Misplaced Pages

Fair trade: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:57, 4 July 2005 editFrelke (talk | contribs)2,423 editsm →Fair trade versus free trade← Previous edit Revision as of 14:39, 5 July 2005 edit undoMccready (talk | contribs)3,705 edits long sentences remade, dictionary-like links removedNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{alternateuses}} {{alternateuses}}
].]] ].]]
The '''fair trade''' movement, also known as the '''trade justice''' movement, promotes the use of ], ] and ] standards for the production of ], particularly those ]ed from the ] and ]'s to the ]. Standards may be voluntarily adhered to by importing firms, or enforced by governments through a combination of ] and ]. Proposed and practiced fair trade policies vary widely, ranging from the commonly adhered to prohibition of ] made using ] to minimum ] schemes such as those for coffee in the 1980s. ]s also play a role in promoting fair trade standards by serving as independent monitors of compliance with ] requirements. The '''fair trade''' movement, also known as the '''trade justice''' movement, promotes international labour, environment and social standards for the production of traded goods and services. The movement focuses in particular on exports from the ] and ]s to the ]. Standards may be voluntarily adhered to by importing firms, or enforced by governments through a combination of ] and ]. Proposed and practiced fair trade policies vary widely, ranging from the commonly adhered to prohibition of ] made using ] to minimum ] schemes such as those for coffee in the 1980s. ]s also play a role in promoting fair trade standards by serving as independent monitors of compliance with ] requirements.


Implicit (and often explicit) in these approaches is a criticism of ] as being "unfair" for a variety of reasons. The most general criticism is that market prices do not properly reflect the true costs associated with producing the product due to ] such as environmental and ]s. Fair trade arguments may support (or be treated as supporting) ], but this is only true of some of the positions within the quite disparate fair trade movement. Implicit (and often explicit) in these approaches is a criticism of ] as being "unfair" for a variety of reasons. The most general criticism is that market prices do not properly reflect the true costs associated with producing the product due to ] such as environmental and ]s. Fair trade arguments may support (or be treated as supporting) ], but this is only true of some of the positions within the quite disparate fair trade movement.

Revision as of 14:39, 5 July 2005

For other uses, see Fair trade (disambiguation).
File:Fair-trade-products.jpg
Fair trade products shown at XI Unctad.

The fair trade movement, also known as the trade justice movement, promotes international labour, environment and social standards for the production of traded goods and services. The movement focuses in particular on exports from the Third and Second Worlds to the First World. Standards may be voluntarily adhered to by importing firms, or enforced by governments through a combination of employment and commercial law. Proposed and practiced fair trade policies vary widely, ranging from the commonly adhered to prohibition of goods made using slave labour to minimum price support schemes such as those for coffee in the 1980s. Non-governmental organizations also play a role in promoting fair trade standards by serving as independent monitors of compliance with fairtrade labelling requirements.

Implicit (and often explicit) in these approaches is a criticism of free trade as being "unfair" for a variety of reasons. The most general criticism is that market prices do not properly reflect the true costs associated with producing the product due to externalities such as environmental and social costs. Fair trade arguments may support (or be treated as supporting) protectionism, but this is only true of some of the positions within the quite disparate fair trade movement.

Overview

"Fair trade" was originally used by those supporting social justice and the alleviation of the intense poverty found in many developing nations. They contrasted "fair trade" with 'unfair' international trade practices. It is associated particularly with labour unions and environmentalists, in their criticism of disparities between the protections for capital versus those for labour and the environment. The use of the term has expanded beyond campaigns to reform current trading practices (and major institutions such as the World Trade Organization which embody them). Now it has become a movement to allow consumers to choose not to participate in these practices. Fairtrade labelling (or Fairtrade certification) allows consumers to identify goods (especially commodities such as coffee) that meet certain agreed standards of fairness.

Advocates of fair trade argue that growing inequity and serious gaps in social justice, and the global export of terrorism, are symptoms of an economic system that permits harms to be exported to other countries, while importing their goods. They point to extinction, deforestation, social unrest, as consequences of globalisation, and in particular of an unfair globalisation. The international trade system, critics say, not only pits David against Goliath - as free trade inevitably will - but blindfolds David.

In the past, the responses sought by critics of the international trade system included various penalties on "unfair" goods. This argument generally made little headway against the long-term movement towards free trade; imposition of penalties for "dumping" was sometimes motivated by domestic political reasons (such as U.S. imposition of steel tariffs in 2001).

Today, the fair trade movement concentrates more on the abolition of agricultural subsidies and dumping, and to a much lesser extent on offsetting penalties on "unfair" goods. Indeed, although there are many who are still critical of free trade in general, there is a trend towards campaigning against what is seen as hypocrisy by developed countries in using protectionism against the poorest countries (especially in agricultural products), whilst requiring them to leave their own producers without protection.

In addition, the fair trade movement has built on long-standing attempts to allow consumers the choice of giving producers in poor countries a better deal, and developed the fairtrade labelling system. This uses the market to help achieve the principles of social justice.

Fairtrade labelling

Main article: Fairtrade labelling

"Fair trade" or "Fairtrade" aims to guarantee not just fair prices, but also the principles of ethical purchasing. These include adherence to ILO agreements such as those banning child and slave labour, guaranteeing a safe workplace and the right to unionise, adherence to the United Nations charter of human rights, a fair price that will at least cover the cost of production and facilitate social development, and especially in agriculture, protection and conservation of the environment. Fair trade also aims for long-term business relationships that are transparent throughout the chain. For consumers, fair trade seeks to guarantee high quality. This is usually indicated to the consumer with a fair trade label or brand.

Fair trade is also to be distinguished from safe trade which is more narrowly focused on preservation of biodiversity, biosafety, biosecurity and preventing serious global climate change. Although both are often advocated by worldwide green parties or global NGOs like Greenpeace and Rainforest Alliance, the two concerns are usually discussed separately at diplomatic conferences, and historically have resulted in separate treaties entirely. Supporters of safe trade see it as a foundation for fair trade, since ecological damage is also implicated in social problems.

Currently the most common definition of fair trade is that of the FINE group of organisations (Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International, International Fair Trade Association, Network of European Worldshops and European Fair Trade Association). The FINE definition does not require or imply offsetting penalties which have been one of the main sources of arguments against fair trade, and reads as follows:

"Fair Trade is a trading partnership based on dialogue, transparency and respect, that seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalised producers and workers - especially in the South. Fair Trade organisations (backed by consumers) are engaged actively in supporting producers, awareness raising and in campaigning for changes in the rules and practice of conventional international trade."

The labelling of fair trade products began with Mexican coffee farmers in 1988 alongside the Dutch development agency Solidaridad. Coffee imported to the Netherlands under the fair trade principles was labelled by Solidaridad under the name of Max Havelaar. This fair trade labelling system is today known as "Fairtrade" or "Fair Trade Certified", includes the Max Havelaar and TransFair labels, and is controlled by Fairtrade Labelling Organisations International (FLO).

The history of fairtrade movements spans the 20th century. It is fairtrade labelling - a relatively recent innovation - which has allowed its principles to be adopted by any company or organisation, and brought the concept into the mainstream. Previous initiatives include "goodwill selling" (practised in the United States from the 1950s until the 1970s), the Worldshop movement (begun in 1959 by Oxfam), and alternative trading organisations (ATOs) that operate primarily in the U.S. and Europe from the 1960s until today.

Fair trade and politics

The Federation of European Green Parties are, unlike most of their counterparts outside Europe, strongly represented in the European Parliament and are firmly in the fair trade camp. Caroline Lucas, a British Green MEP, argues that

" ... many developing countries called for a study to examine the effects of tariff reductions on local industries and jobs, before being required to open their markets further. Local industries, they say, have already collapsed in most African and least developed countries as a result of previous tariff cuts....The choice is not between global trade rules and chaos: rather, it is between trade rules that undermine sustainability and favour the rich, and trade rules that support sustainability and equity."

A major focus for the Greens is land reform that respects natural ecologies and traditional cultures, while other groups focus more clearly on equity.

The World Bank has taken a positive stance at fair trade. According to the Bank comments in their 2003 study of sustainable coffee markets, sustainable coffees (both fair trade and organic) "can provide such benefits as improved natural resource management; fewer agrochemicals used in production, which decreases costs and health risks; and increased use of rural labour, which provides more jobs for those in desperate need." It should be noted that the definition of fair trade here does not involve government-mandated additional taxes or generic foreign aid.

The European Commission stated in 2002 that they will support fair trade plans in the private sector.

Fair trade versus free trade

In the past, suggestions that "unfair" goods be taxed, or that standards such as those from the ILO, be required in order for countries to participate in international trade, have led to heavy criticism by advocates of free trade. Although many organisations and individuals involved in fair trade campaigns are still uneasy about unfettered free trade, they are more cautious about arguing for protectionism or coordinated international intervention. Today the emphasis is on the lack of free trade caused by the protectionism (including agricultural subsidies) of the developed world. Without such rich-country protectionism, it is argued poor countries might stand a chance of seriously alleviating poverty.

Some Italian consumer organisations proposed in the 1980s that goods that were imported to Italy should be taxed inversely proportionately to the degree to which social and ecological standards of the exporter matched those of Italy - in other words, lower standards meant a higher offsetting tariff. The money so collected would presumably be spent on foreign aid to bring the exporting nation up to Italian standards - thus, all purchasing in Italy would become moral purchasing within the Italian ethical tradition.

Relevant articles

External links

Campaigns

Organisations

Articles and papers

Category: