The Irrational Animal: Homo Economicus and the Paradox of Nutritional Labeling in Ecuador
This article offers an ontological and epistemic critique of the concept of Homo Economicus, examining its continued use as a normative figure in the design of public health policies in Ecuador. Using the case of front-of-package nutritional labeling, it problematizes the persistent assumption of fu...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2026 |
| País: | Ecuador |
| Recursos: | Universidad Central del Ecuador |
| Repositorio: | Revista Ciencias Sociales |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:revistadigital.uce.edu.ec:article/8400 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://revistadigital.uce.edu.ec/index.php/CSOCIALES/article/view/8400 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | economía del comportamiento etiquetado nutricional Homo Economicus políticas públicas neurociencia del consumo Behavioral economics nutritional labeling homo economicus public policy consumer neuroscience |
| Resumo: | This article offers an ontological and epistemic critique of the concept of Homo Economicus, examining its continued use as a normative figure in the design of public health policies in Ecuador. Using the case of front-of-package nutritional labeling, it problematizes the persistent assumption of full rationality, decisional autonomy, and utility-maximizing behavior attributed to consumers. Drawing on a theoretical-empirical approach that integrates behavioral economics, cognitive psychology, and the anthropology of the state, the study demonstrates how regulatory frameworks anchored in this theoretical fiction fail to address the affective, cognitive, and structural complexities of food consumption. The analysis shows that labeling, far from rationally empowering the consumer-subject, operates within a regime of governmentality that produces ambiguous and often ineffective subjectivities in relation to the “healthy” imperative. It further argues that the limited effectiveness of labeling cannot be explained by individual shortcomings, but rather by material and symbolic conditions that restrict real decision-making capacity. The article thus calls for a shift toward intervention models that recognize the subject’s structural vulnerability and promote healthier decisions without falling back on the moral requirement of perfect self-determination. |
|---|