Phase 2 – Analysis: Root causes of human rights breaches

We engaged with over two hundred actors along the whole tea value chain from tea pluckers to CEOs of tea companies, from shop stewards to supermarkets. We also consulted external stakeholders and experts in agricultural economics, international supply chains, gender and investment to understand the root causes of the human rights principle-practice gap against a framework of international standards. The resulting report on Root Causes of the Human Rights Gap in Tea was published in November 2023. It identified ten key root causes:

The central root cause is the low price of tea, exacerbated by oversupply in the global market. Other factors are keeping the price low, including falling demand in traditional markets such as the UK and declining quality. Low prices paid for green leaf from fields and farms and made tea from factories places excessive pressure on producers’ ability to provide decent pay and working conditions for plantation workers and on farmers’ ability to earn a living income.

These pressures are increased by factors such as the power imbalances that exist at every level of the industry, be it between women and men at plantation or farm level, between farmers and the factories they sell their green leaf to, between producers and auction brokers or between brands and supermarkets.

A certain level of competition is healthy for any industry. But when companies or countries engage in excessive competition with each other and refuse to collaboration, the fragmented industry gets sucked into a downward spiral. For example, tea producing countries that are currently competing and undermining each other on price, could work together to agree a minimum price, minimum quality and maximum volume of tea produced in order to sustain a price that covers the cost of production.

The industry’s colonial roots have left a deep and lasting impression on the industry. This plays out strongly in management attitudes towards plantation workers in many countries. They are talked about, and sometimes treated, as less than human – or at least as less deserving of human rights due to their social status.

The colonial era is also imprinted on the tea industry’s trading systems – in particular the auction system. This has some advantages – such as helping to connect producers with global markets – and should ensure the best possible price for tea. But the power of a few large buyers skews auction prices and keeps them low, leaving producers unable to command prices that always cover the cost of production.

Governments can add to problems, or fail to resolve them by making weak laws and policies or failing to enforce good ones.

To address human rights or environmental issues, many companies rely on certification to standards such as Fairtrade or Rainforest Alliance. Over-reliance on certification by brands and retailers places additional financial burdens on producers and often misses vital human rights breaches such as sexual abuse. If plantations acheive certification despite these hidden breaches, they can inadvertantly help to mask them.

Lack of transparency about how prices are set, how the value of tea is shared through the value chain, which suppliers tea is sourced from, and the ownership structure of companies leaves civil society unable to gather vital facts in search of human rights.

The majority of the issues above have their deepest roots in the industry’s colonial origins, which are deeply imprinted on the systems, and practices of the industry as evidenced by the use of military terms for workers’ housing – “lines” – and where they get their harvest weighed – “muster” , the sounding of a siren at dawn to wake the entire community. It is also imprinted on the minds and attitudes of many plantation managers who continue to see themselves as absolute rulers over the workers and their families – even if some are benign rulers. This imprinting has led to a deeply ingrained resistance to change in the tea industry.

One of the key findings of the root cause analysis was that the tea industry – more so than many other industries – is highly resistant to change. The systems, structures, attitudes and hierarchies established during the industry’s birth still characterise much of today’s tea industry. This hampers the innovation and flexibility which would allow tea workers’ and farmers’ calls for a fairer deal to be heeded.

The tea sector’s colonial origins crop up in several of the root causes of human rights breaches in teh sector. We hypothesise that this is due to a phenomenon called “organisational imprinting” in which structures, systems and beliefs that existed at a highly sensitive stage of the organisation’s development remain deeply imprinted on it and on the people who inhabit it. The hierarchical plantation model, the auction system, manegerial attitudes towards workers all fall into this category. The twenty first century’s focus on human rights, ethical trade and environmental responsibilty are beginning to loosen the grip of the tea industry’s nineteenth century origins. THIRST exists to hasten this transition.

Read the full report