9. Where Do We Go From Here?
The saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, provides an especially important warning here: good intentions are not enough. While fair trade advocates must be lauded for their good hearts, good hearts are not enough when not tempered by clear thinking. God’s gift of intelligence to humankind demands that we not only try to help people, but that we seek to determine the best means of actually doing so. Fair trade merely joins a long history of efforts to raise well-being without raising productivity, from guilds to unions to price controls to socialism generally. As such, it is doomed to minimal net effectiveness globally.
It is for this reason that economists focus so much on raising productivity. Only with efficiency gains can the economy do more for all people with the scarce resources which are available. While small gains are theoretically possible with fair trade products, far larger efficiency gains are to be had elsewhere, particularly from policies to improve the market environment, e.g. free trade, lower taxes and regulation, sound money, clear property rights, etc. The danger of fair trade is thus its intellectual seductiveness. In a world of people unjustly hostile to or suspicious of market economies and their benefits, fair trade appears to offer the yet another “third way” which “avoids the ravages” of capitalism. But history indicates there is no third way.
Unfortunately efforts to seek the mythical third way are hurtful, not painless delusions. The belief in an alternative system makes the only system with a proven track record appear more suspect. “Capitalism cannot be all that good: See! Here is a more humane alternative.” That was the path of such countries as India and China. But during the period in which people sought the alternative, the failures of those alternatives to provide real gains meant many remained in poverty longer. This is precisely why hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians had to wait two generations before escaping from poverty: wary of market systems and seduced into believing there was an alternative, they took decades before adopting the free market approach which has worked so fast. While some fair trade products offer limited benefits or opportunities for gains, Christians must be wary of concluding that they represent a truly effective (or divinely preferred) general policy for assisting those in need.
The old adage, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is, surely applies here. But we cannot let wishful thinking raise false hopes of programs that ultimately delay the progress in lifting people out of poverty. It is not service to the truth. It is not service to those in need.
While some readers may find the following critical of an area in which much hope and effort has been invested—alas, more hope than the simple fair trade project can justify—it is not intended to be critical of fair trade or praising of markets. As a Christian economist, it is my vocation to integrate the lessons we have learned from the discipline of economics with the normative principles pointed out by our faith that are connected to the economy and economic activity. This must be done truthfully so as to help the people of God reflect upon how to best apply those principles in the world. Its purpose is neither criticism nor praise, but truth. My call is to discover what types of economic arrangements help all those in society, especially those in most need. This can only be done by accurately assessing what works and what doesn’t. Blindly pursuing efforts which sound appealing but which have little effectiveness may feel good, but love for those in need and fidelity to God’s command to help demands we honestly recognize inefficacy so we may progress to policies which work. To delay this realization may indulge our desire to help, but it only prolongs the poverty experienced by our brothers and sisters throughout the world.
Copyright © 2008 by John Larrivee. This article may not be reproduced in any form without the author’s express written permission. Posted on A&M Blog with Author’s permission. An earlier version of this essay first appeared at the Acton Institute’s blog on November 16, 2005.
