A multi-stakeholder perspective on the adoption of good agricultural practices in the Thai fresh produce industry

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore the factors hindering the adoption of good agricultural practices (GAPs) in the Thai fresh fruit and vegetable industry from the perspectives of key stakeholders in different tiers of the supply chain up to consumers.

Design/methodology/approach

Semi-structured interviews were carried out in Bangkok and nearby cities. The key informants were experts, governmental authorities, producers, distributors, exporters, and consumers. A qualitative content-summarising approach was used to analyse the interview transcripts.

Findings

Stakeholders perceived the credibility of national GAP (Q-GAP) standards implemented in the Thai domestic market as low, due to a lack of reliable verification and traceability and because the system is managed by governmental bodies. Consumer demand could drive the market of safe produce, but retail stores are the main influencers of producers’ adoption of GAPs in domestic markets.

Research limitations/implications

The findings are based on a small group of Thai fresh produce industry players and consumers who operate mainly in an urban context.

Practical implications

The paper provides relevant information for policy makers and industrialists to find appropriate strategies to sustain GAPs in Thailand. Stakeholder awareness of food safety issues and information provision are crucial.

Originality/value

This is the first in-depth study of stakeholders’ perceptions of GAP implementation in the Thai fresh produce supply chain as the industry is currently transitioning from a commodity market to a quality/safety-oriented market. The results raise important issues regarding GAP adoption, food safety certification, and labelling in Thailand.

Citation

Wongprawmas, R., Canavari, M. and Waisarayutt, C. (2015), "A multi-stakeholder perspective on the adoption of good agricultural practices in the Thai fresh produce industry", British Food Journal, Vol. 117 No. 9, pp. 2234-2249. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2014-0300