Fair Trade from the West to the East

A literature review on consumer attitudes and beliefs towards Fair Trade products in the United Kingdom and Japan

from a cross-cultural perspective.

Bachelor’s Thesis

Tilburg School of Humanities

Tilburg University

Michael Vu (SNR: 1266674)

University College Tilburg: Liberal Arts and Sciences,

Business & Management Major – Class of 2017

Under the supervision of dr. R.B.J.M. Welten,

Associate Professor at Tilburg School of Humanities,

Department of Philosophy

Also read by dr. A.A.C.J. van Oijen,

Associate Professor at Tilburg School of Economics and

Management, Department of Management

# of words: 15,780 Abstract

This aim of this thesis is to investigate whether cultures have an effect on ethical consumer behavior in overall through a literature review, by which the attitudes and beliefs of British and Japanese consumers towards Fair Trade products have been analyzed and compared with each other. This is done to identify possible differences that may determine the influence of culture on ethical consumer behavior. Additionally, the argument of globalization has been explained and urged to conduct research on consumer behavior across cultures, which also includes that from an ethical viewpoint. Major concepts of this thesis, which are that of culture, ethical consumption, and Fair Trade respectively, have been further elaborated upon in line with the aim mentioned above. From the findings, it concludes that, despite the limited amount of (academic) literature available, culture does affect the attitudes and beliefs of a consumer, and so, ethical consumer behavior as well. More research is advised to support this conclusion better.

Keywords: Fair Trade, consumer behavior, attitudes, beliefs, United Kingdom, Japan, cross- cultural analysis, globalization

Acknowledgements

On the first hand, I would like to thank prof. Welten for sticking with me until the very end, as well as prof. van Oijen to some extent. Also, I would like to thank my parents, younger brother, friends, relatives, fellow seniors, juniors, academic staff, and other acquaintances for giving me motivation and lending me an ear for this project and other (trivial) topics too. Lastly, I want to thank God for everything so far and for what is to come in my journey as well.

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... ii

Acknowledgements ...... ii

Table of Contents ...... iii

1 – Introduction ...... 1

1.1 – Background ...... 2

1.1.1 – Globalization ...... 4

1.2 – Problem statement & research questions ...... 6

1.3 – Conceptual model ...... 6

1.4 – Relevance ...... 8

1.5 – Research design & data collection ...... 9

1.6 – Structure ...... 10

2 – Theoretical framework ...... 11

2.1 – Culture ...... 11

2.2 – Ethical consumption ...... 13

2.3 – Fair Trade ...... 16

2.3.1 – Definition ...... 16

2.3.2 – Historical overview ...... 18

2.3.3 – Socio-economic analysis...... 25

iii

2.3.4 – Criticism ...... 27

3 – Discussion ...... 31

3.1 – United Kingdom ...... 31

3.2 – Japan ...... 33

4 – Conclusion ...... 38

5 – Limitations & further research ...... 39

6 – References ...... 40

7 – Appendices ...... 51

7.1 – Appendix A ...... 51

7.2 – Appendix B ...... 52

7.3 – Appendix C ...... 53

7.4 – Appendix D ...... 54

7.5 – Appendix E ...... 55

1 – Introduction

First and foremost, this paper is written as an assignment for the course ‘Bachelorthesis LAS’

(840900), which is part of the final semester of the study program of Liberal Arts and Sciences at Tilburg University. In this bachelor program, it is possible for students to combine “different scientific disciplines to understand complex global issues and to look for creative solutions”

(Tilburg University, 2017).

Being that, I have decided to conduct a comparative study on consumer behavior in

Japan and the West. The reasons why Japan is selected is that I have been on exchange in

Tokyo, which was during the fall semester of 2016. During my stay in Japan, I noticed during grocery shopping after I was done with my classes that the amount of Fair Trade products placed on the shelves is much smaller than my expectations were, especially in comparison to the supermarkets in the Netherlands that I frequent before and after my exchange. This has surprised me to the extent that I was and still am very intrigued by it, as the attitude and beliefs of the Japanese obviously differ from the West, on how they approach and consume consciously. To name a few personal examples of mine are the strong emphasis on and the unexpectedly enormous offering of local products with the motivation to boost their economy by buying them; and the strict recycling laws that I had to obey, as I would be fined if I did not.

Despite mentioning these, the concept of Fair Trade is not popular in Japan, going thus against the expectations as stated before. During the process of writing this, the realization occurred to me that people in Western countries do also approach and consume consciously, which made me wonder why I did not have that impression at first of the West in this respect.

All in all, it eventually persuaded me to do my bachelor thesis on the need that emerged from globalization to understand other cultures, by zooming in on ethical consumer behavior between the United Kingdom, home to the Fair Trade movement and the biggest consuming market of Fair Trade products, and Japan with a focus on their attitudes and beliefs towards the latter.

1.1 – Background

People are brought up with certain models and mindsets, which are bound to the culture that we are raised in. These so-called ‘cultural models’ enable us to structure and comprehend what we perceive in today’s societies and communities, as they consist of concepts and procedures that are embedded and traceable in our daily lives and the perception of the latter (Fryberg &

Markus, 2007; Fryberg & Rhys, 2007). It gives us the ability to judge something, whether it is an action or a decision, is correct or not (Fryberg & Rhys, 2007). In other words, what we uphold as right or wrong is defined and confined by “the social, historical, and cultural experiences of a society” (Pacquiao, 2001, p.12). Consequently, culture, with its models and experiences, does influence on how we act, decide, and behave in certain situations; and more importantly, how these are done rightfully in our eyes.

Furthermore, an example of such a situation is when we buy something, as it has been argued that culture plays a prominent role in various aspects of buying behavior (e.g. Kacen & Lee,

2002; Legohérel, Daucé, Hsu & Ranchhold, 2009; Park & Jun, 2003; Sood & Nasu, 1995) and therefore, consumer behavior overall. To say nothing of the fact that ethics by itself, still bound to culture though, is regarded as one of, or even the key factor in purchasing behavior (e.g.

Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; De Pelsmacker, Driesen & Rayp, 2005; Takahashi & Omoto, 2017;

Uusitalo & Oksanen, 2004; Varul, 2009), demand (e.g. Hainmueller, Hiscox & Sequeira,

2015), and again, consumer behavior. It has also been taught in marketing courses at several business schools and universities on how culture precedes the attitudes and beliefs of a buyer, all of which contributes the behavior of the buyer (e.g. Kotler & Armstrong, 1980/2011).

Clearly, companies should take these ethical and cultural considerations of customers into account with their strategies (e.g. production and marketing) altogether (Mason, 2000).

It is rather known that cultures differ from one another, which implies that contrast in terms of the understanding of good and bad between cultures exists as well. Yet, there is not so much written on how both culture and ethics respectively could affect consumer behavior, let alone the aforementioned contrast on ethics per culture, which emphasizes the need for

research and the tools to do this on consumer behavior from a cross-cultural perspective that has been raised ever since (Luna & Forquer Gupta, 2001; McCort & Malhotra, 1993).

Actually, due to the so-called ‘global paradox’ (Naisbitt, 1994, as cited in Sassatelli, 2007),

“globalization underlines the market’s effects because it makes the production chain more complex, but also more visible. It therefore spurs the development of new global dimensions of inequality as well as helping the diffusion of tools of industrial regulation, highlighting the environmental and social effects of economic processes and creating conditions for market contestation” (Sassatelli, 2007, p.183). To put it differently, the market has been elevated to the global frontier, what can be most arguably credited to the practice of ‘offshore outsourcing’,

“in which businesses hire people in another country to perform various tasks” (Krugman &

Wells, 2005/2015, G-10). Yet, outsourcing itself partially causes a drift between producers (i.e. businesses) and consumers, as the former, for example, hire cheap labor forces on foreign soil; repeatedly ignore their work and life environment; and the lack of transparency and control on these and other matters as well, of which these have been considered as unethical to some consumers. As a response to this, they engage in ‘ethical consumption’ (also known as alternative, critical, or political consumption), where a steady growth of interest and participation can be observed from it as well (Sassatelli, 2006, 2007).

So, it is indeed possible to indicate and measure how people consume in an ethical sense, when buying Fair Trade products to support its cause(s), for instance (Sassatelli, 2006,

2007). However, consumer societies, in general, are often characterized as modern and affluent (Carrier, 2007; Sassatelli, 2006, 2007). With regards to this, the United Kingdom and

Japan are selected for this research as those to be compared, due to personal interests and the opportunity to conduct a cross-cultural study that has already been announced previously; but also the fact that reputed media outlets of these countries have published articles about this phenomenon (e.g. Butler & Smithers, 2017; Shozawa, 2016; The Japan Times, 2017); and that both Japan and especially the UK have a noticeable presence in the Fair Trade circuit (Nicholls

& Opal, 2005), which is regarded as one of the most recognizable faces of ethical consumption.

Nonetheless, these countries and their national cultures do differ from each other greatly, which is very likely then to be transferred to their respective attitudes and beliefs; and thus, consumer behavior as well.

In summary, this thesis attempts to provide (additional) insight on the contrast between cultures on consumer behavior by looking at the relationship of these two respectively, which is done by examining the differences between the British and the Japanese consumers on their attitude and behavior towards Fair Trade products that might be attributed to their respective culture.

1.1.1 – Globalization

This particular section on globalization argues that it has indirectly caused the emancipation of ethical consumption, as well as it has brought the need to understand other cultures in many aspects, which is explained here more in-depth.

What can be noticed from our behavior when we take up the position of customers in recent history is the ever-increasing number of products and services offered and sold on the market

(Sassatelli, 2007), which is attributed to globalization. According to Kanter (1995), it is the process when “the world is becoming a global shopping mall in which ideas and products are available everywhere at the same time” (p.15), which again can partially be accredited to offshore outsourcing. From this, Kanter proposes that globalization has hugely widened the scope for both the customers and companies to an international level.

Indeed, “the globalization of markets and industries has fundamentally changed the competitive conditions facing firms” (Wiersema & Bowen, 2008, p.115). By way of example is the fierce competition on a global scale, as more and more firms from all over the world have decided to venture overseas. With this in mind, these firms obviously have to go up against each other, to attract customers in yet-to-be-known markets to them, next to their existing clientele. Speaking about this, it could be referred to the verdict that Kanter, but also Spich

(1995) both had on globalization, as the latter of the two stated that “it is a conceptualization

of the international political economy which suggests and believes essentially that all economic activity, whether local, regional, or national, must be conducted within a perspective and attitude that constantly is global and worldwide in its scope” (p.7), which re-affirms that the outlook of, at least, companies has been broadened. Luna and Forquer Gupta (2001) added that the “globalization of markets and international competition are requiring firms to operate in a multicultural environment” (p.45). So, as they expand their business abroad, whether it is just outsourcing for their production process; or actually entering a new market, in which they must target other new groups of possible customers besides the original target group in their national market, contrasting cultural and ethical differences may arise and should be dealt with.

Additionally, Appadurai (1996) has also commented on globalization that “the new global cultural economy has to be seen as a complex, overlapping, disjunctive order (…)”

(p.32). Concerning this, he suggests that globalization and its outcome(s) should definitely be viewed upon as something sophisticated, as it is caused by all sorts of movements (cultures, economies; companies, customers, etc.), that tend to cross set borders, intersect each other, and causes new platforms to emerge, such as the newly-formed, overarching ‘global cultural economy’ where all national markets and cultures are thus connected and intertwined with each other; and cooperations between them, of which it can be referred to the statements of

Kanter and Spich to some extent. Still, it cannot be denied that the ‘complex, overlapping, disjunctive order’ of globalization should be more investigated upon.

On the whole, what can be inferred from the secondary arguments above, is that globalization has indeed resulted into “the economic and cultural interconnection of the entire globe”

(Sassatelli, 2007, p.180), which is rather intricate and complex for us to understand it. Yet, globalization therefore strengthens the necessity to investigate the ‘cultural interconnection’, as we are confronted with the differences from other cultures and their ideas on what is right or wrong, and moreover, how this could also affect ethical consumption and consumer

behavior overall; as well as it is now to be expected that companies should take these into account in their approach too.

1.2 – Problem statement & research questions

The following problem statement has been derived from the problem indication:

“Does culture affect consumers in terms of their behavior towards ethical products, such as

that of Fair Trade?”

Also, the following research questions have been formulated in the attempt to offer an adequate answer to the problem statement with the scope of Fair Trade, as well as the countries taken into consideration:

❖ Are there any differences between British and Japanese consumers in terms of their

attitude and beliefs towards Fair Trade products?

❖ If so, are these differences between British and Japanese consumers in terms of their

attitude and beliefs towards Fair Trade products attributable to their respective cultures?

1.3 – Conceptual model

Figure 1 – The adjusted conceptual model.

Figure 1 depicts the conceptual model has been drawn to illustrate the concepts and the relationships, which are discussed in the dissertation. The model also visualizes the problem statement on how culture could affect the attitudes and beliefs of consumers towards Fair

Trade products and thus, their intentions and buying behavior as well. As the arrow from the variable of culture to the variable of the attitudes and beliefs of consumers towards Fair Trade products indicates that the latter is dependent on the former, it implies that it would also affect

their intentions to purchase these products, and eventually, doing so. What is more, is that culture is also a moderating variable1, next to being an independent variable, as different cultures would lead to different attitudes and beliefs, and also, different intentions and buying behavior of Fair Trade products; hence, the additional research questions.

It is partially based on the conceptual model of Morrell and Jayawardhena (2010)2 where they did research on how individual characteristics such as gender and age of British retail shoppers can have a possible effect on their attitudes and beliefs towards and their purchase of Fair Trade products, which again is based on the popular ‘reasoned action’ model of decision making (Ajzen, 1985, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975, as cited in Morrell &

Jayawardhena, 2010) that has often featured in conducted studies on Fair Trade (e.g. Kirezli

& Kuşcu, 2012; Ma, 2007; Shaw, Shiu & Clarke, 2000; Takahashi & Omoto, 2017); as well as the model of Kotler and Armstrong (1980/2011)3 where the factor of culture precedes the factor of attitudes and beliefs of a consumer, which thus affects the behavior of the latter.

To some degree, it can indeed be presumed that culture does influence the attitudes and beliefs of consumers towards Fair Trade products, and therefore, the intentions and again, the purchase of Fair Trade products by consumers too. Even more so, this presumption can be reaffirmed by going through whether there actually is a contrast between the attitudes and beliefs of consumers from different cultures that affect their intentions and buying behavior, which is the aim of the dissertation, as the attitudes and beliefs of Japanese and British consumers are identified, analyzed, compared with each other in order to prove so.

1 According to Sekaran and Bougie (1992/2013), moderating variables have “a strong contingent effect on the independent-dependent variable relationship” (p.71).

2 See §7.1 – Appendix A for the ‘reasoned action’ model of Morrell and Jayawardhena (2010).

3 See §7.2 – Appendix B for the consumer buying behavior model of Kotler and Armstrong (1980/2011).

1.4 – Relevance

Besides indicating the problem, it is necessary to explain the relevance of this paper. On the one hand, it cannot be dismissed that much has already been written about culture, ethics, consumer behavior, and the relationships between them. On the other hand, due to the subjective nature of these topics in which they are open to multiple interpretations, which most arguably gives the outcome that certain areas of research on a topic or a relationship are understudied, in comparison to others, as it is proven by the wide range of academic articles and other published sources. So, it is very important to be clear and pinpoint the specific issues that are to be discussed.

Not to mention that this could be illustrated by the fact that the interest in the field of ethical consumption leaves a little to be desired (Bonsu & Zwick, 2007; Cooper-Martin & Holbrook,

1993; Holbrook, 1994). For instance, recent literature in the field of consumer ethics puts more emphasis on the subjects of “unethical consumer behavior like shoplifting, credit card fraud, and vandalism” (e.g. Fullerton & Punj, 2004, as cited in Belk, Devinney & Eckhardt, 2005, p.275); but also to a lesser extent on “consumer boycotts of companies whom they deem to be acting unethically” (e.g. John & Klein, 2003, as cited in Belk et al., 2005, p.275); whereas, relatively speaking, there is few interest on “how ethical considerations in consumption are thought about by consumers”, even less so when compared with the previous subjects (Belk et al., 2005, p.275), which is where this paper comes in.

Secondly, “there is also a need to understand how ethical interpretations and behavior may differ in various consumer markets around the world” (Belk et al., 2005, p.276), which can be referred to the argument of globalization that is mentioned before. More so, this need has been stressed in some reviews and papers on ethical consumption and Fair Trade, as they notice that cross-cultural research conducted on these subjects are rather focused predominantly on a national level (e.g. Bonsu & Zwick, 2007; De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Kirezli

& Kuşcu, 2012; Morrell & Jayawardhena, 2010; Takahashi & Omoto, 2017; Uusitalo &

Oksanen, 2004), between-countries comparisons within the European Union (abbr. EU) (e.g.

Varul, 2009), or between those from the EU and North America (Andorfer & Liebe, 2012;

Newholm & Shaw, 2007). To put it in another way, these studies mostly involve Western countries, which supports the decision to do a comparison study of a non-Western country

(Japan) with a Western country (the United Kingdom), as it will offer new knowledge on ethical consumption and Fair Trade, in this case, within a Western-Asian context (e.g.

Malcolm, 2013; Usugami, 2012).

All things considered, this paper attempts, by linking the concepts of culture and ethical consumption with each other, to shed light on the need for research about the latter and Fair

Trade from a cross-cultural perspective.

1.5 – Research design & data collection

To start with announcing that after a brief discussion with the thesis supervisor for the sake of ease, the main research method that is applied in this paper is a literature review, which

“ensures that no important variable that has in the past been found repeatedly to have had impact on the problem is ignored” (Sekaran & Bougie, 1992/2013, p.50). Naturally, this is done in order to answer the problem statement and the related research questions properly.

Secondary sources are found through the (online) research database that Tilburg University give their students and professors access to scientific journal articles and other academic works that can be read and cited for their respective purposes; but also, web search engines where Tilburg University also indirectly grants access to this kind of literature, such as Google

Scholar and EBSCOhost, for example. In addition to this, other sources such as textbooks and news articles are used in this paper as well. Of course, it is indeed necessary to state the publication date to assure that the study will not be based on outdated information.

To conclude, used works in this dissertation concerns culture, ethical consumption, Fair

Trade, and other plausible topics that are related and/or seen as relevant to this research, in which they either contribute to better understanding of these concepts; offer secondary

arguments that support the proposed relationship(s) between the concepts; deliver information for the literature review of countries that are compared with each other; or a combination of these.

1.6 – Structure

Not coincidentally, the first chapter is the introduction of this paper in which it addresses the background, problem statement, additional research questions, conceptual model, relevance, research design and data collection respectively.

The second chapter presents the theoretical framework where the concepts of culture, ethical consumption, and Fair Trade have been presented an overview of these concepts.

Next, the third chapter contains the discussion, which examines how and why exactly

British and Japanese consumers act towards Fair Trade products, as these have been analyzed and the findings are thereby presented as well.

The fourth chapter discusses these and the possible differences that have appeared and identified and whether these are determined by their respective culture or not; and finally, a conclusion is drawn from the discussion as well. Limitations and indications for possible further research are also added for the sake of this dissertation.

2 – Theoretical framework

2.1 – Culture

Albeit, to go more in-depth into the short explanation in the introduction on how culture, whether it is the national culture of a country or a sub-culture within the latter, affects our decision-making in everyday scenarios, it is thus required to provide a brief review on how this reasoning has been constituted.

First, Jones, Bradbury, and Le Boutillier (2003/2011) have actually done so; and to start on how they construe ‘culture’ that, according to them, can be applied to the clear majority of sociologists as well, it prescribes “the rules that govern thought and behavior in a society”

(p.6). However, the concept itself is rather ambiguous, as it is open to interpretation, which is supported by the discovery of Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952) where they reviewed over 160 different concepts and definitions of culture (as cited in Ferraro, 1989/2002).

Then, they proceed by presenting the approach as the structural-consensus theory that takes the stance that culture dictates the attitudes and behavior of its members, as long as they do not infringe on the rules that were acquired through the process of ‘socialization’4 since their infancy. To put it simply, human behavior is learned behavior, in which people can presume and anticipate what others would do under certain circumstances by referring to what they have been taught (Jones, Bradbury, & Le Boutillier, 2003/2011). That being said, it implies that contrast between cultures exists, as there are differences between them in what is deemed as appropriate and what is not. As we have been taught with a set of rules that are not same as those from other cultures, it leads us to think and interact unlike them.

4 Jones, Bradbury, and Le Boutillier (2003/2011) have stated that the process of socialization as “the way in which human beings learn the kinds of behavior expected to them in the social settings in which they find themselves”

(p.6).

Again, according to Jones, Bradbury, and Le Boutillier (2003/2011), a culture functions the same as a simple school building where the placing of doors, staircases, elevators, and classrooms determine the way they walk from the entrance of the building to a specific classroom. It is doubtful that the students do otherwise, as of the physical constraints that exist and the unnecessary acts (e.g. smashing a window) that they will not commit because of the latter. Instead of physical structures, we have social structures (i.e. the cultural models) that are not visible; yet, their presence can infer on our manner of conducting ourselves, similar to the physical structure of the school building on the students. Moreover, Jones,

Bradbury, and Le Boutillier (2003/2011) have stated that there are multiple levels of these

‘cultural rules’, which range from laws which enforce everyone within a society (e.g. theft) that should not be overridden to rules that apply only within a given social context (e.g. the behavior of children on the playground vs. their behavior in the classroom). What is more, these rules can be divided into two categories: norms, which are rules that are linked to the position or role you take up in society; and values, which are rules that have no associations with any roles in society, but are the rules of thumb on what is good or bad within the latter, where norms are based on. The structural-consensus theory presents that through the fundamental process of socialization, where they are taught the norms and values of a culture, which causes that all members conform, or reach consensus, on what is deemed as good and what not, which can be understood as ethics.

As to be expected though, there have been clashes on a number of norms and values within society, which have sparked controversy in our timeline and have been profoundly discussed and explored in newspapers, scientific journals and history books; to name the topic of LGBT rights as an example, which too can be used as proof that a conflict between sub- cultures within the overall culture of a country can happen as well. For instance, while homosexuality is legal in South Korea, the overall consensus within the population is that it is still regarded as immoral or unethical even today, which has been reinstated by the older generations who are very religious and conservative. To add to that, their recently-elected

president Moon Jae-in has stated during a debate, which was broadcasted on national television, that he is an opponent of the idea of same-sex relationships, which has triggered the Korean LGBT community yet again (McCurry, 2017). Like the southern part of the Korean peninsula, the structural-consensus theory argues that all cultures and societies possess central or core values that characterize their norms, social structures (i.e. cultural models); all of which have been passed on and reinforced due to the process of socialization; and thus, differentiates themselves from other cultures.

As it can be inferred from this sub-chapter on culture, it consists of “everything that people have, think, and do, as members of their society” (Ferraro, 1989/2002, p.19).

2.2 – Ethical consumption

In the introduction, ethical consumption has been mentioned as the activity that dissatisfied consumers partake, as they react towards the knowledge asymmetry that exists between the producers and the consumers, as the latter found out through the grapevine lamentably of the unfair treatment of cheap workers by some of these producers overseas, mostly in developing countries. Still, it is not clear on what is meant with the term ‘ethical consumption’ (also labeled with the following adjectives: alternative, critical, and political), by which this part of the chapter hopefully provides clarification on it.

“A growing variety of discourses, both within the marketplace and outside it, in politics and civil society, is calling into being the ‘consumer’ not only as a subject but also, and above all, as a moral and political subject” (Sassatelli, 2006, p.219). From the second half of the 21st century onwards, the process of globalization, among other major developments, resurged and dawned a new era of “economic prosperity, political freedom, and world peace” (Moore, 2004;

Bhagwati, 2004, as cited in Marquardt, 2005). Although it was estimated by the World Bank

Group (abbr. WBG) (2017) in 2013 that the total amount of people living under the poverty line (i.e. $1.90 per day) reduced from 881 million to 767 million, the reduction itself is rather disproportionate. While in one half of those under the line that lives in Asia, it has decreased

by 108 million, especially in the bigger countries of China, India, and Indonesia; whereas, in the other half that lives in Africa, it has only decreased by 4 million. The question on why this unequally-distributed decrease of those that live in extreme poverty, might be answered with globalization and more specifically, the practice of offshore outsourcing, as many goods like clothing and toys are produced in East and South Asia, while it cannot be said the same about

Africa. Subsequently, Sassatelli (2006, 2007) and many others have observed that globalization has brought the ‘growing variety of discourses’, which can be referred to this twofold outcome and the aforementioned global paradox where the coming together of markets does contribute to the social disparities in the world to some extent. As a matter of fact, the gap of inequality has widened over time and will continue to do so (Reuben, 2015). In addition to this, the WBG (2017) has stated that it is troublesome to solve the ever-widening gap, as the world’s poor are living in distant and feeble places with limited access to basic needs

(e.g. clean water, electricity, healthcare, education). Because of this, Sassatelli (2006, 2007) has also expressed every now and then that our roles as consumers have apparently been broadened from the ‘discourses’, which have led us to the point of ‘ethical consumption’ where we, as consumers, should not solely use the goods we buy as an end itself, but that we should be aware and take matters into our own hands by changing “the otherwise allegedly unhampered workings” that contribute to these inequalities (Sassatelli, 2006, p.219).

Not only are those in the developing countries affected with the many implications of globalization but also those in developed countries too.

With regards to the global paradox, there is no clear overview on how the goods are produced due to its increased complexity. Because it is so complex though, people are drawn to it and have therefore demanded increasingly for transparency in this respect, as this has been stated in the introduction. For instance, the food production process has become intensified over the years, in order to produce as much as possible, as cheap as possible. The big players in the fast-food industry like McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken (abbr. KFC) can because of this, leisurely acquire their ingredients like ground meat and chicken for their

burgers and nuggets at a low price, as these have been produced with low costs as well.

Conversely, as opponents would like to call it ‘factory farming’, intensive animal farming has been heavily associated with food scares5 (Sassatelli, 2007), in which McDonalds and KFC had to deal with the misdeeds (e.g., faulty expiration dates, retrieval of incongruous substances) of their food suppliers (McCurry, 2015; Tadeo, 2014), for instance. As a result, more consumers doubt whether the business activities of the fast-food giants are sustainable and ethical or not, which could lead to boycotts of and protests against them in order to bring attention and pressure to their reckless practices (Sassatelli, 2006, 2007).

Another alternative that can serve as a response to this is the purchase of goods that are produced in an appropriate and sustainable manner. There is nowadays an overload of these products: organic fruits and vegetables, Fair Trade coffee, and fake-fur clothing, to name a few examples. Even more, it sends a signal to the outside world that there is a demand for such goods in the market among a growing group of consumers, as well as how things are done now, needs to be changed to an ‘equitable world trading system’ (Young & Redford, 2002, p.ix, as cited in Sassatelli, 2006, p.230).

This new meta-narrative has been consistently pushed forward even until now by numerous social movements and spokespersons, which argues that we possess the capability and have the responsibility to purchase with some afterthought. It must be done in order to alter the undesirable mechanisms by exercising our influence: a ‘bottom-up cultural revolution’

(Sassatelli, 2006, 2007), which range from the most severe boycotts and demonstrations to how we switch some or most of our weekly groceries with organic and Fair Trade-produced substitutes. The Fair Trade movement and their products do fit this meta-narrative, as they

5 According to Whitworth, Druckman, and Woodward (2017), a food scare is “the response to a food incident (real or perceived) that causes a sudden disruption to the food supply chain and to food consumption patterns” (p.133).

are active and sold on the global market while carrying the dialogue that challenges the status quo of the market simultaneously, which attracts consumers to buy them.

2.3 – Fair Trade

In this section of the theoretical framework, it will touch upon four aspects of Fair Trade: how it has been defined and understood; how Fair Trade has done over the course; to what extent it has influenced the world from a socio-economic perspective; and the criticism there is on the concept and the execution of Fair Trade respectively, which is done in order to comprehend

Fair Trade in overall terms and therefore, be more capable to answer the research questions and address the problem statement.

2.3.1 – Definition

According to the Charter of Fair Trade Principles that has been published in 2009, in which the World Fair Trade Organization (abbr. WFTO) and Fairtrade International (abbr. FLO) both have upheld ever since, Fair Trade has been defined as “a response to the failure of conventional trade to deliver sustainable livelihoods and development to people in the poorest countries of the world” (WFTO & FLO, 2009). Both organizations have co-existed and collaborated with each other to dedicate their efforts towards this identified core issue over the past couple of decades. One of them is the installment of a joint quality management system for Fair Trade (WFTO Europe, 2009).

Besides these overarching Fairtrade organizations (abbr. FTOs) that are founded in order to coordinate their efforts on a global scale, there are also national and regional FTOs, to which some of them have been there before WFTO and FLO; and many companies and other institutions, all of whom have shared their own interpretation, like culture, on the topic of Fair Trade as well. To illustrate this with two of these interpretations, the British Association for Fair Trade Shops & Suppliers (abbr. BAFTS) (2017), who has been acknowledged by the

WFTO as a national FTO under the latter, released a statement on their website, in which they

“seek to create opportunities for disadvantaged producers by means of fair trade practices and

accountability”; whereas, Zenshō Holdings (n.d.), a Tokyo-based food and beverage company that owns and operates several popular restaurant chains with Sukiya and Hamazushi, which are regarded as household names serving donburi6 and sushi respectively on the Japanese archipelago and beyond, as their front-runners, has incorporated the practice of Fair Trade and described it as “a trading and economic system that aims to enhance the lives of producers by purchasing products produced by small-scale farmers and craftsmen in developing countries at fair prices and selling them to consumers.” Although it is to be noted that their descriptions of Fair Trade naturally contrast from one another, especially to consider that these two are not alike to each other in multiple aspects, they both do attach great importance to Fair Trade. Nonetheless, a few key points (e.g. stressing the well-being of producers; strengthening the bonds between producers, consumers, and intermediaries; addressing shortcomings of the current market system) can be derived by comparing them.

Considering this, FTOs and some companies thus advocate for an economy that promotes transparency, cooperation, and development in the long run; and therefore, also protects the consumers, producers, and intermediaries from possible exploitations in many ways, through minimum prices that have been agreed upon before by all parties, and goods being produced in a sustainable manner and sold to customers straightaway (Nicholls & Opal,

2005). By doing so, FTOs criticize both directly and indirectly the aforementioned market system of today where most companies are more worried about allocating their costs to cheaper options, maximizing their profits and satisfying their shareholders, rather than how the producers and the environment fare, as they are only valuable to the companies when they help in meeting their goals. However, this first-drawn impression has been weakened, though not by much, throughout the years, as it is true that Fair Trade is becoming much more widespread due to its growing interest among companies (e.g. Zenshō Holdings), and the

6 Donburi (lit. ‘bowl’; abbr. don) is a dish commonly eaten in Japan, which is a bowl of rice with either simmered fish, meat, vegetables, or a combination of those as toppings.

welcoming reception that goes with it as well (Lekakis, 2013). Moreover, Nicholls and Opal

(2005, p.18-19) have stated that within an economy that values transparency and cooperation, other shortcomings of the current market system will be addressed too, which consists of the fact that producers are often confronted with the “lack of access to markets (…); financial markets (…); credit (…); imperfect information (…)”; and “the weak legal systems and enforcement of laws (…)”. Altogether, they concluded that Fair Trade has three goals to strive for, which are also interconnected with one another: “to alleviate extreme poverty through trade; to empower smallholder farmers and farm workers to use trade relationships as a means of enhancing their social capital; and to support the wider campaign for global trade reform and trade justice” (Nicholls & Opal, 2005, p.25).

In overall, as it has been proclaimed that the Fair Trade movement is rooted from ethical consumption, it is indeed to be believed as the dissatisfactory reaction towards the adverse outcomes of the contemporary market system, enhanced by globalization (Sassatelli,

2006, 2007), that includes the neglect, yet also the exploitation of producers from developed countries, and therefore, deteriorated their well-being and indirectly broadened the inequality gap between people from developed and developing countries; and offers a more humane alternative, in both a theoretical and a practical sense (Barratt Brown, 1993) that would solve these problems and be beneficial to all of us, especially the producers who have been treated harshly, which contributes to shaping the world a better place to live and work in.

2.3.2 – Historical overview

To fully grasp of how Fair Trade has developed over the years and how it arrived at its present state, a necessity arises consequently to look at the past of this phenomenon. Undoubtedly, a historical overview of Fair Trade gives more insight and understanding of the idea behind it, as well as its current whereabouts. It is hard though to ascertain when exactly the Fair Trade movement has been conceived. Nicholls and Opal (2005) have determined that there are four waves where noticeable progress can be observed in reference to the latter.

The first wave is usually assumed that it took off around the time that the Second World War occurred, which is in the 1940s, on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean remarkably (Nicholls &

Opal, 2005).

To start closer to home, the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief, much better known today by its abbreviation, Oxfam, was set up in the United Kingdom in 1942. Their aim was originally to help Greek citizens by providing food aid, as Greece was occupied by Italy and

Nazi Germany at that time and had to cope with a naval blockade. It was put up by the Allied

Forces that basically shut off all shipments, that of food too, to the southern tip of the Balkan peninsula. The horrific event that was caused by this decision is now known, by which the full name of Oxfam already suggests, as the Great Famine (Neelsen & Stratmann, 2011; Oxfam

International, 2017). Alongside with many other charitable organizations in Western Europe, the activities of Oxfam were quickly succeeded and shifted to the import of small goods from artisans all over Eastern Europe, who were severely hit by the Second World War. Oxfam acted as an intermediary, by which they sell those back home, in order to alleviate the aftermath of the war (Nicholls & Opal, 2005).

At the same time, Ten Thousand Villages (formerly known as SelfHelp Crafts), which was set up by the Mennonite Central Committee in the United States, began to import small crafts too, and more specifically, embroidery from Puerto Rico (Nicholls & Opal, 2005; WFTO,

2014a).

To conclude, these two charitable initiatives have demonstrated as the first attempts through trade, rather than aid, that the situation of those who needed it the most can indeed be improved.

Proceeding to the second wave that happened in the 1950s, it has featured predominantly the continuation of Oxfam selling small crafts, such as pincushions, which were then made by refugees from China in their shops, next to those from Eastern Europe (Fridell, 2007; Low &

Davenport, 2005; Nicholls & Opal, 2005; Wilshaw, 1991); and also, the first alternative trade7 organization (abbr. ATO), which is to be understood as the spiritual predecessors of FTOs

(Low & Davenport, 2007), was started by and in the name of Oxfam with its purpose to “import crafts and commodities directly from artisans and producers in continental Europe” (Fridell,

2007, p.40), which asserted the continuation of their activities and the pole position they enjoyed in the Fair Trade circuit during this specific timeframe.

As time passes by, a small number of other ATOs have appeared as well, with Traidcraft

(UK) and Gepa (Germany) as prime examples, with their mission was to reach out and give producers from developing countries the chance and the platform to do business directly (i.e. without any middlemen and the risks attached to them) with those from developed countries for first time (Nicholls & Opal, 2005). In general, it is important to realize that in this given period, most of the ATOs had their roots in either religious (e.g. Christian Aid, UK; SERVV,

US; Solidaridad, the Netherlands), political, or cultural communities, in which they engaged into social entrepreneurship8, where Fair Trade products were often bought from catalogs and the so-called ‘world shops’ (e.g. Oxfam Shops, UK; Wereldwinkels, the Netherlands) of the

ATOs (Low & Davenport, 2005; Nicholls & Opal, 2005).

Admittedly, despite coming from different backgrounds and viewpoints, many such organizations are created and feel obligated to diminish, in their view, the injustice around the world through the means of Fair Trade.

7 According to Raynolds (2000), alternative trade includes efforts of companies and organizations that “question existing global circuits of conventional commodities and promote some form of alternative trade in goods and services” (p.298), which is not only that of Fair Trade, but also organic, ecological, and other social movements (as cited in Low & Davenport, 2007, p.317).

8 According to Mair and Noboa (2006), social entrepreneurship (abbr. SE) concerns “innovative approaches to address issues in the domain of education, environment, fair trade, health and human rights and is widely regarded as an important building block of sustainable development of countries” (p.1).

According to Nicholls and Opal (2005), the third wave of the development of Fair Trade marks the emergence of the Co-Operative Group in the UK and Wild Oats Markets in the US, which are ‘naturally sympathetic retail businesses’ or ethical retailers that attempt to appeal Fair

Trade products to a larger audience in the markets they are active in. Furthermore, they have pointed out this expansion of the scope of consumers, as ATOs and FTOs then entered into production of more typical commodities, such as chocolate (e.g. Divine Chocolate, UK), coffee and tea (e.g. Cafédirect, UK; co-founded by Oxfam, Traidcraft, and others).

The introduction of certification labels on these Fair Trade products in the late 1980s

(mostly food and beverage by which the given examples indicate), which assures that these have been produced under the correct conditions, also contributed to the development of Fair

Trade into a more mainstream context to attract more potential consumers (Nicholls & Opal,

2005). As another way to illustrate this, the Max Havelaar Foundation has been on the front line of Fair Trade labelling ever since it was established in 1988 by the two Dutchmen: Frans van der Hoff, missionary, and Nico Roozen, director of the ATO Solidaridad, in order to respond to the situation of Mexican coffee bean farmers who were heavily underpaid (Kocken,

2003, as cited in Nicholls & Opal, 2005; Fairtrade International, 2017a; Stichting Max

Havelaar, 2015). The name of Max Havelaar is derived from the protagonist of the popular 19th century novel that shares the same name, which was written by the Dutch author Eduard

Douwes Dekker, or better known under his pen name, Multatuli, where the social inequalities of the coffee bean farmers and others of the local community in the Dutch East Indies or present-day Indonesia are described and put question marks on these as well (Stichting Max

Havelaar, 2015). Anyway, to return to the subject of the Dutch FTO itself, Max Havelaar announced to the public on November 15th, 1988, their first packs of roasted coffee, which was bought from the Mexican farmers at a fair price, and then offered in the Dutch supermarkets at a fair price too, with their corresponding Fairtrade label9 to certify the Fair Trade nature of

9 See §7.3 – Appendix C for the corresponding images of the marked Fair Trade certification labels (FLO, 2006).

them (Linton, 2012). This was done in the presence of the very first recipient of a Max

Havelaar-certified Fair Trade coffee pack: the late Prince Claus of the Netherlands, who was the husband of former Queen Beatrix until his death in 2002. It has been a great success, as the Dutch FTO nowadays includes in their lists of products that are available in stores, next to coffee: tea, chocolate, bananas, honey, rice, sugar, fruit juices, and many others. All of which are sold with their Fairtrade label to prove that these have been produced in good faith (Moore,

2004; Stichting Max Havelaar, 2015); and even more so that they expanded their activities to other countries (e.g. Belgium, France, Switzerland, Denmark & Norway) within a decade

(Fairtrade International, 2017a). The name of Max Havelaar earned another definition in the

Netherlands, next to the novel of Multatuli, as the Dutch FTO has been credited as the originator of the certification label and the foothold that it has achieved in the global Fair

Trade circuit throughout the years (Nicholls & Opal, 2005).

Next to Max Havelaar, many other Fairtrade certification labels have been created and coincided within and without Europe by their FTOs, such as TransFair10 (Luxembourg,

Germany, Austria, Italy, US, Canada & Japan), Fairtrade Mark10 (UK & Ireland),

Rättvisemärkt10 (Sweden), and Reilu Kauppa (Finland) (Fairtrade International, 2017a; Levi

& Linton, 2003; Loureiro & Lotade, 2004; Thomson, 1999).

More importantly, FLO was created in 1997 to bring several national FTOs, including almost all of the FTOs that have been just mentioned, together under one sign, and also align them, their activities, and their standards in parallel to their collective pursuit of FLO’s interpretation of Fair Trade (Fairtrade International, 2017a; Levi & Linton, 2003; Moore,

2004; Nicholls & Opal, 2005), which has been realized to some extent in 2002, when the

International FAIRTRADE Certification Mark11 was launched and can be found nowadays on

10 See §7.3 – Appendix C for the corresponding images of the marked Fair Trade certification labels (FLO, 2006).

11 See §7.4 – Appendix D for an image of the International FAIRTRADE Certification Mark (FLO, 2011).

the shelves of supermarkets, cafés, world shops, and other stores around the globe (Fairtrade

International, 2017b).

In addition to FLO, WFTO (formerly known as the International Federation of

Alternative Traders, abbr. IFTA) has been established for similar reasons and purposes that are ascribed to the latter as well, as it currently encompasses numerous “fair traders: producers, marketers, exporters, importers, wholesalers and retailers that demonstrate 100% commitment to Fair Trade” in more than seventy countries, all of whom are managed by its five regional-based WFTOs (Europe, preceded by the ATO Network of European Worldshops, abbr. NEWS!; North America & Pacific; Africa; Asia; & Latin America) that adhere to the aforementioned Charter of Fair Trade Principles (Moore, 2004; WFTO, 2014b).

Following the respective successes of Max Havelaar, WFTO, and FLO, the idea of Fair Trade has not reached only those within the circuit but beyond too, which characterizes the fourth wave, as Nicholls and Opal (2005) has phrased it nicely, Fair Trade has been “solidifying growth in the mainstream” (p.20) during this period.

Firstly, to return to the earlier statement about the increasing interest of companies in

Fair Trade, Nestlé has entered the British Fair Trade market in late 2005, by introducing their own Fair Trade instant coffee with the name of Partners’ Blend, obviously labeled with the

FAIRTRADE Certification Mark. The magnitude of this decision undertaken by the renowned

Swiss food and beverage giant, who announced that Partner’s Blend “represents a fundamental, serious commitment to help some of the poorest farmers in the world” (BBC

News, 2005), surely verifies how important the practice, certification, and labelling of Fair

Trade has become, as “its success has encouraged the market entry of more traditional players”

(Nicholls & Opal, 2005, p.20) and that even supermarkets (e.g. Tesco & the Co-Operative

Group, UK; Albert Heijn & Plus, the Netherlands; Æon, Japan) too introduced their own label of Fair Trade products, next to those that are already available on their counters (Æon Group,

2015; Moore, 2004; Nicholls & Opal, 2005).

Secondly, as of late, Fair Trade has also received an increasing interest in the social sciences. To be a little bit more precise on what exactly has been discussed so far, recent studies shows how Fair Trade affects those who are involved in the production process, especially farmers and craftsmen from ‘the global South’ (i.e. developing countries), for instance (e.g.

Bacon, 2005; Barham & Callenes, 2011; Ruben & Fort, 2012; Stenn, 2013; Valkila, Haaparanta

& Niemi, 2010); and how it affects the developing positioning of companies like Nestlé and

Zenshō towards this end (e.g. Davies, 2007; Myers, 2013; Nicholls, 2002; Raynolds, 2009).

It can thus be argued then that Fair Trade has caught the attention of not only companies, but also that of the academic community, as multiple research and case studies have indeed been conducted on this topic over the past few decades.

All in all, the overall development of Fair Trade can be divided into four timeframes, or waves, as it is put by Nicholls and Opal (2005): first, it has been determined that it commenced in the

1940s, when committees from the UK and the US respectively were set up to provide aid to those elsewhere that suffered in and after wartime, which quickly shifted to the import of handcrafts; second, roughly a decade later, when these committees continued and expanded their activities, who were succeeded by the ATOs that acted as middlemen and social entrepreneurs; third, when Fair Trade products can be found on the shelves of supermarkets and other shops that have been certified, and also the foundation of global FTOs to include and integrate as much of their national and regional equivalents as possible; and fourth, when

Fair Trade has strengthened and, most of all, mainstreamed itself into the world, as more reputable conglomerates and supermarkets integrate or even adopt the policy of Fair Trade to their desired extent, and more scientific research has been done on Fair Trade and its many aspects as well.

2.3.3 – Socio-economic analysis

Essentially speaking, Fair Trade stresses the importance to conduct business in a socially responsible manner in order to combat the disparity between producers from developing countries, and both consumers and intermediaries from developed countries.

Like Nestlé, the example as mentioned earlier of Zenshō Holdings (n.d.) also explains their participation in Fair Trade by zooming in on their relationship with coffee bean farmers from

Africa. It begins with the agreed condition beforehand that if the farmers are paid fairly, they will have a reasonable income and acquire the necessary skills and knowledge from the transactions that can be applied within their workplace (e.g. Stenn, 2013), which results into a stable production process. Subsequently, the near environment of the coffee bean farmers will be improved due to the certainty achieved in their financial and productive capacity, which will improve the quality of the coffee beans and therefore, it will eventually justify the fair prices that Zenshō would pay for the coffee served to their customers, dining at their restaurants, sushi bars, cafés, and other eating establishments. The result is then a virtuous circle, rather than a vicious circle, as it generates favorable outcomes for the farmers, Zenshō

Holdings, and their customers.

Above all, this interaction is just one of the many ways that depict the practice of Fair

Trade, as it “represents a promising approach to alleviating poverty and bolstering environmental sustainability in the global South through a strategy of ‘trade not aid’”

(Raynolds & Keahey, 2008, p.213).

According to Nicholls and Opal (2005), Fair Trade has provided a better livelihood for those that are involved in the production of Fair Trade goods (e.g. farmers, craftsmen, regular workers, etc.) and those around them in a lot of different aspects, which is owing primarily to their increased and stable income (e.g. Ruben & Fort, 2012; Stenn, 2013). As of 2015, there are over twelve hundred Fair Trade producer organizations within FLO that comprise of almost

1.5 million farmers and 200,000 hired workers (FLO, 2017-c).

First, they are now more able and inclined to pay tuition fees for their children, which implies that education has become within their reach.

Second, it is not unfamiliar that in most developing countries, besides the responsibilities they already have back at home, many women must work in the fields or somewhere else, to financially support their households. To illustrate the importance of Fair

Trade to women in these countries more explicitly, many of them partake in the initiatives that are set up and supervised by FTOs (Redfern & Snedker, 2002, as cited in Nicholls & Opal,

2005), which may benefit them in a similar fashion to the African coffee bean farmers. A more concrete example of this is the production of clothing made from alpaca wool by indigenous women in Bolivia, where in fact, the empowerment and personal development of the latter have been attributed to Fair Trade (Stenn, 2013).

Third, due to their more stable income once again, Fair Trade workers feel more secure and confident about their personal situation, especially in a financial sense, which suggests that their psychological well-being has been improved too (Nicholls & Opal, 2005).

Lastly, LeClair (2002) proposes that Fair Trade goods, such as the Puerto Rican embroidery and the Bolivian alpaca knitwear (Stenn, 2013), and other “indigenous handicrafts can certainly contribute to the preservation of cultural traditions” (as cited in Nicholls & Opal,

2005, p.209).

Henceforth, fair trade has been defined as “a social movement representing alternatives to conventional trade models that operate within a framework of international development, social justice, environmental sustainability and equitable economic returns” (AAFC, 2012, p.2).

Not only offers Fair Trade another course of option to refer to previous examples of

Nestlé and Zenshō Holdings that endorses international development, social justice, and environmental sustainability, but that it leads to equitable economic returns as well. According to the most recent annual report of FLO (2016), it announced that the total worldwide sales revenue for their Fair Trade certified products has reached the astonishing amount of €7.3

billion in 2015, with the UK as their biggest market where, despite a decrease of 5%, customers bought products with a FAIRTRADE Certification Mark of almost €2.2 billion worth; whereas in Japan, the other country concerned in this paper, it has been increased by 7%, only up to

€74 million though. By way of contrast with the incredible total worldwide sales revenue in

2015, the same figure was only €831 million eleven years ago (FLO, 2005), which marks a tremendous growth of at least 878% in the period between 2004 and 2015.

In the end, it has been assumed that Fair Trade has largely substantiated their idea of

“a competitive business model, which produced long-term growth within an appropriate social context” (Stenn, 2013, p.400), through the actions mentioned above undertaken by the FTOs and companies from a socio-economic perspective.

2.3.4 – Criticism

Notwithstanding the success of the FTOs and their appreciative efforts behind all of this, as most of these have been described previously, the manifold of criticism and allegations that

Fair Trade is faced with should be covered to some extent too.

To return to the accomplishment of FLO by reducing the huge number of national and regional labels to the FAIRTRADE Certification Mark, there is an abundance of other Fair Trade certification labels that exists and they serve the same purpose as the FAIRTRADE

Certification Mark, which again is to prove that the goods to be sold have been produced under fair circumstances.

In particular, TransFair USA, currently active as Fair Trade USA, is still going strong today, as both the association and its respective label Fair Trade Certified (Fair Trade USA,

2017) have not been rebranded to that of FLO. Other examples of certification labels that can be depicted on Fair Trade products, next to these two, include the WFTO12, Equal Exchange12,

Fair for Life12, and Zenshō Fair Trade12. As a result of having so many labels, to say the least

12 See §7.5 – Appendix E for the corresponding images of the mentioned Fair Trade certification labels on this page.

about those from other circuits (e.g. ecological, organic), the concept of Fair Trade certification has become fragmented, which simultaneously distorts the impression of consumers on what it all means and overwhelms producers in the thoughts on the ‘paradox of choice’ that arises on which FTOs paired with their corresponding label(s) should be selected from; the number of labels to be selected; and the enormous costs that go along with it as well (Hoffman, 2013).

What is more though, is that Fair Trade USA has announced through their official channels in 2011, the decision to leave FLO due to contrasting beliefs and attitudes in reaching the shared objective of “empowering producers and workers around the world to improve their lives” (Fair Trade USA, 2011).

Considering these two developments, it shows that there is no general consensus within the Fair Trade movement regarding their approaches.

In much there are some disagreements within the movement, the same can also be said about those outside of it.

For example, Moore (2004) has stumbled upon a few key issues during his research about Fair Trade. He started with what he called, the confrontation with international or free trade. As mentioned before, Fair Trade disputes the conventional wisdom of trading and doing business, and offers a framework that is more suited to their norms and values, in order to replace the apparently outdated system. Unsurprisingly, both of them are often put next to each other to the extent that it is prevalent in academic writing on economics (e.g. LeClair,

2002; Maseland & De Vaal, 2002), to which the conclusion has been drawn that Fair Trade is the in-between of protectionism13 and free trade (Moore, 2004). However, due to the “calls for protectionist measures by developed countries against products that have been produced in poorer countries at prices developed countries cannot compete with because of their different

13 Krugman and Wells (2005/2015) has stated that protectionism (i.e. trade protection or simply protection) encompasses the “policies that limit imports, usually with the goal of protecting domestic producers in import- competing industries from foreign competition” (p.234).

economic circumstances” (Maseland & De Vaal, 2002, p.252). From this, Moore (2004) understands that there is a claim that Fair Trade is just another type of protectionism, which doubts if it is actually ‘fair’ or not, as producers from developing countries have to satisfy the criteria that are set by the FTOs from developed countries.

Additionally, this specific doubt has been inflated by those within the field of economics, as many have written about the issues on the nature and efficiency of Fair Trade

(Moore, 2004).

Finally, multiple questions have been raised on whether the revenues of Fair Trade goods do trickle down to the producers and others involved (Davenport & Low, 2012); and if so, how significant this is to them.

When consumers in Finland purchased their delicious cup of certified coffee for a price that is fairly above average, the farmers and other workers from Nicaragua have actually earned relatively less in comparison with their non-certified compatriots (Valkila et al., 2010).

To continue with this scenario, these farmers were motivated by most FTOs to shift their production to organic coffee beans, in order to be eligible for a Fair Trade certification label.

Be that as it may, despite higher prices and revenues, they would end up with a lower net income, because of the high costs partnered with the low output of organic coffee beans

(Kilian, Jones, Pratt & Villalobos, 2006; Valkila, 2009; Wilson, 2009). More so, it has been reported that 60% of the premium price paid for a cup of Fair Trade coffee stays in the country where it is bought and consumed (in this case, Finland), compared to 50% of a good ol’ cup of joe (Valkila et al., 2010).

Indeed, another critique can then be raised against Fair Trade that, in fact, it actually widens the gap on inequality between the First World and the Third World, as at least half of the earnings do not go to those whom it is intended to benefit.

But even so, many proponents of Fair Trade have bounced back from these and other conceivable allegations and points of criticism that are presented in the debate (e.g. Nicholls

& Opal, 2005), and adding to their responses that it fluctuates like the business cycle, as it experiences temporary periods of stagnation or decline too unfortunately, which is quite reasonable as Fair Trade concurs ‘inside and outside’ the market (Renard, 2003).

On top of that, Fair Trade has only found its common ground in the second half of the twentieth century; it will often find a way to help and improve the lives of those who participate in (e.g. Bacon, 2005; Barham & Callenes, 2011; Ruben & Fort, 2012; Myers, 2013; Stenn,

2013); and it has therefore brought more good than harm to societies around the world.

Again, because of the success of the initiatives that are undertaken by the FTOs, Fair

Trade has emerged to the equitable trading system that it is prominent and gaining support from people, as it attempts to solve the social inequalities that currently exist around the globe.

3 – Discussion

After much debate in the previous chapter, it has been concluded on what the major concepts for this thesis: culture; ethical consumption; and most of all, Fair Trade respectively are. In this chapter, these concepts will be turned to and discussed with additional literary sources in order to find any possible differences between the consumers from the UK and Japan with regards to their attitudes and beliefs towards Fair Trade products.

3.1 – United Kingdom

To start across the North Sea, as Varul (2009) has conducted a study between the British and

German consumers to display ‘the cultural contextualization of fairtrade consumption’ within a globalized world (p.183). In other words, he wanted to prove by undertaking in-depth interviews of those from the UK and Germany that their national consumer culture does affect their attitudes and beliefs towards Fair Trade products, which would then affect their purchase intentions and their behavior to do so. The conclusion that Varul (2009) has made is that it is indeed the case. To keep in mind the scope of this paper, his findings of the German consumers are omitted from here on.

First, Varul (2009) has noticed from the British respondents that they hold their own preferences at heart. In addition to this, it is considered that the ‘privilege of the producer’ has been handed over to the consumer in the UK (Abercrombie, 1991, also cited in Varul, 2009, p.185). The following passage is quoted to show what it is about, without losing much context:

“(…) the shift from producer to consumer means that the capacity to determine the

form, nature and quality of goods and services has moved from the former to the

latter. This represents a profound change in social relationships… This is not to say

that the producer/consumer relationship is more fundamental than any other, but…

change in patterns of authority between producers and consumers… affects social

relations as a whole” (Abercrombie, 1991, p.172).

To put it differently, the distance between producers and consumers has been shortened to the point where the consumers are those that basically decide the to-be-produced goods they need or want, as they are the ones who would purchase and use them, to which the producers have no other choice but to adhere in order to go on. As a result, consumers have the growing impression that they are thus enabled to express themselves to their wishes, which led to the construction of the image that “being a consumer has become the central metaphor for being an autonomous individual, a citizen equipped with the inalienable ‘right to shop’” (Hilton,

2003, as cited in Varul, 2009, p.185). Therefore, British consumers see consumption as a right they must have, as by it, you would convey yourself and your identity to the outside world.

Indeed, what has been discussed so far showed the development of the archetype of the contemporary British consumer. To proceed with it, Varul (2009, p.185) has also quoted this:

“(…) social duties attached to earlier forms of consumer citizenship have become

increasingly absent in [an] officially-sanctioned consumerism, while an incremental

series of practical rights of consumer citizenship have been conceded so that a

particular type of ‘confident consumer’ has emerged in the ‘modern market’” (Hilton,

2001, p.244).

With this statement, Hilton (2001, p.241) has indicated that the majority of British consumers underwent another transition in the 20th century, as their American equivalents already did in the 1930s, by which a couple of decades later on, they abandoned the role or citizenship of a

‘citizen consumer’ who is well-read, socially and politically engaged, and assumed that of a

‘customer consumer’ who just want to shop and consume for their own sake. This seems rather in line with the development of Fair Trade, as more consumers in the UK detached themselves from the ‘social duties’ and became just ‘customers’, the automatic and sensible reply from the

ATOs and FTOs to reach these individuals would be then to offer goods that they want to buy, by which they did with the production of Fair Trade chocolate, coffee, and tea, for instance14.

Anyway, along with their newly-acquired privilege, British consumers have thus gained the confidence to purchase what they want, which shows who they are (Hilton, 2001).

Accordingly, Varul (2009) has confirmed that this confidence could be retrieved from the

British respondents during their interviews. The additional comments he had on this was that, even within Fair Trade consumption, their buying behavior is predominantly focused on how they would express themselves about what they are and they want to be, which is seemingly highly individualistic. British consumers would argue and reason their purchases from the broad selection of Fair Trade products to their own suiting (Varul, 2009).

3.2 – Japan

According to a very recently published article of Takahashi and Omoto (2017), there have only been a few attempts that assess on how Fair Trade would fare in the island group in the near future, and more importantly, what motives do Japanese consumers have when they purchase

Fair Trade products.

Like Morrell and Jayawardhena (2010) and multiple other studies that have been briefly mentioned before, the research approach of Takahashi and Omoto (2017) has been modeled after the ‘reasoned action’ model, and gathered data and additional information through a survey on a sample of over 200 men and women between the age of 20 and 79 and located in Ibaraki Prefecture where three possible factors (self-consciousness; education/knowledge; altruism/pro-social behavior) have been tested. From the findings of their research, the conclusion that has been made by Takahashi and Omoto (2017) reports that all of the given factors affect the intention of Japanese consumers to buy Fair Trade products, but only the one of self-consciousness does influence the latter directly, whereas the others

14 See §2.3.2 – Historical overview.

indirectly through influencing their attitudes and beliefs. Though, to see if one or even all three are culturally dependent, it is then necessary to go through them.

In the first place, self-consciousness, by which Takahashi and Omoto (2017) concluded that it is the sole one that has a direct effect on how Japanese consumers are inclined to buy a bar of

Fair Trade-certified chocolate or a piece of garment that is made by small-scale producers from developing countries with the indispensable support from FTOs. According to Sugawara

(1984), the concept of self-consciousness is referred to the incidence “when others look at you or you look at yourself in a mirror, you are conscious of yourself” (as cited in Takahashi &

Omoto, 2017, p.6). Moreover, it can thus be divided into two categories: public self- consciousness, which is when we consider the opinions of others about ourselves; whereas, private self-consciousness is the process when we judge ourselves on a certain basis.

It follows from this though that the idea behind self-consciousness is rather general and universal.

In the second place, which is the factor of education/knowledge, as Takahashi and Omoto

(2017) have stated that through the means of education, people will acquire the knowledge to develop and make themselves better in the end. As education provides the environment to learn the ropes on how we should “communicate and collaborate with each other to make society better” (Takahashi & Omoto, 2017, p.6). The attribute of being educated gives us the abilities and skills to critically identify, analyze, and solve problems that might arise.

According to the Cabinet Office of Japan (2008), when students take courses on consumer education, they are more informed about the disparities that occur from both a social and an environmental viewpoint, by which it is evident due to their high test scores on this subject (as cited in Takahashi & Omoto, 2017). Furthermore, Didham and Choi (2010) have put on paper that the involvement of the national government of Japan in educating their population to consume in a more sustainable manner (i.e. ‘Education for Sustainable Consumption’, abbr.

ESC) can be traced back to 1960s with the examples of the Quality-of-Life Bureau, which has

been founded in 1965; and the Consumer Protection Fundamental Act, which has been enacted in 1968. Followed by the introduction and integration of ESC in the overall syllabus in 1992, which is being taught in Japanese classrooms even till today; and lastly, the enactments of the Green Purchasing Network (1996), the Green Purchasing Law (2000), and the Consumer Basic Act (2004), by which all of them have pushed Japanese consumers in the right direction of consuming more ‘friendly’ and ‘green’ (Didham & Choi, 2010).

Though, it must be said that these actions and even more of the Japanese government were and are still needed, as to the study of GlobeScan and FLO (2015) that have gathered data on FLO from all over the world, only 22% of the Japanese respondents admitted that they had seen the FAIRTRADE Certification Mark either on a regular basis or from time to time, which hugely contrasts from the 93% of their counterparts from the UK. This holds the same on how familiar they are with the certification label of FLO (UK: 81% vs. JP: 24%), as well as the overall trust in it (UK: 83% vs. JP: 40%). What is remarkable though of the last one, is that if you take those who have actually seen the FAIRTRADE Mark, 90% of Japan has put enough faith in the initiative, which is slightly more than the 86% that was measured from the British subsample.

Hence, there is an apparent gap with regards to the positions of Fair Trade in the UK and

Japan (e.g. Malcolm, 2013; Usugami, 2012), as it has been stated previously that roughly 30% of the total sales revenue from FLO-certified products were sold on the British Isles in 2015, which is substantially more than the 1% of Japan (FLO, 2016).

But again, as the factor of education is very important to raise awareness on the causes of FTOs and ATOs, it does not indicate any cultural difference whatsoever in the motivation to purchase Fair Trade products.

Last but not least, the factor of altruism/pro-social behavior that indirectly affects the attitudes and beliefs of Japanese consumers towards Fair Trade products, which again affects their intention and buying behavior of the latter too. It has been argued by Takahashi and Omoto

(2017) that the motivation behind Fair Trade is to “help and protect producers and workers in developing countries” (p.6). Regarding this, “the mindset of showing respect to others can be

an important driver for fair trade” (p.6), which is why Takahashi and Omoto (2017) selected the variable of altruism/pro-social behavior, in order to assess if Japanese consumers had this particular ‘mindset’ and therefore, are more willing to buy Fair Trade products to support the well-intentioned message behind it.

According to Kikuchi (1988), altruism or pro-social behavior has been described as the manner of conducting ourselves to improve the relationship between us and others, by which those who strive to achieve this do it for either for ‘financial rewards’ (e.g. money) or ‘intrinsic rewards’ (e.g. inner satisfaction, pride) (as cited in Takahashi & Omoto, 2017, p.6). However, it is rather noticeable that the factor could not have been narrowed down to that of altruism or pro-social behavior, but that Takahashi and Omoto (2017) consider it as a combination of the two. The plausible reason on why this is the case, is that it refers to the Japanese concept of omoiyari that encompasses the Western discourses of altruism and pro-social behavior, but also that of sympathy and empathy (Hara, 2006). For example, this has been explained through illustrating when a Japanese person has noticed and is being grateful for the kind- natured actions, gestures, and the intentions behind them of someone else, the Japanese person would then appreciate the omoiyari of the other person. Shinmura (1991, p.387, translated by Hara) has defined omoiyari as “an individual’s sensitivity to imagine another’s feelings and personal affairs, including his or her circumstances” (as cited in Hara, 2006, p.24). Hara (2006) has stated that the concept of omoiyari has received widespread attention from Western academic world, as it is perceived to be “one of the most important cultural value and communication” (e.g. Lebra, 1976; Travis, 1998; Wierzbicka, 1997, as cited in Hara,

2006, p.24), which has been voted through surveys as it also holds the same for the Japanese people. Additionally, Hara (2006) added that the concept of omoiyari has been taught and highlighted from kindergarten to college as “the guiding principle to communicate with others” (Ito, 1998a; 1998b, as cited in Hara, 2006, p.24).

Unlike the other two factors that Takahashi and Omoto (2017) have selected for their research, the applied factor of altruism/pro-social behavior can most arguably be interpreted

as omoiyari, and for this reason, it is culturally dependent. Japanese consumers are learned to anticipate and acknowledge the needs of others, and above all, they are willing to interfere when needed, which can be done through the purchase of Fair Trade products that help those from the global South. Even more so, the rather collectivistic Japanese consumers expressed that they deem omoiyari as very important in their daily lives from a social point of view, which naturally differ that from the ostensibly individualistic British consumers. Simply put, the British buy Fair Trade products because they would like to think and believe it is a good means to an end; whereas, the Japanese buy Fair Trade products because it is a good means to an end, as they would like to think and believe. Finally, to cite Varul (2009) again:

“Fairtrade consumption is embedded into a cultural context of global capitalism,

which informs the way people think about the extent of their responsibility, what

constitutes a fair exchange and how they would construct themselves as ethical

consumer/citizens” (p.189).

4 – Conclusion

Throughout this dissertation, I have attempted to provide a better understanding of the possible relationship between culture and ethical consumer behavior by examining if there are any differences with regards to the attitudes and beliefs of consumers from the UK and Japan respectively; and if so, are these differences caused by the national culture of countries.

Of course, it is necessary to explain the relevant concept to this relationship, which is done in the second chapter of the theoretical framework. First, cultures are assumed to be based on a certain structure and consensus that guides people in how they think and function within their communities, which can be referred to the idea of omoiyari in Japan, for instance.

Moreover, the underlying concept of ethical consumerism is explained as the unacceptable reaction to globalization and the many implications that cause the gap between those from developed countries and those from developing countries to become bigger and bigger. By notifying consumers about the disparities between them and the producers, many movements such as Fair Trade hope to invoke a paradigm shift, which is to be more ethical and conscious in their purchases. As the main focus of this paper lies on Fair Trade, it is also then necessary to review the definition, history, social and economic consequences, and the criticism of this phenomenon. While it cannot be denied that it came to their current position unscathed, Fair

Trade has proven to be a worthy opponent so far, as it is substantiated through the presence, initiatives, and reported successes of the many FTOs to alleviate the poor all over the world.

Despite that the fact that there are not many resources to use for this cross-cultural comparison, the findings in the previous chapter do indicate to a degree that there are cultural differences in terms of the attitudes and beliefs to purchase Fair Trade products, which is the goal of this research, as the British consumers do so from their own individual argument, while the Japanese buy them from their holistic point of view that emphasizes the concern of others.

It does not matter that the Fair Trade products are being bought, but rather the culturally dependent motives behind them, which may argue and answer the question that culture does affect ethical consumer behavior.

5 – Limitations & further research

First of all, it has been briefly mentioned that there is the urge for more scientific articles and working papers on ethical consumption and Fair Trade in non-Western countries15. For this reason, the method of literature review would be then strongly encouraged, as it has been proved with the second chapter, that of the theoretical framework where the applied concepts have been thoroughly discussed and backed with secondary literature sources. Though, the need also implies that the sources that are accessible and significant for applying a cross- cultural comparison, especially between Western and non-Western countries, are rather limited, which has been stated previously.

Next, the already small pool of literary sources available has even become smaller due to the language barrier, as many of them that are about Fair Trade in Japan, are unsurprisingly in Japanese, which has added more to the pile of difficulties when conducting research and writing the review.

Hence, the sources that are used in the previous chapter, the discussion, are published in English, and also are either bound to one specific country (e.g. Takahashi & Omoto, 2017) or a comparison between two Western countries (e.g. Varul, 2009) where the findings are derived from. Nonetheless, they wholly do signify the influence of culture on ethical consumer behavior to a certain extent.

Concerning this, the recommendation is then aligned with the aforementioned need for more research on ethical consumption and Fair Trade across cultures, in order to strengthen the drawn conclusion on the problem statement, and offer more understanding on this, but also on the identified gap between Western and non-Western countries that are involved in Fair Trade.

15 See §1.4 – Relevance.

6 – References

Abercrombie, N. (1991). The privilege of the producer. In R. Keat, & N. Abercrombie (Eds.),

Enterprise Culture (pp. 171-185). London, UK: Routledge.

Andorfer, V. A., & Liebe, U. (2012). Research on Fair Trade Consumption: A Review. Journal

of Business Ethics, 106(4), 415-435.

Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. (1st ed.).

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Æon Group. (2015, January 13). First in Asia! Fairtrade Sourcing Program Chocolate

Launched from TOPVALU. Retrieved from www.aeon.info.

Bacon, C. (2005). Confronting the Coffee Crisis: Can Fair Trade, Organic, and Specialty

Coffees Reduce Small-Scale Farmer Vulnerability in Northern Nicaragua? World

Development, 33(3), 497-511.

Barham, B. L., & Callenes, M. (2011). Fair Trade/Organic Coffee, Rural Livelihoods and the

“Agrarian Question”: Southern Mexican Coffee Families in Transition. World

Development, 39(1), 134-145.

Barratt Brown, M. (1993). Fair Trade: Reform and Realities in the International Trading

System. London, UK: Zed Books.

BBC News. (2005, October 7). Nestle launches fair trade coffee. Retrieved from

news.bbc.co.uk.

Belk, R. W., Devinney, T., & Eckhardt, G. (2005). Consumer Ethics Across Cultures.

Consumption Markets & Culture, 8(3), 275-289.

Bonsu, S. K., & Zwick, D. (2007). Exploring consumer ethics in Ghana, West Africa.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(1), 648-655.

British Association for Fair Trade Shops & Suppliers (BAFTS). (2017). About BAFTS.

Retrieved from www.bafts.co.uk.

Butler, S., & Smithers, R. (2017, February 27). UK falls in love again with Fairtrade bananas

and coffee. The Guardian. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com.

Carrier, J. G. (2007). Ethical consumption. Anthropology Today, 23(4), 1-2.

Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in

purchase behavior? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560-578.

Cooper-Martin, E., & Holbrook, M. B. (1993). Ethical consumption experiences and ethical

space. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 113-118.

Davies, I. A. (2007). The eras and participants of fair trade: an industry

structure/stakeholder perspective on the growth of the fair trade industry. Corporate

Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 7(4), 455-470.

Davenport, E., & Low, W. (2012). The labor behind the (Fair Trade) label. Critical

Perspectives on International Business, 8(4), 329-348.

De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., & Rayp, G. (2005). Do consumers care about ethics?

Willingness to pay for Fair-Trade coffee. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2),

363-385.

Didham, R. J., & Choi, M. Y. (2010, June). Education for Sustainable Consumption:

Effective strategies to promote responsible consumer behaviour. Paper presented at

9th Asia-Pacific Roundtable for Sustainable Consumption and Production (APRSCP),

Colombo, Sri Lanka. Kanagawa, Japan: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.

Fairtrade International. (2005). Delivering Opportunities: Annual Report 2004-2005.

Retrieved from www.fairtrade.net.

Fairtrade International. (2006). Old Fairtrade Logos (TransFair Germany, Max Havelaar

France, Max Havelaar Switzerland, Rättvisemärkt (Sweden), The Fairtrade

Foundation (UK), Max Havelaar Denmark). Retrieved from www.wikipedia.org.

Fairtrade International. (2011). A New Look for Fairtrade. Retrieved from

www.fairtrade.net.

Fairtrade International. (2016). Driving Sales, Deepening Impact: Annual Report 2015-

2016. Retrieved from annualreport15-16.fairtrade.net.

Fairtrade International. (2017a). Fairtrade International (FLO): History of Fairtrade.

Retrieved from www.fairtrade.net.

Fairtrade International. (2017b). Fairtrade International (FLO): History of the

FAIRTRADE Marks. Retrieved from www.fairtrade.net.

Fairtrade International. (2017c). Monitoring the Scope and Benefits of Fairtrade: 8th

Edition. Retrieved from monitoringreport2016.fairtrade.net.

Fairtrade International., & GlobeScan. (2015). Fairtrade International GlobeScan

Consumer Study 2015: Global Findings – Guide to Shareable Data 2015. Retrieved

from www.fairtradeafrica.net.

Fair Trade USA. (2011, September 15). Fair Trade USA Resigns Fairtrade International

(FLO) Membership | Fair Trade USA. Retrieved from www.fairtradeusa.org.

Fair Trade USA. (2017). Fair Trade USA | Every Purchase Matters. Retrieved from

www.fairtradeusa.org.

Ferraro, G. P. (2002). The Cultural Dimension of International Business (4th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. (Original work published 1989).

Fridell, G. (2007). Fair Trade Coffee: The Prospects and Pitfalls of Market-Driven Social

Justice. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

Fryberg, S. A., & Markus, H. R. (2007). Cultural models of education in American Indian,

Asian American and European American contexts. Social Psychology of Education,

10(2), 213-246.

Fryberg, S. A., & Rhys, R. (2007). Cultural Models. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona

Press.

Hainmueller, J., Hiscox, M. J., & Sequeira, S. (2015). Consumer Demand for Fair Trade:

Evidence from a Multistore Field Experiment. The Review of Economics and

Statistics, 97(2), 242-256.

Hara, K. (2006). The concept of omoiyari (altruistic sensitivity) in Japanese relational

communication. International Communication Studies, 15(1), 24-32.

Hilton, M. (2001). Consumer Politics in Post-war Britain. In M. Daunton & M. Hilton (Eds.),

The Politics of Consumption: Material Culture and Citizenship in Europe and

America (pp.241-260). Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers.

Hoffman, B. (2013, January 14). Are Consumers Growing Weary of ‘Eco-Labels’? Forbes.

Retrieved from www.forbes.com.

Holbrook, M. B. (1994). Ethics in consumer research: an overview and prospectus. Advances

in Consumer Research, 21(1), 566-571.

Jones, P., Bradbury, L., & Le Boutillier, S. (2011). Introducing Social Theory (2nd ed.).

Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Original work published 2003).

Kacen, J. J., & Lee, J. A. (2002). The Influence of Culture on Consumer Impulsive Buying

Behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(2), 163-176.

Kanter, R. M. (1995). World Class: Thriving Locally in the Global Economy. New York, NY:

Simon & Schuster.

Kilian, B., Jones, C., Pratt, L., & Villalobos, A. (2006). Is Sustainable Agriculture a Viable

Strategy to Improve Fair Income in Central America?: A Case Study on Coffee.

Journal of Business Research, 59(3), 322-330.

Kirezli, Ö., & Kuşcu, Z. K. (2012). Exploring Fair Trade Attitude and Fair Trade Behavior of

Turkish Consumers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58(1), 1316-1325.

Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2011). Principles of Marketing (14th ed.). Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Prentice Hall. (Original work published 1980).

Krugman, P., & Wells, R. (2015). Economics (4th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

(Original work published 2005).

Luna, D., & Forquer Gupta, S. (2001). An integrative framework for cross-cultural consumer

behavior. International Marketing Review, 18(1), 45-69.

LeClair, M. (2002). Fighting the tide: alternative trade organizations in the era of global free

trade. World Development, 30(6), 949-958.

Lekakis, E. J. (2013). Coffee Activism and the Politics of Fair Trade and Ethical

Consumption in the Global North. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Legohérel, P., Daucé, B., Hsu, C. H., & Ranchhold, A. (2009). Culture, Time Orientation, and

Exploratory Buying Behavior. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 21(2),

93-107.

Levi, M., & Linton, A. (2003). Fair Trade: A Cup at a Time? Politics & Society, 31(3), 407-

432.

Linton, A. (2012). Fair Trade from the Ground Up: New Markets for Social Justice. Seattle,

WA: University of Washington Press.

Loureiro, M. L., & Lotade, J. (2004). Do fair trade and eco-labels in coffee wake up the

consumer conscience? Ecological Economics, 53(1), 129-138.

Low, W., & Davenport, E. (2005). Postcards from the Edge: Maintaining the ‘Alternative’

Character of Fair Trade. Sustainable Development, 13(3) 143-153.

Low, W., & Davenport, E. (2007). Mainstreaming fair trade: adoption, assimilation,

appropriation. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 14(4), 315-327.

Ma, Y. J. (2007). Young consumers’ fair trade consumption: application of the theory of

planned behavior to non-food trade purchases. (Published doctoral dissertation,

Iowa State University, Ames, IA). Retrieved from lib.dr.iastate.edu.

Mair, J., & Noboa, E. (2006). Social Entrepreneurship: How Intentions to Create a Social

Venture are Formed. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social

Entrepreneurship (pp. 121-135). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Malcolm, C. (2013). Under Pressure to be Fair?: How attitudes and subjective norms affect

fair trade consumption in Japan and the West (Master’s thesis, University of Tokyo,

Tokyo, Japan). Retrieved from repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp.

Marquardt, M. J. (2005). Globalization: The Pathway to Prosperity, Freedom and Peace.

Human Resource Development International, 8(1), 127-129.

Maseland, R., & De Vaal, A. (2002). How fair is fair trade? De Economist, 150(3), 251-272.

Mason, T. (2000, October 26). ANALYSIS: The importance of being ethical – A new breed of

caring consumerism means companies need to consider ethical issues, writes Tania

Mason. Campaign. Retrieved from www.campaignlive.co.uk.

McCort, D. J., & Malhotra, N. K. (1993). Culture and Consumer Behavior: Toward an

Understanding of Cross-Cultural Consumer Behavior in International Marketing.

Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 6(2), 91-127.

McCurry, J. (2015, January 6). McDonald’s Japan in new food scare after vinyl found in

chicken nugget. The Guardian. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com.

McCurry, J. (2017, May 4). South Korea must end gay soldier ‘witch hunt’, campaigners say.

The Guardian. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com.

Morrell, K., & Jayawardhena, C. (2010). Fair trade, ethical decision making and the narrative

of gender difference. Business Ethics: A European Review, 19(4), 393-407.

Moore, G. (2004). The Fair Trade movement: parameters, issues and future research.

Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1-2), 73-86.

Myers, P. (2013). Does fair trade promote international development? Journal of Markets

and Morality, 16(1), 251-257.

Neelsen, S., & Stratmann, T. (2011). Effects of prenatal and early life malnutrition: Evidence

from the Greek famine. Journal of Health Economics, 30(3), 479-488.

Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (2007). Studying the ethical consumer: A review of research.

Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6(1), 253-270.

Nicholls, A. (2002). Strategic options in fair trade retailing. International Journal of Retail

& Distribution Management, 30(1), 6-17.

Nicholls, A., & Opal, C. (2005). Fair Trade: Market-Driven Ethical Consumption. London,

UK: Sage Publications.

Oxfam International. (2017). History of Oxfam International. Retrieved from

www.oxfam.org.

Pacquiao, D. F. (2001). Ethics and Cultural Diversity – A Framework for Decision-Making.

Bioethics Forum, 17(3/4), 12-17.

Park, C., & Jun, J. K. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of Internet buying behavior:

Effects of Internet usage, perceived risks, and innovativeness. International

Marketing Review, 20(5), 534-553.

Raynolds, L. T. (2009). Mainstreaming Fair Trade Coffee: From Partnership to Traceability.

World Development, 37(6), 1083-1093.

Raynolds, L. T., & Keahey, J. A. (2008). Fair trade, gender and the environment in Africa. In

K. P. Gallagher (Ed.), Handbook on Trade and the Environment (pp. 213-224).

Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Renard, M. C. (2003). Fair trade: quality, market and conventions. Journal of Rural Studies,

19(1), 87-96.

Reuben, A. (2015, May 21). Gap between rich and poor ‘keeps growing’. BBC News.

Retrieved from www.bbc.com.

Ruben, R., & Fort, R. (2012). The impact of fair trade certification for coffee farmers in Peru.

World Development, 40(3), 570-582.

Sassatelli, R. (2006). Virtue, Responsibility and Consumer Choice: Framing Critical

Consumerism. In J. Brewer & F. Trentmann (Eds.), Consuming Cultures, Global

Perspectives (pp. 219-250). Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers.

Sassatelli, R. (2007). Consumer Culture: History, Theory and Politics. London, UK: Sage

Publications.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building

Approach (6th ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley. (Original work published 1992).

Shaw, D., Shiu, E., Clarke, I. (2000). The Contribution of Ethical Obligation and Self-identity

to the Theory of Planned Behaviour: An Exploration of Ethical Consumers. Journal

of Marketing Management, 16(8), 879-894.

Shozawa, S. (2016, May 25). Inspired by Africa trip, TV celebrity pushes ‘ethical

consumerism’ movement. The Japan Times. Retrieved from www.japantimes.co.jp.

Spich, R. (1995). Globalization Folklore: Problems of Myth and Ideology in the Discourse of

Globalization. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 8(4), 6-29.

Sood, J., & Nasu, Y. (1995). Religiosity and nationality: An exploratory study on their effect

on consumer behavior in Japan and the United States. Journal of Business Research,

34(1), 1-9.

Stenn, T. (2013). Fair enough? Fair Trade and the quality of life amongst Bolivia’s

indigenous women artisans. Development in Practice, 23(3), 389-401.

Stichting Max Havelaar. (2015). Wie zijn wij [Who are we]. Retrieved from

www.maxhavelaar.nl.

Tadeo, M. (2014). McDonald’s and KFC in China food scare after supplier ‘falsified expiry

dates on rotten meat’. The Independent. Retrieved from www.independent.co.uk.

Takahashi, Y., & Omoto, A. (2017). The Future of the Fair Trade Market in Japan: What

motivates consumers to purchase fair trade products? Journal of Japanese

Management, 1(2), 1-16.

The Japan Times. (2017, May 1). Hyogo woman’s quest for fair-trade coconut oil helps

remote Indonesia island. Retrieved from www.japantimes.co.jp.

Tilburg University – Liberal Arts and Sciences. (2017). Tilburg University. Retrieved from

www.tilburguniversity.edu.

Thomson, B. (1999). Lessons for Fair Trade. Small Enterprise Development, 10(4), 56-60.

Usugami, J. (2012). Case Studies Focused on Fair Trade Chocolate in Japan. Tokyo, Japan:

Aoyama Gakuin University.

Uusitalo, O., & Oksanen, R. (2004). Ethical consumerism: a view from Finland.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28(3), 214-221.

Valkila, J. (2009). Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua – Sustainable

development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics, 68(1), 3018-3025.

Valkila, J., Haaparanta, P., & Niemi, N. (2010). Empowering Coffee Traders? The Coffee

Value Chain from Nicaraguan Fair Trade Farmers to Finnish Consumers. Journal of

Business Ethics, 97(2), 257-270.

Varul, M. Z. (2009). Ethical selving in cultural contexts: fairtrade consumption as an

everyday ethical practice in the UK and Germany. International Journal of

Consumer Studies, 33(1), 183-189.

Whitworth, E., Druckman, A., & Woodward, A. (2017). Food scares: a comprehensive

categorization. British Food Journal, 119(1), 131-142.

Wiersema, M. F., & Bowen, H. P. (2008). Corporate Diversification: The Impact of Foreign

Competition, Industry Globalization, and Product Diversification [Abstract].

Strategic Management Journal, 29(2), 115-132.

Wilshaw, R. (1991). ‘Bridge in context: the history and development of the bridge concept

and its implementation’, unpublished internal project report, Oxford, UK: Oxfam

Archive, R0570.

Wilson, B. R. (2009). Indebted to Fair Trade? Coffee and Crisis in Nicaragua. Geoforum,

41(1), 84-92.

World Bank Group. (2017). Poverty Overview. Retrieved from www.worldbank.org.

World Fair Trade Organization, & Fairtrade International. (2009, January). A Charter of

Fair Trade Principles. Retrieved from www.wfto.com.

World Fair Trade Organization. (2014a). History of Fair Trade | World Fair Trade

Organization. Retrieved from www.wfto.com.

World Fair Trade Organization. (2014b). About WFTO | World Fair Trade Organization.

Retrieved from www.wfto.com.

World Fair Trade Organization Europe. (2014, September 18). Fair Trade Organizations

and Fair Trade labelling. Retrieved from www.wfto-europe.org.

Zenshō Holdings (n.d.). Fair Trade | Food Safety | ZENSHO HOLDINGS. Retrieved from

www.zensho.co.jp.

7 – Appendices

7.1 – Appendix A

7.2 – Appendix B

7.3 – Appendix C

7.4 – Appendix D

7.5 – Appendix E