Poor Farmer

Is the company ready to listen to the poor farmers' plea over there? The Seattle Times reported that Starbucks has opened its first store in Africa on Thursday. The Cairo location will be run by Kuwait-based company M.H. Alshaya, which also operates more than 170 Starbucks stores in Kuwait, Lebanon, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Jordan and Turkey. The coffee shop chain opened its first stores in Brazil about a month ago and has plans to open locations in India and Russia in 2007. The poor coffee farmers in Africa are still asking Starbucks to honor its commitments. Few weeks back, The Standard , posted here , reported that "angry farmers from a coffee factory in Nyeri District have blasted officials of the Starbucks Coffee Company for refusing to respond to their questions on a project the multinational is undertaking in the area.” According to the report, Mr John Kabira, a farmer said "Starbucks interests are only in making profits from our c...

Goliath & David? We are in the last days of year 2006 and Starbucks is still being asked to sign a voluntary Licensing Agreement acknowledging Ethiopia's ownership of its own coffee names. While I keep an eye on any developments through the end of the year, I hope the following summary of the major events and issues surrounding the dispute between Ethiopia and Starbucks helps you reflect on the past several days. The first section of this summary tracks the chronological order of major events since the dispute erupted and the second section enlists links to and a brief description of articles, issues, and references posted on this blog through the end of 2006. TIMELINE 2004 : Starbucks filed application to register “ Shirkina Sun-Dried Sidamo ” trademark. Ethiopia asked Starbucks to drop its application because the country is preparing to register the names Sidamo and Harar ; Starbucks refused to talk 2005 : NCA filed a letter of protest asking Ethiopia's application t...

Starbucks released a two minutes video on YouTube in response to that of Oxfam. No surprise there for a defensive and desperate party. What is striking in the video interview is the attempt by Dub Hay, Head of Starbucks coffee Team, to mislead the public. Here is the first segment of the one-man show: Question on the screen : Why won't Starbucks sign the trademark agreement with Ethiopia? Dub Hay : ( from narration ) For us to do what we've been asked to do, which is to sign a licensing agreement recognizing the trademark name to the geographies is something against the law. US law does have and allow it, and allow it for this, it does specifically allow it, called certification and we have proposed for this as an alternative; we are very committed to finding a solution with the Ethiopian government as it is in the best interest of the coffee farmers. Simply put, trademark is illegal because the law allows for certification [also]. The argument is insencere but the intrinsic mo...

Few days ago, I posted highlights of Oxfam's call for public action under Starbucks: Honor Your Commitments to Ethiopian Coffee Farmers . The first comment on this came from Starbucks. The comment posted by a writer who preferred to remain anonymous (have you ever read a name when the company comments?) reads: I recommend you visit www.starbucks.com to see what this company does do to support farmers in every country they buy from. All of this bad press is false. December 14, 2006 2:58:00 PM PST At the time, I appreciated Starbucks' response and encouraged everyone to discuss on how to let the Ethiopian coffee farmers benefit from owning the trademarks of their own coffee names. Well, Shayna has a response: Starbucks has taken some good steps, but it can do better. Recognizing Ethiopia’s rights to its coffee names would complement these efforts. Starbucks has made positive contributions to coffee-growing communities, but now that Ethiopia is proposing a long-term poverty solut...

Given the current government's repeated violation of law and order even in terms of the constitution it wrote, its tarnished human rights records, and attempts to silence the public in every way possible including repression and war, the role it plays in such initiatives is rightly questionable. Also, the current marketing system in the country is skewed towards favoring government affiliated middlemen and exporters more than the poor farmers. My upcoming post will discuss this topic in further depth and attempt to explain or suggest systems that will reinforce the farmers' opportunity to directly benefit from this and other projects.

By Wondwossen Mezlekia The recent Starbucks Day of Action escalated the public dispute to another level, described by an activist as color orange or “severe” – red being “imminent” - in a scale of likelihood of public actions. Starbucks has not commented on this to date but there are indications suggesting that the company did feel the heat. Whether the giant would move from its stance remains an interesting story to follow. On December 16, many Starbucks customers including Ethiopian Americans, Fair Trade activists, and University students made it out to the busy streets in the US, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Germany, and other countries. In addition, in what is seen as proof of Oxfam’s sophistication in campaign strategies and the organization’s intimacy with grassroots supporters, a video of the public action was released through YouTube on December 19th - another surprise. The three minutes video is both alarming and full of striking contrasts. It is amazing to see people ...

An interviewee on Starbucks Day of Action video said that this is an opportunity for Starbucks to “show they are what they say they are.” Is Starbucks missing this opportunity? More soon...