Hello, I'm following Stacie's lead and posting my reflection on "Reluctant Entrepreneurs" and "Parable of Black Sheep" here as well!
I thought that the articles “Reluctant Entrepreneurs” and “The Parable of Black Sheep” shed some excellent insight into the life of impoverished communities and how entrepreneurship helps them break the cycle of poverty. Both articles focus on the power of the individual and how anyone can build a life for themselves, even if the economic odds aren’t in their favor.
Looking at the “Reluctant Entrepreneurs” article, I found the information described on page 211 to be particularly interesting. The author states that “The fact that even after paying very high interest rates, the poor will manage to make enough money to repay their loans must mean that they are earning even more money per rupee invested”. (211) I think it’s great that many entrepreneurs in poor areas are able to not only pay back their loans, but make double the money. Everything in their situation is made to go against them (high interest rates, lack of capital, etc.) but they are all resilient and knowledgeable enough to defy the system and build a better life for themselves. I feel like this must come from a better knowledge of the marketplace and their own environmental needs. They have a more realistic and practical understanding about potential business opportunities and niches in their immediate communities.
The “Parable of Black Sheep” article starts with very similar themes touched upon in the “Reluctant Entrepreneurs” article. There are themes of poverty and the need to defy those limitations and have the desire to go against the status quo. While the author states that some people play the victim card, those who accept the fact that they have the power to change things are the ones that are successful. The point that stuck out to me the most was the author’s description of his mother. He says that “she belonged to that generation of women who were not raised to know what they could do themselves” (44). I think that this lack of knowing your self worth and power you have as an individual is crucial to keeping the entrepreneurial spirit alive and being able to break the cycle of poverty. On a deeper level, I think this is especially true with women in regards to gender issues. Lots of women are conditioned into thinking that they don’t have the power within themselves to be independent.
Reflecting on the two articles, I think both reflect on the importance of the individual and how everyone has the power to change their own situations. Recognizing your self worth is perhaps the best thing we can equip ourselves with.
I found the Patient Capitalist/Blue Sweater reading to be very inspiring. I find myself intrigued by those who partake in social entrepreneurship, and bring an ethical perspective into the world of business. Reading about Jaqueline's struggles, successes, and motivations made for a great read.
First and foremost, I found the business model behind the Acumen Fund to be interesting. I initially found some good and bad in it. I really liked how they put a different spin on the word "investing". Usually an investor, especially a primary investor, is someone who calls the shots in the company and is seeking large monetary returns. Investors in this case, as Jacqueline describes, is someone who is "investing in change". I liked how this gives a sense of responsibility and ownership to those who help donate to the Acument Fund. One aspect that I didn't like however, was the fact that Jacqueline was surprised on how hard it was to get her first 20 investors when she wasn't able to give them a solid idea of where their money was going. I feel like order to be able to get people to invest with you, you need to establish a feeling of trust. You can't just ask someone to give you $100,000 and hope that they will just put their faith in you to do something with it.
One other point that I found to be inspiring was the success of Satyan. I feel like social entrepreneurship is always much more challenging than other areas of business, so to see the success of Satyan and the Acument fund and how they were able to slowly grow their businesses to something that could substantially change the lives of those in need.
This article of "Colonial Pasts and Fair Trade Futures" definitely presents a very different viewpoint on Fair Trade. The author seems to play devil's advocate a lot and show the different "what if"s of the affects of Fair Trade and other possible methods of improvement in the tea industry. Two things that stood out to me was the suggested reforms of the Plantations Labor Act made by plantation owners, and colonialism in India and how it affects the tea industry.
The first thing that struck me was how the planters are seeking to "update" the Plantations Labor Act (PLA) discussed on page 99. Currently, PLA instructs plantation owners to have to provide social welfare to their workers. This includes: houses, medical care, firewood, and food. Deeming these "social costs" and burdens, plantation owners no longer want to provide these for their workers. This fact sparks some conflicting feelings with me.
Upon first reading this fact regarding the PLA, I was pleasantly surprised that plantation owners were even providing social welfare to their plantation workers in the first place. It comforts me that these people aren't left to fend for themselves. That being said, I feel like I don't know enough about the monetary situation of the workers to develop a proper opinion on the matter. The article doesn't state how much these workers are getting paid. It doesn't blatantly stay that these people are living in total poverty, but do we assume this to be true? If these workers are actually adequately paid, then I think it is safe to say that they can pay for these "social costs" themselves. Looking at business in general, employees usually do get benefits from their companies however, food and housing is never provided. If these workers aren't adequately paid, then it is obviously horrible that these tea plantation and factor workers no longer want to provide for them.
The second thing that I found to be interesting was how the article brushed up on the fall of colonialism within India and its affects on the tea industry. I think it's a good analysis to look at the economic and political side of things; to factors that I think have a huge weight on the state of how businesses are able to operate. The British slowly turned their Darjeeling tea plantations over to elite Indians, who soon realized that they did not have enough capital to operate these plantations smoothly (pg. 103). When the British eventually left, not only was the government in India not strong, but the tea industry itself collapsed as well and suffered.
I think this collapse of the industry and the fact that the Indian government was left in a period of vulnerability paved the way for a questionable current state of the tea industry today. Luckily the PLA was able to be formed to help alleviate this situation, but I think this is important to keep in mind that similar to what we discussed in Blood Coltan, while not as extreme, may be something that is deeply rooted in the political and economical state of how things are in India. Rather than trying to tackle what the main issues in the tea industry is, maybe we have to examine the overall economical state of things to see if there is any overlap with what issues are arising within the tea industry.
The tea industry generally seems to be facing a lot of trouble in general right now. There is a lot of areas for improvement and revisions on policies, laws, regulations, etc. How we go about fixing all of these issues is something that we all have yet to see.
I found the points made in "Game-playing: rethinking power and empowerment" had some really interesting points. As readers, we took a look at how power affects both society and the individual person. I think that the article had some great insight as to what power is, how it can limit us, and how it can empower us.
The author touched base on the negative affects of power, "power over". The author states that "power over implicitly suggests a finite resource in which the more power one person has, the less the other has" (7). I think that this is a great point as to how people use these line of reasoning to diminish their sense of empowerment. If we use this line of thinking and assume the position of lesser power in our everyday lives, then our sense of individual empowerment will soon be gone.
A second point that I found to be really interesting was the section where the author talked about was the "power with", "power to", and "power within" concept. I think this highlights all the positive and successful aspects that power can have. As students of entrepreneurship and fair trade, I think we can apply this kind of mentality of empowerment to our everyday lives, classwork, and projects. Knowing that we can make a difference with the power we have is crucial to success and living out the principles that we learn in fair trade.
The passion of William Foote and Root Capital's mission is very inspiring to me. I find it refreshing to see someone from the financial world in Wall St. to break away from the negative reputation of the financial world and do some good in the world.
First and foremost, I found that it was interesting to see the other side of how/why fair trade isn't as popular as it is. Foote discusses that the challenge of businesses in developing areas include "businesses are stuck in the gap, the "missing middle", between micro finance and traditional banking" (Foote 94). Businesses that address the rural poor are often times too large to obtain small business loans but they aren't large enough to get the money from financial institutions.
I find that often times in our class, we we address lack of knowledge to be a main reason as to why fair trade isn't as big as it should be. While this is definitely the case at times, I think that we often forget about the economic and business side of things. This is can be a huge hinderance to the progress of the rate of which businesses can prosper, even if the most developed of areas. Addressing this through Root Capital's 3 step finance, advice, and catalyze strategy is something that I think is definitely a process that can be applied to most of these economic situations.
One aspect that I found to be particularly uplifting was the way that Root Capital was able to partner these small businesses with major corporations like Green Mountain Coffee, Starbucks, and Whole foods. I think that this is huge to think that these kinds of companies are willing to do some good with their businesses. Furthermore, I found it to be ironic that Starbucks is a company that has partnered with Root Capital considering the negative tone we speak about it with in class. I think that it's a huge step forward that there is a growing demand for fair trade products and businesses. Root Capital is definitely a company that is going to change things.
While reading "a brilliant idea", I thought it was extremely interesting to see how much fair trade has grown.
The first thing that I found to be particularly fascinating was the development of the Fairtrade mark and its impact on the expansion of fair trade. The foundation on which the Fairtrade mark has expanded the industry seems to rest on the fact that it provides a visual authenticity to those who seek to support fair trade; a guarantee that what you're buying does in fact come from an ethical source.
Perhaps the most attention grabbing aspect of the Fairtrade mark was the fact that the article used the term "brand development" as an incentive to companies who partner with Fairtrade programs. Shortly after mentioning this, it went on to talk about Nestle. I found it ironic that we had learned about the unethical business practices of Nestle earlier in the school year when we looked at "The dark side of Chocolate". I think that the fact that Nestle is now using a fair trade coffee mix could either be a brand development move, as mentioned above, or it could be that Nestle genuinely wants to be a supporter of fair trade. That being said, I think that this is an excellent turn around for international corporations like Nestle in regards to taking a step in the right direction.
The second thing that popped out at me was the fact that the article brought up the topic of climate change. It emphasized that fair trade is often on an international scale and requires a lot of transportation of goods. This apparently results in a significant carbon footprint.
To be honest, I was surprised by the fact that climate change was included within the article. I feel like this is an aspect of business that isn't really thought about. While I can definitely understand the importance of trying to minimize one's carbon footprint, I think that it is a necessary evil. If we tried to minimize our toll on the environment, then globalization and trade between international fair trade co-ops would no longer be in existence.
This article was definitely powerful with its focus on gender issues and the article's visual representations. Two things in particular grabbed my attention the most: the concept of resurrection and the fingerprints featured in the fair trade soap. They were two concepts that definitely represented the importance of fair trade and the empowerment of the worker.
In the article, it mentions a quote about the importance of resurrection in both a cultural aspect and a metaphorical aspect. Resurrection is something that we associate with death; for these women it is a present day experience. Taking these women out of the red light district and putting them into jobs where they are self sufficient is empowering to them and giving them a means to restart their lives. I feel like fair trade in this aspect give them a voice and a sense of individuality, which leads into my next focus point: fingerprints.
In the article, it states that "a fingerprint is a feature that God gives each person; we use it to emphasize the unique identity of those who make our products". I believe that implementing a sense of self is essential in establishing a strong sense of empowerment. I think that by allowing these women to literally make their mark in the products that they make is a strong foundation for women to learn that they have a voice.
I'm extremely overwhelmed by this documentary. I think what makes this so difficult to take in is the fact that there are so many issues at hand. While we could easily point the finger at the corporations in the case of "The Dark Side of Chocolate", I really don't think this is the case now. There are so many political issues that are going on in Congo and the surrounding area that I think that "Blood Coltan" can be related more to human rights violations than poor business practices. That being said, I think that because of the fact that "Blood Coltan" is set in a war zone, unjust business practices can easily be swept under the rug.
First and foremost, I think that one of the most disturbing topics that came up was rape. In both the "Blood Coltan" and "Demand a Fair Trade Cell Phone", they specifically say that rape is a weapon of war. Additionally, one of the women that they interviewed in "Blood Coltan" even goes on to say that they should invent a new word for the rapes that occur in the congo and in the mining areas. This concept in itself was particularly bothersome to me, and I think is a direct result of both the mining going on and the result of war and cultural conflicts.
Secondly, I found the pastor's speech to be compelling. He states that the natural resources found in the congo are a curse/impairment from God. He goes on to say that foreigners steal from the people of Congo and feed the corruption and violence that goes on. The pastor suggests that instead of fueling the conflict, western countries should do their part by stopping the violence in the Congo. This got me thinking, is it really the western countries duty to solve the political issues with Congo? We can all do our part in promoting a fair trade cell phone, but how can we stop the continuing cultural conflicts that so many have failed to do before?
I'm also a student in Professor Combellick's Fair Trade and Entrepreneurship class at Fordham University. Watching the documentary "The Dark Side of Chocolate" definitely was an eye opening experience to the corruption and injustice that takes place both in business and the world in general.
The first thing that stuck out to me, which has been mentioned above, was the prices at which farmers were compensated for their beans. The documentary states that farmers are paid 1 euro per kilo of beans, which translates into 40 chocolate bars. Considering that most people pay about that amount per chocolate bar, the retail mark-up is incredibly significant.
The second thing that I found to be particularly disturbing was the fact that the corporate heads of major chocolate companies refused to take responsibility for the exploitation of child labor in the chocolate industry. Only when the interviewers were persistent with their questioning did those in corporate finally admit that there as a problem. Even after this admission, these major chocolate companies tried to rid themselves of any guilt by saying that they were not directly involved with the production of coffee beans.
Looking at the price of buying coffee beans, I find it extremely disappointing that the farmers of these beans have no bargaining power. The chocolate corporations are in a huge position of power. They are put in such a disadvantage with their economic situation that they seem to be forced into a position to take however amount of money they can get. As a result, it would appear that because these farmers aren't adequately paid, the exploitation of child labor becomes more prevalent.
Shifting the focus over to the major corporations that produce the chocolate, I find it upsetting that these companies seem to do nothing to stop the corruption within the chocolate industry. While companies like Nestle, Mars, and others have all signed a protocol to stop the use of child labor in the production of chocolate, their actions have gone no further.
Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:00 am
Visitors
Board Statistics
