Rice Trade and the Right to Food

InternationalHuman Rights

Organization for the Right to Food

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Overview Right to Food in Trade Policies

Purpose of the EAA Studies

Preliminary Results in Honduras, Ghana and Indonesia

Conclusions

Challenges for Follow up

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

The Human Right to Food(in International Covenant on Econ., Social and Cult. Rights,

Art. 11)=Access to productive ressources, work in dignity and social

services

Respect in own policy measures (no evictions)

Protect from evictions by third parties

Fulfill for those people currently suffering hunger

Traditional interpretation: States responsable within their own territory: But global actors increased importance

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Extraterritorial State Obligations (ETO)“Governments must recognize their extraterritorial obligations towards the right to food. (...) Governments should respect, protect and support the fulfillment of the right to food in other countries, including through their decisions taken under their roles within WTO, IMF and the World Bank.” (Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food)

Same levels of obligations

Respect = minimum obligation = do no harm: e.g. dumping and forced market access

In own policy measures and in IGO

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Country Case StudiesQuestion: Have specific trade policy measures contributed to violations of the right to food of rice farming communities in Honduras, Ghana and Indonesia?

Challenge 1: Causual chain between market access, dumping, import surges, decline in incomes and hunger

Challenge 2: Responsabilities of different actors: domestic state, origin states of exports, IMF, WB, WTO and signatories of bilateral free trade agreements

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

HONDURAS: Come back of “Free Trade”1991-1997: Market opening through Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) → import surge („Arrozaso“)

1998-2002: Hurricane Mitch → Dumping and Food Aid

2002: Rice Agreement („Convenio de Arroz“) → Recovery at a low level and limits to expansion

2006: DR-CAFTA → progressive elimination of all tariffs until 2024

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

0

20.000

40.000

60.000

80.000

100.000

120.000

140.000

160.000

180.000

200.000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Producción, Importación y Donación de Arroz 1990-2005 (en TM)

Producción Arroz Granza Importación Arroz Granza Importación Arroz Oro Donaciones de Arroz

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Impact in Jesús de Otoro and GuangololaImports and high input costs pushed many farmers out of production (in 72 to 12 in Otoro)

Return to subsistance farming (Otoro) after successful market integration during 1980s

Modest recovering in Guangogola due to the Convenio

Reconcentration of land tenure (Guangolola)

Less incomes, more debts, poverty and food insecurity

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Violations of the Right to FoodHonduras: Market opening through LMA in 1990ies and DR-CAFTA since 2006 (obligation to protect)

USA: Dumping, misuse of food aid and pressure to cut tariffs through CAFTA (ET-obligation to respect)

Members of IMF and WB: Enforcement of SAP (ETO to respect)

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

GHANA: Liberalisation under Auspices of IMF2000-2003 Imports shot from 170,290 to 415,000 Mt

Origins: USA (33%), Thailand (30), Vietnam (17)

US dumping: export prices much lower than production costs and home market price in US

2003 Act 641: Parliament increased tariff from 20 to 25%

Act suspended and withdrawn illegally after „consulation with IMF stuff“ and approval of 270 million USD loan PRGF

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Impact in the Community of DalunLocal rice demand of market women and processing volume of millers dropped by 75% compared to the 1990ies

Real farm gate prices decreased dramatically from 2000 to 2003

Real production costs remained stable, but state support had been withdrawn from 1983 to the late 1990s (SAP)

„Period of hunger“ before harvest (quantity and quality) and higher vulnerability to external shocks

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Violations of the Right to FoodGhana: Market opening in 1992 and non-implementation of Act 641 in 2003 (obligation to protect); withdrawal of support through SAP (obligation to respect)

USA: Rice dumping (ETO to respect)

Members of IMF: Enforcement of SAP since 1983 and pressure to suspend Act 641 in 2003 (ETO respect)

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

INDONESIA under Threat of the World Bank1967-1997: Import and price controls through BULOG → Imports only filled the gap when domestic production insuff.

1998-1999: Financial crisis: elimination of all trade obstacles and privatisation of BULOG as IMF condition

2000: Moderate import control (ban during harvest, tariff eq. 30%) → stable prices, recovery of rice farming sector

WB now proposes 50% cut of tariffs and unlimited quantity for imports

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Impacts on Farmers in Jawa Barat Province1998-1999: Low and unstable producer prices; middlemen pay price according to price of import rice; growth of production stagnated in these years

WB proposal threatens existence of 20% of 13,6 million food insecure rice peasants in Indonesia; incomes of 40% of peasants would drop to 175 USD per year

Existing food insecurity would be increased dramatically

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Threat to the Right to FoodIndonesia must protect the right to food of the peasants by at least maintaining existing import control

The WB and its members are threatening the right to food of peasants by proposing the 50% cut in rice tariff and removal of quantitative restrictions (ETO to respect).

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Common observations in all countriesNo „hunger“ among farmers, but growing food insecurity through trade policy measures = violations of the Rtf

All countries suffer dumping and withdrew own support

In all countries market protection was dismantled in the 1990s due to pressure of IMF and WB

All countries raised tariffs after 2000, but were (or are) pressured to remove them again, with „success“ in Ghana (IMF) and Honduras (CAFTA), now Indonesia (WB)

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Demands from a HR perspective

a) Developing Countries (DC) must maintain or increase protection and support for rice farmers

b) Industrialised Countries (IC) must stop limiting policy spaces of DC to protect their rice farmers (through regional agreements, IMF, WB and WTO)

c) IC must end overproduction and exports below their costs of production

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Challenges for Follow up Develop strategies for „case work“ in countries

and with international Human Rights bodies

Sensitise governments, trade and Human Rights bodies for impact of liberalisation on the Right to Food

Develop proposals for effective HR monitoring tools of trade policies at national and international level

Promote HR approach to trade among civil society actors through training and conferences (cases and campaigns)

Rice Trade and the Right to Food

Thank you very much!