<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Kraft takeover of Cadbury’s bad for ethics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ethical-junction.org/blogs/2009/09/16/kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%e2%80%99s-bad-for-ethics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ethical-junction.org/blogs/2009/09/16/kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%e2%80%99s-bad-for-ethics/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%25e2%2580%2599s-bad-for-ethics</link>
	<description>- from the Ethical Junction membership</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:49:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<meta xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex,follow" />
	<item>
		<title>By: splenda recipes</title>
		<link>http://www.ethical-junction.org/blogs/2009/09/16/kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%e2%80%99s-bad-for-ethics/comment-page-1/#comment-32426</link>
		<dc:creator>splenda recipes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:34:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost.localdomain/blogs/2009/09/16/kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%e2%80%99s-bad-for-ethics/#comment-32426</guid>
		<description>I was interested to read your article covering the potential concerns about the possible purchase of Cadbury’s by Kraft.  It is unfortunate, however, that in the article you chose to repeat the misleading dismissal the Rainforest Alliance certification scheme in that was originally made in the Ethical consumer Magazine.  I often find it to be lazy comment to simply state “it is widely accepted amongst campaigners that the Fairtrade standard is more demanding” as you quoted Rob Harris saying, without citing any evidence for such a claim.

While Faritrade is an excellent and commendable certification scheme, so to is the Rainforest Alliance and I think your readers should be made aware of that.  For a farm to gain Rainforest Alliance certification it needs to meet exacting standards which cover all three of the interlocking elements of sustainability: ethics, environment and economics.  These standards are managed by the Sustainable Agricultural Network, a coalition of NGOs in developing countries, and are developed by representatives from southern based NGO’s, farmers groups and academics as well as the Rainforest Alliance.  Farms are then independently audited on an annual basis so that consumers who have an interest in the broad social, environmental and economic aspects of sustainability can have confidence that the commodities in a product bearing the “green frog” seal have met these exacting standards.

It was also disappointing that you consider the “minimum acceptable price” to be the only way that you can make a substantial difference to endemic poverty.   While the price a farmer receive is important so too is providing that farmer with the skills and knowledge to farm efficiently and sustainably.  The Rainforest Alliance is teaching farmers to farm more effectively, growing their bottom line and conserving the fertile soils and natural resources on which their children will depend. Rainforest Alliance certification puts the emphasis on improved farming practices rather than on alternative marketing schemes. Any farmer’s success depends on crop quality, productivity, cost control and sale price. The Rainforest Alliance program addresses all four. Most farmers in the Rainforest Alliance certification program are getting significantly higher prices for their goods than they did before certification and higher than the non-certified market price. But farmgate prices are not a panacea. The system that focuses only on price is missing a number of other critical elements that influence whether or not farmers get out of poverty. Many farmers earn high prices and yet still fail. 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.

The higher prices that companies are willing to pay for coffee, cocoa and other goods from Rainforest Alliance Certified farms allows farmers to invest in improvements so their farms are more efficient and easier on the environment. Rainforest Alliance also works closely with a number of “green” financing institutions to ensure that farmers have access to soft loans.

At the end of the day what really matters is not a comparison between Fairtrade and the Rainforest Alliance.  Rather a recognition that both schemes are credible and important and to turn all our efforts onto the majority of products available which still have no independent certification to prove that farmers, farmworkers and the environment are getting a fair deal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was interested to read your article covering the potential concerns about the possible purchase of Cadbury’s by Kraft.  It is unfortunate, however, that in the article you chose to repeat the misleading dismissal the Rainforest Alliance certification scheme in that was originally made in the Ethical consumer Magazine.  I often find it to be lazy comment to simply state “it is widely accepted amongst campaigners that the Fairtrade standard is more demanding” as you quoted Rob Harris saying, without citing any evidence for such a claim.</p>
<p>While Faritrade is an excellent and commendable certification scheme, so to is the Rainforest Alliance and I think your readers should be made aware of that.  For a farm to gain Rainforest Alliance certification it needs to meet exacting standards which cover all three of the interlocking elements of sustainability: ethics, environment and economics.  These standards are managed by the Sustainable Agricultural Network, a coalition of NGOs in developing countries, and are developed by representatives from southern based NGO’s, farmers groups and academics as well as the Rainforest Alliance.  Farms are then independently audited on an annual basis so that consumers who have an interest in the broad social, environmental and economic aspects of sustainability can have confidence that the commodities in a product bearing the “green frog” seal have met these exacting standards.</p>
<p>It was also disappointing that you consider the “minimum acceptable price” to be the only way that you can make a substantial difference to endemic poverty.   While the price a farmer receive is important so too is providing that farmer with the skills and knowledge to farm efficiently and sustainably.  The Rainforest Alliance is teaching farmers to farm more effectively, growing their bottom line and conserving the fertile soils and natural resources on which their children will depend. Rainforest Alliance certification puts the emphasis on improved farming practices rather than on alternative marketing schemes. Any farmer’s success depends on crop quality, productivity, cost control and sale price. The Rainforest Alliance program addresses all four. Most farmers in the Rainforest Alliance certification program are getting significantly higher prices for their goods than they did before certification and higher than the non-certified market price. But farmgate prices are not a panacea. The system that focuses only on price is missing a number of other critical elements that influence whether or not farmers get out of poverty. Many farmers earn high prices and yet still fail. 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.</p>
<p>The higher prices that companies are willing to pay for coffee, cocoa and other goods from Rainforest Alliance Certified farms allows farmers to invest in improvements so their farms are more efficient and easier on the environment. Rainforest Alliance also works closely with a number of “green” financing institutions to ensure that farmers have access to soft loans.</p>
<p>At the end of the day what really matters is not a comparison between Fairtrade and the Rainforest Alliance.  Rather a recognition that both schemes are credible and important and to turn all our efforts onto the majority of products available which still have no independent certification to prove that farmers, farmworkers and the environment are getting a fair deal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Singleton-White</title>
		<link>http://www.ethical-junction.org/blogs/2009/09/16/kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%e2%80%99s-bad-for-ethics/comment-page-1/#comment-667</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart Singleton-White</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:14:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost.localdomain/blogs/2009/09/16/kraft-takeover-of-cadbury%e2%80%99s-bad-for-ethics/#comment-667</guid>
		<description>I was interested to read your article covering the potential concerns about the possible purchase of Cadbury’s by Kraft.  It is unfortunate, however, that in the article you chose to repeat the misleading dismissal the Rainforest Alliance certification scheme in that was originally made in the Ethical consumer Magazine.  I often find it to be lazy comment to simply state “it is widely accepted amongst campaigners that the Fairtrade standard is more demanding” as you quoted Rob Harris saying, without citing any evidence for such a claim.

While Faritrade is an excellent and commendable certification scheme, so to is the Rainforest Alliance and I think your readers should be made aware of that.  For a farm to gain Rainforest Alliance certification it needs to meet exacting standards which cover all three of the interlocking elements of sustainability: ethics, environment and economics.  These standards are managed by the Sustainable Agricultural Network, a coalition of NGOs in developing countries, and are developed by representatives from southern based NGO’s, farmers groups and academics as well as the Rainforest Alliance.  Farms are then independently audited on an annual basis so that consumers who have an interest in the broad social, environmental and economic aspects of sustainability can have confidence that the commodities in a product bearing the “green frog” seal have met these exacting standards.

It was also disappointing that you consider the “minimum acceptable price” to be the only way that you can make a substantial difference to endemic poverty.   While the price a farmer receive is important so too is providing that farmer with the skills and knowledge to farm efficiently and sustainably.  The Rainforest Alliance is teaching farmers to farm more effectively, growing their bottom line and conserving the fertile soils and natural resources on which their children will depend. Rainforest Alliance certification puts the emphasis on improved farming practices rather than on alternative marketing schemes. Any farmer’s success depends on crop quality, productivity, cost control and sale price. The Rainforest Alliance program addresses all four. Most farmers in the Rainforest Alliance certification program are getting significantly higher prices for their goods than they did before certification and higher than the non-certified market price. But farmgate prices are not a panacea. The system that focuses only on price is missing a number of other critical elements that influence whether or not farmers get out of poverty. Many farmers earn high prices and yet still fail. 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.

The higher prices that companies are willing to pay for coffee, cocoa and other goods from Rainforest Alliance Certified farms allows farmers to invest in improvements so their farms are more efficient and easier on the environment. Rainforest Alliance also works closely with a number of “green” financing institutions to ensure that farmers have access to soft loans.

At the end of the day what really matters is not a comparison between Fairtrade and the Rainforest Alliance.  Rather a recognition that both schemes are credible and important and to turn all our efforts onto the majority of products available which still have no independent certification to prove that farmers, farmworkers and the environment are getting a fair deal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was interested to read your article covering the potential concerns about the possible purchase of Cadbury’s by Kraft.  It is unfortunate, however, that in the article you chose to repeat the misleading dismissal the Rainforest Alliance certification scheme in that was originally made in the Ethical consumer Magazine.  I often find it to be lazy comment to simply state “it is widely accepted amongst campaigners that the Fairtrade standard is more demanding” as you quoted Rob Harris saying, without citing any evidence for such a claim.</p>
<p>While Faritrade is an excellent and commendable certification scheme, so to is the Rainforest Alliance and I think your readers should be made aware of that.  For a farm to gain Rainforest Alliance certification it needs to meet exacting standards which cover all three of the interlocking elements of sustainability: ethics, environment and economics.  These standards are managed by the Sustainable Agricultural Network, a coalition of NGOs in developing countries, and are developed by representatives from southern based NGO’s, farmers groups and academics as well as the Rainforest Alliance.  Farms are then independently audited on an annual basis so that consumers who have an interest in the broad social, environmental and economic aspects of sustainability can have confidence that the commodities in a product bearing the “green frog” seal have met these exacting standards.</p>
<p>It was also disappointing that you consider the “minimum acceptable price” to be the only way that you can make a substantial difference to endemic poverty.   While the price a farmer receive is important so too is providing that farmer with the skills and knowledge to farm efficiently and sustainably.  The Rainforest Alliance is teaching farmers to farm more effectively, growing their bottom line and conserving the fertile soils and natural resources on which their children will depend. Rainforest Alliance certification puts the emphasis on improved farming practices rather than on alternative marketing schemes. Any farmer’s success depends on crop quality, productivity, cost control and sale price. The Rainforest Alliance program addresses all four. Most farmers in the Rainforest Alliance certification program are getting significantly higher prices for their goods than they did before certification and higher than the non-certified market price. But farmgate prices are not a panacea. The system that focuses only on price is missing a number of other critical elements that influence whether or not farmers get out of poverty. Many farmers earn high prices and yet still fail. 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.</p>
<p>The higher prices that companies are willing to pay for coffee, cocoa and other goods from Rainforest Alliance Certified farms allows farmers to invest in improvements so their farms are more efficient and easier on the environment. Rainforest Alliance also works closely with a number of “green” financing institutions to ensure that farmers have access to soft loans.</p>
<p>At the end of the day what really matters is not a comparison between Fairtrade and the Rainforest Alliance.  Rather a recognition that both schemes are credible and important and to turn all our efforts onto the majority of products available which still have no independent certification to prove that farmers, farmworkers and the environment are getting a fair deal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

