Still working to recover. Please don't edit quite yet.

Fair trade coffee

From Anarchopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article contains content from Wikipedia
An article on this subject has been nominated for deletion on Wikipedia:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/
Fair trade coffee

Current versions of the GNU FDL article on WP may contain information useful to the improvement of this article
WP+
NO
DEL
See also Fair trade debate (WP)

Fair trade coffee is Wikipedia:coffee which is purchased directly from the growers for a higher price than standard coffee. Wikipedia:Fair trade coffee is one of many fair trade certified products available around the world. The purpose of fair trade is to promote healthier working conditions and greater economic incentives for producers.[1]

Coffee farmers producing fair trade-certified coffee are required to be part of a "co-op" (co-operatives) with other local growers. The co-ops determine how the premiums from fair trade coffee will be spent.[2] Growers are guaranteed a minimum price for the coffee, and if market prices exceed the minimum, they receive a premium that is calculated in accordance with every pound1 produced.[1]

Fair trade coffee has become increasingly popular over the last ten years, and is now offered at a significant number of coffee retailers worldwide. In 2004, 24,222 tonnes (of 7,050,000 tonnes produced worldwide) were fair trade; in 2005, 33,991 tonnes out of 6,685,000 tonnes were fair trade, an increase from 0.34% to 0.51%.

The inevitable increase in price due to the Fair Trade organization's costs is more than counterbalanced by the decrease in costs from the large percentage taken by middlemen being removed from the equation. [3] As with any other reduction in employment to gain efficiency, middlemen jobs are removed from the market, to be compared with an improvement in product price and fairer practice.

What should be important to the fair trade debate (WP) is the actual impact on grower prices, and while this is an important part of many activists' arguments, those who are against Fair Trade can potentially share an interest in common with the international coffee companies who are closer to the retail end of supply, and receive the bulk of the profit: critizing Fair Trade practices.


Why it started

Most products, especially food products are sold for a price much higher than the cost of production in all terms of the word. What are sometimes considered as third world countries are the main suppliers of these products and most of these products are then shipped to Canada, Unites States of America, throughout Europe and smaller countries across the globe, then they are sold for a higher price with most profits going to the monopolized corporations, many of which have scarcely known inner working deals with one another to profit an even higher amount of income, even though they are making sometimes hundreds of times more income than their supplier. This has causes a lot of controversy, most in which the large corporation will do anything to keep out of the public eye. It is believed that many of these large companies have been blackmailed, which these companies can afford to pay off those who threaten to release information in which was not intended for anyone to know. The food company's main focus has become less about the supplier and consumer and more about how much they can profit without stepping on too many laws, whilst stating controversial "facts" about their products. It is a delicate balance, and there are many experts now who consult with these companies. The better the consulter and political schemes involved, usually the better the company or corporation's potential.


Regulations prior to fair trade

Farmers, too, incur a lot of costs in meeting Fairtrade standards, do a lot more manual work in the hot sun, and have to hire labour rather than use family labour. It is questionable whether the additional price compensates them for this: there appear to be no case studies investigating this. Fairtrade encouraged Nicaraguan farmers to switch to organic coffee, which resulted in a higher price per pound, but a lower net income because of higher costs and lower yields.[4]

Many Americans couldn't imagine living without coffee in the morning. Others can't live without chocolate. Many people don't realize that these products come from child slave labor, or they don’t care. Americans spend $16 billion on chocolate every year. Coffee is the second largest commodity in international commerce. Americans don't realize that this is the result of social injustice to people around the world.

West African cocoa is purchased and processed by chocolate manufacturers that we support. Overproduction and deregulation of the market has forced cocoa prices to decrease a lot. Bad prices cause cocoa farmers to take desperate measures. Farmers have refused to pay their laborers, and kept them working without pay through beatings and threats. There are 250 million working children who must work in order to help their families survive. Child slaves are normally between nine and sixteen years old. These slaves are illiterate, hungry and desperate for money.

Producer's low margins

It is difficult to compare the profits that Fair Trade and the international coffee companies make, but it is clear that the producers are making very little.

One British café chain was passing on less than one percent of the extra charged to the exporting cooperative;[5] in Finland, Valkila, Haaparanta and Niemi[6] found that consumers paid much more for Fairtrade, and that only 11.5% reached the exporter. Kilian, Jones, Pratt and Villalobos[7] talk of US Fairtrade coffee getting $5 per lb extra at retail, of which the exporter would have received only 2%. Mendoza and Bastiaensen[8] calculated that in the UK only 1.6% to 18% of the extra charged for one product line reached the farmer. All these studies assume that the importers paid the full Fairtrade price, which is not necessarily the case.[9]

Opponents of Fair Trade use the same exact figures to purportedly show that Fair Trade takes too much profit. Fair Trade advocates claim that many counter-examples would be needed to show that these are not typical. These calculations may be optimistic, as they do not take into account what happens between the farmer and the exporter. The first problem is that cooperatives incur costs to achieve certification, and all their production has to meet the standards. If only a small proportion can be sold as branded, they get little extra revenue to cover the extra costs and make a loss from Fairtrade. There are no examples in the literature of all the extra revenue reaching the farmer. If a Fairtrade cooperative is inefficient or corrupt, which is often the case with cooperatives, the farmers cannot sell instead to other cooperatives or traders without losing the Fairtrade premium. There are anecdotes of traders paying more for unbranded coffee than Fairtrade cooperatives pay their farmers, and of cooperatives paying more than traders, but it is impossible to say that either is normally the case.


History

Prior to fair trade, prices were regulated by the Wikipedia:International Coffee Organization according to the regulations set forth by the Wikipedia:International Coffee Agreement of 1962. The agreement, which was negotiated at the United Nations headquarters in New York by the Coffee Study Group, set limits on the amount of coffee imported and exported from countries so there would not be excess supply, and consequently a drop in price. The ICA existed five years, then was renewed in 1968. The agreement was renegotiated in 1976 due to increasing coffee prices, largely a result of a severe frost in Brazil. The new agreement allowed for the suspension of price quotas if the supply of coffee could not meet the demand, and enabling them if prices dropped too low. In 1983, the agreement was again redrawn, this time creating a database on coffee trade, and implementing stricter import and export regulations. Quotas remained a part of the agreement until 1989, when the organization was unable to negotiate a new agreement in time for the next year. It was decided that the 1983 agreement would be extended, but without the quotas because they had not yet been determined. A new agreement could not be negotiated until 1992. From 1990 to 1992, without the quotas in place, coffee prices reached an all time low. Because coffee price quotas could not be decided, the new agreement of 1994 focused on public awareness, providing the public with a forum for comment and access to documents. The agreements of 2001 and 2007 aimed to stabilize the coffee economy by promoting coffee consumption, raising the standard of living of growers by providing economic counseling, expanding research to include Wikipedia:niche markets and quality relating to geographic area, and conducting studies of Wikipedia:sustainability, principles similar to Fair Trade.[10][11]

Beginnings

Fair Trade certification began in the Brazil in 1988 in response to dropping coffee prices in the world market.[12] The supply of coffee was greater than the demand, and since no price quotas had been reimplemented by the International Coffee Act, the market was flooded. Fair Trade certification aimed to control the supply of coffee. A reduction in the supply of coffee, all other things being equal, tends to increase the price of coffee. Profits for the growers' cartel should therefore rise. Fair Trade certification aimed to artificially raise coffee prices in order to ensure growers sufficient wages to turn a profit. The original name of the organization was "Wikipedia:Max Havelaar", after a fictional Dutch character who opposed the exploitation of coffee farmers by Dutch colonialists in the East Indies.[13] The organization created a label for products which met certain wage standards. Within ten years three other labeling organizations began: the Wikipedia:Fair Trade Foundation, Wikipedia:TransFair USA, and Wikipedia:Rättvisemärkt. In 1997 these four organizations jointly created the Wikipedia:Fair Trade Labeling Organization, which sets Fair Trade standards, and inspects and certifies growers.[13]

Activism

Fair Trade coffee initiatives have been a strong symbol and starting point for young activists, universities throughout North America have been bringing awareness to students and people in their local communities, pleading to the interested people that what they may be buying at the store has more background information than what could meet the eye. With anthropology and sociology professors teaching their students there have been changes in what may legally be sold in certain Universities. Those who can make their own coffee and sell it in Canada, although most fair trade coffee is not nearly as cheap as the non fair trade since 2008 there has been a wide initiative to sell cheap fair trade coffee with most of the profits going to the people who grow the coffee cherries.


Certification

The Wikipedia:Fair Trade Certification label allows farmers and farm workers to escape poverty by providing them the skills and the means to compete in the global market of agriculture products. Although Fair Trade began in the late 1950s, certification and labeling was not enacted until 1982. This label assures consumers that strict social, environmental, and economic measures are taken when the production and trade of an agriculture product occurs. Fair Trade standards require that farmers receive fair wholesale prices for their crops. This ensures that farmers will receive approximately $2.35 per pound of raw coffee beans as opposed to the world market average of $.80.[14] Farmers who are involved with Fair Trade receive maximum floor price and an additional premium for certified organic products. In addition to the price standards of Fair Trade labeling there are other principles that must be abided by.

Standards for Fair Trade Coffee Certification:

  • Fair labor conditions: Those who work with Fair Trade farms are able to work with freedom of association, safe working conditions, and above fair wages. Child labor is prohibited.
  • Direct trade: With Fair Trade, importers purchase from Fair Trade producer groups as directly as possible, eliminating the middle man and letting the farmer compete in the global market.
  • Democratic and transparent organizations: Through proof of a democratic market, Fair Trade farmers and farm workers decide how to invest Fair Trade revenues.
  • Community development: Fair Trade farmers and workers invest Fair Trade premiums in social and business development projects like scholarship programs, healthcare services and quality improvement training.[11]

Examples of community development:

  • Wikipedia:Colombia: Members of the COSUTCA coffee cooperative successfully prevented the cultivation of more than 1600 acres of coca and poppy used to produce illicit drugs.
  • Wikipedia:Guatemala: indigenous Tzutuhil Mayans in the La Voz cooperative are sending local kids to college for the first time.
  • Wikipedia:Peru: the CEVOVASA cooperative is assisting indigenous groups in improving coffee quality and transitioning to certified organic production.
  • Wikipedia:Nicaragua: The CECOCAEN cooperative established a reproductive health program providing tests for the virus that causes cervical cancer.[15]

In 1997, Wikipedia:Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International, or FLO was created to support and protect disadvantaged producers within the Fair Trade market. FLO is a non-profit organization based in Bonn, Germany, that sets Fair Trade Certification standards and certifies producers.This umbrella organization has 20 labeling initiatives worldwide that work within it to certify the products.[12] The FLO sets the price floor for the coffee. The current pricing is available on the FLO website [1] .

Popularity

Many coffee vendors with origins in the United States (US) are now advertising Fair Trade-certified coffee. This is most likely a result of increasing public awareness of Fair Trade, as well as increased pressure from consumers. Wikipedia:Sam's Club, Wikipedia:Wal Mart, Wikipedia:Dunkin' Donuts, Wikipedia:McDonald's and Wikipedia:Starbucks all offer Fair Trade certified coffee, as do many independent coffee shops located in the US.Template:cn All espresso drinks served at Dunkin' Donuts, regardless of location, are Fair Trade-certified, and all coffee sold at McDonald's in England is certified. Starbucks is one of the largest purchasers of Fair Trade-certified coffee in the world and, in 2009, the company planned to purchase 40,000,000 pounds green, unroasted coffee.[16] (such a large quantity is partly due to the company's standard operating procedure). In 2008, Fair Trade-certified coffee accounted for 5% of the total coffee purchased by the company.[17]

Though large scale coffee corporations are becoming figureheads for Fair Trade, smaller companies such as Just Coffee Cooperative, Higher Grounds, and Cafe Campesino are now working to successfully advocate Fair Trade coffee. Aside from word of mouth marketing, these small businesses are forming tour groups to various coffee producing countries, such as Wikipedia:Guatemala and Wikipedia:Mexico, to show consumers first hand what coffee farming with Fair Trade entails. These tours allow people to become ambassadors of Fair Trade and gain support for the movement.[18] This type of marketing provokes a growth for popularity and demand. In 2006, nearly 65 million pounds of fair-trade coffee were imported to the U.S., 45% more than the year before, and twice as much as in 2004, according to TransFair USA, in Oakland, Calif., the only third-party certifier of fair-trade goods in the U.S. Trans Fair nearly doubles every year in applicants that want to certify their coffee products.[19] This is because over the past ten years, the demand for Fair Trade coffee has increased significantly and will continue to grow.

Other advocates for Fair Trade coffee include various religious groups and churches across the U.S. From Wikipedia:Catholic to Wikipedia:Methodist, the concept of Fair Trade has been referenced in sermons and further enforced with fellowship hours consisting of Fair trade coffee as part of the refreshment.[20] Many church groups feel that this organization emulates Wikipedia:Christianity by carrying out good works for others and the environment. For many of the faith-based organizations, fair trade is a way to connect younger members with an applicable message of how to be a good Wikipedia:Christian.[20]

Criticism

Transnational corporations such as Wikipedia:Proctor and Gamble’s Wikipedia:Folger's, Wikipedia:McDonald’s, and Wikipedia:Starbuck’s now sell Fair Trade coffee, using their large consumer base and strong advertising campaigns to bring in Fair Trade consumers. Fair Trade activists are now concerned that the morally driven small Fair-Trade-oriented businesses are going to be pushed out of their original customer market.

When large corporations sell Fair Trade coffee, consumers are easily brought to the larger, well known companies for their Fair Trade coffee. This takes out the small coffee shops’ edge of selling consumer-oriented, special coffee’s like Fair Trade coffee and continues the success of big businesses in the coffee industry.


Ethics

Critics believe the Fair Trade certification is abused by marking up retail prices significantly, while only providing the growers with marginally higher prices.[21][22]

When large corporations like Wikipedia:Wal-Mart can afford to sell Fair Trade coffee, and choose to do so as an economic decision for profit, many consumers see the gap between large corporations supporting Fair Trade coffee growers in other countries but in the meantime the same corporations do not pay their workers wages similar to their profits and often put smaller, local business owners out of work. Some smaller sellers of Fair Trade coffee, who sell Fair Trade coffee as more than an economic decision are losing their Fair Trade market to these larger companies and many have suggested that Wikipedia:TransFair USA come up with a tiered labeling system so as to show that these small business owners are truly committed to Fair Trade and are not making the same larger profits off of the Fair Trade label that the large corporations can.[23]

Another criticism is that the per-pound price for Fair Trade coffee is that of the 1990 International Coffee Organization price, which is only moderately above the cost of production. Fair Trade farmers make $0.20-$0.30 per pound of coffee they grow and sell and as a result do not make much profit off of Fair Trade like the final sellers do.[23]

Some argue that Fair Trade pushes under-empowered growers into forming cooperatives, creating islands of democracy in often autocratic regimes. Others challenge the assumption that encouraging farmers to form cooperatives is a good idea; their argument proposes the hypothetical that co-ops can be just as corrupt as any other organization. In a system meant to eliminate middlemen that pitches itself as a direct connection to growers, co-ops add a level of bureaucracy between consumer and producer; this assumes, of course, that all middlemen are bad. The farmer does not directly receive the $1.26 per pound but instead receives whatever portion the co-op decides; this, of course, assumes that the co-op might decide to give an amount too small. Therefore, the reasoning goes, a corruptly managed co-op could mask the real price of coffees from individual farmers and turn a profit greater than that of the farmers themselves.[22]

Marketing concerns

Fair Trade is a commercial brand. For a fee its owners licence commercial firms the right to use the brand in marketing, and they expect to make a profit out of doing so. Coffee producer cooperatives pay a fee to become certified Fair Trade producers, and a fee is paid at packer level in the consuming country, possibly on behalf of the packer, distributor or retailer.

This article will concentrate on the Fairtrade brand, as it is by far the biggest. Other Fair Trade operations differ in detail. The Fairtrade Foundation manages the brand.

The marketing system for Fairtrade and non-Fairtrade coffee is identical in the consuming countries, using mostly the same importing, packing, distributing and retailing firms. Some independent brands operate a virtual company, paying importers, packers and distributors and advertising agencies to handle their brand, for obvious cost reasons. In the producing country Fairtrade is marketed by Fairtrade registered primary cooperatives exporting through secondary cooperatives, and non-Fairtrade partly by the same cooperatives, partly by non-Fairtrade registered cooperatives exporting through the same secondary cooperatives and partly by trading firms.

To become certified Fairtrade producers, the primary cooperative and its member farmers must operate to certain political standards, imposed from Europe, though many producers and consumers may not share these political objectives. The Fairtrade Foundation monitors whether these are achieved. In the Wikipedia:Fair trade debate there are many complaints of failure to enforce these standards, with producers, cooperatives, importers and packers profiting by evading them.

Any coffee that (a) is produced by members of a certified Fairtrade cooperative and (b) is sold with the Fairtrade brand should receive a minimum price FOB New York, which is payable to the exporting cooperative, not the farmer. This is below the world price much of the time, and irrelevant, but it is significantly above the world price when world prices collapse. In addition, the price paid should be 10c per pound above the world price at all times. Examples are quoted in the Wikipedia:Fair trade debate of importers using their buying power to pay exporters less than this for certified coffee, or otherwise avoiding their responsibility.</ref> paying exporters less than the Fairtrade price for Fairtrade coffee (kickbacks)[24] failure to provide the credit and other services specified[25] theft or preferential treatment for ruling elites of cooperatives [26] not paying laborers the specified minimum wage [27] However, far more certified coffee is produced than the market will take, so cooperatives can sell only a limited amount as certified, perhaps 15% to 50%, as branded. The rest must be sold at the normal unbranded world price.

Fair Trade creates a Wikipedia:price floor for coffee, which some economists believe has adverse affects on both growers and consumers. By setting prices artificially high, Fair Trade encourages more people to grow coffee, leading to a surplus. Since no one really understands the so-called Law of Wikipedia:Supply and demand, critics can get away with saying that demand is decreased because prices are higher, despite the fact that economists now more often say the opposite: because prices are high, sellers queue up to sell, increasing supply. These critics claim farmers will be unable to sell their coffee.[28]

Fair Trade claims to be ‘ethical marketing’, but this is challenged in the Wikipedia:Fair trade debate. Griffiths[29] in particular argues that much of it is the criminal offence of Unfair Trading in the EU.

Impact on non-Fairtrade farmers

Critics argue primarily and somewhat hypocritically against Fairtrade's competitiveness; charging that Fairtrade, but not all other Fair Trade businesses, harm all non-Fairtrade farmers by being more effective, and use a truly mindboggling example of Wikipedia:Communist Wikipedia:Vietnam's Fair Trade success story as an example of unfair competition with other 'poorer countries'.

Fairtrade claims that its farmers are paid higher prices and are given special advice on better techniques, both of which will lead to increased output being sold on the global market. Economists[30] assert that, as the demand for coffee, in particular, is highly inelastic, a small increase in supply means a large fall in market price, so perhaps a million Fairtrade farmers get a higher price and 24 million others get a substantially lower price. Their conclusion is that the Fairtrade minimum price means that when the world market price collapses, it is the non-Fairtrade farmers, and particularly the poorest, who have to cut down their coffee trees.

This argument is supported by mainstream economists. This argument is often illustrated with the example in which Vietnam paid its coffee farmers over the world price in the 1980s, planting lots of coffee, then flooding the world market in the 1990s.[31] Smith (2010) questioned the relevance of the Vietnam example,[32] and Griffiths published a sharp rejoinder.[33][34]


See also

Template:portalbox

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Staff (2000-2006). Fair Trade Coffee. coffeeresearch.org. Coffee Research Institute. URL accessed on 27 May 2012.
  2. Fair Trade | World Centric
  3. http://students.robinson.cam.ac.uk/rcsanew/fair-trade-it-really-all-much-fairer
  4. Kilian, B., Jones, C., Pratt, L., & Villalobos, A. (2006). “Is Sustainable Agriculture a Viable Strategy to Improve Farm Income in Central America? A Case Study on Coffee”. Journal of Business Research , 59(3), 322–330.; Valkila, J. (2009). Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua - Sustainable development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics , 68 3018-3025;Wilson, B. R. (2009). Indebted to Fair Trade? Coffee and Crisis in Nicaragua. Geoforum.
  5. Griffiths, P., ‘Ethical objections to Fairtrade’ Journal of Business Ethics July 2011(DOI) 10.1007/s10551-011-0972-0 www.springerlink.com Accessed at http://www.griffithsspeaker.com/Fairtrade/why_fair_trade_isn.htm
  6. Valkila, J., Haaparanta, P., & Niemi, N. (2010). “Empowering Coffee Traders? The Coffee Value Chain from Nicaraguan Fair Trade Farmers to Finnish Consumers.” Journal of Business Ethics , 97:257-270.
  7. Kilian, B., Jones, C., Pratt, L., & Villalobos, A. (2006). “Is Sustainable Agriculture a Viable Strategy to Improve Farm Income in Central America? A Case Study on Coffee”. Journal of Business Research , 59(3), 322–330.
  8. Mendoza, R., & J. Bastiaensen, J. (2003). “Fair Trade and the Coffee Crisis in the Nicaraguan Segovias.” Small Enterprise Development , 14(2), 36–46.
  9. Raynolds, L. T. (2009). Mainstreaming Fair Trade Coffee: from Partnership to Traceability. World Development , 37 (6) 1083-1093, p. 1089); Valkila, J., Haaparanta, P., & Niemi, N. (2010). Empowering Coffee Traders? The Coffee Value Chain from Nicaraguan Fair Trade Farmers to Finnish Consumers. Journal of Business Ethics , 97:257-270 p. 264), Valkila, J. (2009). Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua - Sustainable development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics , 68 3018-3025, pp. 3022-3); Reed, D. (2009). What do Corporations have to do with Fair Trade? Positive and normative analysis from a value chain perspective. Journal of Business Ethics , 86:3-26, , p. 12); Barrientos, S., Conroy, M. E., & Jones, E. (2007). Northern Social Movements and Fair Trade. In L. Raynolds, D. D. Murray, & J. Wilkinson, Fair Trade: The Challenges of Transforming Globalization (pp. 51–62). London and New York: Routledge.
  10. International Coffee Organization - History
  11. 11.0 11.1 Fair Trade USA | Fair Trade Certification Overview
  12. 12.0 12.1 http://www.oxfamamerica.org/whatwedo/campaigns/coffee/background/ft_history
  13. 13.0 13.1 How did it start? | Max Havelaar
  14. Fair Trade Coffee: A Growing Market Trend - Page 2 - Blogcritics Tastes
  15. Fair Trade Certified Coffee
  16. Carly Smolak (2009). Friends Might Start Letting Friends Drink Starbucks. TriplePundit - People, Planet, Profit. TriplePundit. URL accessed on 27 May 2012.
  17. Responsibility | Starbucks Coffee Company
  18. smSmallBiz.com | Farm Tours Tout Fair-Trade Coffee
  19. Popularity Of Fair Trade (Fair Trade)
  20. 20.0 20.1 Faith Groups Promoting Fair Trade Coffee
  21. Fair Trade in Bloom - NYTimes.com
  22. 22.0 22.1 Absolution in Your Cup - Reason Magazine
  23. 23.0 23.1 subter » What’s Wrong With Fair Trade
  24. Raynolds, L. T. (2009). Mainstreaming Fair Trade Coffee: from Partnership to Traceability. World Development , 37 (6) p. 1089);Valkila, J., Haaparanta, P., & Niemi, N. (2010). Empowering Coffee Traders? The Coffee Value Chain from Nicaraguan Fair Trade Farmers to Finnish Consumers. Journal of Business Ethics , 97: p264; Valkila, J. (2009). Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua – Sustainable development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics , 68 3018-3025.
  25. Reed, D. (2009). What do Corporations have to do with Fair Trade? Positive and normative analysis from a value chain perspective. Journal of Business Ethics , 86:3-26; Valkila, J. (2009). Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua – Sustainable development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics , 68 pp. 3022-3); Barrientos, S., Conroy, M. E., & Jones, E. (2007). Northern Social Movements and Fair Trade. In L. Raynolds, D. D. Murray, & J. Wilkinson, Fair Trade: The Challenges of Transforming Globalization (pp. 51–62). London and New York: Routledge.; Mendoza, R. (2000). The hierarchical legacy in coffee commodity chains. In R. Ruben, & J. Bastiaensen, Rural development in Central America. New York: St. Martin’s Press, p.34–9; Mendoza, R., & J. Bastiaensen, J. (2003). Fair Trade and the Coffee Crisis in the Nicaraguan Segovias. Small Enterprise Development , 14(2), p. 42; Moore, G., Gibbon, J., & Slack, R. (2006). The mainstreaming of Fair Trade: a macromarketing perspective. Journal of Strategic Marketing , 14 329-352; Reed, D. (2009). What do Corporations have to do with Fair Trade? Positive and normative analysis from a value chain perspective. Journal of Business Ethics , 86: p. 12).
  26. ; Mendoza, R., & J. Bastiaensen, J. (2003). Fair Trade and the Coffee Crisis in the Nicaraguan Segovias. Small Enterprise Development , 14(2), 36–46; Berndt, C. E. (2007). Is Fair Trade in coffee production fair and useful? Evidence from Costa Rica and Guatemala and implications for policy. Washington DC.: Mercatus 65 Policy Series, Policy Comment 11, Mercatus Centre, George Mason University)
  27. Weitzman, H. (2006, September 8). The bitter cost of ‘Fair Trade’ coffee. Financial Times; Weitzman, H. (2006, September 9). ‘’Ethical-coffee’ workers paid below legal minimum. Financial Times ; Valkila, J. (2009). Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua – Sustainable development or a poverty trap? Ecological Economics , 68 p. 3023)
  28. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0808/p09s02-coop.html
  29. Griffiths, P., ‘Ethical objections to Fairtrade’ Journal of Business Ethics July 2011(DOI) 10.1007/s10551-011-0972-0 www.springerlink.com Accessed at http://www.griffithsspeaker.com/Fairtrade/why_fair_trade_isn.htm
  30. e.g.Griffiths, P. (2008) ‘Why Fairtrade Isn’t Fair’, Prospect, August Accessed at http://www.griffithsspeaker.com/Fairtrade/why_fair_trade_isn.htm; Booth, P. and L. Whetstone (2007) ‘Half a Cheer for Fair Trade’, Economic Affairs, 27, 2, 29–36; Sidwell, M. (2008) Unfair Trade, London: Adam Smith Institute.; Brink, Lindsey. (2004). Grounds for Complaint. URL accessed on September 25, 2006.; Mark, (2008). "Fighting the Tide: Alternative trade organizations in the era of global free trade - A comment," World Developmen, 36, 2953–2961´.
    Harford, T
    “The Undercover Economist.”, 2005]] Sam Bowman. Markets, poverty, and Fair Trade. Wikipedia:Adam Smith Institute. URL accessed on 2011-09-30.;name=”economist”>, ({{{year}}}). "Voting with your trolley," The Economist, {{{volume}}}, .
  31. Griffiths, ({{{year}}}). "Lack of Rigor in Defending Fairtrade," Economic Affairs, 31, 103–104.
  32. Fairtrade, (2010). "Lack of Rigor on Defending Fairtrade: Some important clarrifications of a distorting account – a reply to Perter Griffiths," Economic Affairs, 30, 50–53.
  33. Griffiths, P.: 2011, ‘Rejoinder: False Statements, Misrepresentation and Distortion in Defending Fairtrade’, Economic Affairs, 103-4. http://www.griffithsspeaker.com/Fairtrade/why_fair_trade_isn.htm
  34. Griffiths, P.: 2011, ‘Rejoinder: False Statements, Misrepresentation and Distortion in Defending Fairtrade’, Full version: http://www.griffithsspeaker.com/Fairtrade/why_fair_trade_isn.htm

Additional sources

Template:Coffee