The poor still trade fair
TOM ROBERTSON
The human beings living in abject poverty around the world must be seen not as a means of production, but as the ultimate end of economic development.
How is it that in such a barren and windswept sub-arctic town, we enjoy a cornucopia of luxuries, while others in more fertile climates have so little of even the most basic necessities? Our humanity is tainted by being disconnected from the people who grow our food, make our clothes, and assemble our consumer electronics. The people we depend on for cheap coffee and socks may be paid pennies an hour and endure horrible working conditions. Yet the intricacies of modern global economies render so many of us passive to the plight of the poor, the environment, and our souls. There is no one single solution that promises to right the wrongs of the world, but the market for fair-trade products offers hope to many of the downtrodden, despite the emerging criticisms of ethical food movements.
Fair-trade certified goods meet a set of criteria which include responsible labour and ecological practices, such as growing organic crops and paying workers a living wage. Also stipulated is that a portion or all of the increased revenue be reinvested in the community where the product was produced. The Dec. 9, 2006 issue of the Economist disputed the claims of ethical food movements, including fair trade. One article argued that the fair trade movement essentially subsidizes the over-production of coffee, which is the root of the problem in the first place.
The Fairtrade Foundation characterized the Economist’s point in a Dec. 2006 press release as “unfounded.” In practice, fair-trade farmers do not use the premium to simply produce more of the same crop, but invest in the infrastructure and tools needed to diversify. Investment is not limited to agriculture, according to the Fairtrade Foundation, as many communities develop “alternative income-generation projects,” such as ecotourism. The aim of ecotourism is to promote the well-being of local people through ecologically responsible travel. Impoverished communities also invest the premium price derived from fair trade in health and education programs.
Companies like Kraft, Nestle, and Proctor and Gamble have responded to shareholder requests to enter the fair-trade market, which has hurt the movement’s credibility, according to the Economist. “As with organic food, the Fairtrade movement is under attack both from outsiders who think it is misguided and from insiders who think it has sold its soul.” Mega-corporations now offer fairtrade coffee — such as Starbucks, the world’s largest purchaser of fair trade certified coffee, according to their web page. Those on the left who were initially drawn to fair trade by its anticorporate aspects are now turned off by its ties to big business.
Similarly, Maurie Cohen, editor of the journal Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, wrote in 2005 that the fair trade strategy is to dodge “complex issues embedded in the political economy of globalization.”
On the contrary, the adoption of a fair trade product line by major corporations is a mark of the vast potential available in the ethical food market. Major growth was seen in organic food markets from the late 1990s to 2000 and has since levelled off at about 10 per cent a year, according to a researchandmarkets.com report. Transfair Canada, an independent, non-profit fair-trade certification organization says on its website that sales of fair trade products in Canada have increased at an average rate of 56 per cent a year since 2001.
Some retailers may seek to mark up the price of fair trade products in order to take advantage of people’s enthusiasm to do a good deed. Certification may help buyers identify products that are abusing the term fairtrade, but say little about the businesses that sell them. According to Patrick Falconer, chair of Fair Trade Manitoba (FTM), a not-for-profit network of people and organizations launched in 2006 to raise awareness about fairtrade products: “The downside of most certification schemes is that they only cover a limited number of criteria and usually only apply to a certain part of the production/distribution cycle. So third-party certification provides part of, but not a complete, solution for consumers.”
“So how can consumers make informed and ethical decisions?” asks Falconer. FTM challenges consumers to buy fair trade goods by taking the guesswork out of finding certified products and credible distributors.
While it has been easy for the Economist and for Cohen to dismiss the fair trade movement, the reality is that communities in the global South rely on fair trade in order to survive. The human beings living in abject poverty around the world must be seen not as a means of production, but as the ultimate end of economic development. Fair trade is not the ultimate solution to the world’s economic woes, but for many it promises a new hope.
In Seeds of Contemplation, Thomas Merton writes, “It is easy enough to tell the poor to accept their poverty as God’s will when you yourself have warm clothes and plenty of food and medical care and a roof over your head and no worry about the rent. But if you want them to believe you — try to share some of their poverty and see if you can accept it as God’s will yourself!” Many people today are doing just that by connecting themselves to the poor through fair trade purchases.
