Small Farmers. Big Change.

On December 7th, Francisco VanDerhoff Boersma, co-founder of the first fair trade certifying body, Max Havelaar, and the renowned small farmer co-operative in Mexico, UCIRI (Union of Indigenous Communities of the Region of Isthmus)  submitted the following extremely important proclamation from the Mexican Coordinator of Small Fair Trade Producers as a comment on our earlier blog post,  “Who Owns Fair Trade?”  Due to its importance, I’ve taken the liberty to have it translated from Spanish and am posting it here.  The proclamation expresses the sentiments we hear from Fair Trade small farmer organizations throughout the Global South.  I hope you’ll take the time to read the views expressed here.

Public Pronouncement

The situation created by Fairtrade USA separating from FLO

December 2, 2011

Tuxtla, Gutierrrez, Chiapas, Mexico

On December 2, 2011,  the Mexican Coordinator of Small Fair Trade Producers held their General Assembly in Tuxtla Gutierrez, Chiapas. The “Mexican Coordinator” is made up of 40 small organizations, producers of coffee, honey and other products, from a dozen Mexican states bringing together 25 thousand small producer families. The “Mexican Coordinator” also forms part of the “Latin American and Caribbean Small Fair Trade Producers’ Coordinator”, CLAC.

As part of the “Mexican Coordinator” Assembly’s agenda, we analyzed the recent separation of Fairtrade USA from the FLO system, the new direction that Fairtrade USA has taken and FLO International’s, and other fair trade actors’, reactions.

The Small Producer Organizations of Fair Trade coffee, honey and other products have come to the following conclusions:

1 – In the first place, we are upset by Fairtrade USA’s decision to distance itself from the idea that fair trade is an alternative trade model that benefits small producers and sustainable, self-managed and democratic development. The “Fair Trade for All” model adopted by Fairtrade USA, in our opinion, is no more than a neo-liberalization of Fair Trade. For that reason, we deeply regret that Fairtrade USA has definitively turned its back on the Fair Trade movement’s original principals and on the same small producer organizations that gave Fairtrade USA its strength;  Fairtrade USA lacks political consciousness about the present neoliberal model’s crisis. The neoliberal market model is in full crisis and we have the responsibility to construct another model: democratic and fair for all, including fair to our planet.

2 – With “Fair trade for All”, Fairtrade USA is putting small producer organizations’ future participation in the U.S. market in direct danger, initiating the certification of private plantations and allowing the certification of small unorganized producers. The United States’ market is very important for many small producer organizations in Mexico and unfair competition can have a serious impact on them.  Now that Fairtrade USA has separated from FLO International, and therefore does not have to respect their rules, we fear they will lower the minimum price for coffee and other products, as they tried to do on many occasions in the FLO system. A basic Fair Trade principal is that a product´s price should cover the costs of sustainable production and democratic organization. Private plantations and unorganized small producers have lower costs than small producer organizations that respect the principles of democracy and equity through their obligations and social practices.

3 – Also we have never seen, nor are we now seeing, that Fairtrade USA has authentic representative participation by the Small Producer Organizatons in its decision making structures. For that reason we cannot even hope that this system’s new rules and criteria will take into account our organization’s concerns, needs and proposals.

4 – This separation is causing a lot of confusion and worry in the fair trade and responsible consumer movement, and among fair trade buyers in the United States. Many feel disillusioned and betrayed by Fairtrade USA and some have made public statements. Others regret the division and are taking sides with one of the seals, or not with either, not because they like one more but because of necessity. We believe that this abrupt division is generally affecting Fair Trade’s prestige and its political and economic clarity.

5 – FLO International has reacted to Fairtrade USA’s separation by defending the fact that with some products, like coffee and honey, private plantations are not certified nor is production by contract permitted. We agree with this defense and we believe that this new attitude by FLO International should serve to revise the whole FLO system so that it returns to its social and political origins which is the creation of a Different Market. We believe that Fairtrade USA’s separation obliges FLO International to take this opportunity to make real adjustments and return to the path that we have built as small producer organizations with so much effort and during so many years together with conscious consumers, solidarity businesses and also many people within FLO’s system of different National Initiatives that are committed to small producers and fair trade as a different market.

In our General Assembly we have shared aspects of the current problem that small producers and their organizations are experiencing, for example:

1 – We have to fight hard against big corporations’ unfair practices that increasingly control the markets. Unfortunately, these practices also exist within the fair trade market. Sadly we have seen big corporations obtain large government subsidies which strengthens their dominant position in the field, practically ruining long term organizational efforts.

2 – We have had to confront high market prices which create a financial problem for small producer organizations trying to secure enough accessible credit. There is not enough available financing and financial costs and risks are high.  Big corporations take advantage of these moments to weaken our organizations and disarticulate small producers thus strengthening their almost absolute control of production.

3 – The increase in petroleum prices and the cost of the basic food basket have made production costs and the cost of living go up.  An increase in our products’ prices does not necessarily translate to a good quality of life.

4 – We have struggled with new technological barriers for entering the market, as in the case of honey, where we have had to build new and complex processing plants with safety certifications so that the honey could access different markets.

5 – We are completely outraged by governments’ authorization, among others the Mexican government’s, for planting genetically modified crops on a large scale which inevitably contaminates our products, for example honey, in our country. As producers we have always struggled against the use of genetically modified crops in order to care for our planet’s eco-system, to protect native crops, to assure our producers’ and consumers’ health and to avoid dependence on transnationals that produce and patent genetically modified crops. This contamination means that, in the future, we cannot guarantee that our products will not have (slight) traces of genetically modified material.

6 – Finally, all producers are being faced with the consequences of climate change, in our production as well as in our communities. We have suffered floods, landslides, excessive rainfall and drought, new plagues that affect our family security as well as the quality and consistency of our production and therefore our income.

For all we have mentioned above we make an energetic call to the whole Fair Trade and Sustainable Production Movement that the struggle and division among seals not distract us from the small producers’ real problems.

As small producers we need prices that cover production costs and environmental measures, we need a truly fair economy so that producers can continue to work for a dignified life and can continue to safe-guard the environment as well as guarantee healthy products for the world population.

Our small producer organizations can only move forward with authentic fair trade and sustainable or organic production. We are doing, and will do, all that is within our reach, without resting, so that consumers and solidarity businesses continue to join our cause. We know that we have many allies in this struggle and we are sure that together we will accomplish our mission.

In the name of the General Assembly,

Hugo Reyes Alvarado

President of the Directive Council

The Mexican Coordinator of Small Fair Trade Producers, A.C.

A few days ago, we received the following good news from our friends at CEPICAFE, a small coffee farmer co-op in Peru, and a long-standing partner of Equal Exchange:

Two Peruvian projects, one from Piura and the other from Tingo Maria, winners of the ProClimate Challenge in the best practices regarding climate adaptation and mitigation, received their awards this morning in the city of Piura, having competed with 43 proposals from 12 countries around the world.

Held at the College of Engineers, the Piura Mountains Reforestation Project received the award.  This project is executed by CEPICAFE, the Norandino Coop and Progreso and is located in the town of Choco, Yamango district, Morropon province.  It won the award in the coffee category since it is carried out in a coffee-producing zone and requires high-quality water and the best possible climatic conditions.

Santiago Paz Lopez, manager of the Norandino Cooperative that is part of the Central Piruana de Cafetaleros, CEPICAFE  (Piura Coffee Growers Association) received the $2,500 prize.  “When our producer organization was started we had no resources, but we have achieved a lot.  Now we have won this prize, which belongs to the producers.  They needed a lot of support in order to start this kind of project.  The Norandino Cooperative is part of the producers that make up CEPICAFE and, together with other organizations from northern Peru, we are promoting the export of products such as cacao, coffee, raw sugar and fruit, all of which are quality products with an important consumer demand around the world,” said Santiago Paz.

The project encompasses 264 hectares, 224 of which need to be reforested.  This project will be executed through the year 2035 and its goal is to produce 42,784 tons of carbon. “In this area up to 600 hectares could be reforested, but we are also looking at the possibility of expanding to other mountainous areas and as much as 10,000 hectares could be reforested,” he said.

Rocio Leon, Project Coordinator, said that the Challenge has shown appreciation for projects in the highlands that are combining reforestation with carbon capture because this is something that generates better production for the farmers in the highlands and improves water availability in the coffee-growing zone.

The project is being developed at an altitude of 2,700 to 3,000 meters above sea level on community-owned land in the hamlets of Choco, Alto Huancabamba, Huambiche and Sargento Lorez and currently benefits 325 families.

Facts

• The Progreso Network and ProClimate and Hivos from Holland organized the ProClimate Challenge in the best practices regarding climate adaptation and mitigation.
• The Piura Mountains Reforestation Project is certified by Rainforest Alliance and by the Carbon Fix Standard v3.0; it is also registered with Markit Environmental.
• The local community members that execute the project are also project participants and full owners of their own farms.
• The Piura Mountains Reforestation Project is the first organization in the world in which an organization of small producers has been able to sell carbon credits in the voluntary market.  It is currently selling carbon to companies in England and Ireland that are part of CEPICAFE’s client network.
• In addition to the Norandino Coop, CEPICAFE and Progreso, other organizations that participate in the project include Agronomos Sin Fronteras (Agronomists Without Borders), Veterinarians Without Borders, Forest Sense and Just Green.

The following Action Alert was written by our friends at Fair World Project on November 28, 2011.

Take Action! Send a letter to Fair Trade USA, Fairtrade International and IMO and urge them to continue supporting small coffee farmers by not certifying plantation coffee.

Fair Trade USA  (formerly TransFair USA) and its new initiative, Fair Trade For All,  aims to expand fair trade certification to include coffee plantations.  “Fair Trade for All” has been a major point of contention in Fair Trade USA’s split from Fairtrade International (FLO).  For more on the Fair Trade USA/FLO split, see Fair World Project’s (FWP) statement. Putting aside the secretive and unilateral nature of the initiative, certifying coffee plantations has a number of critical problems.

Small producers and democratic cooperatives are core to the founding principles of the fair trade movement and market.  By definition, small producers are vulnerable, excluded and under resourced in the global market. In the coffee sector, small farmers produce approximately 70% of the global coffee supply. Despite the current high prices in the coffee market, fair trade coops are still unable to sell the majority of their coffee under fair trade terms. Expanding fair trade certification and market access to large-scale plantations will assure that fair trade cooperatives continue to remain vulnerable to volatile international markets and undermine 25 years of fair trade development.

Fair Trade vs Fair Labor

“Fair Trade for All” unfortunately is becoming a divisive issue, pitting small producers against farmworkers. Prominent farmworker leaders have endorsed the initiative, despite the overwhelming rejection of Fair Trade for All from fair trade producer networks, the World Fair Trade Organization (WFTO) and United Students for Fair Trade. No one in the fair trade movement denies that farmworkers at home and abroad need support and market solidarity. There are infinite examples of deplorable working conditions for agricultural workers in every sector. The question is whether “fair trade” is the appropriate model for addressing hired labor in agricultural contexts. FLO has certified fair trade plantations in a number of specific product categories, like tea and bananas, despite resistance from small producer groups and Aternative Trade Organizations.  Fair trade has a mixed record on plantations and hired labor operations, including the tea and banana sector. Complicating matters further, coffee plantation workers are largely seasonal workers, with many workers not returning to the same plantation where they’ve worked the season prior. Assuring that the social premium in fact benefits these workers and that the workplace is operated democratically in the absence of a workers association or union is challenging at best. Perhaps “Fair Labor” certification is a more appropriate approach to supporting farm workers, while keeping fair trade standards, impacts and expectations intact.

“Fair Labor” certification assures a safe workplace, equitable wages and adherence to labor laws. A far labor certification is far more appropriate for hired labor scenarios, as it and does not dilute fair trade as a standard, nor a concept. In fact, there are several existing fair labor 3^rd party certifiers and standards, including Scientific Certification Services Fair Labor program and IMO’s “For Life” program. Or might certifiers look to an effective model adopted by anti-sweatshop advocates that include a code of conduct and monitored by an organization like the Workers Rights Consortium.

Voting with our dollars

FTUSA has stated that coffee from fair trade cooperatives and “fair trade” plantations will be virtually identical to consumers, bearing the same “Fair Trade Certified” mark. Indeed, FTUSA does not currently distinguish between small farmer coops and plantations for tea and bananas. Small coffee producers will have no way of distinguishing their product in a meaningful way when compared to plantation coffee, which will be presumably sold at a lower price, given that large-scale plantation operations can take advantage of economies of scale, market access and existing capacity.  Plantations and estates already have a competitive advantage in the marketplace.  Similarly, consumers wishing to continue supporting small farmers and coops will be unable to simply “look for the label.”

Small is Indeed Beautiful

Paul Rice recently stated in an interview, “In our view, small is not beautiful.” FTUSA’s “Fair Trade for All” claims to be innovating the fair trade model, but appears to be responding primarily to the demands of large coffee roasters and importers, like Green Mountain and Starbucks, not the needs and realities of coffee producers on the ground. According to FTUSA’s most recent audited financials, Green Mountain and Starbucks account for approximately one-third of FTUSA’s lincensee revenues, not to mention are major donors to FTUSA. Taking a step back, history, not to mention existing data, demonstrate that real sustainability is small, but with a big impact. Small farmers form the backbone of not only the global food supply, but are central players in safeguarding biodiversity, fostering environmental stewardship and innovating sustainable agricultural practices. According to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, small farmers hold the key to doubling food production while mitigating climate change and alleviating rural poverty. Similarly, Via Campesina, the global movement of millions of peasants, small and medium-size farmers, has demonstrated that small farmers can address the global food crisis, in a far more equitable and sustainable way than agribusiness and large-scale farming.

Fair trade veteran advocates, including the Organic Consumers Association, and its recently launched Fair World Project (FWP), have long agitated and encouraged large roasters like Starbucks to source more fair trade coffee. Deepening and expanding the positive impact of fair trade to more small producers is central to our mission. Assuring however, that impact is equitable, sustainable and democratic remains the lynchpin in FWP’s approach to fair trade. We are encouraged by the interest of large, conventional manufacturers, roasters and importers in fair trade. However, strengthening, not diluting, the model at this crossroads in the movement to incorporate these powerful players is the challenge.

Stepping back even further, FTUSA’s recent actions largely reflect a crisis in governance and dysfunctional operating infrastructure.  Had FTUSA’s board of directors truly reflected the constellation of voices and perspectives in the fair trade movement (including producers, advocates, ATOs, students, etc.), we doubt that Fair Trade For All would have provoked such widespread condemnation. FTUSA would have been a better steward of fair trade had it surveyed the fair trade community as a whole prior to moving forward with its plans to certify for large-scale plantations in an inclusive and transparent process, rather than request comments on the initiative after the fact. If FTUSA choses to enter the global system as an independent and reputable certifier, it must establish transparent and effective mechanisms for stakeholder engagement, and be accountable to that process. Abandoning its plans to certify coffee plantations would be a positive first step in righting the course.

FTUSA is moving forward with “fair trade” certification of coffee plantations in 2012. IMO’s Fair for Life standards are scale neutral and allows for certification of hired labor operations in any sector, though IMO has yet to certify coffee plantations.  Fairtrade International (FLO) does not currently certify coffee plantations, though is under pressure to expand plantation certification to coffee and other sectors.

Take Action! Send a letter to Fair Trade USA, Fairtrade International and IMO and urge them to continue supporting small coffee farmers by not certifying plantation coffee.

Fair Trade Organizations, Stores, Companies: Sign-on by sending an email to ryan@fairworldproject.org

cartoon by John Klossner, copywrite 2011

With January just around the corner, how many of  you were aware that the United Nations has designated 2012 as the International Year of the Co-operative?

At Equal Exchange, we’ve been shouting the merits of co-operatives ever since we were founded.  As a 100% Fair Trade organization, buying all of our products from democratically-run cooperatives and associations of small farmers, doesn’t it make sense that we would extend our firm belief in the co-operative’s form of ownership and governance to our own workplace?  In today’s world of expanded corporate power and the ensuing results that are causing so much economic disparity and injustice, isn’t it well-beyond time to actively promote co-operatives as a viable alternative economic model?

Check out this really fun 2-minute video explaining the co-op difference produced by a member of the National Coop Business Association (NCBA), CCA Global Partners. Thanks to Becca Koganer at Equal Exchange and Melanie Madden of the Davis Food Co-op for sharing it with us!

Today’s Morning Edition on NPR aired a three-minute story on TransFair USA’s decision to abandon the international Fair Trade system, lower standards, and at the same time, allow for the certification of plantations into their newly-launched “Fair Trade for All” initiative.  The story featured Equal Exchange co-founder and co-president, Rink Dickinson.  At heart is the debate about whether plantation-made products belong in the Fair Trade system or whether the original mission of Fair Trade, supporting democratic small farmer organizations should be maintained and strengthened.

In the interview, Rink defends the position of Equal Exchange, other Alternative Trade Organizations, the United Students for Fair Trade, small farmer organizations, and many Fair Trade activists and members of civil society.  We are united in the belief that the goal of Fair Trade is to support democratic small farmer organizations and support their efforts to gain market access, as well as to educate and engage citizens in the North who wish to use their purchasing power to create alternative business, economic, and trade models.  We have a long way to go to meet this goal and we adamantly oppose TransFair USA’s unilateral and undemocratic decision to water down the Fair Trade standards and open the Fair Trade system to large plantations (who do not need market access, who already have an unfair competitive advantage over small farmer organizations, and where potential impact has never been proven).

Building small farmer supply chains is hard work and requires long-term relationships, investment, patience, and skill.  High-quality coffee, tea, cacao, fruit and other products are most certainly available from these organizations – that is, if deep commitment and integrity are at the core of one’s mission.

Read last week’s New York Times article and yesterday’s Mother Jones article on the topic.

Today, Tom Philpott, writer for Mother Jones, published an article expressing his views of TransFair’s betrayal of small farmers in the Fair Trade system.  Read the short article here.

Read what the New York Times had to say about TransFair USA’s departure from the FLO International Fair Trade System, their lowering of the Fair Trade standards, and their controversial decision to allow plantations to compete with small farmer co-ops in the Fair Trade System.  The article appeared on the front page of the Business Section on Thanksgiving Day.  Let us know what you think!

Click here to hear the NPR interview with Rink Dickinson and for a link to the Mother Jones piece about this latest Fair Trade controversy.

Beth Ann Caspersen, Quality Control Manager, and Lynsey Miller, Director of Sales & Marketing for Advanced Coffee, recently visited coffee producers in Uganda. Lynsey reflects on some takeaways here:

Check this out.

The farmers of Gumutindo co-op in Uganda would not have these things if they just were going at it as a single individual farmer:

The Tangibles

Pulping Stations: Being installed while we visit, these machines allow farmers access to this key equipment right in their own community, near their farm. The alternative would be to travel far (without a car, through very difficult roads) and pay someone else for the service of using their equipment. These machines mean less labor and better quality.

Training: Also being debuted during our visit, the Gumutindo staff created and debuted a short video in the local language of Lugisu, outlining the best practices for each of the many steps the farmers handle: 1) harvesting, 2) eliminating defects, 3) depulping, 4) fermenting, 5) washing, 6) sorting, 7) drying. Knowing the best methods will help farmers submit even-better coffee and receive more income.

Agronomists: Skilled agronomists work in each farming community, helping farmers make decisions that will improve yield, increase quality, and address challenges like pests and climatic changes.

Direct Access to an International Buyer: Equal Exchange staff visits both the co-op staff and the farmers themselves. This week, we offered trainings on quality at the farm level and explained what we look for in the coffee we buy and what farmers can do to increase the amount of quality coffee they produce that will meet these standards. This trip, Beth Ann trained 20 trainers and 95 farmers.

Environmental Stoves: Inspired by the women farmers she met with nine months ago, Beth Ann returned to the U.S. determined to support the women’s initiative beyond our coffee purchases. She raised money that will go toward installing 10 environmental stoves each in the Nasufwa and Buginyanya communities. These stoves will help the environment and the health of the women and their families.

The Intangibles

Direct Relationships: Gumutindo and Equal Exchange share challenges and ideas. We inspire each other. Because this isn’t simply a paper relationship, it creates opportunities we’d otherwise miss if we didn’t personally understand each other’s obstacles and potential.

Women’s Empowerment: the co-op creates a structure for community dialog and leadership. In two short years, four strong women’s groups have emerged and are growing. Five of the nine Gumutindo board members are women!

Youth Staying in Coffee: Co-op support helps to keep coffee farming a viable livelihood option for current farmers and their children. The co-op has just hired about 20 managers (local men and women) who are now living and working with the farmers in their communities. The co-op purposely sought out recent college-educated graduates to bring additional business skills back to the farming communities. This also created an opportunity for young people to return to work in rural communities instead of essentially exporting their skills only to jobs in the cities.

There are a lot of different types of trade models out there these days, touting this or that.

Why does Equal Exchange insist on buying only from small farmer co-ops? (After all, it might be trendier or easier if we did something else.) We’re thinking big and want to change the whole way consumers and farmers connect! Sometimes that means I talk about things like systemic change and infrastructure, and while those things are actually true, those words don’t convey the passion and the creativity of the changes that are actually happening on the ground.

So many of these things are happening in our network that it’s hard to summarize them. So instead, I’m not summarizing; the list above is what I see with my own experience on the ground, that the co-op commitment supports in one co-op in Uganda.

Pretty sweet.

For more stories about Beth Ann and Lynsey’s trip to Uganda, click here.

Jennipher Wattaka with Beth Ann Caspersen, Equal Exchange Quality Control Manager, in Jennipher’s home

We just got back from doing a one-of-a-kind training with small farmers in Uganda.

Experience the sights and smells, the innovative work, and the people…

… like you’re right there with us.  Click here.