Forum Activity for @Clay

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/26/10 07:52:22
1,680 posts

Raw Chocolate


Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Steve:I have to respectfully disagree with you on your first statement - unless you can point me to an external, credible, and definitive source (i.e., not your web site) that makes the distinction between "raw" and "True Raw" - especially as it refers to chocolate. Beans fresh out of the pod are technically seeds (as they are still viable) and so "Fresh Cacao Seeds" is what they should be called. Calling them "Truly Raw Chocolate" is, in my opinion, sloppy and inaccurate marketing lingo that does the raw community a disservice as it lessens its credibility.Lacking any external support, the only "standard" to go by is the "standard" that the raw community as a whole agrees to. By that "standard," the maximum temperature to which food can be subjected without loss of enzyme activity (and related nutritional aspects of a food) is 118F -- despite the fact that there is no firm scientific evidence to back the claims made for this specific temperature.According to my research, there is no magic temperature for all foods in all conditions.A lot depends on the structure and density of the food itself (e.g., lettuces are a lot more delicate than are seeds), whether the food in question is wet or dry, contact time (i.e., the length of time the food is subjected to a source of heat), the nature of the heat source (e.g., you can set a dehydrator to 125F and evaporative cooling - water escaping the food - will keep the temperature of the food below 118F until the water is removed), and the specific heat transfer profile of the food in question (e.g., it should be okay to subject the outside of a nut covered by a thick shell to very high temperatures for surprisingly extended periods of time to kill pathogens on the outside of the food - with little or no heat not transferred through the shell to the nutmeat inside.It is actually easy to fully and completely ferment cacao and keep the pile under 118F - thereby satisfying the most widely accepted definition for the maximum temperature to which a food can be subjected and still be called raw. The "trick" is to control the size of the pile. There are a number of fermentation boxes I have personally seen that make it possible to do this.It is somewhat harder to dry the beans and keep the temp under 118F - if the beans are dried in direct sun, and especially if they are dried on a concrete pad. Temperatures can easily reach 140F - at least at the surface of the pad. It is possible to dry beans at low temp, it just takes a lot more care, takes longer - and therefore costs more.On the other hand.I have eaten a lot of so-called raw (as some sources have now been discredited) chocolate from a lot of different vendors in the past two years or so that I've been researching this. When the rest of my diet is clean enough, I do notice a difference in the way my body responds and the way I feel after eating some raw chocolates, but that may be due as much to other "superfood" ingredients that have been added as the cacao itself.I don't question that there is a difference, I only question the absolute cutoff temperature of 118F - knowing that there are ways to process cacao into chocolate that minimize the loss of all manner of nutrients and keeping the resultant chocolate a relatively whole food.That's the key. If the temp hits 125F for 10 seconds or even 10 minutes, it doesn't really matter because the amount of chocolate you have to eat to reap meaningful benefits is actually quite small. New studies suggest that as little as 1/4 oz (~7 grams) of "cooked" dark (i.e., no dairy) chocolate is enough, when eaten consistently, to deliver measurable benefits even without any other changes to a person's diet. Here's one of the few cases where food combining actually makes scientific sense. Eating a 100% raw chocolate with a glass of raw milk reduces the antioxidant benefits of the chocolate because some of the proteins in the milk will bind to some of the antioxidants thereby reducing the bioavailability of the antioxidants.I have a stone grinder and make a variety of foods for personal consumption. One is a nut and seed butter that consists of a combination of almonds, pecans, and cashews with sunflower, sesame, flax, and chia seed. I happen to like roasty, toasty flavors. A lot. So what I do is dehydrate, at a relatively high temp, a small amount of some of the ingredients. I find that this approach gives me the toasty flavors I crave while delivering virtually all of the benefits of the foods in the raw state. While it's not "100% raw" I can't see that it makes any meaningful difference, dietarily.All raw chocolate makers face this problem when it comes to the sweetener they choose. Agave syrup is subjected to high temperatures to reduce moisture content - as are coconut palm sugar, maple syrup, and most of the other options (I don't know the processing steps for any of the sugar alcohols - xylitol, erythritol, etc.- so I can't speak authoritatively on the temps used). So - even though the cacao in a product may be "raw" the sweetener is almost certainly not.In the end, the question is, "Where do you choose to draw the line?" 100% raw chocolate is difficult to do and comparatively very expensive. One of the clues that the chocolate you might be eating is not even close to 100% raw is the price. If it's anywhere near close to the price of a commodity "cooked" chocolate - then it's not 100% raw.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/15/10 07:12:26
1,680 posts

A new ring in the legal big top over cocoa flavanols


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

I also thought the flavanol content (over 50%) was way high. This must mean that virtually all of the fat is removed along with who knows what else.Your point in other posts is well taken. Conventional chocolate confers high levels of beneficial substances without subjecting the beans either to extreme forms of overprocessing or deliberate under-processing. And, as you say, there are vitamins that are good for you at one dosage that are lethal at another (e.g., vitamin A - remember not to eat polar bear liver). Who knows what the toxicity/prooxidant effects of very high levels of dietary polyphenols might be.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/15/10 07:07:54
1,680 posts

A new ring in the legal big top over cocoa flavanols


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

Sam:We are making different arguments.All I am saying is that one number (total cocoa content) is not a definitive indicator of the "healthiness" of chocolate.One factor I did not present was that because the preponderance of antioxidants is in the non-fat solids, not the fat (cocoa butter), you can't know from the total cocoa content what the ratio of NCFS is -- you might be able calculate the fat component from the ingredients label for chocolates that don't have milk, but as NFCS has some carbs you need to do some math to separate those out; but that's information in addition to the cocoa content on the label.It is perfectly OK for a 70% chocolate to be 50% NCFS and 50% fat. That ratio would contain more antioxidants than a chocolate made from exactly the same ingredients with a ratio of 25:75 NFCS:cocoa butter.I don't doubt your math or your science - I think we're making different points.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/14/10 18:37:02
1,680 posts

A new ring in the legal big top over cocoa flavanols


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

Sam:The author of the article is referencing Mars making the point about a lack or correlation, not me. I was emphasizing from the article.Despite what you point out, I am skeptical that there is a reliable correlation on that one factor.Take three chocolates, all 45% total cocoa content (not NFCS, total cocoa content). All three chocolates have been made from the same beans, roasted the same way.One is a dark milk chocolate containing 15% full cream milk solids.One is made using chocolate that has been Dutch processed.One has bean made using chocolate that has not been Dutch processed.From the cocoa content alone, you cannot which has potentially more health benefits. You need to know more than just the cocoa content.Where I think your graph misleads is that you need to graph the procyanidin count for all of the different forms at the same cocoa content. You will see that they are all different, which I believe is the point the article is making.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/14/10 11:34:50
1,680 posts

A new ring in the legal big top over cocoa flavanols


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

Mars Inc is suing Nutraceuticals, Life Extension Foundation, and Naturex for infringing nine patents covering the manufacture of its [ed, Mars'] CirkuHealth cocoa flavanols.

Mars has been researching cocoa flavanols for about 20 years and launched CirkuHealth via its Mars Botanical division in 2009. The ingredient is made using a patented process called Cocoapro, said to accurately measure active compound levels and, by reducing exposure to high temperatures , provides "greater protection" for flavanols. This process allows CirkuHealth to claim about 550mg of cocoa flavanols per gram.

Mars has in the past made a point of the fact that although dark chocolate with a high cocoa content is commonly perceived to be healthier than sweetened confections with low cocoa levels, cocoa percentage is not actually a reliable measure of health benefits . This is because fermentation, drying and roasting, all of which help develop the flavor of chocolate, may reduce the flavanol content.

[Ed. My Opinion: I wish more people would pay attention to Mars ... in this respect. As Samantha pointed out, they do have an agenda to promote, however blind belief in "70% good" is just plain wrong, IMO. Cocoa content is just one factor that needs to be considered.]

updated by @Clay Gordon: 12/13/24 12:16:07
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/08/12 17:29:23
1,680 posts

Chocolate Thermometers


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

Steve -

Thanks for following up and letting know everyone how things are going. Glad to know that the community was able to help you out.

:: Clay

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/01/10 12:21:30
1,680 posts

April Fool's Day Chocolate "Treats"


Posted in: Opinion

Chocolate Life member Walter Plante posted a link to a blog (kokobuzz) about Free Range Chocolate from/by New Leaf .

Free Range chocolate? Hmmmmm. April 1st? Double hmmmm . I went to the site to take a look for myself. There I read:

In order to be certified as Free Range, growers are not allowed to cut cacao pods from the trees since cutting can result in scaring and discomfort for the trees. Instead the pods must fall naturally and only when they are ready. According to Chuck (no last name), a 27th generation cacao farmer from Madagascar: It takes tremendous patience to wait for the pods to drop from the trees so that we can collect them. Sometimes there is a little bit of bruising on the outside of the pods, but it doesnt affect the cacao beans inside that much really.

I won't reveal a spoiler ... but I do recommend linking over to the site and reading the post, it's a lot of fun (hint: take a look at the acronyms for the "free range" certification agencies).

It brought a welcome smile to my face.

Thanks, Walter, for bringing this to my attention.

Does anyone else have any favorite April Fool's Day Chocolate Treats to share?

updated by @Clay Gordon: 04/19/15 20:12:19
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/30/10 10:07:34
1,680 posts

Graphic for Business


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

What program did you create the graphic in? If it's Photoshop I think you can get the outline(s) of the shapes, turn them into paths, and then export to EPS.Otherwise, I would look into the graphic arts department of a local community college. There is probably someone there who could do the conversion for you for a reasonable price.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/30/10 09:59:26
1,680 posts

the broma process ebook for downloading


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

PLEASE DO NOT pay and download these files. The second one leads me to believe that even though they include the word Broma in the title, they are about computing, not about cacao.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/01/10 09:52:42
1,680 posts

Cacao Info Resources?


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

A collaborative Google map is not a bad idea.There are tools to draw regions as well (to describe boundaries), attach pictures, and more.If this is of interest, I could set up the framework for people to work from.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/30/10 10:15:24
1,680 posts

Cacao Info Resources?


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

Vanessa:There are no generally available maps that provide the information you are looking for; some companies might have ones they use for their own purposes (I have seen ones Nazario Rizek has for various plantations they manage in the Dominican Republic but I don't remember if they have elevation data on them). But finding the underlying stratigraphic detail is going to be very hard - so correlating the geography with soil conditions (and then climatic patterns) is going to be even harder.I think that most of us in the industry with experience and knowledge agree that terroir is somehow involved, however, it's a lot more complex with cacao than with grapes - especially because the bulk of the crop is produced by smallholder farmers who don't care.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/26/10 14:38:55
1,680 posts

Cacao Info Resources?


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

The web site Lowe is referring to is in support of the book, "Chocolate: History, Culture, and Heritage" published by Wiley and funded in large part by Mars.The web site itself (at the URL mentioned in the book http://cocoaknow.ucdavis.edu ) is still very much a work in progress. As near as I can tell, there has been no substantive work done on the site in the last nine months or so.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/24/10 07:05:55
1,680 posts

anyone producing easter chocolates in a nut-free environment?


Posted in: Uncategorized

Mary Jo -Are you looking for personal consumption because you (or someone you plan to gift to) is allergic? Or is there some official FCIA reason for the request? Your classifying this as news and including your FCIA affiliation makes me ask. If this were for personal consumption I would put this in the category "Where Do I Buy?"
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/23/10 14:11:58
1,680 posts

Strange chocolate-no saturated fat?


Posted in: Opinion

70% cocoa solids is no problem as, technically, the solids refer both to the fat and non-fat content of the chocolate.Cocoa butter is a saturated fat - it's solid at room temp. So, no go there. You could, I suppose, use a 100% non-fat cocoa powder and some other fat - but I don't know of an unsaturated fat that is solid at room temp with some very serious processing (e.g., hydrogenation). And then, at least in the US, if you replace the cocoa butter with another fat, you can't call it chocolate.Sort of by definition, a 70% cocoa content chocolate contains about 30% sugar. You could replace the sugar with something else, of course.So, you're right. Whatever it is, it's not natural (and it's not chocolate). I will pun on Michael Pollan and call these (what ever they are) chocolate-like substances.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/22/10 07:44:44
1,680 posts

Source for cacao beans (not roasted nibs) in medium quantity.


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

Matt:Best bet is a bag, which will be about 50-65 kg depending on the origin. There are a couple of growers that have operations here in the US that could easily provide you with beans in this quantity.Patrick Pineda (Venezuela) is one of them (go to Members and Search). Another is MarabelFarms (Dominican Republic).John Nanci is a good source for many origins but I think that you will find that he is even more expensive than Art Pollard.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/18/10 16:40:27
1,680 posts

Dont shoot the messenger


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

There is a long blog post with many comments about raw chocolate and fraudulent misrepresentation that was posted by Ben Ripple of Big Tree in Bali. Rather than keeping two conversations on the same topic going at the same time, I am closing this discussion to further comments and asking that future additions to the discussion take place on Ben's blog post.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/16/10 06:50:11
1,680 posts

Functional Candy - Making Chocolate (Candies) Healthy-er


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

Trials prove efficacy of fiber and multivitamin chocolate fortification.

German chocolate ingredient supplier, Herza Schokolade, said it has recently concluded a series of trials on the incorporation of health boosting ingredients into chocolate based on the hike in demand for the functional additions from its food manufacturer customers.

The Hamburg-based company said the testing it has conducted over the past four months has shown that it has the capability of integrating ingredients such as green tea or aloe vera powder, as well as biotin and bamboo extract for strengthening skin and hair and nails into chocolate for use in a variety of functional foods and drinks.

The company found that natural dietary fibers such as plum powder or dried rice syrup serve to increase the fibre content of cocoa paste while acting as a replacer for isolated inulin. (Ed:Anybody know of a high-end chocolate maker who adds isolated inulin to their chocolate?)

Herza alsocollaborates with its sister companies SternVitamin and SternLife on determining the mix of vitamins necessary when developing chocolate pieces for customers seeking a combination of vitamins such as B, C and E for their cereals bars.Integrated into chocolate pieces, natural fibers, vitamins, minerals, probiotics, and more "can provide health promoting substances in muesli and biscuits.It is more cost effective for our customers to have a ready to mix ingredient that is already fortified with vitamins.

Herza's R&D team has been fine tuning its mixing technology to ensure a smooth blend of functional ingredient with the confectionery product, noting that "chocolate acts as a good protector of health promoting substances due to its high fat and low moisture content. While the theobromine naturally present in the cocoa is already an aid to concentration, Herza researchers found that by adding lecithin granulate it is possible to improve memory as well, thatthe addition of caffeine or guarana boosts performance in the office or in sports, andthat in the form of drops in muesli bars or small slivers in power drinks, the fortified chocolate pieces are a valuable source of energy.

Ahhh, but how does it taste? And - does any of this sound appealing to anyone - other than food processor/manufacturers, of course?

updated by @Clay Gordon: 12/13/24 12:16:07
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/11/10 13:07:45
1,680 posts

Cement mixer as coating pan?


Posted in: Geek Gear - Cool Tools (Read-Only)

As I pointed out, large Hobart mixer bowls can be had for cheap and they are S/S and might even be NSF-approved.It's a toss-up as to which approach involves more work - and more expense. Eventually, however, the plating might wear through I would think so going that route might mean more costly maintenance in the long run.Either way, you should easily be able to do it for less than the cost of a (new) pan.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/10/10 10:05:03
1,680 posts

Cement mixer as coating pan?


Posted in: Geek Gear - Cool Tools (Read-Only)

It all depends on what the interior surface looks like and is made of. I am fairly confident that whatever it is made from it's not certified as food grade. At a minimum it will need extensive cleaning/degreasing.I know you are handy with tools and such, so rigging a small motor to a gearwheel should not be difficult for you. As that's the case I would look into a used Hobart mixing bowl. I just found a 60qt on eBay for $25. Weld a shaft to the bottom of the bowl. Make a simple metal frame (90 degree stamped metal with bolt holes would be easier and cheaper than welding) and use bolt on casters. Here are two photos of something I saw in Ecuador. This one is being used as a cocoa bean roaster - note the burner underneath in the second photo (which also shows the casters being used). You could even adapt this for use as a ball mill.

Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/09/10 10:33:10
1,680 posts

Belgian Chocolate Makers


Posted in: Opinion

Lowe:I think that it is fair to say that there are only two big companies making chocolate from the bean in Belgium. Giving everything else that's going on in the world of artisan/craft chocolate making, saying that there are only two is a stretch. Brad is technically correct when the question of ownership is brought up - while Callebaut has operations in Belgium they are a Swiss company.The list at Wikipedia is wrong: Neuhaus buys its chocolate from Callebaut. I got this information directly from a senior Neuhaus rep from Belgium. Same is true for Dolfin, they buy from Belcolade and I have this from one of the founders of Dolfin. Guylian and Leonidas are also cited in the Wikipedia article but they are not chocolate makers (I checked the Leonidas web site and there is no reference to their being bean-to-bar).The list does include Marcolini and if he's making chocolate from the bean it's in small quantities for his own use, not for resale to others.Callebaut is the one people refer to when they say "Belgium's Finest." Belcolade (owned by Puratos, who also owns Debelis here in the US) is the Susan Lucci of the Belgian chocolate industry. I don't think it's fair to say that all Callebaut chocolates are better than all Belcolade chocolates. I think that there are some things that Belcolade (also sometimes referred to, unfortunately, as "buck a load") does better than Callebaut - but as with many things, that's a matter of personal taste.Feel free to quote me as the source.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/09/10 07:13:32
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade: Does FairTrade Discriminate?


Posted in: Opinion

Wow. What a thought. Is FairTrade discriminatory?

Actually, yes.

The institution of FairTrade (as exemplified by FLO) is, in practice, discriminatory even though this outcome is counterintuitive and unintended. The reason for this is simple: FairTrade is culturally insensitive. The FairTrade standards have two parts, Generic (that apply to all producer organizations and commodities) and Specific (that apply to specific commodities). The standards make no mention of the differences in agricultural culture or markets that exist in different countries.

To suggest that the cocoa culture and markets in Ecuador are the same as Cameroon is absurd. To ignore these differences in official policy is, ultimately, discriminatory.To be truly fair, FairTrade standards would recognize that significant cultural and market differences exist around the world and embed them in their standards - and in the formulas used to calculate premiums.

Now I understand why there is a single standard - it's a matter of bureaucracy and handling paperwork. It's just easier to have a single policy that gets applied worldwide. It also eliminates any protests over favoritism - Ghanaian cocoa farmers would probably complain ifcocoa farmers innearby Cameroon or Liberia "earned" a higher premium, even though by international metrics farmers in these (and other) countries are not as well off.

Nonetheless, the focus on the commodity - and not the culture and markets - leads to the unintended consequence of discrimination through donning cultural blinkers, especially in the minds of consumers: farmers in "developing countries" around the world have exactly the same needs and therefore "benefit" equally from the same premium.In the end, I think, it may be the perpetuation of this stereotype that is the most damaging unintended consequence of FairTrade.

To be honest, this issue is one that has no easy answer when it comes to the creation of a system that can be adopted on a worldwide basis. I've been thinking about this off and on over the course of the last few years.

Any thoughts?

updated by @Clay Gordon: 04/16/15 06:10:12
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/08/10 11:40:38
1,680 posts

New test improves control of chocolate origins


Posted in: News & New Product Press (Read-Only)

A simple test of volatile compounds in chocolate may serve as chemical tracers to enable better traceability of cocoa and inform consumers of the countries of origin, say French researchers.

Aided by the high fat content of chocolate, which traps all but the most volatile of compounds, researchers from the Laboratoire de Chimie Analytique et Sciences de l'Aliment (IPHC-UMR 7178) in Illkirch report that identification of seven compounds that can be used as chemical tracers.

The method described in this work (hydrodistillation, GC analysis, and statistic treatment) may improve the control of the geographical origin ofchocolateduring its long production process,wrote the researchers, led by Christophe Marcic.

The analytical technique is said to integrate the entire production process for chocolate from bean to processing to final product and distinguishes between chocolate originating from the Caribbean, Madagascar, Africa, and South America.
Consumers have no way of tracing the origin of the cocoa used to produce their chocolate to a particular country, much less a particular site of agricultural production, explained the researchers.

To determine the quality of chocolate and the veracity of labelling, consumers need to be informed of the cocoa production sites country, even more with the rising market of healthy chocolate, they added.

The analysis of the volatile content and their statistical processing by multivariate analyses tended to form independent groups for both Africa and Madagascar, even if some of the chocolate samples analyzed appeared in a mixed zone together with those from America, wrote the researchers.
This analysis also allowed a clear separation between Caribbean chocolates and those from other origins.

The French researchers identified seven compounds, which they proposed as tracers, including linalool and (E,E)-2,4-decadienal), for complete characterisation of the chocolate's geographical origin.

Source:Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry2010, Volume 58, Issue 3, Pages 14781483, doi: 10.1021/jf903471eDifferentiation of Chocolates According to the Cocoas Geographical Origin Using ChemometricsAuthors: A. Cambrai, C. Marcic, S. Morville, P. Sau Houer, F. Bindler, E. Marchioni

The entire text of this article appeared on ConfectioneryNews.com on February 10, 2010.


updated by @Clay Gordon: 12/13/24 12:16:07
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/10/10 06:31:48
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade: Is Fair Trade Scalable?


Posted in: Opinion

Dom:Thanks for the reference to FairTracing.org . There is some very interesting stuff there and the 5percent4Farmers system could be implemented on top of it. I am going to reach out to them to see about collaborating.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/09/10 06:41:49
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade: Is Fair Trade Scalable?


Posted in: Opinion

Matt:I have suggested on several occasions that FairTrade actually exerts negative pricing pressure on the market by setting a value on the time and effort involved in the certification process. As some have pointed out (Frederick Schilling for one), this is not the case - FairTrade pricing sets the floor for negotiations. However in some cases (especially with commodity buyers looking to "greenwash" their brands by FairTrade certifying one or a small percentage of their products) FairTrade pricing sets a de facto price cap.Farmers get paid by the pound for their product. Given limited monetary, time, and labor resources they will always opt for a crop that will produce more for a given ratio of money/time/labor to maximize their return. The challenge becomes when the return does not value the investment. A maximum 8% premium - that then is split among many actors (including the certification fee "kickback" paid to the certifier) - is not nearly enough to justify the effort in most cases.In the end, the place to start is the consumer, who needs to realize that in order to help out the farmer we need to pay more for food and value quality. The issue (in the US anyway) is that federal agricultural and food policy for the last 30+ years had focused on delivering cheap calories to the consumer without considering the effects on agricultural workers, their families, and the communities they live in.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/08/10 08:07:14
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade: Is Fair Trade Scalable?


Posted in: Opinion

Another reason why FairTrade fails is that it's not scalable on the producer side.

As I mentioned in my original post Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers , the international FairTrade organization (FLO - FairTrade Labeling Organization, headquartered in Bonn, Germany) says that there were 746 certified producer organizations in 59 countries in their 2008-2009 annual report - after more than a decade of work. Again, as I asked above, if Fair Trade (as institutionalized by FLO) is so great, how come it's not more successful on the producer side?

One reason is that the certification process itself is not scalabl e. Individual farmers are not certified because the entity looking to be certified has to pay fees - the initial certification fee and annual re-certification fees. The fact that the producer organizations have to pay fees to be a part of Fair Trade is not widely known among the general public and the relatively high cost of certification is certainly a barrier to entry.

Another, more systemic, barrier to the expansion of Fair Trade, is the certification process itself. Certification requires certifiers. Trained certifiers. Paid, trained certifiers - who incur travel and other expenses.

Let's take the case of the Ivory Coast. There are an estimated 600,000 cacao farms in the Ivory Coast. For the sake of argument, if we organize Ivorian cocoa farmers into co-ops of 200 farmers each, there would be 3,000 co-ops. Certification is annual, and let's say that one certifier can certify one co-op per week. In order to handle the certification load - just for cocoa, just in the Ivory Coast - it's necessary to have 60 full-time certifiers working 50 weeks a year: for one crop in one country, to achieve 100% certification.

What would 100% certification mean for the individual farmer? Probably not much, as we can see from the TCGA example in Belize, because few co-ops (let alone farmers) have direct access to an export market. The Fair Trade premium on cocoa amounts to just 8% at the floor price (US$1800/tonne) and is about 5% at the current price (US$3200/tonne). The assumption that as the price increases the farmer automatically earns more is clearly erroneous - at least when it comes to cocoa. When government cocoa boards control prices and access to export markets (or there is a contractual agreement that limits market price volatility as is the case with the TCGA in Belize), producers are insulated from the market and have no pricing leverage.

More tellingly, there is no place in the FairTrade standards that focuses on improving quality or agricultural practices that could improve yield. Showing farmers how to take care of their farms (basic pruning, how to care for diseased trees and fruits, etc.) has shown to be able to more than double yields on existing land, reducing the pressure to "pioneer farm" (slash and burn new forest). A focus on improving post-harvest processing techniques improves the quality of the cocoa offered on the market. However, as long as the producer does not have direct access to markets, there is no way to extract any income from improvements in quality.

The focus on certification (to the producer - "You have to prove that you are following our rules, but we don't have to help you in any way by providing information that would make you better farmers") is a travesty in my opinion.

Another travesty is the layers of expensive bureaucracy that have developed over the years. FLO sits at the top of the pyramid in Bonn. There is a World Fair Trade Organization, a Fair Trade Advocacy Office, and more. FairTrade worldwide relies on government support - so some taxpayers (in Switzerland, the UK, and Germany at least) are supporting FairTrade through their federal taxes in addition to paying FairTrade licensing fees when they purchase products.

Perhaps more disturbingly, it occurred to me when I re-read the annual report in preparing this post, is that there is a subtle disintermediation that is happening through the official language that has been adopted by FLO. Agricultural workers are no longer farmers. They are producers. They are not farmer co-ops, they are producer organizations. At one level I can understand this, as not all products that are FairTrade certified are agricultural products (there is a move to certify gold as FairTrade, for example).

Nonetheless, the language has literally dehumanized the supposed beneficiaries of FairTrade, at least among FairTrade officialdom. As consumers, we are marketed to that FairTrade benefits farmers, not producer organizations. I wonder how successful end-consumer marketing of FairTrade would be if all the marketing messages talked not of helping farmers and their families, but of helping producer organizations?

Probably not nearly so successful.

I am firm believer that you can't just be against something, you have to be for something in its place - otherwise shut up. About this time last year, I started another (private) network on Ning to discuss an alternative idea for FairTrade. There are already several members and quite a bit of discussion. As of right now, I am making the network public (subject to member moderation) to advance my ideas in this regard.

The network is called 5percent4farmers . The idea is to create a system that:

a) has the minimum of bureaucracy and overhead
b) does not charge farmers to take part
c) captures premiums for the farmer throughout the value chain - not just at the point of initial sale
d) is scalable
e) can benefit farmers everywhere in the world, not just "developing countries"
f) is completely transparent, using the power of the Internet for administration and oversight
g) encourages "voluntourism" as a component of oversight
h) works to provide farmers direct access to markets

If you are interested in learning more, I encourage you to visit the site and join to add your opinions. If anyone knows anyone interested in funding the development of the underlying software system needed to implement this, please let me know.

updated by @Clay Gordon: 04/18/15 18:29:03
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
05/06/10 06:39:01
1,680 posts

Selling at farmer's markets... in the heat of summer?


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

Search for "portable thermoelectric cooler" on Google. There are a number of different brands but "Koolatron" seems to be very highly rated. You can get a good-sized one for under $200 that runs off 12VDC - plugs straight into the "convenience" outlet of a car or optional 120VAC adapter. Vinotemp makes one (available at Home Depot) that is soft-sided and is built into a luggage cart. Not quite as large as some of the Koolatron units but it would seem to be convenient for some applications.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
10/15/10 18:17:24
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers


Posted in: Opinion

Jeff -You make some very good points about the role of a co-op like TCGA and how it can be pivotal to the growth and development of a community. However, the TCGA's role as a market maker is unusual, if not unique, because the TCGA has a guaranteed buyer. This is not the case for all FT co-ops. There is a downside to the guarantee, however, as the contract with G&B contains a multi-year rolling average provision to reduce volatility. It doesn't benefit the farmers because the FT contract already contains a minimum price provision. The beneficiary is the buyer who was insulated from the recent price surge.The larger point I am trying to make is that the reality of Fair Trade - on the ground to farmers and their families - is a far different from that portrayed by FLO. Many people still believe that when they buy Fair Trade that money goes directly to farmers.As I have maintained all along, FT is a part of a solution, not the solution, and that alternatives need to be considered. A Direct Trade model (like the one we've been mooting over at 5percent4farmers.ning.com) makes a lot more sense because of the inherent transparency.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/05/10 07:04:01
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers


Posted in: Opinion

Brian:Your experiences are valuable and valued and I am glad you shared them. I think each of us has something that we're "expert" at - I just happen to very open to sharing my experiences and what I've synthesized from them.You are so right - the system that seems to make so much sense to consumers in "developed" nations doesn't make a whole lot of sense to farmers in "undeveloped" areas of the world when they learn of the benefits for the work required to earn them.Consumers (especially here in the US) have to learn that inexpensive food is not a birthright, and shareholders in companies need to reward corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs that deliver tangible value and aren't just greenwashing.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/11/10 14:27:36
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers


Posted in: Opinion

Hidden in plain sight in the 2008 TransFair USA annual report is an indication of just how different the perception of "FairTrade" is from reality.On page 19, the following numbers are presented in huge type:160,000 farmers impacted$200,000 granted to producer organizationsNot sure whether that's outright grants or premiums, but US$1.25 per farmer doesn't sound like a whole lot, does it?The 2008 Audited Financials (click to download 2008_TFUSA_Audited_Finan... make for some interesting reading - you get a fair sense of where money comes in and where it goes. For example, rent on the Oakland HQ in 2008 was over $500,000. Having visited the TCGA offices in Punta Gorda I can assure you that their rent is a lot less.
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/08/10 08:17:58
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers


Posted in: Opinion

Read my new post on this topic: Unfair Trade: Is FairTrade Scalable? .For my alternative approach to FairTrade, visit 5percent4farmers .
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/05/10 15:35:22
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers


Posted in: Opinion

David - very interesting suggestion. This is just a part of a larger picture I want to draw that includes my recent experiences in Bolivia and Grenada. When I get done I will definitely follow up. Thanks!:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/04/10 16:06:26
1,680 posts

Unfair Trade in Belize - How Kraft Shafts Cocoa Farmers


Posted in: Opinion

FAQ: Do Fair Trade certified cacao farmers reliably earn more money than cacao farmers who are not Fair Trade Certified and reliably benefit from increased world market prices?


Answer : Probably not.

What? How can this be? A hint at the true nature of how "fair" Fair Trade is can be found in the FAQ on the TransFair USA web site. Many people believe that Fair Trade benefits farmers directly. However, you have to go to the Advanced FAQs page to learn that individual farmers don't benefit directly, though this is not how Fair Trade is understood by the general public . Fair Trade premiums are paid to farmer co-ops who deduct a variety of operating expenses (including certification costs - which are not directly mentioned and are bundled into "administrative costs") from the premium paid. Thus it is quite likely - almost certain - that the average individual cocoa farmer receives little to no actual direct benefit from Fair Trade certification .

Let's do some math. Say that the Toledo Cacao Growers Association sold 40 tonnes of cocoa to Green and Black's (previously bought by Cadbury which was just purchased by Kraft) in 2009. Now Green and Black's tries to do the right thing and pays the entire Fair Trade premium ($150/tonne) irrespective of world market price, even though they are allowed to reduce the premium they pay as the world market price goes up.

This means that the maximum Fair Trade premium on 40 tonnes in 2009 would have been US$6000 (or Bz$12,000). From this amount it's prudent to account for and deduct all of the costs associated with attaining and maintaining Fair Trade certification. I was unable to discover what those are at the TCGA, but for argument's sake let's say they run to 8% to make the math easy, or just under Bz$1000 (they are likely far higher).

At the moment, there are nearly 900 active farmers in the TCGA. If the remaining premium (Bz$11,000) got distributed evenly it would mean that each farmer would receive about Bz$12 (or US$6) extra annually for their work. Fifty cents a month . More likely, the premium distribution is pro-rated according to how much cocoa gets contributed so some farmers will get more - while most get less - and the actual percentage of the premium available to be paid out is lower because overhead costs are much higher than 8%.

And this US$6 average per farmer figure is only because Green and Black's pays the maximum Fair Trade premium irrespective of market price.

How is this Fair?

One of the underlying fallacies of the whole Fair Trade pricing and premium structure is the assumption that, as the world price for an agricultural commodity (e.g., cocoa) increases, farmers automatically get paid more. In fact, this is not often the case because farmers are insulated from market prices through a variety of layers and mechanisms. In Grenada, the Grenada Cocoa Association sets the price, and it does not have to (and does not) reflect market prices as the quality of its cocoa is so high and the amount produced so low that it commands a premium over world market prices often exceeding US$1000/tonne. In Belize, the price paid to the TCGA (and therefore the price the TCGA pays to its farmer members) is based on a 5-year rolling average of the world market price. This rolling average protects Green and Black's from price volatility - at the expense of the farmer.

To be fair, Green and Black's does bring value to the TCGA and to its member farmers by providing a guaranteed market. Guaranteed markets are hard to find in the world and its presence in and around Punta Gorda has benefited farmers in the area immensely because they know they have a buyer for what they produce.However, the guaranteed market is a benefit Green and Black's offers and is not an intrinsic benefit of Fair Trade. In fact, a portion of this guaranteed market is about to go away as the new owners (Kraft) are shifting production from Italy to Canada requiring different organic certification and the TCGA will no longer be purchasing transitional cacao (cacao from farms in the process -which takes up to three years - of being certified organic).

The point to make here is not that Fair Trade is bad, but to acknowledge that while its aims are noble it is part of a solution, andnot the solution. It is important to remember that Fair Trade is a business. And while that business demands transparency and accountability from its member organizations all the way down to the farmer co-ops it certifies, as a business it does not demand the same accountability and transparency of itself .

Because of the nature of reporting required to achieve and maintain certification, I challenge FLO and ALL of the member organizations to publish, annually, a clear and detailed accounting of:

-) how the premium that gets paid varies based on changes in world prices
-) the premiums paid out to farmer co-ops by commodity, by country
-) the amount, by commodity, by country, of the certification and re-certification fees collected from farmer co-ops
-) the number of member co-ops, by commodity, by country
-) the fees collected from companies paying to license various Fair Trade logos
-) operating budgets, including salaries of all senior executives
-) the number of field personnel directly involved in certification along with detailed calendars and itineraries of time spent on certification activities including hard costs (e.g., salaries and travel expenses)

In other words, is Fair Trade as a business run well? As of the 2008-2009 Annual Report there were 746 producer organizations across all commodities in 59 countries with over 2700 companies making over 6000 licensed products worldwide.Is it cost-effective at delivering on its goals? Does the rhetoric of Fair Trade match the reality? Is Fair Trade effective? The total amount of Fair Trade cocoa produced in 2008 was 10,299 tonnes from a total harvest of over 3,000,000 - or about one-third of one percent.

If Fair Trade works so well, how come more cacao farmers aren't certified?

The simple answer is - they can't afford it.

updated by @Clay Gordon: 04/11/15 14:52:00
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
04/01/10 08:42:01
1,680 posts

Chocolate tours in several cities


Posted in: Travels & Adventures

Danielle:The whole idea of a discussion like this is that this information is public and shared. So I wouldappreciate your sharing it and not asking people to e-mail/message you and keep it private.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/01/10 18:42:55
1,680 posts

Chocolate tours in several cities


Posted in: Travels & Adventures

What media outlet are you on assignment for?
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
03/28/10 16:16:18
1,680 posts

looking to buy a hilliard little dipper or a revolution x3210


Posted in: Opinion

Discussions about buying and selling equipment belong in the Classifieds group. So, I am closing the discussion here. If there is still a need on the part of the original poster, the thread can be restarted in Classifieds.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
02/19/10 04:50:22
1,680 posts

ALOHA ~ turning cacao beans and/or nibs into liquid for chocolate making ... techniques/equipment etc ~ MAHALO


Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

DeeDeeThere are several groups on this site to look to for help.The first is Startup Central which is for people looking to start chocolate businesses.The second is Home Brew which is for people looking to make chocolate from beans.The third is Classifieds where members can offer equipment to sell to other members.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
02/10/10 09:15:35
1,680 posts

The most positive word in the English language?


Posted in: Opinion

Over on LinkedIn in the TED group is a discussion with over 400 comments. http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=7478086&gid=138801 I didn't read all of the comments but one word was conspicuously absent:CHOCOLATE gets my vote for being the most positive word in the English language.
updated by @Clay Gordon: 04/10/15 09:10:06
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
01/13/10 11:04:51
1,680 posts

Chocolate truffle making


Posted in: Classifieds F/S or Wanted

Sasha:Can you be more specific about the date? The Valentine's Day season is very busy for many. Also - about how many people are expected and how long will the event last? This will help people know if the are available to help you.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
01/13/10 11:11:47
1,680 posts



Lana:There is an official policy PROHIBITING people attending the show from removing samples from the show floor and there is NO selling from the show floor. However, you should be able to sample almost everything you want to try.There are security people at the exits and they randomly look at bags so if you do have something and they find it in your bag, they will take it from you and donate it to local food bank. The rules don't apply to exhibitors (or the press, thank goodness), so you may be able to arrange to meet outside the show floor and have them deliver samples that way.Also, FYI, bags with wheels on them are also officially prohibited.:: Clay
Clay Gordon
@Clay Gordon
01/02/10 21:28:14
1,680 posts

Cacao Pods


Posted in: Classifieds F/S or Wanted

Brad: The link is not correct or the site is no longer there. :: Clay
  28