Episode 34 - Operation Breadbasket

Boycotts

There are at least 198 methods of nonviolent action. And within this list, the word “boycott” features 17 times. A boycott campaign consists of a concerted refusal to spend money – as well as to convince others to refuse to spend money – on a product or service in the hopes of changing specific conditions or practices of an institution.

Although boycott campaigns draw on an adversarial communication frame, reform and redemption narratives often also accompany these campaigns because it is necessary to convince people that already consume a given product or service to stop doing so for a period of time. After all, there would hardly be a motive for businesses to change their behavior if the only people boycotting were those who did not consume the product in the first place.

Boycott campaigns typically escalate in four stages: announcing that a boycott is under consideration; calling for the boycott to begin at a certain point in the future; publicizing boycott preparations and any organizing that is underway; and initiating the boycott via demonstrations or picket lines. Notably, many boycott campaigns achieve their goals before reaching the fourth stage of actually initiating the boycott.

For over 200 years, the consumer boycott campaign has been a method of holding corporations accountable for their environmental and human rights practices, as well as those of their suppliers.

Boycotts and Civil Rights

Quick Summary of Civil Rights Movement

In typical narratives, the civil rights movement gave way to the black power movement after Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in Memphis in April 1968.[1]

The civil rights movement focused on ending discrimination, especially segregation, and establishing equal rights in law, whereas the black power movement emphasized black pride and black community control. The civil rights movement is most embodied by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), which was formed in 1957 following the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

The black power movement is most closely associated with the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense (BPP), which was founded in 1966 by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. The Black Panthers challenged police brutality through armed citizen patrols. They also carried out a number of community self-help programs like school lunches.

It is fair to say that the Black Panthers represent a more revolutionary movement, in contrast to the SCLC, which was tightly connected to Christian faith communities. The Black Panthers adopted a Marxist ideology and held the view that nonviolent direct action was inadequate to protect Black Americans from violence.

Deppe in his book emphasizes how these movements were really connected to a certain degree – ideologically, Operation Breadbasket took on elements of Black power as that movement started to gain ascendancy. 

One thing that I find interesting about the Breadbasket story, though, is that both movements were complementary. While Operation Breadbasket took a softer approach – negotiating with companies and occasionally practicing economic withdrawal – a looming background feature of their interaction with companies were the riots happening across American cities in the mid-late 1960s.

Why Operation Breadbasket?

Operation Breadbasket was a part of the civil rights movement that often gets ignored, but in fact it was one of the most successful elements of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)’s activities.[2]

One reason to talk about it is that it adds to our understanding of racial equality movements in the 20th century. As Martin Deppe argues in his book, Operation Breadbasket challenges the narrative that the civil rights movement faltered after MLK Jr.’s assassination and was replaced by the Black Power movement.[3]

Operation Breadbasket continued until 1971.[4] As Breadbasket continued, it incorporated certain elements of Black Power while also adhering to SCLC principles like nonviolence.[5]

And although Operation Breadbasket no longer exists in its current form, it continued as what is now known as Rainbow PUSH.[6]

A second reason to talk about Operation Breadbasket is broader: it provides a good model for how consumer power can play an important role in social change. Operation Breadbasket provides a successful model of direct action that continues today. It is also a powerful illustration of how well-organized boycott campaigns can work.

Boycotts and Civil Rights

Operation Breadbasket of course not first boycott movement used to fight anti-black racism in the US.

Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work

In 1929 Chicago, picketers launched a boycott of a department store called Woolworth under a “Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work” campaign. Woolworth agreed to a policy of hiring 25% Black employees in its stores, resulting in 2,000 jobs.[7]

The Montgomery Bus Boycott

Perhaps the most famous example is the Montgomery Bus Boycott, a boycott beginning in December 1955 that went on for 381 days. The bus boycotts were about more than desegregating buses. Black Americans did not only want to ride buses alongside white Americans: they also wanted to drive buses and own bus companies.[8]

The Birmingham Campaign (1963)

Campaign to end discriminatory economic policies. It included a boycott of businesses that hired only white people or maintained segregated restrooms.

Selective Patronage

Reverend Leon Sullivan of Philadelphia selective patronage, which refers to the strategic withholding of black patronage from businesses that discriminate, especially on Black employment. Selective patronage was inspired by the sit-ins in the deep South.

Leon Sullivan created a program where teams of ministers negotiated for jobs with corporations doing business in Black communities, with the threat of boycotts. By 1963, this program had opened up 2,000 skilled jobs in Philadelphia.[9] Sullivan was asked to present on this model to the SCLC in Atlanta. That presentation led to the creation of Operation Breadbasket in Atlanta in 1962.

Operation Breadbasket

Economic Liberation

Between 1916 and 1970, more than 6 million Black Americans relocated from the rural South to cities in Northern, Midwestern, and Western America. This Great Migration was prompted by the harsh segregationist laws and poor economic opportunities in the south. Economic opportunities for Black Americans during the first and second world wars helped to spur this trend.

When WWI ended many Black Americans were fired or expected to return to unskilled jobs. The Great Depression was particularly harsh on Black unemployment: in 1931, 58.5 percent of employable Black women and 43.5 percent of employable Black men were unemployed.[10]

While Black employment rose during WWII and continued during the period of general economic prosperity in the 1950s, by 1960 the job ceiling for Black Americans became an increasing point of contention.[11] By the mid-1960s the unemployment rate amongst Black Chicagoans was twice that of white Chicagoans, for example.[12]

Deindustrialization and the loss of American manufacturing made this situation worse.[13]At the same time, the mid-1960s was a period of protest – which in some cases resulted in violence. There was a growing sense that Black Americans “would no longer quietly submit to the deprivation of slum life.”[14]

President Lyndon B Johnson is quotes as saying privately: “The Negro…[is] still nowhere. He knows it. And that’s why he’s out in the streets. Hell, I’d be there too.”[15]

It was in this context that SCLC moved north in the 1960s to address a new form of segregation – the slum. Housing equality and economic liberation became focal points. Early housing efforts failed due to intransigence from the Mayor, and so jobs became the primary focus. Operation Breadbasket “was a response to the color line in employment.”[16] 

Operation Breadbasket

The SCLC first established Operation Breadbasket in 1962 in Atlanta. Breadbasket was explicitly modelled on Leon Sullivan’s selective patronage.[17] Operation Breadbasket in Atlanta began with the bread industry. The first campaign was against Colonial Bakery, which gave in to Breadbasket’s demands after a boycott and picketing. Between 1962 and 1966, Atlanta Breadbasket won 4,000 jobs and $15 million of income to the Black community there.[18]

Chicago Breadbasket

When SCLC moved north to Chicago, Operation Breadbasket was formed there and became a core element of the SCLC’s overall strategy. Specifically, Breadbasket was launched in Chicago in 1966 with a group of 60 pastors who together formed a steering committee.[19] Reverend Jesse Jackson led Chicago Breadbasket, with guidance from Martin Luther King Jr..[20] Breadbasket was significant in launching Jackson’s civil rights career.[21]

Operation Breadbasket obtained its name from the concept of a breadbasket as “putting food on the table in the form of a steady job”[22]

The Breadbasket Model

Operation Breadbasket had a number of components, but its main focus was creating job opportunities for Black Americans through consumer pressure. The model included six core steps:

1.     Information gathering: a team of clergy would go to the company and request a copy of its Equal Employment Opportunity Commission annual report, a document mandated by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They also asked for salaries by category.

2.     Committee Evaluation: Then, the committee would decide on a set of demands. The baseline was a minimum demand of 20% Black employees (28% of Chicagoans were Black at the time), but this could be adjusted based on factors like where the company was operating.

3.     Education and negotiation: then a team of clergy would meet with company executives to try to reach agreement on targets and deadlines for a “covenant”.

4.     Economic withdrawal and picketing: when CEOs refused to share information or to continue discussions, pastors would call for a boycott from their pulpits. This would be coupled with picketing and leafleting. Economic withdrawal was not necessary in every case, but it was pretty common.

5.     Agreement/Covenant: when the Breadbasket team and the company agreed on a set of targets, they would formalize it in an agreement or covenant. At that time, any economic withdrawal would be officially called off. The agreements would be signed at a formal ceremony.

6.     Monitoring: this was a later addition to the strategy, but it proved important. Breadbasket team members would regularly follow up to monitor the implementation of the agreements. When companies didn’t hold to their commitments (or reasonably close), Breadbasket would initiate another economic withdrawal.

Outcomes

Chicago Breadbasket began with the bread, milk, soft drink, and soup companies, before moving on to other industries like supermarkets and construction.

In the six years that Operation Breadbasket operated, it created 4,500 jobs for Black Chicagoans, an estimated $29 million in income annually.[23] That’s not including the income it created for black products and service contracts – if you include that, Breadbasket created $57.5 million annually for the African American community by 1971 (equivalent to $391.8 million in 2016 dollars).[24]

Operation Breadbasket is forerunner to Operation PUSH (1971), which is now the Rainbow PUSH Coalition (formed in 1987).

The Challenge

Stop Hate for Profit boycott movement, which is calling on companies to boycott Facebook Ads until Facebook agrees to establish and empower permanent civil rights infrastructure so products and policies can be evaluated for discrimination, racism, and hate by experts.

Stop Hate for Profit is promoted by a coalition of various racial equality groups, as well as at least one union and Mozilla.

Footnotes

[1] Deppe, Martin. (2017). Operation Breadbasket: An Untold Story of Civil Rights in Chicago, 1966-1971. Atlanta: University of Georgia Press.

[2] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[3] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[4] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[5] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[6] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[7] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[8] Ezra, Michael. (2013). Introduction: The Economic Dimensions of the Black Freedom Struggle. In M. Ezra (ed.) The Economic Civil Rights Movement: African Americans and the Struggle for Economic Power. New York: Routledge, pp. 1-5.

[9] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[10] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[11] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[12] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[13] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[14] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket p.7.

[15] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket p.7.

[16] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket p.5.

[17] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[18] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[19] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[20] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[21] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[22] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket xxvii.

[23] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

[24] Deppe, Operation Breadbasket.

Episodes 26, 27 and 29 - Palm Oil

What is Palm Oil?

Palm oil comes from the fruit of oil palm trees (elaeis guineensis). Palm kernel oil comes from crushing the kernel (the stone in the middle of the fruit). 66 million tons of palm oil is produced annually, making it the most commonly produced vegetable oil. Global production of palm oil has doubled in the last decade. Palm oil plantations cover more than 27 million hectares of the Earth’s surface.

There are approximately 200 alternate names for palm oil and palm oil derivatives used in cleaning products and cosmetics, which can make it really difficult to know if there is palm oil in what you’re buying.[1]

But here’s a trick: there are four root words that give you an indication that an ingredient might be palm oil-derived (but not necessarily so):

Palm-

• Palm kernel oil

• Palm fruit oil

• Palmate

• Palmolein

• Palmitate

• Palmitic acid

• Palmityl alcohol

• Hydrated palm glycerines

• Etyl palmitate

Stear-

• Sodium stearate

• Stearic acid

• Pentataerythrityl tetraisostearate

• Octyldodecyl stearoyl stearate

Laur-

• Sodium lauryl lactylate

• Sodiul lauryl sulphate

• Sodium laureth sulfare

Glyc-

• Glyceryl

• Hydrogenated palm glycerides

But there are a bunch of palm derivatives that don’t use these roots (e.g., sodium kernelate, elaeis guineensis) and sometimes palm oil can be labelled more generically, as vegetable fat or vegetable oil. Here is a list of 25 sneaky names for palm oil. If you live in an EU country, palm oil can’t be labelled as a generic vegetable oil.[2]

More than 50% of packaged supermarket products contain palm oil. Palm oil is in:

• Packaged foods like pizza (dough), doughnuts, chocolate, margarine, noodles, ice cream, bread, chips, cookies. It’s used where you need fat of some kind.

• Personal care products and cosmetics like deodorant, shampoo, toothpaste, and lipstick. Some cleaning products also.

• Animal feed

• Biofuels

It is also a popular cooking oil in Asian and African countries. 40% of the world’s palm oil is consumed in China, India, and Pakistan.[3] The food industry used about 72% of all palm oil, cosmetics/cleaning take another 18%, and the remaining 10% goes to biofuels and animal feed.[4]

Why is Palm Oil in Everything?

Palm oil has a lot of useful properties. It is semi-solid at room temperature, so it can keep spreads spreadable. It is resistant to oxidation, so it can give products a longer shelf-life. It is stable at high temperatures, so it helps give fried products a crispy and crunchy texture. And it is odorless and colourless, so it doesn’t alter the look or smell of food products. 

Palm oil is also used in some products for its health properties. Palm oil doesn’t have trans-fat and has a lower saturated fat concentration than butter. Other vegetable oils have to be partially hydrogenated to make them more solid, but that process of artificial hydrogenation creates trans-fatty acids.[5] Palm oil is naturally hydrogenated. When scientific consensus was forming around trans-fats, Unilever led the shift to palm oil in food products. 

Palm oil and palm oil derivatives also replaced animal-based fats in foods, as well as cleaning and personal care products (E.g., soaps with animal tallow[6]). Palm oil and palm kernel oil possessed the same properties as animal tallow, which made them the only suitable plant-based alternative.[7] Consumers were already pushing the market toward plant-based alternatives, but the BSE outbreaks in the late 1980s and early 1990s triggered a larger shift toward palm oil.[8] The consumption of animal fats per capita reached its peak in the 1980s and has been in decline since.

Palm oil is also cheap because it’s a productive crop and because oil palm trees demand less work and production inputs than other oil crops. For that reason, it is a popular cooking oil in Asian and African countries.

Where is Palm Oil Produced?

Oil palm trees are native to West Africa but were brought to Southeast Asia in the 19th century. Malaysia and Indonesia produce 87% of global palm oil. However, there are 42 other countries that also produce palm oil. That includes countries in West and Central Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central and tropical South America.[9]

Palm Oil Production

Oil palms are grown and harvested on large-, medium-, and small-scale palm oil plantations.[10] The palm oil industry is dominated by about a dozen corporations that operate large-scale plantations and mills.[11] The three largest players – Musim Mas, Wilma, and Sime Darby, account for 25% of palm oil production.[12] (While these are big multinationals, they are small in comparison to the biggest agribusiness corporations, the “ABCDs”, which are headquartered in western countries). There are at least a million small-scale oil palm producers in Indonesia alone.[13]

Oil palm trees grow up to 20 metres tall and have an average life span of 25 years. They start to bear fruit after three years and reach peak production between years 6-8. Fruit bunches can contain from 1-3,000 individual fruits, which are the size of small plums. The bunches weigh 10-25kg. Harvesting palm fruit is physically demanding. Harvesters use long steel poles with a sickle at the end to cut the palm fruit bunches down. The bunches are then loaded onto wheelbarrows and taken to collection points.

Like sugarcane, oil palm fruit has to be processed quickly after harvesting – within 24 hours. For this reason, palm oil refineries are usually situated within-country. 

Environment

Deforestation

Palm oil is a major driver of deforestation. For instance, approximately 55% of newly developed palm oil plantations in Malaysia and Indonesia from 1990-2005 resulted in deforestation.[14] As the palm oil industry expands, the space for new palm oil plantations is often made through deforestation and peatland clearing.

Palm oil is currently responsible for about 8% of deforestation – that’s a big chunk of the 53% of deforestation caused by agriculture. But keep in mind that 24% of deforestation is from land used for livestock, while 19% is coming from soybeans (which are mostly going to feed animals) and 11% from corn (same). So, if we are looking at changing one consumption practice to counter deforestation, palm oil isn’t the place to start.

And even in the big palm oil producing countries like Indonesia, land clearing for pulp, paper, and timber is a bigger source of deforestation.

However, the forests that are being cleared for palm oil plantations are in some cases particularly biodiverse or particularly efficient carbon sinks. Indonesian forests store even more carbon per hectare than the Brazilian Amazon. Some Indonesian forests are called “peatlands”, which are low-lying rainforests located close to coastal areas. The peat is under the forest, and it is basically a below-ground accumulation of decayed vegetation. It was formed in swampy conditions where plant material fails to fully decay and can build up to a depth of 10 metres or more over thousands of years.

The peat lands are an immense source of stored carbon. They can store up to 20 times as much carbon as tropical rainforests on normal mineral soils. As the forests above them are deforested, those sinks are released – making for something some have called a “carbon time-bomb”. Also, as the industry expands there is concern that its impact on deforestation could increase.

And palm oil could be less destructive. Deforestation could be reduced or avoided by planting in areas that are already deforested.

Biodiversity Loss

This problem is connected to the problem of deforestation and other land conversion for palm oil plantations.  Palm oil expansion could affect 54% of threatened mammals and 64% of threatened birds globally.

Some of the species threatened by palm oil expansion include the cotton top monkey, the chimpanzee, Sumatran tigers, African forest elephants, orangutans, gibbons, sun bears, kangaroos, and cassowaries. For example, 10,000 of the estimated 75-100,000 critically endangered Bornean orangutans are currently found in areas allocated to palm oil.

In addition to the loss of direct habitat, palm oil plantations can increase human-wildlife conflict with species like orangutans and tigers. Each year 750-1,250 orangutans are killed during human-orangutan conflicts, often linked to expanding agriculture.

A Jakarta-based ecologist has referred to palm oil plantations as “green deserts” because they are monocultures. While these are plants, palm plantations in Southeast Asia are an introduced species that does not interact very well with local ecology, so very little biodiversity exists within them.

Unfortunately, boycotting palm oil is likely to displace rather than halt biodiversity loss because it would increase the production of other oil crops. So the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and WWF prefer to push for palm oil sustainability, rather than a boycott or ban of palm oil.

Sustainable palm oil would involve putting an end to the clearing of native tropical forests for new palm oil plantations, and limit demand for palm oil for non-food uses. It would also ask existing palm oil plantations to manage their land responsibly by setting aside forest and other areas identified as important for biodiversity and carbon.

Climate Change

Oil palms are a very productive plant. One of the reasons it was produced initially was environmental sustainability: because palm oil is so productive, you need less land to grow it.

Source: WWF

The problem here is land conversion. Forests and peat lands are carbon sinks. When these lands are converted to palm oil plantations, it results in the release of greenhouse gases. As well, we lose those carbon sinks. Indonesia’s peatlands have gone from a carbon sink to a globally significant source of emissions thanks to deforestation. Oil palms do absorb carbon dioxide, but less effectively than forests.

Also, fire is used to clear lands for palm oil plantations, which emits GHG in addition to creating air pollution. 80% of the fires in Indonesia in 2019 were being set to clear land for palm oil plantations.

The challenging thing here is that oil palm production is more productive than substitute crops. And substitutes like coconut oil have their own environmental problems. We would likely have to convert even more land to keep up with demand.

Chemicals Use and Pollution

Palm oil plantations use a range of pesticides and herbicides, as well as large amounts of fertiliser. These products can pollute soil and groundwater. Although palm oil plantations aren’t large users of pesticides and fertilizers overall, these chemicals are often used indiscriminately – which can result in water pollution.

These chemicals also pose a risk to the people working on palm oil plantations. One herbicide used on palm oil plantations is paraquat dichloride. Paraquat is a highly toxic chemical, and for that reason is banned in the EU as well as several other countries. In Indonesia it is a restricted substance. Amnesty International found evidence of the use of paraquat on Indonesian plantations, as well as the absence of training and sufficient personal protective equipment. Workers described negative health effects after exposure to the chemicals. Palm oil mills also pollute, producing 2.5 metric tons of effluent for every metric ton of palm oil it produces.

People

Oil palms are one of the most profitable crops for farmers, which in part is a success story: palm oil has helped to reduce rural poverty in places like Indonesia, for example. Palm oil has the potential to improve incomes and employment where it is produced. Millions of smallholders rely on palm oil for their livelihoods in Malaysia and Indonesia.

On the other hand, the oil palm industry can sometimes hurt communities economically because they lose access to forests and it may not be compensated sufficiently by economic gains from cultivating oil palms.

Working Conditions

Amnesty International has reported on the labour abuses on palm oil plantations. Specifically, they looked at plantations in Indonesia linked to Wilmar, the largest processor and merchandiser of palm oils (they control 43% of the global palm oil trade).

On those plantations, Amnesty International found evidence of forced and child labour, gender discrimination, as well as exploitative and dangerous working conditions.

Amnesty concluded that these are not isolated incidents, but rather linked to the systemic business practices of Wilmar and its subsidiaries and suppliers, such as the low level of wages, use of targets and “piece rates” (workers are paid based on tasks completed rather than hours worked), and a complex system of financial and other penalties. Because of these systems, workers that do not meet their targets get their already low salaries deducted.

Targets are set by individual companies and “appear to be set arbitrarily to meet companies’ needs rather than being based on a realistic calculation of how much workers can do in their working hours.” Because of the targeting system, workers on the plantations get help from their spouses, children, and others to complete tasks. Amnesty documented evidence of the involvement of children in hazardous tasks, which is illegal under Indonesian law, on plantations owned by two Wilmar subsidiaries and three Wilmar suppliers. Some were as young as eight.

Amnesty found that workers, especially women, are employed under casual work arrangements which make them vulnerable to abuse. While most harvesters (always men) are employed on permanent employment contracts, most plant maintenance employees are women and are employed on a casual basis.

Employers can penalize workers for failing to meet targets or for mistakes in their work (e.g. picking unripe fruit). This penalty usually has a financial dimension. These penalties are not transparent, which allows employers to exact work under the threat of loss of pay or employment. Amnesty International has documented instances of this, which it considers to constitute forced labour. 

Indigenous Peoples and Nearby Communities

Indigenous peoples are losing their land to palm oil plantations. This is especially a problem in Indonesia. Land use rights in Indonesia are often disputed due to conflicts between customary land rights and formal property ownership.[15] Weak laws, poor government oversight, and the failure of palm producing companies to fulfil their human rights responsibilities have led to a loss of land and livelihood opportunities for Indigenous people in Indonesia, according to Human Rights Watch. Companies have failed to consult with Indigenous peoples and to provide just and fair compensation for losses suffered.

In some cases, Indigenous peoples are forcefully removed from their lands, which is one reason that the Rainforest Action Network has used the term “conflict palm oil” to describe the industry. Private armies and paramilitary groups are deployed sometimes, and community members have been killed in Indonesia. There are upwards of 600 ongoing land disputes between palm oil companies and rural communities.

Surrounding communities can also be made more at risk of flooding when palm plants are placed on steep slopes, causing soil erosion.

Food Security

Another problem with the conversion of agricultural lands for palm oil production is that it can hurt local food security (same with all cash crops).[16] And because palm oil is increasingly being used for biofuel, prices are increasing which can sometimes make it unaffordable for communities proximate to these plantations.[17]

Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

What is it?

The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is a sustainable palm oil certification that was founded in 2004. Like the Marine Stewardship Council, RSPO was founded through a collaboration between the World Wildlife Fund and Unilever, as well as Asian producers and a few other Western brands (e.g. Nestlé, Tesco, Cargill).[18] It has managed sustainability standards for palm oil production since 2008.[19] An estimated 14% of palm oil is RSPO certified.

The backbone of the RSPO standard is a generic set of Principles and Criteria adopted in 2005.[20] There are eight core Principles:

• Commitment to transparency,

• Compliance with applicable laws and regulations,

• Commitment to long-term economic and financial viability,

• Use of appropriate best practices by growers and millers,

• Environmental responsibility and conservation of natural resources and biodiversity,

• Responsible consideration of employees, smallholders, and other individual communities affected by growers and mills,

• Responsible development of new plantings, and

• Commitment to continuous improvement.[21]

Each of the eight principles has corresponding criteria, which can also differ from country-to-country and location-to-location.[22] RSPO creates standards for the growth of oil palms as well as the palm oil milling process.[23] It also has standards for tracing palm oil through the supply chain (which is called chain-of-custody certification).[24]

There are also separate standards for smallholder palm farmers. That was introduced a bit later than the main standard, and it responds to the challenges that small producers can have in obtaining sustainability certifications.[25] Basically, the idea is to ask smallholders to make improvements over time, rather than asking them to do everything before obtaining certification. That program was just introduced in 2019, so it isn’t clear how well it will work.

RSPO is the largest and by many accounts the most robust palm oil certification available, but it has still been widely criticized.

Criticisms

RSPO is a multi-stakeholder organization (meaning there are different voices involved in defining standards). The seven groups of stakeholders included in the RSPO’s general assembly are: palm oil growers, palm oil processors and/or traders, consumer goods manufacturers, retailers, banks and investors, environmental and nature conservation NGOs, and social development NGOs.[26]

However, RSPO has been criticized for being industry-dominated and for failing to engage key vulnerable stakeholders, such as smallholding producers, labour unions, social and environmental groups, indigenous peoples and organizations, and women’s groups.[27]For instance, only a small proportion of palm oil-related land use conflicts are sufficiently acknowledged and resolved within RSPO’s institutional dispute resolution mechanisms.[28]

Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and other NGOs have criticized RSPO for the low stringency of compliance enforcement.[29] For instance, Amnesty International concluded that “the RSPO is acting as a shield which deflects greater scrutiny of Wilmar’s and other companies’ practices.”

Also, the majority of certified palm oil is mixed with conventional oil during transportation and as a result consumer products with the RSPO logo will most likely contain unsustainable palm oil.

Another argument is that the RSPO standard gives national governments an excuse to forego further public regulation of the industry.[30]

Critics also point to weaknesses in the standards themselves. RSPO initially avoided defining what sustainability means, going forward with the standard first.[31] RSPO’s emphasis on consensus decision-making, critics say, makes it incapable of dealing with contentious or controversial issues.[32] Even the moderate stringency of RSPO’s standards have led major stakeholders to leave.[33] 

Although RSPO has devoted some attention to the issue, it is still difficult for smallholder palm producers to afford certification.[34] And small- and medium-sized producers have less of an incentive to get RSPO certified because they often supply Indian, Chinese, and Pakistani markets[35]

Kristen mentioned a book chapter that looks at the role of auditors in sustainability labelling. The book is called Transnational Business Governance Interactions.

Why is Certification Uptake so Low?

Most sustainability labels deal with agricultural products for which there is a specific consumer product with a recognizable link to the agricultural product – e.g., coffee, paper, sugar, cocoa, fish.[36] That isn’t the case for palm oil.

That makes it much more difficult to get companies to sign onto voluntary standards for palm oil. Consumers mostly don’t know that there is palm oil in a product. Producers mostly don’t want to emphasize that there is palm oil in their items, since it has baggage and is not the major ingredient. That makes it more difficult to develop a price premium for certified palm oil. And that problem is compounded because even companies like Unilever that might use RSPO certified palm oil are not necessarily going to put the label on, say, their peanut butter because they want to emphasize the primary ingredients instead.

Another challenge is palm oil’s position in the market. Because it is mostly used as a cheap additive, producers mostly do not want to take on the increased cost and because there may not be much potential to charge a price premium. That problem is compounded because so much of the palm oil market is from non-wealthy countries, and there is very little consumer demand for sustainability labelling there.

Boycott v. Sustainability Certification

Palm oil mainly ubiquitous because it is cheap. And there are no real alternatives that wouldn’t cause problems. So:

What Can You Do?

Social and Environmental Labels

Assuming that you aren’t going to go palm oil-free: the RSPO is better than nothing, but it’s not great.

The WWF has a palm oil buyers scorecard where you can search brands for information about whether they are RSPO members or not (though again RSPO is flawed). It only has a few brands, though.

Rainforest Action Network recommends looking for the Palm Oil Innovation Group (POIG) standard, which they see as the only standard truly free of deforestation, peatland destruction, and exploitation. All POIG retailers and manufacturers are RSPO members, and must be certified – so it’s basically a stronger version of RSPO. POIG doesn’t have many certified products right now, but it might be the solution of the future. Some noteworthy POIG members include: Danone, L’Oréal, and Barry Callebaut. POIG NGOs include: WWF, Greenpeace, RAN, Verité (fair labour group), Sumatran Orangutan Society, and Orangutan Land Trust.

For workers’ rights, try the RSPO Smallholder Standard (although this might mean weaker sustainability standards). Another option is FairPalm.

Fairtrade hasn’t created standards for palm oil yet, but there is one available label that is substantively like fairtrade: FairPalm is a label for palm oil grown by smallholders in West Africa.

Or try doubling up with organic labels – which can at least address the harmful chemicals problem. Organic labels deal with the use of pesticides and fertilizers, so on their own they cannot address the other problems with palm oil. Unfortunately, RSPO is the best we have on that.

Ethical Consumer Worst and Best Ratings

Ethical Consumer has put together a list of brands to avoid (received their “worst” rating on palm oil use). Here are some of the brands that I recognized from that list:

• Nestlé – Kit Kat, NESCAFÉ, Perrier

• Mondelez – Cadbury

• Domino’s Pizza

• Yum! Brands – Pizza Hut, KFC

• Subway

• Itsu

• Prêt-à-manger

• TGI Friday’s

• Pizza Express

• L’Occitane

• Proctor and Gamble – Pampers, Head and Shoulders 

Ethical consumer also has a list of recommended brands (received their “best” rating on palm oil use). I only recognized a few brands from this list:

• Marks and Spencer

• Waitrose

• Lush

• Nivea

• Georganics

Get Involved!

Get involved with campaigns asking companies to implement sustainable palm oil practices. Write to companies to get them to use sustainable palm oil. Find out more about Michelle Desilets by following her on twitter.

Endnotes

[1] Ethical Consumer Podcast. (2018). Complex World of Palm Oil. Ethical Consumer.

[2] Paiement, Phillip. (2017). Transnational Sustainability Laws. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[3] The Food Chain Podcast. (2019). Can Palm Oil Be Sustainable? BBC World Service.

[4] Ethical Consumer Podcast, “Complex World of Palm Oil”.

[5] Ethical Consumer Podcast, “Complex World of Palm Oil”.

[6] Audio Long Reads. (2019). How the World Got Hooked on Palm Oil. The Guardian.

[7] Audio Long Reads, “How the World Got Hooked on Palm Oil.”

[8] Audio Long Reads, “How the World Got Hooked on Palm Oil.”

[9] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[10] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[11] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[12] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[13] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[14] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[15] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[16] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[17] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[18] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[19] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[20] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[21] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[22] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[23] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[24] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[25] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[26] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[27] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[28] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[29] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[30] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[31] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[32] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[33] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[34] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[35] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.

[36] Paiement, Transnational Sustainability Laws.