Primera vivienda para Herbert y Katherine Jacobs, la casa Jacobs I

In discussing negotiation and contestation internal to the FLO system it has been suggested that profit orientated and commercial interest have lined up against mission orientated actors and social movements (Bacon 2010; Jaffee 2010). In the case of the FTN programme (and paralleling the development of the first Fairtrade Town in Garstang) the process has not involved commercially orientated interests. Instead, it was driven by civil society concerned with fairer and more socially just international trade practices. Although the Welsh Assembly Government also became engaged, evidence suggests that at least in the beginning, the initiative was not top down, but a grassroots project organised by a wider (if not a limited group of) civil society. Even the Fairtrade Foundation maintained distance as they felt unable to be involved. As a result, the programme has not been influenced by corporate interests in the way that has been identified in studies of fair trade institutions such as FLO (See Chapter Two).

Despite the lack of involvement from profit orientated interests however, research suggests that the meaning of a FTN has still been actively negotiated by stakeholders with differing perspectives. Among those involved in developing the FTN programme, some were determined to maintain an open perspective of what should be implied by such a status. This was partly reflected in an insistence on keeping references to the concept of ‘fair trade’ at a generic level. For some of those involved, the question of what was to be legitimately considered as part of fair trade activity was not up for

169 discussion³¹³. Instead, these individuals were most concerned with how broadly the consumption of FLO certified goods by government authorities would be required³¹⁴.

On the other hand however, others in the group pushed hard for the criteria to move beyond setting targets for the consumption of FLO certified products, and to include other elements considered to be important components of fair trade practice. For example, some of those involved felt that a FTN required a certain number of dedicated fair trade shops, which explicitly recognised the validity of BAFTS governance and in turn reinforced a wider meaning of the term fair trade. Furthermore, and perhaps more radically, some of the group held the expectation that the title of a FTN should not simply be about consumption, but also about the proactive construction of fair trade infrastructure and, in particular, dedicated Fair Trade Organisations – which could be immediately identified with reference to WFTO accreditation.

On the other hand, as with the community in Garstang who developed the Fairtrade Town scheme, it was also considered that FLO certification was the most effective tool with which to promote greater understanding and action on trade justice issues.

Furthermore, many considered that the FTN criterion needed to be quantitatively based – especially after the decision for Scotland to enter the programme, which offered some competition around the achievement. For this reason, it was decided that, by basing the FTN on the Foundation’s existing scheme, it would be possible to count the number of accredited towns, schools and universities as a measure of progress.

Another factor which appears to have been significant was that with support of the Welsh Assembly, there was an added pressure to develop the programme as quickly as possible. As a result, the final decisions of what a FTN would mean were largely based on practical priorities, and ultimately drew heavily on the pre-existing Fairtrade Town scheme. Therefore, at the discursive level, the Nation programme became largely about measuring increased consumption of certain FLO certified goods – and this was particularly true for requirements made of public institutions.

313 David McCollough 31/03/2011.

314 David McCollough 31/03/2011. Interview with Richard Laydon 25/02/2011.

170 Through this inquiry, it emerges that there has been an active and at times intensive discussion between stakeholders with different views on what it should mean for a nation to claim Fair Trade status. Indeed, the very idea came from grassroots activists;

the Fairtrade Foundation had inputs but little decision making power; and an independent panel of experts representing different approaches to the fair trade concept were convened to moderate the programme. As a result, it can be suggested that the FTN programme provides some evidence to support the argument that the fair trade movement is characterised, to some extent, by democratic processes – and that decision to promote the use of fair trade goods in public institutions has some sense of popular mandate. Indeed, reflecting on the process, one of the members of the expert panel brought in to assess the criteria noted that:

“I think this [the way that the criteria emerged] was a good thing and in the spirit of fair trade, that it wasn’t some sort of higher authority passing or failing you, but…more about a community deciding to try and live up to a set of standards, trying to reach a goal together, rather than submitting themselves to some sort of examination”.

On the other hand however, given the resources already developed by the Fairtrade Foundation – in terms of the ex-ante existence of the certification system and geographical Fairtrade accreditation scheme – as well as the political intervention of the Welsh Assembly Government – power relations still pervaded this process and ultimately shaped the outcome. While a further point of contention for some stakeholders is the limited extent to which the FTN programme demands the consumption of FLO certified goods, this evidence also supports the argument that despite the open ended nature of UK Government policy, “Fairtrade absolutism”

(Mohan 2010, p. 94) is on the rise.

At the more practical level, the preference for FLO certification in the Fairtrade Town scheme, and thus their promotion under the FTN programme, raises important questions. Specifically, this situation invites critical reflection on the extent to which FLO certification is actually prioritised by those responsible for government procurement. This is important as wider literature on governance identifies that, by obtaining such government support, certain private governance approaches to promoting sustainable development can generate widespread acceptance – even if they are not necessarily the most effective (Smith and Fischlein 2010). In the case of

171 FLO certification, worries about ‘absolutism’ arise for many reasons, and one major concern is that many producers are already being isolated from fair trade markets due to their inability to obtain FLO certification (see Chapter Two).