The scoping study revealed that the artisanal identity is another informal label attached/ assigned to the industry under study. This identity was also found to be linked with enterprises that had expanded past the small-scale stage. Thus, Scoping Study Finding 2 and 3 found that:
Scoping Study Finding #2 – These industries and other actors view their units and products as artisanal/hand made (i.e. informally label them as such).
Scoping Study Finding #3 – Larger enterprises which have evidently expanded, and their products, are also viewed as artisanal (i.e. artisanal identity preservation).
This section offers a review of literature surrounding artisanal food production and associated concepts and themes (such as link to place and the culture industry). From the review, three components of artisanality and Research Sub-Question 1.4 are arrived at (see Table 3.3). The developed components of artisanality will permit an exploration of this identity.
Historically, agrifood research has “tended to focus on the standardised-generic world” (Murdoch et al., 2000, p. 14), where standardised refers to the “supply of critical inputs to the producer, such as the technology, information, and skills necessary to carry out production … is easy [to source], and relatively cheap, to expand” and generic designating products which “correspond to undifferentiated markets” (Storper, 1997, p.3). In contrast, the specialised-dedicated world relates to the “supply of critical inputs” which are “rare or costly and time-consuming to reproduce” (i.e. specialised) and dedicated denoting products that “are made for clients whose demands have precision and personality (Storper, 1997, p. 3). The artisanal food product is situated within the specialised-dedicated world and, despite the paucity of research into these worlds, “in many respects these other spheres of production show as much dynamism and market growth as the commonly referenced world of globalised, industrial food” (Murdoch et al., 2000, p. 14).
TABLE 3.2: SCOPING STUDY FINDING 2 AND 3, THE LITERATURE REVIEWED AND THE RESEARCH QUESTION DEVELOPED
Scoping Study Finding 2
Scoping Study Finding 3
These industries and other actors view their units and products as artisanal/hand made (i.e. informally label them as such).
Larger enterprises which have evidently expanded, and their products, are also viewed as artisanal (i.e. artisanal identity preservation).
Literature Reviewed Definition and components of artisanality
Artisanal entrepreneur Place
The Culture Industry Concept of authenticity
Research Sub-Question Developed
1.4 How have the expanded enterprises preserved their authentic, artisanal identity upon expansion?
The gap in the research has also been pointed out by Tregear (2002, website), who suggests that:
Within the broad spectrum of research into small firms, the craft or artisan producer has been relatively neglected. This is spite of the fact that craft firms have an important role to play in a diversified rural economy, from the point of view of providing high value products often made according to traditional techniques, requiring labour intensive processes and
considerable levels of skill. These attributes have knock-on benefits in terms of rural employment and diversification of the skill base.
As artisanal products attract new meanings associated with quality food, regional embeddedness and the preservation of diversity, there is an increasing need for research into this subject. The dilemma is, as ITC (2003, website) states, that there “is no
universally acceptable definition for artisanal products due to the many variables involved and the different purposes for which it may be sought.” As such, this section will develop a definition based upon a review of the literature. De Roest’s (2002, p. 2) comparison with the industrial system – that is, “the most significant difference between an industrial and artisan system is the difference in the ratio of capital to labour” – will be used as a foundation in developing the components of artisanality. Artisanal food production has a lower capital but higher labour input than the industrial system, while the industrial product is produced with higher capital input and a lower labour content than the artisanal product. As De Roest (2000, p.2) suggests, the industrial system mainly rewards the amount of capital invested, whereas in the artisanal system, it is the labour input that is rewarded.
In building upon De Roest’s (2002) conception of artisanality, a definition which was accepted by the representatives of 44 countries at the UNESCO/ITC International Symposium on Crafts and the International Market: Trade & Customs Codification (Manila, 1997) will be utilised (ITC, 2003, website). This definition states that artisanal products are:
those produced by artisans, either completely by hand, or with the help of hand-tools or even mechanical means, as long as the direct manual contribution of the artisan remains the most substantial component of the finished product. These are produced without restriction in terms of quantity and using raw materials from sustainable resources. The special nature of artisanal products derives from their distinctive features, which can be utilitarian, aesthetic, artistic, creative, culturally attached, decorative, functional, traditional, religiously and socially symbolic and significant. Artisans can be basically defined as persons who carry out a manual work on their own account, often helped by family members, friends or
apprentices, even workers, with whom they constantly keep personal
contacts, which generate a community of intellect and attachment to the craft
(ITC, 2003, website).
An additional scoping study finding was that enterprises which had evidently expanded past the cottage industry stage were also viewed as artisanal. The questions that this poses are: Is the artisanal identity appropriate as it relates to expanded enterprises? If so, how has artisanal identity preservation occurred? If the artisanal identity is not an appropriate label, why are these enterprises and their products still viewed as artisanal? According to the International Trade Centre (2003, website), the definition of an artisan “should be made flexible” in order to include the aptly termed “artisan entrepreneur”. Although this definition deviates from the above definition, where “the direct manual contribution of the artisan remains the most substantial component of the finished product”, “artisan entrepreneurs” are still considered artisans (ITC, 2003, website). That is, an “artisan entrepreneur” is one who:
a. although not actively participating themselves in production, specialise in research, market negotiations or produce design and conception, b. also make use of machine tools or even other machinery, yet not affecting the artisanal nature of the work and the production process, c. beyond the usual cottage or artisanal unit, have associated in cooperatives or any other form of organisation (even informal); d. manage or form part of micro, small or medium sized enterprises concerned with artisanal production (ITC, 2003, website).
From these definitions, hand processing and the artisanal entrepreneur are important considerations when analysing artisanality. Furthermore, in alignment with De Roest’s
(2002) definition of artisanality as having a higher labour input and ITC’s (2003) suggested roles undertaken by an artisanal entrepreneur (such as product conception and design; management; research), the notion that the artisan is responsible for many of the business activities as well as hand processing is appropriate. Thus, the second component of artisanality developed is that of the artisanal business unit, where the principals (Owners/Investors/Labourers) are responsible for many of the business activities themselves rather than outsourcing. The business activities could include production of raw agriculture right through to sales or could involve the construction of a website or account keeping. It was shown in the scoping study that many of the vignette industries grew all, or part of, the raw product that was used in processing and that they were often involved in selling their own products (via cellar door, farm gate, or local market).
The final component of artisanality developed is partly associated with the hand processing and artisanal business unit components. This third component relates to the principal as artisan having hands-on contact with the artisanal product from start to finish. An artisan is responsible for, and involved with, the creation of the product from conception to end. In a marketplace that is increasingly valuing alternatives to the industrial food system, the artisan’s involvement with the product throughout its entire life cycle potentially signals a quality food product. This final component has been termed product involvement.
Initially, it was shown that artisanality is a defining characteristic of a cottage industry (EPAT, 2003; WBI, 2003b). This characteristic was explored further because of its core positioning in the research project and De Roest’s (2000) conceptualisation of
artisanality as a high capital to low labour ratio was used as a foundation for the development of the components of artisanality. Thus, the three developed components of artisanality include:
• Hand-processing – “Artisanal products are those produced by artisans, either completely by hand, or with the help of hand-tools or even mechanical means, as long as the direct manual contribution of the artisan remains the most substantial component of the finished product” (ITC, 2003);
• Artisanal Business Unit – This concept is associated with the idea that the principals (Owners/Investors/Labourers) are responsible for many of the business activities themselves, rather than outsourcing (i.e. they distribute the product, do their own accounts, construct their own website and grow the raw produce that goes into their product); and,
• Product Involvement – This is similar in idea to the artisanal business unit component; however, rather than being responsible for the business activities, it refers to having hands-on contact of the product from start to finish. This refers to the notion that an artisan is responsible for creation from conception to the end. For a quality end product, it is expected that the artisan thoroughly knows the raw product and works with it through the entire life cycle. This category sits in opposition to the specialisation of labour, where the labourer is responsible for only a part of the life cycle of a product.
In examining artisanal food production, links with place cannot be ignored. Artisanal food production is embedded within a socio-cultural and ecological context. As such, artisanality is not only territorial, but is also an expression of the human input
component referred to previously and the biophysical characteristics that impart distinct qualities upon the product. Artisanal food products are products of place. Moreover, it is how actors view the locality in which the product is produced and the images that are linked to that particular place that further impart meaning and product attributes.
Products of place can be contrasted against conventional food products, where each node of the food chain (such as raw agricultural production, processing and sales) is spatially distanced and the product is not representative of place. Despite artisanal or products of place being sold in distant markets, the bulk of the business activities are geographically concentrated. This was evidenced in the industries outlined in the scoping study where the bulk of the business activities were undertaken within the sub- regional area. The following will offer an exploration of the notion of an artisanal food item as a product of place.