Transnational Social Movements, Solidarity Values and the Grassroots:

The Fair Trade Movement, Mexican Coffee Producers and a European NGO

Coalition.

Horacio Almanza-Alcalde, arejuco@hotmail.comMA in Anthropology of Development and Social

TransformationDissertation, 2002

University of Sussex at Brighton.

Abstract

This paper explores the points of convergence and digression of

the Trade Justice Movement and the Fair Trade Market in Northern

countries and the Mexican peasant project, through the framework of

transnational social movements. It concerns the way solidarity

relations between northern social movements and southern social

movements are carried out, the extent they can be conceptualised as

social movements, and the level of engagement between north and

south movements that share claims. Also, it will analyse the role of

values as a strategy, and as an end in itself, framing the broad struggle

between opposing actors. It is concluded that, actually both the Fair

Trade market and the Trade Justice Movement address one of the

longstanding claims of the Latin American peasant movements namely

better conditions of access to the market. However there are not

visible channels of communication and strong links between northern

and southern social movements. It is suggested that a stronger mutual

involvement could enhance more effective channels of communication

that gives coherence and effectiveness to the movements struggle for

equality, rather than repeating within SM’s the political economy’s

North-South schema of domination.

2

Index.

Acknowledgements 41.Introduction 52.Transnational solidarity movements and intangible strategies

7

Current theorisations of transnational social movements 7The role of values in transnational social movements 14The norm implementation role of transnational social movements

17

3. Fair Trade as a movement 19Some considerations about the trajectory of the Fair Trade Market

21

Fair Trade Labelling Organizations International (FLO Int) 24Symbolic values and the symbolic power of values 264. Peasant movements struggles for production 27An approach to the concepts 27Some basic factors introducing the peasantry in Mexico 30Some actors in the independent peasant movement 33Commercialisation and the demand for improved production conditions

39

5. Local and global notions of trade justice: The case studies of UCIRI and the Trade Justice Movement

41

The context of coffee in Mexico 41UCIRI 44The role of the Church 47The Trade Justice Movement 486. Final considerations 52Acronyms 58Bibliography 59Notes 65

3

Acknowledgements.

Among all the people and groups that contributed to reach

this final stage, I would like to thank very much the National Council for

Science and Technology (CONACYT), the Ford, McArthur, and Hewlett

Foundations for the economic support provided in the graduate

program, and the Institute of International Education for the kind

assistance provided before, during and after the academic studies.

Also, I am very grateful for tutorials and suggestions made by my

supervisor Richard Wilson, Peter Luechtford and specially Jutta Blauert,

who gave insightful advice and sincere comments for the shaping of

this final work. I express also my gratitude to the people from the

Brighton WDM and Christian Aid local groups, some of whom offered

and provided their time and experience through the interviews in

which they kindly contributed. However, nobody but me is to blame for

any mistake done throughout the document.

4

1. Introduction

This work concerns the local outcomes of transnational elite

decisions. The importance of the market in the global political

economy is increasing, but also giving rise to a set of contradictions. In

this context, a variety of social responses may be expected both to the

decisions taken and the processes unleashed by them. For example, a

set of unelected international institutions like the IMF/World Bank arose

as main actors inducing the adoption of market liberalisation policies

within nation states; a free trade agenda was publicly promoted as the

new macro-economic panacea; and third world countries were

encouraged to remove barriers and subsidies as a condition for loans

and a recipe for economic recovery, in order to allow the first world

access to raw materials and basic food products. On the other hand

third world producers were increasingly struggling to access the

market. They were astonished to find that their countries were invaded

by cheap and low quality products with which they could hardly

compete, and realized that the north countries promoted new

subsidies for the protection of their own producers. The rhetoric of free

trade seemed shaped only for large corporations; trade for small

producers appeared almost forbidden.

Although the fight for better conditions of production has been a

longstanding struggle of southern producers, the visible effects of neo-

liberal policies and other macro-economic issues like third world debt

have been putting increasing pressure on poor countries and specially

5

on poor people. A series of social movements has sprung up, in

addition to those already existing, to address and draw attention to the

devastating effects of global political economy outcomes on the local

conditions in southern countries. One of the starting points of this

social mobilization was the first major developing country debt crisis in

1982 in Mexico. This was the time of the initial application of neo-

liberal policies in Mexico, featuring the inclusion of Mexico in the Free

Trade Area of the Americas. In 1994 occurred the uprising of the

Zapatista army, which Carlos Fuentes called the first post-communist

movement of the 20th century (Rubio, 1996:156). A replica of the 1982

collapse happened the last month of 1994. By then, a transnational

citizen mobilisation was already addressing issues like debt, free trade

and structural adjustment. Ironically, what is now considered one of

the pioneers of the alternative trade market labelling organisations,

the Dutch Max Havelaar, had its roots in a meeting with Mexican

farmers from the southern state of Oaxaca, which became, according

to some, the first group of farmers to export coffee through the fair

trade model.

As L. Hernandez stated, the emergence in developed countries of a

solidarity movement with small producers of the underdeveloped

nations, an increasing environmental consciousness and the necessity

of conserving biodiversity, have encouraged the emergence of new

markets (n/d: 1). This work concerns the way solidarity relations

between northern social movements and southern social movements

are carried out, the extent they can be conceptualised as social

movements, and the level of engagement between north and south

movements that share claims. Also, it will analyse the role of values as

a strategy, and as an end in itself, framing the broad struggle between

opposing actors.

The first section consists of a review of the main theoretical

perspectives of Transnational Social Movements and their relation with

solidarity. The role of values will be highlighted within collective action

and advocacy networks. The second section, will analyse the trajectory

6

and outcomes of the Fair Trade Market in terms of a social movement.

This analysis is integrated with individual cases of NGOs initiatives to

provide a parallel way of trading aimed at returning a bigger share to

third world producers. This discussion underlines the way coalitions

have been made to create certification organisations that negotiate

and discuss solidarity values in the certification process with the third

world producers. The third section examines the history of peasant

struggles for production in Mexico. The emphasis on Latin American

producers stresses the importance of their own conceptual and

political frameworks, which is specially important when an overseas

initiative aims to provide or promote alternatives, allegedly to improve

the outcomes of agricultural activities that have been carried out for

centuries according to indigenous social and technical methods. It is

suggested that it is not enough to take into account the current ability

of producers to participate, but necessary also to regard their historical

background and broader political project in the design of any initiative

with solidarity purposes. The fourth section analyses case studies of

the Union of Indigenous Communities from the Isthmus Region, an

organisation of small coffee producers from the south of Mexico that

embodies the model that the Fair Trade Market is aiming for. It has

been rewarded with coffee prices that have resulted in the

improvement of health, education, production, and transport issues

through grassroots organisation. The section than considers the

development of the Trade Justice Movement, a European coalition of

NGOs that addresses the macro-structural level of international trade,

in order to call attention to its undermining effects on third world

people. TJM’s level of connection to the ground is criticised,

specifically, the need for it to enhance the participation of third world

social movements within its agenda. It is concluded that both the Fair

Trade Market and the Trade Justice Movement’s agenda sharply

coincide with the project of the Mexican movements analysed in the

case studies, but nonetheless, there is room for improvement in terms

of level of engagement with the grassroots.

7

2. Transnational Solidarity Movements and the

Intangible Strategies.

Current theorisations of Transnational Social Movements

The two main theories concerning Transnational Social

Movements are the Resource Mobilization Theory (RMT) and to a

less extent the New Social Movements (NSM’s) Theory. It seems

that both the RM and NSMs theories appear to have been made to

suit specific types of social mobilisation. NSMs theory, which

attempts to supersede class based analysis, has been pictured as

focusing on urban actors, on production and signification, on

meanings and practices, and on cultural struggles over

environmentalism, peace, women’s rights, gay liberation, minority

rights, students, youth movements; in short on multiple identities

and on the ‘why’ (Escobar and Alvarez, 1992: 2; Alvarez, Dagnino

and Escobar, 1998: 4, Edelman, 1999a: 17). Resource mobilization

Theory (RMT), on the other hand, has been considered a ‘strategy-

oriented’ paradigm, concerned with the ‘how’. In Edelman’s terms,

Resource Mobilization Theory has focused on

...the construction of ‘social movement industries’ made up of ‘social movement organisations’, regarded collective action mainly as interest group politics played out by socially connected groups rather than the most disaffected. Movement “entrepreneurs” had the task of mobilizing resources and channelling discontent into organizational forms. Resource availability and preference structures became the perspective’s central foci rather than the structural bases of social conflict... (Edelman, 2001: 289).

Likewise the RMT paradigm has tended to disregard situations in

which social movements, usually originating from the very poor, have

emerged with few resources or little overt organization.

When both of these groups, economically favoured and

economically disadvantaged, converge in the form of coalitions

between global and local constituencies, polarised positions seems to

be forced into dialogue. They may be combined in an eclectic

8

approach that takes advantage of the different forms of

conceptualisation of social phenomena, which do not oppose each

other but at the same time expose the greater complexity of

interactions of movements, which go beyond isolated frameworks, and

demand different approaches to address the complex interactions that

are derived from transnational formations. This work will use

interchangeably the varied definitions derived from NSMs and RMT

theories. The latter only seems a bit emphasised due to the lack of

development of the NSMs to tackle global and rural issues of peasant

struggles (Stammers, n/p: 4, Edelman, 1999a:17). Nonetheless it is

well equipped to tackle issues of symbolic values and resources

(Edelman, 2001: 289) addressed in this paper.

As new forms of politics have been created by the spreading of

globalisation, crossing borders and relating with other structures

according to other processes of globalisation such as information,

social movements can not be the exception, if they want to function at

the level of opposing globalisation. Some theorizations of the

transnationalisation of social movements are here reviewed in order to

situate the case studies within existing approaches, and to suggest

other areas for further exploration in case they are challenged by such

developments.

The first relates with Resource Mobilization Theory (RMT). Olesen

draws on it for his conceptualisation of ‘transnational framing’, where

he asserts that ‘the emergence of a new form of transnational

solidarity’, namely ‘mutual solidarity’, is manifested through ‘informal

networks’ (2001: 1). Informal Transnational Solidarity Networks (ITSNs)

are constructed through certain ‘symbolic centers’, and are

expressions of ‘transnational counterpublics’. Olesen underlines the

concept of ‘chains of equivalence’ as a process of social construction

opposing self–marginalizing notions of the politics of difference, hence,

ITSNs are a result of social construction. According to the author, this is

better explained by the framing concept, built from social movements

analysis as ‘...the processes of reality and grievance interpretation

9

whereby social movements attempt to garner support’ (2001: 2-3). The

author adopts the definition of ‘Transnational Framing’, to develop his

explanation of how ITSNs are socially constructed by this process.

According to this scheme, four factors are necessary to ensure a

successful transnational frame, and will subsequently be shaped by the

same process:

-Resonance with the belief systems of the society. This implies a

degree of global consciousness, not only as a pre-condition, but also,

as something rooted in previous solidarity or constructed in the

process.

-The adoption of an ‘injustice frame’, that means the definition of a

problem (neo-liberal restructuring in this case) and the proposal of a

solution through collective action.

-Concurrence with a latent ‘Master Frame’i, in this case, the spread

of human rights ideas after the end of the Cold War (which is seen in

terms of a ‘political opportunity’ii).

-Empirical credibility and the construction of experiential

commensurability (resonance with the experiences of potential target

groups) through the internet (Olesen, 2001: 3,14).

J. Smith, R. Pagnucco and C. Chatfield elaborate another theoretical

framework for the study of Transnational Social Movements in the light

of the Resource Mobilization Theory. They show that despite the

variety of actors mobilized and their degree of formal coordination, the

different political opportunities they face in three different arenas

influence their strategic choices. However, ‘[t]he intervention of

transnational social movements in national, intergovernmental, and

transgovernmental political processes alters decision maker’s

perception...’, clearly impacting on global policy (1997: 59). This

impact is ‘...conditioned by their mobilizing structures; by the political

opportunities inherent in national, intergovernmental, and

nongovernmental contexts; and by strategies to mobilize resources to

act’ (1997:60). They show how the concept of Mobilizing Structures,

10

applied to a transnational movement can adopt dramatic and diverse

configurations of formal and informal shapes, and can be expressed

within a movement or non movement dimension. The most elaborated

of these configurations are formal movement structures, consisting of

TSMOs, national SMOs, and transnational coalitions of NGOs built up to

achieve specific movement commitments. In the case of the

integration of informal social networks, the concept of Issue Networks

is a useful one to explain the importance of the participation of clusters

of activists and movements organizations, policymakers,

intergovernmental officials, media and foundations. Having come

together to reach a common purpose, ‘...these networks aid

communication and strategic coordination, thereby facilitating

movement activity’ (1997: 64-65).

The idea of Structures of Opportunity is developed by the authors in

the context of TSMs, in order to stress that these are factors that exist

in the political and social environment of movements and are keys to

constraint and facilitating the achievement of social change. These

opportunities are structured in the three main areas of political

decision making: national, intergovernmental, and transgovernmental

(1997:66-67).

Another factor in addition to Mobilizing Structures, and Opportunity

Structures, are Movement Strategies, which are decisions taken in

order to ‘...maximize the effectiveness of collective efforts to affect

policy processes or to otherwise alter the political environment’(1997:

70-71). TSMOs possess two different strategic options: first, mobilizing

strategies, which attempt to attract new activists and resources; and

secondly, action strategies, which ‘...are the activities that social

movements employ in order to influence policy’ (1997: 70-71). The

latter element will be important in examining the role of Transnational

Social Movements aimed at changing the global trade rules in an

oncoming chapter, especially as the authors state that TSMOs serve

as ‘vehicles for the diffusion of values, frames, tactics, and practices

11

among different national populations’, an action strategy that is

difficult for most governments to control.

The authors suggest that TSMOs influence the results of global

political decisions in three main ways: by attracting the attention of

global elites to specific issues; by advising governments about

potential problems; and by enhancing government accountability

through their presence, interaction and the ‘shaping of political

processes that generate global policy’ (1997: 73-74).

In a third theoretical framework, Marco Giugni and Florence

Passy analyse solidarity movements through the concept of political

altruism, which Passy defines as all actions: a)performed collectively,

b)that have a political aim and c) whose outcomes are to benefit others

. Such characteristics should be considered in addition to Bar-Tal

framework (from Passy, 2001:6): a) they must benefit other persons,

b)they must be performed voluntarily, c)they must be performed

intentionally, d) the benefit must be the goal itself, and e) they must

be performed without expecting any external reward. Passy equates

actions performed by the solidarity movement to political altruism

which consists of ‘collective actions performed on behalf of other

people and built upon a specific political cleavage....it is embedded in a

specific social environment that gives it cultural and symbolic

resources...’, and it also intervenes at different areas and levels (Passy,

2001:6-8, 18). The solidarity movement is thus based on cultural and

political resources, understood as “master frames” (see note VI) which

frame the example of human rights used by Passy, but are useful too

for the case studies in the fifth section of this paper:

The Christian world provides the movement with the idea of helping your neighbour, giving her/him love, assistance, protection, and care. From the humanist component of the Enlightenment, the solidarity movement draws a coherent discourse on the respect for human rights and individual freedom. Finally, the early socialist movement put forth the ideal of a more just and egalitarian society (Passy, 2001: 8-9).

Passy define another particularity of the contemporary solidarity

movement. It moves on the same levels of intervention as any other

12

social movement. It targets national governments and local authorities,

but is distinguished because it moves on an international level. ‘The

fact that the movement often mobilizes on behalf of populations in

other countries has facilitated its expansion to the international arena’

(2001: 12).

Simone Baglioni briefly analyses the historical evolution of

Solidarity Movements Organizations, showing the relevance of both the

Christian charity, as Passy mentioned, and political liberalism, in the

construction of such networks, a point worth stressing for the purposes

of this paper (2001:220). Giugni asserts that ‘religious beliefs and

values are one of the principal causes of participation in non-profit

organizations and activities’ (2001: 236 from Ranci), perhaps due to

the Christian emphasis on looking after other persons and giving

assistance to suffering people, which (among other motivations)

provides a strong justification ‘...from which to draw the resources to

be invested in the movement’. These kinds of cultural traditions or

‘master frames’ provide the movement, not only with cultural and

symbolic resources, but also with social, material, and human ones, as

Giugni remarks (2001: 236-237).

Giugni (as Olesen, 2001) concludes that the most important

lesson is that altruistic behaviour is the product of situations and

circumstances, namely social relations (Giugni, 2001: 243).

In a fourth approach, C. Eschle and N. Stammers present a

different way of framing the relationship between social movements

and global change: a categorisation of the study of social movements

activism as either pragmatic, pessimistic, and transformationalist. The

pragmatic approach, identified with official perspectives, relies on

formal organisation and seeing the interface between state and non-

state organisations as the unproblematic basis of political life: the

appropriate arena for democracy and the source of social change via

the shaping of policy. The pessimists, usually with a Marxist, post-

structural, and ecologist background, consider NGOs as acting on

behalf of the dominant interests of corporate politics. In brief, they

13

consider that ‘the possibilities for radical global-level changes are

extremely limited’. The transformationalists regard the global action of

social movements and their organizations as a serious factor in

emancipation and social change. The utopian branch tends to perceive

unity and homogeneity in social movements’ organization and goals;

and the critical transformationalist branch, ‘...is more sensitive to the

substantive and organisational differences within and between

movements and to problems of power and oligarchy’ (Eschle and

Stammers n/d: 4-5) .

The problems underlying each of these perspectives, include the

differences in the stressing of concepts, the understanding and

conceptualisation of movements, networks, organizations, and levels of

action, as well as the neglect, mainly from the pragmatists and

transformationalists point of view, of the ‘dynamics of oligarchic and

democratic possibilities in movement organizations and activism’ (n/d:

7-13).

The authors argue for the adoption of a multidimensional

perspective for the analysis of globalisation, cross-cutting the

conceptualisation of fixed schema, and recognition of the ‘...mutually

constitutive relationship between the local and the global. ‘[T]hey point

out the tendency of formal and informal activism involved in TSMs to

combine in complex configurations instrumental and expressive means

for the application of their strategies, but including a network concept

of social movement and of ‘informal modes of activism’.

Eschle and Stammers highlight the analytical distinction between

organizations and networks of informal interactions as constituting

social movements (n/d: 24). They embrace Diani’s definition of social

movement, described as ‘a network of informal interactions between a

plurality of individuals, groups and/or organisations, engaged in a

political or cultural conflict, on the basis of a shared collective identity’

(Eschle and Stammers, n/d from Diani, 1992), adding ‘that movement

networks must necessarily encompass informal groups and extra

institutional activism’ (n/d: 16). This point enables more acute

14

definitions of global activism. A more eclectic approach is needed, to

cross theoretical and disciplinary boundaries, as well as global-local

ones, and include analytical-on-the ground research (n/d: 24).

The Role of Values in Transnational Social Movements.

A central concern of this paper is the role of values as a target

and as key symbolic element of movements strategies. Values are a

factor not only in transnational movements, but also in the domestic

environment of movements, this section focuses on an aspect of

values that is rarely conceptualised in depth, or considered important

in academic and practical terms in relation to social movements and

grassroots constituencies.

M.E. Keck and K. Sikkink, talking about the rationality or

significance of activist networks, stress that scholars have been slow to

recognize the ‘...motivation by values rather than by material concerns

or professional norms’ (1998: 2). The authors find that the role of

values is consistent with some arguments within the New Social

Movement Theory (1998: 31).

Many researchers associate the notion of values and solidarity

with TSMs. Some of them consider that Transnational Social Movement

Organizations serve as vehicles for the diffusion of values, an action

strategy (Smith, Pagnucco and Chatfield, 1997: 72). Others speak of

the early presence of a ‘solidarity movement’, whose origin is

intimately related with Christian charity and with political liberalism; in

this sense, Solidarity Movements represent ‘...a real step forward

toward the creation of an active global consciousness’ (Baglioni, 2001:

220). Passy, regards actions of the solidarity movement as

characterized as political altruism, since they have ‘a clear political

15

aim’, and are ‘pursued to the benefit of other people’ (2001: 7).

Sydney Tarrow considers solidarity, as one of the distinctions and

strengths of contentious forms of collective action; he includes its

meaning within particular groups, situations and political cultures

(1994: 3). For J.D. McCarthy participation in extra-border experiences

of social movements results in the formation of a self-conception in

terms of transnational identity or a greater appreciation of

transnational solidarity (1997: 248).

L. Kriesberg highlights the processes of diffusion of values and

norms, and the increasing tendency of sharing them by

multidirectional flows of ‘ethnic and religious particularisms’ that

challenge western cultural hegemony (1997: 9).

Others look more critically at the idea of social movements as

solidaristic. Charles Tilly, argues that a movement is more than the

activist stories about it and the existing groups within; ‘[s]ocial

movements ...consist of bounded, contingent, interactive performances

by multiple and changing actors’, and to consider SMs as ‘...solidaristic,

coherent groups, rather than clusters of performances’ can be at best

misleading.

P. Waterman develops a more elaborated framework for the

analysis of the formation of Global Solidarity, suggesting that along

with the appearance of economic and political globalisation processes,

emerged global solidarity:

the new global solidarity projects descend from, selectively rearticulate, allow for, but go beyond, religious, liberal and socialist universalisms; proposing neither a return to an unchanging golden past nor a leap into a perfect future –here or hereafter- they allow for and require a dialogue of civilizations and ages, a solidarity with both past and future (1998: 231).

Two challenges confront both these types of integration. The

first, is the risk of reproducing universalism in the same fashion as the

‘grand narratives’ of Judaism, Christianity, the European

enlightenment, liberalism, and socialism, which offered ‘...universal

statements of reality, value and obligation, based on initial

16

assumptions or arguments about the universe, nature, man, society,

etc.’, in a dynamic of truth imposition, the second is the danger of

‘producing or reproducing a sentimental humanist universalism’ (1998:

231). Waterman’s proposal is a concept based in the complexity of

solidarity. It associates the notions of equality, liberty, peace,

tolerance, and emancipatory/life-protective ideals. It is, although

mediated by other institutions, a relationship between people, and an

‘active process of negotiating differences, or creating identity, rather

than assuming it like as the orthodox notions of ‘community’ (1998:

235).

Waterman develops a framework of such definitions, reproduced

here.

Table 2. The meanings of international solidarity (In Waterman, 1998: 236).Definition General or

historical exampleProblem, danger or exclusion

Identity Solidarity of common interest and identity

“Workers of the world unite! You have no-thing to lose but your chains. You have a world to win’

Universalistic; exclu-sion of the non-identi-cal; limitation to the ‘politically-conscious’?

Substitution Standing in for those incapa-ble of standing up for themselves

Charity development co-operation

Substitutionism; one-way solidarity, with in-built patron client relation?

Complemen-tarity

Exchange of different needed/desired goods/quali—ties

Exchange of different emancipatory experiences, ideas, cultural products

Decisions on needs, desires; value of qualities, goods exchanges

Reciprocity Exchange over time of identi-cal goods/qualities

Mutual support be-tween London and Australian dockers, late nineteenth century

Allows for instrumen-tal rationality, empty of emotion/ethics

Affinity Shared cross-border values, Solidarity of pacifists, Inevitably particular-

17

feelings, ideas, identities socialists, ecologists, indigenes (sic)

istic; friendship?

Restitution Acceptance of responsibi-lity for historical wrong

Swiss compensation for victims of compli-city with Nazis

Buying off guilt? Reproduction of guilt/resentment?

Three of the definitions are particularly relevant for the

arguments of this document.

The notion of substitution is about the ‘...standing up, or in, for a

weaker or poorer other’, in a dynamic reminiscent of dependence

schemes; complementarity refers to an exchange of different missing

and desired qualities, that are ‘...equally valued by participants in the

transaction’; and affinity ‘suggests mutual appreciation or attraction,

and therefore a relationship of mutual respect and support based in

values, feelings and friendship’. Waterman concludes that such

complex manifestations challenge binary notions or one-way

solidarities, being a useful ‘research instrument’ for examining

participants’ point of view of solidarity (1998: 237-238).

I. Eterovic and J. Smith observes that a new form of political

action and identity may be emerging, consisting of a transition from

altruistic forms of collective politics to a different mutual solidarity

process. Altruism, in its attempts to assist and support southern groups

in a one-way relation of dependency, due to planetary economic and

political integration processes after the cold war, is giving place to

another relation of inter-group exchange of political solidarity, a more

reciprocal North-South interaction (2001:198). This view is contrasts

with Passy’s interchangeable concepts of Altruism and Solidarity

(2001: 7). Eterovic and Smith submerge the question of how political

altruism has ‘...affected global structural changes that have

transformed nation-states?’. The question remains to what extent

today forms of transnational association are still products of the

patron-client type of political altruism, or form part of a changing trend

towards more collaborative, interdependent relationships? (2001: 198).

18

These problems lie at the core of reactions to the global

processes of economic liberalization, or market-oriented international

policies, from movements within both economically privileged sectors

and economically disadvantaged countries. There seems to be a

considerable gap between northern transnational social movements

advocating on behalf of third world people, and social movements

emerging from these economically and socially excluded sectors.

The Norm Implementation Role of Transnational Social Movements.

Among the multiple definitions of a social movements, some

categorize the manifestations and general aims that move activism. A

short review follows of some of the different classifications of social

movements, principally transnational ones.

R. Cohen, using an early model from Aberle and Wilson,

suggests four kinds of social movements, namely ‘transformative’,

reformative, redemptive and alternative (2000). The transformative

ones focus on structural change in a violent form, like radical political

groups, or anticipate a ‘cataclysmic change’, including movements

with religious roots. The reformative type aims ‘...at partial change to

try to offset current injustices and inequalities’. It fosters positive

change by removing such burdens, creating a ‘...more just social order

and a more effective and viable polity’. Usually this type of movement,

adopts a single issue as point of departure in their efforts at

restructuring exclusive policies. The 2000 Jubilee focused on principle

on reducing the external debt of poor countries; after a considerable

success the strategy focused later on changing the world trade rules,

targeting authorities from transnational organisations such as the

WTO. Redemptive movements imply an internal individual change. This

type is commonly approached through the New Religious Movements

perspective. Finally, Cohen describes alternative movements by

alluding to the ‘...countercultural values, the rejection of materialism

and the development of unconventional lifestyles characteristic of

19

some Western youth, a phenomenon often dated from the 1960s’.

Rather than intending to change any element of the system, they aim

at developing a parallel, viable and sustainable way of life, according

to some ecological and spiritual values. Aware of the changing nature

of social phenomena, he makes the point that no movement fits

exactly into each box. This classification is a useful point of departure

for the analysis of common elements between movements, and the

identification of lack of links between them, which is relevant to the

following examination of the relation between different kinds of

movements that share objectives and targets; but may differ on

strategies and resources.

This section focuses on the reformative movement, mainly its

orientation towards exerting direct pressure on policy changes at

governmental and intergovernmental levels. Some scholars refer to

processes of solidarity built-up in a “top-down” direction. One of the

strategies mentioned is the generation of constituencies for global

policies. Through conscientization and transnational education

campaigns, TSMOs engage with national and local networks, to gather

public support for their policy shaping claims (Eterovic and Smith,

2001: 205; Kriesberg, 1997: 18, Keck and Sikkink, 1998:9). The aim is

to ‘...relate citizens concerns to global institutions and processes’, by

spreading information, and enhancing peoples engagement in social

change agendas (Eterovic and Smith, 2001: 205). This, in words of

Passy, is a new face for the job of Solidarity movements: to direct their

actions towards the inclusion of ‘political claim making addressed to

power holders’; in contrast with the early model, dominated by acts of

assistance and relief (Passy, 2001: 10).

Lobbying for policy changes is a feature of NGOs engaged in

social movements and requires an effective flow of information

between members of TSMs, or as Keck and Sikkink calls it, advocacy

networks. In this sense, a good communication network is not only

necessary for the diffusion and sharing of values, and the strategies for

its inclusion in systems of rules. A closer engagement is also needed

20

with the disadvantaged sectors they claim to be representing and

advocating for. This level of communication is fundamental for shaping

the ideas and demands that are allegedly a norm in cross-border inter-

governmental spheres.

3. Fair Trade as a Movement

At the present time neo-liberal values, whose beginning some

situate in the Bretton Woods conference, are spreading and starting to

prevail in the world political economy, in governments’ and multilateral

agencies’ policies. However this happens mostly around policies and

not necessarily in peoples’ projects and the so-called civil society. One

example is world trade. There is an increasing perception by ordinary

people of the widening of the gap between rich and poor and its

relation with market liberalisation. Nowadays there is never a World

Trade Organisation (WTO) meeting without a parallel contesting forum

or demonstration organised by socially-oriented NGOs, political groups,

coalitions, peasant organisations, intellectuals and an increasing

number of individual people, in a heterogeneous movement that is

showing signs of adopting broader focuses and targets, more

organisation, professionalisation (e.g. The World Social Forum in Porto

Alegre), and hence, whose claims, despite being silenced in many

countries by the media, are being heard and taken seriously by larger

sectors of the population.

Although world trade is a process best explained in the global

arena, its effects are mainly felt in the domestic one.

A common criticism of the current way of economic globalisation

is that international trade is now used by the large corporate interests

to suit their agendas, setting up or omitting the rules and generally

undermining the income of the most disadvantaged groups. For

instance, it is stated that 48 of the world’s poorest countries account

for only 0.4 per cent of world trade. Since 1980 their share has halved.

Five hundred multinational companies now control almost two thirds of

21

world trade, and the world’s five largest companies together generate

annual sales greater than the combined incomes of the forty-six

poorest countries in the world (Curtis, 2001:1, Christian Aid, n/d;

Willmore, 2002). IMF/Word Bank are heavily criticised for requiring

further trade liberalisation as a condition for loans; liberalisation that is

not applied by the rich countries to their own import barriers (Oxfam,

2002).

In this context the Fair Trade initiative is relevant, as a parallel

mini-system inserted into the larger one, presenting a different kind of

values in order to show that a difference can be made in the outcomes

of trade. This section aims at looking at the Fair Trade Market from a

different perspective. Not by making a critique of its weaknesses, but

by trying to understand it as an element of a broader movement,

which this paper will call the Fair Trade Movement. The following

analysis is not limited to the realm of Alternative Trading Organizations

(ATOS) but covers a broader mobilization that, through different

actions and common values, is taking place out of concern for the

principles of the current dominant framework of world trade. It will

examine the way collective action constructs instruments to address

the outcomes of implementing values of competition, rather than those

of cooperation and solidarity, and the way this effort grows beyond

frontiers and is linked at present with directly affected groups and

grass-roots movements that share the same cause. This critique is

based on a limited definition of the so-called Fair Trade Movement,

understood only in its marketing-ATOs side, but disregarding the

amount of global citizen creativity, that through symbolic and practical

values contests the core of the economic system: its own structure of

values.

In this work the Fair Trade Movement will be understood, not

merely in terms of economic values for the producer, but in a wider

social context and addressing non-economic valuesiii. It will include the

Fair Trade market per se, with three relevant actors, namely small

22

producers, importers and certification initiatives; it will also include the

Social Movements aiming at changing trade rules.

1. The Fair Trade market is known as a movement which entails

not only ‘...the marketing of products at greater than free market

prices’, (Leclair, 2002:949), but also as a process concerned about the

conditions of production such as democratic organisations, access to

credits, long term contracts, certainty on prices, support for the

learning process and so on. It is also concerned with keeping the

consumer informed about these facts (Barrat, 1993: 158; Beekman,

1998: 8). The actors on this level are the producers from the South (as

producers and political actors), certified non-commercial importers

(importer ATOs) and FT labelling organisations (Labelling ATOs).

2. Secondly the social movements demanding for a change in the

world trade rules, include the Trade Justice Movement, defined as a

movement integrated by northern NGOs aiming at changing

international trade rules within the World Trade Organisation (see

section 5); and the peasant movements (see section 4). The common

factor is the democratisation of production and world trade based in

values such as solidarity, as opposed to free market values and

including a broader range of actors from the local and the

transnational sectors.

Some considerations about the trajectory of the Fair Trade Market

As L. Waridel (2002: 93) points out, it is not easy to say when the

Fair Trade movement started or whether it is situated exclusively in

the North. None of the literature reviewed about Fair Trade mentions

such initiatives within any country from the South. Through the

relatively little material published about the history of the Fair Trade

movement, we have an analysis of its emergence that seems to be

constructed with an euro-centric model. There is room for more

research and a re-consideration of the approach. The following review

will examine the philosophies and ideologies behind the movement.

23

The Alternative Trade is said to have begun towards the end of the

19th century, with the development of the cooperative movement

mainly in the U.K. and Italy; its goal still is to ‘...build an integrated

cooperative economy, right the way through from production to retail

outlet’, (IFAT, 2002). Another early account of an organized attempt to

trade without middlemen is from the former Mennonite International

Development Agency (currently the Mennonite Central Committee)

which founded in North America their first Self-Help Crafts stores (now

known as Ten Thousand Villages) in 1946. They started purchasing

directly from Latin American craftspeople in order to, along with

purposes as job creation and income generation, educate their

communities about ‘the inequities of international commerce and the

need to pay a fair price to producers’ (Waridel, 2002: 93). The

beginning of the movement in Europe is also associated with the

foundation of a development charity by Catholic youth in the

Netherlands in 1959 (Rice, 2001: 47), and with the launch by Oxfam,

Britain’s largest aid agency, of the ATO ‘Oxfam Trading’ in 1965.

The mid-1950s to early 1970s represent what Tallontire calls the

‘goodwill selling’ stage, which ‘...began with NGOs selling goods

produced by people with whom they were working on development or

relief projects’ (2000: 167), distributing the products mainly through

informal networks (like craft fairs, church bazaars, and public markets),

and being supported strongly by political solidarity movements. In this

period began the work of some ATOS like the Alternative Trade

Organisatie in 1967 and Stichting Ideele (both from Netherlands), and

state trading bodies like the former Greater London Council, that

established Twin Trading in the U.K, importing goods from Third World

countries in political and economic struggles such as Vietnam, Capo

Verde, Mozambique, Cuba and Nicaragua (Medina, 1997:7; IFAT, 2002:

2; Waridel and Teitelbaum, 2002: 4; Barrat, 1992:156).

The ‘Solidarity trade’ period from the 1970s to the late 1980s

was characterised by politically motivated solidarity towards groups of

‘producers organised collectively or based in countries that explicitly

24

challenged the prevailing economic order’ (Tallontire, 2000: 167).

Nonetheless, at the end of this stage, many organisations carried out

their first meetings aiming to come together in order to be organised

with greater efficiency and effectiveness (European Fair Trade

Association or EFTA in 1990), to ‘...improve the livelihoods of

disadvantaged people through trade, and providing a forum for the

exchange of information and ideas’ (The International Federation of

Alternative Trade or IFAT in 1989). IFAT remained as ‘...an umbrella but

not in any way a directing centre’ (IFAT, 2002: 2; Barrat, 1992: 157). In

1986, as a result of a national coffee campaign led by Dutch NGOs

together with political and religious groups to tackle the coffee

purchasing practices of the main Dutch coffee roasters, the first

labelling ATO was founded, Max Havelaar, making a certification

initiative that focused its efforts on coffee with considerable success.

Representatives of NGOs and international solidarity groups have now

joined its board of directors (Medina, 1997: 9; Waridel and Teitelbaum,

2002: 5).

Thirdly, the ‘mutual beneficial trade’ of the 1990s is the result of

ATOs’ concern about ‘consumer needs and to balance this with those

of the producers’, strengthening the relationship with these two

important actors of the Fair Trade commodity chain, and at the same

time stressing the job of product promotion and engagement with

conventional sources of marketing (Tallontire, 2000:168). There is a

particular interest in increasing sales, either as a way meeting the

demand of producers to access the alternative trade markets, or to a

certain extent, to include the environment in the agendaiv (Waridel and

Teitelbaum, 2002: 5). Two of the stronger labelling organisations

sprang up at the beginning of this period: The Fair Trade Foundation

based in the United Kingdom and set up in 1994, and the German-

based Transfair International, founded in 1992-1993, beginning

operations in Canada (1994) and in the USA (1995).

The Alternative Trade Movement is based in principles of

solidarity, rather than the ones of competition, individual success, and

25

reliance on the rules of the mainstream neo-liberal market. The

participating actors range from civil society, governmental agencies,

religious charities, political organisations, and nowadays includes

marketing corporations and other actors from the mainstream market.

Fair Trade Labelling Organizations International (FLO Int).

In 1997, the three certification initiatives TransFair, Max

Havelaar, and the Fair Trade Foundation, along with Swedish and a

Finnish labelling organisations with their own satellite organisations

across Europe, America, and Asiav, came together to build up an

umbrella called Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO-

International) in order to standardise the certification process (Waridel,

2002:96). The initiative is based in Bonn, Germany and Utrecht, the

Netherlands and its 17 members, known as the national initiatives,

currently certify coffee, tea, sugar, honey, bananas, orange juice,

mangoes, rice, and chocolate; a process is ongoing to include herbal

teas, dry fruits, sun-dried fruits, wine, ornamental plants, sport balls,

fresh fruits, and fruit juices.

FLO’s overall objective is through the labelling of a Fair Trade

product, is to support deprived producers to achieve sustainable

development. The label enables the consumer to recognize a Fair

Trade product and hence, enhances producers’ access to international

markets, based on fair conditions (FLO-Int web page).

FLO’s certification tackles two essential areas:

1. It assesses whether or not producers from the South meet the

Fair Trade standards.

2. It guarantees that the Fair Trade benefits are being invested in

social and economic development.

3. It controls FLO’s registered importers in order to guarantee that

the Fair Trade benefits are going directly to the producers.

26

4. It guarantees that the Fair Trade label is been used exclusively

for products coming from FT certified producers (FLO-Int bulletin, April

2002: 3).

The initiative is the only certification system in the world, where

the producers do not pay for their certification. The consumers pay a

higher price, including payment for certification and a premium paid to

the producers (FLO-Int web page).

As Waridel points out, ‘every player in the fair-trade chain has a

role to play in respecting the agreed rules of the game’, (2002: 98). A

continuing monitoring process is carried out on producers and

importers; both production and marketing are strictly controlled. In the

case of coffee, for a product to be certified, it has to be both listed in

FLO-International’s registry of coffee growers and awarded a fair trade

certification label. To achieve the former, the following criteria are

required to be met:

-Small scale production

-Democratic management

-Transparency

-Values based on solidarity

-Political independence and

-Sustainable development

In order to get the certification label the producers, importers,

roasters and wholesalers must guarantee that they comply with the

following criteria:

-Direct trade

-A long term relationship

-Higher than market prices and

-Access to credit (Waridel and Teitelbaum, 2002).

FLO has just prepared the way for national initiatives to introduce

the International Fair Trade certification mark to the market. This is a

common logo that can be recognised by consumers and make trade

easier across the borders, (FLO-Int bulletin, April 2002: 3,5). In the first

months of 2002 FLO-Int was restructured, and now the half the board

27

of directors comprises producers and importersvi. There are six

representatives of producers and importers, and six representatives of

the national initiatives(FLO-Int bulletin, April 2002: 1).

The first list of criteria shows that values based on solidarityvii are

a relevant point to be fulfilled, among others such as democracy,

transparency, autonomy, etc. The first set of criteria is mainly based on

values, rather than concrete and more easily measurable conditions

like in the second set. Relying on certain principles is, not only a key

mechanism in the Fair Trade logic, but a central element of analysis

for a better understanding of the role of the FT market in terms of

social demand.

Symbolic values and the symbolic power of values.

Any consumer that has read a Fair Trade leaflet about how the

system works, is aware that he or she is paying a higher price than for

conventional products, as one of the FT mechanisms that enable the

‘third world’ producers to make a better deal. This over-price is

justified through the set of symbolic social and ecologic values that are

a fundamental requirement the consumer is expecting the label

agency to fulfil, as an assurance of right certification; but the labelling

organisation continually monitors both the importer and the producer,

and the cooperatives have their own rules on individuals’

participation. In short, values appear to be the reason that puts in

motion and justifies the whole apparatus. In the Fair Trade market,

social and ecological values are opposed to the principles of the

maximum bargain for the consumer, and maximum profit for the seller,

which sustains the mainstream market, regardless of other facts such

as quality, production conditions, distribution of profit etc.

The function of symbolic values, like solidarity, has not only been

understood in terms of consumers’ consciousness demanding ‘respect

for certain social values involved in production’ (Renard, 1999: 490-

491). It is also part of the encouragement of an ‘identity driven

28

consumption in which the brand purchased is viewed as an expression

of one’s personality’, (Sud,1998:40); or even as a key element of

consumers’ education about ‘...other cultures, wider economic

development, world trading regimes, and tariff discrimination...’ (Tiffen

and Zadek, 1998:165), among others.

A. Gonzalez and T. Linck, for example, underline the role that

symbolic values play in encouraging consumers’ solidarity by paying

more for a product in order to make a difference to the peasant

families’ life conditions. However, the authors argue, the definition of

standards that validates the incorporation of ecologic and solidarity

values is highly controversial (n/d).

In their analysis of the rules and ethical values of the Fair Trade

market, Gonzalez and Linck critique the way the definition of ethical

criteria seems to reproduce exclusion mechanisms, since the

participation of the producers in decision-making is quite limited. Such

standards, they argue, are assumed to be universal and established

outside the logic and territory of the indigenous communities. Rather

than consolidate a select group of producers that meet the precise

criteria to reach sustainable development, a way should be found to

assume the autonomy of producer groups to decide their own path to

lead them to sustainable development, based in their own values

system; otherwise the benefits of the overprice will continue to be

limited to a small number of groups that meet the rules (n/d).

It is not specified how this could be carried out in concrete terms.

It is also unclear whether if Gonzalez and Linck are aware of the above

mentioned recent changes to FLO-International’s board of Directors,

which appoints the certification committee, an autonomous unit. The

latter has representation from national initiatives, NGO’s, external

experts, traders and producers, and ...’[e]very producer organisation

and trader has the right to appeal against a decision of the

Certification Committee’, (FLO-Int bulletin, 2002: 3).

29

3. Peasant movements struggles for the appropriation of the

production process.

An approach to the concepts.

This section will not review in depth the concept of peasantry

and the categorizations associated with it, but develop a set of starting

points to frame in broad terms this approach to the productive

character of Mexican peasantry. It will show through some examples,

the way the Mexican peasantry have organised in official or

independent movements, in coalitions or isolated efforts, for the

appropriation of the productive process, which includes the struggle for

equal and fairer conditions of marketing. According to differentiation of

the peasantry along Latin America and Mexico itself, it is convenient to

show the way the main actors in agricultural production have been

defined and conceptualised, to get for a better understanding of their

social problematic.

E. Martinez defines a producers’ organization as ‘a qualitative

social process whose objective and end in itself is peasantry’s social

and economic development as the basis for rural development’viii

(1991: 12). In this definition, Martinez tries to stress the notion of

peasants’ struggle against their domination and exploitation, since this

is one of the conceptual characteristics of peasantry. In this sense,

peasant organization for production is one of the peasants’

movement’s fundamental strategies to achieve its own constitution

and class consolidation (1991:12).

A typology of peasantry enables the understanding of its internal

differences and inequalities, allowing a broader view of its place

among the excluded groups of the southern countries. In terms of

associated producers, this kind of peasant category, is considered

commonly as having high and medium productive potential, and as

part of the medium strata. But, within producers, another group of

30

poor peasants has low productivity land, and their job is the growing of

export crops; coffee is an example (1991: 43).

One of the first and most influential approaches in the analysis of

peasantry is the Marxist one with its main internal differentiation of

perspectives. Its main early features were a strong emphasis on class

and history. In Maoist terms, it has been associated with the concept of

peasant; and in Leninist terms, with the notion of proletarian. Roger

Bartra is one of the most representative holders of leninist perspective.

Sometimes orthodox and Bolshevik-inspired (Miller,1994: 170), Bartra’s

approach of the ‘rural proletariat’, considers the peasantry as a simple

commodity mode of production, subordinate to capitalist development.

This perspective is known as well, as the descampesinista theory

(Otero, 1999: 191; Edelman, 1999a: 204). On the other hand the

campesinista approach represented by authors like Armando Bartra,

Arturo Warman and Gustavo Esteva rejects unilineal evolutionism and

the ‘inevitability’ of orthodox Marxism in regards to the disappearance

iNotes

? “Master frames are interpretive media through which collective actors within a ‘cycle of protest’... assign blame for the problems they are facing” (Olesen from Snow and Benford 1992: 139; and Tarrow, 1991).ii ‘Political opportunities refer, inter alia, to changes in political power structures that facilitate the emergence of social movements’ (Olesen in Mc Adam, 1996; and in Tarrow, 1998)iii Zadek and Tiffen stress the role of ‘non-economic values and purposes’, and the principle of seeing ‘...people as the ends and not the means of economic activity’ (1998:163-164), a position that differs from the limited notion of paying higher prices to the producers, but doesn’t address the way peasant movements and those in the north aim to change the way world trade rules play in what is defined here as the Fair Trade Movement.iv For a detailed critique of Fair Trade in regards to environment and consumption, see Sud, 1998.v Max Havelaar is represented in the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway and France; TransFair International, based in Germany, is also in Austria, Luxembourg, Italy, Japan, Canada, and the United States. The Fair Trade Foundation is based in the United Kingdom and Ireland; Finland and Sweden have their own certification processes (Reilun Kaupan edistämisyhdistys ry, based in Helsinki, and Föreningen för Rättvisemärkt, based in Stockholm) (Waridel and Teitelbaum, 2002:12; FLO-Int web page).vi At present there are four producers’ representatives, from Peru, Tanzania, Sri Lanka and Brazil.vii ‘The motivation behind the organization’s existence must be the practice of solidarity, there is no political, racial, religious, or sexual discrimination. The organization must be open to new members’ (Waridel and Teitelbaum, 2002).viii My translation

31

of the peasantry. Some of them argued that ‘...it was primarily

through political struggle, rather than through the “logic” of the rural

household or the larger economic system, that peasants had

historically guaranteed their survival’ (Edelman, 1999a: 204). This

debate has continued around 20 years, and was recently continuing.

Because of his specific focus on the re-conceptualisation of

peasantry in anthropological terms, and his stress on the

transnationalisation of peasants, Michael Kearney’s work is relevant.

Mainly in reference to migration processes, Kearney highlights the

transnational character of the post-peasant subject’s identity, in

opposition to the nation state’s restructuring influence on the

construction of peasants. This post-peasant condition differs from the

idea of a land–peasant essential connection in terms of its current links

with human rights, eco-politics, and ethnicity. There is an ‘emergence

of multiple identities from the category of peasant, which has been

imposed on and assumed by subaltern peoples...’ . Although being

criticised for generalising his assertions on the disappearance of

peasantry from the case of an exclusive region of Mexico (Edelman,

1999a: 205; Otero, 1999: 192), one of Kearney’s standpoints is the

unsuitability of the term peasant for contemporary social conditions.

This is due to the broadening of the range of peasants’ activities to

areas other than agriculture, the transnationalisation of their condition,

and the widening of their cultural participation (Kearney, 1996: 8).

A. Warman’s understanding of peasant movements is oriented

towards an instrumental vision of them, as ‘those that originates,

recruit and sustain in the rural environment and establish demands

oriented to achieve the persistence and growth of producer groups,

which with a territorial basis, have a relative autonomy in the

performance of the productive processes’ix (1984: 14). This is a classic

definition that should be understood in its early context; but it is useful

to contrast the classic notions of rural production such as Stavenhagen

suggestion of peasant economy with its current developments in the

ix My translation

32

neo-liberal environment . He writes in similar terms as Wolf’s 1955

concept, about a form of farm production supported by peasant’s own

means of production in order to satisfy their basic needs, while

complementing their own products through a minimum engagement

with the market. Normally these are small production units associated

with non-wage labour, and with the principal goal of guaranteeing

subsistence, in contrast to any other forms of accumulation (1978: 31).

In the Latin American context, particularly that of Mexico, two

more concepts are related to the specific political conditions within the

country. Two kinds of peasant movements can be distinguished: the

‘official’ and the ‘independent’ movements. The official movement

represents the corporativized sector with membership in Peasants’

Confederations directly linked with the former party in power (the

Institutional Revolutionary Party or PRIx) or with other organizations

with similar characteristics (Flores, Pare and Sarmiento, 1988: 11). The

independent movement is generally referred to in opposition to the

official movement, and has the particular following aspects: concern to

elaborate their own rural development strategy as a common project;

autonomy as an organisation; the rejection of any attempt to be joined

to corporate structures; looking after their members interests, rather

than the unconditional acceptance of private sector-oriented rural

policies; and finally, the attempt to develop new forms of collective

organization and the democratic participation of the grass-roots. In

sum, the type of relationship with the state defines the distinction

between the official and the independent movements (Flores, Pare and

Sarmiento, 1988: 13-14).

Some basic factors introducing the peasantry in Mexico.

This section does not try to make a summary, but stresses three

key moments that contributed to shape the character and

x After being in power for 71 years, the PRI lost Mexico’s presidential election last year for the first time, to the right-center National Action Party (or PAN) candidate Vicente Fox.

33

development of the peasantry as a social, economical and political

actor in the 20th century.

To understand the dynamic of agricultural producers, it is

convenient, first, to be situated in the context of the world political

economy whose capital expansion processes outcomes of the

achievement of food self-sufficiency in countries from the North, and

the loss of this in the South. The role of the so-called underdeveloped

countries has been one of exporting raw materials and agricultural

products to the industrialised countries. In Mexico, after a shift in which

the demand for base products decreased sharply as well as the prices,

a economic disarticulation process began, where the country changed

from an exporter of basic agricultural products to an importer of them,

and where a process of recurrent economic crisis began from about

1976 (Martinez, 1991: 21-22). In this macroeconomic context, the

development of agricultural production has had to face the political

conditions of the Mexican nation state, in a configuration that, in

addition to the agency of producers, has shaped the character of

peasantry in Mexico. Three critical stages in this history help us to

understand the current social dynamic of production and the political

outcomes derived from it. They are reviewed briefly as follows:

1. Corporativism. A process of agricultural modernization started

from the 1930s, with its peak in the 1960s. One of the pillars of the

Mexican political system is the institutional organization of the majority

groups, such as the popular-urban sector, labour, and, the peasants, in

an interrelation with the state which, tried to carry out peasant

mobilization to further its own interests (Martinez, 1991: 28-29).

2. Cardenism. The presidential administration of the Gral. Lazaro

Cardenas from 1934-1940 was a crucial period about 20 years after

the Mexican revolution, when a massive distribution of land was

carried out for the first time through the common land tenure system

of the ‘ejido’, along with strong support for agriculture, peasants, and

34

agricultural businessmen. In this period the nation-state was finally

consolidated under a project of broad popular participation, when the

process of corporatization took shape as a way of widening the

government’s social base (Martinez, 1991:23). Martinez comments:

The peasant movement accepts the establishment of an alliance with the state, which assumes its aims as its own, namely: to distribute the land and constitute the ejido and the community as economic and socio-politic forms of organization par excellence in the countryside. Nonetheless, with changes in the economic and politic project set later at state level, this relationship, more than an alliance between autonomous forces with certain convergences of interests, is converted into a control system over the peasant movement (Martinez, 1991: 29)xi

Corporate control, institutionalised since the cardenista period, was

represented by an organisation created in 1935, the CNC (National

Peasant Confederation), which was a key factor in the reduction of the

possibilities of social conflict (Flores, Pare and Sarmiento, 1988: 32).

Although the neo-liberal model, undermined the corporate system, it

was replaced, as Otero argues (from Bartra, 1993), by a neo-

corporative structure supported by governmental programs such as

the former PRONASOL and PROCAMPO.

3. The Neo-liberal reform in Mexico. As usually is underlined in

studies of peasant movements, the traditional claim around which turn

all the political projects of agricultural producers is the demand for

land. In this respect, the figure of the ejido has been a fundamental

part of the peasant struggles in the 20th century. First Zapata’s

demand for Land and Liberty, was one of the axes of the Mexican

Revolution; secondly, its materialization in the Lazaro Cardenas rule,

brought a long period of political control, much of it through the

manipulation of land, subsidies and patron-client relations; and finally,

its dismantling was achieved through neo-liberal reform, by president

Carlos Salinas de Gortari from 1988 to 1994, and was continued by his

successor, Ernesto Zedillo from 1994 to 2000. This was one of the main

reasons of the 1994 zapatista uprising in Chiapas.

xi My translation

35

President Salinas agrarian reform in 1992 focused on three main

aspects: 1. The right to sell or rent the ejido; 2. the end of land

distribution by the state; 3. and ‘while the limits for individual

landholding were kept to 100 hectares [...] corporations could operate

as much as 2,500 hectares as long as at least twenty-five individuals

were associate members, and none of them exceeded the individual

limit of 100 hectares’ (Otero, 1999: 193). This policy was accompanied

by other similar ones for other sectors, including the deregulation of

the agriculture economy, the privatisation of state enterprises, the

elimination of most subsidies, the restriction of agricultural credit and

insurance, and trade liberalisation through the NAFTA.

Such a model represented and still represents, tremendous

challenges for the ejido and the people who work in it; on the one hand

it is released from state tutelage, on the other it is ‘deprived of all

state support’ (Otero, 1999: 193), at the same time deepening the

structural problems of the countryside and undermining the

possibilities of overcoming them; in addition, with the weakening of

corporativism, the 1992 reform may be fostering opportunities for

bottom-up models of community participation and rural producers’

autonomy .

Some actors in the independent peasant movement.

At the end of the 1970 the first attempts began for the

coordination of a national peasant movement, and from this decade

onwards the peasant struggles, previously isolated by regions or levels

of strength, became of national character. The fight for land and the

formation of the big independent peasant centrals were generalized

throughout the country. At that time the peasant movement was

consolidated as a social phenomenon, constituted by the convergence

of social and regional struggles (Martinez, 1991: 47; Rubio, 1996: 113).

This work considers the independent movement as the actor

which, because of its political autonomy and its lack of privileged ties

36

with the state, embodies claims and needs of the majority of the rural

workers and the agricultural sector itself. Some peasant organisations

from the autonomous movement are mentioned here, due to their

current social and political relevance in the peasant and indigenous

movement of rural Mexico.

CIOAC. The CIOAC (Independent Central of Agricultural Workers

and Peasants) was born as a product of the rupture of a previous

organisation called the Independent Peasant Central (CCI), which was

founded in 1963 with the participation of members of the Mexican

Communist Party (PCM). The CCI was joined from the beginning by

most of the agrarian leaders that had tried to provide an alternative to

the Mexican corporativist system in the countryside. After some

divisions promoted by the government within the CCI, the CIOAC was

founded in 1975, headed by Danzos Palomino, who had led the CCI,

been linked with the PCM and used land occupation as one of his main

strategies. From 1976 the political presence of the CIOAC increased,

and it adopted a project focused, not only on the fight for land, but

mainly on the formation of peasants unions, for credit and the defence

of the peasant as a worker (Flores, Pare, and Sarmiento, 1988: 42, 92-

93). This position was derived from a political affinity with the Leninist

ideology, which considered the proletarian as a class with

revolutionary potential (Renard, n/d: 9).

The CIOAC, because of its early links with the PCM and later with

the former PSUM (Mexican Socialist Unified Party), is an organisation

that aims for a global agenda and socialist change. But this doesn’t

mean that the CCI and the CIOAC were peasant arms of political

parties; according to P. Mejia and S. Sarmiento, the CIOAC has always

been a wide organisation that defends its independence from political

parties (1987: 213). The organisation resists the current model of rural

development, stressing the incompatibility between the social sector

and private property: the former working with scarce resources, the

latter, holding an agenda based on profit. At the same time, the CIOAC

proposes, also, the expropriation of large amounts of private land used

37

for livestock production, in order to convert it to social property; as

well as expropriation of food agro-industry and machinery (Flores, Pare

and Sarmiento, 1988: 94-95).

UNORCA. In 1983, different peasant producer organisations,

including alliances and cooperatives, mainly based in their ejido after

an effort to become closer, began to organise meetings to seek to

exchange experiences and reflection about their problems and

peasantry in general. In 1985, the 7th meeting took place in Cuetzalan,

Puebla, with the participation of 25 organisations of ejido producers

linked to the external market, and formally founded the National Union

of Autonomous Regional Peasants Organisations (UNORCA) (Martinez,

1991: 49-53, Garcia, 1994: 63). The UNORCA ‘...united distinct groups

around common demands and actions, without compromising each

other’s group autonomy (Fox and Gordillo, 1989: 152). The Union was

structured in an horizontal system of representation, with two

members from each organisation and no national executive committee

in order to avoid power concentration (Martinez, 1991: 49-53).

Some of the issues discussed in their meetings are related to

problems of supply, commercialisation and the fixing of guaranteed

prices at a regional level. A policy of agreements followed with

different organisations like the CIOAC, and with governmental

programs to meet the basic needs of food supply. Other parts of the

agenda are the elaboration of regional development plans, the

discussion of alternative law reforms, and the demand for autonomy

and democratisation either through dialogue as mentioned, or by

radical mobilisation like blocking roads and taking over governmental

offices. The main demands of UNORCA are: ‘better guaranteed prices,

credit, state support for the peasant appropriation of the productive

process, commercialisation, supply, infrastructure and diverse

services’xii (Martinez, 1991: 53-54, Garcia, 1994: 63). Another aspect

on which the union has focused is a housing strategy which, in

opposition to the welfare model, is aimed at jobs creation, particularly

xii My translation

38

the strengthening of training at ‘...organizational, and managerial

capacity, and to capitalize self managed construction and materials

firms that could survive beyond the life of the project’ (Fox and

Gordillo, 1989: 155).

UNORCA has become one of the most important

representatives of the peasant movement in Mexico, as Martinez

suggests:

‘The organic and structural level that UNORCA has achieved make it one of the non-official peasant organisations of greater importance nowadays, evidencing the fact that the organization of the peasant as producer has been one of the basic strategies of the peasant movement’xiii(1991: 54-55)

As mentioned by Garcia, one of the most notable aspects of

UNORCA is its experience in the field of productive projects, financing

rural development, as well as national and international

commercialisation, which is especially relevant in the political

environment of the re-privatisation of the rural sector, and the as the

state gives up supporting the social sector (Garcia, 1994: 64). Now

UNORCA is Mexico’s representative of the international peasant and

small farmers movement Via Campesina, reviewed below.

COCEI. With one of the highest percentage of indigenous

population, Oaxaca is one of the most politicized states of Mexico in

terms of ethnic and peasant struggles against state intervention.

Formed in 1973, the ‘workers-peasant-student Coalition of the

Isthmus’, COCEI also includes market women and local zapotec

intellectuals. It emerged as a ‘large but-well run organization capable

of mobilizing more than 10,000 people at a time’ to the extent of

deposing the governor in 1977’ (Campbell, 1994: 170; Blauert and

Guidi, 1992: 193). In 1981 COCEI won Juchitan municipal elections,

becoming one of the first cities to ruled by a left-wing party since the

Mexican Revolution. Two years later, the organisation was overthrown

by the government and members faced imprisonment, but they

xiii My translation

39

returned to municipal ruling post in 1989, and repeated their victory in

1992. During this period Juchitan ‘...became well known as the center

of one of Latin America’s most active indigenous cultural movements’

(Campbell, 1994: XVI). The coalition was supported mainly by ‘landless

and poorest landed peasants’ who were usually engaged in struggles

over communal land, a characteristic associated with being one of the

highly politized peasant sector.

Some of the fronts where the coalition has been active are the

fight for municipal democracy, the demand for land, the demand for

free formation of labour unions, communal work, and the defence of

their own culture through the implementation of education according

to the characteristics of the ethnic group (mainly bilingual and

bicultural) (Mejia and Sarmiento, 1987: 123). COCEI’s struggles over

production concern agricultural credit, crops insurance etc, but mostly

land disputes. They have organised a number of land invasions and

mass mobilizations in order to regain communal territory. COCEI is also

a member of the National Coordinator “Plan de Ayala” (CNPA), one of

Mexico’s most influential independent peasant coalitions (Campbell,

1994: 191-192). The particular strength of COCEI’s agenda has been

associated with agrarianism, as well as an ethnic cultural project where

opposition to outsiders and the combating of ‘powerful class enemies

within the ethnic community’ were the main features of their strategy

(Campbell, 1994: 170-171).

Vía Campesina. Via Campesina (the peasant way) is a significant

case for this analysis, since it is the most ambitious attempt to create

an international peasant network, as a lobbying organization with the

support of European, Canadian, and Indian activists (Edelman, 2001:

305). It is particularly relevant here because it frames in general terms

the concerns of a wide range of small organized farmers, which is most

of the time linked with local, regional and national issues on

agricultural topics in a global context. As defined by themselves, the

Via Campesina is ‘...an international movement that coordinates

40

peasant organisations of middle and small farmers, of agriculture

workers, women and indigenous communities from Asia, Africa,

America and Europe’, with UNORCA among them. They consider

themselves as an autonomous movement of national and regional

organizations, independent of economic, political and other

denominations (Via Campesina, 2002), and are regarded by some

scholars as ‘perhaps the largest and most significant agricultural social

movement in the world’ (Desmarais, 2002: 103).

The idea started in 1992, from some peasant leaders from North

and Central America, and Europe who were gathered in Managua,

Nicaragua; but its official constitution was passed a year later in Mons

Belgium, at the 1st International Conference of Via Campesina. In their

second conference in Tlaxcala, Mexico they analysed a set of issues

regarded as being of central concern for middle and central, producers

such as: food sovereignty, agrarian reform, credit and external debt,

technology, women’s participation, rural development, and others

which were added later to the agenda like international trade, human

rights, biodiversity, bio-security and genetic resources.

At the same time, Via Campesina has its roots in the rejection of

neo-liberal agricultural policies and the exclusion to which the people

that actually work the land have been subject, following the GATT

negotiations on agriculture. The decreasing prices of local products

and the flooding of local markets with low-quality, cheap food imports

are attributed to forced liberalization of trade in agricultural products.

Due to this, their efforts are focused on developing ‘...alternatives to

neo-liberalism and to make their voices heard in future deliberations

on agriculture and food’ (Desmarais, 2002: 96, 100).

One aim of Via Campesina is the achieving of the principle of

‘food sovereignty’, which is understood as the right to produce their

own food in their own territory, as the core of their alternative project

of agricultural development. In other words, it would make a shift in

who defines and determines the purpose and terms of knowledge,

research, technology, science, production and trade related to food

41

(Desmarais, 2002: 100). In this respect, food sovereignty is

distinguished from food security by Via Campesina, because ‘...it

requires the accompaniment of the Via Campesina’s broadly conceived

agrarian reform’, which is not limited to redistribution of land, but

demands for a further reform of agricultural systems to enhance small-

farm production and commercialisation. Although the coalition is not

opposed to agricultural trade, they state clearly that the main principle

and purpose of agricultural production is to ensure food sovereignty, in

contrast with the free-trade-oriented WTO Agreement on Agriculture

policies (Desmarais, 2002: 105,109). As one author stresses:

What the Via Campesina is talking about...is the need to build peasant cultures and economies based on principles ‘which have not yet completely disappeared’ such as moral imperatives and obligations, fairness, social justice and social responsibility. This, according to the Via Campesina, is what building rural community and culture is all about (Desmarais, 2002: 100).

Via Campesina highlights the role of ethics and values as

concrete mechanisms for an alternative model (Desmarais, 2002: 100).

It does this in a different fashion from how the peasants design their

strategies and targets: challenging borders and the affinity for national

and community-based political projects at a moment when, as an

UNORCA member asserted after Mexico’s neo-liberal reforms, ‘the

enemy is lost from sight’ (Magaña, 1993). Via Campesina detects the

enemy in a transnational dimension, and acts accordingly.

The participation of the EZLN (or Zapatista Army of National

Liberation) has not been omitted from this review of the key peasant

movements in Mexico. As Rubio points out, the EZLN does not

constitute, strictly speaking, a peasant movement. It is a revolutionary

movement with a peasant and indigenous base, which gives it a

national dimension. Under the broad EZLN claims the longstanding

demands of the previous and present peasant movements. As an

example, it is found among its key demands for the rural sector are

found:

-The revision of the Free Trade Agreement.

42

-The cancellation of the constitutional article 27 reform, concerning the

allowance of selling ejido land.

-Fair prices for rural products (Rubio, 1996: 147, 153).

The Zapatista movement is a complex configuration that goes

beyond the countryside, towards a direct opposition to the exclusion

politics of neo-liberalism and which is broadening its scope according

to its increasing links with resistance movements from other countries

and oppressed groups. A deeper approach is needed for the analysis of

the presence of peasant politics within the Zapatista project.

The peasants’ struggles have been closely linked with the

situation of production, and have especially fought against the

inequalities underlying the relations of production, within a process

that includes production, marketing, and consumption, and the

constraints coming from the policies, and exclusionary attitudes of the

political system.

Commercialisation and the demand for improved production

conditions

As Stavenhagen asserts, in the traditional view of the

anthropologist, commercial exchange of products, in addition to

outside wage labour, were commonly seen as external factors

disturbing communal stability and self-sufficiency, which were

regarded as the backbone of peasant communities (1978: 27).

Currently, the market has been a main concern of both researchers on

agricultural production issues and peasant organizations’ efforts to

achieve their social, political and economic aims. Although nowadays,

the peasant economy is increasingly diversified, issues about

production and marketing have long been considered one of the

mechanisms through which the peasant economy is integrated. One of

its longstanding problems has been lack of control over the market

process itself, being exposed to a wide fluctuation of prices and hence,

43

to the activity of ‘intermediaries or businessmen in positions of

monopoly control’. As a result, peasants are forced to sell their product

at less than its real price, likewise, credit and technical assistance are

delayed (Stavenhagen, 1978: 32; Mejia and Sarmiento, 1987: 19).

Peasants’ and indigenous people’s demands are mainly focused

on changing the structural conditions that generate these negative

outcomes. They seek official recognition of their organizations and

participation in the design and application of state policy towards

communities. They also claim facilities for production, better

guaranteed prices, elimination of intermediaries, fair trade of their

products, market information, adecuate and timely credit, and

effective technical assistance (Mejia and Sarmiento, 1987: 22,

Edelman, 1999b: 332, 349). The fight to obtain better prices refers to

three different exchange relations according to Martinez: a) product

selling, b) buying production goods (productive consumption), and c)

livelihoods consumption (1991: 34).

The fight for the democratic control of production and marketing,

was fuelled in the 1970s by the crisis of CNCs’ corporativism and the

emergence of independent organizations. However it is based on a

longstanding demand from the main and most combative peasant

organizations, such as the CNPA (from which COCEI is a member), the

CIOAC, and UNORCA. It includes diverse strategies for direct

commercialisation of agricultural products, in order to avoid

intermediaries (also known as ‘coyotes’) (Mejia and Sarmiento, 1987:

209-210, 223, 273; Flores, Pare and Sarmiento, 1988: 20, 40). The

control of the productive process refers to production,

commercialisation and consumption, as well as the peasantry’s general

social conditions, such as participation and political representation,

education, housing, and services; in sum, ‘the capacity to organize and

convert into a social and politically autonomous force’ (Martinez, 1991:

15)

Although it is agreed that land has been the central issue,

organizations from the independent movement have stated that the

44

peasant struggles doesn’t finish with the obtaining of land (Flores, Pare

and Sarmiento, 1988: 169). UNORCA representative Pedro Magaña

argues that, instead of past concerns about the appropriation of the

productive process, currently, the principal demands are of a social

character: health, housing, education (1993:1). Otero suggests that in

the past decade the new dimensions added to the demand for land are

production, self-management, autonomy, and territory (1999: 188,

201). These views are interlinked if understood in terms of the

‘appropriation of the productive process’ defined by Martinez. In

addition, they may be seen in the context of the independent

movement where the most important struggles over the production

sphere have taken place, and where organisations are characterized

by solidarity relations (Flores, Pare and Sarmiento, 1988: 140, 143). A

clear example is Via Campesina coalition, which gives as a main point

of its agenda a ‘...comprehensive reform of agricultural systems to

favour small-farm production and marketing’ (Desmarais, 2002: 109);

and at the same time it has established cooperative links with a wide

range of organizations.

Martinez points out that the peasant strategy is based on the

achievement and consolidation of their autonomy in different

dimensions of social life: the political, ideological, and economic. The

latter includes three strategic branches: a) market autonomy,

manifested in disposing of their surplus through exchange channels,

without being excluded; b) financial autonomy, allowing peasant

control over credit and financial sources, and over resources to ensure

control of the decision making for the development of production; and

c) technical autonomy, in terms of ownership of technical resources for

the creation of peasants own productive process (1991: 44) .

4. Local and Global Notions of Trade Justice: The Case

Studies of UCIRI and the Trade Justice Movement.

‘Until everyone has enough, nowadays, we cannot demand more

than the necessary’. UCIRIxiv.

45

The context of coffee in Mexico

For many years, coffee prices were controlled by the intervention

of the Coffee International Organization (CIO), which regulated prices

at a relatively stable level above those that would have existed in a

non-regulated market. An unmeasured increase in coffee reserves

generated a crisis where the economic consensus of the CIO was

broken down, and the regulating institutions were dismantled. The

prices plummeted in 1989-1993, and after a short stabilization, the

crisis was repeated in 1998 (Bartra, Cobo, Meza and Paz, 2002:1).

Historically, the ups and downs of the coffee prices were a product of

offer fluctuations because of climatic factors. Since 1988, they have

also been associated with stock exchange speculation, the control over

the market exerted by a handful of transnational roasters and the

action of international organisations that financed the production of

rapid-ripening, high-revenue, but low-quality coffee. The forecast is not

favourable due to the continuation of a disordered relationship

between the producer countries and the fact that climate has less

effect on the bigger harvesters (Bartra, Cobo, Meza and Paz, 2002: 1).

Mexico is the fifth largest world coffee producer. Coffee is grown

over 690 thousand hectares in 12 states, 400 municipalities and more

than 3500 communities, in addition to corn, beans, and sorgum. In

good years the earnings in foreign currency generated by coffee

exports are about 800 million dollars, second only to oil exports. Coffee

is also a crop grown by smallholders; about 280 thousand producers, of

whom 92% farm less than 5 hectares and almost 200 thousand use 2

hectares or less; 65% of these small coffee producers are members of

an ethnic group (Bartra, Cobo, Meza and Paz, 2002: 2).

In 1973, some decisions on coffee policy were introduced by

President Luis Echeverria to dynamize agricultural production, such as

the organization of collective ejidos, an increase in guaranteed prices,

and creation and support of institutions to control intermediarism, such

as Tabamex, Inmecafe and Proquivemex (Flores, Pare and Sarmiento,

46

1988: 42). Inmecafe was established in 1958 to protect and improve

the cultivation, processing, industrialization, and marketing of Mexican

coffee, and was a key element of Echeverria’s plan to ‘modernize

small-scale coffee production and increase Mexico’s presence in

foreign markets’, to support small coffee producers. Among others, its

role was to organize the financing of coffee, guarantee its purchase

and export, and to channel credit and technical assistance to small

producers.

Inmecafe’s reputation was seriously undermined by 1982; it was

considered highly bureaucratic and inefficient in providing the support

for which it was created. There was no serious disagreement from

autonomous producers’ organizations when in 1989, during the Salinas

government, Inmecafe’s role was limited to ‘...assist marginalized

producers, and put parastatal coffee-roasting companies up for sale’

(Hernandez and Celis, 1994: 219-220). This move was part of the neo-

liberal policy of dismantling socially oriented state-run institutions and

removing subsidies, leaving coffee producers who had relied on the

state to buy their coffee, as B. Mace points out, ‘at the mercy of the

market’(1998: 18). The CNC continued to serve as an instrument for

the state, taking advantage of the farmer’s needs for assistance and

gathering support for the PRI. At the same time, some of the functions

carried out by Inmecafe were taken over by other governmental

programs such as Pronasol, which continued its clientelist practice of

linking assistance and credits with electoral outcomes. Producers

mobilized against Inmecafe in the first half of 1980s, demanding to be

paid more from coffee.

Coffee producers form a significant part of the peasant

movements in Mexico. Their struggle around conditions of production

is exemplified by that of the indigenous wage earners in coffee

production on private land in Chiapas. Their claims are similar to those

of the main independent peasant organizations: land tenancy, rights to

be guaranteed by federal labour law, freedom to organize in trade

unions, and the protection of natural resources. They began a struggle

47

for the official recognition of their trade union ‘Miguel de la Cruz’ in

1980, which had its most important achievements up to 1983 (Mejia

and Sarmiento, 1987: 215-220).

Coffee producers have also carried out strikes, that have had a

consensus of support from a wide range of organizations, including

second level coffee organizations (e.g. National Coordination

Committee for Coffee-Producer’s Organizations, or CNOC), broader

independent organizations (like CIOAC), and even corporate

institutions like CNC. They joined in deploying a series of strikes from

February to August 1992 to demand that the government introduce

changes in coffee support, for instance: a return to the quota system in

the international market; the implementation of a plan to support

coffee production; a renegotiation of overdue loans; the creation of an

institution to direct national production with the participation of all

involved in the chain of production, and the creation of a program to

promote Mexican coffee. Eight months after the struggle started, most

of the main demands had been met, even the support of the quota

system, which previously was regarded by the state as not compatible

with its free market policies (Hernandez and Celis, 1994: 228-229).

A year earlier, in 1991, the Union of Coffee Producers of the

Southern Border (UNCAFESUR) was formed at the regional level, as an

alliance with local affiliates of the independent and corporate

movement like CIOAC, the CNC, and the Teacher-Peasant Solidarity

Movement (SOCAMA). According to Harvey, this convergence of

independent and official organizations around economic concerns

‘...represented the new type of peasant movement promoted by

reformers within the state and UNORCA’ (1998: 194).

The southern Mexican state of Oaxaca is inhabited by one of the

most diverse populations of indigenous people in the country, with 16

different ethnic groups representing forty four percent of the total

(Blauert and Guidi, 1992: 190). Oaxaca has been the site of a dynamic

and assertive indigenous movement. A range of organizations such as

the already mentioned COCEI, the Trique Unified Movement for

48

Struggle (MULT), and Union of Indigenous Communities of the North

Zone of the Isthmus (UCIZONI) aim to reassert ethnic identity as a

means to achieve their claims (Norget, 1997: 14).

UCIRI. The Union of Indigenous Communities of the Isthmus

Regionxv includes peasant coffee producers from 53 different

communities in the lowlands of the Sierra Juarez, mainly within five

different municipalities. They belong to the Zapotec (from the Sierra),

Mixe and Chontal ethnic groups, and founded UCIRI in 1984, which is

now legally registered to export coffee and other products. To sell

coffee always has been difficult for the producers. Before the

establishment of Inmecafe, they had to sell to middlemen at low

prices, due to the lack of transport roads to Ixtepec. Soon after some

logging companies arrived, made some roads, and were driven away

by the communities in 1977, they were visited by other coffee buyers

and Inmecafe, which opened coffee reception centres and slightly

improved the price. Their problems continued with Inmecafe, where

they suffered continuous discounts on their payments because of strict

requirements, and with the bank, where they became indebted due to

high interest rates (Vander Hoff and Galvan, 1998: 129-130).

With the assistance of a Catholic missionary team, they

reconsidered their problems as producers, and started searching for

other buyers which offered better prices. They found in Misantla,

Veracruz a third level producers organization (ARICxvi) which was

already exporting coffee, and during the harvest 1982-1983, together

with people from Veracruz, Puebla, and Chiapas they founded a

National Level ARIC, based in Mexico City. Although the price increased

considerably, the payment arrived long after the coffee was sold, and

at times they thought about returning to selling to the Institute.

Nevertheless they kept trying because they were learning how to

weigh and taste the coffee, to make receipts and to mobilize

resources; they still needed to learn how to toast coffee and access the

market (Vander Hoff and Galvan, 1998:131).

49

In 1983, the ARIC turned in UCIRI, which was already a legal

organization with membership of about 17 communities, and after an

intense struggle, they were allowed to export. By 1985, a group of

Dutch and German agronomists and representatives of the Fair Trade

Market, invited by some grassroots church activists, visited UCIRI, and

became interested in supporting their struggle (Vander Hoff and

Galvan, 1998: 131). During this visit they discussed the economic

potential and ecological benefits of organic coffee. This resulted in

UCIRI’s decision to shift to organic production and to sell to the

German and Dutch markets by establishing a relationship with two

ATOs: Gepa and Max Havelaar. Today UCIRI sells to over 10

organizations from seven countries (Mace, 1998: 22). Porter points out

that Oaxacan missionaries ‘...have established linkages between the

organization and ATOs and this has been vital to UCIRI’s

success’(1987, quoted from Mace, 1998: 22). According to Mace, of

773, 000 kilograms of coffee produced in the 1996/1997 harvest, 90

percent went to the alternative market, while the rest remained in

Mexico.

Communities belonging to UCIRI do not rely solely on coffee to

meet their livelihoods needs. Along with coffee, they grow for self-

consumption corn, beans, chili, vegetables and tree fruits including

oranges, lemons, bananas, avocados, chicozapotes, black zapote,

mamey, mangoes, etc. They prefer to improve their coffee land and

production systems, instead of enlarging the crop area (Vander Hoff

and Galvan, 1998: 129,132).

UCIRI consider that the main achievements of their form of

organization are: a) the ability and experience of exporting, making

contracts and offering coffee to a wide range of clients nationally, and

selling at better prices across the world through the Fair Trade Market;

b) the construction of infrastructure like roasters, warehouses,

transport, food supply systems, health services, and youth peasants

training in organic technology; c) the creation of networks of

organizations of independent small producers; d) the

50

establishment of a cooperative Solidarity Fund for the

acquisition of consumer goods and equipment; and e) the

provision of credit support (Vander Hoff and Galvan, 1998:

135-136).

Important elements of the infrastructure set up by UCIRI

include a hardware store, which gives access to appropriate

low-cost equipment; a warehouse for storage and preparation

of coffee for export, where they are also preparing to begin

roasting coffee, to get higher profits and eventually to export

according to European tastes; and finally a Centre for Peasant

Education (CECxvii), to provide training for organic production

skills, through 13 month courses (Vander Hoff and Galvan,

1998: 135-136).

Mace observed that UCIRI members’ opinion of the Fair Trade

Market was widely favourable. They underlined aspects such as the

ATO’s ability to export coffee, their support towards the production of

organic coffee and the premium obtained (5 to 10 pesos per kilo) by

producing and selling organic, the stability in the prices, and the

support for projects. They generally agreed that the Fair Trade Market

was really fair (1998:31). Since their participation in the Fair Trade

Market, the incomes of the 53 member villages and 3000 farmers have

doubled (Equal Exchange, 2002), or even tripled (from a yearly income

of US$ 280 in 1983 to US$ 860 in 1999) (UN, 2000).

UCIRI is considered by some, as the first group of farmers to

export coffee through the fair trade model (Equal Exchange, 2002).

They are considered to have achieved self-capitalization, one of the

main goals of Mexican peasant movements: the appropriation of the

production process, resulting in self-sufficiency (Norget, 1997: 10).

UCIRI’s have an organic democratic organization incorporating

elements of the local indigenous government systems, which is

considered to be a key factor contributing to their success (FAO,

2002).Their internal structure is symbolized by the tree. The families

are represented by the roots, the elected delegates from each

51

community by the trunk and the union’s projects and work by the

branches. The fruit produced corresponds to the fruit of their labour

(Equal Exchange, 2002). UCIRI has been an influential example for

other organizations in the southern states of Mexico (Oaxaca,

Guerrero, Puebla, and Chiapas) as well as for people from Guatemala

and Nicaragua (FAO, 2002). In the case of Chiapas, UCIRI helped the

successful coffee cooperative ISMAM (Indigenous people from the

Sierra Madre of Motozintla ‘San Isidro Labrador’) marketing their first

certified coffee in 1988 and providing for them an organic marketing

contact. They also helped the Union de Ejidos de la Selva to establish

ties with the FT labelling organisation Max Havelaar (Hernandez and

Nigh, 1998: 143; Nigh,1997: 432-433; Harvey, 1998: 193).

The role of the Church. UCIRI’s history has been closely linked to

a Catholic missionary team and specially to the Dutch Priest Frans van

der Hoff, who settled in the area in 1980. Although the producers were

already involved already in their own organization process, he started

a dynamic of reflection within the communities about the causes

underlying their problems as coffee producers. This process resulted,

among others, in the peasants’ awareness of the importance of valuing

their product, enabling them to look for alternative coffee buyers with

whom to get better prices for coffee. UCIRI was founded in 1983, and

in 1985 they received a visit from Nico Roozen in the name of the

Dutch ATO Solidaridad. This link was not only critical for UCIRI’s access

to the Fair Trade market, but the basis for the funding of the first Fair

Trade Labelling Organization, Max Havelaar, which focused its first

efforts on coffee (Van der Hoff and Galvan, 1998:130; Roozen and Van

der Hoff, 2001: 34). As Mace points out:

In Oaxaca, the plight of indigenous inhabitants has drawn attention from progressive clergy who used liberation theology to support rural-based social movements. A general mission among liberation theologists is to empower the underprivileged indigenous people and assist them to be the ‘subjects of their own development’...(1998: 22)

52

The relations with missionaries and ATOs were important, also,

for the production orientation towards organic methods. As Norget

suggests, at the core of UCIRI’s ideology is ‘..an accentuation of

qualities regarded as integral to indigenous culture’ (1997: 11).

Organic methods, although introduced by Europeans, are similar to

their ancestral agricultural techniques, practiced before the arrival of

the ‘Green Revolution’ which generalized the use of agrochemicals.

They are consistent with indigenous respect for the earth, the forest,

and all living beings –of terrestial or sacred nature- that inhabit them.

Also the orientation of the theology that encourages the organization’s

efforts has resonance with local notions of organized communal work,

mutual aid, and reciprocity, known traditionally as ‘tequio’. Part of

UCIRI’s philosophy the continuation of decision-making systems based

in the indigenous institution of ‘usos y costumbres’ (uses and

customs), which although sometimes associated with colonial times, is

broadly considered a democratic process of local policy making, deeply

assimilated by the indigenous culture of Oaxaca (Norget, 1997: 11).

This way of organizing of production based on the integration of

local indigenous and Christian (liberation theology) values, has been

UCIRI’s pillar not only for the peasants motivation, but also in terms of

its image and prestige vis-à-vis international public opinion, such as

ATOs, the media, scholars, and development organizations. For

instance, the FAO considers UCIRI’s main goal as ‘solidarity and

sustainability rooted in culture and products according to ancestral

wisdom and new techniques (organic) in order to preserve soil, water,

[forest], and culture’ (FAO, 2002).

The Trade Justice Movement. The Trade Justice Movement is a

young coalition founded at the end of the year 2000 and based in

London, most of whose members are British organisations. The TJM

‘...campaigns for a fundamental change in the unjust trade rules and

institutions governing international trade, so that trade is made to

work for all’ (TJM, 2002). It considers that the current international

53

trade rules are causing a negative impact on the poorest people of the

world, the environment and democracy. Its 40 organisations address a

range of issues such as aid, environment and human rights campaigns,

fair trade, faith and consumer matters. Together they have a

membership of over 2 million members (TJM, 2002). Among the most

influential are the World Development Movement, a London-based

lobbying and research organisation that campaigns against the root

causes of poverty; Christian Aid, a UK and Ireland-based agency of

churches and charity that funds projects in some of the world's poorest

countries; Oxfam, an Oxford-based charity and one of the largest

European NGOs; Friends of the Earth, the largest international network

of environmental groups in the world, represented in 68 countries and

one of the leading environmental pressure groups in the UK; CAFOD,

the English and Welsh arm of Caritas Internationalis, a worldwide

network of Catholic relief and development organisations; and a range

of British ATOs such as the Fair Trade Foundation, Banana Link,

Traidcraft and IFAT. (TJM, 2002).

The roots of the TJM are in the Jubilee 2000 movement, which

was launched in the early to mid-1990s, as a ‘worldwide campaign to

cancel the unpayable debts of the world’s most impoverished countries

by the dawn of the new millenium’ (Collins, Gariyo and Burdon, 2001:

135). The Jubilee 2000 was a call from development NGOs, church,

and labour groups, in a global mobilization of 60 national Jubilee

campaigns, including 17 in Central America and Latin America, 15 in

Africa, and 10 in Asia. Awareness of this issue has its origins in the first

major developing country debt crisis in Mexico in 1982, and is

associated with the undermining of the social sector by structural

adjustment programs. Sectors like the Church and development and

economic justice NGO’s began to raise the issue within their particular

agendas, which provided the foundations for a common transnational

effort, echoing the biblical call for a “Jubilee”, ‘the wiping away of all

debts every 50 years’ (Collins, Gariyo and Burdon, 2001: 136).

54

The Jubilee 2000 campaign focused its claims on the causes and

effects of debts, including, among others, politically-driven

irresponsible lending by banks and countries, borrowing by unelected

and repressive regimes, and responsible borrowing by countries that

could not sustain their debts repayments due to economic and politic

instability in the local and the global arenas. It argued that ordinary

people in poor countries bear the greatest burden of debts, by paying

higher taxes, and being denied essential public services, so that their

government can repay foreign creditors. On the other hand, ‘...it is the

creditors who dictated the terms of debt renegotiation and repayment,

without any neutral arbiters’ (Collins, Gariyo and Burdon, 2001: 136-

137).

The participation of organizations from the South in the

campaign has been of fundamental importance for redefining goals

and strategies in the light of their experiences in national campaigns.

For example, they carried out South-South meetings in 1999, where

they stressed the importance of ‘...strengthening local and national

efforts on the ground as well as of South-South exchanges’, in addition

to the need to contribute more leadership from the South to the global

campaign. They criticise inequalities within the movement, where

Northern campaigners’ share of the global movement resources was

significantly higher than Southern activists’ share in terms of access to

funding, equipment, technical skills, global policy makers, and

international meetings among others, mirroring the ‘...historic

inequalities between North and South’. The main actors in the

movement were ‘...a small number of capital-city based NGOs and

religious groups, some of whom lack strong links with grassroots

constituencies’ (Collins, Gariyo and Burdon, 2001: 143).

Even though the movement was not homogeneous, and had to

deal with internal differences among its participants, the Jubilee 2000

achieved levels of debt cancellation far beyond their supporters’ initial

expectations. Among the main successes were, in April and September

1999 respectively, Canada’s and United States’ commitment to cancel

55

100 per cent of their bilateral debts, and creditors’ offer to make

further cancellations of over U.S. $100 billion afterward. In addition,

‘...the IMF and the World Bank agreed late in 1998 to defer debt

service payments for at least a year for the four Central American

countries affected by Hurricane Mitch’, and Mozambique was added to

these in early 2000 (Collins, Gariyo and Burdon, 2001: 140).

Near the year 2000 deadline for the achievement of the

movement’s goals, some campaigners looked toward the next step:

the challenge of really involving the grassroots in a authentic

transnational movement. They considered the key linkage between

debt and trade issues, given the high costs to developing countries of

trade barriers, opening the field to focus on such an issue in the future

campaign. Although there were some differences of opinion among the

campaigners about whether or not to widen the scope of the

movement, the Jubilee 2000 finally established foundations for the

Trade Justice Movement in the year 2000 (Collins, Gariyo and Burdon,

2001: 148).

Currently, the TJM bases its campaign on the belief that ‘the

performance and legitimacy of the international trade system must be

judged in relation to its ability to meet poverty, social injustice and

environmental degradation’ (TJM, 2002). They consider that the

international trade system can and should address politically difficult

and complex choices concerning equity, sustainability and poverty

eradication which could make the trade system work with equity, and

enable it to be measured in social and environmental terms, rather

than merely pursuing trade liberalisation as an end in itself (TJM,

2002).

A direct critique is being developed of the growing importance of

competitiveness and trade in national economic decision-making,

which undermines the development of environmental and social policy

in some countries. TJM points out that the ideological pursue of

competition for its own sake, can encourage a race to the bottom. It

56

appeals to governments to prioritise cooperation through international

processes to manage trade in the public interest (TJM, 2002).

The TJM clearly states that it doesn’t simply assume a position

against trade and the system of rules around it. Instead, it suggests

that trade has the potential to offer important social and

environmental benefits, as well as liberalisation and regulation; but

that it should be oriented towards the achievement of such goals by

reflecting the interests of the civil society, rather than those of

corporate actors. In this sense, trade is a ‘means to an end’, rather

than an ‘end’ in itself (TJM, 2002). Likewise, the TJM points out:

We support having international agreements on trade. International rules are required to regulate the actions of governments and companies. They must also reflect the different levels of development of WTO member countries and provide greater policy flexibility to the poorest. However, international trade rules must not prevent national regulation in the public interest. Nor should they force ‘equal’ trade relations between unequals. Instead the principle of special and differentiated treatment for developing countries should be fully incorporated into trade agreements. Governments must also develop binding international regulations for companies (TJM, 2002).

Among the strategies adopted by the Trade Justice Movement

has been the Trade Justice Parade on 3rd November 2001, when 8000

people, according with the WDM, marched alongside floats with live

samba music and a giant 12-metre-long monster symbolising the

WTO’s General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS) terrorising

water, education, health, electricity and transport services represented

by costumed participants. The carnival procession along the streets of

London demanded that the UK Government ‘Make World Trade Work

for the Whole World’ (WDM, 2002). On 19th June of 2002, the largest

mass lobby of Parliament to date in Westminster was carried out by

around 12000 campaigners, according to Christian Aid (n/d) and the

newspaper The Guardian, when 320 MPs were lobbied by their

constituents in order to ‘...build public awareness of social justice

issues raised by the Jubilee 2000’. The campaigners were

congratulated by MPs in a special debate at the House of the

Commons, and were invited to meet Prime Minister Tony Blair, and

57

give him the message of the lobby: that ‘poor countries need special

treatment to be able to protect their most vulnerable traders and build

up new industries’. President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa phoned to

thank the members of the Trade Justice Movement, and the support of

the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops of the Church in Wales,

also were given (Christian Aid, n/d; Denny, 2002).

5. Final considerations.

This paper has explored the points of convergence and

digression of the Trade Justice Movement and the Fair Trade Market in

Northern countries and the Mexican peasant project, through the

framework of transnational social movements. The northern

initiatives appear to assume a natural narrative link with the grassroots

character of the southern producers’ struggle for equal conditions of

marketing. Other works have analysed the fairness and viability of the

Fair Trade Market (Medina, 1997; Mace, 1998; etc), but the results are

a complex and hard to reduce to a single answer. The alternative

coffee market model has been criticised because its insertion into the

mainstream rules has reproduced unequal economic relations by its

reliance in some cases on the cash crops model, regarding the peasant

as a mere provider of raw materials and basic foods for the North. It

has also been criticised for reproducing North–South power relations in

certification procedures (Gonzalez and Linck, n/d); and for the limited

size of the market niche, available to a limited portion of the southern

producers. On the other hand it has been found that access to the fair

coffee market is a very desirable outcome for the Mexican coffee

producers (Mace, 1998) considered by scholars as the most reliable

option for coffee producers even more reliable than organic production

(Bartra, Cobo, Meza and Paz, n/d). There is a longstanding political

claim that it provides small coffee producers with more certainty and

more autonomy from speculative and corporate interests.

58

However the focus of this analysis is not so much on the extent

of fairness of the ATOs’ contribution vis-à-vis the mainstream market.

Given the emergence of a European-based movement focused on

contesting macro-level causes of unequal relations in international

trade, namely the Trade Justice Movement, the aim of the paper is to

examine the levels of engagement of this movement and the Fair

Trade market. It has looked not only at the current involvement of

southern, grassroots, indigenous and peasant activists in the

deployment of their strategies, and political activism. In particular it

has examined the extent to which the FT market and the TJM

movements fit into the Mexican peasant project. The producers have

endured political, social, and personal suffering within the authoritarian

and corporate tradition of the Mexican political system during most of

the 20th century. The dynamic character of the FT and TJM is

considered a solid standpoint in common, in historical terms with the

political and epistemological framing of the producers’ struggles that

has shaped their claims through history.

The paper has concentrated on three main questions. First, is it

viable to consider the ATOs activities as a ‘Fair Trade movement’, since

old and new forms of collective action propose other ways of making

trade fair, such as the Mexican peasant movements, and the European

TJM?; Secondly, to what extent are the northern movements engaged

with the actors for whom they claim they are advocating?; And finally,

to what extent can values of the actors be seen as a unitary strategy

and field of struggle, that permeates local and global networks, either

as a means, as an end, or as a field of encounter between two

opposing rationalities?.

The current analytic literature regards the Fair Trade Market in

terms of a Fair Trade Movement, whose members are playing active

roles such as the Alternative Trade Organisations (local cooperatives,

roasters, importers, labelling organisations, and conjunctions of them

in networks, federations and so on), the consumers, and to a minor

extent the producers. The first point to consider is the use of the term

59

‘Movement’ without considering further whether or not the Fair Trade

Market fits into conceptualisations of social movements. It is not the

intention of this paper to further explore the elements that make up

the Fair Trade Market, or contrast them with the available definitions of

SMs; instead it is suggested that there are more actors than those

considered so far in the first version of a Fair Trade Movement.

First, the peasants from southern countries, have struggled for

decades in organized efforts facing poverty, repression, exclusion, and

in many cases violence and humiliation from dominant groups in

national contexts, in order to achieve autonomy in the production

process, of which they are the main actors; access to fair markets is

one of their critical demands for the authentic control of their social,

cultural and political reproduction. Their demand for fair channels of

marketing, has forced them to create their own structures of

organization, in defiance of corporate control and anti-democratic

apparatus of the party-state in post-revolutionary Mexico. They have

resisted the penetration of the country side by capitalism, which was

first adapted to local and national forms of corporate control, and later

to the neo-liberal wave motivated from the World Bank/IMF, and

undermined the existing social policies and common land tenancy

structure at the heart of Mexican peasantry. For this reason the

political organization of agricultural producers and its insertion in the

Fair Trade Market scheme, should be included in any notion of Fair

Trade Movement. It is included in the definition of the Trade Justice

Movement, which was set up by the NGOs that have combined their

efforts to lobby against the way international trade rules have been

shaped to increase the gap between the rich and the poor, as part of a

broader movement against both the globalisation of neo-liberal policies

and the increasing influence of corporate capital on international

politics.

The engagement on the ground of transnational initiatives

among these three actors, namely peasants, FT market, and TJM,

configures a new conceptualisation of a Fair Trade Movement. There

60

seem to be more links between northern initiatives, which have in

common the presence of ATOs within their constituencies, than

between North and South. The relation between peasants and ATOs,

established by the Fair Trade Market, is limited to the number of

producers inserted into the FT niche. To a lesser extent there seem to

be connections between the Trade Justice Movement and southern

actors, limited to the particular links that the NGOs members have with

third world countries according to their own agendas. A dialogue,

debate or feedback between the Trade Justice Movement and

grassroots movements from the south is a key issue needing more

attention. So far it seems limited to direct exchanges among local

activists, or the participation of leading representatives of social

movements in parts of the third world in the meetings and

demonstrations, such as the Soweto Electricity Crisis Committee in

South Africa (Trevor Ngwane), at the WDM rally where the TJM was

officially launched; the Third World Network in Penang, Malaysia

(Martin Khor), and the African Gender and Trade Network (Mohau

Pheko), in WDM’s 2002 annual conference in London; the Research

Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology in India (Vandana

Shiva), at the TJM rally and Mass Lobby of Parliament in June 19th 2002

(Lines, personal communication, august 2002).

The TJM is a young coalition addressing the macro-structural

causes of poverty, rather than the national, regional and local issues

with the social movements from the South are concerned, and there is

a long way to walk. Nonetheless an increasing number of grassroots

movements and citizens’ initiatives within the developing countries are

addressing the broad spectrum of the political economy as a critical

factor in local problems. It is here that a convergence with the northern

movements should be sought, in order to construct a channel for

dialogue between North and South that doesn’t reproduce the same

international inequalities that exist within the social movement

structures. These kinds of links based on cooperation, could continue

the process initiated by the Fair Trade Market, which in many cases

61

appears to have helped poor producers to achieve what their past

struggles and any government efforts couldn’t do before: to reward

peasants’ production. Did peasants ever imagine they would find fair

prices for their products coming from overseas in a globalizing and

increasing neo-liberal environment, rather than in their nationalist and

protectionist policies?. This irony should cause some reflection around

the role of transnational solidarity mobilization.

Thirdly and finally, the role of values has been highlighted as,

first, a field of struggle, because besides the battle over physical

resources, tangible and political strategies, there is a conceptual

struggle for the prevalence of a certain view of the world, an

epistemological challenge that aims for the dominance of one

paradigm over another through the management and use of values.

Such principles can serve either as a strategy to get to the

consciousness of public opinion and the decision makers, or also as the

end that motivates mobilization. In the case of Transnational Solidarity

Movements such as the TJM, an attempt has been made to supersede

the penetration of capitalist and neo-liberal values such as

competition, individual effort, personal success, accumulation,

consumption for its own sake, the law of the market, the pre-eminence

of the majorities etc, with the adoption of opposing terms such as

solidarity, cooperation, identity, substitution, complementarity,

reciprocity, affinity, restitution, conscious consumption, consideration

for minorities, equity, self-sufficiency, and so on. In this sense values

are part of social movements both as a means and as an end. As a

strategy to convince, and as a goal in its own right.

In the case of Fair Trade a kind of feedback can be distinguished

in the use of certain values shared by the ATOs policies and the

grassroots producers. For example, the current idea of organic

production emerged in response to the damaging effects of

agrochemicals on long term soil fertility, and knowledge of it is based

in a set of technical skills possessed by agronomists and other

professional technicians. Nonetheless it does not contradict the

62

traditional ecological knowledge of the indigenous people for whom the

green revolution has not represented an alternative to the ancestral

agriculture systems that still persist. The same applies to the rest of

the set criteria required by the FT labelling agencies to certify

producers, such as democratic organization, which still is practiced by

some indigenous groups of Mexico, specially in Oaxaca, despite the

patron-client relations scheme imposed by the post-revolutionary

government for most of the 20th century. Nonetheless FT criteria that

resonate with indigenous producers’ principles and demands, such as

participatory democracy, sustainable use of natural resources, better

conditions of production, access to the market and technical

assistance, etc, are sometimes framed by broader political demands of

autonomy, self-determination, struggle for land, and food sovereignty,

among others, which are not addressed by the Fair Trade Market

model. Here lies the importance of challenging the North’s Fair Trade

efforts to address such topics. However, a critical approach can be

adopted also toward the oligarchic practices of indigenous groups and

their political movements.

Likewise, the presence of the Churches (in a variety of

denominations) is highly visible in the formation and adoption of moral

values within transnational, and grassroots movements. The Churches

have been considered among the first transnational movements, and

their experience in moving through political channels and getting to

the heart of local, poor, excluded and/or indigenous communities

should not be disregarded, nor the role they play in confrontational

transnational politics. Their work has been relevant for the launching of

UCIRI in Oaxaca Mexico (e.g. the work of missionaries), the Trade

Justice Movement (Christian Aid, CAFOD, the United Reformed Church,

Methodist Relief and Development Fund, and so on), and the

Alternative Trade Market (The former Central Mennonite Committee,

Oxfam trading, Max Havelaar). Thus, their contribution to the addition

of values to the social movements background, is added to the

traditional values of indigenous communities, the humanist values of

63

western organisations and their constituencies, and the opposition to

the domination of western corporate values that foster social

processes of inequality, among others. In this sense a valid social

movement can hardly be imagined without engagement with the

ground, and the yielding of values that epistemologically sustain its

claims. A model based in ethics will be more likely to replace a model

based in corporate selfishness.

Acronyms

ARIC: Asociación Rural de Interés ColectivoATO’s: Alternative Trading OrganisationsCCI: Central Campesina IndependienteCEC: Centro de Educación CampesinaCIO: Coffee International OrganizationCIOAC: Central Independiente de Obreros Agrícolas y CampesinosCNC: Confederación Nacional CampesinaCNPA: Coordinadora Nacional Plan de AyalaCOCEI: Coalición Obrero Campesino Estudiantil del Istmo de TehuantepecCONACYT: Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaEFTA: European Fair Trade AssociationEZLN: Ejercito Zapatista de Liberación NacionalFAO: Food and Agriculture OrganisationFLO-Int: Fair Trade Labelling Organisations InternationalFT: Fair TradeIFAT: International Federation of Alternative TradeIMF: International Monetary FundISMAM: Indígenas de la Sierra Madre de MotozintlaMULT: Movimiento Unificado de la Lucha TriqueNAFTA: North American Free Trade AgreementNGO’s: Non Governmental OrganisationsNSM’s: New Social MovementsPAN: Partido Acción NacionalPCM: Partido Comunista MexicanoPRI: Partido Revolucionario InstitucionalPRONASOL: Programa Nacional de SolidaridadPSUM: Partido Socialista Unificado de MéxicoRMT: Resource Mobilisation TheorySM’s: Social MovementsTJM: Trade Justice MovementTSMO’s: Transnational Social MovementsUCIRI: Unión de Comunidades Indígenas de la Región del Istmo

64

UCIZONI: Unión de Comunidades Indígenas de la Zona Norte del IstmoU.K.: United KingdomUN: United NationsUNORCA: Unión Nacional de Organizaciones Regionales Campesinas y AutónomasWTO: World Trade Organisation

Bibliography.

Álvarez, S.E; Dagnino, E; and Escobar, A.(1998). ‘Introduction: the cultural and the political in Latin American social movements’. In: Álvarez, S.E; Dagnino, E; and Escobar, A. (eds). Cultures of politics, politics of cultures: Re-visioning Latin American social movements. Boulder: Westview

Álvarez, S.E; Dagnino, E; and Escobar, A. (eds) (1998). Cultures of politics, politics of cultures: Re-visioning Latin American social movements. Boulder: Westview

Baglioni, S. (2001). ‘Solidarity movement organizations. Toward an active global consciousness?’. In: Giugni, M; and Passy, F. (eds). Political altruism?. Solidarity movements in international perspective. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield publishers Inc.

Barrat, M. (1993). Fair Trade. Reform and realities in the international trading system. London: Zed Books.

Bartra, A; Cobo, R; Meza, M; and Paz, L. (n/d). Sombra y algo mas. Hacia un café sustentable mexicano. From: http://www.GrupoChorlavi.org/cafe/documentos.php

Beekman, B. (1998). ‘Fair Trade and trade development’. In: ILEIA newsletter, December.

Blauert, J. and Zadek (eds). (1999). Mediación para la sustentabilidad: Construyendo políticas desde las bases. Mexico, D.F.: British Council/ Institute of Development Studies at Sussex/CIESAS/ Plaza y Valdes Editores.

65

Blauert, J. and Sesia, P. (1998). Medio ambiente, economía campesina y desarrollo sustentable: Éxitos, fracasos y perspectivas. Oaxaca, México: CIESAS/Campo/ Grupo Mesófilo.

Blauert, J; and Guidi, M. (1992). ‘Strategies for autochthonous development: two initiatives in rural Mexico’. In: Ghai, D; and Vivian, J. (eds). Grassroots environmental action: Peoples participation in sustainable development. London: Routledge.

Campbell, H. (1994). Zapotec renaissance: Ethnic politics and cultural revivalism in southern Mexico. Albuquerque: U. of New Mexico Press.

Carton de Gramont, H. (ed).(1996). Neoliberalismo y organización social en el campo mexicano. México, D.F.: Universidad Autónoma de México/ Plaza y Valdes Editores.

Christian Aid (2002). Action request from Christian Aid: The day the people came to the Parliament (Leaflet).

Cohen, R; and Rai, S.M. (eds) (2000). Global social movements. London: Athlone Press

Collins, C; Gariyo, Z; and Burdon, T. (2001) Jubilee 2000: Citizen action across the North-South divide. In: Edwards, M; and Gaventa, J. (eds). Global Citizen Action. London: Earthscan.

Coote, B. (1992). Poverty and the global commodity markets. Oxfam publications.

Cornelius, W; Craig, A; and Fox, J. (eds). (1994) Transforming state-society relations in Mexico: The national solidarity strategy. San Diego, California: Center for U.S.-Mexican studies/Univ of California, San Diego.

Cornelius, W.A; Gentleman, J; and Smith, P.H. (eds). (1989) Mexico’s alternative political futures. Monograph series No. 30. San Diego, California: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of San Diego.

Curtis, M. (2001). Trade for Life: Making trade work for poor people. London: Christian Aid.

Desmarais, A.A. (2002). ‘The Via Campesina: consolidating an international peasant and farm movement’. In: The Journal of Peasant Studies 29(2): 91-124.

Edelman, M. (2001). ‘Social movements: changing paradigms and forms of politics’. In: Annual Review of Anthropology, 30: 285-317.

66

Edelman, M. (1999a). Peasants against globalization: Rural Social Movements in Costa Rica. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

Edelman, M. (1999b). Organización transfronteriza: El auge de un movimiento campesino transnacional en Centro America. In: Blauert, J. and Zadek (eds). Mediación para la sustentabilidad. Construyendo políticas desde las bases. Mexico, D.F.: British Council/ Institute of Development Studies at Sussex/CIESAS/ Plaza y Valdes Editores.

Edwards, M; and Gaventa, J. (eds) (2001). Global Citizen Action. London: Earthscan.

Equal Exchange (2002). ‘Mexico. Working with indigenous farmers to support cultural survival and autonomy’. From: http://www.equalexchange.com/partners/mexico.html

Eschle, C; and Stammers, N. (in progress).’Taking part: social movements, INGOs and global change’.

Escobar, A; and Alvarez, S. (1992). ‘Introduction: Theory and protest in Latin America Today’. In: Escobar, A and Alvarez, S. (eds). The making of social movements in Latin America. Boulder: Westview Press.

Escobar, A and Alvarez, S. (eds). (1992). The making of social movements in Latin America. Boulder: Westview Press.

Eterovic, I; and Smith, J. (2001). ‘From altruism to a new internationalism?. A look at transnational social movements’. In: Giugni, M; and Passy, F. (eds). Political altruism?. Solidarity movements in international perspective. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

FAO (2002). ‘Case study report: Mexico. Autonomous development of Indian communities in Mexico. Integrating cultural elements while practicing organic farming’. From: http://www.fao.org/organicag/doc/mexico2.htm

FLO Int (FairTrade Labelling Organizations International) (2002). Boletin de Noticias No. 6. From: http://www.fairtrade.net/pdf/francais/coffee.pdf [june 2002].

FLO Int (FairTrade Labelling Organizations International) (2002). FLO. Ojala que llueva café. No. 6 From: http://www.fairtrade.net/pdf/espa%Flo/Gen.pdf [june 2002]

FLO Int website. From: http://www.fairtrade.net/sp/como_funciona_flo.html [june 2002]

67

Flores, G; Pare, L; and Sarmiento, S. (1988). Las voces del campo. Movimiento campesino y política agraria 1976-1984. México, D.F.: Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales, UNAM/ Siglo XXI editores.

Fox, J; and Gordillo, G.(1989). Between the state and the market: the campesino’s quest for autonomy. In: Cornelius, W.A; Gentleman, J; and Smith, P.H. (eds). Mexico’s alternative political futures. Monograph series No. 30. San Diego, California: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of San Diego.

Ghai, D; and Vivian, J. (eds). (1992) Grassroots environmental action: People’s participation in sustainable development. London: Routledge.

Gonzalez, A; and Linck, T. (In print). El comercio de los valores eticos: Las reglas del juego del cafe solidario.

Gonzalez-Casanova, P. (ed)(1984). Historia politica de los campesinos latinoamericanos. Tomo 1. Mexico: Siglo XXI eds/ IIS/UNAM

Giugni, M. (2001). ‘Concluding remarks. Conceptual distinctions for the study of political altruism’. In: Giugni, M; and Passy, F. (eds). Political altruism?. Solidarity movements in international perspective. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Giugni, M; and Passy, F. (eds) (2001). Political altruism?. Solidarity movements in international perspective. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Harvey, N. (1998). The Chiapas rebellion: The struggle for land and democracy. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

Hernandez, L; and Celis, F. (1994). ‘Solidarity and the new campesino movements: the case of coffee production’. In: Cornelius, W; Craig, A; and Fox, J. (eds). Transforming state-society relations in Mexico. The national solidarity strategy. San Diego, Ca: Center for U.S.-Mexican studies/Univ of California, San Diego.

Hernández, L. (n/p). Café: la pobreza de la riqueza/la riqueza de la pobreza (1). From: http://www.GrupoChorlavi.org/cafe/documentos.php

IFAT (International Federation of Alternative Trade) (n/d). A brief history of the alternative trading movement. From: http://www.ifat.org/dwr/resource3.html

Kearney, M. (1996). Reconceptualizing the peasantry: Anthropology in global perspective. Boulder: Westview Press.

Keck M.E; and Sikkink, K.(1998). Activists beyond borders: advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press.

68

Kriesberg, L. (1997). ‘Social movements and global transformation’. In: Smith, J; Chatfield, C; and Pagnucco, R. (eds). Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

Leclair, M.S.(2002). ‘Fighting the tide: alternative trade organizations in the era of global free trade’. In: World Development 30(6): 949-958

Mace, B. (1998) Alternative Trade and small-scale coffee production in Oaxaca, Mexico. Master’s thesis, Miami University, Oxford Ohio.

Madeley, J. (1992). Trade and the poor: The impact of international trade on developing countries. London: ITP

Magaña, P. (1993). La organización campesina en una época de cambios violentos. From: http://www.laneta.apc.org/pasos/fmagan1.htm

Martínez, E. (1991). Organización de productores y movimiento campesino. México D.F: Siglo XXI editores/ Universidad Autónoma de México.

McCarthy, J.D. (1997). ‘The globalization of social movement theory’. In: Smith, J; Chatfield, C; and Pagnucco, R. (eds). Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

Medina, P. (1997). Putting fair trade to the test: a study of ‘alternative coffee’ in Nicaragua. Unpublished MPhil dissertation, University of Sussex.

Mejia, P; and Sarmiento, S. (eds) (1987). La lucha indigena: un reto a la ortodoxia. Mex: IIES/UNAM/Siglo XXI editores.

NACLA (2000). Justice and Java: coffee in a Fair Trade Market. From: http://www.globalexchange.org/economy/coffee/nacla1000.html [june 2002]

Nigh, R. (1997). ‘Organic agriculture and globalization: a Maya associative corporation in Chiapas, Mexico’. In: Human Organization 56(4): 427-436.

Nigh, R. (1998). ‘Global processes and local identity among Mayan coffee growers in Chiapas, Mexico’. In: American Anthropologist 100(1): 136-147.

69

Norget, K. (1997). “‘The politics of Liberation’: The Popular Church, Indigenous Theology and Grassroots Mobilization in Oaxaca, Mexico”. In: Latin American Perspectives, 24 (5): 124-144.

Olesen, T.(2001). ‘Theorizing transnational framing: Globalization and the construction of solidarity networks’. Paper prepared for the conference on “Networks and transformations” in Manchester, UK, July 2nd to July 4th 2001. Global Studies Association/Institute for Global Studies and the Department of Sociology at Manchester Metropolitan University.

Otero, G. (1999). ‘Neoliberal reform in rural Mexico: social structural and political dimensions’. In: Latin American Research Review 35(1): 187-207

Passy, F. (2001). ‘Political altruism and the solidarity movement: An introduction’. In: Giugni, M; and Passy, F. (eds). Political altruism?. Solidarity movements in international perspective. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc: Oxford.

Renard, M.C. (1999). ‘The interstices of globalization: the example of fair coffee’. In: Sociologia Ruralis 39(4):485-500

Renard, M.C.(n/d). ‘Movimiento campesino y organizaciones politicas: Simojovel-Huitiupan (1974-1990)’. In: Revista Chiapas No. 4. From: http://www. ezln.org/revistachiapas/chiapas4.html

Rice, R.A. (2001). ‘Noble goals and challenging terrain: organic and Fair Trade coffee movements in the global marketplace’. In: Journal of agricultural and environmental ethics 14: 39-66.

Roozen, N; and Van der Hoff, F. (2001). L’Aventure du commerce equitable: Une alternative a la mondialisation. France: JC Lattes.

Rubio, B. (1996). ‘Las organizaciones independientes en México: Semblanzas de las opciones campesinas ante el proyecto neoliberal’. In: Carton de Gramont, H. (ed). Neoliberalismo y organización social en el campo mexicano. México, D.F.: Universidad Autónoma de México/ Plaza y Valdes Editores.

Smith, J; Pagnucco, R; and Chatfield, C. (1997). ‘Social movements and world politics: A theoretical framework’. In: Smith, J; Chatfield, C; and Pagnucco, R. (eds). Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

Smith, J; Chatfield, C; and Pagnucco, R. (eds) (1997). Transnational social movements and global politics: Solidarity beyond the state. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

70

Stavenhagen, R. (1970). Agrarian problems and peasant politics in Latin America. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books/ Doubleday and Company, Inc.

Stavenhagen, R.(1978). ‘Capitalism and the peasantry in Mexico’. In: Latin American Perspectives 18(3): 27-37.

Sud, G. (1998). ‘The way the world should be’?. A critical examination of Fair Trade in regards to consumption and the environment. Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of Sussex.

Tallontire, A. (2000). ‘Partnerships in fair trade: reflections from a case study of Cafedirect’. In: Development in practice 10(2): 166-177

Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in Movement: Social movements, collective action and politics. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Thomson, B. (1999). ‘Lessons for Fair Trade’. In: Small Enterprises Development 10(4): 56-60

Tiffen, P; and Zadek, S. (1999). ‘Manejando la economía global: Un comercio mas justo en Latino America’. In: Blauert, J. and Zadek (eds). Mediación para la sustentabilidad: Construyendo politicas desde las bases. Mexico, D.F.: British Council/ Institute of Development Studies at Sussex/CIESAS/ Plaza y Valdes Editores.

TJM (2002). Trade Justice Movement web page. From: www.tradejusticemovement.org.uk [july 2002]

United Nations (2000). Success stories volume 4. Unlimited responsibility of the Union of Indian Communities of the Isthmus Region. From: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/success/SARD-8.htm [August 2002]. UNORCA (n/d). UNORCA. From: http://www.laneta.apc.org/unorca/frame2.htm

Van der Hoff and Galvan (1998). Un poco de la historia de UCIRI. In: Blauert, J. and Sesia, P. Medio ambiente, economía campesina y desarrollo sustentable: Éxitos, fracasos y perspectivas. Oaxaca, México: CIESAS/Campo/Grupo Mesófilo.

Via Campesina (n/d). La Vía Campesina. From: http://ns.rds.org.hn/via/quienes%20somos.htm

Waridel, L. (2002). Coffee with pleasure: Just Java and world trade. Montreal: Black Rose Books.

71

Waridel, L; and Teitelbaum, S. (2002). Fair Trade report: contributing to equitable commerce in Holland, Belgium, Switzerland, and France. From: http://www.equiterre.qc.ca/english/coffee/outils_eng/rapport_europeen/rapport.html [june 2002].

Warman, A. (1984). La lucha social en el campo de México: un esfuerzo de periodizacion. In: González-Casanova, P. (ed). Historia politica de los campesinos latinoamericanos. Tomo 1. México: Siglo XXI eds/ IIS/UNAM

Waterman, P. (1998). Globalization, social movements and the new internationalisms. London and New York: Continuum.

Willmore, Ian (2002). ‘Trade Justice needs more than just warm words’. The Observer, Sunday June 23, 2002, from: www.observer.co.uk [june 2002].

Zadek, S; and Tiffen, P. (1996). “’Fair Trade’: business or campaign?”. In: Development. Journal of the Society of International Development No. 3: 48-53

xiv Vanderhoff and Galvan (1998: 133).xv UCIRI: Union de Comunidades Indigenas de la Region del Istmoxvi ARIC: Asociacion Regional de Interes Colectivo xvii CEC: Centro de Educacion Campesina

72