Maize is Mexico’s lifeblood – the country’s
history and identity are entwined with it. But this centuries-old relationship
is now threatened by free trade. Laura Carlsen investigates the threat and
profiles a growing activist movement.
But
in Mexico and Central America today maize has come under attack. As a result of
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Mexico has been flooded with
imported corn from north of the border in the US. The contamination of native
varieties with genetically modified imported maize could have major
consequences for Mexican campesinos (farmers), for local biodiversity and for
the world’s genetic reserves.
A
decade ago Mexican bureaucrats and business people had it all figured out.
NAFTA would drive ‘uncompetitive’ maize farmers from the countryside to work in
booming assembly factories across the country. Their standard of living would
rise as the cost of providing services like electricity and water to scattered
rural communities would fall. Best of all, cheap imported maize from the US –
the world’s most efficient and most heavily subsidized producer – would be a
benefit to Mexican consumers.
Unfortunately,
it didn’t turn out that way. There weren’t quite enough of those factory jobs
and the ones that did materialize continued to be along the US border, not
further in Mexico. And despite a huge drop in the price farmers received for
their corn, consumers often ended up paying more. The price of tortillas – the
country’s staple food – rose nearly fivefold as the Government stopped domestic
subsidies and giant agribusiness firms took over the market. Free trade
defenders like Mexico’s former Under-Secretary of Agriculture Luis Tellez
suggest: ‘It’s not that NAFTA failed, it’s just that reality didn’t turn out
the way we planned it.’ Part of that reality was that the Government did
nothing to help campesinos in the supposed transition. Nor did NAFTA recognize
inequalities or create compensation funds to help the victims of free trade –
unlike what occurred with economic integration in the European Union.
Basically,
Mexico adopted a sink-or-swim policy for small farmers, opening the floodgates
to tons of imported US corn. Maize imports tripled under NAFTA and producer
prices fell by half. The drop in income immediately hit the most vulnerable and
poorest members of rural society. While more than a third of the corn grown by
small farmers is used to feed their families, the rest is sold on local
markets. Without this critical cash, rural living standards plunged.
Maize
is at the heart of indigenous and campesino identity. José Carrillo de la Cruz,
a Huichol Indian from northern Jalisco, describes that relationship: ‘Corn is
the force, the life and the strength of the Huichol. If there were a change, if
someone from outside patented our corn, it would end our life and existence.’
The
good news is that the free-trade threat to Mexico’s culture and food security
has sparked a lively resistance. ‘In Defence of Corn’, a movement to protect
local maize varieties, is not a membership organization but a series of forums
and actions led by campesinos themselves. It’s a direct challenge to both free
trade and the dictums of corporate science.
The
farmers’ tenacity and refusal to abandon the crop of their ancestors is
impressive. But larger economic conditions continue to shape their lives. Rural
poverty and hunger have soared under free trade – and placed a heavier burden
on women left to work the land. The battle for food sovereignty continues.
Movement leaders insist that the Government reassess its free trade policies
and develop a real rural development programme.
Questions 1-5
Do the following statements agree with the
information given in the passage.
In boxes 1-5 on your answer sheet, write
In boxes 1-5 on your answer sheet, write
YES if the statement agrees with the information
1) After NAFTA, a lot
of corn from the USA has been sold in Mexico.
2) Following NAFTA, Mexican business people tried to stop maize farmers from working in factories throughout the country.
3) The Mexican farmers were paid a lot less for their corn after NAFTA.
4) Many Mexican farmers wanted to leave Mexico after the Free Trade Agreement.
5) The Mexican farmers were not able to do anything to help themselves after the Trade Agreement.
2) Following NAFTA, Mexican business people tried to stop maize farmers from working in factories throughout the country.
3) The Mexican farmers were paid a lot less for their corn after NAFTA.
4) Many Mexican farmers wanted to leave Mexico after the Free Trade Agreement.
5) The Mexican farmers were not able to do anything to help themselves after the Trade Agreement.
Questions 6-10
Complete
the summary below.
Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS for each answer.
Write your answers in boxes 6-10 on your answer sheet.
Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS for each answer.
Write your answers in boxes 6-10 on your answer sheet.
For
thousands of years, corn has been a very
important 6 ............. in the Mexican culture. After the North
American Free Trade Agreement, 7 ............. corn has been imported from the USA in very
large amounts. Mexican business people hoped that this would mean that Mexican
farmers had to get jobs in factories and that their 8 ............. would
increase. Instead of this result, the farmers suffered from the low price of
corn and people had to pay more for their corn. The farmers wish that the
government had 9 ............. them during this time. As a result of the
hardship, the farmers have organised themselves by forming a 10 ..............
Answers
1. Yes
2. Not Given
3. Yes
4. Not Given
5. No
6. crop
7. genetically modified
8.
standard of living
9.
helped
10. movement