Have you ever stopped to think about where your coffee comes from? Think beyond the store…way beyond it. When was the last time you actually thought about who grew the coffee beans you ground up this morning to make coffee?
In
his article “Justice at a Price: Regulation and Alienation in the Global
Economy,” Daniel Reichman discusses how the global coffee market is regulated
and brings up the topic of fair trade. He asks the following two questions in
his article:
(1)
“Who knows what nefarious forms of
exploitation are happening on the other side of the world?”(102).
(2)
“In a world where individuality is
valued, how does one simultaneously depend on mass-produced goods and assert individual creative autonomy?”
(109).
That
is the idea behind fair trade - eliminate middlemen so the coffee farmers can
get more money for their coffee. But as I watched the film, I couldn’t help but
think the following: Where is the money from the 60% reduction of middlemen
going? If the profit was going to the farmers, wouldn’t they be even a little
better off? Meskala has the money to travel around the world in a plane in
search of a better market. Shouldn’t the farmers have money to buy enough food
to eat? Why are the farmers getting next to nothing for their coffee and barely
getting by?
This
made me think of how I view fair trade as something that benefits the farmers. The
basis of my belief is rooted in the assumption that the officials in charge of selling
the coffee actually distribute the profit to the farmers. We believe fair trade helps farmers only because we place our trust in those in charge. If
those in charge aren’t letting the farmers see the profit, then what good is
fair trade?
That
brings me back to Reichman’s questions…. Do we really know “what nefarious
forms of exploitation are happening on the other side of the world?” (102). No, I
don’t believe we know everything that goes on. Just because “‘fair’ certification for coffee guarantees
that farmers (or grower cooperatives) have been paid a minimum price... per
pound of unroasted coffee…and that workers are treated fairly on farms” doesn’t
mean all that actually happens (103). We believe the guarantee because we trust
it is happening as they say it is, not because we know for sure that it is. For
all we know, the “nefarious forms of exploitation” are still occurring (102). We
really don’t know.
Reichman’s
other question is “how does one simultaneously depend on mass-produced goods and assert individual creative autonomy?”
(109). In answering this question, think of how many coffee drinkers and coffee
name brands there are out there. (A lot.) Yet not everyone drinks the same
brand. Reichman points out that “food and clothing are important elements of
the creation of one’s social identity, so consumer brands like McDonald’s, The
Gap, Nike, and Starbucks are the most targeted symbols of homogenization”
(109). We have various reasons why we choose one brand over another. The
reasons could be based on anything ranging from money, popularity, or
personal preference; and those choices create and shape our identity. While
there is one product (coffee), there are many brands and types of it to choose
from which enable us to “assert individual creative autonomy” (109).
Reflecting
on the rising popularity of fair trade, could fair trade be considered “a brand”?
A brand in the sense that choosing fair trade is perhaps becoming more of a popularity
based decision to keep up with the Joneses? Are fair trade products becoming more
of just a conscience-satisfying decision, so people don’t feel too bad about the
exploited farmers in the far reaches of the world, instead of a truly ethical
choice?
I
don’t think fair trade works in every farmer's case…. Because I find it hard to imagine
that all the officials in charge have dealt with the all the farmers ethically
and have remained uncorrupt. But, although we can’t be for sure whether or not
the farmers are getting their fair share, there remains a chance that some do, and wouldn't those farmers be worse off without fair trade? In the end, even if
only one coffee bean farmer has been helped, I’d say fair trade has done
some good.
As
a side note here before I close, my class is going on a fieldtrip to a local coffee roaster
next week. Where do they get their coffee beans? I wonder how the small
business owners are making it in this economy. It will be interesting to see
what the owners have to say about fair trade and coffee production from a small
business owner’s perspective.
Excellent questions and I agree fair trade doesn't solve all the problems is likely a step in the right direction. I recall in the film a discussion about funds being given to a village to put up a school so I think some of the money was going to the community of a co-op instead of the farmers' hands. So they still benefit.
ReplyDeleteYour blog reminds me that these labor injustices are nothing new, but the power of the media may make them harder to ignore.
I agree with your assertion that the concept of fair trade can be deceptive. Unless an individual is involved in every step and transaction during the marketing process, that individual cannot be certain whether he or she is benefitting or being exploited. I also feel that people seem to, in a word, "find" their identities through the use of brands. In my opinion, the most prevalent form of this is through popularity. Certain people tend to place a heavy emphasis on the brands they carry, and others attempt to use these brands as a way of assimilating themselves within certain social structures. Starbucks coffee, for example, is consumed by many people for the simple fact that its a brand, and others trend toward drinking Starbucks coffee because they wish to be accepted by those that drink it as well. This isn't true under all conditions, but, in a sense, brands create identities at the expense of individualism. it almost raises the question, "Do people feel passionate about free trade because they are truly concerned? Or are they simply following a trend?"
ReplyDeleteGood point about where the money from the 60% reduction is going, we would like to think that the money is going to the people who should be receiving it, but there is no real way for us to know. In the same way, there is no real way for us to know if fair trade products are truly “fair.” I feel like the fair trade label has shifted away from its original purpose and it has become more of an advertising tactic. Other labels that I feel have at times fallen to the same fate are the labels of “eco-friendly” and “organic.” I read an article in a psychology journal in which participants were asked to rate coffees on taste and whether they would buy it again or not. In some cases they were told before-hand that one cup of coffee was “eco-friendly” and that one was not, and in other cases they weren’t told until after (even though both cups were identical). In most cases people were willing to pay more for the “eco-friendly” coffee than the not eco-friendly – even if they liked the taste of the not eco-friendly coffee better! It’s amazing what labels can make us do (or buy).
ReplyDelete