FAIR TRADE WEB LOG

Including thoughts, views and analysis about the development of the fair trade concept, experiences interacting with fair trade people and organisations and anything else that crops up that seems interesting.  All from the perspective of David Turner at WONDERWORLD, a small UK handicraft importer and wholesaler.

If you read this and want to contribute then I will put in links or paste sections in as appropriate.  E-mail me on info 'at' wonderworld.co.uk

The web log titles are ....

Alternative Methods for Looking at Fair Trade Suppliers in BAFTS 

Dividing Lines on 'Fair Trade'

Impressions from IFAT Biennial Conference in Newcastle - July 2003

Trust Me, I am a Mechanic

GUILTY! Send them away

Identifying Fair Trade Criteria- A New Footnote to WONDERWORLD's Trading Policy

Some Comments & Suggestions on the BAFTS Importers Directory

A Strike, A Bike & Some Insights in Nepal

Kite Flying Day in Jaipur, Rajasthan

New Thinking & New Attitudes in the British Association of Fair Trade Shops - Reflections following the BAFTS AGM in Bolton - June 2006

British Association of Fair Trade Shops - A Backward Step?

To Hull & Back - BAFTS AGM 2007

Alternative Methods for Looking at Fair Trade Suppliers in BAFTS

1)        Ask every supplier to look at FINE and write down how they measure up to the definition of fair trade and the goals laid down there.   In particular, ask suppliers to state what they do on a practical, day to day basis in their trading relationships which makes them a distinctive fair trade supplier under the FINE criteria.

2)        Ask suppliers to express their strengths and weaknesses  in respect of their practise of fair trade.

3)        No-one is perfect!   Ask every supplier to state how they intend to develop, deepen and strengthen their practise of fair trade, and on what time scale.  

4)        Suppliers submit these statements plus any supporting documents such as trading policies, monitoring reports, etc to the Appraisal Group.

5)        The Appraisal Group reads and makes specific comments on the statements made and information provided by each individual supplier.    Their comments could be agreed collectively or could be made from individual perspectives.   In particular the Appraisal Group individually or collectively  can highlight suppliers whose practice of fair trade seems especially pro-active, strong, radical and dynamic, in line with European norms, etc.  Conversely they can highlight suppliers whose approach to fair trade is weak,  passive or simply non-existent.  A grading system could be used.   Quality of information provided should also be commented on.

6)        The Appraisal Group publishes their comments to BAFTS members and includes copies of all the material submitted by suppliers.

7)        Suppliers should pay an annual fee to BAFTS that covers all the administrational costs of this process.    £ 100.00 each? 

8)        The Appraisal Group comments and supporting material should also be made available to non-BAFTS members for a fee that covers the administrational costs.

9)        BAFTS members should read the comments made by the Appraisal Group about each potential supplier, and the material submitted by the supplier in the light of those comments.

10)  BAFTS members should formally decide which suppliers they should use based on their own responsibility to develop, deepen and strengthen fair trade in the context in which they are working.   Their decisions should be explained to their customers, staff, volunteers etc.

11)    All BAFTS members and friends of fair trade should maintain a systematic, dialogue with suppliers to monitor their ongoing engagement with fair trade.   This dialogue should be recorded and discussed with other BAFTS members and friends of fair trade.   This may be an excellent task for some of the volunteer staff – enabling them to engage with fair trade issues more deeply.   

12)    In subsequent years when this process is re-visited, particular attention should be given to what suppliers said they were going to do to improve their practice of fair trade.

Some Underlying Assumptions 

• Under FINE there are going to be a huge variety on interpretations of fair trade.   The variety is multi-dimensional.   Any attempt to make a simple distinction between sheep from goats using FINE will be fraught with problems.  
• Emphasis must be placed on encouraging all suppliers to move toward fair trade goals from whatever starting points they have.   Conventional businesses have much to contribute to fair trade as a world changing movement.  
• BAFTS members do have a particular responsibility to support suppliers with a social change agenda and the appraisal process can be geared toward enabling them to fulfill the responsibility.
• All potential suppliers have all sorts of problems and challenges to deal with in regards to the ideals of fair trade.
• Individual retailers must accept that they cannot totally delegate the responsibility for building the credibility of fair trade.   They can get advice but as the front line contact with the public, they have to be pro-active in dealing with the issues.
• Suppliers can afford to financially support the appraisal process because they stand to benefit from it.
• The appraisal process must be public and transparent.
• The fair trade movement must find more ways to work as a community. 
• If the distinction between ‘fair trade’ and ‘ethical trade’ is important then find another phrase other than ‘fair’ to describe the  radical, revolutionary social change agenda.    Find a phrase which describes that agenda, eg. ‘trade for change’.    A marketing expert would never base a major commercial or political project around such confusing brand concepts.
• The 75% rule goes and is replaced by a commitment by retailers to use their relationships with all suppliers to promote fair trade practice.
• As the financial burden of the appraisal process is to be born by suppliers, those BAFTS funds previously allocated to appraisal can go toward other ways of supporting the members.

June 2001

Dividing Lines on Fair Trade

At WONDERWORLD we are regularly asked if we are 'fair trade'?   We reply by asking what the questioner themselves means by 'fair trade'.  We go on to explain that in the eyes of many individuals and organisations we are fair trade but in the eyes of some we are not.  We outline why we think people might view us in different lights and conclude by asserting our strong relation to fair trade.

It should come as no surprise that the term fair trade has a number of different interpretations as people come from many different political backgrounds in order to take part in the fair trade movement.  Different approaches need to be highlighted and discussed in the hope that they might be integrated, or at least that the differences are made crystal clear to everyone concerned.

Efforts are ongoing to offer collective expressions of what fair trade really means.  Most notably there is the FINE definition.  See the BAFTS website for a full account of FINE.   Overall we like FINE but there are at least two areas in which FINE is vague, two areas which divide the fair trade movement.  They are empowerment and intention.  

Empowerment - a key word absent from FINE but cropping up regularly in certain approaches to fair trade.   Various FINE phrases may allude to it but  some fair trade activists need to go further.  For them 'empowerment' is absolutely central, it is strong, specific and essential in their vision.  It means that producers are organised into collective bodies which give them a direct say in the processes of production and trade.  Where production is organised through conventional, privately owned businesses then they feel that 'empowerment' in this sense cannot happen.   These activists think the fair trade movement exists to support alternative, radically empowering producer organisations.   

While no-one in the fair trade movement would reject the word 'empowerment' we know from our contact with various fair trade organisations that many are prepared to use it in a much broader way.   For example worker consultation in conventional businesses has been equated to empowerment.  Equally we have had contact with fair trade organisations who have not refered to  'empowerment' at all.  Instead they have focused on fair wages and fair prices, presumably with the idea that economic security translates quickly into political empowerment.  There is evidence for that.

The differences that fair trade activists have around the idea of empowerment actually go very deep.   If the movement swings behind one approach or another then there will be big consequences for the future path of the movement.    Most dangerous is the possibility that the different approaches degenerate into an endless row to the great detriment of public confidence in the concept of fair trade.

Intention.  The International Federation for Alternative Trade (IFAT) website contains the following sentence in reference to their members .... 'consumers can trust these organisations because poverty reduction through trade is their very reason for being in business'.   Some activists  would take this as a key definition of fair trade.  They would suggest that without the prime commitment to poverty reduction then normal business pressures would make unsatisfactory outcomes for marginalised producers likely.

Opponents of this approach would question whether a necessary connection exists between the intention to reduce poverty and poverty reduction itself.  Conversely, we would question whether a necessary connection exists between normal business and increase in poverty.  We would suggest that there is ample overlap between  fair trade and good, sustainable, caring business practise.  It is perfectly possible that the 'very reason' for being in business is can be BOTH the aspiration to make a modest living AND  ensure that all our trading partners, suppliers & customers also benefit - a win-win situation for everyone.

The differences around 'intention' also go deep, choosing one approach over the other will also make for a very different movement, and ongoing argument in this area will also hurt the movement.

Some in the movement have a short hand way of expressing these differences.  They would say that radical empowerment and the aim to reduce poverty is fair trade while responsible conventional business is ethical trade.   Unfortunately only a minority of activists understand and use the distinction.  Most activists and the wider public use 'fair trade' and 'ethical trade' interchangeably.   The common sense meaning of 'fair trade' is after all semantically indistinguishable from 'ethical trade'.   Choosing a vague phrase like 'fair trade' to describe the radical empowerment/poverty reduction project was a huge mistake and creates confusion.   The expression 'fair trade' belongs to nobody and any business conducting itself ethically, sustainably and so on has, given the public understanding of the phrase, the right to describe itself as fair trade.   

Overall we feel that there is plenty of room for most approaches and there is no need to slug it out.  We should accept the public's understanding of the phrase 'fair trade', ie trade that is, on some level or other, fairer to poor southern producers - through prices paid, wages paid, security of employment, decent working conditions, investment, co-operation or even collective organisation.  Trade that makes a difference.  If we are clear & transparent about who we are dealing with then people who are committed to radical notions of empowerment can support producers who either manifest the ideals of radical empowerment or who have poverty reduction as their prime aim.  

DT 3/9/3

Impressions from IFAT Biennial Conference in Newcastle

The International Federation for Alternative Trade (IFAT) held it’s bi-annual conference at Newcastle University in June.  On the opening day many non-IFAT members were invited to  participate.  It was a valuable opportunity to get insights into an important global fair trade organisation.

The morning session was given over to key-note speeches.  My impression was that a broad church approach to fair trade was being endorsed.  We heard stimulating contributions from Dr Alan Knight of Kingfisher Group whose work at B&Q is well known.  The Co-Op outlined it’s raw numbers success in promoting fair trade products, especially chocolate.

Right at the beginning Francisco VanderHoff-Boersma, a coffee producer from Mexico made, for me, important remarks.  “Our family is rather big” he said, “all fair trade initiatives are good, none is the best or the only road for global changes”.  

“Protest and propose” said Francisco. Challenge the unfair and unsustainable tenets of neo-liberalism with a sustainable alternative that had the characteristic both of a political movement AND a viable business enterprise also.   “We all try to make some profit – why not?” he said. 

Many hard questions about the the character of fair trade were raised later in the day.  For example  the problem of the ‘halo’ effect – a pertinent  phrase new to me.  One IFAT member had taken a fair trade coffee in the Newcastle branch of Starbucks.  2% of Starbucks turnover is fair trade coffee.   He asked if that 2% share of Starbucks business is a cheap price for the PR benefit will they derive?  He asked if  the soul of the fair trade movement had been sold out for this measly 2% and similar such crumbs from the table of thoroughly corporate, globalised,  profiteering  businesses?

I listened to hear if such questions about fair trade within IFAT are sufficiently settled for processes around IFAT membership criteria and monitoring to be accepted as coherent & authoritative.  Should the wider audience of fair trade related businesses and individuals accept IFAT as a global arbiter of fair trade until a system and language that truly facilitate the ‘rather big’ family of fair trade on equal terms takes firm root within IFAT itself?   

I was encouraged by IFAT’s approach from the keynote speakers but  more wary when hearing the churning from other delegates later in the day.    I don’t know what the bottom line is.   Francisco said the arguments were settled – I hope so.  In any case IFAT is a brave effort in pursuit of tough objectives and always to be honoured for that.

DT 15/7/3

Trust Me, I am a Mechanic

Fair tade enjoyed good coverage on UK Radio 4 this week.   For example the Food Programme and You & Yours both had features.   Yet proponents of fair trade did not get a free promotional ride.  They were challenged on a number of points from a number of angles.  It was great to hear some of the arguments that go on around fair trade being aired.  It is an important growth marker for the movement. 

Of course there is a dilemma.  On the one hand we have a commercial and political idea that we want the public to buy.  The communication of that idea must be done in the simplest possible terms in order to be successful.  This is the KISS principle.   The concept must not only be simple, it must also be conveyed with complete confidence and no moral equivocation.      

On the other hand we know perfectly well that in operational terms fair trade is a system  very much under development.   Many loyal supporters of fair trade have rather sketchy ideas about how fair trade is meant to work in practice across a range contexts.  Where fair trade criteria have been agreed they are notably vague.

Of course there is a constructive start on all this through the Fairtrade label system that greatly benefits some  small coffee, banana & tea farmers around the world. Also in organisations like BAFTS & IFAT.    However a broadcaster noted that the annual Fairtrade label turnover is roughly equivalent to that of one medium size UK supermarket.   Clearly the model of fair trade practice that we have established in one tiny corner of the global market needs to be expanded into many other areas.  Inevitably the model will require adaptation, the process of adaptation will give rise to all sorts of honourable disagreements between activists and the disagreements will be highlighted by the media in parallel with the rising profile of fair trade.  

That is what I heard on the radio this week.   The fair trade brand concept that we want the public to understand fully and trust implicitly came under friendly fire.   Ever so subtly, the fair trade brand image got muddied.  

How do fair trade activists embrace this dilemma?  How do we convey real confidence in a simple, overall message about fair trade while knowing that behind the scenes things are far from simple?

The answer is to make sure we invest serious intellectual effort into thinking about the complicated political, economic and cultural background issues of fair trade.  Activists, and here I am especially thinking of retailers and wholesalers who represent fair trade to the public,  must get their heads around some of the arguments that are going on.  They cannot take it on trust.  They cannot rely on faith.  They cannot entirely delegate responsibility, they must adopt some of that responsibility themselves.  In so doing they will acquire sufficient depth and authority when questioned to assure the public that fair trade means something real & effective.   

We have spent much time and effort polishing the gleaming bodywork on the fair trade band wagon, that is why many are keen to join it.  Yet occasionally someone will pop the catch and lift the shiny bonnet so that our passengers glimpse underneath a clattering prototype engine driving us shakily toward our dreams.   I stand ready to say .... "yes madam - it is noisy and smoky but it is the best we have, and it will keep us all going to the next garage where we can fix it up a bit better.  Trust me, I am a mechanic".

DT 5/3/3

GUILTY!  Send them away

The fair trade movement is full of honourable disagreements on all sorts of fascinating, crucial and dynamic issues.  However one outburst on the radio during Fair Trade Fortnight was stupid and dishonourable.   A speaker said that people involved in fair trade were motivated by middle class guilt, that fair trade was a waste of time and that they should be involved in challenging the system more directly.

In relative terms, marginal reform of world  trade rules would out perform even exponential growth of fair trade.   Consequently it is essential to get involved in the challenge to the system at the global level, the macro level, the level of the World Trade Organisation, the G7, the IMF etc.   Individuals & organisations who want to identify themselves with fair trade must also identify with the challenge to the system.  

Meanwhile should we give up the efforts we are making at a micro level to ensure that people whose products and services we buy get a fair deal?    Absolutely not.   Here are the reasons:

• SYSTEMIC CHANGE - A LONG, SLOW PROCESS   We have no idea how much time, effort, resources and organisation will be required to effectively change world trade rules.   The Trade Justice Movement is seeking to include poverty reduction as one of the aims of the World Trade Organisation.  Just the aim, nothing more specific than that.  Actual changes in world trade rules based on that new aim would be some way down the line after that.   Then the delivery of positive change  to southern producers would be even later as we have seen how skillful northern interests have been in exploiting trade rules in their own favour.  (For example how anti-child labour rules have in reality been used to protect northern producers from competition.)   In comparison the benefits achieved by fair trade may be minor but they can be measured.  We can offer some audit of how effective our efforts have been and therefore be accountable to each other and to the South.  I fear that effort at the macro-level, global & systemic, is like pouring energy into a black hole.  It has the potential to suck us all in yet in our lifetimes little light will ever shine out.   I am thinking of those canned tomatoes, subsidised EC tomatoes, selling in Ghanaian markets and destroying the market for local producers.  How can such a situation persist even for another day when the injustice and stupidity screams in our face?  It is not even controversial, everyone agrees it can't be right.  Yet it persists.  
• REAL BENEFITS NOW.  So only small, incremental, marginal benefits will result from fair trade?  For the forseeable future, and in relative terms to the size of the task ahead, that is true.   But not from the perspective of the people getting those benefits - certainly not.   I am thinking of a group of silver makers in northern India.  Their boss came into contact with fair trade and felt compelled to shift them from a sweltering, cramped low roofed tin shed where they worked and slept on exactly the same spot, to proper work space and separate accommodation.   A few percentage points increase in wages or prices often represents highly significant improvement,  the difference between producers experiencing existence on the line or life with a sense of ease.   The efforts of the fair trade movement are appreciated.  I think any affluent, secure critic of the fair trade movement, especially those cosily embedded in a northern society, should hesitate before recommending the abandonment of a system that brings actual gains in hundreds of thousands southern producers' lifestyles.
• A MODEL FOR THE FUTURE.   Fair trade ideals are expressed in statements of principle & priorities, also in frameworks of rules and regulation.  Yet that is not enough.   A great deal more needs to be done to manifest fair trade ideals in specific contexts, in relation to real chains of relationship from producer through to consumer.  All sorts of individual problems and challenges arise in those chains that require consciously working through.  This process then informs future thoughts about principles, priorities, rules and regulation.    In all this activists need to get their hand dirty.  They need to work with business realities such as the demands of the market & lay solid foundations for the future of their alternative system.  Our current political culture often has a purely oppositional character, people know what they are against but have rather vague ideas about what they are for.  Fair trade is a working model of the way we want the world to be. The place we iron out the wrinkles & prove that our dream can become reality.   It is a test bed for our future together.  
• DOING WHAT YOU CAN, WHERE YOU CAN.   Naomi Klein in No Logo and many others say that southern producers interests will be ultimately secured  by a strong framework of international law, controlling multi-national companies, giving workers clear rights globally, enforced by strong organisations representing producers.   Northern consumer power will only be a minor factor in that process.  (In fact I don't think the phrase 'fair trade' appears in No Logo, even once).  Broadly I agree with Klein's overall perspective yet I think a trick is being missed.  Northern consumer power is also a real power for change.  Corporations do care about the views of those people they want to acquire as customers and they can be leveraged as a result.    We in the north have access to these levers, every time we have a consumer choice.  It is an area of genuine empowerment for every one of us in this project.  Only a few stellar northern activists can take a personal responsibility for linking with and supporting southern trade unions, producer groups, NGOs.  The rest of us would be more hindrance than help, we must be content with local, unglamorous spade work.  Why should that spade work be limited to mere politics?  Why not let people's idealism also be focused on shifting units in more fairly traded goods?.  Apart from the direct benefits felt by producers it also brings a tangible impact on our political targets. 

Middle class guilt motivates all sorts of people in all sorts of political movements.   Picking on fair traders in that respect is inaccurate, dishonest & destructive.  One could suggest that those who jet around the world to strike revolutionary poses in front of international summits are no more than weekend class warriors with a passport and a credit card,  privileged thrill seekers dabbling in political extreme sports.  Would that suggestion help build our solidarity & confidence?   Actually our project is so huge,  multi-dimensional &  complicated that contributions can be made at all sorts of levels, in all sorts of ways.  Lets keep it positive.

DT 9/3/3

Identifying Fair Trade Criteria - A New Footnote to WONDERWORLD's Trading Policy

I suspect that there is to be lots more churning about fair trade definitions in the near future.  The more I look around the more we see diversity of both theory and practise in the fair trade scene.  Take the interesting dynamic set up by the Fair Trade Labelling Organisations (FLOs) who are attempting to extend their Fairtrade label into cotton farming and cotton textile manufacture.  Some highly established players, who have been working as fair trade cotton and cotton textile manufacture  for years, are not happy with the FLOs draft proposal  They thought, for example, that the Fairtrade proposals would favour large-scale, factory type operations and disadvantage small-scale operations.  They thought only larger, very formally organised producers could meet the reporting and consultative requirements. They also thought that the proposals set a standard of Fairtrade practise too similar to what might called in some circles 'ethical' practise and an insufficient improvement on basic ILO standards.  At the time of writing it remained to be seen how these issues were to be resolved. 

My vision for the fair trade movement is one in which lots of different approaches are given critical acceptance.   However as there are people who do not share a broad church approach to fair trade it's important to explain as clearly and concisely why some people might choose to regard WONDERWORLD (and many businesses like it) as a fair trade company and some might not.  To this end I have written a footnote to our company Trading Policy ....   

Some Comments & Suggestions on the BAFTS Importers Directory

Also please understand that I am realistic.   If  I was on the Importers Directory Group and had to undertake this process of sub-division between those "on the right track" and those who had substantially reached the destination then I am quite sure that my choices would be just as controversial as anyone else's.

Yet there is a big point that needs pressing, beyond reassuring those of us with doubts about the accuracy of the process. 

If BAFTS wishes "to encourage this group (* *) to work towards meeting all the criteria" then it needs to explain how we can achieve that.  BAFTS needs to give some kind of useful feedback.   Of course WONDERWORLD and it's peers will never transform into a Traidcraft or a Tearcraft.  Traidcraft, Tearcraft, etc are not sustainable  business models for the likes of WONDERWORLD.  Instead the question is - what do we have to learn from other asterisk-free suppliers with whom we have more obvious similarities, those other small-scale, livelihood earning  supplier businesses who supposedly more or less meet the full BAFTS  criteria?  BAFTS should be able to offer a more detailed view on this than two  sentences in the Directory introduction.

A Strike, A Bike & Some Insights in Nepal

It was a little misty.  I cycled from Thamel in downtown Kathmandu where only the pavement cigarette sellers were trading, passed the tall grey fences around the Royal Palace and out toward the Ring Road.   Everywhere people walked, spreading leisurely into the road.  Away from the city centre small grocery shops, butchers, tea shops and hairdressers were taking a chance and in business.   At the Ring Road a gaggle of youth took up a chant and paraded down the road.  From the nearby junction a detachment of police with blue camouflage, helmets, padded tabards and big sticks jumped in a minibus to race down, grab a couple and shove them into the vehicle.  The boys were laughing.   At the junction for Bouddha lots more police and lot of civilians hanging round, looking and waiting for something to happen.  

The Buddhist stupa in Bouddha is one of my favourite places in the world. I have a strong emotional response to it.   No-one knows how old it is, who built it or for what specific reason.   It is a place of pilgrimage for many Buddhists, especially from the Tibetan and Nepali traditions.  Every time I go I see it in a new light.  This time I saw the lightning conductor  - transmitting energy from above into the earth.  I circumnambulated for an hour and saw many sights.  A wild eyed, wide mouthed and fierce looking mountain man,  Tibetan or Tamang maybe, had just arrived in the city, judging by his excited and curious looks at me.  Valley Nepalis don't give a second glance to foreigners.  A very elderly woman sat in a sunny spot on the beautifully layed red brick perimeter,  her back against the whitewashed outer wall below the prayer drums. Shaven headed, tiny, she dozed and slumped.  Someone had made sure she had a bottle of water.  A  young Tibetan boy had argued with his mother  he cried bitterly while trailing behind her.   I thought about giving him one of my juicy oranges because his distress was disturbing my walking meditation.   An older Tibetan woman beat me to it and offered the lad a sweet.  He proudly refused her offering, a little later he recovered his composure and quietened down.  Up on the stupa men climbed from the top of the dome to the central stone pillar, up past the eyes, and began hanging a bright new sambhu skirt all around it.

The Great Stupa at Boudha

Back on the bike, on out of the city and reaching the first army checkpoint.  Nothing too serious for a westerner on a bike but often a nerve racking experience for Nepali's who would expect to be closely questioned about the reason for their journey and their possible support for the Maoists.  Friends told me the typical question from a check point soldier with a gun would be -  'how do we know you are not a Maoist?'   Epistemologists amongst you will understand the inherent difficulties in proving negatives.  Travel further out of the city, not far in some directions, and you would most likely find a Maoist checkpoint where the question would be reversed - 'how do we know you are not with the police?'

A few miles up the road I stopped at a bench under a big shade tree and ate the orange considered for the miserable waif at Boudhha.  It was a peaceful scene, sun shining, quiet, with a football match in progress.  Suddenly I was aware that I was being watched.  Behind me was a house morphed into a small fort, four sand bagged gun positions with men on guard, sandbagged doors and windows, razor wire across the whole perimeter.   Obviously the house of a senior police, army or government official.  I felt less relaxed, spat out my pips and carried on.

A few more miles up the road I halted at a small bridge where some local young men approached me.  They suggested that it was not wise to go much further up the road as it began the long climb up to the valley rim, there might be trouble up ahead.  Instead they suggested that I should cut across country to a temple on the hill top to the east.   I did have some vague idea of making a turn off like this so agreed to let them lead me in the direction they proposed.

We crossed the valley bottom patched with small fields.  Women bent to the rich soil and harvested a crop of potatoes.  These fields were capable of producing four crops a year, potatoes twice, rice once and another vegetable crop such as cabbage or spinach.   We crossed a wobbly bamboo bridge and reached the hillside.  Climbing up from the fields we were now in true rural Nepal, telephone lines the only 20th century intrusions, let alone the 21st.  Looking through my eyes it's a world of great charm but I know perfectly well that most of the people who live there don't see it that way.  Country brick, three storey farm houses, some exquisite carving on window and door frames,  beaten mud yards, rough timbered  barns, lofts and lean tos.  Stopping to overlook the scene (and catch my breath) my guides talked about their work.  Two were tailors earning Rs 300 a day in the city.  In a few days one of them was due to fly to Malaysia to work as a tailor on a contract, presumably for more money than he could earn in Kathmandu.  Another mended motorcycle seats for Rs 300 a day.

Changu Narayan

At the hill top was Changu Narayan, an ancient Vishnaivite temple founded in the 4th Century AD.  The Valley is full of fascinating places like this.   Steps up to archways let you into a square courtyard  from various directions.  The courtyard was cluttered with sacred pagodas, statuary and other ritual objects.   Carvings in wood and stone adorn all the structures, some entertainingly gory and offering much amusement to my guides.  To one side is an inscription thought to be the earliest example of the written word in Nepal.   Sat cross legged in one corner is a healthy looking woman knitting a classic Nepali jumper.   She would be paid Rs 800 for a jumper that it would take 2-3 days to knit.

My guides were suitably rewarded and we said goodbye.  I cycled away from the temple and the small village clustered around it toward Bhaktapur at the eastern end of the Valley.  I stopped briefly to take the photograph above, behind me was a fortified knoll for the army and police to protect and control the only road to the village.  Work was going on.  Picture taken,  I rode on, a long glorious freewheel down through terrace fields, hairpins and woods; head up, enjoying the sunshine, watching vultures circulate on the wind above and below me.  

At the bottom the road flattened and I was among the Bhaktapur brickworks.   Mile after mile of them.   Dig out clay to mix with water, stick the mixture in wooden brick moulds lubricated with sand, knock the wet brick out of the mould and leave it to dry in the sun for a day or two, then collect them up and stack them in the kilns to fire them hard.  The population growth in the Valley has accelerated as people abandon the civil war zones.  So there is plenty of work making bricks to build buildings and even today many of those brickworks were working.  

But some of the people working were people at the absolute bottom of the Nepalese economic pile.  Tiny elderly women carrying boxes of bricks.  According to a Nepali newspaper I read that week these women would be paid about Rs 2 a carry and could make at the most Rs 70 a day.  These were the people who are hit hardest by the rise in kerosene prices,  an extra Rs 6 per litre when a family would use between half and one litre per day.  These simple figures also show why it is an obvious  development objective in countries like Nepal to encourage handicraft skills.  Compare earning Rs 260 sitting & knitting in the temple courtyard, with your nipper playing hide & seek amongst the heritage features to Rs 70 a day humping bricks like these old women.

On to Bhaktapur.  If you go to Kathmandu Valley for the first time then a visit to Bhaktapur is compulsory despite the Rs 750 entry ticket.  It is a medieval Nepali town, well preserved with a fairy tale quality and good views of the Himalayas in the right weather.    I have fond memories of it from years ago before the tourist charging regime was introduced but none since, I am too much the adopted Yorkshireman to part with that much loot for a half hour look round the old place.  So taking the skirting road I headed back toward Kathmandu.   Some twerp on a tractor made me swerve sharply and I punctured my front tyre.  It was fifteen kilometres back to Thamel, 3.00pm in the afternoon and no buses, trucks, jeeps heading anywhere.  

On the trudge back I met people happy to walk and chat and help me out if they could.  I tested the skills of one roadside bicycle doctor and found them wanting.  Some motorbike mechanics struggled manfully with string to adapt their motor bike tyre pump to my bicycle, failed and refused payment for their efforts.  Occasionally I found a bicycle air pump which bought me a mile or two riding the bike.  It was still a long road back to the city.  In the last glooming before nightfall police and demonstrators looked to be kicking things off in the wide boulevards by the city park.   With the air from my last pump stop just holding my tyre up, I stomped the pedals hard to get back into the narrow street havens of Thamel. 

February 2005

(Within a few days of my departure from Kathmandu all those fortifications did indeed come in useful as King Gyanendra sacked the government and instituted a state of emergency with the support of the army.)     

Kite Flying Day in Jaipur, Rajasthan

Six hours late into Delhi, just enough time for taxi thrills to catch the westbound Ashram Express at Delhi Cantonment station -"Delhi Cantt".   Last minute ticket purchasing on Indian trains leaves you with a choice.  Surrender every last milimetre of personal space in the sardine tin hell of the unreserved carriage, or board a reserved coach.  In reserved be ready to withstand the barely sublimated elation of a Travelling Ticket Collector when he produces an Excess Fare Book and scores a savage 150% surcharge on the basic ticket price.   Looking down the platform at the brute melee of excitable students about to fight their way into Unreserved, I make my choice. The TTC will get his prize. I will get my seat. I will accept his triumphalism with due grace even though I am extremely tired and grumpy.

New Thinking & New Attitudes in the British Association of Fair Trade Shops - Reflections following the BAFTS AGM in Bolton -  June 2006

Importer/suppliers could indicate what products they thought had sufficient fair trade authenticity to offer to BAFTS members.  BAFTS members and the Directory group could offer their own views on this and look at the overall quality of information and co-operation with the process the supplier was offering.   I suspect that BAFTS would be able to sort a lot more wheat from chaff amongst suppliers simply by demanding more specific product information in this way.   A lot of extra work for the suppliers?   Some but not that much.  I reckon I could do this for WONDERWORLD in one day.  

A lot of information for BAFTS members, Directory Group people and others would be generated.  It would force members to think in a more sophisticated way about what fair trade should mean and do more work analysing suppliers for themselves.  This point was expressed at the AGM and is an example of what I mean by BAFTS 'wising up'.  Fair trade activists cannot expect some body else to tell them what is and is not fair trade all the time.  For example - it may not be a great shock for you to hear that some NGOs are highly ineffective in their mission.  How would you balance the value to fair trade of an NGO producer without any evidence to prove its usefulness against a conventional business that can solidly demonstrate that it pays well, provides good working conditions for its employees and is strategically relevant?    Activists need to take a view.

Recently IFAT have jumbled their acronym to rename themselves the International Fair Trade Association.  They are being placed in position to become a principle  moderator of fair trade - a phrase that in common understanding should apply to all trade.   The IFAT acronym originally stood for International Federation for Alternative Trade (my underline).  On the basis of what I heard today, maybe that is exactly & simply what they are - 'alternative', a consortium of collectives, NGOs, co-ops and pro-poverty groups who provide something innately different to regular trade.  Therefore in my view IFAT membership can be a sufficient condition for BAFTS recognition but not a necessary one.   (I also have doubts about IFAT's peer review systems for assessing potential new members - but that's for another day!)

 
Hey Maharaj - respected traditional artisan-ji!  Make sure that is a fair trade scarf you are extracting from the Indigo vat - we don't want any of your ethical trade rubbish.

British Association of Fair Trade Shops - A Backward Step?

Having said so many nice things about BAFTS recently I suppose all couldn't remain sweetness and light indefinitely.  As a recognised importer we got the following communication ......

DEFINING A FAIR TRADE IMPORTER - HOW DOES YOUR BUSINESS MEASURE UP?

Today, consumers are much more concerned about the ethical implications of their purchases - how the products were made and the impact on workers and the environment. Consequently, many importers and retailers wish to take these issues into account when they source their products.  However, adopting an ethical approach does not in itself form the basis for a Fair Trade business.  It is essential that Fair Trade organisations - including BAFTS - are clear regarding the meaning of Fair Trade and their assessment of Fair Trade importers.  

BAFTS Importer Review
To ensure that the concept of Fair Trade remains clear in this environment of increased interest, BAFTS believes it is time to audit its Recognised Importer criteria and process.  In view of this, in 2007 BAFTS will undertake a review of its assessment processes and current importers' applications.  This review is necessary to protect organisational credibility and allow BAFTS to make clear public statements regarding the value of Fair Trade as an alternative approach to conventional trading.

What does this mean for you?
We value your business as a BAFTS Recognised Importer and wish to work with you to build the success of your business and the BAFTS organisation.  

1 2007 BAFTS Renewal
It is now time to renew your 2007 BAFTS Recognised Importer status.  The first step is for you to consider your business in the light of the information in this document.  Please consider whether your business fits this description, as compared to the description for a conventional trading company with an ethical policy in place. If you believe your business is a Fair Trade business, then please renew your status by completing the 2007 Importers Renewal Form and sending your fee to BAFTS.

2 Assessment During 2007
During 2007 you will be contacted for a review of BAFTS Recognised Importer status.  We will discuss your business with you to ensure it meets the Fair Trade definition and criteria.

Is my Business a Fair Trade Business?
A definition of Fair Trade has been internationally agreed by the consortium known as FINE.   This includes Fair Trade Labelling Organizations International (FLO), International Fair Trade Organisation (IFAT), the Network of European Worldshops (NEWS), and European Fair Trade Association (EFTA).  

BAFTS is a member of IFAT and NEWS and subsequently adheres to the agreed definition, goals and key indicators of Fair Trade described below.  

Please consider evidence of how your business meets the FINE criteria to demonstrate that your business is a Fair Trade organisation.
 
FINE Fair Trade Definition
Fair Trade is a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, which seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalized 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 practices of conventional international trade.

Goals of Fair Trade
1. To improve the livelihoods and well being of producers by improving market access, strengthening producer organisations, paying a better price and providing continuity in the trading relationship.

2. To promote development opportunities for disadvantaged producers, especially women and indigenous people and to protect children from exploitation in the production process.

3. To raise awareness among consumers of the negative effects on producers of international trade so that they exercise their purchasing power positively.

4. To set an example of partnership in trade through dialogue, transparency and respect.

5. To campaign for changes in the rules and practice of conventional international trade.

6. To protect human rights by promoting social justice, sound environmental practices and economic security.

Key indicators of a Fair Trade Business

· The business must have a clear commitment to Fair Trade as the principal core of its mission.
· A Fair Trade organization will deliberately work with marginalized producers and workers in order to help them move from a position of vulnerability to security and economic self-sufficiency
· This includes empowering producers and workers as stakeholders in their own organizations (such as workers' cooperatives and societies).
· The organization needs to be able to demonstrate that it actively works to achieve greater equity in international trade.

In response we made the following .........

Comments on BAFTS Interpretation of FINE Fair Trade Criteria

I strongly disagree with the way that BAFTS is interpreting the FINE criteria, as expressed by some of your key indicators and other statements in your recently circulated importers' assessment notes.  I share a sense that BAFTS has to strengthen its' system for authenticating suppliers' relationship to fair trade.  However some of the terms outlined present problems, both as a powerful vision for the future fair trade movement and pragmatically supporting your members to run sustainable, professional businesses.

The big philosophical disagreement I have is the attempt to draw a clear distinction between fair trade and ethical trade when the reality is one of no clear distinctions, of multi-dimensional continuums, or to put it another way, grey areas that have to be managed.   Fair trade is said to have a distinctive developmental model.   What many have failed to understand is that small-scale artisan industries of the type that we are involved with have an automatic developmental relevance.   I saw this when I read Government of Rajasthan strategy papers for stimulating traditional hand block printing after the demise of azo-dye screen print units,  or when I sat on a panel in Kathmandu alongside a government minister and other worthies aimed, supposedly, at helping small-scale handicraft business get export orders.  Everywhere in the world, the artisan is up against modern industrial capital and is consequently marginalized.  Anyone who works with them is adopting a pro-poverty project whether they conceive of it in those terms or not.   This sector is full of potential allies and partners who can be encouraged to improve their trading practices.  It is an opportunity that should not be wasted by drawing an artificial distinction between fair trade and ethical trade.     

I think most people who come into BAFTS shops or select Fairtrade branded products, or support fair trade in other ways have a straightforward concept of what they are buying into.   It is perfectly summarised in the Fairtrade Foundation slogan "guaranteeing a better deal for Third World producers".   A minority of fair trade consumers in the UK have a more sophisticated agenda that touches on issues like social justice, democratic worker participation in decision making, collectives/co-operatives and the creation of an alternative trade system that avoids the worst aspects of capitalism and neo-liberalism.  Fair trade businesses that deliver on this agenda should be identified and fair trade consumers can be invited to support those businesses.  However any attempt to nail BAFTS onto a narrow pedestal defined according to the minority understanding would only serve to cheat BAFTS  of growth, influence and impact.  The majority public understanding of fair trade is workable in many broad contexts.  FINE should be interpreted in a broad way and I think the wording of FINE lends itself to that.   

The key question you should pursue is - how does BAFTS use its position to  'guarantee a better deal for Third World producers'?   In answering that the delivery system for any better deal is secondary.  I have worked in businesses, co-ops and Southern NGOs.  In all of them I met rapacious, untrustworthy individuals.  In all of them I met well intentioned people who were ineffectual & no help to anyone.  You can tell me that the primary aim of an organisation is poverty reduction - but so what?  I still want to know what evidence exists to show that producers who work with that organisation get a better deal?   

As there is plenty of evidence that small-scale enterprise can accountably deliver developmental goals just as well as any other type of organisation, and as it is a movement seeking world-changing scale, then fair trade would be grossly unwise to define itself as a system from which regular businesses are excluded.  Your current interpretation is tantamount to this.  

There are lots of businesses positively motivated to be in long-term, mutually beneficial, friendly, human-scale partnerships that pay fair prices and wages, that build trust & respect, that offer consultation, information exchange, skill sharing, etc AND make a modest profit as a single integrated, creative objective.  If any of us were that concerned about seriously making money then we certainly wouldn't be in this business right now.  We have to fight with all our energy and ingenuity in harsh market conditions to sustain our way of doing business in the face of big box retailing, high street deflation and China.  Don't confuse us with Rio Tinto Zinc and other super-alienated, globalised capitalists just because of private ownership.

There is a tension within BAFTS between those who feel they should be more strongly wedded to radical politics and those who face the bottom line of professional, high street operations using a broad understanding of fair trade.   I see this same debate amongst different organisations across Europe.  For example - in the report  of the Autumn IFAT - Europe meeting you circulated there was a presentation by Jérôme Chaplier from Oxfam Magasins du Monde that expertly outlined many parameters of the argument.  It touched on points I have made here.  In another section of the same report, referring to the heart of FINE itself,  there is a telling remark,  'FLO and IFAT have two different agendas and priorities, a "hate-love relationship" at times'.  I think there is a variety of rhetoric & practice across different European world shop organisations and fair trade organisations. It is quite apparent that the FINE criteria are NOT always interpreted according to the interpretation that BAFTS sent out at this moment.  So I don't think BAFTS is under pressure to adopt any particular interpretation of FINE.  Where has this very specific initiative sprung from?  I didn't hear it discussed at the BAFTS AGM in Bolton last year.   Have BAFTS members debated this and decided this is the line they want to take?

Fair trade criteria must be robustly implemented in order to maintain the credibility of the movement.  However the criteria should be capable of challenging a much wider circle of trade than the pro-poverty/ngo/collectivist core group, the 'pioneers' as they have been called.  There are ways of getting tough by auditing businesses and organisations for what they can do on their own terms - where they can go, how and when they can get there.  In practice fair trade means trading activity from Bishopston's thoroughly collectivised supply chain to Tesco selling Nestle Partner brand coffee. Across that wide map there are myriad routes towards getting a better deal for producers.   BAFTS should be canny enough to test who is offering serious effort to make a journey and who is not.  That is all that most of your customers, most of your supporters and many of your members really want to know.

So we decline to accept the interpretation that you have put forward AND we also decline to voluntarily withdraw from the process of consideration as a BAFTS supplier.   We think we have a full role to play in fair trade as a company that supplies a high proportion of products with good fair trade credentials.   Our approach has been vindicated through contact with other fair trade organisations.  We know, without doubt, that many of your members share our thinking on these points.   We'll leave it for you to decide if we, and all those other suppliers just like us, have a place in the BAFTS vision for fair trade, or not.  

March 2007  

To Hull & Back - BAFTS AGM 2007

We are just back from two days in the delightful surroundings of Hull City Hall where BAFTS held a trade fair, conference, fair trade fayre and AGM.   In the background were the Wilberforce 2007 activities as Hull explored its' role in  slavery and its' abolition.  There was a good turn out of BAFTS members and importers, we were able to participate in all the events and spend plenty of time just talking to each other.  One cannot underestimate how rich these opportunities are, even on purely commercial information terms.  At the political level people were discussing some big strategic issues and members approved a draft BAFTS strategy.  

In particular I was listening to people voicing questions about the integration of importer/wholesalers into the BAFTS system for administrating fair trade.  Importers & wholesalers are subject to BAFTS processes but have no formal democratic input into them.  People were saying that is unsatisfactory.

BAFTS declines to open membership to non-retailing importer/wholesalers, this fact was raised & re-affirmed in Hull.  Obviously it is importers who are the interface between most BAFTS members and the producers they want to support.  Importers pay BAFTS for formal BAFTS recognition, the certificate and inclusion in the Importers Directory.  They are so essential to the system yet not part of BAFTS democratic process.  I was not alone in thinking that reforming BAFTS to include importers must be a possibility for the future. 

Of course importers could get off their backsides and organise something for themselves.  Stop waiting for BAFTS to do it for us.  Organise a British Association of Fair Trade Importers.   There is nothing to stop that happening.   Existing fair trade systems like BAFTS and the Fairtrade Foundation might be wary.   A third operational version of fair trade, out on the world and confusing the UK public, might not suit them.  Think that through and BAFTS might reconsider incorporating importers in order to exert some control.   An independent fair trade importers organisation might or might not get recognition from existing fair trade organisations like BAFTS or IFAT, but would that really matter?  If it had a clearly stated fair trade vision and a credible system for authenticating whether members were seriously pursuing it  then the public and business generally might well be prepared to buy into it.

Another option to resolve the issue of importers' representation & organisation also occurs to me.  This one lies intermediate between the extremes of BAFTS as an alliance of importers & retailers in one organisation, or of importers creating their own organisation.   I think the Board of BAFTS is where the action is in terms of critical strategic issues.   Members have a relatively passive role of approving initiatives.  So what about BAFTS creating a system that  enables approved importers to elect two BAFTS board members onto the current seven person board.   These importer elected board members would have to write manifestos outlining their views on fair trade issues, especially key strategic issues and if elected would be expected to represent those views on the board.  In this way the BAFTS board could be sure that elected individuals represented some kind of common ground amongst importers.       

No concrete proposals toward an independent fair trade importers organisation or importer elected board members have been put forward yet.  Personally I am not too fussed if importers' organisation happens within a reframed BAFTS or outside so long as it happens.  There were plenty of people in Hull perceiving and reacting to the vacuum around importers.  I hope that importers start talking to each other, achieve a critical mass for action and provoke  developments to occur.  I will be looking out for it and supporting it.  

Creating spaces like the event in Hull is vital in promoting the evolution of a better fair trade system.  Getting people together, members, importers, friends & supporters, has a real dynamic quality.  The draft BAFTS strategy says that more networking and discussion opportunities have to be found.  That is spot on.  Some of the energy generated may be  grumbling but BAFTS should not be put off by that.  This is difficult work and some people are bound to get frustrated.   Let's bring faith to the job  (transcendental positivity in my case). 

If so called fair trade actors say they have not got time to spend talking then that might be a clue as to their real level of commitment to fair trade.  Right now fair trade is an embryonic system with endless grey areas to be sorted out.  Fair trade participants have to invest their time in that to make it work better.  Hey!  That sounds like a new criterium for fair trade.

Thanks to BAFTS and the team who worked hard to put the Hull experience together.  It was well worth it.  I am still thinking about ideas and conversations encountered there. Come back in a few days and this piece might be twice as long!

 September 2007