The Cultural and Political Intersection of Fair Trade and Justice

Stenn, Tamara L.

doi:10.1057/9781137331489

Cited by 11 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One question is whether prevailing gender divisions of labour in contexts where CS operate exacerbate or reduce the burden of work for women, or not. As discussed in Section 4.5.1.3, certified production, particularly when combined with organic, is reported to increase the workload of both male and female producers, though in different ways (Jaffee, 2006;Nelson et al, 2002;Lyon et al, 2010;Sen, 2009;Stenn, 2015). This gendered increase appears to disproportionately affect women's already heavy workload, as the domestic work burden remains unaffected (Hanson et al, 2012;Lyon et al, 2010Moberg, 2008).…”

Section: Producers and Pos (N=24)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, female producers may find it difficult to divert attention and time from their households or their farms to attend certification-related activities (Hanson et al, 2012;TWIN, 2013;Stenn, 2015). In fact, Hanson et al (2012:171), reporting on Fairtrade coffee producers from Nicaragua, highlight that while women's workloads from domestic and care-giving work remain unaffected, certification may result in an 'onerous double burden of work'.…”

Section: Gender (N=22)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, travelling restrictions for women, (i.e. out of fear of harassment, or lack of childcare), are reported to effectively limit their capacity to participate in meetings and training (Lyon et al, 2010;Pollack, 2006;Stenn, 2015;Stathers and Gathuthi, 2013), while lack of financial support to travel is also reported (Stenn, 2015). Additionally, socio-cultural norms and perceptions can prevent women's participation, particularly after marriage (TWIN 2013;Sen, 2009;Sutton 2014).Overall, it seems that it is particularly poorer women with heavier workloads who are more likely to be excluded from participation, although women from wealthier households are also reported to be restricted (Sen, 2009).…”

Section: Gender (N=22)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, in terms of the division of labour men tend to get more involved in off-farm certification-related activities (i.e. meetings, technical training, planning, loans), while women are left with less visible (and more manual) tasks, such as plant care and post-harvest processing (Stenn, 2015;Nelson et al, 2002). reports that women involved in certified coffee production in Costa Rica are considered as helpers rather than workers, while profits are controlled and distributed by the male members of the household.…”

Section: Producers and Pos (N=24)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, transparency at the management level, but also during transactions with members Nelson et al, 2002;Stenn, 2015), as well as high-quality services, particularly credit and agricultural extension services Ryan, 2011;Setrini, 2011), are reported to play a decisive role in attracting and retaining PO members. In particular, credit schemes are often reported as the prime reason for joining and remaining loyal to a PO, whether certified or not (Ryan, 2011), although Donovan and Pole (2014b) also report that indebted producers who are still in need of cash may side-sell their production, in order to avoid repaying their debt to the PO and secure some income for their families.…”

Section: Pos Context: Management Relationships With Producers and Bumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effects of certification schemes for agricultural production on socio-economic outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Oya¹,

Schaefer²,

Skalidou³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding, producing and synthesising high-quality evidence of what works, for whom, why and at what cost. We believe that better and policy-relevant evidence will help make development more effective and improve people's lives. 3ie systematic reviews 3ie systematic reviews appraise and synthesise the available high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of social and economic development interventions in low-and middle-income countries. These reviews follow scientifically recognised review methods, and are peerreviewed and quality assured according to internationally accepted standards. 3ie is providing leadership in demonstrating rigorous and innovative review methodologies, such as using theory-based approaches suited to inform policy and programming in the dynamic contexts and challenges of low-and middle-income countries. About this reviewEffects of certification schemes for agricultural production on socio-economic outcomes in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review, was submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of grant SR6.1158 awarded under Systematic Review Window 6. This review is available on the 3ie website. 3ie is publishing this technical report as received from the authors; it has been formatted to 3ie style. 3ie will also publish a summary report of this review, designed for use by decision makers, which is forthcoming.All content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not represent the opinions of 3ie, its donors or its board of commissioners. Any errors are also the sole responsibility of the authors. Comments or queries should be directed to the corresponding author, Carlos Oya, co2@soas.ac.uk Certification schemes (CS hereafter) set voluntary standards and monitor their compliance (through independent auditors) to make agricultural production socially sustainable and agricultural trade fairer for producers and workers. Although CS are mainly characterized by the description above, they can also be systems engaging in a wider range of activities in policy, advocacy, capacity building, and building markets and supply chains around the objectives of social sustainability. These standards matter for consumers, especially for ethical and safety-aware consumers. They are expected to contribute to a wide range of socio-economic and environmental outcomes, ultimately improving the wellbeing of farmers and agricultural workers, whether employed by corporate plantations or individual producers. They try to achieve these aims through a combination of standard-setting actions, capacity building and training different types of market interventions, such as guaranteed market outlets, price premium, and credit facilities among others, and the application of adequate labour standards. Do certification schemes work for the wellbeing of agricultural producers and workers in low and middle incom...

show abstract