g-Think | Issue 17 | The 2008 World’s Fair

They say all’s fair in love and war, and I’m not one to disagree with such a timeless, romantic proverb. When it comes to trade, however, there aren’t necessarily axioms on which to rely. In the context of globalization and enterprise, what’s right and what’s wrong has historically been justified by a natural ebb and flow of the market, but increasingly a sense of responsibility and purpose is defining both our business practices and our consumption patterns. Basically, the free world is beginning to wake up and step up.

At the core of the 21st century ethos is a hunger for truth and a desire to know the story behind everything, from products to people; and so it’s no surprise that the fair trade industry has been on the rise. In 2006, consumers spent approximately $2.2 billion on fair trade certified products, an increase of 42% over the previous year (FLO International & The New York Times). From Dunkin Donuts serving only fair trade espresso in its US stores, to Sam’s Club introducing its first fair trade store-brand coffee, to Starbuck’s buying 50% more fair trade coffee in 2006 than in 2005, it appears that the fair trade movement is leaving “niche trend” status long behind and cruising down Main Street, USA.

‘Fair Trade Certified’ may be the catch phrase of the day, but another non-profit organization, the Rainforest Alliance, has pioneered its own seal of approval, emblazoning criteria-meeting products with the iconic green frog. While the Rainforest Alliance and Transfair USA (the only third party certifier of Fair Trade products in the US) share a similar mission, the focus is a bit different. Explains Rainforest Alliance’s Communications Director, Gretchen Ruethling: “Fairtrade sets a minimum price for farm owners. The Rainforest Alliance focuses on sustainable farm management.” Ruethling believes that consumer demand is playing a huge factor, citing McDonald’s 15% sales increase following the adoption of Rainforest Alliance certified coffee in all of its UK stores, and suggesting that “when companies see that consumers do indeed care about where their products come from and how they were produced and vote with their dollars accordingly, they have financial incentives to source products in a responsible way.”

Predictably, Awakening Consumers embrace fair trade; they also aren’t averse to reaching deeper into their pockets, as 79% of respondents to a recent g-Think survey say that they’d pay at least 10% more for a product that bears either the Fair Trade or the Rainforest Alliance certification mark. Since only 40% of Awakening Consumers have actually purchased a Rainforest Alliance certified product, compared with the 71% who have purchased a Fair Trade certified product, it stands to reason that Rainforest Alliance is perhaps less visible in the marketplace—though no less compelling a purchase.

Let’s also consider, for a moment, the 21% of Awakening Consumers who wouldn’t opt to pay more for a Fair Trade or Rainforest Alliance certified product. Maybe they’re die-hard proponents of the free market; maybe their hearts are colder; maybe they’re just living on a painfully tight budget. Or maybe they’re confused and who wouldn’t be, what with all the jargon competing for consumers’ attention. Fair trade, organic, sustainable, biodynamic, the list goes on…and it blends together into a dizzying cloud of responsibility.

Along those lines, it’s conceivable that for many people fair trade is a vague and grandiose notion, bringing to mind two smiling people shaking hands and agreeing to some sort of mutually beneficial deal. Ah, how blissful! The thing is, that’s not really the crux of it. Yes, fair trade is certainly about equity and fostering a plentiful, profitable livelihood for the producer; but, perhaps more importantly, it’s also about preserving the origins of the products we consume—preserving the very products themselves—because, after all, if we underpay the coffee farmer in Guatemala who grows the beans that give us that incomparably delicious rush in the morning, we risk losing access to his beans altogether when he can’t afford to maintain his crop next year. Bottom line: my cup of coffee tastes better if I take care of the farmer!

Is it selfish to see it this way—to value the concept of fair trade for what I get out of it as a consumer?

In the end, I guess it doesn’t really matter what the consumer motivation is. Be it ethics, self-interest or a combination of the two, the net benefit to any farmer—whether he grows coffee or flowers or cotton or some enchantingly obscure tropical fruit—is unquestionably positive. And that’s something that I, for one, wouldn’t trade.