GRSJ224/Globalization Gender and Food Production

From UBC Wiki

Globalization: Overview

Globalization defined refers to the “cross-national flows of goods, investment, production and technology[1]. This facet of the Neo-liberal political economy has generated a marked shift in where and how products destined for consumption are produced. Industries such as agriculture, horticulture, textiles and electronics have relocated production to Export Processing Zones (EPZ’s) in the Global South [2] [3]. The characteristics of EPZ’s stimulate profit, and as such, appear favorable to large Western corporations. EPZ’s are able to stimulate profit on account of relaxed labor and environmental laws, low wages, and the reduced capacity of workers therein to unionize, organize or exercise basic labor rights. Consequently, employees of EPZ’s are often perpetually impoverished, over-worked, discriminated against and physically and/or emotionally abused.[3]

Focus: Food Production and Gender

The majority of laborers in the export-bound agricultural sector are women [3]. As a result, it is estimated that women produce 50 percent of the world’s food [4]. The infiltration of women into the agricultural industry can be traced back to a number of cultural and political pressures and representations including, but not limited too; the understanding that most women in the Global South are impoverished and in need of employment [2], the idea that detail oriented and dexterous labor is well suited for women [2], and the cultural disposition that often delegates the responsibility of feeding men and children to women [4].

As women comprise the majority of the agricultural workforce, they disproportionately encounter the human rights infractions and exploitation that commonly occurs within Export Processing Zones. The physical health and safety of female employees are often compromised, they often experience instances of food insecurity and are left impoverished and bound to the seasonal, unstable and fluctuating nature of farm work.

Physical Health and Safety: Pesticides and Bodily Strain

Pesticides:

Many of the pesticides used in EPZ’s have been banned in European and North American countries due to their hazardous effects on human health [2] [5]. Most EPZ’s are ill-fitted to carry out proper pesticide safety training, having a profound effect on those working with or around such pesticides. The World Health Organization estimates that pesticides cause 20,000 deaths and poison 3 million people each year [2]. With death being the most extreme hazard, those exposed to pesticides may also experience “numbness of limbs and partial paralysis, respiratory infections” [2], and reproductive issues [2].

Bodily Strain:

Work-related fatalities with respect to farm work are also common. Such fatalities are often correlated with improper training. Other forms of bodily strain associated with the occupation of farm work are “back and muscle pain, carpal tunnel syndrome” [2] and various forms of skin and hearing problems [6].

Food Insecurity:

Growing Export Processing Facilities have threatened small subsistence farming initiatives in the Global South.Coupled with the reduction in fertile land, small subsistence farms are unable to compete with the fluctuating cost of imported food. As such, small subsistence farms are becoming obsolete, and communities are unable to secure affordable and nutritional food staples [7]. As women are generally responsible for securing food for their families [4], women disproportionality experience instances of food insecurity.

The Cycle of Poverty

Workers are often impoverished prior to entering the agricultural sector. And, as EPZ’s often keep wages very low, workers are unable to save and thus remain bound to the occupation, vulnerable to the continuous abuse therein [5]. This is otherwise known as The Cycle of Poverty


The Agricultural Subsidy

The agricultural subsidy touches on aspects of globalization, food production and poverty. The agricultural subsidy is a subsidy that developing countries provide to supplement farmer’s income. This subsidy has a very large impact on the global price of food. The subsidy paid out to farmers in developed countries essentially controls the global price of food. This is a very controversial issue due to the many problems associated with the subsidy. The economist estimated that “Government support for agriculture in the mostly rich countries of the [The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development] OECD amounted to $252 billion in 2011 [8]”. This number reveals how drastic of an impact governments in developed countries play on the global price of food.

There are many negative implications associated with the agricultural subsidy. This subsidy artificially drives down the global price of crops and food. In many cases, the cost that these agricultural yields are selling for would not allow farmers to support themselves. Without the government subsidies, the cost of these products would have to be raised. The only way these crops yield a profit for the farmers is through these subsidies. This is a major problem for farmers not receiving these subsidies (developing countries), as they cannot produce a product for anywhere close to the global selling price of that product.

International Dumping

International Dumping is developed between subsidized farmers (developed countries) and non-subsidized farmers (developing countries). Subsidized farmers are able to sell their product at a much lower price than non-subsidized farmers. The result is these subsidized farmers dumping their lower cost agriculture yields on foreign markets that non-subsidized farmers cannot cost wise produce the same product for. This forces these developing countries to buy a foreign product supporting the continued payout of agricultural subsidies, and agricultural practices in these developed countries. This then, in turn, promotes a severe lack of development in the agricultural systems in these developing countries. It was estimated in 2003, that as a result of these agricultural subsidies in developed countries, developing countries lost $24 billion in potential income [9]. This loss in income promotes the cycle of poverty in these developing countries.

See Also

References:

  1. ↑ Petras, J and H. Veltmeyer “Globalization: A Critical Analysis” in Globalization Unmasked. London: Zed Books 2001. Pp. 26-60 2001
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Mellon, Cynthia “Roses Thorns and Seven Dollars a Day: Women Workers in Columbia’s Export Flower Industry” in Amalia L. Cabezas, Ellen Reese, Marguerite R. Waller The Wages of Empire: neoliberal policies, repression, and women's poverty. Paradigm Publishers March 30 2007. Pp 140-151
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Madani, Dorsati. A Review of the Role and Impact of Export Processing Zones. World Bank Publications 1999 Pp 1-107
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Steans, Jill. Gender and International Relations Pp 1-182 Polity Press UK/USA 2008
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Halkin, Alexandra (dir). Paying the Price: Migrant Workers in the Toxic Fields of Sinaloa. Documentary, 2008.
  6. ↑ Zejda, Jan E. MD, PhD; Helen H. Mcduffie, PhD; James A. Dosman, MD. “Epidemiology of Health and Safety Risks in Agriculture and Related Industries Practical Applications for Rural Physicians” in The Western Journal of Medicine. January 1993 – 158:1 Pp. 56-63 Web
  7. ↑ Devereux, Stephen. “Introduction: From ‘Old Famines’ to ‘New Famines’ in ed. Stephen Devereux The New Famines: Why Famines Persist in an Era of Globalization. Routledge Publishing 2007 Pp 1-27
  8. ↑ Agricultural subsidies. 2012. The Economist (US) 404, (8803): 105.
  9. ↑ International Food Policy Research Institute, 2003, 1-7. Accessed December 5, 2014. http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/pubs/media/trade/trade.pdf.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=GRSJ224/Globalization_Gender_and_Food_Production&oldid=405732"