 OK, ydych yn bwysig yn ddweud i gyd, i'n dweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud ar gyfer y ddeudau mor ddisgrifiannus a Bloomsbury DC, gyda Llywodraethol Cymru. Wrth gwrs, mae'n gobeithio i gyd, ydych yn ddweud i gyd yn ddeud i Ddeudiau Barri Eintos i gyd yn ymdweud i gyd yn ymgyrchu i'r Llywodraeth Llywodraeth ymgyrchu i'r Llywodraeth Llywodraeth. Mae'n gwybodol a'r gondol i gyrwbeth gwladau yn ymddangod y gwasan iaith 5 yn rhyw位'o, iawn iawn agri, bydd y cyfnodau, ysgrifoedd, ysgrifoedd, ysgrifaniaeth Chyflodau Lais, ac yn cyfrifoedd cyflosodol Cymru ac cyflosodol Cymru. Mae'r cyfreserciwn hyn yn gryfain gorau ac haith efallai'n meddwl gael wargo ym Alsocaeth Ysgrifai ym Afrika, Abertaiddiaeth Llaton, ysgrifiaeth Ysgrifiaeth, yn ym Mhwylyddion Gwladig. Mae'r amser iweithio gyda'r ble wedi gweithio'r cyfosodol, eu bod gondol cwyr�, a gondol yn gweld yn ymddiol. Mae'n gweithio i'r pwyllgor Paul O'Connor, y reidio yn y Llyfrgell, yw'r cyfnodau ar gyfer ymddiol yn ymddiol yn ymddiol, ac mae'n ddod i'n ddod i'n ddod i'n ddod i'r ddysgu i'r profesi o'r arwain o'r gweithio. Fy rydyn ni'n gweithio i'r cyfnod, a tygwch i'n ymolygiad o'ch yn ei ddalunio. Mae'r cyfnod yω bathroomau sydd yn r weeklydd. Rwy'n gweithio i ymddiol, maen nhw'n aspart o'r newid i fynd jechいきTH Jorff. Orth an bamboo'n hofr, Dawtynt. Mae gwybarrall o'r gymryd, mae'n gweithio meddwl o'iister, dodwn i ddwy meditationen. Rwy'n ddu ddau sydd yn arwhath oherwydd reidio i'n ddod i roi ll Heidipeople Brannol. Fi roeddi wedi'i hawkers, Rwy'n dechrau, mae'n fawr ychydig. Felly mae'n bwysig am ymddiadau. Mae gennym eich gweithio bwysig, y ddefnyddio cyfnodol yn gweithio bwysig i ddefnyddio allanol yn iaith, ac rwy'n dechrau gennym eich cynnopsyste o ffannau gwahogau cyfnodol. Mae'r ddechrau o'r ddechrau, felly mae'n gwneud o'r cyfnod gyda'r honno'n cyfnod i'r diwethaf. Felly, oes yn oed yn oedd o'r syniad bêlion i'r cyfnod yn rhan o'r cyfnod cyfnod wrth reminds mewn rhan o'r cyflotsiaf, ac rwy'n meddwl ar hyn o'r unigwyd yn cyfnod ar y cyflosio penedigol a'r pragmatig, ac yn defnyddio'r cyflosiaf yn gweithio gyda'r ymgylch a'r cyflosiaf o'r cyflosiaf. oeddwn ni'n gweld ar gyfer y cyfaint. Ac oeddwn ni'n gweld yn ymdweud o'r cyllidau anodolwyddiadau sy'n gyffredinol ac mae'r cyfaint yn cael ei chyfyddiadau gyda y bwysigol yn y gwasanaeth neu idio'r cyfaint i'r cyfaint yn ymgylcheddau cyfaint yn y Llebu Llywodraeth. Ac mae'r cyfaint yn cyfaint i ddianafau bod yn gwybod i'r rheswm yn ymgylcheddau cyd-a-gwm, yn ychydig, ond mae'n gwybod i'r cyblwysig sy'n digwydd bod yna'r cyfrifeth, a ddim yn ychwanegau arddangos gynllunio'r ddechrau'r ddechrau'r ddechrau ac rwy'n ddych chi'n rwyf iawn. Rwy'n ddim yn ddweud... Rwy'n ddod yn ddweud eich bod yn ymdyn nhw'n mynd i'r gwahau yn ysgrifennu o'r gwahau yn yr unig yng Nghymru. Mae'n ddweud i gyd, ymdyn nhw'n ymdyn nhw'n gyd yn ymdyn nhw'n gyd. a'r ddiweddol yn cyfrifoedd, maen nhw'n gwybod a rwy'n gwleidio'r ffordd o'r bydddol. Yn ymgyrchau, ydy'r ffordd yn y maen nhw'n wneud, lle mae'r maen nhw'n gweithio'r ffordd yn ymgyrch ymddindol, felly mae'n gweld i'r ysgrifennu gweithio'r ffordd yn ymgyrch, mae'n bwysig i'r ysgrifennu'r Ymgyrchu Llywodraeth i'r Ymgyrchu Llywodraeth, a'r ymgyrchiaid ei wneud i'r llwyr i'r ymgyrch, Llanthau, ac yn ymddangos o Ffricanaeth, ac rwy'n gofio'r ysgolwch yn ymwinell. Felly, yn y cyfnodol, yn y cwmhwyl yn y cwmhwyl, mae'n ddweud y cyfnodol ymdilygol. Rwy'n cael yw'r ysgolwch, oherwydd yng nghymru, ond rwy'n cael y cyfnodol, rwy'n cael ymdilygol, rwy'n cael y cyfnodol, yn ymdilygol, yn y cyfnodol, rwy'n cael y cyfnodol. Both Donald Trump and such... ...on my part, we will discuss that later on. His agenda is certainly a push back on what I am about to talk about. In a value chain, unlike a free market... ...there are key lead players... ...patriulary retailers who coordinate what goes on. I will give you some examples in a second. Where producers are tied in through supply networks... ond gallwch gweithio a'r ddwylo cyfnod am ei gweithio a llwyddoedd a'r dwylo gwybot honno. Rydyn ni'n dod o'r cais gyn quotes yn ôl iawn cyflots yw'r ffemio yng Nghymru, yr oedach o'r miliwn ddim yn cael ei gofod yn ateb yw. Mae gwybod ychydig. Rydyn ni'n fawr i'r ffordd iilleg gyfiawn ac mae'r holl yma'r llwyddoedd yn gallu'r gweithio a'r hwylol yn aqrowadd. The visaform on the gender dimension in quite a complex way and then the inter Secondly very interesting way is to draw out in a complex way that you have leaders where you do have suppliers and retailers and have a very dominant position if you have a%, strong powerful position. You don't need to read all your figures just to have a very strong powerful position. You don't need to read all your figures just to a rydyn ni'n gwneud hynny'n gŵr. Yn chi'r rheiniadau, rydyn ni'n gwneud. Rhyw ydych chi'n siaradau livreid myfio a'r tesgos a'r cythiffwyn oír rhai. Rydyn ni'n peirwadau'r rhai. Yn ddiolch i'r rhoi'n gwneud cyhoedd y cyfrifiad dyma. Rydyn ni'n gwneud bynnag yw y tîl yw gyfrifol o ddim yn fwylo. eich mall beginning is the equivalent of the GDP of Switzerland, so it's approximately the equivalent in size or strength of a country. It operates in 28 countries, it's sources in over 80, from over eighty countries. Walmart doesn't go out into the free market or wholesale market to see if there's goods available and what price it can negotiate, neu'r pethau na'r ystyried cyllid o'r Isaacl neu'r model na'r leirloed midlalu, ychydig hefyd mewn prigol, prigol, gymryd, bod yn iawn y cyfrifiad. Mae'n cyfrifiad, neu ddych chi'n cerddwch, oedd y cyfrifiad yng nghymru yn gyfrifiad. y set of standards, all suppliers, it's got over 100,000 suppliers in total, it all have to comply with the standards in which it requires across all its sourcing countries. So this isn't a sort of classic neoliberal, neoclassical, economic free market model and really what interests me is if you look at the logos of companies not European or North American companies. Shoprite, for example, is a South African company, or SensorSood is the Chilean company which operates in five countries across Latin America. Shoprite is the South African country that operates in 17 countries across Africa. They all work on very similar principles to Walmart, so exactly the same as I've just described. Masmart, I don't know if any of you are familiar with Masmart. Masmart is a South African supermarket. You might know it under its Masmart Holdings Owns Game and a whole other load of shops, so they do come under different names. Masmart is a South African company that operates in 14 countries in Africa, Sub-Saharan Plus. My data is a little bit out of date. I know they were opening in more countries. Walmart now has a 52% holding in Masmart, so effectively Walmart now is one of the largest supermarkets in Africa. So the kind of trends that we've seen in Europe and North America are increasingly playing out in Africa, Asia and Latin America. And I think we're all familiar with the Fair Trade Mark, which you'll see down in the right hand corner. I don't know if you can all see it, but what it says underneath is Fair Trade Africa. You'll get the same in Asia. There's Fair Trade India. There's Fair Trade Brazil. So a lot of the sort of consumer movements that we've seen in Europe and North America are now being replicated, at least to some extent, in Africa, Asia and Latin America. So really it's analysing this kind of retail shift and how it plays out and what are the implications for both producers, workers and consumers is what I've been looking at. But in this talk what I want to concentrate on is the gender dimension, and I think this is a very important gender dimension to the whole story. I mean the first is what's driving all of this. And I think urbanisation rising incomes is really a critical factor in it. Clearly if the majority, 50% or more of the population of a developing country is now living in the urban sector, the possibility of producing food or self-production, local subsistence production becomes much more diminished. But also kind of rising incomes, technological advance, the whole pattern of global sourcing, the way in which big retailers control their supply chains. Also a really important factor is the feminisation of employment. This works in a number of ways, and I can only briefly touch on it, but partly supermarket growth, particularly supermarkets, but there are many other types of retailers as well. Supermarket growth especially is based on the commercialisation of goods traditionally produced in the home that they can now produce commercially, make a profit from and employ women to produce those goods often in the supply chain, which I'll come back to a minute in order to sell to their consumers who are very focused on their consumers, and they all are, not just here in the north but also in the global south, the majority of whom are women, and they know it. And these are bio-led firms who are really customer focused, so they analyse their customer base very, very closely. I'm careful about the time, but I first got onto the gender side of all of this many years ago when I was interviewing a category manager for a UK supermarket, a man, and he started to talk to me about gender, and I was sort of sat back and said, wait a minute, I'm meant to be the person raising issues about gender, why are you raising it out of the blue? And he said, well that's the majority of our customers, of course we're interested in gender issues, we have someone in the team focused specifically on monitoring trends, especially for women. It's estimated that globally women have, I mean we can debate whether they control it, but they're responsible for $20 trillion spend in retail per annum, and of course again companies are aware of this. And with rising incomes this is likely to increase, so assuming we continue with growth in Africa, Asia and Latin America, assuming we continue with urbanisation and assuming we continue with the feminisation of employment, these trends are likely to continue. Big assumptions there, Trump will certainly stop all of that if he can get his way. This is just very brief, but we know that in these supply chains, and there's been a lot of research including here at SIAs and in many universities about the feminisation of employment within the supply chain, so the expansion of these kind of retail value chains has generated a significant amount of employment. These are just some examples, Bangladesh garments, 3.5 to 4 million workers, 80% of them are female, that's in a country in which women traditionally are not meant to work, not in paid work, very important. India garments, the data is often quite difficult to get, 5.6 million workers, but a significant number, and that's where the data is much more blurred, is work in the informal production. For me, and I'll go into it in a second, the supply chain really links all sections of types of work. We can carry on in cocoa, it's 1.5 million to 2 million, small holder farmers are in if you like chocolate, which I tend to like. 1.5 to 2 million households are involved in that small holder households, 25% female farmers, but the research we've done shows that nearly half the actual work is done by women even though cocoa is seen as a male crop. So women play major roles in many of these supply chains. There are big debates, however, about whether this benefits women or not. There's one very strong school and plenty of evidence for it, that it's detrimental, that women are bought in as cheap labour, they're heavily exploited, they're very insecure, they're very precarious, the type of work that they have as soon as there's any kind of downturn they're pushed out. There's another school, particularly with Naila Cabeira and others who've argued, but at the same time, so it's not denying that, but at the same time, the work can be empowering for women. It gives them an independent income that they've not had access to before, it gives them social access, it allows them to begin to organise collectively in ways they've not been able to do before and therefore it has the potential at least if not the reality of being empowering. So there's a big debate there as to whether it's beneficial to what extent. And as I said, I think really what I'm trying to do is to look at both the pros and the cons. I think there's evidence for both sides in those debates, to be honest. And therefore it's really trying to understand what the dynamics are and how this is playing out in this kind of context of rapid retail shift, if you like, that's going on in the global economy. Little bit then to think about the sort of analytical approach is to help try and analyse this. As you've probably noticed, I think a free market model doesn't, for me, doesn't crack it. So my first work was looking at the gender dimension of this kind of work. I very rapidly realised if you're looking at women workers you have to understand what was going on along the whole supply chain to understand what was happening for them in their place of work and what the dynamics were. And value chain analysis helped, I think, has helped to do this. And the essence of a value chain is that the value chain links all stages of production. So production right from their very first inputs through production, distribution through the retailer to the final customer. And as you go along, these chains are coordinated a bit like the Walmart example by lead firms. Those could be producers, lead suppliers, or they could be, usually are as well, lead retailers. And they really govern what happens along the chain. The dimension to value chain analysis that I'm really interested in. And there's a lot of people who critique value chain analysis for being too narrow, too firm focused, and I think those are very legitimate critiques or criticisms to be made. But at the same time, I think you need to, from my perspective, I need to understand what those commercial dynamics are in order to get to the next level, which is how those value chains are then embedded in different types of labour markets which themselves are gendered. But in socioeconomic and cultural context, which can vary a lot, so if you take just one supply chain where sourcing of the same product could be from, well, just fruit is one that I've worked for many years on. So the same product, if you go through a bunch of grapes, if you go into Tesco, a bunch of grapes looks exactly the same. It's been sourced from Spain, it's been sourced from Morocco at the next stage, it's been sourced from Chile and South Africa, it's been sourced from India, and then back into Europe, into Spain, table grapes, not usually France, and so it goes around. To you as the consumer, it looks exactly the same. The socio-cultural context in which that sourcing has taken place is completely different. So what really interests me is the way, and women form the majority probably about, on average, in most countries around 60% of the workers who will have produced those grapes. So what interests me is how is this interaction between this kind of commercial dynamic and the diverse gendered embeddedness, if you like, of these value chains, how do they play out in contexts where, as I said earlier, value chains are really disrupting traditional reproductive work in complex ways and in multiple ways, including at household and community levels. I'll give you an example of that later from Coco. So my core question really is how is the relation between commercial production, social reproduction being reconfigured in the context of these retail value chains, and how is that transforming gendered patterns of work? So just a little bit more about the analysis that I draw on. I mentioned that I draw on global value chain and global production network analysis, and these are two, for those of you who are into this, and I know that I'm one of the crap pots who are there. The value chain approach, which was Jereffi and Kaplancki and others, is very, very focused on those commercial linkages between firms and how those play out, how those change the government, but really the inter-firm relations. What they don't really do is look at this embeddedness side. So there's another body of literature, which is the global production network literature, which is really from economic geography, Peter Dickens and Dicken and many others, which look at the societal embeddedness and really look at the power relations and the uneven way in which production and commercial sourcing, if you like, plays out. I draw on both of those, but I think both have their limitations. Neither of them look particularly at labour and neither of them look particularly at gender. I then draw on labour process and labour study theory, and that gives you a lot of insights into issues around the employment relationship and capital labour relation. I think that's important to understand my concern with focusing on a sort of traditional employment relation, and I'll go into that in a little bit in a second, is that in these value chains, when you've got a company like Walmart, whoever, I mean that's just an example, effectively controlling or having a major say in the conditions of work that take place in supplier firms thousands of miles away, it raises questions about the traditional capital labour and employment relationship, and I think we need to look at that. And also in both of these approaches, the household tends to be overlooked. I'll come back to that. Feminist political economy, and I draw on quite heavily so the work of Susan Hemell White, Diane Nelson, who I think you've got coming to speak later on, and many others, and they really look at the way in which markets themselves are gendered. Now the analysis there is focused on markets, not value chains specifically, but really on more traditional market analysis, but what they do bring out very strongly is the analysis of the relationship between paid productive and unpaid reproductive work. And I think that dimension of the analysis is really important, and their criticism of conventional economics is that it hasn't, and many other approaches that they haven't really drawn that in. Particularly if you're thinking about the reproductive work, why that's so important for me is because as I've said earlier, is that supermarkets especially, their growth is based on commercialising reproductive work, producing ready-made meals that women would have made in the home, doing producing ready-made garments that would have been traditionally made in the home. So therefore that interaction I think is really important to analyse if you want to understand fully the dynamics of these value chains. Keeping going because I don't want to run out of time. So just thinking about this from what I call a gendered value chain or production network approach. The first thing I think is really important is that, and this is the sort of moving beyond a narrow capital labour relation, is that work in a value chain, I mean work firstly I define as all forms of work which produce goods which go into the value chain. Now that could be paid or unpaid, and particularly if you work as I do in smallholder farming, a lot of it is unpaid. Informal workers, a lot of it is unpaid. Or there are questions about what the remuneration is and how that actually plays out. So I think it's very important to think of that as a sort of extended form. The next thing is this issue of the fragmentation of work which I haven't had time to go into a lot but across these value chains you buy a kind of standard produced product. For example you've got an iPhone with you which you could easily have bought through a retailer. Well Apple is a major retailer. That product will have probably been made in approximately 16 countries. So which component of that is Chinese, China assembles it, Apple which is the US sells it, a very large margin, but the components come from many many many many countries. So this fragmentation of work and the division of labour across different segments of the value chain is very important to understand. And this issue that I mentioned before, who actually controls the employment relationship in that, who really ultimately controls what working conditions are like, who is employed, how they're employed etc. And there are three dimensions that I'm particularly interested in and I'll go into in the commercialisation of reproductive work. The first is this issue of value creation and this goes back in a sense and draws on the work of Alson and others which is that the in a gender division of labour in a market economy many of the activities traditionally undertaken by women are undervalued. So cooking being is often and care work for example is often socially undervalued. It's not seen as a particularly valuable and I'm putting this in inverted commerce activity and therefore the remuneration which goes to women because it is largely in a gender division of labour women who undertake those work is lower. Now that is societally embedded. It's not being generated by value chains, but of course the retail value chain does is draw that type of work into the retail value chain and replicate it if you like. The next level and I've not had time to go into it a lot of detail. Skills are really quite important in a retail value chain. If you think of a retailer and again I'll use warm up but it is just a because it's the biggest it's nothing else. It's what they want to do is sell product at the lowest possible price point. Think about it there could be many different price points for the same product but with the maximum quality possible. Now that's the tension. That's what they want to do. You don't know supermarket wants you to go in and buy a product that's shoddy falling apart and then ultimately does you some kind of harm especially but that's just being at it's crudest level but what they want to compete on is both price and quality. Now in terms of the quality a lot of the value enhancement and I'll use the grape example. In the old days you just get a bunch of grapes, pluck it in a box. The box will go off to the wholesale market in a way the grapes will go. Not now. The grapes get put in the box. The box goes into a packing plant. That packing plant is quite likely 90% female workers. Those workers are the ones that make it look all beautiful, pretty. Take off the ones that don't look a bit knobbly. Put it in the bag that you buy it in with the little zip on it and all the rest that finally comes out. That is a major part of the value enhancement of those grapes. Those women workers can be paid quite a large level of remuneration for the skills that they bring in doing that. So it's not traditional skills, it's value enhancement. There is question though still in my view as to whether the remuneration is really reflected given the additional value they add to those grapes whether it's really reflected in the remuneration they get. Finally the capture, the value capture. Who actually captures the value in these value chains? So we're keeping moving because I don't want to get time for discussion. So very, very importantly I should, sorry, just this part of the analysis. I haven't got time to go into too much detail but I'm also very interested going back to that debate between the kind of is it all bad for women, is it all good for women debate. I think for me a very, very important dimension is the way in which the articulation between the commercial and the social plays out as a contested process. So in other words, the idea that it's all bad for women kind of assumes all there is an implicit assumption, not all writers who take that view have it, but that women are kind of passive victims and that's certainly one of the critiques that Nyla Cabrera and others have made of that view. It is contested but it's contested in a very constrained way and where often the leverage points are quite complex that can be drawn on in order to contest the kinds of conditions that women face. So I think the gendered articulations, if you like, between the commercial and the social is very important. Jennifer Baer, Maryam Werner, Pickles and Smith, many of people, Philip Kelly has also been using this articulations approach and he's really looking at it in what he calls gendered reproduction networks or global reproduction networks. And he's a geographer who's really bringing this into the global production network approach. So there are different ways in which you can look at this and this is what I want to just now go into a little bit more. This just to sum up where I've got to so far just gives you a very, very brief. So you've got the sort of global production going on on this side. Social reproduction going on on this side. The value chain that the value chain people look at is this sort of circles in the middle. This is a value chain and it links retail producers, the inputs and the workers. Very simplified but these retailers are watching what's going on in the household and the households in the community themselves often increasingly supply the workers who now increasingly in Africa, Asia and Latin America buy the products that they produce. So a bit Keynesian actually. So there are linkages that are going on between those. But it's how these two articulate. What's the relationship between them? How does it play out? This area here is really the area that I'm focused on examining. Now just to give you a little bit. I've been working on a book. It's still working progress. Just to give you a little bit of some of the kind of analysis that I've kind of been doing. The first really is just simply to map out how many women work across the value chain. We know a lot about how many women there are working in the production. Particularly at sort of lower levels through case studies. But we don't have a lot of information across the value chain. I think one of the issues is this whole issue is of the gender inequality of gender inequalities and the way in which gender inequality is reflected within value chains. I don't think value chains have created gender inequality or gender subordination, but they certainly reflect and replicate that. But at the same time in those articulations, they also create spaces to contest the dominance, if you'd like, the commercial dominance. And they also create spaces for women to organise in ways they haven't been able to necessarily in the past and form alliances. So I think we really have to analyse these inequalities, which a lot of the work I've done has been involved in. And we know there are a lot of gender inequalities. I don't know if you'd be following the press, but you know if you buy a black shaver, it costs less than if you buy a pink shaver. Exactly the same, except that pink, I can't tell you how much it costs extra to produce something in pink. In other words, the retailers themselves have been taking advantage of gender difference in order to get more spending power out of women than they have out of men. That's a big campaign at the moment that's being run by a number of NGOs. And as I mentioned earlier, you've got the other pressures that are going on in terms of the purchasing practices within the supply chain. Those purchasing practices, which again a lot of the NGO campaigns, Oxfam especially, have run, but others as well, are the pressures that some of the retailers put onto suppliers in terms of the conditions they've got to meet, the just-in-time production, turning stuff around, meeting quality standards, always at very, very low prices, constant pressure down on the prices that they pay. So the retailers tend to offload those pressures onto workers. Workers are often the safety valve for them where they can offload those downward cost pressures. But at the same time, they've still got to meet those quality standards. So there's a constant tension that plays out, and this is a contested space in which different actors are engaged at different points. And in that contested space, you have a number of different types of struggles. I mean, for a start, workers know exactly what they're producing. If you produce a branded good in a factory in India for any of the main retailers, high street retailers in the UK now, you don't just produce the garment, the dress or the trousers, et cetera. You also put on the label of the retailer. You put on the price tag of the retailer. So you see exactly what it is that good is finally going to be sold for. And you put it in the final packaging, so it's packed in India as you will buy it in the store here. So the knowledge and the information is quite strong amongst workers themselves and the ability to collectively organise it, et cetera. And at the moment, there are a number of quite major campaigns going on in Asia over particularly other living wages. There's also this issue that retail is a poor sector in any way, of course in retail we can't afford to pay good wages. Just if you all know Oxfam's 1%, 62 individuals have the same wealth or more wealth than the rest of the world. 14 of those 62 are in retail, in other words not far off, over 20% of them are in retail, including the head of Zara. So there's quite a few bucks hidden around. So this is just trying to really map out the gender inequalities across the value chain. And this is actually based on collecting data from a whole number of different sources. It's quite difficult to get that data. So this is a simplified value chain at the top, this is a food value chain, so it's a simplified value chain at the top, which you saw before. But this is at different levels within the value chain. So based on data and information publicly available from companies and other sources, the vast majority, over 50% of all senior level across the value chain is male. When you come across to the permanent supervisors and permanent workers, you get a mixed picture. Now this is current data. So this is three sections, the workers on the next level down, I forget those two levels, this comes from audit data for 10 million workers, which I'll anonymise fully and aggregated. And what that shows in the food chain is that approximately in most segments of the value chain, men and women roughly 45% to 55%. This is indicative numbers, it's not firm numbers, but certainly from the data that I've seen it. Now I would not be surprised from my own research if you went back 10 to 20 years, that would have come out blue. I know in some sectors it would have been blue. So we have seen a shift in the sort of supervisor and permanent workers from male to female. If you come down to part-time and temporary, then it goes female. And when you come, that is predominantly female in all the insecure employment. So that really bears out the bad story, this bears out potentially empowering part of the debate. Now when you come down to small holders, home workers, labour contractors etc, then it becomes much more mixed and it's much more variable across countries. So that just gives you an idea and logistics is straight down the middle. That data actually comes from a very big ILO study, difficult again to get the data, male at every segment of the value chain. So you can see a kind of, and then of course over the other end, the customers to put everybody in the customers we know are 70% plus female. And I'm assuming women eat. So therefore 50-50 on the final customer, sorry, the final consumer. So that just gives that sort of over view of kind of the gender profile of the value chain. But to go back to that question about are women workers benefiting or not benefiting, then I really draw on the concepts of global, of economic and social upgrading and downgrading. Are the conditions improving, when suppliers move up a value chain, when they get to higher value activities in the value chain, do workers benefit or not? And that raises the questions of the social upgrading or downgrading. So if they're benefiting, then they're getting better conditions, more equitable employment, better pay. If they're not benefiting, then they're getting the strong gender inequalities. Women are being concentrated in the precarious and insecure work. Their conditions aren't improving, they're not getting better pay. But in trying to analyse these two and through the Capturing the Gains program, which I won't go into here, we did a number of different case studies where we were looking at these different dimensions in a whole number of different countries. But what you could see is that there was no direct relationship. So in some context women were definitely getting better off, in other context they were definitely getting worse off. And it really is very, very significantly by the different kind of context in which the same value chain plays out. And in part it related to the kind of commercial pressures, which I've already discussed, this kind of cost versus quality, low labour cost versus skill and productivity tensions, which I've already mentioned. But it also very much depended on the bargaining positions of workers. And when you get contestation and bargaining, these are gendered processes where workers are able to find leverage points, make the alliances, form different types of campaigns, and those can vary. Then you can see examples of improvement, but where they're not able to do that, then you often get the downgrading pressures. So ultimately this isn't something that's going to trickle down, the benefits don't simply trickle down, they result from that kind of engagement. So just to give you a few examples. These are just brief examples, how am I doing on time? These are just very brief. So economic and social downgrading in cocoa. So if you are jocoholics like me, I've done a lot of research over many years in cocoa. I don't know what drew me into cocoa anyway, if you eat chocolate you'll know. Coco is a downgrading story through and through. It really goes back to the 1980s structural adjustment, dismantling of all the cocoa boards, et cetera, which protected cocoa farmers. Since the 1980s there's been a decline in cocoa prices. High levels of poverty amongst cocoa farmers, 70% comes out, small holder farmers in West Africa. Deteriorating conditions, problems in production, I mean I could go on and on and on. It's all the downgrading story. Supposedly cocoa is a male crop, but the research that we've done shows that women do 45% at least of the work in cocoa farming. They also do the critical bits of the work in terms of productivity and quality. This decline, which has been going on, also led to one form of contestation. Contestation can take different forms. It can be individual, it can be collective and or it can be collaborative. The individual form is exit. You simply exit the situation in which your downgrading is taking place. In cocoa farming that has happened increasingly across swathes of West Africa in terms of younger cocoa farmers leaving cocoa farming. So there's a serious problem now of declining productivity, exit out of cocoa farming. At the same time as you've got significant expansion in the consumption of chocolate, particularly in Asia, China and India, where chocolate consumption has been going up at around 10% per annum. So you've got the decline in supply, increase in demand just globally. About five years ago, Amajaro, one of the main cocoa traders, did a prediction, which is that by 2020 there's going to be a million at current trends, there's going to be a million ton shortage of cocoa. We're going to need 4 million tonnes, there will only be 3 million available on current trends. So if you like chocolate, start stocking up. That was one thing that was going on. The other thing that was going on was Oxfam behind the Brands. Oxfam did a big campaign where they got the main confectionary companies, they ranked them on a whole set of issues and one of those issues with gender. I won't go too much into the campaign like we can in discussion because I had some issues about how they did the ranking, but the point is they did rank based on publicly available data and information. And the chocolate companies came out very badly, particularly some of them, that they weren't doing anything on gender. But why would you? Because any way cocoa's a male crop. Of course what they weren't looking at is cocoa's a male crop, the cocoa farmer is male, i.e. the land, recognised land owner, what they weren't looking at was who does the work. So the research myself and others showed that women actually do a large amount of work. So you have these two things going on simultaneously, suddenly the chocolate companies are faced with the fact they're going to have a million tonne shortage. They suddenly discover that women do all this work in cocoa farming and you now have in West Africa large numbers of initiatives, millions and millions of dollars, pounds, euros being spent on these initiatives, both to support the livelihoods of cocoa farmers and to promote gender equality. So that's an example of where you've had the downgrading pressures over a very long period of time, different forms of contestation, both collaborative and individual, that then led to the kind of upgrading push. Now whether or not that leads to improvements we'd wait to see but certainly it's just very briefly time, I'm just thinking of which one. I won't be able to do all of them, I think just very briefly. Again the downgrading and upgrading pressures in garment work and I think again this is an area where garments has been traditionally a downgrading industry partly because it's so footloose. You can't just up and move your cocoa production to another part of the world, it takes you very few places that you can grow cocoa, there's all sorts of limits on what you can grow and wear etc and it takes at least five years to grow a cocoa tree. Garments you can up sticks, move a factory to Jordan or another country, a very short notice, transport the workers across and move it around. So there's always long been downgrading pressures in garments. Of course those downgrading pressures led to the collapse, the Rana Plaza disaster and over a thousand workers been killed and that was absolute disaster but it was a one off reflection of what had been going on for a very very long time. So those downgrading pressures were leading to less and less safe work for factory workers in Bangladesh and you have similar pressures elsewhere in many many other garment producing countries. So that's the kind of contested outcomes if you like. Now these pressures, there's a whole range of strikes at the moment going on over living wage in Bangladesh just in the last few weeks. So there's a sort of wave of strikes which have been building in Bangladesh. So Bangladeshi workers are 80% female, traditionally seen as subservient in inverted commas, passive etc. They're not passive now and that contested outcome if you like is at least leading to campaigns for change whether or not that leads to change we'll see. But this is a picture of a factory in fact in Vietnam where there is a major initiatives to try and upgrade in order to get the better skills and quality. So whilst you can find plenty of downgrading pressures there are also to get the better skills and quality some quite important upgrading initiatives that are taking place. Led some by multistakeholder initiatives this particular one is led by the ILO Better Work campaign or program but also led by a number of different retailers. So you're getting both the downgrading pressures and upgrading pressures. Now where those play out again I would argue depends to logic stuff ultimately on the extent to which contestation and bargaining takes place in the value chain. More difficult in garments than it is I think in some ways. Well the difference is you can't generalise but so just a few very quick reflections. So basically what I've argued is that you've got this significant shift that's taken place. What we've seen in Europe and North America is now taking place in it has well long taken place in Latin America and some countries in Asia it is rapidly taking place in Africa too. So and within that you get these upgrading downgrading kind of pressure where you get these pressures for skill and price. So it's not just all cheap it's got to be cheap with quality and that creates a commercial tension. That plays out in terms of the articulations if you like with the societal embeddedness in different ways and complex ways but in ways where the bargaining processes and the types of alliances individual collective and collaborative that are formed play an important role in ultimately leading to the shifts that lead to those improvements. That could have given more examples of that. One thing I haven't gone into and I think is really important and I'm working on at the moment is the role of the state in all of this. The state has traditionally been left out and in fact the states in most countries have usually just said there's nothing to do with us. This is all the exporters. I think that's changing. Certainly the Bangladesh is a very good example of where the role of the state is being questioned and being kind of dragged in. I'm not quite sure that's the right word but it is being drawn into playing a more significant role under pressure and the complex ways in which that interaction also takes place. But also very importantly in terms of the governance so it's not just the state on its own. It's one of the governance arrangements in these value chains where you have not only states should be playing a role but also the companies clearly play a role, big retailers etc. But also civil society organisations. I mean that Oxfam campaign made a massive difference I think in CoCo and there are many other examples like that that I could sign. Thank you so much Stephanie. Paul how about I give you five minutes to offer some reflections for us. Thanks very much. Thanks Stephanie for a really excellent presentation and to the organisers for bringing Stephanie here and also for the whole range of events you've put on around this. So I'm a complete interloper here being the lawyer who dabbils in questions of political economy and so forth. But listening to Stephanie a number of sort of neurons fired off about sort of general sort of I think probably important issues that your research maybe sheds light on. I think the fourth thing was that it was excellent how you broke down the binaries between this is necessarily good necessarily bad because this quite often happens that there are simplistic narratives which says that the increasing employment of women in these sectors necessarily is a great exploitation and there's only one route and so forth. So that was really helpful. There are just I suppose three questions then I'll ask things that would be useful for me to sort of have clarified a little further. The first one and it relates to kind of the last point you made but also something you said at the start of your talk and you said we live in a post neoliberal era in light of Trump and sort of other developments. And you mentioned towards the end the increasing role of the state or the state being dragged in. And so I suppose I wonder to what extent this is new or novel in any meaningful sense. So you gave the example of the state saying oh well that's not to do with us that's the exporters but even that is a form of state action in that that's a decision by the state as to how it structures back. So I do wonder what what the sort of shifting climate is this shift towards a from increasingly authoritarian neoliberalism to I don't know exactly what we'll call it yet we'll wait and see what Theresa May and Donald Trump and others do with this sort of paternalistic state driven capital accumulation support network to the develop and I'm not entirely sure how we classify it. It definitely represents a shift from the rhetoric of neoliberalism. But to what extent the represents a substantive shift from the substance of what was happening under the umbrella of neoliberalism for the last 24 years. I'd be interested to see what you think about that more generally because that relates also I think to you mentioned again at the start you said how this process has taken place over the last number of years. Somebody wrote a book about I can't remember the exact year it was in the mid 2000s when for the first time in human history we tipped from a majority rural global population to a majority urban. And so increasing urbanization so what was one of the factors you identified and you mentioned that this may have just been a throw away comment that for so long as these processes continue but they may not continue because of Trump. I wonder again if you'd sort of reflect on that to what extent that is processes reversible you know to what extent can the genie be put back in the bottle in that sense if we'd want to or not. And I suppose in keeping with the team of sort of rupture or the absence of rupture. So you mentioned one of the key things that happens with these immense global values. I don't know if anybody's ever read The Grapes of Wrath or perhaps even just seen the film and there's a scene in it where Muley who's a tenant farmer in the book he's been evicted from his property. And the guy comes around to a victim and Muley comes out with a shotgun and says I'm not going anywhere and the guy says don't shoot me it's the bank manager who sent me here to do this and he says well I'll shoot the bank manager. And the guy says well don't shoot the bank manager because it's the guy in Detroit who has told him to do it. So you mentioned that one of the things about these expanding global value chains was that it alters the relationship between exploiter and exploiter between worker and labour and capital. And then I wonder to what extent that's novel as well. I'm thinking of James Conley's workshop talks on socialism in 1905 when he talked about railroads that were being built in Russia financed by capitalists from Britain and France. So that tension has always been there. That sort of tension between the relation between capital and labour has always been complicated and messy and very rarely being the neoclassical abstraction of somebody making a loaf of bread and taking it to market and so forth. So I wonder if you'd again reflect on that. And then finally I think I'd be remiss at so asking this question. So the focus on gender is really crucially important. And then I was trying to, as you were talking about the differential impact of these processes that in some places we see downgrading, in some places we see upgrading and it varies and there's lots of subjective factors as to why that might be and so forth. And I wondered if in your research if you have the space or if it's something considered other valences of oppression. So what comes to mind is bell hooks is clunky, but necessary phrase of the system we live under being one. I'll have to read it out because I forget I get mixed up sometimes in imperialist white supremacist capitalist patriarchy, which is a clunky phrase, but perhaps those capture the different layers. And so I wonder, so you mentioned cocoa in West Africa being one sector we've seen downgrading. And so gender is one metric we can look at there, but to what extent is that situated in the colonial past in the sort of racial dimension, the racial perspective. I wonder if that's something you have space to consider in your research. And again, it's, you know, the research for me is extremely helpful and fantastic talk. But again, I just wonder if that is another dimension or series of dimensions. So I'll leave it at that because it's better to hear what the people who know what I'm talking about have to say. Thank you, Paul. Do you want to take a few minutes to respond to those and then we take some questions from the floor? Just a quick response, because it'd be great to have time. But I think, yeah, I mean, this is the issue, the kind of post neoliberalism. I think that the first, I mean clearly we live in a post Washington consensus. So that kind of narrow sense of it, I think we've moved on. I think the trouble, the only problem for me is if you only look at it through a sort of an economic lens of markets, which I think many people still do, is you just miss a lot of what's really going on in terms of the commercial dynamic. And particularly now with, I mean, and that goes back to one of your later questions, which is, you know, what's the shift? And can we put the genie back in the bottle? But if you're thinking of it as sort of a kind of Europe and North America, the sort of traditional imperialist-colonial relationship between Europe and North America and developing countries, even going back to say 20 years, that has been fundamentally changed by outsourcing, and China is clearly the example of that. So a lot of the firms now, the lead firms, are not European and American, they're actually, I mean Tata, for example Tata owns Jaguar cars, it owns Tatley tea, it owns British steel or whatever it's now called, or whichever, yeah, or Corus, isn't it? I mean, you know, so a lot of those traditional kind of colonial relations are being changed, so I don't think you can ignore the past at all, because as I argued it, these commercial processes are embedded in different social context, socio-economic context, and how those evolved is very important to understand, but not just to say, oh well it's all just sort of colonial past, because there are many more complex interactions now taking place, which I mean, you know, often if you talk to, anyway I won't go into, there are people in Africa, Asia and Latin America are quite aware of. So I think there are sort of shifts taking place and it's trying to understand that, not being too caught in the paradigms that we've used in the past and assuming that those will explain, where they do explain, continue to use them, but I think on this issue of the urbanisation and will these processes continue and the Trump thing, I mean that's really, I mean it's very interesting for me that global outsourcing started in America and we under Reagan and we were the ones, the UK under Thatcher was the first to follow suit and those two countries did it full scale, you know, outsourcing, closing down of industry, sending services abroad, et cetera, et cetera, and it's not pure coincidence, I think that you've got Brexit and Trump in those two countries where the full effects of it were the strongest, of course people lost jobs, lost future, lost opportunities and there is now a reaction going on again so that's not a complete surprise where this will continue in the future. I think remains to be seen because of course what you didn't have in the past we didn't have the China India card. Now China and India are major economic and well all the bricks but those two in particular are major economic players now. I know working in Africa, I mean all of the stuff over cocoa it's because of what's going on in China and India. They're the big consumers, they're what's driving the change and the pressures. So I think Trump and May are trying or Maybot or whatever we're meant to call them now are trying to put the genie back in the model. Whether they are able to do it I think there's a big question mark and of course there could be a lot of fallout intentions that arise as a result. But the other final big shift I think the big shift in terms of the capital labour relation is I agree with you that those kind of pressures on the whole in most labour markets not all but most the capital labour relation was usually contained at least to some extent within a kind of national labour market framework where the state did have a role or didn't. I mean chose not to and I completely agree with you not playing a role is just deliberately not playing a role is a strategy. Now the big shift now is that actually from the value chain side is that companies thousands of miles away outside of the jurisdiction of that labour market can have quite a significant impact on what goes on in that labour market. But there is no control over those companies that the government has no control over them. So I think that shift from the national to the global which is again what Trump and people on Brexit are a reflection of a reaction against the implications of that. I think we live in a very uncertain world but we're not going I don't think we're just going to go back to where we were 70 years ago. I know in 1970s I know there are some people would love what we could but I just don't see that happening. OK, great. Well I think we'll open for a few questions from the floor and then we can continue that discussion. Who'd like to ask a question? To raise your hands. Don't be shy. Yes. Any more? I think that's the issue of the consumer. I didn't really go into it in a lot of detail. I've actually written a paper on it because we did a paper on an environment planning A on that side of it and it's more complex. The drivers of fair trade in Africa, Asia and Latin America. I mean actually in places like Bangladesh and India you've often had, there's been sort of small social movement based kind of ethical fair without a certified movement but I agree with you it's tended to be fairly niche. I think those niches continue. I think the rise of the shift in retail, those retailers are also trying to now, that's where the growth market of fair trade is in retailers in Africa, Asia and Latin America. So for example fair trade Africa is selling into Nakimat in Kenya, you get it in Marks and Spencer's in Woolworths and Pick and Pay in South Africa. So they're developing relationships with supermarkets a bit like they did here. I mean it's really going back, it's very small, very nascent. The issue though about whether or not the shift in retail, you see I don't think the shift is purely because consumers ask for it. I mean retailers here know that if you do a survey outside the supermarket and you ask everybody would you pay 50p more for a fair trade label product? Very crude figures are 70% will tell you yes, 30% will tell you more. When the same consumers five minutes later walk through the door, get to the shelf, get faced by a thing of tea, 50p more has got fair trade than the non 30% will buy it, 70% won't. And they'll do that within 10 minutes and that is so well known. I mean they track these things like hawks so they know exactly. So it's actually even more complex here than it is there but there's a whole range of reasons why you sell fair trade. Students buy fair trade but they will only buy it maybe once a month or when the grant check comes or when they manage to pay off the debt to the bank or whatever, they'll sneak it in. So it's a whole complex range of reasons why people buy fair trade. The one thing they don't want anyone doing is going to another shop to buy fair trade because the second they go to another shop they'll buy everything else there as well. So it's complex but the big thing that's driving it in Africa outside of the supermarkets in Africa that do sell fair trade is simply quality. They want quality products even though they don't certify those products in any way and requiring quality products with skill shortages mean you've got to improve labour conditions. Simple, so they're doing it. Not for consumer reasons but for that reason. So there are kind of complex ways in which these things. On the role of entrepreneurs, yes, no that's a really big issue actually. I didn't get time to go into it. I think sometimes, I don't know, there's a thing, I mean obviously working in development you work a lot with, well I do anyway, maybe I went and sold out too many years ago but anyway, with sort of some of the big kind of like the UN etc. So UN women for example at the moment is really focused on promoting gender in supply chains. Female entrepreneurs is what they're particularly focused on. Now a lot of companies are very happy to do that because you know obviously this is promoting private sector engagement. So Walmart for example has a commitment, I can't remember the exact number but they will, you know, a significant amount of their sourcing will be from female owned businesses. So there is quite a lot going on in relation to female entrepreneurs in many countries across many countries across the supply chain. My only worry about it is that it kind of diverts a little bit. I think it's great. I mean I think it's really important but it can sometimes be a sort of diversion from the fact that actually labour conditions, that's not where the worst labour conditions are necessarily. That's my concern. Right, I saw a hand there in the middle. Yep, from Jessica. It seems that it's just about sort of breeding. It's like a homicarp breeding. If there is a homicarp breeding it's a second. If there is a machine and there is a quality, I think that it's just a matter of that. Okay, was the question here? Yeah. I think Paul wanted to add another quick thing. So my question actually is related to the question about value and I think related also to the question. Again there were so many fascinating points about it. I suppose one thing that comes with it, you get the example of grapes and the value chain that where we end up with grapes in the supermarket. And in that context you mentioned that you queried whether or not women ever actually get renumeration equivalent to the value they add to the, in that process. And I suppose the question I have is that isn't that fundamentally impossible? Because if they were getting renumeration equal to the value they were adding to the grapes then it wouldn't be capitalism anymore or something else. And then I think very quickly a related question and this might just, if you can follow my sort of thinking on this and maybe clarify. One of the key processes you described was that the expansion of the retail value chains, the expansion of women's employment and the retail value chains was having the effect, or one of the effects of it was the commercialised home working the home that women used to do historically. And I suppose thinking about the feminist literature and political economy and so forth, one of the arguments would be that this unrecognised and unpaid labour of women is part of what contributes ultimately. And I suppose this turns on what you mean by value, it contributes to the value or the share that capital ultimately enjoys at the end. And is there attention then in the increasing employment of women in these sectors which therefore necessarily takes them away from that historic work of social, reduces the amount of that work of social reproduction which they can perform. And so the retail sectors are creating products to replace work that women used to do. That work that women used to do was part of what generated the value for the fairness of the forced instance and does that create attention, sort of imminent tension in the whole process. I think the points that you're touching on are really critical points. Firstly, I agree with you that the economic and social upgrading concepts on their own, which really come from the ILO decent work, it's really how do you define it, their framework. I don't think they conceptually help you to understand distribution, so I completely agree with that. And that's where I think that's at that point that I really, I did shift the order of the slides around because I wasn't quite sure which way to do it. But that's the point at which that concept of articulations and the bargaining process I think is critical because that's where those distribution, it's the fights, if you like. It's not simply a kind of a technical process of distribution. Even if you go back to pure economic analysis, in a value chain, commercial players have oligopolistic control and therefore even they are able to extract, they're able to use that oligopolistic position in order to negotiate better terms and conditions. So even that on a pure free market analysis is not a free market because of that nature. So I would agree with that. I think the issue of value is a really tricky one and I don't think I've got the answer to it and I'm certainly not going to be able to get that in the book. For me the problem partly of how value is defined and it kind of goes back to the point you're making. And that's why I think the feminist political economy, particularly the work of Susan Himmelwhite and Diane Alson's work is really, really important. For me all of the different ways in which value is analysed theoretically, so that's from the different sort of schools, has not fully understood or taken account of unpaid reproductive labour. I mean that's really the core of the feminist argument against Marxist analysis, against Keynesian analysis and against neoclassical analysis. And I think that's for me a really, really important part of it. Now how you incorporate that in is tricky because exactly as you say, I mean in a sense you can even go back to a sort of standard kind of market economy. Market economies are dependent largely on women's unpaid labour, reproducing the labour force, which then goes into production into the standard capital labour relation if you like. So in a sense it's already, you've had that role there. What's changing to some extent is the way in which that reproductive labour is then being bought in and commercialised, but socially undervalued. So women are still, for societal reasons, producing food. Of course we all know that anyone who produces food, it's a low skill, low value activity. I still can't quite work out why the highest paid chefs in the world are all men, but anyway that's an aside. So in other words it's not necessarily, but societally it's been undervalued. So that is a really tricky issue. I haven't got an answer to it. I do agree with, and that goes back to that earlier question, the first piece of what you said, which is in this kind of oligopolistic situation. There are what, Refi Koplinski calls the economic rents. The Nike example is such a good example. Two pairs of shoes being produced in a factory are the same factory. They both look the same, they feel the same. A slightly different design in one and a few other differences, but they're pretty minor. You're going to pay $100 more for the Nike shoe than you are for the other shoe because it's got a tick on it. Now, which theory of value fully, for me, there is no theory of value that I've seen that really unpacks why the tick and a few other accoutrements are worth $100 more than the shoe. Almost the same shoe without the tick and a few accoutrements. Nike would dispute that by the way they would say, but there's major differences. Well, I'm not sure. So I don't think there's any theory of value that really explains that in my view. And then when you bring the fact that shoes may be a bad example, a garments would have been a better example with a tick on a t-shirt, for example, produced by... It's just that more men work in shoe production, so that would have been maybe 80% women. And anyway, everybody knows that producing garments is a low value activity, but again, I still can't quite work that one out when you get some of the highest paid kind of, you know. So, you know, I've got the word, but autocuture or whatever you want to call it, is very highly paid. So it's a tension, and I haven't got an answer to your question. I think it's a really important question. It's one I battle with. I can find what's wrong with the theories. I haven't got the replacement theory, if you like. But I think one of... Some ways I've actually gone back to looking at some of the theories of unequal exchange and how if you get this economic rent, how it then gets divided out. But then the only way I can see in that is, again, it comes back to this bargaining process. So that's where I am at the moment, but it's a good question. I haven't got the answer to it. Very important question as well. OK, we've got another couple of hands I can see, so this will be the last round. It's OK for you. Thank you. In the back there in the blue. OK, thank you. And a final question here in the corner by the window. So there was one question earlier that I forgot to pick up on, which is how do you maintain the gains if you do make them? And I think that's a really important question. And that is a big problem in precarious work, because, you know, I mean, just taking the... I mean, that's a very simple one, but great workers know. You see, they know everything that's going on. Don't forget they know what the orders are. They know what's going on. They've put the Tesco label on the bag. They know exactly what's going on because they do it. And the classic thing in Chile, for example, is we don't... I mean, workers told me we don't need a union. We know when the pressure's on. We just do that. If you just slow the process down, and by slowing the process down they can get all sorts of gains and really do well. The problem is, as soon as that pressures off or the season changes, those gains go. So how to sustain the gains is a major challenge in these highly precarious types of work. And I haven't gone in, didn't go into state, but that's why a number of people are arguing now that the state needs to come back in and play more of a role. But I think there are big issues there because it's not straightforward. Going back, I think, is not the solution. Sorry, I got a bit messy here. I think the points that you made about the kind of links between producer and consumers in important one. I mean, it is quite interesting with the iPhone... Sorry, the smartphone has made a big... I mean, the iPhone is one because Samsung is Korean. So, I mean, again, there's another example. It's not a European or North American company. But the smartphone, I think, has made a big difference in terms of creating the linkages. And those have been created more and more. I mean, smartphones are available at the moment still with the higher income consumers in Africa, Asia and Latin America. But as you know with mobile, wherever generation we're on now will soon be the second, will move on to another generation. Those will become second hand and then they're very rapidly repaired and resuscitated and sold back in within Africa, Asia and Latin America. So, I mean, I've been in parts of Africa, which, you know, I mean, very small... I mean, I'm working cocoa, goodness, I've been to villages. They've got no water, they've got no road to get... You've got a dirt track for miles and miles and miles and when the rainy season it's unpassable. You go, there's no electricity, there's no school, there's no health clinic, but they've all got mobile phones or access to. Because it's not just owning one, it's having access to, which is really important, particularly in community contexts. And those mobile phones have enormous amounts of information which is already being passed through and that only increases. So the connection between the producer and the consumer is being shortened even within Africa, Asia and Latin America. Now, how that will play out, again, it's difficult to know, but you can see the shifts going on. I should just say in the 14 retailers that I mentioned up there in Oxfam 62, people own more wealth than the rest of the book, the rest of the world put together. One of them is Jeff Bezos of Amazon and another one is Jack Ma, Alibaba, which is the Chinese equivalent of Amazon. So it's not just a European North American. You can see the shifts that are going on. How is the female employment measure? There's a number of people who work on that and it's quite... Obviously you can do it through just numbers. Just simply labour force participation. Now, the problem with the data is the data is usually based on labour force surveys, which are national surveys, it doesn't tell you what percentage of that goes through value chains. So that we don't necessarily know. And then the second thing it doesn't tell you is that a lot of what does pass through value... Value chains link not just the top tier supplier that might be involved with the export, but also many lower tiers as well, the input suppliers in and that isn't available in the data. Because of that and because it's 60 to 80% of all world trade now passes through value chains, that figure is from the OECD, UNCTAD and the WTO jointly. They did that work. They now have a project called the TIVA, the Trading Value Added Programme, which is trying to do this measurement and they're now working on the labour side of that. How do you measure employment within value chains? They're using input output analysis to try and do it, but there are a number of problems again with using input output analysis. So there is a lot of work going on on trying to do that measurement. It is difficult because the data is just not there in a sort of classically traditional ways in which the data is collected is based on national labour markets and so it doesn't give you the value chain picture. The ILO also has a team working on it and they're working with the OECD, which is what houses TIVA where TIVA is housed. Those are mainly econometricians who are working on trying to collect that data. So there is data but it's not very good, but they're working on it. Then the final point about the technology though, so bots, fox bots, which do you want to call them, automation and 3D printing. We'll all be producing our own clothes at home soon. We won't need to go to a shop. Obviously if you talk to some of the tech people, that's going to take over and the whole world's going to change and we can all go out and what's it like. We were going to swim in the morning, fish in the afternoon and whatever. Sorry. That potentially has a very disruptive effect. The robots put into sewing factories, into garment factories is already happening. You can reduce the number of workers significantly, very significantly. I've seen it in fruit as well. I didn't show the South Africa one but a lot of those pack houses now are being automated slowly. I was in one not very long ago and it was all being done. The laser eyes do all the sorting and gathering out. They still use manual labour for the last bit of the process. It's going to have a big effect on labour. The gender impacts of that are going to be mixed. That's the South African pack house factory. I was up on a big gantry looking down and watching this amazing process going on at enormous speed. They had all these small pickup trucks, fork lift trucks, quite small ones that were going around doing the shifting from the different lines. I suddenly realised one of them had a woman in it. South Africa, a woman in a fork lift truck. No, we shouldn't allow that. Sorry, I'm being facetious. Then I realised another one had a woman in it. I said, how come we've got women in fork lift trucks? I've been told for so many years women shouldn't drive fat. In South Africa women should not, because clearly genetically we weren't geared to doing things like that. In fact, probably it was about 50-50 male and female. They found that women fork lift truck drivers were better than the women. It's all computer controlled, but there's this issue of the soft skills that they were just a lot more gentle in the way they did the lifting. Marian Werner's work in the Dominican Republic on the kind of new technology and garment production, ironically there she found that you had an increase in male employment on the labour intensive piece of the production as they increased the automation, but an increase in female employment on the more automated parts where you needed a higher skill level. That wasn't the same worker, because you had to have a degree to go into that level. It's going to be again complex, and it's going to play out differently in different places, but there is some evidence in Asia where you've got the automation. It's leading to defeminisation in some parts of Asia. Different studies are showing different things, but potentially forget Trump and Brexit. That's going to be a big challenge, I think. Excellent. Thank you so much, Stephanie, for joining us this evening and having such an illuminating discussion. I'd like to take an opportunity to thank Stephanie. Please.