News and press releases

EU Textile Strategy: Civil Society’s demands to MEPs

January 2023, Brussels – In the context of the consideration of the European Parliament’s draft report on the EU Strategy for sustainable and circular textiles, the FTAO and 6 other civil society organisations put together a list of 12 actions that are needed for the Textile Strategy to deliver on its promise to make sustainable – both environmentally as well as socially – textile products the norm.

We call on MEPs to take action on:

  1. Developing ambitious and holistic ecodesign requirements
  2. Tackling global overproduction
  3. Ensuring a Just Transition
  4. Ensuring fairer purchasing practices
  5. Enabling the transparency of supply chains
  6. Implementing due diligence accountability
  7. Taking action on ultra-fast fashion
  8. Putting green and social washing to an end
  9. Implementing EU trade policy that rewards sustainability
  10. Maximising local re-use of textiles
  11. Phasing out hazardous chemicals in textiles
  12. Ensuring sustainable textile production in Europe

Read the full joint paper here.

New EU Regulation on deforestation-free products: the good and the bad

December 2022, Brussels

After more than a year of intense negotiations and right before the start of COP15, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission have reached a provisional political agreement over the final text of the EU Regulation on deforestation-free products. The proposed new legislation would guarantee that the products that citizens buy on the EU market or that are exported from the EU do not contribute to global deforestation or forest degradation.

“While the new rules are a steppingstone in the right direction and will surely help to purge deforestation from EU supply chains, remaining loopholes might dilute their capacity to effectively decouple agricultural production from deforestation on a larger scale” comments Charlotte Vernier, Policy and Project Officer at the Fair Trade Advocacy Office, and team lead on deforestation.

Negotiators have agreed on extending the scope to other commodities such as rubber or charcoal but maintain the initial narrow approach of the Commission’s proposal on protected biomes. This constitutes a missed opportunity to prevent the conversion of other valuable ecosystems that are today under major threat and opens up the door to adverse displacement effects.

The provisional agreement sets strict mandatory due diligence rules for companies that will be obliged to trace back commodities to the plot of land where the latter were produced. We strongly welcome this level of ambition as it will help reduce the complexity and opacity of supply chains. With the introduction of a new mandatory polygon mapping obligation for land over 4 hectares, it will however be key to consider the specific compliance challenges that smallholders may face, and design fit-for-purpose support measures to avoid their market exclusion.

In order to alter companies’ business-as-usual activities through a qualitative and inclusive process, meaningful stakeholder engagement is recognized as a key component of due diligence as per existing international due diligence standards, such as the OECD Guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles. Including meaningful engagement as part of the country benchmarking is a positive step but addresses different stakeholders and objectives – it does not replace the need to fully embed meaningful stakeholder engagement in companies’ due diligence obligation. On a positive note, EU decision makers managed to agree on a certain percentage of checks that will be conducted as well as on a satisfying penalty system to ensure greater enforcement.

However, “this legislation won’t be good for nature, if it’s not good for people” stated Charlotte Vernier and added that the FTAO regrets seeing the weak level of protection offered in the final text to the rights of Indigenous Peoples compared to what the Parliament and EU citizens were calling for.

To succeed in the global fight against the twin climate and biodiversity crises the EU must take the responsibility to expand its approach beyond a single metric and adopt a truly systemic approach” continues Charlotte Vernier.

The FTAO has noticed with great concern the absence of any references to smallholders in the official communiqués even though a large majority of the production of covered commodities such as cocoa and coffee lies in their hands.

In this context, a few unresolved issues remain and crucial elements are still to be agreed upon in the upcoming weeks at a technical level. Among them is the need to ensure an obligation for operators to undertake reasonable and documented efforts to support the compliance of smallholders including through fair pricing mechanisms.

We call upon policymakers to consider income as a vital part of the puzzle for the structural changes needed to happen. It is only by allowing farmers to grow their businesses out of poverty that they will be able to invest in more sustainable farming practices that respect planetary boundaries. “If smallholders can’t cover the costs of production and lack savings for additional investments, the transition toward a deforestation-free agricultural sector will move out of reach” says Charlotte Vernier. If this element isn’t properly addressed by the Regulation or left out of scope, smallholders will see themselves trapped in economic realities where expanding their land through deforestation is the only economically viable solution left to secure their livelihoods.

In the absence of a needs assessment that civil society organizations and producers’ networks have been calling for, it is furthermore of utmost importance that the Regulation foresees in the short term, maximum 2 years after entry into force, an in-depth evaluation of the impact of the regulation on farmers, in particular smallholders, indigenous peoples, and local communities and the possible need for additionalsupport for the transition to sustainable supply chains.

In its 2019 Communication on “Stepping up EU action to protect and restore the world’s forests”, the Commission committed to “work in partnership with producing countries to reduce pressures on forests” and to “support[ing] action to transform commodity value chains such as coffee, cocoa, palm oil, and livestock”. However, actions to deliver on this commitment have so far been piecemeal and insufficient to reverse a so far rather top-down approach in the way the proposal has been developed and communicated to partner countries. We look upon the Commission now to walk that talk, towards a comprehensive and complementary set of demand and supply-side measures that would be truly conducive to structural changes on the ground, without leaving no one behind.

Press contact:

Charlotte Vernier

Policy and Project Office, Team Lead on deforestation

vernier@fairtrade-advocacy.org

EU DUE DILIGENCE LEGISLATION FOR A POSITIVE IMPACT: Council position takes a step back in making due diligence work for stallholder farmers and workers

1st of December, Brussels – Today, responsible ministers met as part of the Competitiveness council to vote on the Council position on the Corporate Sustainable Due Diligence Directive. Since the Commission presented the legislative proposal on the 23rd February 2022, the Council has been discussing their position and while there are some positive developments, the Council has failed to deliver a strong position that would hold business accountable.

The Fair Trade movement is happy to see that a slightly stronger role was given to stakeholder engagement by expanding the definition and by including human rights defenders, trade unions and civil society organisations. The position also strengthens the requirement to consult with stakeholders in some parts of the due diligence process, although not at all relevant steps. At the same time, the text remains gender blind, not acknowledging the need to account for different impacts felt by different groups in a vulnerable position.

The aim of the directive should be to support long term development of sustainable global value chains, which requires that the entire value chain is covered. In a positive development, the Council removed the concept of “established business relationships” which led to unclarity on how far through the supply chain the obligation reached and posed the danger of companies avowing long term sourcing relationships. However, at the same time, the scope of the due diligence obligation was narrowed from “value chains” to “chain of activities” which not only significantly limits the coverage of downstream impacts, but also unduly restricts the coverage in the upstream supply chain to immediate inputs into the production process.

Elena Lunder, Policy and Project Advisor leading on CSDDD at the FTAO comments that to ensure sustainable improvements in global value chains, the status quo of business as usual must be challenged so it is disappointing to see that the due diligence obligation does not include a revision of a companies’ purchasing practices.

Their importance is already acknowledged in the recital 30, that a company’s own trading, procurement and pricing practices can play a key role in the ability of business partners to produce sustainably.

Instead, the Council text sticks to the Commission’s proposed emphasis on the use of cascading contractual clauses that would pass on a company’s code of conduct to their business partners. Combined with verification of compliance by third party audits, this mechanism has the potential to enable companies to also “cascade” accountability to their business partners without addressing their own practices that might be causing or contributing to adverse impacts.

To reach the aims of the CSDDD a collaborative approach would need to be encouraged by the due diligence obligation which would mean that the accountability and responsibility for adverse impacts is proportionately carried by relevant actors. A step in this direction is the strengthening of the support to SMEs that should be part of due diligence by larger companies which includes guarantees for long term sourcing. Such agreements are key for smaller actors in global value chains to be able to plan for an invest into a more sustainable production. However, the Fair Trade movement was disappointed to see that the Council position narrowed the application of support measures in recital 47, excluding non-EU actors in global value chains. Without also offering relevant support to non-EU actors further up the supply chain, effective change in occurrence of human rights violations and environmental harm is not possible.

The same is true without good accountability and access to remedy provisions. The Council position has significantly watered down the proposed text of the Commission on civil liability. Without clear accountability mechanisms, including civil liability, none of the other elements in the due diligence process will be enforced to their full extent. 

In furthering a more cooperative approach, the Fair Trade movement also welcomes the clarification by the Council that disengagement from business partners should only be used as a last resort when previous attempts to prevent or mitigate the adverse impacts were not successful. However, it should be clarified, that stakeholder engagement plays a key role in this process. At the same time, the Council adds an exception to the need to disengage in cases where there is no comparable supplier and termination would cause substantial prejudice to the company. This is not in line with the UNGPs or OECD Guidelines and in practice, it would mean that business interests are placed above human rights and the environment even in cases of harm that are well known to the company.

Finally, the due diligence obligation only covers a limited list of human rights and environmental impacts. The Council position would only oblige very large companies to adopt a climate transition plan in line with 1.5°C objective of the Paris Agreement. The due diligence obligation does not include contributions to climate change and the responsibility to be held accountable for prevention, mitigation and remediation.

It is key that the CSDDD refers to living wages, however, by not also explicitly mentioning living incomes a large group of people working in global value chains will not be protected. This includes smallholder farmers who produce most of the world’s food, self-employed people, platform workers and other precarious forms of work.

Press contact: Elena Lunder (lunder@fairtrade-advocacy.org)

Human rights are not on sale: Living wages, purchasing practices and overproduction in the textile sector

Black Friday rhymes with great deals and aggressive discounts, including in the clothing sector. In the last decade or so, it has spread from the US across the globe to become the biggest shopping event of the year in many countries. But how is it possible for brands to slash prices to such extent and even extend sales in the days before and after Black Friday, when the prices they charge the rest of the year are insufficient to pay their workers living wages?

Let’s unpack!

First, it is important not to forget that for many people, Black Friday is one of the only times in the year where they can buy needed goods at a price that they can afford. This year, it may be the case for an increasing number of people, as food and energy prices are soaring around the world.

However, the scale of “exciting” deals and “limited” offers are designed to make customers feel overwhelmed with choice, to stimulate a sense of false urgency and in the end, to trigger us to purchase articles that we do not need, just because they are cheap.

Fast fashion brands can sustain this model thanks to their purchasing, trading and pricing practices, the conditions under which they buy the clothes they sell us from the manufacturers. They typically adopt practices which allow them to renew collections several times a month throughout the year, produce large quantities of clothes at a low unit price, and apply huge discounts during sales, including on Black Friday.

But these practices have a direct impact on the human rights of the workers who make these clothes and on our planet. The contract, order, pricing and payment terms between the suppliers (the factories where our clothes are made) and their buyers (the brands that sell these clothes to us) directly affect the ability of suppliers to respect the human rights of their workers.

How?

  • Low buying prices: due to the high competition between small suppliers in the garment sector, brands are able to purchase orders for very low prices, often below the cost of production. Two thirds of suppliers have already accepted a price below total production costs per unit because they feared losing business (ILO study, 2017)[1]. Worse, when the minimum wage almost doubled in Bangladesh in 2014 from 3,000 to 5,300 Taka, almost no buyers agreed to a price increase to reflect increasing labour costs[2]. It is well documented (ILO, EU) that most companies do not check whether their purchasing prices allow their suppliers to implement living wages.
  • Short lead times: to keep up with renewing collections in a short time frame, making available huge amounts of styles, sudden changes in order volumes, etc., deadlines for the manufacturing of products are often unreasonably short. Like above, because of high competition between suppliers, they may lose orders if they refuse to reduce the time between the date of the order and the date the products are shipped out. To meet such deadlines, suppliers often resort to excessive and forced overtime, or turn to unauthorised subcontracting, often to informal workers based at home who are exposed to particularly acute risks and bad working conditions.

Other irresponsible and unfair purchasing practices include changing or cancelling orders at the last minute, late or delayed payments, unilateral amendment of contract terms or shifting the risks on the suppliers in contractual terms. Other impacts on human rights include cuts in wages, social security contributions, health and safety facilities, delays in payment of wages (even no payment of wages in cases of sudden cancellation, like often was the case during COVID-19), the imposition of unreasonable production quotas per worker, increases in risks of violence and harassment.

This is possible because garment supply chains are buyer-driven: brands and retailers have a lot more power than their suppliers, which allows them to control the activities of companies in the supply chain that they do not own, who in turn transfer this pressure to the workers[3]. This power imbalance also creates a culture of fear where suppliers tend to not sue the brands for those of the unfair purchasing practices that are illegal.

The business model of fast fashion enabled by the above mentioned irresponsible and unfair purchasing practices also leads to overproduction. The amount of overproduction is unknown due to lack of transparency by brands, but there are estimations of 30% of produced garments are never sold, and often these are blatantly destroyed.[4]

How can Good Clothes, Fair Pay help change this?

Good Clothes, Fair Pay not only calls for living wage legislation across the garment sector, it also calls for the prohibition of unfair trading practices which cause, or contribute to, harms to workers. These include:

  • Buyer paying the supplier later than 60 days after the end of an agreed delivery period;
  • Buyer cancelling orders without notice;
  • Buyer changes or fails to provide complete information regarding the terms;
  • Buyer requiring the supplier to pay for damages that occur after ownership has been transferred to the buyer;
  • Buyer refusing to agree on a production price that enables suppliers paying living wages to their workers.

We are convinced regulating brands’ purchasing practices so that they become fair will lift one of the key obstacles to living wages being paid to the people who make our clothes.

Coming back to Black Friday

Right now, suppliers are pressured to produce more clothes in shorter time frames at lower cost, ultimately leading to overproduction and waste and massive human rights violations. Now is the time for a systemic shift away from fast fashion. Putting fairness at the centre of fashion will not only result in increased respect for human rights but would also help the whole sector move away from overproduction and excessive waste, thereby reducing its environment and climate impact. Join the movement and sign Good Clothes, Fair Pay!

A silver lining is that according to a recent report, Black Friday’s popularity among consumers is dropping, with sales declining every year[5]. One of the factors for this loss in popularity could very well be sustainability concerns, which push consumers to make more conscious decisions in what they buy. Consumers expect more from their favourite brands – so let’s change the fashion industry!

[1] ILO, Purchasing practices and low wages in global supply chains: empirical cases from the garment industry, 2017. Available here.

[2] ILO, Purchasing practices and low wages in global supply chains: empirical cases from the garment industry, 2017. Available here.

[3] ILO, Purchasing practices and low wages in global supply chains: empirical cases from the garment industry, 2017. Available here.

[4] Fashion United, Infographic: the extent of overproduction in the fashion industry, Marjorie van Elven, 2018. Available here.

[5] Fashion United, New report suggests Black Friday’s popularity is continuing to dip, Rachel Douglass, 2022. Available here.

COP27 Press Release – The Clock Is Ticking

November 2022

At COP27, Fair Trade organizations reiterate their urgent call for inclusive climate solutions as smallholder farmers and workers face growing climate threats.

BONN, Germany – Global leaders must strengthen and accelerate efforts to enforce human rights and environmental due diligence in supply chains, confront trade injustice, and ensure that climate financing mechanisms reach the world’s smallholder agricultural producers in order to deliver successful and equitable climate action before it is too late, the world’s leading Fair Trade organizations have warned.

In a position paper titled The Clock Is Ticking! and released ahead of the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference, also known as COP27, Fairtrade, the World Fair Trade Organization (WFTO), and the Fair Trade Advocacy Office (FTAO) have intensified their calls for trade and climate justice, indicating the critical measures for delivering fair climate solutions and demanding the enforcement of public climate commitments and for trade actors to be accountable for their climate promises.

“International trade today is not only one of the leading contributors to climate change, but also drives high costs of doing business that cut across supply chains, affecting farmers readiness to respond to climate catastrophes. As Fairtrade, we seek a multi-stakeholder partnership and collaboration approach, towards addressing efforts that strengthen producers resilience and capacity to manage adverse impacts of climate change,” said Sandra Uwera,
Global CEO at Fairtrade International.

“With world leaders, international delegates, and civil society actors now gathering for COP27, Fairtrade and the Fair Trade movement are once again called upon to remind them of their duty to right the global wrongs that continue to disproportionately impact our planet’s most vulnerable communities and deliver equitable climate action once and for all.”

The Clock Is Ticking!

Held in Sharm El Sheikh from 06 November to 18 November, COP27 will bring together global leaders and leading stakeholders to discuss the international community’s climate ambitions and a pathway to building back sustainably following the ravages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Against this backdrop, the Fair Trade movement’s position paper calls on leaders of government and the private sector to immediately deliver on climate targets by meeting the $100 billion USD climate aid commitment promised by the end of 2022; ensuring climate finance delivers for small holder farmers, Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), and workers by including them in the design of climate programmes; agreeing on regulations that tackle the root causes of environmental degradation, such as deforestation, by penalising noncompliance; and supporting farmers, SMEs, and workers with the costs of adaptation and mitigation.

In addition, the paper reiterates the organizations’ long-standing call for businesses to “pay fair prices to smallholder farmers, SMEs and workers.”

“The biggest challenge to combatting climate change is eliminating the current economic system that is dependent on fossil fuels and the extraction of natural resources,” explained Leida Rijnhout, Chief Executive of WFTO. “Without real accountability on what the big polluters are doing, mission-led business models, including SMEs, are the only way to go.” “WFTO members are showcasing that another economy is possible,” Ms. Rijnhout added. “They can be the driving force to achieve climate justice.”

Empowering through inclusive climate finance

According to Fairtrade, WFTO, and FTAO, among the persisting obstacles facing small-scale farmers remains the lack of financial assistant to empower them to successfully mitigate and adapt to climate challenges. In fact, the organizations have long noted that less than 2% of climate finance makes its way to small-scale farmers and that awarding criteria and procedures of financial mechanisms must be aligned to small producers and their organizations so that they can access available funding and manage it in a non-bureaucratic way.

In addition, the Fair Trade organizations are once again urging governments and the private sector to ensure that climate efforts are constructed in an inclusive manner, noting that smallholder farmers and workers have the most comprehensive understanding of how climate change affects their local environments. Such an inclusive set-up, the organizations argue, can help provide invaluable insights on how farmers and producer organizations can make the necessary changes towards becoming more resilient and more sustainable through renewable energies and energy efficiency, reforesting and stopping deforestation, and restoring soil health to enhance its productive potential, thereby limiting the expansion of agricultural land in places with high carbon stock.

“It is urgent to untap the potential of worldwide smallholder farmers, producers and artisans to contribute to climate and social justice,” said Jorge Conesa, FTAO Managing Director. “Major consumer regions, like the EU, have great leverage and also a great responsibility: they must live up to their climate ambitions, while refraining from sabotaging themselves by not addressing global abusive trading practices.”

# # #

Read full press release here

For press inquiries, contact press@fairtrade.net

FIRST EURO-LATINOAMERICAN GOVERNMENTAL MEETING ON FAIR TRADE TAKES PLACE IN QUITO, ECUADOR

October 2022

Quito, Ecuador – In the framework of the international conference of Fair Trade Towns that took place between 21st and 23rd of October, the Fair Trade Advocacy Office (FTAO) and the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Commerce of Ecuador organized the first Euro-Latin American governmental meeting on Fair Trade. Under the theme of “Fair Trade as a strategy to combine environmental and social sustainability in trade relations between Latin America and the European Union”, it gathered government and agency representatives from Ecuador, European Union, Ghana, Germany, Belgium, Mexico, States of Africa, Pacific and Caribbean, Chile, Mexico, Panama, Honduras, Colombia and Paraguay. As well as a representative from the United Nations Forum for Voluntary Sustainability Standards.

The participants exchanged their national experiences on public policies and/or national projects that promote Fair Trade or its principles. From recognition of Fair Trade at constitutional level to workshops on gender and Fair Trade, all efforts put Fair Trade at its core and bring countries closer to achieving sustainable development. A second objective was to discuss the consolidation of a network of countries interested in promotion of Fair Trade, also through joint international efforts. In that sense, main takeaways from the participants were that there is a need of joint collaborative work among governments and to install Fair Trade in the public agendas. As well as the need of creating spaces to discuss creation of public policies for promotion and uptake of Fair Trade. The latter point links directly to the value of this first encounter organized by the FTAO and the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Commerce of Ecuador. In terms of next steps, the formalization of such a network will be sought among participant countries and the identification of the best vehicle to bring to existence this network of friend countries of Fair Trade.

As stated by Ambassador Isabel Albornoz, we hope this is “the first of many encounters that allow to connect consumers with producers and retailers and that allows producers to receive a fair price throughout the supply chain”.

The FTAO thanks the representatives from Ecuador, European Union, Ghana, Germany, Belgium, Mexico, States of Africa, Pacific and Caribbean and from Chile, for their active participation in this encounter and for the sharing of their experiences in implementing policies and projects in their territories. The FTAO hopes this network can be consolidated and that joint efforts are sought for more promotion of Fair Trade through public policies also for other countries. We would like to thank also to the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and of Foreign Commerce of Ecuador for their support and commitment in the implementation of Fair Trade.

Press contact: Virginia Enssle (enssle@fairtrade-advocacy.org), +31 627214411

Full press release

CSOs recommendations to make the EU regulation on deforestation-free products work for smallholders and forest communities

November 2022

As the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of the EU are negotiating a compromise on the EU regulation on deforestation-free products, we call upon them to maintain a high level of ambition and refrain from any harmful trade offs. The undersigned CSOs have at heart to ensure that the realities and needs of smallholders and forest communities are taken into account, to ensure an effective implementation of the future EU requirements. We welcome the game-changing amendments introduced by the Parliament, which have the potential to enable an inclusive implementation of the regulation in smallholder-intensive sectors. read more

Mid term recap – Young Fair Trade Advocates programme

In September 2021, the FTAO launched a brand-new learning academy for young and engaged citizens across Europe who share an interest in Fair Trade and sustainability, the Young Fair Trade Advocates programme, generously supported by the European Climate Foundation and the Erasmus Plus project EU Wise. From the numerous applications we received, we selected 146 highly talented and motivated advocates to be part of the academy. Every week, they have the opportunity to take part in modules with experts in several topics, ask their questions and dig into engagement opportunities on various fields at EU and national levels.

That way, in the past three months, they have gained knowledge about sustainable food, consumption and production, history of the Fair Trade movement, how the FTAO conducts its advocacy work at the EU level, how the EU’s trade policy affect producers, etc.

In addition to this theoretical background, they also acquired practical skills and learnt about tools they can use to influence policymaking themselves. They notably had the opportunity to discover how social media can be used for this purpose from expert and former FTAO colleague Cass Hebron, and have received guidance on ways to engage at EU level as young citizens

In the runup to the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference or COP26, they had the chance to meet with two Fairtrade producers and Youth ambassadors, Rutuja Patil from India and Deborah Osei from Ghana, who shared their views on Fair Trade, climate change, and the UN conference.

The COP26 itself was one of the highlights of the programme. Applying the knowledge they obtained in it, many advocates took to social media to express their view that decisions taken there should take trade justice into account. Furthermore, they had the opportunity to follow our side event on “Youth and decision-makers discuss nature, energy, water and sustainability in the global economy“, where youth leaders, including Malawian Fairtrade coffee producer Rachel Banda, discussed with politicians how youth can be more involved in decision-making on climate, agriculture and sustainability. Three of our advocates were even present in Glasgow with the different organisations with which they cooperate. Here are their thoughts.

Participants in the COP26 side event -Copyright: Daniela León

Mutesi Van Hoecke, Oxfam ambassador in Glasgow, carrying the voices of the Most Affected People and Areas by the climate crisis:

Daniela León, Peruvian organisation AIDESEP, dedicated to defending indigenous communities:

  • “For me COP26 was an opportunity to come together with other young people and work together to demand action from world leaders and hold them accountable for their decisions that have a global impact. I went to COP with an organization of indigenous people from the Peruvian Amazon and getting involved with different indigenous leaders and hearing their testimonies really gave me a deeper understanding of what the climate crisis actually is.” 
  • In her own words: “COP26 and indigenous peoples”, 25 November 2021

The Young Fair Trade Advocates is a great learning opportunity for both the fellows and the FTAO team. We are looking forward to the second half of the programme, where the advocates, as part of their national subgroups, are expected to organise local actions and engage with their communities in a more independent way.

If you are interested in the programme, follow us on social media and on our website to get all the updates on the next edition.

More information about this will be made available in the coming months.

New report showcases inspiring examples around the world that confirm the key role of governments in promoting the uptake of Fair Trade

November 2021

Full report on Public Policies on Fair Trade

Fairtrade International and the Fair Trade Advocacy Office are pleased to jointly publish the results of a research project on Fair Trade public policies around the world. The report, authored by experts Veselina Vasileva and Didier Reynaud, provides an overview of current and past public policies on Fair Trade and related policy fields. The study presents six case studies: Brazil, Belgium, Ecuador, the European Union, France and Italy, and includes snapshots on Tanzania and Sri Lanka – two emerging cases from Africa and Asia that show potential for further development.

The study analyses how public policies on Fair Trade can enable access to markets for Fair Trade producers, support Fair Trade enterprises and enhance recognition of Fair Trade principles and networks by governments. The report classifies four types of public policies on Fair Trade and related policy fields. The screening of 23 country cases during the first phase of the research clearly showed that in most of the countries there are laws as well as frameworks, programmes and initiatives of governmental support (non-binding legislation) related to Fair Trade or at least to one of its principles. However, a direct reference to Fair Trade is given in only a few cases.

The study presents six case studies: Brazil, Belgium, Ecuador, the European Union, France and Italy, and includes snapshots on Tanzania and Sri Lanka – two emerging cases from Africa and Asia that show potential for further development. By presenting the variety of public policies that can enhance Fair Trade and sharing the diverse experiences in different countries the study aims to motivate and inspire Fair Trade movements worldwide to take action and advocate for public policies on Fair Trade in their own countries.

The Brazilian case portrays a multi-stakeholder process of establishing a unique Fair Trade certification system. The Ecuadorian case highlights how many opportunities for the uptake of Fair Trade can open up when Fair Trade is already addressed in the Constitution of a country and how a complex, inclusive multi-stakeholder elaboration process can lead to a comprehensive and multi-dimensional Fair Trade strategy. The Belgian case teaches us ways to establish a sectoral multi-stakeholder initiative on Fair Trade cocoa. The ‘Beyond the Chocolate Initiative’, for example, is based on the Belgian Charter for Sustainable Development and aims to fight child slavery, make a specific sector free of deforestation and guarantee at least a living income for all producers involved in the value chain; and show how beneficial it can be for the whole process when the Parliament of the country expresses the will to become a Fair Trade country. It also shows the impact of international cooperation using Fair Trade as a tool to empower partner countries.

The French case tells of the first country in the world where Fair Trade has been defined in law. It demonstrates that North-North and South- North Fair Trade can co-habit and offers a great variety of legislation on Fair Trade, such as the International Solidarity “Equite Program” and the expected recognition of Fair Trade labels. The Italian case tells of the first country in Europe that has managed to include Fair Trade criteria as a mandatory requirement in public procurement law for some food products like chocolate and banana. The EU case shows how important it is to achieve a certain policy (EC Communication on Fair Trade), even a voluntary one, in order to go further and upgrade the policy some years later (‘Trade for All’ strategy). The Sri Lanka example offers an inspiring example of a legislative process and a unique framework of cooperation on Fair Trade between the government of Sri Lanka and the international Fair Trade networks. The Tanzanian example – which is more so about advocacy activities – shows which enabling and success factors can influence a parliament´s decision in favour of Fair Trade coffee and a reduction in coffee taxes.

All the cases prove the importance of multi-stakeholder processes, government commitment and institutional support for the elaboration and implementation of public policies on Fair Trade. In most of the main case studies there are active Fair Trade networks and well-established structures that have played a crucial role in the elaboration of public policies on Fair Trade. Nevertheless, the analysis has shown that there is an urgent need for strengthening the Fair Trade movement’s structures and capacities – especially on advocacy activities – and for encouraging exchange of knowledge and experience among Fair Trade actors. Awareness-raising among governmental authorities on different political levels is also still needed in most of the cases.

The study concludes that there are many different public policy instruments to achieve support for Fair Trade, such as laws, non-binding resolutions, national action plans, strategies, initiatives, etc. The case studies give ideas and inspiration on the steps to take and the institutions and actors to approach to achieve more support for Fair Trade at policy level.

Several interesting cases emerged during the research that were not explored further given the limited scope of the study. These would be worth studying in the near future as they show that there a lot of potential to encourage Fair Trade actors to strengthen their advocacy activities and lobby for effective and progressive legislation on Fair Trade. Thus, a continuation of this research is strongly recommended.

This research project was possible thanks to the financial support of the European Union and the Charles Leopold Mayer Foundation (FPH). Translated versions in Spanish and French will be made available before mid 2022.