Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wyoming, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on Nov. 18, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 117-121).

World international trade is moving towards more free trade, through globalization and trade liberalization. These moves are guided by trade theories which state that on an aggregated level, nations involved in free trade should benefit, and further that free trade is fair. However, in practice, contradictory views have been raised, stating that free trade may not necessarily be benefiting all participants equally. Rather, other nations, especially developing nations, have become worse-off after opening up their markets for free trade. On the other hand, many developed nations have benefited substantially from free trade. Among other factors, the difference in benefits is believed to have been influenced by the types of commodities being traded (where developing nations mainly trade in primary goods and developed nations in anufactured goods) and unequal power relations (some nations for example, the EU and the US, still adopt protectionism in their agricultural sector). In order to address market imbalances resulting from free trade, Fairtrade has arisen. Fairtrade aims to improve international trading conditions in order to benefit small-scale farmers and farm workers in the developing nations. The Fairtrade organization further claims that its principles are in line with sustainable development. However, Fairtrade suffers a credibility gap because there is a lack of independent research to support their claims. To date in South Africa, there is little research examining the claims of the Fairtrade organization. In order to contribute to the Fairtrade discussion in South Africa, this study has investigated the validity of Fairtrade‘s claims that it contributes towards sustainable development. The study utilised primary data, which was collected from ten commercial farms and two small-scale farmer cooperatives located in the Eastern Cape and Western Cape provinces that are/were Fairtrade certified. The main reason for including commercial farmers and small-scale farmer cooperatives in the study was for comparing relative impacts in the two Fairtrade structures. The data was then analysed using a sustainable livelihoods framework, which was developed in the study. The study focussed on investigating the impact of Fairtrade tools, which are minimum prices, premiums, pre-financing and support for long-term relationships, on its intended beneficiaries. Minimum prices offered to producers cover production costs and are above market prices, and Fairtrade premiums are to be invested in developmental projects. Therefore, examining the influence of Fairtrade tools on individuals and communities provides an overview of how Fairtrade influences development. The results of the study show that sampled Fairtrade beneficiaries in South Africa have witnessed substantial positive changes as a result of Fairtrade. The Fairtrade initiative has managed to empower small-scale producers and farm workers, as well as leverage development opportunities for their wider communities. It has supported organizational development in the supply chain, facilitated investment in community development projects and in business-related training. Producers, both commercial and small-scale producers, managed to access a market that offers stable prices, and have gained from minimum prices. Furthermore, small-scale farmers have been allowed an opportunity to expand their business into export markets, and enjoyed an increase in incomes. Fairtrade benefits further trickle down to non-Fairtrade community members, in the form of employment creation and community development. Despite positive effects, Fairtrade producers faced challenges, including high Fairtrade administration costs and a small market for Fairtrade commodities. The study concludes that in the face of challenges, Fairtrade brings economic, social and environmental benefits, but as compared to economic and social development, the impact on environmental development is rather limited. Even though that is the case, Fairtrade offers valuable development opportunities to producers in South Africa.

Recent years have witnessed a proliferation in the number of products receiving specialized ethical certification labels, even though scholars have underscored that the actual effects of such labels are not well understood. (Luetchford 2012) In the area of coffee in particular, case studies have highlighted that Fair Trade labeling seems to operate in unexpected ways, beyond its straightforward financial incentives. This has led to a call for deeper investigation into the specific mechanisms—particularly the extra-economic and social processes—through which Fair Trade acts on coffee growers and their communities. This is seconded by recent studies that have noted a lack of equality between men and women members of Fair Trade co-operatives, in stark contrast to the label’s advertised aims of advancing gender equity and women’s development. (Bacon 2010; Lyon 2008) This friction has contributed to the emergence of separate, all-women’s Fair Trade co-operatives in coffee-growing regions around the globe, and the specialty marketing of their coffee (e.g., Café Femenino and Las Hermanas from Nicaragua) as specifically empowering for women. (Fair Trade USA 2012; Bacon 2010; Lyon 2008) Yet, as with other ethical labels, the actual processes through which these women’s co-operatives affect their members is under-studied and in need of deeper ethnographic investigation. (Hanson et al. 2012; Lyon 2008) In order to address these gaps in the literature, this study captures the complex social processes set in motion by Fair Trade through a comparative ethnography of a traditional mixed men and women’s co-operative and a newer, all-women’s co-operative in neighboring coffee-growing communities in northern Nicaragua. This research positions the sociological construct of social capital as a robust theoretical lens capable of illuminating diverse dynamics within these groups and their larger structural contexts. The use of social capital theory not only allows access to critical and unexplored insights into the “associational life” created by Fair Trade co-operatives, but also presents an opportunity to explore a “strategic site” of social capital in action and extend the theory by addressing debates surrounding its oft-contested definitions and relationship to gender. (Putnam 2000:60; Portes 2010:2; Burawoy 1998) Specifically, this research examines three perspectives on social capital: Bourdieu’s (1986) resource framework, Coleman’s (1988:108) description of social capital as a platform or “appropriable social organization,” and Putnam’s (2000) notion of social capital as trust. Further, this study critically interrogates the characterization of social capital as a kind of “women’s capital,” and its promotion as both a means and an ends to gendered empowerment. (Maclean 2010:498) In pursuit of these aims, this research both draws on and adds to the literature in the areas of ethical consumption and Fair Trade studies, economic sociology, the sociology of globalization, gender theory, gender and development, men and masculinities, local and transnational feminist movements, empowerment frameworks, and the social determinants of health. This extended case method ethnography links microprocesses to macroforces, through a localized understanding of globalization—in this case the impact of Northern ethical consumption practices and ideologies on producer communities in the Global South. In addition, as an applied ethnography in the tradition of public sociology, this study provides analysis that is useful not only to scholars, but could directly inform further setting-appropriate development efforts.