Showing posts with label chocolate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chocolate. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 28, 2021

No transition to sustainable food systems possible without a living income for farmers


Pic courtesy: Indian Express

In the run-up to the UN Food Systems Summit aimed at achieving more sustainable, equitable and resilient food systems, the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, said: “A well-functioning food system can help prevent conflict, protect the environment and provide health and livelihoods for all.”  

“In food, there is hope.” 

Laudable words, indeed. As the world faces a growing risk of food shortages due to climate change, with several studies warning of the dismal scenario ahead when production of staple crops is expected to contract by almost a third by 2050 in case temperature rise continues unabated, transforming the global food systems to meet the future needs of the people, so as to attain health and nutritional security for one and all, is certainly a timely initiative. More so at a time when increasing desertification, loss of biodiversity, air and water pollution and the devastation intensive farming practices have wrought to soil health and environment had set the alarm bells ringing for long. 

Coming at a time when growing corporate control over agriculture has pushed small farmers to the margins, with monocultures leading to destruction of natural resources, only time will tell whether partnerships between different stake-holders and the commitments from national governments really help to radically transform the existing highly unsustainable food systems. This becomes more difficult to achieve given that high levels of income insecurity is either leading indebted farmers to take the fatal route or abandon agriculture to move to the cities, and those who are left on the farm seem to be somehow surviving against all odds. 

While there is no denying that food provides hope, as the UN Chief said, but unfortunately the people who produce food do not see any hope. 

“Every genuine farmer is now struck unfairly on a treadmill with accumulating debts to meet unless he goes bankrupt, commits suicide or finds another source of income,” a British farmer had summed up the plight of the agrarian community. A banner put up recently by dairy farmers in Northern Ireland loudly announcing -- We can’t afford to feed you anymore – is a telling sign of the crisis that dairy farming are faced with. With prices remaining more or less static for eight years in a row, dairy farmers are unable to recover the cost of production. 

For the same reason, 93 per cent of the dairy farms have closed down since the 1970s in America. Not only dairy farmers, small farmers have also quit agriculture in large numbers. With median incomes in the negative for almost a decade now, and saddled with a huge bankruptcy, farmers have been forced out, hastening the decline of rural America. Mary Rieckmanns is one such farmer, whose family has been raising cows in Wisconsin for generations. “I sometimes feel they are trying to wipe us off the map,” she told the TIME magazine. 

In early March this year, French farmers had hung suicide dolls on trees outside Parliament drawing attention to the economic hardship they were faced with. In neighbouring Germany, farmers too have been protesting, expressing their anger by driving tractors to the cities. In most other European countries, farmers have time and again demonstrated against the sliding farm gate prices, which have rendered farming unprofitable. “What is point to being in debt all the time, and toiling for no reason? We are sacrificed, so the consumer is always happy with low prices,” Dominique Metenier, a French farmer had lamented. 

Concentration of power in the hands of a few multinational companies has resulted in unfair trade practices hitting livelihoods of millions of small farmers and workers in Latin American and African countries. Take the case of chocolate, which is a dominant player in the $210 billion global confectionary industry. While the industry rakes in huge profits, hundreds of thousands of cocoa producers in Africa live on meagre incomes. With child labour rampant in the cocoa plantations, a study has shown that the average income for a large percentage of small cocoa farmers is less than the retail price of a chocolate bar. 

In case of banana, the most eaten fruit in Europe and North America, for growers in Ecuador, Colombia, Costa Rica and Dominican Republic, from where the fruit is largely imported, their earning is anything between 5 to 9 per cent of the end consumer price. The situation is no better for coffee growers, where a majority of the growers live on less than the extreme international poverty line of $1.9 per day. 

To draw attention to the deplorable economic conditions that growers were living with, the World Coffee Growers Forum had roped in the well-known economist Jeffrey Sachs who has proposed a global fund of $ 10 billion a year to help pull out growers from the clutches of extreme poverty. 

In India, which has the largest population engaged in agriculture globally, for almost ten months now tens of thousands of farmers have been protesting at the borders of New Delhi. While the protesting farmers are calling for a repeal of the three farm laws that the government had brought in September last year, which facilitate the entry of free markets in agriculture, farmers are also demanding a law that provides a guaranteed price. Meanwhile, the latest report of the Situational Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households 2018-19, an extensive and elaborate nation-wide survey, shows that the farm incomes have been steadily on a decline. Increasingly, non-farm income occupies a bigger share of the average farm incomes, with earning from crop cultivation alone dropping to a paltry Rs 27 (US$ 0.37) a day. 

What emerges clear is that farming is no longer a viable livelihood. While farmers grow food for the world, they themselves live in hunger. To expect the same beleaguered global farming community, already reeling under indebtedness, suicides and exploited ruthlessly by the markets, to be the strong pillar buttressing the proposed transition towards a sustainable food system will remain a dream. The entire global focus therefore must be to first come up with structural transformation required to provide farmers with an assured and guaranteed income. 

Or else, we’ll continue hoping against hope. #

Source: No sustainable world without a living income for farmers. Sept 22, 2021. Fairfood.nl https://fairfood.nl/en/resources/un-food-systems-summit-no-sustainable-world-without-a-living-income-for-farmers/?fbclid=IwAR0G-iOvRueKOUCx8Gc_vbXDTG1tohRvXsHhci3EFC_rEkrLZkBTLlSbsmE

READ MORE - No transition to sustainable food systems possible without a living income for farmers

Tuesday, January 5, 2021

India needs a rethink on 'free market'

Pic courtesy: Fairtrade Foundation 

All of us like chocolates. But the next time you bite into a chocolate bar, just be reminded. The average income a cocoa farmer earns a day is probably less than the price of a medium-sized chocolate bar that is in your hands. About Rs 100 ($1.30) a day is what a cocoa farmer in Western Africa earns.   

At a time when the $ 210-billion global confectionary industry has been growing leaps and bounds, with chocolate taking the highest market share, the biennial Cocoa Barometer 2020 report illustrates how the prevailing market-driven business model leading to excessive profits for chocolate industry is based on achieving higher productivity of cocoa that in turn has kept nearly 5 to 6 million cocoa farmers perpetually in poverty. Discarding the dependence on markets, if only cocoa farmers had received a minimum support price (MSP) over the decades, it would have helped millions of cocoa farmers ascend the ladder out of poverty, hunger and malnutrition. 

In Britain, after the Milk Marketing Board, which regulated milk prices and marketing, was removed in 1993, the number of dairy farms has come down drastically in the past 25 years -- from 40,000 in 1995 to an estimated 8,310 in 2020. Although 99.9 per cent milk producer had wanted price regulations to continue but market economists thought otherwise. Between 1994 and 2010, milk prices had fallen by 28 per cent and there came a time (in 2015) when prices slumped further by 40 per cent. Farmers were simply unable to even recover the cost of production. The plight and agony emanating from the destruction of farm livelihoods in the process was brushed under the carpet. As a British farmers said: “Every genuine farmer is now stuck unfairly on a treadmill with accumulating debts to meet unless he goes bankrupt, commits suicide or finds another source of income.”    

What happened in Britain or for that matter in Europe was no exception. In America, at least 50 per cent dairy farms have disappeared in the past two decades. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the number of licensed dairy farms had come down from 70,000 in 2003 to 34,000 in 2019.  While small farmers bowed out, mega-dairies have instead taken over. As a result, despite the closure of small dairy farms, milk production has further swelled. This is certainly not what India needs. In a country where roughly 50 per cent of the population remains engaged in agriculture, and which tops the global milk production chart, what India needs is a production system by the masses, where small farmers earn a decent livelihood from an assured price delivery mechanism. 

As expected, ‘free market’ in dairy benefitted the milk processing companies, and pushed small dairy farmers out of business. Thus began a vicious cycle of over-production, bringing down the market prices. Instead of fundamentally addressing the flaws in supply chains, by ensuring assured prices to dairy farmers to begin with, Europe and America focused more on providing bailout packages to temporarily assuage farmer’s ire. British farmers (and also in Ireland) therefore continued to protest against the ‘unfair’ prices and have since been campaigning for a fair deal.   

The tragedy on the dairy farm was further compounded by an unjust WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture which allowed heavily subsidised milk from European countries to be dumped in developing countries. Breaching the five per cent product-specific subsidy support norms for developed countries, EU had actually subsidised skimmed milk powder by 67 per thereby easily dumping cheaper milk in developing countries. In the process, small dairy farmers suffered at both the ends -- in the developed as well as developing countries. 

No wonder, at a time when mainline economists in India are excited at the possibility of ‘free markets’ enhancing farm incomes, Canadian farmers are seeking more protection to save their livelihoods. Three major farm unions in eastern Canada are demanding protection (by way of subsidy and import tariffs) against US President Donald Trump’s recent $ 32 billion subsidy package to American farmers, which they say threatens their survival. “Farmers need to be able to cover the cost of production or many of them will not be able to survive much longer.” 

Now let us look at America. The prosperity that we see on the farm is a reflection of the massive subsidy support. To ensure that small farmers are not wiped out, the US has been coming out with a Farm Bill every five years. In the 2018 Farm Bill, US has expanded the safety-net umbrella for farmers making a provision for $ 867 billion for the next ten years in commodity support, numerous measures to enhance farm incomes as well as for nutrition schemes.

Instead of leaving farmers to face the volatility of markets, the US has time and again come up with programmes to offset the losses incurred. In the 2018 Farm Bill, it has introduced an Agricultural Risk Campaign (ARC) and a Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programme. Both these programme are aimed at covering losses a farmer suffers when crop prices or revenues drop, and covers 24 commodities including wheat, oats, barley, corn, grain sorghum, rice, soybeans, sunflower seed, rapeseed, canola, safflower, flaxseed, mustard seed, crambe and sesame seed, seed cotton, dry peas, lentils, small chickpeas, large chickpeas, and peanuts. In addition, there are numerous other programmes for relief from natural disasters, crop insurance, structural adjustment and environment. 

Even in China, markets have failed to help increase farm incomes. According to a report in Washington Post, ‘China’s agriculture support includes government purchases at above-market prices, as well as market price support programs, where farmers receive a direct payment from the government if market prices fall below a minimum set price’. This has helped raise farm incomes by 38 percent in wheat, 32 per cent in rice and 29 percent for corn. China provided a farm subsidy support of $ 212 billion in 2016, the highest in the world. The US had challenged this subsidies in the WTO. 

Well, if the agricultural giants realise the inability of markets to help raise farm incomes, India too must rethink its approach. There are significant lessons here. #

India needs a rethink on 'free market'. The Tribune. Dec 30, 2020. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/india-needs-a-rethink-on-free-market-191160?fbclid=IwAR19TsKH-Uxz5Zdyz1UfgKAWdZl1qdrQp6YRuf-cknlwYksvBU83vsLbyHY#.X-30cqEmiYY.twitter

READ MORE - India needs a rethink on 'free market'