- Problem statement

- Current PGS initiatives

- Introduction: What are PGS

Arbenz, Markus

Bouagnimbeck, Hervé

Home, Robert

Stolze, Matthias

Ugas, Roberto

Organic Eprints

Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBLinfo.suisse@fibl.org, www.fibl.orgParticipatory guarantee systems: organic certification to empower farmers and strengthen communitiesChania July 2-5, 2018IFSA 2018Robert Homewww.fibl.org• Roberto Ugas, • Hervé Bouagnimbeck, • Markus Arbenz, and• Matthias StolzeCo‐authorswww.fibl.orgProblem statement› Certification is needed› Usually 3rd party› But expensive: Especially in developing world› Often organic by default› Alternative system needed› PGS are an alternative› Currently around 110 000 producers in 72 countries› This number is growingwww.fibl.orgCurrent PGS initiatives4www.fibl.orgProblem statement› But little research› Into what the benefits are for farmers› into what makes them tick› Into why some succeed and some failwww.fibl.org› Organic verification systems• Active participation of stakeholders• Built on a foundation of trust, social networks, and knowledge building and exchange› Intended for local market› Producers have to be accessible to consumers• Typically involve • Producers • Consumers• Stakeholders such as staff from NGOs, universities and extension services, government representatives, and consultantsIntroduction: What are PGS?www.fibl.orgMethodology› Interviews with 85 farmers: analysed according to content› Mexico, Peru, South Africa, India, Philippines, France, Brasil› Interpreted with empowerment theory› Empowerment at individual and community levels› Enhancing factors include› social cohesion› collective infrastructure› opportunity› and social process theory› the ways in which individuals and groups interact within a systemwww.fibl.orgMain results: Social cohesion› Bonds created between participating farmers› Information exchange› Improved techniques› Locally suitable varieties› Mutual support and (even) on farm help› Often organised by women› More intensive contact between participating farmers› Self controlled › Collective decision‐making› Free riders not toleratedwww.fibl.orgMain results: Collective infrastructure› Efficiencies of collective organisation› Collective marketing› Transport› Market access› Green shops/Honey huts› Collective buying› Reduces input prices› Seed banks› Critical mass neededwww.fibl.orgMain results: Opportunity› Evidence of empowerment› Empowerment of women› Seed banks/PGS administration› Sometimes the first recognition› Access to finance› Low interest rates› Internal controls› Not as easy as sometimes reported› Access to knowledge resources› Such as market analyseswww.fibl.orgMain results: Threats› Common to all farming types› Overproduction› Crop losses› Particular to PGS› Heavy reliance on key organisers› Not suitable for export › so only local markets› Define localwww.fibl.orgBut where are they now?› Ecovida (BRASIL)› not members of IFOAM - Organics International and the standard they use is not included in the IFOAM Family of Standards. › Were recognized by IFOAM but no longer. › Still going strong› ANPE/IDMA (PERU): › never obtained the Official IFOAM PGS Recognition.› Still going strong› BONM (SA): › never obtained the Official IFOAM PGS Recognition.› I don’t know. But there was one person who carried it.12www.fibl.orgBut where are they now?› Green Foundation (INDIA): › never obtained the Official IFOAM PGS Recognition.› Still going strong› Keystone Foundation (INDIA): › never obtained the Official IFOAM PGS Recognition.› Still going strong. › REDAC (Mexico): › not maintaining their standards anymore and the network seems to be inactive. › never obtained the Official IFOAM PGS Recognition.› PGS still in Mexico. University of Chapingo› N&P (France) and MASIPAG (Philippines) are both officially recognized› Still going strong.13www.fibl.orgConclusions› Results are about social processes rather than certification› The original purpose of PGS has become secondary› Social processes provide real benefits of participation› Still many problems to be solved› Particularly about export› Particularly about organisational sustainability› More work to be donewww.fibl.orgPublications›Home, R., Bouagnimbeck, H., Ugas, R., Arbenz, M. & Stolze ,M. (2017), Participatory guarantee systems: organic certification to empower farmers and strengthen communities, Agroecology and Sustainable Food SystemsVol. 41(5). ›Home, R. and Nelson, E. (2015), The Role of Participatory Guarantee Systems for Food Security. In Oehen, B. and Hilbeck, A. (eds.) Feeding the People: Agroecology for Nourishing the World and Transforming the Agri-food System.  http://orgprints.org/30165/1/home-nelson-feeding-people-ifoamEUGroup-chapter5-p26-29.pdfwww.fibl.orgContactRobert HomeResearch Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBLAckerstrasse 113 / Postfach 2195070 FrickSwitzerlandPhone +41 62 8657-272Fax +41 62 8657-273info.suisse@fibl.orgwww.fibl.org06 March 2019 16

Participatory guarantee systems: organic certification to empower farmers and strengthen communities

http://orgprints.org/34865/1/home-etal-2018-Presentation-IFSA2018_PGS.pdf

Participatory guarantee systems: organic certification to empower farmers and strengthen communities

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Organic Eprints