1
Accepted for Publication – Journal of International Communication, 4 March 2016
Author: Maria Touri
Title: Development Communication in Alternative Food Networks: empowering Indian
farmers through global market relations
Abstract
As sustainability is becoming a bigger global concern, sustainable development operations
require new partnerships and a multiplicity of communication practices among various
stakeholders. Private enterprises with social, ecological and ethical concerns can be among
those stakeholders, but their role in development communication has received limited
attention. To address this deficit, this article explores the capacity of small private enterprises
to empower farming communities, through a dialogical model of communication. Focusing
on Alternative Food Networks, the article argues that market exchanges are mediated by
social relations that can bring to light an alternative and ethical side of the global market.
These relations are examined empirically through a qualitative case study: a community of
farmers in South India and their relation with small private enterprises from Europe and
North America. The findings reveal significant ways in which these partnerships can prove
empowering for farmers, showing there is fertile ground for more active involvement of
enterprises in development communication practices.
Keywords: sustainability, development communication, food production, alternative
economies
Introduction
Globalization is often seen as the source of many evils and amongst the many challenges it
creates, is the threat to sustainable development. Sustainability presupposes a balance
between peoples’ present and future needs, and environmental and social capacity to meet
those needs, while sustainable development has emerged as a prominent development
paradigm. Dominant definitions refer to ‘three components of sustainable development—
economic development, social development and environmental protection—as interdependent
pillars (United Nations, 2005). Yet, in today’s neoliberal context, which is characterised by a
triple crisis – food, energy and financial – concepts of sustainable development are in flux.
Issues of well-being are becoming more complex to explain while more emphasis is being
placed on the unfeasibility of a universal model for development. In this context,
development operations require new types of partnerships and a multiplicity of
communication practices among various stakeholders (Servaes, 2013; Van Hamelrijck,
2013).
The aim of this article is to shed more light on the multidimensional nature of
development and emphasise the need for the involvement of multiple stakeholders in
development communication operations. To that effect, I explore the role that small private
enterprises can play in supporting developing communities to take control of their lives. This
role is examined in the context of Alternative Food Networks (AFNs), where market
exchanges are performed in an ethical manner to create fair and sustainable communities.
Alternative Food Networks are mediated by social relations and communication processes
through which communities in the developing world could benefit significantly. However,
these relations remain undocumented. This article addresses this gap by focusing on the ways
farming communities can become empowered through their interactions with private
2
enterprises. In these interactions, communication is approached as a dialogical model that
facilitates empowerment through knowledge sharing and trust building.
First, I propose that relations in the global market can be understood through the
notion of alternative economies, where capitalist enterprises share social, ecological and
ethical concerns. These theories draw attention to the process through which outcomes are
achieved, and they sit easily with new discourses of development where empowerment is
understood as an ongoing and multidimensional process. Second, I explore these relations
through the case study of a community of Fairtrade, organic farmers in South India - the
Indian Organic Farmers Producer Company Limited (IOFPCL) - and their foreign buyers, a
group of small private enterprises. These are intermediaries that maintain close and steady
contact with food producers, supporting them improve their business practices and develop
their communication skills; yet their role as agents of development communication remains
understudied. I conducted focus groups with thirty farmers, and individual interviews with
two officials from IOFPCL. These were combined with in-depth interviews with five buyers
in Europe and North America. The findings demonstrate that these small enterprises can play
a pivotal role in trust building and knowledge sharing and can empower farmers through
behavioural change. It was also revealed that, despite the lack of effective communication in
certain aspects of the relation, the ethical philosophy of these enterprises can pave the way for
more effective dialogue that can lead to further empowerment for farming communities.
Development communication and empowerment in alternative economies
In his widely praised work ‘Development as Freedom’, Amartya Sen makes a case about the
role of the economy as a key determinant of human development and freedom. Quoting early
defenders of the capitalist system, he asserts that successful markets operate the way they do
not just on the basis of exchanges, but also on the solid foundation of values and behavioural
ethics (Sen, 1999). This idea finds expression in Gibson-Graham’s theory of ‘weak
economy’, where capitalist enterprises share social, ecological and ethical concerns while
they incorporate communalism into their structures (Gibson – Graham, 1996; 2006).
According to this, a disruption of the association of ‘economy’ and ‘capitalism’ allows us to
produce a mode of thinking that considers the economy to be ‘social’ with social relations of
economic geographies being inseparable from material outcomes. Neoliberalism should not
be approached as a single global economic order with its ability to penetrate all localities, but
as a system of relations where alternative economic spaces can be formed (Leyshon and Lee,
2003). By placing the emphasis on social relations, theories of alternative economies draw
attention to the process and freedom with which people make decisions and produce
outcomes. It is in this process that the capacity of the market system to enable empowerment
also lies (Sen, 1999). In terms of its ‘means’, empowerment is understood as an ongoing
process of expanding poor peoples’ agency, changing their social institutions and
reconfiguring the broader societal relationships. In terms of ‘ends’, it can be understood as
the expansion of an individual’s or group’s ability to make transformative life changes
(Mosendale, 2005; Van Hamelrijck, 2009; Sen, 1999).
The notion of alternative economies proposed by these theories describes an economy
that rests on ethical social relations that sit easily with new traditions of discourse in the study
of communication for development and social change. As Servaes (2013) explains, the
growing interdependencies between regions in the globalised world render traditional
paradigms – modernization and dependency perspectives – more difficult to support. Instead,
new discourses see development as a multidimensional and dialectic process where people’s
ability to make conscious decisions to sustain their well-being cannot be separated from
social interaction. It is through social interaction that people can activate social networks,
build alliances, discover new solutions and behaviours and eventually influence powerful
3
elites (Van Hamelrijck, 2013:33-34). This can be achieved through different types of
partnerships and different types of communication including interpersonal relationships and
sharing of information and knowledge (Servaes and Malikhao, 2007). In fact, communication
practices should not be limited to the use of media and dissemination of messages. Emphasis
should also be given to the establishment of ongoing dialogues that will facilitate trust
building, knowledge and experience sharing and will lead to more solutions and
empowerment for developing communities (Mefalopoulos, 2005). Alternative food networks
are spaces that operate on similar types of relations and processes and where outcomes
happen through dialogic and interactive relations (Hassan, 2013).
Alternative Food Networks: interrogating notions of ‘alterity’ in market relations
Alternative food networks (AFNs) represent a critique of globalization and the neoliberal
relations that conventional markets are normally associated with (Goodman, 2003; Kneafsey
et al., 2008). They are widely seen as a response to growing concerns about the negative
sustainability impacts of the current food system, not only from an environmental point of
view but also in terms of producers’ and consumers’ well-being (Kloppenburg et al. 1996;
Anderson 2008). The underlying characteristics of such networks are as much about
environmentally benign and artisanal production processes as about reduced distance between
producers and consumers, in terms of network and distribution arrangements (Forssell and
Lankoski, 2014). Traditionally, AFNs are characterised by relational chains that are based on
transparency and traceability and rely on consumers’ willingness to pay a premium price in
return for products that were grown in an environmentally friendly and ethical manner, which
can also allow farmers to stay in business (Stamm, 2008). These arrangements enable new
forms of market governance in food networks that are supported by and enabled through the
‘strong relationships exemplified by notions of trust and social embeddedness’ (Forssell and
Lankoski, 2014:67).
Nevertheless, the original remit of AFNs is believed to be undermined by the move to
a more corporate model, underpinned by capitalist relations that emphasise accumulation of
capital (Guthman 2004; Hassan, 2013). Both Fairtrade and organics have been criticised for
allowing low entry barriers and a minimum set of production standards that have brought big
corporations into the market, undermining the credibility of the movements (Eden et al.,
2008; Guthman, 2007; Johnston et al., 2009). Moreover, processes of regulation and
certification have encouraged production conditions that resemble those of conventional food
– grown in industrial farms and distributed through trans-continental commodity chains and
supermarkets. One of the consequences of this institutionalization is the commodification and
fetishization of farmers’ livelihoods. Often packaged into marketable stories, narratives that
focus on specific geographical places and humble origins tend to fetishize corporate
ownership structures, ending up antithetical to sustainability and social justice (Goodman et
al, 2014; Johnston et al, 2009).
Such criticisms are entrenched in a binary mode of thinking that encourages mutually
exclusive definitions of alternative and conventional markets and agro-food networks. These
binary oppositions emphasise market relations as the main forces that invalidate the alterity
of food networks. However, considering the complexity that characterises today’s neoliberal
context, this approach offers a rather skewed and narrow picture of alterity. It neglects the
fact that alternative ways of doing things can indeed coexist with the powerful capitalist
system, and food enterprises can successfully combine elements of alternative and
conventional supply chains (Goodman et al, 2014; Ilbery and Maye, 2005). Yet, most studies
of AFNs tend to neglect the fact that there is a variety of values involved in economic
exchanges, and they can create conditions for different types of empowerment. These values
are often hidden in the social relations through which economic geographies take place
4
(Goodman et al, 2014; Leyshon and Lee, 2003). To this end, the work of Hassler and Franz
(2012) and Franz and Hassler (2010) offers some insight into the non-conventional relations
embedded in a partnership between the producers of organic pepper in South Indian tribal
villages and the buyer that marketed the product in Germany. The buyer’s ecological
responsibility created space for the tribal producers’ active participation in shaping the
narratives through which they and their products were represented to the foreign consumer. In
fact these types of intermediaries are in close and steady contact with food producers and
often support them improve their business practices and develop their communication skills
while also educating them regarding foreign market preferences and international standards
for quality (Gereffi, 1999; Lyon, 2006). Nevertheless, their role as empowering agents
remains understudied. In this article, I aim to delve deeper into this role, through the prism of
development communication.
Researching relations in Alternative Food Networks: a case study of the Indian Organic
Farmers Producer Company Limited (IOFPCL)
This is a qualitative exploratory case study, focusing on the Indian Organic Farmers Producer
Company Limited (IOFPCL) - headquartered in Aluva, Kerala - and their interactions with
foreign buyers. Through interviews with representatives from the farmers and buyers’ groups,
I was able to explore the informal reality of these relations, which can only be perceived from
the inside; and see them from the perspective of those involved (Gillham, 2010). Although
the data and findings drawn from this case study are not generalizable, they can offer an
alternative view of the market relations that mediate production and consumption in agro-
food networks, and raise new assumptions about the role of different stakeholders in
communication for sustainable development.
IOFPCL is a marketing and procurement body that acts as a liaison between organic
farmers and foreign buyers, and with over 600 organic farming shareholders from South
India, it is practically owned by farmers. The company follows cooperative and Fairtrade
principles and their main crops, all organic, include black pepper, ginger, turmeric, vanilla,
coffee, cocoa, coconut oil and cashew nuts. I am focusing particularly on the IOFPCL
shareholders based in the Wayanad District, where Kerala’s organic export movement and
organic certification institutions have their roots (Thottathill, 2014). Set on the Western Ghats
mountain range of Kerala, Wayanad is a biodiversity hotspot, famous for its climate and
geography that provide ideal conditions for the cultivation of spices, including the Tellicherry
Garbled Special Extra Bold, a variety local to Wayanad.
The case of IOFPCL exemplifies the political and social culture in Kerala that has
supported development innovation through years of mobilization, government reforms and
educational programmes. It is also the result of the long-term efforts made by food producers,
local activists and religious leaders in South India to address the numerous agricultural
hardships and distress faced by farmers - mainly due to dependence on cash crops and
chemicals - which led to a number of farmer suicides in Wayanad, in the beginning of the
century. Since then, a number of bodies have been established, including the ‘Indian Farmers’
Movement’ (INFAM), the first historically significant certified organic entity; and ‘Organic
Wayanad’, an internal control system that assists farmers with the process of gaining organic
certification. Of decisive importance was the establishment of ‘Indocert’, the first indigenous
organic certification body in India that facilitated farmers’ introduction to certified organic
agriculture and their access to European and North American markets (Thottathill, 2014).
Through the support of INFAM and Organic Wayanad, the IOFPCL group have
managed to create a more bottom-up system where farmers are able to actively communicate
their needs and discuss how they can improve their farming practices and livelihoods. To a
5
certain extent, their case presents variations to the traditional North/South relationships
promoted through the corporate organic and Fairtrade discourses. It also reflects the
heterogeneity of global food networks and the diverse spatially locatable values and practices
through which networks emerge (Murdoch and Miele, 2004). This heterogeneity implies that
more analytical attention needs to be paid to the particularities of the different smaller
networks that compose the global food network, which can shed light on more nuanced types
of empowerment, through farmers’ interactions with foreign markets.
Method
The data was collected in two phases. The first phase took place in the district of Wayanad,
Kerala between 17 and 25 February 2014 and comprised focus groups with thirty organic
farmers that were also shareholders in IOFPCL. The interviews were conducted in groups of
four and three, depending on the farmers’ location and availability. Six groups of four and
two groups of three were conducted in total. Individual interviews were also conducted with
two officials, the Chairman of IOFPCL and the Coordinator of Organic Wayanad. The
majority of interviews took place in the participants’ local language, Malayalam, with the aid
of a local interpreter. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. The second phase of the
research included interviews with five of the buyers that collaborate with IOFPCL in Europe
and North America. These are small-medium enterprises, wholesalers and retailers, that
import a number of crops – including coffee, coconut oil, pepper and other spices - from
Wayanad into Europe and North America. With the exception of one European buyer, all
others are certified to comply with Fairtrade and organic quality standards. The interviews
were conducted through skype from August 2014 to January 2015.
The interview design aimed to capture a combination of the participants’ subjective
viewpoints and objective information about their material and social conditions. It aimed to
measure the different perspectives about their collaboration and understand their relationships
and communication beyond the strictly market exchanges. The interviews with farmers aimed
to capture their subjective viewpoints regarding the value of their products and their feelings
and perceptions about their relationships with each other and with the foreign buyers, as well
as their perceptions about the local and foreign markets and consumers. They also aimed to
collect information about their farming practices. The buyers’ interviews were designed to
capture information about their position in the global market and their philosophy and ethos,
their perceptions about their interactions and collaboration with IOFPCL and about the
support they offer to the farmers as well as their perceptions about the connection between
producers and consumers.
The interview data was analysed through a deductive and an inductive process. The
deductive process involved the use of the broader interview topics as codes, under which the
data was organised. For the interviews with the IOFPCL group, these codes included the
following topics: experience of working with IOFPCL; material conditions of the farmers’
work; benefits and challenges of organic farming; the material conditions of the local - soil,
topography, and microclimate; collaboration and communication with the foreign buyers;
knowledge and perceptions about the domestic and foreign consumer. For the interviews with
the buyers’ groups, the following topics were coded: position in the domestic and global
market; company philosophy; collaboration and communication with IOFPCL; marketing
practices; communication with consumers. After the first coding, the data was coded
inductively, though iterated detailed readings of the interview material, and additional key
themes were derived that captured core messages, based on which further interpretations
were made. Such themes included the societal pressures and constraints that farmers had to
deal with; provenance and uniqueness of certain products like pepper; natural and ancient
farming practices; environmental protection. Additional themes that derived from the