This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/6086330.stm

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Starbucks in Ethiopia coffee row Starbucks in Ethiopia coffee row
(40 minutes later)
Coffee chain Starbucks has been accused by development charity Oxfam of denying Ethiopian farmers potential annual earnings of up to £47m. US coffee chain Starbucks is denying Ethiopia earnings of up to £47m ($88m) a year, the charity Oxfam has claimed.
Oxfam claims the US firm used its power to block a trademark application for two of the country's coffee beans. The charity says the firm asked the National Coffee Association (NCA) to block Ethiopia's bid to trademark two types of coffee bean in the US.
This would have enabled Ethiopia to control the use of the beans in the market, and its farmers to receive more of the retail price, it says. The move would have given farmers a greater share of profits, it claims.
Starbucks denies the claims, and says it has programmes to help farmers. But Starbucks denies approaching the NCA, and the association says Ethiopia is being badly advised and there is no economic case to back Oxfam's views.
The Ethiopian government last year filed applications to trademark coffee bean names Sidamo and Harar in the US courts, Oxfam says. 'Backwards step'
The charity claims that Starbucks flagged up the application to the National Coffee Association (NCA), which then filed an opposition to the US Patent and Trademark Office. Last year, the Ethiopian government filed applications to trademark the coffee bean names Sidamo and Harar in US courts.
Oxfam's Phil Bloomer said the charity had worked with Starbucks in the past and appealed to the firm to "set an example". This particular scheme is going to hurt the Ethiopian coffee farmers economically Robert NelsonNCA
"Their behaviour on this occasion is a huge backwards step, and raises serious questions about the depth of their commitment to the welfare of their suppliers," he said. The charity claims that Starbucks flagged up the application to the NCA - of which the firm is a leading member.
The NCA then filed its opposition at the US Patent and Trademark Office.
Oxfam's Phil Bloomer said the charity had worked with Starbucks in the past and appealed to the firm to "act responsibly".
"Their behaviour on this occasion is a huge backwards step and raises serious questions about the depth of their commitment to the welfare of their suppliers," he said.
'Reduce demand'
But Starbucks senior vice president of coffee procurement, Dub Hay, denied approaching the NCA to oppose the Ethiopian move.But Starbucks senior vice president of coffee procurement, Dub Hay, denied approaching the NCA to oppose the Ethiopian move.
"We did not get the NCA involved - in fact it was the other way around, they contacted us.""We did not get the NCA involved - in fact it was the other way around, they contacted us."
The company also says it pays above-average prices for its beans. Robert Nelson, head of the NCA, backed Mr Hay's claim, adding that his organisation opposed the Ethiopian move for economic reasons.
"For the US industry to exist, we must have an economically stable coffee industry in the producing world," he said.
"This particular scheme is going to hurt the Ethiopian coffee farmers economically."
He claimed that the Ethiopian government was being advised to price itself out of the market and that the trademark move would reduce demand for its coffee.
Oxfam said the NCA and Starbucks should not dictate to Ethiopia how best to sell its products.