Cadbury’s Goes Fairtrade with Dairy Milk
Cadbury’s, the firm which makes Diary Milk, Britain’s highest-selling chocolate, has said that it wants the bar to be Fairtrade certified by the autumn of this year.
Grand stuff, and the Fairtrade certification definitely improves the health, wellbeing and economic opportunities for those who produce Fairtrade certified foods. Having visited a number of Fairtrade cooperatives in my life, I’m confident that on the human scale, Fairtrade producers live better, and longer, than their non-Fairtrade compatriots. But on the environmental scale, it may be time for The Fairtrade Licensing Organisations International (FLO) to ramp up its commitment to the world at large.
What is Fairtrade for the environment?
It’s a tough and unpopular thing to say, and certainly the producers in the rich world should be putting their houses in order faster too, and consumers could be doing more to refuse high-input, high-damage food production systems in favour of low-input, organic and low-damage systems, but – for those who read the standards set down by FLO – there’s sometimes a feeling that rods are being made for backs already burdened by debt. While it could seem harsh to impose tougher ‘rules’ on Fairtrade producers now, it could help them remain competitive in a future where more care is taken over purchasing ‘good’ food that is good for the environment as well as the body and the pocket.
Just to take one example from the FLO that worries people working in the standards industry: the Generic Fairtrade Standards for Small Producers say: ‘Producers are expected to continually reduce the volumes and types of agrochemicals used in production to the maximum possible extent.’
What, exactly, does that mean? Well, it means ‘all synthetic inputs directly or indirectly used in the production of agricultural products or in the maintenance of processing equipment. This includes pesticides, fertilizers and coadjutants such as cleansing substances, detergents and mineral oil products’ That’s reasonably comprehensive and coherent.
Over what timescale? Well, that depends on the development plan that the producers’ organisation has put together and had approved by FLO – so that could be anything from three years to thirty. And unless the development plan is published, the consumer doesn’t know if Fairtrade X has managed to achieve 50% or 5% agrochemical product reduction, nor whether the Fairtrade produce of one country might not be massively more environmentally friendly than that of another.
There are some tougher rules in the Generic Standards, such as ‘New planting in virgin forest areas is prohibited.’ Nice and clear. Nice and simple. Easy to check on. Perhaps there should be more like that.
Consumers deserve to know more
Standards for environmental management are a contentious business. There are many good reasons, such as local circumstances, development issues, and government and intergovernmental policies, that can make it difficult to have widely based standards, but when consumer power is being used to effect environmental change, it’s good to know that the consumers understand what their purchasing power is obtaining for the environment, as well as the producer and buyer, and on that basis, FLO could look at how it moves its focus to demonstrate that producers and their localities are both equally enriched by the certification process.
