Starbucks: Fair Trade or “Tradewash”?

August 1, 2008

Posted by Chris O’Brien

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is telling consumers to turn up the heat on Starbucks and pressure them to take Fair Trade more seriously.

According to OCA, many customers mistakenly assume that all Starbucks coffee is fair traded, but in fact just 6% of the company’s coffee is certified Fair Trade.

OCA is asks consumer activists to take these steps:

1) Sign OCA’s 2008 petition to Starbucks demanding that all espresso drinks be both 100% certified Organic and Fair Trade.

2) Make a free call to Starbucks’ Customer Service line and let them know how you feel. (800) 235-2883. Click here for a sample script.

3) Sound off on My Starbucks Idea, Starbucks’ public forum. We have an idea for you Starbucks, its called Fair Trade!

4) Find a non-corporate café near you using the Delocator.

Is the “all Fair Trade espresso” demand impractical or too idealistic? Not really. Dunkin’ Donuts, the world’s largest coffee and baked goods retailer, already does just that. Even McDonald’s sells all Fair Trade coffee in their New England stores and in the U.K.

So what’s up Starbucks? Why not empower farmers by supporting a minimum price per pound and buying from democratic cooperatives?


Coffee Companies Help Launch ‘B Corporation’ Standards for ‘Good Companies’

June 8, 2008

Posted by Chris O’Brien

B Corporation

B Corporation is a new certification system for socially and environmentally responsible companies. The ‘B’ stands for ‘benefits.’

I couldn’t find out much about the people behind this effort, apparently a non-profit group called B-Lab, but the standards seem legit from what I can tell so far. The founding companies are a cast of the usual suspects – many are names that are already highly associated with the ‘responsible’ business movement. On the one hand, that is a good thing – it means companies with real commitments are the ones being recognized by the certification. But on the other hand it raises the question of whether this is a well-intentioned effort that will never reach beyond the same core of businesses that are already doing the right thing.

But perhaps this is a good thing. An article in the Financial Times reports that Coen Gilbert, one of B-Corp’s founders, intends for the certification to serve as a way for the many small and medium sized ‘truly green’ companies to differentiate themselves from the older, bigger companies that are suddenly talking green for the first time.

Of the more than 100 ‘founding’ B-Corp companies, a few are in the coffee biz: Moka Joe; Mugshots Coffee House and Cafe; One Village Coffee; and Pura Vida Coffee. To become certified, each company completes a survey evaluating their practices. A minimum score of 80, out of a possible 200, is required to receive certification. In addition, the company bylaws or articles of incorporation must specifically require consideration be given to all the company stakeholders, including employees past and present, suppliers, customers, and the communities and society in which the business operates.

Moka JoeThe completed company audits are available for viewing online. That way interested stakeholders can see that, for example, One Village Coffee scored a measly 9.1 points on the environmental section of the assessment, which is just 24% of the points available in that category, and that they barely squeaked through the certification at all with just 86.1 points total. Whereas Pura Vida earned 32% of the environmental points and scored 103.4 on the evaluation overall. But Moka Joe performed considerably better than both, meriting 90% of the environmental points and reaching an impressive (comparatively) 129.4 on the test as a whole.

I realize the aim of this system probably isn’t to compare the certified businesses to each other, but rather to differentiate them all from the business-as-usual pack. However, the website that houses the reports is a little clumsy – there is no easy way to compare companies to each other but more importantly, there is no way to know how individual company scores relate to average industry performance. Another problem is that the information is presented only in summary form – we see how a company scored but we don’t know why they earned that score.

I do, however, like the scheme overall. The site refers to the current system as Version 1 and claims that Version 2 is already in development. I’m impressed so far and look forward to seeing how they improve this useful tool in the future.

To read more about B Corporation and to access company reports, go to http://www.bcorporation.net and click on the ‘B Community’ tab. Currently, the only way to search for reports is to either browse company names at random or to use a key word search. I typed in ‘coffee’ and found the four above-mentioned companies.


Talking Trash about Coffee

May 16, 2008

Compostable

Posted by Chris O’Brien

An article in the Seattle Times this past Wednesday claims that Starbucks’ vice president of corporate social responsibility “knows it’s an issue” that the company’s coffee cups are single-use disposable trash that can’t be recycled.

The company’s 2.5 billion paper cups used in North American stores last year contain 10% post consumer waste (PCW) recycled fiber content, and the cup sleeves contain 60% PCW content; both attributes are improvements considering that the cups used to be 100% virgin and “double-cupping” was a common wasteful practice that was mostly made obsolete by the sleeves.

But the cups are still lined with plastic, and that makes them non-recyclable. There are new coffee cups on the market, like the ecotainer (which I wrote about here), that replace that plastic lining with a starch-based material, which makes them compostable. But a compostable cup does not compost make. Just like a ‘recyclable’ aluminum can has to actually be recycled in order to gain the benefit of its recycability, so a compostable cup needs to enter a composting system in order to realize its environmental advantages. That’s a bit of a challenge since composting infrastructure is fairly limited in the U.S.

However, it is certainly possible to arrange composting services independently, and there is a growing number of compostable products: food serviceware, garbage liners, and packaging products. The Biodegradable Products Institute website lists all the companies with products that meet the BPI standard for compostability. Only products that meet these standards are allowed to display the BPI logo (seen here at top). Composting is a heady matter, requiring specific conditions regarding light, temperature and moisture. In other words, simply tossing a cup in landfill and waiting decades or centuries for it to degrade doesn’t count.

Bottoms Up!My prediction is that government will eventually provide composting services the same way it now offers recycling services in many places. Meanwhile, I like the approach taken by Higher Grounds (my co-bloggers here at BeanActivist). They simply don’t offer disposable cups. Instead, if you forget to bring your own reusable mug, they’ll give you one! That’s right, they’ll give you a ceramic mug to takeaway. How can they afford that? Simple answer: craigslist. They post want ads for free coffee mugs on craigslist. Imagine all the tacky, unloved mugs stuffing cupboards across America, like that “bottoms-up” mug you received at your bachelor party from your high school buddy. Now imagine someone who is willing to take them away from you for free and put them to good use. It’s simply brilliant.

Don’t expect Starbucks to attempt this novel approach any time soon. They are currently experimenting with the compostable variety so we’ll have to see what happens.


Catholic Relief Services Economic Justice Consulation Report Back

March 7, 2008

By Jody Treter

 

I’m writing from the Baltimore airport, headed home from two days of meetings convened by Catholic Relief Services (CRS) to share ideas and get feedback from stakeholders about the next decade of CRS’s fair trade program. CRS Fair Trade logoThe added bonus of the trip was that I got to spend some time with my good buddy and fellow bean activist, Chris O’Brien, who also attended the first day of the meetings. CRS invited Chris to present on the difficult-to-tackle topic “Where is Responsible Consumption Headed?” and he wowed the meeting particpants with his comprehensive understanding of “green” purchasing (as many of you may know, Chris O head’s up the Responsible Purchasing Network). CRS prepped us for the visioning session with several other short presentations including the history of CRS and their FT program, a snapshot of the FT movement today and an argument for why it might be a good approach to open CRS’s FT program to more mainstream partners for greater market impact.

Among faith-based development organizations, CRS is a leader. It’s newly finished LEED-certified building is the first sign that, indeed, CRS is walking their talk. In the world of Fair Trade, CRS began it’s work with the Work of Human Hands craft project in 1995. In 2003, CRS launched it’s Fair Trade Program which became the umbrella for several other initiatives including the Work of Human Hands, plus the FT Coffee and Chocolate Programs. The Coffee Progam, an ambitious and forward-thinking partnership between marginlized farmers in Nicaragua and 100% fair trade coffee companies in the United States, is a new twist on interfaith coffee projects. While the Presbyterians, Lutherans and others have programs that partner exclusively with Equal Exchange, CRS boldly created the first “localized” program encouraging dioceses and parishes to support their nearest CRS Coffee Roasting Partner, of which there are twelve in the States. This model serves to “share the wealth” amongst several roasters plus it better leverages the FT movement.

Now four years into their FT program, CRS leaders are carrying out the due diligence necessary to create a well-informed blueprint for the next ten years. This is no easy task. The goal is clear – how does the CRS FT program serve the overarching CRS mission to alleviate suffering and create dignified livelihoods for the poorest of the poor? Our contribution, as stakeholders of the CRS Fair Trade, is to assist in the creation of long-term strategies to this end.

CRS offered three ideas to help generate conversation around strategies for the future:

  1. Revisit the strict adherence to the Gold Standard for Partners (ie – can CRS’s impact be greater if it broadens it’s partnership criteria?). The small working group I joined focused on this issue and offered up a hybrid solution. First, it’s important to maintain (and even actively improve) the Gold Standard of Fair Trade (often referred to as the 100%ers or Alternative Trade Organizations b/c their business models are fully committed to the principles of fair trade). The partners who meet “Gold Standard” criteria should be distinguished from others as the preferential partners. But, when these partners can’t meet the need of a potential customer (ie – a large institution wants to purchase individual pods for coffee makers), CRS directs the customers to “silver” level partners and, finally, “bronze” level partners. The discussions were much richer but this is the core of our group’s proposal.
  2. Shifting from a “product” focus to “points of engagements”. My opinion is that the CRS FT message will have the greated impace if both a “product” focus plus a “points of engagement” strategy are employed. For example, CRS may choose to sponsor an up-and-coming Skateboarder to engage Youth on their own turf – a point of engagement – but, when a church calls to ask about where to purchase office supplies or coffee or chocolate, CRS should remain an authority (termed “trust provider”) by offering a list of products from their program partners.
  3. From advertising to advocacy: Economic Justice beyond consumption. This piece wasn’t taken on by a working group because meeting attendees felt like this issue would be covered under the other two topics. Economic Justice is the over-riding theme of the CRS FT program and should continue to be so. In the end, Fair Trade is just one tool in the greater struggle for dignity and sustainability within economic justice. So, perhaps, the CRS FT program should consider changing their name to the CRS “Economic Justice Program” and create a more comprehensive approach that includes 1. the promotion of authentic “gold standard” fair trade partners; 2. engaging companies that are slowly coming into the fold of fair trade and economic justice; 3. identifying and pursuing points of engagements for CRS constituents.

Kudos to CRS FT for lining up an impressive roster of movers and shakers for the visioning session! I’ve been impressed time and time again with CRS’s commitment to the involvement of their stakeholders and the time they take to nurture relationships. Representing the Fair Trade movement was Carmen Iezzi, ED of the Fair Trade Federation; Serena Sato of SERVV; Kimberly Easson of TransFair USA; Joe Falcone of Counter Sourcing Fair Trade Apparel; Allen Thayer of Handcrafting Justice/Fair Trade Uniforms. Rick Peyser joined from Green Mountain Roasters and many CRS staff/volunteers from several different departments attended including Abby Causey, a CRS FT ambassador from Virginia Beach; Lara Puglielli, who was instrumental in the birth of the CRS fair trade coffee program in Nicaragua; Chuck Paquette, Foundation and Corporate Relations at CRS; Barbara Myers, Senior Director of US Operations; Sarah Ford, Senior Technical Advisor for Partnerships; Shaun Ferris, Technical Advisor on Agro-Enterprise; Brian Backe, Director of Domestic Programs Support Unit; Juan Molina, CRS-US Southwest; Thomas Awiapo, CRS-Ghana; and last but not least were the tireless CRS Fair Trade Champions, Jackie DeCarlo and Katy Cantrell.

Thanks much for the provocative discussions and good humor! That’s all for now . . . need to catch my plane.


Looking for Justice and Sustainability at Coffee Fest DC

February 16, 2008

Posted by Chris O’Brien

I’ve been looking forward to this for about a month. Finally the Coffee Fest as arrived – and I’m sick as a dog.

I had planned on taking a couple of the $95 seminars on cupping and blending but frankly I couldn’t smell the difference between a cup of Rwandan Zirikana and a piece of burnt toast right now. I’ve had the worst cold of my life for five weeks now. It hit me the day I landed in Colombia for coffee coop visits and I haven’t been able to shake it yet. In fact it’s gotten so bad I even – gasp – went to see a doctor. Four days on prescription meds and I’m still clogged up, congested, bronchially infected and generally down and out and dejected.

So I skipped the costly (but probably worthwhile) training classes and barely managed to haul my belling-aching ass to the show at all today. I traversed the whole show floor in less than two hours. It was a little smaller than I expected, which was a relief since I was so sick, but made the $30 door charge seem slightly steep. I tried to get in on a press pass but got no response at all from my emailed request. So right off the bat I was going in already docking them points for poor media relations.

My goals ranged from seeking sustainable packaging and serviceware, talking with roasters, importers and certifiers about sustainable trade issues, and looking for roasting equipment for my own possible coffee roastery business (shh, that’s kind of a secret). I left mildly better informed on each of these points.

Here’s what I learned.

PACKAGING & SERVICEWARE
Marketing claims about ‘green’ packaging and service items were all over the place. In fact, the majority of the booths offering these products made some kind of eco-assertion.

EcoSleeve

EcoSleeve. Made from polystyrene, this cup sleeve is marketed as “100% recyclable.” The bad news is that polystyrene, a.k.a. styrofoam, a.k.a. #6 plastic, is NOT recyclable where I live. As one might expect of one of the most liberal counties in America, Montgomery County, Maryland has a robust curbside recycling program, and even sponsors a free waste veggie oil exchange program in order to encourage conversion of this byproduct into useful biodiesel. If styrofoam is not recyclable here I wonder where it is recyclable.

EcoSleeve also claims to be “#100% biodegradable.” I’ve never heard this claim about styrofoam before, but the product brochure references a certification by EcoLogo, a credible eco-certification program that I’m very familiar with from first hand experience with the people who run the company. In fact, I’m giving a series of seminars in California next week with one of their VPs. I’ll have to make a note to ask him about this product because he is fond of noting in his presentations that biodegradability claims are generally bogus since nothing degrades in a sealed landfill. The EcoSleeve website further claims that one sleeve produces 66% less waste than a paper sleeve. That seems vague since it leaves me wondering whether the product itself just has less mass or if they are accounting for all the waste in the respective manufacturing processes, or what.

Despite the EcoLogo certification, the combination of three dubious claims (recyclability, biodegradability, waste-reduction) earns this product a double thumbs down from me.

GreenGood. This company produces PLA cups and containers; plates, clamshells, and other containers, made from recycled paper pulp and sugarcane waste; and 42% post-consumer waste recycled plastic cup lids. PLA stands for polylactic acid, which basically means plant-based plastic as opposed to plastic derived from petroleum. This is generally a good alternative to regular plastic, especially if you have a composting program for the used cups. However, my sense is that prices are steeper than conventional plastic plus PLA has the disadvantage of breaking down when exposed to sunlight or high temperatures. The good news is these guys also sell something called CPLA, or crystallized PLA. The science is lost on me but the salesman explained that it’s a microwaveable version of PLA, but it too has a performance tradeoff in that the crystallization process turns transparent PLA into a tan opaque color, thus obscuring the beverage.

Ag waste and recycled paper are definitely better options than virgin paper pulp. And the recycled plastic lids seem like a pretty good no brainer. I wasn’t able to do a cost comparison on any of the above because there were no price lists. But if you’re looking for solid environmental benefits, GreenGood seems to deliver.

CupCoatCupCoat. Why is everything twowords combined into one these days? CupCoat is reusable “fabric” cup sleeve claiming to be environmentally preferable because it replaces multiple disposable sleeves. The promotional literature claims that one CupCoat saves “approximately 2-5 lbs of garbage per person.” Hunh? How ever did they arrive at that number. The “coats” are made of such eco-friendly materials as “faux-fur” (okay, that tells me what it’s not, but it doesn’t tell me what it is), “rubberized synthetics” and “waterproofed t-shirt material.” Not sure what the second one is there either but the last one is apparently an obfuscating way of saying “cotton,” which happens to be the most chemical input-intensive crop on the planet. Sorry CupCoat, you are way bogus. Oh, except you almost won me over with the “T-zur” line. I’m a sucker for animal prints.

ecotainer Hot Cups. These are apparently an International Paper product marketed under the brand JavaStock. The ecotainer ™ is simple a virgin fiber paper cup with a PLA lining instead of a regular petro-plastic lining, earning it a BPI Certification. That’s a new one to me but on first glance the certification looks legit. Unfortunately, there’s a hefty price premium for this eco-benefit. For example, 1000 8 oz. ecotainer cups cost $82 compared to $59.40 for the regular kind. Seems steep and for that price I’d think you could get some recycled content fiber in there too. This gets a marginal thumbs up on the environmental improvement but a big wet raspberry for the jacked up price.

COFFEE CERTIFICATIONS
Rainforest Alliance
. I talked with the folks from Rainforest Alliance about how their sustainability standard stacks up against the many other coffee certification schemes. The staff rep at the booth asserted that its “up there with Fair Trade and organic” and emphasized its focus on “conservation” whereas Fair Trade addresses “trade.” I asked who pays and how the label is applied to products. Confusingly, he said anyone along the chain of supply can pay, but when I pressed him for a firm answer it became clear that ultimately farmers must pay the costs unless some generous partner offers to pay it for them. He also explained that there is a “traceability” system that serves to verify a company’s right to use the logo, but when I asked how a coffee drinker could access that traceability system he allowed that they couldn’t and the best they can do is ask a roaster for their certificate. We weren’t able to get into much more detail but this conversation highlighted to me how the trade and environmental communities continue to see themselves as separate instead of focusing on their obvious commonalities. Ultimately, long-term sustainability must include people and the planet.

Fair Trade Proof. I was happy to then run into Tripp and other good folks associated with Cafe Campesino. Finally a friendly face in what was mostly a sea of food-colored-syrup-flavored “coffee” drinks. I indulged in a cup of medium roast Colombian since he offered and because I was kinda grooving on the fact that I had just visited Fondo Paez, the coop that grows these very beans. I asked Tripp about whether CC had considered Rainforest Alliance certification and his direct answer was that there was no way they could ask their producer partners to pay for another certification. He also thought that organic certification more or less covered what was important in terms of shade canopy and that this extra certification would be like “splitting hairs.”

Cafe Campesino

I’m not convinced on this latter point (and I’d advise Tripp not to say such a thing to the bloggers over at Coffee and Conservation!) but I do see the inherent contradiction in holding growers responsible for the costs of certification in general, be it Rainforest Alliance or otherwise. It forces the good guys to pay for being good while letting the polluters/exploiters off scot-free. But the advantage is that it provides transparency to business claims about justice and sustainability. Cafe Campesino, and it’s importer Cooperative Coffees, will soon be launching an online transparency program called Fair Trade Proof that allows regular old everyday coffee drinkers to access company trade documents which show producer origin and payments. This is a significant stride forward in terms of truly transparent business and I look forward to announcing the launch when its ready. But I think you can already take a sneak peak now, just click the link above.

Direct Trade. Speaking of transparency, my next stop was Intelligentsia Coffee right across the aisle. They treated me to a Rwandan Zirikana and I spoke with a company rep who explained a little bit about their “Direct Trade” business model. Importantly, he first mentioned that it incorporates quality. Many certification programs for other unrelated products are going this same direction. For example, Green Seal launched a new certification last year for recycled content paint which incorporated performance standards from the Master Painters Institute. This is a significant trend because it helps dispel any notion that going “green” or “fair” means a compromise in quality. The myth that green equals poor quality has slowed the uptake of sustainable products for decades.

But Direct Trade, as far as anyone has been able to explain to me so far, including this rep from Intelligentsia, is not a certification and as far as I can tell it isn’t even a standard. It is really just a company (and a couple other companies they like) making unsubstantiated claims about fairness and sustainability. Their brochure lists six “criteria” of Direct Trade including that the price must be at least 25% above the fair trade price. It’s not clear whether this includes the fair trade premium or just the fair trade floor price and its also not clear whether this includes the additional organic premium required by the fair trade standard for the 80% or so of fair trade coffees that are also organic. When you add those both in and then consider that Intelligentsia’s coffee’s retail on their website for $14 or $15 dollars a pound all the way up to $28 and even $60 per pound, one wonders whether 25% is really very meaningful. Keep in mind also that by skipping certification, this company also gets to avoid paying its own share of the fair trade fees. I asked the rep point blank, without any certification, why should I believe that any of this is true? His response was “come to Nicaragua with me.” Hardly a viable option for 99.9% of this company’s customers. Ironically, one of his first assertions in our conversation was that their model is “totally transparent.” I got this same claim about Direct Trade from folks at Counter Culture in an online discussion we had over at the fantastic Coffee & Conservation blog.

One thing is clear: everyone is making claims about justice and sustainability in the coffee trade but there is little agreement about what that means. Hmm, someone ought to write a book. Oh wait, that’s what we’re doing!


Washington D.C. Coffee Fest

February 3, 2008

Coffee FestPosted by Chris O’Brien

The Washington D.C. Coffee Fest is scheduled for February 15-17, 2008, in the Convention Center. Tickets are $30 to enter the trade show where you’ll find more than a hundred exhibitors of coffee, tea, hot chocolate, all kinds of coffee-related equipment and supplies, coffee publications Barista Magazine and Roast Magazine. Hey, it even looks like my fair trade pals at Cafe Campesino will have a booth!

Bear in mind this event is intended for coffee professionals, not just casual coffee drinkers. So the roster of free educational classes includes enticing topics such as “Everything you’ve always hate about cash registers is about to change.” Sounds boring but I bet there are a lot of cafe owners who really do hate those damn machines!

In addition to the free classes, there are longer, more intense training workshops that carry an extra cost of entry (as much as $95 each) and require advance registration. Great sounding hands-on workshops cover a range of really nuts and bolts coffee business topics: coffee cupping tutorials; learning to blend beans; maintenance for espresso machines; gelato and smoothie workshops; barista trainings; the art of the free pour latte; and a lot more.

It doesn’t look like sustainability or economic justice issues are covered at all. Frankly, I find this a little surprising. In the past year, I’ve spoken on sustainability topics at a wide range of mainatream business conferences. From groups of government procurement professionals and educational buyers to associations of professional “meeting planners” and craft brewers (actually, those last two are coming up within the next couple months), sustainability is becoming a major theme at conferences of all kinds. Given that the coffee industry has so many justice and sustainability issues to deal with you’d think there would at least be a workshop or two on organic coffee or fair trade.

The lack of sustainability content not withstanding, this promises to be a very practical and worthwhile event for anyone interested in the business of beans. And, in addition to Cafe Campesino, it looks there are a handful of other exhibitors with an eco-angle: Sambazon is a fair trade fruit smoothie company who I met a couple times back when I worked at the Fair Trade Federation; Ecosleeve, and Eco-Products sound intriguing; the Rainforest Alliance has a booth which I will be sure to visit so I can investigate their sustainability certification a little closer; and I’ll be keen to visit the Counter Culture and Intelligentsia booths to learn more about their so-called “Direct Trade” business model that appears to be rivaling fair trade. (As an aside, I’ve been having a great online conversation with some of the Counter Culture folks over at the Coffee Habitat blog – a blog with highly recommended reading for anyone with a special interest in how coffee growing affects bird habitat and other concerns with ecosystem protection and management.)

Besides Washington D.C., Coffee Fest also occurs in Hawaii, Seattle, and Hong Kong. Check it all out right here.


News from Fair Trade: FLO’s Pricing Announcement, Market Forces & Peru

December 16, 2007

 Last Week, the Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO) announced a long-awaited decision to increase the Fair Trade certified minimum price for washed and unwashed arabica coffees. The press release is here: FLO Price Increase Release

For washed arabicas the minimum price per pound bumped to $1.25 per pound (up from $1.20) and for unwashed the price increased to $1.20 USD per pound (from $1.15). The FLO increase translates into a base price of $1.55 for organic fair trade washed arabica coffees. ($1.25 minimum + $.20 organic premium + $.10 fair trade premium).

FLO’s press release states that market pressures didn’t warrant a price increase for robusta coffees.

This announcement follows on a decision made in June 2007 when FLO conceded a modest increase on both the organic and fair trade premiums by 5 USD cents each under  pressure from producers, ATOs (alternative trade organizations) and allies. 

For many ATO’s and trade allies, FLO’s decision to increase pricing is too little too late. For several years now, alternative traders and small scale producers have attempted to engage FLO on the minimum price issue. How are Fair Trade cooperatives supposed to secure coffee in a market when, on one hand, the global commodity market prices are reaching those of the Fair Trade minimum and, on the other end of the spectrum, elitist coffee importers are offering exhorbitant prices to indiviual farming families for a year’s entire harvest?

So, while FLO’s price increase may be vital when the world’s coffee prices spiral downwards once again, it is unlikely that small scale farmers will see much benefit in 2008 from the recently announced price increase.  In 2007, importers of specialty coffee were forced to pay prices that far exceed fair trade minimums in order to secure high-quality coffee. 2008 promises to be yet another year of increasing prices in the specialty market.  The Oromia co-op from Ethiopia, for example, recently announced they expect approximately $2.50 per pound USD on 2008 contracts.  

The increase in coffee prices, whether dictated by FLO or a result of demand for specialty coffee, is a victory for small scale producers. Alternative traders and allies have long advocated for severing ties with the commodity markets and, instead, create pricing structures based on the cost of production plus differentials related to quality, cost of living, isolation of the farmers and inflation in the country. It remains to be seen what our market in the States will bear as increasing prices get passed along to roasters, retailers and consumers. The value of currency will be another factor to watch in 2008 because buyers from Europe, New Zealand and other countries, with their currencies becoming stronger and stronger against the dollar, have more flexibity to deal with increasing prices in their respective markets.

 Finally, it’s important to note that healthy trading relationships shouldn’t be relegated to pricing alone. Small scale coffee growers from Peru circulated the following letter (linked below), admonishing FLO for their acceptance of Perales Huancaruna into the FLO certification program. They assert that Perales Huancaruna, the biggest coffee exporting corporation in Peru,  has a long history of disenfranchising small scale growers in order to make a profit.  They fear the entrance of Perales Huancaruna into FLO’s system will be the demise of the fair trade certification system for small scale growers in Peru. Read the letter by clicking below

Letter from the National Association for Small Scale Producers in Peru