About Sustainability & Fair Trade

Sustainability Sustainable development Promote economic growth without damaging env. Sustainability Promote economic growth that improves quality of life and minimizes impact on planet Not just about environmental concerns Necessarily about social concerns For producers, but also communities ¤

Sustainability Tied to globalization (Hudson, et al say:) Extension of rules that control connections Is ‘neoliberal globalization’ (NEM) Product of Washington Consensus Critical of NEM Didn’t raise all boats, need alternative to capitalism Inequality and poverty persist, cause env. issues ¤

Fair Trade Fair price, conditions for producers of commodities FT movement pushes for more Social justice, equality, community development, democratic decision making, etc. Split within FT movement FTUSA v. FLO Form FT connections to bypass capitalist market system Recognize potential value of using capitalist system Greater reach Form ATOs ¤

Fair Trade History Now Formal Dual: within and outside system Mostly impersonal Sell stories to appeal to buyers Equal-exchange model Much more secularized Social justice through ‘trade not aid’ Driven by not only social justice, but social status FT labels and FTOs Then Informal Alternative to capitalist system Network-, trust-based Charity affiliation, charity model Mostly churches Sought social justice through religion, solidarity, charity Fair trade organizations

Organism v. Labeling Whole package Producer to customer Labeling Not new idea Unions, country of origin Raise awareness Sell through vendors Label guarantees product Trust-based mvt. didn’t need labels Label only guarantees product, not corporation, vendor, etc. ¤

Labeling Problems Different values cause split in labeling orgs. FTUSA, FLO (FLO split: set/review; certify) Lots more labeling orgs. form Rainforest Alliance, Equal Exchange, UTZ, Fair Trade Each with different standards Retailer, etc., benefits from association Not all Starbucks coffee is FT Label clutter Diff. orgs, diff. standards, LOTS of labels Other causes- dolphin-free tuna, etc. FT and label became synonymous Result: Dilute value of fair trade notion ¤

Commodity Fetishism Commodity= product produced to earn profit Real value of product obscured, not even considered, so not even valued Cereal example Individual self-interest Price, brand v. generic, healthfulness Don’t consider source of the product Fetishism part results from the characteristics imbued into the product Not just cereal, but Quaker Oats Not just a phone, but an iPhone Value-added products ¤

Commodity Fetishism Consumers only value the product because of what it can do for them Satisfy need, accord social stature, assuage guilt, promote health, save them time/money, etc. Intrinsic value of product not in the labor that goes into making it Producer not vested in end product beyond earning wages Consumer not vested in producer Hidden costs behind product Human, env. costs ¤

Value Assigning value NEM: quantitative aspect- market decides Marx: qualitative aspect- should be based on value of labor contribution Value in the capitalist market Use value- table serves purpose Exchange value- table is commodity in rel. to other commodities Abstract value- homogenization of diff. types of labor Work is means to an end in order to consume rather than end in itself ¤

NEM Destroys Social Relationships CF intensified Marketing, distance Distance producers from consumers Job no longer determines place in society Deteriorates society, community People conditioned to not care or voice concerns Challenge: Rethink being consumers Think more about social relations Respond with political activism ¤

Self-Preserving System System sets rules in its favor IGOs, esp. WTO Concern is end product, not effects of production GMO ex.= regulate if consumer problem, not production-end issue (env., health of laborer) Race to the bottom discourages ‘fair’ compensation Need to remain competitive ¤

Theorists at Odds Social theorists Focus is social mvts., social relations, communities NEM no longer embedded w/in soc/pol relations Had set norms; now market is a force of its own Concern over disconnect bt. market and soc/pol sectors Undermine social relations  undermines democratic participation, governance Set policy through market-dominated states New Deal ¤

Theorists at Odds Disagreement abounds- even within same camps FT working in the market FT as potential to provide human, env. checks FT necessarily working outside of the market Called Alternative Trade Organizations (ATOs) for a reason What do the authors think? FT can use market to counter current norms FT can raise awareness about/ challenge commodity fetishism ATOs just don’t have same reach ¤

Criticisms Dependency theory Unequal exchange- basis of system Comparative advantage as dead end for GS dev. New International Division of Labor Consumers as activists Individual buyer v. collective action for change Lack equal spending power in market FT= rich consumer movement FT neglects env. aspect Pushes solving problems through consumption ¤

Dual Nature of FT Undermine CF Gets consumers to look behind the curtain Rework CF Buy FT for peer approval Effect change through buying (more) stuff Political action through consumerism Challenge: How to use market against itself to transform consumerism ¤

Authors Argue FT provides $ transfer from GN to GS FT focus is at exchange end, but can still raise awareness ‘Political consumerism’ can facilitate activism Use market but don’t get consumed by it ¤

How about You? Did you consider social relations, community, and/or democratic participation as part of sustainability? Why are these necessary? What are the main objectives of FT? ¤