STiR coffee and tea magazine

STiR coffee and tea 29 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 30,000 60,000 90,000 120,000 150,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 22,050 149,225 355,297 210,000 64,053 49,092 52,500 41,070 16,105 151,000 11,467 11,552 12,560 3,074 2,939 10,690 SALES (MT) PRODUCTION (MT) 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 30,000 60,000 90,000 120,000 150,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 22,050 149,225 355,297 210,000 64,053 49,092 52,500 41,070 16,105 151,000 11,467 11,552 12,560 3,074 2,939 10,690 SALES (MT) PRODUCTION (MT) Overproduced Undershopped equity is frankly irresponsible as we have found out, courtesy of the BBC and KSV exposes on the trade in India. Despite their bias, these reports make irrefutable points with respect a trade that (appar- ently) has papered over the cracks with marks rather than dealing with the root causes of the issues. In these instances, the role of certification as a method of engaging customers, to satisfy the emo- tive desire of the consumer (for sustain- ably produced goods) has created a per- ceived declaration of sustainability which invited scrutiny. Furthermore, if we need more rea- sons to engage in a more measured dia- logue with the consumer, consider that most origins sell the majority of their teas into markets for whom certification holds no relevance which begs the ques- tion with respect to engagement vs true endeavor towards a sustainable industry. When there exist instances where compa- nies that, dependent on the target market, change their engagement in sustainable programming, we have a moral dilemma that demands addressing. The concerns expressed above lay bare certification as a business-to-con- sumer (B2C) vehicle whose capabilities are misunderstood by those producers facing the critical needs of commercial viability and perceive membership as delivering a solution. There is no question of impropriety here, merely an illumination of a com- munication need. By the most superficial metric, we can see a disconnect in certified production vs certified sales (below). In fact, there is more than three times the certified volume available than sold and this, at best, suggests some inefficiency in market conversion. COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATES: n Fairtrade 2010-12: 18% n Organic 2008-11: 6% n Rainforest Alliance 2008-12: 61% n UTZ 2009-12: 58% From Assam: "…So the only thing which has been sustainable is the image to sell the consumer the product. If ground realities have not changed, you must highlight this as a complete failure of certification. If you look at the hypocrisy of the "cert's name" (omitted) on the multinational pack, the tea in it is completely different from a subsidiary of this company working in India which sources mainly from bought leaf factories. How can you have two diametrically opposite standards existing for the same source? How can plantations absorb higher input costs when realized prices are suppressed?" From India: "…As I see it, these certificates are (a) way out to deflect press criticism which would otherwise brand the tea industry a "Sweat Shop". But the fact of the matter is an ordinary women pluckers plight has not improved over the last 100 years, (they are still underweight and suffer from anemia) and they may be better off mak- ing an Addias World Cup Foot Ball, rather than spend time out in the field for a pittance…." From Sri Lanka: "…Most producers embark on certification as a marketing tool and not really as a tea sustain- ability exercise. Hence the commitment is diluted. The tea industry starts from the principle that, given the spectrum of estates and producers, estate-level verification is an essential part of risk management. However, it is not sufficient on its own, and if badly implemented or 'mis-sold' can generate its own risks, as highlighted in various media reports. COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATES: n Fairtrade 208-12: 2% n Organic 2008-11: 2% n Rainforest Alliance 2008-12 (estimates*): 61% n UTZ 2011-12: 5% The fact is that certifications stand for a promise that is frightfully oversold (or misunderstood) and under-delivered on, for those producers that are convinced of significant economic return. On the ground, there is further gran- ularity to the danger of our purport of a sustainable product, or at least of the even handedness of the tools that we em- ploy; in example: To pass the majority of certifications a producer must be able to prove the cor- rect storage, use, lifecycle management, and application of all agrochemicals in conjunction with the wearing of per- sonal protective equipment (PPE); this last point negates the inclusion of most smallholder farmers for whom the $30 for PPE is unconscionable let alone the access to approved agrochemicals, the funds to build external storage or the literacy and management skills to execute the desires of our less-than-practical desires of our less-than-practical expectations. Ironic really, the romanticism of smallholder farmers stands at the core of many brands that are heavy users of cer- tifications yet, practically speaking, these

• Cover