Next Article in Journal
An Approach to Evaluating Light Pollution in Residential Zones: A Case Study of Beijing
Previous Article in Journal
A Decision Model to Predict the Optimal Size of the Diversified Management Industry from the View of Profit Maximization and Coordination of Industrial Scale
Article Menu
Issue 4 (April) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability 2017, 9(4), 651; doi:10.3390/su9040651

Problems with Firm-Led Voluntary Sustainability Schemes: The Case of Direct Trade Coffee

1
Centre for Sustainability Studies (LUCSUS), Lund University, 22362 Lund, Sweden
2
Centre of Excellence for Integration of Social and Natural Dimensions of Sustainability (LUCID), Lund University, 22362 Lund, Sweden
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Barbara Aquilani
Received: 17 January 2017 / Revised: 30 March 2017 / Accepted: 10 April 2017 / Published: 19 April 2017
(This article belongs to the Section Economic, Business and Management Aspects of Sustainability)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [2373 KB, uploaded 20 April 2017]   |  

Abstract

Ensuring sustainable consumption and production is one of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainable consumption can be supported through regulatory processes. Voluntary private regulatory schemes claiming to contribute to sustainability are a rapidly growing form of regulation. We study one such voluntary sustainability scheme in order to look at the opportunities and challenges this type of regulatory process poses using Abbot and Snidal’s regulatory standard-setting framework (2009). Specifically, we examine direct trade voluntary schemes in the coffee industry. To do this, we selected six leading direct trade firms in the US and Scandinavia, analyzed firms’ websites in 2015 and 2016 and conducted interviews with four of the firms. We found direct trade as a voluntary scheme was an attempt to market and codify good sourcing practices. US-based founding firms have distanced themselves from the term due to perceived co-optation, which we conceptualize as the failure of industry to self-regulate and argue was enabled by the re-negotiation of standards without the power to enforce or penalize misuse of the term. Firms reacted to co-optation by releasing data to consumers directly; we argue this puts too much responsibility on consumers to monitor and enforce standards. By contrast, Scandinavian firms maintained standards enforced through trademark nationally. Both US and Scandinavian contexts demonstrate a weakness of firm-led agenda-setting for sustainable development in that schemes may be optimized for a particular business concern—in this case quality—rather than to achieve sustainable development goals. This is problematic if schemes are marketed on contribution to the public good when incentives within the scheme are not aligned to produce an optimal result for the public good. View Full-Text
Keywords: sustainability standards; certification; sustainable consumption; green consumption; co-optation; regulatory standard-setting; governance triangle; ethical coffee; specialty coffee; quality sustainability standards; certification; sustainable consumption; green consumption; co-optation; regulatory standard-setting; governance triangle; ethical coffee; specialty coffee; quality
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

MacGregor, F.; Ramasar, V.; Nicholas, K.A. Problems with Firm-Led Voluntary Sustainability Schemes: The Case of Direct Trade Coffee. Sustainability 2017, 9, 651.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top