Tensions Between Firm Size and Sustainability Goals: Fair Trade Coffee in the United States

Abstract

Sustainability marketing trends have typically been led by smaller, more mission-driven firms, but are increasingly attracting larger, more profit-driven firms. Studying the strategies of firms that are moving away from these two poles (i.e., mission-driven but larger firms, and profit-driven firms that are more committed to sustainability) may help us to better understand the potential to resolve tensions between firm size and sustainability goals. We used this approach to analyze a case study of the U.S. fair trade coffee industry, employing the methods of data visualization and media content analysis. We identified three firms that account for the highest proportion of U.S. fair trade coffee purchases (Equal Exchange, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters and Starbucks) and analyzed their strategies, including reactions to recent changes in U.S. fair trade standards. We found an inverse relationship between firm size and demonstrated commitment to sustainability ideals, and the two larger firms were much less likely to acknowledge conflicts between size and sustainability in their public discourse. We conclude that similar efforts to increase sustainability marketing for other products and services should be more skeptical of approaches that rely on primarily on the participation of large, profit-driven firms.

Assessing Environmental Information Disclosures and the Effects of Chinese Nonferrous Metal Companies

“…Though different from Howard and Jaffee [37], who demonstrated an inverse relationship between fi rm size and sustainability goals, the result is consistent with most current research [30,32]. Therefore, we hold that larger fi rms are more willing to disclose more environmental information because they not only have more resources and are able to shoulder more social responsibilities, but also have greater pressure and motivation in respect to EIDs.…”

Do Distinct CSR Categories have Distinct Determinants? The Roles of Market Structure and Firm Size

“…In what concerns the relationship between CSR and firm size, several authors conclude for a positive one (e.g., Parket and Eilbirt, ; Roberts, ; Stanwick and Stanwick, ; McWilliams and Siegel, ; Dyer and Whetten, ; Sweeney, ; Reverte, ), others for the opposite (Howard and Jaffee, and Bourlakis et al, present evidence of a negative correlation between the variables; Darnall et al, show that smaller firms are more responsive to pressures and hence become more likely to undertake environmental practices than larger firms), and still others conclude that CSR engagement is not directly related with firm size (Orlitzky, ; Siegel and Vitaliano, and Baumann‐Pauly et al, ). These mixed findings may be affected by the different contexts employed, but also by the different measures of firm size that have been used in the literature.…”

What does it mean to do food justice?

“…The recent undercutting of fair trade standards in the U.S. (Howard and Jaffee 2013;Jaffee and Howard 2010) points to the urgency of negotiating definitions that promote accountability. In order to persuade firms like Nestlé to participate in fair trade production and certification, the meaning of the term was weakened.…”

“…Instead, AFNs have often sought to 'bring good food to others' as a mode of redemptive action rather than to seek local and global justice by analyzing and acting upon structural inequalities. Thus, the food movement has tended to project idyllic social relations and contributed to problematic patterns of exploitation, domination, and dependency ( Alkon and Agyeman 2011b;Allen 2008;Allen 2010;Allen et al 2003;Allen and Guthman 2006;Allen and Wilson 2008;Anderson 1999;DuPuis, Goodman, and Harrison 2006;Freidburg 2003;Goodman 2003;Guthman 2003Guthman , 2004Guthman , 2008aGuthman , 2008bGuthman , 2008cGoodman and Goodman 2007;Goodman, Maye, and Holloway 2010;Hinrichs 2010;Hinrichs and Kremer 2002;Howard and Jaffee 2013;Jaffee and Howard 2010;Mooney 1988;Mooney and Majka 1995;Mutersbaugh 2005;Slocum 2006Slocum , 2007. Time and again we find the same gaps between ideal and practice in efforts to change the food system.…”