Will Low

Mainstreaming fair trade: adoption, assimilation, appropriation

Fair Trade is a global social movement that blends an alternative business model with explicit transformative objectives—a ‘business and campaign’. This paper explores the ways in which the movement challenges aspects of hegemony, including colonialism and free trade, to transform traditionally exploitative global production and trade relations. We present a case that the mainstreaming of Fair Trade into commercial distribution channels has not led to its principles being embedded in conventional trade. Instead, the dominant discourses of Fair Trade are currently assimilation, and appropriation or ‘clean‐wash’. Finally, we suggest ways in which elements of the movement have maintained their original counter‐hegemonic character, taking Fair Trade beyond the current discourse of individuals ‘shopping for a better world’ and into realms of collective decision making about consumption, and new producer/distributor relationships that challenge the distribution of value, through the ‘alternative high street’.

The labour behind the (Fair Trade) label

Purpose – This paper critically examines the marketing of fair trade, arguing that the use of the term producer conflates a number of categories of actors, not all of whom benefit equally. The authors contend that the two existing archetypes – the noble peasant farmer and the independent artisan – and the emerging archetype of the “empowered decision maker” serve to obscure and mask complex labour relationships.Design/methodology/approach – This conceptual paper draws on a wide range of literature and original fieldwork conducted by the authors to illustrate the three marketing archetypes in the fair trade value chain.Findings – Hidden behind the three dominant archetypes used to promote fair trade is a relationship between fair trade “producers” (small farmer, craft enterprise and plantations) and permanent and temporary/casual labourers. The trickle‐down of fair trade benefits to these workers is uneven at best and falls far short of the expectation of empowerment of all “producers” that fair trade prom...

Out of the Wild and into the Kitchen

There has been no shortage of calls for change in the global and local food and agricultural systems (e.g., Pollan, 2006; Smith & Mackinnon, 2007). The food sector is argued to offer key solutions for sustainable development in terms of hunger, poverty eradication, and the creation of long-term food security (UN, 2015). Numerous attempts have been made in the Global North to reimagine our relationship to the modern food system, from farmers’ markets, to zero-mile diets and even to withdrawal from mainstream provisioning.

Running wild in the marketplace: the articulation and negotiation of an alternative food network

ABSTRACT In this paper, we examine how actors within what we conceptualise as an emerging wild food alternative network are navigating through the foodscape to find alternatives to homogenous and standardised food products. Drawing on data from different research engagements with wild food consumers and producers over the last decade in Canada, we use the context of wild foods to explore how the ‘alternative’ is being articulated and negotiated. Inspired by scholarly work exploring the pedagogical promise of food, we also explore the transformational potential of the ‘alternative’ – how bringing wild foods to the table can both inspire and teach consumers about sustainability and alternative consumption practices. We conclude with directions for future marketing research on alternative food networks.

Poverty, Prosperity, Progress (P¯ hara, T¯ nui, K¯ kiri), second biennial Aotearoa New Zealand International Development Studies Network (DEVNET) conference, 17-19 November 2000, Wellington

While the Aotearoa New Zealand Development Studies Network (DEVNET) has existed for some time, this is only its second biennial conference, bringing together over 300 people working in the broad field of development, internationally and locally. Giving any sense of the content of over 60 papers and four keynote speeches is a daunting task, particularly given the breadth of the conference themes. Hence we shall provide some general observations about the conference and focus on themes emerging from the keynote speeches. The conference clearly achieved its aim of bringing together academics and development practitioners. Taken together, almost half the presentations were from development practitioners—NGOs, government, and private consultants or consultancy firms. The conference also enjoyed a good mix of local and international presenters and delegates. Seven presenters were based in Pacific Island countries, six were from Asia, and seven from the rest of the world. Contributions from Europe were notable by their absence, save one exception, and even more surprisingly only four presenters came from Australia. The conference format offered a combination of keynote/plenary sessions and papers given in 90-minute slots, organised thematically. The sheer number of papers sometimes left little time for discussion and questions and the pace often felt hurried. The addition of workshop sessions could have provided an opportunity to share crosscutting issues, explore connections between papers, and learn the common lessons from New Zealand, the Pacific, Asia, and beyond. Sadly, with such a tight schedule, workshops were not possible. Keynote addresses offered some opportunity to think more widely about development issues and for questions from the floor. However, it was noted that few women speakers came forward, particularly in the first session. Whatever the nature of the power dynamics of the setting (large hall, formal seating, open microphones) which explains this reticence, it ought to be possible to find a process that more actively fosters the participation and involvement of women in sharing their experiences and voicing their opinions. Finally, a number of the papers made use of sophisticated presentational equipment: PowerPoint, big-screen projection, and video. One can understand that scientific conferences insist on PowerPoint so the technical material is presented legibly, and that business conferences thrive on the latest in multimedia. It would be sad, however, if development conferences, where the interchange of experiences and ideas is central, became arenas where the medium is the message. We now consider how the conference dealt with the themes Poverty, Progress, and