Forum Activity for @Reto

Reto
@Reto
07/30/11 20:02:55
1 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

ok, first of all: yes, fill the truffle shells almost to the top and let them rest over night before cap them.

by the next day they should have shrunk enough to leave enough space to close them.

Pre-made truffle shells are very expensive.

Now, here is a way to make truffles (shells) as cheap as it can be, without having to buy a spinner.

Chocolate World in Belgium are selling a filling machine called "Easy Fill" which I have used for many years.

Not cheap, but a far cry away from a one shot machine/spinner.

And now the trick:

they are selling a 2pc truffle mould (magnet/series 2000) which you can use to make either only truffle shells or in "2 shot" way, the entire truffle with filling.

I have the moulds, but still have to find the time to use them.

You can of course also fill the moulds by hand but the easy fill machine will make it much faster and more equal in weight.

Make sure to get the machine for truffles as there are 2 types.

Check-out their website.

Chocolate Luv
@Chocolate Luv
07/18/11 10:34:08
8 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Thanks for the advice, everyone. It's hard for me to go from completely hand made EVERYTHING to using shells, but my research has shown they are extremely common. I even ordered some truffles from a French guy in the states, and he was using them. So I figure, if it's good enough for a French guy, it's good enough for me! :)

My next question is: what's the best way to fill/cap the shells? When I was making molded chocolates (where I made the shells myself) I would let the fillings set overnight before capping. Is this recommended for truffles too? I've read that people cap them right after filling, but my concern would be that the filling would contract as it sets, leaving a gap for air, which could result in mold.

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
07/06/11 10:52:37
1,692 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

For anyone interested in learning a tiny bit more about one-shot, try this page on the A w ema web site.

John M Rossini2
@John M Rossini2
06/29/11 11:57:39
12 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

CL,

Premade truffle shells are the way to go, as you need to make extremely high volumes to justify doing it yourself.

And with truffles, the sweet, creamy center is what counts the most! :)

Good luck,

John R.

Chocolate Luv
@Chocolate Luv
06/23/11 08:52:55
8 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

I have a guitar, I used to do hand-dipped ganache but recently stopped. I find that even with the guitar there to cut consistent shapes, spreading the ganache can be problematic. I personally have never been good at spreading things evenly!
pattyc
@pattyc
06/22/11 19:02:22
5 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Since your main concern is consistency in size, I'd suggest you buy a guitar. Different arms will produce different size squares, and from that point you only need to roll them into truffles. The end result will be size uniformity, you'll save yourself the cost of having to always purchase premade shells, and then in good conscience you can continue to say your truffles are handmade.

Chocolate Luv
@Chocolate Luv
06/19/11 12:29:57
8 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Thanks everyone. I know lots of people use shells- Vosges for sure, and I'm pretty good at spotting them so I can pick them out when I see them. As of now, they would still be hand-filled with handmade ganache, and hand dipped as well. I think I just needed to hear that it's okay to use the shells!
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
06/19/11 11:38:58
1,692 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Have you ever walked into a chocolate shop and seen perfectly round (except for a flat bottom) truffles? They were done either using a one-shot machine or by filling shells.

You identified the key issue for you - if there was any negative impact on taste or texture you would not use them. As there is not, then why not? A long time ago I learned that it was important to understand what I was "willing to fall on my sword" for when it came to production. Yeah, I know I could make my own puff pastry, but, there are so many good ones that are frozen, by using those I could concentrate on what really set my work apart and allowed me to increase production (or reduce the number of hours I spent in the kitchen).

One of the most famous chocolate companies in Chicago (whose name also starts with a V and is not Valrhona though the name is French) used shells from the very beginning - although they may be doing them on one-shot machines now for production and shelf-life reasons.

The only problem that I see is representing them as one thing (100% hand-made) if they are not.

BTW - just because you start using shells doesn't mean there is no longer room for a 100% hand-made product - a real truffe nature au chocolat.

antonino allegra
@antonino allegra
06/19/11 09:08:54
143 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Hi,

Have you thought about Chocoflex by Laghi, from Pavoni.it? Is an alternative to the already made shells, it gives you consistency in weight and shape.

I have used the shells for long time, nothing wrong or bad about that.

but if you wish to do everything from scratch, you could either trying piping, let dry and then hand roll (you could easily pipe about 200/300 every 15 min.) but you may have problem with size consistency. I decided to switch to Pavoflex mainly because the cost of shells is too high where i live.

regards

Nino

Richard Foley
@Richard Foley
06/19/11 07:07:16
48 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Truffle shells are standard in the industry and are designed thin so you dont really notice them, and they should not be impacting flavor, but more used as a tool for your production. Although I would not suggest using bad chocolate truffle shells, I think spending the money on expensive truffle shells is not worth it, again as you likely will not taste the impact of the truffle shell in the finished product.

Qzina sells a truffle shell made in Germany, with Callebaut Chocolate, made by Keller. We stock these in Chicago, well priced, that should increase your profit vs more expensive truffle shells. Keller is probably the biggest producer in the world of truffle shells, top quality. They also have a number of shells in unique shapes by special order. We import direct from Keller in full containers and are very competitively priced.

Also Truffle shells allow you to manufacture very soft fillings, which is not possible without them. We also can get you liquor shells, smaller hole in the top, designed for liquid filling. There are also filling machines, and plates available for truffle shell trays that dramatically speed up your production, and make covering or topping the shells easy, consistent, and fast.

IF your production gets very high in volume, you should then consider the only machine that can truly deposit thin shell one shot, truffle shell and filling in one shot, the Avema Depositor. We have many customers who for example, have the round truffle shell molds, and fill the chocolate and filling into the round ball shape, in one shot, still maintaining a thin shell and liquid filling. That machine however is around 100K. But just for future reference.

Carlos Eichenberger
@Carlos Eichenberger
06/18/11 22:53:12
158 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Nothing wrong with it at all. I know many top chocolatiers that use the V shells. Do it and make some money!
Chocolate Luv
@Chocolate Luv
06/18/11 21:20:14
8 posts

Premade truffle shels- necessity or copout?


Posted in: Opinion

Hello friends,

I own a small chocolate company which has been slowly growing over the last 4 years. I mainly sell wholesale to small gourmet shops, and am really looking to expand out of my city and to a more national basis. With that in mind, I really need for this business to become profitable. My sales doubled in 2010 and I did see a profit (for the first time) but I have yet to pay myself (or any employees). In other words, I need to start making money.

My biggest selling item are my truffles- they make up about 25% of my total sales. I have been doing everything by hand- making the ganache (though I have started using a food processor to help with this), scooping (#100 ice cream type scoop), rolling, dipping, everything. I can personally scoop, roll & dip about 200 truffles/hour. However, I have problems with consistency of size, as well as shelf life (I typically get a very thing shell). I am considering using premade shells, but I have always been opposed to them in the past. They seem like a copout to me, a shortcut, etc.

I got some samples from my local distributor (who does sell the Valrhona shells, though these were not V's) and tried it with one ganache, and I don't really notice a difference. Obviously if the shells made a difference in taste or texture, I wouldn't consider them.

So my question is, does using premade shells make me a bad person? :) I've never been one to take the easy way out just to make a buck, but to be honest, if I don't start making money soon, I won't be making chocolates at all for much longer!


updated by @Chocolate Luv: 04/15/15 23:17:31
Richard Foley
@Richard Foley
06/19/11 07:17:24
48 posts

Some basic questions


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

My advice is to purchase a true and tested winnower, you will save money vs testing and trial and error.

I just visited Cacao Cucina in Tampa, great winnower for 11,000 USD so for 8000 Euro, you have never to worry about it...

But on the other hand, I visited a farm in Hawaii winnowing with a small vibrating table, and a modified Shop Vacuum from the hardware store.

Nice thing about buying from Cacao Cucina is the machine breaks, winnows, and results are very good, very low shell content.

Maria6
@Maria6
06/17/11 23:56:53
35 posts

Some basic questions


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Hello !

Firstly, thank you for this site and for this forum ! It's so useful for us!

We are new to making chocolates and we would like to create our factory for handcrafted chocolate in a small european country.

We learned from internet, that tomake1 kgofchocolate, about300-600beans ( 500-700gr) are processed. Is this true ?

We would like to build our winnower. Do you have some advices ?

Thank you in advance for your help !


updated by @Maria6: 04/11/25 09:27:36
Samuel Maruta
@Samuel Maruta
10/25/11 07:23:18
19 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

On the same topic you may also want to check this short but well written opinion piece :

[Edited to add: The study, "which followed hundreds of Nicaraguan coffee farmers over a decade, concluded that farmers producing for the fair-trade market are more often found below the absolute poverty line than conventional producers.

Over a period of 10 years, our analysis shows that organic and organic-fair trade farmers have become poorer relative to conventional producers.]

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
10/06/11 16:50:02
1,692 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Is being "smug" a part of the challenge that needs to be overcome?

Earlier today, Equal Exchange posted the following table on their Facebook page:

and then bragged about the fact that their pay ratio (the ratio between the highest-paid and lowest-paid workers in the company) was only 4:1.

I asked them if their computation of the pay ratio included what growers got paid.

They poasted no, but then tried to justify their position in a very long reply by saying that, when they included an estimated annual income for an average grower at US$3000 that their pay ratio was still "only" 33:1 - a much more "egalitarian" figure than companies whose CEOs would have pay ratios of thousands:1 or more if the wages of foreign farmers were considered in the mix.

Is "egalitarian" "fair?" Is that the measure of the success of these programs?

For me, trumpeting the pay ratio is a symptom of an attitude that is prevalent in programs like FLO, and reminds me of a shell game where our attention is deliberately distracted so we can't see what's actually going on.

Rodney Nikkels
@Rodney Nikkels
10/06/11 08:23:25
24 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Dear Mark,

Thanks for the observations, and you are right, applying P & K is not the most environmental sustainable solution (although the N is normally causing the most harm in terms of soil acidification and related N2o emissions. The basic issue is that crop removal (cocoa beans to be consumed in the West) equals nutrient removal. In a closed system (amazon rainforest) cocoa pulp is eaten by animals and the beans end up on the soil to regenerate. When humans start to harvest and remove the beans the nutrients should be replenished to be able to produce cocoa on the long run. The other option could be to accept relative low yields (250 kg), but more hectares are needed to grow cocoa (world demand is growing with 2% per year).

These extra hectares needed are just the remaining forest patches with high biodiversity value (and enormous carbon content in the biomass and soil!). So that's basically why a better management of what already has been cut down would make sense, first by applying all nutrient recylcing measures, and supply the missing nutrients in sufficient cuantities to maintain a healthy balance. The Soil Organic Matter content should be maximized and soil life be supported as much as possible, but where nutrient reservoirs are low, some sort of replenishment should take place (organic or in-organic). The basic reason is that low yields will push farmers in the end towards the remaining forest borders in order to start cocoa farming in these buffer zones (high prices have the same effect!).

I think you are right with your suggestion to maintain a 30% in tact, but farm preparation has been (sometimes) done by timber companies. As free service they offer to remove the trees so farmers can plant cocoa. As extra service they also take away the trees, so the farmers don't need to worry about them anymore. That is the reality of the world we live in.

Perhaps we should consume less chocolate, or chocolate made from beans that can only grow combined with other trees (like the criollo's)?

In terms of envirmental impact the fine flavour beans are much much better that the full sun cocoas! But we should be prepared to pay a decent price for these cocoa beans (at least to compensate for the lower yields).

The current limited premium for fine flavour actually is perhaps not and incentive for farmers to grow more fine flavour beans.

Best regards

Rodney

Mark J Sciscenti
@Mark J Sciscenti
10/05/11 21:44:48
33 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

I've been following this discussion with great interest. As a chocolate educator I try to involve people in the complex issues surrounding cacao and chocolate, including the "fair-trade" and ecological issues.

Rodney, You've brought up a really good point of issue concerning the ecological sustainability of growing cacao. Most, if not all tropical ecologists/agronomists, and especially those working with commodities "cash" crops, have always spoken about the viability of growing these crops in the long term. How does one maintain the fertility of the soils given rainforest ecology while also sustaining whole ecosystems along with balancing the needs of both human living systems and providing a living? What do you do to increase these while being sustainable in the short and long term?

By cutting the rainforest down just to grow cash crops will, maybe, in the short term provide an income for those on the ground, but as you stated, the system will become exhausted and more rainforest gets cut down. Once those soils have lost their fertility it does not come back. It takes a long time for the rainforest to grow back - if it does. Given the variables of the climate and the expansion of desertification this may not happen at all.

I would suggest that investment needs to include the overall perspective of where in the world these 'cash' crops are being grown, i.e. the rainforest. The simple answer is to apply (N)-P-K. But that stuff is expensive - surely the growers can't afford it, nor can the governments of the respective countries. And I don't think NGO's or the other advocates of 'fair-trade' will pay for it either. And if you add the cost of shipping these into the equation... well.. you get my drift.

Also, just adding n-p-k is really not enough to support the viability of soil microorganisms. There are a lot of macro and micro nutrients that are made available through the actions of microorganisms that are needed for a healthy ecosystem - especially in agriculture crops. There is already enough evidence here in the Western world that the practice (of just adding n-p-k) has a couple detrimental costs and effects upon the environment - those petrochemical fertilizers consume a lot of energy in producing them, they have been shown to decrease the soil microorganisms and they leach out of the system in large quantities and pollute water sources and the larger environment, in essence poisoning the ecosystem and human drinking water.

I believe that in order to increase the sustainability and address all these needs, one needs to look at not cutting down the rainforest wholesale but leaving about 30%, with most being over-story. Intermixing other cash crops (food sources, lumber, etc...) into the growth pattern will provide for several things - more varied income for the growers, stabilizing the ecosystem in general which introduces a better habitat for wildlife, increasing the ground soil viability by introducing organic material through natural processes along with adding small amounts of both organic matter and fertilizers.

This will obviously impact cacao growing patterns,usually by lessening the amounts of cocoa beans coming out of the regions (not the point I understand for us chocolate loving westerners).

However, though cacao originated in the understory of the rainforest, which is a better habitat for it, growing in full sun or 1% shade is detrimental to the plant in the long term. In the full rainforest there were historically less incidents of disease attacking cacao - simply because the tress were too widely spaced for disease to wipe out whole stands. I am not suggesting this as an alternative to the current agricultural growing systems in place now as it does not address the issues and needs of all concerned.

By increasing to 30% and adding these other things growers could actually expand their holdings and increase the cacao groves, in essence creating managed growing environments while sustaining the viability of the whole ecosystem.

There is evidence that in pre-Columbian times humans in the Americas created managed agricultural environments over large tracts of land, which sustained peoples for long periods of time. I'm not really suggesting anything new here. This is just like modern "permaculture'.

I think I remember the that there are a few models of this happening on a smaller scale, in South America and in the DRC.

I also appreciate your brining into the discussion the political issues, i.e. the instituted SAPs, IMF/Word Bank, instability of governments... etc...

Kristy, thank you for your speaking about your experiences on the ground and your frank honesty. It is very nice for me to hear from professionals who study these issues in depth. Thanks for your link - will read it.

These really are large and complicated issues. I think that most of the large agricultural/commodity/chocolate companies just have their heads in the sand and do not want to address these larger issues (although to be fair, some are trying) - even though combined they could make a big difference, imo. Governments are not going to, neither is the answer in the large political organizations (again some are trying, but with little funding).

We do live on One world, we just can't seem to get outside our little minds/heads/egos/greed to be able to see the bigger picture and work together. On a small scale quite a lot of us 'see' and are doing this, but...

kwim?

Looking forward to learning more on this discussion - I like the intelligent and thoughtfulness put forward by everyone and thanks for the links.

Rodney Nikkels
@Rodney Nikkels
10/05/11 05:30:02
24 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Hi Kristy,

Thanks for your feedback! Cocoa farmers in Ghana have yields from 280 kg/Ha (eastern region) upto more than 1 MT in the Western regions (recently converted forest lands). The difference is mainly caused by the availabilty of soil nutrients (cocoa requires P & K mainly) and pest and disease control (25% is lost due to pest and diseases). The relative poor soils in West Africa needs some sort of replenishment, otherwise after 15 years you'll end up with an exhausted system.

Moderate yields of 800 kg/Ha would for the average farmer result in a doubling of their income. An expansion from 1.8 to 3.6 Hectare combined with a bettter yield would have an serious impact!

Many of these issues cannot be solved from a supply chain perspective, but actually have to do with how you build a healthy commodity sector. After de de-colonisation in Africa ('60-'70) and structural adjustment programs from World Bank and IMF, followed by a collapse of international trade agreements that resulted in a oversupply and low commodity prices we end up with so called orphan commodities like cocoa, meaning little investment in farmer training, research, extenson services, availability of planting material, fertilizer availability, timely finance (for harvest, but also plantation renovation).

Within that context still the Ghanian cocoa farmer is pretty well served, compared to many other cocoa farmers!

Don't want to make the issue more complex, but this in my opinion is the situation the cocoa sector needs to deal with. In the end, we as consumers have had 50 years of declining chocolate prices (Lidl sells chocolate at Euro 0,35/100 gram), and it is time to really invest in order to make cocoa farming a decent business.

All the best

Rodney Nikkels

Kristy Leissle
@Kristy Leissle
10/04/11 16:03:19
3 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Rodney, your comment about the farmer perspective -- on small farm size and low yields -- really brought me back to what was one of the more powerful moments of my fieldwork in Ghana. I had been working with farmers who sold to Kuapa Kokoo, the fair-trade cooperative, and with farmers who sold to Akuafo Adamfo, a licensed buying company that did not have FLO certification, but that was nevertheless doing plenty of social development work.

I was talking one day with a farmer who sold to Akuafo Adamfo, her name is Mercy, and when I mentioned fair trade to her, she had never heard of such a thing before and asked me to explain (this was common among farmers in Ghana - hardly any of them knew what fair trade was). I told her that consumers in the US and Europe pay a little more for a chocolate bar, so that farmers in Ghana could earn a little more for their cocoa beans.

Mercy looked at me as if I had six heads. I'll paraphrase her response: "Why would I want to earn a little more for my cocoa?" she said. "If I want to make more money, I must work harder to grow more cocoa."

Her response stopped me in my tracks. I had always thought first about price -- raising cocoa's price was paramount for me (and in many ways, still is). I had never thought before that simply growing more cocoa was a solution.

But I think you have hit the nail on the head with the low yields/small farm size issue, Rodney. I forget sometimes, thinking and writing about fair trade, that what appears most important to me, a white Western woman who has the privilege to sit around and think philosophically about trade issues, does not necessarily resonate with cocoa farmers. At the heart of Mercy's material poverty was the fact that she grew a tiny amount of cocoa, which she sold for a tiny price. The small addition of a few more cedis from an unknown entity called "Fairtrade" meant nothing to her. What was of much greater interest to Mercy, as well as most of the farmers I worked with in Ghana, was the national spraying program, in which the government supplied pesticides and spraying machines. This did increase yields, sometimes significantly.

We in the West never, ever sit around and think, "If only we could spray more pesticides on the cocoa trees, farmers' lives would be so much better!" But living as she did on the margins, Mercy did think that, along with plenty of other farmers. I realize that this is hardly a solution and I am not advocating that we all champion pesticide application now. This post probably raises more questions than answers. But I did want to share what was, for me, an enlightening moment, when I first realized that what *I* believed to be fair was not what a farmer believed to be fair -- that realization started me down a long road of critical thinking, the end of which I am nowhere near as yet.

Ice Blocks!
@Ice Blocks!
10/04/11 15:36:24
81 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

I'm finding this discussion very interesting.

Rodney Nikkels
@Rodney Nikkels
10/04/11 15:23:45
24 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Well, we live since a couple of years in a period of relative better cocoa world market prices and people seem to forget that in the period 1994-1999 and 2002-2007 commodity prices were (very) low. FT system guaranteed a minimum price for the cocoa beans and made it feasible for farmers and coops to survive. Origins like Peru where fine quality cocoa beans are exported by producers coops have benefited from this (Naranjillo, Acopagro, Cepicafe) and I must say that without the price protection from FT it would have been much more difficult. The basic problem is the demand side combined with a too low premium in times of cocoa world market prices above the fair trade minimum price. Fair Trade is not the solution for all issues, but a guaranteed minimum price for a tree crop is a helpfull tool to maintain your farm and not uproot and shift to annual crops.

The yearly cost of $ 2500 for FT certification (my estimation for a producer organisation) is in my opinion not the issue to be honest (for exports you would normally need at least 1 container, being 18 MT of cocoa beans, with a FOB value of $ 54.000)

From a farmer perspective, the small size of the farms combined with low yields is much more an issue. If you have a 1 hectare farm with a yield of 500 kg of beans, it is impossible to earn a decent income. In addition, for fine flavour beans, the relative small mark-up for precious beans is a crucial bottleneck, espcially considering the lower yields of the criollo cocoa (nacional at 350 kg/Ha in Esmeraldas, Ecuador compared with a 1,2 MT when using CCN51).

Best regards

Rodney Nikkels

Kristy Leissle
@Kristy Leissle
10/04/11 14:37:12
3 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Clay, I could not agree more. Certification fees are a real issue for cooperatives, as is the gargantuan reporting responsibility they must undertake to prove they meet FLO producer standards. I do not see how either one is germane to fairness -- especially in a system (ethical trade in general) that was instituted to redress ECONOMIC imbalances between producers and the people who manufacture and consume their products.

I have spent time thinking this issue through in a different way, asking how distinct Fairtrade really is from the predominant economic and ideological system of neoliberalism. Too often Fairtrade is presented as a separate and alternative system, when in fact (as the numbers I offered above show), it can be indistinguishable from the world market. I just made the full article excerpted above available on my blog , and here is the direct link to the article for anyone who is interested in these issues. Though I deal with FLO in general, my case study is the cocoa-chocolate trade, particularly in Ghana and Britain.

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
10/04/11 06:03:22
1,692 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Kristy:

The moral mafia I am referring to is not FLO, it's supporters of "Fair" trade who have not actually spent any time to learn what is really going on.

It's the general consuming public that assumes that "Fair" trade MUST BE FAIR just because there is a certificate and who demands that products/ingredients must be FT & Organic without really understanding what that means. Like many minorities, they can be very vocal and tend to be passionate, so they garner a lot of attention and can exert outsize influence.

Chocolate Life Nat Bletter posted a link to a very interesting thesis on FT coffee in Laos that clearly reveals some of the potential (and real) flaws in certificate programs as well as some of the unintended consequences of such programs. ChocolateLife member Cristian Melo has posted a link to a fabulous thesis he did on cocoa in Ecuador.

Your numbers above clearly show that the direct economic benefits are hard to justify. My contention has always been that if FT was so great why aren't there many, many, many more co-ops who are FT certified? Could it be that the value - delivered to the grower - is not as rosy as the picture painted to the consumer? Could it be that it's so expensive that a significant percentage of certification fees is paid by third parties (including NGOs and taxpayer-funded aid programs)? Perhaps more importantly, the finances of these certification organizations is far from transparent. Given their demand for traceability up the supply chain you'd think that delivering reliable numbers for quantities of product moved and the value of the social premium paid would be easy to publish (and would be something they would be proud to publish). Yet, getting such figures is NOT an easy task. I have been waiting since May for "reliable" numbers from FLO's press office and have been politely stonewalled every time I have asked.

I think that FT (as practiced by FLO, RA, and others) is a part of an answer, but not the answer. Critical examination of the value these programs actually deliver - relative to the value reaped by the program itself and upstream actors in the supply chain - needs much closer examination. At the moment, it costs a company like Kraft almost nothing to gain FT certification. However, they can charge a premium for FT certified product (the market will pay for the perceived social benefit), so in the end, Kraft makes millions more than the producers do.

Is that "fair?"

Kristy Leissle
@Kristy Leissle
10/03/11 19:16:40
3 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

I often teach and write about fair trade (my doctoral work was on the cocoa-chocolate trade, part of it on the FLO system), and I find that I run increasingly thin on ways to justify Fairtrade to my university students, or anyone who sincerely desires a way to direct their purchasing power ethically.

I am intrigued by Clay's use of the term "moral mafia" to describe the FLO system -- the suggestion being that to be considered "fair," producer co-ops are beholden to this particular model. Of course they are not -- there are plenty of artisan makers trying to circumvent it -- but the fair trade model remains by far the most visible to consumers, even if they don't fully understand how it works. So in that way, yes, it does have a stranglehold.

I did some research this summer for an article on FLO, and below are the figures I came up with. Note that I quote ONLY the FLO price floor for cocoa, which was $1600 per metric ton until January 2011. The more common protocol is to combine the social premium of $150 (now $200) with the price floor, which in my opinion artificially inflates the reported price for cocoa beans ; the social premium almost never reaches farmers as cash for their crop, and goes almost exclusively to development projects, which is NOT a direct form of compensation. Here is my analysis:

For most of its existence, FLO has set the Fairtrade Minimum Price for conventional (non-organic, bulk) cocoa at $1600 per metric ton; in January 2011, it raised the price floor by 25%, to $2000. Taking into account this recent increase, between January 2006 and May 2011, the Fairtrade Minimum Price was higher than the world market price during eight months, at an average of $38.50 per metric ton. For fifty-seven months, the FLO price floor was lower, by an average of $987.51. That is, for all but eight months of the last five and a half years, certified cooperatives have received the world market price for their cocoa. To compare the two pricing schemes in a different way, FLO raised its price floor for cocoa to $2000 per metric ton in January 2011. For the twelve months preceding this raise, the average world market price for cocoa was $3,132.99.

The Fairtrade Minimum Price for cocoa seems to run much more in parallel with, rather than as alternative to, the price set on the world market. In the absence of derivation specifics (which are not given in either the Fairtrade Standards for Cocoa, which detail the commodity-specific price floor and premium, nor the global Minimum Price and Premium Table), the Fairtrade Minimum Price seems to be a sort of average of world market prices, moving irregularly upwards as market prices also rise. Of course, because agricultural commodities are subject to large price fluctuations, from year to year or even over the course of a single growing season, by guaranteeing a minimum price over the long term, Fairtrade does introduce a degree of security into a volatile system, smoothing budgetary forecasts and guaranteeing a certain amount of revenue. If the market price should fall below $2000 in the coming months, Fairtrade certification would protect participating cooperatives. Yet in practice, the Fairtrade Minimum Price has not, at least in recent years, demonstrated a meaningful alternative to the trade terms set on the world market.

Note: I calculated world market prices using the ICCO Monthly Averages of Daily Prices, available on the ICCO website, http://www.icco.org/statistics/monthly.aspx


Clay, if IMO does ever provide justification to you for its pricing scheme, or make known how much was paid out in the social premium last year, I'd love to hear about it. It seems to me a stagnant model that lacks a true vision for change.
--Kristy Leissle, PhD
Samuel Maruta
@Samuel Maruta
09/16/11 11:37:53
19 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Nat, many thanks for posting this, I devoured it, it's a very nice piece of academic research, I'll be in touch with Vanh.

Nat
@Nat
09/16/11 04:10:56
75 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Here is the thesis in English by Lao honors studentBounthavivanh Mixap (aka Vanh) that Clay mentioned foryou to read in its entirety. Vanh has requested thatpeople email her atmiznui <at> yahoo <dot> com if they have any questions about her thesis.

I think Vanh's excellent thesis this brings a reallyimportant light to the issues with fair trade that Clay, Sunita and others have brought up on these forums. In helping with some plantings of cacao in Lao, I am hoping to assist in setting up a more equitable direct trade model, or a model wherepeople in Lao are making their ownchocolate right there where it grows.

-Nat

____________________

Nat Bletter, PhD

Chocolate Flavormeister

Madre Chocolate

http://madrechocolate.com

Samuel Maruta
@Samuel Maruta
07/05/11 11:34:01
19 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Same thing we're seeing here: going organic is a huge leap into the unknown for farmers in Vietnam. Local farms average < 1 ha of cocoa / farm. The only project in place here has its (huge) bill paid by a foreign aid agency. It's great that they are doing this but once they're done with the project I am somewhat dubious of the farmers' capacity in perpetuating the scheme. At the end of the day certification is by definition a bureaucratic exercise: a/ set norms, b/put in place standards to verify the norms are being upheld, c/ bury any query under a ton of paper... When you're dealing with a family on a farm that is just a couple acres, has a few hundred cocoa trees, some other marketable crops, a pond for raising fish, a pig or two and some chickens running around the vegetable patch, the whole thing seems a bit absurd. On the other hand I like the fact that I know the guys who sell us cocoa by their first name and that when we finish weighing the bags the money goes directly in their pocket.
Gg
@Gg
07/01/11 07:08:47
1 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

I live in Guatemala, and have a very small company. We make hot chocolate only. ( http://www.junajpu.com/ )
Impossible to get through all the paper work for exporting....much less for organic certification-

hence, we only sell locally. I don't know ANY Cacao farms here that have Organic certification. (Although there may be a co-op or 2 run by ngo's)

As for Fair trade coffee- The farms here that DO have certification meet the standards, sure, but the problem is that they buy a great deal of their export coffee at ridiculously low prices from farms that really are not fair at all.
Whata system.

Michael3
@Michael3
06/30/11 15:58:57
2 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Hi Clay,

I found similar data when I was planning a discussion on Fair Trade/Organic with a group of food students. Reading about FLO showed how little if anything farmers actually end up with once license fees are paid. Your analysis of unFair Trade is spot on. Probably the same is true for most certification programs by ngos-organic, kosher etc.

It certainly would be interesting to come up with a grower friendly alternative.

Michael

Rodney Nikkels
@Rodney Nikkels
06/23/11 06:42:23
24 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Hi Sunita,

Thanks for sharing your vision, you're right, interesting things are happening in cocoa as well. To be clear, I'm not against Fair Trade, I think the principles are great, but it lacks a quality focus and a pricing mechanism. With all solution built in the "systems" world, you'll start to loose the human connection, and perhaps that is the biggest problem, when trying to solve social and invironmental issue. A value chain so be a chain of values, broader than only financial value.

I've been organizing tastings in the past and sure, people are more "open" with a piece of chocolate. It seems to affect the brain function!

Best regards and success with the tastings (I really like the name: chocolate garage!)

Rodney Nikkels

Sunita de Tourreil
@Sunita de Tourreil
06/23/11 00:38:49
19 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Hi Rodney,

Many would argue that cacao is lagging behind coffee in many ways... certainly the kinds of specific relationships you are talking about with coffee suppliers/farmers is also happening with cacao. Shawn Askinosie of Askinosie Chocolate is a great example. He works directly with the farmers, profit shares with them and has other associated projects and commitments to farming communities from whom he buys. Taza is also using Direct Trade as are many other artisan makers.

My hope is that in ten years, these kinds of models and others are taking up more space and accounting for the purchasing of more and more cacao. Unfortunately right now, the makers who are doing the right thing for the farmer and the farming communities are barely a drop in the bucket when it comes to overall chocolate production, but the trend is hopefully in the right direction. This is where education comes in and this is where people who understand some of the complexities and difficulties inherent to Fair Trade *must* speak up and explain what Fair Trade does and does not do.

This kind of education is something I am passionate about doing and currently am doing in Silicon Valley. People are ready for it, and those who are adamant about Fair Trade and third party certification (this was me five years ago) will slowly start to see that there are other ways to address the very real problems they are concerned with and that there are many other models that are doing a better job than Fair Trade (IMHO).

Tip for effective chocolate education: People are more receptive to chocolate education when you also feed them (what I call) " Happy Chocolate ". I start with the theoretical and move into the applied in the same session, this keeps people's attention and really has a positive and lasting impact. ;)

Ice Blocks!
@Ice Blocks!
06/20/11 16:14:24
81 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Sounds like a really cool idea.

From what I've seen bland complacency is all that most people can manage, unfortunately. :-( Yet they are empathetic and in my experience do want to know their products, especially premium products, where they can afford to invest time and choose, and may wish to appear generous or altruistic, are sourced in an ethical, healthier and or sustainable manner.

One thing we are quite keen on is optimising labelling. Fair trade, etc. in its current guise is great for advertising raw materials. Yet for us, none of our products consist of a single certified raw material which either leads to a huge very detailed ingredients list which can be economically unfeasable due to package printing limitations (and unwieldy and failure) or failure to get leverage for a cost.

What we know is that if ingredients are presented well consumers are very interested in local sourcing, and interested in organics and fair trade. This is tempered by quality and price considerations. Local produce is usually cheaper, fair trade more expensive, and organics of variable quality, supply and more expensive.

I've found Jhai Coffee Farmers Cooperative's email address, I'll flick them and email asking a few questions and see if we get a reply on funding sources and their opinion on fair trade etc.

Rodney Nikkels
@Rodney Nikkels
06/20/11 14:51:08
24 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Hi Clay,

Having been involved in coffee certification for quite some years (various schemes) and not having found THE solution yet, I was wondering if you could share some of the concept you're developing under the cocoassure domain. In coffee, companies also have developed their own approaches, Starbucks, Nespresso, Intelligentsia coffee etc. Some have blended existing systems (like Fair Trade) with personal believes and arrangements with suppliers (Dean Bean, Uncommon Grounds, George Howell and many others). All off them have developed specific relationships with their suppliers. This relationship building in cocoa seems to be more complicated, perhaps because traders don't want to disclose the exact origin of the cocoa bean? What have you identified as the core elements to make the cocoa market more fair for farmers and their families?

Best regards

Rodney Nikkels


updated by @Rodney Nikkels: 06/15/15 03:51:19
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
06/20/11 09:51:54
1,692 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

IB -

The first link is to a 223 page document. Please let me know which page(s) you refer to in this document. Likewise, the second document is 210 pages long. Please provide the direct references.

I don't think that it is necessarily a good thing that an NGO pays for certification ... even when there is a commitment to cover the cost of certification in perpetuity. This is rarely the case (in my personal experience) as most NGOs project time horizons are very short, often only two years, with the stated goal of improving things to the point where the co-op gets to the point where it can cover those costs on its own. Then the NGO leaves, usually taking the market/buyer with them along with the $$ and technical support necessary to sustain progress. To be truly effective, program support has to last at least a decade and preferably longer - not just "appear" to be ongoing.

What the short term commitment to pay for certification does is create artificial, unsupportable, conditions. At the end of the commitment period the co-op must either be in a position to cover the costs themselves, lose their certification, or go begging for further subsidies.

I can also argue that having NGOs cover the cost of certification is anti-competitive because the certification bodies see no need to lower costs.Creating a culture where the answer is NGO support is not a good solution, IMO.

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
06/20/11 09:33:46
1,692 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

IB -

Please take a look around at my work and writings here and other places and you will know the answer to that question. But - the answer is very clearly that I am working to find alternative solutions to ethical supply chain certification in cocoa that address what I perceive to be the drawbacks in the existing Fairtrade model. I recently registered the domain name www.cocoassure.com in support of my efforts in this regard.

One of the necessary steps I see is to shake people out of bland complacency and acceptance. Most people (if you asked them) will think that "the problem has been solved" and Fairtrade is the solution.

Part of what I am trying to do is to get people to acknowledge is that there is still more work to do in finding ways to approach the issues at hand.

-- Clay

PS. Also, I find it frustrating that you know my name and I don't know yours. It's not listed on your web site that I can find and none of the articles linked to mention your name. Care to share?

Ice Blocks!
@Ice Blocks!
06/20/11 00:32:57
81 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

"I maintain that while 'Fair Trade' as it is currently constituted by FLO/Fairtrade, Rainforest Alliance, et al, may A part of AN answer, it is not THE answer." So what you going to do Clay be part of an answer, invent a new answer or not be part of an or the answer?

Ice Blocks!
@Ice Blocks!
06/20/11 00:16:28
81 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

By "simple explanation" I'm referring to the set of calculations you quote and the inherent assumptions. In the public JCFC accounts 2004-2008 there is no mention of certification costs and the simple explanation looks like they have or had grants to cover those costs with no costs to farmers whatsoever. It looks extremely likely, from public documents, that NZ Aid has provided a grant for the organic certification, which appears ongoing and another unspecified US? NGO provides or provided fair trade certification. http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Consultant/40105-LAO/40105-LAO-TACR.pdf initiated by Oxfam Australia.

http://www.die-gdi.de/CMS-Homep age/openwebcms3.nsf/(ynDK_contentByKey)/ANES-7YUGRA/$FILE/Studies%2051.pdf

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
06/19/11 18:02:46
1,692 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

IB -

The problems are not from having been spun off. The challenges are inherent in the Fairtrade model.

You quote one pervasive misunderstanding of the Fairtrade process, "The vast majority of the money goes back to the farmers ... " While it is true that the co-op purchases the coffee from the farmers, paying them the Fairtrade minimum, the premium that gets paid goes to the co-op and is typically used to cover overhead and invest in infrastructure to increase production.

There are far more subtle forces at play here that rarely get looked at or reported. One thing that most people don't understand is that the amount of labor, water, and energy required to produce coffee to the Fairtrade quality standard is significantly greater than that which the farmers are normally used to.

In fact, the labor demands (as reported in the thesis) are so much greater that coffee farmers now spend a significant portion of their income on food, whereas before they would grow it themselves and hunt and fish for it. Apparently, the price of rice has trebled in the last few years. Thus, while there has been a rise in income, an unintended consequence is that now the farmers are dependent on the world food market. Whereas now they might be making more than the per capita income, they are working far harder for it and many find themselves with expenses they never faced before - and are, in actual fact, poorer for it.

There are other trade-offs - while the farming practices may be organic, the associated production practices may not be sustainable because of the increases in water usage and energy. I am sure these figures are not properly accounted for in the the ASEAN figures you link. Another way in which they are an example of poor statistics is that they don't indicate how many farmers are involved from year to year and don't include the number of dependents. So, we don't know anything about how much of the growth in sales is due to an increase in the number of farmers.

These are just a few examples of why the situation is not simple: there are no simple answers, no simple fixes. The blindness is built into the system, which is a lot about forcing western consumer culture values on to farmers in producing countries. Furthermore, the social and economic contract is essentially the same worldwide: it is culturally insensitive and therefore cannot be equitable.

The real issue is that most consumers don't take the time to go an look for themselves in any depth or examine the situation with any critical facility. We want to believe that by spending a few extra bucks at the grocery store that we can make a difference in the lives of farmers. Sometimes it works that way - but many times it does not. Who benefits most from Fairtrade (in coffee)? The companies near the top of the supply chain who, between them account for more than 80% of the increase in value of the commodity once it is exported.

I maintain that while "Fair Trade" as it is currently constituted by FLO/Fairtrade, Rainforest Alliance, et al, may A part of AN answer, it is not THE answer. However, the institution of Fairtrade has garnered so much weight and prestige from unthinking adherents that other legitimate attempts to address the very real issues at stake are not given a chance in the market because of the suasion of an informal "moral mafia" that has arisen around Fairtrade and organic certification.

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
06/19/11 17:28:02
1,692 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

IB -

Thank you for asking. I am already in touch with FLO about a far more fundamental issue. One of the supposed "advantages" of Fairtrade is traceability up the supply chain. If that's the case, it should be a simple matter of putting together a report on how much cocoa was purchased, by country, and therefore how much was paid in the way of the social premium.

I asked for this information over a month ago and am still waiting for an answer. True, I was told that they were in the process of preparing their annual report and that took precedence. However, figures like this should be readily available, IMO.

Contrary to your belief, there is no simple explanation. The issues are far more complex than most people ever stop to consider.

Ice Blocks!
@Ice Blocks!
06/19/11 17:00:38
81 posts

The High Cost of Certification


Posted in: Opinion

Looks like this is in my neck of the woods and organic certification appears to have been paid for by NZ Aid.

http://cafelao.blogspot.com/ the coffee is bought by http://www.obscura.net.au/origin.html . I wonder if problems have stemmed from being spun off from http://jhai.org/successes/ http://www.cnntraveller.com/2009/11/12/laos-how-to-make-a-better-cup-of-coffee/ "The JCFC now involves 550 households in 12 Bolaven villages, and revenues in 2008 stood at $260,000, 10 times more than in 2004. The vast majority of this money goes back to the farmers, who are able to invest in new homes, tractors and education for their children."

  277