129
Carimentrand and Ballet (2010) argue about the risks of mainstreaming commodities’ markets as it happened in the case of the royal quinoa grown in Bolivia. The
commodity boom in the European market led to the introduction of mechanised
cultivation to attend the sharply increased demand.
The imbalanced capacity of producers to afford mechanisation increased the disparity in production. Advantages of mechanisation had effects on land ownership,
and the plain areas suitable to mechanised cultivation started being disputed. This
caused social disruption with fights for land among producers and communities. As
a result, disparities among producers have soared. The added value of the fair trade
produced quinoa was transferred to agro-industrial companies who started hiring
producers to guarantee large-scale commercial contracts. Therefore, the direct
transference of benefits to the small quinoa producers, who have assured the ethical
consumption market to the fair trade model, was diverted.
In the associations and cooperatives, models to protect small producers’ interests
by adding up strengths, there was deviation of collective interests to individual
interests (Carimentrand and Ballet 2010). In ANAPQUI (The National Association
of Quinoa Producers) and APROQUIRY (The Regional Association of Quinoa
Producers), the proportion of small producers’ participation was reduced, according
to examples provided by Carimentrand and Ballet (2010). In this case, one can see
that the associations of producers did not address collective interests, and the wild
fight for the external market created inequality due to mismanagement and priority
to commercial contracts. In short, there was a booming economic growth with revenues from increasing sales but no evidence of sustainable development assured to
small producers.
Authors report that the manual practices coexist with mechanised cultivation in
the Bolivian Altiplano; as a result the disparities among different provinces and
communities in the country remain (Carimentrand and Ballet 2010). This is where
externalities of globalisation for mainstreaming a product in the absence of enough
planning and sustainable development partnerships – such as government and institutions – can lead, if stringent guidelines towards sustainability are disregarded or
misrepresented.
9.6 Discussion
From both cases one can observe a prime lesson to learn: the global market access
requires planning and surveillance under sustainable development guidelines to
avoid externalities of over production. Further analysis indicates the advantages of
assisting and protecting small farmers with price stabilisation, anticipation of payments, decent work conditions and assisted market access but also government policies and guidance with regard to environment protection and capacity building, as it
happened in the case of Thai rice farmers.
Recognising and addressing the complexity of fair trade standards, the administrative logistics required, the understanding of accountability and procurement and
9 SDG 8 Decent Work and Economic Growth
Carimentrand and Ballet (2010) argue about the risks of mainstreaming commodities’ markets as it happened in the case of the royal quinoa grown in Bolivia. The
commodity boom in the European market led to the introduction of mechanised
cultivation to attend the sharply increased demand.
The imbalanced capacity of producers to afford mechanisation increased the disparity in production. Advantages of mechanisation had effects on land ownership,
and the plain areas suitable to mechanised cultivation started being disputed. This
caused social disruption with fights for land among producers and communities. As
a result, disparities among producers have soared. The added value of the fair trade
produced quinoa was transferred to agro-industrial companies who started hiring
producers to guarantee large-scale commercial contracts. Therefore, the direct
transference of benefits to the small quinoa producers, who have assured the ethical
consumption market to the fair trade model, was diverted.
In the associations and cooperatives, models to protect small producers’ interests
by adding up strengths, there was deviation of collective interests to individual
interests (Carimentrand and Ballet 2010). In ANAPQUI (The National Association
of Quinoa Producers) and APROQUIRY (The Regional Association of Quinoa
Producers), the proportion of small producers’ participation was reduced, according
to examples provided by Carimentrand and Ballet (2010). In this case, one can see
that the associations of producers did not address collective interests, and the wild
fight for the external market created inequality due to mismanagement and priority
to commercial contracts. In short, there was a booming economic growth with revenues from increasing sales but no evidence of sustainable development assured to
small producers.
Authors report that the manual practices coexist with mechanised cultivation in
the Bolivian Altiplano; as a result the disparities among different provinces and
communities in the country remain (Carimentrand and Ballet 2010). This is where
externalities of globalisation for mainstreaming a product in the absence of enough
planning and sustainable development partnerships – such as government and institutions – can lead, if stringent guidelines towards sustainability are disregarded or
misrepresented.
9.6 Discussion
From both cases one can observe a prime lesson to learn: the global market access
requires planning and surveillance under sustainable development guidelines to
avoid externalities of over production. Further analysis indicates the advantages of
assisting and protecting small farmers with price stabilisation, anticipation of payments, decent work conditions and assisted market access but also government policies and guidance with regard to environment protection and capacity building, as it
happened in the case of Thai rice farmers.
Recognising and addressing the complexity of fair trade standards, the administrative logistics required, the understanding of accountability and procurement and
9 SDG 8 Decent Work and Economic Growth