Direct Trade Coffee: what's it mean to you?

7 comments

• By Nic Walker  |  Tuesday, May 4, 2010 08:44 PM

  I think the important thing to keep in mind is the difference between the values held by us - the western consumers in regards to the ecological, social and economic status of the operations and landscape involved in the production of direct trade coffee and that of the producers and their communities. It seems obvious the direct trade model provides more flexible and red-tape free relationships between consumers and producers via roasting companies etc than fairtrade or RFA and the other certification schemes around, but I'd argue the continual consideration of producers' cultural understanding of their landscapes and their businesses is vital to the evolution of sustainable and excellence driven coffee trade.

  
  
• By Chris Capell  |  Sunday, May 2, 2010 10:12 AM

  I think Direct Trade is the best current model we have for purchasing coffee. I would not be surprised to see a better one come along.
  
  I like that Direct Trade means connections are shorter and more, well, direct, between the people growing the coffee and the people drinking it. I like that roasters can choose to pay more for organic/de-facto organic, farms that practice fair labour practices, more ecologically sustainable processes, etc. I like the increase in information available about the coffee that comes from the roaster dealing directly with the farmer (eg. varietal, elevation, backstory, etc.). I like that it encourages excellence in quality by allowing roasters to pay more for it when they taste it. However, I want to see this go hand-in-hand with feedback and education for the farmers, so that growers that did not meet the quality standards that merit these higher prices get to learn why, and then have the chance to improve their coffee in the future. On the other hand, I don't want to see growers chasing after the high prices earned by the Esmerelda by ripping out their plants and planting all Geisha, for example.
  
  I don't like how hard it is to explain Direct Trade to customers. I don't like how some of them get really suspicious when you start mentioning that the market sets the value that the farmers get. I don't like that Intelligentsia has trademarked the name (although they seem to be good about not suing others for using it). Up until this point, I tend to trust the info I get from roasters about their Direct Trade purchases, mainly because I feel that most people currently involved in our level of coffee are doing it because it's a passion. However, as our style begins to become the mainstream, and corporations start to practice Direct Trade too, I'd love to see some sort of third party verification of Direct Trade claims.

  
  
• By Jim  |  Friday, April 30, 2010 10:23 PM

  From the standpoint of a retail customer, if Direct Trade benefits both the roaster and the producer that is great as long as there is still good quality coffee at a reasonable price.

  
  
• By David  |  Friday, April 30, 2010 07:10 AM

  Direct trade is as close to buying coffee from a neighbor as one can get in Edmonton AB.

  
  
• By Lisa Rotenberg  |  Friday, April 30, 2010 07:03 AM

  *Follow-up* I see this "Intelligentsia pays growers 25 percent above the Fair Trade price. Beyond that, it takes a flexible approach to labor issues, as it does with environmental issues. The guideline is economic sustainability. Are all parties benefiting from the coffee trade?" And it reminds me of Loblaws/Presidents Choice. Anyone else?

  
  
• By Lisa Rotenberg  |  Friday, April 30, 2010 06:52 AM

  If I understand the term correctly, and I read about here, http://www.ethicalcoffee.net/direct.html, it is great concept. In my menu of coffees, very few are Fair Trade, as there is so little of it that it is not an issue. We are lucky to have it on earth at all. A perfect example is Flores Komodo Blue Dragon. Can't wait for that one!
  
  Recently you and I were fortunate enough to acquire coffee from The Petersons in Panama. They were so kind, accommodating, and the story that goes with coffee definitely adds to its value. Part of the rare coffee business is proving the bean is genuine. Direct trade may be the only way it is possible.
  
  On the down side however, adding another term to explain to your customer may be cumbersome at retail. They do not really understand the lingo at best and if a bean fell from the moon they might reject it for not being organic or fair trade.
  
  Hope that contributes to a great topic!
  
  Lisa Rotenberg
  www.rocketfuelcoffee.com

  
  
• By Aaron Ball  |  Friday, April 30, 2010 06:40 AM

  When you use "direct trade" it is clear to me that you are cutting out the middle man and getting more profit to the farmer. I don't feel the term "direct trade" does justice to the relationships you are building with coffee farmers. We know you have top quality coffee but we don't get to see the relationships, support, and feedback you are giving the producers. Does "relationship coffee" tell enough of the story or should we invent a new phrase?