Anecdotes only evidence for Fairtrade

Since Fairtrade refuses to give details on what happens to the money, its advocates have been reduced to producing anecdotes, saying that it has been successful in a few instances. There is a clear distinction between anecdote and case study in research, in statistics and in daily life. One can learn a great deal from case studies,. However, one cannot assume that because a case study shows that, for instance, one firm lost money, all others lost money then, lose money now, and will continue to lose money in the future. The data that went into the original model, and the conclusions drawn, are specific to that case study: one cannot say that they represent all the firms in one industry in one country, let alone 5000 Fairtrade suppliers in many industries, many markets and many countries.

The case studies do not in any sense constitute a random sample, and they have no statistical value –researchers choose the more successful Fairtrade cooperatives to study. This means that anecdotal evidence, even when it cites a perfectly good case study, is no more valid than the typical Fairtrade marketing plug, ‘“Fairtrade means more security, a bigger say and a better life for ourselves and our families” Ramond Kimaro, KNCU Tanzania.’