This denial of personal responsibility in the eyes of an individual participating in collective action can cause harm in international trade, but it can also allow international corporations to commit human rights violations because if the individual does not understand, recognize or take responsibility for the results of the collective action, they will never see the need for change, or fairness of trade
One exception to this is the recent change in the international coffee market. Some corporations have begun offering "Fair Trade" coffee that supposedly is grown and produced in an economic and human rights climate that is fair to the local citizens where the coffee is produced. These corporations argue that if consumers are educated on what the effects of their collective actions are on international trade, that they will make the ethical decision, and in this case, purchase the coffee that was produced through "Fair Trade" practices. Although the success of these enterprises is yet to be determined, it stands to reason that in this case consumers are at least asked to change their collective action and become part of a group that is trying to make international trade more ethical.
Another view of the individual's role in collective action comes if one applies Olson's principle to groups in the midst of collective action, it becomes obvious that individual contributions to the action go largely unnoticed. Collective action is a problem because it ultimately promotes free-riding. (Jones 2007) The herd mentality that comes with a large group of people moving toward one goal becomes dangerous when a group made up of free-riders and other potentially uninformed people is taking action to alter international trade policy. A more sinister possibility is a collective action in which a majority of individuals are participating in a cohesive way and moving toward a goal, or goals, which would benefit their specific collective while taking advantage of others.
