|
|
WTO-SPECIAL: Family Farming Vs. Agribusiness in Brazil
By Mario Osava
RIO DE JANEIRO, Dec 2 (IPS) - The farm subsidies that underwrite the
"dumping" of products on a market at below cost and that distort
international trade should be abolished, but not the support for family
farming that forms part of rural development and food security policies.
Representatives of associations of small farmers and civil society groups
that fight against subsidies and agricultural protectionism will take that
argument to the Dec. 13-18 sixth World Trade Organisation (WTO) ministerial
conference in Hong Kong.
An agreement that merely expands access to rich markets could exclusively
benefit agribusiness exporters and the large corporations that control
prices and markets, said Adriano Campolina, regional director of Action Aid,
an international non-governmental development agency.
And the results could be even worse if industrialised countries agree to
reduce the dumping of products at artificially low prices in exchange for
greater liberalisation of developing country markets. In Brazil, for
example, that would only favour large farming interests, which account for
15 percent of farmers, and not the remaining 85 percent, consisting of
family farms, he said.
Such an accord would broaden the external market for soybeans and other
agribusiness products, while leading to an increase in food imports, thus
intensifying the competition faced by family farmers and driving down prices
on the domestic market, he told IPS.
If concessions to the European Union (EU) and the United States are made in
the services sector, by lowering non-agricultural tariffs, "Brazilian
society as a whole will suffer" from an increase in unemployment in industry
and the domination of areas like sanitation, banks and other services by
foreign corporations, Campolina argued.
But there is no prospect of an agreement in Hong Kong given the
dissatisfactory offers set forth by the different parties, especially the EU's
proposal for phasing out agricultural subsidies, said the activist.
"The current format" of the negotiations constitutes "a setback with respect
to Doha" - where the present round of WTO talks was launched at the fourth
ministerial conference in 2001 - and makes any agreement in Hong Kong
unlikely, added Campolina.
The Brazilian government and the world's developing countries should not
accept any accord that "endangers national sovereignty to adopt rural
development policies," said Alberto Broch, vice president and director of
international relations in the National Confederation of Agriculture Workers
(CONTAG).
CONTAG, a federation of associations of rural labourers and small farmers,
presented a document to the Foreign Ministry urging that access by exporters
to rich markets not be obtained by sacrificing "the protection needed by
family farms," Broch commented to IPS.
Eliminating the protectionism that leads to dumping would benefit everyone
by boosting exports and domestic prices, he acknowledged. But, he added, it
must be kept in mind that there are different agricultural sectors in any
given country, which require different treatment, because small farmers are
"vulnerable and must sell their output fast since they lack the conditions
to store their products" while waiting for prices to rise.
The difference between small-scale farming and large-scale agribusiness was
highlighted at a congress held last week in Luziania, a city near Brasilia,
by the Federation of Family Agriculture Workers (FETRAF), a CONTAG
competitor.
Brazilian small farmers have more in common with their counterparts in
Europe than with big Brazilian agricultural producers, which is why the real
dispute is not between developed versus developing nations, but rather
between family farms and agribusiness within each country, the congress
participants stressed.
But according to Gilman Rodrigues, head of international negotiations at the
Brazilian Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock (CAN), which groups
together large producers, this is a mere "ideological" question introduced
into international negotiations.
An end to trade-distorting subsidies would benefit everyone in Brazil, he
maintained, pointing to the example of the dairy industry. If it were not
for the heavy subsidies paid out to European farmers - some 48 billion
dollars annually - Brazil would not import milk from Europe, and not only
would prices rise on the domestic market, but the potential for exports
would be bolstered as well, even for small producers, he said.
Much of the milk produced in Brazil comes from the family farming sector,
whose problem "is not its size, but the quality of the products," especially
since the obstacles of scale are often overcome by joining together in
cooperatives and other associations, maintained Rodrigues, a cattle rancher.
There is no danger that the "social subsidies" or support for small
producers in Brazil will be eliminated through the WTO negotiations, he
said. The financing provided by the National Programme for Strengthening
Family Agriculture (PRONAF), which offers soft loans to small farmers,
accounts for only three percent of the total value of the country's
agricultural production, which falls far short of the limit established by
international rules, he explained.
Neither PRONAF nor the competitiveness of Brazilian agricultural exports can
be wielded as arguments - as the United States has attempted to do - to
weaken the demands made by Brazil and the Group of 20 (G-20) developing
countries for reductions in the subsidies paid to farmers in the wealthy
industrialised nations.
Subsidies in the United States and the European Union are granted according
to "volume of production, which encourages producing more and increasing
land ownership by buying up land from small farmers," which is an entirely
different matter from the credit offered by PRONAF and other support for
family farming, he commented.
Rodrigues described the prospects of the Hong Kong meeting as "grey", but
added that since WTO conferences tend to bring surprises, he is hoping for a
good surprise, because the situation "could not get any worse."
Campolina believes that if any agreement is reached in the WTO - something
he considers improbable - it would only benefit rural development if
anti-dumping measures are accompanied by policies adopted in the developing
countries to "curb the abuse of corporate power," preventing transnational
corporations from controlling the market while fostering the full productive
capacity of family agriculture.
The activist noted that Brazil's stance, including its defence of family
farms, is a relatively new one, brought about by the insistent demands of
associations of small farmers and other non-governmental groups and
strengthened by its participation in the G-20, where India plays a pivotal
role as well. Indonesia, Pakistan and Kenya are other developing countries
that steadfastly support this position, he added.
(END/2005)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is RSS?
