If you live in the Northeast you know that we’ve had about eight sunny days this summer. Friday was one of them, so I decided to take the day off to go hiking in the White Mountains. The day was beautiful, the views from the top of Mt. Osceola were stunningly clear, and the breeze was placid, with a foreshadowing of autumn in the air.
I hadn’t gone far on my drive back to Boston when I realized that a good cup of coffee was critical. Of course, if you’ve been in that part of New Hampshire on Route 93, you know that your options are limited. And of course, I’m a bit of a snob when it comes to coffee… I can be practically falling asleep at the wheel, but I still can’t buy just any old cup.
After my third try exiting the highway and looping around one small town after another, I finally came upon a small town with a cute central area… and there is was, a sign advertising lattes, cappuccinos, etc. Relieved, I pulled over and eagerly wandered in. The place was cute – part General Store, part café. Weavings from South America hung from the wooden ceiling, and signs revealed that many products were local to the region: maple syrup, produce, cheese, and some crafts.
Instinctively, I walked over to the shelves where the coffee was sold. Packaged in brown paper bags, there was a label on the front with a photo of an indigenous woman in her native garb. On the back, another label explained that this was “Do good” coffee – 10% of the proceeds would go to help “an impoverished school in Peru.” No other labeling helped describe the product.
I already found myself reacting skeptically. Don’t get me wrong… I’ve spent years (upon years) in the “solidarity movement” and later in human rights and development organizations trying to raise money for worthwhile projects in rural communities in Latin America. It’s just that we always tried to do this work within a context. First, to provide an analysis of why people in these communities are poor, second to portray a complete picture of the relationship (and responsibilities) those of us in the “developed world” have to those we deem “in need”, and third to be very careful not to portray people as objects of “charity” but people with dignity, working hard, with dreams for their children and hope for a better future, just as we have here. In short, to try not to reduce our work to simple charity, but to use every interaction as an educational and transformational opportunity.
So a one liner on the back of a coffee package that merely said “Feel good: we donate 10% of the sale of this coffee to help an impoverished school”, did little to make me understand who these Peruvians are, what challenges they are up against; while a worthwhile cause, it didn’t help me understand or learn anything that might ultimately help me feel transformed or that I had any power to participate in the transformation of this Peruvian community.
Okay, I still clearly wanted my coffee.
So I eagerly ordered a cappuccino from the woman behind the counter. While waiting, I noticed a large wooden sign behind the register that proudly proclaimed: “All our coffee is 100% Fair Trade.”
Well that was interesting. I picked up one of the bags again (selling for $10.99 by the way). I turned it over a few times, but no sign of the Fair Trade seal anywhere.
“This coffee is Fair Trade?” I asked the woman.
“Yep,” she answered. “All our coffee comes from one plantation in Peru that’s owned by the owners of this store.”
I wanted my coffee and I really didn’t want to be obnoxious, but I was curious. “Really?” I pressed her, “but I don’t see the seal anywhere.”
I think she picked up on my expression, which I must admit, must have revealed my reaction to her “definition” of Fair Trade.*
“Yes,” she said, “that’s because our coffee is a different kind of fair trade. We don’t use the seal, that’s a different kind.”
“How is that?” I asked her incredulously.
She repeated, “all our coffee comes from one plantation. It’s owned by the guys that own this store and it’s roasted here locally.” She saw my reaction, leaned forward and whispered to me, “don’t worry, they pay the farmers wads of money. It’s Fair Trade, just a different kind.”
*Certified Fair Trade coffee may only be purchased from small farmer co-operatives, who own their land, and own their business. While there is pressure to change this criteria, to date, the Fair Trade movement has succeeded in not allowing Fair Trade coffee to include plantations, owned by one person or one family and employing workers. Regardless of how “good” the plantation owner is, how well s/he treats the workers, Fair Trade was started as an alternative model to support the efforts of small farmers seeking self-determination, market access, and more fair prices. Equal Exchange is committed to deepening this model of trade.
Hi Phyllis, So How was that cup of coffee? no need to post this but it’s been awhile since we talked and this is a good one. I’ve encountered similar situations and they have always served to dull my euphoric anticipation of the nice cup o’ joe. what’s particularly troubling about this is that someone’s actually been taught to deliver the non-truth. I love the story, so typical unfortunately, an idea or concept that resonates, the realization that there maybe rules and conditions that surround the concept and the decision to plow ahead with an alternative version that suits the person that was interested in the beginning with some sort of rationaization that it’s all fine–why? well to jump back to grade school: “Just because, or just because I say so.” End of discussion. I’m not engaging any further because to do so does not suit my needs or my goals. Which is usually code for : ” I wanna sell stuff MY way.” Although far less dramatic than the 60 Minutes banana example mentioned yesterday, I think this is in the same family of logic. We do what we do and it’s OK, trust us. In this case, “It’s Fair Trade, just a different kind.” Sure I will, see this Monopoly money I’m handing you for the coffee? It’s really money, just a different kind.
see you next week.
your pal, wn
This is a great story to share and I think that it cuts to some of the heart of the controversies in the Fair Trade scene. For me and many others FT is about empowerment and self-determination. If the farmers are not owning their own land and not running their business in a cooperative and democratic process then it’s not FT.
But ultimately I think that what we really should ask is:
Why should someone from New Hampshire own a farm in Peru anyway? What is the advantage; for him and for the farmers and people who actually live there?
I was on the bus yesterday and heard some women talking about how they saw “free trade, organic, racist teas” at Wholefoods. I tried my best to listen in, it seemed like they thought that the smiling pictures of farmers on the tea was exploitational and that the whole “organic/free trade” thing was bull (I paid no attention to the fact that she was confusing the words “fair trade” with “free trade”). I almost asked them what they were talking about but had to get off the bus.
I walked down the sidewalk wondering what kind of society we live in where people think that FT/Organic packaging with farmer pictures on it is “racist”.
I recognize the idea that sometimes charities and FT organization use these images to pull at peoples heart strings. But come on, racist?
Sorry if I’ve gotten off subject a bit……
I have had many similar experiences to this one Phyllis. I have seen coffee company’s who put YouTube videos up on the web of visiting a coffee farm in Africa where they play with the smiling children and build schools with the money they are making from their trade. When looking at their offerings, this coffee project is not actually that substantial when you notice that the majority of their other coffees come from a broker from the conventional coffee green market. Furthermore, just as the label you found in the store wasn’t very telling of the details, a lof of roasters have a hard time pinning down information about size and structure of the producers, how much (if any) pre-harvest financing is being offered, the sustainability or duration of the business relationship, etc.
It makes you wonder whether both consumers and stores really care about structural change (as in the terms and conditions in which producers interact with the market) or if they are just looking to feel good, or less guilty, about their purchases. In my experience, local roasters doing this type of thing often get very defensive when someone asks them a question about the Fair Trade seal and this also makes me wonder why they can’t own up to their model a little more instead of saying “just trust us.” No one is above independent third party certification – this is where integrity comes in and it doesn’t matter how (self) righteous you are. On the other hand, ceritication has many costs and can be prohibitive both for producers and for being priced competitively on the shelf. $10.99 for a bag of coffee, even with 10% of the profits being donated back to the farmers, is certainly not cheap though (obviously I can’t comment on the quality of that particular coffee which is an important factor in considering the price).
The problem here is not, as you pointed out, that this company’s efforts are coming from a bad place or that they are using the donations as a marketing scheme, but rather they have reduced the idea of Fair Trade to a very simplistic concept of charity. In this format, the ownership model (plantations versus cooperatives) is not important – in fact, from this general store’s perspective, the fact that the owners of the store “own” the coffee finca is an added benefit and consumers can trust them even more this way. And the other problem here is that because it is a small local entrepise making an effort to do good in the world it becomes even harder to be critical (it’s not Maxwell House suggesting they are making donations to the farmers afterall) and people can be blindsighted by any other competing claims other company’s might have of “doing good” in the meantime. Meaning, consumers and retailers aren’t willing to listen and they have an established loyalty to their particualr coffee that prevents the coffee company’s model from ever becoming anything more substantial in the ways of systematic change at the producer level. When academics (and especially economists) study Fair Trade they will, perhaps justifiably so, be critical of the movement of this reason – Jacob Levin’s critique is a good recent example of this.
We need to ask questions and we need to push for more transparency and less “just trust us” type attitudes. If we want Fair Trade to be simplified, co-opted, and watered down, then don’t put the time and energy into asking questions and doing the research but if you care about what’s actually going on at the ground level than engage as Phyllis has, and I suppose, will continue to do. Good work Phyllis!
Thanks to all of you for your interesting and insightful comments! I don’t have a lot of time right now to comment back, but Brian, I did want to just say something about the comment you overheard by the woman who felt that trying to sell a product by using the “smiling face of a farmer” was “racist”.
I’m not going to get into a whole discussion of racism, but I have to say that there is a very fine line between marketing and promotion (even if the cause/product, etc. is for a very legitimate and positive issue/benefit) and real analysis/education. As we all know, there is not a lot of space on a coffee bag, or a sign, to tell a complete story and consumers are trying to buy something and may not have more than a minute to make a choice.
Nevertheless, I do think we have a responsibility to our farmer partners not to “reduce” them to a smiling face, just as we have a responsibility to our retail partners and consumer advocates not to patronize or overly simplify the complexities of what we are trying to do or what our farmer partners are trying to do.
It’s very complex as we all know. Consumers don’t want to feel guilty; we do want to convey the hope and pride that many of our partners feel…. still the best we can do is have as much integrity in our words, our marketing, and in our actions and do this work the best we can.
thanks,
phyllis
Thank you for this sad reminder of how much more education is needed to combat the myths, misconceptions, and outright manipulations out there.
Consumers need to ask better questions, as you tried to. We, as FTers, need to distinguish real Fair Trade Organizations more effectively. As has been said by others above, guilt may not work, but -hopefully- we can show that there’s a spectrum of choice. We can show that giving some proceeds to a school is nice (better than nothing), but a dignified partnership that enables farmers and artisans to take their own decisions is much better and much more sustainable. I’ doubt structural change is on most consumer’s minds, but we need to show them that they can have great products that create tremendous impact if they support true Fair Trade Organizations. Here at the Fair Trade Federation, we are working to do just that – we’re not there yet, but, if we work together, it can happen.
If Fair Trade really is a partnership based on dialogue, transparency, and respect, then we should expect nothing less and insist that others do the same. Thanks for all that EE does – keep the faith!
Thanks Carmen… very well stated and appreciated. We too are appreciative of the work that the Fair Trade Federation does to further the mission of the Fair Trade movement and respective partners!
Phyllis
I, too, sometimes have this back and forth with cafe owners and workers. I appreciate those that don’t confuse language and call what they do direct trade rather than Fair Trade (if the coffee has not been certified). Transfair could probably sue all of these little mom and pops that incorrectly use their trade mark but I doubt that would help further their mission. Those that are serving DT coffees are doing much more to ensure sustainability than those who buy at commodity prices. (But they could do more.)
The best that I can do an an advocate for social justice is to continue to train consumers to look for the FTC label, which ensures transparency and accountability. I just finished a 3-month sell-in of FTC commodities at my rather large urban church. The hardest arguments to win was not of price but of direct trade vs. Fair Trade. One of the best illustrations actually came from a staff member. He argued that the relationship between direct trade and Fair Trade is much like natural vs. USDA Organic. With the organic label, the consumer can be ensured that inspections are routinely made to ensure that standards are met. The same goes for Fair Trade Certified products. Third party certification gives consumers greater confidence and ease when making choices.
Last time I went to the White mountains it was about 25 years ago—camping with Rink Dickinson and Lee Stivers. We had breakfast at a charming small breakfast place. Charming until our very friendly server turned to walk from our table. His t-shirt was a KKK shirt. We asked him if it was for real. “oh yes, he said.” I was stunned. We all were.
Interestingly, we finished our breakfast without further conversation with our klansmen. Coffee in the white mountains seems to have made progress…and has a ways to go!
WINCHESTER (AP) – The Southern Poverty Law Center, a national organization that tracks so-called hate groups, says a branch of the Ku Klux Klan in New Hampshire has ceased operating.