Fairtrade: Just Another Target Group?

by Jonathan Morgan on December 9, 2009

Post image for Fairtrade: Just Another Target Group?

As I’ve mentioned here before, the industry juggernauts are beginning to notice. They’re beginning to tap into the growing target group that is the Fairtrade consumer. It’s been creeping in for a long time, ever since the pioneer brands (Traidcraft, Cafédirect, Divine, etc.) created enough of a presence to force supermarkets to realize we exist: we who care who produces, and what goes into, the food we eat.

So in the UK we began to see Tesco and ASDA branded Fairtrade-certified goods. At the time these changes were seen as a breakthrough, a sign that at last consumers were having an influence. The idealists among us imagined that eventually we would visit a supermarket and not have a slave-produced alternative, that it would all be fairly traded and that we would even hear reports of fewer countries classified ‘developing’, as they gain economic power themselves. But the supermarkets continued to stock the other products and they continued to fly off the shelves.

This year we have seen a spate of the big players decide to accommodate the ethical consumer in their product ranges: Cadbury have committed their Dairy Milk line to certification, Mars have announced that by 2020 they will be more ethical, and Kraft Foods, who want to buy out Cadbury, are taking steps towards working with the Rainforest Alliance. Sadly, on Monday when Nestlé announced that their four finger Kit Kat will be Fairtrade certified we got another whiff of the target group mentality – “we’ll create a line which is Fairtrade, so that we can tap into that niche.”

When this fair trade journey began, the goal was to play the capitalist game in a way that would benefit the poor. It wasn’t about charity: for people to throw money at the poor while they pretended to be interested in the product. We actually wanted better products that would be desirable for more than just their sense of conscience. That’s how Cafédirect came to be, and why Nestlé (Nescafé) were forced to pay a little more for their coffee (because apparently the farmers were giving their best produce to the highest bidder).

With this in mind, why does it leave a nasty taste in our mouths when we hear of a Fairtrade version of the Kit Kat, or a Fairtrade line of Nescafé?

Maybe we were hoping that the soul-less superpowers would grow souls? Or perhaps there was an idea that we would be proven right and that the oppressors would repent of their wrong doings and confess to being modern-day slave barons?

Of course, there’s no reason why Nestle can’t take the profits from their Fairtrade line and invest them in another less-than-ethical enterprise. There’s nothing stopping Mars from back pedaling before 2020 (as they have before). But, as Stephanie Celt points out, there are 8,000 farmers who will be affected, for the better, by this (Kit Kat) decision.

We must celebrate this, but also recognize that there will always be people who face injustice, and it is always our responsibility to fight it. Wearing our “consumer” hats and fighting on an economic level is not our only option. As George Monbiot reminded us recently:

“We cannot change the world by changing [only] our buying habits…our power comes from acting as citizens – demanding political change – not acting as consumers.”

And so the fight goes on. Yes, we’ve won a tiny fraction of Nestlé’s overall output, and yes, we will continue to long for a day when their whole product line represents our consciences. But until then we must allow these small victories to fuel our steady movement forwards.

This post is part of a larger debate on the mainstreaming of Fairtrade curated by Shared Interest on their Blog. Click here to read more.

(photo by Ahron De Leeuw)

Share This Story
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • StumbleUpon
  • TwitThis

{ 1 trackback }

Mainstreaming Fairtrade – The Great Debate
December 9, 2009 at 2:07 pm

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Mike Brady December 9, 2009 at 4:42 pm

There is another aspect beyond the niche market and that is using Fairtrade certification to provide public relations cover, so diverting attention from concerns and criticisms. When Nestlé launches its national advertising campaign for Fairtrade KitKat in January, how many people will be reflecting that Nestlé is part of the problem when it comes to child labour/slavery in the Ivory Coast?

Nestlé has been taken to court in the US for failing to act on a 2001 agreement to end child slavery in its cocoa supply chain and in the past has boycotted a meeting by Senator Horkins (co-sponsor of the Horkins-Engel Protocol in the US) called to examine lack of progress. There are 11 million people dependent on cocoa farming in West Africa, many of them dependent on Nestlé. The KitKat products involved in this scheme will benefit only 6,000 of them. There is a danger that the improved conditions for the 6,000 farmers will divert attention from the many others outside the scheme, and be used deliberately to this end by Nestlé.

Stop the Traffik, founded by Steve Chalke, the United Nations Special Advisor on Community Action Against Human Trafficking, said in response to the announcement that ‘two finger’ Kit Kats and all of Nestlé’s other chocolate products ““will continue to exploit the chocolate slaves of the Ivory Coast from where Nestlé source most of their cocoa”.” See:
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/10757

This is a similar situation to its Fairtrade coffee, which involves just 0.1% of the coffee farmers dependent on it, but is used to suggest it is making a huge difference, providing cover for continued unethical practices.

In addition, Nestlé is the most boycotted company in the UK and one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet according to GMIPoll because of the way it pushes its breastmilk substitutes. Nestlé systematically breaches the baby milk marketing standards adopted by the World Health Assembly, undermines breastfeeding and contributes to the unnecessary death and suffering of babies. According to UNICEF, 1.5 million babies die around the world every year because they are not breastfed. Even Nestlé’s Global Public Affairs Manager, Dr. Gayle Crozier Willi, admitted in 2007 that Nestlé is ‘widely boycotted’.

Fairtrade KitKat will be added to the boycott list. The boycot has forced some changes in Nestlé marketing practices and policies, but the company, the market leader, refuses to make all necessary changes and is still the worst of the baby food companies. At the present time it is being targeted for practices that include claiming its infant formula ‘protects’ babies – it does not, babies fed on it are more likely to become sick than breastfed babies and in conditions of poverty, they are more likely to die.

Its Fairtrade product should be seen in this context.

Please see my blogs on this topic, which include a quote from me:
http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2009/12/nestle-fairtrade-two-fingers.html

Jonathan Morgan December 9, 2009 at 5:26 pm

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your comment.

You’re right that Nestle really, really needs to clean up their act. I just wanted to point out that this can also be seen as a chink in the armour of the giant.

By adopting one Fairtrade product, Nestle are in no way vindicating themselves from the injustices they cause.

People like yourselves are doing a wonderful job by drawing attention to such injustices.

I’m not intending to start buying Kit Kats now that the four finger bars are Fairtrade, but I am glad for those 6,000 farmers.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: