Reducing Reliance on Foreign Goods
Is Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum anti-agriculture? Or, is her new plan for the country’s food production exactly what Mexico needs? Mexico is not alone in their pursuit of domestically strong food supply chains. Bolivia, Nepal, Senegal, Egypt, and Ghana are just a few of the nations worldwide who have adopted food sovereignty policies as they work to rely less on imported food and build economic stability. Governments have to make sure food is available, safe, and affordable if they are going to stay in power. Producing food domestically, seems like a good way to ensure local food security.
The concept of producing enough food for one’s own people rather than growing crops for the sake of selling them to foreign markets is not new. Perhaps it stems from an idea rooted deeply in all of our minds that whoever is in control of our food supply is, in a very large way, in control of us. Sheinbaum’s plan is not new. It’s a continuation of methods put in place by her predecessor, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO). And, it’s a response to a question that all governments, post the pandemic supply chain crisis, have been wrestling with; how do we make our food systems more resilient?
Dismantling longstanding trade relationships and returning to a grow what we eat method is part of policy discussions across the globe. This is especially true for Mexico as the United States considers raising tariffs. Certainly there are numerous benefits to regionally strong food networks and prioritizing domestic production, but how will a continuation of Mexico’s food sovereignty plan impact food production in the United States? And, does it have the potential to bolster Mexico’s economy?
A New Plan to Return to Old Ways
Mexico aims to expand production of traditional crops grown in traditional ways. Corn, beans, and squash were once planted side by side and produced household staples. Coffee beans and cocoa trees are part of Mexico’s agricultural heritage. Beans wrapped in a corn tortilla was the meal of the people for a very long time. Food was produced in-country and even sold in government operated groceries that offered low prices for these necessities. Yes, the options were more limited than today but, as President Sheinbaum reminds her country, they were healthier, there was enough to go around and consumers were at less risk of experiencing price fluctuations.
Today 44% of Mexico’s population is impoverished. The country consumes 40 million tons of corn per year and imports almost half of it, most of which comes from the United States due to our free trade agreement. Consumers also enjoy fewer home cooked meals and opt for prepackaged goods coming in from other countries. Options are plentiful and yet the average household has trouble affording them. Bean consumption is down significantly.
An agricultural plan focused on food sovereignty could be an income boost for rural farmers. If they take advantage of monthly payment incentives for producing these staple crops rural economies could experience a reinvigoration of cash flow. But, it is also a move away from trade debt. Less debt creates more opportunity for a nation to shift their policy in areas like agriculture and invest financially in necessary changes. Mexico’s long term plan isn’t just about food traveling shorter distances to impoverished populations, it’s also intended to create financial stability for the sake of reshaping policy.
Is the Food Sovereignty Movement Anti-Agriculture?
Farmers in Mexico are on the fence about how the agricultural plan will actually support agriculture, arguing that current food sovereignty language will undermine farm income. The country of Mexico might be less reliant on other nations, but the average farmer would be fully reliant on government subsidies and incentives. They would also have to produce crops that they have not grown in years. A large number of farms are already too small to participate in government programs that would allow them to change what they produce.
Because of its location, Mexico produces food that is harder to grow in other regions. The United States relies heavily on produce from Mexico where it’s grown year round. Access to foreign markets is what farmers believe gives them greater earning potential. Similarly, the plan aims to move away from biotech crops and crop protection innovation used in commercial farming. Some farmers argue that efficiency is key to economic stability and that the new plan will rob them of productive tools and ultimately be a step backwards for agriculture and rural economies.
How Will Mexico’s Agricultural Plan Impact Global Trade?
Mexico has set a goal to increase corn production by 30% over the course of the next six years. At that point they would be growing approximately 75% of the corn they consume and the government believes that will be a stabilizing ratio for farmers, ensuring they can feed themselves, sell excess for profit domestically, and reduce the need for imports. In order to accomplish this goal, land used for growing produce exported to the United States would be repurposed for corn and other staple crops.
The United States is Mexico’s largest export market. Last year the country shipped $9.9 billion worth of fruits and vegetables to the U.S. Meanwhile, the United States exported $5 billion worth of corn to Mexico. Simply put both countries will have to return to domestically producing what they are now importing from each other. It’s not impossible. The United States has plenty of land suitable for growing fruits and vegetables but high labor costs, has made production more expansive that produce from other countries. Plus, there are more seasonal constraints with American production. As Mexico moves towards food sovereignty, trade dynamics with the United States will shift. American consumers will find there is less produce in the grocery stores and it is more expensive than before.
Under the new agricultural plan, Mexico will continue to ban genetically modified corn for human consumption and push to discontinue the use of the herbicide glyphosate on crops. Even without a food sovereignty slogan, Mexico will need to produce more corn domestically if they do not want to purchase imported corn from the United States that is genetically modified or exposed to glyphosate. And, they’ll need to do it with some level of efficiency so as not to disrupt supply.
The United States isn’t immune to the same irony faced by Mexican families. Food insecure families in the Midwest live within miles of some of the most fertile soil in America which produces food for livestock overseas. And our own pandemic supply chain issues brought the discussion of food sovereignty back to a place of prominence in agricultural discussions and has garnered increased support from consumers. Minimizing food security risks while still maintaining economic vitality revolves around finding the perfect ratio of how much food do we keep for ourselves and how much do we sell to our neighbors? A healthy economy needs both access to foreign markets and domestic cash flow. Is Mexico risking its economy or is food sovereignty becoming the new baseline for trade negotiations?
Comentários