comments_image -

Fair Trade Coffee: Coming to a Cafe Near You (Short Version)

Buying fair trade coffee -- coffee grown and sold with concern for both the coffee farmer and the land -- may not be the bravest form of activism. But the impact of consuming ethically on poverty and the environment is impossible to ignore.
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
 
 

Here's a breathtaking statistic: The $3 many Americans shell out every day for a latte at Starbucks is equivalent to the daily wage of a Central American coffee picker. Nonplussed? Here's another heart-stopper, specially designed for the non-gourmet coffee drinker: Those $3.95 cans of Maxwell House and Folgers you pick up at your local supermarket, well, the beans that fill them are bought for around a quarter and come from corporate farms, which use environmentally poisonous pesticides and clear-cut forests to produce the highest possible yields.

Such stats may just serve as more fodder for those already sufficiently demoralized by the practices of big business. Indeed, you may be too depressed to read any further. But what is interesting about galling information of this sort is that it is being used to create a new American political animal: the ethical consumer.

The ethical consumer may pale in comparison to do-gooders of old -- the abolitionist, the suffragist, the fighter for civil rights or no nukes -- since his primary act is figuring out how to ethically empty his wallet. Yet considering that among the 100 largest economies in the world 51 are corporations and that 82 of the top 200 corporations are American, ethical consumerism may be the best political weapon we've got.

Enter fair trade coffee

Consider the example of Starbucks and "fair trade" coffee. Fair trade coffee or "politically correct coffee," as Time magazine dubbed it, is grown under the rainforest canopy on small farms rather than on huge plantations that depend on pesticides. It sells for a minimum of $1.29 per pound -- which goes directly to coffee farmers, not to middlemen, who usually pay farmers no more than 35 cents. And, according to TransFair USA, the group that certifies the beans as fairly grown and sold, fair trade has allowed 500,000 coffee farmers in 20 developing nations to improve the quality of their product, live above the poverty line and send their children to school.

Nothing wrong with that. Unless you're Starbucks and want to make certain next year's profits exceed this one's. (The company's net revenues soared 28 percent in 1999 to $1.7 billion.)

At first, Starbucks' refused to sell fair trade coffee. It explained that until there was consumer demand, it could not sell the p.c. bean in its 2,300 stores. But after being subject to a year-long campaign organized by the San Francisco nonprofit Global Exchange -- a campaign that culminated in plans to stage protests at Starbucks in 29 cities -- the retailer decided to avoid a public relations nightmare and start selling fair trade.

"Fair trade gets the benefit back to the family farmer," said Starbucks vice president David Olsen shortly after the decision in April. "It is consistent with our values."

Starbucks' decision to sell fair trade coffee, however, does not mean the company will brew it in their stores. This will depend on "consumer demand," say Starbucks corporate heads. And so, once again, this will mean that Global Exchange and other fair trade coffee advocates will have to prove -- through a combination of grassroots organizing, educational outreach and threat of protest -- that a demand exists.

Is fair trade just for gourmands?

Starbucks' introduction of fair trade coffee is a victory for ethical consumers. And it extends beyond the creator of the Frappaccino: during the 18 months fair trade coffee has been available on the U.S. market, the number of retailers has grown from 400 to 7,000, according to Paul Rice, head of TransFair USA. In late November, even Safeway, the supermarket king, launched fair trade coffee in 1,500 of its stores nationwide -- a decision Rice says came about not through threats of protest but through the supermarket's "enlightened self-interest."

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Fox, Breitbart, and Ricketts Try to Bring Back D'Souza's Pseudo-Birtherism

By Steve M | No More Mister Nice Blog

 
 
Activists Speak Out Against Lack of Access to Bradley Manning

By Agence France Presse

 
 
NYPD Catches Sexual Assailant, Then Lets Him Go Free Because He Didn't Feel Like Being Questioned

By Jill F | Feministe

 
 
Gov. Scott Orders Purging of Florida’s Voter Rolls - Just in Time For Prez Election

By Adele Stan | Washington Monthly

 
 
Abortion Clinics Across Country Put On Alert In Wake of Georgia Clinic Arson Cases

By Robin Marty | RH Reality Check

 
 
Former GOP Congresswoman Blasts New GOP Women’s Caucus: ‘They’re Not Voting In Best Interest Of All Women’

By Josh Israel | ThinkProgress

 
 
Debbie Wasserman Schulz is Wrong on Wisconsin

By LaFeminista | DailyKos

 
 
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 2 ]