michaelbotterill.com - Latest Comments

Re: Giving Unfair Trade a Grilling!

michaelbotterill — Sun, 23 May 2010 18:41:30 -0000

To be fair, most of the charcoal in the shops is FSC certified, but according to Friends of the Earth (http://bit.ly/bwCt9P) 20% of it is imported from tropical countries and only one of these suppliers is FSC certified, although this info is 6 years old! I personally haven't seen any non-FSC certified charcoal in a long time so from an environmental point of view it is ethical.

I personally prefer to look at it from the angle of the producers, and I think its very important that they receive a fair living wage. But then again one could also argue that buying locally produced charcoal would be more ethical.

So I don't think its a black and white situation of this is ethical and all others are not, there are defiantly some shades of grey.

Re: Giving Unfair Trade a Grilling!

James — Sun, 23 May 2010 18:08:05 -0000

Interesting. So with this product you know that the charcoal comes from plants and trees that are not part of a protected forest and stand in the way of a farming. There is, therefore, an implicit suggestion (especially in the writing on the box) that the charcoal we currently see in the shops is not from ethical sources, but is there any information to support that?

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

Name — Tue, 04 May 2010 05:43:47 -0000

Hi Michael,

Interesting article, and I agree with you that institutionally, the monitoring and verification structure of SAN and RA are weak. While I don't know any evidence of this impacting their work practice, it does make the system potentially unreliable.

I just want to clarify the 100-80-50% requirements confusion, since I think it is an important point.

The SAN Standard lists 10 principles, and each has 5-10 associated criteria to measure compliance. Several of these are 'critical criteria' and specify, for example, that child and forced labor is not used, protective equipment is provided for chemical use, GM crops and specific chemicals are not used, etc. 100% of the critical criteria must be met.

If 100% of the critical criteria met, a farm can be certified if it complies with 80% of the total, including non-critical criteria. These non-critical criteria do not address things like child labour - those are critical issues. So for example, it is not strictly necessary for the farm to operate an integrated pest management system, though it must not use prohibited chemicals.

To ensure that a farm is not certified if it is completely deficient in specific areas, it is *also* required to meet at least 50% of the criteria for each principle.

So, to be certified: 100% of the critical criteria, 80% of the total (including non-critical criteria) and no one area with 50% not met.

The 30% requirement is a bit different - it refers to the amount of fully-certified materials that must be in a product for the RA label to be used. Practically speaking, a large company like Kraft or Unilever could not possible commit to using higher percentages until larger volumes started to be produced. This is why so few 'mainstream' products can be fairtrade - there is not a reliable supply.

I do agree that there should be a requirement for this percentage to grow over time.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

michaelbotterill — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:34:30 -0000

What I said was 50% of each criteria, which you yourself have confirmed, 50% is not 100% which is the point I was making. 50% still means that my tea could be made by child labour, and that is why I will not buy Rainforest Alliance certified tea.

Did William Wilberforce ask people to cut down from two slaves to one? Or Emmeline Pankhurst politely suggest that husbands might consult their wives before going out to vote? No they asked for total 100% commitment to the cause.

I am glad that SAN are pursuing ISO 65, but right now SAN cannot claim to be a separate legal entity, when the Rainforest Alliance dominates the organisation as it does, and acts as secretariat, you need sweeping changes to SAN in order to gain consumer confidence.

My specific issue with Abby Rays response is that she hasn't taken the time to read my article or respond to the criticism, instead she has glossed over the issues, and I have seen this exact same reply on other articles daring to question the legitimacy of the Rainforest Alliance. You have clearly read my article and have responded to specific issues, which is great, and I applaud you for engaging with me.

You have the best intentions, don't get me wrong, but you are far far from being what I would consider a truly ethical certification.

100% is needed, not 30%, not 50%, not even 80%, but 100%, do that and then you will be welcomed with open arms by the ethical consumer.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

SAN — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:58:01 -0000

I am responding as a representative of the Sustainable Agriculture Network, the standards-setting organization for the Rainforest Alliance Certified system, and respond specifically regarding the SAN standards and certification system components. After reading your post, I see that you have reached some incorrect conclusions regarding the scoring system that determines if farms can become certified and are also not aware of the evolution of the certification system in recent years. In terms of the scoring system, 100% of the critical criteria must be met in order for a farm to become Rainforest Alliance Certified – not 50% like you indicate. In addition to that, farms must meet 80% of the overall criteria AND also 50% within each category (such as Water Conservation, Fair Treatment and Good Working Conditions for Workers, Community Relations and 7 others).

The SAN, which is a separate legal entity, is indeed in the process of implementing an accreditation system including ISO65. This implies a complex operational transition and shift for an entire system and is expected to be operational in 2011. The SAN website will soon be available so that you can become well informed about this accreditation system, SAN members and the full breadth of the SAN standard and its criteria.

I respectfully suggest that consumers concerned about sustainability try to understand that global certification systems are complex and that their organizations are actively invested in their credibility and work. Offensive remarks to those working for these good causes only serve to draw attention away from the real challenges we face for achieving sustainability.

Re: A Month With Riverford Veg Boxes

michaelbotterill — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:52:20 -0000

I think its worth a try, there is something so very satisfying about cleaning the mud off the veg and getting them all in different shapes and sizes, not quite as good as growing your own, but when it comes to gardening, everything I touch tends to die!

Not having a car its great for us, as before we would opt for frozen convenience, which was never as good for us, this helps keep us healthy. I checked my weight the other day, and along with cutting out chips and cutting my meat intake by 66%, I have lost quite a nice amount.

Re: A Month With Riverford Veg Boxes

Chris Lee — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:42:29 -0000

Tempted, tempted, will let you know. Thanks Michael.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

michaelbotterill — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:09:03 -0000

Abby, this is a copy and paste job of replies you have made to other articles daring to challenge your legitimacy, you clearly haven't read my blog post, please do so before replying.

I took a great deal of time to read your comments on other articles and your site before making my mind up about the Rainforest Alliance, the least you could do is the same.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

AbbyfromRA — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:33:31 -0000

You have mentioned that the Rainforest Alliance certification program is less rigorous than Fair Trade - I am assuming (since this is our key differentiator) you are referring to the fact that we do not get involved in the trade of the goods, but rather examine holistically how the farm is managed. If I'm correct, your statement perpetuates the myth that only a guaranteed minimum price gets farmers out of poverty and hence any scheme not guaranteeing a minimum price is only half decent. A system dependent on price premiums depends on a customer willing to pay them through that system, so what about the farmers who are not so lucky to have such a customer? We are teaching farmers to farm smart, growing their bottom line today and conserving soil and the natural resources on which their children will depend. Rainforest Alliance certification takes a different approach, putting the emphasis on improved farming practices rather than on alternative marketing schemes. The recipe for economic success for any farmer contains four essential ingredients: crop quality, productivity, cost control and sale price. The Rainforest Alliance program addresses all four. The program is a hand up for those who need it, not a hand out. It gives farmers more control over their own futures. It empowers them to be better business people ? and to dream of a sustainably successful future. Higher prices are important, and most farmers in the Rainforest program are getting significantly higher prices for their goods. But farmgate prices are not a panacea. We see many farmers earning high prices and still failing. Successful farmers learn to control costs, increase production, improve quality, build their own competence in trading, build workforce and community cohesion and pride, manage their precious natural resources and protect the environment. A system that improves farm performance will always outperform a system dependent on market prices.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

MarkyD — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:26:32 -0000

Never really had any confidence in the whole Rainforest Alliance, thanks to you I realise it is what I suspected all along, greenwashing.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

RevGaurd — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:10:01 -0000

LOL, v.surprised that the corportate morons that run RA haven't cracked down on this yet, w ouldn't be surpised if they jsuyt sued you instead, kraft, unilever, mars, and mcdonalds don't like it when u speak the truth.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

Socko Belly — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:38:45 -0000

Brill Blog, good read, I am sure the morons that are Michiel, Abby and Stuart will be along soon to stir up some rubbish, don't listen to them, they are environment traitors who spout lies with every word they ejaculate.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

Andy — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:33:18 -0000

Rainforest Alliance Certification = Worthless, plain and simple.

Fairtrade far superior.

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

Robert Vickers — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:21:22 -0000

Great article, RFA have been getting away for this for far too long, its a cop out for nasty companies to get away with doing sweet FA. The sooner this bunch of charlatans and frauds are exposed the better

Re: How Ethical is my Tea??? (Rainforest Alliance or Fairtrade)

Keith Harman — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 07:23:59 -0000

Great article, I feel the same way, the derisory 30% minimum content is pathetic, all it does is confuse people, and when they are confused they go for the cheapest one.

Until RA sort themselves out (or just disappear all together) we need to adopt an Orwellian style manta.

Fair Trade good, Rainforest Alliance Bad.

Re: Mark Kalch Lecture in Darlington

michaelbotterill — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 05:23:23 -0000

I would love to do the same, via bus though, I have always figured that it would be a greatly inspiring journey. The history of Iran is rich and deep, its more than about the Revolution.

But alas we Baha'is cannot go, hopefully one day soon, when the persecutions end, we can.

Re: Mark Kalch Lecture in Darlington

Paul Saunders-Priem — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 05:19:12 -0000

Thanks Michael . I'm going to this and I will see if one or more of the lads want to. I would love to do the same thing but being Bahai it is not possible.

Re: Religious? Or Just a Thug?

Darren Howell — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 04:23:30 -0000

Interesting

Re: Archives

Chris — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:41:42 -0000

Hi Michael, it's Chris here from the "Save our Bunnies" Facebook group.

Thankyou for providing your followers on here with our link, but I felt after having a brief look on here that I must inform you about another website which I go on. It's called skyscrapercity, and it provides a lot of information on places around the world. I myself and others have recently been able to gain Newcastle a Sub-Forum on this website which gives all kinds of information from transport, retail, buildings, photo's, history etc.

I think this is a website that you would like very much (if you haven't already came across it), so I'm providing you with a link for if you wish to take a look around.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?...

Re: Fairer and More Ethical Food

Chris Lee — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:37:54 -0000

Let us know how you get on with Riverford. Have considered it in the past as the last box scheme we used were eventually making mistakes with our order every week.

Re: Vegbox from Riverford

Sarah Cockman — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:36:16 -0000

i have used them before for salad and fruit they were good :)

Re: Vegbox from Riverford

Chris Lee — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:34:54 -0000

I am watching and waiting. We too have tried a few schemes and ended up dissatisfied so perhaps Riverford next time......

Re: Uni(Tea)

michaelbotterill — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:42:21 -0000

You are right, Ringtons is a superiour tea to Typhoo, personally I am trying to use Traidcraft more, blended by Ringtons, both are Geordie companies, so it has the Ringtons Qualitybut has the added advantage of being Fairtrade too and thus guilt free!

Re: Uni(Tea)

Tea Drinker — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:03:39 -0000

You write "The Bahá’ís also believe that all the peoples of the earth are identical in that they are made in the image of God, not the physical image, God doesn’t have a form, or at least not one that we could possibly understand anyway, but in the image of His Spirit." Like that but you are wrong to place Typhoo and Ringtons in the same context. Ringtons is a quality company but Typhoo is a very different one, please taste the difference.

Re: Typhoo Going Fairtrade

Michiel — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 05:57:10 -0000

Hi Michael, i work for Unilever, PG tips' parent company. Unilever works with both Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade. I have worked closely on launches of some of our products that are certified by either RA or FT. Like you, I am excited about Typhoo's announcement.

However, you say 'RFA (...) concentrates on the environmental side which is admirable, but neglects the workers'

This is not true.

Both schemes cover social, environmental and economical aspects of sustainability. Rainforest Alliance focuses on how farms are managed. Fairtrade is more focused on tackling poverty and how crops are traded. In the end, both systems work towards the common objective of a sustainable livelihood for farmers. But they use a different approach. Both schemes are sound, and both have their strengths and weaknesses.

You also say that 'Fairtrade places the responsibility on the company making the final product, RFA places all the emphasis on the farmers, so they have to shell out the cash to get certified.'

Again, this is not true. Both FT and RA require the farms to pay for their own certification (or in your words- to shell out the cash to get certified. For farms, this is an investment that provides them access to better incomes and better market access. Also, PG Tips/Unilever has invested significantly in helping small farmers to become certified through Farmer Field Schools www.makeitfair.org.uk/.../farmer_field_school_b...

Lastly, you mention the galaxy bar which has palm oil, which is not certified. The same is true for e.g. the KitKat bar, which carries the Fairtrade label, and which uses palm oil that's not certified.

I don't mean to nitpick but i think it's unhelpful when people compare the two schemes suggesting one is better than the other- they're different. It's like comparing apples and oranges.

The reality is that we shouldn’t focus on the difference between RA and FT. We should focus on the difference between credibly certified and non-certified goods. Both RA and FT are members of ISEAL, http://www.isealalliance.org/ the de facto gold standard for certification schemes. They are both credible and sound schemes working towards a sustainable future.

In that sense, i share your enthusiasm about Typhoo- what's important is that we see more certified goods coming to the market- whether it's FT or RA.

BTW PG tips is already fully Rainforest Alliance certified - no need to wait till the end of this year! http://www.pgtips.co.uk/sustainability/

best regards, and thanks for letting me weigh in!