Posted on October, 26 2000
The report 'The Environmental and Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico' written by Dr. Alejandro Nadal of El Colegio de México, shows that liberalization of the Mexican corn market has not delivered gains in human welfare nor the environmental benefits promised during the negotiations of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Instead, it has pushed producers increasingly away from environmentally sound production practices and deeper into poverty. The author concludes that many of the problems stem from the lack of prior in-depth review of the potential effects of liberalization and a full understanding of the policies needed to mitigate these effects.
"Current liberalization patterns threaten the ability of Mexican farmers to continue to grow corn, and the ability of consumers to afford it," said Mireille Perrin, of WWF's Trade and Investment Unit. "In this case, the traditional approach to liberalization - with its focus on market-based efficiency - seriously undervalued the social and environmental benefits offered by diversified small-scale, non-intensive practices".
According to the report, the roots of the problem lie in a combination of bad planning and incomplete implementation by the Mexican government of its policies for transforming Mexican agriculture. Though the planned transition period was of fifteen years, in fact this was compressed to thirty months. During the NAFTA negotiations, it was envisaged that Mexican corn output would decrease in response to a fall in domestic prices, thus releasing labour, land and capital for reallocation to more productive activities. Environmental benefits were also predicted since it was assumed that marginal land that is vulnerable to erosion would be left fallow. However, there was little incentive and possibility for farmers to shift to other crops, and as a result, corn production has remained at historically high levels (18 million tonnes/year), and the area under corn cultivation has actually increased. Local producers are therefore caught in a difficult situation having to compete with cheap US corn imports, and at the same time ensuring sufficient quality production for family consumption.
Restructuring of the corn sector is also contributing to accelerating trends of soil erosion as the more competitive producers use increasing quantities of fertilizers and traditional producers farm their land more intensively. At the same time, the 'opening' of the Mexican corn sector is threatening to reduce the extradordinary genetic diversity of Mexican corn stocks. This has potentially serious implications not only for Mexican farmers, but also for the future availability of diverse and adaptive Mexican varieties that could help feed a hungry developing world. This is yet another example of how a liberalization planned with a short-term view can have long-term negative impacts.
"This study shows clearly the danger of moving ahead with liberalization without first assessing in detail the complex linkages between sustainability, poverty reduction and market liberalization," said Penny Fowler of Oxfam. "The human and environmental stakes are just too high for governments to move ahead without understanding fully the impacts of liberalization, and without putting in place measures to prevent devastating social and environmental changes that could have been foreseen, if more detailed analysis had been conducted."
For further information and a full copy of the report:
Olivier van Bogaert: tel: +41 22 3649554, email: ovanbogaert@wwfint.org
Mireille Perrin: tel: +41 22 364 9026, email: mperrin@wwfint.org