I take back all the less-than-positive stuff I said about student activism. At least for tonight.
We had about 50 people — 50 engaged, interested people — show up to Oxfam-USC’s inaugural event. You can see proof of the amazing turnout to the left.
Gloria (right), the Oxfam-USC founder and leader, had told me that about 12 people had RSVP’d, which I thought was pretty impressive for a first Oxfam meeting — on the sexy topic of agricultural subsidies, no less (The exact title of the event: U.S. Agricultural Subsidies: Underselling the Livelihoods of West African Farmers). When I got to the classroom, I started rearranging the chairs in a semi-circle format, with extra chairs on the sides, so that it wouldn’t look too embarassing if, say, just six people showed up. In the end, it was the rearranging of chairs to accomodate latecomers that got a little noisily embarrasing.
The featured speaker: Mr. Seydou Ouedraogo (left), a cotton producer from the village of Tabou in the Sissili Province of Burkina Faso in West Africa, through a translator (Ouedraogo speaks French).
The bare bones story for those unfamiliar with agricultural subsidies: During the Depression, the US gave small farmers who were having a tough time money to survive — called agricultural subsidies — to keep US agriculture afloat. Times changed, but the subsidies didn’t go away — Instead, they grew substantially and got channeled not to the small farmers, but to huge agri-businesses that really didn’t need the help.
How does this affect West African cotton farmers? Because US subsidies are so huge, US cotton can be sold very, very cheaply — cheaper than the cost of production. So the farmers in countries who don’t get subsidies, who actually have to at least break even to make ends meet, really can’t compete with the prices of this cheap US cotton in the world market. (BTW — to the right is the fair trade, organic, shade-grown coffee we served at the event, provided courtesy of USC Costa Rica)
So in 1995, a WTO (that’s World Trade Organization) agreement capped agricultural subsidies at 1992 levels. The US broke these. In April 2004, Brazil pointed this out and won a ruling from the WTO, appealed by the US, and upheld by the WTO this March.
These huge cotton subsidies are paid for by us taxpayers, by the way.
Bush, as you can imagine, hasn’t done anything about this legally-binding WTO ruling, saying he’ll do it when other countries do it. You can email him here, telling him he’s gotta do it. Now.
Have you read Pietra Rivoli’s “The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy”? It is a nice intro to US cotton industry and the surrounding subsidies, including the Multi-Fibre Agreements. It also explains rather well the political rope-walking that US presidents have had to do. It stretches back more than WWII: even slave labour laws and later the sharecropping legislation were a non-monetary subsidy. The book taught me something about American history too (which, being an arrogant latte-sipping EU citizen, is not one of my strengths). A word of caution - Rivoli is a strong free-market advocate but then again are Oxfam too. Kind of.
There’s also another book. This one I haven’t yet read, but probably will. I have high hopes for “Fair Trade: Market-Driven Ethical Consumption” (Alex Nicholls, Charlotte Opal) as it promises to discuss the business aspects of switching to Fair Trade. I hope that the book will take its discussion beyound the usual “Fair Trade means $1.26 per pound of coffee” simplistic discourse and actually talk about the business persectives and entrepreneurial possibilities.
- avs
Comment by avs — September 16, 2005 @ 3:06 am
Great background information. Just another example of the US government ignoring international law. So what exactly did you cover in the meeting?
Comment by BlondebutBright — September 16, 2005 @ 7:05 am
Great to see the apparently growing awareness and concern there. I’ve been in Burkina for 15 years, and this issue is a real heartache for me. We need to put pressure on during the months leading up to the WTO in Dec to see change happen. Hope the momentum continues to grow. Cheers.
Comment by Keith — September 16, 2005 @ 8:24 am
Whoa… fifty people! Great news, fifty more who are aware just how obnoxious farm subsidies are. Cotton subsidies literally exist only for the sake of agribusiness. Some farm subsidies justify themselves on the grounds of market failure - something called an overproduction trap - or the preservation of rural ways of life. Not cotton farmers. And Keith, the real issue is who and how to pressure. I think we should be asking our congressional reps. what bills they have introduced lately to knock these subsidies down.
Comment by Fletch — September 16, 2005 @ 2:49 pm
The meeting itself: Ouredraogo covered the basic info and recent history regarding cotton subsidies, and talked a little about the state of things in West Africa, then quickly opened up the discussion by taking questions. I think it’s both challenging but exciting when we get people with such differing levels of knowledge about these issues in one room — We had some who’d been actively campaigning against cotton subsidies, and others who asked, “What’s WTO?” In the Q&A section, we covered everything from the effects of terrorism on farming to the implications of GMO-cotton. Somewhat difficult to summarize and multi-faceted, but super-informative. More on this issue from Fletch here.
avs — Thanks for the book recommendations. I’m working on creating a froogle wish list — I have one on Amazon now, but am gonna get rid of it now that I know the company supports the Republican party. My birthday’s Nov. 1, btw :)
Keith — your site is fascinating! I have a very vexed relationship with religious “social work,” to use the terms often used by people who do missionary work — My parents were missionaries in Kenya for a long long time, but I am an atheist myself. It’s interesting addressing some of these conflicts I have again — Thanks for stopping by!
Fletch — I think there’s a bill in the works in California re: our cotton, but I’m not sure what’s been going on. Will have to research that.
Comment by Siel — September 16, 2005 @ 7:05 pm
US COTTON SUBSIDIES HAVE SIMPLY REPLACED AFRICAN SLAVES WORKING ON AMERICAN COTTON PLANTATIONS…
Comment by Arya — October 13, 2006 @ 11:17 am