LIFE BEHINDBARS
As more chocoholics want proof their sweet treat is sourced ethically, one company’s branding has been singled out for lacking transparency and confusing consumers. Anuja Nadkarni reports.
IT might seem like a simple treat or a chance to shut the kids up for five minutes, but chocolate is becoming a complicated business.
As Kiwis with a sweet tooth begin to care more about where their bars come from – from those picking beans in developing countries, to the final factories where the bars are put together – chocolate-makers are vying to prove their products’ ‘‘ethical’’ provenance.
Cadbury has started a promotional push on its selfinvested ‘‘ethical’’ chocolate label Cocoa Life, including asking selected journalists to go with it to Africa to visit cocoa plantations of its choosing.
Consumers will see more of the little green logo on the front of Cadbury’s chocolate, owned by giant processed-food conglomerate Mondelez.
The Cocoa Life label replaces the Fairtrade label that used to be on the front of its Dairy Milk bars, but they are not the same, and there is concern the move could cause confusion among chocolate buyers.
Mondelez has defended the controversial move to leave the Fairtrade system, claiming it never pulled out and this was an ‘‘evolution’’ of the partnership.
Cocoa Life will appear on the entire range of Cadbury Dairy Milk milk chocolate products.
But Fairtrade Australia and NZ chief executive Molly Harriss Olson said Mondelez’ Cocoa Life programme was not the same as Fairtrade.
For consumers, the difference between Cocoa Life and Fairtrade may be hard to understand. Neither Fairtrade nor Mondelez have published a comparison of Fairtrade and Cocoa Life.
But Mondelez said Cocoa Life was going ‘‘beyond’’ the supply chain and improving the lives of its cocoa farmers in Ghana, Cote D’Ivore and Indonesia, through education, providing clean water and ensuring gender equality.
Fairtrade continued to be a part of Cocoa Life as an independent auditor of the programme.
However, Cocoa Life’s standards of ethical practice have been written by Mondelez, not Fairtrade, which is partgoverned by cocoa farmers themselves.
Olson said that although Cadbury intended to hugely increase its support for Cocoa Life, it was not going to be as rigorous and clear as Fairtrade.
‘‘Fairtrade has transparent and robust standards in our supply chains. Our standards are developed by high-level expert advisory committees and those standards are published internationally.
‘‘That’s very different for a AP company – they may or may not have external advisers and publish standards publicly. Cadbury’s ambition is to have a greater impact but when schemes develop their own programmes, but it’s not the same [as Fairtrade],’’ she said.
Trade Aid chief executive Geoff White said Mondelez moving outside of a recognised auditing programme was a ‘‘terrible step back’’.
‘‘They would never dream to do it on the reporting of their financials so why do they think they can get away with reporting on their environmental concerns?’’ White said.
Marketing lecturer at Auckland University Mike Lee doubted ordinary consumers could understand the difference between competing ‘‘ethical’’ labels.
‘‘The only way to have that level of transparency is to have entities beyond the corporation to have the access to some sort of power or it’s all happening behind closed doors,’’ Lee said.
‘‘If everyone starts doing their own thing, you have this massive influx of information and seriously, do they think consumers are going to look into the processes of every fair trade
‘ Cadbury’s ambition is to have a greater impact but when schemes develop their own programmes... it’s not the same as Fairtrade.’ FAIRTRADE AUSTRALIA AND NZ CHIEF EXECUTIVE MOLLY HARRISS OLSON, LEFT
scheme of companies? It just gets too hard and people start tuning out.’’
According to the International Labour Organisation, one fifth of African children work as labourers, most of them in the