Putting the farmer’s face on food: governance and the producer–consumer relationship in local food systems

Papaoikonomou, Eleni; Ginieis, Matías

doi:10.1007/s10460-016-9695-2

Cited by 32 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These markets are not solely points of sales for organic products but rather "seek to support local food security through the provision of safe food at fair prices, improve local ecology by encouraging organic production, build a sense of community through direct sale and cultural activities, and educate the public about environmental and social issues related to food systems" (Nelson et al 2010, p. 231). This definition mirrors different rationales underlying PGS adoption, the diverse dimensions of PGS and some elements promoted as inherent to local food systems, and alternative and civic food networks (DuPuis and Goodman 2005; Morgan et al 2006;Papaoikonomou and Ginieis 2017;Renting et al 2012).…”

Section: Pgs In Mexico and The Network Of Local Organic Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each stand had a vote, mirroring the ideal of collective decision-making in PGS (IFOAM 2007). According to Papaoikonomou and Ginieis (2017), collective decision-making is important for decentralising information flows and avoiding concentration of information with the PCC and can lead to "a greater sense of collective empowerment" (Papaoikonomou and Ginieis 2017, p. 61). Other working committees ( Fig.…”

Section: Market and Pgs Organisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, some producers arranged farm visits for consumers that were not related to the certification process (Resp.4/I1). These visits, as with regular certification visits, workshops and festivities in the marketplace and intense conversations between producers and consumers noticed on market days, represent important sharing events that can foster a reconnection between producers and their customers and are common in other types of LFS as well (Feagan and Henderson 2009;Flora and Bregendahl 2012;Nost 2014;Papaoikonomou and Ginieis 2017;Thompson and Coskuner-Balli 2007).…”

Section: Functionality Of the Certification Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Collective decision-making can decentralise information flows (Papaoikonomou and Ginieis 2017), but can also be a potential source of conflict. Consensus building, equal participation and sharing of responsibilities can be difficult to achieve (Nelson et al 2010;Papaoikonomou and Ginieis 2017).…”

Section: Social Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consensus building, equal participation and sharing of responsibilities can be difficult to achieve (Nelson et al 2010;Papaoikonomou and Ginieis 2017). Home et al (2017) argue that participation in the PGS strengthens relationships among producers, but also implies challenges inherent to collective work such as personal differences and problems because it is not always possible to have an equal sharing of benefits and responsibilities.…”

Section: Social Conflictsmentioning

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: Pgs In Mexico and The Network Of Local Organic Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Market and Pgs Organisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Functionality Of the Certification Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Conflictsmentioning

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

Local Food Supply Chain Dynamics and Resilience during COVID‐19

Thilmany¹,

Canales²,

Low³

et al. 2020

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

179

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local and regional food systems (LRFS) innovated during COVID‐19 to respond to market demand and policy changes. Given their unique characteristics, we identify drivers that explain why local responses to COVID‐19 vary when compared with the national dialogue on food supply chain disruptions. We suggest LFRS enterprises are nimble and connected to supply chain partners, allowing them to innovate quickly with a targeted approach. Considering the shorter supply chains and smaller operations typical of LRFS, we assert the current regulatory environment's fairness and relevance may be scrutinized. In conclusion, we articulate an updated research and technical assistance agenda for LRFS.

show abstract

Institutional entrepreneurship and the negotiation and blending of multiple logics in the Southern Arizona local food system

Mars

Schau

2016

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Putting the farmer’s face on food: governance and the producer–consumer relationship in local food systems

Cited by 32 publications

References 46 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?

Local Food Supply Chain Dynamics and Resilience during COVID‐19

Institutional entrepreneurship and the negotiation and blending of multiple logics in the Southern Arizona local food system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About