Comercio Casi Justo

So, it's been quite some time since I've made any posts. Awhile ago I said I would make some comments about some of the growing pains of the fair trade movement.

In the last few years, as the fastest-growing niche in the coffee market has continued to expand, the ways that fair trade coffee products are available to consumers is diversifying. Fair trade coffee is not only available from Starbucks (just one blend called Cafe Estima) and Dunkin Donuts (its espresso beverages are made with fair trade beans) but also in the grocery aisle where you'll find a handful of fair trade coffees mixed in with the more conventional brands and blends. For instance, Target now has several fair trade coffees available from its Archer Farms brand. Millstone, owned by Procter & Gamble, sells a fair trade coffee rarely available at larger grocery chains and usually as long as customers have asked for fair trade. It's called Mountain Moonlight. You might also encounter a variety of coffees that appear to be somewhere in between fair trade and organic, like the shade grown and bird-friendly coffees sold by Seattle's Best and other brands. Then there's the boutique coffee places like Intelligentsia (now, having opted out of the fair trade certification regime, is marking many of its coffees "direct trade" having created its own label through a process they claim is better than fair trade but that does not include third-party verification). Beyond that, you also have the more politically oriented coffee or fringe retailers like Just Coffee or Cooperative Coffees that see themselves as more movement-based rather than market driven. These guys may not use the Transfair certification model (complaining that it's become too institutionalized) and they promote themselves as 100% fair trade as compared to the part-time or maybe they'd say half-assed fair traders like Starbucks and others.

All of this says that there's definitely a market for fair trade coffee and a growing one. But things are seeming a little out of whack; the movement is spliting and its getting harder for the consumer to know if a company's commitment to fair trade is authentic or just another aspect of the trend of the corporate greenwashing we see so much of these days. Depending on the way you look at it, fortunately or unfortunately, it is getting more and more popular for companies to want to promote or see themselves as socially responsible and environmentally sustainable. And the fair trade/green movement should receive a lot of credit for pushing things in this direction. But the public relations guise of fair trade assigned to a company like Philip Morris doesn't really cancel out the corporation's misdeeds and other dirty investments - just out of offering one fair trade blend among all of it other coffees and products. Let's be honest, doesn't it really mean that the company is extending its product line to make more of a profit from a new set of consumer preferences? If so, what about the fair traders who wish to see an economy as if people matter? Under what arrangements is it happening this way? Is it even happening? Well, I guess so. The more fair trade coffee being sold, no matter who is selling it, does mean, or theoretically should mean, that more producers are getting more decent and stable prices for their coffee. But it also seems to reveal that when you buy the Millstone brand you are affirming a market-based, consumer-driven arrangement that is more about making ethical consumers feel better about themselves than about making life marginally better for coffee producers. What are the implications of market-driven forms of social justice being played out through the now viable, somewhat mainstream approach of fair trade? What's that you say? I thought fair trade was supposed to be more concerned with the reality of the poor producer...?

100% Fair Traders vs. Part-Time Fair Traders

There's been a lot of discussion lately over the authenticity of a roaster's commitments to fair trade when only some of their product is available as fair trade. Catholic Relief Services keeps a decent list of the 100% fair trade enterprises that it works with. I'll admit being puzzled as to why CRS is not a part of the Equal Exchange Interfaith Coffee Program but this is a fairly comprehensive list of the 100% fair traders in the U.S.

I'll say more another time about trends and arguments in the fair trade coffee certification debate as certain roasters either defect from or simply opt out of the Transfair system by setting up their own, often termed "direct trade," certification standard (i.e. Starbucks, Intelligentsia, Just Coffee). These changes represent a growing split in the fair trade coffee movement.

Easy Ways to Get Fair Trade Coffee at the Office

As interest in fair trade has grown--mainly through attention to fair trade coffee--consumers are looking for and demanding more convenient ways to purchase fair trade.

Here are some ways that I know of that you can order pre-measured 12-cup brew packages for the office:

From the Equal Exchange Interfaith Coffee Program (Equal Exchange is one of those outstanding fair trade pioneers and a 100% fair trade business). Try their pillow pack coffees.

My dad told me about a local roaster in his area that provides similarly prepared packets of a fair trade Guatemalan coffee. The only drawback with this company is that they also throw in industrial size coffee filters which were too big for my office coffee maker. We started cutting the filters down to size, but eventually it sort of cancelled out the added convenience of having the ready-made pouches for making a quick pot in the a.m. They declined to stop sending the filters since this is the way the boxes are prepared for most of their clients. Check out Ferris Coffee & Nut based in Grand Rapids, MI. Scroll down to their fair trade coffees. When you order, make a request for the 12-cup coffee packets.

Of course, convenience can often mean more waste. And in this case, it probably does, because of the additional packaging required for making individual pouches. Still, if the added convenience provides a way for you to convince folks in your office to make the shift to supporting fair trade--give it a try. After all, let's face it, not everyone knows how to make a good pot of coffee.

Later on, once the commitment to fair trade has taken hold in your office find a local roaster and begin enjoying the ritual of scooping out the appropriate amount to be brewed (1 to 2 teaspoons for every six ounces of water) from a pound of their fair trade coffee.

UMCOR Project News from Marengo, IL

My wife's family attends a Methodist church in Marengo, IL. Awhile ago, her dad introduced me to a guy who was in the process of setting up a fair trade coffee ordering co-op for their congregation. His name is Brian Standley. I asked Brian to send along an update on his and others efforts within their church to promote fair trade (see below). Brian said that if anyone is interested in learning more about doing something like this in their church he would be happy to share more with them. Just post a comment on the blog and I'll put you in touch with him.

I will make an effort to share fair trade success stories like this and feature other interesting trade justice initiatives on the blog from time to time.

Here is what Brian tells us about the UMCOR Fair Trade Co-op at Marengo Methodist:

We started the Co-Op soon after Halloween. Our Wesley Fellowship Group did a Halloween Outreach for the neighborhood trick-or-treaters where we gave out free coffee and hot chocolate. I volunteered to get the coffee and hot chocolate. I had heard about the United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR) Coffee Project some time ago and was always curious about how it worked. Now I had an excuse to try it out. Both the coffee and hot chocolate were reasonably priced and (of course) delicious. We had many happy kids and parents that night (it was kinda cold). Afterwards, I had some extra coffee left over, so I hit on the idea of giving it away to the congregation to see if there was interest in beginning a co-op. I seperated
it into 1/2 pound bags, made my pitch during church, and gave it away on a Sunday in November 2006. Some people were a little shocked that I wasn't charging anything for the samples. Then I stood back and waited for the response. Within a few weeks, people started asking me when there was going to be more coffee. With the holidays approaching, I decided to wait until January to make our first order.

On January 14th, I put an order form in the worship bulletin offering one choice of regular coffee and one choice of decaf (both whole bean or ground). I also let people know that tea and hot chocolate was available as well. The response was better than I had anticipated. Sixteen people made orders that day and since then we've had three more orders totaling over $1,100 of coffee, tea, and hot chocolate. The church is also now buying the coffee for fellowship hour from the UMCOR Coffee Project.

I've made some tweeks in the process since that first order, but it basically remains the same. About every six weeks, I choose one regular and one decaf coffee and create an order form. I leave the order form by a container in the lobby for people to place their orders any time during the six week period. The week orders are due, I put a reminder in the bulletin and I set up a "Taste of Justice" stand-up display in front to the ordering container to jog people's memories. The coffee normally comes in a week to ten days later and we hand it out after worship services.

Lately I've been putting notes and cards in peoples bags reminding them of the next ordering date and encouraging them to share their coffee with their friends and neighbors that don't go to our church. With our next order I will be putting in stories about the farmers they are helping to give them some connection to their buying choices. It's my hope that folks will begin
to see this not just a way to get a great cup of coffee but also begin to see the impact of all their purchases and begin asking, "what would Jesus buy?"

As we approach the one year anniversary of the co-op in November, I'm going to try to have a Fair Trade Sunday to re-engage folks in the purpose (and the people) behind the coffee. The experience has truly been a blessing in my life. I spent some time within the coffee growing regions of Guatemala, so I can see in my mind's eye the faces of those we are helping. It's such a simple thing: an honest day's wage for an honest day's work for a product we can't even grow in this country (with all due respect to Kona). Who could argue with that?

The UMCOR Coffee Project (along with seven other denominational efforts) is part of the larger Interfaith Coffee Program administered by Equal Exchange.

A Coffee Tale

My friend Ted Erski teaches in the earth science department at McHenry County Community College in Crystal Lake, IL. A coffeeholic and geographer, he has developed an amazing course called the Geography of Coffee. He also finished his first self-published novel called Salavandra: A Coffee Tale. Ted did several readings from the book in area cafes that support fair trade. I asked him to write up a synopsis of the book and his interests for the blog. You can order the book from Amazon.com or download a free audio copy.

"My current professional interests lie in globalization, social development and the interplay amongst economics, politics and the environment. I'm most interested in how coffee, an ostensibly simple commodity, connects consumers in the developed world with producers in the developing world. To this end I created a course called “The Geography of Coffee.” The nuanced, politically and economically charged character of this global commodity also inspired my first novel, Salavandra: A Coffee Tale. The story is about a revolution on a coffee-producing island. More significantly, however, it offers readers a critique of US trade policy, globalization and international labor conditions.

I use the novel in my geography classes. Here are three questions I ask my students about the text:

1. Compare and contrast communication infrastructure and access to information and technology between the developed and developing world as represented in the first three chapters of Salavandra. What might the term "the digital divide" mean in the context of Salavandra's first three chapters?

2. In Chapter four, what symbolizes the conflicting view about the value of natural resources between the developed and developing world?
Thinking about Chapters four through six, describe how Salavandra illustrates that access to information can level the playing field for advocates of working people in the developing world.

3. Thinking about chapters seven through nine, how does Salavandra illustrate that politics and business often work together, and what is often beneficial to consumers in the developed world can actually harm producers in the developing world?"


Ted became an individual member of Chicago Fair Trade (www.chicagofairtrade.org) in May.

Take Action: Oppose Free Trade Agreements & Fast Track Renewal

I just returned from a delegation to El Salvador about a week ago. U.S. influence, through CAFTA and other means, over El Salvador's now dolarized economy has had disastrous effects on the poor of this small, densely populated Central American country (about the size of Massachusetts packed with around 7 million people). Many of the producers and activists our group had the opportunity to speak with stated that El Salvador no longer has any viable crops that trade well on the world market. Coffee and other commodities are no longer the strong exports they once were due to changes in market prices & oversupply problems in the global economy, in addition to agricultural subsidies awarded to farmers in the U.S. and Europe that aggravate already pronounced trade imbalances. One mantra we heard repeated time after time is that currently El Salvador's biggest export is people. According to an investigation performed by the Jesuit University of Central America (the UCA), 700 people (finding no options for enough work to feed their families) leave El Salvador headed for the United States every day. Many end up stuck in Guatemala or Mexico along the way. Last year 14,000 Salvadorans were deported by the U.S. government. Deported individuals are often viewed as outcasts and sometimes criminals in the communities they return to. So, the primary contribution to the Salvadoran economy now (like the experience of Mexico/NAFTA) -- supporting many poor families in El Salvador at varying degrees -- is the arrival of remittances from family members in the U.S.

Remittances have created a new system of dependence on family incomes now being earned in the U.S. -- income that is not able to be gathered or generated by activities in the country due to lack of jobs and inappropriate/insufficient economic policies, programs or infrastructure, leaving many people in the society idle. The main message from everyone we talked to is that migration is destroying the family in El Salvador and beyond that the entire country because of the profoundly negative consequences for the economy. In general, there is a lack of response by the government because of the powerful dynamic of remittances from the U.S. along with other economic directions taken as a requirement of the free trade agreement.

Global Exchange and other groups have launched campaigns in oppposition to the country-specific free trade agreements currently being debated by our Congress aimed at the Peruvian, Colombian, South Korean economies. The U.S. should change its trade policy in order to avoid further complications that stem from a sinfully unfair global trading system that pursues a preferential option for the rich.

The same action alert also calls on Congress not to renew the Bush administration's fast track trade authority. Furthermore, Global Exchange has most recently called for a moratorium on free trade agreements with hopes to force our lawmakers and politicians to revise or remake our trade policy according to fair trade standards and specifications.

Radio Interview: Live From the Heartland this Saturday, May 5

So, in case you haven't noticed by now I'm from Chicago. And this Saturday, May 5, I'll be on WLUW's (88.7 FM) Live From the Heartland at 9 a.m. It's broadcast from the Heartland Cafe in Rogers Park, practically an institution for progressive causes in the city for many years. I'll be talking about the fair trade movement and also have a chance to promote Chicago Fair Trade's World Fair Trade Day event on May 12 (see posting below from 5/1). The interview will likely address some of the differences between "Fair Trade" and "Direct Trade," a new trend among coffee roasters and retailers (i.e., Intelligentsia, Whole Foods, Starbucks). Hopefully, we'll get into some suggestions of ways people can take action to promote trade justice as well. Listen in.

Coffee Cultivation & Commodity Environments

According to “traditional” methods, coffee is grown under a canopy of fruit and hardwood trees that provide a cover of mixed shade (WRI 1998-99, TED 2000). Under ideal conditions, this agro-ecosystem of shade-grown coffee can sustain a large diversity of bird species and small mammals (TED 2000). The agricultural habitat of forested coffee groves involves a small-scale production scheme that provides subsistence opportunities and addresses natural resource conservation goals with the sustainable harvest of shade trees for fuel and nutritional needs. This is in contrast to the dominant, higher-yield production method, which often involves removing forest to plant a monoculture crop grown in full sun. This method, usually referred to as “sun-farming” or “technified” cultivation, requires that fertilizers, dangerous pesticides and herbicides be applied often and has become the preferred approach on large coffee estates and plantations. Sun-farming practices have contributed to coffee becoming “the second-most heavily pesticide-sprayed product in the world (after cotton)” (Cycon 2001). Twenty percent of Guatemala’s coffee area is under technified production, compared with 40 percent in Costa Rica, 69 percent in Colombia, 17 percent in Mexico and 8 percent in El Salvador (Sorby 2002).

On most of Guatemala’s large coffee estates, varieties of high-quality Arabica are grown and harvested on highly managed shaded monoculture plantations, a modernized agriculture, high-density production scenario that requires chemical application, different from the often diversified plots of small-scale traditional coffee farming. The most common shade tree in Guatemala is gravilea (Australian oak), which tolerates heavy pruning for firewood; also, amate admired for the compostable quality of its broad leaves, as well as native trees like cuxin. Other trees common to a rustic, polyculture coffee shade forest include banana, avocado, and citrus trees such as lemon and orange. More and more, macadamia, a nut tree known for its environmental benefits, is suggested as a potential shade tree for Guatemalan coffee, and as a secondary or replacement cash crop. Even growing flowers among coffee is an increasingly common practice with the advent of organic production.

Background on the Coffee Crisis

Attention to environmental sustainability in coffee production has formalized measures for soil and water conservation, including composting, terracing, reforestation and diversification. Indeed, since the circumstances of the coffee industry have worsened with expansive, high-yield production leading to capitalist crisis, a rationale for highlighting and returning to traditional methods of smaller-scale cultivation has emerged in the form of a specialty coffee industry with new markets for “sustainable” and “Fair Trade” coffees. Presumably, commodity environments for Fair Trade and sustainable coffees not only foster an environment conducive to subsistence and family labor, but also to natural resource conservation. In some countries rustic coffee farms have been classified as forests or are viewed as important buffer zones around biosphere reserves. On the other hand, technified cultivation of coffee, by removing pre-existing forest or crops, is viewed as fragmenting the landscape and eliminating the natural capital elements of a seemingly pre-capitalist space. Cultivation categories, like organic and other commercial polycultures, fall somewhere in the middle of a hierarchy of coffee production methods as hybrid forms of agriculture.

A massive drop in coffee prices in recent years has had a devastating impact on the economies of Latin American countries, particularly those of Central America. Though the coffee industry is not unaccustomed to periods of crisis and other market side effects that influence commodity slumps, gluts and booms, the current situation is particularly severe. With prices hanging steady at historic lows for most of the past four years, social costs have been great in many coffee-producing areas. In Guatemala devastating loss of work has led to conditions of starvation and increased migration (Hernández Navarro 2004; Brosnan 2003). Causes of the global coffee crisis can be traced to processes of agricultural modernization and increased competition that have resulted in world over-production as well as a discontinued system of quotas that once steadied the price of the commodity worldwide. Changes in coffee production introduced almost fifty years ago created a trend toward intensive monoculture cultivation on large plantations. Increased yields associated with this production method have contributed to a 200 percent increase in worldwide coffee production since 1950 (WRI 1998). Moreover, in the early 1990s the World Bank advised Vietnam to increase its output of low quality coffee for export. Amazingly, the country has achieved a 400 percent increase in production over approximately 10 years (Eco-Exchange Jun-Jul 2001).

In its 2002 report Mugged: Poverty in Your Cup, Oxfam International determined that global coffee exports had fallen by $4 billion over five years (Sep 2002). Rainforest Alliance reports that in countries like Guatemala, where coffee has been the leading export for decades and “700,000 families or 20 percent of the population have coffee-related jobs,” total exports fell by a half in the first year of the coffee crisis (Eco-Exchange Jun-Jul 2001). Guatemala’s National Coffee Association (ANACAFE) estimated a loss of $300 million in revenues as the crisis began (Eco-Exchange Jun-Jul 2001). With thousands of coffee pickers now unemployed, many have migrated to Mexico or the United States in search of work. Indeed, families in the highlands of Guatemala have few employment opportunities other than coffee plantation labor. The Guatemalan government indicates that there are more than 250 thousand unemployed due to the coffee crisis; out of 1.8 million agricultural sector jobs in the country, only 145 thousand have formal employment (Prensa Libre Nov 12 2003). Exacerbated by the dramatic fall in coffee prices, unemployment in agricultural areas of the country has surpassed 50 percent.

Meanwhile, North American consumer campaigns for Fair Trade coffees, with their boycotts and public protests, have propelled Fair Trade advocacy to the status of “pet project of the anti-globalization movement” (New York Times Nov 3 2002). Even so, a 2002 joint report of the Inter-American Development Bank, United States Agency for International Development and World Bank captures the recent tendency of market-oriented development groups to embrace Fair Trade as an acceptable niche solution to the coffee crisis.

Stages of Coffee Production

Fair Trade Arrangements in Coffee Production

According to the Fair Trade model as it relates to coffee production, groups of small-scale producers or producer collectives, as new social movements and innovative participants in the global economy, are said to have the potential to move up the commodity chain and gain control over production and distribution of coffee in markets (i.e. extension of credit and technical assistance allowing for increased control and involvement in stages of processing before export). Hypothetically, this should put certain groups, namely cooperatives, in a position to contest the established regime and challenge elite control over production and social reproduction. Sustainable means of production (i.e. Fair Trade, organic and shade grown) establish new productive spaces that rely on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to replace middlemen and act as social brokers for the guarantee of premiums paid to farmers and certification of Fair Trade criteria. In theory and in some instances, this provides conditions for a sort of assisted autonomy based on a peasant-centered, family-oriented approach that combines economic development with subsistence goals toward self-sufficiency and self-determination.

What is Fair Trade?

“Fair Trade” is gathering recognition as a groundbreaking approach to development, symbolizing the integration of human rights, ecological and economic concerns. Through attention to social responsibility, environmental sustainability and market profitability – the concept of a triple bottom line – Fair Trade suggests potential to make attainable the intent and efforts exhaustively discussed by proponents of sustainable development. As defined by the social justice and environmental groups that support it, Fair Trade promotes the capacity of consumers to change the world based on opportunities for “equal exchange” and “economic justice” achieved through forms of “ethical consumption” that respond to notions of a “popular economy.” Fair Trade is characterized as a “a new ‘people to people’ form of international aid” (Van Loo 2004) that “sidestep[s] world market forces” (Bordreau 2004) and provides producers “a sweet deal” that facilitates “a human link” (Roosevelt 2004) involving long-term commitments of direct trade, as long as there is transparency in the democratic management of cooperatives and public information is made available to consumers (Waridel 2003). Buying products with the Fair Trade label is characterized as “an easy way to make a positive impact” on the lives of producers (TransFair 2003).

An abstract of what's to come

"Fair Trade" is gathering recognition as a groundbreaking approach to development, symbolizing the integration of human rights, ecological and economic concerns. Through attention to social responsibility, environmental sustainability and market profitability - the concept of a triple bottom line - Fair Trade suggests potential to make attainable the intent and efforts exhaustively discussed by proponents of sustainable development. With this blog I hope to explore and evaluate the effects of Fair Trade as a development concept and potential policy trend. What makes Fair Trade "fair" and who defines the notions of fairness and equity from which it is pursued? Is it only just "fair enough" to address the social and environmental concerns of protesters in the anti-globalization movement as well as new categories of "ethical consumers" from wealthy countries in North America and Europe? As a movement, Fair Trade is both a conduit for and response to the content of free trade bashing. Its idealistic supporters see Fair Trade as "alternative," while technocratic interlopers define it as a market niche. The remarks on this blog will include an evaluation of Fair Trade as a sustainable development approach as well as a critical investigation of the practical aspects of implementing conceptual development strategies like Fair Trade, through the analysis of arrangements in coffee production for Fair Trade and other markets. As it currently exists, Fair Trade is the fastest growing niche in the specialty coffee sector, giving consumers the opportunity to express solidarity with their purchasing power while reinforcing a new market-led version of social justice. Many factors influence the reliability of Fair Trade benefits as they are distributed to the producers that participate in markets for these certified, specialty coffees. Producers able to sell their coffees to the organic, Fair Trade market do so according to numerous principles and rigorous standards that respond to consumer preference and quality concerns.

As someone in support of efforts to "make trade fair" (Oxfam campaign slogan), my original intention was to rely on and respond to debates that pit Free Trade vs. Fair Trade, pursuing a sweeping comparison of these divergent trade strategies that would hopefully reveal and emphasize all of the presumed goodness associated with the latter. Yet, on closer examination the progressive force of Fair Trade is beginning to reveal its own contradictions. After all, it is unavoidable that Fair Trade, while promoted as a robustly alternative, participatory and principled approach, functions within a conventional market-based framework, adheres to the same neoliberal logic and follows similar patterns associated with the dominant free trade orientation that Fair Trade activists usually rant about.

Is it time for Fair Trade Plus?

5/12: World Fair Trade Day

I am involved with Chicago Fair Trade (CFT), a newly formed not-for-profit organization seeking to build the movement for fair trade in the Chicago area. For my first posting I wanted everyone to be aware of an upcoming event to celebrate World Fair Trade Day in Chicago.

Join CFT at the HotHouse on May 12. Participate. Help grow the movement. CFT seeks support for its efforts to raise awareness of the need for trade justice worldwide, including the lauch of a local campaign to make Chicago a "Fair Trade City."

CFT’s membership includes non-governmental and faith-based organizations, fair trade businesses, educational institutions, student groups and individual activists.

Buy a ticket to the World Fair Trade Day event and sign up to become a member today at www.chicagofairtrade.org!