Participatory guarantee systems: organic certification to empower farmers and strengthen communities

Home, Robert; Bouagnimbeck, Hervé; Ugás, Roberto; Arbenz, Markus; Stolze, Matthias

doi:10.1080/21683565.2017.1279702

Cited by 82 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Challenges include the lack of legal recognition as an organic certification scheme (Home et al 2017;Meirelles 2003;Nelson et al 2010), 1 sustainable financing of the PGS (Fonseca 2004;Nelson et al 2010), biases in decision-making and personal conflicts (Home et al 2017;Nelson et al 2010). There are also difficulties in securing the sufficient participation of producers and consumers (Bellante 2017;Home et al 2017;Nelson et al 2010Nelson et al , 2016 due to time constraints, the long distances involved, a lack of transportation or a perceived lack of competence to carry out certification (Bellante 2017;Bouagnimbeck 2014;Fonseca 2004;Home et al 2017;Nelson et al 2010Nelson et al , 2016.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are also difficulties in securing the sufficient participation of producers and consumers (Bellante 2017;Home et al 2017;Nelson et al 2010Nelson et al , 2016 due to time constraints, the long distances involved, a lack of transportation or a perceived lack of competence to carry out certification (Bellante 2017;Bouagnimbeck 2014;Fonseca 2004;Home et al 2017;Nelson et al 2010Nelson et al , 2016. Lack of participation is associated with a lack of trust in and credibility of the PGS and hampers knowledge exchange, equal sharing of responsibilities and the full empowerment of farmers (Bouagnimbeck 2014;Kirchner 2014;Nelson et al 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…TPC's focus on outcome and the provision of guarantees through annual visits by external inspectors are considered contradictory to farmers' self-determination and empowerment, an impediment to their political involvement and an encouragement of the concentration of power in the hands of TPC bodies (Andrade 2015;Beck and Walgenbach 2003;Källander 2008;Meirelles 2003;Schulze et al 2006;Velleda Caldas et al 2014). As TPC bodies are often located in the Global North, the implementation of TPC in the Global South is perceived by some actors as imposing standards from the Global North on the Global South (Home et al 2017;Nelson et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They are considered as a means for empowering smallholders and local stakeholders (Boza Martínez 2013;Nelson et al 2016), facilitating market access and strengthening local markets (IFOAM 2007;Käl-lander 2008). PGS have also been promoted as mechanisms to facilitate sustainable community development (IFOAM 2007;Nelson et al 2010), foster knowledge creation and farmer-to-farmer knowledge exchange (Home et al 2017;Kirchner 2014), enhance farming communities' livelihoods (IFOAM 2007), support family agriculture (Coscarello and Rodríguez-Labajos 2015) and increase food security (Home and Nelson 2015;Nelson et al 2010) and food sovereignty (Nelson et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PGS are said to foster learning processes and knowledge exchange and to be built on a foundation of trust based on the direct engagement of actors (Bouagnimbeck 2014;IFOAM 2007;May 2008). It is argued that this engagement is positively linked to strong relationships among participating actors and social cohesion (Home et al 2017), which facilitates social control, respect of rules and trust among PGS members (Zanasi et al 2009). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) in Mexico: a theoretic ideal or everyday practice?

Kaufmann

Vogl

2017

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Third-party certification (TPC), the most common organic certification system, has faced growing criticism in recent years. This has led to the development of alternative certification systems, most of which can be classed as Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS). PGS have been promoted as a more suitable, cheaper and less bureaucratic alternative to TPC for local markets and are associated with additional benefits such as empowering smallholder farmers, facilitating farmer-to-farmer learning and enhancing food security and sovereignty. PGS have spread rapidly in the past few years, but studies suggest that they are facing numerous challenges that, if not addressed, may jeopardise these benefits. Using the example of three Mexican PGS initiatives, this paper explores the main challenges faced by PGS, specifically those predominantly found in producer-run PGS initiatives. Based on producer and consumer surveys, semi-structured and informal interviews, and participant and non-participant observation, the key challenges that emerged were continuous implementation of the certification process, time constraints, personal conflicts and conflict avoidance. The paper further argues that the requirements for PGS recognition under the Mexican Law for Organic Products may also threaten the continued existence of PGS and suggests that mechanisms for managing conflicts, incentivising PGS participation and mitigating opportunity costs are key if PGS are to continue to develop.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) in Mexico: a theoretic ideal or everyday practice?

Kaufmann

Vogl

2017

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Social innovation matters: The adoption of participatory guarantee systems within Italian alternative agri‐food networks

Sacchi

2019

Strategic Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participatory guarantee systems are locally based practices for assuring organic product authenticity that are proving to be a valuable tool for farmers' empowerment and social innovation. Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in locally based certification and distribution strategies of organic products. Participatory guarantee systems (PGS) simplify bureaucratic procedures for small organic producers, who are often overwhelmed by the extensive documentation required by third‐party certification. PGS development has facilitated several social processes, thus enabling social inclusion, farmers' empowerment, and mutual support.

show abstract

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) with View at Promoting Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture

Barbosa

Melo

Peixoto

et al. 2022

Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participatory guarantee systems: organic certification to empower farmers and strengthen communities

Cited by 82 publications

References 12 publications

Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) in Mexico: a theoretic ideal or everyday practice?

Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) in Mexico: a theoretic ideal or everyday practice?

Social innovation matters: The adoption of participatory guarantee systems within Italian alternative agri‐food networks

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) with View at Promoting Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About