Framework for Re-thinking Ethics in the Organic Movement - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 274

13.2.3 Control and Trust in Farmer-Consumer Collaboration

This section reviews different types of collaborative relationships along the organic
agrofood chain. Each contributes to more socially driven and economically balanced
approaches that specifically respect the IFOAM Principles of Fairness and Care in
non-governmental regulations and certification schemes (Padel and Röcklinsberg
2009 ). Central is this question: how forms of collaboration and standard-setting
processes could operate as a social contract relationship among actors along the
organic agrofood chain?
Alternative organic guarantee systems (e.g., participatory guarantee system) offer
one framework for such approaches (Padel et al. 2010 , p. 66). Others include
alternative ethical approaches, such as CSR and Fair Trade (see Hatanaka, Chap. 3 )
or Corporate Moral Responsibility (CoMoRe), that serves as a tool-kit for food
companies (Brom et al. 2006 ). Do these schemes engender engagement and trust-
building and thereby help move beyond bureaucratic control (Giovannucci and
Ponte 2005 ), and what can the organic movement learn from these schemes?

13.2.3.1 Alternative Forms of Standard Setting Processes

and Collaboration

The creation of site specific and self-reflexive regulatory processes offers the
possibility for the emergence of more collaborative trust and guarantees of ethically
driven organic practice. Several actor-defined instruments, indicators or checklists
for self-assessment (DeLind and Howard 2008 , p. 29) could improve transparency in
ethical action that is consistent with the IFOAM Principles (cf. De Wit and Verhoog
2007 ). Such instruments are an option for the creation of a value based mission
statement or contracts between partners along the organic agrofood chain.
Giovannucci and Ponte ( 2005 ) note that the state should offer a legal guarantee
for the implementation of more ethically oriented instruments. In addition, the actors
in a specific organic agrofood chain must accept responsibility (with state approval)
to develop private regulations that build on the given standards, but specify their
concrete value oriented practices (e.g., NGOs, firms and individuals from civil
society). To ensure the integration of such values, Padel et al. ( 2007b ) recommend
a procedure of participative and deliberative democracy. This process would ensure
the participation of representatives of all relevant stakeholder groups, guided by
experts who advise with respect to specified rules of ethical dialogue.
There are several advantages to such a procedure: it builds a direct relationship
between producers, certifiers, marketers and consumers, and it ensures a better flow
on information between all partners (Giovannucci and Ponte 2005 , p. 298). Such a
system also allows for a democratic decision making process along the value chain
(Giovannucci and Ponte 2005 ). It is important to keep in mind that these types of
collaborative relationships are time consuming for all participants. As such, they
require broad and deep commitments, e.g., the IFOAM Principles, underlying the