Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
narrowing of the progressive promise of meaningful commodities more apparent
than in organic food commodity circuits, which, absent certain prescribed chemicals
and farm practices, look more and more like conventional, industrialised food cir-
cuits every day. Transforming the social relations of agricultural production, ques-
tioning productivism (including a full range of questionable growing practices), and
providing high-quality nutritious and safe foods for everyone remain not only in
question, but may actually be undermined by increasing market shares for organics
(Guthman, 2003; 2004). More and more, the dynamics of organic food markets
seem subject to the systemic processes of competitive commodity production under
capitalism outlined succinctly by Kloppenburg (2004). As Mutersbaugh (2004)
shows, for instance, struggles over the symbolic and material dimensions of certifi ed
coffee indicates an ever-present danger that labels will be co-opted, eliminating
provisions for genuinely fair trading, including viable economic returns for inde-
pendent and co-operative peasant producers.
These are not merely ephemeral, contingent and sector specifi c issues but rather
deep, structural challenges to alternative commodity networks. Recognising them
need not mean rehearsing tired debates between structure and agency in the evolu-
tion of commodity chains, agricultural or otherwise. Alternative commodity circuits
have costs associated with them, not least administrative costs associated with
certifi cation (including in governance and enforcement). Who will bear the brunt
of these costs (Mutersbaugh, 2005)? Is it socially just if only the more affl uent con-
sumers of the world can afford alternative commodities? Moreover, it is in the very
nature of displacement and commodity fetishism in the context of competitive,
capitalist economies that threats are ever present to more just and benign commodity
circuits from competitive profi t and rent seeking behaviour. Competition between
labels and certifi cation standards, for instance, can confuse consumers while placing
downward pressure on standards via price-based competition. Even within labels,
efforts to sustain and increase profi ts in commodity production regimes that remain
largely capitalist (or are in competition with capitalist commodities in the same
sectors) leads to systemic pressures to compromise, presenting a particular challenge
to voluntary labelling and certifi cation schemes (see, e.g., Klooster, 2006; Guthman,
2007). These observations are not meant to cast aspersions on efforts to forge
alternative, fair, ethical, and more environmentally benign commodity circuits; quite
the opposite. They are meant to refl ect realistic assessments of the social (not merely
technocratic) challenges involved in establishing and sustaining networks of ethical
commitment that are frequently transnational in scope (Goodman, 2004). Maintain-
ing these networks requires organising and solidarity, but also new relations of
production, representation and governance that allow diverse actors from across
commodity circuits - including workers, peasants, environmentalists and consumers
- opportunities for meaningful participation in lasting coalitions. These efforts
reenforce the need for political relationships in search of alternative commodity
circuits to span the same range as those circuits themselves. And this is one more
reason for scholars and activists alike to critically engage with the complex dynamics
of commodifi cation in a robust and polyvalent sense of the term, from inputs, to
production, to distribution and to consumption.
A fi nal word about decommodifi cation. One of the appealing features of the term
commodifi cation is its inherently dynamic connotation. This can be interpreted
teleologically to imply that everything, eventually, will be commodifi ed, including
our own bodies, and the earth, air and water around us. There are depressing trends
Search WWH ::




Custom Search