Tag Archives: Ethical consumption

Analyzing the CVS Chocolate Selection: The Need for Ethical Options

The contemporary chocolate industry allows consumers to enjoy a wide array of chocolate products that appeal to diverse palates and varying budgets. This chocolate has gone through many steps, being exchanged by multiple parties, in order to be transformed from the seeds of a fruit into the smooth, sweet, finished product that consumers expect. Although most consumers are largely unaware of this complicated supply chain, their decision to consume chocolate and their decisions about what type of chocolate to consume can have important impacts on all individuals involved in the production of the good. By looking at a store that is very familiar to all Harvard students, CVS, and comparing it to a more gourmet store, Cardullo’s, we can consider how the products CVS chooses to stock and how our purchasing decisions at this store tie into the global chocolate trade. Unlike Cardullo’s, which caters to a demographic of consumers who are shopping with the intent to purchase first-rate products and can therefore be more critical about the quality and even the potential consequences of their purchases, grabbing a chocolate bar before checking out at a CVS convenience store is likely devoid of consideration regarding the impact of the purchase. It is therefore necessary to work to educate consumers and change their behavior so that even casual consumers can make informed decisions when purchasing chocolate.

As CVS was originally named “Consumer Value Store,” it is not surprising that they aim to provide customers with relatively inexpensive products, which is reflected in their chocolate selection, much of which is made by members of the Big Five chocolate companies (Leissle 73), specifically companies like Hershey’s, Mars, and Nestle. Some of the offerings at CVS are much in keeping with the original vision of early chocolate producers, such as the Hershey family, who aimed to create a simple chocolate bar that could be mass produced and would be affordable for the general population. These chocolate-only products include Hershey’s chocolate bars, Hershey’s kisses, M&Ms, and the slightly higher priced Dove chocolate, among other options. Even these slightly more expensive options, which have sleeker packaging in an attempt to appeal to a more quality conscious demographic, are still quite cheap compared to the options at Cardullo’s. The image below shows Dove Chocolates and M&Ms and demonstrates how companies at a similar price point try to differentiate themselves with sleek packaging and ornate lettering versus playful, colorful packaging in order to appeal to different consumers.

CVS also offers a number of other Hershey candy products that include chocolate as one of several ingredients. We see how large chocolate companies employ this strategy just as they did nearly one-hundred years ago in order to decrease the costs of producing their chocolate products, thereby increasing profits. This strategy was employed by Frank and Forrest Mars when they first developed the Milky Way bar in 1924 (Brenner 54). The Milky Way had malt-flavored nougat as the main ingredient, which allowed Mars to produce a much larger chocolate bar that would be sold at the same price as the small chocolate bars produced by their competitors like Hershey. When consumers saw these two products next to each other on the shelf, they would therefore be attracted to the larger chocolate bar. This strategy is not unique to Mars, as it was employed even earlier in Europe by Toblerone, which also uses nougat, among other ingredients, in order to decrease costs and create a unique product (“Toblerone”).

Today, these types of chocolate products that have other ingredients that constitute the majority of the candy are quite common, likely both because of companies’ desires to decrease costs and because of consumer’s constant demand for new, innovative chocolate products. These types of products include Milky Way and Toblerone, which are still produced, as well as a number of candies that have a variety of other types of fillers. For example, Kit Kat has wafers, while Rollo has caramel, and many new types of M&Ms have various fillers including caramel and pretzels. All of these fillers are likely to be less expensive than chocolate. Combining this strategy with increasingly low cacao content, to which Americans have largely grown accustomed, allows large chocolate companies to be very profitable.

It is also important to note the lack of international chocolate brands that are offered at CVS. Among the few options in the small international section, the very popular British chocolate, Cadbury, is relegated to a tiny shelf that is largely in shadow due to the other shelf directly above it. (The Cadbury Chocolate is in the right side of picture below, four shelves up from the bottom, in the purple, yellow, and red packaging.) The reason for this lack of diversity in terms of national origin of chocolate products can probably be attributed largely to Hershey, which set the standard for what Americans came to identify as the usual chocolate taste. Hershey developed one of the earliest mass-produced chocolate bars in the United States, and their particular method of production resulted in a distinct taste. Unlike most European produced chocolate, which uses powdered milk, Hershey used condensed milk, which results in fermentation of the milk fat, leaving a sour taste (D’Antonio 107). As Americans are often exposed to Hershey chocolate as children, they grow used to this taste and it is therefore not surprising that there is little demand for international chocolate products.

A final point of particular importance regarding the selection of chocolate at CVS is the lack of brands that aim to address social and environmental issues. As mentioned above, this may be partially due to consumer’s preferences, as they are not accustomed to darker chocolate, which is often produced by socially and environmentally conscious companies that want to emphasize the quality of their cacao. Customers shopping at CVS are also likely from a demographic that is generally looking for cheap prices and may not be willing to pay the premium associated with these brands. This issue speaks to the need to further educate customers about the potential ethical issues with the chocolate that they are consuming, which could then change preferences.

The extensive chocolate selection at Cardullo’s demonstrates quite a contrast to that seen at CVS. One of the most immediately obvious differences is the price point at which they sell their chocolate. Whereas CVS sells the vast majority of their chocolate, including large bags, for under five dollars, Cardullo’s has a number of chocolate bars, relatively small in size, which cost over ten dollars. Most of these chocolate products are higher in cacao content and many of them aim to address specific social or environmental issues that are common within the chocolate industry, demonstrating an increased customer concern towards these important issues.

The concern for labor and environmental abuses has been mounting, driving customers to stores like Cardullo’s where they can make informed, ethical purchases. The issue of labor abuses has been a concern since large scale chocolate production began, as demonstrated by Cadbury’s concern with slavery on Sao Tome, Principe, and Angola at the end of the nineteenth century and beginning of the twentieth century (Higgs, Satre). Despite the passage of over one hundred years, there have still been numerous recently documented cases of coerced labor, specifically child labor, in chocolate production. For example, Carol Off’s book, Bitter Chocolate: The Dark Side of the World’s Most Seductive Sweet sheds light on the issue of child trafficking in the Cote d’Ivoire, as children are brought from Mali and other surrounding countries under the false pretense of paid labor and are then often not allowed to leave once they arrive (Off). There have been attempts to address labor abuses such as these through measures such as the Harkin-Engel Protocol, which called upon large chocolate companies to devote resources to eliminating child slavery (Ryan, 47). Unfortunately, there is little evidence that the Harkin-Engel has been successful at limiting labor abuses.

In light of the inability for the Harkin-Engel Protocol and similar measures to initiate change, many organizations and chocolate companies themselves have taken it upon themselves to affect change, as demonstrated by many of the chocolate options at gourmet stores like Cardullo’s. One example of an ethically concerned chocolate company that is stocked at Cardullo’s is Goodnow Farms Chocolate, which is a single origin chocolate maker that aims to monitor both the working conditions and environmental impact of the farms from which they source their cacao (“Goodnow Farms Chocolate”). Another example of an ethically concerned chocolatier is Castronovo Chocolate, who work to create a sustainable supply chain and ensure fair wages for all workers (“Castronovo Chocolate”). Castronovo even had a limited time deal where they sent fifty-percent of the purchase price of their chocolate to the Amazon Conservation team, which is a nonprofit organization that works with indigenous communities to protect tropical forests. Chocolatiers such as these must be commended for taking the initiative to tackle these serious issues, while stores such as Cardullo’s should also be recognized for their role in educating the consumer and making these products more widely available.

Another point of differentiation for Cardullo’s is the variety of locations in which the chocolate that they stock is made. Within North America, there are chocolatiers as close as Somerville, where Taza Chocolate operates, and as far away as Canada, where Jelina Chocolatier is run. There are a number of other US chocolate companies represented, including Akinosie Chocolate from Springfield, Missouri, and Raaka Chocolate from Brooklyn, New York. Cardullo’s has a good selection of international chocolates as well. Much of this chocolate is from Europe, such as Belgian chocolate companies like Neuhaus and Jelina Chocolatier, and French companies like Valrhona. Yet they also stock chocolate from countries that are not as often associated with chocolate production, such as Fossa Chocolate, which is made in Singapore. By providing chocolate options from a wide variety of places, Cardullo’s can both appeal to the interests of their customers and inspire curiosity about chocolate. As customers look into these companies, they can then make informed decisions about their purchases and have a better understanding of their impact within the chocolate supply chain. The pictures below show just some of the chocolates offered in Cardullo’s wide selection.

Although the chocolate selection in Cardullo’s is largely dedicated to one specific area of the store, it is important to consider how decisions regarding location in the store, particularly within CVS, can impact consumer behavior, and how chocolate could be better organized to induce informed, ethical purchases. At CVS, the location of chocolate products, both in terms of which shelf they are on and their level on the shelf, demonstrates clear strategic decisions to maximize sales. There are two primary locations for chocolate within the store. The first location, which holds the majority of the chocolate, is the candy aisle. Although labeled as a “candy” aisle, the vast majority of the products include some type of chocolate, demonstrating the overwhelming popularity of chocolate relative to other sweets. Most of the chocolate products in this aisle are large bags, which hold many chocolate pieces, some of which are individually wrapped. It is clear that this aisle appeals to customers who have entered the store with the intention of buying chocolate products. The second primary location where chocolate is sold in CVS is at the checkout counter. These chocolate products are smaller, individually-wrapped items that are meant to appeal to impulse buyers who will grab a chocolate bar as they are checking out. The picture below shows some of these options.

The other important location decision within the store is at what level to place the products. It has been shown in a number of studies that shelf height is very important in driving consumer decisions. Some evidence of this importance comes from the British marketing company 4imprint, which aggregates a number of studies on the topic and shows that consumers start looking at the shelf at eye level and typically take fewer than eight seconds to make their purchasing decision (“Eye level is buy level”). The decision to place well known types of chocolate at eye level is therefore clearly intentional, as CVS wants consumers to immediately recognize the name and impulsively decide to buy the product. The decision to dedicate significant space in CVS to chocolate products and trust consumers to give in to their impulses and buy chocolate at check-out also demonstrates the effectiveness of advertising in the chocolate industry, which has worked for decades to depict chocolate as a product which can instantly satisfy cravings.

 Although CVS may never exclusively stock chocolate that aims to address ethical concerns, as this would not be in keeping with their goal to provide accessible, low prices, it is clear that there is much room for improvement. Ideally, CVS would give the consumer more options, adding some ethically produced products like those seen at Cardullo’s. This change would allow consumers to decide for themselves whether they sufficiently value these ethical concerns to warrant paying a premium. If CVS was willing to place these ethical chocolate products in the prime eye-level shelf real estate, that could also help to encourage consumers to purchase these types of chocolate products. Even if the consumer did not purchase these bars, they would still be forced to engage with them, making them aware of other options and encouraging them to learn more about the chocolate that they currently consume. Therefore, as more attention is increasingly paid towards environmental and social issues, hopefully CVS and other value-focused chains will increasingly learn from more premium stores and provide the consumer with a more balanced experience.

Works Cited

“About Castronovo Chocolate – Single Origin, Small Batch, Bean to Bar Craft Chocolate.” Castronovo Chocolate, http://www.castronovochocolate.com/. 

“About Us.” Goodnow Farms Chocolate, goodnowfarms.com/about-us/. 

Brenner, Joël Glenn. The Emperors of Chocolate: inside the Secret World on Hershey & Mars. Broadway Books, 2000. 

D’Antonio, Michael. Hershey. Simon and Schuster, 2006. 

Higgs, Catherine. Chocolate Islands: Cocoa, Slavery, and Colonial Africa. Ohio University Press, 2012. 

Krishna, Manu. “Eye Level Is Buy Level: The Importance of in-Store Product Placement.” Trax Retail, Nov. 2017, traxretail.com/2017/11/22/eye-level-buy-level-importance-store-product-placement/.

Leissle, Kristy. Cocoa. Polity Press, 2018. 

Off, Carol. Bitter Chocolate: the Dark Side of the Worlds Most Seductive Sweet. The New Press, 2006. 

Ryan, Órla. Chocolate Nations Living and Dying for Cocoa in West Africa. Zed Books, 2011. 

Satre, Lowell Joseph. Chocolate on Trial: Slavery, Politics, and the Ethics of Business. Ohio Univ. Press, 2005. 

“Toblerone – Our History.” Toblerone, http://www.toblerone.co.uk/history. 

Media Cited

All photographs were taken by me.

Cardullo’s Chocolate

At Cardullo’s Gourmet Shoppe in Cambridge, Massachusetts there is an extensive selection of chocolate. In fact, the offerings cover an entire wall of the store and are split up into 5 sections. Upon inspection of the makeup of the selection of Cardullo’s chocolate, it is apparent that several groups of sections are broadly representative of certain types of chocolate. It further becomes apparent that the categories of chocolate one finds in Cardullo’s progresses from the front to the back of the store as follows: luxury chocolate, bean to bar craft manufactured chocolate, cheap and common chocolate. I will examine the brands representative of each of these categories at Cardullo’s and identify that luxury chocolate brands offer brand name and popular flavoring, bean to bar brands offer ethical supply chains, and that common chocolate offer the lowest prices. As such, Cardullo’s commitment to being a “gourmet” shop reveals the word “gourmet” can have many meanings in the world of chocolate. Gourmet chocolate can have to do with brand recognition as luxurious, or with being an ethically committed niche craft maker, or as being in line with popular tastes.

            There are complex ethical concerns involved with cacao production, most importantly regarding child labor and unsustainable living conditions for cacao farmers. The center of these ethical issues is West Africa. There is considerable evidence that cacao production in West Africa has used and continues to use child labor (Berlan, 1089). Child labor on farms in West Africa was first brought to attention by reports of such slavery in 2000 (Ryan, 44). Orla Ryan in Chocolate Nationdescribes,

“Traffickers preyed on children at bus stops in Mali, promising riches on cocoa farms in Cote d’Ivoire. Once children got to the farm, they survived on little food, little or no pay and endured regular beatings…. They were essentially slaves, harvesting the beans that were the key ingredient for chocolate” (Ryan, 44).

Given the evidence provided to the public the Harkin-Engel protocol was introduced, which was a voluntary agreement among chocolate manufacturers to end child labor. However, Ryan asserts that “nearly a decade later, very little has changed on the farm” (Ryan, 44). 

            Although the use of children on farms in West Africa is prevalent, it has been argued that this is in fact necessary and part of the culture. Ryan spoke with a Ghanaian buyer who asserted “In an African household, everyone contributes to the family’s welfare, a Ghanaian buyer told me. He had accompanied his mother to the farm from the age of 5” (Ryan, 45-46).  Amanda Berlan articulates that “In the broader context of Ghanaian society, child labour is well-documented. Of children aged 5–17 years, 39 per cent are known to be engaged in economic activities, of which 57 per cent are engaged in agriculture, forestry and fishing and 88 per cent are unpaid family labour or apprentices” (Berlan, 1090). This is a framing of child labor as “apprenticeship,” rather than slavery. However, it remains that children do not really have a choice in these situations. If their parents require them to work on the farm and learn the business, the children are not in a position to pursue other options. Further, this can be argued to be a manipulation of facts from remote areas to advance interests not aligned with the interests of those who live there (Off, 160). Even if this is true, however, there is the necessity of improving these farming communities in general. As Ryan notes,  “It is also doubtful a boycott of slave-produced beans would make matters better. A ban on beans from the region would devastate millions of families reliant on cocoa to survive. These kinds of threats or bans, however well-intentioned, can backfire dramatically” (Ryan, 51-52). As such, a rejection of West African producers should not occur, especially for bean to bar chocolate manufacturers. Kristy Leissle aptly asserts,

Certainly media attention to slavery allegations makes it easy for consumers to reject West Africa as a ‘‘safe’’ source of chocolate. But when artisans or mid-size companies (such as Tcho) offer a bar from West Africa, they apparently can generate significant sales. As Tcho has proven with its best-selling Ghana bar, and Divine with its entire product line, West Africa bars can be successfully sold in the U.S.—provided the maker has already inspired trust with a clear statement of its social mission” (Leissle, 29).

West African cacao can be used responsibly, even given its history. In fact, it is necessary that manufacturers involve themselves with these farming areas in order to help them benefit and grow, rather than harming their economic situation further. As such, policies of fair trade and direct trade have developed in which chocolate producers are directly involved in the sustainability of the cacao growing communities. It is in this context of ethical issues within the cacao supply chain that we will examine the chocolate companies offered at Cardullo’s and compare how ethical commitments within the chocolate manufacturers align with price and brand recognition as well as how these relationships affect placement within the store.

            The first section of Cardullo’s chocolate selection, closest to the storefront is a collection of luxury (i.e. recognizable brand and highly priced) chocolate companies. However, these companies are variable in their ethical commitments. Here we can see the sections we are talking about:

The most prevalent company in all of Cardullo’s selection is Godiva. Godiva chocolates are allocated four shelves in the store. The offerings are mainly boxes of a variety of chocolate truffles. These boxes go for a high price of $20 – 40 each. Godiva had successfully branded itself as a luxury brand, as we can see in this advertisement.  

The use of gold and wine associates Godiva with a luxurious existence. Godiva’s cacao, however is sourced from West Africa, the center of the child labor matters. Nonetheless, on Godiva’s website, they describe that they are a member of the World Cocoa Foundation, a leading nonprofit that fosters sustainable farms, strengthening the cacao farming communities. They write, “Godiva believes that protecting children is a shared responsibility across the cocoa industry… We have a policy that requires all of our suppliers to be in compliance with applicable labor laws and regulations.” Yet, Godiva received an F from Green America’s evaluation of their supply chain ethics. This was due to their having no labor certifications and none of their cacao having been certified as ethically sourced to date even though they have a promise to be 100% certified by 2019.

            There are two other brands, Neuhaus, and Chocolat Bonnat, that appear to fit into the same category as Godiva, that is, highly priced (and thus luxury items) and not apparently or fully committed to pursuing an ethical supply chain. Most similar to Godiva, Neuhaus is given  three shelves in the store and also is mainly boxes of mixed chocolates. These boxes sell for $40-70 and as such can be characterized as luxury items. Further, on the Neuhaus website there is an emphasis on the deep history of the company. This history tracks its ups and downs as well as innovations. However, there is no suggestion of concern with supply chain ethics. Chocolat Bonnat has two shelves in Cardullo’s and offers bars of dark chocolate sourced from different areas for around $12. Although their cacao beans are sourced from areas that haven’t been hubs of child labor (e.g. Mexico, Peru, Madagascar, Brazil), there is nonetheless no mention of ethical concerns on their website. Like Neuhaus, they have an extensive history of the company. They also have a seven minute video on the process and soul of cacao harvest, but not mention of the moral issues that accompany that harvest. 

            There are however, luxury priced chocolate brands that reveal concern for the ethical supply chain in the Cardullo’s selection: Butlers, Castronova, and Milkboy. Butlers is represented by only a couple of bars in Cardullo’s, which sell for $22 and thus are luxury items. Butlers, on their website articulates, “We use sustainably sourced cacao through Cocoa Horizons because we believe that sustainably sourced cocoa makes for better chocolates and better livelihoods for the farmers who grow and nurture it.” In fact, in 2018 the chairman of Butlers went to meet with women that they had been empowering in these communities by training them in the techniques of growing cacao on the Ivory Coast, exhibiting a commitment to the improvement of these communities. Castronova is another brand priced in a luxury range of $15 for a bar. This chocolate is made from Colombian cacao beans, likely separated from child labor issues. As the founders write on their website,   

“We salute the few, craft chocolate makers that are taking time and care with each part of the chocolate making process, releasing the full potential of the bean; those who are supporting careful farming and fermentation, the ones who ensure farmers are paid a fair wage through an ethical and sustainable supply chain, and those who skillfully grind, roast, and sweeten without diluting the bean’s essence.”

Milkboy chocolate also falls under this category with bars priced at $20. Milkboy chocolate is UTZ certified, which requires good agricultural practices, social and living conditions, and farm management. This certification requires investment in farming practices that aid individuals at all stages of the supply chain, ensuring better futures for the cacao farming communities.  

            The next section, located one step further toward the back of the store, is composed of bean to bar chocolate manufacturers as well as Fairtrade and Direct Trade certified manufacturuers. Here we can see the sections we are speaking about:

Bean to bar means that the companies are fully involved in every step of the creation of their chocolate, from the growth of the beans to the manufacturing process. The main bean to bar brands in these sections are Fossa, Antidote, and Taza. Fossa is a bean to bar craft chocolate maker priced around $13 for a bar. Taza likewise is a bean to bar manufacturer priced around $5 for a bar. Finally, Antidote is a bean to bar manufacturer priced at around $10 per bar. We can note a symmetry here between bean to bar companies and Direct Trade certified companies. Antidote, a bean to bar manufacturer claims they practice direct trade, writing on their website, “Prioritizing quality and flavor over certification allows us to foster direct relationships without Ecuadorian partners and pay them wages that are far above market rate. We are practicing direct trade with all cacao beans and some other ingredients cutting our any middleman.” Taza likewise is Direct Trade certified. The alignment between direct trade and bean to bar is that direct trade is focused on the quality of the beans. And, as Antidote succinctly explains, this focus forces the manufacturer to be closely involved with the farming communities it sources from. This intimacy leads to a care and necessary ethical unveiling of the harvesting process. Note that these companies tend to have a lower price point as well.

            The other ethical certification is the Fairtrade certification, which is an explicit commitment to bettering the farming communities. The companies in this section that have this certification are Chuao and Pure 7. The Fairtrade certification ensures safe, healthy working conditions for cacao farmers as well as bettering the communities they live in. Chuao articulates that part of the additional income they make goes back to the farming communities to invest in education and healthcare.  These also sell at a lower price point, Chuao at $6 a bar and Pure 7 at $5 a bar.

            The final category of chocolate at Cardullo’s is the cheaper and common chocolates, such as Kinder and Milka. Here we see this section:

Both of these cholate producers offer milk chocolate that is highly sweetened, appealing to the common appeal of sweet soothing chocolate candy. They also both sell for about $2 a bar. Now, both of these companies have some sort of ethical commitment. Kinder is UTZ certified, part of the Fairtrade cocoa program, and also Rainforest Alliance certified. Milka is part of the Cocoa life sustainable sourcing program. Thus, these mass producing and popular manufacturers do not sacrifice ethical sourcing in their production.

            Cardullo’s we have examined the central three categories offered: luxury, bean to bar and Fairtrade certified, and cheaper, common candy. Within the luxury category, there is a mix of ethically bound and non-ethically bound companies. The bean to bar and Fairtrade certified are necessarily ethically bound. Finally, the common candy chocolates are also ethically bound. Given this variation in price and ethical commitment, it appears Cardullo’s is not taking a strong stand on what “gourmet” chocolate is. They offer to their consumer the option of viewing gourmet as expensive, as ethical, or as simply tasty. Indeed, the luxury items are toward the front of the store, but this does not imply a judgement on what is important, but more common business sense to have the more expensive items more prevalent. Nonetheless, Cardullo’s wide variety of ethically sourced chocolate products is impressive and aids in exposing consumers to the possibility of chocolate that is produced via an ethical supply chain, aiding in the issues that face chocolate production today. 

Works Cited

Berlan, Amanda. “Social Sustainability in Agriculture: An Anthropological Perspective on Child Labour in Cocoa Production in Ghana.” Journal of Development Studies, vol 49, 2013, . pp. 1088-1100. 

Leissle, Kristy. “Invisible West Africa: The Politics of Single Origin Chocolate.” Gastronomica, vol. 13, no. 3, 2013, pp. 22–31.JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/gfc.2013.13.3.22.

Ryan, Orla. Chocolate Nations: Living and Dying for Cocoa in West Africa. London: Zed, 2011. Print.

Off, Caroline. Bitter Chocolate : the Dark Side of the World’s Most Seductive Sweet. New York :New Press, 2008. Print.

Madécasse: Conscious Chocolate for a Better Madagascar

One of the most pressing ethical issues concerning the chocolate industry is the poverty suffered by many cacao farmers around the world. Cacao farmers in Ghana, for example, generally make less than $2USD per day, which is insufficient for farmers to feed themselves and their families, even though the cost of living in Ghana is much lower than in the United States and other Western nations (Leissle 2018). Farmers also rarely have any control over the price of their cacao, as large corporations, weather, and politics all exert a large amount of influence on the price of cacao beans. Furthermore, this economic poverty is only amplified by the environmental degradation that often accompanies large amounts of agriculture. Recently, there has been a movement among chocolate companies, facilitated by consumer demand, to produce chocolate using ethically-sourced cacao in order to mitigate the destructive forces of capitalism in the Global South. One company working in this realm is Madécasse. By facilitating close relationships with cacao producers in Madagascar, Madécasse demonstrates how chocolate companies can work to provide better pay and living conditions for cacao farmers and invest in an environmentally sustainable enterprise – all while making chocolate that tastes great.

Madécasse was founded in 2008 by two Americans, Tim McCollum and Brett Beach, who had both previously served on the Peace Corps in Madagascar (Madécasse LLC 2019). This experience prompted McCollum and Beach to want to do more to help the people of Madagascar, and thus Madécasse was born. On the Madécasse website, their mission is stated as “a journey to flip the chocolate world right-side up” (Madécasse LLC 2019). This suggests that their purpose is revolutionary, and that in their view, the chocolate industry is in need of serious reform. Their stated mission is two-fold: first, to make the best-tasting, highest-quality chocolate from organic, “heirloom cacao” from Madagascar, and second, to remove middlemen from the chocolate production chain (Madécasse LLC 2019). One of the biggest problems in the chocolate industry that they aim to tackle through their business is “the thousands of miles and layers of middlemen” that separate farmers from chocolate producers and consumers, and they do this by conducting every stage of the chocolate production chain in Madagascar itself (Madécasse LLC 2019). 

One major way in which Madécasse is working to create a better Madagascar is by implementing business processes that work to ameliorate the poverty suffered by farmers in Madagascar. This is incredibly important, as Madagascar is considered one of the poorest countries in the world today, with 90% of people living on less than $2 USD per day, and 62% of the population living below the extreme poverty line, which is defined by the International Monetary Fund as an income that is less than what it would cost to consume 2,100 calories per day (Engstrom et al. 2015). Additionally, approximately 80% of the population lives in rural areas, and most of these people rely on subsistence farming to make a living. 

The cacao industry in Madagascar is also relatively small compared to that of nations such as Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana, as Madagascar produces less than 1% of the world’s cacao (Schatz 2016). However, Malagasy cacao is very highly-valued among Western chocolate companies, because it is genetically distinct and has a unique flavor (Watkins 2012). Combined with the high poverty in Madagascar, the value of cacao has led people to start stealing it (Katz 2014). The photo below depicts a cacao producer who keeps a gun at his desk to deter thieves. This display highlights not only how valuable cacao is to the farmers that grow it in Madagascar, but also how desperately poor so many Malagasy people are. 

Photo by Giulio di Sturco. From: http://time.com/3809538/madagascar-cocoa-chocolate-war-giulio-di-sturco/

But despite how coveted cacao is as a primary product, cacao farmers globally tend to only receive an extremely small proportion of the profits from sales of chocolate. In the diagram below from Make Chocolate Fair!, a European organization that advocates for fair trade in the chocolate industry, cocoa producers on average only receive approximately 6.6% of the profits from chocolate. 

Additionally, prices for primary agricultural products such as cacao tend to have the most volatile prices. Prices are not determined by typical supply and demand processes, rather, these products are treated as investments, and prices are determined by investor speculation (Sylla 2014). Both the low share of the profits from chocolate given to farmers and the unstable prices contribute to the economic inequalities between the Global North and South. However, there has been a growing movement to correct these issues and achieve greater equity in global trade. As a result, a few different strategies have been implemented, with the goal of correcting the trade injustice that leads to the majority of the profits going to the company, while farmers live in poverty. One of the most well-known of these initiatives is Fairtrade.

Fairtrade is a label overseen by Fairtrade International, a non-profit organization that oversees third-party labelling of products that confirms that both companies and farmers are complying with specific trade terms (Leissle 2018). Fairtrade has several requirements, including that producers must practice environmentally sustainable farming, and that they adhere to International Labor Organization rules for hired workers, including protecting children from the worst forms of child labor. Fairtrade producers also receive a minimum price for their cocoa, as well as a price premium for upholding Fairtrade policies, which both serve to protect producers from price volatility. The major benefit of Fairtrade is that this labelling helps to make consumers more aware of where their food is coming from, which can create greater accountability among consumers when they are choosing which products to buy.

However, Fairtrade is not a perfect system. For example, producer organizations are required to pay a fee to be certified, which can add to the financial challenges that producers of agricultural products already face (Leissle 2018). It becomes increasingly problematic because this cost is not passed on to consumers through, for example, making Fairtrade chocolate more expensive. This is done to keep Fairtrade chocolate competitively priced. Furthermore, the price floor set by Fairtrade International is still quite low, at around $2000 USD per metric ton of cacao (Leissle 2018). While this prevents cacao prices from dropping below that value, it does not incentivize chocolate companies to pay any more for their cacao, and thus the Fairtrade price of cacao has remained fairly stagnant. Finally, Fairtrade labelling can have the negative side effect of decreasing transparency among major players in the chocolate industry. While the increase in demand for ethically-sourced cacao has pressured major chocolate producers to communicate more information about the sources of their cacao, some companies like Cadbury have opted to use internal certification schemes, which are difficult to assess the robustness of (Leissle 2018). 

According to Madécasse, Fairtrade is simply a label that allows large chocolate companies to remain disconnected from cacao producers, but to still indicate to some unspecified extent that they are ethically sourcing their cacao (Madécasse LLC 2019). Madécasse is not Fairtrade certified; rather, they are Direct Trade certified, and they believe that this distinction not only makes their operations more transparent to consumers, but also allows them to do a better job than other companies of improving conditions for cocoa farmers.

In contrast to Fairtrade, which is basically just a labelling system, Direct Trade actually alters the structure of the commodity chain in chocolate production. Essentially, Direct Trade removes middle men from the commodity chain (Leissle 2018; Madécasse LLC 2019). Companies buy directly from farmers, which increases the amount that farmers can make for their products. In her book, Cocoa, Kristy Leissle describes the process of Direct Trade with the example of Taza Chocolate. Taza’s goal is primarily to source the highest-quality cacao, but in order to do that, they are willing to pay a higher price for the beans (Leissle 2018). For example, Taza paid cacao suppliers Maya Mountain Cacao and Cacao Verapaz over 75% more than the 2015 average price of bulk cacao. Not only does Taza pay more, but they pay farmers directly, and this also allows them to invest resources to help producers maintain a high standard of quality of their cacao. 

Similarly, Madécasse emphasizes the importance of maintaining close relationships with cacao farmers in Madagascar and paying producers more than average for their cacao. On the company website, Madécasse emphasizes that they are fully integrated into communities in Madagascar, and it is this close connection with the local people that allows them to make a positive impact. One way in which Madécasse has contributed to growth of the cacao and chocolate industry in Madagascar is by providing farmers with the infrastructure to ferment and dry cacao beans themselves so that they can sell dried cacao beans instead of wet ones, which allowed farmers to increase their income by 60% (Madécasse LLC 2019). Dry beans are much more profitable than wet cacao beans because they have gone through the extra processing steps of fermenting and drying (Leissle 2018). By providing Malagasy cacao farmers with the equipment to begin the processing of cacao, Madécasse has made an investment that will help cacao farmers begin to make more money for their product in the long term. 

Furthermore, Madécasse is unique because they have pledged to make chocolate where it is grown in Madagascar. To date, they have made over 4 million chocolate bars in Madagascar (Madécasse LLC 2019). By integrating cocoa farmers and the Malagasy people into the commodity chain of chocolate production, it gives them more agency over the final product. Additionally, it helps to expand the chocolate market beyond just Western nations. For example, South African consumers have expressed a demand for chocolate made in Madagascar (Watkins 2012), which indicates that high-quality chocolate can be made in Africa, and the demand for it does exist. 

However, the work that Madécasse is doing in Madagascar is not without its challenges. One major issue is scaling the business up in order to meet increasing demand, as Madécasse chocolate can now be found in Whole Foods stores in the U.S. (Schatz 2016). The challenges with producing chocolate in the country where it is grown are exemplified in the graph below, from the Madécasse website, which depicts the proportion of their chocolate that is made in Madagascar. 

From: https://madecasse.com/made-at-the-source/

In the initial years of the business, 100% of their chocolate was produced in Madagascar, but as demand increased, Madécasse elected to move a large percentage of their production outside of Madagascar (Schatz 2016). Madécasse states that they are committed to eventually moving 100% of their production back to Madagascar in the next few years (Madécasse LLC 2019). However, the necessity of moving production outside of Madagascar until factories have the capacity to produce a sufficient volume of chocolate highlights one of the major issues with the ethical, bean-to-bar chocolate business model, which is that making a tangible difference for cacao farmers and their families requires well-developed infrastructure that many cacao-producing countries simply lack. Therefore, the challenge of scale is one that small chocolate companies like Madécasse must address going forward. 

A second problem that Madécasse is becoming increasingly involved in helping to fix is deforestation and biodiversity loss in Madagascar. Madagascar is home to a large number of endemic species – over 85% of the animals on Madagascar are unique to the island – and over 90% of those species depend on the forest as their habitat (England, Ratsimbazafy, and Andrianarinana 2017; Harper et al. 2007). Furthermore, between 1950 and 2000, Madagascar lost 40% of its already-diminishing forest cover, and much of that deforestation can be linked to subsistence farming (Harper et al. 2007).

Madécasse has become increasingly vocal about environmental issues in Madagascar; the company recently published a report on their environmental impact, based on work with local people (England, Ratsimbazafy, and Andrianarinana 2017). This report demonstrated that cacao farms are actually a common habitat for many of Madagascar’s endemic species. This discovery led to a partnership with Conservation International and the Bristol Zoo to research the lemurs that live in the cacao forests. The importance of conservation in the company’s values is reflected in their packaging. As of 2016, Madécasse has redesigned their logo to include a lemur holding a cacao pod, which signifies that the company is aware that their business is tightly intertwined with the ecosystem of Madagascar. Furthermore, this packaging signals to consumers that Madécasse is interested in working to save and expand habitats for endangered species in Madagascar. Indeed, in an interview with Forbes, Madécasse co-founder Tim McCollum says that the company hopes to reforest an entire valley to use as a habitat for rescue lemurs (Schatz 2016). This is possible, he says, because the increased value of their cacao has allowed some farmers to replant old rice land, previously used for subsistence farming, into cacao forests. Thus, Madécasse is aware that their business’ positive impact on the people of Madagascar can also extend to the island’s ecosystem. 

Madécasse is thus an exceptional model for other chocolate companies. The goal of making chocolate from start to finish in the places where it is grown provides companies a great opportunity to make a positive impact on cacao farmers who today often barely make enough income to feed their families. Maintaining close relationships with cacao farmers and providing them with the resources to earn a sustainable, higher income is beneficial for the cacao farmers, chocolate producers, chocolate consumers, and for the environment as a whole. The result of business practices, such as those applied by Madécasse, is a high-quality product that consumers can feel good about purchasing and that truly makes a difference for those involved in every stage of its production.

Works Cited

England, Kate, Hajaniaina Ratsimbazafy, and Sitraka Andrianarinana. 2017. “Madécasse Impact Report.” Wildlife Returns. https://madecasse.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Made%CC%81casse-2017-Impact-Report.pdf.

Engstrom, Lars, Patrick Imam, Priscilla Muthoora, and Alex Pienkowski. 2015. “Republic of Madagascar: Selected Issues.” 15. IMF Country Report. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund.

Harper, Grady J., Marc K. Steininger, Compton J. Tucker, Daniel Juhn, and Frank Hawkins. 2007. “Fifty Years of Deforestation and Forest Fragmentation in Madagascar.” Environmental Conservation34 (4): 325–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892907004262.

Katz, Andrew. 2014. “Dark Gold: Giulio Di Sturco Goes Inside Madagascar’s Cocoa War.” Time. May 27, 2014. http://time.com/3809538/madagascar-cocoa-chocolate-war-giulio-di-sturco/.

Leissle, Kristy. 2018. Cocoa. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Madécasse LLC. 2019. “Madécasse – Direct Trade Chocolate and Vanilla.” 2019. https://madecasse.com/.

Schatz, Robin D. 2016. “Can A Brooklyn Chocolate Maker With A Social Mission Stand Out From The Crowd?” Forbes. April 25, 2016. https://www.forbes.com/sites/robindschatz/2016/04/25/can-a-brooklyn-chocolate-maker-with-a-social-mission-stand-out-from-the-crowd/.

Sylla, Ndongo S. 2014. The Fair Trade Scandal: Marketing Poverty to Benefit the Rich. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press.

Watkins, Tate. 2012. “Cuckoo for Cocoa Processing: Making Chocolate—Not Just Picking It—Helps Madagascar Develop.” GOOD. February 9, 2012. https://www.good.is/articles/cuckoo-for-cocoa-processing-making-chocolate-not-just-picking-it-helps-madagascar-develop.

Multimedia Sources

“Cocoa Prices and Income of Farmers.” 2013. Make Chocolate Fair! August 13, 2013. https://makechocolatefair.org/issues/cocoa-prices-and-income-farmers-0.

Katz, Andrew. 2014. “Dark Gold: Giulio Di Sturco Goes Inside Madagascar’s Cocoa War.” Time. May 27, 2014. http://time.com/3809538/madagascar-cocoa-chocolate-war-giulio-di-sturco/.

Madécasse LLC. 2019a. “Made At The Source.” Madécasse(blog). 2019. https://madecasse.com/made-at-the-source/.

———. 2019b. “Madécasse – Shop Direct Trade Chocolate.” Madécasse(blog). 2019. https://madecasse.com/shop/.

Raising the Bar with Tony’s Chocolonely

Seldom will the average consumer find a chocolate company as unique as Tony’s Chocolonely. From its irregularly divided bars representing the inequality in the chocolate industry, to its quirky name referencing the founder’s sense of solitude as a crusader against slavery in the industry, all of the company’s efforts aim for ethical reform through delicious chocolate. This Dutch company arose from the investigative journalism work of Teun “Tony” van de Keuken. After discovering the reality of slavery in the cocoa industry, Tony sought to tackle the issue himself. He realized the importance of consumer responsibility in reinforcing these industrial injustices, going so far as to “prosecute [him]self for buying and eating chocolate” that involved slavery in its production (Tony’s, “The Story”).

From chocolate conviction to confectionary: The ethical foundations of Tony’s Chocolonely.

The Mission

Thus, Tony’s Chocoloney was founded on the principle of producing completely “slave free chocolate” and influencing chocolate makers around the globe to follow suit. Its products, characterized by bright colors and eye-catching designs, are emblazoned with company’s mission: “Together we make 100% slave free the norm in chocolate” (Tony’s, Report 11).

This mission is not only applied toward its own products; Tony’s also aspires to elevate the worldwide chocolate industry to this same standard. Tony’s takes a holistic approach to transforming the chocolate industry from within. This begins with grassroots community efforts at the local farmer level, continues through to consumer transparency, and extends beyond to the global chocolate industry. Tony’s Chocolonely hopes to leverage its loyal customer base and prominence in the Dutch market to alleviate ethical issues in the global cacao-chocolate supply chain.

Tony’s dedication to ethical chocolate starts with the social and economic well-being of its cocoa farmers and continues through every ingredient and packaging material. These steps trace the company’s five sourcing principles for 100% slave free chocolate: traceable cocoa beans, higher prices, strong farmers, long-term sustainability, and improved quality and productivity.

The five sourcing principles, on display in Tony’s Chocotruck.

Reliable Relationships

Each of these social, economic, and political tactics is tailored to the key players in Tony’s chocolate supply chain: cocoa farmers, chocolate makers, stores, fans, and governments (Tony’s, Report 13). Beginning with the farmers, Tony’s has been strategic in choosing which cocoa-producing regions to work with. Rather than shying away from countries with severe social abuses in farming, the company has embraced them head-on. After discovering the prevalence of slavery in West Africa, Tony’s formed partnerships with five cocoa farming cooperatives in Ghana and the Ivory Coast. This direct contact with farmers at the local community level has been necessary to target the engrained unjust cultural practices. Tony’s works with farmers on a personal level to address social, financial, and educational issues. The company sources 100% of its cocoa beans from these five cooperatives, establishing balanced relationships through which it can introduce fundamental institutional changes. Tony’s engages in direct trade with these farmers, eliminating profits lost by the farmers to intermediaries in the supply chain. This direct contact also helps develop strong, stable long-term relationships that enable the cooperatives to grow and organize.

Principles Over Profits

Financial stability is one of the most pressing issues facing West African cocoa farmers. This problem has been poorly addressed in the chocolate industry due to incomplete or misdirected efforts. A popular suggestion involves paying higher prices for cocoa; however, this approach fails in many cases if the national government is the intermediary between the farmers and the global market, or if national policies incentivize the cultivation of other crops (Off 146, Martin slide 40). Cocoa farmers are paid the farm gate price for their beans, but this may not reflect the global market price. However, farmers can enhance their earnings through certification premiums. All of Tony’s cocoa farmers are Fairtrade certified; however, this still does not relieve them from financial insolvency. Due to its pervasiveness and widespread effects, poverty is Tony’s target and root cause of labor abuses.

Tony’s cocoa beans are Faitrade certified, so farmers receive both Fairtrade and Tony’s additional premiums.

Considering these challenges, Tony’s goal to pay farmers living wages—enough to hire adult workers and send their children to school—seems almost quixotic. To work towards this goal, the company has instituted an additional Tony’s premium that bypasses institutional middlemen and directly benefits farmers: “We pay the extra Tony’s premium straight to the cooperatives of our partner farmers, so not every link in the chain (such as local and international traders, cocoa processers or bar manufacturers) in the chocolate chain receives a percentage of this higher premium” (Tony’s, Report 27). During the 2017-2018 fiscal year, on top of the Fairtrade premium of $200 per metric ton, Tony’s paid an additional $400 per metric ton in the Ivory Coast and an additional $175 in Ghana (103). Thus, the cooperative farmers in the Ivory Coast received a payment 47% greater than the farm gate price; in Ghana, 21% greater (29). The additional Tony’s premium is also dynamic, taking into account the current cocoa market, farm family size, cost of family sustenance, and agricultural input costs. For example, in response to the 2016 excess Ivorian cocoa harvest, Tony’s more than doubled its premium to compensate for the decline in farm gate price. This contrasts from the nearly static Fairtrade price and premium, which will be updated in late 2019 from their 2011 values (Fairtrade).

The Proof is in the (Chocolate) Pudding

One of the unique aspects of Tony’s relationships with farmers is its comprehensive analysis of progress. Tony’s has partnered with the KIT Royal Tropical Institute, “an independent centre of expertise and education for sustainable development,” to investigate the impact of its efforts on local communities (KIT 2). The interviews documented in the FAIR Report indicate that the farmers have generally positive feelings toward their relationships with Tony’s. The cooperative managers have a greater sense of ownership and confidence in their farms. Women in the cooperatives are more empowered and can contribute tangibly to the cocoa communities. Overall, farmers appreciate the additional Tony’s premium, but there is no explicit evidence regarding the extent to which the premiums have directly increased their incomes (Tony’s, Report 36). Although increased living incomes is one of Tony’s goals for its farmers, these economic efforts are also intended to indirectly prevent systemic causes of slavery and child labor.

The Climb for Ethical Labor with CLMRS

Tony’s efforts at eradicating slavery and child labor extend beyond the economic sphere in its collaboration with the Child Labor Monitoring Remediation System (CLMRS). This system was founded by the International Cocoa Initiative and Nestle to track, target, and eradicate child labor in the cocoa industry (Nestle 23). Tony’s has thoroughly embraced this system by mobilizing local communities to “actively and structurally [search] for child labor” (Tony’s, Report 1). The system is centered on the CLMRS community facilitators. trained individuals who spread awareness of prohibited forms of child labor among local communities. These facilitators visit farmers at their homes to interview both farmers and children to identify the children at greatest risk for child labor. They also hold awareness sessions to teach farmers about fair labor practices. From an interview with KIT, an administrative manager at an Ivorian cooperative indicated his involvement in CLMRS has enabled him to “educate people and strengthen groups” and fulfill a personal goal of being a “role model for the youth” (34).

One of the major strengths of this system is its focus on the collective local identity and social solidarity of cocoa communities through personal interaction. However, this also leads to inefficiencies including incomplete data collection and difficulties in data analysis. In 2017, CLMRS found 268 cases of child labor—primarily children performing dangerous tasks on family farms—and no cases of modern slavery. Very reasonably, Tony’s admits this may be an underestimate. However, after only one year of working with CLMRS, it has visited over 3,000 households and interviewed nearly 4,000 children (Tony’s, Report 40). On a larger scale, CLMRS spans multiple companies in West Africa, and its overall performance shows promising signs of progress. As of 2017, CLMRS as a whole identified nearly 15,000 cases of child labor, over half of whom were longer in child labor three years later (USDOL 74). Considering this broader progress, Tony’s appears to be on an upward trajectory of identifying and eliminating child labor.

Chocolate industry labor abuses and Tony’s central mission, explained on a box of chocolate bars.

Emphasizing Education

Tony’s Chocolonely also prioritizes education—of both producers and consumers—as a proxy for social change. The company invests in agricultural education and works with farmers to improve their yields through sustainable farming practices. They help develop skills for cultivating cocoa and other crops, for higher farm productivity and less dependency on cocoa. Focusing on education helps target and prevent inequalities that arise downstream in the supply chain. The company seeks to “professionalize farming cooperatives and farms, giving them more power to structurally change inequality” (Tony’s, Report 27). In addition to educating farmers and managers, Tony’s also provides children with direct resources to help them attend school. Its efforts range from arranging birth certificates and health insurance to distributing school supplies and bicycles. Rather than fixing surface-level issues of productivity and management, Tony’s targets the core of the problem, laying a solid foundation to enable the farmers to grow.

Scrutiny in Sourcing

Another ethical point of contention along the cocoa-chocolate supply chain is the sourcing and sustainability of ingredients. Since Tony’s engages in direct trade with its five cooperatives for all of its cocoa beans, it is able to maintain complete transparency and traceability throughout the process. All of its cocoa beans are 100% traceable, meaning Tony’s knows exactly who produced the beans, under what conditions they were produced, and the path they took to arrive at its bean warehouse in Antwerp, Belgium (Tony’s, Report 27). Another key ingredient, cocoa butter, has also come under scrutiny regarding sourcing and sustainability. Tony’s produces its cocoa butter in conjunction with Barry Callebaut in Abidjan, the economic capital of the Ivory Coast. The company focuses on improving sustainability in cocoa butter production by using locally grown mid-crop beans (52). Because these beans are out of season and lower in quality, the Ivorian government prohibits them from export. Consequently, cocoa farmers generate significantly less income during the off season. However, these beans can still be used to produce cocoa butter, which is exactly what Tony’s does. It also pays these farmers the same Tony’s additional premium, allowing them to maintain a more stable income year-round.

In addition to its cacao products, Tony’s also pays close attention to the sourcing of its various flavorings and chocolate add-ins. The FAIR Report displays a traceability map of the main ingredients in various chocolate products (80-81). This includes basic ingredients such as Fairtrade cane sugar from Mauritius, to limited edition flavorings such as red wine powder from France. The company doesn’t stop at only the edible ingredients; they also take into consideration their packaging. Their chocolate wrappers are made of Forest Stewardship Council-certified recycled paper and printed with plant-based inks in a climate neutral and environmentally friendly facility. Furthermore, the pages of the FAIR report were printed on paper made from recycled sugar cane leaves and corn cobs (127).

Creative Consumer Contact

The other side of Tony’s chocolate industry mission is its consumer base. The company relies on its loyal Dutch fans and growing international customers to spread its chocolate and mission. One of the most recent initiatives to spread consumer awareness is the Tony’s Chocotruck Tour featuring the “Bean to Bar Journey.” This unique approach to fighting the “‘anonymity’ of the market” sensitizes consumers so they know conditions of production of the goods they consume (Sylla 47).

Tony’s Chocotruck toured the country to spread awareness, consumer responsibility, and of course, chocolate.

The colorful truck is adorned with bright lights and operated by enthusiastic Tony’s employees eager to share both Tony’s chocolate and mission. This fun, jovial atmosphere contrasts from the sobering message that the company is trying to convey: slavery and child labor are ubiquitous in the chocolate industry, and consumers and companies must take action. Through the tour, Tony’s seeks “to meet loads of new chocofans and serious friends who will share our chocolate and our story” (Tony’s “Chocotruck”). The truck contains interactive displays highlighting labor abuses in the chocolate industry, as well as Tony’s efforts to remediate them. It begins with staggering statistics revealing human trafficking, slavery, and child labor on cocoa farms. The displays continue by describing Tony’s various measures and sourcing principles to address the issue. The focus on consumer interaction— “The choice is yours. Are you in?”—makes visitors feel like they are directly involved in impacting these injustices.

The interior of the Chocotruck, filled with fun, educational displays.

Governmental Action

Finally, Tony’s has also worked with the Dutch government in an attempt to pass legislation addressing corporate responsibility of child labor. The “Zorgplicht Kinderarbeid” Child Labor Due Diligence Act would require businesses in the Netherlands to declare that they are taking all necessary measures to prevent child labor, identify the risks of child labor in their supply chains, and address these risks to the best of their abilities (Beltman 1). Although this bill would have only applied to Dutch businesses, it was an earnest attempt at governmentally enforceable change in the political sphere. Despite Tony’s petition including 42 cocoa businesses and over 13,000 signatures, the bill failed to pass the Dutch Upper House (Tony’s, Report 66). The company admitted that efforts at government progress in child labor due diligence have been met with resistance. However, the wide support of the petition demonstrated that the company has succeeded in spreading awareness and inspiring others to act. Despite the lack of political progress, Tony’s shows no signs of resignation.

Solidairy-ty in the Industry

Overall, Tony’s Chocolonely presents a wide array of strategies aimed at their singular mission of 100% slave free chocolate. These principles have helped Tony’s excel in spreading awareness among consumers, and it hopes to further inspire other chocolate companies to act. However, no single company can successfully address every complex ethical issue in the chocolate industry. Tony’s has a significant presence in the Netherlands, but Dutch chocolate is only a fraction of the global industry, in terms of consumption and economy (ICO 39-40). Additionally, Tony’s currently works with approximately 5,000 individual farmers in West Africa, only about 0.2% of the total 2.5 million farmers in region (Tony’s, Report 34). The company values strong personal relationships with its farmers, but this comes as a tradeoff to the breadth of its influence. Finally, Tony’s mission of slave free chocolate may initially seem like too simplistic of a goal. If the company were to approach this mission exclusively through traditional tactics of policy, certifications, or consumer pressure, this would indeed be too low a bar. However, Tony’s uses an innovative, holistic approach to targeting systemic social, economic, and political issues at different stages within the supply chain. These principles, combined with over-the-top enthusiasm for its “chocofan” consumers, are helping Tony’s transform the chocolate industry’s ethical standards from within.

Works Cited: Scholarly Sources

  1. Beltman, Henk Jan. “A Law on the Duty of Care for Child Labour Seriously Tackles the Issue of Child Labour.” Received by Senate of the Netherlands: Standing committee for foreign affairs, defence and development cooperation, 3 October 2017, The Hague, Netherlands.
  2. Fairtrade International. Fairtrade Minimum Price and Fairtrade Premium Table. Bonn, Germany: Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International. 28 March 2019.
  3. International Cocoa Organization Executive Committee. The World Cocoa Economy: Past and Present. London, United Kingdom: International Cocoa Organization. 18–21 September 2012.
  4. KIT Royal Tropical Institute. Annual Report 2017. Amsterdam, Netherlands. 2017.
  5. Martin, Carla D. “Modern Day Slavery” AAAS 119X, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University. 27 Mar. 2019.
  6. Nestle Cocoa Plan. Tackling Child Labour 2017 Report. Vevey, Switzerland. 20 June 2017.
  7. Off, Carol. Bitter Chocolate: the Dark Side of the Worlds Most Seductive Sweet. The New Press, 2008.
  8. Sylla, Ndongo Samba. The Fair Trade Scandal: Marketing Poverty to Benefit the Rich. Ohio University Press, 2014.
  9. Tony’s Chocolonely. “The Bean to Bar Journey – Chocotruck Tour.” Tony’s Chocolonely, 2019, tonyschocolonely.com/us/en/chocotruck.
  10. Tony’s Chocolonely. Tony’s Chocolonely FAIR Report 2017-2018. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Tony’s Chocolonely. 29 November 2018. Print.
  11. United States Department of Labor. Child Labor Cocoa Coordinating Group (CLCCG) Annual Report 2017. Washington, D.C.: USDOL. 2017.

Works Cited: Multimedia Sources

  1. Fairtrade. Fairtrade Logo. Wikimedia Commons, 7 November 2011. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fairtrade-logo.jpg. Accessed 15 March 2019.
  2. Tony’s Chocolonely. “Tony’s Chocolonely – the story of an unusual chocolate bar.” Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 15 October 2015. Web.
  3. Tony’s Chocolonely. “Tony’s Chocolonely – Tony’s Bean to Bar Journey.” Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 7 March 2019. Web.
  4. Tony’s Chocolonely. “Tony’s Chocolonely USA on Instagram: ‘Girl Power! These Ladies Supply Cocoa Beans to ECOJAD, Our Partner Cooperative in Ivory Coast. This Picture Was Taken on Their Cassava…”.” Instagram, 2 August 2018, http://www.instagram.com/p/Bl_lLgXBgts/.
  5. All other photos were taken by the author.

Faulty Fair Trade: The Hidden Realities of Fair Trade Chocolate

In today’s interconnected world, one’s decisions are no longer decisions merely. Every choice is a statement, a declaration of personal values. For example, purchasing a Prius or installing solar panels can reveal your stance regarding the state of the environment. In a similar fashion, purchasing Fair Trade certified chocolate provides an option for chocolate lovers to enjoy a delicious treat while contributing to the well-being of cacao farmers and indirectly shunning “bad” chocolate companies that utilize modern day slave labor. In fact, one research showed that consumers sought the Fair Trade label to a point that they were willing to purchase the same amount of certified Fair Trade chocolate each year, even after an increase in prices (Hainmeuller 23).

Above: Promotion of Fair Trade chocolate for Valentine’s Day. The Fair Trade brand has become a part of consumer decision making.

Thus, the demand for Fair Trade is clearly present. In theory, Fair Trade helps cacao farmers “build better livelihoods for themselves, their families and communities” (Fair Trade Briefing 10). More specifically, Fair Trade aims to stabilize incomes for cacao farmers, whose livelihoods fluctuate in response to the volatility of chocolate prices[1] (Ibid 11). For example, Fair Trade guarantees a “minimum price of $2,000/tonne for Fairtrade certified cocoa beans, or the market price if higher” and works to ensure that “forced labour and child labour are prohibited” (Ibid). According to Fair Trade such measures “[help] producer organisations and farmers weather low and unstable markets by encouraging greater access to financing, relationship building between buyers and sellers, and improved contract terms” (Ibid 17). But is the existing consumer demand for Fair Trade chocolate feeding a truly “fair” system? While the Fair Trade theory is desirable, the realities are much less so. Despite Fair Trade’s efforts, cacao farmers continue to struggle with chocolate pricing, costs of obtaining Fair Trade certification, and ambiguity of Fair Trade standards in cultural contexts.

Screen Shot 2017-05-05 at 8.18.14 PM
The ideal results of Fair Trade Chocolate

Fair Trade’s claim on providing cocoa farmers with better prices has been questioned in recent years. Entrepreneurship lecturers Alex Nicholls and Charlotte Opal point out that returns are “marginal at best, non-existent at worst,” and that “a typical Fair Trade chocolate bar only returns about 4% of its final price to the producer” (Nicholls 29). Seventy% founder Martin Christy, founder of Seventy%[2], stated that “the Fairtrade premium—about $400 per tonne of cacao—is not enough to make much difference to farmers lives and there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that not much of that actually reaches the real farmers” (Ramsey). Christy adds, “if you do the the maths backwards from a £1.30 100g Fairtrade bar there’s no way, once you’ve taken off all the margins, that the farmer is getting enough to live on” (Ibid).

According to a transnational investigation hosted by the Forum for African Investigative Reporters, farmer testimonials support Christy’s claims. Frédéric Doua—owner of a cocoa farm in the Ivory Coast—revealed that his harvested product often sits in warehouses, waiting for the occasional Fair Trade buyer to come along (Fair 6). According to Doua, he was hoping for “higher prices and welfare premiums,” but instead became “overly dependent on cocoa prices and Fair Trade buyers” (Ibid). This is due to the fact that “as a member of a FAIRTRADE-certified cooperative, one ‘cannot sell beans outside the FAIRTRADE circuit’” (Ibid). In other words, even if Fair Trade can provide better prices (which Nicholls and Christy have shown isn’t necessarily true), they do not guarantee consistent purchases, despite forcing farmers to sacrifice their freedom to choose their buyers.

But restriction on clientele is only one of the many hoops Fair Trade farmers must jump through. In the first place, gaining Fair Trade certification is a challenge for many cocoa producers. Economist Peter Griffiths notes that “the costs of achieving certification are an unavoidable negative impact” (Griffiths 363). Farmers are expected to pay fees for receiving certification (Certification). For a small farming cooperative of just twenty workers, such a fee can run upwards of $5,000 (Ibid). In addition, Fair Trade does not cover the costs incurred by farmers in order for them to meet Fair Trade standards. A major Fair Trade requirement is the use of sustainable agricultural practices (Brodersen). Thus, cocoa producers that use herbicides must switch to manual weeding, which usually results in higher wage costs. In such cases, Fair Trade does not compensate farmers accordingly (Griffiths 363).

Two additional issues exacerbate the cost problem of Fair Trade certification. The first is that Fair Trade is “unable to certify the total production of registered organizations” (Muradian 2033). For example, in 2001 only about 13% of total production was sold as Fair Trade, thereby resulting in “a large gap between potential and actual certified sales” (Ibid). Farmers’ fears of certification costs are usually sated by projected sales, which are based on selling annual production in its entirety as Fair Trade. However, the reality of partial certification sales causes farmers to rarely restore the money used in order to pay for Fair Trade certification in the first place. The second problem is the lack of a strong regulatory force on Fair Trade’s part. Mislabelling—when non Fair Trade products are sold as “fair trade”—is a rampant problem, allowing non-certified products to enjoy the benefits of price premiums (Parry). The global nature of the chocolate market makes label enforcement difficult, which means that real Fair Trade certified farmers aren’t protected. One seller might lie about being “fair trade,” which is unfair for the producers who had to spend their own money to officially earn Fair Trade certification.

An unexpectedly ambiguous source of contention is Fair Trade’s policy on child labour. Simply stated, Fair Trade has zero tolerance for child labour, especially in a production process as risk-heavy as cacao farming (Child). Injuries from the use of tools such as machetes are common, as well as illnesses caused by contact with various agricultural chemicals (Alliot 10). The confusion arises from determining the line between child labor and family labor. According to Fair Trade:

A major cause of the use of child labour is poverty: farmers receive such low prices for their produce that they can’t afford to pay hired workers. Even where farmers want their children to attend school, this is often hampered by poor availability of education in rural areas, and parents not being able to afford to buy schoolbooks or pay teachers. (Fair Trade Briefing 8)

But from farmers’ perspectives, Fair Trade’s child labour regulations are what leads to such “poverty” (Ibid). Without the help of family members, farmers simply cannot harvest enough to pay for their children’s school fees (Etahoben 16). Furthermore, the generalization that any child participating in work—even if that work is the family business—is considered a violation of Fair Trade values seems excessive. A Cameroonian farm owner Dat Williams explained: “When it is time to break the cocoa pods, I collect my children and any family children around at the time and take them to the farm to help. This is considered as part of the household chores children do to help their parents” (Ibid). Etahoben added “It was an exciting experience when we, as kids, were taken to the farms to break the cocoa, suck the seeds and drink the juice from the pods. We considered it part of becoming a responsible family member” (Ibid). While no parent should get away with abusing children and placing them at risk, the issue of child labour requires greater scrutiny and careful judgment so as to prevent unintended harm caused by good intentions.

 

File:Chuao 003.JPG
A child helping with the cacao harvest. The boundaries between familial work and child labour are sometimes unclear.

With Fair Trade no longer being a clear-cut good, and standard chocolate brands already having been criticized for unsustainable business practices, who can consumers turn to? Organizations like Direct Cacao, founded in 2012, are attempting to provide alternatives to the Fair Trade model. Whereas Fair Trade requires cocoa producers to essentially become members of a global organization and work under standardized guidelines, Direct Cacao works directly with small farmers and create specific relationships based on individualized circumstances (Declaration). Without a singular structure and a set of regulations that apply universally, this direct interaction model does run the risk of creating inconsistent standards. In addition, the process of following each producer through their cocoa production and discussing the best price is time-consuming and in many cases, expensive. The time and money costs can limit the range at which direct interaction can have an impact. However, as Direct Cacao points out, this new approach frees farmers from having to meet Fair Trade standards that aren’t universally easy to achieve.

Another alternative to Fair Trade is an alternative trading organization (ATO). ATOs share the goals of the Fair Trade movement, but each ATO takes its own approach to achieving those goals (Abufarha). Alter Eco, a France-based company founded in 1988, is a representative example of an ATO. All of Alter Eco’s chocolate is Fair Trade certified, but the organization also pursues particular principles that are not apparent in the Fair Trade’s broader manifesto. For example, Alter Eco places a special emphasis on gender equity within the chocolate industry (Alter). While the Fair Trade movement has a general mission to improve the well-being of cacao producers, they are not as specific as Alter Eco’s. Because Alter Eco is part of the Fair Trade movement but doesn’t manage every source of Fair Trade cocoa, they are more mobile and better equipped to place more focus on individual producers. In essence, ATOs are a compromise between Fair Trade and Direct Cacao.

It’s important to note that the presence of such alternatives does not necessarily mean that Fair Trade has failed. Fair Trade’s ideology comes from a desire to help people and create a more sustainable world. Despite the problems discussed above, there are plenty of success stories with Fair Trade—as there should be, given its 70-year history. Still, consumers should approach products with a critical mind. It’s not enough to claim one’s participation in ethical consumerism simply by purchasing a Fair Trade chocolate bar. Without proper scrutiny, the Fair Trade brand will quickly fall from being a symbol for change to being a pawn of consumerism, manipulating the consumers’ guilt complex and desire to “feel good.” In the case of Fair Trade, the organization as a whole should work to ensure stable income over higher per unit prices, redirect cocoa premium investments toward children’s education—thereby alleviating parents’ concerns regarding school fees—and implementing an organized regulatory force that effectively prevents others from taking advantage of the Fair Trade label, so as to protect the investment and hard work of farmers toward Fair Trade certification.

Works Cited

“About.” Seventy%. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 May 2017.

Abufarha, Nasser. “Alternative Trade Organizations and the Fair Trade Movement.” Fair World Project. N.p., 2013. Web. 09 May 2017.

Alliot, Christophe, Matthias Cortin, Marion Feige-Muller, and Sylvain Ly. The Dark Side of Chocolate: An Analysis of the Conventional, Sustainable and Fair Trade Cocoa Chains. Rep. N.p.: Bureau for the Appraisal of Societal Impacts and Costs, n.d. Print.

“Alter Eco Nourishing Foodie, Farmer and Field.” Alter Eco Foods. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 May 2017.

Brodersen, Pernille Louise. How Fair is Fairtrade? Thesis. Copenhagen Business School, 2013. Copenhagen: n.p., 2013. Print.

“Certification fees.” FLOCERT. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 May 2017.

“Child and Forced Labour.” Fairtrade International (FLO): Child and Forced Labour. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 May 2017.

“Declaration.” Direct Cacao. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 May 2017.

Etahoben, Chief Bisong, Bjinse Dankert, Janneke Donkerlo, Selay Kouassi, Benjamin Tetteh, and Aniefiok Udonquak. The FAIRTRADE Chocolate Rip-off. Rep. Ed. Evelyn Groenink. N.p.: n.p., 2012. Print.

Griffiths, Peter. “Ethical Objections to Fairtrade.” Journal of Business Ethics 105 (2012): 357-73. Print.

Hainmueller, Jens. Consumer Demand for the Fair Trade Label: Evidence from a Multi-Store Field Experiment. Diss. Stanford U, 2014. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Muradian, Roldan, and Wim Pelupessy. “Governing the Coffee Chain: The Role of Voluntary Regulatory Systems.” World Development 33.12 (2005): 2029-044. Web.

Nicholls, Alex, and Charlotte Opal. Fair Trade: Market-Driven Ethical Consumption. London: Sage, 2011. Print.

Parry, Hannah. “Beware the Fairtrade fraudsters: Shoppers warned to watch out for produce with fake labels as criminals attempt to cash in on premiums on ‘ethical’ goods.” Daily Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 06 May 2015. Web. 9 May 2017.

Ramsey, Dom. “How Fair Is Fairtrade Chocolate?” Chocablog. N.p., 1 Mar. 2013. Web. 8 May 2017.

[1] Some of the causes behind price volatility are: political instability in cacao producing countries, variable weather, and changes in supply and demand (Fair Trade Briefing 5)

[2] Seventy% is an organization founded in 2001 whose aim is “to raise awareness of the quality and origin of the chocolate we eat” (About)

Drawing on Chocolate: How Society Displays its Values on its Favorite Food

From the earliest of its history, chocolate has been tied to the value systems of the people that consumed it. As cacao products and recipes traveled around the world, the decorations and designs that people have chosen to use on containers give us insight into the value systems of their cultures.

Mezo-American Values

Relics of Meso-American pottery date to the same place and timeframe as the archeological record of chocolate–with the Olmec people. (Rose) Chemical analysis of pottery shards shows that the Olmec culture made cacao pulp into an intoxicating beer-type drink at least 1000 years before the current era. Eventually the cacao bean byproduct fermented into its own food source and began to resemble chocolate–at least in its crudest liquid form. (Henderson)

Screen Shot 2017-03-05 at 10.39.18 PM
The Mayan drinking vase on display in the permanent collection of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts is an example of documentation of ceremony, politics, and the importance of chocolate in their society. Slightly larger than a modern quart jar, the drinking vase has a wrap-around visual narrative that details a ritual, specifically noting out that kakaw (cacao) was one of the stimulating substances used in this event.

Our first pictorial record of the original bitter drink begins with the wealthiest of the Mayan society. These colorful jewels of Western Hemisphere art document the details about ritual life by describing events, attendees, and even the ingredients of the beverage. Documenting their religion and political record onto the containers from which they drank chocolate shows the importance of the beverage in their society.

The Aztec created rounded bowls from the calabash gourds which the local populace used to prepare their daily cacao. The society elite commissioned ceremonial pottery that took the same shape and name as the gourd vessels–jícara. Vessels like this were documented in the first Spanish histories, with descriptions of cacao preparation being poured from bowl to bowl to create a frothy top. (Presilla 32)

By the time the Spanish arrived, Aztec decorations were becoming less literal than the Mayans’ had been, and were more symbolic of the gods’ earthy powers. Geometric representation of forces such as lightening and serpents were replacing the drawings of the gods themselves. As colonization progressed, the strong geometric symbolism was married with the Spanich-Islamic influences and techniques–showing up in the hybridization of cuisines, ingredients (Lauden) as well as in the art motifs.

The ultimate reason for the Spanish colonization the Americas was to extract the wealth from the natural resources of the new world. Although the Spanish government justified their version of slavery with the religious conversion of the Native Americans, in the end the colonization effort needed to be a wealth-producing enterprise. Along with agricultural products such as chocolate and sugar, metals were of great value in the European market. Native cultures shared the affinity for gold, silver and copper and used them as ornament and decorative items for the elite, but they had not perfected many techniques to create items for utilitarian purposes. The Spanish brought the knowledge of metallurgy which led to the local creation of copper chocolate pots for drink preparation. They also used silver to create handles and feet on the local cups made from coconut, literally wrapping the drink in wealth.

This video of a Filipino chocolate preparation shows the use of a copper chocolate pot and a molinillo stick to stir the chocolate into a froth. This is how the Spanish modified the native Nahuatl method of pouring the chocolate from bowl to bowl to produce a froth. (Coe 156), (Presilla 20)

After the Spanish arrival, pottery designs started showing stronger geometric divisions and flowery natural imagery moving away from the stylization of the Aztec and becoming more reminiscent of the designs that were slathered on mother Spain’s 12th century Moorish architecture. Images of upper-class colonial life, replaced the Native American depictions of myths and ceremonies. Plantation life was becoming more important than the natural forces and religions of Mexico. The sgrafitto, or incised pottery techniques that the Spaniards brought with them, married well with the engraved and carved techniques that had been in Meso-America since the Olmecs, but allowed for a more refined hand to carve into gourds and coconuts as well as pottery. (Presilla 32)

jicara
Jícara such as this one from Peru uses the sgrafitto technique to create a delicate designs that bring to mind the Spanish homeland.

The gourd-bowl shape has become synonymous with colorful, modern Mexican tourist-style pottery in the shape of flowerpots and salad bowls. Calabash gourds are still grown, dried, carved and sold today in the markets of Tabasco. Grown from a native American tree that is remarkably similar to cacao in habit and form–modern uses for the gourds can be anything from drinking, to measuring, to display.

The influence and pottery technology of the Olmecs had moved northward with trade routes to the Pueblo people. Gas chromatography analysis of North American artifacts has shown that long before the Aztecs had usurped the regional market on cacao, the trade routes of the Mayans had extended northward to canyons of New Mexico. (Mozdy) The Anasazi cultures created tall, vessels reminiscent of the Mayan vase shape, decorated with extremely stylized iconography that represented the common Meso-American pantheon.

anasazi2
These examples from Chaco Canyon are covered with lightening bolts that reflect the Pueblo’s interpretation of the imported Mezoamerican rain god, Quetzocoatle and display the reverence to the forces of nature that the local culture held. (Eaton 38)

This 1200-mile path between where the vessels were found (in the Pueblo Bonito of Chaco Canyon) and the nearest source of cacao would have required 600 hours of backpacking through rough country and sweltering heat. As one researcher phrased it “That’s a long way to go for something that you don’t need for survival”, [something] that’s more of a delicacy…” Whether the Anasazi acquired this cacao through dedicated treks south–which would have taken weeks–or their pueblo was the endpoint of an even slower hand-to-hand, village-to-village trade route. (Mozdy)

European Values

Soon after chocolate washed across the courts of Europe, trade with the east opened up, bringing with it tea, and a new the technology harder, refined pottery that we still refer to as “china”. Tea was not treated just as basic sustenance. Like the original chocolate beverage, there was ceremony attached to it that appealed to the idle wealthy who could afford these imported beverages. Tea was prepared in a fancy ceramic pot–separate from the kettle used to heat the water. Then it was decanted to a cup to delicately sip. The wealthy started applying the same approach their chocolate. Long gone was the habit of preparing and drinking chocolate out of the same vessel. The wealthy had even stopped decanting directly from a copper pot into a cup. Drinking chocolate now represented wealth and was given all the trappings to prove it. Chocolate was prepared in the kitchen and placed in the chocolate pot, or chocotalière, by servants, then brought to the public gathering of wealthy ladies, and delicately poured into cups and handed round by the magnanimous hostess. (Coe 156-159)

meissen
The best and most expensive chinoiserie hailed from Germany, where Johann Friedrich Böttger duplicated the art of Chinese fine porcelain making.

 

Chocolate pots were made from the most expensive of porcelain, and shaped in the fashion of teapots with some adjustments. Traditional teapots have a short, squat form into order to be able to keep heat in and extract the flavor from the swirling tea leaves that are actively stewing in the hot water. A low-seated spout is fixed with an interior strainer to keep the floating leaves in the pot once you are ready to pour the fully brewed beverage. Coffee pots, on the other hand, need a tall form and highly placed straining spout for the opposite reason. As it is basically a decanting mechanism for an already brewed beverage, the height of the coffee pot allows any grounds from the brew to settle to the bottom, or get caught in the strainer. (Righthand)

Chocolate pots can be hard to spot, as they often hybridize these two forms–typically tall, but often bulbous. Early European chocolate pots most always have a removable finial to allow for a mixing stick to create the desired froth and keep the chocolate mixed. As cocoa powder was developed and cocoa preparations replaced true hot chocolate, the stirring stick went by the wayside, and chocotalière became nearly indistinguishable from coffee pots. The last distinguishing characteristic of a coffee pot was the internal strainer where the spout and body meet, and a spout that lowered over time.

Drinking chocolate represented wealth, therefore decorations were those that affluent courtiers and nouveau-riche traders would value. Gone were the forces of Meso-American nature, or plantation life, and in came garden scene–often mimicking the exotic origins of the pot. Elaborately painted and gilt decorations brought the wealth of court on the surface of the chocolate pot. An 18th century fad called “Chinoiserie” depicted the European’s visions of Asian gardens with palm trees, umbrellas, and architecture that they imagined would be found in the gardens of the imperial court of China. As many of the traders were making fortunes off the new-found economy, the asian motifs became a temporary obsession throughout the continent and its colonies.

staffordshire
Pottery for the middle class living in British colonies was most often imported from Staffordshire England. Extremely fine china rarely made it across the Atlantic during the colonial period.

Chocolate drinkers in the British colonies of North America usually imported English middle-class pottery with basic garden motifs to take to their breakfast tables. Very little pottery was made in New England so imported china had a cache of wealth and the designs were reminiscent of the estate and gardens of England as colonists tried to keep up all the appearances of home. The wealthiest of families had their chocolate pots crafted by local silversmiths, and garnished with the family seal to tie their family names and crests directly with the wealth that the precious metal embodied.

 

Modern Global Values

bars

As solid chocolate became available and ubiquitous throughout western culture, the packaging of it has changed with the form, but the still conveyed the values of the local surroundings. To make chocolate appealing to a mass Victorian audience, purveyors wrapped it in the trappings of health and wholesomeness. As modern food science undermined the myth of “healthful chocolate” and the western world was coming out of a financial depression, the ideology of wealth returned. Silver wrappers, foil lettering on thick, glossy boxes, expansive packaging, and silky imagery are on all price-points of chocolate. Our favorite addiction is made more expensive by giving it the trappings of luxury: heart-shaped boxes and ribbons; gilded truffles and patisseries. Feeling rich makes many of us very happy.

The fact that cacao is grown as a third world agricultural product, but consumed almost exclusively in comfortable homes of first world economies has been coming to the attention of consumers over the last half a century. For the socially conscious consumer–those whose values do not hold with personal indulgence without consideration to the cost to others and the planet–a whole new branding for chocolate has developed.

These consumers feel better about buying chocolate that is emblazoned with the iconography of Fair Trade, organic, or direct trade certifications–even if the certification system is more of a seasonal band-aid than a true economic transformation. (Sylla) The sheer plethora of virtuous symbols appearing on labels in the chocolate isle work to the benefit of the marketing. The variety of symbols and levels of individual certification system adds layers of confusion to the real benefits. The level of confusion is so high, there is no way the average consumer can understand all the nuances and impacts. In the end buyers spend more for a product that has a “seal of approval,” and go on their merry way with the psychological satisfaction of having done something good for the “other.”  They get to feel good without ever looking for any proof of the benefit these programs have on the lives of the farmers.

Slapping a feel-good seal on a wrapper has become so successful as marketing, that major companies are eschewing certifications that are attached to bureaucratic oversight of bona fide good intent, and instead are working toward establishing their own brands’ seal of ethical approval and creating home-grown social initiatives that are much easier to operationalize and do not threaten profits in the way that transforming the cacao supply chain would. Adding these icons into the patchwork of other initiatives ensures that social initiative logos appear on more and more packaging. Buying products branded with one of the myriad of ethical icons assuages the consciences of most purchasers. (Martin) In this way, we ensure that imagery that conveys these values will keep on proliferating on the packaging of our chocolate.

Works Referenced:

Brigden, Zachariah. Chocolate Pot. 1755. Silver. Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts.

Burt, Benjamin, and Nathaniel Hurd. Teapot. 1763. Silver. Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts.

“Crescentia cujete.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 03 Apr. 2017. Web. 07 May 2017. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crescentia_cujete>.

Coe, Sophie D., and Michael D. Coe. The True History of Chocolate. Third ed. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2013. Print.

Eaton, William M. Odyssey of the Pueblo Indians: an introduction to Pueblo Indian petroglyphs, pictographs, and kiva art murals in the Southwest. Paducah, KY: Turner Pub., 1999. Print.

Henderson, John S., et al. “Chemical and Archaeological Evidence for the Earliest Cacao Beverages.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, National Acad Sciences, 16 Nov. 2007, www.pnas.org/content/104/48/18937.full. Accessed 6 Mar. 2017.

Laudan, Rachel, and Ignacio Urquiza. “The Mexican Kitchen’s Islamic Connection.” Aramco World. Saudi Aramco Services Co, May 2004. http://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/200403/the.mexican.kitchen.s.islamic.connection.htm. Accessed 3 Feb. 2017

Presilla, Maricel E. The New Taste of Chocolate: A Cultural and Natural History of Cacao with Recipes. Revised ed., Berkeley, NY, Ten Speed Press, 2009.

Martin, Carla D. “Alternative trade and virtuous localization/globalization.” 5 April 2017, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Chocolate, Culture, and the Politics of Food.

“Metallurgy in pre-Columbian America.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 02 May 2017. Web. 07 May 2017.

Mozdy, Michael. “Cacao in Chaco Canyon.” Natural History Museum of Utah, Natural History Museum of Utah, 4 Aug. 2017, nhmu.utah.edu/blog/2016/08/04/cacao-chaco-canyon. Accessed 6 Mar. 2017.

Righthand, Jess. “A Brief History of the Chocolate Pot .” Smithsonian.com. The Smithsonian Institution, 13 Feb. 2005. Web. 23 Feb. 2017. <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/brief-history-chocolate-pot-180954241/>.

Rose, Mark. “Olmec People, Olmec Art.” Archeology. Archaeological Institute of America, n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2017.

Sylla, Ndongo Samba., and David Clément Leye. The fair trade scandal marketing poverty to benefit the rich. Athens, OH: Ohio U Press, 2014. Print.

Unknown. Anasazi [Pueblo] pottery, Pueblo Bonito, Chaco Canyon, New MexicoAMNH Digital Special Collections, accessed March 06, 2017, lbry-web-007.amnh.org/digital/items/show/38991.

Unknown. Drinking Vase for “om kakaw”. Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts, 2003.

Unknown. Gourd (jicara) with red figures. Circa 1700. Lacquered Gourd. Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, San Francisco, California.

Unknown. Jícara. Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts, 2003.

Image Citations:

Unless otherwise noted, drawings and photographs are works of the author and images may not be reused without attribution.

 

 

Indulge in a Cause: How Endangered Species Chocolate and the Ethically Oriented Consumer are Changing Chocolate

“Indulge in a cause”. This is what consumers read when they are first introduced to Endangered Species Chocolate. Upon first sight of the chocolate products, it is clear that Endangered Species Chocolate has a mission more complex than simply providing a sugary treat for its consumers to indulge in. Each flavor of chocolate bar is wrapped in packaging featuring an image of a different endangered species. This is indicative of their promise, which claims “10% of our net profits are donated annually to current 10% GiveBack Partners; each is guaranteed a minimum annual donation of $10,000 and is free to use the funds on projects they deem most important. With over $1.3 million generated in the past three years alone, each chocolate purchase adds up to big support that helps wildlife thrive” (“Promise”, 2015). This dedication to the preservation of wildlife is in conjunction with their promise to adhere to high ethical standards in the chocolate industry. In fact, Endangered Species Chocolate was the first American chocolate company to use fully traceable Fairtrade West African cocoa (“Endangered Species”, 2015). The company produces delicious products with the thought that their commitment to ethical standards makes them all the more indulgent and enjoyable.

Since its formation, the chocolate industry has experienced many ethical problems that companies like Endangered Species Chocolate are trying to combat. When chocolate first became a popular commodity, its production relied on slavery. This was first fulfilled through the encomienda system and then through the enslavement of Africans (Martin & Sampeck, 2015). Even after the abolition of slavery in the countries in which the cacao industry was dependent on slaves, slavery was still uncovered in certain cacao growing regions. However, once the slavery was uncovered, chocolate companies began to boycott these regions (Martin, 2017). Although slavery has become less of a problem in the industry, one of the most apparent problems affecting the industry now is the low quality of life of cacao farmers. The farmers work in harsh conditions for extremely long hours, yet often survive on an unsustainable income. In 2015, a study showed that the average salary for a Ghanaian cacao farming household was $0.50 to $0.80 USD per day (Martin, 2017). This instability has resulted in the use of child labor in some cases in order to sustain the households. A study by Tulane University found that 800,000 children in Cote d’Ivoire and 1,000,000 children in Ghana performed labor related to cacao farming in 2008 (Martin, 2017). Furthermore, the labor conditions of cacao farming have been associated with fatigue, musculoskeletal injury, general injuries to the skin, heat-related illness, and the risk of mosquito-borne disease. Most farmers also lack sanitary areas to prepare food, do not have access to clean water, and do not have areas to get away from the heat (Martin, 2017). For these reasons, government and independent organizations have worked to change policy and create more sustainable working conditions. Fairtrade organizations have helped to create better conditions for the cacao workers and have provided certification for certain companies that meet Fairtrade guidelines. Endangered Species Chocolate effectively helps to reduce some of the problems in the chocolate industry by adhering to ethical Fairtrade standards and being transparent.

What is Fairtrade?

There have been recent efforts within the chocolate industry to focus on becoming Fairtrade registered. In terms of the goals of Fairtrade, Fairtrade America describes “Fairtrade America’s mission is to connect disadvantaged producers and consumers, promote fairer trading conditions and support producers to combat poverty, strengthen their position, and take more control over their lives” (Work”, 2015). This is accomplished by providing farmers with more fair prices for their products and a strict adherence to standards that protect the environment and worker’s rights (“Work”, 2015). The Fairtrade logo indicates that a product was produced by a small-scale farmer organization that meets Fairtrade standards. These standards include a Fairtrade minimum price as well as the Fairtrade premium, “an extra amount of money that producer organizations invest in products of their choice” (“What”, 2015). These products may benefit the business of the farmers directly, or may go towards projects that benefit the community. Other promises of Fairtrade include long-term direct trading relationships, efficient payment for farmers, no child or forced labor, safe working conditions, discrimination-free workplaces, environmental sustainability, and traceability (Martin, 2017).

In the video produced by Fairtrade America, the farmers who are a part of the Fairtrade cooperative are seen happily performing their daily tasks on the farm. There are also scenes showing how Fairtrade helps women and helps to benefit the communities that the farmers live in. A Fairtrade International Liaison Officer in the area, Anne Marie Yao, explains her opinion of the Fairtrade system and says “To me fair trading means more empowerment for farmers. Fair trading enables them to sell their crops in a fair market while supporting their communities”. The farmers are also shown to be appreciating the benefits of Fairtrade. Oubda Sambo, a cacao farmer in the area, describes how the farmers did not know how to treat their plants to produce high quality beans, but with the help of Fairtrade certification, his farm was able to produce a consistent, high quality product. The video also specifically mentions how the farmers work together and do not depend on child labor to sustain the demands of the farm labor. As seen in the video, Fairtrade contributes to ethical consumption because it allows farmers to receive adequate pay for their work, and the communities also benefit.

Endangered Species Chocolate Role in Ethical Consumption

Endangered Species Chocolate’s commitment to ethically sourced chocolate and promise to give back to the environment are what distinguishes it from other bean to bar chocolate companies. Furthermore, the company is very transparent with their practices, and shares detailed reports of where their beans are sourced from as well as exactly where their donations of profits go to (“Promise”, 2015). In order to convey this to the consumer, each bar is wrapped in packaging explaining the company’s commitments.

filled-bars-packaging

Aside from the image of an endangered species, the front of the bar also advertises that 10% of the net profits made from the bars are donated. A full explanation of where the donations go is available on the inside of the wrapping.

Endangered-Species-Inside-Label

This includes donations to the African Wildlife Foundation, Xerces Society, SEE turtles foundation, Rainforest Trust, Wildlife Conservation Network, SEEtheWILD, and Chimp Haven (“Promise”, 2015). All of these organizations are committed to species conservation, habitat preservation, and humanitarian efforts. Their website provides an impact report that gives detailed explanations of the work done by each foundation. In the report, the current CEO, Curt Vander Meer, explains “We’ll keep doing our part, creating chocolate too delicious to resist, with one goal in mind – to grow our GiveBack, year after year. With your support, there’s no limit to the good we can do” (“Promise”, 2015). In addition to their dedication to transparency involving donations, Endangered Species Chocolate also makes information regarding the effects of Fairtrade avaliable through their website. Their sourcing Fairtrade sheet educates consumers on where their cacao is sourced from, and how the farmers from these areas use the benefits of Fairtrade to improve their practice and community (“Promise”, 2015). The company attracts ethically conscious consumers, as the bar allows for ethical consumption that derives from principled and transparent production while also providing support for other ethically-oriented organizations.

This commitment to an ethical product is seen throughout their branding. On their website products page, the company explains “our milk and dark chocolate bars and bites are made with ethically traded, shade grown cacao and natural ingredients. Learn about at-risk species by reading the inside of each 3oz. bar wrapper. And the best part? 10% of net profits from your purchase are donated to support conservation efforts!” (“Products”, 2015). These promises to support ethical business and give back to conservation efforts appear to excite consumers and give them more reason to indulge in chocolate. One excited consumer shared her experience with the chocolate on twitter saying, “Today I bought a chocolate bar that states that 10% of its proceeds go to a wildlife organization to save endangered species. #yay”. Endangered Species Chocolate is unique in that it excites consumers through their use of endangered species awareness, yet further educates customers, who may not previously have been aware of the problems in the chocolate industry. The company also attempts to excite and educate customers of their doings through social media.

Endangered Species Chocolate produced a video thanking their customers, in which they explain the moral benefits of buying their chocolate. The video shows one of the communities from which their chocolate is sourced, displaying scenes of cacao harvesting and community involvement. The text of the video explains “ESC supports before the bar […] ESC supports a better bar […] ESC supports beyond the bar”. This is reflective of their commitment to supporting the chocolate farmers, the chocolate production workers, and supporting a cause beyond the chocolate industry—wildlife conservation. The video appears to be less centered around their chocolate products, and more focused on the benefits they provide to the global community. The importance of the ethics surrounding the production and consumption of the product is stressed, as importance of chocolate is greater than the product itself.

In the past two decades, the purchase of foods that are considered to be more ethical has increased drastically. In an analysis of the chocolate market, sales of organic chocolate increased by 70% from 1999 to 2000. At the time, the president of the Endangered Species Chocolate company said that he believed this increase was a result of a more ethically-conscious consumer, explaining “The state of organic chocolate is extremely healthy. What drives this market forward is increased awareness  and the intelligence of the customer” (Curtis, 2000). In terms of certifications, Endangered Species Chocolate is committed to a variety of ethically and health-minded promises. These include certifications for Fairtrade, Non-GMO Project, Vegan Action, gluten-free, Kosher, and RSPO. These certifications are reflective of their commitment to high ethical standards. Consumers appear to be influenced by these certifications, and the Fairtrade certification has had a particularly large effect on consumer habits. From 2004 to 2012, sales of products certified by Fairtrade International increased by almost 4 billion euros (Austin, 2016). Consumers are in fact motivated to pay a little extra if they believe it goes to a good cause. It is for this reason that companies like Endangered Species Chocolate are able to have an impact on the problems in the chocolate industry. However, there have been some criticisms regarding Fairtrade certifications.

Is Fairtrade Good Enough?

Although Fairtrade sounds as though it is an extremely effective and positive measure for benefiting the lives of farmers, it has faced some criticism. In the video produced by Fairtrade America, Anne Marie Yao had explained that she believed Fairtrade to be empowering to the farmers, but this may not always be the case. To begin with, the standards that a farm must meet before being certified are rigorous, and it is not possible for some small-scale farmers to meet the criteria (Austin, 2016). Therefore, farmers that may desire to commit themselves to Fairtrade practices may lack the resources to do so. This disadvantage to small-scale farmers is seen in the data indicating that 54% of Fairtrade certified producers are located in nations that are considered to be “upper-middle income” (Sylla, 2014). It is possible that Fairtrade benefits producers who may not need the assistance in comparison to small-scale farmers who lack basic resources. Another possible problem with Fairtrade that has been examined is that hundreds of products have received the certification, making it difficult to understand exactly what qualifies as Fairtrade. Furthermore, for every U.S. dollar more that is spent towards a Fairtrade product, only $0.03 goes back to the country in from which the product came from (“Good”, 2014). Fairtrade does provide benefits to the farmers that receive the verification, however, the benefits may not be as wide-spread and accessible as previously believed.

The Future of Chocolate

Although there are still many ethical problems in the chocolate industry that require solutions, companies like Endangered Species Chocolate are taking necessary and important steps towards improving the chocolate industry. These steps include using ethically-sourced products in their production, and being transparent with their customers. Although Fairtrade and other ethically-oriented certifications do not solve all of the problems in the cacao farming industry, they are a starting point for future changes that may transform the chocolate industry and make it more ethical for producers and consumers. Endangered Species Chocolate has committed itself to high ethical standards, and it is an important example and start in creating effective long-term solutions.

Works Cited

Austin, M. (2016, Mar 24). Southeast sustainability: Is fair trade actually a fair deal? University Wire Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/docview/1775592522?accountid=11311

Endangered Species Chocolate. (2015). Retrieved May 01, 2017, from http://www.fairtradeamerica.org/en-us/fairtrade-products/chocolate/endangered-species-chocolate

[Endangered Species Chocolate Bars]. (2014, February 27). Retrieved May 3, 2017, from https://redheadwithafork.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/filled-bars-packaging.jpg

[Endangered Species Chocolate Wrapper]. (2016, March 20). Retrieved May 3, 2017, from Products. (2015). Retrieved April 29, 2017, from http://www.chocolatebar.com/?page_id=20

Good thing, or bad? (2014, July 05). Retrieved May 04, 2017, from http://www.economist.com/news/business-books-quarterly/21606248-easing-consciences-good-thing-or-bad

Jenny Nguyen [jnguyen510]. (2017, April 29]. Jenny Nguyen [Twitter moment]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jnguyen510/status/858384551730491392

Life on a Fairtrade Cocoa Farm [Video file]. (2015, March 10). Retrieved May 3, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXBLDSxfgxc

Martin, C. D. (2017). Alternative Trade and Virtuous Localization/Globalization [Lecture]. Retrieved from Harvard University AFRAMER 119x Canvas site.

Martin, C. D. (2017). Modern Day Slavery [Lecture]. Retrieved from Harvard University AFRAMER 119x Canvas site.

Martin, C. D. (2017). Slavery, Abolition, and Forced Labor [Lecture]. Retrieved from Harvard University AFRAMER 119x Canvas site.

Martin, C. D., & Sampeck, K. E. (2015). The bitter and sweet of chocolate in Europe. SOCIO. HU, 2015(3), 37-60.

Morse, K. (2013, April 19). [Endangered Species Chocolate Logo]. Retrieved May 3, 2017, from http://thewellnessscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/endangered-species-logo.png

Products. (2015). Retrieved April 29, 2017, from http://www.chocolatebar.com/?page_id=20

Promise. (2015). Retrieved April 29, 2017, from http://www.chocolatebar.com/?page_id=18

Sylla, N. (2014). The fair trade scandal: Marketing poverty to benefit the rich. Ohio University Press.

Thank You 2016 | Endangered Species Chocolate [Video file]. (2016, November 30). Retrieved May 4, 2017.

What is Fairtrade, (2015). Retrieved May 01, 2017 from http://www.fairtradeamerica.org/en-us/what-is-fairtrade

Work For Us. (2015). Retrieved May 01, 2017 from http://www.fairtradeamerica.org/en-us/get-involved/work-for-us

 

Fair Trade, Direct Trade, and The Relationship Model: Millennials Changing The Ethically Sourced Market

We’ve heard a lot about our generation, the famed “millennials.” Often stereotyped as lazy, selfish and entitled, it doesn’t seem like we’re doing much for the world besides trying to build the next great “Angry Birds” app. However, there is an important part of our generation that is not talked about as much, that we are the “do well while also doing good” generation. Our generation wants to see contributions as investments in causes that we care about instead of solely a donation or charity. In finance, there is something called sustainable and responsible investment and “ESG,” which stands for environmental friendliness, social responsibility and corporate governance. This form of investing is known as impact investing, a strategy for investing in companies that do something good for humanity, yet also do well for portfolios.

Impact investing in the US has grown 76% from 2012 to 2014, in only two years (USSIF). Why is this? Because millennials are entering the marketplace and demanding more ethically sourced goods and ethically responsible companies. Although millennials currently may only account for a small percentage of investing, as we age and come into money that we want to invest for our future, we will be a significant driver of impact investing growth. This investment perspective is important for understanding millennial consumption habits, especially in regards to the future consumption of goods and products that have a history of bad ethics and poor social responsibility, such as characterized in the production of chocolate and coffee.

Our generation is extremely influential in its current and potential buying power, and it has a handle on the limitless potential of social media to address issues and be a voice for causes like no other generation before it. As our generation increasingly enters the marketplace, there will be increasing scrutiny of where we invest our money and what good it is doing in the world. There will be increasing scrutiny on transparency, on getting to the bottom of the supply chain, where much, much more of every dollar we spend gets back to the producer, the farmer. I mention these economic and finance terms as a way to frame the importance of understanding what is happening in the marketplace to inform chocolate companies of the coming conscious consumer and how we will see certifications such as Fair Trade and Direct Trade face increased scrutiny, and companies like Taza Chocolate as pioneers in the marketplace grow in popularity.

In its latest annual study, Nielsen revealed that almost two thirds (66%) of consumers are willing to pay extra for products that come from companies who are committed to positive social and environmental impact (Nielsen). This percentage represents a large jump from 55% last year and 50% the year before. Interestingly, willingness to pay more is consistent across income groups. The study also revealed that almost three-quarters of millennials (ages 20-34) claimed they would pay more for sustainable products, up from about half last year. One of the most fascinating parts of this study was that female millennials, in particular, were willing to pay more at 75% (Nielsen). These trends towards more conscious consumption are something chocolate companies should be paying attention to. While at the moment we are most familiar with Taza Chocolate as a pioneer in the Direct Trade chocolate market, I believe we will be seeing more companies and brands come into the Direct Trade ethically sourced market to capitalize on the millennials that will be looking for such differentiated products in the marketplace. As we discovered in class, women buy the bulk of chocolate products, and if millennial women are the most inclined to pay more for an ethically sourced product, it is good news for the ethical chocolate market and for companies like Taza, who have to charge a premium to maintain their Direct Trade business. According to Steve Polski, senior director of responsible supply chains and sustainability at a top consumer company observes, “Businesses today are looking at sustainability differently than they were even a few years ago.” Polski continues, “It’s an exciting time to be working on supply chain sustainability and I think we’re approaching an inflection point among consumers as well” (Mcavoy).

Nielsen-Paying-Premium-Sustainable-Products-Oct2015

Chart showing the incredible rise in millennials being willing to pay a premium for sustainable products – this is good news for ethically sourced chocolate and coffee companies that must charge a premium to stay committed to their ethical sourcing and be willing to cover the high price of maintaining an ethically sourced company with a high quality, pricey product. 

I have had my own first-hand experience with the issue of supply chain sustainability and the new millennial market that I will discuss further. First, however, I will begin by highlighting the difference between Fair Trade and Direct Trade using Taza Chocolate as an example, and then discuss my own experience creating an ethically sourced coffee company without certifications of any type, a trade model I call the “Relationship Model,” or the one-to-one model. There is much to be explored on the topics of ethically sourced chocolate and coffee and many difficulties of supply-chain management. Yet, as noted earlier, the economic trends and research data tells us that the consumer of the future will increasingly demand ethical products, particularly those transparent as to source, and be willing to pay more for these products – the chocolate market needs to think about how to adapt to these trends and answer millennial questions on sourcing.

We have discussed and explored in depth the various issues with the Fair Trade and Direct Trade certifications in the chocolate world. Fair Trade USA promises “the money you spend on day-to-day goods can improve an entire community’s day-to-day lives” (Fair Trade USA). While this goal is promising, taking a closer look at Fair Trade USA’s standards reveals that this certification is not enough to directly impact cacao farmers (Martin). There is no guarantee that money from the purchase goes directly to the farmers’ pockets. Instead, farmers must shoulder high fees, pay premiums, and other charges that come with the Fair Trade certification (Martin). This furthers the sad reality that very little, if any, money actually goes the farmers at the origins of the supply chain. Fair Trade USA promises a fair minimum price for cocoa, but in reality it “barely differs from the current world market price” (Leissle). Ultimately, the research tells us that that Fair Trade USA’s promises and commitments are misleading, and “lack of evidence of impact” makes its certification less appealing to informed consumers seeking ethically sourced products, particularly among millennials (Martin).

By contrast, Direct Trade moves beyond Fair Trade USA’s standards to create a clearer connection between cacao farmers and chocolate makers, or coffee farmers and coffee makers. Direct Trade hopes to go further than Fair Trade USA and be the solution that “make[s] for more ethical, sustainable production in an industry with a long history of exploitation” (Shute). Direct Trade tries to realize this benefit by eliminating the “middleman,” allowing chocolate makers and coffee makers to speak and interact directly with the farmers at the beginning of the supply chain to negotiate prices for the beans. Such direct negotiation, eliminating the cost and burden due to the middleman, should make it possible to compensate farmers at a “premium price they should earn for the high quality cacao they produce” (Taza Chocolate). In addition, Direct Trade eliminates the fees that come with Fair Trade USA certifications. The direct interaction between the farmers and chocolate and coffee makers means the farmers and farms are not obligated to be a part of cooperatives and can thus earn even more (Martin). These structural details of the Direct Trade process make it a better solution than Fair Trade USA for consumers seeking truly ethically sourced products and who want to see more of their money getting back to the farmer and making a difference. Importantly, those who seek ethically sourced products are growing in numbers and are mostly made up of millennials, whose purchasing power is only increasing. Now is when the Direct Trade market can do well while also doing good in the world. As millennials, we care about where the products we eat come from and that the money we spend is going to a good cause, thus enabling companies to charge a premium to make sure that their products are up to our new millennial standards and be assured that these premium prices will not hinder the profits of their business.

Taza Chocolate marketing labels showing their “Direct Trade” icon and their marketing slogan, “seriously good and fair for all.” We should question what these labels mean and recognize the vague notion of “Direct Trade” and the lack of standards it implies. 

While the Direct Trade model eliminates most of the issues buyers have with the Fair Trade USA certification system, certain problems of inconsistency arise due to the lack of set standards for Direct Trade. Buyers who directly source from farmers can have different standards when it comes to what a so-called “premium price” actually represents, what “quality cacao” means, and what the expectations are for farms with “fair working conditions” (Martin). Taza Chocolate maintains that they have “direct relationships with cacao producers,” and pay a set “premium price” to cacao producers and continues to “purchase high quality beans” but does not offer too much into detail of where exactly the money from the premium pricing goes (Taza Chocolate).

Screen Shot 2016-05-10 at 12.06.14 AM

Screengrab of Taza Transparency Report meant to highlight that the transparency reports do not detail the amount of money received by individual farmers or the “premium” paid – it seems as if these “Transparency” reports are no more than a marketing scheme to appear transparent. The details of the economics of the cooperatives and the income of the farmers is left out. 

Taza’s particular company-developed souring transparency also brings forth concerns about inconsistencies in Direct Trade’s more general, less specific standards amongst other producers claiming to source their products via Direct Trade.

As a millennial, I know how difficult it is to be a conscious consumer. Until a few years ago I was unaware of the struggles farmers faced in their supply-chains and how little income farmers were able to make by selling to conventional markets or to big companies. It was only when a started a coffee company myself was I able to truly understand how difficult it is to create a great company with a great product, how difficult it is for the farmer to reap the benefits while also being able to make a profit to sustain a business. But the success of the business is a real case study in changing consumer habits and of the new supply chains consumer changes are causing. In 2011, I visited the Ngorongoro Crater in Tanzania, Africa. There, I met Paskali Gwandu, our guide in the crater for a week and a wonderful horticulturist. He introduced my family to the most wonderful coffee we had ever tasted, grown and roasted right on his farm in his village down the road from the campsite. Over the course of the week my family drank his coffee and explored the crater. At the end of the week we exchanged email addresses so we could send some photos we had taken and keep in touch about his horticulture studies. In a couple of emails, my family asked about his family and his great coffee, which led to him sending us his coffee beans, rare Tanzanian Peaberry, for a small money transfer of $50, as a thanks for him sharing his knowledge with us. To our surprise, the coffee arrived in just over a week, wrapped in beautiful Tanzanian stamps and with a gift of a blanket interwoven with exotic cowrie shells and with my own name, “Catherine” on it – a thank you from Paskali’s wife and family.

slide4-2

My brother (on left) with Paskali Gwandu, the talented horticulturalist and coffee farmer. Evidence of direct relationship. 

We continued this email exchange and money transferring to receive his amazing coffee every few weeks. After a while, friends and extended family began asking about Paskali and the coffee and started buying it through us. For my senior multimedia project, I decided to build a website for Paskali as a way for it to be easier for both customers and Paskali to order coffee, naming it “Gwandu Coffee.” Since that point, I have been trying to help Paskali and his family by marketing Gwanducoffee.com and learning about the complex coffee business in Africa. The small amount of coffee we have sold has changed Paskali’s life, allowing him to earn tuition to send his children to school and invest in new coffee plants, things that Paskali never thought were possible before.

Screengrabs from GwanduCoffee.com, the website I made in my multimedia class. Fully functional credit card processing and order transfer to Paskali’s email at the village computer which he checks daily. 

I discovered that by selling this coffee direct from Tanzania to the consumer via the internet, Paskali could get $4 per pound, compared to max $.50 per pound he would get at the markets. I have seen first hand what transparency can do for both the consumer and the farmer. Paskali’s coffee is of highest quality, and he takes deep care of his coffee because he knows he is sending it directly to the consumer’s doorstep and getting paid a premium to care for the consumer and the coffee.

static1.squarespace-2

From GwanduCoffee.com, our simple infographic showing the supply-chain from farm to consumer. 

Screen Shot 2016-05-09 at 3.02.06 PM

A screengrab of my research slide detailing the current issues with the coffee market in Tanzania and how GwanduCoffee.com is a solution to those problems. Detailing the significant price change to the farmer. 

Screen Shot 2016-05-09 at 2.48.52 PM

A screengrab from GwanduCoffee.com showing again the supply chain as direct from farm to consumer, truly “Direct” trade, no middlemen (buyers, sourcers, packaging, etc. – such as Taza must use)

Here, my model goes one step further, in what I like to call the one-to-one or Relationship Model of trade. In this model, you, the consumer, know the exact farmer and farms where your coffee is grown and roasted and can directly witness the impact you make. You know that this coffee is from Paskali Gwandu, not from just from farms in a region or a cooperative. A common question that comes up from people is, “Is this coffee Direct Trade or Fair Trade” and this is where I have to tell them no, it’s much more than that. It’s a relationship trade with Paskali, his family, his village, the coffee and the consumer. It was clear that people knew about fair trade but were unaware of what it did or what it did not do for farmers.

Screen Shot 2016-05-10 at 11.18.45 AM

Straight from GwanduCoffee.com website under the “The Company” tab. Gwandu gvies all the credit to Paskali Gwandu and makes sure to give background to him and the company. Pictured below the information is a photo of Paskali Gwandu himself. 

These new ways of trade and sourcing chocolate and coffee beans leaves more questions to be asked pricing, quality control, marketing, and the disruption of old supply chains, and whether consumers may be exploited from labels and buzzwords, but that is a larger conversation. The important conclusion is that millennials coming into the marketplace and demanding more ethically sourced products, and willing to pay more for them, bodes well for the positive future of farmers and chocolate and coffee businesses.

Even further than the Relationship Model I propose, is a relationship much like World Vision, a charitable organization in which a specific child or family is sponsored over time by a contributing family. Perhaps in this extended relationship model, a farmer could be supported by multiple families or people over a longer period of time, to make a real difference and receive high quality coffee or chocolate. This may be wishful thinking for the future of coffee, but we must continue to think of new ways to innovate the supply-chain and how to increase transparency.

relationship-trade-icon

It is advised to avoid all certifications on packaging to not stray consumers with false advertising, but this is an example of a possible relationship model trade icon, if the market demands such labeling. 

Of course, not every person has access to a coffee or chocolate farmer and can create a company, but consumers can take control of their knowledge and quickly identify which companies are doing good for humanity. Something as small as a chocolate bar or a cup of coffee in the morning can change the life of a farmer half way across the world. As a millennial, I believe the market place will start to make this form of conscious consuming more available to us, as companies will want to capitalize off our changing concerns about where our food is from and where our money is going to support. Companies like Taza Chocolate and Gwandu Coffee are not only paving a new path for companies of the future, but also serving as a contrast to present company ethics and serving as a way for consumers to question current supply-chain practices. Our generation can and will create real positive change in the chocolate and coffee industry. I feel honored to be a part of this change and look forward to the future of an industry so marred with a dark past and even a dark present.

 

Works Cited:

Leissle, Kristy. “What’s Fairer than Fair Trade? Try Direct Trade with Cocoa Farmers.”YES! Magazine. YES! Magazine, 04 October 2013. Web. 02 May 2016.

Mcavoy, Kaitlyn. “Ethical Sourcing: Do Consumers and Companies Really Care?” Spend Matters. N.p., 15 Feb. 2016. Web. 2 May 2016. <http://spendmatters.com/2016/02/15/ethical-sourcing-do-consumers-and-companies-really-care/&gt;.

Martin, Carla. “Alternative Trade and Virtuous Localization/globalization.” AAAS 119x Lecture. CGIS South, Tsai Auditorium, Cambridge, MA. 6 Apr. 2016. Lecture.

Nielsen. “GLOBAL CONSUMERS ARE WILLING TO PUT THEIR MONEY WHERE THEIR HEART IS WHEN IT COMES TO GOODS AND SERVICES FROM COMPANIES COMMITTED TO SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.” Nielsen. Nielsen Press Room, 17 June 2014. Web. 2 May 2016. <http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press-room/2014/global-consumers-are-willing-to-put-their-money-where-their-heart-is.html&gt;.

Nielsen. “Sustainable Selections: How Socially Responsible Companies Are Turning a Profit.” Nielsen. Nielsen Press Room, 12 Oct. 2015. Web. 2 May 2016. <http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/sustainable-selections-how-socially-responsible-companies-are-turning-a-profit.html&gt;.

Shute, Nancy. “Bean-to-Bar Chocolate Makers Dare to Bare How It’s Done .” NPR: The Salt. NPR, 14 February 2013. Web. 02 May 2016.

REPORT ON US Sustainable, Responsible and Impact Investing Trends 2014. 02 May 2016

“Taza Chocolate Direct Trade Certified Cacao.” Taza Chocolate. Taza Chocolate, 2015. Web. 02 May 2016.

 

Images:

Nielsen chart: http://www.marketingcharts.com/traditional/will-consumers-pay-more-for-products-from-socially-responsible-companies-60166/

All Gwandu Coffee Images are from author and from Gwanducoffee.com website.

“Relationship” icon: http://blog.seattlecoffeeworks.com/in-the-news/introducing-relationship-trade/

Taza Direct Trade and Taza Chocolate: Via Taza Chocolate website

 

The Oh-So-Convenient Sugar Aisle

When you traverse around a convenient store for your necessary groceries and finally make it to the front counter, you begin to notice a bright array of sugary delights staring upwards at you as you wait lethargically in line for the cashier to call “NEXT!” You begin to think, “well, I am craving something sweet…and that’s not too expensive” before picking up a chocolate bar and adding it to your tab. But have you ever stopped to wonder why it may be that the candy isle is so conveniently located at the check-out around waist-level when it already has a bigger isle devoted to it right in the back of the store? Coincidence? Well it is surely far from it.

Screen Shot 2016-05-03 at 3.28.34 PM.png

A candy selection at the checkout counter of a generic convenient store. Notice the placement of the isle and physical height. 

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/call-to-adventure/5365750201]

In this blog post, a discussion will arise pertaining to the varying types of chocolate bars sold at a convenient store such as CVS, the history and contents of this selection of chocolate, and all in relation to contemporary issues in sugar and obesity in youth, harkening back to the advent in the rise of sugar amidst the chocolate industry historically.

Among the selection of candy bars sold at CVS there include, but are not limited to: Reese’s, Twix, Hershey’s chocolate bar, M&Ms, Butterfinger, Kit Kat, 3 Musketeers, and the like. Such inexpensive candy bars tend to sell at a price at or around $1 USD. Interestingly enough, although there seems to be a wide selection of candy bars at these check-out counters, oftentimes all these bars fall under roughly three major chocolate companies: Hershey’s, Mars, and Nestle. After Henry Nestle’s creation of milk chocolate in 1875, the chocolate conglomerate race began. In the 1920s, competition began to run starkly between Hershey’s and Mars with Forest Mar’s cheap but selling creation of the Milky Way. When customers would approach the candy counter back then and see a flat Hershey’s bar adjacent to a bulging, thick Milky Way, they surely chose the latter, raising sales for Hershey’s competitor (Brenner). What was interesting about Mar’s company as well as the big chocolate companies back then, was that even though they were putting out over 20 million candy bars, their infrastructures didn’t actually appear on the outside as manufacturing plants. Instead, they adopted cultural architectural styles, and had magnificent grass lawns; in essence, an emulation of a utopia (Brenner). But competition really wasn’t too strong between Hershey’s and Mars all the time: when Hershey’s was starting out with Mars, Mars was actually helping sales of the former by purchasing its chocolate coating and Hershey’s would make specific chocolate coatings for different Mars bars. Unfortunately, candy spies arose amidst these companies, with workers disguising themselves to find secrets about the chocolate making of these large companies, thereby contributing to a rise in competition (Brenner).

            Soon these companies realized they could add other materials inside their candy bars such as nougat or even peanut butter, racing each other with novel inventions and mass or bulk production of chocolate. And with industrialization underway by the late 1800s, culinary modernism–a period of processed and bulk production of food (especially cacao)–was prominent entering into the 20th century (Laudan, 2001). Representing these industrial manufacturing plants as utopias and embodying American values, companies like Hershey’s would be found producing commercials that represent core American values and common societal motifs. Yet not only was industrialization helping these companies sell their products, but a steep rise in sugar consumption was also attracting customers. In 1830-1840, with a drop in the price of sugar by over 30%, the working and middle class were beginning to outnumber consumption rates over the wealthy, with sugar being added to most foods, especially tea and chocolate products. Children at young ages were now being accustomed to larger caloric intakes of sugar, as sugar began to represent, and continues to represent, the most significant upward production curve of any other food item on the market over the course of several centuries (Mintz, p. 142-145; Martin, Lecture 7).

            Consequently, with a rise in cacao production, the manufacturing of bulk or processed candy, and higher sugar intake in these processed items, major ethical issues have arisen. As a matter of fact, when looking at the nutritional facts and ingredients in a Hershey’s candy bar, one may be surprised to find out that a generic Hershey’s Chocolate Bar only has roughly 11% cacao content. If that is the case, then one may ask what the remaining contents are; the answer being mostly milk and sugar. Simply put, the chocolate bars you may find at a store like CVS may be considered mere imposters or cheats of chocolate bars when you consider that a purchase of such a bar that brands itself as a “chocolate” bar only has at or around a tenth of chocolate in all [See: Washington Post below].

Washington Post: Chocolate By the Numbers 

Article explaining the cacao contents in contemporary chocolate

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24276-2004Jun8.html]

More frightening is the fact that such bars contain nearly the entire daily recommended percentage value of sugar intake and over a fifth of the daily amount of fat intake  As a result, it is noteworthy to inquire as to why these candy bars are being purchased in such high quantities, and as to who these companies attract as their target audiences.

Going back to an observation made in the introduction of this discussion, it should be reiterated that not only is the candy isle located both in the back of the store and at the check-out counter, but that it is also conveniently placed at waist level: keyword being convenient. Convenient for whom? Children! The wider selection of the back-of-the-store candy isle can be found stocked with finer chocolates such as Lint Bars or Ghirardelli, but take notice that the front checkout counter merely contains your $1 candy bars supplied by Hershey’s, Mars, and Nestle. And this all makes sense now when shining the light on youth. Given the sweet tooth common among children, Lint Bars and 72% cacao may not be enough for their desperate taste buds. Instead, they may desire the high, sugary content of a Reese’s bar or M&Ms, flashing over 24 grams of sugar. Yet oftentimes a caring parent avoids the candy isle. But what he/she cannot avoid is the child’s stare at the array of colorful candy bars as mom/dad pulls out the credit card to pay for the groceries. Clearly, manufacturing companies like Mars team up with store owners to win over their target audiences: youth. Colorful candy wrappers and animated characters, teamed up with a beautifully placed, waist-line presence of candy bars, mom and dad cannot help but cease the wining and begging of their children, ultimately conceding to the purchase of a sugar-packed candy bar from one of the top chocolate conglomerates.

Screen Shot 2016-05-03 at 3.42.12 PM.png

The animated characters that candy companies utilize to help attract youth. 

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/pareeerica/16877815242/in/photostream/]

As a result, significant ethical issues have arisen, especially over the current decade and continuing on into the present: namely, in relation to sugar consumption and child obesity. As the documentary film “Fed Up” mentions, “They’re in business to make money, not to make America healthy” (“Fed Up”  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVX6_LzX4mM ). What is more interesting is to find recent research studies supporting the findings that the human brain reacts similarly to sugar intake as it does to drugs such as cocaine (Serge, Karine, and Youna, 2013). The reward pathway in the brain lights up nearly identical to that of the reaction to the intake of hard drugs. In fact, the dopamine reward pathway of someone who consumes sugar has more activity than someone who is obese, and the person who is obese shows a similarly dulled dopamine response as someone who is addicted to drugs (http://mic.com/articles/88015/what-happens-to-your-brain-on-sugar-explained-by-science#.52zWKxwvS). What this shows is that sugar intake can be a very dangerous aspect of human culture, but more so, that with the rise in sugar production and consumption significantly, and with a target audience of youth for candy companies, issues are arising. Looking back at the 1800s, the average American consumer consumed what is now equivalent to the amount of sugar in one can of soda, but during the length of five days. Now in the second millennium, that 5-day intake has risen to over fifteen cans of soda or nearly 20 times the amount of sugar intake.

The Rise in Sugar Consumption

[http://mic.com/articles/88015/what-happens-to-your-brain-on-sugar-explained-by-science#.52zWKxwvS]

According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), obesity rates in youth ages 6-11 years old rose from 7% (1980) to 18% (2012), almost three times the amount, tagging almost one in five children as obese, and one third of youth and adolescence combined falling under the category of obesity. With cheap prices, flashy advertising, and high sugar/calorie contents of these candy bars, the rise in obesity in youth and teens is strongly increasing, posing risks for cancer, cardiovascular health, diabetes, and obesity during adulthood, which may further affect offspring and their further risk for obesity and related health problems (http://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/obesity/facts.htm).

In summary, current society is posed with a vital issue at hand: obesity. And much of this problem can lend itself to the big candy companies who continue to contribute significantly to the rise in production and consumption of sugar. Adding to their sales repertoire, flashy candy wrappers, color cartoon mascots, joyful commercial advertisements, and conveniently placed candy at convenient stores for youth to run into, candy companies and stores like CVS are only contributing to the problem. The CDC points out that statistics for child and adolescent obesity are rapidly increasing and posing risks for adulthood and future generations. Documentary films such as “Fed Up” attempt to expose the sugar industry and the issues at hand. And parents claim to be trying hard to provide healthy alternatives to their children. Yet issues are still arising and issues will continue to arise until the conglomerates are staunchly confronted. Until then, they may hide behind flashy advertisements and commercials that appear to embody true American values, concealing the truth of crushing these values with issues like obesity.

Works Cited

Ahmed, Serge H., Karine Guillem, and Youna Vandaele. “Sugar addiction: pushing the drug-sugar analogy to the limit.” Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care 16.4 (2013): 434-439.

Brenner, Joel. 2000. The Emperors of Chocolate: Inside the Secret World of Hershey and Mars. chapters 5, 13 pp. 49-69, 179-194.

 

“Chocolate By the Numbers.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, n.d. Web. 03 May 2016.

Kate, Nina. “The Cacao And Cognition Connection | HoneyColony.” HoneyColony. N.p., 12 Mar. 2013. Web. 03 May 2016.

Laudan, Rachel. “A Plea for Culinary Modernism: Why We Should Love New, Fast, Processed Food”. Gastronomica 1.1 (2001): 36–44.

Mintz, Sidney W. 1986[1985]. Sweetness and Power. pp. 142-145

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/obesity/facts.htm)

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/call-to-adventure/5365750201]

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/pareeerica/16877815242/in/photostream/]

[http://mic.com/articles/88015/what-happens-to-your-brain-on-sugar-explained-by-science#.52zWKxwvS]

Slave-free Sugar: exploring the economic linkages between sugar, British industrialization, and abolition

As the global commodification of sugar served to enrich European markets, laying the groundwork for an industrialized and pre-capitalist economy, the discourse around the abolition of slavery also shifted. The growing efficacy of arguments for the abolishment of slavery coincided with the emergence of technological advances and changed  labor needs. In short, as the efficiencies around sugar production increased to drastically decrease the amount of human capital required in its production, the need for slave labor diminished.

For example, the scholar Eric Williams, in what is now referred to as the “Williams Thesis”, argued that central to the development of Britain’s economy into a capitalist and industrial one was its accumulation of economic surplus through slavery and that it was the decline of the  sugar economy rather  than morality that led to Britain’s abolishment  of slavery and slave trade in the British West Indies. [1] In Capitalism and Slavery, it was “the commercial capitalism of the eighteenth century developed the wealth of Europe by means of slavery and monopoly. But in so doing it helped to create the industrial capitalism of the nineteenth century, which turned round and destroyed the power of commercial capitalism, slavery” explains Williams. [2] In Sweetness and Power, Mintz explains that during debates against and for both the slave trade and slavery, the future of Britain’s sugar production figured into such discussions. [3] (Mintz, 1985, p. 68)

Not all scholars shared Williams view, for example Solow explains how Eltis and Engerman, respected scholars, countered that Britain’s sugar industry when compared to its others was not its most dominant nor did it have strongest ties to Europe’s economic growth and development. [4] (Solow, 2014, p. 49) While the economic debate around the linkages between Atlantic trade and the industrialization of Britain are contested, scholars like Inikori have clarified that the central concern of Capitalism and Slavery was Williams exploration of the causality between “between industrial capitalism in England and the abolition of the slave trade and slavery by the British government” [5] (Inikori, 2012, p. 14) and demonstrate the overall economic basis of  British abolition. [6]  

On the other hand, economic linkage between slavery and sugar consumption in Britain was very much in the public consciousness; for abolitionists, it was a link they attempted to break through a campaign of public awareness, consumer activism through the boycott of sugar from the British West Indies. [7] (Carmichael, 2015, p. 8) In protesting the horrors of slavery, abolitionists called upon the British people to abstain from consuming and buying sugar from the British West Indies, thought to be derived from slave labor,  to undermine the economic foundations of slavery through collective action. [8] (p. 25)

Changing consumer habits based on increasing consumer awareness of how  a product was produced or not produced was central to the consumer’s economic resistance to slavery, which included buycotts. For example, a strategy adopted included other colonial sugar producers marketing their product as “free sugar” signaling to consumers that the commodity was derived from non-slave labor which may have correlated with “positive brand association (Figure 1). [9] (p. 67) This technique is not too dissimilar from today’s usage of certifications of the ethical and sustainably sourced/produced products, like coffee and chocolate for example. 

east_india_sugar_not_made_by_slaves_glass_sugar_bowl_bm
Figure 1. East India Sugar Bowl

Finally, the development of print culture introduced new strategies for promoting the boycott campaign included literary and visual materials to shape the public discourse. [10] (p. 26) For example, in 1791 James Gillray released “Barbarities in the West Indies‟ a cartoon satirising horrors and atrocities of sugar slavery (Figure 2) , the image worked to make explicit the link between human suffering  and violence  through the institution of slavery and sugar sourced from the British West Indies.

NPG D12417; 'Barbarities in the West Indies' by James Gillray, published by  Hannah Humphrey
Figure 2. Barbarities in the West Indies, by James Gillray, published by Hannah Humphrey, hand-coloured etching, published 23 April 1791 (NGP D12417)

All in all,  historical scholars continue to debate to what extent sugar played a role in Britain’s industrialization and the emergence of capitalism, arguing primarily the economic importance of sugar to Britain overall. However, even while this is the  subject of ongoing  historical debate, it may be reasonably inferred that for many British consumers, the economic link between sugar and their consumer behavior  and consumption habits  was well understood. This is most easily demonstrated in their resistance to slavery using economic strategies like the boycott of British West India sugar and buycott East India sugar. This would become one of the earliest examples of consumer and food activism. 

Endnotes

[1] Selwyn H. H. Carrington. (2003). Capitalism & Slavery and Caribbean Historiography: An Evaluation. The Journal of African American History, 88(3), 304–312. http://doi.org/10.2307/3559074

[2] Williams, Eric (2015-09-17). Capitalism and Slavery (Kindle Locations 5839-5843). Lulu.com. Kindle Edition.

[3] Mintz, S. W. (1985). Sweetness and power: The place of sugar in modern history. New York: Penguin.

[4] Solow, B. L. (2014). The Economic Consequences of the Atlantic Slave Trade. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

[5] Inikori, J. E. (2002). Africans and the industrial revolution in England: A study in international trade and economic development. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[6]  Ibid.

[7] Carmichael, L. (2015). Fetishism and the Moral Marketplace: How Abolitionist Sugar Boycotts in the 1790s Defined British Consumers and the West Indian” Other” (Master’s Thesis,Victoria University of Wellington). Retrieved from http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10063/4941/thesis.pdf?sequence=1.

[8]  Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

Sources

Carmichael, L. (2015). Fetishism and the Moral Marketplace: How Abolitionist Sugar Boycotts in the 1790s Defined British Consumers and the West Indian” Other” (Master’s Thesis,Victoria University of Wellington). Retrieved from http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10063/4941/thesis.pdf?sequence=1.

Inikori, J. E. (2002). Africans and the industrial revolution in England: A study in international trade and economic development. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mintz, S. W. (1985). Sweetness and power: The place of sugar in modern history. New York: Penguin.

Selwyn H. H. Carrington. (2003). Capitalism & Slavery and Caribbean Historiography: An Evaluation. The Journal of African American History, 88(3), 304–312. http://doi.org/10.2307/3559074

Solow, B. L. (2014). The Economic Consequences of the Atlantic Slave Trade. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Williams, Eric (2015-09-17). Capitalism and Slavery (Kindle Locations 5839-5843). Lulu.com. Kindle Edition.

Image

Figure 1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:East_India_Sugar_not_made_by_Slaves_Glass_sugar_bowl_BM.jpg

Figure 2. http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portraitLarge/mw61443/Barbarities-in-the-West-Indias-Indies