Comments on: Starbucks wonders why Ethiopia won’t do what Starbucks wants

By: silver

silver — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 00:08:28 +0000

boo.

well i’m certainly glad to have more light shed on this topic.. (why did it take so long to break down???!)

but it has left a bad taste in my mouth, and left me disappointed and saddened by it all…

if starbucks really wanted to help educate the public on their position, they should have put out something like this article (”coffee that cares”) to break down what it was they were trying to say; now if they try to put out a counter argument, i’m gonna have to take it with a big ass grain of salt.

darn.

By: DW

DW — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 03:02:25 +0000

“Appelations are not brand names and simply saying a coffee was grown in Sidamo (a mindbogglingly large geographic region exporting many millions of pounds of green coffee) does nothing to indicate or guarantee quality - nor can it”
…that’s kind of the point. The appellations give the Ethiopians no better bargaining position to get more money to their farmers than they had before. This isn’t an issue of telling people the coffee is from Sidamo, this is an issue about them owning and managing their own brands the same way that almost anyone anywhere (in the developed world) already does.
And also, it’s not “Oxfam’s scheme”. It’s the Ethiopian’s prerogative to take whatever action they see as appropriate to protect their property. In this case, Oxfam is just giving them a helping hand to do things that are going to better their farmers and their country overall.

By: t o n x

t o n x — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 10:29:56 +0000

I’d really urge you to take a second look and maybe talk to some of your coffee industry friends and find out what they think about this (frankly retarded) scheme oxfam is advocating for Ethiopia. Starbucks and the NCA are not the only ones to oppose the idea - it poorly addresses a problem that seems poorly grasped. The SCAA has also advised against it and everyone I’ve talked to in coffee sees it as counterproductive or just hairbrained snake oil. Support for the scheme strikes me as naive at best and at worst disingenuous and irresponsible.

Appelations are not brand names and simply saying a coffee was grown in Sidamo (a mindbogglingly large geographic region exporting many millions of pounds of green coffee) does nothing to indicate or guarantee quality - nor can it. Should the state of Indiana trademark the name “Indiana” for its corn? Should I have to write a check to Gov. Schwarzenneger before I tell you the avocado I’m selling you was grown by a farmer in California?

There is a lot that can be done and ought to be done to help Ethiopia’s coffee growers, but manufacturing some hollow vilification of Starbucks isn’t productive. Oxfam should put its energy into real on the ground work that is relevant to the struggles of farmers and resist the temptation to create an easy controversy that ultimately benefits nobody.