Entries Tagged as 'Jewelry Manufacturing'

Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Committee Procedures:


Introduction:

This post was circulated internally among the participants of the Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Group before the onset of our discussions. My apologies for posting it out of sequence.

A second document, below this post, states the goals in a simple format. This came out of our dialogues.

What is not mentioned at this early point is the following of ISEAL guidelines. Amanda raised point later and it was adopted by our group.. – Marc

The work of the Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Working Group* derives out of an industry wide recognition that there is a growing market interested in a supporting a greater level of corporate socially responsibility through their purchases.

Many in the jewelry sector are already branding themselves as “eco-friendly,” or “fair trade” with various degrees of transparency. The work of this committee is to legitimize those efforts which are credible through a third party certification process.

The ultimate goal is to create a certification agency that produces a product far beyond the “fair trade” label. Studies have shown http://www.fairjewelry.org/archives/97 that consumers wish to make their own assessment as to whether something is “fair,” or “green” or “ethical” themselves. The certification agency will draw on principles in the areas of environmental protection, human rights, sustainable development, and fair trade.

The committee will do the ground work which will ultimately enable customers to click on a logo on a web page which will take them to a specific website, which will allow them to see the actual study, including comments, photos and perhaps video of the factory. In this regard, the model will be based less on just a logo than an actual report. Butter Business Bureau is a good example of this:
http://www.bbbsw.org/BBBWeb/Forms/

Objectives

The Manufacturing Committee has three objectives:

1. To develop fair trade based principals which lead to specific objective criteria for environmental, corporate social responsibility, and working condition for jewelry manufacturing facilities in the developing world.

2. To create a working group that will visit factories and objectively evaluate the fair trade standards.

3. To publish these standards online, on a website which will allow those who work with the factory to link directly to that site, offering third party verification to legitimize claims of “fair trade” or “ethical” practices.

Leadership of Committee and Participation

We recognize that there will be many different levels of participation. Casting a large net creates greater legitimacy for our work. We are going to do our best in invite a wide diversity of participants.

The initiators of this document are Amanda Stark, the Rapaport Group Fair Trade Development Liaison, Marc Choyt, President of Reflective Images Inc, and Demos Takoulas, CEO of Vukani-Ubuntu. Anyone who wishes to join this steering committee who is currently part of the Madison Dialogue is welcome. The steering committee is limited to seven people.

The purpose of this steering committee is to draft documents, set deadlines, call consensus and to ultimately develop funding and brand identity for what we hope will become a vibrant, non-profit organization created to validate the fairly manufactured jewelry. The steering committee will also initiate proposals for discussion, assure that all opinions are respectfully heard, set deadlines and call consensus.

We seek to have a diversified group which would include representatives from various sectors. Sectors which we hope to see represented include but are not limited to: manufacturing, civil society, and environmental protection.

Forum for Discussion

The initial discussion will take publicly on the blog, www.fairjewelry.org. This is a temporary home for this discussion. Ultimately we will create our own website. The purpose of putting it on this blog is to legitimize the process by making it completely transparent. Those who post comments will be required to first create a profile. Anonymous posts will not be accepted.

Proposed Initial Steps

These proposed steps are only a broad outline that we will put forth initially. We realize that over time, issues will come up that will need to be covered.

1. We will call for participants and ask them to create a profile which will be published online.

2. We will begin our process of developing principals based on fair trade practices and in reference to parallel efforts.

3. We will begin to develop standards, specifically a list that can allow for test studies.

4. We will seek funding for initial case studies of factories.

5. We will publish those studies and the work of the manufacturing committee on its own website.

Proposed Decision Making Model for the Manufacturing Committee

We will strive to reach consensus at every step of the way. However, recognizing that consensus may not always be possible, we propose that a two thirds vote of the manufacturing committee will be sufficient for us to move forward with a decision.

The committee decisions will be posted on the blog along side of the minority decent, if the minority wish to write one.

POSTED 5/19/08

HERE IS ANOTHER WAY OF VIEWING THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE

There are factories and workshops that currently already work their hardest to create jewelry produced with environmental responsibility and fair labor practices. Some members of our group run such factories.

I see our objective as not to transform the entire jewelry sector’s manufacturing base or solve its greater socio-economic problems, but to support exemplary small scale and large scale studios and factories in the international jewelry manufacturing sector.

Whether a factory choses to work with our principals and standards will always be voluntary. Support means that we offer suggestions to run a workplace that is safer and has less environmental impact. We pool our knowledge and help each other, here and abroad, to be the best we can.

Support also means that we drive business to them by “certifying” them. Ethical initiatives in the jewelry sector only work if they are market supported. “Fair made”, (if we choose that term), manufacturing can be part of their product’s unique selling point. The market demands are there — they just lack the proper infrastructure and certification that distinguishes legitimate efforts from those who are fair washing and green washing.

Over time, the prosperity of these exemplary factories will make other factory owners want to clean up their act or obtain our certification.

Our website will post studies of each factory and have detailed, transparent information so that the customer can learn about the issues and make their own evaluation. In my view, this is more potent than a label from a fair trade organization that says, “fair trade certified” like you see on coffee.

I recognize that there are myriads of issues that need to be considered as we move forward. Yet I also believe our objective is simply to create a set or principals and standards where this can take place.

This humble goal is obtainable with the good will and focused efforts of our group.

Thank you for your participation.

Cheers,
Marc

Catalina Cock Duque, Chair Person of ARM On Setting Standards


The Manufacturing Group of the Madison Dialogue has determined principals and now begins the process of setting standards.

Catalina writes, Photobucket title=

“We do not think the Madison Dialogue list should be developing standards. It should continue to do what it was set up to do, that is to serve as a forum for discussion, including feedback on standards that are currently being developed by standard setting organizations such as ARM for small scale mining and IRMA for large scale mining.”

She points out the necessity that this next process take place within a larger international community where all stakeholders are represented.

This post was on the Madison Dialogue list serve. Special thanks to Catalina for permission to reprint her post.

****************************************************

The MD list serve, meetings and working groups represent a great opportunity for discussion and debate on ethical sourcing, trading and manufacturing of minerals. The Association for Responsible Mining, ARM, joined the MD with an understanding that this was “a cross-sector initiative established to promote communication and collaboration among companies, civil society groups and others seeking to encourage –

Best practices,
Sustainable economic development,
- and verified sources of responsible gold, diamonds and other minerals”

Over the past weeks we have been concerned with the growing expectation on some of the working groups that somehow the Madison Dialogue is an appropriate space to develop standards and accompanying verification systems.

We do not think the Madison Dialogue list should be developing standards. It should continue to do what it was set up to do, that is to serve as a forum for discussion, including feedback on standards that are currently being developed by standard setting organizations such as ARM for small scale mining and IRMA for large scale mining.

The MD is not an organization; we believe it does not have the capacity or the governance structure to lead a legitimate standard setting process. We are of the view that organizations and institutions need to take responsibility for standards setting to ensure legitimacy and accountability.

We would like to invite you read the ISEAL Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards, which clearly describes procedures to ensure that standard-setting practices are credible and effective.

In very general terms, compliance with the code means:

The standard will not create unnecessary barriers to trade;
The standard-setting process is transparent and open to interested stakeholders;
The standard has clear objectives, and criteria that meet those objectives;
There is meaningful participation by those stakeholders that are directly affected by the implementation of the standard; and
There is a balance of input in the discussion and in the decision-making on the standard.

In accordance with this code, we believe the questions that one must ask in determining the appropriateness of a body to set standards and develop verification systems includes the following:

What are the procedures?
What is the decision making process?
Who will lead the consultation processes?
Who will respond to complains or questions?
Are the interested parties represented?
Are the miners represented?
How will we ensure the participation of interested groups who do not have access to Internet or who do not speak English?
Who will test the standards on the ground?
Who will implement them?

We would recommend that the Madison Dialogue might be a useful place to have this discussion and perhaps reach some agreements as to the appropriate methods and approaches to standard setting and implementation. We welcome this space for consultation, sharing information and discussion and will continue to participate under such philosophy.

What Makes A Sweat Shop?

Senior diamond editor for the JCK Magazine, Robert Bates, writes an interesting post about diamond cutting in China after his recent visit there. I have been grateful to Rob’s support of my work and for keeping in touch with me over the past few months.

Here’s Rob’s post:

http://www.jckonline.com/blog/870000287/post/370026837.html

Current Working Draft Of The Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Principles

This document is a result of a dialog between members of the Madison Dialogue manufacturing group. This current document is the revised version of a previous principle document. You can read the actual dialogs

Principles represent the broad overarching ethos.

Our next step will be to create standards. A standards document will allow us

[Read more →]

Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Committee: Considering Child Labor In International Manufacturing

The Manufacturing Committee is developing fair trade standards for international manufacturing.

The first part of this process is the development of broad, overarching principles. From that, specific standards can be developed.

In this dialogue, minimally edited, participants discuss the issue of child labor principles based on

[Read more →]

Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Committee: Contamination Issues In International Manufacturing

The Manufacturing Committee is developing fair trade standards for international manufacturing.

The first part of this process is the development of broad, overarching principals. From that, specific standards can be developed.

In this dialog, minimally edited, participants discuss the issue of contaminations issues based on

[Read more →]

Reflective Images Says No! - To All Dirty Silver

Company’s Fair Trade International Manufacturing Will Now Be Eco-Friendly

Santa Fe, NM: May 29, 2008: Starting in July, 2008, all jewelry manufactured by Reflective Images will be done with 100% recycled precious metal.

The most toxic element of our supply chain has been internationally mined silver,” said Marc Choyt, President of Reflective Images. “We facilitated an agreement between

[Read more →]

Fair Trade Manufacturing Principals For The Jewelry Sector

Introduction:

Here we have the standards that are being discussed by the International Manufacturing Group that came out of the Madison Dialogues. This is currently being discussed on a list serve. If anyone reading this post wishes to participate in this discussion, please contact us.

[Read more →]

Madison Dialogue Manufacturing Group Begins Discussions

Introduction:

The manufacturing group is an outcome of the Madison Dialogue. The purpose of the group is to develop standards for ethical international manufacturing. The group is diverse and international, representing a wide spectrum of experiences.

It is spearheaded at this point by Amanda Stark, Fair Trade Development of the Rapaport Group and Marc Choyt of Reflective Image, author of this blog.

[Read more →]

The Term “Ethical” Jewelry Is Divisive by Steve Gerencser

Introduction:

Guest blogger and bench jeweler, Steve Gerencser returns to fairjewelry.org to post this insightful comment: The phrase “ethical jewelry” is divisive because, “somehow the people not following the newest trend are somehow unethical.” ~Marc

The use of the word, “ethical”, put forth in the Madison Dialogue to describe what is being attempted in the jewelry sector, is divisive. The implication for those of us who are not producing “ethical” jewelry is that somehow the people not following the newest trend are somehow unethical.

Many of us are working very hard to do the right thing to the best of our ability. By using the ethical tag it becomes nearly impossible to incorporate it in to our daily use at the showroom level because of the implied negative

[Read more →]