 |
PG Tips has not gone with the Fairtrade Mark but has opted for RainForest Alliance Certification. Is this a good thing? As one of the comments I received points out, it has many ethical/environmental aims and is more easily available. Will the Fairtradeblogger now be being buying PG Tips and ‘doing his bit for the tea farmer’ as their adverts say?
Yes and No, there’s more to this than meets the eye…
It’s worth noting that Rainforest Alliance Certification standards and the Fairtrade Mark standards overlap, but come from different directions:
- Fairtrade is about the deal for the farmers and ensuring that the unfair trade system is reversed so that farmers can work their out of poverty. Environmental benefits mainly come as a side-shoot from the empowerment and protection of the workers - e.g. reduction in chemical usage, reduction in deforestation as current crops are financially viable.
- Rainforest Alliance comes from an environmental and sustainability angle. Working conditions are also in the standards, but there is no aim to change the trade system. Any increases in price paid to the grower for the product come as a side-shoot of growing a better quality crop .
It’s this crucial difference that affects everything. There is merit in both systems - both Fairtrade and the RainForest Alliance ensure that no child labour is employed and that the International Labour Organisation standards are being adhered to, for example.
But the Fairtrade Mark is about empowering the poor and ensures that the tea is bought by the packaging companies in the developed world at a fair price. It is a partnership between the buyer and producer (with responsibilities on both):
- The guaranteed minimum price, coupled with payment up front, frees the farmers from the tyranny of loan sharks and unscrupulous buyers.
- The Fairtrade premium (the guaranteed extra on top of the minimum price) allows the farmers and workers to develop their community in a democratic fashion.
Under the Rainforest Alliance Certification scheme, the responsibility is on the farmers/plantation owners only . If the market price falls to an unsustainable level, there is no responsiblity on the developed world company to buy at a higher level.
On environmental issues, the RainForest Alliance Certification has tighter standards than Fairtrade.
It is also important to bear in mind that Fairtrade Mark is given to products and FairtradeTea is 100% Fairtrade. Rainforest Alliance Certification is given to farms, not products - so it is always worth checking how much of the ingredients in the product is from Rainforest Alliance Certified growers.
All of this raises an important question: why are so many different labelling schemes are coming out?
Harriet Lamb, director of the Fairtrade Foundation in the UK, points out that this can cause confusion in the consumer’s mind and dilutes the chance for everyone to benefit from Fair Trade. After all, we’re too busy to spend hours comparing in-depth certification standards documents before making a purchase. Why can’t there be just one certification scheme that provides the assurance that consumers need? Whilst she is against a ’super-label’ that tries to bundle up organic, fair trade, environmental, etc. standards, I think that this misses a fantastic opportunity. Certainly some areas can be kept as separate; Organic being a good example (everyone should let the Soil Association’s mark do that one). However, there are other schemes that have a lot of overlap and need to work together. There are opportunities in collaborative working, as the Rainforest scheme has good uptake amongst tea plantations and strong environmental standards, whilst the Fairtrade scheme has strong uptake amongst small-scale tea farmer co-operatives and has strong social and ethical standards.
So, Yes, Rainforest Certification is a good thing but it needs to do more on changing the trade system. Fairtrade is, in my opinion, better as it focuses on tackling the root causes of poverty and changes the way the companies treat developing countries. (However, Fairtrade would do well to consider moving environmental issues up the agenda.) And, No, the Fairtradeblogger will not be buying Rainforest Certified tea, but will ‘do his bit’ by buying Fairtrade tea.
What’s your opinion, have I got it wrong?
Katerobertson 
Randa 
Fair Trade Shopping 
Enlarging Fair 
Jon Wade 
5 users commented in " Rainforest Allliance Certification versus Fairtrade - what’s the difference? "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackIsn’t it sad that we live in a world where we even have to consider all this? Where it comes down the consumer to make ethical decisions over whether to buy something that is basically produced with slave labour, or not? (Anyone who says that this is no longer the case should consider that in Cambodia, garment factory workers earn 25 pounds a month! When did you last buy a pair of trousers from M&S or Next that cost less than that? And if they were even cheaper we should not really consider buying them.) It is up to us because the world leaders are governed by big business over common economic sense and ethics, and allow unfair trade practices to continue. Arrrgh this blog is great because it reminds me about what I care about and forget to act upon at times.
Anyone supporting Fair Trade should also sign up to the global trade campaign Make Poverty History which challenges world economic structures which basically allow rich countries to exploit the resources of poor countries whilst they protect their own producers with trade tariffs and subsidies.
Keep it up Paul, and get this brilliant blog out there!
I’ve added the Make Poverty History campaign link to the Blogroll so that everyone can get involved.
Also, I’ve found this article from the Guardian that compares the 2 certification schemes:
http://shopping.guardian.co.uk/food/story/0,,1359609,00.html
The website address is a link to my fair trade blog i am still learning how to navigate. I am a UK citizen living in the USA for 5 years now. i have a fair trade retail company here in Charleston, sc. I just want to say that it is great to see the discussions in and around fair trade. Interesting to read about the different labeling that is appearing. It can be confusing…a friend recently bought tea here in the US and it had 4 different ‘certifications’ on it. He approached me saying look.. fair trade tea! actually it wasn’t when you looked more closely at the labels!! i didn’t burst his bubble though as he was excited about being a fair trade consumer!!
Isn’t it good that the dialogue for such mindsets is going on?
The notion of exploitation is nothing new, but it seems that for us to be part of the solution which is not only awareness, but making others aware is enlightening. How wonderful to be a part of this with like minds such as yourselves.
I travel quite a bit and deal with small companies and laborers working to get out of poverty. I agree that we need to be aware of those who tout the fair trade logos and ideas as a marketing ploy, and we need to be equally concerned with the environmental aspects. Those living in poverty are often very closely tied to the environment for sustenance, so we need to look at protecting both. However, there is little doubt that those who look to protect the environment need to work more towards the alleviation of poverty. There is a fine line.
The point is, I suppose, that at this point in the process it is imperative that we seek out those who practice what they preach, and attempt to enlighten those who know no better. I have people ask me all of the time—as I get quite preachy about this—what is fair trade, or if kids made this or that, or if people in places like Indonesia, Nicaragua, or natives in Panama make minimum wage.
The answer is that fair trade is treating the people who make these products with respect and dignity and looking for ways to enhance their lives both monetarily and emotionally. We can apply humanitarian ideals on the cultures we deal with, but we cannot force our cultural ideals on those we wish to help. We need to help them on their terms. It is our duty to then read between the lines as Susie has done when looking for those truly devoted to fair trade and look into the issues at hand and put things into perspective as Georgie has done and create forums as you have done, Paul, and make the world a better place though our actions that will move forward.
It’s a tall order to expect consumers to educate themselves on the complexities surrounding standards and certification programs. The information cost of doing the research is so great, particularly for a low cost purchase. (so, thanks for conversation!) At this junction, only the most fiercely eco-conscious consumers are peeling back the eco-label to vet the rigor of the claim.
I spent the last several years in the floral sector, which has seen an explosion of so-called sustainability certification programs. Peel back the label, and there are significant differences, with profound implications for environmental protection, social responsibility, economic viability and product quality. In addition to looking at the science behind the program, and the presence of independent auditing, it’s also important to consider compliance. A standard can include all the right criteria, but if it only requires 50% compliance, how rigorous is it? In the floral sector, science and compliance render the Fair Trade and VeriFlora certification programs vastly more rigorous than Rainforest Alliance and the other initiatives.
Thanks for the discussion; it helps consumers make purchasing decisions that support environmental and social stewardship.
Leave A Reply