Benefitting from the global, protecting the local: The nested markets of wild product trade

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Rural Studies journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

Benefitting from the global, protecting the local: The nested markets of wild product trade Mikelis Grivinsa,∗, Talis Tisenkopfsb a b

Baltic Studies Centre, Kokneses Prospekts 26-2, Riga, LV-1014, Latvia Baltic Studies Centre, Latvia

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Wild blueberries Nested markets Foraging Rural communities Re-agrarianisation

The economic hardship of rural communities and the interest multinational processors have shown in local wild blueberries has facilitated the quick growth of the wild blueberry trade in Latvia. With this trade, rural areas have witnessed the emergence of new market structures and new roles supporting the sector. However, despite the growing number of powerful actors in the wild product supply chain, communities have managed to maintain control over the wild products and to secure high blueberry prices. This article analyses the properties of the wild blueberry sector that have enabled local communities to do so. The paper asks two research questions: what aspects have facilitated the shift from foraging for wild blueberries as a subsistence activity associated with cultural heritage, to the globally integrated market sector it is today, and what properties of the blueberry market and the associated structural and political context have allowed local communities to maintain ownership over wild products? The concept of nested markets is used to explain those attributes characterising relations between stakeholders, which strengthen local level actors and thus balance out the power relations within the supply chain. This also provides ways to defend, maintain and strengthen an agrarian lifestyle.

1. Introduction The agriculture, forestry and fishery sectors are among the main employers in Latvia's countryside (Eurostat, 2013). However, due to intensification, the share of people working in these sectors has significantly decreased in the decades following the collapse of the Soviet Union (Eurostat, 2016; Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia (CSB), 2009). Other employment alternatives, however, have not been introduced. The rural situation was further aggravated by the economic crisis of 2009 (CSB, 2016) when unemployment levels rose all across Latvia. Unemployment forced people to rethink their livelihood strategies. In the search for income, land and natural resources re-emerged as livelihood opportunities for rural communities. This situation, accompanied by the discovery of the lucrative wild blueberry (Vaccinium myrtillus) retail market, facilitated the quick growth of the wild blueberry trade into a noteworthy sector with well-functioning logistics and significant turnover. Statistical data illustrates that during the economic crisis, the amount of exported frozen blueberries grew more than tenfold in just a few years – from 271.8t in 2005–3034.3t in 2013 (CSB, 2017a). It is also suggested that in 2009, ∼5000t of wild berries were foraged just for subsistence (Donis and Straupe, 2011). In an assessment

∗

conducted in 2010, the Ministry of Agriculture of Latvia concluded that the wild berry, fruit and nut market could be worth around €17 million (Ministry of Agriculture, 2010). It is estimated that in the year 2009 4.1% of Latvia's population (or approximately 69,000 people) had sold berries at least once (Donis and Straupe, 2011). This article explores the transformation wild product foraging in Latvia has gone through – from culturally-rooted wild product subsistence foraging into a commercial activity connected to a global market while all along keeping the ownership of the wild products in the hands of the local communities. This paper raises two research questions: firstly, what aspects have facilitated the shift from foraging for wild blueberries as a subsistence activity associated with cultural heritage to the globally integrated market sector it is today? This question addresses the changes that linked land with new forms of livelihood. Secondly, what properties of the blueberry market and the associated structural and political context have allowed local communities to maintain ownership over wild products? This question addresses the power relations underlying the wild product market in Latvia. In this paper, the concept of a ‘nested market’ is used to explain the relationship between locally-owned, often culturally-embedded economic activities and global markets. A nested market designates the

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Grivins).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.01.005 Received 26 July 2017; Received in revised form 17 January 2018; Accepted 20 January 2018 0743-0167/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Grivins, M., Journal of Rural Studies (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.01.005

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

the product, (2) a different distribution of value added, resulting in a higher price for farmers (or in this case – foragers), (3) a different infrastructure (or socio-material infrastructure), (4) a different location of transactions in time and space, and/or (5) a different governance pattern (van der Ploeg et al., 2012). The properties of nested markets emerge from the fact that these markets are not anonymous – nested markets could rather be described as embedded in a set of goals and values out of which these markets emerge. The actors operating in nested markets are known and set the shape of processes in the market. In contrast, anonymous free trade, manifesting itself through lack of ownership is expected to regulate the relations between actors in global markets. In the case of wild blueberries (as well as most other wild products) there are several characteristics that have the potential to enable local actors to maintain a certain agrarian lifestyle: most of these products grow only under certain conditions (in the wild); many of these products are associated with unique nutritional properties (for example, wild blueberries from northern Europe are associated with a high level of anthocyanin); alternatively, it might be claimed that societies around the globe have lost the practice of foraging and knowledge about wild products, thus rendering such practices unique characteristics. The interest of global actors in Latvia's wild blueberries is based on the product's characteristics as well as being due to the historical practice of foraging. These features explain at least in part as to why blueberry foraging became linked to global markets in the first place and why global actors are listening to local demands. However, it cannot explain the power of the communities to make and sustain any claims on ownership. None of the properties listed above is unique: practices can be replicated while wild resources are publicly owned. That is, they are as much available to global as to local actors. An additional problem emerges from the fact that concepts like nested markets typically presuppose organisational structures that represent each part of the analysed system (such as farms or enterprises). Each of these guarantees certain stability in the sector – these actors need a constant outlet and can have long-term contracts. This is different in the case of wild products. In the case analysed here, foragers take up foraging spontaneously, getting involved in the sector occasionally and unpredictably. The absence of the need for any investment makes foraging a much more accessible activity and facilitates dynamism at the lower levels of the supply chain. It also reduces subordination among those actors operating in the market and allows the rural poor to reconnect with the land as a solution to poverty (Rigg, 2006). However, this very dynamism could be the reason why foragers might have more problems protecting their interests - robust and static global parts of the markets will have more time to accumulate power and to protect their interests. However, due to dynamic involvement and the absence of fixed regulatory structures, tacit knowledge regarding market properties takes on more importance. Trust, relations that go beyond simple trade, and mutual recommendations become crucial factors in relationships within the sector. Relations in the sector are also maintained away from the wild blueberry market – foraging and community life are intertwined. Thus, the reputation obtained in one sphere will most likely be carried over to the other. The nestedness of wild product foraging is based on the structure of social relations that connects the daily life of communities with the wild product foraging and selling practices in which they engage. Those relations that presuppose mutual empowerment and co-dependency and which set sectoral rules have ensured the emergence of a nested market. The following sections of this paper illustrate how these relations came about and how they are maintained.

type of relations between market actors where weaker, typically smaller and local actors have been enabled to overcome power asymmetries and thus have the means to negotiate better deals (van der Ploeg et al., 2012; see also Hebinck et al., 2015). This presupposes that certain market arrangements can empower farmers (or in this case – foragers). In this paper, the concept helps to explain how during the rapid wild product market expansion, foragers have managed to secure high incomes from wild blueberries. At the same, etc. the analysis of the nested blueberry markets uncover the nature of the strategies of the wild blueberry harvesters. For them, harvesting berries secure some kind of agrarian lifestyle which helps them in their struggle against exclusion and against the trend that rural livelihoods tend to deagrarianise and that off- and on-farm work takes over the central role of farming in rural life (Rigg, 2006; see also the Introduction to this Special Issue). Harvesting wild products from the forest emerge as a strategy to maintain rural livelihoods that are based on harvesting and the management of these natural resources. The paper, inter alia, also shows that what is meant by ‘agriculture' in the deagrarianisation literature needs to be broadened to also include harvesting of wild products, such as blueberries. This paper is organised into six sections. The introduction is followed by a section examining the explanatory strength of the ‘nested market’ concept. In this part of the paper, characteristics that can be associated with nested markets are discussed and the peculiarities of nestedness that make this concept applicable to an analysis of wild products are identified. The next part offers a detailed overview of the data used in this article. The paper then moves on to a section discussing the study results, which starts by dealing with foraging as a cultural activity and continues with an explanation of the relationships between the stakeholders in the sector, before finally discussing the attempts that have been made by some actors to concentrate power. The article ends with two sections – discussions and conclusions. 2. Nested markets The concept of nested markets has been used to describe market arrangement structures that have allowed local actors to penetrate global markets while also securing ownership claims to established nodes connecting the local and the global (van der Ploeg et al., 2012). The nested market approach is just one of the concepts researchers have used to capture the principles that allow small-scale actors to maintain control over the production process in ever more globalised markets (the others being Alternative Food Networks, niche markets, local food supply chains, etc.). Nestedness differs from other, somewhat similar notions in the sense that it is not seen as being in opposition to conventional global markets, but rather as a more inclusive response to the challenges posed by these markets (Schneider et al., 2016). A nested market is a part of a global market that through unique operational principles manage to enable local level actors. Nestedness signifies an attempt to incorporate into the market some regulatory, distinctive, supportive aspect that can only be replicated in certain conditions – either by following certain production practices or by being in a specific region, etc. The embeddedness of nested markets has also been explained as mutual agreements between the actors involved when it comes to product properties (Schneider et al., 2015). What sets the borders that protect and separate nested markets, in general, is an interpretation of uniqueness manifested through historical practices, tacit knowledge, specific tastes or maybe already institutionalised social structures, such as trademarks, schemes of geographical indications, or historical specialities. This demarcation of uniqueness can be seen as a common pool resource (publicly available to everybody, yet owned by no one) that sets the specific market apart from surrounding common market structures (Schneider et al., 2015; van der Ploeg et al., 2012). When compared to conventional markets, nested markets will exhibit one or more of these features: (1) a clear final price differential for

3. Methods used in this study The topic of wild product foraging in Latvia is not well examined. For this reason, the available data related to this field of activity is limited and unstructured. Keeping this in mind as well as taking into 2

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

2013). The reoccurring crises which undermined the population's livelihoods ensured that tacit knowledge concerning wild product foraging and processing prevailed in the region. Thus, due to events the region has witnessed in its recent history, a significant share of people continue to forage even today, and a noteworthy economic sector has emerged from this tradition.

consideration the theoretical data gathering principles suggested for case studies, multiple data sources are used for this study. The main body of data consists of 17 semi-structured, in-depth interviews, each lasting for approximately 1 h, supplemented with repeated interviews and several shorter interviews. Of the respondents interviewed, there were four major dealers, four collecting points, two people selling berries in short food supply chains (also foragers), a secondary processor, three governing actors, and three foragers. Repeated interviews were conducted with one of the dealers, two of the collecting points and a forager. In the shorter interviews, additional foragers, municipality representatives, and actors operating in NGOs were interviewed. Interviews were supplemented with three unstructured observations at collecting points, which allowed to observe and document the relations collecting points have with foragers and dealers. The data for the article was collected in multiple waves between 2013 and 2015. The interview guidelines were modified in the different stages of data gathering. The initial interview guidelines focused on the structure of wild product supply chain. However, in the later steps of the research, the guidelines were adapted to target specific questions that emerged from data analysis. In the earliest stages of the research, mainly open coding was applied to analyse the data. The only set categories in this initial coding concerned the possibilities of different actors present in the supply chain. Although new categories for data analysis were introduced in later stages of the analysis as well, mainly thematic coding was applied in these stages. In this article data from interviews are used to illustrate the current situation and the most recent historical events. To gain a better understanding of the changes occurring in the market over time, an unstructured media analysis was conducted covering three time periods: the interwar period, the first decade after the WW2, and the decade after Latvia regained independence. Articles mentioning the word ‘blueberries’ (‘mellenes’) were selected from the archives of the digitalised Latvian press and used to identify the uses of the wild products. The media articles were analysed because the argument presented in the article is strongly based on the historical development of foraging. In-depth interviews have significant limitations in presenting the historical development, as they cannot offer more information than that of the informant's experience. Thus, data from media analysis is used to illustrate the more distant history of the wild product trade. The three periods were selected for analysis following the premise that wild product foraging tends to manifest itself during a crisis (Shackleton et al., 2013). Each of the three selected periods represents periods of rapid changes and high socio-economic uncertainty. The results illustrated in this paper are also supported by multiple sources of secondary data, such as statistical data, data collected by state institutions, and quantitative data collected in surveys covering related themes. The paper mainly focuses on three groups of actors: foragers, collecting points, and dealers. Table 1 summarises the characteristics of these groups. These three groups of actors are just the main ones at the core of wild product operations in Latvia. In the context of this article, other stakeholders play a minor role and thus are omitted from the analysis.

4.1. The emergence of a nested market The social structures surrounding culturally-motivated foraging have only a limited role in improving the livelihoods of the rural population. To become a source of substantial income, culturally-based practices had to be connected to an outlet market. This sub-section illustrates how wild blueberries became linked to global markets after Latvia regained independence and the characteristics of these links which ensured that local communities managed to accumulate the strength needed to negotiate their position in the market. 4.1.1. The birth of nested blueberry markets In the initial period after Latvia regained independence, the population had limited income opportunities. Thus, any opportunity to make extra income came as a relief and attracted the interest of a considerable number of people. In this period, enterprises willing to buy berries from people foraging emerged (Lauku Avīze, 1991, 1994; 1995). These enterprises opened up berry collecting points and advertised them in regional newspapers, hoping that the opportunity for income would attract foragers. And it did. At a time when rural regions were looking for new opportunities, the income that could be generated from foraging seemed like a good opening for many. However, the first dealers mainly supplied local food processors and thus could only sell a limited amount of berries. Without any interest in foraging, yet willing to support the rural population, the national government quickly adopted two laws that supported commercial foraging: the Law on Forests (Saeima of Latvia (Saeima), 2000) was passed and formulated in such a way that suggested that foraging was allowed almost everywhere (even in private forests); the Law on Personal Income Tax (Saeima, 1993) designated earnings from foraging as one form of tax-exempt income. The taxation of income from wild products was renegotiated on multiple occasions in the years that followed, with the eventual outcome being that on some occasions (when income exceeds a specific sum), income from foraging will be taxed. The lack of political oversight allowed specific relations between pickers, collecting points and dealers to develop within the sector. Tax exemptions meant pickers and collecting points could easily disappear when it came to the regulatory body. Of course, officially it was expected that all transactions between pickers and collecting points would be registered. However, with no supervision, this demand quickly lost credibility. Collecting points were buying blueberries without any documentation whatsoever, and thus dealers received considerable quantities of undocumented berries. However, at this point, the sector lacked a customer able to buy such berries in bulk; the major outlet – local food processers – needed to be able to account for the ingredients they used. Thus, dealers had to invest to give at least some impression of accountability. In this early period of commercial foraging, there were just a few dealers and a handful of collecting points operating with wild products. For this reason, pickers had to travel long distances to sell their berries and thus emerged as a mobile group willing to travel and dependent on collecting points. Meanwhile, collecting points emerged as a static group – bound to a specific place and dependent on dealers. Both pickers and collecting points represented local communities. However, each collecting point operated across a broader region and thus territorial relations at this stage were not so pronounced. As such, at this time, collecting points had a better relationship with dealers – the two groups held long-term relations, and opportunities presented to

4. Nestedness of wild blueberry foraging Historically, inhabitants of Latvia have extensive, culturally-based, tacit knowledge on the diversity of wild products. The reliance on foraging grew during periods of crisis. Multiple studies from around the world have shown that a return to an agrarian lifestyle can be among the strategies used by the rural population to cope with the failures of modern economies. In times of crisis, people can re-link their livelihoods with small-scale farming (Shackleton et al., 2013) or in other cases, with wild product foraging (Ahenkan and Boon, 2011; Shackleton and Pandey, 2014). Land-related livelihoods can serve as a reliable safety net, especially for the rural poor (Shackleton et al., 3

4 For biggest dealers annual turnover exceeds €1 m

On average, a collecting point receives around 500 euros per season.4

Between 77 and 186 euros per season. However, it is more likely that there is a small group of foragers who receive significantly higher income from foraging, while for most foragers, the selling of berries has never been a serious income source.3

Income estimations - A diverse group of people. - Typically inhabitants of the most distant rural regions and representatives of the most vulnerable social groups are benefiting the most from foraging (like, for example, the Romani community). - Foragers might use blueberries as a means to diversify their livelihoods (teachers from rural schools are a typical group involved in foraging). - It is possible to assume, that foraging is more widespread among ethnic Latvians. - A diverse group of people. - Have free access to space where the trade can be organised. - Have a lifestyle that allows them to spend most of their time during the foraging season at this location. - Need to have at least some entrepreneurial and communication skills and social capital. - The scope of dealers' operations differs. - Some dealers are small-time, unregistered entrepreneurs trying to profit from the sector while collaborating with just ten collecting points. - Other dealers are officially registered enterprises with managing vast collecting point networks (some of them with more than 100 collecting points) covering half of Latvia's territory. - Dealers also differ in terms of how they organise their business – some are technologically and globally oriented, while others are locally and product diversity oriented.

Characteristics of the group

2

Data based on Donis and Straupe, 2011. The dominance of the wild blueberry trade allows us to surmise that the given statistics cover mainly if not exclusively, blueberries. 3 Estimations based on Grivins, 2016. 4 Estimations based on Grivins et al., 2016.

1

There is a high number of small dealers. However, there are around five dealers dominating the market.

It is estimated that there could be around 500 to 800 collecting points in Latvia.4

Collecting points

Dealers

In 2009 77.7% had gathered some wild products, 35.4% had picked wild berries, and 4.1% (or around 69 000 people) had sold berries at least once during the previous year.1, 2

Foragers

Size of the group

Table 1 Description of foragers, collecting points, and dealers.

A dealer initiates the establishment of collecting points and often provides newly-established collecting points with the equipment needed to carry out their work. In return for the help given, the collecting point is expected to sell berries to that specific dealer. Among the largest dealers, there are globally-oriented entrepreneurs pursuing market transparency, investing in technological modernisation and often not only exporting but importing berries as well. On the other hand, there are locally-oriented dealers selling berries in neighbouring countries. These dealers are constantly on the lookout for other wild products that could be sold, allowing them to prolong the foraging season.

Foragers sell blueberries and other wild products to collecting points – a middle-man connecting the global sector and the foragers. One does not need an initial investment to be a forager, but there is a need to have access to some resources if one wants to run a collecting point.

The extent to which foragers are involved in the sector varies. For example, some foragers see foraging as a kind of recreational meditation (reconnecting with nature) and only occasionally sell some foraged blueberries to collecting points. This group does not rely on the profits that foraging offers. Other foragers use foraging either to diversify their livelihoods or as an exclusive opportunity to ensure their livelihoods.

Comments

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

is easier to convince existing collecting points to switch dealers. This weakened the link dealers had with collecting points, which facilitated broader changes regarding relations within the market. Foragers used to be dependent on the partnership of collecting points and dealers. However, after the market transformations, dealers were losing the trust and loyalty of collecting points and thus – control over the supply chain. Collectors and foragers emerged as the main actors, holding the means to influence dealers. This could have been different if dealers had decided to officially employ collecting points and/or foragers. However, this was not a practice the industry was used to. During this time, both foragers and collecting points emerged as a more place-bound co-dependent group. However, there were other changes as well – by loosening their ties with dealers, collecting points gained more freedom. Many of them learned how to negotiate higher prices for the berries, tried to switch dealers, and searched for new channels for selling their berries; a few tried to become dealers themselves. Of course, there were also those collecting points that were just looking for quick profits and had no intention of caring about the foragers or their position in the sector. However, these points typically operated with smaller quantities of berries and were not so attractive to dealers and remained marginal. Meanwhile, the existing situation empowered the well-connected collecting points to reinvent themselves into local social entrepreneurs. Thus, what initially was an additional source of income during times of crisis transformed into a communal land-based business project. This is when the blueberry trade became nested – together, the collecting points and foragers formed relations that allowed them to negotiate the trade principles that would dominate in the supply chain and the share of the price they would receive. The growth of the sector re-established community ties, introduced new opportunities for local actors, and raised the share of income received by local communities. However, changes went well beyond this. The short harvest season and the unpredictable yields of wild blueberries forced the actors involved to search for ways to overcome seasonality and reduce unpredictability. While some, more global enterprises found the solution in modern technologies and blueberry imports, others looked for new wild products that could help to prolong the season. This led to the discovery of wild mushrooms (chanterelles and boletes), cranberries and some other wild product markets.

collecting points were mainly dependent on their relations with a dealer. Dealers had established connections with actors willing to buy berries in bulk and thus, without them, the collecting points would have had to stop their activities. The collecting points’ dependency allowed dealers to maintain control even without written contracts. This quickly emerged as a common practice in the sector – collecting points were not officially employed and thus did not pay taxes. The power relations between the actors involved played a significant role in limiting the communities’ ability to benefit from the emergence of blueberry markets. Although there is no documented evidence of the share of income each group received, the descriptions of mutual economic relations given by respondents give us reason to believe that the main profits were concentrated at the upper levels of the supply chain. 4.1.2. Consolidation of communities’ strength The sector was comparatively small up until the economic crisis of 2009. In rural regions, unemployment caused by the crisis was felt more strongly than elsewhere, and rural inhabitants had to search for new income sources. Meanwhile, during the pre-crisis period, the blueberry supply chain was going through significant structural changes. First of all, dealers working with a new global market – the pharmaceutical industry – emerged. The presence of the pharmaceutical industry provided a practically unlimited demand for wild blueberries. Also, other dealers had found partners in neighbouring countries that were able to buy undocumented blueberries. Thus, the sector was ready to operate with huge quantities of products, which attracted more and more new dealers hoping to cash in on profits. The only thing lagging behind was the number of foragers, but these were provided by the economic crisis. New dealers established new collecting points. The networks of collecting points grew quickly and so did the competition between them. Suddenly, it was not the foragers who were looking for collecting points (as had been the case before), but rather the other way around – the dealers were forced to compete for the foraged blueberries. This competition raised the prices paid for blueberries and thus both foragers and collecting points were receiving an ever higher share of the final blueberry price. At this point, neither of them had the means to influence price fluctuations. The crisis also diversified the social structure of the foragers significantly. They were not just the rural poor anymore; it was a diverse group of people (including teachers, former office employees, and low-level officials) whose households had lost a share of their income. For them, foraging emerged as an opportunity to diversify their livelihoods. Most of these people lived close to forests even before the crisis. Thus, when the crisis hit, they just had to shift where they were looking to find a solution to their problems – from the town they were living to the forest they were living next to. The growing number of collecting points gave foragers the possibility to choose where to sell their berries. This made collecting points realise that they were now dependent on their relationship with foragers and were thus forced to rethink the relations they had with people picking blueberries. Consequently, during this period, collecting points strengthened their ties with foragers, which eventually led to many collecting points transforming themselves into a support point for the foragers. Collecting points emerged as centres facilitating information exchange, offering practical assistance (many collecting points offer water, equipment, some medicine, and maybe even food), organising logistics (the most prominent example identified during interviews was when a collecting point acquired second-hand bicycles, which were then given to people foraging so that they could spend less time getting to the forest), etc. The collecting point networks each dealer operated with grew, yet the dealers themselves became ever more integrated into the global markets and distant from local communities. To secure the flow of berries in an ever more competitive market, dealers were forced to constantly search for new collecting points. However, establishing a functioning collecting point that attracts foragers is time-consuming – it

4.2. Consequences of rapid growth The quick growth at all levels of the supply chain was the reason the market could acquire the properties of nestedness. However, the rapid expansion also brought changes in the sector that could have a longstanding impact on the prevalence of foraging. 4.2.1. Risks posed by growth Despite the quick growth, the interest of national legislators in the sector was limited – taxing the berries remained the only real priority for legislators. And even then, when the state tried to intervene in the blueberry market, it failed, thus illustrating that dealing with the sector will bring few benefits yet will cause a lot of headaches. To elaborate, in 2009 the State Revenue Service introduced new ways to tax income from foraging. Income tax is one of two taxes allocated for municipal use and thus local councils felt quite strongly that citizens were managing to avoid this tax. Additionally, in most municipalities, social benefits are granted based on the household income, which for some households blueberry foraging elevated significantly. For this reason, the state and municipalities were keen to take advantage of the unexpected income source the population had found. During the interviews for this study, foragers were met whose income from wild blueberries significantly exceeded 1000 euros per month, which is well above the national average salary (which is a little less than 700 euros after the taxes (CSB, 2017b)). Some foragers claimed that on an average day they could forage berries worth 50 euros. The income earned by the actors could be higher than indicated in Table 1. Furthermore, foragers 5

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

majority of their colleagues, these dealers officially employ the collecting points they collaborate with. This approach has both pros and cons. The collecting points that are employed have all the benefits a typical employee in any other sector would have. They can feel much safer as they are protected by governing institutions and the enterprise and will be able to benefit from state welfare services if anything happens to them. Furthermore, for these collectors income is regular and predictable and all taxes are paid. Being protected in the unstructured and non-transparent sector of wild products can be a crucial asset (in some cases, mutually negotiated rules when it comes to relations between collecting points and foragers might involve criminal activity). However, once the relations between the collecting point and the dealer are legal, the collecting point's income tends to decrease and they lose the ability to shape processes within the supply chain. Furthermore, since the collecting point is unable to be an entrepreneur him/herself, their involvement in the community is greatly reduced. Thus, their role in forming an alliance with foragers to oppose a dealer vanishes and with it – control. Dealers who employ collecting points have the means to make all the major decisions without consulting communities. Thus, benefits from local resources are at least theoretically managed by external actors whose vision is most likely not related to community's development. Global dealers are well aware of this threat and one interviewee representing this group reiterated that it is their priority to secure the involvement of collectors in decision-making. Despite these claims, it is more likely that it is the overall characteristics of the market that have been forcing global actors to consider the interests of communities. To appeal to foragers, they have to set prices that are close to average and create a way of ensuring that foragers' income is not revealed. To transform practices dominating in the sector, globally-oriented dealers have tried to establish a group of dealers willing to lobby for greater regulation of the sector. So far all attempts have failed. Finally, global enterprises are also trying to pressure the state agencies responsible for taxation to take a closer look at the processes in the sector. Being a comparatively small economic sector, it is not the priority of these institutions. Still, pressure from the dealers has been pushing the controlling actors to take at least some steps, and since it is impossible to control foragers, their interest has shifted to collecting points. This has resulted in fines, but as yet none of the dealers has received one. This has also led to controlling actors being used in the rivalry; during interviews, there were numerous occasions when interviewees recalled anonymous tip-offs to inspectors, who were used to eliminate competing collecting points. However, despite these efforts, controlling institutions have not had any success improving transparency; on the contrary, fear of controlling institutions has seemingly pushed some collecting points and foragers even deeper into the shadows. As has been shown, nested markets and global markets are closely linked in the case of wild products in Latvia. However, those market traits that create nestedness and transform it into a viable strategy for the rural population are also perceived as a threat by global actors. Thus, although nested markets are dependent on global markets, representatives of the latter are looking for new ways to organise the trade.

are not the only group involved in the supply chain of wild products that manage to earn notable sums from selling these products. For this reason, municipalities had an interest in this new way rural inhabitants were raising their income. This interest was transformed into real practices, and the State Revenue Service introduced the pickers’ permit – a one-off payment that would cover taxes related to foraging during the particular season. In 2010, when the idea of permits came into force, 209 were sold. However, by 2012 the number of permits sold had already dropped to 10.1 This was despite an increase in the overall amount of exported frozen berries. In 2013, the permit idea was dropped altogether. The controlling institutions were not able to find a way to impose the regulation and the national economy was recovering. The government dropped its interest in foraging. The sector remained unregulated, which placed some of the actors of the supply chain in a disadvantaged position. With the emergence of the pharmaceutical market and the opportunity to sell undocumented blueberries to neighbouring markets, two types of dealer emerged. One group of dealers (those collaborating with the pharmaceutical industry) were willing to operate legally. They exported berries, modernised premises, introduced technologies, and imported berries when local harvests were poor. These were truly global enterprises, exporting their products all around the world. For these enterprises, it was important that they maintained the traceability of the origins of their product. The other group of dealers sold undocumented berries, mainly to Lithuania. During one interview, a dealer representing this group hinted that the actual amount of berries he was working with was much higher than that officially indicated. He also estimated that around 1/3 of the market could consist of officially non-existent blueberries. Many commercial foragers earning notable sums from wild blueberries also receive welfare benefits that are granted in Latvia based on the income a person has. Thus, extra income from berries might limit a forager's chances of receiving this aid. Furthermore, many foragers believe that since the national government has tried to tax them once, they will eventually do so again. Thus, the opportunity to sell berries anonymously is considered protection against unknown threats and is highly appreciated by most foragers. To attract this group of foragers, even collectors that claim to be operating legally (representing globallyintegrated dealers) are forced to turn a blind eye when it comes to transactions between foragers and collecting points. Collecting points which claim that they document all transactions do admit that the documentation is selective and even when they record the transaction, they might adjust the forager's personal information, so he or she is not exposed. Thus, foragers and collecting points are invisible to any controlling organisation. Being invisible and without official contracts means that trust becomes a significant part of relations within the supply chain. Foragers’ expectations are forcing all dealers to adopt the same principles – to allow foragers and collecting points to create relations based on their vision of the market. However, the effects of these relations run deep – for any undocumented sales, dealers do not have to pay taxes, and therefore the profits from these berries are higher. This then leads to unequal opportunities for enterprises trying to operate fully legally and those remaining in the grey zone. The latter can afford to pay more for berries. Meanwhile, the main losers in this battle are merely the local dealers – those who first discovered the market.

5. Discussion Due to the presence of global markets, commercial wild blueberry foraging has recently emerged as a practice that can ensure a notable income for rural populations in Latvia. In the European context, academic literature dealing with wild products has stressed their recreational role. Researchers have presented foraging as a ‘lifestyle’ (Pouta et al., 2006; Kovalčík, 2014) or most commonly as part of a broader concept of ecosystem services (see Maes et al., 2012; Schulp et al., 2014). Furthermore, even from the scarce evidence available, it is possible to conclude that even in the European context, wild products

4.2.2. The expansion of global influence Due to their disadvantageous position, globally-oriented dealers have involved themselves in a fight against those dealers selling undocumented berries. For global dealers, it is a rule that all of their partners have to have official contracts. Furthermore, unlike the 1

Data from an unofficial communication with the State Revenue Service.

6

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

might be related to a series of other unique properties – these products improve diets (Pouta et al., 2006; Kangas and Pasi, 2001; Kovalčík, 2014) and strengthen community ties (Polanyi, 2001; Grivins, 2016; Bardone and Pungas-Kohv, 2015). This article introduces a new and so far poorly examined (at least in the European context) dimension of wild product foraging – the ability of these products to ensure and diversify household livelihoods (some notable examples when the economic significance of wild products has been explored are Cai et al., 2011; Bonet et al., 2014). Particular structural arrangements in the wild product supply chain supported by specific contextual conditions can facilitate that the transformation of wild product foraging into a lucrative business opportunity for rural inhabitants. This is what happened in Latvia: the economic crisis of 2009 and close relations between foragers and collecting points facilitated the emergence of a nested market – a segment of the global wild product market within which the adopted trade rules enable local communities. The article provides evidence for researchers studying wild products to include in their studies questions evaluating the economic role wild products play in rural households. However, the article also illustrates that analysing foraging only from the perspective of income and market relations might be misleading. To understand the nestedness and commercial foraging, it is necessary to take a holistic look at the wild product trade and the cultural role of these products. Foraging represents both a way to diversify livelihoods and cultural activity. Seeing foraging just from the market or cultural perspective might mean ignoring aspects crucial to explaining foraging. There are mutual influences between commercial and cultural foraging. This article has been looking at a market that has emerged from a cultural activity and has benefited from pre-existing ties within communities. However, the influence extends the other way, too. In its search for a way to overcome seasonality, the sector has discovered other wild products that have value in the market. Products like chanterelles, boletes and cranberries to name a few can be sold in those supply chains created for wild blueberries. These products have been identified by dealers and are seen by them as a way to benefit from their networks of collecting points for longer periods of time. However, they also allow foragers to have a longer foraging season and thus ensure that foraging brings more cash into households. It is not the objective of this study to say how many of the products promoted by the dealers have become a part of cultural foraging. However, the fact remains that commercial foraging has discovered local products that were culturally unknown before. Over time, these products could find their way into culturally-motivated foraging. The case analysed here has also illustrated that practices related to foraging are also related to maintaining the community and to strengthening and creating new ties connecting the actors involved. Many foragers and collecting points knew each other even before they got involved in the wild product trade. However, the trade has also been connecting people that were unknown to each other before and thus the sector is broadening communities. Addressing just cultural or commercial properties would neglect the contemporary social role products like wild blueberries have. Nevertheless, present as well as emerging social capital is what has allowed nestedness to emerge and, by doing so, have ensured that the community maintains ownership over the wild products they collect. Little attention has been paid to livelihood diversification in this paper. Foraging helps to diversify livelihoods. The question then arises as to what other livelihoods foragers have. The interviews revealed that foragers often hold multiple links to the land. Most notably, many of them have small plots of land where they grow some products for their consumption. In many ways, these people are self-sufficient. What they have lacked so far is access to cash that would allow them to pay for services they cannot provide themselves. In this regard, foraging has similarities with small-scale dairy farming – these two activities bring cash into the household. Since berry picking is considered a normal cultural practice in the region, people trying to earn a living this way

are not seen as something out of the ordinary. These discussion points suggest that to fully grasp the significance of foraging, there might be a need for new theoretical explanations that would consider the interlinkages between three dimensions: market, culture and society. In this article, the concept of nested markets has allowed illustrating how the cultural, social and economic spheres intertwine. At the same time, while the concept brings together the mentioned dimensions to explain relations emerging in markets, it does not fully explain how the market influences the other two dimensions. Finally, despite everything that has been said, the analysis presented in this paper does not reveal how resilient foraging as a solution is. The sector has emerged due to the failure of conventional markets, and the core of foragers represents marginalised groups. Foraging is a strategy that helps to overcome difficulties, but it is unlikely that they will decide to rely only on this practice. Wild products remain too unpredictable and seasonal, and foraging is hard work. Thus, it is likely that if other employment opportunities arise, these people will take them. Furthermore, the pool of potential foragers is decreasing. Thus, it is likely that foraging will remain a safety net, yet it will not be able to sustain itself as a sector. However, it is also worth noting that the sector is strengthening the entrepreneurial skills of some of the rural inhabitants. Thus, the sector is not just empowering communities now; it is also providing communities with various tools they will be able to use in the future. 6. Conclusions This article analyses how wild product foraging has transformed from a cultural activity into an opportunity for the rural population to diversify its income. To do so, it has explored the changes that have been taking place in culturally-motivated foraging since opportunities to sell wild blueberries were introduced in Latvia. It has illustrated that the presence of a global market in the wild product sector can be an opportunity as well as a threat to the local population's opportunities to benefit from its resources. Furthermore, Wild product foraging has a long tradition in Latvia. Cultural foraging provided a fruitful foundation upon which the commercial blueberry trade could be built. After discovering a demand for these products, a group of intermediaries – dealers linking the cultural practice with local fruit processors – emerged. The lack of interest from policymakers allowed the sector to develop its particular structure, yet as has been shown this turned out to be size-sensitive. While the sector was marginal and small, it was dependent on its dealers. However, after expansion, a power shift occurred, putting more control in the hands of local communities. This happened due to the more responsible model of trade that sectoral growth accidentally facilitated. This growth strengthened the relations between pickers and collecting points, connecting the berry trade with community relations and mutual support and creating a nested market in the process. This same shift, as well as the sudden emergence of strength, also convinced collecting points that they could negotiate the prices they received for berries. This raised the share of income foragers received and thus, strengthened the significance of foraging as a landbased income opportunity. However, this has also transformed collecting points into a group of rural entrepreneurs that also happen to have a strong sense of connection to rural communities. Thus, even if global actors lose interest in the trade, it is highly likely that these actors will discover other ways to maintain it. Thus, the processes that have ensured local ownership over the wild products have also ensured that foraging is a viable re-agrarianisation strategy – a strategy to use against exclusion, and a way to reconnect with and benefit from nature. There are several factors that have ensured that lower level actors can negotiate their role in the supply chain. First of all, the sector has a unique network of collecting points with a distinctive infrastructure that cannot be easily replicated. Secondly, the collecting points represent more than just a middleman – these are actors uniting communities and relating to communities. Thus, the relations that emerge 7

Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

M. Grivins, T. Tisenkopfs

between collecting points and foragers are a crucial element ensuring community strength. Thirdly, collecting points accumulate knowledge of how the sector works, which allows them to understand the dealer's role. And finally, foragers and collecting points have negotiated their own rules regarding how transactions and relations among the actors involved should be. These rules are based on the perspectives of the foragers and the collecting points. To operate in the market, all newcomers have to comply with these rules. The economic crisis allowed foraging to emerge as a viable income source for rural communities. Meanwhile, the accumulation of power at the local level has ensured that local actors continue to be among the main beneficiaries of the trade.

rxid=89fa53c2-5ff7-456f-aae4-c4274cf3b2aa, Accessed date: 24 October 2017. Donis, J., Straupe, I., 2011. The assessment of contribution of forest plant non-wood products in Latvia's national economy. For. Sci. 2, 59–64. Eurostat, 2013. Rural Development Statistics by Urban-rural Typology. http://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Rural_development_statistics_by_urbanrural_typology, Accessed date: 4 July 2017. Eurostat, 2016. Employment by Sex, Age and Detailed Economic Activity (From 2008 Onwards, NACE Rev. 2 Two-digit Level) - 1 000. [lfsa_egan22d]. http://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/lfsa_egan22d, Accessed date: 4 July 2017. Grivins, M., 2016. A comparative study of the legal and grey wild product supply chains. J. Rural Stud. 45, 66–75. Grivins, M., Tisenkopfs, T., Stojanovic, Z., Ristic, B., 2016. A comparative analysis of the social performance of global and local berry supply chains. Sustainability 8, 532. Hebinck, P., van der Ploeg, J.D., Schneider, S. (Eds.), 2015. Rural Development and the Construction of New Markets. Routledge ISS Studies in Rural Livelihoods, London. Kangas, K., Pasi, M., 2001. Factors affecting participation in wild blueberry picking in rural and urban dwellers. Silva Fenn. 35, 487–495. Kovalčík, M., 2014. Value of forest berries and mushrooms picking in Slovakia's forests. Beskydy 7, 39–46. Lauku Avīze (1991, nr.61.). Gulbenē. Lauku Avīze (1994, nr.59.). Melleņu vasara. Lauku Avīze (1995, nr.59.). Melleņu sezona šogad pieticīgāka. Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schagner, J.P., Grizzetti, B., Drakou, E., La Notte, A., Zulian, G., Bouraoui, F., 2012. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv. 1, 31–39. Ministry of Agriculture, 2010. Meža Nozares Attīstība 1990. -2010.g. https://www.zm. gov.lv/public/ck/files/ZM/Mezhi%20konf%20materiali/meza_nozares_attistiba_90_ 10.pdf, Accessed date: 4 July 2017. Polanyi, K., 2001. The Great Transformation. The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Beacon Press, Boston. Pouta, E., Sievanen, T., Neuvonen, M., 2006. Recreational wild berry picking in Finland – reflection of a rural lifestyle. Soc. Nat. Resour. 19, 285–304. Rigg, J., 2006. Land, farming, livelihoods, and poverty: rethinking the links in the rural South. World Dev. 34, 180–202. Saeima, 1993. On personal income tax. In: Latvijas Vēstnesis, 01.06.1993., Nr.32. Saeima, 2000. Law on forests. In: Latvijas Vēstnesis, 16.03.2000., Nr.98/99 (2009/2010). Schneider, S., van der Ploeg, J.D., Hebinck, P., 2015. Reconsidering the contribution of nested markets to rural development. In: Hebinck, P., van der Ploeg, J.D., Schneider, S. (Eds.), Rural Development and the Construction of New Markets. Routledge ISS Studies in Rural Livelihoods, London, pp. 190–205. Schneider, S., Salvate, N., Cassol, A., 2016. Nested markets, food networks, and new pathways for rural development in Brazil. Agriculture 6, 61. Schulp, C.J.E., Thuiller, W., Verburg, P.H., 2014. Wild food in Europe: a synthesis of knowledge and data of terrestrial wild food as an ecosystem service. Ecol. Econ. 105, 292–305. Shackleton, C.M., Pandey, A.K., 2014. Positioning non-timber forest products on the development agenda. For. Policy Econ. 38, 1–7. Shackleton, R., Shackleton, C., Shackleton, S., Gambiza, J., 2013. Deagrarianisation and forest revegetation in a biodiversity hotspot on the wild coast, South Africa. PLoS One 9, e76939. van der Ploeg, J.D., Jingzhong, Y., Schneider, S., 2012. Rural development through the construction of new, nested, markets: comparative perspective from China, Brazil and the European Union. J. Peasant Stud. 39, 133–173.

Acknowledgements The data for this article was gathered during the EU FP7 GLAMUR project (grant agreement 311778). This study was financially supported by the ERAF Post-doctoral Research Support Program project No 1.1.1.2/16/I/001 research application No 1.1.1.2./VIAA/1/16/155. The authors are grateful to Paul Hebinck for critical evaluation of the earlier versions of the article. We also acknowledge the comments on an early draft of the paper by Charlie Shackleton. Finally, we also thank the peer review comments of two anonymous reviewers. References Ahenkan, A., Boon, E., 2011. Non-Timber forest products (NTFPs): clearing the confusion in semantics. J. Hum. Ecol. 33, 1–9. Bardone, E., Pungas-Kohv, P., 2015. Changing values of wild berries in Estonian households: recollections from an ethnographic archive. J. Baltic Stud. 46, 319–336. Bonet, J.A., Gonzalez-Olabarria, J.R., De Aragon, J.M., 2014. Mushroom production as an alternative for rural development in a forested mountainous areas. J. Mt. Sci. 11 (2), 535–5433. Cai, M., Pettenella, D., Vidale, E., 2011. Income generation from wild mushrooms in marginal rural areas. For. Pol. Econ. 13, 221–226. CSB, 2009. NBG08. Employed by Economic Activity and Sex (NACE Rev 1.1), 1996–2009. http://data.csb.gov.lv/pxweb/en/Sociala/Sociala__ikgad__nodarb/?tablelist=true& rxid=cdcb978c-22b0-416a-aacc-aa650d3e2ce0, Accessed date: 4 July 2017. CSB, 2016. NBG02. Activity Rate, Employment Rate and Unemployment Rate (%). http://data.csb.gov.lv/pxweb/en/Sociala/Sociala__ikgad__nodarb/NB0020.px/? rxid=562c2205-ba57-4130-b63a-6991f49ab6fe, Accessed date: 4 July 2017. CSB, 2017a. ATD12. EXPORTS by COUNTRIES IN 2016 (CN at 8-digit Level; Euros, Kg and Supplementary Units). http://data.csb.gov.lv/pxweb/en/atirdz/atirdz__ detalizeta__8zim/?rxid=cdcb978c-22b0-416a-aacc-, Accessed date: 24 October 2017. CSB, 2017b. DS08. Average Monthly Wages and Salaries by Statistical Region by Quarter (in Euro). http://data.csb.gov.lv/pxweb/en/Sociala/Sociala__isterm__dsamaksa/?

8