Participatory Guarantee Systems: structure, benefits and reasons for participation – insights from the Italian case study of Campi Aperti

Greta Winkler, Sonja Kaufmann, Nikolaus Hruschka, Christian R. Vogl
{"title":"Participatory Guarantee Systems: structure, benefits and reasons for participation – insights from the Italian case study of Campi Aperti","authors":"Greta Winkler, Sonja Kaufmann, Nikolaus Hruschka, Christian R. Vogl","doi":"10.3389/fsufs.2024.1388853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) have emerged from initiatives introduced by farmers and civil society to ensure the organic quality of products by directly involving producers, consumers, and other stakeholders in the guarantee process. While actor participation in PGS provides the foundation for these systems, it also presents challenges, yet little empirical research on this has been undertaken. This study used a framework to analyze four dimensions of participation in PGS: who, how, what kind, and why? The Italian case study of Campi Aperti was qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed by means of: (1) research of internet documents, (2) semi-structured interviews with seven key members and one expert, and (3) an online survey of PGS members (N = 614 members, survey respondents: n = 16 producers and 45 co-producers). Participation took the form of two main activities: management of the guarantee process and organization of farmers’ markets. Discussions are held and decisions made at assemblies and market meetings. The growing number of producers joining the PGS has added to organizational tasks, and hence increased costs. Participants stated that the reasons for joining the Campi Aperti PGS and the benefits of being a member were to gain access to city markets and to send a political message. Building trust between members was an additional benefit cited. Time constraints emerged as the main drawback preventing participation by members, with producers taking on more roles and investing more time in the PGS than co-producers. However, co-producers provided evidence of other ways in which they participated in the PGS, in particular by making purchases and socializing at the markets.","PeriodicalId":504481,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","volume":"5 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1388853","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) have emerged from initiatives introduced by farmers and civil society to ensure the organic quality of products by directly involving producers, consumers, and other stakeholders in the guarantee process. While actor participation in PGS provides the foundation for these systems, it also presents challenges, yet little empirical research on this has been undertaken. This study used a framework to analyze four dimensions of participation in PGS: who, how, what kind, and why? The Italian case study of Campi Aperti was qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed by means of: (1) research of internet documents, (2) semi-structured interviews with seven key members and one expert, and (3) an online survey of PGS members (N = 614 members, survey respondents: n = 16 producers and 45 co-producers). Participation took the form of two main activities: management of the guarantee process and organization of farmers’ markets. Discussions are held and decisions made at assemblies and market meetings. The growing number of producers joining the PGS has added to organizational tasks, and hence increased costs. Participants stated that the reasons for joining the Campi Aperti PGS and the benefits of being a member were to gain access to city markets and to send a political message. Building trust between members was an additional benefit cited. Time constraints emerged as the main drawback preventing participation by members, with producers taking on more roles and investing more time in the PGS than co-producers. However, co-producers provided evidence of other ways in which they participated in the PGS, in particular by making purchases and socializing at the markets.
参与式保障体系:参与的结构、益处和原因--意大利 Campi Aperti 案例研究的启示
参与式保障体系(PGS)是由农民和民间社会提出的倡议,通过让生产者、消费者和其他利益相关者直接参与保障过程,确保产品的有机质量。虽然行为者参与 PGS 为这些系统奠定了基础,但也带来了挑战,然而这方面的实证研究却很少。本研究使用了一个框架来分析参与 PGS 的四个方面:谁、如何参与、什么样的参与以及为什么参与?通过以下方法对意大利 Campi Aperti 案例研究进行了定性和定量分析:(1) 对互联网文件进行研究,(2) 对七名主要成员和一名专家进行半结构化访谈,(3) 对 PGS 成员进行在线调查(N = 614 名成员,调查对象:n = 16 名制片人和 45 名联合制片人)。参与形式主要有两种:管理担保程序和组织农贸市场。在大会和市场会议上进行讨论并做出决定。加入 PGS 的生产者越来越多,增加了组织任务,从而增加了成本。与会者指出,加入 Campi Aperti PGS 的原因以及成为会员的好处是可以进入城市市场并传递政治信息。成员之间建立信任也是一个额外的好处。时间限制是阻碍成员参与的主要因素,与共同生产者相比,生产者在 PGS 中承担的角色更多,投入的时间更多。不过,共同生产者提供了他们参与 PGS 的其他方式,特别是在市场上采购和社交。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信