Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU a Policy Evaluation with a Focus on Small Firms in the German Coffee-Processing Sector

Södertörns högskola | Institutionen för naturvetenskap, miljö och teknik Masteruppsats 30 hp | Environment, Communication & Politics Vårterminen 2015

Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU A policy evaluation with a focus on small firms in the German coffee-processing sector.

Författare: Anna Berkmann Handledare: Paulina Rytkönen

ABSTRACT

Title: Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-labelling Schemes in the EU. A policy evaluation with a focus on small firms in the German coffee-processing sector.

Author: Anna Berkmann

As SMEs transformation to sustainable practices in manufacturing, processing and services, is declared to be the key to a green growth model, the research in this thesis aims to understand in what way eco-labelling can be a part of that. In order to approach this complex issue, the thesis aims to identify the greening potential and the limits of contemporary eco-labelling schemes for SME product within the German coffee-processing sector. With regard to that, the thesis applied the policy evaluation method “Program Theory Evaluation” (PTE), which assesses a policy in place and thus provides information how the introduction and the function of eco-labelling schemes is observed and perceived by German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS). Hence, based on a policy evaluation from a rational perspective, which has the focus on the policy’s problem-solving process and implementation cycle, the thesis reveals how eco-labelling schemes’ underlying theoretical greening strategy act in practice to German coffee-processing SME (GCPS). Thereby it could be evaluated that eco-labelling schemes imply shortcomings to address and green GCPS high quality coffee products. As the PTE-method aims also on optimizing the policy’s rationalisation, the inappropriate or failed implementation of eco- labelling schemes by GCPS has been further explored. To grasp the eco-labelling schemes extent of limits to green GCPS products, the thesis compares and analyses the policy evaluation results against the backdrop of eco-labelling schemes’ normative theoretical policy conception and in the light of “Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism (Ecological Modernisation Theory)”. With regard to that, the thesis fosters a policy learning process and uncovers that eco-labelling scheme eco-labelling schemes potential to green GCPS products is limited and conditioned to this a lower level of sustainable value as they are focused to supply mainly the demand for mainstream coffee products. Hence, the thesis concludes that it is not the underlying rationality of eco-labelling schemes, namely being a consumer-oriented and market-based policy instrument that does not apply to green GCPS products. However, this opens up a new perspective as it points out a sustainable quality gap between products using eco-labelling schemes and non-labelled GCPS high quality products. In return this raises considerations in terms of improving eco-labelling schemes’ contribution to sustainable development. Thus the thesis argues to optimize their rationalization with regard to GCPS high quality products as frontrunners of tomorrow’s sustainability.

Key words: Eco-labelling schemes, German Coffee-Processing Sector, SME, Policy Evaluation, Program Theory Evaluation, Ecological Modernization Theory, Environmental Authority, EU, Environmental Policy, Sustainable Development.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract �� iii Table of Contents ��v List of Abbreviations ��viii Table of Figures ��ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION...... 10

1.1 Background...... 10 1.2 Research Problem and Objective...... 11 1.3 Research Scope and Limits...... 12 1.4 Research Purpose...... 13 1.5 Defining Eco-Labelling Schemes for the German Coffee Sector...... 14

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH METHOD AND METHODOLOGY...... 19

2.1 Methodology...... 19 2.2 Program Theory Evaluation (PTE) ...... 20 2.2.1 Program Theory Evaluation in Practice...... 22

2.2.2 The Means Behind Evaluating...... 24

2.2.3 Merit, Worth and Value...... 25

2.2.4 “Goal-Attainment Evaluation”...... 26

2.2.5 “Side-Effect Evaluation”...... 28

2.3 Methods of Data Collection ...... 29 2.3.1 Secondary Sources ...... 30

2.3.2 Primary Sources...... 30

2.3.3 Interview Design and Coding Scheme...... 31

2.3.4 Considerations on Research Design: Limits and Bias...... 32

CHAPTER 3 PREVIOUS RESEARCH...... 34

v CHAPTER 4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK...... 37

4.1 Ecological Modernisation Theory (EMT)...... 37 4.1.1 Ecological Modernisation in Practice and Theory...... 38

4.1.2 The Transformation of the Industrial Caterpillar...... 40 The Techno-Corporatist Conception...... 40 The Reflexive Socio-Institutional Conception ...... 43

4.2 The Consumption Side of the Industrial Caterpillar...... 46 4.2.1 Citizen-Consumers’ Environmental Authority...... 47

4.2.2 Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism: Eco-Labelling Schemes...... 49

4.2.3 “Should We Leave it to the Environmental Authority?”...... 50

4.3 The Rationality Behind Eco-Labelling Schemes: An EU Policy Perspective...... 53 4.4 Close-up Shot: Eco-Labelling Schemes in the German Coffee Sector...... 56 4.4.1 Fair Trade...... 57

4.4.2 UTZ...... 57

4.4.3 Rainforest Alliance...... 58

4.4.4. EU Organic label...... 59

4.5 Discussion on the Theoretical Conceptions of Eco-Labelling Schemes. . 60

CHAPTER 5 EMPIRICAL FINDINGS...... 62

5.1 German Coffee-Processing SMEs—An Overview...... 62 5.1.1 Business Structure...... 62

5.1.2 High Quality Coffee...... 63

5.2 Eco-Labelling Scheme Implementation —GCPS’ Performance and Position...... 64 5.2.1 Company 1...... 65 Eco-Labelling Implementation...... 65 Eco-Labelling Position...... 66

5.2.2 Company 2...... 67 Eco-Labelling Implementation...... 67 Eco-Labelling Position...... 67

vi 5.2.3 Company 3...... 68 Eco-Labelling Implementation...... 68 Eco-Labelling Position...... 69

5.2.4 Company 4...... 71 Eco-Labelling Implementation...... 71 Eco-Labelling Position...... 72

5.2.5 Company 5...... 74 Eco-Labelling Implementation...... 74 Eco-Labelling Position...... 75

CHAPTER 6 ANALYSIS...... 77

6.1 Application of the “Goal-Attainment Evaluation” and “Side-Effect Evaluation”...... 77 6.2 Goal-Attainment Evaluation...... 78 6.2.1 Goal-Achievement Measurement...... 79

6.2.2 Impact-Assessment ...... 79

6.3 Side-Effect Evaluation...... 80 6.3.1 Anticipated Positive and Negative Side-Effects ...... 82 Primary: Providing and Promoting Eco-Labelling schemes. . . .82 Secondary: Gaining Market Interest...... 83 Tertiary: Raising Consumer Demand...... 84

6.3.2 Un-Anticipated Positive and Negative Side-Effects...... 85 Primary: Providing and Promoting of Eco-Labelling Schemes. . 85 Secondary: Gaining Market Interest...... 86 Tertiary: Raising Consumer Demand...... 87

6.4 Discussing the Policy Evaluation Results ...... 89 6.5 In Light of “Environmental Authority” ...... 94

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION...... 101

Acknowledgements ��105 References...... 106 Appendix 1: Goal-Attainment Evaluation Coding...... 115 Appendix 2: Side-Effect Evaluation Coding...... 116 Appendix 3: Interview questions...... 120

vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BAT. . . . Best Available Technique EC. . . . European Commission EPIS . . . Environmental Product Information Scheme EMT . . . Ecological Modernization Theory EU. . . . European Union FAO. . . .Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FSC. . . .Forest Stewardship Council GCPS . . .German Coffee-Processing SMEs GPD . . . Gross Domestic Product ICO. . . .International Coffee Organization ISEAL . . .International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling ISO. . . .International Organisation for Standardization IPP. . . . Integral Product Policy NGO. . . Non-Governmental Organisation OECD. . .Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development PTE. . . .Program Theory Evaluation SME...... Small and Medium-sized Enterprise TBT. . . .Technical Barriers to Trade UN . . . .United Nations UNECD . .United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNEP. . .United Nations Environment Programme UNOPS. . United Nations Office for Project Services WCED . . World Commission on Environment and Development WTO. . . World Trade Organisation WWF . . .World Wildlife Fund

viii TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Classification of EPIS within the European Union ...... �� 18 Figure 2. Voluntary Environmental Coffee Product Schemes in Germany. . . . . �� 19 Figure 3. The Simple System Model...... �� 24 Figure 4. The System Model Adapted to Government Intervention Evaluation. . . �� 25 Figure 5. Multiple Normative PTE-model of the Eco-Labelling schemes in Relation to German Coffee-Processing SMEs ...... � 26 Figure 6. The Principles of Good Governance...... �� 27 Figure 7. Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model...... �� 29 Figure 8. Side-Effect Evaluation Model...... � 30 Figure 9. Ecology’s Emancipation...... � 49 Figure 10. Comparative Chart on relevant ISO Type I and Type I-like Eco-Labelling schemes...... � 64 Figure 11. German Coffee-Processing SMEs...... � 68 Figure 12. Normative PTE-model of Eco-Labelling schemes...... �� 83 Figure 13. Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model...... � 84 Figure 14. Side-Effect Evaluation Model...... �� 87 Figure 15. Normative PTE-model of Eco-Labelling schemes; indicated with Outcome1=defect...... �� 97 Figure 16. Normative PTE-model of Eco-Labelling schemes; indicated with Outcome1=defect, Outcome2=positive, Final Policy Goal=positive.. . . � 98 Figure 17. Modification of the normative PTE-model of Eco-Labelling schemes. . . � 99 Figure 18. Normative PTE-model of Eco-Labelling schemes; indicated with Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism ��101 Figure 19. Modification of normative PTE-model of Eco-Labelling schemes in relation to Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism ��101 Figure 20. a) Demand and Supply of Coffee Products with different Sustainable Quality ��103 b) Demand and Supply of Coffee Products with different Sustainable Quality ��104

ix 10 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

In the 1960s and 1970 citizens of “advanced industrialized democratic states”1 were no longer willing to accept environmental degradation in the form of local air pollution, waste mountains, etc. As a result the industry’s detrimental impact on the environment became a matter of public concern. The understanding of pollutions regional and global effects emerged and pushed the subject of environmental protection and preservation onto the level of international politics. To address the source of environmental de gradation, domestic legal actions and environmental policy instruments were developed. In the beginning, environmental policy approaches focused mostly on interventions and measurements for regulating industrial point sources of pollution. Regulation for the installation of catalytic converters to reduce the caused emission is one example. Along such reactive end-of-pipe solutions, product-related environmental policies and marked-based instruments were introduced to meet and diminish environmental problems before they occurred (Carter, 2007; Shaffer, 2001; Hajer, 1995).

These environmental policy interventions, e.g. bans on specific chemical substances or taxes for production-related emission, with their prevention-oriented values served as a prerequisite for the further and later development of eco-labelling schemes. With the purpose of harnessing current market forces by providing product information to empower consumers towards sustainable consumption and thereby alter the mode of production into a more environmentally benign manner, eco-labelling schemes address environmental protection and improvement as market friction-based2 and consumer- oriented voluntary environmental product measurements. In other words, eco-labelling schemes provide product information to aggregate consumer power, to steer businesses towards more a sustainable production (Boström & Klintman, 2008; Carter, 2007; Salzman, 1999).

1 The term “advanced industrialized democratic states” refers to the definition “advanced industrially state” by the World Bank. This includes all developed countries with a large degree on GPD which are also referred to as the north (World Bank, 2015) In that time period, the advanced industrialized states with a democratic system have for instance been covered by the US, Germany etc. 2 Among other policy instruments are eco-labelling schemes by EU definition regarded as market friction-based, policy as they “pursue the goal of stimulating a market to produce a desired resource efficient our environmental outcome by improving information flows” (Rademaekers, 2011: 43). Chapter 1 Introduction • 11

Since the first eco-label, “The Blue Angel“, was introduced in Germany 1978, dozens of national and international eco-labelling schemes have been developed and implemented. According to the eco-labelling catalogue “Ecolabel Index”, 458 eco-Labels currently exist in 197 countries, covering 25 industry sectors (Global Ecolabel Monitor, 2015). Through the integration of social merits, such as a minimum wages, the term sustainable-labelling schemes was developed. However, sustainable-labelling schemes still mainly address environmental issues and are thus still mostly discussed as eco-labelling schemes (Golden et al., 2010).

Besides the growing of the number of different eco-labelling schemes, the “State of Sustainability Initiatives Review 2014” (Potts et al., 2014) demonstrates an increasing market value and stated a double and triple-digit growth rate across the sixteen most prevalent eco-labelling schemes. The study documents the trend of sustainable commitments by big polluters such as large manufacturers and corporations including Dole, Chiquita, Coca Cola Company, Tetley, Twinings, Unilever, Hershey’s, Home Depot, Lowes, Starbucks, Nestlé, Ferrero Group, Mars, Ikea, Adidas and others. Similar results of eco-labelling schemes’ growing market share and large companies’ sustainable commitments, have been examined in other studies (Global Ecolabel Monitor, 2010; Golden et al., 2010).

However, it is mainly the small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)3, representing more than 99% of all enterprises operating throughout the EU, which have historically not been the focus of environmental measurements, but are likewise identified and regarded as significant contributors to environmental problems. Even if each individual SME has merely a minor environmental impact in contrast to the big polluters of larger corporations, they are considered to have a substantial environmental impact, due to their vast number (OECD, 2010; Stubblefield et al., 2010; Labonne, 2006).

“The prospects and strategies for a green growth economy cannot be entirely understood without taking fully into account the production, technology and management practices of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)” (OECD, 2010: 3).

1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVE

If the transformation of SMEs to sustainable practices, in manufacturing, processing and services, is declared to be the key to a green growth model, in what way can eco-labelling be a part of that? The number of eco-labelling implementation by big polluters is increasing, which is regarded as fostering more environmentally benign consumption and production. In that sense, are present-day eco-labelling schemes also an option for supporting the greening of SMEs productivity and can they been seen as an established

3 The definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) is based on the EU Commission’s SME criteria, which regards SMEs as “enterprises which employ fewer than 250 persons and which have an annual turnover not exceeding 50 million euro, and/or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding 43 million euro” (COM/2007/0379 final). 12 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU perspective for this task? Which strategies do contemporary eco-labelling schemes imply in terms of greening SMEs production and fostering sustainable production and consumption, and are they capable or effective enough to improve the environmental performance of SME products or do they need to be complemented by other existing policy interventions? In order to approach to this complex issue, the thesis aims to identify whether or to what extent eco-labelling schemes are suitable for attaining the goal of greening SMEs production and thus focuses on the greening potential and limits of contemporary eco-labelling schemes for SME products within the EU.

In order to meet the requirements of my research objective within the parameters of the thesis, I am going to focus on German SMEs within the processing-coffee sector. Hereafter, the objective of this thesis is to explore the greening potentials and limits of current eco-labelling schemes in regards to German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS).

1.3 RESEARCH SCOPE AND LIMITS

What is the German coffee-processing sector offering as a research framework in relation to eco-labelling schemes and SMEs? Since several years, coffee has been ranked as the second most traded commodity after crude oil and is still one of the world’s most valued agriculture commodity product. Therefore, its importance to the world’s economy and for providing livelihood for over 125 million people cannot be overstated (ICO, 2014; Panhuysen & Pierrot, 2014; Trade Economics, 2015). In 2008, coffee ranked as the top- most eco (fair trade) labelled commodity product and about 52% was also certified as organic (Pay, 2009).

Accounting for 31% of worldwide coffee consumption, the EU is by far the world’s largest coffee consumer, compared to the US with 17% and 6% for Japan. Germany is the largest coffee drinking nation (Pay, 2009). At the same time, Germany is also the biggest coffee- importing country in terms of volume within the EU. Beyond being an important import country, Germany is also the largest coffee-processing nation within the EU (Preibisch, 2012). There are a total of approximately 600 coffee-processing companies in Germany and it is estimated that around 590 thereof are small or medium-sized companies (KL, 2015). Eco-labelled German processed coffee is rather rare. The market share in Germany of imported eco-labelled green coffee beans amounts to about 5%, but it is regarded as market niche with a growth potential, due to an increasing consumer demand for certificated coffee (Preibisch, 2012; Pierrot, 2011; Pay, 2009).

Against this background, the status and amount of coffee trade and consumption in the global commodity market highlights the relevance of producing coffee sustainable. Germany’s strong coffee industry and large coffee-drinking culture stresses the vast significance of the coffee-processing sector. Due to their large presence in this sector, German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS) gain importance in this regard. A minor share Chapter 1 Introduction • 13 of eco-labelled coffee products in Germany on the one hand and an increasing consumer demand of German eco-labelled coffee on the other, demonstrates an unexploited greening potential for eco-labelled certified coffee products. In this respect, the thesis regards a research scope limited to eco-labelling schemes in regards to GCPS as appropriate and meaningful for identifying the greening potential and limits of SME products by eco-labelling schemes.

Due to that, the scope of this thesis is restricted to coffee eco-labelling schemes of positive voluntarily ISO Type I and ISO Type I-like environmental policy instruments in Germany, which are explicitly defined in section 1.5.

1.4 RESEARCH PURPOSE

To this end, this thesis has an overall aim to firstly contribute to approaching eco-labelling schemes as being related to environmental benefits and thus as environmental policy instruments improving environmental performance and conditions.

Secondly, the focus on eco-labelling schemes in relation to German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS) within the coffee sector seems to be an appropriate and expedient framework for exploring and reflecting upon the impact and possibility of eco-labelling schemes as a strategy for greening SME products. Based on explorative research the study seeks to provide a deeper understanding of the implementation of eco-labelling schemes for coffee products from its normative theoretical conception to a detected logic/rationality in practice. Thus, the thesis aims to understand how the schemes’ underlying theoretical greening strategy correlates in practice of German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS). In this sense, the overall goal is to gain an insight of qualitative nature about eco-labelling schemes’ implementation strategy, thereby fostering a learning process and serving to optimize eco-labelling schemes’ rationality. Therefore, the thesis attempts to grasp and explore existing implementation shortcomings or positive outcomes in relation to GCPS products in order to evaluate eco-labelling schemes’ greening potential and limits.

In the main part of the thesis, a policy evaluation will reveal the intended and unintended effects of coffee eco-labelling schemes’ policy intervention - from benefits till constraints - in the perspective of GCPS. It thus provides information on how eco-labelling schemes are actually implemented and perceived to function in the eyes of GCPS and reveals how eco-labelling schemes meet and affect GCPS products with respect to whether or to what extent the initiated and intended policy goals of eco-labelling schemes are attained. At the same time, the policy evaluation will expose which anticipated and un-anticipated side-effects have occurred in the process of accomplishing the eco-labelling schemes’ policy goals and which might have produced counterproductive impacts. 14 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

In return, the thesis has the intention of generating a hypothetical insight that firstly grasps coffee eco-labelling schemes’ actual impact on greening GCPS products. Secondly, the thesis aims to compare and analyse these results further against the backdrop of eco-labelling schemes’ normative theoretical conception in order to clarify their scope of limits and potential to green German SME coffee products and gain thereby knowledge to enhance the policy rationalization of eco-labelling schemes. The thesis applies therefore eco-labelling policy conceptions and draws on theoretical approaches of the Ecological Modernization Theory (EMT).

To explore eco-labelling’s greening potential and limits for German SME coffee products my overarching research question is therefore as follows:

• What are the motivating factors and benefits as well as barriers and shortcomings of existing eco-labelling schemes experienced by GCPS?

To answer the question above, the study will investigate the following central research questions on a base of explorative research:

• What are the actual intended policy implementation/intervention goals of coffee eco-labelling schemes and how do German SMEs in the coffee-processing sector correspond to them?

• Are these intended policy goals achieved by German SMEs in the coffee- processing sector?

• What anticipated side-effects as well as un-anticipated side-effects are experienced by GCPS in regards to accomplishing the intended endeav- ours and achievements of eco-labelling schemes?

1.5 DEFINING ECO-LABELLING SCHEMES FOR THE GERMAN COFFEE SECTOR

To start with, eco-labelling schemes, also called non-legally binding voluntary environmental product information schemes (EPIS), are considered to interlink economic and social forces by awarding and indicating products with environmental information, in contrast to similar products with the same functionality and within the same competitive sector. Based on the notion, that a certain segment of consumers consider environmental quality as a purchase selection criterion, eco-labels are seen as crucial for favouring consumers’ purchase choice towards products of a more environmentally benign manner. With this transformation towards a greener demand on the market, eco-labels are seen as an informative voluntary market-friction instrument with the objective of continuously Chapter 1 Introduction • 15 improving products’ environmental performance and thereby reducing environmental degradation (Rademaekers, 2011; Salzman, 1991).

The products’ environmental information can be supplied in different manners, either promoting the positive effects toward the environment or warning about the product’s negative impacts. In this regard, notion of this information being voluntarily or mandatory differs. Furthermore, the environmental product information can refer to a national, supra- national or global scope and may cover multiple or single criteria area etc. (Rubik & Frankl, 2005). The different classification of eco-labelling schemes are illustrated by Figure 1:

Figure 1. Classification of EPIS within the European Union (Source: Rubik & Frankl, 2005: 34).

Due to the thesis’s research purpose the focus solely be on positive, voluntary eco- labelling product schemes, which are valid for the coffee sector in the EU and Germany. This selection is further reduced by the definition of the International Organisation for Standardization (ISO). With respect to the ISO taxonomy of eco-labelling schemes, the research deals only with all German coffee-related "ISO Type I environmental labelling” (14024:1999). This restriction is based on the opinion by ISO and the UN that merely products certificated by ISO Type I or Type I-like are capable of promoting and altering a greening of the market, which is in line with the thesis’ assumption to approach eco- labelling schemes as being related to environmental benefits. The UN has even stated that only ISO Type I or Type I-like schemes should be declared eco-labelling schemes (ISO, 2012; UNOPS, 2009).

Following the ISO definition, ISO “Type I environmental labelling” implies a:

“[V]oluntary, multiple-criteria-based third party program that awards a license which authorizes the use of environmental labels on products indicating overall environmental preferability of a product within a particular product category based on life cycle considerations" (ISO 14024:1999). 16 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

In other words, these kinds of eco-labelling schemes are meant to cover a multiple- criteria area and are based on a governmental agency, a quasi-governmental body, or a private organisational entity and are therefore awarded from a source independent of the eco-label certified producer, distributor or seller. The ISO taxonomy further distinguishes between “Type I” and “Type I -like environmental labelling”, whereby the latter might only address specific sustainable impacts (e.g. water quality, labour conditions) and/or focus only within a specific sector (e.g. forest industry, commodity sector) and/ or refers just to single life cycle phases (e.g product production; product recycling). In this case eco-labelling schemes have a more narrow focus and are seen as "hybrids" or “alternatives”, as they differ, though still comply with the major elements of the ISO Type I scheme definition. (UNOPS, 2009; Rubik & Frankl, 2005).

The ISO taxonomy of eco-labelling schemes also implies two further standardizations, which characterize eco-labelling schemes as “Type II self-declared environmental claims (ISO 14021: 1999)”, and “Type III environmental product declarations (ISO 14025:2006)”. These will be not explained here in detail, but in order to gain a complete picture of all current coffee eco-labelling schemes within Germany, Figure 2 provides an overview with respect to the ISO taxonomy4.

Figure 2. Voluntary Eco-Labelling Coffee Product Schemes in Germany.

4 The EU Organic label covers a wide range of food categories (and not on single food issues) and a broad range of sustainable impact categories (including ethical issues). Further the EU Organic label considers more than just the agricultural stage of the product lifecycle (Sengstschmid et al., 2011). In this sense the EU Organic label can be regarded as complimentary to the ISO Type I EU Eco-label scheme “EU-Flower” which has developed criteria for products solely in the non-food sector. Therefore, the thesis puts the EU Organic label here on equal footing with the ISO Type I definition and distinguishes it from the other relevant three coffee eco-labelling schemes, which are limited to certain food areas and sustainable issues. Chapter 1 Introduction • 17

Figure 2 demonstrates that “ISO Type II environmental declarations”, for instance, exist in Germany through Nestlé’s (AAA) and Starbucks’ (C.A.F.E.) own declaration. There are also further alternative options of “Type III environmental product declarations” in the German coffee sector. Against this background, Figure 2 also clearly illustrates that the research objective of eco-labelling schemes within the German coffee sector is limited to the public Type I scheme by the EU Organic label and the private Type I-like schemes covered by Fairtrade, UTZ and Rainforest Alliance. For the study’s purpose of conducting a policy evaluation, these governmental and private voluntary Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are unified and defined under the umbrella of voluntary consumer-oriented and market friction-based environmental policy instruments.

For the study’s purpose of conducting a policy evaluation, these governmental and private voluntary Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are unified and defined under the umbrella of voluntary consumer-oriented and market friction-based environmental policy instruments.5 Since eco-labelling schemes primarily provide consumer information, they could also be regarded as solely voluntary information instruments. However, in notion to Boström and Klintman (2008), the EC Directorate-General Environment (Rademaekers, 2011) and the OECD (Salzman, 1991), their function is not to merely provide information, but rather to strive toward harnessing and improving the current market forces in regards to sustainable consumption, thereby altering the mode of production toward a more environmentally benign manner.6

“Widely recognised and supported eco-labels may influence producers in a similar manner to traditional regulatory standards (especially if they stipulate the BAT7 principle) in markets where green consumerism is very strong” (Jordan et al., 2003: 11).

A low degree of public environmental awareness has the opposite effect. This being said, it should be noted that the effect of eco-labelling schemes in relation to consumer awareness is not the object of this thesis. Moreover, following the stated numbers of the “State of Sustainability Initiatives Review 2014” (Potts et al., 2014), which claims an increasing eco-labelling market share growth, the thesis assumes that sustainable consumerism is growing to a similar degree.

Further, to access eco-labelling schemes in the means of environmental policy, eco-labelling schemes of public Type I and private Type I-like mentioned in this thesis are both approached by Lundqvist’s (1996) purpose-based view on environmental policy

5 Due to the high attention on environmental issues of these labelling schemes, this paper will refer to them in the following solely by the term eco-labelling scheme. In some cases, the paper distinguishes more clearly between ISO Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, though the term eco-labelling scheme or other descriptions as Type I schemes etc. imply also the full ISO definition of governmental and private voluntary positive multiple Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. 6 The normative logic beyond eco-labelling schemes as a consumer-oriented and market-friction based instrument is further discussed and outlined in chapter 4. 7 BAT = best available technology. 18 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU instruments. According to Lundqvist, these are “courses of action which are intended to affect society – in terms of values and beliefs, action and organisations – in such way as to improve or to prevent the deterioration of the quality of the natural environment” (Lundqvist, 1996: 14). From this perspective, eco-labelling schemes with a different institutional characteristic (private and public) and the characteristic of functioning as a sermon8, with the aim of creating and providing a “carrot”9 for realising environmental policy goals, can be still considered environmental policy instruments.

In the following, a method for approaching the pre-assigned eco-labelling schemes’ impact of their policy implementation in practice will be introduced, thus demonstrating how the thesis will elucidate eco-labelling schemes’ policy conception from the observational perspective of coffee-processing SME in Germany.

8 In notion to Vedung’s (1998) debate on taxonomy of public policy. 9 In notion to Vedung’s (1998) debate on taxonomy of public policy. Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 19

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH METHOD AND METHODOLOGY

To understand how Fairtrade and other voluntarily informative environmental product policy instruments currently correspond in practice to German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS) and in order to assess their capability to green those SMEs, this thesis will conduct a policy evaluation of coffee eco-labelling schemes. Several methodical approaches of environmental policy evaluation have been developed, which imply different research designs and elaborations of methods. Conceptions of environmental policy evaluation are mostly applied to measure a policy’s possible impact on environmental objectives or their effectiveness in meeting environmental objectives (Mickewitz, 2006). However, in this thesis, the intervention and implementation of coffee eco-labelling schemes are evaluated by an inductive approach, in order to understand how they are meeting and affecting GCPS in place.

In order to achieve this step, answer the research questions at hand and cover all intended or unintended outcomes in regard to the policy intervention of eco-labelling schemes in the context of GCPS, the thesis addresses the policy evaluation from a rational perspective. This evaluation perspective enables a focus both on policy’s problem-solving process and on its implementation cycle. In order to evaluate coffee eco-labelling schemes from a rational perspective, the thesis chooses to apply the evaluation method of “program theory evaluation”. However, it will not evaluate the entire policy implementation cycle of coffee eco-labelling schemes, but will rather elaborate and zoom onto one part of the “chain of [policy] objectives” (Suchman cited in Crabbé & Leory, 2008: 54), which consists namely of the implementation outcomes regarding GCPS.

2.1 METHODOLOGY

On the base of the method “program theory evaluation” (PTE), the thesis will organise and analyse the experience of GCPS so as to render them comprehensible and explain- able. Thus, the thesis’s ontological position is based on semiotic sense making about the worth, merit and value1 of coffee eco-labelling schemes in Germany. In other words, the thesis acquires comprehension about the perception that GCPS have on the eco-labelling schemes policy, which is not rendering an objective of a truth and is thereby clearly assigned to a constructivist evaluation approach.

1 This will be more in detailed explained in section 2.2.2 of this chapter. 20 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

For a more precise understanding, this means in detail that the thesis meets the “a priori” considered reality as constructed through thoughts, language and social performance. The existence of an objective reality is therefore not denied. The reality and the world is out there, but its truth cannot exist independently of the human mind as descriptions of the world are not out there: “The understanding does not draw its laws (a priori) from nature, but prescribes them from nature” (Kant cited in Cohen, 1985: 32). By assessing the phenomena of coffee eco-labelling schemes from this constructivist ontological view, the thesis clearly stands in contrast to the ontological belief of a real physical truth of the world, which is thought to be objective accessible and can be derived from real knowledge.

2.2 PROGRAM THEORY EVALUATION2

Regarding the thesis’s aim to evaluate the eco-labelling schemes implementation effects on GCPS, the assessment of coffee eco-labelling schemes is addressed by a rational perspective of policy evaluation, which determines the basic framework for the choice of the “program theory evaluation” (PTE) method. Environmental policy evaluation can be appointed to three different types of policy evaluation perspectives and their functionality, however, it is the rational perspective that addresses a policy as a problem-solving process and focuses on the policy’s implementation cycle. One can further distinguish between an interaction perspective and an institutional evaluation perspective of policy evaluation. Whereas the former regards policies as a product of interaction among different interrelated stakeholders and evaluates the decision-making process, the latter frames policies within the broader picture of institutions and concentrates on the policies institutional context (Crabbé & Leroy, 2008).

Within the chosen rational evaluation perspective, policies are considered to imply and follow the logic of a goal-set agenda, which address a certain problem-defined target. Thus, a rational policy evaluation has the intention to assess “whether, or to what extent the initial problem has been resolved [through the policy implementation], and whether or not the policy cycle must be reiterated“ (Crabbé & Leroy, 2008: 9).

A policy evaluation from a rational perspective is thus regarded as a process of learning, therefore contributing to an understanding of how to optimize the rationalising of the policy. “In this view, policy is like a control loop” (Crabbé & Leroy, 2008: 9). Whereas the method of “program theory evaluation (PTE)” does not intend to describe how the implementation of a policy is actually occurring, which would cover negotiations and

2 The method “Program theory evaluation” (PTE) is discussed to be a broader term for all various existing forms of PTE, which differ clearly from each other. However, the different PTE labels as public intervention theory (Vedung, 1997: 10) theory based evaluation (Weiss cited in Rogers et al, 2000:6), policy theory evaluation (Crabbé & Leroy, 2008: 53) etc. have not yet been applied consistently to a certain method conception and are therefore practically synonymous with PTE (Rogers et al., 2000). Thus, authors applied in this thesis might term the method differently. Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 21 decision-making processes, it instead explicitly serves as a tool to assess the actual policy implementation and its effects in practice, thereby supporting the process of learning and understanding, and thus providing an evaluation of eco-labelling schemes from a rational perspective.

In general, the policy evaluation method PTE is rooted in the idea of first reconstructing a public policy normative causal “chain of [policy] objectives” (Suchman cited in Crabbé & Leroy, 2008: 54) and on that basis, evaluating the policy instrument in the sense of understanding what happened along its chain elements. This implies generating a model of all the chain structures between the starting point of the policy’s expectation and formulation up to its implementation and series of immediate and intermediate outcomes, until its final goal. In other words, “[p]rogram theory evaluation consists of an explicit theory or model of how the program [policy] causes the intended or observed outcomes and an evaluation that is at least partly guided by this model” (Rogers et al., 2000: 5).

Thus, PTE is a method for building a conceivable and reasonable model of public policy instruments in a twofold manner. On the one hand, it has a normative component focusing on how a public policy intervention is supposed to function. On the other, it has an empirical component focusing on how a public policy implementation (can) causes intended or unintended outcomes. PTE “involved the development of an explanatory model which is used as a basis for policy evaluation [and] encompasses the beliefs and expectations of the policy-makers with regard to the [actual] course of policy” (Crabbé & Leroy, 2008: 53).

In this sense, PTE should be considered a policy model “of the micro-steps or linkage in the causal path from [policy] program to ultimate outcome” (Rogers et al., 2000: 10), which is derived from and established on the basis of the policy’s intended implementation and function. Through the application of the model, one reveals how the policy is actually implemented and how it is perceived to function, which is in line with the aim of this thesis, namely to provide information on how the implementation and function of coffee eco-labelling schemes is observed and perceived by GCPS. This also implies that a model of “program evaluation theories” serves as a way to learn about the practical mechanisms and outcomes of a policy in order to reformulate policies and improve their implementation processes or other activities that might need improvement. Thus, the evaluating of coffee eco-labelling schemes in relation to GCPS will also serve to share general knowledge about and to develop contemporary (coffee) eco-labelling schemes as well as to generate general knowledge for future research on (coffee) eco-labelling schemes in other product sectors within the EU.

“The opportunities to learn from evaluations are numerous. Those participat- ing in the political process through which policies are formed can learn, likewise those implementing the policies. Evaluation may provide opportunities to learn about the question to ask, the goals to set and how to frame the issue as well as the instrumental learning about how to design or implement policy” (Mickwitz, 2006: 18). 22 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

2.2.1 Program Theory Evaluation in practice

This thesis will primarily apply PTE in the notion of Vedung’ s (1997) review of ideas behind public policy and program evaluation and his primarily conception beyond PTE’s function, which reflects the thesis constructivist approach:

“This model is a tool which may generate questions about reality; it does not picture reality” (Vedung & Román, 2002: 10).

The simplest model for reconstructing and outlining a “chain of [policy] objectives” (Suchman quoted in Crabbé & Leory, 2008: 54) is rooted in the idea of rendering public policy implementation within a basic system. This relies on a whole chain of elements, which depend on each other and are basically solely consisting of input, conversion and output, as illustrated in Figure 3.

Input Conversion Output

Figure 3. The Simple System Model (Vedung, 1997: 4).

Applied as a model for policy evaluation, Vedung (1997) changes the terminology and refers to “administration” instead of conversion. Thus, conversion happens within the policy’s respective responsible agency and is triggered by the input. In the case of this thesis, the output would be the environmental policy instrument of coffee eco-labelling schemes.

Figure 4. The System Model Adapted to Government Intervention Evaluation (Vedung, 1997: 5)

In a second step, as the illustration (Figure 4) above shows, Vedung extended the policy evaluation model’s output phase by introducing further variables of outcomes, which refer to the results when the output (eco-labelling schemes) reach the receivers or ad- dressees. These different phases of outcomes are distinguished by immediate = Outcome 1, intermediate = Outcome 2, and ultimate = Outcome 3. The latter is presented in this study as final policy goal. Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 23

To apply this basic model and conduct a policy evaluation, the first step is, as discussed before, to outline and construct a normative “program theory evaluation” model (PTE- model)3 of coffee eco-labelling schemes in the German coffee sector. The fundamental data and knowledge for the modelling in this case is derived from secondary sources, which frame eco-labelling schemes’ rationality roughly, but is mainly outlined through an inductive approach via the application of official policy documents of eco-labelling bodies.

Thus, the outline of a normative PTE-model follows the initial logic beyond a policy and thus constructs a normative cycle of all considered elements of a policy chain striving for the coffee eco-labelling schemes’ goal-set agenda. Due to the thesis’s purpose, the policy model will focus on elements of the policy chain’s outcome phase and will outline these parts more in detail. In this case, the final goal of coffee eco-labelling schemes is the greening of German SME coffee products and thus their ‘contribution to a sustainable consumption and production’.

This is first caused by outcome 1= ‘the implementation (introduction and application) of eco-labelling schemes’ which leads to outcome 2= ‘the increase of environmentally benign products’. However, Mickwitz (2006) suggests that the application of program theory evaluation should rather be based on multiple models, as there might be different expectations regarding the course of policy intervention and thus the chain of objectives.

“Constructing multiple intervention theories, which make different assumption on causalities explicit, can foster learning even on its own before any of the assumption of the intervention theories are empirically examined” (Mickwitz, 2006: 35).

Figure 5 below illustrates a normative multiple PTE-model of the eco-labelling schemes’ implementation in relation to GCPS. This model is only based and constructed on the data and knowledge of eco-labelling schemes in chapter 1, which does not explore the complete policy rationality of eco-labelling schemes in detail. Regarding its shallow and general understanding of eco-labelling’s policy strategy, it can only be comprehended as an exemplary normative model to make the method more accessible. However, in that sense, it also serves as a blue- print for constructing the normative PTE-model of coffee eco-labelling schemes.

3 In the following, the term “program theory evaluation model” will be supplemented by the abbreviation “PTE- model” or the term policy model. 24 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Figure 5. Multiple PTE of the eco-labelling schemes in relation to German coffee-processing SMEs (Source: adapted from Figure 4).

Regarding the PTE method, the second step will be to conduct an evaluation by weighting and valuing the empirical data collection against the normative intended implementation outcomes of the normative PTE-model. This implies establishing an evaluation of gathered data and knowledge that displays how the application and function of coffee eco-labelling schemes is observed and perceived by GPCS. Though, before this second step of evaluation can be realized, there are further requirements that have to first be addressed by applying the method PTE.

2.2.2 The Means Behind Evaluating

As stated above, the second step of a PTE method is to use the constructed normative PTE-model. In this process, it is necessary to clarify what it means to conduct an evaluation. An evaluation is defined as follows:

“[C]areful retrospective assessment of the merit, worth and value of administration, output and outcome of government interventions, which is intended to play a role in future, practical action situations” (Vedung, 1997: 3).

In this notion, evaluation is an analytical process limited to ex-post assessments of governmental public policy, which are “a set of techniques by which public sector authorities wield their power in attempting to effect social change or eliciting support” (Vedung 1997: 122). In this study, the definition and application of evaluation is based on Vedung’s concept. Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 25

Due to the thesis’s scope, the variables are limited to output and outcome. Further his conception is extended to include eco-labelling schemes and tailored by Lundqvist’s purposed-based approach for environmental policy instruments. Therefore, the evaluation of coffee eco-labelling schemes within this thesis refers to a:

“careful retrospective assessment of the merit, worth and value of output and outcome of consumer-oriented and market friction based courses of action which are intended to affect society in such way as to improve or to prevent the deterioration of the quality of the natural environment” (applied quote by Vedung, 1997: 3 and Lundqvist, 1996: 14).

2.2.3 Merit, Worth and Value

Beyond determining the general inherent direction and purpose of evaluation in order to later focus on coffee eco-labelling schemes policy element of GCPS, it also has to be clarified what principle (“the merit, worth and value” (Vedung, 1997: 2)) the assessment is based on. Throughout the history of policy evaluation, three fundamental sets of evaluation criteria have emerged: the judicial rational, the economic rational and the political rational. Recently, the United Nations established eight evaluation criteria of “Good Governance”, which sum up the former three fundamental sets (Crabbé & Leory, 2008). All of these eight evaluation criteria are equally valid and can be applied for evaluation research using the PTE method. Regarding to the official criteria of Good Public Governance by the UN, the policy evaluation’s merit, value and worth can be chosen and determined by following different principles of:

Figure 6. The principles of Good Governance (adapted from Crabbé & Leory, 2008: 27).

26 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Within these principles of “Good Governance”, the merit, worth and value of coffee eco-labelling schemes’ policy evaluation can range from proofing their practical accountability to promoting their legitimacy. Regarding the former, an evaluation could measure if eco-labelling schemes are transparent and traceable in meeting their goal of contributing to sustainable growth, or, following the latter, could ensure that certified producers fulfil their obligations. However, this study focuses on evaluating eco-labelling scheme implementation through the lens of effectiveness.

Although effectiveness and efficiency are often seen as synonymous, the application of the criterion “effectiveness” does not take any economic aspects into account (Vedung, 1997). Effectiveness relates to the achievement of the eco-labelling schemes’ intended and set policy goal of contributing to sustainability by greening GCPS products. But, as stated before, without having the intention to measure its environmental performance, the criterion effectiveness is used here with the sole purpose of understanding to what extent the eco-labelling scheme intervention is corresponding with its intended goal-set agenda in regards to GCPS. In this sense, the evaluation criterion effectiveness serves to frame the actual outcomes and side effects of eco-labelling scheme interventions from the perspective of GCPS. This also holds for all counterproductive impacts which coffee eco-labelling schemes might produce along their intended goal-set agenda. All in all, the criterion effectiveness is applicable for the assessment of the efficiency of eco-labelling schemes with the goal of greening GCPS products.

To approach the eco-labelling schemes intervention by way of “effectiveness”, two effectiveness evaluation models will be applied. Thus, based on an outlined normative PTE-model, which reflects coffee eco-labelling schemes’ intended implementation goals, these effectiveness evaluation models can be considered as tools for supporting and guiding policy evaluation in the sense of effectiveness. Both of these define the term effectiveness within the frame of goal achievement, but differ slightly. For a better -un derstanding of the thesis’s further methodical approach, both evaluations’ effectiveness models are described in the following.

2.2.4 Goal-Attainment Evaluation

‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ analyses policy implementation by asking if the outcomes are in line with the intended goals and if the produced outcomes are a result of the impact of the policy. The latter is termed ‘impact assessment’ and the former ‘goal achievement measurement’. Both evaluations require that the policy has already been adopted for a prolonged period, in order to achieve appropriate results concerning the implementation (Vedung, 1997). This requirement does not pose a problem in the context of this thesis.

Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 27

According to the thesis’s evaluation, coffee eco-labelling schemes goals have to be identified and ordered by their rank and meaning in order to evaluate in what sense and to what extent these goals have been realized and achieved. Thus, a ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ would entail here, for instance, an analysis whether GCPS have sustainable coffee products and if this actual outcome can be observed, see in a second step, if their sustainable value is attributed to the implementation of eco-labelling schemes. The evaluation is based on a descriptive analytical valuing process, which will be carried out by comparing and weighting the empirical gathered data and knowledge of GCPS to the underlying policy goals of the relevant coffee eco-labelling schemes, which are derived from the normative PTE model.

Figure 7. Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model (adapted from Vedung 1997: 39).

This implies that eco-labelling schemes’ content, as a result of democratic decision- making process and within a descriptive analytical valuing process, is compared and weighted “from the frog eye perspective of the citizenry” (Vedung, 1997: 42), which in this case are the GCPS stakeholders. While this takes into account a policy’s inherent value of representative democracy and it thus demonstrates the evaluation model’s strength. Though, the goal-attainment evaluation has also weaknesses, which the most compelling one will be discussed here. By assessing a lack of accomplished goals, the probability of unintended and unanticipated side-effects, for instance, missing time or high costs of implementing a policy as well as weak human performance or human error are often disregarded. According to this, inappropriate implementation results may not be the only reason for a sloppy or excluding policy formulation. But as environmental policy instruments are applied in a changing and complex context, they are exposed to external unforeseeable factors and interactions (Vedung, 1997). Against this background, the thesis will, in the following, introduce the second evaluation model, the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’, with the intent of diminishing the weaknesses of the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model’. 28 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

2.2.5 Side-Effect Evaluation

‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ elaborates on ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ by making room to include factors occurring outside the intended policy target area. These outside factors act, in the best case, as complementary side effects to accomplish the policy’s intended endeavour and achievements. Anyhow, a policy implementation can also produce detrimental impacts. Whether positive or negative, Vedung distinguishes between side effects located within or outside of the policy target area. With regard to this, any positive or negative additional effect outside of the policy target area is considered as an unanticipated side effect. These unanticipated side effects can only be identified as such in relation to the main effects. Main effects are regarded as all side effects which political decision-maker intended and thought to induce within the target area of the policy intervention.

Figure 8. Side-Effect Evaluation Model (adapted from Vedung, 1997: 58).

Thus, main effects are by definition positively anticipated and are therefore all beneficial for achieving the policy’s intended goal. At the same time, a policy implementation can produce detrimental impacts, which act contrary to the policy’s functionality. When these counterproductive side effects are occurring within the policy target area, Vedung refers to so-called perverse effects. As completely counterproductive consequences, they negate all initially positive anticipated side-effects, act contrary to the policy’s target area and thus question a policy’s implementation and cause of problem-solving in total. Thus, perverse effects need to be factored in beforehand to diminish and eliminate their impact and are therefore defined as anticipated negative side effects. Simultaneously, policy intervention might also have null effects, which speaks for itself (Vedung, 1997). Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 29

To evaluate anticipated side-effects, Vedung suggests mapping the outcomes by comparing their congruency with the intended results in the policy target area and further weighting their positive or negative trade-off in order to identify their beneficial or detrimental value. In this way, anticipated side effects within the present outcome, both beneficial and detrimental (perverse-effect), have to be evaluated in relation to the predetermined goals by way of a descriptive analytical valuing process of the gained empirical data. In this study, the data will be obtained from stakeholders of GCPS. As stated before, the unanticipated side-effects can be framed and pictured in relation to all identified anticipated side-effects, though in order to value these as negative or positive unanticipated side effects, the descriptive analytical approach has to be open for the stakeholders’ own view of benefits or constraints. Since the unanticipated side effects are partially not foreseeable or known before an evaluation is conducted, they are of great importance and might serve as strong impetus and support through their unexpected insight for further reflection on policy’s performance (Vedung, 1997).

2.3 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

Due to the thesis’s purpose to explore and gain an in-depth understanding of coffee eco-labelling schemes in regards to German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS), this thesis approaches its research questions by data of small N, which is based on qualitative empirical data collection.

Thus, the method ‘program theory evaluation (PTE)’ builds, on one hand, on qualitative data from primary and secondary sources to outline the normative policy model of coffee eco-labelling schemes and render its policy cycle with all relevant chains of objective and zooms onto its intended policy goal-setting. On the other hand, the evaluation applies qualitative data from primary sources in order to evaluate how the coffee eco-labelling schemes implementation accomplishes its goal-set agenda in relation to GCPS and further, what actual anticipated or un-anticipated effects are observed and perceived by GCPS and accomplish eco-labelling schemes interventions’ intended achievements or might produce counterproductive outcomes.

In terms of secondary sources, reference books, academic articles, literature review, scientific and institutional reports on eco-labelling schemes were applied. Primary sources are based on semi-structured interviews with stakeholders of GCPS, EU policy-documents concerning Integrated Product Policy (IPP) and official policy documents of the respective coffee eco-labelling schemes’ bodies (ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes). 30 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

2.3.1 Secondary Sources

In order to gain a general overview on eco-labelling schemes as policy instruments, a small number of literature reviews, in contrast to the vast array of reference articles, were collected. The search on “Web of Science” and “Google” was guided by the following English keywords:

• eco-labelling scheme & coffee • eco-labelling & SME / in EU • eco-labelling & policy

Based on these findings, reference books, further official documents and scientific- re ports on eco-labelling schemes’ objective, typology, historical background, policy embedding and rationality as well as website sources like the German coffee association, International Standard Organisation, International Coffee Association, etc. were added. This allowed narrowing down the general eco-labelling information to the coffee sector of eco-labelling schemes, but also helped in terms of gaining a broader understanding of SMEs in the German coffee sector. Secondary data for the rough modelling of a normative PTE-model was partially obtained from scientific reports and reference books on eco-labelling schemes (Boström & Klintman, 2008; Rademaekers, 2011; Salzman, 1991) as well as from former policy evaluation research on the eco-labelling scheme “Swan” (Thidell, 2009). Regarding the modelling, all secondary data must be regarded as templates, which merely complemented and supported the primary data sources.

2.3.2 Primary Sources

For the construction of a normative PTE-model, the official policy documents of all four relevant eco-labelling schemes bodies4 were selected in order to detect their eco-labelling scheme’s rationality. Further, the Green Paper of Integrated Product Policy (IPP) and the Commissions Communication on IPP were also applied as they cover mainly voluntarily environmental product policy approaches like eco-labelling schemes and thus support the normative modelling of coffee eco-labelling schemes rationality from a wider governmental EU perspective.

There was an attempt to gather data and knowledge about coffee eco-labelling schemes rationality via interviews with representatives from each respective eco-labelling scheme’s institution or body. However, the majority of the requested representatives did not show interest or did not have time for a proper interview. Therefore, the secondary sources of eco-labelling schemes play a crucial role, as it is the combination of secondary and primary sources that support by the construction of a normative PTE-model to pre- clude that one eco-labelling approach gains a greater weight or that some chains of the objective are disregarded, etc.

4 FairTrade, UTZ, Rainforest Alliance and EU-organic label. Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 31

In order to evaluate the coffee eco-labelling schemes from the perspective of GCPS and thus assess them by using a descriptive analytical valuing process, primary data is obtained by semi-structured interviews with representatives from respective GCPS. As there are about 590 German coffee-processing companies, the study needed to restrict this large number and set a constraining exploratory research frame. Due to this, just all size-relevant 19 members of the German Coffee Association were asked to participate in a semi-structured interview. Only five responded, even after a third round of contacting. Thus, the data of primary sources of GCPS is limited to this number. The interviews were carried out during February and March 2015 and the questions were posed in German. As no face-to-face meetings were possible, the interviews were conducted as similar as possible via a Skype Video conference and were recorded using the program Pamela.

2.3.3 Interview Design and Coding Scheme

The semi-structured interview was designed according to the Kvale & Brinkmann (2009) interview framework and an English version is attached in Appendix 1 of this thesis. To compensate for the lacking response from available GCPS interview partners, a broad array of interview questions were decided upon in order to achieve a large data input and were sent to the interviewees beforehand. Though, with the leeway of a semi-structured interview, there was the possibility to ask follow-up questions, which was relevant in the study’s case when there was need for room to explain complex and divergent issues. Thus, semi-structured interviews were chosen mainly due to their flexible character, but also because of the small number of GCPS interviewees. On the one hand, a semi-structured interview allows validly acquiring data on each interviewee’s perspective, but leaves room for detailed explanations, impressions and observations. On the other hand, such an interview structure provides the access of relevant knowledge in order to gain an in-depth understanding of the issue, even with a small number of interview partners. In contrast, a structured interview would not have been applicable, as the perception on coffee eco-labelling schemes’ effects are too multifaceted and complex to be quantifiable by coded answers.

The interviews started with warm-up questions to acquire general information about the GCPS’ business structure, coffee volume, etc. Further question served as information generators to identify the perception and impression of eco-labelling schemes’ intended goal-achievements and effects by asking about their implementation status and personal position towards coffee eco-labelling schemes application as well as about their observation of coffee’s schemes sustainability. Depending on the GCPS business context (if eco-labelling schemes have been applied or not), the predetermined set of questions was phrased in a different way and was tailored to each interviewee’s business background. During the interview, many follow-up questions were posed to the interviewees, due to the above discussed issues. Further, qualitative interview techniques such as the filler questions recommended by Williams (2003) were not used, though they were included in the interview design, in case the conversation did not flow. 32 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

With this in mind, all interviewees were treated as providers of information about the phenomena of coffee eco-labelling schemes in the German coffee sector, with the intent of gathering a holistic picture through their perception, which is suitable for the inherent inductive approach of the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ and ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’. Some parts of the collected interview data were transcribed to facilitate the process of sorting out the relevant data to be presented within the empirical findings. The collected data of the interviews has been analysed, following a coding scheme, with focus on the meaning of eco-labelling schemes’ goal-achievement as well as anticipated and unanticipated effects. The coding schemes are enclosed in Appendix 2 and 3.

2.3.4 Considerations on Research Design: Lim its and Bias

As there is a vast amount of research about eco-labelling within all kind of scientific disciplines, it was a challenge to find a common core of approved research and reference books to focus on. Thus, the thesis had to exclude and limit sources of secondary data which especially affects the illustration for the research on previews studies as well as affect sources of scientific reports and studies on eco-labelling’s objective. Due to that, the secondary source selection reflects eco-labelling schemes more from a general view of social science. To cover all different fields of eco-labelling schemes’ preview research, sources of information have been chosen because of their quantitative reputation or because of their recent publication, though there might be other sources with the same value which are not listed.

The building of the coffee eco-labelling schemes’ policy model in the sense of a program theory evaluation model is stated to be of a normative nature, which could differ from different viewpoints. Thus, to provide a model about “how coffee eco-labelling schemes ought to function” with internal reliability and validity, the construction is based by opposing and complementing primary data on eco-labelling’s rationality from secondary sources. This has also the intention of excluding any bias from the researchers about what the normative picture of eco-labelling should look like and make the modelling construction repeatable for other research, which increases its external and internal reliability. The semi-structured interviews obtained data and knowledge from GCPS with the aid of a rich question-catalogue, and the applied possibility of following up-questions. As a result, the interviews’ large and deep content compensates for the small number of just five interviewed GCPS stakeholders. Thus, the gathered in-depth data and detailed understanding is sufficient to conduct the ‘Goal-Attainment-Evaluation’ and ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ to receive internal validity. Still it should be acknowledged here that this could have been increased by a larger number of interviews.

The applied ‘Goal-Attainment-Evaluation’ and ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ is essentially based on the data from interviews and therefore also coupled with drawbacks as a counterbal- ance of secondary data source cannot be applied. Just as the interviewer can influence the shape of the answers through his/her questions, the interviewees can also influence Chapter 2 Research Method and Methodology • 33 the response by withholding or exaggerating information. Thus, for the researcher, it has been of utter importance to be aware about his/her self-interest in GCPS and to reflect his/her own position in order to exclude bias from both sides. As the gathered interview data (in German language) had to be translated into English, the researcher tried to eliminate translation-related bias by a back translating technique suggested by Nes et al. (2010). Thus, the researcher translated the English version back into German and compared this translation with the original in order to increase an objective quality of the interview findings. By excluding all these bias in the best possible manner, the interviews semi-structural obtained data of each company gets one as close as possible to the perception of GCPS and allows for strong inductive arguments. This can be argued to give a higher degree to hypothetically generalize for all GCPS, but far more important, it generates a high internal reliability.

As the follow-up questions are unrepeatable and the five cases from the GCPS with their unique perspective on coffee eco-labelling schemes in the German coffee sector might be too specific, the external reliability can be considered rather weak. With the given predetermined set of questions further interviews with other GCPS might be considered partially repeatable and the outcomes are thus transferable to further research that covers coffee eco-labelling schemes and SME. As it could be argued that there ought to be common components for any other coffee-processing SMEs in Germany or even within the EU, external reliability is increasing and makes the thesis’s research already worth considering for a broader context and the findings transferrable to other commodity sectors.

Additionally, by looking at the interviewed GCPS, they differ completely in their specific business approaches to eco-labelling scheme implementation. Nevertheless, the unique in-depth perspective on coffee eco-labelling schemes from each SME offers relevant information on common components within their different nature. Thus, the thesis findings and theoretical conception can be useful for further research on how eco-labelling schemes function in their natural practice of commodity trading and processing SMEs within the EU. To understand how coffee eco-labelling schemes’ policy is experienced thus offers an opportunity for the improvement and enhancement of eco-labelling schemes implementation in the coffee sector. But furthermore, the study of the thesis can be definitely also be regarded as reaching such a degree of external valid insight so as to give an applicable fundamental conception for considering eco-labelling schemes within the EU in general. Thus, due to the high likelihood of similar results within other product areas, the thesis provide with its findings a conception for further research and gives general recommendations on eco-labelling schemes policy development.

Nonetheless, human error should never be underestimated. With regards to the above- mentioned considerations, it can be stated that the study has been analysed and evaluated in the most objective manner as possible. 34 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

CHAPTER 3 PREVIOUS RESEARCH

Like any other environmental policy instrument, the implementation of eco-labelling schemes has been estimated and evaluated in contemporary research within all kind of scientific disciplines from economic, social science till natural science, etc. There is a vast amount of research about eco-labelling schemes’ achievements as well as about their drawbacks in terms of objectives and goals. The following tries to give a picture about the variety of previous research, but due to its obscure quantity it should not be seen as complete.

Whereas scholars have criticised eco-labelling as being an adjusted tool following the logic of economic dynamics and is thus “in the market but not of it” (Taylor, 2004), studies doubting eco-standard and labelling schemes’ environmental benefits in general, have become less significant (Thidell, 2009). Beside eco-labels’ inherent contradiction in terms of pursuing and appealing consumption, other critiques about the complexity to adequately gather data and evaluate the correlation among varying eco-labelling schemes and their environmental effectiveness are present. Hence, several eco-labelling operators (MSC, 2013), governmental (EC DG-Environment, 2004; OECD, 2005) and other actors such as academics (Öman, 2009; Gutiérrez, 2012) provide scientifically based evidence on the improvement of environmental performance through eco-labelling schemes. Even though it is sure that eco-labelling certification alone is unlikely to arrest environmental degradation, there seems to be no doubt about the importance of eco-labelling schemes for improving environmental quality (Nash, 2009). Thus, critique about eco-labelling in relation to evaluating environmental improvement lies on the fact that a) there is no common systematically method to quantify and report the degree of environmental merits and comparatively document the environmental effectiveness of the current 458 eco-labelling schemes and further that b) there are constraints in terms of isolating the eco-label induced impacts from those of other environmental measures (Thidell, 2009; OECD, 2005).

In the quest for a certain evaluation standardization of eco-labelling schemes in order to organise “the jungle of environmental data” (Boström & Klintman, 2014: 81), the question of whether to strive for a uniformity of eco-labelling criteria based on minimal standards or maintain them exclusively to highlight green pioneers, is highly debated (Boström & Klintman, 2014). As the latter is assumed to encourage “a race to the top” in terms of sustainable competition and innovation regarding the stimulation of larger corporations (First & Khetriwal, 2010), the former is endorsed to reduce potential barriers for the Chapter 3 Previous Research • 35 certification of SMEs in the global South, which are, for instance, identifiable within the sector of the forest industry and coffee-farming (Boström, 2011; Taylor, 2004), organic agriculture (Guthman, 2006) and eco-tourism (Klintman, 2012). Regarding companies in the global South, a lot of attention has been paid to the trade effects of labelling schemes in general and their implication of protectionism towards developing countries (Zarrilli & Vossenaar, 1997; OECD, 1997).

Beyond the discussed eco-labelling shortcomings and complications, there have also been quite a few studies on eco-labelling’s role and effectiveness in guiding consumers (Biel, 2004; Thidell, 2009; D‘Souza et al., 2006). Even though studies demonstrate that consumers often have limited knowledge about eco-labels (D‘Souza, et al. 2006; Nilsson et al., 2004), scholars with a focus on consumers purchase behaviour stated that eco-labelling schemes imply a positive effect by raising consumer awareness (Biel, 2004; Thidell, 2009; D‘Souza et al., 2006). Direct consumer behaviour change is often referred to in terms of market share growth or studies on consumers’ willingness to pay higher premiums for eco-labelled products. (Sammer & Wüstenhagen, 2006). Further, it is acknowledged that more results on ‘green’ consciousness and green purchase behaviour are needed to define eco-labelling’s impact on fostering green consumerism (Golden et al., 2010; Gallastegui, 2002).

Additionally, a great number of reports and studies have also examined the beneficial potential of eco-labelling in the light of market transformation (Potts et al., 2014; Golden et al., 2010; Global Ecolabelling Network, 2004). These studies, pointing to growing market share, indicate an increasing improvement of environmental performance by arguing that eco-labelling products are substituting conventional ones (Potts et al., 2014; Golden et al., 2010; Global Ecolabelling Network, 2004). However, literature regarding the determining factors about corporations and SMEs integration of eco-labelling is sparse (Gallastegui, 2002). Many studies investigate how and why larger firms and SME are greening their product innovations, which slightly touch upon eco-labelling schemes (Dangelico & Pujari, 2010; Rehfeld et al., 2007; Pujari, 2006). However, the focus remains here rather on the actual eco-innovation process and on the impact by a broader frame of environmental policy measurements than on deepening the determinants, impact or constraints for SMEs or corporations’ eco-labelling certification. Based on the findings of an EU Foundation Report (Hilton, 2005) about SME and Environmental Management System Audits, the scholars Crals and Vereeck (2005) try to highlight the problems for European SMEs to realize and integrate environmental management audits, sustainable code concepts and eco-labelling schemes. An exact distinction between these different environmental policy instruments’ impacts as well as empirical confrontation with SMEs without eco-labelling compliance is missing. Quite the contrary, there are many studies concentrating on the eco-label FCS and reveal with numerous empirical exam- ples the certification barriers and constraints of SME within the Global South as well as Europe and the US (Boström, 2011; Butterfield et al., 2005; Taylor, 2004). There are further studies focusing on one eco-labelling scheme and its impact on the producer’s side, though SME are not acknowledged or specifically distinguished (Thidell, 2009). 36 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Hence, data on eco-labelling schemes highlighting the impact on SME within Europe seems to be rather exceptional. Due to a numeral of challenging arguments towards their potentially beneficial function in response to consumer demand, market transformation, evaluation of environmental improvement and their implementation, eco-labelling schemes legitimacy seems to be critically scrutinized. On the one hand, further research in relation to these challenging arguments is needed to deepen the knowledge of their weaknesses. On the other hand, as eco-labelling schemes are in place, there is also the need to provide and reinforce tools to strengthen and make use of their beneficial potential.

This thesis will therefore firstly approach eco-labelling schemes as related to environmental benefits and thus as environmental policy instruments striving for improving environmental performance and conditions. Second, the focus will lie on the policy implementation of eco-labelling schemes in the frame of European SMEs. Thereby, this thesis will mainly contribute to filling the gap of knowledge about determining factors, benefits and constraints for European SMEs to realize and integrate Eco-labelling schemes and will thereby especially complement the knowledge derived from the FSC studies of Boström (2011), Butterfield et al. (2005) and Taylor (2004) as well as empirically deepen the study of Crals and Vereeck (2005). Thirdly, as this thesis has a focus on eco-labelling schemes from the perception of German coffee-processing SME (GCPS), the study stands in contrast to any previews studies in a twofold way. On the one hand, the study will give European SMEs stakeholders a voice within an eco-labelling policy evaluation, which seems to be unique in and of itself. This contributes to detecting the functionality of eco-labelling schemes’ rationality to greening consumption and production from a different perspective in general and will thereby offer a new theoretical conception to approach eco-labelling schemes sustainable dimension.

On the other side, the thesis covers an insight of coffee eco-labelling, which previous research has not yet covered. Their focus lies mainly on their influence on small scale coffee growers and reflection on embedded North-South power inequalities (Fridell, 2007; Bray et al., 2002). Further, there is a large amount of research which covers the development for coffee eco-labelling schemes with a perspective on the market (Ferraro et al., 2005), on consumers’ purchase conscience (Loureiro & Lotade, 2005) or on consumers’ willingness to pay premium prices (Sörqvist et al., 2013). There have also been critical reflections on eco-labelling schemes’ promotion of “sustainability”, which is here mainly covered by studies on the eco-labelling scheme Fairtrade (Granville & Dine, 2011; Bacon, 2010). With regard to that, the thesis’s intention of giving German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS) a voice to speak in the light of a policy evaluation will significantly contribute to widening the knowledge with regard to any previous research on eco-labelling schemes within the EU coffee sector. Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 37

CHAPTER 4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

To define and understand eco-labelling schemes in this distinctive context of German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS), they must first be placed in a larger theoretical context of environmental policy. Eco-labelling schemes are in general considered to interlink economic and social forces with the aim of improving environmental performance. To shed light on the underlying logic of eco-labelling schemes from a meta-theoretical perspective, this thesis draws on Ecological Modernisation Theory (EMT). This theory has as central tenet the compatibility and need for environmental protection through and within the economic cycle of production and consumption. Though, for the research’s purpose of conducting a policy evaluation, policy conceptions are also applied in order to frame eco-labelling schemes’ rationality from a political perspective. This implies, on the one hand, the inclusion of the EU’s policy conception on eco-labelling schemes, which is addressed in the “Integrated Product Policy” (IPP). On the other hand, the policy documents of each relevant ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes concerning coffee is laid out to cover eco-labelling schemes’ rationality from their individual labelling scheme perspective.

To begin with, the thesis will at first introduce the Ecological Modernisation Theory (EMT) to discuss and detect later eco-labelling schemes rationality in light of ecological modernisation.

4.1 ECOLOGICAL MODERNISATION THEORY (EMT)

By acknowledging modernisation’s detrimental effects on environment, but at the same time regarding modernity’s process as a contribution towards environmental improvement, EMT provides a differentiated view on the relation between economic growth and environmental protection. Based on Giddens’ definition of modernity1, EMT considers a transformation of the economic, political and societal sphere towards a further modernity as the trajectory for diminishing and eliminating environmental devastation. In other words, “all ways out of the ecological crisis will lead further into modernity“ (Mol, 1996: 305).

1 Modernity can be understood roughly as equivalent to “the industrialised world”, so long as it be recognized that industrialism is not its only institutional dimension (Giddens, 1991: 15). 38 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

From this perspective, environmental reforms and changes occur without altering the basic substance and structure on which “modernity” is established: “[S]uccessful environmental reform can exist even in an overall destructive late-modern, capitalist-industrialist society” (Mol et al., 2013: 17).Thus, EMT regards the steady increase of capitalist-industrialist society’s potential of sufficiency and efficiency as being able to reconcile a satisfactory economic performance and an environmentally good condition. Thus, if the environment and the economy are appropriately managed, they “are mu- tually reinforcing; and are supportive of and supported by technological innovation” (OECD, 1985: 10).

In this sense, modernity’s progress is seen as the cause and the trigger for environmental reform and change and can thus be regarded as a balancing act between modernisation’s potentials and limits for the enhancement of environmental quality. Even though this position remains highly contested, scholars of EMT are acknowledged for contributing a great deal of innovative notions and concepts to various perspectives of contemporary environmental policy-making. They positioned and captured in a coherent framework the fusion of economic dynamics and market-based instruments with environmental policy-making: from eco-taxes to green consumerism (Mol et al., 2013). In this regard, EMT provides also a theoretical conception on eco-labelling schemes, which outlines their contribution and functionality to act as an environmental reform towards modernity. However, to understand EMT at this stage, one has to take, first of all, EMTs historical roots and initial conception into account.

4.1.1 Ecological Modernisation in Practice and Theory

From the 1960s onward, the ecological crisis of the planet became a public concern and at that time newspapers began to report on environmental devastation, whether caused by polluted air, mass deforestation or catastrophes like Chernobyl. Since then, various disciplines have been capturing and documenting the steady increase of modern societies’ environmental degradation. Neo-Marxism and De-Industrialism theories had been steering the debate of environmental sociology, and scientific perspectives of de-modernisation or de-industrialisation then became dominant (Hajer, 1995; Mol & Spaargaren, 2000a). Similar to the radical environmental movements working on stopping the exploitation of resources in the 1970s, the scientific environmental debate within sociology postulated “that a fundamental reorganisation of the core institutions of modern society, was essential in entering a path of long term sustainable development” (Mol & Spaargaren, 2000: 19).

Opposed to that core of radical de-modernist ideas, in the beginning of the 1980s, scholars of environmental sociology and politics started to consider environmental change and improvement in accordance with modernity’s progress and adopt a different approach by seeking to understand and explain environmental reforms in terms of ad hoc responsive policy-solutions and end-of-pipe approaches. By applying new policy-making Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 39 strategies and the practise of “environmental frontrunner states”, which forced reconciling environment and economics, European social scientists shifted their attention significantly. Due to this development, scientific focus moved from explaining the cause of environmental degradation towards exploring and understanding the processes and dynamics of environmental reform, which led later to EMTs breakthrough within social science (Mol et al., 2013).

With respect to the influence of “environmental frontrunner states”, the basic idea of EMT had already been reflected within policy programs before. After Hajer, the roots of EMT can be even traced back to former documents like the “Limits of Growth” (1972). But the idea of EMT can also be found in later OECD or UNEP calls, as these intuitions already appealed for “the introduction of new policy-making strategies that focus on precaution and the internalization of environmental care in economic considerations” (Hajer, 1997: 97) in the 1970s.

In 1982, the German environmental social scientist Martin Jänicke stressed “the need to give modernisation processes a strong ecological twist” (Mol & Jänicke, 2009: 17) within the context of the German environmental policy debate and was thus the first to introduce the concept of “Ecological Modernisation Theory”. At the same time, another German environmental social scientist, Joseph Huber published his book “Die Unschuld der Ökologie“ (1987) and later established the terminology “Ecological Modernisation”. Attributed to the work of both, “Ecological Modernisation” was since then discussed within the discourses of environmental social science and environmental policy-making. Thus, basically driven by empirical and practical, institutional and ideological developments, EMT developed with a focus on modernity’s compliance with environmental reform as a complementary concept to previous studies on environmental degradation (Mol et al., 2013; Buttel, 2009).

However, Hajer argues here that Ecological Modernisation could only conquer the dis- cursive environmental policy and science sphere of the mid-1980s due to the establishment of secondary policy-making institutions of development and health such as the OECD and constant moderate environmental activity of NGOs such as the WWF within the arena of politics (Hajer, 1997). With respect to Hajer, Ecological Modernisation’s roots of origin have been positioned in the environmental discourse of global policy elites. Due to the popularized conception of sustainable development by major events as for instance the Brundtland Report “Our Common Future” (1987) and the UNECD conference in Rio (1992), the studies of EMT became mainstream. Largely based on the work of Arthur Mol and Gert Spaargaren, EMT became explicitly embedded as a social theory and finally included within the realm of environmental social science (Mol et al., 2013).

EMTs broad support for the conception of developing sustainability by “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (WCED, 1987) reflects EMTs dominant status, as being regarded as the most legitimate thought to address environmental policy issues. Since circa 1990, for 40 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU instance, the governments of Germany, Netherlands or the UK have directed their national environmental policy plans towards the thought of ecological modernisation (Mol et al., 2013; Hajer, 1997). Environmental policy plans demonstrate that along the outline of national strategies for the regulatory management of environmental problems, “[the governments] carefully position themselves within the context of the perspective of ‘sustainable development’ as proposed by Our Common Future” (Hajer, 1997: 9). In accordance to that development, the conceptualisation of modernity’s progress towards environmental reform gained wide acceptance and attractiveness within the field of governance, but also achieved broad popularity within the academic field of empirical studies and theoretical debates (Mol et. al, 2013).

Against this background, EMT has to be distinguished between its application and purpose of (a) an analytical conception and theory, and (b) as a political model and policy strategy. Whereas the latter has a prescriptive/normative character and is applied to promote and orient environmental policy programs, the former offers an explanatory framework through its descriptive character to theoretically capture the interrelation of modernity and environmental concerns as well as comprehend environmental policy instruments and interventions (Mol et al., 2009). The gap between ecological modernisation as a political model and an analytical exploratory framework is narrow as its political praxis and scientific literature is intertwined, “though the analytical value of the concept is not always paralleled and furthered by its political ambitions” (Leroy & Tatenhoven, 2000: 15).

In that sense, the thesis will use the theory of “Ecological Modernisation” as an analytical exploratory framework to put the contemporary coffee eco-labelling schemes of ISO Type I and Type I-like as well as EU's eco-lablling policy conception into a broader theoretical context of environmental policy and thus receive a deeper comprehension on the rationale of environmental policy instruments in the manner of eco-labelling schemes. However, before exploring the underlying context and logic of eco-labelling schemes from a the meta-theoretical perspective of EMT and detect thereby eco-labelling schemes embedding, the following will provide a deeper look into the theory in order to understand later how “the dirty and ugly industrial caterpillar will transform into a[n] ecological butterfly” (Huber in Spaargaren & Mol, 1992: 334) by eco-labelling schemes.

4.1.2 The Transformation of the Industrial Caterpillar

The Techno-Corporatist Conception

As stated above, the concept of “Ecological Modernisation” opposes Neo-Marxist and De- Industrialist de-modernist approaches that were prevalent in the 1970s and early 1980s and can be regarded within a wider innovation-oriented policy approach to combat environmental degradation. Thus, in contrast to Neo-Marxism and De-Industrialism, both founding fathers of EMT argue for environmental reform by rethinking and renovating Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 41 the relation between state and market, while remaining within the framework and par- adigm of the modern market economy and welfare state.

Their arguments are based on the shortfall of European states to appropriately resolve and address environmental degradation and with their work thus point to the failures of European environmental policy-making. At that time, European governments tried to address the negative side effects of the ongoing process of economic growth by direct regulations of control and command. Thus, to effectively address environmental protection in relation to economic growth, Jänicke and Huber stress the need for re-developing the relation between the state and the market in order to make environmental reform better adapted to the needs and conditions of capitalist industrialist societies. At the same time, they place equal emphasis on the need for progress in the sector of technologies. As the current industrial mode of production is seen as the major source of environmental devastation, improvements and innovations in the technological sector are regarded as key components for responding to the environmentally detrimental effects of the modernisation process and reducing the environmental impact of growth. In that sense, both authors reflect on the European environmental politics of promoting curative end-of-pipe technologies in the early 1970s, and its development towards integrated and preventive technologies in the late 1980s and the appeal to turn further towards new environmental policy-making which fosters resource-efficient and precautionary innovation (Mol et al., 2009).

While Jänicke refers, in his earlier work, to the state as the responsible motor for a progressive technology-switch towards sustainability by policy intervention, Huber regards economic actors as initiators for propelling innovation and progress in environmental technologies (Leroy & Tatenhoven, 2000; Mol, 1996).

To have first a closer look at Jänicke, he argues for an “innovative dual structure of the state as a majority legitimated bureaucratic mechanism of intervention and an initiator of processes of negotiation” (Jänicke, 1993: 15). Environmental crisis therefore strives for and necessitates the change of democratic institutions, which Jänicke outlines in his recent work as “a decentralized and consensus-oriented policy model, that focuses the central state on strategic task and transfers detailed regulation more strongly to decentralized actors” (Jänicke, 2009: 35). According to Jänicke, these elements of “political modernisation” (Jänicke, 1993) are the essential core of creating innovation-friendly mechanisms in environmental policy and refer in a broader picture to the renovation and reinvention of environmental policy approaches. “Environmental innovators in particular often prefer not to wait until a suitable policy has been passed and enacted […], but often rely instead on the government’s recognition that a problem exists and on the early phases of policy formulation” (Jänicke, 2008b: 8).

Further, Jänicke stresses that fostering eco-innovations and supporting their diffusion stands to have the largest potential for achieving improved environmental performance. However, as the governments still provide the legal framework for promoting the 42 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

“greening” and the acceleration of technical modernisation, in the sense of Jänicke, it is the task of the governance to increase the attractiveness towards eco-innovation investments and raise their competitiveness, especially with regard to ‘big polluters’ (Jänicke, 2008a; Jänicke, 2008b). Hence the supposed ecological-economy win-win solution of Ecological Modernisation requires political support. Here, Jänicke calls for the need of governmental structural solutions to push resistant big polluters and challenge them using “a more conflict-oriented approach that increases pressures for environmental innovation under the conditions of growing complexity and insecurity” (Janicke, 2008a: 564).

Even though Huber’s initial concept differs from Jänicke’s idea of “political modernisation”, one could say that Huber’s recent work also points, from another angle, to the idea that governmental structural solutions such as “the rise of ‘smart regulation’” (Jänicke, 2008a: 564) are regarded to hold a large potential for environmental improvement. Huber’s switch from a focus on environmental degradation to sustainability depends, on one hand, upon the process of ‘ecologization of economy’ (Mol, 1996: 306) and upon the ‘economization of ecology’ (Mol, 1996: 306) on the other. Whereas the former refers to reorienting and redirecting physical and organisational economic practises of production and consumption into more environmental sound ones, the latter points to an economic valuation of the environment (Mol, 1996).

The prerequisite of the formation and integration of these two equally valued domains is what Mol later calls the “emancipation of an ecological rationality and an ecological sphere” (Mol, 1996: 306). Huber, by contrast, considers an incorporation and integration of ecological values into economic dynamics and strategies while economic decisions and instruments are applied and introduced to environmental politics. In his notion, the market strives on itself for technological progress and innovation in environment, and he favours an environmental policy-making that addresses a transfer of governmental responsibilities to the economic actors, so that “the dirty and ugly industrial caterpillar will transform into a[n] ecological butterfly” (Huber quoted in Spaargaren & Mol, 1992: 334).

Although he mentions that “legal foundations of environmental policy and regulations by environmental authorities are in principle absolute indispensable” (Huber, 2009: 50), he considers governmental policy interventions - what he calls ‘environmental bureaucratization’ (Huber, 2009) - to be suppressive effects and obstacles towards environmental reform. In this regard, environmental governance in the Huberian sense should merely imply governmental interferences to improve the encouragement and enforcement of the establishment of lead markets for environmentally sound technology and innovation. This view stands still in contrast to Jänicke’s suggestion where the emphasis on governmental structural solutions is of importance. At the same time, Jänicke’s recent work converges Huber’s approach as he remarks that “a strategy of ecological modernisation will begin with clear target data, but with ‘soft’ instruments and regard regulations and official directives as the very last resort” (Jänicke 2008b: 7). Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 43

Hence, even though they differ about governance’s role, it can be concluded that both promote the basic assumption that “economic growth and the resolution of ecological problems can, in principle, be reconciled” (Hajer, 1997: 26). Thus, either with a focus on economic or governmental structures solutions, both specifically address the market as the site to stimulate eco-innovations in order to alter the mode of production, increase environmentally benign goods and contribute to sustainability. Regarding Jänicke’s and Huber’s focus on economic-technical transformation towards environmental innovation, stimulated and supported by technological inventions, ecological modernisation is often applied to environmental policy instruments as eco-restructuring, eco-management, etc. According to Hajer (1997), their initial concept of “all ways out of the environmental crisis lead us further into modernity” (Mol, 1996: 305), approached by controlled, technology-based and innovation-oriented policy strategies can be described as a “techno-corporatist” notion of EMT (Spaargaren & Mol, 2000; Jänicke, 2008b). As their technocratic approach concentrates mainly on discussing the requirements for changing economy’s production side, there is no room left for environmental policy approaches considering and targeting the consumption side.

Therefore, the thesis will turn now to the scholars Mol and Spaargreen, which have paved the way in terms of approaching the notion of EMT by focussing on the other important element of the detrimental cycle of growth: the consumption side of economy.

The Reflexive Socio-Institutional Conception

Derived by and based on the techno-corporatist variant of EMT, Mol’s and Spaargaren’s main prerequisite for environmental improvement is also founded on the assumption that a transformation and renewing of the state-market relation is necessary for reconciling economic growth and ecological solutions. Beyond the restructuring of central institutions in order to overcome “environmental bureaucratization” (Huber, 2009) and create innovation-friendly incentives and dynamics in the market, Mol and Spaargaren include a third dimension of “reflexivity”. This is argued to partially refer to Ulrich Beck’s work about reflexive modernisation and risk society. (Buttel, 2000). The reflexive dimension has been introduced with regard to ‘new’ environmental problems like global warming through which a shift towards a global level of well-founded developing coalitions between environmental scientists, environmental movements and governmental institutions appeared. Following Mol, this kind of environment-induced global societal development and alteration within industrial modern societies can “no longer be interpreted as mere window-dressing” (Mol, 1996: 2).

It must be framed as aggregating processes of social practices in the sense of institutional reorganisation and striving towards a “fundamental ecological restructuring of late modern society” (Mol, 1996: 2). In Beck’s notion, reflexive modernity opposes and reforms earlier established practices and institutions and thus he “refers to the ‘self-confrontation’ of modern society due to its self-endangerment” (Spaargaren, 2000a: 62), which Mol and Spaargaren apply to ecological modernisation. In that sense, the progress of modernity 44 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU is seen (like by Huber and Jänicke) both, the cause and the trigger for environmental reform. Though, with the dimension of reflexivity, ecological modernisation must face itself in order to improve environmental performance by transforming institutions and social practices (Mol, 1996).

Modernity, in that case, is thought as being capable to identify and resolve environmental problems through the process of critical and rational self-confrontation, which is referred to the process of “reflexive modernisation” (Mol, 1996: 303).

Beyond the dimension of a “reflexive modernity” (Mol, 1996: 302), Mol and Spaargaren add a further component to their conception of EMT. After Mol, the ecological rationality can further not exclusively be considered as being solely enclosed by the rationality of economy, as the processes of reflexive modernisation embrace and contain an alteration and restructuring of the advanced industrialized society as a whole. Thus, Mol and Spaargaren’s notion of “Ecological Modernisation” integrates the idea of an emancipated ecological sphere, which is conditioned through a “concomitant articulation of an independent ecological rationality” (Mol et al., 2013: 18) by the economic but also by the further added public and political sphere (Mol et al., 2013).

Based on Huber’s approach of an incorporation of ecological values and economic dynamics, Mol and Spaargaren regard first of all the ecological rationality as a sphere of emerging and growing independence, since environmental concerns have started to gain the same attention and standing as economic ones. Beyond the economic sphere, they regard the public and political sphere likewise as rationalities striving for modernisation towards environmental improvement, for the sake of their own interest in keeping the world alive. Thus, the political and public sphere increasingly articulate environmental concerns as matters of great importance, which gives the ecological sphere weight. Still, ecology rationality has to be regarded as intertwined within the organisation of production, but as mentioned above, also as an emancipated sphere with its own domain and therefore independently interlinked to all other spheres involved in the mode of production (Spaargaren, 2000a).

According to that, Mol and Spaargaren propose a model of four distinguished spheres (see Figure 9 on the next page) and thereby shift the focus from Huber and Jänicke’s approach of environment-induced change by a merely economic-technical modernisation to an ongoing process of developing “a specific set of social, economic and scientific concepts that make environmental issues calculable and – by doing so – facilitate the ‘integration of ecological rationality’ as a key variable in social decision making”(Hajer quoted in Spaargaren, 2000a: 24). Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 45

Figure 9. Ecology’s Emancipation (Source Spaargaren, 2000: 53).

With regard to Jänicke’s and Huber’s essentially technocratic concept of EMT , Mol and Spaargaren have complemented and transformed the theory through the application of the notion of modernity’s reflexive progress and the introduction of a public (socio-ideological) and political sphere. According to Hajer, Mol and Spaargaren’s concept can therefore also be distinguished and considered as a “reflexive” (socio-institutional) variant of EMT, in which environment and thus ecological rationality moves “from the periphery to the core of processes of social change” (Mol, 1996: 304).

In other words, Mol’s and Spaargaren’s attempt to introduce social theory and give the environment space in relation to other spheres of society, contributes to widen ecological modernisation’s picture of a bare technocratic fix and opens the theory up to grasp environmental policy instruments such as eco-labelling schemes. “The broader sociological debate on […] modernisation is taking into account notions of reflexivity that specifically refer to the (environmental) sub-politics that come along with and help to shape the socio-technical changes in production and consumption cycles that are required to carry us over into a more sustainable modernity“ (Spaargaren, 2000a: 65; Jänicke, 2008b).

Mol and Spaargaren postulate, in contrast to Huber and Jänicke, that the modernisation of the production mode cannot solely be argued and decided in relation to the logic and rationality of the economic sphere, the market. The economic sphere is in need of a counterpart to acknowledge its dependency on a functioning healthy ecological system as: “economic mechanism, institutions and dynamics will always follow economic logics and rationalities, which implies they always will fall short in fully articulation environmental interest and pushing environmental reforms, if they are not constantly paralleled and propelled by environmental institutions and environmental movements” 46 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

(Mol, 2001: 211). At the same time, Spaargaren argues further that an ecological criterion in itself cannot be applied as an optimum above all other rationalities, as procedures and norms of the ecological sphere are gaining relative autonomy vis-à-vis economical, socio-cultural and political rationality (Spaargaren, 2000a).

In that sense, an emerging scientific sophistication of eco-innovations and technology is still seen as a significant tool for steering and acting against environmental degradation. But Mol and Spaargaren regards the role of the economic and ecological sphere as always being in a balanced interrelation with the political and public (socio-ideological) sphere. “This intertwinement of economic and ecological rationalities should not prevent us from noting that concepts like ‘the polluter pays principle’ or the ‘precautionary principle’ stem from the interrelation with the political and socio-cultural sphere respectively” (Spaargaren, 2000a: 49). To make this point more clear, especially Spaargaren stresses keeping in mind that the consumption mode, and thus the interrelation to the political and public (socio-cultural) sphere, has to be taken into account as an integral part of altering the industrial production mode towards an enhanced environmental performance. Thus, the conditions for a critical and rational self-confrontation leading to reflexive modernisation progress cannot be only reduced to or derived from the intertwinement of the economic sphere and ecological sphere (Spaargaren, 2000a).

In that sense, Mol and Spaargaren, with their ‘reflexive socio-institutional’ notion of Ecological Modernisation, provide a perspective that also acknowledges elements of non-institutional and sub-political actors in order to “tame the global treadmill of capi- talism” (Mol, 2001: 93) and thereby provide a base to grasp environmental transformation processes in the light of modernity also from the consumption side. In that respect, their reflexive conception provides a wider defined strategy of environmental reform, which considers environmental change and improvement also in relation to citizens as consumers. That being said, the following section will remain within the frame of EMT, though it will only further explore its perspective on the consumption side of economy and introduce thereby its theoretical conception of eco-labelling schemes.

4.2 THE CONSUMPTION SIDE OF THE INDUSTRIAL CATERPILLAR

Especially Spaargaren’s recent work (in collaboration with different scholars) acknowledges the crucial role of citizens as consumers in relation to eco-innovations in the utility sector, which has been so far neglected by ecological modernisation’s notion of technological optimism. Spaargaren stresses that environmental innovations and technology can be applied or misused in profoundly different ways. Due to that, their contribution to the enhancement of environmental performance is accompanied by and dependent on the consumer’s use of eco-innovations and access to green utilities. In relation to that, Spaargaren deepens the ‘reflexive socio-institutional’ notion of EMT by considering how Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 47 actors on the end of the supply chain are conditioning the altering of the production mode. Thus, the focus is on the consumption modus, which implies citizen-consumers’ everyday application, usage and valuing of green products, services and technologies, like drinking a cup of eco-labelled coffee (Spaargaren, 2000b; Spaargaren & Vliet, 2000).

“When studying the modes of production, provision, access and use of the products and services that are used by domestic agents to pursue more sustainable domestic routines, one can avoid most of the pitfalls of, for example, those (economic) perspectives on consumption that focus almost exclusively on single products, made available and acquired primarily in the market mode of consumption” (Spaargaren, 2000b: 326).

To step out of focus of the ‘production-oriented techno-corporatist’ perspective of ecological modernisation progresses, Spaargaren widens the fundamental principles of EMT to access the consumption mode and thus give room to consider environmental reform which includes citizen-consumers. Thereby eco-labelling schemes policy instruments are, among others, introduced as a distinct contribution to environmental reform within the ‘reflexive social-institutional conception’ of reconciling economic growth and environmental solutions.

4.2.1 Citizen-Consumers’ Environmental Authority

Based on Giddens’ (1991) model of social practises2, Spaargaren discusses environmental change and reform from the perspective of the citizen consumer3. At first, Spaargaren points out that in the light of new emerging globalising dynamics4, the traditional roles and interrelations of economic, political and social-cultural rationality have been affected. Due to these constitutive factors, which are caused by globalisation, a combination of public and private actors’ authoritative involvement has increased on the local, national and global scale. These authoritative involvements are considered a general intensification of non-state authority (Spaargaren, 2000b; Spaargaren & Mol, 2008).

With respect to environmental reform, the phenomenon of non-state authority is trans- ferred to the level of environment and three types of non-state environmental authority are distinguished here. Following Spaargaren, all three types of environmental authority

2 Giddens defines social practices as the expression of human actor’s individual lifestyle, which is at the same time embraced with the structure’s system of provision. Based on Giddens’ (1991) model of social practises , Spaar- garen has elaborated a model of consumption practices to investigate the consumption cycle with the attempt to avoid lapses into either an exclusively subjectivist lifestyle based or a predominantly objectivist rules- and resource-based account of consumption (Spaargaren, 2000b). 3 Following the premise of globalisation processes like denationalisation, privatisation, etc., ecological modernization theory regards the distinction between the roles of citizenship and consumership as blurred. Thus, new areas of power and authority outside the political system arise and offer the opportunity to exert citizenship, which also directly refers to the economic rationality (Spaargaren, 2000b). 4 The rise of globalized production networks and of global societal networks in combination with a decrease of governmental institutions’ regulatory autonomy and a transformation from government to governance (Spaar- garen& Mol, 2008). 48 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU assign different roles and positions to citizen-consumers in the greening of globalising consumption, which can be considered interrelated with each other and still a contribution to environmental reform itself (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008).

Within the first concept of non-state environmental authority, so-called “ecological citizenship” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 350), the citizen-consumer is addressed and empowered to participate in and shape political discourses on sustainable development. “Ecological citizenship” then focuses primarily on the overt and explicit ecological commitments of citizen-consumers in the political sphere” (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010: 1891). In contrast to that, the second concept, “political consumerism”, refers to citizen-consumers’ power relations within the realm of the market and consumption. “Political consumerism” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 350) mainly addresses citizen-consumers’ purchase power, which for instance implies eco-labelling schemes policies. This type of non-state environmental authority targets the production chain in a political purpose and can thereby be framed as “political forms that connect the environmental activities of upstream economic actors of production and consumption chains and networks” (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010: 1893).

Whereas “ecological citizenship” formulates citizen-consumers’ environmental authority in closest relation to the state, and “political consumerism” defines environmental authority in market context, the third concept, “lifestyle politics” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 350), refers to the citizen-consumers’ private and personal moral commitments and responsibilities in relation to their everyday ordinary (consumption) routines. Thus, “lifestyle politics” goes beyond the market and the state, defines environmental authority in the context of civil society and addresses citizen-consumer choices as ‘individualist’ policies towards environmental change (Spaargaren & Mol 2008; Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010).

In this regard, one can state that citizen-consumers are a decisive factor for the (efficient or inefficient) utilization of environmental resources within the limits of (eco) politics and (eco) technology. Thus, on the one hand, citizen-consumers have to be regarded as decisive “agents of change” (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010) through their consumption practices. But on the other hand, their environmental authority role and position also has to be considered in relation to the state’s, market’s and private sphere’s systems of provision. That means that the citizen-consumer has to face different forms of given resources and provision in each of its authoritative roles and positions (as of ecological citizenship, political consumerism and lifestyle politics). In relation to ecological citizenship, global rights and responsibilities, participation in global politics and in shaping the discourse of green consumption practices are dependent on the provision of the state. Interrelated to that, the market’s distribution and provision of eco-products and services, sets the potential of political consumerism. Furthermore, the private mode of provision, related to lifestyle politics, is based mainly on the individual’s ‘household’ (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008; Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 49

Against that background, Spaargaren highlights citizen-consumers’ empowering position and authoritative role in the greening of global consumption in interrelation with the economic, political and public (socio-cultural) provider sphere. Thus, the greening potential of the production-consumption chain potential must be regarded in relation to all three forms of citizen–consumer oriented environmental authority. To facilitate this greening potential of the entire production consumption chain, Spaargaren stresses that the citizen-consumers’ role as agents of global environmental reform has to be put more in focus (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). To this end, Spaargaren calls for a new normativity of global environmental politics in order to enable the three ideal forms and engage citizen-consumers as agents of global environmental change:

“Improving citizen-consumer involvement in the state mode of provision will result in a further democratization of (post-national) environmental policies, from the local Agenda 21 levels, up to the regional (EU), and global levels of politics. Increasing the impact of political consumerism in global environmental change means getting consumers actively engaged with the upstream processes and with decisions previously left only, or primarily, to global greening of consumption is possible to global market actors. Enhancing the politics of lifestyle change that result from and feed the greening of everyday life consumption practices will release the politics of greening consumption from their individualist image.” (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010: 1901).

4.2.2 Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism: Eco-Labelling Schemes

With regard to eco-labelling schemes, Spaargaren considers them a form of citizen- consumer environmental authority in the context of globalized markets. Thus, they are referred to in the concept of political consumerism and mainly discussed as volunteer “civil society-based environmental politics”, which address the necessity to empower citizen-consumers as the end-users of the production-consumption chain (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008; Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010).

“Where companies and business organisations are key-players at the up-stream end of globalising production–consumption chains, citizen–consumers are key-players at the lower-ends of these chains. For the (environmental) regulation of globalising production–consumption chains, the roles of citizen– consumers as the increasingly empowered end-users of services and products, turn out to be of crucial importance” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 354).

Thus, the greening of products by eco-labelling schemes is considered to enable citizen-consumers to act as decisive bottom-up actors for a greening of the production- consumption chains, and thus exert their market-based powers for a political purpose. Furthermore, Spaargaren points out that instruments of “political consumerism” such as eco-labelling schemes serve to do more than just give the consumer the possibility to 50 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU articulate power by purchasing products and influencing the up-stream actors of the global production-consumption chain. Eco-labelling schemes give citizens-consumers’ concern for sustainability a platform where they are “are articulated, translated and directed to providers in production–consumption chains, […]” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 357).

At the same time, through their application of political consumerism, eco-labelling schemes also provide an operational foundation for eco-innovative industries and providers of green products. Thus, citizen consumers’ purchase power in favour of eco-labelling schemes sustains and creates a field for greening economic growth and is regarded as a relevant source of progress in terms of ecological modernisation, beyond the triangle of technology, market and governance power. In conclusion, eco-labelling schemes are regarded as a wider strategy of “reflexive” ecological modernisation, which understands assigning citizen-consumers an active role in the market sphere. In that sense, eco-labelling schemes (are seen to) comprehend including and using citizen-consumers’ environmental authority and thus recognizing the importance and potential of citizen-consumers’ active engagement as agents of environmental change, with the goal of realizing the greening of production and consumption practices (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008; Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010).

“The emerging forms of citizen–consumer-based environmental authority have something to offer when understanding environmental reform in global modernity is at stake “(Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 359).

With this in mind, the thesis will now offer a critical view on “what eco-labelling schemes have to offer in the light of ecological modernisation”. In this regard, the thesis discusses the greening potential of citizen consumers’ environmental authority of political consumerism. Whether Jänicke and Huber, or Mol and Spaargaren, the theory of ecological modernisation has in general become subject to criticism for being “colonised by the economic and cultural system” (Mol et al., 2014: 13) and “cursed with an unflappable sense of technological optimism” (Mol et al., 2014: 13). This thesis will however not deepen the perspective of different critics from other schools-of-thought and research traditions in the field of environmental social sciences. Instead, it will critically reflect on the conception of citizen-consumers’ environmental authority with an emphasis on eco-labelling schemes’ call and invitation to act as agents of environmental change.

4.2.3 “Should We Leave it to the Environmental Authority?”

At first, the concept of thee environmental authority of political consumerism can be regarded as rooted in classical market theory. Even though Spaargaren and Mol have opened up the narrow efficiency-oriented and technocratic approach by Jänicke and Huber to improve environmental conditions, their “reflexive socio-institutional” response is determined within and relies on the structure of a capitalist-industrialist society. Hence, environmental reform in the light of EMT is in particular be considered Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 51 by concepts that follow the tradition of an invisible hand of demand and supply within the framework of infinite growth.

Thus, eco-labelling schemes as one strategy for greening consumption is based on the notion of following and sustaining the thought of perpetual economic growth. Instead of digging into the complexity of the incompatibility between an ecological and economic optimum, the thesis will focus further on eco-labelling schemes as an expression of exerting environmental authority. In that sense, the thesis only acknowledges that consumption and sustainability can be generally received to stand in contrast to each other, but concentrates solely on discussing eco-labelling’s function as a reputed tool of environmental authority.

Jänicke regards “political modernisation” as the prerequisite for environmental reform, which implies linking explicit ideas on innovative governance with an efficiency-oriented management of environmental reform. Thus, forms of environmental authority might at least be understood, but, with respect to his view of the political sphere, which is only developed for institutional actors. Thus, in his conception, there is no space for any environmental authority of citizen-consumers. Further, his companion Huber clearly dismisses any authoritative role of the citizen-consumer. He favours environmental reform via efficiency-oriented and technocratic practices, though he considers a transfer of governmental responsibilities to the economic actors to be necessary and indispensable for a successful accomplishment of environmental improvement.

Thus, in his notion of EMT, he acknowledges that consumer demand does indeed play a certain role, but he still sees no possibility to give or recognize citizen-consumers in an active authoritative role as “it is manufacturers of end-products […] who are in the position to effectively implement supply chain management” (Huber quoted in Spaargaren & van Koppen, 2009: 84).In that sense, the greening of consumption and production should neither bother the consumer nor is it of governance business and should preferably be arranged “‘behind the back of the end-users’ with major players in industry (applying PPP-strategies) and politics (providing level playing fields) taking the lead” (Spaargaren & van Koppen, 2009: 84).

However, from the perspective of Mol and Spaargaren, it seems that progress towards modernity of environmental change can only be addressed by taking all spheres of capitalist late-modern society into account. Depending on the consumer’s mode of use and access to products, consumption constructs the greening of production in a very prag- matic manner. Thus, to achieve sustainability, environmental reform cannot be solely left, in a Huberian sense, to a faith in technology and provider-oriented market-based concepts. In that respect, the thesis agrees with the idea of a reflexive socio-institutional approach, as this provides a more holistic picture of environmental reform through the inclusion of the individual and regards thereby the greening of production-consumption chains as being not only decided by market-forces or at any level of governance alone. 52 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

However, the thought of eco-labelling schemes as one reflexive strategy of ecological modernisation to green consumption lacks the acknowledgement that the implementation and use of purchase power in a political purpose anticipates an idealistic view on the citizen-consumer itself.

On one hand, it requires that citizen-consumers are capable of understanding themselves as the primary guardian of the environment as a public common good. This implies ensuring that citizen-consumers gain awareness of their role but also gain access to make use of their role. With respect to eco-labelling schemes, this would call for education about the function beyond eco-labelling schemes. But furthermore, it also requires making eco-labelled products available to everyone and affordable enough so that individuals have no restrictions in exerting their role, leading to the dominance of an equal distribution of authority. However, even if the elements of access like price are blinded out, each citizen-consumer might still trade-off against other factors while purchasing goods.

On the other hand, eco-labelling schemes, as one strategy to green consumption, require that citizen-consumers all have the same understanding and values, in order to protect and preserve the environment as a common good. Even if citizen-consumers might be equally enabled to act as concerned end-users, citizen-consumers will still differ in their perception about what environmental quality or sustainability implies. Both are dependent on each individual and society’s perceptions and thus it depends on citizen- consumers’ social construction what sustainability or a good quality of environment looks like. Thus, if the environment is at stake, should we leave it to the individuals to exert their environmental authority of purchase power and to their value of what sustainability entails?

The above-gathered arguments might also be taken into consideration when analysing the product providers, which enable citizen-consumers to exert environmental authority of purchase power. First of all, companies need the provision and resources to implement eco-labelling schemes in order to invite citizen-consumers to take on their responsibility. Thus, it is left again to the state to provide equal playing fields for green eco-innovation, which makes the implementation of eco-labelling schemes and thus the greening of products equally accessible. Also here, access to eco-labelling schemes is not the only reason for product providers to apply eco-labelling schemes. Again, product providers also have to consider trade-off decisions between economic and sustainable aims while designing and producing their goods.

Simultaneously, it necessitates companies creating and providing sustainable goods with a perception and understanding of sustainable quality that leads to an improvement of environmental performance. Again, the level of environmental quality that the product provider is aiming for is dependent on the eco-labelling schemes’ design, which in return relies on the social perception of “environmental quality”. Thus, an implementation of eco-labelling schemes does not by default cause any environmental Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 53 efforts. If the environment is at stake, should we leave it to the producers and product providers to imply environmental authority of purchase power and to their value of what sustainability entails?

By having demonstrated the limits and potentials of eco-labelling schemes as a reflexive reform strategy to green the consumption and production chain, the following section will shed light on eco-labelling schemes as strategically policy conceptions. Thus, the thesis will now depart from EMTs meta-theoretical perspective on eco-labelling schemes and will firstly illustrate what eco-labelling schemes have to offer as a voluntary environmental product policy instrument within the EU. Subsequently, the thesis will introduce the conceptual policy background of each relevant coffee ISO Type I and Type I-like scheme5 to finally discuss eco- labelling schemes policy conception in light of EMT and detect their parallels.

4.3 THE RATIONALITY BEHIND ECO-LABELLING SCHEMES: AN EU POLICY PERSPECTIVE

In general, voluntary consumer-oriented and market friction-based environmental policy instruments are only legislatively covered and legally guided by the “Code of Good Practice” and “Condition on Membership” within the World Trade Organization's (WTO's) Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) agreement. Without going into detail on global trade politics, according to the TBT-agreement, any regulations, standards and procedures of eco-labelling scheme instruments are to be adopted and applied without causing obstacles to international trade (Kerr & Gaisford, 2007). Thus, as stated before in Chapter 1, eco-labelling schemes are considered to comply with the ISO standards preferably of Type I and Type I-like schemes, though any compliance with ISO or other institutions is not legally binding. However, verifying an eco-labelling scheme by ISO or other external sources will enhance its reliability (UNOPS, 2009).

In the frame of the EU legislative, eco-labelling schemes are appealed by the Integrated Product Policy (IPP) as policy possibility to reduce product environmental impact. Eco- labelling schemes are addressed merely in relation to the EU’s own labelling strategy. However as the IPP dominantly attempts to green products by any volunteer policy product instruments, it serves to outline a general rationality of eco-labelling schemes within the EU. In the following, the EU’s general policy logic beyond eco-labelling schemes will be illustrated through an emphasis on the preparatory “Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy” and its follow-up, the “Communication on Integrated Product Policy”.

First of all, the basic document of the IPP, the Green Paper of the IPP, acknowledges all three types of eco-labelling schemes as defined and distinguished by the ISO taxonomy,

5 Section 1.5 explores and defines the criteria ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes, but can be in short summed up by the umbrella term “positive voluntary environmental product policy instruments”. 54 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU and on that basis provides and expresses a compilation of goals and objectives for eco-labelling schemes within the EU in general.

“ISO has already developed a framework of distinct types of environmental labelling, differing in degree of life cycle thinking and methodology, inter alia. This is an important and useful base for systems, notably eco-labels” (COM(2001) 68 final).

Eco-labelling schemes discussed within the IPP’s Green Paper are voluntary certifications of public or private third-party bodies (ISO Type I and Type I like) and share as main goal and objective to indicate and award products with a relatively higher value of sustainability in contrast to similar products with the same functionality and within the same competitive sector. Eco-labelled products thus set by their high sustainable value a higher standard, which other products of the same criteria are measured against: “they have important secondary effects in influencing the further development of the whole range of products. There are cases where the eco-label standard later became a general product standard” (COM(2001) 68 final).

Therefore, the IPP Green Paper for instance suggests and promotes extending eco-labelling’s scope so that eco-labelling schemes cover as many products as possible. The application of non-EU eco-labelling Type I schemes is thereby of importance as is stated in the Communication on “Integrated Product Policy”: “[O]ther labels may, in the future, through equivalence arrangements or new developments, play a significant role in providing such consumer information” (COM (2003) 0302 final).

Further, the labelling should provide easily accessible information about the product’s environmental quality, which is reliably evaluated by expert assessment. In this way, labelling is meant to give consumers accurate, credible and understandable product information and, due to this, raise consumer awareness about the differences between similar products in relation to their environmental impact. Furthermore, the Green Paper on IPP stresses that consumers’ “preference for environmentally friendly products is the major driving force for companies to reflect upon ways to green their products and win market shares through innovation and a better design” (COM (2001) 68 final). Based on the notion that a certain segment of consumers considers environmental quality as a purchase selection criterion, eco-labelling schemes have the purpose to stimulate consumers’ purchase behaviour to favour products of a relatively higher value of sustainability. “The stronger this demand will be, the faster and more massive will be the shift towards a more sustainable consumption” (COM (2001) 68 final). Thus, labelling is clearly stated to be more than a voluntary tool designed to regulate, clarify and justify products’ environmental marketing.

On the basis of being labelled more environmentally friendly, a product obtains a further purchase quality in the marketplace beyond price, performance, etc. In this sense, eco-labelling schemes use market mechanisms with the purpose of shifting market demand Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 55 from conventional products to sustainably rewarded products. Thus, eco-labelling schemes expect the industry to improve their environmental performance, according to the environmental quality of their products, when it affects their commercial interest.

“The improvement of brand image, the perspective of new markets and higher market shares – these, plus eventually anticipation of regulatory measures, might be listed as main interests. Image and market share both stand for the influence the consumer can exercise, whether the consumer is in the private or the public sector ” (COM (2001) 68 final).

To this end eco-labelling schemes are striving to create a market interest to obtain labelled products and thus shape incentives for manufacturers, producers and retailers to invest in, produce or design their products in a more environmentally sound manner, “so that the market moves in a more sustainable direction by encouraging the supply and demand of greener products” (COM (2003) 0302 final).

Besides the aim of creating pull factors6 in terms of image and market share, the IPP also suggests integrating environmental added cost into the product price as “the most powerful instrument to transform the market in favour of more environmentally friendly products and services is to correct these market failures according to the polluter pays principle by ensuring that the true environmental cost during the life cycle of products is integrated into the product price” (COM (2001) 68 final). However, internalising environmental externalities into the price of a product is stated in the Communication of Integrated Product Policy rather as the Commission's long-term goal and can yet not be regarded as a principal element of the rationality of EU’s eco-labelling schemes policy.

Still, the success of eco-labelling schemes depends in that sense on the extent and degree of the use of market forces. From this perspective, they are only effective if they can indicate certain market-pull factors, so that the improvement of environmental performance is considered more feasible. However, this is also dependent on the consumer’s acceptance and preference of eco-labelled products.

To this end, a green consumer demand – the power of consumer purchase choice, which is continuously stimulating the given potential for a market-driven environmental improvement of products – is a core aim and a decisive benefit for eco-labelling schemes’ ultimate goal: to contribute to sustainable consumption and production. Thus, the requirement for eco-labelling schemes’ success is their function as a reliable communication instrument and an advantageous competition tool.

“Once a product is put on the market, there is relatively little than can be done to improve its environmental characteristics. Equally, all design efforts will be in vain if consumers do not buy greener products or use them in an environmentally friendly way” (COM(2001) 68 final).

6 Market pull is when product ideas are produced in response to market forces. 56 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Thus, the main decision, so to speak, about a product’s environmental performance is taken at the design table of the business and in the shops. Therefore, the Green Paper of the IPP stresses the promotion of knowledge and the use of eco-labelling schemes to product providers and manufacturers so that they take the lead in environmentally benign products, but also to consumers in order to challenge the industry to improve their products’ environmental performance.

“The success of a product-oriented environment policy therefore depends on its implementation strategy, on identifying and using the most relevant drivers and the corresponding instruments to ensure a continuous improvement of the environmental characteristics of products within the framework of the Internal Market” (COM(2001) 68 final).

Thus, the EU stresses that a successful implementation of product-oriented environment policy such as eco-labelling schemes is of importance so that the policy can fulfil its function and goal: to contribute to sustainable production and consumption “by using so far untapped potential to improve a broad range of products and services” (COM(2001) 68 final).

Since the Green Paper and the Communication of IPP reveals eco-labelling schemes’ underlying strategic elements from a general point of view, it gives a broad picture on the rationality of market-friction and consumer-based voluntary environmental policy instruments. To gain insight on the underlying logic of the relevant coffee eco-labelling scheme, their policy mission and tactical components have also to be taken into account. Thus, the following illustrates all policies of ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes7 that are relevant for the German coffee-processing sector in Germany.

4.4 CLOSE-UP SHOT: ECO-LABELLING SCHEMES IN THE GERMAN COFFEE SECTOR

As stated above, this thesis focuses solely on ISO Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes within the German coffee sector. Thus, the following pertains to the eco-labelling schemes Fair Trade, UTZ, Rainforest Alliance and the EU-organic label. Except for the EU Organic label, all other three eco-labelling schemes are members of the ISEAL Alliance8. In collaboration with ISEAL, an international association for voluntary standard setting, these three eco-labelling schemes develop and ensure their Code of Conduct to create credibility and recognition for their schemes’ standards. The EU Organic label standards are covered by the legislative process within the EU.

7 ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes are defined and explored in section 1.5 and are determined as “[V]oluntary, multiple-criteria-based third party program that awards a license which authorizes the use of environmental labels on products indicating overall environmental preferability of a product within a particular product category based on life cycle considerations [ISO 14024:1999]. 8 The International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Allaince. Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 57

4.4.1 Fair Trade

Fair Trade’s Certification Policy Mission

The eco-labelling scheme Fair Trade is denoted as a product certification scheme and has as its central tenet the securing of greater equity and transparency within the conventional trade system in order to reduce poverty and contribute to enhancing sustainable development. To this end, Fair Trade labelling is fundamentally seen as an answer to the failures and shortcomings of conventional trade and the enhancement of conventional trade as a contribution to sustainable consumption and production (Fair Trade, 2009).To this end, the Fair Trade labelling scheme is regarded as encouraging manufacturers and product providers throughout the entire coffee trade chain to take the lead in turning to sustainable production by obtaining the Fair Trade label. Further, this ensures product providers promotion that their coffee trade has a positive impact for the producers at the end of the chain in a credible way.

Fair Trade labelling is also perceived to raise awareness and thereby enable citizens to take action in regard to the social, economic and environmental impact through their purchase choice. Backed by informed consumers’ purchase choice, Fair Trade labelled coffee products can provide security for an enhanced living quality by better trading and wage conditions as well as supporting community development and environmental stewardship. Fair Trade coffee products are regarded as products of rewarded and encouraged farming and production practices that are environmentally sustainable and are thus coffee products that contain an added value (Fair Trade, 2009). A demand for Fair Trade labelled coffee products supports marginalized producers and environmental conditions. But just a further growing demand for Fair Trade-labelled coffee products is considered to extend the impact for reforming the conventional trade. Thus, consumers’ purchase choice is seen to visibly articulate public support and thereby encourage actors along the whole chain of production. Furthermore, it enables Fair Trade as an organisation to widen their outreach to policy makers by working as advocates and campaigners, “to connect the aims of […] greater sustainability and justice” (Fair Trade, 2009: 4).

4.4.2 UTZ

UTZ’s Brand Policy Mission

The UTZ certification is referred to as a brand endorser that communicates and assures costumers and consumers of the coffee product’s added value of addressing social and environmental issues. As economic viability is seen as a crucial factor for long term sustainability, the UTZ scheme has its main emphasis on combining goof performance of economy, environment and social responsibility along the coffee supply chains in order to achieve sustainable production and consumption. To fulfil this goal, the UTZ scheme has set its target on coffee supply chains within the mainstream sector. Thus, the UTZ 58 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU scheme is intended to implement 'sustainable quality' on a large scale in the worldwide coffee market and make sustainability a product norm. By improving coffee farming’s quality, efficiency and management, the UTZ scheme focuses on the implementation of internationally recognized social and environmental practices, but also ensures producers better business opportunities: “Better price for a better product” (UTZ, 2007 ) Thus, the UTZ brand is seen as a credible tool for coffee companies to demonstrate their commitment and responsibility to sustainability as well as to meet the growing demand for environmental and social precaution, while operating in competitive, price-sensitive markets. In order to achieve this goal, the UTZ certification is regarded as providing an independent and credible way for coffee companies to claim rewarding sustainably grown coffee products and thus, taking action for environmental responsibility. Due to that, consumers can trust that their standards are met while purchasing UTZ-certified coffee products (UTZ, 2009; UTZ 2007). By the support and acknowledgement by costumers and consumers, the UTZ scheme is seen as leading to an enhancement across the entire coffee supply chain, towards sustainability. The scheme is stated to approach “the tipping point where sustainable farming is becoming the rule rather than the exception. As more major brands and retailers commit to sustainable sourcing, this process will accelerate” (UTZ, 2013).

4.4.3 Rainforest Alliance

Rainforest Alliance’s Seal Policy Mission

The Rainforest Alliance Certified seal is regarded as a trademark as it is “well known and well trusted as robust sustainability seals across the world”. Standing for environmental, social and economic sustainability, the Rainforest Alliance Certified seal is built on the idea of improving natural-resource-based economic activities and management. Thus, the Rainforest Alliance’s contribution to sustainable consumption and production is affected by supporting the transformation of coffee business practices into more sustainable manners and rewarding these coffee producers in their effort to produce coffee in accordance with the seal standards for social and environmental sustainability (Rainforest Alliance, 2015; Rainforest Alliance, 2014).

The Rainforest Alliance Certified seal is perceived to assure consumers that coffee products are produced in an environmentally and socially sound manner and to further give them the opportunity to use their consumer power and make informed purchase choices.

Thus, by enabling the consumer to make an informed purchase, the Rainforest Alliance seal is seen as a tool through which consumer power harnesses the market forces without interfering with free market decisions. Further, by providing enrolled coffee producers with the improvement of their sustainable performance and linking them with companies demanding a secure supply of sustainable coffee, the seal is considered to, on the one hand, give producers better market access and value for their coffee while protecting the Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 59 environment. On the other hand, businesses that collaborate with Rainforest Alliance producers can meet consumers’ growing demand for sustainably produced coffee and stand out from the competition. Furthermore, they can communicate authentically to their consumers about their products’ sustainability value and can demonstrate accountability and responsibility. Backed by consumer demand and purchase choice, Rainforest Alliance coffee products are regarded as shaping a dialogue between product providers and manufacturers along the supply chain and introducing and raising sustainable standards holistically throughout the entire coffee farm management (Rainforest Alliance, 2015; Rainforest Alliance, 2014).

4.4.4 EU Organic label

The EU’s Organic Label Policy Mission

Since the EU regulation on organic farming covers the legislative framework for the production and the labelling of organic food, the EU Organic label is operated under the Regulation (EC) 834/2007. Thus the EU Organic label has to be considered a public policy instrument for promoting and providing organic coffee products within the EU with the aim of enhancing sustainable growth.

In order to achieve this goal, the EU Organic label guarantees high standards of organic coffee production and offers consumers a simple and credible way to identify them as such. Furthermore it gives a visual identity to organic coffee farming production, which is seen as an overall system of food production that combines best environmental and climate action practices, a high level of biodiversity, the preservation of natural resources, and production standards. Due to this, organically labelled coffee products are considered to play a dual role, in which they, on the one hand, respond to consumer demand for organic coffee production and, on the other hand, stimulate the organic product market in order to contribute to the protection of the environment (Regulation (EC) 834/2007). Thus, the label’s objective, namely to improve the recognition of organic products through the provision of consumer information in all EU countries and provide consumers with the confidence that organic food is produced entirely in line with the EU Regulations, is built on the intention to promote a more resource-efficient and greener economy in order to enhance the sustainability of growth. In that way, the EU-organic label is considered to also comply with the general framework of the Europe 2020 Strategy which strives for a “Smart, Sustainable, and Inclusive Growth” (COM(2010) 2020 final).

60 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

4.5 DISCUSSION ON THE THEORETICAL CONCEPTIONS OF ECO-LABELLING SCHEMES

With regard to the above-illustrated ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes within the German coffee sector, one can note the differences between their policy missions. As a consequence, each eco-labelling scheme’s emphasis on how to tackle the greening of coffee products differs. Despite these differences within their broader mission picture and their tactical emphasis to achieve sustainability, they share the goal of contributing to sustainable coffee production and consumption. Secondly, they all strive to interlink economic and social forces by awarding and indicating products with environmental information, in contrast to similar products with the same functionality and within the same competitive sector. Thus, though they might have different features, their underlying logic is based on the same rationality of being a market friction-based and consumer-oriented volunteer environmental policy instrument with the final goal of creating products that contribute to sustainable production and consumption. By having a further look, they all imply that consumers’ purchase choices in favour of eco-labelled products is a key requirement to successfully accomplish their operations and achieve their goal. To make their common and divergent features more graspable, Figure 10 illustrates the main elements:

Figure 10. Comparative Chart on relevant ISO Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. Chapter 4 Theoretical Framework • 61

The short comparison of the coffee eco-labelling schemes of ISO Type I and Type I-like, with regard to their eco-labelling policy, demonstrated that despite their different em- phases and different missions, they still meet in the same rationality, share the same goals and moreover approach them by the same key component of consumers’ purchase choice. By comparing coffee eco-labelling schemes, they can be regarded as being in line with the goal, rationality and key elements of the general EU policy conception on positive voluntary environmental product policy instruments. The outline of the Green Paper on “Integrated Product Policy” and the Communication on “Integrated Product Policy” covered aspects with the same point of view as the coffee eco-labelling schemes of ISO Type I and Type I-like.

To this end, one can generally summarize that the EU policy conception as well as that all the concerning coffee eco-labelling schemes stress the importance of green consumer demand, as this continuously stimulates the given potential for a market-driven environmental improvement of products. Moreover, they all regard the contribution to sustainable consumption and production as their ultimate goal, which can only be fostered by a successful eco-labelling scheme implementation. Without going into any further detail about the EMT again, the above-discussed similarities also contain parallels to the greening of products within the conception of the “environmental authority of political consumerism”. There, eco-labelling schemes are seen as inviting citizen-consumers to act as decisive bottom-up economic actors in the process of greening the production-consumption chains. Further, Spaargaren stresses that the given environmental authority of political consumers has to be used to exert pressure from the lower ends of the supply chain, but also to sustain a field for the greening of growth, which implies acting as market-oriented instruments. In the light of ecological modernisation, eco-labelling schemes provide consumers with the “power” to make informed purchase choices and thus, consumer purchase power with a political purpose is again recognized as the key to realizing the common goal of contributing to sustainable consumption and production practices.

This implies that the discussed conceptual policy background of each relevant coffee ISO Type I and Type I-like scheme as well as the EU policy conception of eco-labelling schemes are following the notion of EMT. In that sense, they can be clearly stated as embedded within the EMTs realm to contributing towards sustainability by reconciling economic growth and environmental reforms. Secondly, they can be can be regarded as reflexive socio-institutional policy approaches of environmental authority. As all official eco-labelling scheme policy documents will be applied to outline the normative PTE-model of coffee eco-labelling schemes, the normative policy model in itself can be regarded as being based on the notion of the “environmental authority of political consumerism” and following the thought of EMT. 62 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

CHAPTER 5 EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

The gathered data obtained from the semi-structured interviews with stakeholders of German coffee-processing SMEs (GCPS) is presented below. In order to create a compre hensive and structured understanding, the empirical findings are represented and divided up into two categories. In the first part, the reader will receive a more general understanding about the business performance of the represented GCPS stakeholders. Furthermore, their performance in regard to and perception of ISO Type I and Type I-like coffee eco-labelling schemes1 will be introduced and the study will offer a deeper understanding of the later frequently used term “high quality coffee”.

The second part will present the empirical findings in accordance with the GCPS’ performance and perception of coffee eco-labelling scheme implementation. Thus, their commercial operation with eco-labelling schemes in connection to their own perceptions about eco-labelling schemes implementation are described separately. Beyond the structuring, the findings are illustrated in a neutral manner and not in the sense of interpretation. Thus, this chapter has the intention to leave room for an unbiased scrutiny by the reader.

5.1 GERMAN COFFEE PROCESSING SME— AN OVERVIEW

5.1.1 Business Structure

The GCPS stakeholder group is represented by coffee-processing companies with a company size ranging between 5 and 120 employees. The volume of green coffee bought via direct trade links or via green coffee traders ranges from 30 to 1000 tons yearly.

Their sale system is restricted to the borders of the EU. The distribution among different sales options varies among the represented coffee processing companies. Not one of these coffee-processing companies has an extra budget for advertisement, nor a budget, position or department related to Corporate Social Responsibility.

1 In the following, the paper often uses shorter descriptions or other variations for the term ISO Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, however refers to their original definition. Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 63

Figure 11 gives an overview on the business structure of the GCPS stakeholders:

Figure 11. German Coffee Processing SMEs.

5.1.2 High Quality Coffee

The term “high quality coffee” is used by each interviewed stakeholder as their main value indicator for categorizing and distancing their products from the mainstream coffee sector2. Each company defines “high quality coffee” with their own words and from their own perspective. Even if their expression differs, they commonly apply the term “high quality coffee” to define and determine a coffee product quality with the following main criteria: high quality taste, high purchase price and high sustainable or/ and artisanal cultivation. Further, the term high quality coffee has been also referred to as a coffee product with quality values like regional reference or ‘historical’ family business. Though this expressions varies between the companies.

It should be mentioned here that even though these three criteria match the expressions of all the five interviewed stakeholders, “high quality coffee” cannot be regarded as a generalized objective term, as each company has a subjective notion of its wording and a subjective expression about their coffee products’ quality.

Still, in the coffee business, “high quality coffee” classifies individual coffee products, which are all “above” mainstream taste and price class standards and thus commonly distinguish GCPS products from the mainstream coffee industry. According to the statement of all companies, importing high and good quality green coffee implies buying green coffee that is grown on a certain basis of sustainability. Furthermore, all companies indicate that high quality and high purchase price imply a higher added sustainable

2 The term mainstream coffee sector, also referred to as mainstream coffee industry, relates to the 80-90% global mass-produced and marketed coffee production. Roasters in this market segment are therefore known as ‘mainstream roasters’ (Global Trade Exchange, 2015). 64 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU value in contrast to mainstream eco-labelled coffee products. To what extent the grade of sustainability depends on the taste and price class of coffee is a dispute on its own. However, the interviewed stakeholders basically framed high quality coffee as a product with a higher added sustainable value, since quality taste requires and indicates a different form of cultivation, which is comprehensively regarded as being of higher sustainable value. Thus, the companies mediated their coffee product as an output that is essentially dependent on the quality of green coffee, since the roasting process is just a refinement process.

“One can buy a chrome blinking fancy coffee roasting machine, but if you put rubbish in it, you become rubbish out of it.” (Company 3).

Further, nearly all interviewed companies stated that their products’ relatively higher added value of sustainability also refers to their sustainable business procedures in their own company as they comply, for instance, with above-average salary, gender balance, recycling, traditional handcraft, etc.3 In this respect, the thesis uses the term “high quality coffee” in the following as a common category, which distinguishes SME coffee products from those in the mainstream coffee sector by a relatively higher sustainable value, as discussed above. The terms high-class coffee, specialty product or premium quality coffee are to be placed on the same level. According to the statement of all companies, importing high and good quality green coffee implies buying green coffee grown on a certain basis of sustainability. Therefore, the companies mainly try to further communicate their product by shedding light on the value of its high quality, thus uncovering the links of sustainable factors.

5.2 ECO-LABELLING SCHEME IMPLEMENTATION— GCPS’ PERFORMANCE AND POSITION

The following interviewed stakeholders differ in their amount of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelled or non-eco labelled products and also in the realisation of their implementation. Therefore, the following will picture each company separately. The interview questions about their operational interaction with eco-labelling schemes helped to point out each company’s practical dealings with eco-labelling schemes and offered answers to corresponding decisions.

Questions referring to the value of eco-labelling schemes and the interviewees’ personal view on the implementation of eco-labelling schemes shed light on each company’s perception about the benefits and shortcomings of eco-labelling schemes for their coffee products.

3 Each company’s arguments about their coffee’s product higher added value of sustainability is in detail illustrated in the following part “eco-Labelling schemes implementation – the company’s performance and position”. Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 65

5.2.1 Company 1

Eco-Labelling Implementation

Company 1 imports non eco-labelled as well as eco-labelled green coffee following Type I and Type I-like schemes. The decision to choose eco-labelled green coffee depends on the quality of eco-labelled coffee corresponding with the desired demand of high quality. According to the statements of company 1, the growing conditions and level of sustainability of the green coffee purchased by their importers can only be estimated, due to a lacking or diminished transparency. However, coffee bean quality and their price speak for themselves since “an exploited coffee plantation cannot produce a high quality of coffee. The ecological standards have to be high, that plants can grow and workers have to be well educated to know which fruit to pick from the coffee plant” (LG, 2015).

To a lesser extent, company 1 also imports non eco-labelled green coffee from direct trade links. Beyond the high quality of the coffee beans, the production process on the plantation is completely transparent and traceable. Importing green coffee under these conditions is stated to be more expensive, but at the same time “this price also offers an optimum of importing coffee. Every step of the coffee bean process is visible. And a maximum of transparency presents you from the working till the soil conditions a good quality and thereby you get of course a very high quality of coffee” (LG, 2015).

The choice for not labelling any of it coffee products has two reasons. On one hand, some of the coffee imports are practically missing a certification of any Type I eco-labelling scheme. For the amount of eco-labelled green coffee they import, company 1 could obtain a certification license. In that regard, “to slap a fair trade or UTZ logo on the package” (LG, 2015) would be the easiest way out of it. However, company 1 chooses to refuse any Type I-like scheme as it perceives high quality coffee products general as a goods of sustainable value (no matter if with or without an eco-label certification), which company 1 claims to have evidence for in the case of their direct trade links. Secondly, as global coffee processing companies are beginning to brand their low quality coffee with Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, company 1 points out that implementing eco-labelling schemes could lead to being viewed as a coffee-processing company of lower quality that supports lower standards of sustainability. “These labels are against our principles. We stand for quality and serve a different coffee branch than these labels do. Even it might be stated that Fair Trade for instance can have a positive influence, for us their influence is not enough” (LG, 2015). With regard to Type I eco-labelling schemes, they are referred to as being in accordance with the company’s idea of organic quality. However, as company 1 regards its own products as being of high quality and thus as having an inherent sustainable value, there is no reason to take the added implementation efforts of cost and time for branding its products with a Type-I label (LG, 2015).

66 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Eco-Labelling Position

In accordance with company 1’s choice for refusing to certificate their products by any Type I or Type I-like eco-labelling scheme, the company indicates that the rules and standards of these coffee eco-labelling schemes are tailored to the coffee-processing industry. As the hurdles of regulations and measurements are perceived to be on a very low level, coffee eco-labelling schemes are perceived as being ineffective for achieving sustainability. “Their rules and standards are washed down and ridiculous. They have no value, as the farmers become with them [eco-labelled green coffee] just a certain income which fits to the industry, but the labels never help and motivate them to raise their quality of coffee” (LG, 2015).

Following that premise, company 1 further justifies it decision that the positive influence of these labels are only marginal. “They never push the farmer to raise their quality and thus drive them towards sustainability. The farmers should be able to live of their coffee production and not just survive. If they would have resources and incentives to improve their quality, they will invest in their production, have high class quality and work in relation with the environment” (LG, 2015). Company 1 also noted that eco-labelling schemes only consider the area of coffee cultivation, although a high sustainable quality of a product implies everything around the processing process, like the handcraft or wages (LG, 2015).

Company 1 believes that most of the investments for Type I-like eco-labelling schemes do not reach their actual objective and claim that direct support is needed in order to enhance coffee’s quality. As high quality coffee is demanded, it allows farmers to define their prices on their own and thus become independent of price regulation through raising their quality. But as these eco-labelling schemes have drifted towards the production of low quality coffee, Type I-like schemes criteria are considered to be incapable of supporting such development. Company 1 argues further that through the absence of determined clearer and stricter rules, Type I-like eco-labelling schemes have become a pure marketing instrument of the industry. “Fair Trade for instance has lowered the requirements of the initial hurdles even further, instead of implementing stricter rules and measures, which would really make a difference and have high significance” (LG, 2015).

In terms of describing positive or negative consequences of the establishment of eco-labelling schemes in general, company 1 states to not perceive any competition disadvantages. At the same time, it argues that coffee eco-labelling schemes have principally contributed to changing consumers’ views and raise consumer awareness about the quality differences of products. This has fostered the proportion of consumers that now give and attach more importance to high quality coffee products. In that sense, company 1 stresses that one cannot just argue against all eco-labelling schemes and has to always consider both sides (LG, 2015).

Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 67

5.2.2 Company 2

Eco-Labelling Implementation

99% of company 2’s imports are carried out via trade importers. The range of eco-labelled green coffee varies as the choice of buying a certain green coffee depends mainly on the dimension of high quality taste. Using a datasheet, the company obtains all the information necessary to validate the green coffee’s origin and cultivation. This datasheet also implies coffees’ further values regarding eco-labelling, part of development projects, etc. In accordance with the datasheet, the company decides first whether the coffee beans comply with their standards of quality to achieve a high class quality taste later in the processing process. If there is a bigger selection that conforms to their quality standards, they would choose a green coffee source with an added value of being eco-labelled. The company does not hold a certification license for any of the imported beans which are labelled with a Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, for two reasons. Its purchase volume is too low in correlation to the added costs of fee and effort for the implementation of such eco-labelling schemes. At the same time, company 2 indicates that it sees no reason to pay more just to have the right to brand their coffee product as being eco-labelled since its products already imply a sustainable value creation. “The coffee does not get more fair or ecological when we obtain the certification license to put a logo on the package, so why to pay extra?“ (PN, 2015).

However, the company holds a certification for a Type I eco-labelling scheme since the regulations needed to claim the coffee beans as “organic” are reasonable and the added cost and efforts are feasible. The Type I eco-label is not visible on coffee products in the physical shop since the costumer at the first glance might downgrade other products as being of “less worth”, even though there are stated to have a high sustainable value. “We have other coffee products not holding an organic label which have definitely the same or even higher added value of being organic” (PN, 2015). The company has also one import source via direct trade link, which has neither Type I nor Type I-like eco-labelling certificated green beans (PN, 2015).

Eco-Labelling Position

At mentioned above, there is no intention to obtain a license and have added costs just in order to brand coffee products of any Type I-like eco-labelled scheme. Moreover, company 2 finds that these eco-labelling schemes do not necessarily stand for quality. With respect to that, it is mentioned that Type I and Type I-like schemes do not pay enough attention to the quality of products and would all need to focus holistically on “the preservation of the nature, as the natural habitat of the coffee plant plays a central role how the coffee beans can grow to obtain a good quality”, and therefore “the labels should also have as their task to show the farmers how to cultivate a coffee plant in an overall sustainable and cost-effective, but not cheap manner to achieve high quality. Because for good quality we and our customers also pay a good price” (PN, 2015). 68 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Thus, for company 2, there is no eco-labelling scheme that fulfils this role of connecting ecological and social components in an innovative way to support farmers and sustainability. To be effective, eco-labelling schemes would need to support the high-skilled handcraft of cultivating, picking, selecting and washing the green coffee beans as well as encouraging farmers and consumers to build “a direct relation to the coffee bean, to the product and its quality“(PN, 2015). Thus, practises towards sustainability, which in return would be generated “as a matter of course”, have yet not been attained (PN, 2015).

In this regard, contemporary coffee eco-labelling schemes are perceived as being aimed mostly at the mainstream coffee industry in order for them to sell qualitatively good coffee, like smaller companies. Thus, Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are coordinated to be compatible and aligned with the processes of the mainstream industry, but do not correspond to high quality coffee roasters. Due to these reasons and further factors, as Type I-like eco-labelling schemes have a bad traceability and missing implementation possibilities for small processing companies, company 2 choose to not attach value to coffee eco-labelling schemes in general (PN, 2015).

Even though company 2 points out that the coffee industry like Nestle effectively uses eco-labelling schemes to enhance their coffee quality and reinforce their position within the market competition of quality coffee, market disadvantages have been not notice- able. Moreover, it states that current eco-labelling schemes have a positive effect. As the coffee industry advertises their products using eco-labelling schemes, company 2 believes that coffee consumers have become more aware of the differences regarding coffee quality and cultivation. Further, company 2 acknowledges that the industry also supports high quality farmers in the case of low quality harvest. “A bad coffee harvest can at our importers reach an ‘AA’, but the same coffee would become at Nestle still an ‘AAA’” (PN, 2015).

5.2.3 Company 3

Eco-Labelling Implementation

Company 3 imports up to 60% green coffee from importers, which consists of eco-labelled Type I and Type I-like green coffee, but also contains non-labelled green coffee. Sufficient data and information about the coffee’s origin in order to estimate the conditions of sustainability is accessible in just half of the cases. Without long experience and personal contact to the importers, sustainable qualities cannot at all be assessed. “There are agriculture experts, who knows how to achieve a certain high quality of coffee, but might speed with their tractors over wild meadows and thus have no sustainable attitude at all” (KL, 2015). Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 69

Direct trade links account for at least 40% of company 3’s green coffee imports. With the help of new media techniques, product conditions are observable and traceable. These imports are completely certified by Type I (organic) and Type I-like (Fair Trade) eco-labelling schemes. Beyond the producers’ certification, company 3 holds a license for both eco-labelling schemes and the labels are visible on the company’s coffee products. In the case of importing green coffee via its importers using a different Type I-like eco-labelling scheme, the resulting coffee products are not highlighted by a different Type I-like label like UTZ or Rainforest Alliance.

The Type I-like eco-labelling scheme implication can be dated back to the starting point of the trade relation establishment between the company and its direct trade links, whereby the Type I eco-labelling scheme was implemented more recently. Company 3 also established its own fair trade logo, which stands for the company’s self-commitment towards sustainable values of justice and solidarity. Company 3 is considering annulling the Type I-like eco-labelling license as the Type I-like and replacing it with their own logo. Partially, the Type I-like label has already been removed from several coffee products (KL, 2015).

Eco-Labelling Position

Company 3 stated to have always followed eco-labelling schemes’ development and being a strong supporter of the initial movement. The business structure was established around applying eco-labelling schemes and promoting their values. However, company 3 believes that Type I-like eco-labelling schemes have been developed and evolved as an instrument for global players. In this regard, Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are considered as being oriented toward discount chains that set prices at the expense of coffee farmers as they have to pay for certifications on their own. Thus, the requirements of Type I-like certification schemes which company 3’s direct trade links have to face are perceived as a farce as they serve only mainstream coffee products. “I do not have to mention that we pay our farmers way more than Fairtrade or any label would require. This is our own decision to do so, to do what we think is fair, to imply for instance in our payment that the Fairtrade label has to be paid by the farmers. But in comparison with big powerful discounter who pay a just ridiculous amount more to purchase Fairtrade coffee to get labelled and be regarded as fair, this is not fair” (KL, 2015).

In this regard, the company indicates that eco-labelling schemes should also require that other sustainable conditions, such as payment above minimum wage as well as a low waste disposal should be fulfilled and respected by the coffee producers, but also by the processing companies. “Sustainability has to be comprehended as a continuous line through the whole coffee value chain” (KL, 2015).

Due to the apparent counter-development of Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, company 3 is already planning to drop their Type I-like license since the label’s adjustment towards being a “straight marketing tool for the industry” (KL, 2015) is not conform to 70 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU their business values. “This is not in line with our convictions we stand for. Fair trade for me is based on having a certain Christian ethical self-conception and thus a fair trade logo should not to stand at the first place to satisfy the consumers demand for labels. It should express and stand for the companies overarching business values” (KL, 2015).

Further, it is argued that the adjustment of eco-labelling schemes to reach a broader public could have been justified if at least the measurements would target all their objectives holistically. In the case of wages or working conditions, Type I-like eco-labelling schemes just cover measurements at the point source of coffee production. Company 3 indicates here that Fair Trade regulations do not, for instance, cover the rights of labour forces in the packaging or logistic process. Beyond that, it is stressed that such eco-labelled declared coffee products are often not 100% sustainable products as their measurements are not strict enough to guarantee the products’ content or require just a certain proportion of certified coffee beans. “This might be appropriate for other products, but coffee is just made out of one ingredient, the coffee bean. Thus, even if a label requires a content of 90% eco-labelled coffee beans, coffee can be just fair or not fair” (KL, 2015).

In this respect, company 3 refers to Type I eco-labelling schemes as being adequate and acceptable coffee eco-labelling schemes, since they render a service in accordance to their claims and obligations of providing organic coffee beans. Thus, in contrast to Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, the Type I schemes guarantee only one value and thus ensure to only supply beans of organic quality. Further, the Type I eco-labelling schemes ensure that organic quality is maintained throughout the whole coffee production and processing chain (with a large possibility of traceability and transparency). Therefore, company 3 stressed that such labelled coffee products are 100% in compliance with what the label on the product package indicates. “Organic labelled coffee is not mixed or states to have a further ecological or social value than just being organic cultivated coffee, that’s honest, that’s appropriate” (KL, 2015). Company 3 also states that the given effort and cost for the implementation of Type I eco-labelling schemes are manageable and valid in proportion to their practical realisation and function (KL, 2015).

According to company 3, eco-labelling schemes should not be eliminated as they have encouraged consumers to purchase products more consciously and still influence the consumer in regards to thinking about what and where they buy their products. However, Company 3 believes that the current eco-labelling schemes need to make a distinction between the industry’s and high quality coffee products. Thus, coffee eco-labelling schemes should also speak for and highlight the differences between the sustainable quality of high quality coffee products and industry coffee products. “Even though, there might be agriculture pros with no sustainable attitude, a certain coffee quality is expected to have certain sustainable standards as one has to foster the environment and condition of plants and workers to attain high quality beans for high quality taste” (KL, 2015). Especially with regard to workers’ payment condition, producers of high quality coffee are considered to pay wide above the wage level required by any Type-I like eco-labelling scheme, in order to get and keep educated workers of high skilled working quality (KL, 2015). Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 71

With an exception of the Type I eco-labelling schemes, which cover organic quality, for company3, there is currently no coffee eco-labelling scheme suitable to express and promote the company’s level of high quality coffee and the quality’s inherent value of sustainability. Further it is argued that quality-oriented processing companies are paying higher prices for their green coffee beans, as the production of high quality coffee need higher ecological and social standards which in return require more resources. “Our prices include the higher cost and effort for certain higher ecological and social values. So, a coffee product of high quality costs of course more, but speaks for itself and we strive for customers trusting in high quality and paying for this quality as an added cost, rather than for paying the labelling of a product.” (KL, 2015).

5.2.4 Company 4

Eco-Labelling Implementation

Company 4 imports mainly green coffee from direct trade links. These imports of green coffee are exclusively non eco-labelled, though the farmers follow strict rules of sustainability, defined by their own statutes. As company 4 and their trading partners look back on a long personal tradition, the whole coffee production chain and the compliance of their statutes can be accessed for observation and is thereby completely transparent and traceable. “Our direct trading partners have such highly regarded qualities of coffee production, which is vastly demanded and appreciated plus their sustainable standards reach often beyond the eco-labelling schemes, that they do not need any eco-label to show off“ (BK, 2015).

A lower volume of green coffee with circa 30% is imported via importers. These green coffee imports are chosen for their quality and their compliance with sustainable values. Both of these factors are taken equivalently into account to bypass producers of high quality coffee that don’t sustainability. “Even if coffee beans can show a very high quality but do not fulfil certain sustainable requirements as biodiversity, water recycling or workers’ payment, they are not adequately enough as they do not meet our philosophy.” (BK, 2015)

With the exception of one certificated Type I eco-labelled coffee producer, company 4 does not purposefully import any further eco-labelled green coffee. Company 4 holds a license for certified Type I eco-labelled green coffee. However, the implementation of this Type I scheme is regarded as an exception to only comply with the demand of a few food retail customers who have converted to organic retailing. Company 4 notes here that the implementation of the Type I scheme was highly disputed as other non-labelled products also meet organic standards, but due to their missing labels might be disqual- ified or downgraded. Thus, the small amount of Type I label products is implemented only in regard to the demand of few food retail customers, but will not be furthered since the company wants to reinforce coffee products with even higher quality criteria. 72 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

The quality criteria are based on high quality coffee beans, which are the prerequisite to achieving a high quality taste. Though, as their trade relations towards the importers are also based on long personal tradition, sufficient data and information about the green coffees’ origin is accessible, which allows customers to make appropriate choices on the coffee beans’ sustainability grade without a guarantee by eco-labelling certification. “At the same time, a certain level of price, exclude certain factors as low wages and a ton of chemicals. The price for green coffee is not just a result of the market, it is also a result of quality, and quality depends on the conditions throughout its cultivation and processing process” (BK, 2015).

Eco-Labelling Position

As stated above, the implementation of the Type I scheme is not in line with the company’s general standpoint towards eco-labelling schemes, which characterizes the reason for their low level of eco-label implementation. To begin with, company 4 stresses that one has to make a distinction between basic coffee programs in developing countries, which need access to the market, and established coffee producer businesses in developed countries, like their direct trade links. With respect to this, company 4 points out to their direct trade links which have a living standard above the minimum due to their high skills of handcraft and respect of nature, which allows them to achieve a highly accredited quality of coffee with a “proud” high price. Though company 4 was once interested in implement Type I-like eco-labelling scheme, they realized that their direct trade links have already reached all requirements and have clearly gone beyond them. Thus, as company 4 indicates, these farmers have no incentive to implement any of the current eco-labelling schemes as these would provide no added value, but would include higher cost and larger effort. “With their own statutes of how to work sustainably, they even have a higher level of ecological and social norms in contrast to the requirements of eco-labelling schemes, so besides costs of money and time, these labels affect nothing as they cannot further ensure or enhance sustainable protection or security” (BK, 2015). In line with this, company 4 indicates that eco-labelling schemes became a business in and of themselves, which needs to recover its costs and achieve a reasonable profit. Thus, as company4 states, customers and coffee businesses pay not only for the improvement of sustainability, but also for the Type I-like scheme businesses (BK, 2015).

To this end, company 4 notices that the implementation of coffee eco-labelling schemes in order to brand their coffee products as sustainable is practically not up to debate. But company 4 further highlights that this situation reflects best coffee eco-labelling schemes’ actual impact and purpose. As a coffee-processing company, they would either have to force their direct trade links to implement eco-labelling schemes and thereby raise their partners’ expenses without creating an added value, or they would need to end their longstanding relationships and import coffee from eco-labelled producers which might provide lower sustainable norms. For this reason, eco-labelling schemes are regarded as a way to brand a product mainly for consumers demanding sustainable products. “These consumers demanding products with eco-labels consider them as a Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 73 safety feature, that the labelled product is qualitatively more high-grade. With an eye on labelled coffee products at discount chains such as Lidl or Aldi, it becomes quite clear that eco-labels cannot stand for premium quality. Thus, eco-labels pretend to be a safe safety line and consumers, which need such moral security, are ready to buy such products, but actually they should pay for the certification and not the producers or processing companies”(BK, 2015).

Further, company 4 stresses that with respect to discount chains, which sell coffee products for low prices, there is no possibility for truly sustainable value creation. Promoting and enforcing environmental friendly cultivation, better working conditions, etc. imply technical higher costs, which in return raise the coffees’ quality. As dumping prices cannot cover the cost of technical efforts, they cannot obtain an added value of quality. In this respect, company 4 considers eco-labelled coffee products to be an marketing tool that have the purpose playoff playing on the consumers’ moral conscience, but in reality are far away from contributing towards sustainable value creation and thus being high quality products (BK, 2015).

According to all these aspects, company 4 argues to not have any incentives to obtain any further Type I-like eco-labelling scheme certification license as it believes that they would, on the one hand, dismiss the company’s other high qualitative products and, on the other, would support the industry’s marketing game, which stands in contrast to their own business principles and values. Therefore, the implementation of eco-labelling schemes is in general considered to not be representative for their business concept of selling of high quality products, which imply and foster sustainable value creation. In this regard, company 4 expressed its view on sustainability, which should ideally be implemented during every single phase of the coffee product’s value chain: “Sustainability and the creation of sustained value should not stop when the green coffee beans are shipped to us. Sustainability has no border for us and thus we make no difference between here and there. If it is the coffee packaging, the paper or furniture we use at our office, the woman’s quota, employees payment at the coffees origin or here in Germany, all aspects are of equal importance to be sustainable“(BK, 2015).

In that regard, company 4 considers the approach behind coffee eco-labelling schemes a self-evident practice that any company should try to apply as best it can. Branding products with eco-labels with the goal of demonstrating values of respect and honour to human kind and natural resources is seen as counterproductive from the company’s perspective. Type I and Type I-like schemes honour business principles that should be naturally incorporated and taken for granted (BK, 2015).

In this connection, company 4 states that the Type I eco-labelling scheme can also not be supported, though company 4 regards this eco-labelling scheme as less problematic since it contributes to a certain added sustainable value. From the perspective of company 4, it is mainly archaic coffee producers - mostly from developing countries - without the money for pesticides etc. who produce naturally organic coffee, Thus, 74 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Type I eco-labelling schemes might contribute to awarding poor farmers’ green coffee with a higher sustainable value. However, organic cultivation on a big industrial scale leaves behind other organic values such as manual labour, shadow-grown, biodiversity, etc. and has no intention to take on the whole burden of sustainability. Thus, to make big-scale organic coffee production profitable, other expenditures have to be trimmed, meaning that other ecological or social factors are downgraded or skipped. In that case, Type I eco-labelling schemes are perceived as possessing the same problems as other current Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. With its focus on promoting and providing high quality coffee, company 4 sees in that way no reasons and has no encouragement to increase their amount of organically labelled coffee products and regards the Type I eco-label as an exception that might be removed in the future (BK, 2015).

Nonetheless, company 4 states: “behind all the negative sides, one should also keep in mind the eco-purchase movement which has been woken up by eco-labelling schemes” (BK, 2015). Through their popularity, coffee eco-labelling schemes have sharpened the conscience of the consumer. This has made consumers more alert when purchasing products and thus more sensible to the means and relations of high quality and sustainability. As this is of advantage when promoting their own high quality products, company 4 noticed further that coffee eco-labelling schemes have increased the importance of transparency and traceability, so that hidden games on all levels of the value chain have been become more difficult. This could have even a greater impact on future trade in terms of sustainability, since “transparency by new media techniques can give more insight and security than what eco-labelling schemes are trying to do” (BK, 2015).

5.2.5 Company 5

Eco-Labelling Implementation

Company5 imports mostly non eco-labelled green coffee from importers. The rationale behind the choice of coffee beans, is based on how they correspond with the desired demand of quality. Regarding the statements of company 5, the level of sustainability of imported green coffee via importers cannot distinctly be determined, due to lacking or reduced transparency. However, with a certain quality of coffee and thereby a certain price, one can clearly estimate the sustainable values as “sustainability is not for free. There are of course costs from the conservation of fertile soil, shaping good hygienically conditions, buying innovative recycle water machines till investing in high educated farmers” (BA, 2015).

Company 5 also imports circa 3% non eco-labelled green coffee from direct trade links. From a logistical point of view, these coffee beans are regarded as more expensive, though since the coffee is of very high quality, all steps of the cultivation process are completely transparent and traceable and are align with the company’s principles of sustainability. Therefore, the high price is perceived as implying a specific high quality value. Chapter 5 Empirical Findings • 75

Since most of its coffee imports are not eco-labelled, the company mentions that there is practically no option to get certificated for any Type I eco-labelling scheme. But even in the case of the company’s small amount of eco-labelled coffee imports, company 5 does not see any possibility to obtain a certification license. According to company 5, high quality implies sustainability and is already paid off due to its high price, so that there is no need to implement any eco-labelling certification “The coffee does not become more sustainable, not fairer or environmentally friendly if we have a sticker on the package saying that it is so. Quite the contrary, having the same sticker as such cheap miserable coffee products at discount chains give my coffee product a rather lower quality” (BA, 2015). Even though company 5 acknowledges here to be interested in implementing a Type I eco-labelling scheme, since it is built upon “reasonable grounds” and has a clear framework with strict and assessable rules, there is currently no capacity for implementing a Type I eco-labelling, due to the high cost and increased time resources associated with such an implementation (BA, 2015).

Eco-Labelling Position

Company 5 mainly argues that the decision to not support or certify its products through any Type I or Type I-like eco-labelling is because coffee eco-labelling rules and standards have been downgraded. Thus, coffee eco-labelling schemes’ regulations and measurements imply such a low level of sustainable improvement that they cannot be perceived as obstacles and are therefore fruitless in terms of promoting sustainability within the coffee sector. “Eco-labels fulfil now the purpose of the processing coffee industry and so have become a classical marketing tool for the industry. Therefore, their required standards, fair or ecological, are so low that they cannot be considered as having a real impact” (BA, 2015).

In this respect, company 5 points out that especially Type I-like eco-labelling schemes’ low standards of sustainability are not in accordance with the company’s principles of offering high quality coffee. “The private eco-labelling standards are just enough to raise coffee cultivation standards to a minimum but are far from the requirements for high quality coffee” (BA, 2015). Further, company5 stresses that the impact of eco-labelling coffee schemes are marginal since the industry is just improving the farmers’ condition enough to keep “the hard work of cultivating coffee at a cheap price” (BA, 2015) attrac- tive and thereby slowing down rural migration or appeasing farmers’ voices for higher income etc. (BA, 2015).

Thus, eco-labelling schemes are perceived as halting sufficient development towards sustainable coffee cultivation instead of supporting and improving coffee quality and thereby cultivating coffee under better environmental and social conditions. “Sustainability has a high price and therefore we are glad to pay high prices for exceptional coffee beans and will always seek to form relations with such people who stand behind this. Though eco-labelling schemes try to make sustainability profitable and that might reach a certain level, they will never achieve sustainable values in the sense of high quality coffee” (BA, 2015). 76 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

In this context, company 5 mentions that eco-labelling schemes of Type I and Type I-like cannot help the consumer to distinguish between different grades of sustainability. However, the high sustainable quality of a product is meant to speak for itself. As it needs good environmental requirements but also time and skills to look at each single coffee bean and decide if it is ripe or has gone bad, high quality can achieve a high class taste, but also has a higher price. Thus, for company 5 there are currently no coffee eco-labelling schemes that fulfil their requirements, since sustainability is can only be achieved if farmers comprehend and are capable of cultivating such high quality coffee and if consumers learn to appreciate such high quality coffee products with higher prices (BA, 2015).

However, company 5 also note here that through the arrival of Type I and Type I-like coffee eco-labelling schemes on the big market, consumers have become more aware of their own impact on sustainability and that eco-labelling schemes laid the first steps of this development. Furthermore, company 5 states that these eco-labelling schemes have a positive effect on the company’s own business since consumers have started to understand the relation between quality and sustainability. Company 5 perceives no competition disadvantages (BA, 2015). Chapter 6 Analysis • 77

CHAPTER 6 ANALYSIS

The analytical chapter of this thesis is divided into three parts. Firstly, the empirical findings of the five German coffee processing SMEs (GCPS) are generally evaluated and discussed by using a ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ and a ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’. Secondly, the evaluation results are analysed under the guise of the thesis’s central conception of Ecological Modernization Theory (EMT) and environmental authority. Thirdly, and lastly, the research questions of this thesis are answered on the basis of the aforemen- tioned other two parts of this chapter.

6.1 APPLICATION OF GOAL ATTAINMENT MODEL AND SIDE-EFFECT MODEL

The collected and assessed empirical data presented in Chapter 5 provides the funda- ment for evaluating eco-labelling schemes on the basis of a descriptive analytical valuing process. This mainly implies comparing, weighting and valuing the empirical data of all five companies within the frame of the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model” and the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation Model’. However, as both models ask how coffee eco-labelling schemes refer to eco-labelling schemes’ intended policy goals, one has to firstly construct a normative PTE-model1 on eco-labelling schemes in the German coffee sector (Figure 12 below).

Based on a generic “input-output-outcome” model, the presented data on eco-labelling schemes’ policy conception in chapter 4 serves to outline the normative policy model on coffee eco-labelling schemes in Germany. Thus, based on the derived data from the EU policy conception on eco-labelling schemes and the ISO Type I and Type I-like schemes’ strategy, the PTE-model in Figure 12 (next page) illustrates and reflects coffee eco-labelling schemes’ intended underlying rationality with its anticipated implementation goals. In this case, the final goal implies “the contribution to sustainable consumption and production” of GCPS through environmentally benign coffee products. The immediate outcome to reach this final policy goal should therefore be understood as “outcome1= implementation of eco-labelling schemes” and is followed by the intermediate outcome which consists of “outcome2 = increase of environmentally

1 The application of the method “program theory evaluation” (PTE) and the outline of a “program theory evaluation” model (PTE-model) can be find in chapter 2, section 2.2.1. 78 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU benign products”. The following will evaluate how the empirical data of GCPS is related to this normative policy model of coffee eco-labelling schemes in order to see how eco-labelling schemes correspond in practice to their underlying rationality.

Figure 12. Normative Eco-labelling scheme PTE-model.

6.2 GOAL-ATTAINMENT EVALUATION

The Goal Attainment Evaluation evaluates coffee eco-labelling schemes in relation to GCPS by asking if GCPS and their products are in line with the schemes’ intended goals and if the produced outcomes are a direct result of the schemes’ impact.

Figure 13. Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model (adapted from Vedung, 1997: 39). Chapter 6 Analysis • 79

6.2.1 Goal-Achievement Measurement

While applying the empirical findings to the Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model, the coffee eco-labelling schemes in relation to GCPS demonstrate discrepancies and lapses to the intended final policy goal, which consists of:

• the implementation of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes in order to promote and provide sustainable consumption and production.

By reviewing if GCPS have accomplished the goal of implementing coffee eco-labelling schemes and labelling their products in order to promote and provide environmentally benign coffee products, the following discrepancies can be defined as followed:

• eco-labelling schemes of Type I-like are not sufficiently implemented by GCPS.

• eco-labelling schemes of Type I achieve to be implemented by GCPS.

All companies stated to have implemented the Type I scheme by offering at least one coffee product with a Type I scheme certification. Nevertheless, Type I-like labels are either completely disregarded or not fully implemented. In the latter case, the companies purchase Type I-like labelled green coffee, though their products are not certificated as such. Only one company out of five had completely implemented one Type I-like eco-labelling scheme, but is in the process of removing the labels from the respective coffee products. From this perspective, it can be concluded that GCPS have a very low rate of definite implementation of Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. With regard to the Type I scheme, a full implementation by three companies can be observed.

6.2.2 Impact-Assessment

By analysing if the small amount of actually implemented eco-labelling schemes is a result of the impact of coffee eco-labelling schemes as policy instruments, the further impact-assessment significantly demonstrates a weak effect:

• Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are mainly not applied by GCPS in regards to their impact.

Just one out of five companies had established the implementation of a Type I-like eco-labelling scheme with regard to its sustainable impact. Concerning the Type I scheme, all companies noted that they do not use the labelling scheme for its intended impact of creating environmentally benign products. 80 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

To sum up, the following will provide a short interim balance on the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ results. First of all, the evaluation using the Goal-Attainment Model clearly shows the need for a further analysis of the empirical data using the Side-Effect Model, due to certain evaluation shortcomings. Comparing the inappropriate or failed implementation of eco-labelling Type I-like schemes with the partially appropriate or more successful implementation of Type I schemes demands a further evaluation to explain the inconsistencies, especially with regard to the fact that both types of coffee eco-labelling schemes share the same underlying rationality, ultimate goal and key components. However, since the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ is only efficient in terms of evaluating if coffee eco-labelling schemes have been practically applied in regards to their intended implementation and function, the model cannot evaluate and differentiate the side effects leading to the cause of these different outcomes.

Thus, with an emphasis on the premeditated and substantive outcomes, the model leaves no possibility to evaluate if Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are inapplicable in practice, due to an erroneous policy formulation or due to unanticipated side effects. This also applies to the result of a positive Type I schemes implementation by the majority of the interviewed companies, as its success can neither be explained. On the other hand, with regard to the fact that an overall positive implementation of Type I schemes is not caused by the direct impact of eco-labelling policies, further evaluation is needed to comprehend also a failing of Type I eco-labelling schemes from the impact-assessment perspective; especially with regard to the fact that only one company positively implemented a Type I-like scheme due to the impacts of eco-labelling scheme policies.

Thus, the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ results provide an overview if coffee eco-labelling schemes in general achieve or dismiss their intended policy goals and impact in regards to GCPS products. But as discussed above, they allow only a limited insight about how GCPS concur with the underlying rationality and inherent intended policy goal of coffee eco-labelling schemes. In order to not use subjective speculations to explain the shortcomings of coffee eco-labelling schemes’ implementation and their consequences at this stage and rather diminish the weaknesses of the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation Model’, the thesis will further evaluate the empirical findings by applying them in an analytical valuing process using the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’.

6.3 SIDE-EFFECT EVALUATION

First of all, the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ evaluates coffee eco-labelling schemes in relation to GCPS, by asking if the findings on GCPS eco-labelling implementation are linked to anticipated positive as well as negative side-effects. Null effects, which cover all effects having no impact on their policy targeted rationality regarded, are not regarded. Chapter 6 Analysis • 81

The anticipated positive side-effects are in line with the intended final goal and cover all effects which contribute beneficially to the intended final goal of coffee eco-labelling scheme policy. Derived of the intended policy goal which consist of to contribute towards sustainable consumption and production, the anticipated positive side-effects are divided into the following categories:

• Primary: Providing and promoting coffee eco-labelled products (increase the number of environmentally benign products).

• Secondary: Gaining market interest (obtain added purchase quality and increase market share).

• Tertiary: Raising consumer demand (provide easily, credible and approachable information; increase consumer awareness).

The anticipated negative side-effects are all premediated estimated counterproductive effects which would lead to the opposite of intended final policy goal. Thus, the design of coffee eco-labelling scheme policy intends to avoid them as they have contrary and detrimental consequences to the final result. As human error cannot be excluded, a failing or inappropriate policy implementation might be caused by counterproductive side-effects and thus need to be examined. Derived from the intended goal to act counterproductive against sustainable consumption and production, the anticipated negative side-effects are divided into following categories:

• Primary: Non-implementation (counterproductive to contribute increase the number of environmentally benign products).

• Secondary: Non market interest (counterproductive to increase GCPS market interest).

• Tertiary: Non consumer recognition (counterproductive to stimulate consumer demand).

Further, the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ also assesses the probability of unanticipated negative or positive side-effects by asking if the gained outcome data about coffee eco-labelling schemes’ impact on GCPS is linked to positive or negative side-effects outside of eco-labelling’s policy targeted rationality. Thus, the un-anticipated effects cover all side-effects which can for instance complement or disturb coffee eco-labelling schemes underlying rationality with the final policy goal to contribute to sustainable consumption and production. Figure 14 below illustrates the different evaluation steps visually. 82 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Figure 14. Side-Effect Evaluation Model (adapted from Vedung, 1997: 58).

6.3.1 Anticipated Positive and Negative Side-Effects

Primary: Promotion and Provision of Eco-Labelling Schemes

Positive: • Import of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. • Complete implementation of Type I eco-labelling schemes. • Interest towards Type I eco-labelling schemes. • Type I eco-labelling schemes acquire feasible costs and effort for GCPS.

As already evaluated by the Goal Attainment Model, Type I eco-labelling schemes have been completely applied by 3 companies whereof a fourth is interested in doing so for the future. All of these companies regard the Type I eco-labelling schemes as appropriate due to a balanced ratio between the implementation requirements (cost and efforts) and the claimed outcome of eco-labelling performance. Just one company disregards Type I schemes completely. All companies have a green coffee import of Type I-like eco-schemes. Just one company obtains a certification to brand their products with it.

Negative: • No complete implementation of Type I-like eco-labelling scheme by majority or removal of Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. • Type I-like schemes have a low impact in comparison to other import values. • Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes implementation do not improve sustainable performance of GCPS products. Chapter 6 Analysis • 83

• Type I-like eco-labelling schemes imply unprofitable implementation costs and efforts for GCPS.

Type I-like schemes link to anticipated negative side-effect of working counterproductive by promote and provide eco-labelled products. The company holding a Type I-like eco-labelling schemes has started to partially remove and replace the label by an own eco-certification logo. A complete annulation of the Type I-like scheme is being considered. All GCPS import Type I-like scheme green coffee beans. Though, the rationale behind the decision, to choose eco-labelled green coffee, depends on whether the eco-labelled green coffee correspond with the companies’ desired demand of specialty quality. Thus, the import volume of eco-labelled green coffee is randomly set and other values as quality taste, traditional handcraft have a higher impact than Type I-like eco-labelling. This is linked to the third evaluated negative (perverse) side-effect. Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are perceived to be not capable to enhance or upgrade the sustainable performance of GCPS products. Even though, GCPS generally regard Type I schemes as appropriate, this fact also applies to the Type I eco-labelling schemes. A certain organic cultivation, which might not be in line with all the principles of Type I scheme, is already naturally in place, so that the green coffee in itself is not perceived to improve GCPS sustainable value any further.

Further, GPCS import and process green coffee beans of specialty quality whose sustainable standard lies above the norms of what eco-labelling require. Orientated towards the mainstream of coffee processing industry, especially Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are regarded as too low to express the sustainable value of GCPS products. In contrast to the Type I schemes, the evaluation illustrates at the same time that Type I-like eco-labelling schemes mostly do not comply with GCPS low import and processing volume, as they are tailored to the industry.

Secondary: Gaining Market Interest

Positive: • Market share in Type I eco-labelling. • Type I eco-labelling generate added quality value of organic value.

In relation to GCPS, Type I eco-labelling concur with the positive anticipated effect of causing market interest. 3 of 5 companies have obtained Type I schemes certification to indicate their respective products with it. This results from an appropriate ratio between the schemes implementation requirements of costs and effort and the products obtained added value of organic quality. GCPS have within their whole chain of a sustainable value creation due to their high social and environmental standards, though a distinct and exclusive organic norm is missing. With respect to this, Type I eco-labelling schemes imply a positive side-effect of generating an added value and create incentives to obtain this as a further purchase quality to gain market share in organic products. 84 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Negative: • No incentive to gain market share in Type I like eco-labelling schemes. • Low grade of Type I schemes eco-labelled products. • No incentive to increase number of Type I eco-labelled products. • Type I-like eco-labelling schemes lack added quality purchase value. • Type I eco-labelling schemes added purchase quality value rather disregarded.

In contrast to the Type I eco-labelling scheme, the evaluation shows, that there is in general no incentive to gain market share in Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. But also in light of Type I scheme, there is no encouragement or incentive to increase the volume of such organic labelled products, which are rather present of low stock.

These negative side-effects result from the fact, that Type I-like schemes are not capable to enhance the sustainable value creation of GCPS’ products and thus offer no added purchase quality value. With regard to the Type I eco-labelling scheme, which offers an added purchase quality value, there are still other values more preferred and promoted in comparison to the organic value. Especially with regard to the fact, that organic coffee cultivation on a big scale is seen to drop or trim other ecological and social norms, it is important to the GCPS to predominantly uphold and sustain their coffee product values of high quality. Further, they prevent them from being downgraded and dismissed by similar labelled products. Due to that, one company with a positive implementation of Type I scheme implementation provided Type I scheme labelled products only for online sale and does not brand them as such in the store. A second one holds its organic product volume consciously on a low grade to reinforce other similar non-labelled products as well as to sustain its business focus on coffee products with higher quality criteria.

Tertiary: Raising Consumer Demand

Positive: • Type I and Type I like schemes raise consumer awareness about sustainable purchase values2.

Whether Type I or Type I like schemes, the evaluation demonstrates, both are linked to the anticipated positive effect of raising consumer awareness on sustainable consumption. By wakening up an eco-purchase movement and gaining popularity, all GCPS stated that both eco-labelling schemes have been shaken up consumers and sharpened their consciousness about differences of coffee cultivation. With regard to GCPS experience, Type I and Type I-like scheme currently still influence consumer to consciously reflect about their purchase impact. Thus, both eco-labelling schemes contributed making consumers more alert when purchasing coffee products, which has been resulted in a big number of costumers asking GCPS after eco-labelled coffee products.

2 This implies only consumer awareness experienced by GCPS. Chapter 6 Analysis • 85

Negative: • Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are unable to provide easily, credible and approachable product information.

Even though, GCPS have on Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes only positive connotations with regard to generally raising consumer awareness, both eco-labelling schemes evaluated as lacking to genuinely express the levels of sustainability of high quality coffee products. Thereby both schemes are perceived by GCPS to fail to classify and inform consumers about additional higher standards of sustainability and thus are incapable to make the different rankings of sustainable qualities approachable. According to that, Type I-like and Type I schemes are due to their simpleness easy to comprehend, but at the same time they are evaluated to have a contrary effect, as they fail to give accurate credible and reliable product information.

6.3.2 Unanticipated Positive and Negative Side-Effects

Primary: Promotion and Provision of Eco-Labelling Schemes

Positive: • All Type I and Type I-like labelling implementation requirements can be easily and fully met.

At first, ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ uncovers as a positive unanticipated side-effect, which is associated with the promotion and provision of eco-labelling products. With regard to the high requirements and expectations that high quality coffee has to fulfil, Type I and Type I-like schemes’ requirements are not perceived as obstacles. In contrary, high quality coffee from GCPS provide accessible data about their sustainable values, which easily go beyond the requirements of Type I-like schemes. In the case of Type I-like schemes, this implies that the GCPS trade sources do thus not have to make any adjustments as their standards are already above average and thereby naturally comply with production rules and certification arrangements.

In practice, Type I scheme requirements could also be fulfilled by GCPS as most standards for organic production are already in place. However, the Type I scheme has specific technical requirements due to the strict cultivation and processing separation of organic and non-organic coffee. In order to comply with these standards it would require coffee trade sources and GCPS to technically modify their coffee production, even though the high quality green coffee bean itself already meet the requirements of Type I schemes.

Negative: • Type I and Type I-like schemes fail to foster higher degrees of sustainability. 86 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

• Type I and Type I-like schemes do not address different degrees of sustainability or differentiate products of high quality coffee. • Type I and Type I-like scheme fail to represent the products’ quality.

The first evaluated unanticipated negative side effect that directly links to the promotion and provision of eco-labelling schemes implies the incapability of Type I and Type I-like schemes to propel a high quality coffee cultivation. As they are coordinated and aligned with the process of the coffee industry, they promote sustainability on what are perceived as low and profitable conditions that do not foster the quality level of coffee needed in order to gain a high coffee quality status. As the enhancement of coffee quality implies cultivating coffee under better environmental and social conditions, Type I and Type I-like schemes provide a degree of sustainability that do not reach the sustainable value of high quality coffee and therefor rather halt further development towards sustainable coffee cultivation. Further, the evaluation shows that GCPS have a holistic perspective on sustainability, which they try to foster with their products. Beyond the import of high quality coffee that unifies high standards of social and environmental components, they also imply and strive for sustainable values in their own processing company, such as gender balance, recycling, above average wage, traditional handcraft, etc. Type I and Type I-like schemes are also unable to cover and foster further higher values of sustainability beyond the scope of the coffee cultivation process.

In this regard, the evaluation shows the second unanticipated negative side effect of the eco-labelling, namely to be unable to differentiate between different degrees of sustainability. As both schemes target the mainstream coffee processing industry market, but have the same certification for all qualities of coffee, there is no possibility for GCPS to signify and distinguish their coffee products of high quality value, which implies even higher standards of sustainable norms. Further, without improving the sustainable value of their products, the implementation of Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, i.e. getting certificated to obtain a label, solely implies added costs and efforts for GCPS. In the case of Type I scheme implementation, an added organic purchase quality is perhaps acquired, but the coffee products’ additional or even higher sustainable values can still not be addressed by the Type I scheme. In this respect, Type I and Type-I like scheme fail to stand for the products’ actual sustainable content. Thus, both eco-labelling schemes are not capable of accurately addressing the products’ sustainable quality and further cannot distinguish high quality coffee products.

Secondary: Gaining Market Interest

Positive: • Type I and Type I-like schemes create no market disadvantages.

With regard to the evaluation, Type I and Type I like scheme have not yet caused market disadvantages for any of the five companies due to the absence of a Type I and Type I-like scheme implementation. Though this unanticipated positive effect supports the Chapter 6 Analysis • 87 already discussed occurring perverse effects of Type I and Type I-like schemes lacking to create incentives to obtain labelling certifications.

Negative: • Absent Type I and Type I-like schemes create no market disadvantages (which could foster incentives). • Type I-like schemes make high quality coffee appear to be of lower quality. • Type I and Type I-like schemes ‘added value’ fail to be expressed through the consumers purchase price of high quality coffee.

As stated above, Type I and Type I-like schemes do not have the capacity to signal products of higher sustainable value. This leads to the negative unanticipated effect that products with a Type I and Type-I like labelling are perceived as having the same quality as high quality coffee. Thus, labelled products of GCPS are downgraded in their quality value whereas labelled industry coffee products appear to have a higher quality value. Considering that, Type I and Type-I like labels might negatively affect the high quality coffee sector, though as the evaluation demonstrates, competition disadvantages have not yet been recognized.

Further, the evaluation shows that the so-called purchase added value of Type I and Type I-like schemes, which should confer to GCPS, cannot be indicated by consumers purchase prices. As high quality coffee is already distinguished from mainstream market coffee products from global coffee companies by a higher purchase price, an even higher price does not generate further value recognition from the costumer. Thus, Type I-like or Type I schemes can award a high quality coffee product with a physical logo but they cannot be expressed through a higher consumer purchase price.

Tertiary: Raising Consumer Demand

Positive: • Consumers are receptive to the means and distinction between high quality coffee and Type I and Type I-like schemes’ sustainability values. • Consumer awareness raises GCPS market advantages. • Type I and Type I-like schemes have increased the importance of transparency and traceability.

Type I and Type I-like schemes have in the eyes of GCPS not just triggered consumer awareness. The evaluation also demonstrates an unanticipated positive effect through the labels’ popularity in the mainstream coffee sector. With regard to GCPS experience, consumers became receptive to the distinction between sustainable values of high quality coffee products and sustainable values of Type I and Type I-like labelled products. Since consumers have become more conscious about their purchase impact in general, they became more receptive and open to further coffee product quality values beyond 88 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Type I and Type I-like schemes values. GCPS advertisement about their specialty quality coffee products has thereby received more attention, but consumers also became more receptive to understanding the relation between high quality coffee products and sustainability. According to that, the evaluation shows that, on the one hand, consumers expect and demand Type I and Type I-like schemes to be in place. But on the other hand, (if Type I and Type I-like schemes are not in place), consumers are open to further or other product information about coffee sources and its sustainable sustained value. As GCPS own product promotion also has the capability to distinguish the companies’ own high quality coffee products from mainstream coffee industry products, the consumers’ attention caused by Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes is also beneficial for differentiating and individualize their own products. As a result, through their side-effect of raising consumer awareness, Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are beneficial in terms of promoting and differentiating high coffee quality and thus create market advantages for GCPS. As a further consequence, the increasing consumer interest for Type I and Type I-like schemes has forced the increase of information conditions about the source of coffee products in general and thus enhanced the transparency and traceability of coffee producer data. Due to that, Type I and Type I-like schemes have contributed to making coffee cultivation standards more visible and observable, so that the import of high quality coffee without eco-labelling can be (beyond other factors) validly rated for its sustainability value.

Negative: • Type I and Type I-like schemes are used by the coffee industry as a marketing tool. • Type I and Type I-like scheme play with the moral conscience of the consumers.

With regard to raising consumer awareness, Type I like scheme are also linked to negative unanticipated side-effects. Type I-like eco-labelling schemes address a level of sustainability that is under the grade of the sustainable values of high quality coffee. Type I eco-labelling schemes indicate an sustainable quality of organic value, though if coffee products meet a higher level of the same or other environmental and social merits they cannot be awarded as such by Type I scheme. Thus a higher sustainable values receive no attention. By lacking to distinguish the different levels of sustainability and thus to classify and inform consumers about a ranking of sustainable qualities, Type I-like and Type I schemes are perceived by GCPS as marketing tools rather than serving to give credible and reliable product information. In that sense, the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ detects even further, that Type I-like and Type I schemes play, from the perspective of GCPS, with the moral conscience of the consumers. Type I-like and Type I eco-labelling schemes cannot give accurate information on high quality coffee products as they cannot grasp further or higher sustainable values. Thereby they are regarded by GCPS to promote products of different sustainable value in the same positive light, instead of highlighting differences and stressing that a higher sustainable value is possible and that industry coffee products have not yet reached the peak of sustainable worthiness. Chapter 6 Analysis • 89

6.4 DISCUSSING THE POLICY EVALUATION RESULTS

Using ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’, the assessed results from the ‘Goal Attainment Evaluation’ have become more clear and comprehensible. Thus, the Goal-Attainment Evaluation question – “Do the results attained correspond with the goals?” – gained an explanation for its first result, namely:

• eco-labelling schemes of Type I-like demonstrate a lack of implementation by GCPS.

Further, the Side-Effect Evaluation served with its outcome to shed new light on the Goal-Attainment’s second result, namely:

• eco-labelling schemes of Type I are implemented by GCPS.

Whereas the first result can be confirmed since it is mainly demonstrated by the fact that Type I-like schemes are incapable of creating added sustainable value and fail to match high quality market conditions, the second result has to be re-interpreted. Type I schemes are indeed implemented by GCPS, though the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ demonstrates that Type I schemes are essentially just implemented on a low percentage of products and, in terms of figures, are of minor significance for the total of GCPS coffee products.

This leads third result of the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ with regard to the question “Are the positive results linked to the impact of eco-labelling schemes as policy instruments?”:

• Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are mainly not applied by GCPS because of the schemes’ impact.

Here, the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ demonstrates that Type I eco-labelling schemes are implemented due to the balanced ratio between the cost and effort they require and due to the compliance with its claims. However, it is not the sustainable quality of the organic value in the Type I schemes implementation (the impact of the eco-labelling schemes as a policy instrument in itself) that persuades GCPS to apply Type I eco-labelling schemes. In combination, the ‘Side-Effect Evaluation’ and the ‘Goal-Attainment Evaluation’ evaluate and illustrate the relevant coffee eco-labelling schemes from the perspective of GCPS. These results provide insights from a retrospective assessment and thus reveals if the planned rationality of eco-labelling schemes policy is effective in accomplishing its intended goals, which all amount to the final policy goal of contributing to a sustainable production and consumption by the greening of GCPS products. As a result, both evaluations provide resulting outcomes on which one can base a choices to reconsider and modify or endorse and approve the underlying rationality of eco-labelling scheme policy interventions. 90 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

In the following part, the outcomes of both evaluations are presented in a summarized and structured manner to give a comprehensible and coherent picture about how the introduction and function of eco-labelling schemes is observed and perceived by GCPSs. Based on this, the study initiates a learning process by applying these evaluation results to the normative PTE-model in order to see if the eco-labelling schemes are effective in terms of greening GCPS products (the policy achieves its target in practise) or if there is necessary to optimize and improve eco-labelling schemes:

• At first, as a main result, the study can clearly state that Type I-like eco-labelling schemes fail to be implemented, as they are perceived to be incapable of awarding and indicating a higher value of sustainability for GCPS high quality coffee products. Type I eco-labelling schemes are essentially implemented on a low product stock as the sustainable values of high quality coffee are by contrast rated as being more valuable and thus are prioritized over the added organic purchase quality.

»»Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes’ requirements can be met but are incapable of improving the environmental performance of GCPS products as they do not raise the products’ level of sustainability.

• Secondly, both eco-labelling schemes are perceived as being unable to distinguish between GCPS’ higher sustainable quality value and the eco-labelled products of mainstream coffee sector. High quality coffee products with a Type I or Type I-like logo appear to have the same quality as eco-labelled mainstream coffee and therefore are rather perceived as downgraded. Further, high quality coffee implies higher purchase costs and thus has a higher selling price.

• As a result, any added eco-labelling scheme value cannot be indicated to bring about positive result. Thus, the eco-labelling schemes’ market conditions do not create market incentives for high quality coffee to put up or cope with the additional costs and efforts required for implementing an eco-labelling scheme implementation.

»»Both eco-labelling schemes are not capable of matching the market conditions of GCPS and thus generate incentives to gain market interest.

• Thirdly, both eco-labelling schemes are perceived as raising consumer awareness of environmental and social issues through their popularity within the mainstream coffee sector. Thus, consumers’ conscience about their purchase impact and about the differences of coffee cultivation has been enhanced. This serves to make consumers more receptive and Chapter 6 Analysis • 91

demanding for GCPS product information on sustainability. However, both eco-labelling schemes lack to give consumers appropriate information about GCPS products’ overall value indicators of sustainable quality and their sustainable impact in contrast to mainstream coffee products.

• Thus, Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes both fail to meet the GCPS demand of consumer product information that is able to highlight their high sustainable quality status of speciality coffee.

»»Both eco-labelling schemes set the foundation for consumers’ sustainability awareness. This enhances the promotion conditions for GCPS to make the sustainable reputation of their high quality coffee understandable and more visible. However, both eco-labelling schemes are incapable of indicating and signalling the sustainable quality differences between specialty coffee of high quality and the mainstream coffee sector.

»»Thus, eco-labelling schemes cannot distinctively characterize coffee products of higher sustainable quality in order to meet and satisfy consumer demand for high quality products (of additional or higher sustainable value indicators).

By looking at these comprehensive evaluation results and comparing them against the different intended outcome phases of the normative eco-labelling policy model (Figure 15 below), it is quite obvious that Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes do not reach the first intended outcome, namely being successfully implemented (outcome1, black).

Figure 15. Normative PTE-model of Eco-labelling Schemes; indicated with Outcome1=defect. 92 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

Whereas Type I-like eco-labelling schemes fully fail to generate the requirements for operating as market-friction based instruments towards GCPSs dealing with high quality coffee products, Type I eco-labelling schemes are applied, but only on a narrow scale. Thus Type I schemes only marginally generate the requirements to operate as market- friction based instruments. Type I and Type I-like schemes function as consumer-oriented instruments since they raise awareness about environmental and social issues as well as sharpen the consumers’ conscience about their purchase impact in general. However, they cannot highlight GCPS products’ specific details about their higher quality through values such as sustainability or other values that could be regarded as such. As a result, Type I and Type I-like schemes fail to generate the requirements to fully work as a consumer-oriented and market-friction based instruments. In sum, Type I schemes (regarded as rather being ineffectively implemented) and Type I-like schemes (regarded as failing to be implemented) can be considered as failing to encourage GCPS to certify their products and fulfil “outcome1” in order to create and increase the number of environmental benign products.

Figure 16. Normative PTE-model of eco-labelling schemes; indicated with Outcome1=defect, Outcome2=positive, Policy Goal=positive.

At the same time, the comparison of the evaluation results shows that GCPS still achieve ‘outcome 2’ and the ‘final policy goal’, even though ‘outcome1’ was not accomplished (Figure 16, above). At first glance, the marginal or missing implementation of Type I and Type I-like schemes should negatively affect the number of environmentally benign products. But as GCPS offer high quality coffee products with an inherently high degree of sustainable value, GCPS contribute to ‘outcome 2’ by increasing the number of environmentally benign products without the implementation of eco-labelling schemes. With respect to that, GCPS realise the ‘final policy goal’ of contributing to a sustainable production and consumption by providing and promoting environmentally benign products. Further, they even imply a higher sustainable value, which the rationality of Chapter 6 Analysis • 93 eco-labelling policy cannot cover, express or reward. In summary, the evaluation results demonstrate that GCPS operate in opposition to the normative PTE-model, which draws on coffee eco-labelling schemes’ underlying rationality.

Without the implementation of the considered eco-labelling schemes, GCPS address eco-labelling schemes’ policy target and realize their policy’s goal-set agenda by their high quality coffee products. Thus, the obtained evaluation results are directed against the anticipated rationality of coffee eco-labelling schemes, since eco-labelling schemes’ intended problem-solving process is not needed to contribute to a sustainable development. According to that, the normative PTE-model, based on how the eco-labelling schemes’ policy is supposed to function, must be reconsidered and reformulated in order to offer an appropriate picture of eco-labelling schemes’ practical implementation process in relation to GCPS. Figure 17 below tries to cover this modification. This new model must still be regarded as a hypothetical model since realistic pictures can only be painted on the basis of large empirical studies. However, it serves as an instrument to clearly show that GCPS products foster sustainable consumption and production without being eco-labelled. In general, this implies that current coffee eco-labelling schemes are not able to green GCPS products. However, does this imply that the entire rationality of eco-labelling schemes is incapable of greening GCPS production or are there just some conflicting, counterproductive elements that cause this result? The extent of eco-labelling schemes’ limits in terms of greening GCPS remains unclear.

Figure 17. Modification of the Normative PTE-model of Eco-labelling schemes.

It should be mentioned here that the applied policy evaluation method consists of two components, which firstly implies assessing a policy implementation and its effects. Secondly, the PTE method serves as a way to learn about the potentials and limits of a policy in order to provide constructive feedback on how to optimise the policy 94 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU rationalization or other activities that might need improvement. It is thus of importance here to more precisely identify eco-labelling schemes’ limits in relation to greening GCPS, as a further analysis might give an outlook in order to better use eco-labelling schemes and strengthen their positive potential or to finally reject them as a greening strategy for GCPS. Hence, the following part will further explore the limitations of current eco-labelling schemes in terms of greening GCPS. The modified normative PTE-model will support and facilitate the following analytical reflection on coffee eco-labelling schemes in regard to GCPS and thereby supports the further application of the policy evaluation results.

6.5 IN LIGHT OF “ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORITY”

As already briefly outlined, the evaluation results demonstrated that the eco-labelling implementation in relation to GCPS did not proceed as planned, namely applying Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. Moreover, the above reformulation of the normative PTE-model practically questions eco-labelling schemes’ underlying rationality, with its intended policy function and goals of greening. But further, it also put a question mark on eco-labelling schemes’ theoretical conception from the perspective of ecological modernisation progress, which regards eco-labelling schemes as a wider, reflexive socio-institutional policy strategy of environmental reform that assigns citizen-consumers an active role in the market sphere.

To recapitulate, eco-labelling schemes provide a distinct form of environmental author- ity3 – political consumerism – which citizen-consumers can apply as the end-users of the production-consumption chain. In other words, the greening of products through eco-labelling schemes is considered by EMT to enable citizen-consumers to act as decisive bottom-up actors and foster progress towards green modernity. Further, eco-labelling schemes are a conversion of the concerns of citizens-consumers with regard to sustainability, which “are articulated, translated and directed to providers in production- consumption chains” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2008: 357).

Beyond exerting pressure from the lower-ends of supply chains and making their voices heard, citizen-consumers sustain and provide grounds for industries and providers of green products to implement innovation by using their political purchase power, i.e. choosing eco-labelling schemes. Thus, the exertion of purchase power in a political purpose is regarded as the key to putting Type I and Type I-like schemes’ policy goals into force and propelling the progress of ecological modernization. The notion of environmental authority can be located in relation to outcome 1= “implementation of eco-labelling schemes”, since this provides the prerequisite of “giving citizen-consumers

3 As the study just regards political consumerism as a form of environmental authority, the study uses the term “environmental authority”. Thus, political consumerism and environmental authority will be applied in the same tenor. Chapter 6 Analysis • 95 authority and power in a non-trivial way” (Spaargaren & Mol, 2010: 357) Figure 18 visually positions the ‘environmental authority’ of political consumerism within the normative PTE-model.

Figure 18. Normative PTE-model of Eco-labelling schemes, indicated with ‘Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism’.

Though, if environmental authority is regarded as a reflexive policy approach for the progress of ecological modernization, what happens when Type I and Type I-like coffee eco-labelling schemes fail to be implemented by GCPS, as illustrated in Figure 19 below?

Figure 19. Modification of normative PTE-model of Eco-labelling schemes in relation to ‘Environmental Authority of Political Consumerism.’ 96 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

At first glance, general consumer awareness about purchase impact through eco-labelling schemes’ popularity in the mainstream sector is perceived as being present. Consumers are thereby generally invited and stimulated to articulate environmental authority by purchasing coffee products that are indicated with Type I and Type I-like eco-labels, which are mainly provided by the mainstream coffee sector. Thus, environmental authority in the form of purchase power and responsibility, with the purpose of acting as a guardian for the common goods, is assumed to be given.4 However, by choosing to purchase non-labelled high quality coffee of GCPS, consumers seem to be not taking the chance to exert their environmental authority in order to influence the up-stream economic actors within the production-consumption chain. As consumers’ purchase choice is regarded as the key component to accomplish eco-labelling schemes goal, their whole conception of being a consumer-oriented and market friction-based instrument is from that perspective dysfunctional.

At second glance, it looks different. GCPS provide high quality coffee products, which demonstrate in the evaluation to have a higher degree of sustainable performance in comparison to mainstream coffee products. Even though their products are not awarded or indicated by eco-labelling schemes, GCPS can be regarded as inviting and stimulating consumers to exert environmental authority of political consumerism, too. However, this environmental authoritative role is based on a different construction on sustainability than that of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. In this sense, GCPS invite and empower citizen-consumer to articulate their power of environmental authority by purchasing high quality products. By choosing the sustainable value of high quality coffee, citizen-consumers also gain an active role in the market sphere as they use their political purchase power to sustain and create grounds for GCPS to provide high quality coffee products.

In this respect, one can state that GCPS apply environmental authority. Thus GCPS use the underlying rationality of eco-labelling schemes, to interlink economic and social forces by awarding and indicating products of sustainable value, to harness the market forces. This implies that eco-labelling schemes’ rationality in itself is not failing. Though, this also shows that the execution of environmental authority is not directly dependent on the fact that product providers such as GCPS invite consumers by merely implementing Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes, which in return poses the question: What is the conception of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes lacking that their provided environmental authority (by the labelling of products) is not be regarded or used by GCPS?

Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes raise consumer awareness about purchase impact and thus lay the foundation for consumers to become conscious about their environmental authority of purchase power. However, Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling scheme do not consider that non-labelled similar coffee products (and thus with the same

4 The thesis excludes the factor of other restrictions that eco-labelling schemes products might imply, as discussed in chapter 4 (consumers’ lack of purchase capability by missing information, high prices etc.). Chapter 6 Analysis • 97 functionality and within the same competitive sector5) can imply a sustainable value of a different degree. With regard to the results of policy evaluation, GCPS products reach a firm degree of sustainability, which is above the expected requirements of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. Beyond their relatively higher grade of sustainability in relation to coffee cultivation, it has been demonstrated that GCPS products imply even further sustainable values in regards to issues that Type I and Type I-like schemes do not address. GCPS high quality products are linked with sustainable values of above-average salaries, gender balance, recycling, traditional handcraft, etc. The presence of these values depends on each company’s business structure and processing process. Regardless of how these sustainable values are promoted, there is a certain segment of consumers that purchase in favour of higher sustainable values, even though the mainstream coffee sector offers a broad range of eco-labelled products. Thus, GCPS products provide more than simply invite citizen-consumers to exert environmental authority by making a purchase choice in favour of one certain sustainable value.

In addition, GCPS products invite citizen-consumers make a purchase choice in favour for a higher degree of sustainable value. According to that, GCPS products express a way to contribute towards sustainability that responds to citizen-consumers’ concerns that could not have been articulated and translated through products indicated by Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. In other words, the high quality coffee products from GCPS manage to meet a certain set of concerns, which Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes fail to acknowledge, promote and express. With this in mind it can be stated that Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes’ conception fails to design, develop and maintain coffee products in accordance with the consumers who are choosing to purchase high quality coffee and are thus requesting a higher degree of sustainable quality. In other words, eco-labelling schemes’ underlying rationality of being a consumer-oriented and market-based instrument cannot supply consumer demand towards coffee products of a higher sustainable quality. Figure 20 attempts to illustrate the demand and supply of coffee with different sustainability qualities.6

Figure 20. a) Demand and supply of coffee products with different sustainable quality.

5 Even though one could argue that speciality coffee and mainstream coffee have a different functionality and different competitive sector, they are still considered within the same market and have the same functionality. 6 The product quantity and the level of sustainable quality in Figure 20. a) and 20. b) is fictional. 98 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU

The research design of the thesis has neither the intention nor the competence to measure the gap between different levels of sustainable values. However, as the policy evaluation reveals, GCPS products can be placed above the level of the sustainable quality of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes. Further, as Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes are perceived as mainly tailored to and thereby assumed to be mainly used by the mainstream coffee sector, Type I and Type I-like scheme coffee demand and supply can be put on the same level as eco-labelled mainstream coffee demand and supply.

Figure 20. b) Demand and supply of coffee products with different sustainable quality.

One can generally state that Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes meet the fictional sustainable quality level 1 of mainstream coffee products, but fail to meet the relatively higher degree of sustainable quality of high quality coffee products (fictional sustainable quality level 2). In return this implies, first of all, that contemporary Type I and Type I-like schemes are limited to supplying the demand for eco-labelled mainstream coffee products with a lower degree of sustainable value than GCPS. But further, Type I and Type I-like schemes’ environmental authority is also limited to this degree of sustainability.

In that regard, the thesis is able to identify that, with regard to their level of sustainable quality, Type I and Type I-like schemes are limited in terms of affecting the greening of GCPS products. Hence, it is not the underlying rationality of eco-labelling schemes, namely being a consumer-oriented and market-based policy instrument that does not apply to green GCPS products and act rather inconsistent. However, since Type I and Type I-like schemes are focused on and reduced to consumer demand of a lower sustainable quality, their potential to green GCPS products is limited and conditioned to this one (lower) level of sustainable value. According to that, current Type I and Type I-like schemes would need to raise their relatively lower level of sustainable quality to meet GCPS products positioned above and close the gap between the different degrees of sustainable quality. Chapter 6 Analysis • 99

Thus, by looking to the sustainable quality gap, one can conclude that the provided sustainable level of Type I and Type I-like schemes is not capable to propel the sustainable value of GCPS high quality products and thus is the decisive factor why these coffee eco-labelling schemes are not suitable to green GCPS products. With respect to that, current Type I and Type I-like schemes seem to be obsolete in terms of contributing to a long-term development towards a modern organisation of production and consumption. Especially from a viewpoint of Ecological Modernization Theory (EMT), there eco-labelling schemes are regarded as a wider reflexive strategy of environmental reform, these Type I and Type I-like schemes are seen to be an expression of a social-institutional transformation within modernity’s reflexive modernisation process towards sustainability. In other words, Type I and Type I-like schemes are in that sense considered as a form of policy innovation, driven and propelled by a reflexive progress of modernisation processes, which ought to contribute to a constant improvement of environmental conditions.

Though, as the sustainable quality gap demonstrates, Type I and Type I-like schemes’ intended goal of improving environmental conditions is surpassed by GCPS non-labelled high quality products. Their relatively higher degree of sustainable quality points to a more advanced development towards sustainability. In this respect, GCPS coffee products are further ahead on the path towards modernity and have surpassed Type I and Type I-like schemes’ capacity to improve environmental conditions. Therefore, Type I and Type I-like schemes seem to be more a sad taillight rather than a steering innovative policy headlight leading the society further into modernity by “using untapped potential to improve a broad range of products and services” (COM(2001) 68 final).

Further, in light of EMT, these schemes (as a reflexive environmental policy approach) arise from and are propelled by a continual societal development that critically opposes and reforms its earlier established practices and institutions (posterior) with the goal of improving environmental performance (anterior). From this perspective, Type I and Type I-like schemes can be regarded to be confronted and opposed by GCPS’ respond and supply to consumers demand of a higher level of sustainability, which could lead to a reflexive transformation. However, this would imply that Type I and Type I-like schemes must start to reflect and demonstrate their needs and requirements to reach a higher level of sustainable quality in order to be reformed. Yet, in fact, current Type I and Type I-like schemes are successful with their level of sustainable quality, as they demonstrated for instance in the review „State of Sustainability Initiatives 2014” an increasing market value. Thus, reflexivity processes in order “to carry us over into a more sustainable modernity” (Spaargaren, 2000: 65) remain absent.

In this regard, contemporary Type I and Type I-like schemes might not only be limited in terms of greening GCPS products. They might also be limited in regards to acting as a reflexive policy approach, as their reflective development and response to citizen- consumers’ demand for a higher level of sustainability is missing. In other words, a next step in the continuous process of ecological modernisation is apparent and can 100 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU be pinpointed, but is nevertheless neglected. In this regard, two things can be said. The application of reflexive policy practises through eco-labelling schemes reconciles environmental and economic performance with the goal of improving (corporate) sustainability to a certain degree. However, economic dynamics either fall short in terms of articulating sustainable interest and pushing the level of sustainable goals as they are not paralleled and propelled by environmental institutions and environmental movements consistently enough or economic dynamics are just delimited/bounded to a certain level of sustainable quality, because the logic of the economic sphere is not able to acknowledge differences among forms of environmental improvement and are thus resistant to sustainable quality differences.

Just as Jänicke appeals to challenge and push resistant big polluters in the struggle for environmental improvement by using techno-corporatist practices of governmental structural solutions, one might also need to challenge and push obsolete reflexive policy approaches like the regarded coffee eco-labelling schemes. Thus, in order to overcome their resistance towards a higher degree of sustainability, Type I and Type I-like schemes might need to face up to high quality coffee products. As GCPS products demonstrate through their higher degree of sustainable quality that a more advanced and innovative sustainable future is already possible, they can be regarded as a model on how sustainable development can be approached. In return this implies that to enable a progressive sustainable development which can lead into further modernity, GCPS high quality products should be considered as a guideline to push and confront eco-labelling schemes low level of sustainability. As a result of this, the thesis suggests that eco-labelling schemes as an explicitly merely reflexive policy approach cannot address sustainable improvement adequately enough that “the dirty and ugly industrial caterpillar [to] transform into a[n] ecological butterfly” (Huber quoted in Spaargaren & Mol, 1992: 334).

However, in the combination of being both, a reflexive and techno-corporatist policy approach, coffee eco-labelling schemes may can turn into environmental policy instruments that could further raise the level of sustainability and give citizen-consumers the chance to truly act as agents of environmental change and make a difference. From this perspective, the potential of optimizing these eco-labelling schemes lies in the possibility to extent their underlying rationality, namely being a consumer-based and market friction-based instrument, by technocratic structural solutions which are oriented towards or even above the sustainable level of high coffee quality products. Such (governmental) involvement to affect coffee eco-labelling schemes sustainable regulatory line, could enhance and so propel eco-labelling schemes provision of sustainable quality. As a result, this could ensure eco-labelling schemes contribution “to carry us over into a more sustainable modernity”.

Thus, if environment is at stake, we might not just leave it to someone’s value of what sustainability entails. Chapter 7 Conclusion • 101

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION

With the intention of exploring the greening potentials and limits of current eco- labelling schemes in regards to GCPS, the overarching research frame focused on the following question:

• What are the motivating factors and benefits as well as barriers and shortcomings of existing eco-labelling schemes experienced by GCPSs?

This question has been answered using a policy evaluation of a rational perspective that provides information on how the introduction and the function of eco-labelling schemes is observed and perceived by GCPS. The evaluation results showed on one hand that certain shortcomings of Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes to address high quality coffee products lead to an inappropriate or failed implementation of eco-labelling schemes by GCPS. Further with the support of a normative eco-labelling scheme policy model, it could be demonstrated that on the other hand GCPS products realize and accomplish the schemes’ initiated and intended policy goals without implementing them.

Beyond the intention to assess a policy’s implementation cycle, the chosen policy evaluation method PTE aims also to optimize a policy’s rationalization. According to that, the study explored further the discovered limitation of eco-labelling schemes to green GCPS products and clarified the extent of eco-labelling schemes greening limits. Thereby it could be excluded that eco-labelling schemes underlying rationality in itself is failing. Hence, they are contributing to a sustainable production and consumption, but as the thesis detected that both eco-labelling schemes are conditioned to supplying the demand for mainstream coffee products, they are thereby limited to a lower degree of sustainability. Thus, due to the fact of their lower degree of sustainable quality, current existing coffee eco-labelling schemes are not suitable to green GCPS products. This opens up a new perspective as it points out a sustainable quality gap between products using eco-labelling schemes and non-labelled GCPS high quality products. In return this raises considerations in terms of improving eco-labelling schemes’ contribution to sustainable development and thus optimizing their rationalization with regard to GCPS high quality products.

It should be once again acknowledged that the applied policy evaluation method has the goal of assessing eco-labelling schemes implementation, but also of fostering a learning 102 • Greening Potentials and Limits of Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU process. Thus on the basis of new insight and knowledge of contemporary coffee eco- labelling schemes' policy cycle, one can provide constructive feedback for improving their policy’s rationalization. That being said, the policy evaluation of this thesis aims also to contribute to the development and enhancement of currently existing coffee Type I and Type I-like schemes. Therefore, the thesis regards the need to raise their relatively lower level of sustainable quality to meet and green GCPS products positioned above. But further the thesis also points to the need to close the gap between the different degrees of sustainable quality. Thus, eco-labelling schemes should also be challenged to surpass GCPS products’ sustainable quality, if they are to be considered as an adequate policy tool that stands for and ensures a genuine continuous improvement of environmental conditions. To this end, the study stresses that non-labelled GCPS high quality products manage to contribute to sustainable development autonomously through their inherent sustainable quality. Further, as they imply a higher level of sustainable quality, the thesis regards GCPS products as frontrunners of “sustainability”.

As it seems to be that GCPS products are setting the agenda for tomorrow’s sustainability, and not environmental product policies like Fair Trade, UTZ and Co., the thesis aims to regard GCPS high quality products as a guideline to raise eco-labelling schemes standards and thus as an model to approach and propel sustainable development towards a higher level. According to that, the thesis recommends to reconsidering the policy conception of all Type I and Type I-like schemes related to the German coffee sector. However, this applies to the study’s results and insight on sustainable quality differences, which open up new a perspective on eco-labelling schemes limitations and raise considerations on the improvement of eco-labelling schemes’ level of sustainability. Thus, reconsidering Type I and Type I-like eco-labelling schemes with regard to GCPS high quality coffee products does not have the intention to cast doubt on the substance of eco-labelling schemes nor to put the whole policy strategy into question. It only is meant to optimize eco-labelling schemes rationalization of contributing to a progressive sustainable consumption and production.

The thesis understands that conclusions and recommendations can be only made on the basis of what has been studied. Still, as there are likely common components and similar mechanisms among other coffee-processing SME, the study regards its results as representative and worth considering in a broader context. Therefore the study appeals generally reconsidering Type I and Type I-like schemes with regard to their sustainable level in relation to the EU-wide processing coffee market. It is self-evident that a strong statement for the EU can only be made on the basis of EU-wide empirical studies. Though, as other eco-labelling schemes from an EU perspective are based on the same rationality as coffee eco-labelling schemes, it seems to be quite likely that other product sectors (especially of commodity trade) might point to similar results of a sustainable quality gap. Thus, the thesis wants to stress here that the policy evaluation provides viable data to generally reconsider eco-labelling schemes sustainability within the EU. But further these data can be applied for further research on eco-labelling scheme implementation in regards to SME, which can generate knowledge with the goal of making Chapter 7 Conclusion • 103 more precise and general recommendations for the policy development of eco-labelling schemes within the EU.

In this respect, the thesis aims also to address the research community especially regarding the conceptual perspective of a sustainable quality gap. This new conception on sustainable quality differences could be fruitful for further research to approach eco-labelling schemes’ sustainability but also to address SMEs contribution to sustainable development by high quality products. On one hand, this could give new insights on how to foster and approach sustainable development by high quality products and gain thereby understanding to what extent high quality products can guide eco-labelling schemes or be a path towards modernity. On the other hand, this could give SMEs stakeholders an even stronger representative voice within the research field of eco-labelling schemes.

Last but not least, due to the high likelihood of similar results within other product areas in the EU, the thesis would like to point out that if the EU strategy 2020 is truly striving to make the EU a leader in terms of achieving a sustainable and sound economic growth, it would be of general importance to identify the frontrunners of green products and services and consider them as a model to approach and propel sustainable development. This would not only enhance eco-labelling schemes in relation to their sustainable quality, but would also make it possible to take the advantage and use them as environmental policy instruments striving for and ensuring a continuous improvement of the environment.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my supervisor, Paulina Rytkönen, who has supported me throughout my thesis with her patience, advice and knowledge while allowing me the room to work in my own way. In one expression for you to never forget: tack, vad cool!

Also, I would like to thank Björn Hassler and Romina Rodela for their encouragement and support, respectively.

Furthermore, I would like to thank my interviewees, who kindly shared their time, experiences, and opinions with me. None of this would have been possible without them. At this point I would like to thank also Anna Bjurholm for giving the thesis its final shape.

I would also like to thank to my friends, Wolfgang Kayling and Nacka Församling cheering me up with encouraging words or just a smile.

Most importantly, I would like to thank my family for their love and patience. My family, an amazing and unique one in many ways, supported me whenever I needed it and I always deeply appreciate their belief in me.

“To see a world in a grain of sand and a heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour.” – William Blake 106 • References

REFERENCES

Bacon, M. (2010). “Who decides what is fair in fair trade? The agri-environmental governance of standards, access, and price.” Journal of Peasant Studies 37: 111-147.

Biel, A. (2004). “The impact of environmental labelling on consumer preference: negative vs. positive labels.” Journal of Consumer Policy 27: 213–230.

Boström, M. (2011). “The problematic social dimension of sustainable development: the case of the Forest Stewardship Council.” International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 19: 3-15.

Boström, M. & Klintman, M. (2008). Eco-standards, product labelling and green consumerism. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Boström, M. & Klintman, M. (2014). Dilemmas for standardizers of sustainable consumption. In International Handbook of Social and Environmental Change. In Lockie, S. et al., London: Routledge: 81-93.

Bray, D. et al. (2002). “Social dimensions of organic coffee production in Mexico: Lessons for eco-labeling initiatives.” Society & Natural Resources 15: 429-446.

Buttel, F.H. (2000). “Ecological modernization as social theory.”Geoforum 31: 57-65.

Butterfield R. et al. (2005). Forest certification and small forest enterprises. Key trends and impacts – benefits and barriers. Forest trends and rainforest alliance. Available on: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/forestcertpaper.pdf [2015-05-25].

Carter, N. (2007). The politics of the environment. Ideas, Activism, Policy. Cambridge: University Press.

Crabbé, A & Leroy, P. (2008). The handbook of environmental policy evaluation. London: Earthscan.

Crals, E. & Vereeck, L. (2005). “The affordability of sustainable entrepreneurship certification for SMEs.” International Journal Sustainable Development World 12: 173–183.

Cohen, R. S. (1985). The foundation of objective knowledge. The relations of poppers theory of knowledge to that of kant. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.

References • 107

Dangelico, R & Pujari, D. (2010). “Mainstreaming green product innovation: why and how companies integrate environmental sustainability.” Journal of Business Ethics 95: 471–486.

D’Souza, C. et al. (2006). “An empirical study on the influence of environmental labels on consumers. Corporate Communication.” An international Journal 11: 162-173.

EC Council Regulation (2007). Regulation on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation EEC) No 2092/91 (Regulation (EC) No 834/2007). Available on: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=- OJ:L:2007:189:0001:0023:EN:PDF [2015-05-25].

EC DG Environment (2004). The Direct and Indirect Benefits of the European Ecolabel – Final Report. Brussels: EU Commission.

European Commission (2001). Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy (COM (2001) 68 final). Available on:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/2001developments.htm [2015-05-25].

European Commission (2003). Communication on Integrated Product Policy. (COM (2003) 0302 final). Available on: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/ippcommunication.htm [2015-05-25].

European Commission (2007). Communication on small and medium-sized enterprises. (COM/2007/0379 final). Available on:http://eurlex.europa.eu/legalcontent/ EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52007DC0379 [2015-05-25].

European Commission (2010). Europe 2020: the European Union strategy for growth and employment (COM (2010) 2020 final). Available on: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:em0028 [2015-05-25].

Fair Trade (2009). A Charter of Fair Trade Principles. Available on: http://www.fairtrade.net/fileadmin/user_upload/content/2009/about_us/ documents/Fair_Trade_Charter.pdf [2015-05-25].

First, I. & Khetriwal, D. (2008). “Exploring the relationship between environmental orientation and brand value: is there fire or only smoke?”Business Strategy and the Environment 19: 90–103.

Ferraro, P. et al. (2005).”Price premiums for eco-friendly commodities: Are 'Green' markets the best way to protect endangered ecosystems?” Environmental & Resources Economics 32 419-438.

Fridell, G. (2007). Fair trade coffee: the prospects and pitfalls of market-driven social justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Gallastegui, G. (2002). “The use of Eco-labels: A review of the literature.” European Environment 12: 316–331. 108 • References

Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford: University Press.

Global Ecolabel Monitor (2010). Ecolabel Index. Available on: http://www.ecolabelin- dex.com/downloads/Global_Ecolabel_Monitor2010.pdf [2015-05-25].

Global Ecolabelling Network (2004). Introduction to Ecolabelling. Available on: http://www.globalecolabelling.net/docs/documents/intro_to_ecolabelling.pdf [2015-05-25].

Golden et al. (2010). An Overview of Ecolabels and Sustainability Certifications in the Global Marketplace. Corporate Sustainability Initiative. North Carolina: Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

Granville, B. & Dine, J. (2013). The Processes and Practices of Fairtrade: Trust, Ethics and Governance. London: Routledge.

Gutiérrez N. et al. (2012). “Eco-Label Conveys Reliable Information on Fish Stock Health to Seafood Consumers.” PLOSONE 7 Special section: 1.

Guthman, J. (2006). “The Paradox of Organic Farming in California.” Geographical Review 96: 159-161.

Hajer, Maarten A. (1997). The politics of environmental Discourse: Ecological modernization and the policy process. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hilton, M. (2000). SME support for sustainable development: Principles and practice. European foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions. Luxembourg: Official Publications of the European Communities.

Huber, J. (2009). Ecological modernisation: beyond scarcity and bureaucracy. In Ecological Modernisation Reader: Environmental Reform in Theory and Practice. In Mol A. et al., London and New York: Routledge: 42-56.

ICO (2014). The Story Coffee. Available on: http://www.ico.org/coffee_story.asp [25.05.2015].

ISO (2012). Environmental labelling and declarations. Genève: ISO. Available on: http://www.iso.org/iso/environmental-labelling.pdf [2015-05-25].

ISO 14024:1999 – Environmental labels and declarations –Type I environmental labelling – Principles and procedures. Available on: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:st- d:23145:en [2015-05-25].

ISO 14021:1999 – Environmental labels and declarations – Type II Self-declared environmental claims. Available on: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=23146 [2015-05-25]. References • 109

ISO 14025:2006 – Environmental labels and declarations –Type III environmental declarations. Available on: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=38131 [2015-05-25].

Jordan, A. et al. (2003). New instruments of environmental governance? National experiences and prospects. London: Frank Cess Publishers.

Jänicke, M. (2008a). “Ecological modernisation: new perspectives.” Journal of Cleaner Production 16: 557-565.

Jänicke, M. (2008b). Ecological modernization: Innovation and diffusion of policy and technology. Berlin: FFU.

Jänicke, M. (1993). Ökologische und politische Modernisierung in entwickeltenIndus- triegesellschaften. In Umweltpolitik als Modernisierungsprozeß. Politikwissenschaftliche Umwelforschung und -lehre in der Bundesrepublik. In Prittwitz, V. Opladen: Leske + Budrich: 15–30.

Kerr, W. & Gaisford, J. (2007). Handbook on international trade policy. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar.

Klintman, M. (2012). “Issues of scale in global accreditation of sustainable tourism schemes: towards harmonised re-embeddedness?” Sustainability: Science, Practice & Policy 8: 59-69.

Kvale, S. & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage.

Labonne, J. (2006). A comparative analysis of the environmental management, performance and innovation of SMEs and larger firms. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General Environment)

Leroy, P. & Tatenhove, J. (2000). Political modernization theory and environmental politics. In Environment and global modernity. In Spaargaren, G. et al., London: Sage Publications: 187-209.

Loureiro, M. & Lotade, J. (2005). “Do fair trade and eco-labels in coffee wake up the consumer conscience?” Ecological Economics 53: 129-138.

Lundqvist Lennart J. (1996). Environmental politics in the nordic countries: Policy, organisation, and capacity. In Governing the environment: Politics, policy, and organization in the nordic countries. In Christiansen P., Copenhagen: Nord: 13-27.

MSC (2013). Independent report of MSC engaged toothfish fisheries confirms positive environmental improvements. Available on: https://www.msc.org/newsroom/news/ new-independent-study-of-msc-engaged-toothfish-fisheries-confirms-positive-environmental-improvements [2015-05-25]. 110 • References

Mickwitz, Per (2006). Environmental policy evaluation: Concepts and practices. (Doctoral dissertation 66) Tampere: University of Tampere.

Mol, A. (1996). “Ecological modernisation and institutional reflexivity: Environmental reform in the late modern age.” Environmental Politics 5: 302-323.

Mol, A. & Spaargaren G. (2000). Ecological modernization theory in debate: An review. In Ecological modernization around the world: Perspectives and critical debates. In Mol, A. & Sonnenfeld, D., London: Frank Cass: 17-49.

Mol, A. (2001). Globalization and environmental reform. Ecological modernization and the global economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Mol, A. & Jänicke, M. (2009). The origins and theoretical foundations of Ecological Modernisation Theory. In Ecological Modernisation Reader: Environmental Reform in Theory and Practice. In Mol A. et al., London and New York: Routledge: 17-28.

Mol et al. (2013). Ecological modernization theory: Taking stock, moving forward. In Handbook of environmental sociology. In Lockie, S. et al., London: Routledge: 15-30.

Mol et al. (2014). Ecological Modernisation Theory: where do we stand? In Ökologische Modernisierung. Zur Geschichte und Gegenwart eines Konzepts in Umweltpolitik und Sozialwissenschaften. In Bemmann, M. et al., Frankfurt: Campus Verlag: 35-66.

Nash, A. (2009). “The European Commission’s sustainable consumption and production and sustainable industrial policy action plan.” Journal of Cleaner Production 17: 496–498.

Nes et al. (2010). “Language differences in qualitative research: is meaning lost in translation?” European Journal of Ageing 7: 313–316.

Nilsson, H. et al. (2004). “The use of eco-labeling like initiatives on food products to promote quality assurance—is there enough credibility?“ Journal of Cleaner Production 12: 517–526.

OECD (1985). Annuaire Europeen. Paris: OECD.

OECD (1997). Eco-Labelling: Actual Effects of Selected Programme. Paris: OECD.

OECD (2005). Effects of Eco-Labelling Schemes: Compilation of Recent Studies. Paris: OECD.

OECD (2010). SMEs and Green Growth. Promoting sustainable manufacturing and eco-innovation in small firms. Lessons from the global crisis and the way forward job and growth. Paris: OECD.

Panhuysen, S. & Pierrot, J. (2014). Coffee Barometer 2014. The Hague: Hivos.

Preibisch, H. (2012). German coffee market. Hamburg: German Coffee Association. References • 111

Pay, E. (2009). The market for organic fair-trade coffee. Rome: FAO Trade and Markets Division.

Pierrot, J. et al. (2011). Trends in the Trade of Certified Coffees. Geneva: International Trade Centre.

Pujari, D. (2006). “Eco-innovation and new product development: understanding the influences on market performance.” Technovation 26: 76–85.

Potts, J. et al. (2014). State of Sustainability Initiatives Review. Standards and the Green Economy. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

Rademaekers, K. et al. (2011). The role of market-based instruments in achieving a resource efficient economy. Rotterdam: EU Commission, DG Environment.

Rainforest Alliance (2014). Requirements and Guidelines for Use of the Rainforest Alliance Trademarks. Available on: http://www.rainforestalliance.org/sites/default/files/up- loads/4/rainforest-alliance-marks-guide.pdf [2015-05-25].

Rainforest Alliance (2015). Mission. Available on: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/de/about [2015-05-25].

Rehfeld, M. et al. (2007). ”Integrated Product Policy and Environmental Product Innovations: An Empirical Analysis.” Ecological Economics 61: 91–100.

Rogers, P. J. et al. (2000). Program Theory Evaluation: Practice, Promise, and Problems. In Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities. In Rogers, P.J. et al., San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass: 5-13.

Rubik, F. & Frankl, P. (2005). The Future of Eco-labelling. Making Environmental Product Information Systems Effective. Sheffield: Greenleaf.

Salzman, J. (1991). Environmental labelling in the OECD countries. Paris: OECD.

Sammer, K. & Wüstenhagen, R. (2012). “The influence of eco-labelling on consumer behaviour.” Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 185–199.

Shaffer, G. (2001). “The World Trade Organization under Challenge: Democracy and the Law and Politics of the WTO’s Treatment of Trade and Environment Matters.” Harvard Environmental Law Review 25: 1-19.

Spaargaren, G. & Mol, A. (1992). “Sociology, environment, and modernity: Ecological modernization as a theory of social change.” Society and Natural Resources 5: 323-44.

Spaargaren, G. (1997). The ecological modernization of production and consumption: Essays in environmental sociology (Doctoral dissertation 2213). Wageningen: Wageningen University.

112 • References

Spaargaren, G. & van Vliet, B. (2000). ”Lifestyles, consumption and the environment: The ecological modernization of domestic consumption.” Environmental Politics 9: 50-76.

Spaargaren, G. (2000a). Ecological modernization theory and the changing discourse on environment and modernity. In Environment and global modernity. In Spaargaren, G. et al., London: Sage Publications: 41-73.

Spaargaren, G. (2000b). “Ecological modernization theory and domestic consumption.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 2: 323-335.

Spaargaren, G. & Mol, A. (2008). “Greening global consumption. Redefining politics and authority.” Global Environmental Change 18: 350– 359.

Spaargaren & van Koppen (2009). Provider strategies and the greening of consumption practices: exploring the role of companies in sustainable consumption. In The new middle classes globalizing lifestyles, consumerism and environmental concern. In Meier, L. & Lange, H., Dordrecht: Springer.

Spaargaren, G. & Oosterveer, P. (2010). “Citizen-Consumers as agents of change in globalizing modernity: The case of sustainable consumption.” Sustainability 2: 1887-1908.

Stubblefield, L. et al. (2010). “Engaging small- and medium-sized businesses in sustainability.” Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 1: 178–200.

Sörqvist et al. (2013) “Who needs cream and sugar when there is Eco-Labeling? Taste and willingness to pay for "Eco-Friendly" coffee.”PLOSONE 8: 12.

Taylor, P. (2014). “In the market but not of it: Fair Trade coffee and Forest Stewardship Council certification as market-based social change.” World Development 33: 129–147.

Trade Economics (2015). Commodity coffee. Available on: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/commodity/coffee [2015-05-25].

Thidell, Å. (2009). Influences, effects and changes from interventions by eco-labelling schemes. What a Swan can do? Doctoral Dissertation 2009:5. Lund: Lund University.

UTZ (2007). Certified in a nutshell: Key points of value. Available on: http://sustainableinnovations.com/PDF/UTZ_keypoints.pdf [2015-05-25].

UTZ (2011). Coffee labelling & communications policy. Available on: http://savassicafe.com.br/assets/documentos/2011_coffee_labeling___communica- tions_policy_utz_certified.pdf [2015-05-25].

UTZ (2013). Bringing good practice to scale certified. Available on: https://www.utzcerti- fied.org/attachments/article/2074/utz-annual-report-2013.pdf [2015-05-25]. References • 113

UNOPS, United Nations (2009). A Guide to environmental labels for Procurement Practitioners of the United Nations System. Copenhagen: United Nations.

Vedung, E. (1997). Public Policy and Program Evaluation. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

Vedung, E. (1998). Policy Instruments: Typology and Theories. In Carrots, Sticks, & Sermons: Policy Instruments & Their Evaluation. In Bemelmans-Videc, M. et al. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers: 103-128.

Vedung, E. & Román, Mickael (2002). Intervention Theory Evaluation of Global Environmental Regimes. Seville: European Evaluation Society.

Williams, A. (2003). “How to Write and Analyse a Questionnaire.” Journal of Orthodontics 30: 245-252.

WCWD, United Nation (1987). Our Common Future. Towards Sustainable Development. New York: United Nation General Assembly.

World Bank (2015). Beyond Economic Growth. Developing Countries. Available on: http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/global/glossary.html [2015-05-25].

Zarrilli, S. & Vossenaar, R. (1997). Eco-Labelling and International Trade. Hampshire: Macmillan.

Öman, A. (2009). The impact of Type I eco-labelling schemes to improve the environmental performance of products. Stockholm: Swedish Environmental Research Institute.

Interview references

LG. (2015): Company 1, CEO.

PN. (2015): Company 2, CEO.

KL. (2015): Company 3, CEO.

BK. (2015): Company 4, Assistant of CEO

BA. (2015): Company 5, Assistant of CEO

Appendix • 115

APPENDIX 1: GOAL ATTAINMENT EVALUATION

Final Outcome Goal-Setting: providing and promoting eco-labelled products.

German Coffee Import of eco-labelled Marking products as Are eco-labelling schemes processing SMEs. green beans. eco-label branded. policy the decisive impact?

Company 1 1. Via importers: Most Type I: No. Import of eco-labelled green missing. Not only or coffee: If quality of eco-label 90% import volume: 1 target-oriented, but random Type I-like: No. coffee correspond with desired 10% import volume: 2 purchase of Type I and Type demand of quality. I-like. No distinct eco-labelled volume.

2. Via direct trade links: No.

Company 2 1. Via importers: Not only or Type I: Labelling on the Import of eco-labelled green target-oriented, but random products of the online shop. coffee: If quality of eco-label 99% import volume: 1 purchase of Type I and Type No labelling on the pack- coffee correspond with desired 1% import volume: 2 I-like. No distinct eco-la- aged products and loose demand of quality. belled volume. goods in the own shop. If one can choose out of a 2. Via direct trade links: No. bigger selection of green coffee conform to the company’s quality demands, the decision is in favour of eco/labelled coffee.

Labelling of products: Just at online shop as other coffes maybe get downsized with quality.

Company 3 1. Via importers: Not only or Type I: label covers the Import: Purchase eco-labelled target-oriented but random products. coffee to contribute towards 60% import volume: 1 purchase of Type I and Type sustainability. Type I-like: label is partially 40% import volume: 2 I-like. No distinct eco-labelled volume. removed and replaced by a Labelling: Applied eco-label- own fair logo. ling schemes to provide and 2. Via direct trade links: Yes, promote the values. all purchase is of Type I and Type I-like.

Company 4 1. Via importers: Mostly not, Type I and Type I-like via Import and Labelling: To com- but random purchase of Type importers: No labelling on ply with the demand of organic 90% import volume: 1 I and Type I-like. No distinct the packaged products. food retail customers. 10% import volume: 2 eco-labelled volume. Type I via direct trade Just in small amount as organic 2. Via direct trade links: links: label covers one cultivation on a big scale Mainly not. Type I of a product. lacking other values to be volume to cove the offer of profitable. one product.

Company 5 1. Via importers: Mostly not, Type I: No. Import of eco-labelled green but random purchase of Type coffee: If quality of eco-label 97% import volume: 1 I and Type I-like. No distinct Type I-like: No. coffee correspond with desired 3% import volume: 2 eco-labelled volume. demand of quality.

2. Via direct trade links: No. 116 • Appendix

APPENDIX 2: SIDE EFFECT EVALUATION

Intended Final Outcome. Anticipated positive/ Anticipated negative/ Beneficial Side-Effect Detrimental Side- (Beneficial Main Effects). Effect (Perverse Effects) Consequences are produced contrary to the intended outcomes.

German Coffee Eco-labelling schemes goal: Derived of the intended goal: to Derived of the intended goal: processing to contribute to sustainable contribute to sustainable consumption contrary produced outcomes SMEs consumption and production. and production. to contribute to sustainable consumption and production. Implementation of eco- • Primary: Provide and promote labelling schemes to provide eco-labelling. • Primary: Non-implementation: and promote environmental counterproductive to contribute benign products. • Secondary: Create market interest: towards sustainability. obtain added purchase quality and This implies: gaining market share. • Secondary: Non market interest: 1. To purchase and process counterproductive towards SME. eco-labelled green coffee • Tertiary: Raise consumer beans. awareness: provide easily, credible • Tertiary: Non consumer approachable information and recognition: counterproductive 2. To certificate the increase consumer awareness. to stimulate consumer purchase production/product. choice.

3. To mark the end-products as eco-labelled.

Company 1 Primary: Does not exist. Primary: No implementation. Implementation implies too high Secondary: Interested in public effort of cost and time, ineffective Type I label. to achieve sustainability and cannot improve high quality. Tertiary: Increased consumer awareness. Secondary: No incentives to gain market share. Reach not objective: Consumers have asked after Fair Trade has even lowered eco-labelling’s. the requirements of the initial hurdle. Tailored to processing Added value from a market side coffee industry, eco-labels are not from a sustainable side. valued as special market interest, not valued as added value: quality makes sustainability.

Tertiary: Does not exist.

Company 2 Primary: Implantation of public Primary: Non implementation Type I. of private Type-like. As NO: sustainable improvement or higher Secondary: Market interest as added quality by adding label value. cost and efforts are feasible and eligible for Type I. Secondary: No incentive to gain market share, aim at the main Tertiary: Coffee consumer became coffee industry, coordinated and more aware about the differences of aligned with the process of the coffee cultivation and quality. industry.

Consumers have asked after Tertiary: Does not exist. eco-labels. Appendix • 117

Intended Final Anticipated positive/ Anticipated negative/Detrimental Outcome. Beneficial Side-Effect Side-Effect (Perverse Effects) (Beneficial Main Effects). Consequences are produced contrary to the intended outcomes.

Company 3 Primary: Public Type I: 100% sustainable Primary: No implementation as and given cost and effort is manageable. Eco-labelling cover and reach not the sustainable values to be sustainable: Secondary: Create market interest in No sustainable or quality improvement public Type I as eco-labelling is seen as adding label value quality. “Adequate and acceptable as they render a service in accordance to their claims Secondary: Counter-development of and obligations”. Type I-like labels, Straight marketing tool for industry. Not interest, do not Tertiary: Raise consumer awareness match their market interest and via direct links: Type I credible information. Shaken up the consumer Tertiary: Does not exist. and still influence the consumer to think about what and where to buy the products.

Consumers have asked after eco-label.

Company 4 Primary: Implementation by public Primary: Non implementation as Type I, demand of food retailers. Direct trade links have no incentives as higher costs and effort but no added Secondary: Contribute to remunerate value, cannot ensure or enhance poor farmers green coffee with a higher sustainability at the coffee farm as sustainable value. coffee farm has higher norms and values. Pay only for the eco/labelling Tertiary: Eco-labelling schemes have business, does not raise their value. been woken up an eco-movement. Through their popularity, eco-labelling Secondary: Force SME to cut direct schemes, sharpened conscious, consumer trade links or put more expenditure more alert when purchasing products on their partners. No incentives to and consumers have asked after gain market access. Just to brand a eco-labellings product for the mainstream consumer marketing tool. Organic cultivation on a big scale drops its value.

Tertiary: Does not exist.

Company 5 Primary: – Primary: Shape no need to implement as high quality coffee is regarded as Secondary: – sustainable. Label makes the products not better. Standards downgraded to Tertiary: Eco-labelling schemes made. fulfil the processing coffee industry, Consumers aware about their impact be perceived fruitless to promote towards sustainability. Led the first step sustainability. Impact is marginal. No for consumer purchase consciousness. sustainable improvement by adding Consumers have asked after eco-label label value.

Secondary: Are not eligible with the companies of offering high quality offer no incentive to gain market share.

Tertiary: –

Cannot improve. 118 • Appendix

Intended Un-anticipated positive Un-anticipated negative Final Outcome. Side-Effect. Side-Effect.

German Coffee Eco-labelling schemes goal: processing to contribute to sustainable SMEs consumption and production.

Implementation of eco-labelling schemes to provide and promote environmentally benign products.

This implies: 1. To purchase and process eco-labelled green coffee beans.

2. To certificate the production/product.

3. To mark the end-products as eco-labelled.

Company 1 Primary: Label requirements could Primary: Fail to foster quality. be easily and fully met. Eco-labels are not valued as special market interest, do not represent Secondary: No market real added value: quality makes disadvantages. sustainability.

Tertiary: Fostered the proportion of Secondary: Labels Comprehend as consumers attaching importance to lower quality as global players have higher quality products. the same. Match not the market of high quality coffee. Has no value indicator to characterize coffee products.

Tertiary: Give wrong information.

Company 2 Primary: Label requirements can or Primary: Do not foster to raise could be easily and fully met. coffee quality from a holistic perspective which a sustainable Secondary: No market development needs, cannot disadvantages Industry supports represent the special quality and farmer of speciality coffee in the case do not make a difference between of bad harvest. different levels of quality and thus also sustainable value tailored to Tertiary: Coffee consumers industry, missing implementation have become more aware of the possibility for SME . Type I like: Do differences regarding coffee quality not want to pay additionally as it and cultivation. does not get fairer, have no impact. Schemes have no impact to stand for quality taste and cannot define a products content for 100%.

Secondary: Match not the market of high quality coffee, Nestle reinforcing with eco-labelling on speciality coffee market. Has no value indicator to characterize coffee products. Appendix • 119

Intended Un-anticipated positive Un-anticipated negative Final Outcome. Side-Effect. Side-Effect.

Company 3 Primary: Label requirements can or Primary: No fostering of raising could be easily and fully met coffee quality from a holistic perspective which a sustainable Secondary: No market development needs, cannot disadvantages. Further organic labels represent quality and do not like Demeter, give the possibility differentiate between different to differentiate the quality of one’s levels of quality and thus coffee product with an additional sustainable value. higher standard Secondary: Has no value indicator to characterize coffee products.

Tertiary: Labels Lack to be 100% sustainable, No label can express real standard, irritating for consumers.

Company 4 Primary: Implementation by Primary: Do not raise coffee demand of food retailers, label quality in general, cannot represent requirements can be easily and fully quality and cannot show different met. levels of quality and thus of sustainable value. Tertiary: Non eco-labelling: Traceable and transparent Secondary: Eco-labelling’s support information of direct trade links. industry products and in long Consumers receivable to the term dismiss own high quality. No means between high quality and encouragement to increase organic sustainable. Advantage to promote eco-labelled coffee. Has no value own products. Eco-labelling’s raise indicator to characterize coffee the level of transparency. products.

Tertiary: Play with the moral consciousness of the consumer. Just a safety line for consumers.

Company 5 Primary: Label requirements could Primary: Eco-labelling cannot be easily and fully met. cover or show with their logo values of high quality coffee. No Secondary: Positive for own fostering of raising coffee quality, business. No market disadvantages. stop a sustainable development. no capacity for public Type I due Tertiary: Consumers have started to implementation high costs and to see the line between quality and effort. sustainability. Secondary: Chains with labels give own product a lower quality, Has no value indicator to characterize coffee products.

Tertiary: Cannot help consumers to distinguish products grade sustainability, eco-labelling’s are in the current form not needed. 120 • Appendix

APPENDIX 3: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Alle Daten und Informationen die aus dem Interview erhoben werden, bleiben vertraulich und werden anonym behandelt.

1. Wieviel Angestellte hat ihre Firma?

2. Wie stellen sich ihre Handelsbeziehungen zu Kaffeebohnenproduzenten dar? • Großhändler, direkte Bezugsquelle, gemischt — jeweils in % • Seit wann, • Welcher Umfang, • Veränderungen, Umstellungen, Einschneide innerhalb der Geschäftsbeziehungen?

3. Wieviel Tonne Kaffee kaufen Sie jährlich ein? Wieviel werden verarbeitet und wieviel verkauft?

4. Wie genau sieht Ihr Vetriebssystem aus? Wieviel Standorte haben Sie? Niederlassungen im Ausland?

5. Wie sieht Ihr Kundenprofil aus?

6. Wieviel hoch ist prozentual ihr jährliches Budget für Werbung?

7. Haben Sie eine CSR Abteilung, Posten oder eine Person, die für Sustainability in Ihrem Betrieb verantwortlich ist. Wenn nein, wäre es für die Zukunft vorgesehen oder ist es angedacht?

8. Wann war das erste Mal als Sie oder Ihr Betrieb auf Zertifizierungen für Sustainability im Kaffeesektor aufmerksam geworden sind?

9. Gab es dafür Interesse oder ist Ihr Betrieb weiterhin an solchen Zertifizierungen interessiert und wenn ja, was sind die Gründe dafür?

10. Gab es Veränderungen im Kaffeemarkt und damit innerhalb Ihres Marktanteils nachdem solche Zertifizierungen implementiert wurden? Oder gibt es mittlerweile Änderungen?

11. Sie haben keine Zertifizierungen für Sustainability, aber sind Sie im Kontakt mit Zertifizierungen wie 4c, UTZ, EU Bio-label, usw. gewesen?

12. Wenn ja, wie würden Sie den Kontakt/den Kundendienst beschreiben?

13. Wieviel hätte die Zertifizierung für das jeweiliges Label gekostet?

14. Wieviel hätte der zertifizierte Kaffee (prozentual) mehr gekostet? Appendix • 121

15. Warum sind Ihre Produkte/Ihr Betrieb nicht zertifiziert? Was sind die Gründe dahinter?

16. Was wären die Bedingungen damit Ihre Produkte/Ihr Betrieb zertifiziert werden können?

17. Gibt es Nachteile/Beschränkungen, dass Ihre Produkte/Betrieb nicht zertifiziert sind?

18. Gibt es Pläne oder Vorstellungen eine eigene Zertifizierung für Sustainability einzuführen? Warum und wie?

19. Gibt es Pläne oder Vorstellungen über eine Kooperation mit anderen Betrieben um ein eigenes Label/Zertifizierung für Sustainability zu gründen?

20. Sind sie an anderen Zertifizierungen wie Geographical Indicators interessiert oder sehen sie ein Potential darin?

21. Welche Aspekte würden Sie als meist relevant betrachten, die eine Kaffeezertifizierung im Snne voni Sustainability zum Ausdruck bringen sollte?

22. Welche Aspekte Ihres Betriebes und Ihre Produkte würden Sie als meiste relevant betrachten, die eine Kaffeezertifizierung zum Ausdruck bringen sollte?

23. Wurden Sie von Ihre Kunden/Konsumenten gefragt warum Sie keine Zertifizierung haben oder wurde der Wunsch danach ausgesprochen?

24. Was würden Sie als Sustainable (organic, soziale, ökologische, ethische Faktoren, Standards, Werte) in Ihrem Betrieb betrachten und bewerten, auch wenn es nicht als solches zertifiziert ist?

25. Welche Werte, Faktoren, Standards finden Sie, sind generell in Zertifizierungen für Sustainability nicht beachtet?

26. Denken Sie, dass Zertifizierungen in Zukunft mehr Gewichtung bekommen und warum?

27. Es gibt Interessensvertreter die eine Harmonisierung und Standardisierung von Zertifizierungen fordern, wie stehen Sie dazu?

Danke für Ihre Teilnahme! Greening Potentials and Limits of Masteruppsats av Anna Berkmann 2015. Eco-Labelling Schemes in the EU. Environment, Communication & Politics