The Manufacturing Committee Dialogue’s Second Foundational Issue: Size of Factory PART IV
Introduction:
This is the fourth and final post regarding the issue of the size of the factory in the creation of exceptional manufacturing standards. Within the fair trade community, there is a vigorous debate as to whether fair trade should be for the small producer or large producer.
At the beginning of each section is the participant in our dialog who wrote the post. For a complete list of participants, previous posts and background information, visit https://fairjewelry.org/madison-dialogue-manufacturing-committee.
In this post, I summarize the key points gained from the previous discussion, which will be the basis for the next stage, setting the standards.
~ Marc Choyt, Publisher
Marc Choyt wrote:
We have had a very productive discussion. Let me try to summarize the six key points which I believe we have consensus on:
1. We will create standards for medium and small manufacturing facilities.
2. Standards will be widely encompassing, supporting a variety of best practices within the context of jewelry manufacturing, small and large, in producer communities.
3. We will pay particular heed to issues related to the small producer, who should be the greatest beneficiary, particularly in the context of “fair trade” manufacturing (if that is what we decide to call it.) Our initiatives need to be entirely supportive and not burdensome.
4. Our manufacturing certification will take advantage of the latest technology, creating a format which will add greater value to the producers’ efforts through published online studies. Secondarily, this platform will be educational to both the public and trade.
5. We will partnership with manufacturers, offering technical support so that their workers can live long and healthy lives.
6. We will continue to work throughout this process in accordance with civil society, with multi-sector input and complete transparency.
In context to discussions about the fair trade space, the challenge we face, not only now, but at every stage of our endeavor, is to bring our idealistic goals into fruition by grounding them in the factory. We have to create a living, compassionate bridge between the producing communities and the markets of the developed world. The goal is to create not merely sustainable, but regenerative economies– dignified, equitable economic relationships that strengthen producers, their communities and craft traditions.
The goal of recognizing exemplary manufacturing, supporting best and safest practices and connecting them to market is fully obtainable. In fact, I have been able to facilitate this myself in a small way through interviews on fairjewelry.org which have, though this exposure, created business opportunities to exceptional suppliers and manufacturers.
We cannot solve so many inequities. Our efforts may only lead to a humble improvement in the overall situation in the jewelry sector. Yet it is a small contribution, our contribution, to a much greater movement around the world for social and economic justice—the “Blessed Unrest” as Paul Hawkins calls it. If you are ever despairing about the way things are, it is good to watch this short clip. We have a part to play, and it is up to us to seize this moment.
These days, when I consider the many elements of the global situation, I am reminded of lines from the poem “Second Coming” by William Butler Yeats:
“The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
I know many people in this group, as colleagues and a few I count as friends. I would say, with complete assurance, that we are full of both (altruistic) conviction and passionate intensity.
Certainly, many of the issues raised here in this initial discussion will continue to be considered even more deeply in our ongoing discussions. They must be considered! Yet at this point, may we continue forward with good will and our best intentions, leaving the foundational issues and considering the first principle and standard?
Mari Lee Wrote:
Thank you once again for your ongoing consideration and participation.
Thanks for the CLEAR summary, well done! I agree fully, and think that this has been a valuable process.
Martin RIzzi Wrote:
Congratulations on your excellent work in designing and managing this Madison Dialogue manufacturing list process.
I do still have reservations about the directionality of the certification and representation of products as being fair or ethically-made.
Especially if a product in question is intended to be marketed with claims that its purchase “helps” the artisan and his or her family.
And, especially, if claims are to be made that this process is all about real economic development and opportunity for the craftspeople.
That’s all I have to say – only asking you good well-meaning people to not take the names of the farmers and the humble artisans in vain.
The constructive suggestion I have offered would be to form an alliance between the producers and the idealistic commercial merchants.
This would address concerns about the economic interests of the producers being defined by their customers, rather than by themselves.
This is the only point of reservation I have – the rest of the initiative as presented in this outline has my support and admiration.
Having registered my reservation, I will quietly stand to the rear and respectfully let the process proceed..
Flavia Aarden-Kilger Wrote:
Well put. The mountain is steep, our path rough, but the benefits to producers in the South will make it worth everyone’s while. In the North and South.
What you have written below is clear. We are a stepping stone, we can not solve all of the issues that need attention, but we can make a difference in a number of them and shed light on many others.
Melinda Nugent
I must say, the ‘energy’ of this discussion is excellent. I applaud your thoughtful and clear summary of the process and goals.
I have been particularly moved by the picture painted by Martin – it has given me much food for thought. He depicts a very humbling perspective. I have spent many days since thinking over the points he raised.
I look forward to future discussions.
