The idea of "fair trade" first became popular in the 1990s as a method of assuaging the conscience of the affluent urban liberal. It was a time when left-leaning Baby Boomers had to start reckoning with hard truths: Not only was classical capitalism stronger than ever, but they themselves had to admit that they were unlikely to drop out of consumer society in middle age.
Hence "fair trade," which came not to bury capitalism but to harness it. A few clever entrepreneurs reached the conclusion that socially conscious Westerners could be persuaded to pay a premium for consumer goods made in Third World countries by small producers who were audited and guaranteed to be environmentally sound, free of child labour, and properly unionized.
The idea has been a success, sort of. In our cities, the concept remains confined mostly to coffee, other perishables like flowers and spices, and ethnic artwork. As far as we know, no one is yet buying "fair trade" scrap metal or video games. Still, Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International, a nonprofit association of fair-trade certificate issuers from 20 countries, estimates its members' 2005 sales at $1.7-billion.
But more money means more problems, as the late great philosopher Biggie Smalls reminded us. According to a CBC report published this week, Trans- Fair Canada, the most prominent Canadian fair-trade monitor, is joining with fair-trade retailers to raise concerns about unethical rivals who are horning in on the label without, as it were, walking the walk. Anybody can slap a sticker reading "fair trade" onto a bag of coffee, and apparently it happens rather a lot. At least one coffee shop is pressing Ottawa to regulate fair trade certification.
This is a curious step for the "fair trade" movement to contemplate. The genius of "fair trade" is that it is completely compatible with free trade: It is, in theory, supposed to be about educating consumers at their end of the supply chain and getting them to change their choices voluntarily. Trans Fair's complaint seems to be a confession of failure: If consumers are merely looking for a label, and aren't smart or motivated enough to tell the real from the counterfeit, then the consciousness- raising project seems to have stalled.
Giving government the responsibility for fair-trade labelling would make matters worse, for it would turn the movement into just another protectionist racket beset by domestic political demands and conflicting agendas. And if a non-governmental authority or group of authorities were given exclusive control of the labelling, it is easy to imagine "fair trade" turning into just another brand over time as the moral energy gradually trickles out of the business. Practitioners and advocates of fair trade should not give up on the voluntary, trust-based nature of their movement. From our perch on the right, that would seem to be its biggest strength and best virtue.National Post
