Contributing Writer the global coff ee supply. Despite the current high prices in the coff ee market, fair trade coops are Ryan Zinn still unable to sell the majority of their coff ee un- der fair trade terms. Expanding fair trade certifi ca- tion and market access to large-scale plantations will assure that fair trade cooperatives continue to FWP’s Statement on Fair remain vulnerable to volatile international mar- kets and undermine 25 years of fair trade devel- Trade USA’s Resignation from opment. FTUSA’s decision has drawn the widespread con- demnation of fair trade producer networks, in- Fairtrade International (FLO) cluding the Network of Asian Producers (NAP), Latin American and Caribbean Network of Small Fair Trade Producers (CLAC) and Fairtrade Africa. air trade is a social movement and market The Problems with Plantations It is inconceivable that an organization whose or- model that aims to empower small-scale At its core, “Fair Trade For All” is FTUSA’s unilateral ganizational values include striving “to always act Ffarmers and their communities in under- decision to initiate certifi cation of Fair Trade cof- ethically and value relationships built on honesty, developed countries to create an alternative fee on plantation operations. FTUSA intends to mutual respect and trust” would advance a pro- trading system that supports equitable trading, open cocoa to plantation certifi cation as well. Fair gram without the knowledge or consent of the sustainable development and long-term trading trade was established on the values of supporting very producers it aims to support. relationships. Fair trade supports fair prices and small-scale, disenfranchised farming communi- wages for producers, safe working conditions, ties, most often organized in democratic coopera- Fairwashing Multi-Ingredient Products investment in community development projects, tives. Despite claims to the contrary, hundreds of Based upon initial drafts of FTUSA’s multiple in- and the elimination of child labor, workplace dis- thousands of small coff ee and cocoa producers gredient product policies, on October 19th FWP crimination and exploitation. organized in cooperatives and certifi ed fair trade declared that it would not recognize FTUSA as a still lack access to fair trade markets. To continue reputable certifi er as of January 1st 2012 unless Certifi ed fair trade products now represent a to make progress and expand the benefi ts of fair key provisions in the policy were corrected. In par- multi-billion dollar industry with over 10,000 trade, these producers must be given priority and ticular, FWP objected to the lowering of the fair products in the marketplace. Consumer demand support when considering further expansion of trade content threshold to 25% for a product to for fair trade products has steadily risen over the the fair trade system. Without strict standards bear FTUSA’s “whole product” seal and 10% for its course of the last decade thanks to the tireless and implementation, the expansion of fair trade “ingredients” seal, and the allowance for multiple work of dedicated advocates, fully committed to include plantations in coff ee and other sectors ingredient products to receive the FTUSA seals by companies, and students. will most certainly erode standards and dilute fair sourcing the minimum 10% or 25% fair trade (FT) trade’s impact. content, even if FT forms of remaining ingredients On September 15th, Fairtrade International (FLO) in a product were commercially available. Over and Fair Trade USA (FTUSA) jointly announced While it is true that farmer and worker advocates 2,000 FT advocates sent letters to FTUSA object- that FTUSA was resigning its membership in FLO, are deeply concerned with the plight of farmwork- ing to this draft policy. eff ective December 31, 2011. FTUSA’s resignation ers and other hired laborers in the Global South, it from the FLO system is partially due to its new is not conclusive that the current fair trade system FTUSA released its revised draft Multiple Ingredi- initiative,“Fair Trade For All,” which it claims will is the best antidote for their situation. Fair trade’s ents Product Policy on January 18, 2012. FWP is “double the impact” of fair trade by 2015. record as it relates to hired labor or plantation op- pleased to see that FTUSA has incorporated feed- erations, like tea and bananas has been anything back from various stakeholder groups on impor- FTUSA will also be phasing out its but successful. In fact, the literature suggests that longtime black and white “bucket boy” seal, replacing it with a new seal, Expanding fair trade certifi cation and market allowing FTUSA to compete with FLO globally. access to large-scale plantations will assure In an open letter, Rob Cameron, former CEO of Fairtrade International, wrote: “I, the staff at that fair trade cooperatives continue to remain Fairtrade International, and the entire global Fairtrade network sincerely regret FTUSA’s deci- vulnerable to volatile international markets and sion to pursue its own approach, rather than con- tinue working within the global system. It is a de- undermine 25 years of fair trade development. cision they have taken themselves, and we have to respect their choice.” fair trade’s benefi ts miss the mark on plantations, tant issues, especially with respect to raising the Fair Trade USA’s move raises many questions for undermining the presence of farmworker unions whole product seal threshold to “100%” (actually fair trade producers in the Global South. Many pro- and ceding decision-making power to plantation 95% with allowance for non FT minor ingredients ducers rely heavily on the US market for sales and owners and managers when allocating the fair similar to the organic program) and ingredients distribution. FTUSA’s exit from the FLO system has trade premium. seal to 20%, and reinstating the commercial avail- caused confusion in the near-term as FTUSA’s has ability requirement to source FT forms of ingre- not fi nalized its own standards or details regarding Small producers and democratic cooperatives dients in products even if the minimum 20% FT its new labeling scheme, but initial versions mark- are core to the founding principles of the fair content threshold is reached. The commercial edly weaken key fair trade provisions and criteria. trade movement and market. By defi nition, small availability requirement in particular is a crucial In the long run, if fi nal rules remain low-bar, FTUSA producers are vulnerable, excluded and under market driver to expand markets for fair trade may well undermine consumer trust in the fair resourced in the global market. In the coff ee sec- producers. However, there are a number of criti- trade market and the overall positive impact for tor, small farmers produce approximately 70% of producers. cal areas for improvement, including clarifying Continued on Page 11 www.fairworldproject.org 10 Continued from Page 10 front package labeling for composite products, rized the misleading and deceptive labeling and market is overrun with hundreds of social, ethical, tightening compliance timelines for traders from advertising of Avon’s “Mark” brand products as green, and sustainable claims, labels and certi- two to one year and creating mechanisms to “Fair Trade Certifi ed” when, in fact, the products fi ers, many with questionable ethics and stan- dards. For consumers to maintain confi dence in FTUSA and its certifi cation program, FTUSA must The commericial availability actively and in good faith be accountable to pro- ducers and civil society at large. requirement in particular is a crucial FWP calls upon Fair Trade USA to do the following: market driver to expand markets for 1. Suspend plans for certifying plantations in coff ee and cocoa. fair trade producers. 2. Engage civil society in good faith in the development of its new standards and es- tablish clear mechanisms for accountable stakeholder review. publish to ensure transparency. Pending the fi nal so labeled contain a minimal amount of fair trade 3. Open its Board of Directors to participa- outcome of Fair Trade USA’s draft policy for mul- certifi ed ingredients. Over 8,000 people have tion from members of producer networks. tiple ingredient products, Fair World Project will signed letters in support of OCA’s complaint. OCA reconsider recognizing FTUSA as a valid fair trade is awaiting the pending decision from the FTC. 4. Commit to full transparency and trace- certifi er. FTUSA has repeatedly failed to apply a key FLO ability. rule, commercial availability standard 2.2., which 5. Create an ethical labeling scheme that FLO/FTUSA in Context states that “Food composite ingredients must does not allow a fair trade seal to appear FTUSA’s move away from FLO comes on the heels contain as many [FLO Fair Trade] certifi ed ingre- on the front of packaging unless a major- of the organization’s controversial name change. dients as available.” Dozens of products in the ity of the product is fair trade; and clearly In fall of 2010, FTUSA changed their name from US marketplace have failed to source fair trade identifi es fair trade ingredients on the TransFair USA to Fair Trade USA, eliciting a signifi - ingredients, yet continue to display the FTUSA front of packaging and whether the prod- cant uproar from within the fair trade community, fair trade seal. This dilution of the standards un- uct contains coff ee or cocoa from planta- with over 10,000 concerned consumers, advo- dermines consumer confi dence in fair trade and tions . cates, and organizations sending letters to FTUSA denies producers the full benefi t of a fair trade 6. Actively cooperate with FLO, IMO and expressing their concern about what many saw as market. other reputable certifi ers to establish a an eff ort to monopolize the fair trade market and “high bar” standard for fair trade cer- movement in the United States.