A report by the think tank the Overseas Development Institute argues that existing social and environmental labels (e.g. Fair Trade, Rainforest Alliance etc) help too few people in the the developing world and that the costs of compliance can be prohibitive for the developing world producers who often have to bear them.
The presence of these labels also suggests that "ordinary" developing world exports are "unfair" or "unethical". It cites a study looking at the impact that the wholesaler Costco's purchases of French green beans have had on rural communities in Guatemala.
In 2005-2006, the company purchased 2000 tonnes of French beans with US$1.5 million in total going directly to farmers, who earned an average of US$779 per family. Interviews with families suggested that this money had helped to increase their access to health care, education and improved housing.
The report authors propose a Good for Development label. Such a label would not create new environmental or labour standards but would indicate to consumers the positive development impacts associated with purchasing most conventional developing country produce (as long as it met some basic minimum standard e.g. to ensure compliance with national laws).
This would cover a much greater proportion of produce than existing labelling schemes, and include more producers in the poorest countries that are currently underrepresented. It could, potentially, help to expand the market for such produce, supporting more livelihoods in the developing world.
Post a new comment »