Direct Trade vs. direct trade vs. Relationship coffee: How we view it.

We know what Direct Trade means when we refer to it.  Locally, we also know what it means when 21st Street, Tazza d'Oro, Blue Horse, Voluto, Big Dog or Espresso a Mano refer to it.

At each of the above coffeehouses, direct trade means that the roasters have been at the farms working with the growers on production and processing techniques to produce superior quality coffees.  Their coffees pass numerous quality control tests and deserve a higher price than commodity or Fair Trade coffees. In many cases these direct trade projects represent commitments to a farm/co-op partnership that will last for years.

Intelligentsia, Stumptown, Counter Culture Coffee, 49th Parallel and Verve - the roasters used by the shops mentioned above - each have their own definitions of what direct trade means, but all of them include active involvement with the farmer at origin in their definition.

However, we don't always know what "direct trade" means when someone else refers to it.

Case in point. Last week Rich obtained 10 lbs of green coffee from a Colombian farmer who was in Pittsburgh.  That's about as direct as you can get.  The farmer grew the coffee, shipped it in himself and now he brought it to us.

But we had nothing to do with how that coffee was developed.  We didn't negotiate a price prior to harvest.  We didn't deliver any specifications as to what profile or cupping score we wanted to achieve.  We didn't even cup multiple samples.  All that happened was that a farmer happened to have a bag of his coffee with him and we obtained some of it.

That's a far cry different from the effort that the abovementioned roasters put into their direct trade programs.

Given we've spend 5+ years talking about the merits of direct trade and involvement from seed to cup, we feel it would be misleading for us to call some coffee that all but fell into our lap "direct trade".  To imply that these  things are equal would be very, very wrong. Devious even.

And it was a tweet containing that word - "devious" - that got us into a bit of trouble over the weekend with some other roasters.

That's because there are roasters and retailers out there who would indeed call that kind of simple purchase "direct trade".  To their way of thinking, "direct trade" means nothing more than agreeing with the grower to a purchase price for an already harvested coffee.  No origin trips to evaluate growing conditions or processing methods, no QC mandates, no commitment to certain volumes required.  Just a price agreement.

It's hard to say they're wrong.  Taken at the minimum definition, what they're doing is both "direct" and "trade".  It's just not the same kind of "direct trade" that those of us who buy from Intelligentsia, Stumptown, Counter Culture, et. al. talk about.  And those are the companies who more or less invented the concept and have the most influence over how direct trade is perceived by the public.

The argument from roasters who object to a "direct trade" definition that includes elements beyond a simple purchase contract goes something like this:

1) smaller roasters don't have the resources to do all the things at origin that larger roasters can

2) what the larger roasters are doing is "bigger" than direct trade. Their marks are "Intelligentsia Direct Trade", "Stumptown Direct Trade", "Counter Culture Direct Trade Certified", "Sweet Maria's Farm Gate", etc. etc., not simple "direct trade".  Let them use their full marks and leave the generic "direct trade" definitinon for the market to decide.

While we're calling the coffee in question "relationship coffee", there's technically nothing wrong with calling those coffees "direct trade".

Still, we're very glad to see documents like this popping up (PDF: Direct Trade Certification Transparency Report).  This is the type of information and transparency we'd expect from the people who've established the better direct trade programs (and hopefully we'll be seeing some similar docs from other companies soon).

To some extent, it probably doesn't matter all that much if it's called "relationship", "direct trade", "farmer direct" or whatever, as long as the process (and price paid) is transparent and the coffee tastes great.  Because transparency and quality are what will ensure a higher % of each purchase gets back to the farm and that's the goal - creating quality through economically and ecologically sustainable agricultural practices.

Unfortunately, the marketing of "direct trade" is looking more and more like a situation where the consumer has to trust the company selling the coffee on what that term means to them.  Certainly the more confusion there is about "direct trade", the better it is for fans of Fair Trade certification, who will point to the confusion and shout, "See, this is why you need a third-party certification, because consumers can't trust anyone!"

In the meantime, we'll continue to call the direct traded Intelligentsia and Stumptown coffees "direct trade" and whatever we're doing under the La Verdad label "relationship" coffee until such time as we're actually working directly with farmers to develop those coffees - at the farm.

As an aside, when we bought our house, the seller's attorney was our new next-door neighbor.  In the sales agreement were the words, "Remote controlled garage doors and two remote units."  When we tried the garage door remotes, they didn't work.  The lawyer noted that "working condition" wasn't in the contract.

Comments

[james simon]

Rich, At least you know the dollars when straight to the farmer that is as direct or fair as you can be. Good Day!

[Coffeeguruapp]

Well said! I think there should be an industry standard: Establishing a Direct Trade standard - http://bit.ly/qGyDYr