Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451

www.elsevier.com/locate/geoforum

Ecological entrepreneurship: sustainable development in

local communities through quality food production
and local branding q
Terry Marsden *, Everard Smith
Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and Society, School of City and Regional Planning, Glamorgan Building,
King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff University, Wales, CF 103 WA, UK

Received 5 August 2003; received in revised form 25 May 2004

Abstract

The paper explores the importance of specialised networks in shaping local/regional responses to the deepening crisis of conven-
tional agriculture in the EU, as well as potentially creating a more sustainable platform for rural development. The emphasis will be
on the problem-solving aspects of network creation and maintenance within a broader and not necessarily supportive competitive
and regulatory environment. This involves examining, both over time and space, how networks function to shape knowledge and
create a competitive willingness to innovate to achieve mutually beneficial goals. Through a process which we call ecological entre-
preneurship, key actors facilitate sustainable development in the countryside by a combination of fragmentation, specialisation and
quality building strategies. We empirically explore these evolutionary and spatial factors through two farming-centred networks—
an organic farming network in the UK: the Graig Farm Producer Group; and a regional quality brand in the Netherlands: the Wad-
dengroup Foundation.
The analysis of these two networks is used to examine in-depth the significance and construction of the social and spatial milieu
for providing the individual and collective capabilities to establish viable problem-solving responses. This raises questions of: (i) how
such networks are and can be sustained over time; (ii) the extent to which there are common evolutionary pathways which reproduce
and embed problem-solving network building; (iii) how different spatial relations are engendered and (iv) whether such ÔlocalÕ pro-
jects can advance to wider counter-movements in the context of the prevailing political economy.

2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Sustainability; Spatial networks; Quality food production; Local branding

1. Introduction: sustainability through agro-food?
There is much discussion and critical analysis of the
extent to which real progress has been made towards
sustainable development during the decade since the
Rio Earth Summit. And, whilst at the global level, many
voices question the ability of international agreements to
q
This paper was originally presented at the AAGÕs 99th Annual
Meeting, New Orleans, March 9, 2003.
*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: marsdentk@cardiff.ac.uk (T. Marsden).
deliver sustainable development, in many localities, pat-
terns of intra- and inter-community relationships have
begun to emerge to offer some optimism for a bottom-
up approach to the wider sustainability goal. Creating
sustainability in rural spaces across the EU is one do-
main in which local initiatives have been playing an
important and encouraging role.
The ongoing crisis in European agriculture, and its
links to sustainable rural development, may be charac-
terised as a persistent struggle against stagnant or
declining food consumption levels, increasing competi-
tion from foreign producers and novel foods, declining

0016-7185/$ - see front matter
2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2004.07.008
 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
farm incomes and a producer-based Ôcost-price squeezeÕ
in conventional farming, and increasing public demands
for higher quality in food and in the rural environment.
Two responses to this plethora of challenges to EU agri-
culture and rural development have been a sharp in-
crease in organic farming in all EU member states, as
well as, more intense communication of quality in pro-
duction through local and regional brand-building (see
Renting et al., 2003).
Our aim in this paper is to examine the importance of
specialised food networks in shaping local/regional re-
sponses to the deepening crisis in EU agriculture; and
to assess whether such locally and regionally-based net-
works have the capacity to contribute to more sustain-
able rural development (see Marsden, 2003). As such,
the emphasis will be on the problem-solving aspects of
local and regional network building; i.e. how networks
function and evolve to shape knowledge and create a
collective willingness to innovate to achieve mutually
beneficial goals (using a combination of fragmentation,
specialisation and quality building strategies).
Data collected on two farming-centred networks—an
organic farming network in the UK: the Graig Farm
Producer Group, and a regional quality brand: the Wad-
dengroup Foundation in the Netherlands—will be used to
illustrate how local innovation and non-conventional
thinking can foster sustainable economic, environmental
and social development. Special emphasis will be placed
on examining the underlying political and economic
backdrop that shaped the operating contexts out of
which these two successful case studies emerged, and,
as importantly, are being maintained. Attempts will also
be made to outline past, current and likely future con-
straints/opportunities to these local/regional initiatives,
as well as the likelihood of these particular case studies
acting as working examples for other localities.
2. The competing dynamics of globalisation and
re-localisation
A crucial part of sustainable development is sustain-
able wealth creation, or what we might regard as Ôvalue-
captureÕ. This requires that social and entrepreneurial
initiatives be merged with respect for ecological, human,
social and manufactured capital. This is an identifiable
part of ecological modernisation as capacity building
(see Lundquist, 2000; Murphy, 2000; Evans et al.,
2002; and Jokenin, 2000). It also requires that the dis-
posal of the wealth thus created shows a careful balance
between satisfying consumption needs and maintaining
re-investment levels that will assure the long-term future
of both ecology and enterprises. Overall then, sustain-
able wealth creation and local economic development
within the wider context of sustainable development re-
quire new entrepreneurial initiatives that focus on
441
investing in the local environment, creating/strengthen-
ing local institutions, and employing people and their
resources. But key questions surround how these new
more sustainable models of development can occur
and how they evolve.
In the agrarian sphere we can postulate that value-
capture at the producer end of food supply chains has
at least three potential dimensions. First, it suggests that
local producers and their networks attempt to capture
more of the economic value of their products in a prevail-
ing context when more of this value is being lost to the
down-stream sectors (see Renting et al., 2003; Marsden,
2003). Second, it also suggests, as we will outline below,
that in order to achieve this it also requires new innova-
tions in the mechanisms for distributing value among pro-
ducers and processors at the local level. This involves
new types of entrepreneurial activity which is socio-eco-
logical in the sense that it is based upon distinctly differ-
ent types of networks and activities. Third, these two
types of value-capture can lead to new potentialities
with regard to forging synergies between agricultural
practices and different types of multi-functional activi-
ties; such as agri-tourism, engagement in off-farm
incomes activities and environmental schemes and pro-
jects. As a result, these can also stimulate further, mul-
ti-functional forms of value-capture. To engender the
possibilities for such value-capture to occur, we argue
here through our case study analysis, that new local
network formation and new forms of what we term Ôeco-
logical entrepreneurshipÕ become critical; not just in
initiating these new valorisation processes, but also in
protecting and sustaining them in the context of signifi-
cant countervailing forces.
Such innovative regional and local forms of develop-
ment need to be seen in the context of two major coun-
tervailing forces, within which local Ôvalue-captureÕ has
to fit: globalisation and agrarian (agro-industrial) mod-
ernisation. First, against the backdrop of globalisation
(for instance, the international pressures for free trade
through the WTO), Ôwith global companies and global
markets accounting for an increasing proportion of pro-
duction and exchange, the very idea of a local economy
may seem anachronisticÕ (Ekins, 1997, p. 19). Yet, de-
spite the real threat to economic sustainability, social
equity, cultural diversity and ecological integrity that
globalisation poses for local communities, many believe
that subsumed within this global transition is a strong
justification for encouraging the development and
strengthening of local economies. Therefore, whilst glo-
bal competition—through rationalisation of production
sites and techniques as well as market operations—offers
certain important comparative advantages, the process
itself tends to distribute cost and benefits unevenly
across different spatial, temporal and social domains.
Hence, communities that are not fortunate enough to
be located on the benefit side of the global logistics scale,
442 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
tend to experience economic, political and social mar-
ginalisation. Local economic development therefore,
can provide an effective counterforce against economic,
political and social vulnerability due to the forces of
global competition.
Second, with respect to rural economies in particular,
there has been the widespread application of a particular
agrarian modernisation process (which by and large is
still continuing). This process involves scale-enlargement
and cost-price reduction in the producer sector, further
intensification of the production unit, specialisation
and a drastic reconstruction of the rural area so as to
create the most favourable production conditions for
maximising agricultural (and standardised) production
volume. In addition, while this process holds consider-
able crisis tendencies, it has been further encouraged
by logistical retailer-led supply chains and standardised
quality regulation (see Van Der Ploeg, 2003; Smith
et al., 2004).
Under these conditions the analysis here explores the
ways in which alternative ecological and quality food
networks can be constructed and developed. These two
sets of conditions provide a Ôprevailing landscapeÕ in
which new anomalies, struggles, Ôsocio-technical nichesÕ
have to be placed. As we shall explore, the future
long-term success of local food networks depends upon
both the robustness of their internal mechanisms, and
the degree of interaction or boundedness with these pre-
vailing external trends.
2.1. Contingent agrarian local economies and
sustainability
Whilst recognising the problems of over-dichotomis-
ing or disconnecting global processes with the local, it
is important to consider Ôthe localÕ in this context as a
form of social contingency; that is a space for rearranging
possibilities which attempt to counter the prevailing
forces in the agrarian landscape. ÔLocalÕ then becomes
potentially a social space (a place to share some form
of disconnection) for the re-assembling of resources and
of value; a place for evolving new commodity frame-
works and networks; a place of defence from the deval-
orisation of conventional production systems.
As actors in their own right, local economies offer
their own brand of comparative advantages. Through
network building, local human capital–knowledge,
skills, creativity, motivation and commitment to com-
munity and a shared vision of the present and the
future–can be harnessed to build and cement mutually
beneficial relationships between suppliers, producers
and consumers. A sense of shared ownership of commu-
nity resources and the responsibility for its viability
and preservation, Ôcan inspire trust and commitment,
effectively lowering transaction costs and facilitating
the process of economic interactionÕ (Ekins, 1997,
p. 19); without marginalising social and environmental
capital.
This paper aims to outline two case studies in which
the problem-solving aspects of partnership-building at
the local community level, and the reliance on local cap-
ital,1 have developed to mitigate, if not reverse, several
of the negative consequences that have been imposed
upon two local communities as a result of the globalisa-
tion and modernisation of agro-food production and
markets. In both of these local entrepreneurial net-
works, sustainable development in the wider sense,
rather than merely sustainable economic development,
was a major motivating factor.
Like a number of other contributors to the recent net-
work analysis literature, Roch et al. (2000) reject the
contrasting notions that
• individuals have full autonomy over the acquisition
and use of information; and
• available information, beliefs and values are fully
determined by the prevailing social context.
In fact, in RochÕs view Ôwhile the social milieu con-
strains the range of alternative discussants available to
an individual, it also provides opportunities for the indi-
vidual to meet and consult with new discussantsÕ (Roch
et al., 2000, p. 778). This viewpoint relates to the trajec-
tories of problem-solving network building which led to
the Graig Farm and Waddengroup Foundation devel-
opments. In both cases an effective operating milieu
was created in which new innovations could thrive. In
the analysis we consider these network developments
in detail and more particularly explore the interelation-
ships between the development of new synergies in
quality food production and marketing and their rela-
tionships to network construction and development.
One central part of this is the development of a new
form of Ôecological entreprenuershipÕ we contend,
whereby key actors are committed to preserving cul-
tural, ecological and environmental integrity yet find
new pragmatic ways to create economic benefits (e.g.
employment) in the local community. This involves the
risky identification of potential high value traditional
products and practices as well as using new regulatory
and legal structures (e.g. logos and trademarks) to
develop and to protect niche products.
These network-based forms of ecological entrepre-
neurship can foster the wider development of Ôsocio-
technical nichesÕ (Van Der Ploeg, 2003) in particular
geographical spaces. These can be seen as collective at-
tempts to resist the dominance of the globalisation and
modernisation processes. In these ways, we argue, it is
1
This includes funds, knowledge, skills, labour, commitment, and so
on.
 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
important to examine not only the networks themselves,
but also their substance and social ecologies. In particu-
lar, they have to contend on a dynamic basis with strong
and often countervailing competitive forces. This puts
more emphasis upon the new entrepreneurial abilities
of the network members. We see here, therefore, a set
of conceptual interrelationships between network build-
ing, the exploitation of production and marketing syner-
gies based upon quality foods, and the new spatial
development of socio-technical niches.
So far in the growing literature on alternative food
networks (see Goodman and Du Puis, 2002; Ilbery and
Kneafsey, 1998; Goodman, 2003; Allen et al., 2003;
Renting et al., 2003) these conceptual interrelationships
have yet to be fully and critically explored. Several writ-
ers have questioned the somewhat easy assumptions
associated with Ôspatial valorisationÕ; and the potentially
unproblematised links between local foods, quality and
sustainability (see Goodman, 2003; Winter, 2003). It is
important to recognise that Ôbeing localÕ is not a sufficient
pre-requisite in itself to engender the sorts of innovative
frameworks we analyse in this paper. As Winter (2003)
and Holloway and Kneafsey (2000) support:
the valorisation of the local. may be less about the
radical affirmation of an ethic of community or
care, and more to do with the production of less
positive parochialism and nationalism, a conserva-
tive celebration of the local as the supposed repos-
itory of specific meanings and values (quoted in
Winter, 2003, p. 30).
Such conceptualisations of Ôdefensive localismÕ (Win-
ter, 2003) are clearly relevant in certain social and cul-
tural contexts. However, with regard to agro-food, as
we show here, it is not just the ÔlabelÕ of local which is
important, it is: (i) how the local is constructed and used
in relation to new forms of economic and social net-
works; which in turn provide a basis for innovation
and new types of economic development; and (ii), how
these new spatially-based networks then set up and con-
tinue to demarcate their spatial and competitive rela-
tions and boundaries with the conventional food
system. Moreover, as we shall see through the prism
of the two succeeding case studies, what mark these
types of novel development out is only partly to do with
the fact that they are producing a particular and more
locally-based type of food. More significant conceptu-
ally is that they represent new forms of more (ecologi-
cally-based) social organisation which link producers
with consumers both within and across spaces, at the
same time as Ôre-rootingÕ (as well as re-routing) these
supply chains in particular spaces.
The creation of new quality food ÔspacesÕ is then in
need of further critical attention. Not necessarily in pre-
senting just additional cases of emerging trends, but also
in conceptually identifying what is significantly distinc-
443
tive socially and economically in their evolutionary
and highly competitive development. The two cases
below begin to explore these spatial and social dynam-
ics, and explore the evolutionary nature of alternative
food networks in different rural spaces. In exploring
the two cases, an overall question remains. Do they
begin to represent the evolution of a more sustainable
rural economy based around the re-definition of social,
economic and ecological resources? Or are they destined
to remain Ôsocio-technicalÕ niches amongst a wider econ-
omy which continues to devalue local and rural natures;
and as a result aspatialise rural space?
3. Organic livestock production and marketing in mid-
Wales: the Graig Farm case
As the recipient of the 2001/2002 UK Organic Retai-
ler Award as well as a long list of other awards won over
the years, Graig Farm Organics is one of the UKÕs best
examples of small business innovation in the country-
side. Graig Farm was established in 1988 by Bob and
Carolyn Kennard following 10 years of work in tropical
agriculture. Upon their return to Welsh farming, the
Kennards came face to face with the early signs of what
was later to become a full-blown economic and quality
crisis in UK agriculture. In particular, the Kennards
were concerned at certain developments in intensive live-
stock farming in the UK; and were disappointed with
the bland taste of British meats compared to what they
had been accustomed to in tropical agriculture. Their
initial response was to attempt to produce chickens that
were reared with compassion and which would taste like
chickens. To do this, a 50 ha farm was acquired in the
rural county of Powys, Mid-Wales, near to the mid-
western border with England.
Most of the county of Powys has been classified by
the EU as a Less Favoured Area, and from the year
2000 has also been designated an Objective 2 region
(i.e a region in receipt of some European regional fund-
ing for assisting economic and skills development). Agri-
culture contributes significantly to the economy of
Powys, employing in 1998, some 9902 people or 20%
of the total Welsh agricultural labour force (Banks,
2001). Over 75% of these are farmers, partners, other
family members or directors, with the remainder com-
prising full-time hired and casual/seasonal workers
(Banks, 2001).
Following a challenging start-up, the farm began to
deliver higher quality chicken meat, and soon customers
started to ask for lamb, beef and pork from animals that
have been reared in a similar manner to Graig Farm
chickens. This led the Kennards to adopt the organic
principle of farming, being, as they see it, Ôthe only stan-
dard which could not be debasedÕ. So, from producing
high quality chicken meat, Graig Farm expanded into
444 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
the production of a range of organic livestock. And, as
demand for organic meats increased beyond the capa-
city of the farm itself, closer ties were established with
other organic farms in the area, creating a network of
organic suppliers which, later, became known as the
Graig Farm Producers Group. Graig Farm thus became
the central marketing actor for the livestock that it pro-
duces, as well as those produced by other farmers within
the Graig Farm network. Two principal aims of the net-
work are to seek out new and large markets for organic
meats, as well as ensuring that organic farmers receive a
fair price for their produce.
In addition to fostering a responsive and mutually
beneficial supplier–marketer partnership, the Graig
Farm network also offers significant benefits to consum-
ers, all of which engage positively with the concern for
creating sustainability in local communities through
careful regard for ecological, human, social and manu-
factured (produced) capital. For instance, the preserva-
tion of ecological capital is facilitated by the utilisation
of the organic farming practice which seeks to leave as
small an Ôecological footprintÕ on nature as possible.
The issue with regard for manufactured (produced)
capital is, in this case, demonstrated through compas-
sionate livestock rearing practices. By recognising the
intrinsic rights of non-human species to a shared exis-
tence with mankind, organic farming also contributes
to ecological sustainability in agriculture.
At the same time, the Graig Farm network addresses
the issue of sustainability of human capital from a num-
ber of perspectives:
(a) Farmers’ advantages:
• Producers become integral parts of a network that
functions through group meetings, invited expert
talks and farm visits, thereby improving the
knowledge that allows them to Ôfarm the way they
always wanted to farmÕ (Smith, 2002). These fre-
quent opportunities to meet and discuss individual
as well as shared problems have facilitated knowl-
edge-building as well as problem-solving.
• The levels of trust engendered within the network
makes it easier for certain productive resources to
be shared amongst the members.
• With Graig Farm acting as the central marketing
agent for the group, producers are spared the cost
and effort of having to plan and execute individ-
ual marketing programmes. Hence there is an
opportunity to concentrate rather than fragment
farm resources with each party focusing on what
it does best. Farmers with finished lambs, for
instance, will notify Graig Farm who makes every
effort to match the supply with market demand-
either through its farm shop, mail order retailing,
a chain of independent retailers, the multiple
supermarket chains or via export.
• The producers/marketer partnership allows farm-
ers to have instant feedback on the quality of
their animals and any changes that may be
required to improve specific quality standards.
• Farmers are also assured of a reliable market for
their livestock at fair prices.
• Significant developments have taken place with
regard to the traceability of products from the
farms to the point of consumer purchase. Label
and bar-code systems are used at each stage,
and maintained as products pass through the var-
ious stages of processing at Graig Farm. The
identity of each farm is kept on the labels, and
information of each farm can be found. Welsh
Black Cattle meat is a main speciality, and speci-
fied butchery techniques, including vacuum (bio-
degradable) packaging have developed. A team
of skilled butchers breakdown the carcasses into
retail-sized packs. Orders can also be freshly
butchered to customersÕ requirements.
(b) Graig Farm benefits:
• By working as part of a network, any problems of
quality can be communicated instantly to the
producer of each animal, thereby reducing the
likelihood of small problems becoming systemic
problems with significant long-term consequences.
The same applies to risks associated with any devi-
ation from the approved organic standards.
• The partnership approach to future production
planning allows Graig farm to be assured of a
continuity of supply and quality to meet customer
demand; which is good for business for both pro-
ducers and the marketing agent.
(c) Consumer benefits:
• In an era dominated by food scares, consumers
can have confidence in the organic farming sys-
tem, which, by law, requires adherence to pre-
scribed production techniques.
• The Graig Farm network facilitates easy trace-
ability of organic meats through personal knowl-
edge of the farms and farmers; each farmerÕs
personal knowledge of each animal he rears,
and due to predominantly local sourcing.
• With no external middle-men involved in sales
that pass through Graig FarmÕs farm shop and
by mail order (local) customers can enjoy prices
that are as low as possible without negatively
affecting producer margins.
Through the development of Graig Farm and the
Graig Farm Producers Group––assisted by knowledge
borrowed from tropical agriculture, and the quality
standards and economic support that have been avail-
able to UK organic farmers—many livestock farmers
along the English/Welsh border of Mid-Wales have been
able to mitigate the encroaching economic crisis that
 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
Fig. 1. The Graig farm network.
they face in conventional UK agriculture. This has been
assisted by the deliberate diversification of marketing
outlets, and the corresponding independence from sup-
plying the main corporate retail chains (see Fig. 1). In
fact, this partnership has been so successful that, with
economic prospects constantly worsening for conven-
tional livestock farmers in the area, the number choos-
ing to convert to organic production and become
members of the Graig Farm network, has increased
dramatically from 2 in 1990 to 20 in 1999 to over 180
in October 2001 (Banks, 2001; Smith, 2002).
The job creation and job preservation impacts on
local farms and within the wider local community, up-
stream and downstream of Graig Farm itself, have been
considerable. In 2000, Graig Farm itself, created 16.5
full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs (Banks, 2001). It is esti-
mated that this also indirectly generates 15.2 FTEs (total
31 FTEs), and a total of 36.5 FTEs when the induced ef-
fect of spending generated by those employees in the
economy is taken into consideration. Moreover, the va-
lue-added contribution of providing large quantities of
high quality meat products that enjoy strong consumer
demand and premium prices has helped to encourage
sustainable economic, ecological and social development
in the area, as opposed to the cultures of marginalisation,
disempowerment, social and economic exclusion that
have been the experience of large parts of the neighbour-
ing and former predominantly coal mining community
of the Welsh Valleys. The network can also act as a spur
for other synergistic ecological innovations on the farms
involved. For instance, several of the larger producers
also participated in the agri-environmental schemes
(Tir Gorfal), associated with landscape and amenity
management; while others also regularly compete for or-
ganic association awards, as well as for sheep and beef
445
farming and conservation awards. In this sense a social
landscape of agro-ecological improvement is instilled in
and through the network.
4. The Waddengroup Foundation: quality production and
location branding
Like agriculture in the UK, Dutch agriculture epito-
mises the modernisation-productivist trajectory. The
drive for production efficiency and cost reduction have,
to a large extent, been achieved through specialisation,
intensification of production, scale-enlargement and a
philosophical reconstruction of the countryside into a
large Ôagriculture factoryÕ (Roep, 2001). Over time, how-
ever, the notion that persistent modernisation and ratio-
nalisation would keep Dutch agriculture globally
competitive came under severe stress as global markets
continue to show an increasing appetite for ever cheaper
products. And, those farmers and Dutch regions (like
elsewhere) that were unable to remain viable partici-
pants in this agriculture race to the bottom, soon found
themselves marginalised. Such was the case that pre-
ceded the Waddengroup Foundation initiative.
The seeds of the Waddengroup initiative were planted
in 1976 when the van Rijsselberghe family, owners of the
Sint Donatus farm on Texel––the largest of the Dutch
Wadden Islands––attempted to start the first organic
farm in the Netherlands. This pioneering attempt to
forge an economically viable, ecologically friendly dis-
connection with conventional agriculture encountered
many obstacles and challenges especially during the
early years. However, following encouraging successes
in producing and marketing what was branded: ÔTexel
Environmentally and Nature Friendly ProductsÕ, but
446 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
an absence of critical mass to make a real impact in the
market-place; Marc van Rijsselberghe, in 1994, cataly-
sed a network approach to solving this and other related
problems that many of his colleague Wadden Island
farmers shared (many of whom had already started to
produce to organic standards). These shared problems
included:
• A sharp reduction in the number of farms and farm
employment in the area.
• Declining incomes and outward migration.
• Significant environmental losses (especially of an
uncharacteristic Dutch landscape of leafy hedgerows)
due to scale-enlargement farming; hence, loss of spa-
tial diversity and places of specific natural beauty as
well as the loss of traditional breeds and architecture.
• Standardisation of products for world markets, and
ever declining prices were leading to the loss of Ôtradi-
tionalÕ ways of producing, processing and consuming
within the Wadden Islands.
The cornerstones of the Waddengroup initiative
were:
• Combining local experiences and effort to build up a
collective capacity in producing primary products
(Texel sheep and a variety of cheeses, for instance),
in processing, distributing and sales.
• Using collective knowledge to support new members
and others engaged in related businesses within the
Wadden, area.
• Implement, by means of a registered trademark and a
common logo, a collective presentation for a wide
assortment of products from the area on the basis
of high quality and place of origin. (To qualify, pro-
cessed products had to be at least 51% locally
sourced.)
The Waddengroup Foundation itself was formally
established in 1996 under the sponsorship (and partici-
pation) of the Sint Donatus Foundation, the first
organic dairy farm on Texel. Also, ÔStichting Wraldf-
ruchtÕ (World Fruit Foundation), was founded in 1992
to stimulate organic farming, processing and the mar-
keting of typical products from the distinctive Northern
Frisian area; and ÔWholesaler KroonÕ, played a role as
a longstanding buyer of Sint Donatus dairy products,
and supplier to a network of organic food shops in the
Netherlands and Belgium. What develops, therefore, is
a clustering of initiatives within the region which con-
nect together around the Waddengroup.
According to its Articles of Association, the Wadden-
group co-operative Ôsupports the development of sus-
tainable agriculture with a high value in the Wadden
area by extending the production and marketing of
regionally specific high quality productsÕ (Roep, 2001).
Although the area within which the Waddengroup
Foundation operates is neither a governmental unit
nor has any precise geographical boundary beyond
abutting the Wadden Sea, the ultimate objective of the
Foundation is for Waddenproducts to be fully produced
(primary production and processing) within the area.
Waddenproducts include the world famous Texel sheep,
organic milk, cheeses, baked products, sauces, wines,
ice-cream, cereals craft items and fruits.
Creating synergy within the Wadden Sea community
is a prime objective of the Foundation, with all members
of the Waddengroup having a direct financial interest in
the co-operative. A two-person, unpaid executive team,
overseen between meetings by an elected supervisory
board, carries out the day-to-day operations. Through
a combination of funding from the three founding mem-
bers, new members and grant funding under the EU
Leader Programme; and a number of national economic
regeneration schemes such as the Regional Stimulation
Scheme for Economic Development in the North of the
Netherlands, and the Agriculture MinistryÕs Schemes
for Regional Innovation, R&D and marketing capabili-
ties are developed and strengthened. The effect has been
to stimulate new producers and processes in the area
through the assurance of a guaranteed market for their
produce at very attractive prices. Through the Founda-
tion, raw material producers are put in close contact
with dairy, fruit and cereal processors, creating both
logistic and financial symbiosis. In 1998, for instance,
the Foundation had 70 members, 45 of which were pro-
ducers, and 25 being processors.
Although not all products from the region covered by
the Waddengroup Foundation are sold through the co-
operative; in 1998, some 125 different products were
marketed under the Waddenproducten brand producing
gross turnover of €3.3 million (Roep, 2001). Five per-
cent of net sales is dedicated to re-investment, and is
placed in a general development and promotion fund.
This is used for such purposes as research and develop-
ment,2 registering new trademarks and seeking out addi-
tional markets overseas. Currently, the principal
overseas markets are in Germany and Belgium.
The assurance of high quality products that goes
along with small-scale production, organic certification
and location-specific marketing, has translated into high
value-added products for the area. Unlike several other
regions within the EU (including the UK) sharply rising
sales of Waddenproducts are not associated with sales
through supermarkets. Both at home and abroad, the
principal sales channels are speciality shops and general
grocers. With this level of heterogeneity within its supply
chain, the Waddengroup network can retain greater
2
A number of the new products marketed under the Waddenprod-
ucts brand originate from old and traditional recipes.
 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
Fig. 2. An organigram of the Waddengroup foundation (after Roep, 2002).
control over production levels, prices and the spatial
distribution of gains.
Although it is difficult to quantify precisely the extra
net value-added that the Waddengroup Foundation has
contributed to the area, estimates place this at 31% over
what could have been gained from conventional agricul-
tural practices. But this excludes the value created in up-
stream and downstream commercial activities and jobs
created within the locality. And to this must be added
the preservation, and in many cases, the rebuilding of
fast diminishing environmental, social and cultural val-
ues. Consequently, after some six years since its formal
inauguration, through collective action, the Wadden-
group Foundation has delivered both economic success
and political influence for the Wadden Sea community
without sacrificing social or ecological capital.
The organisational structure of the Waddengroup has
facilitated more specifically the micro-economic pro-
ducer-based synergies between organic, conventional
production, and the growing significance of complemen-
tary ÔbroadeningÕ activities associated with amenity and
welfare functions. Again, perhaps more starkly in this
case, we see the development of multi-functional farms
as part of their engagement in the network (Fig. 2).
The Waddengroup network is rooted on the
experience and skills of ÔpioneersÕ. Whereas the
447
formal-organisational structure and the new institu-
tional arrangements can be relatively easily reproduced
elsewhere, it is not the case with these personally-
bounded abilities. Roep (2001) argues that Ôthe immense
Ôsea of ignoranceÕ and institutionalised inability are the
main obstacles to be overcomeÕ. Also the relationship
with policy frameworks is at best ambiguous, especially
with regard to the national policy frameworks. As in the
UK, some policies explicitly favour such initiatives
while, more generally, many still support Ôold styleÕ mod-
ernisation. More hope can be given to regional and local
policy initiatives.
5. Reclaiming sustainable rural spaces through the
development of socio-technical niches
As part of our analysis of the cases it was seen as
important to attempt to enumerate how these new net-
worked developments do actually facilitate Ôvalue cap-
tureÕ for producers involved; and second, demonstrate
(rather than just assert) that this value is innovatively
shared amongst the producers and the local buyers in
different types of partnership arrangements. In the
Graig farm case lamb prices, for instance, were com-
pared between those inside and outside the network.
448 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
In 1999, for instance, there was a 50% premium on large
lambs and a 100% premium on small lambs. Also, com-
paring conventional livestock auction market prices for
beef cattle with those received by Graig producers
showed a premium (see Banks, 2001) of 27% in some
cases. There was some evidence that this was not just
associated with the traditional premium on organic
lamb and beef, given that conventional prices through
Graig also showed a premium compared to conven-
tional prices associated with the traditional livestock
markets. The producer network has grown significantly
since 1999 as a result of the relative economic attractive-
ness (not least in the reductions in transaction costs) of
supplying through Graig; and the protection from the
further falls in farm gate prices in the conventional sec-
tor. Indeed, one economic advantage is the creation of
more stability in farm prices more generally as long as
partnership arrangements can be effectively maintained.
There is, therefore, an active and dynamic process of
value-capture occurring which is socially and spatially-
based.
In the Waddengroup case, being a part of the net-
work implied a range of new opportunities for partici-
pating farmers. The marketing channels (partly
internal circuits), the protection of the hallmark,
involvement in new networks, and an increased flow of
clients, offer considerable potential to consolidate and
generate further income, and thus broadening and deep-
ening agricultural production. Several new on-farm
activities can lead to more solid forms of Ômulti-func-
tionalityÕ. One case study farm reached extra returns
of 21% (Roep, 2002). Much of this is over and above
the usual premium for organic production. If the extra
activities are included (like agri-tourism, environmental
schemes), the extra returns reach 44%. It is the food sup-
ply chain links, however, which contribute most signifi-
cantly to extra returns. Case study analysis of farm
accounts show significant premiums from being in-
volved in the network. In one case, the Sint Donatus
farm, returns from food supply chain innovations
reached 335% in comparison with convenrtional pro-
ducers, through value-adding processes especially in
dairy products. This case offers full-time employment
to 10 people, compared to 1–1.5 on the average dairy
farm of the same size (i.e., the same milk quota). This
difference underlines the significance of enabling Ôecono-
mies of scopeÕ through network development and the
financial opportunities of developing synergies between
food value capturing activities, direct selling of farm
products and agri-tourism activities.
Both of the above case studies show that the prob-
lem-solving capacity of networks can be enhanced with
the emergence of entrepreneur-type facilitators, and
the openness of the network to ideas that originate from
outside as well as inside of the action milieu (Roch et al.,
2000). Whilst sustainable development in local commu-
nities will depend on how successfully local capital
(funds, knowledge, labour, culture, a shared vision and
environment) can be merged with local entrepreneurial
ability towards agreed objectives, much can also be
learned from the external community to enhance local
initiatives. Hence, these cases are not just about new
forms of localism. Rather, they display ways in which
re-localisation can contingently create spaces which
bring together new assemblages of local and external
knowledges and practices.
In the above two cases, the problems of economic
marginalisation and creeping rural decay (not least
through the continuing crisis in agricultural modernisa-
tion and its policy frameworks), have been successfully
arrested by the move to quality farming and food
production, facilitated by organic farming standards
that are stipulated in EU law. And, whilst the problem
of sustainable rural development is by no means
solved in these localities, important progress has been
made.
At a more conceptual level, the development of these
alternative and locally-derived networks raise some
important questions concerning the degree to which they
are sustainable economically and socially over time; the
degree to which they could become more diffused over
larger areas of rural space as the crisis in agricultural
modernisation continues; and what the social, economic
and environmental conditions and obstacles are for the
capacity-building witnessed. Our wider research, con-
ducted across six European countries (see Van Der
Ploeg et al., 2002) estimates, for instance, that up to
50% of farmers are, to varying degrees, following broad-
er or deeper rural development strategies; with many of
them combining these with continued participation in
conventional agricultural markets. While our two exam-
ples here represent particularly well-developed counter-
movements to conventional and more aspatialised
agro-food systems, they are emerging in a more wide-
spread fashion; increasing the total amount of locally
dependent initiatives (see Renting et al., 2003). These
developments are, however, much more ÔhiddenÕ from
official data sources (like Eurostat), even though in
operational terms they are often (as we see in our two
cases here) far more open to their public and customer
base about their supply chain organisation than con-
ventional chains. They are in general terms both a re-
sponse to the recent deepening crises in conventional
agricultural costs and prices, and at the same time,
opportunistic and entrepreneurial attempts to capture
more value-added from a larger segment of Ôquality-
seekingÕ customers.
More conceptually, we can see these new networking
activities as distinct socio-technical niches which begin to
reclaim parts of the rural land- and social-scape back
from the homogenising tendencies of the conventional
system (see Van Der Ploeg, 2003; Marsden, 2003). As
 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
Van Der Ploeg (2003, p. 379), echoing Kautsky (1899) a
century earlier, argues:
A particular ordering of space is implicit in all
labour and production processes. Different farm-
ing styles result in different spatial constellations,
just as a particular spatial constellation lends itself
to certain development patterns and hampers oth-
ers. Not for nothing is the struggle for accelerated
scale enlargement translated into the compartmen-
talisation of rural areas, in the creation of Ôfree-
havensÕ or ÔenclavesÕ.
We can see these new socio-technical niches as
demarcating in one sense such Ôfree-havensÕ; that is,
areas within which new social and environmental land-
scapes begin to take shape; free in the sense that they
are released from the traditionally regulated ÔgripÕ of
the modernisation project. In both regions considered
here, for instance, it is noticeable that the new agro-food
developments have also spawned new labour and com-
munity practices, which then contribute to the further
economic capture of value for the regions. In this sense
it is possible that the social and economic reach of such
agro-food developments can be far greater than the
some of their parts; creating new capacities in a more
diversified rural landscape.
There are, of course, significant tensions in this pro-
cess, because of the continued dominance of conven-
tional chains and their attendant and competitive
regulatory systems. They continue to dominate the land-
scape as well. In the UK case, the onset of the Foot and
Mouth crisis in 2001, and the dominant role of the corpo-
rate retailers in both procuring and selling over 70% of
organic products, suggest the strong tendency for the
replication of the conventional Ôcost-priceÕ squeeze affect-
ing the overall organic sector (see Smith and Marsden,
2004). This is a large concern for networks like Graig
Farm, which partly find their economic strength not only
through the diversification of farm production, but also
in diversifying their retail markets. Over-dependence on
the large retail multiples holds considerable dangers,
and their large slice of the organic market in the UK
means that they play an influential role in overall organic
product price setting. It is important to recognise, how-
ever, that retail-led chains hold a different economic
and social relationship with the local and regional land-
scape than that outlined here. They are concerned with
abstracting value from it, rather than capturing value
for it. Here lies a significant difference in the spatial rela-
tions between conventional agro-food chains and those
analysed in this paper. Moreover, this leads to the
competitive co-production of the overall, or wider rural
landscape; with the compartmentalisation and abstract-
ing processes associated with conventional production
lying contiguous to the more heterogeneous and re-valo-
rising processes associated with these quality-based
449
Ôsocio-technical nichesÕ. Many farmers in the new net-
works are also practising in both systems. In one sense
this is the new value-based dualism affecting rural areas
in Europe; and it is one which implicates the social, eco-
nomic and environmental aspects of rural landscape.
In another important sense, however, and partly as a
consequence of the arguments outlined here concerning
divergent landscape ÔcaptureÕ, is the finding from our
analyses of the importance for the new networks of lo-
cally and regionally-based institutional support and
involvement. These networks, in order to prosper, need
more spatialised (rather than sectoralised) institutional
involvement. A major barrier to their development,
and a major reason why their diffusion is hampered,
concerns the domination of competitive forms of conven-
tional regulation. These concern aspects of regulation
associated with competition policy, food safety and
hygiene, environment and planning, and the private
forms of regulation increasingly implemented by corpo-
rate retailers. The new networks need alternative forms
of regulation and support in order to counter and to
give legitimacy to their actions. This can occur through
R&D and marketing support, for instance, in the estab-
lishment of the new knowledge and skills capacities
needed; but also support is needed to defend rural spaces
and niches from the devalorising tendencies of the ÔoldÕ
style, and corporatist and clientelistic CAP policy instru-
ments. As Brusa (2003) has convincingly argued with
respect to such new forms of local development in
Southern Italy, rather paradoxically, it is the actual
degree of distance that producers and processors can cre-
ate from the CAP and associated regulatory system,
which influences the degree of real success in creating
new quality networks. This is a distance from the lock-
in effects of production-based subsidy structures,
intensively-based production systems, low value-added
chains, and, often traditional corporatist and clientelis-
tic farmer-farm union-state relationships, which in
themselves still derive power from lock-in.
To enable their development, therefore, such new
networks not only need to create alternative internal
quality assurance systems, they also need external, insti-
tutional support to assure and defend their spatial and so-
cial boundaries; boundaries which can sustain the benefits
of exit and Ôlock-outÕ from the Ôprevailing landscapeÕ; and
help to bolster different types and packages of technolo-
gies and techniques. We see this regional institutional
development, for instance, in cases in Italy around spe-
ciality cheeses and wines, and in organic production (see
De Roest, 2000).
In Wales and in the Netherlands, given the stronger
application of the conventional system along modernisa-
tion lines, such regional and local strategies are starting
from a much lower base. In Wales, since 1999 the Wales
Agro-food Strategy and Partnership has been estab-
lished to begin to provide this territorial approach
450 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
through the Welsh Development Agency. This is a new
territorial approach to agro-food, sitting alongside the
conventional (sectoral) allocative system of the CAP
(run through the National Assembly Government of
Wales).
Our case studies also highlight that a central dis-
tinctive feature of their development and potential
sustainability rests with new forms of associational
involvement, not only between producers but along
newly formed (and potentially contested) supply chain
themselves. In addition these come together, very often
through the re-creation of what we might term back-
ward–forward technological, or retro-innovation such as
the recreation of old butchery and slaughtering, curing
techniques, and ÔoldÕ forms of pest management (Stuiver
and Marsden, under review). These again, rely upon
new types of spatiality, new agro-ecological relation-
ships (Guzman and Woodgate, 1997); and they require
assistance in their development from external state
organisations and policies. They need to combine the
use of forward and backward technologies in new ways,
as demonstrated by communications on their websites
about the ÔtraditionalÕ nature of some of their produc-
tion and processing techniques.
6. Conclusions: capturing spaces: creating opportunities
Despite considerable obstacles and constraints, not
least from the maintenance of the competitive regula-
tory, rural and agricultural policies which continue to
Ôlock-inÕ producers into providing standardised food
products at ever cheaper farm-gate prices, new and
highly uneven network developments in agro-food are
diffusing and contributing to a more diverse rural land-
scape in Europe. As we see from these two specific cases,
this raises important conceptual questions on the capac-
ity of local places to sustain these Ôcounter-movementsÕ.
We have identified some of the key internal and external
components which are shaping these new spatial rela-
tionships. Embodied in these is also the recognition of
a new form of what we term Ôecological entrepreneur-
shipÕ, whereby key actors in the networks that develop
play a decisive role in enrolling and mobilising other
actors into the network; create and sustain its structures,
and innovate in developing new interfaces between
producers and consumers.
We can postulate that this may be an important ele-
ment in the progression of agrarian-based ecological
modernisation more generally (Marsden, 2004); and it
raises important theoretical issues which challenge the
need to view ecological entrepreneurship as more than
simply an oxymoron in the environmental policy litera-
ture and debates. It also takes us beyond the realms of
generalised Ôsocial capitalÕ justifications for local rural
development. What our cases demonstrate here is the
need to match an understanding to new forms of net-
work development with ecological entrepreneurship on
the one hand, and the wider social and political econ-
omy of rural and regional landscapes on the other. As
we see, both are important components in shaping rural
space, with the former being distinctive in harnessing
social, natural and economic resources in new ways
for the purposes of carving out new value-creating
niches. Ecological entrepreneurship, therefore, deserves
more attention in the new rural social and spatial trans-
formations suggested in this analysis.
Whilst the scholarly literature concerning alternative
food movements and networks has expanded rapidly
over recent years, our analysis here suggests that more
conceptual effort is now needed concerning the distinctive
geographical and social components of these trends. In
particular, such concepts as spatial contingency and cap-
ture, the degree of disconnection from conventional sys-
tems (i.e. Ôlock-in and lock-outÕ), retro-innovation and
ecological entrepreneurship, would seem to be salient
areas for critical development if we are to continue to as-
sess the real sustainability and contestablity of the new
and distinctive agro-food geographies that confront us.
Acknowledgment
The paper is based upon research conducted under
two projects. First, the EU funded IMPACT project
entitled: The socio-economic impact of rural develop-
ment policies: realities and potentials (CT-4288). In par-
ticular, the authors would especially like to recognise the
work of Jo Banks and Dirk Roep for their empirical
case study work. Second the arguments and analyses
developing here form part of the UK Economic and
Social Research CouncilsÕ Research Centre on Business
Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and Soci-
ety (BRASS) under one of its projects entitled: Engaging
Local Communities.
References
Allen, P., Fitzimmons, M., Goodman, M., Warner, K., 2003. Shifting
plates in the agri-food landscape: the tectonics of alternative agri-
food initiatives in California. Journal of Rural Studies 19, 61–75.
Banks, J., 2001. Organic food supply chains in Wales: impact and
potential, Department of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff
University, Working Paper.
Brusa, L., 2003. Rural development, culture and environment in
Southern Italy, unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manches-
ter, UK.
De Roest, K., 2000. The Production of Parmigiano–Reggiano Cheese:
The Force of An Artisanal System in An Industrialised World. Van
Gorcum, Assen.
Ekins, P., 1997. Sustainable wealth creation in the local economy. In
Community Economic Development: Linking the Grassroots to
Regional Economic Development, Conferences Proceedings from
the Regional Studies Association, 1997, pp. 18–21.
 T. Marsden, E. Smith / Geoforum 36 (2005) 440–451
Evans, N., Morris, C., Winter, M., 2002. Conceptualising agriculture:
a critique of post-productivism as the new orthadoxy. Progress in
Human Geography 26 (3), 313–332.
Goodman, D., Du Puis, E.M., 2002. Knowing food and growing food:
beyond the production–consumpiton debate in the sociology of
agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis 42 (1), 6–23.
Goodman, D., 2003. The quality ÔturnÕ and alternative food practices:
reflections and agenda. Journal of Rural Studies 19, 1–7.
Graig Farm, ÔWho is Graig Farm OrganicsÕ http://www.graigfarm.co.
uk/who.htm.
Guzman, S.E., Woodgate, G.R., 1997. Sustainable rural development:
from industrial agriculture to agro-ecology. In: Redclift, M.,
Woodgate, G. (Eds.), The International Handbook of Environ-
mental Sociology. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Holloway, L., Kneafsey, M., 2000. Reading the space of the
farmersÕmarket: a case study from the United Kingdom. Sociologia
Ruralis 40, 285–299.
Ilbery, B., Kneafsey, M., 1998. Product and place: promoting quality
products and services in the lagging rural regions of the European
Union. European Urban Regional Studies 5, 329–341.
Jokenin, P., 2000. Europeanisation and ecological modernisation:
agro-environmental policy and practices in Finland. Environment
Politics 9 (1), 138–170.
Lundquist, L.J., 2000. Capacity building or social construction.
Exploring SwedenÕs shift towards ecological modernisation. Geofo-
rum 31 (1), 1–119.
Marsden, T.K., 2003. The Condition of Rural Sustainability. Van-
Gorcum, The Netherlands.
Marsden, T.K., 2004. The quest for ecological modernisation: re-
spacing rural development and agro-food studies. Sociologia
Ruralis 44 (2), 129–147.
Murphy, J., 2000. Ecological modernisation. Geoforum 31 (1),
1–8.
451
Renting, H., Marsden, T.K., Banks, J., in press. Alternative food
networks and rural development in Europe. Environment and
Planning A.
Roch, C.H., Scholz, J.T., McGraw, K.M., 2000. Social networks and
citizen response to legal change. American Journal of Political
Science 44 (4), 777–791.
Roep, D., 2001. The ÔWaddengroepÕ Foundation: the added value
of quality and region. EU IMPACT Project Working
Paper, The Agricultural University, Wageningen, The
Netherlands.
Roep, D., 2002. Value of quality and region: the Waddengroup
Foundation. In: Van Der Ploeg, J.D., Long, A., Banks, J. (Eds.),
The Living Countrysides. Elsevier, The Netherlands
(Chapter 7).
Smith, E., (2002). Ecological modernisation and organic farming in the
UK: does it pay to be ÔGreenÕ? Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis.
Department of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University,
Cardiff.
Smith, E., Marsden, T.K., 2004. Exploring the Ôlimits to growthÕ in UK
organics: beyond the statistical image. Journal of Rural Studies 20,
345–357.
Smith, E. et al., 2004. Regulating food risks: rebuilding confidence in
EuropeÕs food? Journal of Environment and Planning C 22, 543–
567.
Stuiver, M., Marsden. T.K., under review. The promise of retro-
innovation for rural development: theorising beyond the modern-
isation paradigm.
Van Der Ploeg, J.D., Long, A., Banks, J. (Eds.), 2002. The Living
Countrysides. Elsevier, The Netherlands.
Van Der Ploeg, J.D., 2003. The Virtual Farmer. Van Gorcum, The
Netherlands.
Winter, M., 2003. Embeddedness, the new food economy and
defensive localism. Journal of Rural Studies 19, 23–32.