Considering the company's major exposure and cultural relevance, Starbucks is practically a celebrity in and of itself, so I feel like it's fair to post this here . . .

It seems that the coffee powerhouse has pushed coffee farmers in Ethiopia to stand up for themselves and their outstanding crop. Up until now, while New Yorkers have been casually dropping $2 for a cup of joe, Ethiopian coffee farmers have been barely making that much for each day of back-breaking labor. The government of the Eastern African country has been trying to trademark their famous beans for the past couple of years so that they can have rights over the products that are grown specifically on their soil, potentially helping their economy enormously. Starbucks is suggesting that GI -- or Geographical Indication -- certificates would be a better choice for protecting Ethiopian farmers rights. Ethiopia is choosing to pursue the trademark, hoping that it will give Ethiopians more control over their product. An article at All Africa says that:

"In Ethiopia, the proposed trademarks provide the country with exclusive rights to identify coffees as Sidamo, Harar or Yirgacheffe. This should give Ethiopia's fine coffee stakeholders some control over use of the brands in consumer markets, strengthening their position in negotiations with buyers and marketers. And it reduces control by multinationals that often want to pay as little as possible."

The article further quotes Ron Layton, an intellectual rights activist who said: ""Fine coffee pricing doesn't mean life or death to these companies, but it does to the farmers." (source)

This issue ties in with another celebrity comment that, though flawed in its execution, made a good point. Apparently, American Idol Clay Aiken criticized the recent Idol Gives Back event by essentially saying that the program indicated multiple examples of poverty and suffering without ever addressing the causes and reasons for the economic and social problems so prevalent in much of Africa. (Incidentally, his flaw was in calling the continent a "country" . . . which, while baffling, was all the more interesting given that most commenters to the post didn't seem to notice the mistake!) (source)

What Clay said that resonates, though, is that we can't put a bandage on problems and expect the source to disappear. Giving money to a struggling economy is helpful, but researching the reasons why poverty exists is even more important for sustainable change. Why aren't resource-rich countries benefitting the way that they ought to? A chain-reaction starts to unfold . . . not only is this about laws and economics, but about education, agriculture, and globalization. It's very much a part of the "teach a man to fish" mentality, of which I'm very much a fan . . .

Related Causes:        Global Extreme Poverty