CORPORATE FARMING OR CORPORATE GREED? The remedy our government is proposing -- under the trade liberalisation regime -- is to hand over our food production to TNCs. In other words, if our farmers cannot afford to eat bread, why don't they eat cake? By Dr Abid Qaiyum Suleri The federal cabinet approved the introduction of Corporate Agriculture Farming (CAF) in Pakistan last week, despite warnings from NGOs and Advisor to President on Food, Agriculture and Livestock that this would hurt small farmers (with an exception to a few large landholders, about 94 percent farmers in Pakistan are small landowners and tenants) and diminish national food security. Under the terms of the new CAF policy, there will be no ceiling on the size of corporate farms. CAF would be declared an industry and would enjoy the credit and other facilities but would be exempted from labour laws thus threatening the livelihood of farm workers. This paves the way for: (1) wealthy landlords which have been hurt by land reforms to form corporations and regain their old advantages; and (2) trans-national agribusiness corporations (TNCs) to buy out or place under contract small farmers no longer able to compete. There will be no duties on equipment imported for purposes of CAF. This will advantage the corporate farms and will also assist the TNCs which vend the expensive equipment needed for intensive animal farming and other forms of corporate agriculture. All of this will promote monocultural production of cash crops for export, and would give TNCs an opportunity to cultivate genetically modified crops, at the expense of agro-biodiversity and local food security. At the same time, profit-hungry investors will extract the fruits of the land and labour without regard for equity or sustainability. And this is not all. According to the CAF brochure designed and distributed by Board of Investment, 100% foreign equity is allowed; no minimum foreign investment is required, remittance of capital, profits, and dividends is allowed, exemption of duty on transfer of lands for CAF is under consideration, and all banks and financial institutions will earmark separate credit share for CAF. The authors of CAF plan have ensured that each and every source of livelihood for subsistence farmers and poor is privatised. The activities that may be carried out under CAF plan include farming, food processing, food packaging, production and marketing of mutton, processing and packaging of milk, deep sea fishing and its processing, animal feed production and marketing and many more. Would it not establish the monopoly of few TNCs on all food sources? Do we want to deprive our people from easily available, fresh and cheap food? What would happen to small fishermen when the corporate fishers would bring their (import-duty free) trawlers? It is fairly easy to assess the impact of CAF on small farmers. Agricultural corporatisation and exports increases single commodity harvests. With all farmers growing the same commodity over large areas, the prices farmers receive from their crops come down, while the costs of inputs which are imported have been on an upward increase. As a result, farmers' profit margins get drastically narrowed. As cost of production increases, farmers experience a cost-price squeeze. In this process, only the larger farms can survive and subsistence farmers would not be able to compete with multinational giants. They would have to sell their farms either out of compulsion, or due to the influence and threat of the investors. One can recall the stories of small farmers of Raiwind, who resisted selling their lands to Mian Nawaz Sharif's family. To give CAF a legal cover, and to waive off the upper ceiling of land holding, the Land Reform Act of 1977 is being amended. It would revert, whatsoever was achieved out of land reforms to date. As no minimum foreign investment is required, feudal lords and the capitalists would be back and lives of tenants would be miserable. The plight of state tenants at military farms of Okara, Sargodha, Multan, and Lahore and those of at agriculture department controlled research stations in Khanewal and Kala Shah Kakoo, is evident under the proposed CAF. They would have to surrender their tenancy rights and abandon those lands. It reminds me of General Musharaf's pre-referendum promises that state lands would be distributed among landless and tenants. President's referendum speeches may be termed as political and non-binding statements, but what about the international commitments to halve hunger by year 2015, and to ensure food sovereignty and food security. Would we be able to claim being a food sovereign state when the decisions of what to grow, where to grow, and how much to grow would be done by TNCs dealing in CAF? Federal Minister for Food, Agriculture and Livestock, who is a big proponent of CAF, and latest technologies including genetically modified food production technologies, committed two weeks ago in FAO's World Food Summit 2002, Rome, that Government of Pakistan would firmly anchor the national policies for hunger reduction in the poverty reduction strategies. However, it seems that government, in pursuit of corporate interests, has betrayed the poor and marginalised the communities of Pakistan. There may be development but it would certainly not be pro-poor development. Consequently, the phenomenon of hunger would keep on increasing. CAF is plainly backing out from our international commitments. Pakistan is a signatory of United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), and in "National Report of Pakistan on the Implementation of UNCCD" submitted in April 2002 to UNCCD Secretariat, GoP reports, "Government has a plan regarding redistribution of assets, especially state-owned land. It can have a major impact on poverty reduction efforts in rural Pakistan. The government has launched a programme of accelerated distribution of state-owned land to small farmers. The distribution of about three million acres of available land will be fully supported with the provision of infrastructure and all other possible inputs to combat desertification and rural poverty." One wonders where are the three million acres of state land that government has committed to distribute among small farmers to eradicate poverty. Does it not show that government is not sticking to its international commitments for the welfare and betterment of the poor? Government claims that CAF is being introduced as the small farmers of Pakistan are unable to adapt new technologies and cannot afford the costly inputs required to get optimum yield from new crop varieties. Let us assume that it is true, but can we deny the fact that traditionally, agriculture has not been just an economic activity but it has been a way of life and farmer's socio-cultural values are emotionally attached with agriculture? We blindly adopted "Green Revolution" and found that it was unsustainable. Not only did it play havoc with our renewable natural resources, but it deteriorated our environment as well. At societal level it led the rural communities to loose subsistence agriculture as well as their socio-cultural values. It is now widely recognised that latest farming technologies have benefited a few big landlords and, particularly, corporations involved in agribusiness. As a result, rest of the farmers are gradually loosing their hold on agriculture due to the fact that they cannot afford increasing costs of modern inputs to compete. And we are blaming them of being inefficient. The remedy our government is proposing-under the trade liberalisation regime-is to hand over our food production to TNCs. In other words, if our farmers cannot afford to eat bread, why don't they eat cakes? Corporate greed for profit from renewable natural resources would lead to growing food insecurity and prove to be the last nail in the coffin of subsistence farmers already economically hard pressed. With all these facts CAF plan of GoP seems to be unrealistic. If President of Pakistan cannot listen to what masses say, then he should try to listen to his special advisor on agriculture and member, National Security Council Shafi Niaz, who opposed this CAF plan in the cabinet meeting.:
