Governance

With all of the challenges the cotton industry faced last year – volatile market, contract defaults, droughts and floods – Bloomberg’s accusations of child labor in Fair Trade cotton at the peak of holiday shopping was just another blow.

The December 15th, 2011 Bloomberg article, “Victoria’s Secret Revealed in Child Picking Burkina Faso Cotton,” unfairly paints a negative image of fair trade and the cotton industry. The story centers on a girl, Clarisse, who was taken in by her relatives at the age of 9 and reportedly works on a farm that produces fair trade cotton for Victoria’s Secret.  

The reporter oversimplified complex issues that are not unique to or a result of the activities in the cotton industry. The reasons behind Clarisse losing her parents were not thoroughly explained. While the depiction of the sparse belongings, hard work and limited food are, very unfortunately, is realistic in much of Africa. The reporter also failed to recognize the value that the cotton industry provides to rural farmers in such desperate conditions.

Targeting one of the few apparel brands that have made the effort to support to improve conditions on the farm in West Africa can deter other brands from making this important investment in the future. But the real damage is the lasting negative impact of cotton in the eyes of consumers.

And, if that weren’t enough, there is much speculation regarding age of the “girl” that was the central figure in the Bloomberg article. The reported stated she was 13 years old. In a January 3, 2012 public response to the allegations made in the Bloomberg article, Fair Trade International states “she cannot accurately be described as a child as defined by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (i.e., under 18 years old).” Fair Trade International also found that the she works on a family-owned vegetable farm and is not involved in cotton.  They also state that there are no fair trade farms in the area. Bloomberg alleges that Clarisse is using her dead sister’s birth certificate.

I can’t help but wonder why would Bloomberg write such as discriminating article on cotton. It appears that Bloomberg did not conduct a sufficient level of due diligence regarding the “facts” they presented in the article. This raises the question of journalistic integrity.  Naturally, there are laws that apply to Bloomberg and its reporters and editors so I won’t belabor that point. But what can we do as an industry to avoid this from happening in the future.

We can keep each other informed of investigations, exposés or other inquiries to ensure they have access to truthful and accurate information. We should also support each other clarify or defend accusations that do get in the public arena.

Questions to consider:

Are negative mdeia accounts - and at time with false statements - something on which the cotton industry should take action? Or just something we need to shoulder?

Cotton production globally will both affect and be affected by climate change. In its paper, Cotton and Climate Change: Impacts and Options to Mitigate and Adapt, the International Trade Centre (ITC) examines threats to cotton production posed by climate change and options to mitigate such threats. With the aim of stimulating discussions, the report presents key issues on the nexus of cotton, climate change and trade.  Below I provide a brief summary of several of the key issues and impacts and how they differ from region to region. While the focus of this report is on cotton, many of the impacts and recommendations are relevant to other agriculture products.

Along the cotton value chain GHG emissions are broken down as follows: 30-60% from consumer use, 20-30% from manufacturing and 5-10% from production. Given the higher level of threat to cotton production due to altered weather patterns, the ITC paper focuses on this segment of the value chain.

Cotton is adapted to semi-arid and arid environments and can be rainfed or irrigated. While it has some resilience to high temperatures and drought, the crop is sensitive to water availability. The authors provide snapshots of potential impacts in the top cotton production regions.

The negative impacts of climate change on cotton production are likely to be most acutely felt by producers in Xinjian (China), Pakistan, Australia and the western United States. Some of the impacts that these regions will feel include: lower water availability coupled with higher use of irrigation – leading to more pressure on water sources, lower yields, losses due to more frequent and pronounced climate variability (e.g. longer droughts or flooding), soil exhaustion and salinization due to increased mono-cropping and irrigation, and decreased water sourced due to diminishing glaciers (e.g. Pakistan). Arid regions (e.g. Yellow River region of China, India, southeastern U.S. and Turkey) may find benefits from climatic variations (e.g. increased rainfall). Results in Brazil and West and Central Africa are unclear. You can find a detailed discussion on each region’s predicted impacts in the paper.

The authors propose the following opportunities to reduce GHG emissions along the cotton value chain.

• Introduce carbon pricing policies to stimulate investments in energy conservation and renewable energy technologies.
• Raise consumer awareness on the benefits of more energy efficient ways to launder cotton products.
• Support and advise processing facilities on adoption of more energy efficient technologies.
• Support and advise farmers on more efficient use of nitrogen fertilizer and encourage low tillage, improve soil, water and land management as well as low input farming practices.

Market incentives to reduce GHG emissions include:

• Product carbon footprint standards: consumers are increasingly interested in purchasing products that have smaller environmental footprints.
• Carbon reduction investment and market opportunities: producers and processors in developing countries can take advantage of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or other carbon trading mechanisms (e.g. Chicago Climate Exchange).

The paper concludes by suggesting the following options to adapt to climate change:

• Stop unnecessary nutrient loss from farming systems, preventing soil erosion and halting the burning of crop residues.
• Improve soil fertility management through inclusion of crop covers, plant diversity and limiting the time land lays bare.
• Time sowing to offset moisture stress during the warm period to maximize the length of growing season and prevent pest outbreaks.
• Breed and plant varieties that are more resistant to heat stress, droughts, weeds, pests and diseases.
• Optimize the use of sustainable, natural fertilizing sources in cotton production.
• Optimize the efficiency of additional fertilizer used.
• Optimize the water-use efficiency in the production of irrigated cotton.
• Optimize the use of industrial preparations such as pesticides, herbicides and defoliants.

Climate change will certainly impact cotton production and processing. The industry should take steps to minimize its contributions and prepare for the adaptation to climate change.

Questions to consider

What policy or market incentives can the industry promote? How is it best to do this?

With the focus shifting to adaptation, how can we best help farmers?