Political Economy of Transnational Food Chains

Owner	Bachelor Future Planet Studies
Coordinator	dr. R.J. Pistorius
Part of	Exchange Programme Faculty of Science, specialisation BSc Future Planet Studies, year 1Bachelor Future Planet Studies, major Future Society, year 2

Course manual 2020/2021

Course content

What room does the organization and regulation of transnational food production and consumption and provision leave for sustainable transitions, or should the transnational food system be considered as in impediment to sustainability? This course helps students study the workings and structure of the world food system and use this knowledge to explore options for and barriers to sustainable food production.

Students are introduced to the contemporary organization and regulation of transnational food production, provision and consumption. Key determinants of the shifting organization and coherence of food chains will be discussed, such as dominant narratives about trade and the concept of competitive advantage. We will also discuss the growing concentration and specialization in food production, the role of transnational regulatory regimes, the impact of new technologies on food production, as well as global demographic trends, and climate change.

Next, we will study how transnational food production, provision and consumption can be understood in terms of 'global food and/or value chains'. These help us to frame unfamiliar social-political and ecological (climatic) dilemmas and challenges related to the coordination or governance of transnational organization of food production. Think of social- economic and political dilemmas and challenges such as 'land-grabbing', the growing physical and psychological alienation between consumers and producers, growing concerns related to human health and food safety. 

In the final part of the course students will investigate case-wise what hinders and what can support sustainability within existing transnational food chains. Cases will focus on local dynamics in food production; alternative (transnational) production and distribution networks; new consumer awareness; alternative regulatory frameworks and sustainable technologies. The research methods will include stakeholder analysis and Food Chain Analysis (FCA).

This course allows students to generate a better understanding of the world food system through the lens of political and economic structures supporting contemporary transnational food chains.

Study materials

Literature

• Literature in Canvas. 

Syllabus

• Syllabus in Canvas.

Objectives

• Students are able to understand and apply basic concepts in the contemporary transnational organization, trade and consumption of food production and provision.
• Students are able to investigate recent political and economic shifts in food production and provision associated with globalization, regionalization, localization and specialization.
• Students are able to analyse new global-local dynamics associated with the increasing consumer demand for and promotion of food produced sustainably.
• Students are able to understand and apply two research methods of (a) Food System Approach (FSA) and (b) concepts of ‘coordination’ to analyze the political economy and governance of food chains and sustainable adjustments to those.
• Students are able to critically analyse and compare scientific literature and media expressions (journals, internet footage, websites) on organization, trade and consumption of food production and provision.

Teaching methods

• Lecture
• Seminar
• Working independently on e.g. a project or thesis
• Supervision/feedback meeting

First, in Lectures 1 and 2 we will go back in history and explore the emergence of industrial, intensive agriculture in conjunction with the emergence of economic thinking on the exchange and production of food. Four major schools of thought will be explored (and related to contemporary policy-making in global food trade): classical and neo-classical economic thinking, (neo-)Marxism, Keynesianism, and neo-liberalism. 

Second, lectures 3 and 4 will offer information on the origin, workings and economic philosophy of Global food and Global value chains. These will help students to map global structures in food trade, provision and consumption and detect possible inroads per chain-element for desired structural change (such as poverty alleviation or sustainable production).   In doing so we will  analyze 'agro-industry' in terms of its economic and political structure: where is the money earned?, by whom?, who decides?  In Lecture 5 the knowledge generated in the previous 4 lectures will be applied to one or two case studies.

The Individual Assignment II (Paper on the political economy of agriculture) allows you to display your ability to apply the main theoretical concepts and theories as discussed in Lectures I-IV to a self-chosen issue. 

Group Assignments I (Portfolio plan), III (Fact sheet) and IV (Research report) are not to 'test' your knowledge in terms of memory and reproduction of facts, but support you in your endeavor to thoroughly jointly analyse a food production chain of your choice. They are described in detail under tabs 'Assignments' and 'Module'.

You will work in small teams of 4-5 per working sub-group (S1-4) which requires a dedicated and well managed division of labor.  There are 4 working groups, each divided into 5 sub-groups. We will work in 3 consecutive working-group sessions where you will get the full support of 2 excellent assistant teachers: Jordy Willems and Misha Velthuis (and myself as a back-bencher). Consider these meetings as scientific 'staff' meetings - every question is possible provided it contributes to your output, and is well prepared. You are jointly responsible for the Assignments, except for the personal reflection (Assignment IV). 

Learning activities

Attendance

Programme's requirements concerning attendance (OER-B):

• Participation in fieldwork is compulsory and cannot be replaced by assignments or other courses.
• In case of practical sessions, the student is obliged to attend at least of 90% of the sessions and to prepare himself adequately, unless indicated otherwise in the course manual. In case the student attends less than 90%, the practical sessions should be redone entirely.
• In case of tutorials/seminars with assignments, the student is obliged to attend at least 7 out of 8 seminars and to prepare thoroughly for these meetings, unless indicated otherwise in the course manual. If the course has more than 8 seminars, the student can miss up to 1 extra meeting for every (part of) 8 tutorials/seminars. If the students attends less than the mandatory tutorials/seminars, the course cannot be completed.

Additional requirements for this course:

Attendance during tutorials is mandatory.
You are allowed to miss one tutorial, provided you announce your absence to one of the teaching assistants (Willems and Velthuis) 24 hours before.

 

 

Assessment

Item and weight	Details
Final grade
Final grade

The assessment of the course is structured around a Group Portfolio (Assignments I , III and IV, together 60%) and an Individual assignment II (Paper on the political economy of agriculture, 40%).

The Portfolio exercise addresses three interrelated challenges in respect. First, at the simplest level, it gives you practice in professional skills such as information-gathering, networking and writing for a non-scholarly audience. Second, it will give you an insight into the more subtle and complex matter of how to streamline academic findings into non-scholarly products without distorting them, as well as conversely, translating society’s need for answers to important questions into manageable research projects. Going from writing a fact sheet to a research design, and from the research design back to interacting with societal actors or to delivering a dissemination product, you will come to experience and reflect on the interaction between political science research and political practice. Finally, working on the portfolio will require you to collaborate with others. Former students often face a striking disconnect between the almost exclusive emphasis on individual performance in their educational experience and a pervasive need to collaborate, and be judged on collective performance, in practically every type of professional environment afterwards.

The group portfolio provides an opportunity to learn to deal with different disciplinary backgrounds, working styles and deadline management within an academic environment, where the stakes are real but manageable.

The Group portfolio will be graded as a whole and no grades are provided for the separate assignments. Feedback live and on request in written form will be provided for Assignment I / II, and Assignment IV (see below).

Students work in 4 small groups of 4 and one of 5 per working group in completing the Assignments. There are four working groups (S1-4)

N.B. 1: You do not have to revise your portfolio plan or Fact Sheet on the basis of feedback received, but if you do, please mark it clearly as ‘Revised Portfolio Plan’ and/or ‘Revised Fact Sheet’ in your Finished Portfolio.

N.B. 2: If your submission for Assignment IV B does not lend itself to embedding within the Portfolio document, for instance because it is a podcast or video-clip, provide a clear link to the dissemination product within the Portfolio. Please triple-check that the link works from different devices, so your grading teacher will definitely be able to open it.

N.B. 3: ‘Live feed-back’ implies that sub-groups will be invited in timeslots of 20 minutes per slot: during the hours reserved for working groups (‘werkcolleges’). There will be no plenary working group sessions. The sub-group sessions (no grade) are to help you further in completing the assignments: sharing of ideas, discussing intermediate output, discussing sub-group-interaction, asking questions on the focus of the lecture series etc., all are welcome. A good preparation for a working group session is mandatory and may consist of: (a) a brief summary of the material collected, written, planned – you may send this on beforehand to save time; (b) a consistent series of questions for the teacher; (c) a planning. Sending in materials for discussion to the teacher should take place 48 hours on beforehand. Brief e-mail feedback can be obtained (although not as a replacement of the live feed-back session), but should be confined to a ‘reasonable amount’ of mails.

 

Assessment diagram

Leerdoel:	Assignment I	Assignment II:	Assignment III:
#1.		Yes	Yes
#2.	Yes	Yes	Yes
#3.	Yes	Yes	Yes
#4.			Yes
#5.			Yes

Students that were enrolled in the course in previous years

n/a

Inspection of assessed work

Registration of theme for group portfolio via Canvas by 2 November, 23.59.

Group composition made available via Canvas by Wednesday 4 November, 23.59.


Assignment I (the Portfolio Plan) to be a submitted by any group member via Canvas by Monday 9 November, 23.59.

Assignment II (the individual essay) to be a submitted via Canvas by Sunday 22 November, 23.59.

Assignment III (the fact sheet) to be a submitted by any group member via Canvas by Monday 30 November, 23.59.

Finished Portfolio (assignment I, III, IV) to be submitted by any group member via Canvas by 18 December, 23.59.

Assignment V Individual reflection to be a submitted via Canvas by 20 December, 23.59. thus not included in the Portfolio.


E-mail feedback can be obtained as well, but should be confined to a ‘reasonable amount’, to be determined by the assistant teachers.
 

Assignments

GROUP Assignment I - Portfolio Plan (deadline 9 November)

This assignment will also be explained at the end of Lecture 1, 28 October.

The purpose of the Portfolio Plan is to get you to think through in advance:

(i) how to create a joint portfolio that displays coherence between the different assignments, so that the whole adds up to more than the sum of its parts;

(ii) how to collaborate in such a way that you leverage on each other’s strengths, and work around different individual deadlines and commitments;

(iii) how to plan ahead and have a plan B, especially in relation to Assignment IV.

In addition, presenting a plan will provide your teacher with the opportunity to give some early feedback and allow you to adjust accordingly.

 

The Assignment

The Portfolio Plan should be a straight-forward document of max. 800 words. It should contain:

• A brief motivated choice of the food item 300 words.
• A brief description of the objectives of your portfolio - the way you plan to handle assignments III, IV A/B, and how you see them connecting to each other (250 words)
• How you plan to communicate and collaborate with each other (250 words). Please think of a division of labour and associated tasks, and how you as a group deal with group members that fail to meet their tasks. To date, an optional sub-group ‘team charter’ (perhaps even signed by all) may help to formalize team roles, mission, basic rules of engagement, conflict resolution, etc. A brief sub-group discussion on the content of the team charter will entice you to think about questions such as: What are my qualities, and what can I offer the team? What are my pitfalls and to what extent should I share these with the team? What are my challenges and what do I need from other team members? What are my success criteria (e.g. I want to score an A). The ‘team charter’ does not fall within this Assignment 1, but can be used as input for your Individual Reflection (Assignment V).

 

Grading criteria

Your Portfolio Plan will be graded at the end of the course:

• originality: depth and contribution: level of ambition of your plan and its implementation, in terms of creativity and innovation as well as academic depth and solidity;
• coherence: envisaged and successfully executed substantive linkages between the fact sheet, the research design and the field visit or dissemination assignment;
• planning: demonstrated ability of group members to coordinate and collaborate, good forward planning, contingency provisions in case the plans go awry;

• presentation: the ability to submit reader-friendly, well-structured, meticulous work within tight deadlines.

 

Submission

Assignment I (Portfolio Plan) is to be a submitted by a designated group member via Canvas by 9 November, 23.59.

• There will be brief live feedback on Assignment I from teachers during working group sessions.

 

==================================================================================================

Word count: 1200 (10% margin)

Deadline: 24 Nov 2020 23.00 hours

This assignment will be explained in working group session No. 2. 

Goal: This assignment serves for you to engage with the dilemma of continuity and change, and particularly, requires you to mobilize lessons from various theories and concepts to explain why change is occurring or not occurring in a self-chosen food issue. Food issues may relate to sustainability, food security, food regulation, poverty, resource depletion, etc.

Instruction: In week 1, 2 and 3 we have discussed several narratives about global agricultural trade, ranging from the arguments for liberalization as they have been made by classical economists like Ricardo and neoliberal neoclassical economists like Milton Friedman, to the more interventionist pleas for protectionism (rooted in Keynesian ideas about state intervention and more critical (Marxist) analyses of domestic/international exploitation of nature and labor).

In this essay you get to pick one of these narratives, get more acquainted with it (e.g. by reading some of the extra suggested readings), and apply it to a food issue of your choice.

To help you get started (and provide some additional structure to the narratives provided) we suggest you choose  one of the two main categories presented in Jennifer Clap's "Food security and international trade" (required reading of week 3): "trade as a threat" or "trade as an opportunity".

Choosing "trade as an opportunity" you could for instance use some of the (neo-)classical narratives/ideas provided in this course, to analyze the history, emergence, and potentially beneficial effects of the emergence of horticulture exports from East Africa to (e.g.) the Netherlands. Choosing "trade as a threat" you could draw on some of the more critical, interventionist/protectionist narratives to analyze why such (or other) developments could be reason for concern. In both cases, key follow-up questions are of course: threats/opportunities to whom/what? Who is doing what in response to these threats/opportunities?

N.B.1: you are allowed (but not required) to pick the crop of your group assignment.

N.B.2: Although we suggest you use the (basic categorization of the) text of Jennifer Clap as a starting point, we encourage you to build your case using other (required/suggested/additional) readings and arguments.

• Introduction:
  • Shortly introduce your self-chosen food issue. What are the trends? E.g. in terms of (share of total) trade flows? In terms of prices?
  • Connect the introduction to your basic focus: are you highlighting threats or opportunities?
• Theory:
  • Explain the basic theoretical insights that help you analyze the chosen issue.
  • For sources you are recommended to use one or more 'Background sources' (the yellow ppt pages) and you must use at least two ‘Weekly reads’ (the green ppt pages) of the first three lectures (see the uploaded ppt presentations in Canvas). Other / more sources are welcome of course.
• Application of theory:
  • Explain how the chosen theory helps you to better understand the dynamics of that particular food issue.
  • Clarify what we can learn from your application.
• Conclusion:
  • Succinctly repeat your most important arguments.

 

Submission: On Canvas

General Requirements: Each assignment should have the student’s name and student number, a title, and a list of references in APA- or Harvard-style. Assignments not written in correct English or Dutch run the risk of not being graded and/or to have points deducted because of language mistakes. 

Evaluation: This second assignment accounts for 40% of the final grade for the whole course. Handing in an incomplete assignment or no assignment at all will result in a ‘0’. Failing to submit it on time, results in a deduction of points. Students receive a brief written feedback on this assignment via Canvas.

Grading criteria

• reliability: the information in a briefing note must be accurate and come from dependable sources. Triangulate if things are unclear, be explicit about any ambiguous or missing information that is relevant to your boss. Plain language should be used, accurate but without jargon. 
• conciseness: this means more than just brevity. Every word should be used as efficiently as possible. Keep your boss firmly in mind and include only what matters to her.

• fitness for purpose: the paper should be able to fulfill its purpose for your boss, include all relevant information and only relevant information.
• reflection: the justification should make clear how you came to choose your  empirics and theoretical  or conceptual vantage point, what you left out, what problems you encountered and how you resolved them.

=====================================================================================================

Assignment III, The Fact Sheet

Deadline: 30 November, 23:59

This assignment will be explained at the end of Lecture 5.

What is a Fact Sheet?

A fact sheet, also referred to as information sheet or briefing note (but not a full policy brief) is a short paper that quickly and effectively informs a senior decision-maker about an issue. Fact sheets are typically written for senior-level decision-makers who:

• have to keep track of many, often unrelated, issues;
• may not be familiar with the issues and may not have any related background;
• for whatever reason, cannot spend time doing their own research;
• need a capsule version of the key facts and considerations about an issue.

Fact sheets usually deal with "issues"—subjects of debate. But fact sheets are also prepared for any topic a senior decision-maker needs to be informed about: a situation, a report, an action by another political actor—in fact, anything that a political actor needs to deals with.

Note: This fact sheet is a stepping stone for subsequent assignment IV in which you will carry out a Food Chain Analysis (presented in lecture 3 and 4)  which we will use as a method to map and analyze the problem you present in this fact sheet.

The Assignment

Imagine you are putting together a fact sheet for your boss, on an issue within your chosen theme. You get to decide who your boss is: she could be a Minister, a European Commissioner, a Chief Executive Officer of a multinational corporation, or the Director of an international NGO. You also have to decide why your boss needs this factsheet. It can be a call for attention for a looming crisis related to one of the food items to which she urgently needs to respond, or a plea for a more sustainable use of the food item of your choice. Before you start writing, be sure you are clear about the points you will cover and how you will structure your information.

The 2-page fact sheet (max 700 words) should start by stating its purpose and addressee, and determine on the basis of Figure 1 below (Berkum, S. et al. 2018) what areas in the Food System Map are involved, and why they are relevant (ppt drawn from lecture . To understand the design and workings of the Food System Map you are requested to read Chapter 4 ‘Mapping the Food System’, In: Berkum, S. van, Dengerink, J. and Ruben, R., (2018). The food systems approach: sustainable solutions for a sufficient supply of healthy food. Wageningen, Wageningen Economic Research, Memorandum 2018-064. pp 10-16. This report is also your read for Lecture 3 on 12 November. [link] (Links to an external site.)

In addition to the actual factsheet, you should prepare a 1-page (max 300 words) justification, which explains why you think the information you presented is useful to your boss, what choices you made, what sources you used, and how you dealt with the trade-off between brevity and scientific accuracy.

Finally you should explain to your boss from what conceptual or theoretical background you are writing the Fact Sheet and how this frame determines your view on the issue. For example, you may address food shortages from a neo-liberal perspective (and not a neo-Marxist), or you may resort to Keynes to underscore a plea for more public food governance. (max 300 words)

Example of fact sheet issue:

Farmers in various EU countries are complaining about the quality of the Dutch onion species. They seem much more vulnerable to black mold than in previous years. The French Ministry has asked the EU to step-up national phytosanitary inspections of all Dutch onions at the French borders in spite of the free internal market regulations. Dutch onion exports (95% of total production) will be affected in various ways...

Grading criteria

• reliability: the information in a briefing note must be accurate and come from dependable sources. Triangulate if things are unclear, be explicit about any ambiguous or missing information that is relevant to your boss. Plain language should be used, accurate but without jargon. Design your fact sheet for maximum readability (using white space, subheadings, lists, font, visuals etc.).
• conciseness: this means more than just brevity. Every word should be used as efficiently as possible. Keep your boss firmly in mind and include only what matters to her.
• fitness for purpose: the fact sheet should be able to fulfill its purpose for your boss, include all relevant information and only relevant information.
• reflection: the justification should make clear how you came to choose your  empirics and theoretical vantage point, what you left out, what problems you encountered and how you resolved them.

Submission

Assignment III (Fact Sheet) is to be a submitted by a designated group member via Canvas by 30 November, 23.59.

• Brief written feedback will be provided by the assistant teachers.

Feedback

The role of the assistant teachers and the lecturer is to entice you to strike a balance between the information offered through the reading list and the lectures. At the same time deviating from these sources is encouraged as far as it further enhances the quality of the product as formulated in the grading criteria.

==================================================================================================

GROUP Assignment IV A or IV B - Paper / Dissemination Product (deadline 18 December)

Assignment IV: (A) Designing a research proposal as a follow-up of your Fact Sheet, or (B) producing a dissemination product as a follow-up of your Fact Sheet

This assignment will be explained in working group session No. 4.

You either do Assignment A designing a research paper, or this Assignment B, producing a dissemination product. You can switch from one to the other without seeking permission from your teacher, as long as you stick to the deadline. Both assignments will be in working group session No. 4.

Submission

Submission of Assignment IV (A or B) by a designated group member via Canvas by 18 December, 23.59.

• Brief e-mail feedback can be obtained from the assistant teachers, but should be confined to a ‘reasonable amount’ of mails.

Feedback

As with Assignment II, the role of the assistant teachers and the lecturer is to entice you to strike a balance between the information offered through the reading list and the lectures. At the same time deviating from these sources is encouraged as far as it further enhances the quality of the product as formulated in the grading criteria below.

Ad. IV A) Paper on food chain analysis including policy recommendations

Your joint Fact Sheet (Assignment III), and the brief feedback on it, has probably caused you to become aware of unanswered questions relating to your theme. Let us assume your boss has become convinced of the urgency of the food issue you raised in Assignment III. In fact, she is convinced that further broader research should be initiated. She appoints you and your team to draft a brief paper closing with at least three policy recommendations.

For this task, being Assignment IV, you need: (a) to think through how to go from the issue raised by our real-world observations to a research question and proposal that lend to being answered through academically sound methods and  (b) with reference to a specific theory or concept within a theory as outlined in your Individual Essay (Assignment II).

The Assignment

The paper should consist of:

• An introduction: what is the background of this research paper? You obviously can draw from the Fact Sheet (Assignment III) but it is useful to add arguments why (your boss is convinced) it is necessary to investigate the issue in depth.
• A brief literature review: what existing knowledge is there on this phenomenon, where can it be found? Can you discern a literature gap?
• And what do we not know yet, that your research design will tackle? There might be other ways to underline the relevance of your research, e.g. the ambition to contribute to a more sustainable production of a specific food item. Here again your joint Fact Sheet will be of use. It is advisable to frame your paper in terms of a Food Chain analysis as was done in the Fact Sheet. Exceptions are possible though, but please consult your tutor.
• An over-arching research question, possibly with some sub-questions, possibly with hypotheses. This research question should go beyond the ‘problem’ stated in the Fact Sheet (e.g. The market share of fair-trade chocolate bars is stagnating). That is: it should invite to a structured investigation of that problem (e.g. Which (f)actors in the chocolate chain contribute to the stagnating market share of fair-trade chocolate in Country?)
• An argumentation of the research method of your choice. You may draw from the chain analyses offered in Lecture 4 (Global Value Chain Approach and/or perhaps even a Global Food Systems Approach). Please indicate why and how such approach is suitable, what these methods’ drawbacks are, and a discussion of the sources that would be used to generate a complete picture of (the workings of) the chain/problem approach chosen.( e.g. you need to do a Global chocolate Value Chain analysis to analyze the stagnating market share of fair-trade chocolate in Country)
• Indicate from what narrative (e.g. 'trade as an opportunity', vs 'trade as a threat' as treated in Lecture 3), and / or trade theory (classical, neo-classical, neo-liberal, etc.) treated in Lectures 1 and 2) are most relevant for answering your research question and explain why. You may use material from one or more of the group members' individual essay(s) (Assignment II). ( e.g. certain neo-liberal trade policies since the 1980s (indicate which) have caused the global chocolate market prices to plummet causing large a price differentiation between non-fair trade and fair trade chocolate).  
• Indicate who decides, and what are the power relations within the (Global) Value Chain (GVC, as discussed in lecture 4) of your research subject (food item)? How are these power relations expressed in the Chain (e.g. by means of a particular chain relation (modular, captive etc.) as described by Gereffi et al. 2005), and how they may hinder or perhaps help to solve the problem discussed in your research question. ( e.g. public pressure on key chocolate processors may mitigate current 'captive' chain relations).  
• Optional: Explore what elements in of a Global Value Chain (GVC) (see also lecture 4) would further be required to solve the problem discussed in your research question. Here you may argue as well why a GVC analysis does not (fully) suffice and what additional social and environmental factors need to be incorporated in the GFS analysis and why. As this additional analysis goes beyond the scope of this Assignment IV this section can be formulated as an advice to your boss.  
• The paper should close with a brief conclusion (300 words max) and a brief section (max 200 words) with at least three policy recommendations allowing your boss to take action in the near future.
• The paper should be 4500 words with a 10% margin excluding appendixes and literature list.
• There are many general methods books you can draw on (but not necessary), but they can be rigidly prescriptive and sometimes offer conflicting advice. J.D. Creswell (2014), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, chapters 5-7. (available online) is recommended for being quite common-sensical and flexible in its approach. http://fe.unj.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Research-Design_Qualitative-Quantitative-and-Mixed-Methods-Approaches.pdfhttp://englishlangkan.com/produk/E%20Book%20Research%20Design%20Cressweell%202014.pdf(Links to an external site.)
•  

Grading criteria

• research topic and question(s): clarity, originality, motivation and relevance
• literature review: adequate choice of literature; clarity and relevance of sources chosen
• theory/concepts: a relevant theoretical or conceptual framework compatible with the research question(s) 
• research design: clarity of description; appropriateness of design and method(s)
• writing: readability, academic style, and referencing, coherence.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ad. IV B) The Dissemination Product to communicate the food chain problem

This assignment will be explained in working group session No. 4.

Let us again assume your boss has become convinced of the urgency of the food issue you raised in Fact Sheet Assignment III. She now plans to lobby for the cause raised in your Fact Sheet. She appoints you and your team to draft a dissemination product which will convince friends and foes of the urgency of the matter. In fact, this Assignment is an elaboration of the Fact Sheet with the important difference that it contains sufficient data and arguments to convince even the most ardent sceptic. 

The Assignment

In this assignment, you will offer a substantive message within the theme of your choice, informed by academic empirical and theoretical insights, but targeted at a specific audience outside of the university (citizens, policy-makers, other professionals). The product may take the form of a policy brief, an NGO campaign plan, a consultancy report to a company, a podcast or a video-clip. Make sure the subject falls within the conceptual scope of the course – the political economy of transnational food chains.

Think about what you are trying to achieve, getting an issue on the agenda or influencing a particular group’s opinion or behaviour, and adjust your format and language accordingly. You can make use of the Fact Sheet, but only use it in so far as it fits your message and format. You are encouraged to package your product creatively, using ICT and/or artistic expression, keeping in mind the audience targeted.

Before choosing your dissemination product, think through the following questions:

• What is the key message you would like to convey?
• What different audiences could there be for your message, and which group do you want to prioritize?
• What is the theoretical or conceptual vantage point of your message. You use a concept (e.g. 'trade as an opportunity', vs 'trade as a threat' as treated in Lecture 3), or theory (the ones treated in Lectures 1 and 2) the paper will be written, and why. You may use material from one or more of the group members' individual essay (Assignment 2). This section should contain at least 1000 words. 
• Why should they know what you have to say? What (if anything) should they do with the information?
• What are the characteristics of your target group? What means of communication do they use, what kinds of decisions do they get to make, what kinds of arguments appeal to them?
• What is the customary and appropriate style (language, lay-out, length, visuals) for the product you have chosen?
• How do you balance between fact and claim? What do you ‘show’ to the audience and what is it that you suggest when you use images or text?
• What is your personal point of view and to what extent does it interfere with your selection of information? What is included and what is excluded?

Suggestions:

• Think of how to visualize and/or present a merely abstract theme as the political economy of transnational food chains.
• In terms of quantity this assignment will be judged on the basis of the personal assessment of the grading teacher. There are a few rules of thumb you may use though: a brief documentary may be about 10-15 minutes. A podcast about 20 minutes. Please don't underestimate the amount of time required to transfer your knowledge into multimedia. 
• All sources used should be mentioned separately in a separate document (Word), including most relevant URLs, source persons, and grey literature.
• Make sure you comply to copy-right rules when you plan to use the product for further disseminated outside this course.

Grading criteria

• originality, level of ambition: have you come up with a message that says something new and important about (an aspect of) your chosen theme?
• message: clarity, relevance and persuasiveness of the message you are conveying audience: have you chosen your audience strategically? Is what you are asking or recommending something they are able, and may be willing to do?
• documentation and evidence: are your claims reliable, and how can you prove their validity? Do you use vague language to foster your message, or sound sources that speak for themselves? In case you choose for a multimedia expression, you are encouraged to add a list of documents which support your message(s).
• fitness for purpose: have you chosen a product that is appropriate to the ways in which your group is used to receiving information? Are the language, style and visuals coherent with the usual norms for this type of product, and with your audience?
• use of literature, theory and key concepts: You should be able to use at least two concepts or one theory which are key in this course (e.g.  ‘Commodity Value Chain’ (as a concept), or 'food regime theory', or 'neo-liberalism') including an active and traceable use of the literature associated.

====================================================================================================

Final GROUP Portfolio (Assignments I, III and IV) (deadline 18 December)

Finished Portfolio to be submitted by any group member via Canvas by 18 December, 23.59. The portfolio will be graded as a whole including feedback. Feedback will not be provided for pre-final versions of the Finished Portfolio.

N.B. 1: You do not have to revise your portfolio plan or Fact Sheet on the basis of feedback received, but if you do, please mark it clearly as ‘Revised Portfolio Plan’ and ‘Revised Fact Sheet’ in your Finished Portfolio-set .

N.B. 2: If your submission for Assignment IV B does not lend itself to embedding within the Portfolio document, for instance because it is a podcast or video-clip, provide a clear link to the dissemination product within the Portfolio. Please triple-check that the link works from different devices, so your grading teacher will definitely be able to open it.

N.B. 3: ‘Live feed-back’ implies that sub-groups will be invited in timeslots of 20 minutes per slot: during the hours reserved for working groups (‘werkcolleges’). There will be no plenary working group sessions. The sub-group sessions (no grade) are to help you further in completing the assignments: sharing of ideas, discussing intermediate output, discussing sub-group-interaction, asking questions on the focus of the lecture series etc., all are welcome. A good preparation for a working group session is mandatory and may consist of: (a) a brief summary of the material collected, written, planned – you may send this on beforehand to save time; (b) a consistent series of questions for the teacher; (c) a planning. Sending in materials for discussion to the teacher should take place 48 hours on beforehand. Brief e-mail feedback can be obtained (although not as a replacement of the live feed-back session), but should be confined to a ‘reasonable amount’ of mails.

=====================================================================================================

INDIVIDUAL Assignment V - Individual Reflection (deadline 20 December)  (0.5 bonus option)

You are asked to write and upload an individual reflection on the learning process and quality of collaboration after submitting your portfolio. The individual reflections are read, but not graded. They serve two purposes.

First, the reflection will provide an opportunity for you to signal to your teacher whether there were obstacles or mitigating circumstances that impeded the work on the portfolio, but that you could not indicate in the portfolio itself, such as for instance the illness or dropping out of one of your group members. This is also the space for you to let us know if any of the group members were not pulling their weight, and letting others do all the work. Your portfolio will receive a collective grade and feedback, but the grade can be adjusted downwards for individuals in case of clear signs of free-riding behaviour, as indicated by all other members of the group. It can also be adjusted upwards for individuals who are unanimously pointed out as having done significantly more or better work than everyone else.

Beyond giving teachers an insight into obstacles and group dynamics, the individual reflection is also an important tool for yourself. Pedagogical studies (McCrindle and Christensen, Learning and Instruction, 1995; Sumsion and Fleet, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 1996; Wagenaar, Teaching Sociology, 1984) have shown that explicit written reflection on the learning process gives students insight into their cognitive strategies, as well as helping them retain what they have learnt. In other words, your individual reflection will help you to better remember both your substantive learning about Transnational Politics and your experiences with collaborative work.

The individual reflection can be brief, 300 to 400 words.

0.5 penalty or bonus point: Not submitting an individual reflection may result in a deduction of max 0.5 grade point from your final grade (of the entire module).  At the same time the reflection may raise your final grade with max 0.5 grade point in case your can convincingly explain why the group process(es) in Assignment II (Fact Sheet) and IV A/B (Paper) suppressed your weighted average in a manner beyond your control or responsibility.   

Submission

Individual submission of Assignment V via Canvas by 20 December, 23.59. Do not include Assignment IV with the Finished Portfolio.

 

===================================================================================================

Final grade, resit and suspension

Finished Portfolio's are to be submitted at 20 December 2020 Final Grades are available at January 15 2021: 23:59 latest. 

Grades below 5.5 require a resit of all members of the sub-group delivering the Finished Portfolio.

The suspension period is 3 weeks (21 days, which is 4 February 2021), starting from the date of reception of the final grade (15 January 2021). The resit applies to all members of the sub-group delivering the Finalized Portfolio. Suspended Portfolio’s are to be delivered through Canvas.  

Grading of suspended Portfolio's will be max 7 days. Hence reception of final grade of suspended papers is 11 February 2021. 

Fraud and plagiarism

The 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' applies to this course. This will be monitored carefully. Upon suspicion of fraud or plagiarism the Examinations Board of the programme will be informed. For the 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' see: www.student.uva.nl

Course structure

Timetable

The schedule for this course is published on DataNose.

Honours information

n/a

Additional information

All study materials (syllabus/literature) are provided through Canvas. 

Last year's course evaluation

n/a

Contact information

Coordinator

• dr. R.J. Pistorius

M. Velthuis (m.velthuis@uva.nl)

J. Willems (j.willems2@uva.nl)