results of the survey to assess the satisfaction of producer ......the invitation to participate was...

This report was compiled by Dr. Karin Pries, Prof. Dr. Ludger Pries, Dipl. Soz. Wiss. Benjamin Melzer, Intercultural Consultancy and Studies, INCCAS Bochum, June 2015

Kurfürstenstr. 2 Fon +49 234 5839876 Mail [email protected]

44791 Bochum Fax +49 234 579 66 688 Web www.inccas.de

Results of the Survey to Assess the Satisfaction of Producer Clients

with the Services of Fairtrade Producer Support Staff

2

Table of Contents

1 Setting of the survey 3

2 Executive summary 4

3 Survey return rates 6

4 General information 8

5 Type of contact with Fairtrade producer support staff 15

5.1 Results regarding support service 15

5.2 How to get Fairtrade producer support services 15

6 Feedback on satisfaction with Fairtrade producer support staff 18

6.1 How was the support service provided? 18

6.2 Initiation of the support service 22

6.3 Comparison with the results 2012 29

7 Results regarding the satisfaction with Fairtrade support service 34

7.1 Top 5/ Flop 5 34

7.2 Satisfaction with the Fairtrade producer support staff 36

7.3 Comparison with the results of 2012 42

8 Top 3 expectations for the future 44

8.1 Additional comments on future expectations in free texts 44

9 Basic information on participants 46

10 Appendix 47

10.1 Full free text comments 47

10.2 List of illustrations and tables 52

3

1 Setting of the survey

The survey was carried out between 20th of March and 23th of April 2015. The invitation to participate

was sent to a sample of 1,892 Fairtrade (FT) producer organizations all around the world out of which

64 mails bounced back as undeliverable, giving a real sample of 1,828 invited producer organizations.

Within the indicated time frame three reminders were sent to all organizations that had not

participated so far.

The questionnaire was programmed as an online survey in four languages: English, French, Spanish

and Portuguese. The participants could choose their preferred language. In order to be able to

compare the results, the questionnaire followed the structure of a survey conducted in 2012; it was

slightly adapted by the International Development Unit (IDU) of Fairtrade International (FI) in

cooperation with INCCAS. Moreover, the survey approach was discussed and agreed with the three

Fairtrade producer networks in Africa, Asia and Latin America & the Caribbean which have already

taken on or are in the process of taking over the operational management responsibility for producer

support service from FI.

It was divided up into three parts and an introduction:

The introduction consisted of generic questions to get a clearer picture of the structure of the

producer units and the kind of services they received.

Part 1 focused on the kind of contact with Fairtrade producer support staff.

Part 2 was dedicated to the assessment of satisfaction with the Fairtrade producer support staff:

participants had the choice to select agree/disagree in a scale of 5, ranging from “fully agree” to

“fully disagree”, to a set of pre-established statements. At the end of the questionnaire participants

had the possibility to make comments in form of free text.

Part 3 asked for the expectations of the participants regarding the support services.

At the end, participants were asked to provide some data about their person.

4

2 Executive summary

The survey was well accepted by the Fairtrade producer organizations of the three world regions:

Africa/Middle East, Asia and Latin America/The Caribbean. A total of 347 companies/organizations

participated in the survey; the overall return rate of 19% is good and sets a valid data base for data

analysis. If we only consider Fairtrade certified organizations, the return rate is noticeably higher with

almost 30% (chapter 3 Survey return rates).

The first part of the survey reveals information about the location and size of the organizations, their

certification status, their producer type setup according to the Fairtrade standards and the services

they received on behalf of Fairtrade producer support staff (chapter 4 General information). In total,

89% of the persons who answered the survey in 2015 were the appointed contact persons for

Fairtrade matters.

The majority of surveyed organizations (301) is already certified, only 34 have an applicant status and

another 4 have been de-certified; the return rates of certified (30%) and of not yet certified

organisations (4%) differ substantially so that results can be considered as representative for certified

organisations. Regarding the producer type set up in all regions, the biggest group is represented by

Small Producer Organizations (79% in average over all regions) followed by Hired Labour Companies

(19% in average over all regions). Only from the Asian region organisations of Contract Production

participated in this survey. Of all Asian producer organizations 9% were Contract Production.

In chapter 5 Type of contact with Fairtrade producer support staff the answers concerning the type

of contact with Fairtrade producer support staff are analysed. A majority of 73% of the surveyed

organisations’ representatives would contact the producer support staff in case he/she needs a

Fairtrade service, and they also know how to get in touch. Another 18% of the participants would try

to get in touch with the FLO-CERT auditor, and 9% would try to get in touch with Fairtrade

International in Bonn. Compared with the 2012 survey, now 10% less of the producers would

contact the producer support staff, but the number of producers that would contact FLO-CERT

auditors in case they need Fairtrade producer support services, increased by 16%.

The central part of the 2015 questionnaire is Part 2, the feedback on Fairtrade producer support

staff. Results are presented in chapter 6 Feedback on satisfaction with Fairtrade producer support

staff and chapter 7 Results regarding the satisfaction with Fairtrade support service. Compared to

the 2012-survey, a higher percentage of producers received some kind of support service in 2015

(chapter 6.3). In the 2015 survey we combined for the first time the question of HOW a support

service was provided with the satisfaction with the specific form of provided service.

The participants were then asked to answer 16 pre-established statements that could be assessed

with values between 0 (fully disagree) and 5 (fully agree). The feedback concerning satisfaction with

Fairtrade in general is highly positive. By regions the results concerning the general satisfaction level

are rather homogenous. Significant variations between regions are evident in two aspects (chapter

7.2 Satisfaction with the Fairtrade producer support staff − Comparison by regions). Concerning

satisfaction, the proportion of positive answers has increased in 13 out of 16 statements compared

to the survey in 2012 (chapter Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden. Fehler!

Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden.).

5

In general, Fairtrade producer support staff received a very good feedback by the surveyed

organizations. 94% of the organizations agree, fully agree or strongly agree with the statement that

the producer support staff“provides a competent and professional service”. Also over 90% state that

the support service they received as organizations was important to them. Other positively evaluated

statements of the Top 5 are to be found in chapter 7.1 Top 5/ Flop 5. On the side of the most

negatively evaluated aspects, one can derive the following issues from the rating of the statements:

(1) support in seizing market opportunities, (2) connection to other service providers (if necessary),

and (3) identification of areas were support is required (chapter 7.1 Top 5/ Flop 5).

The third part of the survey posed three statements concerning expectations for the future (chapter

8 Top 3 expectations for the future). All of the three proposed points received high approval of over

95% of the participants:

Fairtrade should develop services that enable producers to improve their functioning as

business,

Fairtrade should develop a programme of trainings that address key non-compliance

problems identified in Fairtrade audits as a whole,

Fairtrade should improve its market access and market information service.

Despite of or based on the high level of general satisfaction with Fairtrade services so far, there are

very high expectations of improving specific aspects of these services in the future.

About 89 organisations used the opportunity to give free text comments. About 70 participants used

this option to make statements that refer to expectations related to the before mentioned

statements.

6

3 Survey return rates

A total of 347 out of 1,828 organizations which were invited to participate in the survey answered

the questionnaire, giving an overall feedback rate of 19%. The feedback rate is reasonable and

represents a valid database.

From the general data we can derive that a share of approximately 45% of the 1,828 organizations

has the applicant status. In more precise terms this means that 823 organizations have applicant

status and 1,005 are certified organizations or formerly certified organizations. If we take this

differentiated calculation of the feedback rate as a base, we get a slightly different result: Out of the

Fairtrade certified organizations or organizations which stated “our Fairtrade certification is currently

suspended” a share of almost 30% answered to the 2015 questionnaire that can be stated as a very

good response rate.

F. 1. Feedback rates by Fairtrade-regions in survey 2015

T. 1. Feedback rate differentiated by status

Sent e-mails Answers Feedback rate

Fairtrade certified or our Fairtrade certification is currently suspended.

1.005 301 29,9%

Not yet certified, application status.

823 34 4%

688

265

875

1828

157 46

144

347

23%

17% 16% 19%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Africa and the Middle East

Asia and Pacific Latin America and the Caribbean

Total 2015

Sent e-Mails Answers Feedback rate

7

F. 2. Distribution of responses from Fairtrade-regions in the 2015 survey

So far, most of the responses came from Africa (45% in this survey 38% in overall sample of invited

organizations), followed by Latin America (42% in this survey, 48% in overall sample) and Asia (13% in

this survey, 14% in overall sample). Compared with the share of the regions in the overall sample of

the invitations sent, African organizations responded at a higher level and Latin American

organizations at a slightly lower level. In general, the response rate of this survey is good.

The overall response rate in 2012 was slightly higher with 22.7% and the distribution of the

responses by regions was similar: Africa and the Middle East 43%, Latin America with 40% and Asia

with 17%.

45%

13%

42%

Africa and the Middle East Asia and Pacific

Latin America and the Caribbean

8

4 General information

F. 3. Question 1: Specific person who is the appointed contact person for the Fairtrade matters?

Figure F. 3. shows that in total more than 98% of the organizations do have an appointed contact

person for Fairtrade matters. In the 2012 survey, this share was a little bit lower with 91%. If we go a

bit deeper into detail, we can see that 89% of the persons who answered the questionnaire are the

specific appointed contact persons for Fairtrade. Another 10% state that their organization has such

a person but it was not them who answered the questionnaire. And a very small share of 0.6 % states

that their organization does not have such a contact person.

From which countries did organizations participate?

F. 4. Question 2: Africa & Middle East: Survey return numbers per country

83%

6% 10%

1%

80%

11% 9%

82%

6% 8% 3%

82%

7% 9% 2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Yes, I am this person and I also received the E-Mail from Fairtrade

Yes, I am this person and the E-Mail from

Fairtrade was forwarded to me from another person in our

organization

Yes, but I am not this person

No

Africa and the Middle East Asia and Pacific Latin America and the Caribbean Total

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Kenya

Côte d‘Ivoire

Mauritius

Ghana

Uganda

South Africa

Malawi

Ethiopia, Rwanda

Burkina Faso, Swaziland

Madagascar, Morocco, Egypt, Zimbabwe

Burundi, Cameroon, São Tomé and Príncipe Sierra …

9

In Africa & Middle East most answers came from Kenya, followed by Côte d’Ivoire; this was the same

in the 2012 survey.

F. 5. Question 2: Latin America & the Caribbean: Survey return numbers per country

In Latin America most organizations came from Colombia, followed by Peru and Brazil; again this

order was the same in 2012.

F. 6. Question 2: Asia: Survey return numbers per country

Just like in the 2012 survey, organizations from India made up the biggest group in Asia.

The Fairtrade standard system distinguishes three types of producer groups: Small Producer

Organization, Hired Labour Company and Contract Production. Concerning this producer type set-up,

we can state that in all regions most of the organizations belong to the Small Producer group. The

average over all 3 regions is 79%. The share varies between 89% in Latin America and the Caribbean,

74% in Africa and the Middle East and 67% in Asia.

29

18

9

8

7

5

4

2

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Colombia, Peru

Brazil

Honduras, Mexico

Dominican Republic

Ecuador, Nicaragua

Guatemala, Guyana

Bolivia, Costa Rica

Chile, El Salvador, Paraguay

Belize, Haiti, Panama, Saint Vincent and the …

14

7

6

4

3

2

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

India

Indonesia

Sri Lanka

Viet Nam

Samoa, Pakistan, Fiji

Kyrgyzstan

Tonga, Timor-Leste, Tajikistan, Philippines

10

An average of 19% over all 3 regions is Hired Labour Companies. A greater share will be found in

Africa and the Middle East (26%) and Asia and the Pacific (24%), whereas in Latin America and the

Caribbean only 11% belong to this producer type set-up.

As in 2012, Contract Production is again only to be found in Asia - as shown in the following graph

F. 7. Question 4: Distribution of producer group types in survey 2015 by region

Concerning Asia, this finding differs from the one of 2012, where the share of small producer

organizations responding the survey has increased; in 2012 it was lower than the responses from

Hired Labour Companies.

In addition, participants were also asked for their role within their respective producer group. The

answers are presented in the following graph 0

74%

26%

67%

24%

9%

89%

11%

79%

19%

1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Small Producer Organization Hired Labour Company Contract Production

Africa and the Middle East (N=155) Asia and Pacific (N=45)

Latin America and the Caribbean (N=144) Total (N=344)

11

F. 8. Question 4.1 – 4.3: Role in organization

As also stated in the 2012 survey, here again in almost all regions a high number of respondents is

allocated at the management or administrative staff of Small Producer Organizations: This can be

explained by the online-mode of the survey and the fact that they represent the group with easy

internet access. Besides that, the fact has to be considered that 89% of the participants who

answered were the appointed contact person for Fairtrade matters. Only 9% stated that their

company has such a contact person but that it was not themselves. Mostly management staff

answered the survey even if they were not the FT contact person. 13% of the management staff was

not the contact person.

Asked about the number of persons directly employed by the company or organization participants

answered as shown in the following chart:

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Management staff contracted by organization

Farmer member

Board member/delegate

Technician staff contracted by organization

Worker contracted by organization

Contracted worker

Supervisor

Member of Premium Committee/Joint Body

Fairtrade Officer

Company owners / executive management

Company owners / executive management

Supervisor

Smal

l Pro

du

cer

Org

aniz

atio

n

Hir

ed L

abo

ur

Co

mp

any

Co

ntr

act

Pro

du

ctio

n


12

F. 9. Question 7: Number of persons directly employed

The size of the organizations responding varies by regions, but the share of small size organizations is

the highest one in this survey and in all regions:

In Africa the highest absolute number is small size organizations below 50 employees; but also

organizations of all other sizes answered in a considerable number. This was different in 2012, where

the highest share was found in organizations with 101-500 employees.

In Latin America 57% of the organization have less than 50 employees (same as in 2012).

From Asia also the small size organizations had the greatest share. Despite that Asia has the highest

share in the category of big size organizations. This differs from 2012, where the highest number of

responding organizations was the group of 1001-5000 employees.

Participants were also asked “Out of the number of individuals working in your organization or

company, how many are women?” The answers are represented in the following graph.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Below 50 50-100 101-500 501-1000 1001-5000 More than 5000



13

Question 8: Share of women employees

Although an average of approximately 20 % in all regions states that they have a share of over 50% of

women employees, it is also obvious that gender equal employment is not yet a fact. The lowest

number of female employees is in Latin America and the Caribbean.1

Being asked for their certification status, most organizations qualified themselves as already certified

(288), 34 as applicants and 18 were suspended or decertified. The following table represents the

regional distribution of the certification status:

T. 2. Question 9: Certification status by region

Africa and the Middle East

Asia and Pacific Latin America and the Caribbean

Total

Fairtrade certified 122 (78%) 42 (91%) 124 (86%) 288 (83%)

Not yet certified, application status

22 (14%) 3 (7%) 9 (6%) 34 (10%)

1 This finding cannot be compared with 2012 as we had no clear picture of the data in 2012.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Less than 25% Between 25% and 50% Between 50% and 75% More than 75%



14

Our Fairtrade certification is currently suspended

5 (3%) 1 (2%) 7 (5%) 13 (4%)

We are decertified 4 (3%)

1 (1%) 5 (1%)

Other 3 (2%)

3 (2%) 6 (1,5%)

I do not know 1 (1%)

1 (0,5%)

In all regions the majority of participating organizations is already certified, some differences among

the regions can be stated regarding those which are not yet certified, the biggest number in Africa

and the lowest in Latin America and the Caribbean. This was the same finding in 2012, although the

numbers were different, as Fairtrade producer organizations increased considerably meanwhile.

F. 10. Question 9.1: In which year did you achieve Fairtrade certification for the first time?

The table shows that half of all organizations participating in the survey are quite young in terms of

years of certification.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1985-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2010 2010-2015

In which year did you achieve Fairtrade certification for the first time?

15

5 Type of contact with Fairtrade producer support staff

5.1 Results regarding support service

By presenting the results regarding the support service, we will stick to the same chronology as in the

questionnaire. This section of the survey aimed at getting a detailed overview of the kind of support

services the organizations received.

5.2 How to get Fairtrade producer support services

The first question was: “What do you normally do in case you need Fairtrade producer support

services?” The answers are shown in F. 11. compared by regions.

F. 11. Question 10: What do you normally do in case you need Fairtrade producer support

services?

As one can see, 73% of all who need Fairtrade producer support service try to get in personal contact

with the Fairtrade producer support staff. This has to be taken into consideration in the evaluation of

the free text comments at the end of this report, where some participants stated that getting in

contact with these persons is sometimes a bit difficult. Furthermore, if we compare the results of this

question with the results of the 2012 survey, we can see that in this year and in all regions 10% less

persons tried to use this mean of contact (2012 results: 85% Africa and Middle East, 81% Asia and

Pacific, 80% Latin America, 83% total). On the other side, the number of persons who tried to get in

touch with the FLO-CERT auditor increased significantly, from 2% in total in 2012 to 18% in total in

78%

8%

19% 15%

70%

7% 11%

17%

70%

10% 15%

21%

73%

9%

16% 18%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

I try to get in touch with the Fairtrade Producer

Support staff

I try to get in touch with the head office of

Fairtrade International in Bonn, Germany

I try to get in touch with a Producer Network

representative

I try to get in touch with the FLO-Cert Auditor



16

2015 (Results from 2012: 1% Africa and Middle East, 3%, Asia and Pacific, 5% Latin America and the

Caribbean, 2% total).2

Additionally, it was asked if one has the necessary contact information to get in contact with the

specific persons. In almost all of the mentioned contact types, the necessary contact information is

available (F. 12. ).

F. 12. Question 10.1 – 10.4: Necessary contact information is available

Those who responded “other” had the possibility to specify. These are the results:

From Asia:

It’s a two way communication between Liaison Officer and us, some time we contact them,

some time they contact us.

From Africa/Middle East

By a private consultant who is supporting us concerning Fairtrade issues

Fairtrade Liaison Officer

producer support staff of producer networks

I contact Mr. XX who is responsible for all matters concerning Fairtrade in Mauritius

I contact the Swaziland Sugar Association but I also now have access to the Fairtrade

producer support staff

In contact with the independent Fairtrade Officer from XX

2 No significant changes are observable for the question “I try to get in touch with the head offices of Fairtrade

in Bonn, Germany” between 2012 and 2015. Results of the 2012 survey: 6% Africa and Middle East, 7% Asia and Pacific, 5% Latin America and Caribbean, 6% total.

94%

83% 87%

91% 91%

67%

80%

100% 88% 87% 86%

93% 91% 83% 86%

93%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

I try to get in touch with the Fairtrade Producer

Support staff AND Yes, I do have the necessary contact information.

I try to get in touch with the head office of

Fairtrade International in Bonn, Germany AND

Yes, I do have the necessary contact

information.

I try to get in touch with a Producer Network

representative AND Yes, I do have the necessary

contact information.

I try to get in touch with the FLO-Cert Auditor

AND Yes, I do have the necessary contact

information.


17

J’essaie d’entrer en contact avec l’Officier de Liaison de FLO-CERT

Regional Coordinator Eastern Africa?

Since we are not yet certified, I still contact XX at Fairtrade international

From Latin America/Caribbean:

Atualmente estamos sem apoio, porque estamos numa região distante do centro de

comercio e desprovido de equipamentos para official o café.

Busco información a través de la página oficial de FAIRTRADE, es decir, descargo los

documentos para poder contar con información y poder disipar cualquier duda.

Con la coordinadora colombiana de comercio justo.

Contactar al enlace en Colombia.

Contacto a Fairtrade internacional.

En Flo Costa Rica.

Meu contato é com as organições que já estão certificadas, pois não conheço os

representantes Fairtrade.

Trato de ponerme en contacto con el analista de certificaciones en Costa Rica.

Trato de ponerme en contacto con la Persona de Contacto de FLO-CERT en Costa Rica.

18

6 Feedback on satisfaction with Fairtrade producer support staff

6.1 How was the support service provided?

As illustrated in the last section of the report, the personal contact to Fairtrade and its

representatives is important for the participants and especially in the context of the producer

support. The participants’ satisfaction with the support services is therefore evaluated in the

following section. In general, all means of service provided are evaluated as very good.

F. 13. Question 12: How was the service provided?

The following charts always show the satisfaction results with all forms of contact in detail and

compared by region. They are arranged according to traffic lights, giving at the first glimpse a clear

picture of the very positive feedback as indicated by the predominantly “green lights”. The

percentage axis is the one on the left side. The axis on the right side is associated with the calculated

arithmetical means based on a scale from 0 (Fully disagree) to 5 (Fully agree). The possibility to

directly evaluate the type of contact is an extension of the survey in 2015 and did not exist in 2012.

F. 14. Question 12.1-12.4: I was satisfied with the provided support

Figure F. 16. shows that the absolute majority of the participants was satisfied with the type of

provided service. The means are all to be found in the positive range of the scale.

No matter what the means of communication was, the vast majority of all participants of the survey

state their satisfaction with the provided support. Some Latin American members seem to have

problems with telephone/skype and e-mail. It would be good to know if this is because of the quality

of their internet connection or if this is a critique of the quality of the content of Skype sessions and

received e-mails.

71%

44% 42% 48%

82%

36% 36% 41%

77%

36% 34% 31%

75%

39% 38% 40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

e-mail Telephone/Skype Meeting in an office Workshop setting on site



19

Figure F. 17. shows how often the specific service was provided. In total, more than 60% of the

participants stated that they had contact either 3-5 times or more than 5 times via e-mail or

Telephone/ Skype. Meetings in an office or workshop settings on site do not happen that often. Here

it is more than half of the participants who state between 1 or 2-3 times. The same is valid for the

other types of workshops (F. 20.). 2-3 times is the most common mentioned frequency. But we can

observe some differences between the regions.

3,8 3,5

3,9 3,8 3,9 3,9 3,9 3,9 3,9 3,7 3,8 3,8 3,8 3,8

4,2 3,9

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=9

3)

Asi

a (N

=32

)

L. A

. (N

=99

)

Tota

l (N

=22

4)

Afr

ica

(N=5

7)

Asi

a (N

=14

)

L. A

. (N

=46

)

Tota

l (N

=11

7)

Afr

ica

(N=5

4)

Asi

a (N

=13

)

L. A

. (N

=44

)

Tota

l (N

=11

1)

Afr

ica

(N=6

3)

Asi

a (N

=15

)

L. A

. (N

=40

)

Tota

l (N

=11

8)

e-mail Telephone/Skype Meeting in an office Workshop setting on site

5 Fully agree 4 Strongly agree 3 Agree 2 Disagree 1 Strongly disagree 0 Fully disagree Means

20

F. 15. Question 12: Frequency of provided service

F. 16. Question 12: How was the service provided?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=9

3)

Asi

a (N

=32

)

L. A

. (N

=99

)

Tota

l (N

=22

4)

Afr

ica

(N=5

7)

Asi

a (N

=14

)

L. A

. (N

=46

)

Tota

l (N

=11

7)

A (

N=5

4)

Asi

a (N

=13

)

L. A

. (N

=44

)

Tota

l (N

=11

1)

Afr

ica

(N=6

3)

Asi

a (N

=15

)

L. A

. (N

=40

)

Tota

l (N

=11

8)

Email

Telephone/Skype Meeting in an office Workshop setting on site

1 time (0) 2-3 times (1) 3-5 times (2) More than 5 times (3)

20%

34%

16%

4%

15%

28% 31%

0%

10%

28%

19%

2%

15%

31%

19%

2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Workshop setting off site

In a workshop setting with participants from

other Fairtrade certified producer organizations,

companies

In a joint workshop Other



21

F. 17. Question 12.5-12.8: I was satisfied with the provided support

Figure 0shows that the absolute majority of the participants was satisfied with the workshops they

participated in. The means are all to be found in the positive range of the scale. The highest

appreciation is obviously given in Asia and Latin America to the workshop setting off site and in Latin

America to the joint workshops.

3,5

4,2 4,1 3,8

3,9

3,4

3,8 3,8 3,8

3,2

4,0 3,7

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=26)

Asia (N=5)

L. A. (N=13)

Total (N=44)

Africa (N=44)

Asia (N=10)

L. A. (N=37)

Total (N=91)

Africa (N=21)

Asia (N=12)

L. A. (N=25)

Total (N=58)

Workshop setting off site Workshop setting with participants from other

Fairtrade certified producer organizations

In a joint workshop with the Fairtrade Producer Support

staff and persons from other support organizations


22

F. 18. Question 12: Frequency of provided service

Figure 0shows how often the specific service was provided. There is no significant difference

between the regions.

In the free texts some participants specified:

From Africa/Middle East

E-mail and telephone.

Je trouve très bien que l'on puisse nous aider à travailler à la compréhension du standard et

la mise en œuvre de ses recommandations.

No support was provided since we are still at application stage.

Trainings.

From Latin America/Caribbean:

Por e-maile-mail e skype - e quem forneceu foi FLO-CERT.

Unicamente en el ambito de certificacion, y supervicion de la misma.

6.2 Initiation of the support service

The question on How the support was initiated results in the following interesting findings which

illustrate that the producers are very active in initiating support:

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=2

6)

Asi

a (N

=5)

L. A

. (N

=13

)

Tota

l (N

=44

)

Afr

ica

(N=4

4)

Asi

a(N

=10

)

L. A

. (N

=37

)

Tota

l (N

=91

)

Afr

ica

(N=2

1)

Asi

a (N

=12

)

L. A

. (N

=25

)

Tota

l (N

=58

)


Workshop setting with participants from other Fairtrade certified producer organizations

In a joint workshop with the Fairtrade Producer Support staff and persons from other support

organizations

1 time 2-3 times 3-5 times More than 5 times

23

F. 19. Question 13: How was the support action initiated?

The majority of support (60% in total, in Africa 62%) is initiated by request on the producer’s side –at

48% the support is initiated by the Liaison Officer as an offer to the producers. In general we have

predominantly an active approach of demand and offer- compared to a setting where the support

service is part of a broader work plan (26% in general).

This was similar in 2012, but the share of support then initiated by request on the producer’s side

was higher: almost 70 % in total, in Africa 77% and also the initiation by the Liaison Officer reduced

slightly from 55% in 2012 to 48 % in 2015.

Additionally, we also gave the participants the possibility to evaluate the initiation process of the

support action. In questions 13.1 to 13.3 we asked the participants to evaluate the following

statements:

Question 13.1: I/we was/were satisfied with the offered support from the Fairtrade producer support

staff.

Question 13.2: I/we was/were satisfied with the requested support from the Fairtrade producer

support staff.

Question 13.3: I/we am/are satisfied with the broader work plan agreed between me/us and the

producer support staff.

The figure F.22 shows that no matter how the support action was initiated, the clients were highly

satisfied with the initiation process. No statistically significant differences can be found between the

3 evaluated types of initiation nor between the 3 regions. The few negative answers can be clarified

by the free text responses shown below in the annex.

50% 58%

29%

4%

36%

56%

28%

6%

50%

62%

23%

5%

48%

60%

26%

5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff

approached me or us and offered support

I / We approached the Producer Support staff and requested support

The support activity is part of a broader work plan agreed between

me/us and the Producer Support staff

Other

Africa and the Middle East (N=123) Asia and Pacific (N=36) LA and the Caribbean (N=125) Total N=284)

24

F. 20. Question 13.1-13.3:

3,9

3,5

3,8 3,8 3,8

3,5

3,8 3,8 3,9

3,6

4,2 4,0

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=6

2)

Asi

a (N

=13

)

L.A

. (N

=62

)

Tota

l (N

=13

7)

Afr

ica

(N=7

1)

Asi

a (N

=20

)

L.A

. (N

=77

)

Tota

l (N

=16

8)

Afr

ica

(N=3

6)

Asi

a (N

=10

)

L.A

. (N

=29

)

Tota

l (N

=75

)

Question 13.1 Question 13.2

Question 13.3


25

What kind of support service have you received?

F. 21. Question 14 & 14.1-14.4: What kind of support service have you received?

Satisfaction with the support services

52% 55%

72%

50%

63%

53%

78%

53% 53% 59% 58%

51% 54% 57%

67%

51%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Achieving Fairtrade certification for the first

time

Overcoming non-compliances identified

in a FLO-Cert audit

Training on Fairtrade standards

Orientation on Fairtrade premium use

Africa and the Middle East (N=137) Asia(N=40) LA and the Caribbean (N=137) Total (N=314)

4,1 3,7

4,2 4,1 4,0 4,2 4,0 4,0 4,0 3,7

4,0 3,9 3,8 3,8 4,0 3,9

0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=6

9)

Asi

a (N

=24

)

LA (

N=7

2)

Tota

l (N

=16

5)

Afr

ica

(N=7

5)

Asi

a (N

=20

)

LA (

N=7

9)

Tota

l (N

=17

4)

Afr

ica

(N=9

6)

Asi

a (N

=29

)

LA (

N=8

0)

Tota

l (N

=20

5)

Afr

ica

(N=6

7)

Asi

a (N

=20

)

LA (

N=6

9)

Tota

l (N

=15

6)

I/ we am/are satisfied with achieving the

Fairtrade certification for the first time

I/ we am/are satisfied with overcoming non-compliances identified

in a FLO-Cert audit

I/ we am/are satisfied with training on

Fairtrade standards

I/ we am/are satisfied with Orientation on

Fairtrade premium use


26

All four kinds of support service are requested equally. There is only a slightly bigger interest in

trainings on Fairtrade standards. As the graph shows, satisfaction with this service – as with the other

three services as well – is very high.

Although the overall evaluation is quite positive, comparing to other support services there seems to

be a higher degree of disagreement with the service of overcoming non-compliances identified in a

FLO-CERT audit.


42%

26% 34% 31%

60%

35% 33%

23%

39% 32% 31%

12%

43%

30% 32%

22%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Training to Board members/

organizational strengthening

Facilitating experience exchange with other Fairtrade producer

organizations

Responding to information requests

sent by Fairtrade International

Improving the work of a committee dealing with the Fairtrade premium (such as a “Fairtrade

premium committee” or a “Joint Body”)


27



Compared to the other services above, less persons stated that they used these four services.

4,0 3,8 4,0 4,0 3,6 3,8

4,2 3,9 4,0 3,8 4,0 4,0 3,8 3,9 4,1 3,9

0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=5

7)

Asi

a (N

=23

)

LA (

N=5

2)

Tota

l (N

=13

2)

Afr

ica

(N=3

3)

Asi

a (N

=13

)

LA (

N=4

4)

Tota

l (N

=90

)

Afr

ica

(N=4

5)

Asi

a (N

=13

)

LA (

N=4

3)

Tota

l (N

=10

1)

Afr

ica

(N=4

2)

Asi

a (N

=8)

LA (

N=1

5)

Tota

l (N

=65

)

I/ we am/are satisfied with Training to Board

members/ organizational strengthening

I/ we am/are satisfied with facilitating

experience exchange with other Fairtrade

producer organizations

I/ we am/are satisfied with responding to

information requests sent by Fairtrade

International

I/ we am/are satisfied with improving the

work of a committee dealing with the

Fairtrade premium


20% 20% 21% 12%

28%

15%

30%

15% 9%

18% 20% 15% 16% 19% 22%

14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Improving the work of a worker’s committee

Executive Management needed information on

the Fairtrade International system

Improving access to the Fairtrade market

Relating to potential or existing buyers of Fairtrade certified

product


28


F. 24. Question 14.12- 14.16

3,9 3,8 4,1

3,9 3,9 3,6

4,2 4,0

3,5 3,6

4,2

3,8 3,6

3,2

4,0 3,7

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=2

7)

Asi

a (N

=10

)

LA (

N=1

2)

Tota

l (N

=49

)

Afr

ica

(N=2

8)

Asi

a (N

=5)

LA (

N=2

5)

Tota

l (N

=58

)

Afr

ica

(N=2

9)

Asi

a (N

=11

)

LA (

N=2

8)

Tota

l (N

=68

)

Afr

ica

(N=1

7)

Asi

a (N

=6)

LA (

N=2

0)

Tota

l (N

=43

)

I/ we am/are satisfied with improving the work of a worker’s

committee

I/ we am/are satisfied with information

distributed to Executive

Management that needed information…

I/ we am/are satisfied with improving access

to the Fairtrade market

I/ we am/are satisfied with relating to

potential or existing buyers of Fairtrade certified product


42%

12% 15% 20%

35%

10%

25% 28%

39%

11% 13% 20%

40%

11% 15%

21%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Understanding and meeting the compliance criteria as defined by the

auditing organization (FLO-Cert)

Finding other organizations or experts

who could assist us to overcome a specific

problem we identifiedreceived?

Making our producer voices heard in the

Fairtrade International system

Understanding better the support needs of

our organization / company better (for

example, conducting a needs analysis)


29

Satisfaction with the support services:

6.3 Comparison with the results 2012: How was service provided?

In the following figures (F. 25. F. 28. ) the differences in how often the different types of contact

possibilities were frequented in comparison with the survey from 2012 and 2015 are shown. The bar

on the very right side of the figure shows the sum of all participants who at least mentioned one type

of contact. In 2015, in total and over all regions 96% of the participants had at least on type of

contact/service to the producer support staff. In 2012, only 82% received one of the mentioned

types of service in general. Of those who participated in the 2015 survey, only 4 % had no contact at

all to FT producer support staff. Taking a closer look at the regions we find some differences in how

producer support staff is contacted (see F.31.).

4,0

3,5

3,9 3,9 3,9

3,3

4,1 3,9 3,9 3,5

4,2 3,9 4,1

3,3

4,3 4,0

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=5

6)

Asi

a (N

=13

)

LA …

Tota

l (N

=12

2)

Afr

ica

(N=1

7)

Asi

a …

LA …

Tota

l (N

=36

)

Afr

ica

(N=2

0)

Asi

a (N

=10

)

LA …

Tota

l (N

=48

)

Afr

ica

(N=2

7)

Asi

a (N

=10

)

LA …

Tota

l (N

=64

)

I/ we am/are satisfied with understanding

and meeting the compliance criteria as

defined by the auditing organization

(FLO-Cert)

I/ we am/are satisfied with finding other organizations or

experts who could assist us to overcome a specific problem we

identified

I/ we am/are satisfied with making our

producer voices heard in the Fairtrade

International system

I/ we am/are satisfied with understanding better the support

needs of our organization / company (for

example, conducting a needs analysis)


30

F. 25. All regions

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total 2012 (N=227) Total 2015 (N=314)

31

F. 26. Africa

F. 27. Asia

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa 2012 (N=118) Africa 2015 (N=137)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Asia 2012 (N=45) Asia 2015 (N=40)

32

F. 28. Latin America

Figure 0shows again the share of respondents of the survey who stated how a specific service was

provided in comparison by region. In Asia e-mail contact was used by 82% of the producers.

Compared to Africa this answer given is 10% higher. Africa, on the other hand, is the region where

almost half of the participants stated that service was provided by a workshop setting on site. Only

31% of the participants from Latin America stated this. Over all regions, between 95% and 98% of the

participants stated that service was provided by at least one of the mentioned types of service. In

other words, a total of only 4% of the participants did not receive service through one of the 7

specific types of contact or any other type of contact.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

LA 2012 (N=111) LA 2015 (N=137)

33

F. 29. Comparison by regions

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa 2015 (N=137)

Asia 2015 (N=40)

LA 2015 (N=137)

Total 2015 (N=314)

e-mail

Telephone/Skype

Meeting in an office

Workshop setting on site


In a workshop setting with participants from other Fairtrade certified producer organizations, companies

In a joint workshop

Other

One of the mentioned Types

34

7 Results regarding the satisfaction with Fairtrade support service

To assess the satisfaction with the support service, participants provided their feedback to 16

statements using a scale from completely agree (5) to completely disagree (0 - or “no answer”). In

addition, they had the opportunity to insert additional comments as free text and made good use of

it (see all free text answers in the annex).

In general, the support service received a very good feedback by the surveyed organizations; they are

highly (to 93%) satisfied with them as experts and trainers. They are mostly regarded as competent

providing professional services, and their services are considered as important for the organizations.

Before presenting all 16 items in detail, we will start with an overview of the 5 best results (Top 5)

and the five worst results (Flop 5) as to be seen in the two following charts.

7.1 Top 5/ Flop 5

In this overview the top 5 satisfaction items are presented in correlation to the general satisfaction.

The higher the number in the column “corr.1” and “corr.2”, the more the answers given correlate

either with the statement “I am satisfied with the producer support staff as he/she provides a

competent and professional service” or “We would recommend the producer support staff to

others”. The correlation is the tendency how the items were answered by the participants. The

highest value that can be reached is 1,0 meaning that answers to two statements are given in the

absolute same way. Those who marked “Fully agree” in one statement would have marked “Fully

agree” in the other statement as well. Absolutely no correlation would be the value 0,0. Please look

on the next side for the frequency distribution and correlation – Top 5.

35

F. 30. Frequency distribution and correlations – Top 5

The following chart shows those statements that received a minimum of satisfaction rates and could

be interpreted as the critical or weak points that might be analyzed more in detail:

The statement where the highest share of disagreement was appointed is the statement concerning

contact to the head office in Bonn. Please look on the next side for the frequency distribution and

correlation – Flop 5.

corr.1* corr. 2**

The support services we received as

an organization from the Fairtrade

Producer Support staff were

important to us (N=285)

2015 0,74 0,72

I am satisfied with the Producer

Support staff as he/she provides a

competent and professional service

(N=286)

2015 0,78

The Fairtrade Producer Support

person is an expert in Fairtrade

Standards and Fairtrade Certification

(N=278)

2015 0,77 0,78

The Fairtrade Producer Support

person is a competent trainer

(N=280)

2015 0,74 0,77

After approaching the Fairtrade

Producer Support staff, I get a timely

reaction/ answer (N=283)

2015 0,81 0,81

* Correlation with the item: I am satisfied with the Producer Support staff as he/she provides a competent and professional

service.

**Correlation with the item: We would recommend the Producer Support staff to others.

Due to direct sequence of some of the questions correlated, significance of statistical measures has to be interpreted carefully.

33% 27% 32% 5%

34% 29% 31% 5%

29% 32% 35% 3%

30% 31% 32% 5%1%

27% 33% 34% 3%

36

F. 31. Frequency distribution and correlations – Flop 5

7.2 Satisfaction with the Fairtrade producer support staff − Comparison by regions

The following charts show the satisfaction results of all 16 statements in detail by region. They are

arranged according to traffic lights, giving at the first glimpse a clear picture of the very positive

feedback as indicated by the predominantly “green lights”. In each column, besides the number

indicating the share of respondents in the corresponding category, the level of the grey field and the

corresponding number in it represent the calculated arithmetical mean based on a scale from 0 to 5.

The overall high level of satisfaction with the FTLO is reflected in the value which is almost always

higher than 4. This is even true for most of the above stated “Flop 5”-results. The topic of supporting

in seizing market opportunities is the only one evaluated with a higher percentage of negative

responses.

corr.1* corr. 2**

If I have a problem with Fairtrade, I

first contact the Fairtrade

International Head office in Bonn or

the office of the producer network

(N=270)

2015 0,15 0,2

If I have a problem with certification I

get in touch with other Fairtrade

producers (N=270)

2015 0,31 0,33


supported us in seizing a market

opportunity (N=259)

2015 0,53 0,54


is able to connect us to other service

providers in order to tackle a specific

problem if he / she did not have the

specific skil ls or resources

him/herself (N=272)

2015 0,67 0,66


helped us to identify areas where we

need support (N=284)

2015 0,77 0,76

* Correlation with the item: I am satisfied with the Producer Support staff as he/she provides a competent and professional

service.

**Correlation with the item: We would recommend the Producer Support staff to others.

Due to direct sequence of some of the questions correlated, significance of statistical measures has to be interpreted carefully.

12% 19% 26% 29% 6% 9%

24% 30% 33% 8% 3%

18% 26% 34% 15% 3%

15% 25% 27% 23% 6%5%

18% 18% 29% 24% 6%6%

37

The results are rather homogeneous among the regions, only in few cases there are significant

differences. Significant differences between the regions are marked with * (Question 15.7 & 15.12).3

In the case of the ability to speak the local language (Q 15.7), statistically significant differences could

be detected between the 3 regions (there is a probability of at least 99,9% that respondents’

variation by region is not by random).The highest share of positive feedback to this statement was

observed in Latin America 96%, it is less in Asia 85% and less in Africa 83%. This indicates that either

there might still exist demands of a better local language performance in Africa and Asia or this issue

is not in the same way important in the 3 regions.

The statement on seizing market opportunities (Q.15.12) is one with higher shares of negative

feedback to the statements. Means are ranging from 2,8 in Africa to 3,3 in Latin America and Asia.

These differences are significant between the regions.

In general, Asian participants preferred to choose the mediate answer options “agree”; they only

rarely chose the very positive (“fully agree”) and very negative (“fully disagree”) options.

F. 32. Question 15.1 & 15.2: Satisfaction with the support service

The means shows that there is a general consent in the satisfactory work of the Fairtrade producer

support staff. Some critique comes from Latin American and African participants as a very small

number used the answer option “fully disagree”.

3 Statistical significance means, that the differences we found in the sample are likely also likely to exist in the

real world. Significance levels are: Significant with * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001 between country groups.

3,8 3,6

3,9 3,8 3,7 3,4

3,9 3,8

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=123)

Asia (N=38) LA (N=124) Total (N=285)

Africa (N=122)

Asia (N=38) LA (N=126) Total (N=286)

The support services we received as an organization from the Fairtrade Producer

Support staff were important to us

I am satisfied with the Producer Support staff as he/she provides a competent and

professional service


38

F. 33. Question 15.3 & 15.4

A considerable quantity of the producers don’t think the support staff was able to identify areas

where the members need support. This critical view is even more valid for the staff’s ability to adapt

to the needs of the different groups in one organization and the application of good practice

examples (F.36).

3,5 3,4 3,6 3,6

3,2 3,3 3,4 3,3

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=122)

Asia (N=37) LA (N=125) Total (N=284)

Africa (N=118)

Asia (N=34) LA (N=120) Total (N=272)

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff helped us to identify areas where we need support

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff is able to connect us to other service providers in order to tackle a specific problem if he / she did not

have the specific skills or resources him/herself


39

F. 34. Question 15.5 & 15.6

F. 35. Question 15.7 & 15.8

3,5 3,5 3,7 3,6 3,4 3,4

3,7 3,5

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=120)

Asia (N=34) LA (N=123) Total (N=277)

Africa (N=121)

Asia (N=33) LA (N=124) Total (N=278)

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff is able to relate well to the different groups in our organization (for example, small farmers,

workers, management, men and women) and takes into consideration their needs

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff seeks to make us aware of how similar organizations tackled specific challenges (good practice)


3,6 3,4

4,0 3,8 3,6 3,6 3,7 3,6

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=121)

Asia (N=36) LA (N=125) Total (N=282)

Africa (N=119)

Asia (N=36) LA (N=122) Total (N=277)

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff is able to speak to me / us in my / our local language **

The support services we received as an organization from the Fairtrade Producer

Support staff were essential in addressing a gap we had identified


40

F. 36. Question 15.9 & 15.10

The good response to the question whether “The Fairtrade producer support person is a competent

trainer” is also reflected in his/her language abilities (F. 37), in the approval of his/her capacities to

help the producers to increase their capacities (F. 38) and finally also the fact that they would

recommend the producer support staff to others (F. 40).

3,9

3,6 3,9 3,8

3,7 3,4

3,7 3,6

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=120)

Asia (N=38) LA (N=122) Total (N=280)

Africa (N=121)

Asia (N=36) LA (N=121) Total (N=278)

The Fairtrade Producer Support person is a competent trainer

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff has helped us to increase our capacities


41

F. 37. Question 15.11 & 15.12

F. 38. Question 15.13 & 15.14

3,9

3,5

3,9 3,8

2,8

3,3 3,3 3,0

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=121)

Asia (N=37) LA (N=120) Total (N=278)

Africa (N=114)

Asia (N=30) LA (N=115) Total (N=259)

The Fairtrade Producer Support person is an expert in Fairtrade Standards and Fairtrade

Certification

The Fairtrade Producer Support staff supported us in seizing a market opportunity

**


3,7 3,4

3,8 3,7 3,8

3,4

3,9 3,8

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=122)

Asia (N=37) LA (N=123) Total (N=282)

Africa (N=122)

Asia (N=37) LA (N=124) Total (N=283)

We would recommend the Producer Support staff to others

After approaching the Fairtrade Producer Support staff, I get a timely reaction/ answer


42

F. 39. Question 15.15 & 15.16

7.3 Comparison with the results of 2012

A comparison of the sixteen statements of satisfaction shows that the share of positive answers is

higher (13 statements), partly even significantly higher. The chart T. 3. illustrates the topics which

show the highest increase in positive statements (decreasing order of priority).

2,8 3,1 3,2

3,0

2,5 2,7

3,0 2,7

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Africa (N=115)

Asia (N=34) LA (N=121) Total (N=270)

Africa (N=113)

Asia (N=36) LA (N=121) Total (N=270)

If I have a problem with certification I get in touch with other Fairtrade producers

If I have a problem with Fairtrade, I first contact the Fairtrade International Head office in Bonn or the office of the producer network


43

T. 3. Share of positive statements 2012/ 2015

Percentage 2015 Increase/decreasePercentage of

increase/decrease compared to 2012

Statement of satisfaction

56%

16%

If I have a problem with Fairtrade, I first contact the Fairtrade International Head office in Bonn or the office of the producer network

66%

11% The Fairtrade producer support staff supported us in seizing a market opportunity

89%

6% The Fairtrade producer support staff has helped us to increase our capacities

64%

6% If I have a problem with certification I get in touch with other Fairtrade producers

87%

5% The Fairtrade producer support staff helped us to identify areas where we need support

91%

4%

The support services we received as an organization from the Fairtrade producer support staff were essential in addressing a gap we had identified

79%

4%

The Fairtrade producer support staff is able to connect us to other service providers in order to tackle a specific problem if he / she did not have the specific skills or resources him/herself

89%

2%

The Fairtrade producer support staff is able to relate well to the different groups in our organization (for example, small farmers, workers, management, men and women) and takes into consideration their needs

93%

2%

I am satisfied with the producer support staff as he/she provides a competent and professional service

91%

2% We would recommend the producer support staff to others

95%

2%

The support services we received as an organization from the Fairtrade producer support staff were important to us

93%

1% The Fairtrade producer support person is a competent trainer

89%

1% The Fairtrade producer support staff is able to speak to me / us in my / our local language

86%

0%

The Fairtrade producer support staff seeks to make us aware of how similar organizations tackled specific challenges (good practice)

93%

-1% The Fairtrade producer support person is an expert in Fairtrade Standards and Fairtrade Certification

92%

-1% After approaching the Fairtrade producer support staff, I get a timely reaction/ answer

44

8 Top 3 expectations for the future

F. 40. 3 expectations for the future

As chart F. 40. Illustrates, the three means of improvement and development proposed by Fairtrade

show a high degree of approval.

8.1 Additional comments on future expectations in free texts

At the end of the survey, 89 participants made use of the possibility to express additional comments:

9 from Asia, 51 from Africa and 29 from Latin America. We tried to group them into positive /

4,3

3,9

4,4 4,3

4,4

3,9

4,3 4,3

4,5

3,9

4,5 4,4

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

4,50

5,00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Afr

ica

(N=1

22

)

Asi

a (N

=37

)

LA (

N=1

28

)

Tota

l (N

=28

7)

Afr

ica

(N=1

20

)

Asi

a (N

=36

)

LA (

N=1

27

)

Tota

l (N

=28

3)

Afr

ica

(N=1

20

)

Asi

a (N

=38

)

LA (

N=1

28

)

Tota

l (N

=28

6)

Fairtrade should develop services that enable producers to improve their functioning as

businesses.

Fairtrade should develop a programme of trainings that address key non-compliance

problems identified in Fairtrade audits as a whole.

Fairtrade should improve its market access and market

information service.


45

negative feedback and comments, but this was not possible for all statements and the distinction

between positive or negative feedback and comment is not always clearly given as they sometimes

overlap. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the great majority of the participants used this opportunity

to state some comments or recommendations. The following table shows that this is valid for all

regions. As the possibility to write a free text statement was given in PART 3 of the questionnaire

with the headline: “What are your top 3 expectations for the future towards Fairtrade’s producer

support work” it is not surprising that most of the participants gave comments or recommendations.

T. 4. Additional comments in free text

Positive feedback

Negative feedback

Comments/ recommendations

Total

Asia (1)

0 0 9 9

Africa, Middle East (2)

1 11 39 51

Latin America, Caribbean (3)

0 6 23 29

Total 1 17 71 89

In the appendix (10.1) all free texts are listed by regions.

Taking a closer look at the negative feedback, we found there is very little direct critique to the

producer support staff, his/her knowledge, skills, abilities or attitudes. Two kinds of problems are

outstanding which are inter-related: about 10 statements from Africa and Latin America do complain

contact problems or a lack of information about who is the producer support staff. And a similar

number of statements suggest that the frequency of visits or the contact intensity or even the

number of responsible Liaison Officers should be increased.

46

9 Basic information on participants

F. 41. Sex

F. 42. Year of birth

F. 43. Certified Products

0%

50%

100%

Male Female

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Before 1950 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-or later

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Gold Timber

Herbs and Herbal Teas (Hired Labour) Prepared and Preserved Fruit (Hired Labour)

Sports Balls (Hired Labour) Tea (Hired Labour)

Honey Oilseeds and Oleaginous fruit

Vegetables, including Pulses and Potatoes Fresh Vegetables (Hired Labour)

Cereals Prepared and Preserved Fruit and Vegetables Prepared and Preserved Fruit and Vegetables

Fibre crops (including cotton) Nuts

Herbs, Herbal Teas & Spices Flower & Plants (Hired Labour)

Tea Cane sugar

Cocoa Fresh Fruit (including banana and wine grapes)

Coffee

Fairtrade product company / organization is certified for

47

10 Appendix

10.1 Full free text comments

All free text comments by regions:4

1. Asia:

1. Also Fairtrade min. prices should be updated in time.

2. Fairtrade should implement to place a Fairtrade Liaison Officer for the south pacific region.

3. Fairtrade should establish a quick information cell or customers support email.

4. Fairtrade should give more details of steps to achieve the certificate for companies that met

difficulties to get the certificate.

5. Is it possible for FLO or NAPP to have a producer assistance expert that will help until an SPO

is able to send its product to the market? Especially for Fairtrade centrifugal sugar.

6. Number of Liaison Officers needs to be increased in India, so that we can have more and

more visits there, workshops etc. Market linkage activities, awareness on Fairtrade among

the consumers’ needs to be enhanced to increase the demand of Fairtrade certified product.

7. On-going governance support for established organizations would also be beneficial to assist

through periods of change of staff and/or board members.

8. Speed up the certification issue after the audit.

9. Would be better if Tajikistan had eligibility for contract production. Thank you.

2. Africa/Middle East:

1. Fairtrade devrait trouver des contrat ou marchés pour les organisations Fairtrades. Fairtrade

devrait permettre des formations appuyées (pratique) sur les exploitations Fairtrades.

2. More workshops of Fairtrade to build capacity. Different country's experience sharing.

3. 1. More Fairtrade standards training programs should be organized for producers at the 2nd

grade level to ensure full compliance to the Fairtrade Standards hence increasing our

productivity as well.

2. Farm visits should be encouraged to help identify the problems the producers face and

come up with the required solutions.

4. Buyers of Fairtrade coffee should be audited also so that the traceability chain can be

streamlined as a whole, other than concentrating on producer organizations which do a lot

of work. The auditors should know that farmers who strongly need help some times are not

learned / educated. We train them but on going back, you find they have messed up, for

example poor record keeping, forgetting to sign against their names during their meetings

held despite all the trainings carried out. Despite of all the trainings, women still have

inferiority complex and is a big issue to be addressed.

5. Check on the progress of small produce organization and be able give support in they work

and progress to be registered.

6. Comme nous sommes débutants en Fairtrade, nous n’avons pas encore bénéficies des

rencontre avec d'autre membres de secteurs pour plus faire connaître notre coopérative.

4 The xxx indicate the names of persons or countries and languages which we have been deleted due to data

protection reasons. Basic grammar of the free text answers was corrected.

48

7. Developper le marché Fairtrade avec des exportateurs comme XXXXXX.

8. During audits (3-5 days audits) the auditor should give regular updates to the producer

(company being audited) on his/her findings from interviews, within the course of the audit

e.g. at the end of each day to enable company clarify or locate any supporting documents.

Example, where there are verbal allegations of nonpayment to workers instead of waiting to

give feedback at end of audit the auditor should inform Fairtrade officer of her findings to

seek any clarifications during the audit rather than recording this as a non-conformity.

9. Encourage Fairtrade buyers support young growing producer organizations with grants for

certifications and audit services. Reduce Fairtrade fees on certifications and audit.

10. Fairtrade should be sending their support staff to our head office and factories more often

for more trainings and advice.

11. Fairtrade should seek ways by which newly enrolled member organizations, especially small

producers, can get financial support to carry out exchange visits to learn from matured

groups. Groups need more training but lack the means to sponsor them.

12. Fairtrade devrait aussi former le personnel administratif pour la bonne marché de

l'organisation.

13. Fairtrade devrait faire la formation continue des personnes contact pour qu'ils puissent bien

maitriser tous les contour du projet FLO de Fairtrade.

14. Fairtrade devrait favoriser un cadre de rencontre bimestriel des personnes contact Fairtrade

afin de partager leurs expériences et difficultés. Au besoin, une personne contact Fairtrade

pourrait assister à la rencontre.

15. Fairtrade devrait instaurer un système lui permettant de controler les differentiels que les

acheteurs donnent aux producteurs surtout pour la stabilité de la production, la qualité et

relationship.

16. Fairtrade devrait nommer une personne dans chaque region pour encadrer les organisations

membres.

17. Fairtrade doit prendre en charge les personnes contacts de chaque organisation certifiée.

18. Fairtrade must revise its policies to address on upcoming challenges such as the case of

producer organization which relies on an independent processing unit to process and market

its produce and in the long run this processor withdraws from Fairtrade in disregard to the

producer's wishes. A case scenario is XXX Company which pulled out of Fairtrade whereas

disregarding the stand of the small producers who accounts to 70% of the tea processed in

its factories to continue enjoying Fairtrade services.

19. Fairtrade needs to work towards ensuring a fair playing field for all producers. It is important

that the system is not focusing on getting as many certified producers as possible by diluting

their standards as this has the net effect of weakening the "fair trade" model.

20. Fairtrade should also help to build the capacity of the certified organization in marketing as

well as identifying reliable coffee buyers for low grade coffees.

21. Fairtrade should assist in funding certification fees.

22. Fairtrade should be more flexible on issues related to FPC particularly for organizations which

have multi sites.

23. Fairtrade should be paying for Fairtrade representatives in startup SPOs for at least a year to

enable them build their capacity in handling market access as they grow.

24. Fairtrade should consider organizing conference/workshop for certified producers so that we

can share our different cultures, experiences and challenges.

49

25. Fairtrade should continue to make producer support staff readily available to contact for

training & capacity building and assisting to comply with the standard.

26. Fairtrade should establish a link between Fairtrade buyers and Small Producer Organization.

27. Fairtrade should find a way of addressing some issues that are country specific that may not

be fully addressed by blanket application of Generic standards.

28. Fairtrade should have direct contacts with us in all transactions. Thank you.

29. Fairtrade should increase monitoring on remittances for premiums and also allow some

flexibility where the standard is at variance with company policies, articles and or National

law.

30. Fairtrade should review the Small Producer Standards on sugarcane to realign the standards

with the climate change effects.

31. Fairtrade should work hard to encourage more buyers to go for Fairtrade products.

32. Fairtrade's producer support work should be a regularly programmed activity for certified

producers not just when needed.

33. FLO should ensure regular meetings of Fairtrade organization to discuss cost benefits with

them. More so inform the certified coops how FLO is marketing the standards to buyers as

there has been a gap.

34. I have the feeling that every idea is developed behind the desk, there is no good research

about rules and regulations in specific countries. If you talk about hired labour not any

understanding how much energies and time it takes to bring members of a JB on a level that

they can fulfill their responsibilities. I mention a lot more problems what we face in Ethiopia

but it has no use if there is not a serious delegation from Fairtrade on the spot to listen and

discuss with the management to find solution. We are a company of 40 ha of Roses we have

a big customer who buys our flowers because we are Fairtrade, we and I'm talking about our

management are eager to fulfill all the requirements of Fairtrade but the most difficult part is

to handle the premium on a proper way so the money can be 100% used for what it is aimed.

We don't want to be a company which has to stop fair trade because we are blocked by the

government or by Fairtrade. So please send a serious delegation for our company with

persons who have some authority we don't need messengers we can do that by mail. XXX

Company we want to be the first Hired Labour Company who can fulfill the aim of Fairtrade

and their employees for this year and for the future. Till now we have only info from other

company's in our country that there are problems.

35. If possible lower the annual certification cost.

36. Increase the volume we sell under Fairtrade condition by building up relationships and

commitment from traders.

37. Je crois fortement que si ses trois principaux éléments sont résolus, nous aurions vraiment

fait un pas de géant pour l'amélioration de nos conditions d’organisations de petits

producteurs.

38. Je souhaiterais que Fairtrade oeuvre pour l'acces au marchés de toutes les organisations

certifiées.

39. Local fairtrade officer must be more active and interact with us instead of us contacting

them.

40. Macadamia should be included as a crop for fairtrade certification.

41. More publicity to be done to create awareness.

42. Need to regulate the fairtrade sugar market for producers in Malawi, it is really crucial!!!

43. Ok

50

44. Organiser des formations et les conférences pour les petits producteurs avec les grands

clients.

45. Pour notre part, nous souhaiterons avoir une approche plus concrète des formations.

46. Revoir à la hausse la valeur du prime que les acheteurs accordent aux producteurs.

47. Should also improve the way Liaison Officers deliver their duties like to us we don't get the

required support from our local Liaison Officer.

48. Should organize more and regular exchange programmes with other certified SPOs from

different countries.

49. The conditions to be fairtrade certified should be less rigid.

50. We are very satisfied with the regional advisers and online contacts of the FLO-CERT but

there is big problem to get the Fairtrade Liaison Officer in our country and we cannot get him

when we need and no adequate support from this guy.

51. We designed and have implemented a planting model under the 'block farming' and would

like to get these plantations fair trade certified and have been trying to get answers from

head office and are still waiting, or company name is XXX.

3. Latin America/Caribbean:

1. A Fairtrade/Clac deve contratar pessoas capacitadas que tenham conhecimento em Fairtrade

para certificar novas organizaçoes no Brasil para aumentar a cesta de produtos Fairtrade no

pais.

2. Apoyo a la promoción de los productos y crear una feria internacional de comercio justo para

promocionar.

3. Ayuda a los productores con problemas del mercado.

4. Contar con el oficial de enlace en cada país.

5. Convocatorias y apoyos a OPP con pocos ingresos. El valor recibido de la prima escasamente

alcanza para los costos de certificación.

6. Crear un programa de financiamiento a largo plazo para recuperación de fincas ya que si no

tenemos buena producción no podemos mejorar nuestras condiciones de vida.

7. Debe apoyar en el entendimiento de la norma y adicionalmente apoyar a las OPP en que los

auditores sean claros con el entendimiento de la norma y no según cree el criterio el auditor.

8. Debe de haber mas comunicación con los pequeños productores, tener acercamientos,

enviar información de empresas certificadas a nivel de cada país para que los pequeños

productores podamos optar a ellas.

9. Debe enviar a las organizaciones las personas contacto, y los medios de comunicacion

expedita, brindar un acopañemieto continuo en el tema de cumplimiento de criterios FLO-

CERT.

10. Debe tener personal totalmente capacitado en los diferentes criterios y socializarlos con los

productores cuando nosotros lo creamos conveniente.

11. Desarrollar mas talleres sobre temas fortalecimientos a las organizaciones de productores y

seguir con el apoyo del enlace.

12. El trabajo de apoyo al productor por parte de Fairtrade debe ser promocionado para que las

organizaciones sepan donde acudir. En nuestro caso, el año pasado tuvimos la necesidad de

una capacitación y tuvimos que acudir a FLO-CERT y no FLO.

13. Existen muchas cosas por aprender e implementar, por lo tanto sería muy bueno que las

personas de apoyo fueran mas para nosotros como productores tengamos acceso a ellos mas

51

seguido, ya que el servicio es muy bueno pero su tiempo para atender a todas las

organizaciones es muy limitado porque hay muchas organizaciones y creo que poco personal.

14. Fairtrade debe ayudar a encontrar mercado a las fincas que no lo tenemos. No hemos podido

encontrar compradores para nuestra fruta de finca las delicias FLO XXX.

15. Fairtrade debe apoyar a las organizacion de pequeños productores con financiamiento

accesible con intereses favorables.

16. Fairtrade debe asegurar que el comprador priorize la compra de producto producido por el

propio productor.

17. Fairtrade debe considerar el tamaño de la organización, respecto al pago de certificación,

respecto al numero de productores vigentes o volumen de exportado. Fairtrade debe apoyar

a las organizaciones de pequeños productores que no cuenten con personal para poder

atender las medidas correctivas derivado de la auditoria FLO, por los costos que esta genera.

18. Fairtrade debe desarrollar: A) buenas practicas y sugerencias por temas de: Salud y Seguro

de trabajadores y sus familias en las zonas remotas especialmente en países con servicios

medicos malos B) actividades y ideas por la educación del trabajador y su familia/hijo C) una

herramienta de análisis para evaluar la satisfacción del trabajador con su organización o su

empresa en cual el trabaja. Espero que Fairtrade va a invertir mas fondos y inteligencia en

temas cuales están conectando con el bien estar del trabajador y su futuro. Necesitamos ver

un desarrollo en Fairtrade en el sentido que vemos mas un foco al humano y su desarrollo y

que Fairtrade no solamente se siente como una inspección de temas de labores legales.

Necesitamos ver mas médicos, profesores y menos abogados con el logo de Fairtrade en el

campo. Eso requiere un urgente desarrollo en Fairtrade, Fairtrade debe tener mas respuestas

con ideas como puede una organisacion usa en una mejor forma sus fondos por el desarrollo

del productor-solamente tener un foco al tema de labores legales no es suficiente y no ayuda

el desarrollo.

19. Fairtrade debe ser más constante en el apoyo brindado ya que es muy esporádico y

espaciado, tanto en información generada como actualización de información.

20. Fairtrade debería implementar jornadas de capacitación en el area de auditores externos

para mejorar las auditorias.

21. Fairtrade debería tener en cuenta a los representates de los grupos de productores para ser

capacitados en conjunto con los el unico ente certificador que nos audita para poder tener la

misma información y facilitar las auditorias, se dejaría de interpretar la norma en varias

direcciones, pues una cosa es la revisión de la norma y otra es la implementación en campo

de cada uno de estos criterios.

22. Fairtrade should consider assisting small groups that are finding it difficult to remain certify

due to the fact that Fairtrade is not buying our sugar in 2015.

23. Fairtrade necesita orientar a los auditores FLO-CERT, que son facilitadores del proceso, en

vez de fastidiar a las organizaciones, dedicando tiempo en relación al uso de la prima, y dejen

los auditores de meterse en asuntos internos de la organizaciones certificado por comercio

justo.

24. Informar de actualización de criterios Fairtrade.

25. Las certificaciones deben ser de acuerdo al potencial mercado.

26. No he recibido ese apoyo al productor directo de FLO.

27. Que le bajen el valor de la factura de la certificación anual, es muy alta para nuestra

organización.

28. Tener más cercano al productor.

52

10.2 List of illustrations and tables

F. 1. Feedback rates by Fairtrade-regions in survey 2015 6

T. 1. Feedback rate differentiated by status 6

F. 2. Distribution of responses from Fairtrade-regions in the 2015 survey 7

F. 3. Question 1: Specific person who is the appointed contact person for the Fairtrade matters? 8

F. 4. Question 2: Africa & Middle East: Survey return numbers per country 8

F. 5. Question 2: Latin America & the Caribbean: Survey return numbers per country 9

F. 6. Question 2: Asia: Survey return numbers per country 9

F. 7. Question 4: Distribution of producer group types in survey 2015 by region 10

F. 8. Question 4.1 – 4.3: Role in organization 11

F. 9. Question 7: Number of persons directly employed 12

T. 2. Question 9: Certification status by region 13

F. 10. Question 9.1: In which year did you achieve Fairtrade certification for the first time? 14

F. 11. Question 10: What do you normally do in case you need Fairtrade producer support services? 15

F. 12. Question 10.1 – 10.4: Necessary contact information is available 16

F. 13. Question 12: How was the service provided? 18

F. 14. Question 12.1-12.4: I was satisfied with the provided support 18

Figure F. 16. 18

Figure F. 17. 19

F. 15. Question 12: Frequency of provided service 20

F. 16. Question 12: How was the service provided? 20

F. 17. Question 12.5-12.8: I was satisfied with the provided support 21

F. 18. Question 12: Frequency of provided service 22

F. 19. Question 13: How was the support action initiated? 23

F. 20. Question 13.1-13.3: 24

F. 21. Question 14 & 14.1-14.4: What kind of support service have you received? 25


53


F. 24. Question 14.12- 14.16 28

F. 25. All regions 30

F. 26. Africa 31

F. 27. Asia 31

F. 28. Latin America 32

F. 29. Comparison by regions 33

F. 30. Frequency distribution and correlations – Top 5 35

F. 31. Frequency distribution and correlations – Flop 5 36

F. 32. Question 15.1 & 15.2: Satisfaction with the support service 37

F. 33. Question 15.3 & 15.4 38

F. 34. Question 15.5 & 15.6 39

F. 35. Question 15.7 & 15.8 39

F. 36. Question 15.9 & 15.10 40

F. 37. Question 15.11 & 15.12 41

F. 38. Question 15.13 & 15.14 41

F. 39. Question 15.15 & 15.16 42

T. 3. Share of positive statements 2012/ 2015 43

F. 40. 3 expectations for the future 44

T. 4. Additional comments in free text 45

F. 41. Sex 46

F. 42. Year of birth 46

F. 43. Cerfified Products 46

results of the survey to assess the satisfaction of producer ......the invitation to participate was...

Documents