A Fair Definition of Fair Trade, and application to the issue of GMF

Last week we discussed Economic Agreements, including Free Trade Agreements like CAFTA, in our Global Business class. I had students discuss the notion of 'Fair Trade' as comapred to 'Free Trade' and write a brief paper. Many students had interesting view points.
Ms. CB wrote a thoughtful piece that reminded me of my thinking when I was at that age. It is reproduced below. As usual, a few typos/errors crept in, but have to be ignored to appreciate the overarching point.
****
I would define fair trade as justice. Fair trade should be the only accepted form of trade, unfortunately; however, this is not the case. My understanding of fair trade is that all parties involved in trade will benefit. Clearly, benefit is a key component in trade; otherwise trade wouldn’t exist if something didn’t stand to be gained. So allow me to refine a bit more. I believe that in a fair trade situation no one party should gain anything at the expense of the other.
It may be obvious, or not, but it is a way of life that something can’t be gained unless something somewhere else is lost. Take for example free trade. In a model of free trade economically wealthier parties are concerned with losing their rather high standard of living based on the perceived standardizations that globalization would bring. On the other hand, the economically poorer parties welcome the perceived effect that would increase their standard of living. So I consider, set aside the complexities of free trade and globalization and look at the reality; people are concerned with losing wealth at the expense of someone else. To apply this thought, in an extreme context, is to say that I don’t want to give up my daily luxuries so that someone else can have a meal to eat.
I realize that perhaps this is a bold and extreme context, but I state it with assurance that it is not too far from the truth. A model of fair trade would assure that the inequalities that exist today would be minimized and eliminated to the extent that they can be. I take a step back and consider all of the wonderful extra/ luxury things that I have in my life, also realizing that many people in the world don’t even have access to what should be considered the basics of life. What greed? What injustice? And to know that there is resolution to many cases of poverty with justice. There is resolution to poverty and the plethora of accompanying issues: the answer is fair trade. I return to the theory that no one should gain anything else at the expense of another.
Think of it this way, what satisfaction is there in taking first place in a race if you are the only competitor? Apply this model to trade and financial well being. What satisfaction is there in a cup of coffee or an inexpensive item knowing that somewhere in production, somebody that harvested those coffee beans or someone that made that item can’t afford to get an education, access health care, or for that matter have a meal to eat. Personally I would prefer pay more for an item if I could be assured that everybody along the line had access to the basics of life.
In life we all make decisions, and each decision has consequences. This is something that we learn early on in life. A lesser considered fact is that the decisions that we make affect more than just us. This simple truth has cost many when the self-concerned and ego-centric make their decisions without a care or regard for the rest of humanity. It can be seen in unjust trade practices as well as many other instances.
An instance that I would like to contemplate relates to governments and the health and well being of humanity. Genetically Modified Foods (GMF) is an issue far more complex than I can completely process. My opinion of GMF is as follows, I have a hard time taking a position on the various debates regarding altering nature. My thought is that no, genetically modified is not natural, we are too smart for our own good, therefore it shouldn’t take place. Well, the truth is that it is too late. GMF products already exist. I further have trouble with trying to understand what to do with them now. Preferably, I would like to banish all GMF products and go au natural, but the reality is quite possibly it is too late for that too! Nature takes its course, and the potential for cross contamination between GMF and organic goods has taken root. It may be near impossible to know for sure what is natural and organic versus what has been genetically modified.
Here is the perfect example of the decision of a few impacting the lives of many. The U.S government, as an example, has been pressured by the U.S agricultural industry to compete in the global market. To have an advantage, a superior product was needed, and therefore created, with political and government support. As I understand it, the U.S now has the superior product, genetically modified, and has an advantage in production as well as in the market. Wrong from the beginning, but increasingly more negative as now the GMF products are pressuring their ways into other countries that don’t want them.
I find it extremely difficult to deal with decisions that are made for me either as an individual or as a member of society. And in such instances feel the need to resist passive compliance. As a result I find myself questioning and pressuring to an extent that shows as rebellion. Related to fair trade and GMF products I seek and expect honesty and accountability from leaders of society, which in some cases is a tall order.
Why is it that GMF products are also known as “generally recognized as safe” by the FDA? I find myself skeptical of anything that is generally recognized as safe. Why is it that foods with color agents and preservatives need to be ‘inspected’ by the Food and Drug Administration, but foods that are genetically modified don’t need to be inspected? In cases such as these I see a system that has a procedure of checks and balances that would pass 2 plus 2 as generally 4. The truth is that it either is or isn’t and no matter how it is masked doesn’t make it right.