Blueberries in winter, quinoa for lunch, and Fairtrade coffee – Global food trends and implications for smallholder farmers

有证据表明，农业价值链的全球化为贫困农民与高价值出口市场建立联系提供了机会，从而提高了世界上最贫穷人口群体的生活水平。然而，全球化粮食市场的特点还包括需求模式和粮食趋势迅速变化、新技术的扩散和更严格的标准。对于贫穷的农民来说，可能难以足够快地适应不断变化的市场条件。该研究项目以两种粮食趋势为例-可持续性认证（如公平贸易）和藜麦/超级食品热潮-以提供证据，帮助确保小农不被排除在全球化的粮食市场之外。三个相互关联的工作包采用了不同的方法和数据来源。WP 1旨在就小农是否受益于可持续性认证得出可推广的结论。越来越多的个别研究分析了认证的经济影响，结果相互矛盾。将进行荟萃分析，以巩固现有结果。元回归将有助于解释结果的差异，从而确定农民可以（或不能）从认证中受益的条件。WP 2还旨在帮助更好地了解农民是否以及在何种条件下受益于认证，但重点是合作社的作用。现有的研究使用了大量农民的数据，但使用了少数合作社的数据，大大限制了所考虑的合作社以外的结果的普遍性。我们将汇编和使用来自大量农民和合作社的独特数据集。这些数据和计量经济学技术将使我们能够理清认证和合作效果的影响;评估合作绩效对认证结果的重要性;并扩大对农民参与的原因的理解，特别是如果他们没有从认证中受益。WP 3将以藜麦热潮为例，分析初始利基产品的主流化和商业化的影响。先前的研究表明，国际上对藜麦需求的增加和藜麦价格的上涨对藜麦生产者和消费者都有利。然而，人们对藜麦繁荣的间接影响（如家庭资源的重新分配）知之甚少，这种影响可能增加或减少了家庭的长期脆弱性。同样，藜麦价格已经下跌了一段时间，对藜麦生产商的影响尚不清楚。根据秘鲁具有全国代表性的家庭数据（即ENAHO数据集），我们将探讨藜麦繁荣期间和之后的直接和间接影响。由于许多产品都经历类似的价格变化和产品差异化周期，其结果的相关性将超出藜麦的情况。

The evidence shows that the globalization of agricultural value chains offers opportunities to link poor farmers to higher-value export markets, thereby improving living standards among the world’s poorest population segments. However, globalizing food markets are also characterized by rapidly changing demand patterns and food trends, the proliferation of new technologies, and stricter standards. For poor farmers, it can be difficult to adapt sufficiently quickly to changing market conditions. This research project takes two food trends as examples – sustainability certification (e.g. Fairtrade) and the quinoa/superfood boom – to provide evidence that can help ensure that smallholders are not excluded from globalizing food markets. Different methodological approaches and data sources are used for three interlinked work packages (WP). WP 1 is aimed at drawing generalizable conclusions on whether smallholders benefit from sustainability certification. An increasing number of individual studies have analyzed economic implications of certification, with conflicting results. A meta-analysis will be conducted to consolidate existing results. Meta-regressions will help explain differences in results, and thus identify conditions under which farmers can (or cannot) benefit from certification. WP 2 is also aimed at contributing to a better understanding of whether – and under what conditions – farmers benefit from certification, but focuses on the role of cooperatives. Available studies have used data from a large number of farmers – but a small number of cooperatives, substantially limiting the generalizability of results beyond the cooperative under consideration. We will compile and use a unique data set from a large number of both farmers and cooperatives. These data and econometric technique will allow us to disentangle the effect of certification and cooperative effects; to assess the importance of cooperative performance for certification outcomes; and to expand the understanding of why farmers participate, especially if they do not benefit from certification. WP 3 will analyze effects of the mainstreaming and commercialization of initial niche products, taking the quinoa boom as an example. Previous studies have shown that raising international demand for quinoa and increasing quinoa prices benefited both quinoa producers and consumers. However, indirect effects of the quinoa boom (e.g. reallocation of household resources), which may have increased or decreased households’ vulnerability in the longer run, are poorly understood. Likewise, quinoa prices have been falling for a while, with unclear implications for quinoa producers. Based on nationally representative household data from Peru (i.e. the ENAHO data set) we will explore direct and indirect effects during and after the quinoa boom. As many products undergo similar cycles of price developments and product differentiation, results will be relevant beyond the case of quinoa.