and safety (Cong luan bao, 1934, p. 4). Publicizing test results served not only as a marketing strategy, but also as a means for Vietnamese enterprises to assert their capacity to participate in a scientific-technical sphere that was often associated with Western institutional authority. Such practices further underscore that scientific expertise could be strategically appropriated by indigenous actors to reinforce, rather than undermine, community livelihoods.
Taken together, these cases indicate that the boundary between "tradition" and "modernity" within the colonial food system was neither fixed nor dichotomous, but continuously reconfigured through interactions among indigenous knowledge, scientific instruments, and market competition. At the same time, the growing authority of scientific standards as legal benchmarks of legitimacy created the conditions under which standardization could be mobilized for objectives extending beyond quality protection. The events of 1933—most notably the proposal for mandatory centralized bottling—marked the point at which standardization became directly entangled with governance, monopoly formation, and the erosion of community choice. This structural shift, and the conflict it generated, are examined in the following section.
The 1933 Bottling Proposal: Food System Governance Conflicts and the Limits of Human Sustainability
While biochemical testing and quality standardization in the early decades of the twentieth century were largely embraced by Vietnamese nuoc mam producers as tools to protect product credibility and stabilize livelihoods, the 1933 proposal to mandate the bottling of nuoc mam in glass containers marked a structural turning point in food system governance. At this juncture, "modernization" no longer functioned primarily as a means of improving product quality or hygiene; instead, it began to intervene directly in the organization, control, and circulation of an essential component of everyday life.
The growing attractiveness of the Indochinese nuoc mam market rapidly drew the attention of capitalist investors, particularly French capital endowed with advantages in finance, technology, and close institutional ties to the colonial administration. Within this context, a scheme was advanced to replace traditional ceramic jars (tin sanh) entirely with glass bottles, justified in the language of hygiene and the prevention of adulteration. Unlike earlier Pasteur Institute interventions—which focused primarily on testing and quality standardization—this initiative was intrinsically linked to the centralization of bottling and distribution, thereby reconfiguring control over critical nodes of the nuoc mam value chain.
Fig. 3 highlights the material embeddedness of ceramic jars within everyday production and consumption practices, underscoring their role as infrastructural elements of human sustainability rather than neutral containers.
The proposal was initiated by Alexandre Granval, a French entrepreneur active in both the nuoc mam trade and the glass industry in Indochina. Under the proposed system, all nuoc mam produced in Indochina would be required to pass through a centralized facility for analysis and quality control, after which it would be mandatorily bottled using glass containers and closures supplied by the Société Française des Verreries d’Indochine and the Société du Bouchage Hermélicos—both directly linked to Granval—before being distributed to the market (La Tribune Indochinoise, 1933). Beneath its technical rationale, this model effectively transferred control over bottling and circulation—key leverage points within the food system—from indigenous producer communities to a centralized mechanism aligned with capitalist interests and colonial authority.
What began as a commercial initiative was rapidly elevated to the level of public policy. In a memorandum submitted by the Ministry of Colonies to the President of France, mandatory bottling was justified on grounds of hygiene and public health. The document argued that counterfeiting not only impeded the development of the nuoc mam industry but also endangered the health of the working poor through the adulteration of products with contaminated water and unregulated substances. On this basis, the Ministry recommended granting the Governor-General of Indochina authority to issue decrees imposing strict controls over nuoc mam production and packaging, stipulating that testing be conducted in government laboratories and that containers conform to official standards (Ngo Bao, 1933, pp. 1–2). Under the banner of science and hygiene, the proposal thus entailed a profound restructuring of the traditional food system, effectively severing decision-making power over circulation and distribution from producer communities.
From a food system governance perspective, the 1933 conflict did not arise from glass-bottle technology itself, but from the coercive and monopolistic institutional arrangements attached to its implementation. Under the traditional system, indigenous producers and traders retained a degree of autonomy across production and circulation, with ceramic jars well adapted to local ecological conditions, consumption practices, and small-scale operations. Imposing glass bottles as a mandatory standard not only altered the material form of containment, but also centralized critical control points along the value chain, increased production and transaction costs, narrowed the range of available choices, and pushed many small producers toward marginalization or exclusion from the market. The core issue, therefore, lay not in technology per se, but in the power relations embedded within its regulatory deployment.
This redistribution of control triggered widespread resistance across Vietnamese society. Throughout 1933, numerous Vietnamese- and French-language newspapers—including Ha thanh Ngo bao, Dong Phap, Tieng Dan, Cong luan, and La Tribune Indochinoise—published editorials and polemics opposing the bottling project. On 29 August 1933, the Association for the Protection of the Rights of Annamese Nuoc Mam Producers and Consumers was established, bringing together representatives from production, journalism, and Vietnamese enterprises. The association articulated two clear objectives: opposition to increases in nuoc mam taxation and categorical rejection of mandatory bottling under a monopolistic framework (Ngo Bao, 1933a, pp. 1–2). Its formation marked the transformation of the controversy from a technical or commercial dispute into a broader social conflict over rights, livelihoods, and food system governance.
In the French-language press, critiques emphasized the economic and institutional implications of the proposal. Writing in La Tribune Indochinoise, Nguyễn Phan Long argued that although Granval’s model did not formally monopolize production, it effectively monopolized distribution, rendering producers "no longer masters of their own establishments". He characterized the scheme as a cleverly disguised monopoly, cloaked in the rhetoric of hygiene and technical progress, yet increasing producer dependence on a centralized control mechanism backed by colonial authority (La Tribune Indochinoise, 1933, p. 1).
Vietnamese-language newspapers framed the issue more directly in relation to everyday life and consumption practices. Tiếng Dân emphasized that nuoc mam was indispensable to daily meals and deeply embedded in ways of life shaped over centuries. Invoking hygiene to impose a monopolized packaging system was thus perceived as a threat to everyday autonomy and to the capacity to sustain life, particularly among urban working populations and coastal communities (Tieng Dan, 1933, p. 1). These arguments underscore that resistance was not directed against modern science or technology as such, but against their deployment as coercive instruments for redistributing control within the food system.
From a human sustainability perspective, the 1933 debate illuminates a critical boundary between standardization pursued in the public interest and standardization deployed as a tool of control. When scientific testing and hygiene standards enhanced product quality and consumer health without undermining producer autonomy, they contributed to strengthening food system sustainability. By contrast, mandatory centralized bottling directly eroded the freedom of choice of both producers and consumers—a core dimension of human sustainability. For coastal communities and urban working classes alike, access to nuoc mam at affordable prices and in familiar material forms was essential to everyday life; when this access was subjected to monopolistic control embedded in foreign technical and institutional frameworks, the sustainability of the traditional food system was compromised, regardless of claims to hygiene or progress.
Sustained public pressure and debate ultimately produced tangible political effects. At the meeting of the Indochinese Financial and Economic Council on 23 November 1933, Granval’s proposal for centralized control and mandatory bottling was rejected (Ngo Bao, 1933). This outcome demonstrates that Vietnamese society was capable of distinguishing between the selective adoption of new technologies for collective benefit and the imposition of technology as a mechanism of monopoly. Indeed, the same bottling technology, when detached from coercive institutional arrangements, could be accepted and even mobilized for market expansion—as illustrated by the Vạn Vân company in Hải Phòng, which used glass bottles to export nuoc mam to France in the late 1930s (L’Information d’Indochine, 1939; Kien, 2015).
The 1933 bottling controversy thus reveals the limits of modernization within colonial food systems. When science and technology move beyond supporting ecological knowledge and public health to become instruments for redistributing power and economic benefit, they collide directly with the foundations of human sustainability. It was precisely at this point of collision that social resistance articulated a clear principle: development and sustainability were shown to be inseparable from questions of equity, livelihood security, and community autonomy.
Discussion
The findings of this study demonstrate that the Vietnamese nuoc mam industry during the colonial period can be understood as a complex human-environment system, in which coastal ecological knowledge, material technologies, scientific testing, and governance institutions interacted to sustain everyday life. From this perspective, human sustainability depends not only on the stability of natural resources, but also—crucially—on the capacity of communities to protect livelihoods, knowledge, and meaningful freedom of choice amid technical and institutional change. Analytically, this distinction rests on separating science as a form of knowledge from science as an instrument of institutional power—a distinction that becomes particularly salient in colonial contexts.
The nuoc mam case shows that human sustainability is neither a static condition nor a fixed set of indicators. Rather, it emerges as a continuous process of social negotiation unfolding within asymmetrical power relations. When Pasteurian science was mobilized to standardize quality, combat counterfeiting, and protect public health, it contributed to strengthening the sustainability of the traditional food system. Conversely, when the same scientific foundation was redeployed to restructure control and monopolize distribution, it undermined the basic conditions required for maintaining livelihoods and autonomy among both producers and consumers. Importantly, this analysis does not treat science or technological innovation as inherently detrimental to human sustainability. Instead, it demonstrates that scientific knowledge enhances sustainability only when embedded within governance arrangements that respect community agency and livelihood practices.
To clarify how human sustainability is constituted and operates within the nuoc mam food system, this study conceptualizes its core dimensions through the interrelations among livelihoods, knowledge, materiality, choice, and equity in the distribution of power. Table 4 synthesizes these dimensions and illustrates how they were articulated through concrete historical practices and conflicts.
As Table 4 demonstrates, human sustainability in the nuoc mam food system cannot be reduced to a single factor. Rather, it is produced through the interaction of multiple dimensions deeply embedded in everyday life. It was precisely the simultaneous encroachment upon livelihoods, material foundations, and freedom of choice in the 1933 bottling proposal that pushed the conflict beyond the realm of technical regulation, transforming it into a broader social issue.
One key contribution of this study lies in clarifying the dual character of scientific standardization within food systems. Standards related to protein content, hygiene, and laboratory testing—grounded in scientific expertise—created a shared language for distinguishing authentic products from adulterated ones and for protecting consumers in the volatile markets of the early twentieth century. However, the 1933 controversy reveals that when standardization exceeds its role as a public-good mechanism and becomes a tool for redistributing power along the value chain, it rapidly encounters social resistance. Mandatory bottling was not merely a technical adjustment; it represented a transfer of control from producer communities to a centralized model aligned with capitalist interests and colonial authority. At this point, the boundary between "ensuring hygiene" and "institutionalizing monopoly" became precariously thin, exposing the limits of modernization from a human sustainability perspective.
The study also highlights the often-overlooked role of materials and physical infrastructure in sustaining human-environment relations. The debate between ceramic jars (tin sanh) and glass bottles illustrates that containers are not neutral technical devices, but integral components of environmental memory and everyday practice. Ceramic jars—well adapted to local climatic conditions, consumption habits, and small-scale production—were the outcome of long-term experimentation between coastal communities and their environments. The attempted imposition of glass bottles in 1933 therefore did not simply replace one material with another; it disrupted a familiar relationship linking food, livelihood, and daily life. The intensity of press and public reactions at the time underscores that everyday material practices and environmental memory constitute essential, yet frequently overlooked, dimensions of human sustainability.
Viewed analytically, the colonial nuoc mam case offers insights that extend beyond its historical setting. It demonstrates that preserving traditional food systems cannot rely solely on technical standards, but depends on how such standards are embedded within ecological, cultural, and livelihood contexts of producer communities. The findings further indicate that indigenous ecological knowledge and modern science are not inherently antagonistic, but can be mutually reinforcing when standardization remains negotiated rather than coercive.
Beyond its historical specificity, the nuoc mam case contributes to broader theorization of human sustainability by illustrating how tensions between scientific standardization and community agency unfold within food systems. Rather than representing a uniquely Vietnamese experience, the 1933 controversy exemplifies a recurrent dynamic observable across diverse socio-ecological contexts, in which technical rationalization intersects with livelihood security and power asymmetries. In this sense, the study provides an analytical framework for examining similar negotiations in other traditional food systems facing pressures of standardization and institutional centralization.
Finally, the historical evidence examined here underscores the centrality of choice and access to food as core elements of human sustainability, illustrating how sustainability is shaped by governance arrangements that structure everyday practices, livelihood security, and community participation.
Conclusion
This article has examined the Vietnamese nuoc mam industry under French colonial rule as a human-environment system in which coastal ecological knowledge, material practices, scientific testing, and governance institutions jointly sustained everyday life. Through an analysis of Pasteurian scientific intervention, the adaptive strategies of indigenous enterprises, and—most notably—the 1933 controversy over mandatory bottling, the study demonstrates that human sustainability is not an automatic outcome of modernization. Rather, it emerges as a socially negotiated process closely bound to livelihoods, freedom of choice, and equity in food system governance.
The nuoc mam case shows that science and technical standardization can play a constructive role when they support product quality, public health, and the livelihoods of producers. Under such conditions, indigenous ecological knowledge is not displaced, but repositioned and reinforced through scientific standards. By contrast, when the same scientific tools are mobilized to establish centralized control and monopolize distribution, they collide with the foundations of human sustainability and generate social resistance.
The 1933 debate therefore cannot be understood simply as a confrontation between tradition and modernity. Instead, it represents a conflict over how an essential food system should be organized and governed. The failure of the mandatory bottling project reveals that Vietnamese society at the time was capable of clearly distinguishing between the selective adoption of new technologies for collective benefit and the imposition of technology as a mechanism for redistributing economic power. In this context, freedom of choice is best understood not in a narrow market-driven sense, but as the capacity of communities to retain meaningful control over everyday practices, material arrangements, and livelihood strategies. Methodologically, this study demonstrates the value of historical analysis for conceptualizing standardization as a social process—one through which scientific knowledge is translated into governance practices with uneven consequences for human sustainability.
From both historical and analytical perspectives, the Vietnamese nuoc mam experience offers a reference point for examining similar dynamics in other traditional food systems. The colonial-era case illustrates that sustainability is not secured by technical solutions alone, but depends on governance arrangements that mediate the relationship between knowledge, power, and everyday life.
PDF Links
PubReader
ePub Link
Full text via DOI
Download Citation
