Did you say 100% pure cotton

Cotton is ill.

This is a concern to leaders of cotton producing countries although each has a different view regarding the seriousness of the issue. In 2004, “OMG” condemned the subsidies to the American cotton producers.
However, in 2005, American production beat all previous records, achieved largely by utilizing intensive mass-cultivation leaving the southern world producers in an alarming situation. Africa, the third largest producer behind the US and China has been the first victim. Competitors admit that higher production costs in America still allow producers in this country to overtake the world market due to very substantial government assistance.
African farmers are in a critical position and their livelihood is threatened. Their production costs are even higher than those of Brazil, which is developing its cotton production capacity at incredible speed. It is impossible for those African farmers to achieve satisfactory quality and levels of production. With no preliminary training or guarantees on the quality of the seeds, returns decreasing and the costs of production increasing, this has become a vicious circle leading to a growing dependency on multinationals. The world market is being dramatically affected with prices tumbling.
Supply is forever increasing while demand has run out of steam for this household commodity.

Did you say 100% pure cotton

Organic cotton offers sustainable alternatives to these problems. Agriculture without the use of chemical input of fertilizers or pesticides, results in cotton re-uniting with an ancient “know-how” and tradition.

Underground water pollution is reduced and farmers’ health is safeguarded. With a premium return on organic products, farmers need not become so indebted or rely on multinationals. Traded volumes have increased year on year and major textile companies now offer products made from organic cotton. However they deal with numerous suppliers and it is therefore difficult to verify that each and every step of the manufacturing process is rightfully endorsing the organic treatment. For example, to improve the productivity with a material like cotton, it is not uncommon to use gluing oils which need to be withdrawn before dyeing can begin.

Emulsifiers and chemicals i.e. “dispersal agents” used for this purpose are polluting the environment and will require greater need for waste management. In addition, heavy metal is used to achieve a crease-resistant material. The will to consider upstream processes may be there as is the choice of wanting an organic material, but a more thorough, audited approach should apply. Decisions makers and certified organizations should become more sensitive to the “coherent principle”, the application of organic principle throughout the manufacturing and distributing process.

Did you say 100% pure cotton

ONG cotton? The solution?

ONG cotton is produced globally with the larger producers being India, China and the USA (the latter produces 21% of world cotton). Introduced by blue-chips companies to make the plant more insect-resistant and more productive, OGM cotton has captured a large share of the market.

In the first year these plants better defend themselves against other plants and weeds, however this results in the requirement for increasing quantities of water and fertilizers. Consequently, soils more quickly become depleted and there is a large detrimental impact on insects and other wildlife. In addition, these crops cannot be grown from seeds produced by farmers, so farmers need to procure each year new batches of ONG seed from the large corporate producers and governments. Farmers also have to pay annual patent fees to the suppliers of ONG seeds.

It is estimated that 70% of ONG production is used to feed animals or making nutritious oils. To date there has been no scientific evidence that ONG crops are harmless in the short or long term.

Scientific evidence has shown however, that ONG crops even when grown with stringent control can expand geographically from wind or animal/bird transfer for example, to contaminate nearby “non-ONG” crops. It is proving difficult for the two systems to co-exist independently. Hence, the cultivation of modified cotton via genetic processes has negative consequences that governments, lobby groups and industrial corporations with vested interests refuse to acknowledge, namely, economic dependency, environmental destruction, risky management practices and contamination.

Did you say 100% pure cotton

Sign of the times Fair Trade is growing in popularity.

This reflects the fact that consumers are concerned with the way in which products are manufactured. We want to know more about work conditions and provenance. This has pushed wholesalers and manufacturers to enlarge their Fair Trade offer.

However Fair Trade itself may have its own counterfeits which could slow down collective enthusiasm.

Numerous enterprises will wave the ethical label, full of good intentions but are often more eager to benefit from this valuable image, not fully respecting their commitments throughout the production process.

Many examples of information manipulation exist. With time, increased transparency and auditing will make it more difficult for those operating in a non ethical manner to benefit from the movement and this will facilitate the block out of such supplies.

As an example, a well known fair trade brand has committed not to work with the ONG, but it has associated with Agro-Industrial Holding which promotes ONG.

Fair Trade cotton must be capable of being produced and then transformed without chemical intervention, economical dependency, or overproduction of “national resources”, or else become an ally of big blue chips companies which may take advantage of the situation, and deceiving those desiring real transparency.