List of Figures List of Tables Preface Introduction 1. A Movement or a Market? 2. Coffee, Commodities, Crisis 3. One Region, Two Markets 4. The Difference a Market Makes: Livelihoods and Labor 5. A Sustainable Cup? Fair Trade, Shade-Grown Coffee, and Organic Production 6. Eating and Staying on the Land: Food Security and Migration 7. Dancing with the Devil? 8. Mejor, Pero No Muy Bien Que Digamos": The Limits of Fair Trade 9. Strengthening Fair Trade Conclusion Acknowledgments Appendix: Research Methods Notes Bibliography Index

Brewing Justice: Fair Trade Coffee, Sustainability, and Survival (Updated Edition)

List of Diagrams - List of Graphs - List of Maps - List of Tables - List of Abbreviations - Glossary of Foreign Terms - Introduction - Security and Vulnerability in Livelihood Systems - Coping and Adapting - Monitoring How People Feed Themselves - Drought, Food Insecurity and Early Warning in Mali - Livelihood Safety Nets: the Inner Niger Delta in the Sahel - Livelihood Systems - Production Entitlements - Exchange Entitlements - Coping and Adaptive Entitlements - Tracking and Tackling Food Vulnerability - References - Index

Adaptable Livelihoods: Coping with Food Insecurity in the Malian Sahel@@@Securite alimentaire et strategies de maitrise chez les pecheurs du delta interieur du fleuve Niger au Mali

Many of the key problems in food systems are linked specifically to industrial agriculture: uniform crop monocultures relying on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, industrial feedlots (the infamous "CAFOs") using preventive antibiotics. This form of agriculture is generating negative outcomes on multiple fronts: widespread degradation of land, water and ecosystems; high GHG emissions; biodiversity losses; persistent hunger and micro-nutrient deficiencies alongside the rapid rise of obesity and diet-related diseases; and livelihood stresses for farmers around the world.

From uniformity to diversity: a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological systems

Agroecology is a promising alternative to industrial agriculture, with the potential to avoid the negative social and ecological consequences of input-intensive production. Transitioning to agroecological production is, however, a complex project that requires diverse contributions from the outside of scientific institutions. Agroecologists therefore collaborate with traditional producers and agroecological movements. Permaculture is one such agroecological movement, with a broad international distribution and a unique approach to system design. Despite a high public profile, permaculture has remained relatively isolated from scientific research. Though the potential contribution of permaculture to agroecological transition is great, it is limited by this isolation from science, as well as from oversimplifying claims, and the lack of a clear definition. Here, we review scientific and popular permaculture literature. A systematic review discusses quantitative bibliometric data, including keyword analysis. A qualitative review identifies and assesses major themes, proposals, and claims. The manuscript follows a stratified definition of permaculture as design system, best practice framework, worldview, and movement. The major points of our analysis are as follows: (1) Principles and topics largely complement and even extend principles and topics found in the agroecological literature. (2) Distinctive approaches to perennial polyculture, water management, and the importance of agroecosystem configuration exceed what is documented in the scientific literature and thus suggest promising avenues of inquiry. (3) Discussions of practice consistently underplay the complexity, challenges, and risks that producers face in developing diversified and integrated production systems. (4) The movement is mobilizing diverse forms of social support for sustainability, in geographically diverse locations. (5) And scholarship in permaculture has always been a diverse marginal sector, but is growing.

/pdf/permaculture-for-agroecology-design-movement-practice-and-2cj8io9t1j.pdf

Permaculture for agroecology: design, movement, practice, and worldview. A review

Cultivation, processing, and consumption of coffee are dynamic processes that connect coffee farmers and agro-ecosystems with coffee drinkers spanning the globe. As a cash crop, coffee cultivation gained popularity in the Old and then the New world, and flourished under colonial regimes of the nineteenth and twentieth century. Coffee production patterns and management styles have changed ­drastically in the past two centuries and continue to shift, with the greatest recent expansions in East Asia. Traditionally, coffee is cultivated under a canopy of shade trees, a practice that ensures the longevity of the farm, supports biodiversity, and provides communities with a broad array of ecosystem services. However, many modern management schemes abandon shade practices. On the other hand, specialty coffee markets, like certified organic, certified shade (Bird Friendly), Fair Trade, and other certified coffees have gained recent popularity, though they still represent a small fraction of the global coffee economy. The global coffee economy is comprised of a wide array of coffee value chains that connect farmers with consumers, and thus impact farmer livelihoods at multiple spatial scales. Key players in the coffee value chain include local cooperatives, national government agencies, and global certification agencies. Similarly, ecosystem services provided by shade coffee occur at local, regional, and global scales, including pollination, erosion-control, and carbon sequestration, respectively. While the ecological and socio-economic costs and benefits associated with shade coffee are clear, this review reveals that there are many challenges to bridging sustainable coffee management with livelihood security. Furthermore, in this review we identify existing gaps in the literature and a number of promising research directions concerning the ecological and socio-economic impacts of coffee production.

A Review of Ecosystem Services, Farmer Livelihoods, and Value Chains in Shade Coffee Agroecosystems

EurepGAP is a pioneering field level food safety protocol called ‘good agricultural practices’ currently exercising influence over the global food quality assurance system. Developed by a consortium of major European retailers, this private standard enforces codes of conduct that address issues of health and safety for producers and consumers, as well as working conditions and environmental management on the farmland. Despite various merits and benefits that the standard is premised to offer, the institutional design gives a financial edge to powerful large farms and exporters while diminishing opportunities for smaller growers and exporters to remain in the profitable agricultural export sector of the Global South. This paper explores the institutional origin and evolution of EurepGAP, discusses entry barriers and risks that EurepGAP imposes on the global value chain stakeholders, as well as the ethical implications from broader theoretical perspectives. Subsequently, it examines the evolving nature of a new trend in the fresh fruit and vegetable sector, i.e., the rise of public GAP standards. Promoted by some governments in the Global South, these GAP standards emphasize support for horizontal partnerships among value chain stakeholders, farmer participation, and less capital-intensive agricultural innovations. The paper argues that, within certain limitations, these GAP standards have the potential to be the major alternative GAP approach by encouraging a much broader inclusion of small-scale producers towards the attainment of various social, economic, and environmental benefits.

Reflections on the Growing Influence of Good Agricultural Practices in the Global South

Agroecology and SL studies are multi-disciplinary development schools that investigate the contexts and struggles of the rural poor in making a living under various adverse conditions. Both schools have made critical strides in rural development by promoting people-centered approaches. However, these two vital approaches to rural development have cut across each other based solely upon a loose combination of relevant elements derived from each of them. This paper argues that not only the shared spectrums but also the divergent interests between agroecology and SL studies signify the potential for beneficial cross-fertilization. With this conception, this paper tries to make conceptual and methodological syntheses between agroecology and SL studies as an integrated approach to rural development. The attempt results in a stylized model of modified SL framework with an eclectic set of new concepts. It is hoped that critical discussions on the possibility of integration between agroecology and SL studies woul...

Agroecology and Sustainable Livelihoods: Towards an Integrated Approach to Rural Development

Agroecological practices have increasingly been recognized as major development alternatives that could ensure rural people's basic needs while enhancing the ecological capacities grounding their livelihoods. This paper explores the multifaceted dimensions of agroecological practices that could potentially address the compelling livelihood necessities of less advantaged smallholder farmers in developing countries. It is argued that, despite its claim to uphold interdisciplinary approaches, agroecology as a scientific discipline has originally been led by ecologists and agronomists, with interdisciplinary collaboration largely limited to anthropologists. The concept of agricultural multifunctionality is proposed to help address the existing limitations in agroecology and thus overcome the conventional chasm between ecological research and social realities in agroecology-based development.

Delineating the Multifunctional Role of Agroecological Practices: Toward Sustainable Livelihoods for Smallholder Farmers in Developing Countries

This paper examines the feasibility of official institutional programs for sustainable agriculture in Thailand during the last decade. In Thailand, both popular and official attention was paid to sustainable agriculture well before the Asian economic crisis occurred in 1997. However, the policy implementation of sustainable agriculture programs began only after the turn of the millennium, and the processes and outcomes have not been adequately studied from a feasibility standpoint. This paper aims to fill the gap by employing a ‘sustainable governance’ perspective for examining the programs of three main official institutions promoting sustainable agriculture in Thailand. It is concluded that the social impacts of public sustainable agricultural interventions in the past decade remain limited for the estimated 5 million small-scale farmer households in Thailand.

Yuichiro Amekawa

Papers

Reflections on the Growing Influence of Good Agricultural Practices in the Global South

Agroecology and Sustainable Livelihoods: Towards an Integrated Approach to Rural Development

Delineating the Multifunctional Role of Agroecological Practices: Toward Sustainable Livelihoods for Smallholder Farmers in Developing Countries

Rethinking Sustainable Agriculture in Thailand: A Governance Perspective

Do climate change adaptation strategies improve farmers’ food security in Tanzania?