Comments on: The Fair Trade Finish Line http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/ James Hoffmann's coffee blog. Sun, 14 Mar 2010 23:55:52 +0000 hourly 1 By: “You don’t purposefully buy Fair Trade coffee?!” http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-98260 “You don’t purposefully buy Fair Trade coffee?!” Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:31:20 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-98260 [...] repeating what he has to say, read the article yourself: www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line [...] [...] repeating what he has to say, read the article yourself: http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line [...]

]]> By: The state of Fair Trade « coffee + development http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97627 The state of Fair Trade « coffee + development Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:55:07 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97627 [...] for its developmental impact.  And Fair Trade has taken some hits the popular media and among coffee cognoscenti lately, which makes it a timely [...] [...] for its developmental impact.  And Fair Trade has taken some hits the popular media and among coffee cognoscenti lately, which makes it a timely [...]

]]> By: M. http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97577 M. Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:33:15 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97577 Jim: Great post that has given rise to a great discussion...Is this what you mean by agitation? :) I love your 140-character summation of Fair Trade. At one point, after more than 3 years of full-time FT activism in the United States, I had thought of a bumper-sticker version of the same sentiment: "Fair Trade. It's the least you can do." The point is the same as the one you raise, and that is that Fair Trade ought not to be held up as the goal, but rather a point of departure on a longer and more meaningful path. As a stand-alone goal from the corporate side it is pretty uninspiring and invites the kind of cynicism you seem to share. From the perspective of the coffeelands, it hardly has a monopoly on the way farmer organizations think about trade that contributes to sustainable development...M Jim: Great post that has given rise to a great discussion…Is this what you mean by agitation? :) I love your 140-character summation of Fair Trade. At one point, after more than 3 years of full-time FT activism in the United States, I had thought of a bumper-sticker version of the same sentiment: “Fair Trade. It's the least you can do.” The point is the same as the one you raise, and that is that Fair Trade ought not to be held up as the goal, but rather a point of departure on a longer and more meaningful path. As a stand-alone goal from the corporate side it is pretty uninspiring and invites the kind of cynicism you seem to share. From the perspective of the coffeelands, it hardly has a monopoly on the way farmer organizations think about trade that contributes to sustainable development…M

]]> By: Kyle Freund http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97571 Kyle Freund Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:47:00 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97571 Thanks for the comment Amber. And great discussion. Helping these families have more consistent income, access to education and health care, and greater food security goes a long way to ensuring sustainability. Coffee Kids and other nonprofits in the industry give every shop, roaster, and consumer the opportunity to help these families create more vibrant local economies that help buffer against price fluctuations. . Thanks for the comment Amber. And great discussion. Helping these families have more consistent income, access to education and health care, and greater food security goes a long way to ensuring sustainability. Coffee Kids and other nonprofits in the industry give every shop, roaster, and consumer the opportunity to help these families create more vibrant local economies that help buffer against price fluctuations. .

]]> By: Anne http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97529 Anne Sat, 31 Oct 2009 04:49:11 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97529 This is one of those great debates that will last us for a long time but will also keep me going. I have really been having this debate for almost 10 years. I think Rick actually hit it pretty squarely on the head when he said, "I think starbucks has been pushing fair trade so hard lately because it is easier to get that point across than to try to educate their customers on what their own ethical sourcing program is all about." That goes back to some of your earlier posts, James, about 'educating the customer' (customer reaction: ick), and also how the coffee community handles the press. I think the vast majority of us in the specialty market really do want to see a higher price for green coffee, and as Amber mentioned, a higher 'sustainable/holistic/etc.' impact on the people we buy coffee from. And for better or worse, we as a coffee community are fascinated with that complex process, wether it's through co-ops in mexico, the COE, or the ECX in Ethiopia. We will talk about them until we are blue in the face. But are we really explaining it to the consumer? This is where I also starting wading into the muddy waters of the 'Direct Trade' model. If I try to put on my ethical consumer hat (actually, usually my mom does this for me), it's very hard for me to understand clearly and easily what's better about Direct Trade. For the most part, you as a consumer have to keep the faith in your roaster to tell you that they really are in a relationship, and perhaps how they define it. Is a Direct Relationship knowing the name of a farmer? A visit once a year? Education/Training at origin? All? None? Does a Direct Relationship coffee need to have a multi-year contract, or pre-harvest financing for farmers? Is it 3rd-party certified? When does the definition of direct trade become 'ethical' enough? And why does one farmer get lucky, while all his or her neighbors suffer the same old fate? I think this is where specialty coffee falters. We spend a lot of time saying that Fair Trade isn't what it could be, but not a lot of time clearly defining/explaining/marketing the better alternative, if there currently is one. And I'm not saying there is. Sorry to use the American political reference, but when it comes to this issue, it seems like we're all Democrats. We all agree that there are big flaws with Fair Trade, but then we spend a lot of time debating the complex nuances of any alternatives. In the meantime, we leave the consumer alone in the grocery aisle, with the choice between fair trade or canned coffee. I just hope they reach for the Fair Trade for now - but we come up with a clear message for the alternative. This is one of those great debates that will last us for a long time but will also keep me going. I have really been having this debate for almost 10 years.

I think Rick actually hit it pretty squarely on the head when he said, “I think starbucks has been pushing fair trade so hard lately because it is easier to get that point across than to try to educate their customers on what their own ethical sourcing program is all about.” That goes back to some of your earlier posts, James, about ‘educating the customer’ (customer reaction: ick), and also how the coffee community handles the press.

I think the vast majority of us in the specialty market really do want to see a higher price for green coffee, and as Amber mentioned, a higher ’sustainable/holistic/etc.’ impact on the people we buy coffee from. And for better or worse, we as a coffee community are fascinated with that complex process, wether it’s through co-ops in mexico, the COE, or the ECX in Ethiopia. We will talk about them until we are blue in the face. But are we really explaining it to the consumer?

This is where I also starting wading into the muddy waters of the ‘Direct Trade’ model. If I try to put on my ethical consumer hat (actually, usually my mom does this for me), it’s very hard for me to understand clearly and easily what’s better about Direct Trade. For the most part, you as a consumer have to keep the faith in your roaster to tell you that they really are in a relationship, and perhaps how they define it. Is a Direct Relationship knowing the name of a farmer? A visit once a year? Education/Training at origin? All? None? Does a Direct Relationship coffee need to have a multi-year contract, or pre-harvest financing for farmers? Is it 3rd-party certified? When does the definition of direct trade become ‘ethical’ enough? And why does one farmer get lucky, while all his or her neighbors suffer the same old fate?

I think this is where specialty coffee falters. We spend a lot of time saying that Fair Trade isn’t what it could be, but not a lot of time clearly defining/explaining/marketing the better alternative, if there currently is one. And I’m not saying there is.

Sorry to use the American political reference, but when it comes to this issue, it seems like we’re all Democrats. We all agree that there are big flaws with Fair Trade, but then we spend a lot of time debating the complex nuances of any alternatives. In the meantime, we leave the consumer alone in the grocery aisle, with the choice between fair trade or canned coffee. I just hope they reach for the Fair Trade for now – but we come up with a clear message for the alternative.

]]> By: Amber Fox http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97514 Amber Fox Wed, 28 Oct 2009 06:28:32 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97514 Well said, Kyle. This is a great discussion, of the sort that we should all be having more often in the specialty coffee industry. This is an incredibly complex issue, difficult to address in any broad manner due to diverse producing, and purchasing, situations. Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts, your local small roastery, Herbazu, a co-op in Ethiopia, or a large plantation in Brasil all come with their own set of circumstances (obviously). We have to keep this in mind, tailoring individual solutions to each situation. This approach is strengthened by long-standing trade relationships, a deeper knowledge of the intricacies of each situation, and the broader goals of the producer and roaster. Here's where I think we all become too focussed on the price paid for the coffee as being the primary piece of data on which we place the success or failure of a more ethical sourcing program. We forget the WHY of this movement in the first place! We're after a truly ethical sourcing program in which the quality of life can improve for producers, yes? We should continue to question what that means, exactly, and how we measure it. Yes, we should be concentrating on transparency, traceability, quality, and integrity. Thankfully, these are becoming more accepted, and have even moved toward the status of common sense for sourcing practices in the industry. But beyond establishing relationships to raise quality, and then paying for that quality (probably more so under direct trade-type programs), what are the broader benefits for the producing community? Without a doubt, in certain direct trade relationships, the broader impact has been extraordinary... but can that happen more often, for more producing communities? What else, beyond extra funds paid for the coffee, can a more ethical trade model contribute? This attacks a fundamental question of how we measure success: monetary values, or by other bottom lines? Idea exchange, collaboration, more participatory work on community issues (Bikes to Rwanda is one example that springs to mind, as does Cafe Femenino). I think that to truly be ethical in the way we source coffee, we absolutely have to be holistic! So to get back to Kyle's point, it should be within our reach as responsible coffee purchasers to work with producing communities on year-round income, as well as contributing to other areas that can improve quality of life (education, infrastructure, gender issues, health care, etc). Before we get too focussed on the fact that direct trade coffees pay more to the farmer in a more transparent way than Fair Trade tends to, we should remember that we're all working towards a model in which the bare minimum is a progressively ambitious and holistic target. (there are many caveats to this, especially in how it would be applied... i.e.: i'm not suggesting that every coffee roaster who buys coffee directly then has the power to dictate how or where extra funds should be spent on community projects... but rather that collaborative and participatory support could be offered for such projects. moreover, we should also be talking about commodity grade coffees and sourcing practices there... but that's another discussion!). Well said, Kyle.
This is a great discussion, of the sort that we should all be having more often in the specialty coffee industry. This is an incredibly complex issue, difficult to address in any broad manner due to diverse producing, and purchasing, situations. Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts, your local small roastery, Herbazu, a co-op in Ethiopia, or a large plantation in Brasil all come with their own set of circumstances (obviously). We have to keep this in mind, tailoring individual solutions to each situation. This approach is strengthened by long-standing trade relationships, a deeper knowledge of the intricacies of each situation, and the broader goals of the producer and roaster.
Here’s where I think we all become too focussed on the price paid for the coffee as being the primary piece of data on which we place the success or failure of a more ethical sourcing program. We forget the WHY of this movement in the first place! We’re after a truly ethical sourcing program in which the quality of life can improve for producers, yes? We should continue to question what that means, exactly, and how we measure it.
Yes, we should be concentrating on transparency, traceability, quality, and integrity. Thankfully, these are becoming more accepted, and have even moved toward the status of common sense for sourcing practices in the industry.
But beyond establishing relationships to raise quality, and then paying for that quality (probably more so under direct trade-type programs), what are the broader benefits for the producing community? Without a doubt, in certain direct trade relationships, the broader impact has been extraordinary… but can that happen more often, for more producing communities? What else, beyond extra funds paid for the coffee, can a more ethical trade model contribute?
This attacks a fundamental question of how we measure success: monetary values, or by other bottom lines?
Idea exchange, collaboration, more participatory work on community issues (Bikes to Rwanda is one example that springs to mind, as does Cafe Femenino). I think that to truly be ethical in the way we source coffee, we absolutely have to be holistic!
So to get back to Kyle’s point, it should be within our reach as responsible coffee purchasers to work with producing communities on year-round income, as well as contributing to other areas that can improve quality of life (education, infrastructure, gender issues, health care, etc). Before we get too focussed on the fact that direct trade coffees pay more to the farmer in a more transparent way than Fair Trade tends to, we should remember that we’re all working towards a model in which the bare minimum is a progressively ambitious and holistic target.

(there are many caveats to this, especially in how it would be applied… i.e.: i’m not suggesting that every coffee roaster who buys coffee directly then has the power to dictate how or where extra funds should be spent on community projects… but rather that collaborative and participatory support could be offered for such projects. moreover, we should also be talking about commodity grade coffees and sourcing practices there… but that’s another discussion!).

]]> By: Kiki http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97501 Kiki Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:32:51 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97501 Hello James,

I recently came across your blog and noticed that you focus much of your attention on ethical issues such as fair trade. My name is Kiki and I am a volunteer ambassador for Shared Interest and I’m writing to you to ask you if you would like to support our cause.

Shared Interest is a co-operative lending society and the world’s only 100% fair trade lender that aims to reduce poverty in the world by providing fair and just financial services. We work with fair trade businesses all over the world, both producers and buyers, providing credit to help them trade and develop.

We currently have just over 8700 members who have collectively invested £25.5 million. Unfortunately the demand for our lending has far outstripped our ability to supply – all of our funds are fully lent. It is for this reason that we are actively soliciting new members and we could really use your help in this endeavour. Helping is relatively simple – placing a simple text link or Shared Interest banner on your blog would be fantastic. You can find our banners at the following url: http://blog.shared-interest.com/?page_id=296

We would be more than happy to reciprocate by adding a link to your site from our blog. Please let me know when you have added a link or banner and I will do the same.

Thank you very much for your consideration and have a great day!

Kiki

]]> By: rick http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97489 rick Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:59:59 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97489 I worked for starbucks for some years and spent a lot of that time in moral quandry trying to decide if the company was doing more good or more harm on several levels. Though cafe practices at first seemed like a but of a shifty proposition -going from third party certification to starbucks essentially giving themselves certification, I thought- I've since warmed up to it after learning more, including the fact that the certification is done by a third party. It's nice every now and then to hear comments as above that show some evidence that this really does work for growers. I think starbucks has been pushing fair trade so hard lately because it is easier to get that point across than to try to educate their customers on what their own ethical sourcing program is all about. When a company buys into fair trade certification they also are getting a nice prepackaged phrase with which to engage those concerned (but not necessarily that informed) about sourcing. Everyone knows (or thinks they know, or has an idea) what "Fair Trade" means for product they are buying. Starbucks says that CAFE practices is still their main program for ethical sourcing (http://www.starbucks.com/SharedPlanet/ethicalInternal.aspx?story=performanceProgress), which suggest that they will indeed continue to pay above fair trade for most of their coffee. Unfortunately CAFE practices doesn't have the same pull with starbucks' yuppie clientelle as the magic words "Fair Trade Certified", so it seems in public they push their fair trade affiliation while less publically working towards CAFE practices certification for most of their coffee . I worked for starbucks for some years and spent a lot of that time in moral quandry trying to decide if the company was doing more good or more harm on several levels. Though cafe practices at first seemed like a but of a shifty proposition -going from third party certification to starbucks essentially giving themselves certification, I thought- I’ve since warmed up to it after learning more, including the fact that the certification is done by a third party. It’s nice every now and then to hear comments as above that show some evidence that this really does work for growers.

I think starbucks has been pushing fair trade so hard lately because it is easier to get that point across than to try to educate their customers on what their own ethical sourcing program is all about. When a company buys into fair trade certification they also are getting a nice prepackaged phrase with which to engage those concerned (but not necessarily that informed) about sourcing. Everyone knows (or thinks they know, or has an idea) what “Fair Trade” means for product they are buying. Starbucks says that CAFE practices is still their main program for ethical sourcing (http://www.starbucks.com/SharedPlanet/ethicalInternal.aspx?story=performanceProgress), which suggest that they will indeed continue to pay above fair trade for most of their coffee. Unfortunately CAFE practices doesn’t have the same pull with starbucks’ yuppie clientelle as the magic words “Fair Trade Certified”, so it seems in public they push their fair trade affiliation while less publically working towards CAFE practices certification for most of their coffee .

]]> By: Tamara http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97459 Tamara Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:01:16 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97459 I've been dealing with this a lot lately; customers who want ethically sourced coffee who ask for a coffee with fair trade branding. I've been looking for a short way to explain that the fair trade designation is a starting point, that we pay very high prices for our coffee because it's very high quality, and that no, it's not fair trade designated, but it is an ethical product. And I've been trying to find a way to say it so it's palatable to customers at 6:30 in the morning. So I'm going to steal your 140 character summary and use it shamelessly. Thanks! I’ve been dealing with this a lot lately; customers who want ethically sourced coffee who ask for a coffee with fair trade branding.

I’ve been looking for a short way to explain that the fair trade designation is a starting point, that we pay very high prices for our coffee because it’s very high quality, and that no, it’s not fair trade designated, but it is an ethical product. And I’ve been trying to find a way to say it so it’s palatable to customers at 6:30 in the morning. So I’m going to steal your 140 character summary and use it shamelessly. Thanks!

]]> By: Kyle Freund http://www.jimseven.com/2009/10/18/the-fair-trade-finish-line/#comment-97457 Kyle Freund Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:23:21 +0000 http://www.jimseven.com/?p=1126#comment-97457 I just served on a panel about this ("Deepening Fair Trade" at the Ross Net Impact Conference at the University of Michigan) with Cate Baril of Transfair. Some great points made, but a lot of it focuses on trade and making it more traceable and transparent. An equal amount of effort ought be dedicated to ensuring families have options for consistent year round income as well. Higher prices go a long way in supporting families, but coffee will never be enough, especially for the small landholders. Encouraging and supporting economic alternatives alongside coffee production can give families more consistent income and bolster families against market volatility. I just served on a panel about this (“Deepening Fair Trade” at the Ross Net Impact Conference at the University of Michigan) with Cate Baril of Transfair. Some great points made, but a lot of it focuses on trade and making it more traceable and transparent. An equal amount of effort ought be dedicated to ensuring families have options for consistent year round income as well. Higher prices go a long way in supporting families, but coffee will never be enough, especially for the small landholders. Encouraging and supporting economic alternatives alongside coffee production can give families more consistent income and bolster families against market volatility.

]]>