Participatory Guarantee Systems in Peru: Two Case Studies in Lima and Apurímac and the Role of Capacity Building in the Food Chain

Abstract

Participatory guarantee systems (PGS) are an emerging strategy in the organic farming and agroecology movement for ensuring the sustainable origin of food. This study focused on the perspectives of stakeholders involved in PGS in Peru (Lima and Apurímac) in order to acquire a greater understanding of how these PGS operate and the context in which they are embedded. Qualitative and quantitative approaches were used for data collection in 2016. PGS in Peru have a fairly centralized pyramid structure, with non-governmental organizations and regional farmers’ associations the main driving forces behind PGS implementation. Improved access to markets and additional commercialization channels are major motivations for farmers to participate in PGS, but major difficulties in these two areas are still being encountered in both regions. There is a high demand among farmers for technical training. Farmers acting as internal evaluators play a special role in their local nuclei and are crucial in the PGS process. The PGS in Lima and Apurímac are an important tool in the agro-ecological movement in Peru and offer considerable potential for the support of small-scale farmers. However, there is a need for official recognition and support together with improvements in internal organization and communication for PGS to be able to maintain their principles.

Participatory Guarantee Systems: When People Want to Take Part

“…However, in PGSs, the members themselves assume this responsibility, sharing a social and geographical context and in turn issuing a guarantee through membership of the system (in the case of the producers). This is standard in all PGSs where systems have been established in different countries, such as Italy, Mexico, Peru, Japan, and Brazil [1,3,4,6,9,24,33]. Thus, producers (and consumers when they participate) take responsibility for building trust in the members of their own initiative.…”

“…To do this, they must be fully involved, including making decisions related to every aspect of the process. This process contains procedures that develop capacities and abilities, building collective knowledge and empowering those social groups involved [2,11,33].…”

“…These difficulties may have arisen because the requirements demanded of members by PGSs-especially in activities and decision-making-were not clearly stated from the outset. Interestingly, in case studies where these weaknesses were identified, PGSs were driven by external organisations, i.e., they were not self-organised and managed by the producers themselves [1,6,33]. We, therefore, recommend that in contexts where external institutions aim to promote PGSs in local communities of producers (and consumers, where possible), an analysis should be conducted on the attitudes of participation by the people to be involved or at least to have procedures of self-organisation in place which guarantee that the mechanisms of the PGSs will be developed and adopted appropriately.…”

“…These systems are designed for people with a collective and political view of agri-food systems, in line with the political dimension of Agroecology [45] as proposed by [3]. This would therefore be a prerequisite to making PGSs' procedures work (leaving aside certain structural weaknesses which may also affect their success, such as those noted by [1,14,33] or [11]). Without this collective support, PGSs would likely have weak structures and procedures which would necessitate external support for their correct functioning, running the risk of constructing the usual small certifiers, as pointed out by [1].…”

Sistemas de garantía participativos como estrategias de desarrollo para productores rurales

“…La consolidación de espacios alternativos para la comercialización, la distribución y consumo de alimentos constituye un referente para la transformación de los sistemas agroalimentarios en la medida en que dichos espacios expresan demandas, visibilizan las luchas y reivindicaciones de sus participantes. (p 3). …”