http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/18/world/africa/18ethiopia.html?hp

“In village after village, people said they had been brutalized by government troops. They described a widespread and longstanding reign of terror, with Ethiopian soldiers gang-raping women, burning down huts and killing civilians at will.

It is the same military that the American government helps train and equip — and provides with prized intelligence. The two nations have been allies for years, but recently they have grown especially close, teaming up last winter to oust an Islamic movement that controlled much of Somalia and rid the region of a potential terrorist threat.

The Bush administration, particularly the military, considers Ethiopia its best bet in the volatile Horn — which, with Sudan, Somalia and Eritrea, is fast becoming intensely violent, virulently anti-American and an incubator for terrorism.”

Go ahead buy more Ethiopian coffee.

If you disagree with me, then make your case.

The government of Ethiopia is well armed and it kills people that disagree with it. This is not a subject of debate.

Ethiopia is Bush’s top ally in the Horn of Africa. This is also simple fact.

Large Hampster: Champage really is from Champagne - else it’s sparking wine. Stilton cheese, Parma ham, both HAVE to come form a certain region. This protecting regional names is not a novel approach.

Also Starbucks is bound by law to put the interest of their stockholders above those of Ethiopian farmers or Ethiopia in general (hence stockholder call make a difference). There will be at times competition for margin - let the farmers use what honest leverage they have to improve their margins. think that Starbucks is striving to act in their interests is in my opinion as unlikely as all corporations being run by demons

Large Hamster, maybe you have read through all the relevant documents but your comment seems to be little more than uninformed conjecture.

Ethiopian coffee farmers have embraced a novel proposal created by OxFam in which the government of Ethiopia would trademark geographic names–the Sidamo, Harar, and Yirgacheffe coffee growing regions. After doing so, the government of Ethiopia would set up a global network of licensed distributors. The licensed distributors working with the government would then help determine the retail price of Ethiopian coffee and direct some portion of their proceeds to advertise and market the superiority of Ethiopian coffee versus say Colombian coffee. The goal of all of this being higher prices for coffee and happier, healthier coffee farmers.

I believe the novel, untested OxFam approach is unworkable and that it will have the unintended consequence of harming the Ethiopian coffee industry, reducing demand for Ethiopian coffee, and thus hurt already poor coffee farmers and their families. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Geographic names are not usually trademarked. In fact it is not typically even possible to do so. We squeeze Florida oranges not Florida™ oranges and drink Burgundy not Burgundy™. I wish Mayor Bloomberg could trademark “Brooklyn” to prevent Domino’s from further disparaging its fine history with their horrid new pizza, but he won’t because the idea is absurd. Alas, the whole world is free to make New York cheesecake.

The government of Ethiopia has not succeeded at providing running water in more than 50% of its villages nor at paving many roads nor at much of anything actually. The country is a basket case, a disaster. It is laughable to suggest that this government is now ready to take on the task of setting up and managing a worldwide network of anything. In any event, it has more pressing issues that it should be focused on.

The government of Ethiopia is good at buying weapons including tanks and fighter jets. It is also good at jailing, torturing and killing its opponents. It is corrupt and perhaps very, very corrupt. In this case, the demons are real. This corrupt government will now take on the added task of managing coffee exports and distribution. It is not hard to imagine that some of these coffee earnings could then be converted into more tanks, bullets, and bombs. Given the long history of corruption and theft in Ethiopia and most of Africa (see Nigeria), it is much harder to imagine any of the additional coffee earnings actually making their way to poor farmers. It would be extremely naïve to believe this. OxFam thinks that it has created some checks and measures that will prevent this outcome. Well, call me a pessimist but I don’t see a bunch of well armed military guys taking orders from some intern grad students at OxFam 5,000 miles away. Does OxFam even have a tank?

The Oxfam scheme also injects another layer of cost and overhead into Ethiopia’s coffee sales. Costs that will need to be recouped before farmers even have the potential to benefit.

From a coffee buyer’s perspective, the plan makes Ethiopian coffee more difficult to purchase and sell than other coffees. Buyers are asked to sign a lengthy, onerous trademark licensing agreement. This makes buying other coffees easier and more attractive and thus places Ethiopia at a disadvantage in the marketplace. This is likely to lead to lower demand and lower prices. Not a good outcome for farmers.

Instead of the complex, unworkable and potentially lethal Oxfam scheme, I think Ethiopia should follow the tested and traditional approach of geographic certification. Florida oranges, Burgundy wines, Napa Valley wines, and Colombian coffee all have producers’ co-operatives that insure these products actually are grown and produced in their stated geographies. The co-operatives then pool some of their resources to promote their products to try and increase demand and thus prices. Juan Valdez, the Colombian coffee dude, and his burro are the creation of one of these co-operatives. Oxfam is essentially saying that these large, well established, proven co-operatives are wrong. I say their sales and the demand for these products prove they are right. The livelihood of Ethiopian farmers will hang on the outcome of this bet.

Creating new customers for Ethiopian coffee rather than attacking existing customers is likely to generate incremental demand and higher prices. Neither McDonald’s, Proctor and Gamble, Dunkin Donuts nor Kraft purchase any coffee from Ethiopia. They could. However, is the CEO of McDonald’s, seeing the no-win situation that Starbucks now has with Ethiopia, likely to decide to leap into the fray? This dispute is repelling demand. That is not good for farmers.

Ethiopia needs to abandon the unworkable OxFam scheme, embrace not attack its customers, and work to find more customers. I cannot see any upside to coffee farmers from increased government involvement in the Ethiopian coffee market.