Equal Exchange was founded in 1986 to support authentic fair trade by challenging the existing trade model, which favored large plantations, agri-business, and multi-national corporations; to support small farmers; and to connect consumers and producers through information, education, and the exchange of products in the marketplace.
With the founding, they joined a growing movement of small farmers, alternative traders (ATOs), religious organizations, and non-profits throughout the world with like-minded principles and objectives. The U.S. consumer co-operative movement has been an integral part of this movement. Underlying Equal Exchange’s work is the belief that only through organization can small farmers survive and thrive. The cooperative model has been essential for building this model of change. From their website: the founders envisioned a food system that empowers farmers and consumers, supports small farmer co-ops, and uses sustainable farming methods. They started with fairly traded coffee from Nicaragua and didn’t look back.
During the 1990’s, Equal Exchange joined with a number of other organizations to create the certifying agency, TransFair USA (now Fair Trade USA). The goal was to create a mechanism, in a complex marketplace, to ensure that a company’s products were providing social, economic and environmental impact for the small farmer organizations that grew them. With a third party certifier, it was hoped that consumers would have more confidence in their purchases without needing to background check every brand and product. This turned out to be good business and Fair Trade USA grew as a result.
Deep controversies in the Fair Trade movement have been simmering for over a decade. As time passed, Fair Trade USA began to take on a life of its own. Rather than confine itself to its purpose as a certifying agency, collecting fees from industries that used its seal and monitoring them to ensure that Fair Trade practices were being met, Fair Trade USA soon developed its own vision. “Quantity over Quality”, “Breadth over Depth”, and other qualifiers came to be used to describe Fair Trade USA’s vision of a world in which vast numbers of products throughout the grocery store could be certified Fair Trade, in as fast a manner as possible.
Their problem was supply. Working with small farmer organizations can be challenging and time-consuming. These organizations don’t have the same access to market, credit, infrastructure, and technology that large plantations generally do. Over the opposition of the ATOs, farmer organizations, and a host of other Fair Trade advocates, Fair Trade USA and its umbrella organization FairTrade Labelling Organization (FLO) began certifying plantation tea, bananas, cut flowers, and other products with a set of different, less rigorous standards than those elaborated for small farmer organizations.
Soon, large corporations began to see value in certification as well. They discovered that consumers would respect all of their products, even if only one or two were certified as Fair Trade (this happens in fabric collections too). Fair Trade USA rapidly began courting big businesses into the Fair Trade “family”, such as Chiquita, Dole, and Nestle. The Fair Trade advocates protested, but to no avail. Big business profits grew and, as more volume got certified, Fair Trade USA continued to grow as well.
Equal Exchange feels that all their advances are now in jeopardy, because Fair Trade USA has left the international Fair Trade System (FLO International/FairTrade International), lowered standards, eliminated farmers from their governance model, and invited large-scale plantations into coffee and all other commodities.
Equal Exchange has recently launched the Stand with Small Farmers campaign for authentic Fair Trade in response to these actions by Fair Trade USA. They believe that small farmer cooperatives are the heart of Fair Trade and the engine of real grassroots development.
The following is from a press release we just received:
This is not Fair Trade and we are asking you to join with us in differentiating Fair Trade USA’s model from the authentic small farmer Fair Trade that we are collectively building.
These actions, and many others throughout the years, have created large-scale opposition against the certifiers and bad feelings have mounted about the lack of transparency, accountability, openness, and representation on the boards and within the committees of FLO International and Fair Trade USA. Little has changed. Until this year, when the growing rift finally reached a head:
- In October, 2010, the original organization, TransFair, unilaterally changed its name to Fair Trade USA. Ten thousand people signed an Organic Consumers Association petition asking them not to appropriate the name of an entire movement. No response.
- During that same time, TransFair announced their Fair Trade Apparel standards. Fair Traders complained that the standards are too low and don’t require unionized factories. http://ethixmerch.com/blog/race-fair-trade. No response.
- In September 2011, TransFair – now Fair Trade USA – announced their new initiative, Fair Trade for All, certifying plantations in all remaining categories (coffee, cocoa, sugar, and cotton). This strategy means that small farmers will now be forced to compete with large plantations for market access – the very reason Fair Trade was created in the first place. The Fair Trade community opposes this action. Read the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Small Fair Trade Producers’ (CLAC) statement: http://smallfarmersbigchange.coop/2011/10/05/4153/ and Fair World Project’s statement: http://fairworldproject.org/news/single/477.
- Part of Fair Trade USA’s, Fair Trade For All initiative includes lowering standards so as to make it even easier for corporations to label their products as Fair Trade. Many have opposed this. Read FWP’s statement: http://smallfarmersbigchange.coop/2011/10/20/fair-trade-usa-goes-rogue-new-%E2%80%9Cstandards%E2%80%9D-undermine-fair-trade-commitment-to-farmers-and-consumers/and the United Students For Fair Trade statement: http://smallfarmersbigchange.coop/2011/10/28/united-students-for-fair-trade-call-for-a-boycott-on-transfairfairtrade-usa-certified-products/.
- The day afterFair Trade USA announced their strategy, knowing that they would be opposed by FLO International, and the movement in general, they left the FLO system and now plan to go it alone. This was the breaking point.
It is time to withdraw support from TransFair USA/FairTrade USA products. They do not represent Fair Trade.
What are we asking?
- Please ask your friends and work colleagues to sign our public statement: http://www.equalexchange.coop/fair-trade-campaign. They may sign as organizations and/or individuals.
- Please continue to educate yourselves and others about the issues brewing in the Fair Trade world. For more information on Equal Exchange’s perspective on the differences between Authentic Fair Trade and what Fair Trade USA is doing, please read Rink Dickinson’s views here: http://smallfarmersbigchange.coop/2011/10/23/4269/. For a producer point of view, please read this: http://smallfarmersbigchange.coop/2011/12/15/mexican-small-farmer-fair-trade-producers-speak-out-we-can-only-move-forward-with-authentic-fair-trade/.
We remain engaged with small farmers and with the international Fair Trade system. We will keep you posted on events as they unfold. As always, thanks for your loyal support, your commitment, and for putting your values into action.
If you have any questions, please call Phyllis Robinson, Education & Campaigns Manager at Equal Exchange, at 774-776-7390.
2 thoughts on “Fair Trade in jeopardy”
Dear Patty and Leigh Ann,
I just received the April edition of Traditional magazine and was shocked to read about a prominent “green” interior designer who renovated a summer home and used toxic fabrics! She had the perfect opportunity to talk about using natural fiber as an outdoor fabric and she chooses Sunbrella! The other products that were mentioned that make no claims to be eco-friendly are Brunschwig & Fils and furniture by McGuire. Where are the “great” designers that can create beautiful environments using “truly green” products?
Each month, I look forward to getting my subscribed magazines and learning about the latest in “green” designs. However, the highlighted products are always the same and many are not “truly” eco-friendly. It doesn’t take much effort to use low VOC paints or energy efficient appliances. Anybody can do that. I would love to see more designers use “truly green” fabrics and furniture for their projects. If a designer advocates “green” design then he or she should take more time to research the companies that are eco-friendly.
I believe designers have a responsibility to educate their clients about the dangers of toxic materials. A company that is “truly” environmentally friendly will make it known on their website. There is no excuse for using toxic materials when beautiful and natural materials are available. It’s been proven that the toxins in our environment are making us sick. People just need to care.
Thank you Patty and Leigh Ann for caring and producing luxurious and healthy fabrics!
Thanks Brenda. I agree with you that people need to learn what they’re actually buying, and second, think about what that choice means. That means they need to care enough to do the research. But today’s world leaves little room for that kind of product research. Which makes it especially sad when a person, who is in a position as advisor to others who depend on them for their thoughtful choices, doesn’t care enough to do the research.