17,733 research outputs found
Organic Agriculture, Food Security, and the Environment
No full text Organic agriculture is often perceived as more sustainable than conventional farming. We review the literature on this topic from a global perspective. In terms of environmental and climate change effects, organic farming is less polluting than conventional farming when measured per unit of land but not when measured per unit of output. Organic farming, which currently accounts for only 1% of global agricultural land, is lower yielding on average. Due to higher knowledge requirements, observed yield gaps might further increase if a larger number of farmers would switch to organic practices. Widespread upscaling of organic agriculture would cause additional loss of natural habitats and also entail output price increases, making food less affordable for poor consumers in developing countries. Organic farming is not the paradigm for sustainable agriculture and food security, but smart combinations of organic and conventional methods could contribute toward sustainable productivity increases in global agriculture. </jats:p
Fairtrade, Agrochemical Input Use, and Effects on Human Health and the Environment
Full text linkIt is often assumed that voluntary sustainability standards – such as Fairtrade – could not only improve the socioeconomic wellbeing of smallholder farmers in developing countries but could also help to reduce negative health and environmental impacts of agricultural production. The empirical evidence is thin, as most previous studies on the impact of sustainability standards only focused on economic indicators, such as prices, yields, and incomes. Here, we argue that Fairtrade and other sustainability standards can affect agrochemical input use through various mechanisms with possible positive and negative effects. We use data from farmers and rural workers in Cote d’Ivoire to analyze effects of Fairtrade certification on fertilizer and pesticide use, as well as on human health and environmental toxicity. Fairtrade increases chemical input quantities and aggregated levels of toxicity. Nevertheless, Fairtrade reduces the incidence of pesticide-related acute health symptoms among farmers and workers. Certified cooperatives are more likely to offer training and other services related to the safe handling of pesticides and occupational health, which can reduce negative externalities in spite of higher input quantities. These results suggest that simplistic assumptions about the health and environmental effects of sustainability standards may be inappropriate
Trading off nutrition and education? A panel data analysis of the dissimilar welfare effects of organic and fairtrade standards
Full text linkMillions of smallholder farmers in developing countries participate in different types of sustainability standards. A growing body of literature has analyzed the welfare effects of such participation, with mixed results. Yet, there are important knowledge gaps. First, most existing studies look at the effects of one standard in one country. When comparing between studies it is not clear whether dissimilar outcomes are driven by differences in standards or local conditions. Second, most studies use cross-section, observational data, so that selectivity issues remain a challenge. Third, the existing work has primarily analyzed effects in terms of purely economic indicators, such as income, ignoring other dimensions of household welfare. We address these shortcomings using panel data from small-scale coffee producers in Uganda and comparing the effects of two of the most popular sustainability standards, namely Organic and Fairtrade. Welfare effects are analyzed in terms of household expenditures, child education, and nutrition. Results show that Organic and Fairtrade both have positive effects on total consumption expenditures. However, notable differences are observed in terms of the other outcomes. Organic contributes to improved nutrition but has no effect on education. For Fairtrade it is exactly the other way around. We explore the mechanisms behind these differences
Promoting written employment contracts:Evidence from a randomised awareness campaign
No full textWritten employment contracts may improve the conditions of agricultural workers in developing countries, but farmers as employers often prefer less formal oral arrangements. We evaluate whether farmers' preferences, which are deeply rooted in traditional norms, can be influenced through a group awareness campaign. In a randomised experiment in Côte d'Ivoire, we show that such a campaign increases farmers' preferences for written contracts and for contract features involving social benefits for workers. The campaign also increases farmers' likelihood to initiate concrete steps towards signing a contract with their workers. We conclude that group-based interventions can change farmers' traditional views about employment relations. </p
Toward Improving the Design of Sustainability Standards—A Gendered Analysis of Farmers’ Preferences
No full textRecently, sustainability standards have gained in importance for export crops produced in developing countries. Several studies analyzed whether such standards deliver on their promise to improve the livelihoods of poor farmers, with mixed results. Here, we ask whether the design of standards could be improved such that farm households benefit more. An assessment of what particular features of standards hamper or facilitate participation requires a better understanding of farmers’ preferences. Our contribution is twofold: First, based on a choice experiment we analyze how farmers evaluate actual and hypothetical features of standards. Data were collected from small-scale coffee producers in Uganda. Second, this is the first quantitative study on standards employing a gendered research design. A gender focus is important, because coffee and other certified export crops are often controlled by men. The choice experiment included features of standards aimed at reducing gender inequality and was conducted separately with male and female members of farm households. Results indicate that farmers have positive attitudes toward sustainability standards in general. While they dislike bans of productivity-enhancing inputs, agricultural training and special female support are appreciated. Many also see requirements that have to be met for certification as a welcome nudge to invest in better farm management and quality upgrading. Female farmers have a higher preference for standards than male farmers. Also within households, significant preference heterogeneity between women and men is found
Do Sustainability Standards Benefit Smallholder Farmers Also When Accounting For Cooperative Effects? Evidence from Côte d'Ivoire
No full textAlthough many studies analyzed effects of sustainability standards—such as Fairtrade or Rainforest Alliance—on smallholder farmers in developing countries, most did not sufficiently account for systematic differences between certified and noncertified farmers. Certified farmers are typically organized in cooperatives. When sampling only from a small number of cooperatives, as previous studies did, it is not easy to disentangle certification effects from possible cooperative effects. Here, we address this shortcoming by randomly sampling from a large number of cooperatives, thus better capturing existing institutional heterogeneity. In particular, we collect and use data from cocoa farmers in Côte d'Ivoire who are organized in Fairtrade‐certified and noncertified cooperatives. Regression models with instrumental variables show that Fairtrade has positive and significant effects on cocoa yields, prices, and living standards. These effects remain significant also after controlling for cooperative characteristics, but the magnitude of the estimates changes. We draw two conclusions. First, in Côte d'Ivoire, Fairtrade certification benefits farmers economically. Second, and more generally, cooperative characteristics are jointly correlated with certification and relevant outcomes, which needs to be accounted for to avoid bias when evaluating the benefits of sustainability standards in the small farm sector
Effects of Fairtrade on the livelihoods of poor rural workers
No full textWorkers in rural areas in developing countries often face precarious working conditions, low wages and poverty. Sustainability standards—such as Fairtrade—could potentially improve the situation. Although many studies have analysed the impact of Fairtrade on smallholder farmers, few focus on wage workers beyond those employed by large companies despite most workers being employed by small farms and cooperatives. We analyse the effect of Fairtrade on workers’ wages and working conditions in the small farm sector. We conducted a survey among workers in the cocoa sector in Cote d’Ivoire and their employers, distinguishing between farm workers and cooperative workers. Fairtrade improves wages and reduces poverty among cooperative workers, but not among farm workers, even though the latter are particularly deprived. At the cooperative level, labour standards are regularly monitored by Fairtrade. Certification also helps cooperatives increase the services offered to their members, which leads to more and better-paid employment at the cooperative level. At the farm level, inspections of labour standards are more costly, difficult and rare. Thus, Fairtrade hardly affects traditional employment modalities at the farm level even when farmers themselves benefit from certification. Ensuring that labour standards are met at all levels may require innovative and more efficient monitoring approaches
- …
