افزایش سوپر مارکت ها و تغییر الگوهای مصرف خانوارهای روستایی فقیر : مطالعه موردی در منطقه ترانسکی، آفریقای جنوبی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|2987||2005||17 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 6825 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Food Policy, Volume 30, Issue 1, February 2005, Pages 97–113
Since the late 1990s, the number of supermarkets in South Africa has been steadily growing. Due to a more effective and efficient management and procurement system, the supermarkets can benefit from economics of scale and sell food at a relative low price. In this paper, we present a case study of two villages in the Transkei area of South Africa. In these poor rural communities, the majority of households now buy their main food items from supermarkets rather than from local shops and farmers. While presenting an important step towards livelihood development and food security, these supermarkets form also a strong competitor for local agricultural sales. The supermarkets provide many food items at lower prices. With an increase in income, the households look for variety and exotism in their food products, and will most likely find this in the supermarkets, rather than the local stores. We argue therefore that development programs should focus on the local growers’ access to the supermarket procurement systems.
The importance of supermarkets in developing countries has been a matter of increasing study and comments (see inter alias Balsevich et al., 2003, Boselie et al., 2003, Cacho, 2003, IFPRI, 2003, Reardon et al., 2003a, Reardon et al., 2003b and Weatherspoon and Reardon, 2003). At a different rate for countries of Latin America, Asia and Africa, supermarkets have become a place to shop for many households, and not only for the upper-income families (Reardon et al., 2003a). The reasons for success of the larger retailers are clear. They offer a greater selection of food. Prices of food products are often lower in supermarkets compared with the smaller local shops, especially for processed food products such as maize meal and bread. It is difficult for the small shops and local farmers to compete with the supermarkets, mainly because the latter benefit from significant economies of scale, good retail logistics, centralized procurement, consolidated distribution and better inventory management which enable them to cut down the prices (Reardon et al., 2003a and Reardon et al., 2003b). Urbanization and possibilities to provide a wider food variety at a lower price have initiated the growth of the supermarket sector in developing areas in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The steady rise in real per capita income, availability of electricity and refrigeration and increased access to transport (own cars and public services) have further catalysed its success (Reardon et al., 2003a). A recent paper of Weatherspoon and Reardon (2003) describes how the number of supermarkets in Africa has been rising since the mid-1990s. South Africa has the largest expansion in the region, with supermarkets on the rise in smaller towns and poorer areas. The share of supermarkets in food retail is estimated around 50–60% (depending on the source), while they only account for 2% of the stores (Weatherspoon and Reardon, 2003). Reardon et al., 2003a and Reardon et al., 2003b argue that in sales, the 1700 supermarkets in South Africa are comparable to 350,000 small local shops or spaza’s. Four main chains dominate the South African supermarket sector, taking about 90% of the supermarket sector, namely Shoprite, Pick n Pay, Spar and Woolworths (Weatherspoon and Reardon, 2003). Vendors and small shops make up the retail community in the rural village. Every village has its spaza’s (Zulu for “hidden”) shops. These mud-floor, one-room with shelves stores sell a selection of basic foodstuff; groceries as soap, toothpaste, tobacco; and, very important, soft drinks and beer. The range of products and brands and the selection of packages of different sizes is smaller in the local shops compared to the supermarkets. The prices in these local shops are high compared to national averages especially for processed food (Food Pricing Monitoring Committee, 2003). Yet supermarkets may also provide new opportunities for local producers of high-value fresh products. But the requirements in time, quality and standards present major obstacles for these producers, often smallholders (Boselie et al., 2003, IFPRI, 2003, Reardon et al., 2003a and Reardon et al., 2003b). Huges (in IFPRI, 2003) phrases it as follows: “The growth of supermarkets is good news for big farmers and efficient, well-organised farmers. For other it can be troublesome”. New opportunities for sales of farm product for local or export markets are very welcomed. Estimates of rural growth multipliers for case study areas in sub-Sahara Africa have been generally low, especially when compared to Asia. Reasons for this include the low production capacity due to the lack of production resources, labour and infrastructure along with institutional problems resulting in limited local marketing for locally produced goods (see, e.g., Timmer, 1995, Timmer, 1997, Eicher and Staatz, 1998, Mellor, 1999, Ashley and Maxwell, 2001, De Janvry and Sadoulet, 2002 and Dorward et al., 2004). The weakest link in the multiplier story is that for the local economy to benefit an increase of the households’ income should lead to increased demand for locally produced (!) products and goods. Engel’s law explicitly expressed the decrease in the share of food in the total expenditure of a household at higher income levels. Yet consumers inherently search for diversity even within their food purchases (Bennet’s law). An increase in income may facilitate access to more markets on which a wider variety of goods and services is available (Timmer, 1997). This indicates that other goods may be preferred, or that with an increased income the consumption basket is increasingly diversified with other and even luxury goods. The variety of the consumption basket increases to the extent that consumers seek variety. The demand for variety and exotic (imported) products has been widely reported (see Kahn (1995) for references). The problem for a significant local production response is, however, that local growers and tradesmen in many developing areas seldom have the financial and infrastructural means to provide a variety of goods and brands. Many of the households will therefore shop outside the village, spending their income on products imported in the local economy. In this paper, we provide a case study of the purchasing patterns of rural households in South Africa. We argue that given the high incidence of poverty households maximize the utility of their income and carefully plan their shopping. Studies have shown the importance of supermarkets as place to shop for processed food which households go and buy in bulk outside the village. Yet literature supports that supermarkets in South Africa are supplied by large commercial farms. Therefore, many of the processed food products are imported in the local economy, or in other words, it is unclear that the households’ income spent contributes to the development of local growers. We focus on the hypothesis that supermarkets provide households a choice of cheaper food, and that the increasing importance of supermarkets may reduce the local demand for food, thus limit the potential for local growers. We analyse the situation in two villages in the Transkei area, a former homeland of South Africa which is now part of the Eastern Cape Province. Data on the main items households purchased in a month were gathered for families in Xume and Luzie. The results show that the purchasing patterns of poor households in the sample do not change significantly when income levels rise; the income being mainly spent on basic food items. It becomes furthermore clear that a large group of households go shopping outside the village, mostly in supermarkets in the nearest centre. The plan of the paper is as follows. First, we describe the case study area, followed by a review of the methodology used. Then the data of the expenditure patterns of 81 households recorded is used to explore the shopping pattern from which the results are presented in Result section. The section thereafter discusses the results. Finally, comes the conclusion section.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The findings would suggest that the local shops and local growers are unable to compete with the supermarkets that are ever-growing in number and importance; not only in the case study area, but also in many developing areas (described in Weatherspoon and Reardon, 2003). But whether supermarkets have a positive or negative impact for rural development remains an open question. Von Braun (IFPRI, 2003) indicates that the gains for the poor from supermarket expansion depends on their net benefits as consumers through prices, time costs and food safety, on their access to markets as growers and on employment skills and wage effects in the whole value-added food chain. On the one hand the importance of supermarkets for the food security of the households should not be underestimated. The supermarket sector provides quality food at a lower price than other shopping outlets. Buying the food instead of producing it themselves gives the households labour time to invest in other income generating activities. Timmer (1997) proposed a theoretical model showing that agricultural transformation is accompanied with a decreased diversity of agricultural production on the farms, an increased diversity within the agricultural sector and an increased variety of food consumed in the households. The reason for agricultural production thereby shifts from subsistence to specialised production of a limited variety of crops or livestock on-farm. This transformation is however only possible if rural households find a cheap market to buy their daily required food. Supermarkets can play this role and may furthermore provide a new market for the produce of the growers. Yet as discussed above in the study area poor development of the production capacity and trade deficiency prevent the community from fully benefiting from these new possibilities. On the downside, the money spent in the supermarkets represent expenditure outside the local economy, with a depressing effect on the multipliers as they are direct competitors to local sales. Supermarkets have taken over the role of the local traders also for these households in the sample who have a low level of income. As shown a large part of the available income is spent on bulk goods, bought once or twice a month in a supermarket. The fresh fruits and vegetables are produced from their own garden. In conclusion, a major challenge lies in linking the local growers and entrepreneurs to these new distribution channels. Governments and development practitioners should recognise the growing trend of supermarket development and have a supporting role in integrating smallholders into the new supply chains. Further research is needed into the development of a pro-poor policy, which should concentrate on improved access to assets, increased productivity of the assets held by the poor, institutional development for increased marketing and reduced vulnerability to price shocks. Although promising initiatives in this respect, the impact of the AgriBEE on small-scale South African farmers and entrepreneurs remains uncertain.