Who decides what is fair in fair trade? The agri-environmental governance of standards, access, and price

By Chris Bacon. 2010

219 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Plant Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/57ffb71a82c6d8867f43db0ba6f5e28b2a7d2393

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

In Plant Science

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Shade Coffee: Update on a Disappearing Refuge for Biodiversity (2014, background): “…certifications are often associated with higher coffee prices, the small volumes sold and additional certification costs often counterbalance added income at the household level, especially because the real price premiums delivered to farmers have declined during the past decades (Bacon 2010).”
Weak Coffee: Certification and Co-Optation in the Fair Trade Movement (2012, background): “Since the recent price crisis ended in 2005, coffee producer organizations have increasingly complained that even for those groups able to sell all of their export-grade coffee at fair trade prices, many of their members could not cover their costs of production (Bacon 2010; Jaffee 2007).”
Multiactor Governance and the Environment (2012, background): “Certification: formal approval of certain characteristics of an item, person, or organization following a procedure that may include review, education, assessment, or audit Examples of multiactor governance arrangements in the sustainability realm range from certification initiatives for timber (121”
Who Governs Socially-Oriented Voluntary Sustainability Standards? Not the Producers of Certified Products (2017, background): “…credibility (Schepers, 2010 on PEFC); compromised accountability (e.g., Bain, 2010 on GlobalGAP); diluted standards (Renard, 2015 on FI); structures that reflect the ideas of traditional elites (Dingwerth, 2008 on FSC); and reduced benefits for intended beneficiaries (e.g., Bacon, 2010 on FI).”
Transnational private governance between the logics of empowerment and control (2015, background): “Furthermore, relating back to the concerns about size discrimination noted above, with Fairtrade there are worries that courting larger retailers to license the logo, although generating greater demand, can mean these companies have undue influence over the direction and focus of Fairtrade, moving i”
Guest Editorial, part of a Special Feature on A Social-Ecological Analysis of Diversified Farming Systems: Benefits, Costs, Obstacles, and Enabling Policy Frameworks Diversified Farming Systems: An Agroecological, Systems-based Alternative to Modern Industrial Agriculture (2012, background): “However, recent changes to standards now allow transnational agricultural trade companies to export certified Fair Trade products in direct and potentially unfair competition with the smallholder organizations that this system intended to empower (Bacon 2010, Jaffee and Howard 2010).”
Food crises, food regimes and food movements: rumblings of reform or tides of transformation? (2011, unknown): “The question has been directed at different projects and sectors within the food movement (e.g. fair trade), producing uneven and sometimes contradictory answers (Bacon 2010).”
Beyond a subjective theory of value and towards a ‘fair price’: an organizational perspective on Fairtrade minimum price setting (2010, methodology): “According to its main author (Bacon, 2010), the study challenged FLO’s definition of CoSP.”