Post Riposte Riposte

I received the following from reader Caleb in re: the China predicament. As it is one of the most level-headed and informed takes on the situation I have yet encountered, I am reproducing it in full for everyone to see.

Again, comments are encouraged.

- - - - - - - - - -

I, too, have a tumultuous relationship with Chinese production and, as a "sustainable business" MBA with some experience in the consumer goods industry, I hope I might be able to help speak to some of these issues. I did Corporate Social Responsibility for my company and worked fairly closely with our director of production, so some of what I have to share is not firsthand boots-on-the-ground experience but has been relayed by a committed and honest professional with over a decade of experience with Chinese production. Insofar as this is the case I hope I might be able to share a couple quick notes before settling into my day's work.

1) Not all Chinese production facilities are irresponsible. Seriously. This is mostly due to pressure from companies that have enough influence to make such things happen, but it’s happening. Much of this can be attributed to the good, hard work of activists in the 90's: many of the larger, more reputable brands are scared out of their proverbial wits about getting slammed on human rights issues like Nike did way back when. Additionally, there is a happy ripple effect to this, namely that a factory living up to the stringent(ish) demands of the "big money" companies for whom they produce will almost always be on the up and up for its other production clients, as well. Therefore, a no-name, small company producing in China might still have high-standard production as long as they're in the same factory as a larger, more publicly visible corporation. This is not a surefire occurrence, but seems to sometimes be the case.

1.a) Just because it's not made in China doesn't guarantee it's any better. Indeed, there are other (mostly SE Asian) countries which--if only because China has taken the brunt of the force on this one (perhaps for good reason)--have been able to get away with standards that are just as troublesome. Don't pat yourself on the back just because it's made in Burma rather than China.

1.b) Don't pat yourself on the back just because it's (responsibly) made in China. China is committing genocide in Tibet. They're committing atrocities in western China. They're manhandling the Taiwanese. They're censoring the internet. They're committing egregious human rights violations against ethnic minorities (and Han Chinese) with reckless abandon. They kneecapped the talks in Copenhagen. (I repeat: the climate actions that the world *needs* were totally laid to waste. Seriously, read this article from The Guardian: http://bit.ly/5I7TTC) Even if the individual factory is okay, that doesn't change the fact that the money is being funneled into an authoritarian nation whose ascendancy is dangerous, unchecked and unprecedented.

1.b.1) The situations with Tibet, Taiwan, the Uighurs, Iran, its currency manipulation, the Copenhagen deal and many years of double-digit growth, seem to demonstrate the fact that China need not listen to/abide the rest of the world. I do, however, take heart knowing that history seems to indicate that, when a people begin to step out from bonds of poverty, they begin to demand greater civil liberties and environmental standards. If this is the case, there is, perhaps, some redemption for supporting ethical Chinese production as it puts money in the pockets of perhaps the only people who can change the ways of the Chinese goverment: the Chinese people.

2) Verification is (mostly) great. As any farmer can tell you about "organic" (and, hopefully in due time, any logger about FSC, and fisherman about MSC, etc.), verification standards are a (mostly good) mixed blessing. They add a *very* important degree of 3rd party auditing. This comes at a not-so insignificant cost (to the company, and thus to you), but it is really the only way (short of seeing it for yourself) to be sure that goods are made in a decent manner. There is always the question of who's inspecting the inspectors, but if a company has a good oversight organization (Verite and the FLA, for instance), you can feel pretty good about the product. And, as I said above, while the FLA might only be inspecting a factory for companies A & D, companies B, C, & E will also be more likely to have acceptable production.

3) A lot of companies want to--and do, indeed--do things right ...but they're afraid to make public claims about such things. Because there is such vociferous push-back regarding greenwashing and "ethicalwashing(?)" claims, some companies make darn sure that their house is clean and then, gradually, come to make such things publicly known. This takes time.

4) Don't let up the pressure. As individuals and, (for better or worse) most importantly, consumers, you need to keep making these things a priority. Vote with your dollars. Ask salespeople about the sustainability credentials. Ask the company. Let people in the industry know that these things are important to you and that you will be happily providing your business to companies who do right and signing petitions and telling all your friends about companies who don't.

In conclusion:
I now work as a marketing consultant and I can tell you that CWAC is a perfect example of the wonders of what the internet has been able to achieve: one man can, in a matter of minutes, express his support (or distaste) for a particular brand or product and it can reach more ears (eyes) than ever before. It used to be said that you shouldn't pick fights with people who buy ink by the barrel (newspapers). Now, looking at the state of newspapers, it's instructive to witness the influential power of blogs such as this one: humble yet authentic and outspoken. Smart companies will try to avoid picking a fight with a community such as patronizes CWAC for this very reason. Keep it up.