UBC Undergraduate Research

UBC Fair Trade Week survey results Badiei, Sadia; DeRose, Kristin; Jung, Yoon; Liu, Linda; Wong, Peter; Yu, Helen 2012-03-28

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata


18861-Badiei_S_et_al_SEEDS_2012.pdf [ 1.72MB ]
JSON: 18861-1.0108605.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108605-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108605-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108605-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108605-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108605-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108605-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report         UBC Fair Trade Week Survey Results  Sadia Badiei Kristin DeRose Yoon Jung Linda Liu  Peter Wong Helen Yu University of British Columbia LFS 350 March 28, 2012         Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.      LFS 350: Group Project Report Community Food System Project  Sadia Badiei  Kristin DeRose Yoon Jung Linda Liu Peter Wong Helen Yu  TA: Masoumeh Bejaei March 28, 2012        UBC FAIR TRADE WEEK SURVEY RESULTS   March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   1 LFS 350 Group Project Report for SEEDS/UBC’s Fair Trade Week:  Pre- and Post-Fair Trade Week Survey Results  Summary   Introduction : As t he first Canadian university to be titled a “Fair Trade Campus,” the University of Britis h Col umbi a (UBC ) launched its first eve r Fair Trade We ek (FTW ), March 5 - 9, 2012, in o rder to raise aw aren ess on the i mportance of th e Fair Trade (FT) movement and prom ote  its ple thora of Fairtr ade certified (F C )  products across campus .  W e have set out to deter mi ne the degre e to which thi s FTW has impacted stude nts , staff, and facult y m e mbers t hrou gh admi nist rati on of surve ys .  W e ho pe the result s from this surve y w ill be used by SEEDS and the Fair Trade We ek  Comm it tee of UBC to purchase and sell more desirable F C products  to students, further reinfor cing its stance as a FT campus .    Methods : The pre - event  surve ys (Mar ch 2 and March 5, 2012)  and post - ev ent  surve ys (Ma rch 12 an d March 13, 2012) wer e co nducted at the UBC Boo kstore, Irvin g K. Barb er Le arnin g Centr e, a nd the Student Union Buil ding.  The se  surve ys wer e dist ributed at random to 187  stu dents, staff and facult y members , and dat a was entered int o an  onli ne Goo gle do cument as an electr onic ref eren ce.  Additi onall y, we created a Scaven ger Hunt acti vit y she et  to promot e  stude nts ’ discover y  of  dif fer en t t ypes of FC  products ava il able on campus .  The te am liaisons were respons ibl e for att endin g FTW Comm it tee meeti ngs, an d meeti ng minutes we re s hared with the rest of the group throu gh onli ne comm unicati on networks .    Results : W e found no stati sti call y si gnific ant  diffe rence betwe en respond en t  awaren ess of FC  produc ts or avail abil it y at UBC.  Howeve r, we reco gniz e l im it ati ons to our surve ye d population, as it does not account fo r a lar ge enou gh proportion of the UBC comm unit y.  Most surve yo rs felt the y had a ‘mediocre ’ understandin g of FT ; a  la r ge propo rtion of indivi duals could not reco gniz e a  FC  produ ct based on labeli n g.   Few indivi duals knew  FC  cof f ee is avail able on campus , while fewe r stil l were aware of other FT products.   A valuable result invol ved suggesti ons on which FC  products students  would like  to see more of in UBC outl ets, includ ing  food, cl othi ng, and bev era ges.     Recommendations : Fro m our findi ngs, we reco mm end increas ed adve rtisement of FC  produ cts at UBC food - servic e outl ets , and  more ac cessi ble methods of obtaining inform ati on on  FTW .   We encoura ge the FTW Comm it tee to utilize suggesti ons from surve y respondents pert aini ng to FC  products .  For futu re LFS 350 students conduc ti ng thi s CFS P , we reco mm end increasin g the nu mber of surve ye d indi viduals to obt ain more accu rate result s.  Furthe rmor e, we beli eve the findi n gs from the surve ys ma y be mad e more vali d if the same respondent  were to particip ate in  both the pre -  and post - event surve ys.   March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   2 Introduction   Our res ear ch group consi sts of 6 under gradu ate st udents at the  Universit y of Britis h Colum bia  (UBC ) withi n the f acult y of Lan d & Food S ystems.  This resea rch proj ect is part of the series of Communi t y Food S ystem Proje cts (CFS P s ) that seek to promo te sustainable food s yste m practi ces with in local comm unit ies.  The focus of thi s resear ch pap er is the food s ystem of UBC, with Fairt rad e  c ertified products on campus as th e topi c of conc ern.   Fairtr ade  certified (FC) products are defined b y th e principl e that produ cers in developi ng countries shoul d be fairl y compens ated for their products, w it h a right to acceptabl e working condit ions  1 .  Consum ers who wish to support thi s cause ma y opt for FC  products, identi fiable  b y a lab el bearin g t he In te rnati onal Fair Trade Certificati on Mark ( Appe ndix 1)  2 .  This mark indicates that the pro duct’s related comp anies meet Fairtr ade  standa rds: work ers ar e paid at le ast the nati onal mini mum wage, t he safet y of wo rkers is emp hasiz ed, and environmen tal standards ar e met  2 .  FC  products are closel y associated wit h the con ce pt of sust ainable agricult ure — remot e comm unit ies often re ceive suppo rt for financial and env ironmen tal concerns 3 .  Ther e is evidence that small er  fami l y fa rms have great er acc ess to i nternati onal markets t hrough Fair Trad e (FT)  partnerships; knowled ge and regulation from partnerships also aid s  the se comm unit ies in achiev ing  a gr eate r level of foo d securit y 4 .    UBC is Canada’s first FT campus , and adh eres t o standards  set b y TransF air Canada 5 .  As per the FT Campus agreement  (App endix 2 ) , FC  products must be readil y av ail able around campus ; uni versit y -owned food outl ets ma y  onl y serv e FC coff ee whi le at least three FC  teas must be avail able at tea vendors 6 .   Popular FC  pr oducts avail able on camp us include Zhena’s Gypsy Tea, Ethical Bean cof fe e, and Cadbury Dairy Milk chocolate; t he UBC book store sells a variet y of no n - food  FC produ cts such as jewelr y  and greet in g card s.   Visi bil it y is also take n int o account, as vendo rs of FC  products must displa y signs that indicate the av ail abil it y of these items  6 .  A comm it tee withi n UBC oversees thes e functi o ns, and is compos ed of repre sentatives from both the facult y and student bod y 6 .     This resear ch proje ct is fashion ed in collaborati on with two sociall y aw ar e UBC groups: Social Ecologic al Economi c De velopm ent Studi es (SEEDS) and the Fa i r Tr ade Week Com mi tt ee of UBC.  Within the UBC comm unit y, there ar e three m ain stakeholders of FC  prod ucts — t he UBC  Bookst ore, Food Servic es, and the AMS student societ y.   The broader comm unit ies of Vancouve r, ar e incr easin gl y s upporti ve of ethi cal pro ducts: Vancouve r is home to the Ethical Bean compan y, whi ch dist ributes FC  coffe e, while Happy Planet uses FC  ban anas and other fruits (wh en avail a ble) to produce th eir ce rtified organic juices  7 , 8 .   Canadian consum ers hav e also shown a s teadil y incre asi ng dem and for FC  produ cts; from the perio d of 2008 t o 2010, sales of FC  co co a have inc reas ed b y over 100%, while FC  co ffe e has shown a stead y gro wth of approx im atel y 17% 9 .  March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   3  As of the 2011/2012 sch ool ye ar, the UBC Van co uver campus has 56,204 acti ve students  1 0 .   Man y food inventor y man a ge rs and chefs at UBC food outl et s are also con ce rned with the ethi cal sele cti on of food; restaurants su ch as Point Grill on campus opt for FC  fruit when the y are avail able  (Chef Josh, pers onal comm unicati on, Febru ar y 7, 2012) .  Th e  followin g  questi ons are add ressed  by thi s res ear ch project :   1.  W hat is the level of unde rstanding and aw aren ess of FT produ cts withi n the UBC comm unit y, befo re and after FTW ?  2.  W hat are the prefe renc es and behaviour of UBC comm unit y memb ers towa rds FT produ cts, be fore and aft er FTW ?   3.  How can we raise aw are ness of FT issues with in t he UBC comm unit y?   Research    Methodology :   The fram ework fo r our C FS P focused on the prom oti on of equit able food s ys tems throu gh FT, and our methodolog y invol ved th e creati on and implement ati on of pre - event and po st - event surve ys to understand the impact of UBC’s inaugural FTW.  These surve ys  asses sed t he knowled ge, att it udes, and behaviours of the UBC comm unit y tow ards FC  pr oducts  and all ow the FT W  Commit tee to gain a bett er understanding of which products students’ desire.  Additi onall y, we created a scaven ger hunt to all ow students to discover th e different t ypes o f FC  prod ucts  avail able on campus (Appendix 4 ).   Two group members wer e elect ed  to be liaisons wit h the UBC FT W  Comm it tee.  Surve y and sc aven ge r hunt questi ons were desi gned onli ne b y group wo rk through th e UBC Vist a and Goo gle Do cuments websit es, whil e fe edback from the FTW C omm it tee  was tak en int o ac coun t during the edit in g pro ce ss .   We surve ye d 187 pa rticipants at three loc ati ons : 1) the UBC Bookst ore, 2) th e Student Union Buil ding (S . U . B . ), and 3) the Ir ving K. Barber Le arnin g Ce ntre. Pre - ev ent surve ys were condu cted on March 2 n d  and 5 t h ; post - event surveys were on March 12 t h  and 13 t h  (see Appendix 5  for schedule).  On the first da y of pre - evaluation surve yi ng, we surve ye d students face - t o - f ace.  We obtain ed verbal consent and ha d consent forms on hand in case pa rticipants furthe r inqui red; we did not outl ine risks and ben efits since was not reco rded .  Two i nvesti gators su rve yed ea ch participant , with one member askin g questi ons and the oth er re cordin g responses  on information shee ts  (Appendix 6 ).   Redundant questi ons were skipp ed when int erviewin g pa rtic ipants who were un fami li ar wit h the conc ept of FT .    After the fi rst da y of surv e yin g, we met as a team t o refle ct  on how our role as investi gators could impact the result s and op ted to chan ge  our methodol og y (se e Appendix 7  fo r meeti ng dates).  FT is a March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   4 value - bas ed conc ept and the process of in - person interviewin g  ma y hav e made particip ants uncomfortable, providi n g us  with inaccurat e result s .  We anal yz ed the wa y we negoti ated entr y and decided to re - defin e our role as investi gators 1 1 .  Our ini ti al questi o nnaire was shortened (Appendix 8 ), print ed  out , and dist ributed  to people who could choose  to return them.  Th e data coll e cted was  compi led on a Goo gle Documents spreadsh eet an d sorted by date of su rve yi n g (App endix 9).   Community :   Our ex perienc e re flected comm unit y - bas ed res ear ch as  we acquir ed res ear c h skill s and implemented a resea rch proj ect wit hin our comm unit y.  With regards to comm unit y se rvic e learnin g (CS L), the data we coll ected provides th e FT W Commit tee with information on the UBC popu lation ; this data ma y be used to order  more desirable FT products and en coura ge great er support of FT wit hin the UBC comm unit y .  Our comm unit y pa rtners did not create CS L  oppor tuni ti es , but we were enc oura ged to attend the eve nts held during FTW .  We ex perienced some bar riers because we felt t hat we had limi ted tim e to ex plore other opti ons for int e grat ing CS L int o our rol e since the tasks were alre ad y well defined. We valued the ex perience and oppo rtunit y to parti cipat e in FTW since man y of us were no t ver y kn owled ge able in FT iss ues; in order  to trul y understand the inner - work ings of somethin g, one needs to delve into the iss ue first - hand 1 2 .  A  chall enge  we faced was wh en co mm unicati ng with  indi viduals who wer e vehem en tl y opposed to the FT mo ve ment; as resea rch ers, it was important  to keep an open mind and take criticism lightl y, and without rebut tal.   Findings: Results   FT epit omi z es the importance of consum er kno wledge and awar eness; b y supporti ng FT, c onsum ers address the lack of workers’ ri ghts in certain ma rk ets b y supportin g impove rished comm unit ies  1 3 .  Fairtr ade  certificati on  be gins on the produ cti on level , in which  small - scale farmers provide raw ingredi ents  that foll ow a set of FC  crite ria.   Thes e criteria include st andards for labour, sust ainable farmin g, govern ance, and democrati c participati on  2 .   Survey Details:  Graphs were developed  from  the information gath ered durin g  the pre -  an d post - event surve ys ; accompan yin g the graphs are  n - v alues indi cati n g  t he number of respondent s  (Appendix 3).  A  greate r number of respond ents w ere acc essi ble wit h the dist ributi on of paper - bas ed surve ys , as opposed to t he ini ti al verbal l y condu cted  surve ys .  To accomm odate this discrepan c y in n - values , we an al yz e th e re su lt s using per centa ge compa r ison  as opposed to anal yz ing fr equen c y values.  Su rve yors  were also giv en the libert y to omit questi on s  the y felt uncomfortabl e answerin g , furthe r alt erin g n - values for all secti ons.  March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   5 Core Findings (Appendix 3):  Background Respondent Information: The ma jorit y of the surv e yed po pulation does not live on campus ( ~ 75% in bot h pr e -  and post - ev ent surve ys ; Figu re 11 ), wit h the gr e atest repr esentation from the Facult y of Arts (36% pr e - event, and 43 % post - eve nt surve y; Fi gure  12 ).   General Understanding on the FT Issue: One noti ceable surv e y result  was that most participants  did not know about FTW , an d man y did not att end the FTW acti vit ies. In addit ion, approx im atel y 20% of the UBC comm unit y was unawar e of how to ident if y a FC  produ ct (Fi gur e 5 ) .  M ost respondents claimed a ‘mediocre’ understandin g  of wh at FT means  ( Fi gu re 4 ).  Regar ding FC  produ cts avail ab le at UBC, 40 - 50% of the sur ve yo rs  knew that UBC carries  FC  coff ees ; how ev er  man y respondents, pri or to and proce edin g FTW , were  unaw are of other FC products on campus (21 %  and 36%, resp ecti vel y; Figu re 6 ).    Importance of FT to Respondents: F ew  students were unint e rested in FT  and did not seem ea ger to learn  more rega rdin g the ini ti ati ve  (3% pre - event ,  and 4% post - ev ent  surve ys ; Fi gur e 7 ). H o weve r, man y  pre -  and post - event surv e ye d indi viduals se emed  ver y curious to lea rn more about FT :  most students rated the importance of FT as “neutral” (52% and 37%, respectively), 30% claimed FT is  “important” ( in bot h pre -  and post - ev ent surve ys), whil e 7% and 6% , r espe cti vel y,  claimed FT was “very important” to them (Figu re 7 ) . T o these curious indi viduals, we provided small resou r ce  pamphl ets (App endix 10 ).  These resou rce pamphl et s were also provided to indi viduals that claimed to be  not fami li ar wit h FT  at all  (7%  pre - event,  and 22% post - event surve ys ; Figu r e 7 ).   Preferences for FC Products: Most surve ye d in divi duals claim ed to be wil li ng to pa y five to ten percent mor e for a FC  pr oduct as compar ed to a conventi onal product (37 %  pre - event , and 42 % po st -event surve ys ; Figu re 8 ).  FC products also scor ed roughl y the same as conv enti onal products on taste and quali t y (approx im atel y 50% in bot h pre -  and post - FTW surve ys), but m an y have yet to tr y FC  products (25%  pr e - ev ent , and 30% post - ev ent surv e ys ; Fi gure 9 ).  Respond ents in pre -  and post - FT W surve ys mainl y want to see more FC  food (40 % in bot h) and clot hing (26% and 41%, resp ecti vel y) avail able at UBC (Fig u re 10 ); man y su rve yed indi viduals were op en to seei ng an y variet y of FC  products on campus .   Respondent Participation in FTW: F ew er  than  10% of the post - ev ent res pondents attended FTW events compar ed to the 62% of respond ents that were ini ti all y int er ested in att ending FTW events w hen asked i n the pre - FTW sur ve y (Fi gur es 14 and 13, respecti vel y ).    March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   6 Findings: Discussion   The foll owing discussi on will focus on the result s deemed most relev ant for refle cti on, as all result s are included in gr aphical for m in the appendix of this report.  In comp arin g  res ult s from the pre -  and po st -event  surve ys, we found no stati sti cal significant differen ce in respondents’ FT awar eness . How eve r, thi s conclusi on cannot be correl ated to the ef fecti v eness of FTW in fostering awar eness at UBC as  t her e are some fl aws in our pro cess; m ost importantl y, our  sam ple siz e  is far too small in comparison to the UBC population. To ens ure a random sampl ing of the UBC population, we conducted su rve ys in a variet y of UBC on - c ampus locati ons and we did n ot surve y at an y FTW events. As a result , man y of our surve yors  likel y did not participate in FTW — this is evident in that 94% of the post - surve y responde nts claimed to have not participate d  in “Happy Hours” (a FTW promoti on that distribut ed free FC coff e e and tea at spe cified UBC Food Servic es locati ons to raise aw aren ess; Appe ndix 3 , Figure 14 ).    To improve our ex periment, our surve ye d population must account for a la rger  portion of the UBC comm unit y. Furth ermore , a s highli ghted b y Check land and Holwell (2007), thi s acti on resea rch proj ect demons trates the compl e x ities of creati n g pe rfe ctl y repli cable result s; withi n a dyn ami c comm unit y, such result s are not consist ent throughout tim e .  Despit e these  condit io ns, we feel the  su rve y s provid e  us with h elpful insight rega r ding desir able  FC  produ c ts and custom er will ingn ess to pay mo re fo r such equit able products.   From Fi gur e 4 , regardin g how respondents woul d rate their FT knowled ge (5 being hi ghl y knowledgeable ), the mea n response in the pre -  an d post - event surveys was “3”, and the distribution of result s between the two surve ys was relativel y equ al  (Appendix 3 ).  This ‘neutral ’ stanc e indi cates th at man y consum ers ma y no t be acti vel y int erested in seeking out information on FT issues ; howeve r, these respondents did seem int erested in edu cati n g the mselves on the FT move ment when information was provided in a quick and eas y mann er ( su ch as  dist r ibut ion of information pamphlets) .    When as ked how one w o uld identi f y a FC product, the majority of respondents were aware that a ‘logo’ would be v isi ble on the product  (Fi gu re 5 ).  Howe ver, even in the post - eve nt surve y s ,  24 % of respondents did not know how to reco gniz e a FC  product ,  and  42%  wer e un awa r e that  FC  co ffe e i s avail abl e on campus  (Fi gure 5 and 6, respe cti vel y) . W e reco gniz e a need fo r print ed information noti f yin g  students on  wh at FT produ cts are avail a ble to them ; students will likel y be mor e educ ated on an iss ue if information an d facts ar e provided in a manner that is quick and efficient  to lea rn .  This information could be pro vided on coff ee or tea sle eves and cups, on  m enu bull eti n board s  for food and drinks sold b y that UBC Food Servic e s  locati on , and on lar ge printed si gns  or post ers  in noti ceable locati ons.  We further ask ed respondents if the y were will ing to pa y mor e if a  product that is FT certif ied: n earl y all respondents sai d the y would pa y more t o some de gre e — the  dist ributi on of result s r emain ed March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   7 unchan ged prio r to and proceedin g FTW (F i gur e 8 ).  The mean response was a wil li ngn ess to pa y 12% more for a FT product; 27% wer e will ing to pa y 25% more, while 8% wer e will ing to pa y up to 50% more for FT.   A  particularl y valuable questi on was regardin g  which  FC  products respon dents woul d like to see more of on campus .  The most comm on response was a desire for mor e FC  food (40% pre - event, 43 % post -event), foll owed b y clot hing (26% pre - event, 41% post - event) and bever a ges (26% in bot h pre -  and post - event surve ys).   We also encounter ed some gr eat ideas from this questi on; for ex ampl e, one int erviewee claimed that the y would like to se e more FC  produ cts in vending ma chines, whil e anoth er asked for FC products to be served at UBC Food S ervice sit es that are op en late.  Another recomm endati on was for FC  gifts  to be mad e av ail able , such  as bod y butt er s, purses, stati onar y  supp li es (such as  homemad e pape r ) , or art suppli es (such as oil paint s and watercolo rs ) . Providing  consum ers with alternati ve comm od it ies —those that are fr es h, safe, creat e jobs and pr omot e entrepr eneurship — bring consum ers and pro ducers of thes e produ cts closer to gether 1 4 .   Our surve y has demonstr ated that the gene ral UBC population stil l lacks know ledge about the avail abil it y and me anin g of FC  products.  This issue is not unique to the UBC comm unit y alon e: a  surve y b y Trans fair Can a da found thi s lack of info rmati on to be even stron ger amon g the bro ad Canadian populati on .  In 2002, a  surve y of 1487 c offee drinkers found th at onl y 11%  of respondents  were awa re of FT co ffe e, and onl y  4% had ev er pu rchased it 1 3 .   Recommendations & Conclusion  Our research concludes that UBC’s first annual FTW was certainly a success.  Aside from the suc c ess of FTW events alone, we strongl y feel that b y surv e yi n g 187 UBC comm unit y membe rs , we wer e able to raise aw aren ess in at leas t these  187  indi viduals.  As a FT Campus, UBC  has a responsi bil it y to fu rther educate its  s tudents, facu lt y members, sta ff  and vi sit ors about the FT move ment; the result s from our surve ys indi cate that man y indi viduals lack awar e ness of the FT mov ement and avail abil it y of FC  products on campus .  Alt hough the numbe r of indi viduals we wer e able to surve y was minim al, toget her with SEEDS  and the FT W Commit tee,  we hope t o have inspi red cu riosit y and fostered dis cussi ons about FT betwe en surv e y partic ipants and their comm unit ies.     Based on ou r fin din gs, we recomm end in cre ased advertisement of FC prod ucts at UBC Food Servic es  outl ets; r esult s from our surve y cle arl y indi cated th at not man y indi viduals are aw are what the Fairtr a de  certific ati on logo looks like.  Ther efor e, d ispl a yin g lar ger poste rs in more noti ceable locati ons at Food Services sites  with this embl em ma y incr eas e aw a reness. The areas whe re s uga r, cr eam, and oth er condim ents  for cof fee  an d tea ar e plac ed would be ideal  locati ons , as well as areas  near line - ups for café March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   8 it ems. Coffee sleev es and cups could also feature  i nformation on FT , or ind icate that the produ ct is FC . Furthermo re, staf f at thes e outl ets can be encour a ged to verball y inform eac h student that purchases FC  products that the y ar e indeed purch asi n g items that are FT.    The FTW Comm it tee ca n certainl y uti li z e sugges ti ons provided by respon dents, if the y shoul d cho ose, which include an inc reas ed desire fo r re adil y avail able FC  food, clot hing, and bevera ges . How ever, it is important to note that m ost  of these indi viduals are will ing to spend 5 - 1 0 % more for FC  products, in comparison to conventi o nal products  (app endix 3, Figu re 8) .   We were abl e to deduc e from respondents that mo st indivi duals were not aware of FTW sim pl y due to a potential lack of adv ertisi ng prior to the event. We feel this ma y have been t he case as mos t information pertaini ng to FTW was posted on the UB C Food S ervice s  websit e and UBC Bookst ore websit e (wh ich man y students do not fr e quent). We recomm end t hat s igns  be set up in h igh  traffic loc ati ons on cam pus , such as the S.U.B. ,  prior to  and during  FTW  to rai se awa reness .  Social med ia can also be us ed more effe cti vel y throu gh the use of Twitt er or Faceboo k. Advertisi ng that priz es or free samples wil l be provided for participati o n in events can dr aw a lar ge r number of students. Wit hin the facult y of Lan d and Food S ystems , there are weekl y e - newslett e rs wit h information on even ts and opportuni ti es; if other facult ies also hav e newsl ett ers, it would be ef fecti ve to promot e throu gh thi s channel.   In order to fu rther impro ve thi s UBC CFS P for fu ture LFS 350 students, w e suggest incre asing th e number of the peopl e sur ve ye d in orde r to obtain more ac curat e result s. We also suggest, if possibl e, that int erviewers obtain the pre -  and post - ev ent surv e y result s from the same in divi duals in order to determi ne if the event ha d an y impa ct on individual awaren ess; thi s can be achieved b y perhaps ema il ing surve ys to indivi duals that agre e to participate  bot h prior to, and proc eedin g FTW . These indi viduals can sti ll remain anon ymous when discu ssi ng th e resu lt s of the stud y; f uture gr oups ma y wish to  consi d er usin g incenti ves fo r parti cipation.             March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   9 References   1 . Fairt r ade Canad a. (n.d. ).  What is fair trade? . Retrieved from             http:/ /fairtrade.ca/ en/abo ut - fairtrad e/what - fair - tr a de   2 . Fair t r ade Canad a. (n.d. ).  Fairtrade certification . Retrieved from       http:/ /fairtrade.ca/ en/abo ut - fairtrad e/fairtr ade - ce rtificati on    3 . Enns, J . (2008). Glossar y. In  A seat at the table: Resource guide for local governments to promote food secure communities (p. 30). Van cou ver, BC.   4 . McCull um, C., Desjardins, E., Kraak, V. I., Ladipo, P., & Costell o, H. (2005). Evidence based strate gies to build communi t y food se curit y.  Journal of the American dietetic association , 105(2), 279.   5 . Fair t r ade Canad a. (n.d. ). Fair Trade Campus. Retrieved from  htt p:/ /fairtrade.ca/ en/get - invol ved/fair - trad e - c amp us   6 . Fair t r ade Canad a. (D e signer ). (n.d.).  Fair trade campus . [W eb Gr aphic] . Retrieved from  htt p:/ /fairtrade.ca/si tes/de fault /files/Fair  Trade  Ca m pus -  Publi shed Standards 1.1.pdf    7 . Ethi cal Be an. (n.d.).  Ethical bean coffee: Fair trade certification . Retriev ed from htt p:/ /www.ethi calbean.c om/ just /fair - trade/   8 . Full er, V. & Nalasco, J . (2003 ). A passion for organics . Retrieved from  htt p:/ /scholar.goo gleuse r content.com/ scholar? q=cache:W C gsGwkP l2EJ :scholar.goo gl e.com/ + F u ller,+V.+ %26+N alasco, + J .+(2003).+A+passi on+ f or+or gani cs&hl= en &as_ sdt=0,5   9 .  Fair t r ade Canad a. (D e signer ). (n.d.).  Canadian sales of (labelled) fairtrade certified products .  [Web Gra phic] .  Retrieved from htt p:/ /fair trade.c a/si tes/default /file s/FC Volumes 1997 - 2010_0.pdf    10 .   Far rar, D., & Owra m, D. (n.d.). Enrolm ent s umm ar y, 2011/12. In D. Far rar (Ed.),  UBC Annual report on enrolment, 2011/12 (p. 4). Retrieved fro m htt p:/ /www.senate.ubc.c a /vancouver/download/v a _annual_repo rt_enrolm e nt_2011.pdf    11 . Checkland, P. & Hol well , S. (1998). Acti on Resear ch: Its Natur e and Vali dit y . Systemic Practice and Action Research, 11, 9 - 20.   March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   10  12 .  Guthman, J. (2008). Brin gin g good food to ot hers : investi gati n g the su bjects of alt ern ati ve food practi ce. Cultural Geographies, 15, 431 - 447.   13 .  Hira, A., & Ferri e, J . (2006). Fair trad e: Thre e ke y chall en ges for rea ch ing the mainst re am. Journal of Business Ethics , 63(2), 107 - 118. Retri eved from htt p:/ /www.jst or.org/st ab le/25123694? seq=2   14. Wil kins, J . (2008). Civic dietetics: opportunit ies for int e grati n g civi c  agr iculture conc epts into dieteti cs practi c e. Agricultural Human Values, 26 , 57 - 66. doi: 10.1007/s 10460 - 008 - 9177 - 2                              March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   11 APPENDICES  APP END IX 1: Fairtr ade Lo gos     Figure 1: The Current Fairtrade Certification Mark (Fairtrade Canada)   Figure 2: The Previous Fairtrade Certification Mark-- This is Still Found on Some Fairtrade Products (Fairtrade Canada)   March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   12 APP END IX  2 : Fair Trad e Campus Agre ement Figure 3: UBC’s Fairtrade Campus Agreement (Fairtrade Canada)             March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   13 APP END IX 3 : Surve y Result s     Figure 4: Question #1 Asked   Figure 5: Question #2 Asked 051015202530351 2 3 4 5Pre-FTWPost-FTWOn a scale from 1-5 (in which 5 represents highly knowledgeable) how would you rank your understanding of what Fair Trade means? Response (Percent) Scale (from 1-5) n=111 n=78 010203040506070Pre-FTWPost-FTWHow do you know if a product is Fairtrade Certified? Response (Percent) n=61 n=103  March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   14    Figure 6: Question #3 Asked   Figure 7: Question #4 Asked 0102030405060Pre-FTWPost-FTWWhich Fairtrade Certified food products are available at UBC? Response (Percent) n=44n=103 0102030405060NotImportantNeutral Important VeryImportantNot familiarwith FTPre-FTWPost-FTWHow important is Fair Trade to you?  Response (Percent) n=69 n=106 March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   15  Figure 8: Question #5 Asked   Figure 9: Question #6 Asked  0510152025303540450-4 5 to 10 11 to 25 26 to 50Pre-FTWPost-FTWHow much more (in %) are you willing to pay for a product that is Fairtrade Certified? Response (Percent) Range of Values (In Percent) n=67 n=74 0102030405060FT Better Same FT Worse Haven't TriedPre-FTWPost-FTWHave you ever tried any Fairtrade Certified products? How does it compare to the conventional equivalent? Response (Percent) Level of Satisfaction of FC Products Versus Conventional Products n=57 n=103 March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   16  Figure 10: Question #7 Asked    Figure 11: Question #8 Asked 051015202530354045Beverages Food Clothing Other Don't KnowPre-FTWPost-FTWWhat kind of Fairtrade Certified products would you like to see more of?  Response (Percent) n=101 n=77 Type of Product 0102030405060708090Yes NoPre-FTWPost-FTWDo you live on campus? Response (Percent) n=109 n=76 Response March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   17  Figure 12: Question #9 Asked   Figure 13: Question #10 Asked (Pre-Survey)  051015202530354045Pre-FTWPost-FTWWhich faculty/department are you in? Response (Percent) n=101 n=67 010203040506070Yes No MaybeDo you plan to sample FC coffee/tea during happy hours this week, or participate in any FTW activities? Pre-FTW n=48 Response Response (Percent) March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   18  Figure 14: Question #10 Asked (Post-Survey)                       0102030405060708090100Yes NoPost-FTWDid you sample FC coffee/tea  during Happy Hours last week or participate in any FTW activities?  Response (Percent) n=110 Response March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   19 APP END IX 4 : Side Project: Formul ati on of Scav enger Hunt Qu esti ons for FTW   Figure 15: Scavenger Hunt Questions  Available at the UBC Bookstore and Online on the UBC Food Services Website March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   20 APP END IX 5 : 2012 Surve y Sch edule & Info rmat ion   Note the foll owing abbr e viations :   S tudent Union Buil ding (S. U.B.)   Ir ving K. Barbe r Le arnin g Centr e (Irvin g)   University of British Columbia’s Bookstore (Bookstore)  Date Surveyors Time Location Method of Surveying Frida y Ma rch 2  Linda & Kristi n  Yoon & Pete r  2 - 4pm  2 - 4pm  Ir ving  Bookst ore  Verbal  Monda y M arch 5  Yoon & Kristi n  2 - 4pm  S.U.B.  Paper  Monda y M arch 12  Sadia & Linda  2 - 4pm  S.U.B.  Paper  Tuesda y Mar ch 13  Helen & Peter  Sadia & Helen  12 - 2pm  2 - 4pm  Ir ving  Bookst ore  Paper   The same time was picked as consistently as possible within each group member’s schedule. We did this so that the number of ind ivi duals on campus would remain rath er stati c (no t sus cepti ble to diurnal variati ons). Fu rthermor e, no two group m embers were paired to geth er mor e than once so as to avoi d an y statis ti cal error that ma y have aris en.                   March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   21 APP END IX 6 : Pre -  and Post - Event Surve y Qu est ions — Frida y Mar ch 2, 2012    March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   22   Figure 16: These Survey questions were found to be not only too long, but were also formatted so that the questions would be asked verbally. This format was later changed to a short, paper-based survey sheet (see Appendix 7)         March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   23 APP END IX 7 : Meeti n g Dates   LFS 350 Group 4 Meeting UBC Fair Trade Committee Meetings Febru ar y 5, 2012  Febru ar y 2, 2012  Febru ar y 16, 2012  Febru ar y 21, 2012  March 2, 2012  March 1, 2012  March 28, 2012  April 12, 2012   APP END IX 8 : Revised Pre -  and Post - Event Surv e y Questi ons — Monda y March 5, 2012 and Onwa rds    Figure 17: Pre-Survey Questions Note: All questions are the same as the post-survey questions with the exception of Question #11 March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   24  Figure 18: Post-Event Survey Questions Note: All questions are the same as the pre-survey questions with the exception of Question #11               March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   25 APP END IX 9 : Onli ne Google Do cument for Inpu tt ing Surve y Info rmati on    Figure 19: Example of one tab on the Google Document Excel spreadsheet with respondent's answers                 March 28, 2012 LFS 350 CFSP                   26 APP END IX 10 : Resourc e Pamphl ets Distribut ed by  Surve yo rs    Figure 20: Front & Back of the Pamphlet Distributed   Figure 21: Inside the Pamphlet Distributed  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items