Governing Fair Trade Coffee Supply: Dynamics and Challenges in Small Farmers' Organizations

Abstract

Farmers' organizations are essential actors in fair trade certification schemes, and therefore in delivering their associated benefits for poor small-scale farmers. However, the dynamics and challenges faced by these cooperative organizations have been largely bypassed in the fair trade literature. In this context, this paper aims to unpack the multiple, coexisting and interwoven marketing channels available for small-scale coffee producers, unveiling potential sources of uncertainty and tensions among competing actors and interests, and identifying and assessing the strategies used by organizations to influence farmers' marketing decisions. The analysis comprises two case studies based in the department of Huehuetenango (Guatemala), where the existence of distinct marketing channels combines with processes of product differentiation, namely organic production. Results show the limitations of standard fair trade mechanisms to secure farmers' engagement with cooperative organizations. Rather, technical advice to improve farming practices and quality construction seem to be a more effective mechanism to govern this collective supply chain. Nevertheless, these strategies could be further constrained by productive and organizational factors, affecting the sustainability of potential benefits delivered by these key collective actors. channels provides unequivocal advantages for small-scale farmers, partly due to the complexity and volatility of the combination of factors that shape individual marketing decisions: relative prices and payment timing, quality requirements and organizations' incentives (see also Valkila and Nygren, 2010). Source: Authors' elaborationFigure 3. Coffee marketing channels for Guaya'b producers Source: Authors' elaborationFigure 4. Coffee marketing channels for CODECH producers 48 D. Ortiz-Miranda and A. M. Moragues-Faus 9 Even, in some cases, in a context of suspicion. Some interviewees stated that sometimes 'coyotes' had paid with counterfeit money. 52 D. Ortiz-Miranda and A. M. Moragues-Faus

Forging alliances: Coffee grower and chain leader partnerships to improve productivity and coffee quality in Papua New Guinea

“…Unlike Fair Trade, NAASA Organic certification does not require strong governance systems which would augment the social capital of the group (Hernandez-Aguilera et al, 2015;Ortiz-Miranda and Moragues-Faus, 2015). The CC2 group has low levels of social capital and lacks group cohesion leading to lower trust levels among members, especially between group leaders and ordinary members.…”

“…NAASA Organic issued the group's certification, and its imposed governance system is weak. Unlike Fair Trade, NAASA Organic certification does not require strong governance systems which would augment the social capital of the group (Hernandez-Aguilera et al, 2015;Ortiz-Miranda and Moragues-Faus, 2015).…”

Coffee Output Reaction to Climate Change and Commodity Price Volatility: The Nigeria Experience

“…Exports + Imports GDP (9) The interpretation of the openness index is that the higher the index, the larger the influence of trade on domestic activities and the stronger the country's economy.…”

“…by November 2013, fallen to the level of US$ 123 per pound [7]. Price volatility has wreaked drastic negative impacts on small producers in many developing countries [8,9]. Ironically, the disproportionate effects of the price volatility are mainly on the marginalized populations who make up a large population of coffee farmers, especially women and youths.…”

Examining the interface of sustainability programmes and livelihoods in the Semendo highlands of Indonesia

“…VSS has the potential to provide greater access to information and technology, via training, to help farmers improve the sustainability of production (Bray and Neilson, ). While some evidence indicates capacity building can improve livelihoods more effectively than price mechanisms (Ortiz‐Miranda and Moragues‐Faus, ), VSS tend to encourage farmers to specialise in coffee production (Vellema et al, ), which is problematic if it occurs at the expense of food production, diversified (and resilient) livelihoods or agro‐diversity (Barham and Weber, ; Stoian et al, ). Another recent systematic review of the effectiveness of certification schemes for improving socio‐economic outcomes (Oya et al, ) found that, although there was evidence for improvements in intermediate outcomes (producer prices and agricultural income), there was less evidence of impacts on endpoint outcomes (wages, household income and assets).…”