Re: Fairtrade coffee - Q & A
Hi Michael
I think its often hard to appreciate, from the outside, the dynamic nature of systems like Fairtrade.
Ive been involved in it for 3.5 years now and as an insider, it has always seemed in a state of flux - new products, product and standard reviews, big projects and questions on improving effectiveness and efficiency throughout the supply chain, etc.
One of the biggest things, that I put in the category of systems improvements, to have happened in recent times is a rather radical restructuring of FLOs governance.
See here for information on FLOs governance now http://www.fairtrade.net/structure.html.
While its been on the table for a long time, over the last 18 months major constitutional and operational changes have happened to give greater producer voice and ownership of the FLO system. Previously, FLO was owned and essentially governed by the Labelling Initiatives - primarily in developed nations. Given what FLO is about, there have always been processes for producer engagement, but the lack of having them occupy a formal position in the power structure was not acceptable.
Now, as youll see in the description of FLOs structure now, Labelling Initiatives share ownership of FLO with Regional Producer Networks. There are more producer seats on the Board.
There is a lot more to all that, but I would hope you can appreciate how important these changes are to ensuring Fairtrade delivers on its vision and mission for producers around the world.
As an example of the impact of these processes, the current Fairtrade Minimum Price and Premium review for coffee - which has already resulted in the increases to the Fairtrade Premium and Organic Differential - was prioritised because the Regional Producer Network from Central and Latin America (CLAC) conducted research on the sustainable cost of coffee production in their region and in relation to Fairtrade and presented this to the FLO Board. Their research demonstrated a clear need for change and, with their new status as one of the owners of FLO, the current process is happening.
As I say Michael, no one in Fairtrade is resting on their laurels or thinking weve got it perfect. The system is continually evolving and changing and adapting - and hopefully improving! This is the case from the FLO governance, to standards, to how certification is done in the field, to how we here in ANZ support and interact with our stakeholders.
Across it all, issues of resources and timing are always constraints and impact on priorities, when things can be done, etc.
Michael if you had specific things in mind, which the above doesnt address, let me know. I think ive dealt with some of the quality issues in other postings.
Cameron
Originally posted by grendel link=1179628700/0#2 date=1179631222
I think its often hard to appreciate, from the outside, the dynamic nature of systems like Fairtrade.
Ive been involved in it for 3.5 years now and as an insider, it has always seemed in a state of flux - new products, product and standard reviews, big projects and questions on improving effectiveness and efficiency throughout the supply chain, etc.
One of the biggest things, that I put in the category of systems improvements, to have happened in recent times is a rather radical restructuring of FLOs governance.
See here for information on FLOs governance now http://www.fairtrade.net/structure.html.
While its been on the table for a long time, over the last 18 months major constitutional and operational changes have happened to give greater producer voice and ownership of the FLO system. Previously, FLO was owned and essentially governed by the Labelling Initiatives - primarily in developed nations. Given what FLO is about, there have always been processes for producer engagement, but the lack of having them occupy a formal position in the power structure was not acceptable.
Now, as youll see in the description of FLOs structure now, Labelling Initiatives share ownership of FLO with Regional Producer Networks. There are more producer seats on the Board.
There is a lot more to all that, but I would hope you can appreciate how important these changes are to ensuring Fairtrade delivers on its vision and mission for producers around the world.
As an example of the impact of these processes, the current Fairtrade Minimum Price and Premium review for coffee - which has already resulted in the increases to the Fairtrade Premium and Organic Differential - was prioritised because the Regional Producer Network from Central and Latin America (CLAC) conducted research on the sustainable cost of coffee production in their region and in relation to Fairtrade and presented this to the FLO Board. Their research demonstrated a clear need for change and, with their new status as one of the owners of FLO, the current process is happening.
As I say Michael, no one in Fairtrade is resting on their laurels or thinking weve got it perfect. The system is continually evolving and changing and adapting - and hopefully improving! This is the case from the FLO governance, to standards, to how certification is done in the field, to how we here in ANZ support and interact with our stakeholders.
Across it all, issues of resources and timing are always constraints and impact on priorities, when things can be done, etc.
Michael if you had specific things in mind, which the above doesnt address, let me know. I think ive dealt with some of the quality issues in other postings.
Cameron

Comment