PDF version
IFAP Commodities Conference
Tropical Products Group
Bruges, Belgium, 20 April 2005
Summary Report

 

GENERAL THEME: RAISING PUBLIC AWARENESS ABOUT THE SITUATION OF PRODUCERS

 

Opening of the Session

 

The IFAP Tropical Products Group met in Bruges on 19 April 2005. Following the opening of the session by Mr. Mathias N’Goan, President of the Group, and the welcoming address delivered by Mr. Ignace Coussement of the Belgian Boerenbond, participants mainly discussed how to improve the income of tropical commodity producers. A Round Table was also organized through the tri-partite collaboration of these agencies: IVA, AGRITERRA and AFDI.

 

The European Union Proposal: An Action Plan on Agricultural Commodities

 

Ms. Liselotte Isaksson of the European Union presented the broad outlines of the EU Plan of Action on Agricultural Commodities. Adopted in February 2004, its double aims are to improve the income of traditional and other commodity producers, on one hand, and to minimize income vulnerability both from the producer and macroeconomic standpoints, on the other. The Plan of Action stems from the fact  that commodity dependent developing countries (CDDCs) have been devastated by a drop in  commodity prices by as much as 30 to 60% in constant dollars.

 

Ms. Isaksson set forth the Plan’s six challenges: (1) as a priority to reduce dependence on commodities at the national and international levels; (2) To respond to the downward spiral of prices by establishing national strategies (2004-2007) and regional approaches; (3) To manage the risks associated with producing commodities and to provide access to financial resources: improved availability of insurance schemes and the development of crisis management instruments (namely through the World Bank and other international organizations) ; better access to the EU FLEX compensation mechanism (the European Union instrument that seeks to offset short-term export income fluctuations for the countries of Africa – the Caribbean- and the Pacific (ACP); (4) To diversify production with the inclusion of non-traditional commodities and by strengthening assistance to the private sector in conjunction with NGOs if needed; (5) To promote the integration of such commodities within the international trading system; and, finally, (6) To encourage the use of business practices and viable investments among CDDCs; foster corporate social responsibility; encourage public-private partnerships between multinationals and CDDCs; and promote competition (also within the WTO).

 

The presentation generated a lively debate. Two points were raised concerning the involvement of farmer organizations in the Plan of Action and, in general, as to how the European Union might in future develop strategies conducive to establishing direct contacts with the farming community.

 

In conclusion, members recognized the need to strengthen the capacity of farmer organizations at the national, regional, and international levels so they may benefit more fully from the Plan of Action, specifically, and from public-private sector initiatives, in general.

 

 

THE SESSION ON COFFEE

1. The Coffee Market and Improved Producer Incomes

 

Mr. Pablo Dubois of the International Coffee Organization (ICO) made a presentation on the current coffee market situation. He recalled that since the end of 2003, the price of Arabica coffee has doubled, while that of Robusta has increased by approximately 38%. Mr. Dubois explained that it is only in the last five months that Arabica prices have raised, and even more recently for the Robusta.  Throughout almost all the period between 2000-2004, prices remained at levels that had not been so low in a long time and which, in many instances, did not even cover the cost of production, thereby causing considerable economic and social upheaval among coffee producing communities.

 

In the discussion that ensued Mr. Dubois’ presentation, a number of actions were highlighted that could help in looking for solutions to the coffee crisis which is evident chiefly from the exceedingly low prices paid to producers. Among them : (1) To improve the flow of information to producers ; (2) To promote diversification ; (3) To remove tariff barriers on processed goods ; (4) To develop market niches like organic coffee ; (5) To bet on quality ; (6) To strengthen the capacity of producer organizations ; and (7) To generate new markets.

 

2. What Underlies the Price of Coffee? The Components of Price,

from Producer to Consumer, within a Sustainable Framework

 

Ms. Mamaty, IFAP commodity analyst, shared information about the study being developed by Consumers International under the responsibility of Ms. Irina Danada. The study examines the formation of coffee prices, from producer to consumer. It seeks to inform consumers and to raise public awareness about the impact of purchasing decisions on sustainable agriculture and rural development (SARD) by analyzing the marketing chain of coffee. With that in mind, the study sets out:

(1) To discover the formation of prices for traditionally grown coffee and for coffee considered sustainable, produced in differing regions of the world under conditions of fair trade from the standpoint of its economic, environmental, and social impact--particularly as regards producer income and employment;

(2) To explore the incentives of and barriers to sustainable production and consumption in the coffee sector given the food chain’s current vertical coordination and industrial concentration;

(3) To draw up convincing policy recommendations to influence specific international fora;

(4) To encourage participation of «Consumers International» groups in data collection on prices, thereby attracting talented professional interest to the study on how commodity trading actually works; 

(5) To provide information for consumers that will stimulate and enable them to make informed choices as to the selection of coffee produced under ecologically viable conditions.

 

IFAP shall contribute to the aforementioned study by assisting in the preparation of questionnaires to be distributed among producers. In addition, members of IFAP will be part of the study sample and will answer the questionnaire as well as respond to interviews in the field.

 

 

THE SESSION ON COCOA

 

1. The Cocoa Market and Improved Producer Incomes

 

Mr. Jan Vingerhoets, Executive Director of the International Cocoa Organization (ICCO) set forth the current situation of the cocoa market. He explained that world cocoa production rose in irregular increments from 2.9 million tons in 1995/96 to a new estimate of 3.2 million tons in 2004/05, yielding an average annual growth rate of 1.0%. World consumption of cocoa increased on average 1.8% yearly. Over the two preceding years, supply has outstripped demand. World stocks of cocoa beans rose from 1.2 million tons at the start of crop year 1995/96 to 1.4 million tons estimated at the end of 2004/05 season.

 

Regarding trade in cocoa, Mr. Vingerhoert noted that Africa accounts for 77% of the world net exports of cocoa, followed by Asia and Oceania (17%), then the Americas (6%). Statistics compiled over the past five years show the following breakdown of cocoa import destinations: European countries (58%), the Americas (30%), Asia (11%), and Africa (1%). The United States rank first with 23% of the world’s cocoa imports.

 

Mr. Vingerhoert explained how, after a three-year period of constant increase, average international cocoa prices registered a substantial drop of 23% over the 2003/2004 crop year,  moving from 1.369 Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) in 2002/03 to 1.047 SDRs the following year.

 

Having completed his analysis of the market, Mr.Vingerhoest turned to a number of factors that could serve to improve prospects for the world cocoa market: (1) Increase demand ; (2) Supply reliable information to producers ; (3) Raise total quality (as to physical and ethical standards, food security, and sustainable production) ; (4) Organize producers into cooperatives in order to cut middlemen and shorten the marketing chain ; (5) Boost yields and work productivity through improved technology.

 

Following Mr.Vingerhoest’s presentation, participants debated the issues and insisted on the need to take action in order to raise producer income through improvements on various fronts: the technological (yield; inputs; quality; effective consumer lobbying); the institutional (strengthening producer organizations); and the commercial (international partnerships; cocoa negotiations to generate favourable conditions to the development of sectors in the South).

 

 

 

THE SESSION ON COTTON

1. The Cotton Market and Improved Producer Incomes

 

Mr. Didier Mercier, Director General of COPACO--the French cotton company—described the salient characteristics of the cotton market. His analysis indicated that world production of cotton fibre over crop year 2004/2005 may well post a record-breaking 5.1 million ton increase, i.e., a rise of 25.1% compared to the preceding period, thereby reaching a total production level of 25.91 million tons. The increase is attributable to China, the United States. Pakistan, and India, four countries which collectively account for more than two-thirds of world production.

 

As a matter of fact, China ranks number one among world producers (6.32 million tons), followed by the United States (5.03 million tons), India (3.94 million tons), and Pakistan (2.51 million tons).  If the production figures for Brazil (1 390 000 tons), Uzbekistan (1 056 000 tons), and Turkey (900 000 tons) are added to the first four, the overall yield for these seven largest world producers represents over 80 % of total production.

 

Mr. Mercier explained that China’s membership in the WTO and the end of the Multi-Fiber Agreement on 31 December 2004 (which brought about the total disappearance of export quotas relative to textile products and articles of clothing) triggered most of the rapid changes that have taken place in the distribution pattern of world consumption now benefiting the more competitive countries, namely China itself. World consumption could thus rise by 8.1%, that is by 1.73 million tons for crop year 2004/2005, with increases of 1 100 000 tons in China, 350 000 tons in India, 150 000 tons in Pakistan, 125 000 tons in Turkey, and 75 000 tons in Brazil. Consumption continues to drop in the United States, however, as well as in Western Europe.

 

Mr. Mercier specified that world stock estimates drawn up by the International Cotton Consultative Committee (ICCC) point to an increase of 2.88 million tons, world stocks thus up by 8.1%.

 

Mr. Mercier likewise remarked that international trade will fall by 338 000 tons this year as compared with the previous crop year and are expected to reach 6.94 million tons, i.e., 26.8% of overall world production and 30.1% of world consumption. With exports totalling 2.75 million tons—an amount representing 39.6 % of world exports and 54.7 % of the country’s national production--the United States is far and ahead the number one cotton exporter in the world.

 

The group of African countries within the Franc Zone is again the second world exporter. With exports of 780 000 tons, they thus stand before Uzbekistan (710 000 tons), Brazil (400 000 tons), and Australia (374 000 tons).

 

As regards imports, China is in first place with estimated net imports of some 1 600 000 tons, with Indonesia occupying a far distant second place (505 000 tons), followed by Turkey (625 000 tons), Thailand (416 000 tons), and Mexico (348 000 tons).

 

Mr. Mercier went on to explain that the average A index denominated in Euros has risen to 863 Euros per ton for crop year 2004/2005, as against 1272.95 Euros for crop year 2003/2004, which represents 31.3% of drop. In some countries, it most be noted, the decrease is directly attributable to the depreciation of the US Dollar.

 

In sum, according to the ICCC, world production for crop year 2005/2006 might well increase to 23.2 million tons.  That would represent a drop of 2.7 million tons compared to the preceding crop year (-10,3%). Given the weakness of cotton prices by contrast with the robustness of polyester, world consumption is expected to rise again (+ 2.4%) by + 560 000 tons, thereby attaining 23.6 million tons—again according to the ICCC.  That upturn will occur mainly in China with an increase of 500 000 tons.

 

The ICCC also expects world stocks to drop slightly (- 350 000 tons), then rise by 31 July 2006 to 10.34 million tons in light of a new increase in United States stock levels, a circumstance which have a negative impact on prices. International trade volumes are due to grow by 1 million tons and rise to approximately 8 million tons. Finally, as regards prices, the ICCC expects index A (more precisely, index A Far East) to reach an average of 57 cts/lb over crop year 2005/2006.

 

Mr. Mercier recalled that the ICCC Secretariat meeting in Mumbai recognized that the cotton sector has been strengthened through productivity improvements combined with the prevalence of low prices, noting even so that the conjunction of these two factors has lowered farmer incomes.

 

In Mr. Mercier’s view, the current 2004/2005 crop year will definitely affect countless small producers, especially in the African cotton sectors of the Franc Zone. They have been hard hit by a weakened Dollar devalued with respect to the Euro and thus with respect to the CFA Franc as well.  But they have also been hurt by the fall in prices which in the case of some countries is linked to export and production subsidies. This trend simply proves that producers must confront myriad problems such as price fluctuations, currency fluctuations, and the ongoing use of subsidies on the part of certain producers.

 

Faced with such challenges, cotton producers might consider a number of measures that have been suggested to assist in securing their position within the sector: (1) Improve quality to compete effectively against the inroads of polyester and synthetic fibres ; (2) Promote cotton fibre among consumers through the use of labels ; (3) Minimize pesticide application in order to contain the cost of inputs ; (4) Strengthen the capacity of national cotton producers’ organizations ; (5) Comply with the terms of international trade contracts ; (6) Foster cotton processing in producing countries ; (7) Increase yields and quality by providing the means to acquire necessary inputs and equipment ; (8) Establish stabilization and insurance funds through appropriate mechanisms and/or the assistance of donors necessary to protect competitive cotton sectors that are non-subsidized and largely composed of small family farms without many alternatives.

 

 

2. The Present State of International Cotton Negotiations

 

Mr. Karim Hussein, Chief Administrator and head of the Agricultural Processing and Sustainable Development Unit within the Secretariat of the Club of the Sahel and West Africa (CSAO) of the OECD, spoke on the importance of cotton cultivation in the West and Central African sub-region, and the high stakes involved in ongoing international cotton negotiations.  

 

Mr. Hussein observed that cotton represents a good success story of agricultural development in West and Central Africa. Cotton cultivation there has had a multiplier effect: on agriculture (prompting grain production, for example); on the provision of livelihoods; on households’ access to services; on the economic development of cotton-growing areas; and on the economies of cotton producing countries, in general.

 

Approximately 2 million small family farms (of 3 to 10 hectares) produce cotton on part of their fields.  Close to 16 million persons depend directly or indirectly on the cotton crop. The commodity is also a critical currency generator: in 2003, cotton produced 51% of total export revenue for Burkina Faso; 37% for Benin; 36% for Chad; and 25% for Mali.

 

Mr. Hussein recognized that international cotton fibre prices have been experiencing a structural slump. It was in the 2001/2002 crop year that the price of cotton on the international market (then 42 cents per pound) slipped below the estimated cost of production for producers in West and Central Africa.

 

According to Mr. Hussein, there are multiple reasons that explain the fluctuation and fall of prices. These include market competition between cotton and synthetic products, the drop in yields, quality issues, and the uniformity of West African cotton. Nonetheless, as several studies show, surpluses in the world’s cotton supply (like the associated fall in prices) have resulted mainly from production support measures adopted by governments in Northern countries. Such measures are a key reason for the significant loss of income suffered by producers in West and Central Africa.

 

This recognition is what prompted four West and Central African nations (Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Chad) to launch an initiative in support of cotton at the 2003 WTO ministerial. In fact, it was producer organizations which first developed the initiative that was subsequently taken up by the States. Cotton producers faced with punishing drops in income turned to their farmer organizations—the Union nationale des producteurs de coton du Burkina –Faso (UNPCB) and the Réseau des organisations paysannes et de producteurs de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (ROPPA)—and rang alarm bells to call attention to the impact of export subsidies back in 2001. International NGOs joined in the fray over 2002-2003: OXFAM, IDEAS Centre, ENDA-Tiers-World, the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) among them. Cotton ginning groups in the private sector also rallied. Then came political support from Heads of States and ambassadors meeting in Geneva in 2003. Finally, the Cotton Initiative was supported and validated by several regional organizations: the West African Economic and Monetary Union (UMOA); the West African Development Center (CEDEAO); the African Union (AU); the Countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP); and the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) all spoke up in June of 2003 at the WTO.

 

Mr. Hussein noted that despite this energetic response, the Cotton Initiative failed to garner support at the Cancun Ministerial held in December 2003. Nonetheless, WTO Member States requested that the WTO Secretariat call for a regional African work-shop on the development parameters of cotton, to be held in Cotonou (Benin) in March 2004. The meeting would aim to pinpoint possibilities and outline the appropriate framework for technical and financial assistance for the sub-sector.  Likewise, the European Union (EU) organized a European Union-Africa Forum on cotton in July 2004 aimed at establishing an EU-African partnership on trade and development issues linked to cotton. At the end of the Forum, a Plan of Action was proposed. In closing, the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD convened a meeting to discuss the development of African cotton for 28 January 2005 with assistance from the CSAO Secretariat.  The aim of the meeting was to find a way out of the ongoing crisis affecting the cotton sub-sector throughout West Africa, and to exhort development partners to achieve more effective coordination among themselves.

 

Finally, Mr. Hussein stressed the role played by CSAO in encouraging dialogue and well-informed trade among the countries of the OECD and the AOC countries concerned, posing questions of strategy and the African perspective on that and other issues.

 

In the debate that ensued following Mr. Hussein’s presentation, similar points were made to those that had already emerged with regard to other sectors: producer organizations must be assisted to obtain access to information and to training, aiming to familiarize agricultural organization officials with international issues and the pursuit of strategic alliances at the national, regional, and international levels. There was consensus around the fact that, currently, producers in developing countries have no access to such tools. Another key fact was raised regarding the difficulty inherent in identifying sustainable solutions in the face of decreasing producer income in the context of liberalized markets.

 

DIALOGUE ON THE SITUATION OF PRODUCERS:

A ROUND TABLE WITH AGRICULTURAL LEADERS

 

In order to offer a platform from which representatives of agricultural organizations could speak out, IFAP convened «a dialogue on the situation of producers » in collaboration with three agro-agencies: IVA, AFDI and Agriterra. Ten farmer leaders from developing and developed countries participated in the event. The Round Table sought principally to facilitate an exchange of experiences among those present on such matters as the socio-economic dimension of their activity; obstacles posed by the global market; partnership strategies between countries and producers that have proved successful or which appear to be promising. The Round Table debate focused on a number of important sectors in turn: coffee, cotton, bananas, and sugar.

 

Mr. Jagannath Sami, Executive Director of the Sugar Cane Growers Council (SCGC) of Fiji addressed participants to explain, first, that his country’s single-crop exports of cane accounts for 8% of GDP, 25% of overall exports, and provides employment for 46 000 persons—a significant share of the Island’s population engaged in cropping 180 000 hectares and producing 3 000 000 tons.

 

He also explained that a major obstacle that sugar-cane growers in Fiji must surmount is the reform of the EU sugar protocol which, among other results, will lower the guaranteed price producers will receive as from 2008.  Mr. Jagannath Sami admitted that the reform might well bring about the disappearance of 90% of all small-scale farmers. This is why Fiji shall need EU financial support to enable a reorganization of the sugar industry. To conclude, Mr. Jagannath Sami stated that if the sugar protocol cannot be kept as it is, maintaining the level of customs duty « sufficiently high » at the threshold of the European Union might serve to safeguard Fiji sugar. Producers there are penalized by the very high cost of transportation they face to penetrate the European market.

At that point, Mr. Zoro Bouragui, cotton producer of Benin and member of ROPPA, went on to explain that family farms largely predominate in that country and throughout western Africa, including the cotton producing zone. He referred to himself as an example and noted that he produces cotton, of course, but also grows corn, chick pea, and raises some cattle stock.

 

Cotton in Benin, according to Mr. Bouragui, accounts for a production of 418 000 tons, income of 80 billion CFA Francs (FCFA), and 29 billion for the financing of inputs. Beyond the economic dimension per se, the cotton sector encompasses considerable social aspects since more than 2 million persons make a living directly or indirectly from cotton. Over time, the sector has gradually reorganized and transferred management of the same to producers. The family farm has served as the hub of such reorganization both at the level of Village Groups (VG) and as the Federation of Producer Unions of Benin (FUPROP) launched in 1994.

 

Mr. Bouragui recalled that low prices are the principal constraint facing cotton producers. Thus, for the current crop year (2004-2005), producer prices were set at 190 FCFA/kg while the cost of production is 210 FCFA. To conclude, he stressed that providing information to producers is a matter of necessity and that farmer organizations should strengthen their capacity both at the national and international levels.

 

Mr. Singh, Vice-President of the New-Delhi National Agriculture Institute, took the floor next. He informed that cotton in India represents a living for 60 million persons working on small holdings with an average surface area of 2 hectares. Sixty percent (60%) of the cropped area is rain fed. One characteristic of cotton cultivation in India is that on average it represents 374 kg/ha, i.e., 1/3 of the yield in China—the weakest in the world-- and cotton of mediocre quality. Technological progress thus remains a major challenge faced by Indian cotton producers who might benefit from an expanding textile industry. But a great impediment remains producer illiteracy and their scant organization. To conclude, Mr. Singh shared the view that trade liberalization within the WTO is both a challenge and an opportunity for Indian producers. But an opportunity only if the quality of the cotton improves.

 

Mr. Joaquim Vasquez, President of Ecuador’s Regional Union of Coastal Farmer Organizations (Urocal) and a banana producer, explained that banana cultivation in his country represents the second most important crop.  Directly or indirectly, 2 million people depend on the sector to make a living. Approximately 6000 producers--from the many «little» (working on land tracts of 1 to 10 hectares) to the «big farmers » (+100 hectares)--crop some 160 000 hectares.  Close to 4 million tons were exported over the 2004 crop year.

 

Mr. Vasquez mentioned that constraints facing banana producers at the international level include the weight of multinational enterprises crowding out the producer and making it harder to attain market access, and the high customs duties imposed at the borders of the EU. Finally, for Mr. Vasquez, it is essential that farmer organizations concentrate on capacity building and that an ongoing dialogue be established between the various actors of the banana sector.

 

Mr. Mathias N’Goan, President of Côte d’Ivoire’s National Association of Professional Agricultural Organizations (ANOPACI), chair of the IFAP Tropical Commodity Group, and a himself a banana producer, noted that bananas in Cote d’Ivoire are grown in conjunction with with pineapple. Together, both crops represent 1.5 to 2% of the country’s GDP. Banana production posts 250 to 300 000 tons annually. There were about 80 farms in the mid-1990’s while today, the smallest producers have disappeared and the largest have absorbed those tonnages. Mr. N’Goan insisted on two major challenges facing banana producers from Cote d'Ivoire: the devaluation of the dollar, and the forthcoming liberalization of the European market in 2006. The liberalization will undoubtedly lead to sharp competition among Latin American countries. This is why Mr. N’Goan considers it would be wise to organize an international consultation bringing African and Latin-American producers together in hopes that it would help to avoid fractious bickering and division among the farmers in those regions.

 

The coffee sector was presented by Mr. Jack Bigirwa, President of NUCAFE in Uganda; he explained that Ugandan coffee is often produced in tandem with other garden crops such as corn or banana. Robusta is the main coffee variety produced in the mountainous areas of western Uganda; it is cropped by small land-holdings of some 300 to 400 trees. The producers are structured into small groups at the local level.

 

Uganda is the principal coffee producer of Africa. Despite its premier position, however, Ugandan coffee producers come up against manifold problems such as currency fluctuations, the vagaries of the national marketing chain, and producer lack of access to relevant market information. In addition, credit access for Ugandan producers remains extremely limited. The main message Mr. Bigirwa conveyed in the dialogue was the importance of promoting farmer organizations and of strengthening capacity.

 

Still referring to the coffee sector, Mr. Lorenzo Castillo, Executive Secretary of Peru’s National Coffee Board [Junta Nacional del Cafe (JNC)], stated that coffee cultivation in Peru covers a surface area of some 300 000 hectares. Most coffee farms--97% to be exact—cover a surface area of less than 5 hectares and, on average, each producer tends to crops over a 2-hectare expanse of land. It is estimated that 2 million Peruvians work in the coffee sector. The JNC itself, for instance, is a grouping of small coffee producers and cooperatives that represents 36 000 families.

 

Mr. Lorenzo Castillo explained that the average coffee yield in Peru is 697 kg/ha, and the cost of production is estimated at US$1.4/kg while the producer is only paid 97 US cents per kg of coffee. In 2004, 3,183 million bags were exported to 37 countries, of which 70% to Europe. Coffee exports make up 7% of Peru’s GDP and 25% of exported agricultural commodities.

 

The recommendations suggested by Mr. Castillo echoed those of preceding participants: an alliance should be forged between Northern and Southern farmers, and farmer organizations should be strengthened to function as business enterprises as well as lobbying groups interacting with governments. In Mr. Castillo’s judgement, coffee producers must face three major challenges ahead: (1) improving quality by ascribing increased importance to standards of quality, (2) diversification, and (3) the promotion of domestic consumption.

 

Other producer representatives then took the floor to respond to prior interventions. Ms Caroline Trapp, President of the Farmers’ Confederation of Sweden (LRF) and Chair of IFAP’s Development Cooperation Committee (CCD), noted that the operation of international markets is very complex and that producers work in greatly varying conditions, depending on the country in question.  That being the case, market liberalization can be the source of difficulty in some instances while it may offer the solution to problems in others.

 

Professional agricultural organizations can take determinative action by seeking to organize for price negotiation with the processing sector, or resolving to acquire their own means of industrial processing and manufacture. Ms. Trapp said that the problems of producers in the North are complex too:  they are beset with EU market liberalization measures; currency fluctuations; and weak farmer associations, among others.  For some, namely in Sweden, agriculture is largely dominated by numerous small land-holders. Based on her own experience, Ms. Trapp proffered the following counsel to producers in the South: (1) organize; (2) negotiate prices; (3) consider the adoption of strategies vis-à-vis the processing industry; (4) and seek alternatives to supply management as do Canadian producers.

 

The final message Ms. Trapp had to offer was the need to ensure that globalization includes correction measures and that it takes place within a framework of governmental commitments which will serve to structure favourable domestic and international environments for farmer organizations worldwide.

 

Mr. Renouard, Board member of the National Federation of Farmer Unions (FNSEA) in  France, explained how tough it is to identify simple solutions in the current globalization context. A fundamental principal must be met, however, by ensuring that producers the world over can make a decent living.

 

Mr. Renouard added that there is no choice but to think hard about such issues as supply management, world trade regulation, and what it will take to truly increase Official Development Aid (ODA). He then explained that the right to agriculture is a right to participate in economics. Considerable thinking must be devoted to the means to avoid chronic overproduction and crisis management. Each country should enjoy the right to produce, to trade, and to consume locally. In that context, trade regulation becomes a necessity if the gap widens between the haves and the have-nots, if indeed the gap is ever to be closed.

 

Mr. Renouard stressed that framing agricultural policies is the right of all world producers. In addition, it is essential that farmers of the South organize and become engaged in a professional debate to determine how, together, they can envisage viable market regulation mechanisms.

 

In Mr. Renouard’s view, just as the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has benefited both consumers and producers, so too, other regions should have the right to similar benefits. In closing, Mr. Renouard hoped that solidly structured professional farmer organizations would emerge to succeed governments in the field. Faced with the pressures of managing globalization, they will need to stiffen their resistance capacity—to operate as a world trade union, in short.

 

Mr. Noël Devish, President of the Boerenbond, Belgium, took the floor to explain that bananas pose a genuine problem for producer organizations. As to coffee, one solution would be to practice fair trade on a greater scale. Finally, Mr. Devish expressed the notion that farmer organizations of Southern countries require assistance, and that such organizational assistance constitutes an essential element of the corrective measures needed for fair globalization. He added that the world’s farms lack adequate market knowledge and information. It is thus critical to develop information exchange. Mr. Devish likewise recalled that when the Boerenbond was created, the condition of Belgian farmers much resembled that of Southern farmers at the present time.

 

Mr. Bill Helj of the United States «Red River Sugar Beet Growers Association » and President of IFAP’s World Association of Beet and Cane Growers (WABCG) also took the floor to respond to some statements. He shared how American producers have known a similar situation to that experienced by the developing countries. But they managed to build industrial and credit associations set up specifically to meet their own farmer needs. He then noted that producers should not be content to rely on the WTO, but should instead generate international solidarity to tackle their problems.

 

Mr. Philip Kiriro, President of the Kenya East African Farmers Federation (EAFF) and Vice President of IFAP’s Development Cooperation Committee, expressed his concern about the considerable political support enjoyed by the cartels. In addition, he drew the attention of the audience to the feeble impact of EU programs in the field, and pleaded for clear and direct links with various development partners.

 

The Round Table highlighted the great diversity of agricultural conditions that exist in the participating countries. Above and beyond their different positions, the participating agricultural leaders did arrive at a consensus on the need to strengthen farmer organization capacity in developing countries, build stronger relations among developing and developed country farmer associations in order to bring pressure on States and international organizations to set up market mechanisms fostering «more equitable trade ».

 

From IFAP’s standpoint, the Round Table was another opportunity to provide producers from both developing and developed countries a platform on which to share the wealth of their experience.  It is to be hoped, then, that the present initiative may be replicated and broadened to include other commodity groups in future.