Ready to take the Plunge to Slave-Free Chocolate

I just wrote a whole long post ... and lost it. Grrrrr! It took me two days, too, what with kid interruptions.

So, short, less rational and less passionate version: I first heard about child/slave labor on cocoa farm here. It took me a while to really internalize that and decide to avoid child/slave labor chocolates, but now I have and I've been doing some online research. My biggest hang-up has been whether or not I need to avoid my favorite chocolatier, See's. Unless someone has already received correspondence from them, I'm going to write them and check.

There's a lot of back and forth you can read on this subject on the internet, and you can't believe everything you read, or just go with what comes up first on your google search. I've decided to believe that child/slave labor does indeed occur and that there is something however small that I can do about it. Why? Because the history of big business has depended on the exploitation of workers in the past and with political and social turmoil in the areas where cocoa is grown I wouldn't be surprised if it happened (Central African nations are of the most concern, though cocoa is also grown in Brazil and Central America-most of the slave rap focuses on Africa). Today I ran into this article, but it still leaves concerns about treatment of workers to me.

So, what to eat? Well, Consumption Rebellion has compiled a list/ranking of major chocolate companies that you can read here, though it is for Australia. I decided to check out the big players, and here's what I found:

Mars: Has a Cocoa plan thing; mostly focuses on environmental impact; depends on World Cocoa Foundation and International Cocoa Initiative - in CR's opinion these are meaningless in regards to actual working conditions, and I'm going with her viewpoint

Hersheys: Also has this Cocoa plan thing (lost the names and too tired to look them up; you can find them on each companies website); seems pretty similar to Mars; references WCF and ICI

Lindt: No mention whatsoever on website as to anything pertaining any of this as far as I could see

Nestle: Working toward Rainforest Alliance Certification by a certain year

So, it would seem from all this that of the big players, Nestle is doing the best. And it quite possibly is. I have a few concerns, mainly these:

1. One of Nestle's executives is on the Board for the Rainforest Alliance. Even if this doesn't mean their interfering now, I see this as a potential conflict of interest and compromises Rainforest Alliance's evaluation of Nestle.

2. Rainforest Alliance focuses mainly on environmental impact (which is great), but requires very little in the way of fair treatment/pay of farm workers. They don't permit child/slave labor, but due to reason #3, I'm not sure (especially 'cause I'm not sure if I read right) if this is a complete comfort.

3. Rainforest Alliance certification isn't very stringent; to get the logo only 30% of the product in question has to be certified (the actual percentage must be on the package). Why only 30%? Apparently they can't verify the sources for all of the product. Granted, they cover more than just cocoa, there are middle men, etc., but I still think that's silly. Also, from what I read, which I could be misinterpreting, it appears that the 30% in question only has to adhere to 50% of requirements. Again, not sure on that. Either way, too many loopholes. And big companies will find those.

I know some of these comments are knocking Rainforest Alliance. I think they are actually trying to work within the current system, and are actually finding a step that big companies will take, so I'm not completely opposed to Rainforest Alliance Certified products. With chocolate, though, I will only go for products with a high percentage of certified cocoa.

There is also Fair Trade and certain Organic Certified chocolate to take into account. I haven't done much research on the organic certified, and there are all sorts of organic certifications so that one is up in the air. I like what I've heard about Fair Trade. They operate with small business (which I like), and require much better payment/treatment of farmers and employees. I think that smaller business is more sustainable economically and also environmentally. Anyone who's ever had a garden and actually worked with the earth is more likely to make conscious decisions as long as their life isn't on the line.

As far as the differences between Rainforest Alliance and Fair Trade Certifications, I like this article. Basically, they both have pros and cons. But, mostly, they're coming from different perspectives (environment and social ethics).

Hope this was informative! Now, go eat some chocolate and let it sink in. :)