Chapter 23 Buying And Owning A Vehicle: Fill & Download for Free

Firstly it is important to understand the difference between “guru” and “swami.”A guru is a teacher who can be an householder, as most of them were in the Vedic Age. They can be married, have a family and a profession and be earning an income and living as lavish a life-style as they want while teaching their students.A “swami” is a misnomer since it is simply a title (Lord/master)and not a vocation. The actual vocation is sannyasi (m) sannyāsini (f). The proper English equivalent term is renunciate, ascetic, or monastic or monk/nun.There absolutely are rules and regulations for sannyāsis throughout the Dharma literature but since there is no official regulatory body – most monks and nuns do as they please without oversight. So therefore it is extremely important for lay people to know the rules so that they can hold them accountable and prevent the types of excesses and skulduggery that we see defaming Hindu culture and detrimentally affecting thousands of their followers.Rāmānuja Ācārya anticipating the problems that would ensue from lack of regulation had one of his disciples Yadava Prakasha, compile an extensive manual on the subject taking all the rules, regulations and directions from all the Shastras — it is entitled Yati-dharma-samuccaya. After him another version was compiled by Viśveśvara Sarasvati in about 1600.There are hundreds of different Hindu monastic orders both Vedantic and Tantric. The most common ones are those of Sankaracharya who established 10 orders of monastics known as the Daśanāmi Sanyāsis. Their names usually carry an ananda (Sivananda, Brahmananda, Nithyananda, etc.) and their titles are Giri, Vana, Sarasvati, Puri, Bhārati, Parvata, Sagara, Tirtha, Asrama and Aranya.The Vaishnava monks of the Sri Sampradaya have the title of Jeer or Jiyar.A sannyāsi is a RENUNCIATE in other words they have given up all materialism and have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of self-realization and spiritual awakening. So I would suggest you all familiarise yourself with these rules and apply them in your judgement of the authenticity of the “god-man” in question.MONASTIC VOWS According to BodhāyanaNow then these are the vows: non-injury, telling the truth, honesty, chastity and renunciation (of all possessions). These are the secondary vows: suppression of anger, obedient service to the teacher, avoiding carelessness, cleanliness and purity of food. (B.Dh 2:18.2-3)PROPER CONDUCT OF AN ASCETIC (Derived from Manu Chapter 6)1. A sannyāsi must relinquish all property.2. A sannyāsi must give a promise of safety to all beings — whatever being comes to the sannyāsi for refuge he is under an obligation to give it.3. A sannyāsi must abstain from injuring creatures4. A sannyāsi must practice restraint of the senses, he must entirely abstain from any form of sensual enjoyment — any form of luxury is forbidden. This is socially and cuturally conditioned, but the general guideline is the sannyāsi must use whatever the lowest socio-economic group in the society in which he is based use for their bedding, accommodation, bathing etc. Traditionally in India a sannyāsi must always sleep on the ground and never use a bed because the majority of the common people sleep on the floor.5. A sannyāsi must politely reject all forms of enjoyments that may be offered.6. A sannyāsi must relinquish love and hatred. He must not bear affection towards favourable people nor malice towards unfavourable people.7. A sannyāsi must be equal-minded towards all sentient beings. He should not be partial to devotees nor impartial and hostile to any others.8. A sannyāsi must regularly practice the vow of noble silence (mauna). At regular times of periods the sannyāsi should observe the vow of silence and not speak any words whatsoever.9. A sannyāsi must patiently bear harsh words that are spoken against him without retaliating. He must never intentionally insult anybody. Against an angry man let him not in return show anger, let him bless when he is cursed, and let him never say anything that is devoid of truth.10. A sannyāsi must speak only the truth — he should not comment on anything that he does not personally know nor speak about things without knowing the established facts.11. A sannyāsi should always wander alone, without any companion — nowadays many sannyāsis live in aśrams or monasteries — this injunction is observed by avoiding the cultivation of friendships with the other monks.12. A sannyāsi must cultivate indifferent to everything, remain firm of purpose, meditating (and) concentrating his mind on Brahman.13. Should wear coarse worn-out garments — he should wear simple cotton garments, preferable not stitched, but if the weather conditions do not permit — like in Europe then he should wear the simplest possible garments.14. A sannyāsi should keep his heart pure — in other words he should cultivate loving kindness and compassion towards all being and repress any unwholesome and negative thinking.15. Let a sannyāsi avoid creating enemies for the sake of his (perishable) body — a sannyāsi should never create enmity for the sake of preserving his own body, eating or living arrangements. If his presence in a particular locality causes enmity then he should remove himself to another place.16. A sannyāsi must not earn a living by (explaining) unusual atmospheric occurrences and omens, nor by practicing astrology and palmistry, nor by giving advice and by the exposition (of the Sastras).17. A sannyāsi must always have his hair, nails, and beard trimmed. Traditionally the head and beard are shaved once a month on the full moon.18. A sannyāsi should carry an alms-bowl, a staff, and a water-pot.19. A sannyāsi must not use vessels made of metal. The prohibition against a sannyāsi using metal used to extend also to money and any other item. Nowadays in the west it would be very hard to observe this rule unless a sannyāsi were to have a credit card — but having a bank-account is forbidden and therefore money has to be used.20. A sannyāsi must disdain all (food) obtained in consequence of humble salutations. By eating little, and by standing and sitting in solitude.21. A sannyāsi must not undertake any projects with the intention of acquiring merit.He may engage in projects of social work and relief and engage in projects which benefit the poor, down-trodden, refugees, marginalised members of society etc. but it should be done with disinterest and never for acquiring merit or fame. The sannyāsi’s name should never be attached to welfare projects.22. A sannyāsi must dedicate himself to the practice of meditation. He is forbidden to engage in pujas and yajñas.23. A sannyāsi must live without fire or a house and without comfort or protection. (Apastamba)24. A sannyāsi should not acquire masses of disciples nor broadcast his knowledge. (Likhita)25. A sannyāsi must refrain from uttering words of greeting or blessing. (Kapila)The usual greeting and blessing of a sannyāsi is simply to raise his hand in abhaya mudra (the gesture of the gift of fearlessness) and utter the name of God such as “nārāyaṇa nārāyaṇa.”26. A sannyāsi should refrain from the use of betel. (Jamadagni)This would include the use of cigarettes, ganja and any other form of stimulationAccording to Medhatithi27. A sannyāsi should refrain from alchemy, judicial litigation, astrology, buying and selling and all crafts.28. A sannyāsi should not watch dances and shows, attend gambling events, look at young women, festive foods or menstruating women.29. A sannyāsi should never live in 6 types of places, royal courts, cities, economic centres, granaries[1], cattle farms and houses.30. A sannyāsi should never even think of these 6:— selfish-desire, hatred, arrogance, pride, hypocrisy and malice towards others.31. These are the 6 causes of an ascetic’s fall: travelling at night, travelling in vehicles, talking about women, greed, sleeping on beds and wearing white clothes.32. These are the 6 causes of a sannyāsi’s bondage: residence, lack of a begging-bowl, accumulation of possessions, gathering of disciples, sleeping during the day and idle conversation.33. A sannyāsi should be tongueless, neuter (kliba), lame, blind, deaf and stupid.When a sannyāsi, as he eats does not notice the difference between tasty and not tasty, whether hot or sweet is called “tongueless”.A sannyāsi unmoved to passion by a 16 year old young lady, a new born girl and an old woman is called “neuter”.A sannyāsi who walks only to beg food, to answer the calls of nature, and does not travel beyond 3 miles is “lame”.When a wandering ascetic does not look beyond 6 feet in front of him, unless there is some danger, is said to be “blind”.A sannyāsi who is indifferent to kind or unkind words, praise or abuse is said to be “deaf”.When a sannyāsi, in the presence of hostile people remains silent and acts as if he were asleep even though he has the full use of his faculties is said to be “stupid”.34. By accepting servants, houses, vehicles, cows, real estate, grain, money and gold a sannyāsi destroys 200 generations of his family. Sannyāsis who are intent on giving gifts, as well as accumulating clothes and other such goods will end up in a putrid hell because of their stupidity. (Kratu)35. If someone reverts from sannyasa he will be born as a beetle living in dung for 60,000 years. He [becomes an outcaste and] should be excluded from all religious activities.36. Acquiring disciples for profit and self-adulation is the sign of a false ascetic. (Vasistha)[1] Obviously living in or near granaries nowadays is not feasible.

Dreaming has been a vehicle of revelation to mankind for centuries, but a Dutch psychiatrist Frederik van Eeden (1860–1932) coined the term “lucid dreaming” to describe the state of being asleep as well as being self aware and ‘in control’ of your dreams.Certainly, dreaming is Biblical and there is no precisely and clearly expressed prohibition in the Scripture against lucid dreaming, Moreover, we notice that God uses dreams to accomplish the following:Restrain from evil - Genesis 20:3Reveal His will - Genesis 28:11–22Reveal future - Genesis 37:5–10Encourage - Judges 7:13–15Instruct - Matthew 1:20The closest example of lucid dreaming can be seen in the book of 1 Kings chapter three where King Solomon went to Gibeon and sacrificed 1,000 burnt offerings on the local altar. That very night God appeared to Solomon in a dream, and asked him to make a request. Because God was pleased with Solomon's reply and was glad that he had asked for wisdom, He also gave Solomon what he didn't ask for--riches and honor--so that no other king would be like Solomon as long as he lived.At Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon in a dream by night, and God said, Ask what I shall give you. And Solomon said, You have shown great and steadfast love to your servant David my father, because he walked before you in faithfulness, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart toward you. And you have kept for him this great and steadfast love and have given him a son to sit on his throne this day. And now, O LORD my God, you have made your servant king in place of David my father, although I am but a little child. I do not know how to go out or come in. And your servant is in the midst of your people whom you have chosen, a great people, too many to be numbered or counted for multitude. Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, that I may discern between good and evil, for who is able to govern this your great people? It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. And God said to him, Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches or the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, behold, I now do according to your word. Behold, I give you a wise and discerning mind, so that none like you has been before you and none like you shall arise after you. I give you also what you have not asked, both riches and honor, so that no other king shall compare with you, all your days. And if you will walk in my ways, keeping my statutes and my commandments, as your father David walked, then I will lengthen your days. (1 kings 3:5–14)However, a Christian commentator makes this remarkable postulation:While there is no explicit prohibition in the scripture against lucid dreaming, an inference can be drawn that the related practice of controlled dreaming is not beneficial:Some dreams are evidently a gift from God and should be received by faith after the exercise of appropriate discernment. If on the other hand, there is an attempt to control this as it's happening, the lucid dreamer could be engaged in a form of Simony:Acts 8 (NIV)18 When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money 19 and said, “Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” 20 Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! 21 You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. 22 Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. 23 For I see that you arefull of bitterness and captive to sin.” Simon wanted 'control' of the gift of the Holy Spirit - this attitude revealed an underlying lack of repentance and bondage to sin. Wanting to control a dream given by God would be an attempt to pervert the gift of God similar to the way of Balaam.One may argue that "Well I would only try to do this with my own dreams", but this would require you to despise receiving dreams from God as it's impossible to exercise the required discernment while you're asleep.Dream control has some commonalities with divination and witchcraft as they all seek to exert control over circumstances through so-called 'spiritual' practices. It is therefore a likely path towards demonisation....do not give the devil a foothold (Ephesians 4:27 NIV) The truth is that lucid dreaming may not be unbiblical, but it should be avoided if Christians become obsessed with the desire to realize they are dreaming and always want to control their dreams or if they start getting attracted to transcendental meditation, out-of-body experiences, and other New Age and occult practices. “Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones.” (Jude 1:8) See also Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 18:10-12.

Arguably everything we consume, i.e., eat, wear and use, our habitations and everything within them, offer undeniable illustrations of 'There is no ethical consumption in late capitalism'.Coffee, tea, tin, coltan offer easily digestible parables.The first two, most of us drink one or other or both.The latter two? Anyone with an electronic device of any kind, meaning practically everyone in developed countries and increasing numbers in developing countries, uses them.After all, electronic devices include cell phones (basic/smart), computers (desktop/laptop/tablet), iPod/MP3 music players, e-readers, video game systems, internet streaming devices, smart TVs, DVD/Blu-ray players, VCRs, home wireless Internet.As the faddish-sounding Internet of Things takes off, our dependence on coltan and tin mined largely in 'resource cursed' conflict zones in the Third World only increases.Niobium and tantalum extracted from coltan are used in electronic device capacitors.As for tin? Used in the ubiquitous solder in circuit boards.Both largely mined in the Third World (For e.g., China, Malaysia, Peru, Indonesia, Brazil for tin).A brief rendition of recent coffee history follows. Moral? Indulging in a cuppa joe could be among the furthest from ethical consumption we've yet managed to contrive.CoffeeFirst, some coffee numbers.A non-essential food item, coffee is the world's second leading trade commodity after petroleum.Coffee trees need elevation, which means hillsides and rough terrain become heavily planted so automation and mechanization are obviously difficult. Result? With few economies of scale, coffee is largely the purview of small-holders (1).Even with its attendant vagaries, small-holding is actually an improvement over the slave-holding plantations of the past.Globally, more people are involved in growing coffee than any other crop.Exclusively tropical, a crop that grows in very warm, humid climates, ~25 million farmers grow coffee, almost all of them in the 3rd world, with ~125 million earning their livelihood from the coffee business.OTOH, abundant coffee consumption is almost exclusively the purview of the 1st World (see figures below from 2, 3).~60 producer countries and ~ 20 key consumer countries.Originally discovered in Africa, the Arabica and Robusta coffee varieties are today grown the world over, inevitable result of colonial tentacles relentlessly seeking out apt ecological niches for commercial exploitation of coffee.Arabica? Higher altitudes in Latin America, Southeast Asian island nations, West Africa.Robusta? Lower altitudes in East and sub-Saharan Africa, and mainland Asian countries such as Vietnam.Considered to have a superior taste and thus netting higher prices on the world market, Arabica is more commonly found in upscale US coffee chains like Starbucks. Needing more stringent growing conditions, its production is more labor-intensive 'because the coffee cherries must be picked when they are perfectly ripe to maximize quality, which requires numerous passes through the same patch of coffee' (4).I gave up drinking coffee cold turkey in 2004. As self-respecting Tamils would be quick to point out, coffee is in my blood. Witness that Indian filter coffee has its own Wikipedia entry. An indelible part of my childhood, mom used to buy raw coffee beans. She had a roaster, a contraption rigged by a local neighborhood handyman. So did other 'mamis' (housewives) around us. She'd roast the beans about once a month. My nightly chore to grind the beans using a hand-held grinder, ready for the next morning's classic South Indian dabarah (saucer)-tumbler (cup)-style fresh filter coffee. We didn't grow the beans, harvest it or bring it to market but all the other parts of the process, especially the so-called value added roasting and grinding bits, were quite sustainable, dint of our own labor, the consumers. Still sitting in the family pantry, how swiftly the roaster and grinder have become relics. Should they have? Falling in the category of what-price-so-called progress, that's a question for the ages.The cold turkey bit. After coming to the US, I became addicted to the Starbucks routine. The grotesque amount of money I was spending on my coffee habit was already chafing when I came across the 2002 Oxfam report on coffee (5). Titled 'Mugged: Poverty in your coffee cup', I devoured the 60-page report over a week-end. That was it. What I learned made it impossible for me to blithely continue gulping my cuppa joe. Three weeks of blinding headaches later, I'm now coffee-free for 11 years and counting. Of course, giving up coffee drinking is no panacea to global inequity. After all, I still drink tea, which comes with its own particular embedded inequities. No ethical consumption in late capitalism indeed.How coffee became steeped in inequityUntil 1989, coffee was traded in a managed market regulated by the International Coffee Agreement (ICA), administered by the International Coffee Organization (ICO).Set up in London in 1963 under the auspices of the UN, the ICO's member governments represented 94% of world coffee production and >75% of world consumption.Producing and consuming nation governments managed supply-demand using export quotas for producing countries.This kept coffee price relatively stable and reasonably high, i.e., equitable for the growers.Producing countries agreed to not exceed their 'fair' share of coffee exports.If prices rose above a ceiling level, producers were allowed to exceed their quotas to meet unmet demand.The ICA worked well in setting prices, at least for the poorer producer countries (6, 7).The ICA broke down in 1989, mainly due to opposition from the USA, which walked away from it.'the (U.S.) State Department saw the ICA as primarily a geopolitical agreement designed to provide aid to the Third World countries' (8).The US was using the ICA as a tool for political influence (6, 9).In 1989, the US geo-political focus was shifting away from Brazil to Central America.The quota system also limited the extent to which coffee could be used for political influence.The air was thick with free-trade aroma. Along with pretty much everything else, coffee too became subsumed in the ensuing, inexorable tidal wave of free-market nostrum prevailing since the 1990s (8).No longer empowered to regulate coffee supply using quotas and price setting (called 'corsets'), today the ICA survives as a toothless tiger.Instead coffee prices are set by two large futures markets in London (for robusta coffee) and New York (for arabica coffee).Hand in glove with the ICA debacle, higher value processes of roasting, packaging, marketing and selling moved from developing to developed countries, specifically to Multinational corporation.Meanwhile, spread with evangelizing intensity through relentless advertising campaigns, the explosive worldwide growth of upscale coffee chains such as the US-based Starbucks made coffee a poster child of Leslie Sklair's culture-ideology of consumerism, namely, 'you are what you consume' (10).The pre-1989 process was somewhat more equitable to growers. A predictable, strict hierarchy of value grew out of its ashes.Now value rises up the coffee chain, producers harvesting minimal, processors maximal of the value. How?Supplier-managed inventory reduced working stock by outsourcing stock management.Roasters hold minimum quantity of stock predicated on projected roasted coffee sales and adjusted actual sales.Traders also hold and own a greater proportion of coffee stock.Thus, mobilizable coffee stocks, i.e., coffee immediately available on the market, have increased.As a result, price volatility has become even more inherently a part of the coffee trade since much more than ever of coffee stocks are now readily mobilizable with resultant stronger-than-ever impact on price (11).Coffee price volatility mirrors its supply-demand dynamics while futures market trading is essentially risk management, i.e., hedging, rather than actual physical trade of goods. Speculative activity thus hugely amplifies price volatility, driven in part by the fact that investment funds are 'extremely active in commodity markets' (12).Result? Generally hefty profits for the world's biggest coffee roasters. In 2002, those were Kraft Jacobs-Suchard, the food sector of the huge Philip Morris corporation; Nestlé with its Nescafé brand number one in instant coffee; Folger Coffee, a branch of Procter & Gamble; the Douwe Egberts group, the European coffee split-off of the erstwhile Sara Lee (now Hillshire Farms); Tchibo, the giant German roaster, all 1st world multinationals. After all, they buy the bulk of the coffee beans on the market.3rd World coffee farmers? Unsurprisingly, short end of the stick. Prices all too frequently below the cost of production. This, even though the entire global coffee trade depends principally and primarily on the arduous work of small-holder coffee farmers (8, 13, 14).Careful analyses reveal the most labor-intense parts of coffee production remain the exclusive purview of the 3rd world (1, 8, 15).High levels of dependence on coffee production and export also go hand in hand with persistent poverty and dependency (5, 8, 16; see figures below from 5 and 16).Late 1980s, early 1990s, the World Bank and IMF were also key in tilting balance in favor of consumers, and away from producers. Vietnam offers the clearest illustration of this policy.In 1989, Vietnam was nowhere on the world coffee production stage, producing ~1 million 60kg bags of coffee. By 2005, it was 2nd, only behind Brazil, making ~ 11 million 60kg bags.Vietnam's coffee story is a mix of serendipity and pity.Serendipity? Pushed into coffee growing through specific World Bank and IMF structural adjustment programs, the historic Brazilian freeze of 1994 spurred Vietnamese coffee growers as an unseasonal and severe cold snap in Brazil's coffee growing plantations put paid to a vast swath of their harvest that year.Pity? Vietnamese farmers expanded too much too soon into coffee growing. Meantime, the much more experienced Brazilian farmers rapidly regrouped and replanted in frost-resistant areas in record time, handily outcompeting their new Vietnamese competitors. Vicious cycle of World Bank/IMF indebtedness continues to fuel ongoing supply.Coffee's become the classic boom-and-bust crop.As world coffee prices rose due to the 1994 Brazilian coffee crop debacle, raw (pun intended), inexperienced Vietnamese coffee growers needed little convincing to plant a lot of coffee.Problem is a coffee tree takes 3 to 5 years to bear harvestable cherries, and even then a mature tree on average yields <1 pound of roasted coffee (4).Inevitably, over-planting leads to over-supply a few years down the road.In turn, this depresses world market coffee prices for several years.This in turn initially triggers classic Loss aversion on the part of the growers who continue to harvest and grow trees even as prices start falling.Yet as low prices linger over several seasons, inevitably farms foreclose and production declines. Eventually, demand exceeds supply.Fair trade coffee has grown in fits and starts but is still a minuscule part of total coffee sold in developed countries. Only ~5% for example in USA, the world's largest coffee consumer. Lack of consensus definition for 'sustainable coffee' and 'sustainable production of coffee' emphasizes the inherent structural weaknesses of such non-governmental, non-profit consumer movements (17).The Fair Trade certification business only became murkier when the US chapter split from the worldwide body in 2011 to pursue its own agenda (18). At best in coffee, the notion of fair trade, i.e., trade as a vehicle for social justice, sputters (19).Further, inequities in coffee trade drive practices that wreak environmental havocHigh yield coffee seed varieties are particularly damaging to the environment (14).Traditional coffee trees grow in semi-shade. This preserves forest, encourages mixed-cultivation of other trees, vegetables, etc. In other words, preserves biodiversity.High yield coffee trees are most productive in full sunlight.Predictable change? Shift from mixed cultivation to coffee mono-crops where as many coffee trees as possible are planted to maximize yields (20, 21, 22, 23) and attendant economic benefits to those higher up the coffee value chain, namely, the roasters, packagers, marketers and sellers of the finished product.High yield coffee crops can be planted more densely.Harvest-ready in fewer years.Problem is the local ecological costs outweigh distant economic benefits.Shorter life-span of high yield coffee plantations.Higher agrochemical (fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, nematocides) use.Higher year-round labor need and higher soil erosion.Loss of biodiversity.Predictable result? Increased deforestation rates reported in Brazil (24), Indonesia (25), Cameroon (26), Ghana (27) in tandem with high yield coffee growing.A recent news media article summarizes the deleterious impact of these destructive market force-driven trends in coffee production (28). Also see figures below from 28 and 22, respectively, summarizing these effects.A case study analyzing satellite imagery of forest cover in El Salvador shows that boom-and-bust coffee cycles also drive deforestation (29).Similar trend of rapid deforestation also seen in heavily coffee-planted southwest Sumatra (30).BibliographyTalbot, John M. "The coffee commodity chain in the world-economy: Arrighi’s systemic cycles and Braudel’s layers of analysis." Journal of World-Systems Research 17.1 (2011): 58-88. Page on jwsr.orgA coffee addict’s guide to the universeWhere the world’s biggest coffee drinkers liveAustin, Kelly F. "Coffee exports as ecological, social, and physical unequal exchange: A cross-national investigation of the java trade." International Journal of Comparative Sociology (2012): 0020715212455350. Page on researchgate.netGresser, Charis, and Sophia Tickell. Mugged: Poverty in your coffee cup. Oxfam, 2002. Page on oxfamamerica.orgRobert H Bates, Open-Economy Politics: The Political Economy of the World Coffee Trade (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1997), 159.Gregory Dicum and Nina Luttinger, The Coffee Book: Anatomy of and Industry, From Crop to the Last Drop (New York: The New Press, 1999), 91-92.Talbot, John M. Grounds for agreement: The political economy of the coffee commodity chain. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2004. p.89.Gregory Dicum and Nina Luttinger, The Coffee Book: Anatomy of and Industry, From Crop to the Last Drop (New York: The New Press, 1999), 121-122.Leslie, Sklair. "Globalization. Capitalism and its alternatives." (2002).Daviron, Benoit, and Stefano Ponte. The coffee paradox: Global markets, commodity trade and the elusive promise of development. Zed books, 2005.Borzoni, Matteo. "The Green Coffee Purchasing Policies of Italian Roasters." Page on isnie.orgPonte, Stefano. "The latte revolution'? Regulation, markets and consumption in the global coffee chain." World development 30.7 (2002): 1099-1122. Page on uky.eduWaridel, Laure. Coffee with pleasure: Just java and world trade. Black Rose Books Ltd., 2002.Bacon, Christopher M. Confronting the coffee crisis: fair trade, sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems in Mexico and Central America. MIT Press, 2008.http://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ourworldindata_poverty-world-map-poor-square-in-total-square.png Pavlovskaia, Evgenia. "Environmental Sustainability Criteria in the Coffee Sector–Lessons that Can be Learnt." Environment and Ecology Research 2.3 (2014): 138-148. Page on hrpub.orgLyon, Sarah. "The Hidden Labor of Fair Trade." Labor 12.1-2 (2015): 159-176. Page on researchgate.net; Fair Trade, Free Markets, and the Bitter Fight Behind Your Morning Cup of Coffee | VICE News)The Paradox of Fair Trade (SSIR)Gillison, Andrew N., et al. "Impact of cropping methods on biodiversity in coffee agroecosystems in Sumatra, Indonesia." Ecology and Society 9.2 (2004): 7. Page on cbmglobe.orgBlackman, Allen, Beatriz Ávalos-Sartorio, and Jeffrey Chow. "Shade coffee & tree cover loss: lessons from El Salvador." Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 49.7 (2007): 22-33Perfecto, Ivette, et al. "Shade coffee: a disappearing refuge for biodiversity." BioScience (1996): 598-608. http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Rice9/publication/247843679_Shade_Coffee_A_Disappearing_Refuge_for_Biodiversity/links/00b7d53710ebad6daf000000.pdfJaffee, Daniel. Brewing justice: Fair trade coffee, sustainability, and survival. Univ of California Press, 2014.Simon, Marcelo Fragomeni, and Fernando Luis Garagorry. "The expansion of agriculture in the Brazilian Amazon." Environmental Conservation 32.03 (2005): 203-212.Gaveau, David LA, et al. "Three decades of deforestation in southwest Sumatra: effects of coffee prices, law enforcement and rural poverty." Biological Conservation 142.3 (2009): 597-605. Page on researchgate.netGbetnkom, Daniel. "Deforestation in Cameroon: immediate causes and consequences." Environment and Development Economics 10.04 (2005): 557-572.Appiah, Mark, et al. "Dependence on forest resources and tropical deforestation in Ghana." Environment, Development and Sustainability 11.3 (2009): 471-487. Page on researchgate.netThe dark side of coffee: an unequal social and environmental exchangeBlackman, Allen, Beatriz Ávalos-Sartorio, and Jeffrey Chow. "Shade coffee & tree cover loss: lessons from El Salvador." Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 49.7 (2007): 22-33.Gaveau, David LA, et al. "Three decades of deforestation in southwest Sumatra: effects of coffee prices, law enforcement and rural poverty." Biological Conservation 142.3 (2009): 597-605. Page on researchgate.net