Bananapocalypse:

Cavendish Extinctions, Fair Trade, and the future of

the Banana Trade in Central America

By Benjamin K. Lowy

December 2012

1

In the last twenty years, fair trade policies as incentives for sustainable development have

become increasingly prevalent particularly in developing regions such as Central America. The

system is predicated on the growing global consciousness of ecological and human rights, and

concerns regarding food production by the industrial agricultural complex that characterizes the

global food system. In practice, fair trade policies have focused on the exportation of sustainably

produced non-essential luxury goods, such as cocoa and coffee, from developing countries (e.g.,

Honduras) for exportation to developed nations (e.g., the United States). However, one particular

good that is often not associated with fair trade is also one of the most profitable export products:

the banana. Historically, banana production has been exported to the Northern Hemisphere by

the Southern Hemisphere in a mechanized system that has left little room for sustainable

development. Contrary to historical context however, I argue that bananas sold through the fair

trade model can be relatively viable, and indeed, the imminent extinction of the valuable banana

crop will provoke a movement towards more economically stable and environmentally sound

methods of production.

My argument for the implementation of a global banana trade based on fair trade

standards requires a multistep approach which considers the following topics:

Foremost, it is important to understand fair trade in the context of the global economic

market, i.e. fair trade contrasted with free trade.1 This includes an understanding of the viability

of fair trade and defining what it actually means for an economic system to be “viable.”

Second, I provide a brief historical examination of the case of the Cavendish banana in

Central America, examining historiographies of the banana trade throughout the region to

evaluate the price inelasticity over time of the banana fruit.

1 Unless otherwise noted, “free trade” refers the current global economic system, based on the principles of supply and demand, where consumers seek lower costs and producers seek higher profits.

2

Third, in order to place the banana in a broader context, I discusses the relative success of

coffee as a fair trade product and how coffee and bananas relate, which is helpful in

understanding the fair trade potential of the banana.

Fourth, I investigate the predicted extinction of the Cavendish variety. Given that

Cavendish cultivars produce 80% of the world’s bananas, it is useful to synthesize various

studies that examine the likelihood of extinction, as well as the implications such extinction will

have on both fair and free trade.

Finally, I address the arguments against fair trade economics that claim the system is a

non-functioning economic system that does not provide realistic benefits to the producers who

operate within it.

Fair Trade: Fact or Fiction?

In order to understand fair trade as a mechanism for sustainable development, several

factors need to be clarified. As defined in 1987 by the UN World Commission on Environment

and Development, sustainable development is best understood as a method of infrastructure

expansion that focuses on reducing the impact of human growth on natural resources from the

current generation in order to preserve those same resources for future generations.2 Although

sustainable development, and the inclusive term “sustainability” can be measured by several

methods, and may often vary depending on numerous contexts, this paper recognizes it in terms

of the positive impact a system of development has on human livelihood (including rights) and

ecological integrity (stewardship, preservation, conservation, etc).

“Fair trade” is a part of the sustainable development movement and can be defined as the

consumer paying a higher regulated premium for a particularly good, with the higher premium

2 "Our Common Future." World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Page 16

3

being associated with higher wages (standards of living) and improved environmental standards,

when compared to more traditional methods of production.3 What makes fair trade unique,

beyond its simple definition and practice, is that it exists outside the atypical global model for

production that relies on a steady balance between supply and demand, and cannot be explained

in purely economic terms. To begin with, it is important to realize that fair trade items, when

compared with free trade goods, do not offer more physical benefits to the consumer within the

marketplace. That point is pertinent, and instead of evaluating fair trade through the same scope

as free trade, it is better to compare fair trade with the likes of organic food and kosher food,

which cater to specialty markets.4 The market for organic and kosher products is similar to the

market for fair trade products, in that all three produce goods with special characteristics that

place them into specific niche markets. In the case of fair trade items, which may include food,

furniture, jewelry, even sports equipment, the consumer is purchasing not only the physical

product, but also a certain “quality of relations” that is associated with the item, such as higher

wages for workers and greater care of the surrounding environment.5

In the last thirty years, fair trade has received growing attention as an alternative to the

free trade market. But what have been the drivers of this growth? The fact is that since its

inception, several factors have come into play supporting fair trade. The first shift was the

emergence of climate change as a global phenomenon, and the realization that people’s daily

activities and consumption choices actually had a real effect on the global environment. Also,

3 Mann, Stefan. “Analysing Fair Trade in Economic Terms.” The Journal of Socio-Economics 37, no. 5 (October 2008): 2034–2042.

4 Organic and kosher foods are not exactly like fair trade products in that they arguably do provide certain physical benefits. For example, organic foods, in addition to providing environmental benefits might be viewed as providing a health benefit to the consumer.

5 (Mann 2008)

4

increasing access to information as a result of the internet has made people more aware that

decisions made as consumers in the local marketplace can have substantial impact on workers in

other countries half way around the planet.

While fair trade economics is considered a movement, much in the same manner as

organic food, because it driven by the supplemental and intangible value resulting from its more

sustainable methods of production, it is nonetheless a per factum economic market, one driven

by social and environmental-based consciousness factors.6 As a result of fair trade economics

sitting on the outside of the typical supply-and-demand bubble, analyzing how fair trade works

requires a different approach. In the conventional economic system, prices fluctuate based on the

relationship between supply and demand: when supply is high but demand low, the product will

have a lower price, and vice versa. As buyers pursue lower prices, this means that those selling

the goods attempt to eliminate as many costs during production as possible, which can create

issues regarding human rights and ecological integrity. In the fair trade economic system,

however, this is not exactly the case – while the consumer wants to pay a minimum price, the

consumer also is prepared to accept a premium (compared to a free trade product) because there

is an understanding that the higher price is associated with greater benefits to the workers and the

environment. Additionally, fair trade practices often must work within the limits provided by

morality, land, and climate that do not restrict the growth of free trade. For example, there may

be no free trade restrictions on the utilization of herbicides and pesticides to boost agricultural

production but such practices are more restricted in the fair trade system. Because of this,

production costs are much higher than in free trade production, and thus prices are usually

considerably higher.7

6 Jaffee, Daniel. Brewing Justice: Fair Trade Coffee, Sustainability, and Survival. 1st ed. University of California Press, 2007.

7 (Mann 2008)

5

Understanding what fair trade is, and how it functions in relation to the conventional

economic system is a rather straightforward process. More difficult to discern is the viability of

such a system, or rather, how a fair trade-based economic system can reliably support producers

of fair trade goods that may have to compete against free trade goods. As noted above, a

recognized system of supply and demand ensures that those who can provide the cheapest goods

at the lowest cost will be the most successful in the market place, assuming the market is stable

and remains uncongested. Fair trade works differently, in that higher prices typically correspond

to a high value, yet intangible commodity. This does not mean to say, however, that there is no

economic basis for fair trade. Rather, the demand end of the spectrum of fair trade is still in

place, just adjusted in that the consumer demands a particular good plus “interest.” The viability

of a fair trade system is entirely dependent on a consumer base that has a value system that is

concerned with the non-physical benefits the goods carry, and can afford a higher cost. And so,

just as the mainstream economic system relies on a stable economy for goods to be purchased

and sold, when the consumer economy is stable in a market with “conscious” consumers, the fair

trade economic system exists as viable alternative.8

The question remains then, how does fair trade apply to Central America, and more

specifically, the Central American banana trade? The reality is that in terms of value of exports

from Central America, free trade products and goods are clearly dominant. Nonetheless,

production through fair trade standards of development continues to grow rapidly in the region,

as demonstrated by organizations such as COCABO in Panama, a cacao-growing cooperative

that grows with fair trade standards in mind, even if they are not associated by a fair trade label.9

8 (Mann 2008)

9 Pineda Navarro, Mitsila Del C. “Caracterizacion de La Cadena Productiva de Cacao y Diagnostico de La Cooperacion entre Actores”. COCABO - CATIE, May 25, 2008.

6

It is a mechanism of sustainable development that has been greatly influenced by support from

governments in Europe and North America, as well as multinational corporations, such as Whole

Foods10 and Kraft11, which have sought to purchase more goods from fair trade and sustainable

producers.

Central American Bananas

Bananas are currently the most exported fresh fruit and the fifth most exported

agricultural product in the world after grains, sugar, coffee and chocolate. It is an expansive

market, with exports totaling over $7 billion and employing and providing essential income for

thousands of people worldwide. Produced widely throughout the world’s tropical regions, these

herbaceous plants flourish in hot environments with lots of rain. For these climatic reasons

bananas are commonly grown throughout the Central American region, particularly in Honduras,

Costa Rica, and Guatemala. Historically, the production of bananas for export in Central

America has been tied with vast enterprises established by multinational corporations such as

Chiquita (f. United Fruit), Dole (f. Standard Fruit) and Del Monte.12

The historical relationship between the multinational corporations and bananas runs

exceedingly deep, and is considered responsible for helping shape the socio-political dynamic

that exists in the region today. With the rise in global influence of the United Fruit Company

came the term “Banana Republic” to denote countries in which United Fruit and other

multinational corporations wielded significant political and economic influence so as to protect

10 Certified Sustainable Products Alliance: Timber-Bananas-Coffee (CESPA). Report no. 596-A-00-04-00048-00. Rainforest Alliance – USAID. Page 11, 2007.

11 (CESPA 2007)12 Chambron, A. C. “Bananas: the ‘Green Gold’ of the TNCs’.” In Hungry for Power: The Impact of Transnational Corporations on Food Security, edited by J. Madeley. London: UK Food Group, 1999.

7

their investments. This influence has been demonstrated in many ways over the last hundred

years, including through continuous repression of union movements and land reform initiatives,

monopolization of production that has led to massive rural poverty, and at times promotion of

U.S.-led intervention to protect investments. The most manifestation of this influence is the 1954

CIA operation in Guatemala that overthrew President Jacobo Arbenz, whose land reform policies

threatened the agricultural monopoly United Fruit had in the country.13

This history of ties between the multinational corporations and social and political unrest

in Central America is nonetheless framed by an increasingly aggressive market for banana

exportation, centered on a “race to the bottom” in which competition between the

aforementioned multinational corporations has forced the consumer price of the banana down, as

production costs dropped as well.14 It is this push for increasing profits by selling increasing

quantities at low prices that have led to unsustainable production and trade methods that

characterizes the free market banana trade, and are found to be detrimental both to the integrity

of the environment and to the livelihood of the plantation workers. This includes contamination

of water and soil resources due to the heavy use of agrochemicals intended to repel diseases and

pests as well as the agricultural model of monocultures, causing massive nutrient depletion of

soil nutrients, deforestation and erosion. Plantation conditions also lead to many conflicts with

workers, where wages are low, working conditions are poor and unsafe, and adverse health

effects from agrochemical use is common. Unfortunately, little has been done to solve this issue

within the camps of the multinational corporations. As long as the prices of bananas stay low, the

13 Soluri, John. Banana Cultures: Agriculture, Consumption, and Environmental Change in Honduras and the United States. annotated ed. University of Texas Press, 2006.

14 Hough, Phillip A. “A Race to the Bottom? Globalization, Labor Repression, and Development by Dispossession in Latin America’s Banana Industry.” Global Labour Journal 3, no. 2 (September 20, 2012): 236–274.

8

production costs of bananas must remain low as well, ensuring that little change can be expected

with regard to improving working conditions or ecological integrity.15

Fair trade banana production has been viewed as an alternative to this degenerative

system of production employed by the multinational corporations. With a focus on human rights

and ecological integrity, “fair trade,” as discussed above, acts as a mechanism of sustainability

by favoring better working conditions for the farmers, typically including breaks during the day

and adequate wages, as well improving upon the system practiced by the multinational

corporations via the implementation of integrated pest management and limited crop rotation to

prevent the spread of disease. While not nearly as effective as the heavy use of agrochemicals in

the short term, as discussed below, integrated pest management techniques and crop rotation are

much less damaging to the local environment and considerably more sustainable in the longer

term.

One of the criticisms of fair trade as a basis for banana production in Central American is

that it is not economically viable, and does not improve the lives of the workers nor does it

improve the integrity of the affected environment. I argue in this to the contrary; that fair trade

may act as a catalyst for widespread economic growth and self-dependency, creating alternatives

to working for the multinational corporations that produce the majority of banana exports from

Central America. Although the banana market is considerably smaller and much less diverse than

the market for coffee, the system of fair trade for coffee can be used as an archetype for fair trade

bananas.

15 (Hough 2012)

9

Coffee vs. Bananas

Statistically speaking, the global free trade banana economy is unique, in that market

price is typically fairly low, which is the result of a homogenization process pursued by

multinational corporations that

export a single banana variety, the

Cavendish, which requires minimal

specialization for shipping

techniques and packaging. This is

reflected by the following data:

Over the past decade, production of

bananas for exportation has accelerated rapidly across the globe, increasing from 65.1 million

metric tons (mmt) in 2000 to 97.3 mmt in 2009, an increase of 49 percent. At the same time,

global prices for bananas have risen dramatically as well, from $471 per ton in 1999 to $892 per

ton in 2011.16

While the growth rate for free trade bananas may appear to be astronomical, the growth

of fair trade banana exports is much more substantial. The exportation of fair trade bananas

amounted to a total of 300,000 tons in 2007, about 1.7% of the all banana exports globally.

Between 2006 and 2007 there was an increase of nearly 50%, which can be seen in Figure 1.17

These increases speak to a larger phenomenon that is taking root: that since the inception of fair

trade policies in the late 1990s, there has been explosive growth in the sale of fair trade bananas,

a statistic that points to greater opportunities in the future for fair trade banana producers.

16 (Jaffee 2007)

17 Llu, Pascal. “Certification in the Value Chain for Fresh Fruits: The Example of the Banana Industry. FAO Commodity Studies. Rome: Trade and Policy Service. Page 50, 2009.

10

Figure 1 – World Fair trade Banana exports

To better understand the banana in regards to fair trade, it is appropriate to compare

bananas to fair trade coffee. To begin with, coffee is the original fair trade product, so there is

certainly some historical value to investigating it. Secondly, although coffee experienced a

period of relative inelasticity between

the creation of the first International

Coffee Agreement in 1962, which set

production quotas and created a

stable market, and its collapse in

1989, the price of coffee has since

fluctuated wildly, highly dependent

on external factors (climate and weather) and market forces (saturation of the market and futures

trading). Lastly, there is a substantial body of literature on coffee as a fair trade product. Thus,

the experience with fair trade coffee may support the increased use of fair trade to produce and

market bananas.

The story of fair trade coffee is tied to the history of fair trade, and it is necessary to

understand the origins of fair trade coffee. The roots of fair trade coffee date to 1988, when

Mexican farmers from Oaxaca convinced a Dutch development organization, Solidaridad, to

help market coffee that offered a “fair return.” The result was the creation of a label, “Max

Havelaar,” which certified that the coffee was fair trade. Of course, the market for fair trade

coffee has benefited greatly from coffee as a whole being such a valuable commodity. Coffee is

the world’s number one cash crop, generating over $70 billion worth of trade annually. 18

Additionally, and this is where the banana and the coffee market differ greatly, coffee benefits

from a straight forward production process. Whereas bananas when cut from the plant begin a

18 (17-19 are all Jaffee 2007)

11

Figure 2. World free trade Coffee prices, fair trade prices, and organic fair-trade prices for Arabica coffee 1998-2006

rapid aging process that must be combated through specific storage and gassing procedures,

unroasted or green coffee may be stored for up to a year. Because of this process, growers can

manage their crop, waiting until the market is unsaturated to sell coffee for the highest obtainable

price. In a fair trade system, there are added bonuses to this reality. For one, although the market

may still be saturated in a year with high production rates, the floor will continuously remain

higher than the floor for free trade bananas, pointing to lesser fluctuations and a maintaining a

minimum-level premium that is nonetheless higher than free market value (See Figure 2).19

Unfortunately, while coffee on its own is an extensively traded product, fair trade coffee

is much more of a niche market, generating $1.5 billion in trade annually, only about two percent

of the global trade.20 The question remains then, how does this comparison help promote the

idea of bananas as ripe (no pun intended) for exploitation on the fair trade market? As we’ve

seen so far, the free trade and fair trade coffee markets vastly outrank the free and fair trade

banana markets with regards to profit generation and export quantity. Also, coffee differs from

bananas in that the market is flush with variety. Thus, it is relatively easy to see how fair trade

bananas could exist, in the same manner as fair trade coffee, as a niche market. However, unlike

coffee, fair trade bananas have an opportunity to move into the mainstream as a result of what

can be referred to as the bananapocalypse.

Bananapocalypse 21

More than anything else, the industrial agricultural method of production in the free trade

system is geared towards increasing the quantity of the product grown at any cost, typically done

through monoculture and the heavy use of agrochemical, as previously mentioned. This 19 20 21 Note – The term “bananapocalypse” is my own creation. It is held by copyright.

12

production system however, comes at a cost. Beyond the evident ecological problems related to

monoculture and heavy pesticide and/or herbicide use, these practices have a negative side

effect: the ease of which disease can spread. Over-application of agrochemicals as preventative

measures can build resistance, in that it kills off the weakest strains of the dangerous pathogens,

allowing the strongest strains to evolve and multiply. Beyond this, because every plant in a

monoculture system is genetically analogous, there is no need for adaptive radiation by a

pathogen, only a need for transportation between each plant, which in the case of most diseases,

occurs through contaminated soil, so there is no genetic diversity or gene transfer. This leaves

the door open for any well adapted virus or bacteria to effectively eliminate the banana crop.

And while I foreshadow an outbreak of such a disease, the scariest detail is that it has happened

before.22

The origins of the first banana disease are tied to the beginnings of the international trade

for bananas and the dichotomy between Central (and South) America and the United States. The

original pan-American banana trade dates back to the early 1800s, but the relevant event

occurred much later. By the 1900s, the banana

trade was entirely reliant on the production of a

single cultivar, the Gros Michel, known for its

ability to withstand the effects of transportation

machinery as well as for its sweet succulent

flavor. Unfortunately, its third claim to fame

would also be its fatal flaw, which was its

22 Chambron, A. C. “Straightening the Bent World of Bananas”. Banana Link - EFTA, 2000.

13

Figure 3 Global Distribution of Panama Disease (R1)

inability to withstand the fungus Fusarium oxysporum, or fusarium wilt (R1).23 This fungicidal-

resistant disease spread through the soil and water at a rapid rate, and once it infected a plant, it

quickly suffocated the psuedostem, preventing the passage of any nutrients and effectively

causing the death of the plant.

Originating in Australia in the late 1800s, the disease quickly spread to the Americas, and

by the 1940s, began to ravage the monoculture crops of Gros Michel throughout the region

including Panama, one of the countries hardest hit by the fungus, colloquially known as “Panama

disease.”24 No country was spared from the epidemic, however, and past studies have estimated

that over $400 million was lost in primary profits, which, when converted into modern rates

(utilizing inflation), is estimated to be roughly $2.3 billion without including the cost of

“unemployment, abandoned villages, unrealized income, and expenditures to maintain social

stability in the affected regions.”25

As we see today in supermarkets everywhere, however, although the supply of Gros

Michel for exportation was essentially eliminated by the 1960s, the large multinational

corporations that produced the majority of exports bananas turned to a new cultivar to continue

their trade. In an enormously expensive move which required adjustments to production and

distribution mechanisms, the Cavendish, a weaker, less aromatic and disease-resistant cultivar

was adopted, often planted on the same land where f. oxysporum had wiped out Gros Michel

cultivars only months before.

Since replacing the Gros Michel over fifty years ago, the Cavendish has become an

economic success, and dominates the world export market for bananas, as Gros Michel did

23 Ploetz, Randy. Panama Disease: An Old Nemesis Rears Its Ugly Head - Part 1: The Beginnings of the Banana Export Trade. APSnet, August 2005.

24 (Ploetz 2005)

25 (Ploetz 2005)

14

previously. Although the Cavendish was planted on the same land where infected Gros Michel

plants had died, beyond any extenuating environmental circumstances it remained a stable crop.

Unfortunately, this sense of security has since been shattered, and much like before, a threat has

emerged which could spell the end of the Cavendish . In a fatal case of déjà vu, a new strain of

fusarium wilt, known as Tropical Race 4 (TR4) has emerged in Southeast Asia, threatening to

decimate the global banana crop.26 Already, populations of Cavendish cultivars have been killed

off by TR4 in parts of Australia, Taiwan, Indonesia, and Pakistan. While extensive research is

being done to investigate both the causation of the fungus as well as preventative measures, and

early results have appeared promising, no definitive cure has yet been found, and thus the threat

of Cavendish extinction remains a possibility.27

So what implications does a theoretical extinction of the Cavendish banana cultivar have

on the global market as well as on the implementation of a fair trade system of production? The

truth is complicated, and requires some reflection on the realities of the global banana market. As

has been noted, the elimination of the Gros Michel banana industry resulted in losses estimated

at upwards of $2.3 billion (in today’s value), and when considering that both consumption and

production of export bananas have risen drastically within the last 50 years (between 1985 and

2002, global export production of bananas grew 5.3% annually), if the Cavendish were to be

wiped out, the financial loss would surely be greater than experienced with the Gros Michel.28

These facts point to greater issues regarding the global market and support a transition to

a moderated system of production that encompasses the fair trade ideology. As has been 26 Ploetz, Randy. Panama Disease: An Old Nemesis Rears Its Ugly Head - Part 2: The Cavendish Era and Beyond. APSnet, October 2005.

27 "Honduras En Busca Del Futuro De La Industria Bananera | Portal FrutÃÂcola." Honduras En Busca Del Futuro De La Industria Bananera. Portal Frutícola, 6 Aug. 2012. Web. <http://www.portalfruticola.com/2012/08/06/el-camino-de-honduras-hacia-una-banana-resistente-a-enfermedades/?pais=united states>.

28 Liu 2009

15

previously discussed, the modern mechanism of banana production relies heavily on

monoculture, which, as we have learned from historical narrative, can often lead to drastic

results.29 Given the lack of sustainability in this method, the elimination of the monoculture

system, and reliance on a fair trade system may be an appropriate response. By reducing

agrochemical usage and implementing varietal crop coverage by planting different banana

cultivars (one of the many mechanisms of fair trade production), the threat of disease pandemics

can be dramatically reduced, and thus, the economic market is protected in the long-term.

The Case Against Fair Trade Bananas

Even when considering the possibility of Cavendish extinction, there are many factors

present that would argue against the implementation of a fair trade system of production for

bananas. To begin with, the cost differential between the two systems of production is highly

variable. Because it is a product of monoculture, the cost of transporting bananas is uniform, and

does not vary from shipment to shipment, as each product can be treated in the same, methodical

manner, while differentiation of products in a fair trade system requires specific management per

cultivar, something notable in pesticide management as well. This causes costs to be

considerably higher than they would be in a monoculture system of production. Finally, because

the goal of the market is to keep prices low, low wages must be given to workers, whereas in a

fair trade system, the cost of labor is considerably higher. .

Another factor that suggests a fair trade system would be problematic is the reaction of

consumers. In general, the majority of consumers will avoid the higher costs of fair trade

bananas, which would lead to a drastic drop in the market, causing severe issues. Additionally,

29For another great historical record of the negativities of monoculture, read Black Potatoes: The Story of the Great Irish Famine, 1845-1850 by Susan Campbell Bartoletti.

16

fair trade, although recognized as a possible solution to the modern economic system, has often

been questioned in its effectiveness, and this lack of faith would play vital role on the existence

of fair trade bananas flooding the market.

Finally, even if the new standards of production necessary to protect crops and growers’

economic interests, including the implementation of crop rotation, there is little incentive for

multinational corporations to implement fair trade policies

Counterarguments

While the arguments against fair trade raise important issues, they do not seem to

consider the existence of a market that would entirely rely on fair trade. To begin with, while the

cost of fair trade production currently is considerably higher than that of free trade bananas, it

needs to be realized that short term expenditures in the case of converting to fair trade lead to

long term gains and market security through the increased awareness of both where bananas

come from, and reduction in the risks created by the use of monoculture. As mentioned

previously, the usage of different varieties of bananas actually decreases the risk of another

banana pandemic, and therefore provides a long term stable market.

Secondly, consumers generally prefer variety in the food products they buy, and variety

often leads to more intelligent and informed consumers. It is possible that consumers, who are

only familiar with the Cavendish, might prefer the different banana varieties that would likely be

marketed in a fair trade environment.

17

Third, with regards to consumer economics, the higher prices might translate into a drop

in consumption (although it is hard to estimate just how drastically this drop would be) although

it is possible that consumers will simply apply a greater share of their food budgets to bananas.

Fourth, although the banana trade was previously able to transition from one monoculture

system to another after the downfall of the Gros Michel, there are clear differentiations between

the consumer bases of then and now that would make such an adjustment difficult. Today, while

the internet and increasingly available literature provide food histories and nutritional

information to people regarding what they eat, the increasing industrialization of food has

resulted in a growing disconnect among people and the food they eat. Fair trade bridges that

established gap by ensuring that the food a consumer purchases has not only been grown in a fair

manner, denoting value of human rights and the environment, but has been minimally “fixed” by

a mechanized production system that is universally impacting the food we find in supermarkets

today.

Fifth, it is important to understand the misconstructions regarding issues raised by

historical implementation of fair trade with regards to perceived benefits including promotion of

sustainability and actual economic or social benefits received by producers. Unfortunately, there

is some truth to this, and there are many case studies which recognize issues regarding fair trade.

In her investigation of a fair trade bananas Aimee Shreck found as follows:

“Specifically, the implementation of (Fair trade) certification creates a disconnect between expectations raised by labels and the ‘lived experience’ of small farmers. In the case of small farmers in Mexico growing certified organic tomatoes and herbs, certification exacerbated socio‐economic inequality and disrupted local social norms by creating a hyper-focus on surveillance.”30

30 Getz, Christy, and Aimee Shreck. “What Organic and Fair Trade Labels Do Not Tell Us: Towards a Place-based Understanding of Certification.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 30, no. 5 (September 2006): 490–501.

18

In addition to these recognized problems, there is a concern that the production of fair

trade products creates a highly vulnerable producer, susceptible to the possibility that growing a

more expensive product will not always have as high of an available market to sell to.31 Of

course, all of these issues are factors of a niche market for fair trade bananas, with reduced

profits and a considerably smaller consumer base than that of free market bananas. I have argued

for the implementation of a system of growth that favors varietal diversity and better care of

crops to support environmental integrity and alas, protect long-term investments, i.e. a system of

production based on fair trade standards. Of course, this argument also supports the improvement

of respect to human rights particularly among the multinational corporations. The incentive for

these companies to protect future labor instability that has characterized the industry in the past,

as well as improve marketing appeal in a world of growing consumer consciousness far outweigh

the economic costs in the short term.

Concluding Thoughts

The banana trade in its current state is a multi-billion dollar business with a centuries-

long history, employing thousands of people in long supply chains that stretch from Africa to the

Americas to Asia. It is a business predicated on its need for efficiency and uniformity, with a

penchant for delivering products that are relatively identical in every manner. Furthermore, it is a

system that relies on a massive usage of agrochemicals and monoculture, as well as enforcement

of strict worker standards that in the end create a hegemonic workforce that is underpaid and

treated poorly. Fair trade bananas, in the most basic sense, are an attempt at addressing these

issues. By paying more for a fair trade banana, consumers are buying into an economic system

that supports the improvement of ecological integrity and the rights of workers and their

31 "Impact of Fairtrade Bananas - Summary and Management Response to an Independent Impact Study." FAO.org. Fairtrade Foundation, Dec. 2011. Web. <http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/banana/documents/IIWBF/contributions/FT_Banana_Summary1.pdf>.

19

families. Yet while the market for fair trade bananas has increased surprisingly in the past several

years, due in part to trade agreements established by the European Union, fair trade bananas

seem destined for the same niche market as fair trade coffee.

I have argued that several factors could eventually contribute to fair trade bananas

leaving the niche market in order to enter the mainstream marketplace. While the industrial

agricultural complex has muddled the pathway that foods take to reach the consumer from point

of production, the internet has helped to shed some light on the issue and allow consumers to

build a small, but vital connection to the sources of their food. The possible extinction of the

Cavendish banana, tied together with an increase in available literary resources concerning

bananas history and the internet, are the creation of a perfect storm. The extinction of the

Cavendish will act as a catalyst, forcing people to become more acutely aware of where they get

their food from and how it is produced. It will help consumers to realize that the systems that

modern food production are predicated on are unsustainable and unsupportable, and may lead in

turn to extreme changes in the market from where they buy products. By relying on a fair trade

system, the consumer both enforces the need for an increase in protecting valuable ecology, but

also supports the cause of human rights as an important and universal issue. While I have

proposed that fair trade bananas can become a product of the mainstream market through the

catalyst of the Cavendish extinction, I conclude with this final thought - bananas are only the

beginning of an important global cultural and economic change, in which overreliance on

industrial agriculture may become a distant memory.

Works Cited

1. "Our Common Future." World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Page 16

20

2. Mann, Stefan. “Analysing Fair Trade in Economic Terms.” The Journal of Socio-Economics 37, no. 5 (October 2008): 2034–2042.

3. Jaffee, Daniel. Brewing Justice: Fair Trade Coffee, Sustainability, and Survival. 1st ed. University of California Press, 2007.

4. Pineda Navarro, Mitsila Del C. “Caracterizacion de La Cadena Productiva de Cacao y Diagnostico de La Cooperacion entre Actores”. COCABO - CATIE, May 25, 2008.

5. Certified Sustainable Products Alliance: Timber-Bananas-Coffee (CESPA). Report no. 596-A-00-04-00048-00. Rainforest Alliance – USAID. Page 11, 2007.

6. Chambron, A. C. “Bananas: the ‘Green Gold’ of the TNCs’.” In Hungry for Power: The Impact of Transnational Corporations on Food Security, edited by J. Madeley. London: UK Food Group, 1999.

7. Soluri, John. Banana Cultures: Agriculture, Consumption, and Environmental Change in Honduras and the United States. annotated ed. University of Texas Press, 2006.

8. Hough, Phillip A. “A Race to the Bottom? Globalization, Labor Repression, and Development by Dispossession in Latin America’s Banana Industry.” Global Labour Journal 3, no. 2 (September 20, 2012): 236–274.

9. Llu, Pascal. “Certification in the Value Chain for Fresh Fruits: The Example of the Banana Industry. FAO Commodity Studies. Rome: Trade and Policy Service. Page 50, 2009.

10. Chambron, A. C. “Straightening the Bent World of Bananas”. Banana Link - EFTA, 2000.

11. Ploetz, Randy. Panama Disease: An Old Nemesis Rears Its Ugly Head - Part 1: The Beginnings of the Banana Export Trade. APSnet, August 2005.

12. Ploetz, Randy. Panama Disease: An Old Nemesis Rears Its Ugly Head - Part 2: The Cavendish Era and Beyond. APSnet, October 2005.

13. "Honduras En Busca Del Futuro De La Industria Bananera | Portal FrutÃÂ-cola." Honduras En Busca Del Futuro De La Industria Bananera. Portal Frutícola, 6 Aug. 2012. Web. <http://www.portalfruticola.com/2012/08/06/el-camino-de-honduras-hacia-una-banana-resistente-a-enfermedades/?pais=united states>.

14. Getz, Christy, and Aimee Shreck. “What Organic and Fair Trade Labels Do Not Tell Us: Towards a Place-based Understanding of Certification.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 30, no. 5 (September 2006): 490–501.

21

15. "Impact of Fairtrade Bananas - Summary and Management Response to an Independent Impact Study." FAO.org. Fairtrade Foundation, Dec. 2011. Web. <http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/banana/documents/IIWBF/contributions/FT_Banana_Summary1.pdf>.

Supplementary Bibliography

1. Evans, Edward, and Fredy Ballen. "Banana Market." Report #EDIS FE901. April 2011. Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences at the University of Florida.

2. "Yes, We Do Have Bananas, For Now." Interview by Ira Flatow and Dan Koeppel. Transcript. National Public Radio. July 22, 2011.

3. Smith, Sally. "Fairtrade Bananas A Global Assessment of Impact." Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK. April 2010. http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/includes/documents/cm_docs/2011/F/Fairtrade%20in%20the%20Banana%20Sector_IDS%20Final%20Report%20December%202011.pdf.

22