Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Uneven and unequal people-centered development: the case of Fair Trade and Malawi sugar producers

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper advances critical Fair Trade literature by exploring reasons for and lessons from uneven and unequal lived experiences of Fairtrade certification. Fieldwork was conducted in 2007 and 2008 to explore views and develop interpretations from various actors directly and indirectly participating in a Fairtrade certified sugar organization in Malawi. By exploring an embedded social and political context in a production place, and challenging assumptions and expectations of a Fair Trade community empowerment approach, research reveals intended and unintended consequences since certification. Findings propose lessons to adopt more nuanced understandings of place and context in Fair Trade approaches to facilitate more balanced community empowerment outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Fair Trade, as used in this paper, refers to a broader trade justice and development movement pioneered by Fair Trade Organizations that incorporates a wider range of products, campaigning and awareness raising activities. Fairtrade is a certification and labelling system governed by FLO and FLO-Cert to certify products that carry the Fairtrade Mark.

  2. Material from doctoral research funded by the ESRC and collaboration between (will be completed upon acceptance).

  3. In contrast to other commodities such as coffee, tea, cocoa, and bananas in a number of countries. For instance see the work of Bacon (2004), Dolan (2008), Murray et al. (2003), Ronchi (2002), Shreck (2005), Tallontire (2000), and Taylor et al. (2005).

  4. Local government districts in Malawi are subdivided into Traditional Authorities governed by chiefs. In many ways traditional structures in rural society in Malawi exist in parallel with national and local government administrative structures. TA leaders, for instance, govern access to customary land and associated rights to cultivate on that land.

  5. Intended to be effective from October 2015.

  6. I. Parrott, personal communication 10 June 2008, and B. Namata, personal communication 27 September 2007.

  7. There are other aims related to the environment that are not relevant to this study.

  8. Situation at the time of research, since under review by the FLO and FTOs.

  9. As indicated earlier in the paper, this was amended to invite two employees into the committee.

  10. In their research Eberhart (2006) and Prieto et al. (2004) warn of a risk of producing “islands of prosperity” where only a limited minority (elite) capture benefits from Fair Trade in low-income communities.

  11. An issue also discussed by Hickey and Mohan (2004) and Luttrell et al. (2007).

Abbreviations

ACP:

African Caribbean Pacific

CSA:

Cane Supply Agreement

DOP:

Division of proceeds

EU:

European Union

FLO:

Fairtrade Labeling Organizations International

FSP:

Fairtrade Social Premium

FTO:

Fair Trade Organization

GAP:

Good Agricultural Practice

GPN:

Global Production Networks

GVC:

Global value chain

KCGL:

Kasinthula Cane Growers Limited (in Malawi)

References

  • Amin, A. 2001. Moving on: Institutionalism in economic geography. Environment and Planning A 33: 1237–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arce, A. 2009. Living in times of solidarity: Fair Trade and the fractured life worlds of Guatemalan coffee farmers. Journal of International Development 21(7): 1031–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, C. 2004. Confronting the coffee crisis: Can Fair Trade, organic, and specialty coffees reduce small-scale farmer vulnerability in northern Nicaragua? World Development 33(3): 497–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedford, A., M.E. Blowfield, D.G. Burnett, and P. Greenhalgh. 2002. Value chains: Lessons from the cocoa and tea sectors. Greenwich: NRI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlan, A. 2008. Making or marketing a difference? An anthropological examination of Fair Trade cocoa from Ghana. Research in Economic Anthropology 28: 171–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolwig, S., S. Ponte, and A. du Toit. 2008. Integrating poverty, gender, and environmental concerns into value chain analysis. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies, DIIS working paper no. 2008/16.

  • Casson, M.C., M.D. Giusta, and U.S. Kambhampati. 2010. Formal and informal institutions and development. World Development 38(2): 137–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coe, N., and M. Hess. 2007. Global production networks: challenges and debates. GPERG workshop University of Manchester, 25–26 January 2007. http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/geography/research/gpe/downloads/Manchester_Jan07_positionpaper_final.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb 2009.

  • Coe, N.M., P. Dicken, and M. Hess. 2008a. Global production networks: Debates and challenges. Journal of Economic Geography 8: 267–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coe, N.M., P. Dicken, and M. Hess. 2008b. Global production networks: Realizing the potential. Journal of Economic Geography 8: 271–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumbers, A., C. Nativel, and P. Routledge. 2008. Labor agency and union positionalities in global production networks. Journal of Economic Geography 8: 369–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daviron, B., and S. Ponte. 2005. The coffee paradox. London: Zed Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • DEFRA. 2006. Reform of the EU sugar regime. London: DEFRA.

    Google Scholar 

  • DFID 1999. Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets. http://training.itcilo.it/decentwork/staffconf2002/presentations/SLA%20Guidance%20notes%20Section%202.pdf. Accessed 17 July 2007.

  • Dolan, C. 2010. Virtual moralities: The mainstreaming of Fairtrade in Kenya tea fields. Geoforum 41(1): 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, C. 2008. In the mists of development: Fairtrade in Kenyan tea fields. Globalizations 5(2): 305–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberhart, N. 2006. Summary of the Fair Trade impact study concerning small farming organizations and families and their lands in the Yungas coffee region, Bolivia. Lyon: AVSF.

    Google Scholar 

  • FLO. 2009a. A charter of Fair Trade principles. http://www.fairtrade. net/fileadmin/user_upload/content/2009/about_us/documents/Fair_Trade_Charter.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept 2009.

  • FLO. 2009b. Generic Fairtrade standards for small producers’ organizations. http://www.fairtrade.net/fileadmin/user_upload/content/2009/standards/documents/Aug09_EN_SPO_Standards.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept 2009.

  • Getz, C., and A. Shreck. 2006. What organic and Fair Trade labels do not tell us: Towards a place-based understanding of certification. International Journal of Consumer Studies 30(5): 490–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J., P. Dicken, M. Hess, N. Coe, and H.W.-c Yeung. 2002. Global production networks and the analysis of economic development. Review of International Political Economy 9(3): 436–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, S., and G. Mohan. 2004. Participation: from tyranny to transformation? Exploring new approaches to participation in development. London: Zed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. 2005. Economic geographies: Circuits, flows and spaces. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, A. 2005. Geographies of exchange and circulation: Alternative trading spaces. Progress in Human Geography 29(4): 496–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, A. 2001. Global commodity networks, ethical trade and governmentality: Organizing business responsibility in the Kenyan cut flower industry. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 26(4): 390–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, J. 2005. Shaping value chains for development: Global value chains in agribusiness. Frankfurt: GTZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illovo. 2008. World of sugar 2008. http://www.illovosugar.com/ World_of_sugar/WorldSugarPricesandUpdates.aspx. Accessed 23 March 2009.

  • Jaffee, D. 2007. Brewing justice. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. 2001. Institutional re(turns) and the strategic-relational approach. Environment and Planning A 33: 1213–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, S. 2009. Beyond a fair price: The co-operative movement and Fair Trade. Manchester: Co-operative College, Paper 14.

  • Leslie, D., and S. Reimer. 1999. Spatializing commodity chains. Progress in Human Geography 23(3): 401–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luetchford, P. 2008. The hands that pick fair trade coffee: Beyond the charms of the family farm. Research in Economic Anthropology 28: 143–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luiz, J.M. 2009. Institutions and economic performance: Implications for African development. Journal of International Development 21: 58–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luttrell, C., S. Quiroz, C. Scrutton, and K. Bird. 2007. Understanding and operationalizing empowerment. Berne, London: SDC, ODI.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, G. 2001. Beyond soft institutionalism: Accumulation, regulation, and their geographical fixes. Environment and Planning A 33: 1145–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. 2003. Institutional approaches in economic geography. In A companion to economic geography, ed. E. Sheppard, and T. Barnes, 77–94. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mayoux, L. 2001. Impact assessment of Fair Trade and ethical enterprise development. EDIAIS paper. http://www.sed.man.ac.uk/research/iarc/ediais/pdf/IAofFairTrade.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2005.

  • Mendez, V.E. 2002. Fair Trade networks in two coffee cooperatives of western El Salvador. Fort Collins: Colorado State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J., A. Dorward, J. Kydd, C. Poulton, and L. Smith. 2000. Sustainable livelihoods and new institutional economics. http://www.livelihoods.org/PIP/pip/nieint.html. Accessed 24 July 2007.

  • Murray, D.L., L.T. Raynolds, and P.L. Taylor. 2006. The future of Fair Trade coffee: dilemmas facing Latin America’s small-scale producers. Development in Practice 16(2): 179–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, D.L., L.T. Raynolds, and P.L. Taylor. 2003. One cup at a time: Poverty alleviation and Fair Trade coffee in Latin America. Fort Collins: Colorado State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neilson, J., and B. Pritchard. 2009. Value chain struggles: institutions and governance in the plantation districts of South India. Chichester, West Sussex, England, and Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

  • Nicholls, A., and C. Opal. 2005. Fair Trade: Market-driven ethical consumption. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. 1991. Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1): 97–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NSO. 2006. Malawi international merchandise trade statistics http://www.nso.malawi.net/data_on_line/economics/Trade%20on%20NSO%20website/Trade_Index.html. Accessed 4 March 2009.

  • Philo, C., and H. Parr. 2000. Institutional geographies: Introductory remarks. Geoforum 31: 513–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, C. 2004. Economic pathways for Malawi’s rural households. London: CARE Malawi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prieto, M., C. Seeley, and D.F. Murphy. 2004. Supply chain codes of conduct and Fair Trade initiatives. Chapter 13, Trade and gender: Opportunities and challenges for developing countries. New York: United Nations.

  • Raynolds, L.T. 2004. The globalization of organic agro-food networks. World Development 32(5): 725–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raynolds, L.T. 2002. Poverty alleviation through participation in Fair Trade coffee networks: existing research and critical issues. Background paper prepared for project funded by the Community and Resource Development Program, The Ford Foundation, New York.

  • Raynolds, L.T., D. Murray, and J. Wilkinson. 2007. Fair Trade. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, B. 2009. Restructuring the EU-ACP sugar regime: Out of the strong there came forth sweetness. Review of International Political Economy 16(4): 673–679. iFirst: 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronchi, L. 2002. The impact of Fair Trade on producers and their organizations. University of Sussex, PRUS working paper no. 11.

  • Ruben, R., R. Fort, and G. Zúñiga-Arias. 2009. Measuring the impact of fair trade on development. Development in Practice 19(6): 777–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.K. 1999. Development as freedom. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shreck, A. 2005. Resistance, redistribution, and power in the Fair Trade banana initiative. Agriculture and Human Values 22: 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slob, B. 2006. A fair share for smallholders: A value chain analysis of the coffee sector. Amsterdam: SOMO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallontire, A. 2000. Partnerships in fair trade: Reflections from a case study of Cafedirect. Development in Practice 10(2): 166–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallontire, A.M., M. Opondo, V. Nelson, and A. Martin. 2011. Beyond the vertical? Using value chains and governance as a framework to analyze private standards initiatives in agri-food chains. Agriculture and Human Values 28: 427–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P.L., D. Murray, and L.T. Raynolds. 2005. Keeping trade fair: Governance challenges in the Fair Trade coffee initiative. Sustainable Development 13: 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNICEF. 2006. The Malawi social cash transfer pilot scheme, preliminary lessons learned. http://www.unicef.org/policyanalysis/files/The_Malawi_Social_Cash_Transfer_Pilot_Scheme__Preliminary_Lessons_Learned.pdf . Accessed 2 May 2008.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the countless number of people in Malawi who participated in and supported this research. This includes research participant members of Kasinthula Cane Growers Limited and the Chikwawa district who welcomed me into their community and offered significant time and effort to share their experiences, opinions, and concerns. It is from that information that all of this work has been built upon and would not have been possible otherwise. My gratitude extends to Jason Agar and associates of Kadale who kindly hosted me in Blantyre and provided priceless advice and support. Also thanks to the research assistants for their excellent work with me in the field and for their friendship. Funding for this research was provided by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC Studentship PTA-033-2006-00041). The selection of the case study, research proposal, and funding for research were secured through collaboration between Newcastle University and Traidcraft Plc.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Medway Campus, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK

    David P. Phillips

Authors
  1. David P. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David P. Phillips.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Phillips, D.P. Uneven and unequal people-centered development: the case of Fair Trade and Malawi sugar producers. Agric Hum Values 31, 563–576 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-014-9500-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-014-9500-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation