Green Guerillas

Green Guerillas The reader looks at case studies of the ‘non-traditional’ agro-export (NTAE) sector in different Latin American countries, and examines the “bittersweet” results it has yielded. As a response to the instability of reliance on traditional exports like bananas, coffee, and sugar, NTAE offer less price fluxuation and more stability in world markets. However, this promising alternative appears to be following the same pattern of risk as previous agro-export booms, including fertilizer dependence, deforestation, and monoculture, and a dangerous focus on export crops which compromises the consistency of the domestic food supply. This reader provides analysis of a promising new sector of Latin American agricultural development, and calls attention to the risks involved. It cautions against vesting too much in the current NTAE boom. • • • • “Meanwhile, local trade in Latin America is stagnating, and hunger and insecurity among the majority of the regions rural people will continue to grow.” (129). How does this relate to the dire food crises facing Haiti today? Reliance on the world markets undermine the stability of Latin American markets. What opportunities are available to increase local trade? How do Nafta and Cafta fit in/ affect local trade? The promotion of indigenous crops seems the most promising solution to me. The greatest challenge is finding a willing market. Could that market be found within Latin America? Wouldn’t that solve some of the issues of transporation? I find it disturbing that foreign corporations benefit from the production of NTAEs, and yet they produce them with such high levels of pesticides that the importing countries refuse to take them. In other words, the US sets certain standards of safety which it upholds for the safety and consumption of its own citizens, but allows workers in its own production plants to work under such insafe conditions. Pre-Meeting Response A key issue presented in Green Guerillas is the instability of Latin American markets because of their reliance on global markets. However, there are multiple forces which hinder the development of local trade: The IMF’s Structural Adjustment Policies emphasize the development of the export sector. The increasingly popular ‘nontraditional’ agro-exports cater to North American tastes, and thus are extremely susceptible to fluxuations in Northern appetite. NAFTA and CAFTA open up local economies to multi-national corporations, further challenging the viability of local trade. These factors both push Latin America away from transitioning to a more self-sufficient economy, with a more active local trade component. Lori Ann Thrupp connects the weakness of local trade to social and political instability within Latin American countries: “…local trade in Latin America is stagnating, and hunger and insecurity among the majority of the regions rural people will continue to grow” (129). Without a strong local economy, Latin American countries end up exporting all of their agriculture, and importing all of their food for domestic use. This arrangement is very dangerous, because if/when the global price of certain foods goes up, poor countries will be unable to provide for their own people because they are importing rather than producing their own food. To what extent has the current crisis in Haiti been aggravated by an economy focused too much on exports? The “promotion of indigenous crops with high market potential” (129) is touted as a means of strengthening the local economy in Latin America. If products can be grown profitably by small farmers, like snow peas in Guatemala, then this model could be workable. However, it seems to me that most likely large corporations would be able to infiltrate whatever indigenous crop proves marketable, and be able to dominate in the production. I find it disturbing that foreign corporations benefit from the production of NTAEs, and yet they produce them with such high levels of pesticides that the importing countries refuse to take them. In other words, the US sets certain standards of safety which it upholds for the safety and consumption of its own citizens, but allows workers in its own production plants to work under such insafe conditions.