Journal of Environmental Sociology
Online ISSN : 2434-0618
The Environmental Sociology of Global Commodities
Toward Livelihood Marketism: Competition and Unity in the Coffee Trade of Southern Laos
Arihiro MINOO
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

2021 Volume 27 Pages 101-116

Details
Abstract

This paper proposes the concept of “livelihood marketism” in contrast to “competitive marketism,” which aims to increase the value of products through market competition, and “anti-marketism,” which resists the deprivation caused by excessive market competition, focusing on a production site located upstream in the supply chain of a global commodity. “Livelihood marketism” signifies a position that, while displaying a certain understanding of market competition, opposes the excessive competitive orientation seen in markets, based on the logic of livelihood. The logic of livelihood refers to the beliefs and values rooted in the social relations of producers in the field of trade. The paper clarifies the reality of this position based on an ethnographic description of the process of building relationships between buyers and farmers in a coffee-producing area of southern Laos where a coffee-buying group, calling its trading method “people’s trade,” and its trading partner, a farmers’ cooperative, have been working together since 2010. In 2013, an agricultural engineer, who aimed to differentiate purchase prices according to quality, approached the cooperative as a new supporter. By elaborating on the dissatisfaction of the cooperative leaders with the supporter’s purchase method, this paper demonstrates their logic of livelihood in which they avoid competition among individuals but sell coffee while maintaining group harmony. This case study explains the position of adopting a form of trade that is more in line with the logic of the farmers’ livelihood namely “livelihood marketism” and argues that it is important for buyers to show an understanding of the logic of the producers’ livelihood in order to build sustainable trading relationships.

Content from these authors
© 2021 Japanese Association for Environmental Sociology
Previous article Next article
feedback
Top