Earth Day, the Bajo Lempa in Resistance

Today, residents of the Bajo Lempa region of Jiquilisco, Usulutan are marking International Earth Day with a large event in Amando Lopez. Event organizers have made it clear that this is not so much a celebration, but a call to action.

Communities throughout the region have identified food sovereignty and protection of the region’s natural resources as their top priorities. They reject mega-development projects and large monoculture-based economies as a threat to their existence. For more on the mega-projects, click here. For more on mono-culture-based economies (i.e sugarcane) click here. For more on climate change, click here).

Today, organizers of the Bajo Lempa Earth Day event released this declaration stating their positions (we’re posting the declaration in English and Spanish).

ON INTERNATIONAL EARTH DAY, THE BAJO LEMPA IN RESISTANCE – More than a celebration, a cry of alarm and indignation!

Gathered in the community of Amando Lopez to commemorate International Earth Day, we are more than 1,500 people, community leaders, members of grassroots organizations, social groups, and movements, and we declare that we will defend our constitutional right to life.

Our Mother Earth is suffering the consequences of capitalism, which has plundered natural resources and caused serious problems such as destruction of biodiversity, the pollution of the oceans, depletion of water resources, and climate change. This indefensible destruction infringes upon the rights of the poor by making them even more vulnerable.

The main threats to the Bajo Lempa are the profit-driven national and multinational entities that are eager to invade and plunder the region without regard for the rights and dignity of the communities, or the rights of the population. They are doing so in the form of mega-tourism projects that are already underway with the appropriateion of land and the construction of a highway through the San Juan del Gozo Peninsula.

The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC, known in El Salvador as FOMILENIO) is a mechanism for implementing these megaprojects. If passed it will stimulate private investment for mega-tourism projects whose main goal is generating profits and not the wellfare of the communities.

The consequence of MCC/FOMILENIO and related investment projects will be the predation and contamination of the coastal region of El Salvador, as well as the eviction of the peasant communities that have traditionally lived sustainably in the region.

It is sad that these types of mega-projects are possible because stakeholders employ strategies that dismantle the social fabric of communities, and  discourage and deter the organized struggle of hope.

Faced with this reality, there are two possible paths for residents of the Bajo Lempa: tolerate the domination and irrational exploitation of Mother Earth, which will generate disastrous consequences for the poorest, or deploy a strategy of resistance based on sovereignty, sustainability and solidarity with nature and individuals.

For this reason, we, the social organizations and rural communities of the Bajo Lempa, commit ourselves to strengthening the economic struggle in an organized, persistent and brave manner, which involves:

• Defending our region to the end against all those that threaten to deprive us of our scarce resources, especially our land;
• Promoting and maintaining a strong mobilization and advocacy campaign to prevent the passage of the Law on Public-Private Partnerships to protect against the privatization of water and health;
• Strengthening atonomous ways of life and reject the establishment of monoculture economies such a sugarcane production;
• Creating alliances with all organizations and social movements that reject the Millennium Challenge Corporation;
• Developing a process to achieve food sovereignty with a focus on agro-ecology that includes the protection of heirloom seeds, the defense of the earth, and the conservation of sources of water;
• Promoting awareness and disseminating information on the FOMILENIO megaprojects, including tourism, to increase and maintain strength.

  IN DEFENSE OF LIFE AND TERRITORY
  Bajo Lempa in resistance.

  Community Amando Lopez, April 21, 2013

EN EL DÍA INTERNACIONAL DE LA TIERRA – EL BAJO LEMPA EN RESISTENCIA: Más que una celebración, un grito de alerta e indignación.

Reunidos en la comunidad Amando López para conmemorar el Día Internacional de nuestra Madre Tierra, más de 1500 personas, entre líderes comunitarios, miembros de organizaciones de base, de grupos y movimientos sociales, declaramos que defendemos nuestro derecho constitucional a la vida.

La Madre Tierra sufre las consecuencias del capitalismo que ha depredado los recursos naturales y ocasionado graves problemas como la pérdida de  biodiversidad, la contaminación de los océanos, el agotamiento de fuentes de agua  y el cambio climático. Esta destrucción injustificada atenta principalmente contra las poblaciones empobrecidas incrementando su vulnerabilidad.

En lo local la principal amenaza es el afán de lucro de grandes empresas nacionales y trasnacionales que invaden y saquean los territorios sin importarles la dignidad de las comunidades, ni los derechos de la población que se ve afectada. El Bajo Lempa vive esta realidad producto de un megaproyecto turístico que ha iniciado con la concentración de tierras y la construcción de una carretera que cruza de norte a sur  la Península de San Juan del Gozo.

La Corporación Cuenta del Milenio (conocida en El Salvador como FOMILENIO), es un mecanismo para impulsar este tipo de megaproyectos. De aprobarse el segundo FOMILENIO, se realizarán grandes proyectos de turismo cuyo fin será la generación de ganancias y en ningún momento el bienestar de las comunidades.

Las consecuencias del segundo FOMILENIO, serán el incremento en la depredación y contaminación de los ecosistemas costeros del país; además el desalojo de comunidades campesinas que tradicionalmente han pertenecido a estos territorios, quienes han convivido y aprovechado sosteniblemente los recursos naturales.

Es de lamentar que este tipo de megaproyectos se hacen posibles porque los sectores interesados emplean estrategias que desarticulan el tejido social de las comunidades,  desaniman la lucha organizada y desalientan la esperanza.

Frente a este nuevo escenario hay dos caminos posibles para los habitantes del Bajo Lempa, uno tolerar el proceso de dominación y explotación irracional de la Madre Tierra,  ó plantearse una estrategia de resistencia, basada en la soberanía, la sustentabilidad y solidaridad con la naturaleza y las personas.

Por esta razón, organizaciones sociales y comunidades campesinas del Bajo Lempa, nos  comprometemos a trabajar para que se fortalezca la lucha reivindicativa de forma organizada, perseverante y valiente, que comprenderá lo siguiente:

• Defender nuestro territorio, hasta las últimas consecuencias, de  aquellos intereses que amenacen con despojarnos de nuestros escasos bienes, principalmente la tierra.
•  Impulsar y mantener una fuerte campaña de movilización para evitar la aprobación de la Ley de Asocios Público – Privados, por el riesgo de privatización de bienes como el agua y la salud.
• Fortalecer los medios de vida autóctonos y rechazar el establecimiento de monocultivos, como la caña de azúcar.
• Articular alianzas con grupos, organizaciones y movimientos sociales que rechazan el segundo FOMILENIO.
• Desarrollar un proceso de Soberanía Alimentaria, con enfoque agroecológico que incluya la protección de nuestras semillas, la defensa de la tierra y la conservación de las fuentes de agua.
• Impulsar procesos de sensibilización y difusión de información sobre el segundo FOMILENIO y megaproyectos de turismo, para incrementar el conocimiento sobre estos temas y mantener la resistencia.

POR LA DEFENSA DE LA VIDA Y EL TERRITORIO,

EL BAJO LEMPA EN RESISTENCIA.

Comunidad  Amando López, 21 de Abril de 2013.

The Debate Over Public-Private Partnership Law and MCC Funding in El Salvador

Last week Pacific Rim Mining Company announced it is seeking $315 million dollars in damages from El Salvador. It was a stark reminder that the 8-year old mining debate, which included several years of threats and violence between mining supporters and opponents, has yet to been resolved and could still result in a devastating economic blow to El Salvador.

As the mining issue continues, another debate with the potential to become just as volatile is brewing. In March the Funes Administration provided some details about its proposal for a second round of funding from the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), a US aid program started by President Bush in 2004. The proposal is worth $413 million dollars, half of which will likely go towards an infrastructure project like improving the Litoral Highway that runs along El Salvador’s southern coast. The other half is likely to help finance public-private partnerships and improve human capital, which seems to mean education.

As details of the proposal emerge, opposition to a second round of MCC funding is growing. So far, opposition has opened on two fronts. The Salvadoran labor movement has been the most outspoken opponent, denouncing the proposed Law on Public Private Partnerships (P3 Law) since last year. Environmentalists and communities in the Lower Lempa region of Usulután have been less outspoken, but oppose the MCC proposal because the public-private partnerships will support tourism, which they strongly oppose. In 2011, members of the anti-mining movement also spoke out against the P3 Law fearing it would result in mining activities.

Mangrove Forests near La Tirana, a community targeted for a large tourism project

Because politicians within the FMLN are supporting the MCC, the politics of opposing the P3 Law and tourism are a little more complicated than opposition to mining was. Other than a protest outside the US Embassy in March and other small activities organized by the labor movement, opposition has remained largely behind closed doors, which may change soon.

            The Public Private Partnership Law

US Ambassador Maria Carmen Aponte said in October 2012 that approval of a second round of MCC funds relies on the passage of the P3 Law. The labor movement and their international supporters, argue that the P3 Law will privatize government operations including the airport, seaports, health care facilities, and other important services. They fear it will result in the loss of thousands of jobs, increasing the country’s already high rates of unemployment and driving wages down even further.

The labor movement and other opponents also do not want the private sector to control important resources and services like water, education, and health controlled. For example, Salvadoran civil society has fought against privatization of water for many years, making it such a toxic issue that politicians are unable to advocate for it publicly. Just like the government has not been able to privatize water, civil society organizations have not been able to pass a water law they have been promoting for over 8 years. Among other things, the law would protect water resources from privatization. Similarly, in 2002 then President Francisco Flores tried to privatize part of the health care system, but health care workers and many others took to the streets and forced the government to back off. Opponents of the P3 law fear it will make it easier for the government to accomplish what it has failed to do in the past – privatizing water and health care.

Supporters of the P3 Law, including President Funes, counter that public-private partnerships are not privatization, and the government will not privatize any important services, like health and education. They argue, instead, that public-private partnerships will result in more foreign direct investments, injecting capital into services and industries that are lagging behind.

The labor movement and other activists fear, however, that while not called privatization, the P3s are a way to accomplish the same goals. Concessions could last as long as 40 years, which means the state is essentially relinquishing control of an asset. Similarly, while capital investments are needed, the P3 Law will allow private, international investors to generate profits from basic services in El Salvador and take the profits overseas instead of re-investing in El Salvador.

Public-private partnerships are not new in El Salvador – they government has contracted out many operations to private companies over the years. One regular criticism is that these relationships prioritize profits over the well being of Salvadorans. For example, in the aftermath of the October 2011 floods, communities and organizations in the Lower Lempa blamed the CEL for washing them out. The CEL is the state-owned agency that manages the dam, generating electricity that private power companies sell for profit. The more electricity produced, the more money the companies make. In the months after the 2011 floods CEL representatives responded frankly, stating they operate the dams to make electricity and generate profits, not protect the people downstream.

FESPAD and Voices on the Borders 2012 legal interns recently published a full analysis of the P3 Law.

Tourism and other Investments

One of the public-private partnerships being proposed in the second MCC compact is tourism – hotels and resorts being built along El Salvador’s Pacific coast. In December the government solicited proposals from the private sector and received 49 responses, 27 of which are tourism projects in Usulután, La Paz, and La Libertad.

Tourism is not inherently bad, but communities in the Lower Lempa of Usulután fear that building hotels and resorts in and around their important and fragile ecosystems will cause irreparable harm. One Lower Lempa community targeted for a tourism project is La Tirana, an isolated and economically poor community located at the edge of one of the most pristine mangrove forest in Central America. In addition to its immense natural beauty, the forest supports thousands of species of flora and fauna. The nearby beaches are protected as a nesting ground for several species of endangered sea turtles. Residents of La Tirana fear tourists would damage the fragile mangroves with construction of houses and resorts, jet skis and motorboats, and solid waste and sewage, while displacing local residents and their farms.

Proponents of tourism argue that resorts and hotels in places like Tirana would provide jobs and spur the local economy. They believe this to be especially important in communities, such as those in the Lower Lempa, that have had their agricultural economy diminished by free trade. But locals doubt resorts will help the local economy. They know that hotels are much more likely to hire bilingual youth from San Salvador who have degrees in hotel management than poor campesinos who barely have a sixth grade education.

Voices staff recently met with community members in La Tirana, and they are very much against outside investors building resorts in their region. Recognizing that they live in a special place, the community board is proposing that the community build a series of small, humble cabanas that would have a small ecological footprint, but provide comfortable housing for a small number of guests. They are also proposing that the community build a small community kitchen that could feed guests. The community wants to develop its own small eco-tourism industry that it can regulate and ensure does not harm the forest or turtle nesting ground. It would also mean that the money from tourism would benefit the community, and not just make wealthy investors in San Salvador or abroad even richer.

Other communities in the region are even more vulnerable than La Tirana. In El Chile and other small communities, many residents still do not have title to their land. They fear that if a private investor wants to build a hotel or resort the State could take their land and they would have no legal recourse.

Our staff also met with other communities in the Lower Lempa – Comunidad Octavio Ortiz, Amando Lopez, Nueva Esperanza – and several local organizations. They are also completely opposed to tourism projects in the region. They fear that hotels and resorts will further destroy agricultural land, use up limited water resources, and destroy local culture. The community of Octavio Ortiz even wrote in their strategic plan that they see tourism as a large threat to farming and their peaceful way of life.

While most of the public-private partnership proposals involve tourism, there are quite a few agricultural projects. According to PRESA, the government agency managing the project proposals, they received 14 requests to support production of exports in dairy, mangoes, limes, and honey. In order to be considered for a public-private partnership, investors have to have $100,000 in capital and be producing export crops. The capital requirement means local farmers will not be able to participate. And the requirement that products be grown for export means even more land will be dedicated to products that do not contribute to food sovereignty, which is a top priority for the region.

There are also civil society leaders and academics in El Salvador who oppose the MCC because they see it as the latest phase in implementing a neoliberal economic agenda in their country. They hold it in the same regard as the privatization of state assets (1990s), dollarization (1995-2001), Central American Free Trade Agreement (2006), the first MCC compact (2007-2012), and Partnership for Growth (2011). Similarly, Gilberto Garcia from Center for Labor Studies (CEAL, in Spanish) believes the

highway projects, including the northern highway funded by the first MCC compact and the Litoral Highway project planned for the second compact, are part of an effort to build a land bridge in Guatemala. The “Inter-Oceanic Corridor” will connect ports on the Pacific coasts of Guatemala and El Salvador with Caribbean or Atlantic ports in Guatemala. ODEPAL is managing the project in what they call a public-private partnership. The land bridge is located in Guatemala, but it is right on the borders with El Salvador and Honduras, giving both countries easy access.

Politics of Opposing the MCC and P3 Law

Building a strong national movement around opposition to the second MCC compact and the P3 Law may be more difficult than organizing Salvadorans against mining. While the anti-mining movement was able to reduce the debate to a single issue that all Salvadorans could understand – i.e. gold mining will destroy water resources for 60% of the country – most people believe that tourism, better highways, and other capital investments are always good. Similarly, the P3 Law is fairly abstract and difficult to reduce into a simple message that the majority of Salvadorans can relate to their everyday lives.

The politics around the MCC and P3 Law will make it more difficult to achieve the kind of nation-wide opposition that the anti-mining movement was able to garner. During the mining debate, the FMLN (leftist political party) was the opposition party and had the political freedom to take an anti-mining position. The FMLN is now in power and has to consider the economic and political interests that helped them get there. President Funes and FMLN presidential candidate Sanchez Cerén support the P3 Law and MCC compact, arguing the investments will be good for the economy. According to anonymous sources, many of the same business interests that helped Mauricio Funes with the 2009 presidential elections will benefit from the P3 Law and MCC funds. FMLN legislators have been a slower to sign on to the P3 Law. At times FMLN legislators have said it was not their top priority, and more recently they have tried to negotiate amendments to exclude certain sectors such as health and education from public-private partnerships. Officials from the conservative ARENA party have accused the FMLN legislators of not supporting the law because they want to implement a socialist economy agenda.

But the civil society organizations, communities, and labor unions that are opposed to the P3 Law and the MCC funding generally make up much of the FMLN’s base. If Sanchez Cerén and his supporters continue to embrace the P3 law and the MCC funding, while many in their base protest against it, it could exacerbate an existing split within the party in the months leading up to the February 2014 presidential elections. Many former FMLN militants and supporters, especially in the Lower Lempa, already believe the movement they once fought for no longer represents their interests and values.

Though the US and Salvadoran governments want to pass the P3 Law and sign the MCC compact before the elections, many opponents are gearing up for a long struggle. Even if the P3 Law passes, when the government wants to enter into a public-private partnership the Legislative Assembly will have to approve it. They are likely to face great scrutiny and opposition. Similarly, developers wanting to break ground on tourism projects in La Tirana and other communities are likely to face some rather significant legal and social barriers – much like Pacific Rim faced in Cabañas.

Salvadoran Government Catching up to Communities on Climate Change

Yesterday we issued a press release reporting that Salvadoran government officials attribute last week’s record rainfall and flooding to climate change.

This morning Hernán Rosa Chávez, the Minister of the Environment and Natural Resources, told La Presnsa Grafica that El Salvador is about to “begin the process of shielding itself against climate change.” He wants El Salvador to be a model country for the international community on how to live with climate change.

He said, “we have to prepare ourselves for this [the rains] to occur every year. We have to make changes in agriculture so that [farmers] will not lose their crops. We have to build an infrastructure thinking about vulnerability, and develop the country without needing to destroy it.”

While these statements are an important recognition of the problem, they are also another sad reminder that the time for the United States and other industrialized nations to change their greenhouse-gas emitting ways is running out. And its countries like El Salvador that are suffering as a result.

With regards to Minister Chávez’ plan to change the agriculture sector so farmers won’t lose their crops, communities long-ago recognized that extreme weather patters would affect their crops. In the Lower Lempa region of Usulután, one of the most affected during last week’s historic rains and floods, farmers have been converting some of their fields to rice which is more flood resistant. That have also been installing irrigation systems that will allow them to plant corn in the dry season when the risk of flooding is low. Local development organizations and farmers talk openly about climate change and how to better protect their crops, and increase their food security.

Rio Lempa flowing through a levee break on October 13th, days before the flooding got really bad

If the Salvadoran government really wanted to help, they could work with local farmers to protect domestic markets for their crops instead of allowing cheap imports from heavily subsidized US farmers to run them out of business. In September, President Funes was in the Lower Lempa to announce an $18 million aid package for the region that will in part help farmers convert to “exotic crops” such as cashew nuts that they can sell in the US. Such crops are even more sensitive to climate change and would subject Salvadoran farmers to the ups and downs of US markets. And if locals are not growing corn and beans, it creates a greater market for US farmers. If the Funes administration really wants to help the domestic agricultural sector respond to climate change, they should help provide farmers access to simple technologies that give them more control over their crops, and protect domestic markets for domestically grown products.

Minister Chávez also said the government will improve the nation’s infrastructure to decrease vulnerability. That’s great, but communities in the Lower Lempa and other river basins around El Salvador have been asking for better levees and drainage systems for more than 10 years. The levees have failed in several of the most recent storms, and since 2003, communities have marched from the Lower Lempa to San Salvador to demand they repair them. It’s great that the Minister supports these efforts now. Imagine if he and other government officials had supported these efforts last year or the year before. Maybe Nueva Esperanza, Ciudad Romero, Zamorano, Nuevo Amanecer, Salinas del protrero, and hundreds of other impoverished communities would have faired a little better last week.

Climate change is a reality. And with all due respect for Minister Chavez, if there is a silver lining to last week’s rains its that the government and international community may begin supporting communities that have been trying to deal with it for years.

The Cost of Free Trade: 5 Years into DR-CAFTA

The Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (or DR-CAFTA) went into effect March 1, 2006. After 5 years, it is time to evaluate what kind of results this agreement has produced. Like any other free trade agreement, the logic behind CAFTA was that liberalized trade leads to a net welfare gain for both countries. Furthermore, because the seven countries involved in the agreement (US, Dominican Republic, Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Nicaragua) have different resources, technologies, and preferences, there are gains to be made from trade. By pursuing each other’s comparative advantage, as David Ricardo first argued, each country may specialize in that which it is relatively better at producing. This is a powerful theory, but as economics often shows, theory cannot always be reconciled with reality; many of these models make specific assumptions that do not always match the real world. Specifically in the case of CAFTA, it appears as though the Central American countries have suffered several negative consequences of this free trade agreement. The results of the agreement that weren’t clearly negative are ambiguous at best.

 

The removal of tariffs lowers the costs of trade between these countries and their main trading partner–the US. That being said, because tariffs have been removed, the governments of the Central American countries have less government revenue flowing in. While the US hardly had any tariffs on imported goods from Central American countries, the Central American nations had high tariffs on US goods in order to raise revenue for their governments. Before DR-CAFTA came into effect, about 80% of all US goods were not duty free, and the removal of the tariffs caused the governments to lose a substantial amount of revenue.

 

Additionally, because the US subsidizes its agricultural products, it has hurt the average farmers in these Central American countries. Since most Central American farmers cannot compete with the massive, more efficient farms in the US that are subsidized by the government, many of these Central American farmers find themselves out of business.  This forces them to instead try to find work in the multi-national corporations’ factories. More individuals in the cities seeking jobs in the so-called “maquilas” means that the supply of labor rises while the number of maquilas stays the same. This leads to an excess supply of Salvadorans seeking jobs in these factories. Thus, factory owners may lower their salaries because there is so much competition for work.

 

Many theorists would assert that one of the largest benefits of trade is that after lifting barriers to trade, the countries involved in the agreement will be able to consume more, leaving them all better off. In reality however, the results are neither negative nor positive, but rather unclear. Data shows that over the course of the last five years and until 2010, exports and imports in El Salvador have steadily increased. One, however, cannot say for certain that this is a direct result of DR-CAFTA. More than that, while Salvadoran exports and imports may have increased, it does not necessarily mean that El Salvador is physically producing and exporting more goods. Export and import data are calculated by value, and therefore one must factor prices into the equation. It is possible that El Salvador produced just as much last year as it did five years ago. However, because prices have risen, the value of its exports has also risen even though El Salvador is not better off in real terms. There is some evidence that suggests that increases in price levels over time account for some of the rise in exports. According to the data, El Salvador has experienced inflation since 2005. Because of the difficulty of directly attributing rises in exports and imports to DR-CAFTA the actual effect of the agreement on trade is ambiguous.

 

The effects of DR-CAFTA remain unclear when analyzing Chapter 10 of the agreement, which eliminates barriers to investment. According to the chapter, investments are very strongly protected.  This protection is provided by the most-favored nation provision (in which the countries agree to accord one another with the same favorable terms that would be offered in treaties with any other nation) the “fair and equitable treatment” clause (which refers to a country agreeing to treat foreign investors the same as domestic ones), and the “full protection and security” clause (which refers to a country’s agreement to protect one other’s investors by providing them with security).  Because of these provisions, multi-national corporations can securely conduct their business in signatory nations and employ their citizens.  Although this is positive for El Salvador and the rest of Central America, the nature of the jobs these corporations often provide is unsanitary, unsafe, and low-paying. Thus, the citizens of Central America are not necessarily better off, especially since the multi-national corporations often do not reinvest their profits within the region but instead send it back to their home country. Due to the lack of economic development from the international investors, workers do not necessarily stand to gain.

 

For all of these reasons, DR-CAFTA has no clear and significant benefits to El Salvador and the other Central American members of the agreement. Salvadorans and other Central Americans need development, and because DR-CAFTA seems to facilitate it through spurring investment, but impede it through working conditions, among other things, this trade agreement is neither a sufficient nor an ideal solution to development.  DR-CAFTA, along with its effects like poor working conditions, low salaries, US subsidized exports, etc, will continue to remain an issue of concern until further investigation and/or reforms can be completed.

El Salvador’s Ongoing Struggle with Food Security (Part 2)

Food security and water issues in El Salvador are partially caused and definitely worsened by the effects of climate change.  The unpredictable patterns of rainfall and drought that are characteristic of climate change negatively affect crop production, thereby leading to reduced yields and higher market prices.

 

José Camilo Rodriguez, mayor of the community of Tonacatepeque, remarked in an interview conducted by the World Bank on the stress that has been put on the poor farmers in his community, due to the effects on the market that were caused by precarious weather conditions, such as floods.

 

Floods, in addition to harming crops, often tend to lead to the contamination of rivers as sewage and rainwater combine and flow back into rivers as the floods subside. FAO estimates that a mere 16% of Salvadorans have access to water that is safe to drink.  The Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) additionally notes that only 2% of the rivers in El Salvador hold water that is suitable for human consumption.  MARN alleges that one of the most contaminated rivers is the Lempa River, which reaches a large number of communities over its 360-kilometer span and is highly polluted by fecal bacteria.

 

In regards to food related security, FAO cites that 9% of the Salvadoran population is undernourished, missing about 190 calories from their diet.  Inequality in access to food is troublingly high.  Despite all of the challenges and problems the Salvadoran people face, at least a few communities have come together in community-based projects to improve their food and water security situations.

 

Grassroots community efforts to improve food security and water quality are making concrete, positive impacts in El Salvador.  We at Voices on the Border have had a direct hand in working with communities in the Lower Lempa to help develop irrigation systems that facilitate crop cultivation, especially during the dry season and periods of drought, which threaten crop yields.

 

In addition, communities in Santa Marta, El Salvador, with the help of an international NGO have successfully worked to raise fish, harvest honey, and crops.  These products are sold at market and some of the profits are invested back into the venture, to keep it growing.  This project enjoys the help of many members of the community, who take turns fishing or selling their products at market.  Grassroots level improvement of the food security situation in El Salvador is promising and seems to be gaining popularity.

 

Supplementing these grassroots initiatives are the efforts of various international organizations that have attempted to help improve the food security situation in the country.  On March 24, the USDA, under their Food For Progress (FFP) initiative, donated 30,000 metric tons of wheat to El Salvador.  The sales of this wheat are intended to generate about $11 million of revenue that will be utilized to finance infrastructure and development projects to help farmers affected by Tropical Storm Ida. Food For Progress  also urges them to take advantage of the trade opportunities afforded to them under the DR-CAFTA agreement. Since 2001, USDA has delivered 130,400 metric tons of food to El Salvador, for a total value of approximately $27.5 million.  While this form of aid seems both promising and beneficial to food security measures, due to the direct investment in domestic production El Salvadoran agriculture, other programs have not been as conscientious.

 

USAID’s “glass of milk” project, was launched in 2009 with the intention of providing a daily glass of milk to 3,790 students in 15 schools of Ataco, Ahuachapán, with the aim at improving the physical health and development of Salvadoran youth.  USAID invested $76,317 for the provision of these resources and the program was successful with the caveat that it missed a prime opportunity to invest in the Salvadoran economy.  Instead of cooperating with local dairy farmers within the country, USAID financed the importation of dried milk imported from northern US states.  This large-scale importation of milk drove down market prices for dairy products, creating adverse consequences for local dairy farmers.  While the aid of international organizations is necessary for food and water improvements in El Salvador, this project is an example of why organizations need to be wary of the manner in which they seek to make improvements.

 

Food and water security is a vital issue for communities in El Salvador who are experiencing unpleasant consequences on their agricultural sector from the economic interdependence that has arisen from globalization and the effects of climate change.  These factors continue to complicate El Salvador’s quest to better its food security situation, but through domestic investment in agricultural infrastructure and products and grassroots community efforts to promote sustainability, it is likely many of these problems could be mitigated.

El Salvador’s Ongoing Struggle with Food Security (Part 1)

El Salvador has not been exempt from the food security problems that have historically plagued developing countries.  According to The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), food security exists when “all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.” Currently, El Salvador’s food security condition remains stable, without instance of acute food shortages.  Although ‘stable,’ the food security situation in El Salvador is definitely less than ideal and market prices for agricultural products continue to climb.

 

FAO’s Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture reports (GIEWS) highlight a few important characteristics of the current Salvadoran state of food security.  A 40% rise in the price of maize and beans since last year is the first among the challenges facing Salvadorans.  These are the country’s basic food sources, which experienced severely reduced yields due to the excessive rainfalls of 2010, coupled with the international rise in grain prices.  Finally, the 2011 sowing of cereal crops is predicted to be low due to the damage caused by the La Niña phenomenon.

 

Food security problems in El Salvador have historical roots. Landholdings in El Salvador were once concentrated in the hands of a small group of wealthy elites until agrarian reforms were initiated in 1980.  This group of landholders instituted a system of cultivation in which they focused on a singular export, producing a mono-crop culture that would persist for decades.  The focus of production on a singular crop necessitated the importation of many other important agricultural commodities that were not being domestically produced. The first of these mono-crops was cacao, during the end of the 16^th century, followed by indigo in the 18^th century, and then finally in the mid-19^th century, coffee. From 1871 to 1927 El Salvador was referred to as the “coffee republic.” The extremely lucrative nature of the coffee trade served to further concentrate land in the hands of oligarchy that had developed.

 

The beginning in the 1980s witnessed an increase in demand for government intervention in the agricultural sector, as Salvadorans pressed to gain access to land through protests and other public demonstrations.  An agrarian reform eventually liberated over 500 hectares from 230 estates, or about 15% of the country’s farmland. Although the redistribution of land seemed to be promising, overall it was not effective enough to change the trajectory of El Salvador’s agricultural sector or economy.

 

During the Cristiani administration (1989-1994), El Salvador’s economy remained dependent on agricultural imports.  Cristiani prioritized his family business, Semillas Cristiani Burkard (SCB), a privately held seed company headquartered in Guatemala City, Guatemala, over internal development of the agricultural sector.  Crisitani curtailed the growth and development of the domestic sector by heavily importing seeds from SCB in order to accumulate personal wealth.

 

Cristiani also pushed for further industrialization of the country, which had been seen briefly during the Civil War, in the form of maquiladoras, which contained free economic export zones or ports commonly located in and created by third world countries, which dealt mainly with exporting cheaply priced, handmade products. Maquiladoras were located in the metropolitan areas of El Salvador, which heightened the level of urbanization, creating problems of congestion, but also demands for more industrial commodities and services, such as electricity and transportation.

 

This population shift, from rural to urban centers of living and sometimes from El Salvador to other international locations, had significant impacts on the agricultural sector.  Remittances provide a clear example of the consequences of migration on agricultural practices.  Salvadorans are extremely dependent on remittances, and as much as 20.7% of their GDP consists of said monetary transfers.  The Central Bank estimated that in 2010 remittances from Salvadorans working in the United States totaled a hefty $3.5 billion.  Essentially, the less developed communities in El Salvador are making lifestyle and economic shifts that signify a movement away from subsistence agriculture, made possible by remittances that supplement or comprise their household incomes.

 

The Funes administration (2009-present), has been left with the historical lack of diversification of agricultural production, along with the absence of development of the domestic agricultural sector as a consequence of Cristiani’s strategy to focus on crop imports.  Almost 95% of fruit and vegetables consumed in El Salvador are imported from abroad, along with 30% of all its beans and 40% of corn.  Funes and the FMLN have made it a goal in May of 2011 to achieve “food sovereignty” meaning the ability to decide what agricultural policies El Salvador will implement which will also hopefully lessen the impact the international market has on the Salvadoran agricultural sector.

 

In an effort to achieve “food sovereignty,” Funes has explicitly recognized the role of small, non-commercial family farmers who produce 70% of the country’s domestically cultivated grains, mainly for the consumption of their own family.  These farmers are particularly significant to stability of El Salvador’s food security situation and Funes proposed the Family Agriculture Plan in an effort to aid them. This plan intends to serve over 325,000 families that are dependent upon subsistence agriculture by continuing to provide them with free agricultural packets of seeds and chemical fertilizer.

 

Food security has historically and currently is a major issue that confronts El Salvador.  The problems caused by a lack of food security must not only be addressed by the Salvadoran government but also highly prioritized, as current environmental and market conditions—climate change and high market prices for agricultural commodities—are only serving to exacerbate the insecurity.

Al Jazeera in the Lower Lempa

 

At the beginning of February, a fellow Lower Lempa solidarity organization Eco Viva, invited Aljazeera reporter Dahr Jamail to the Lower Lempa.  Jamail spoke with members of the communities, representatives from the Jiquilisco and Tecoluca mayor’s offices, and doctors with the NefroLempa kidney medical team.  His article, published this week, is titled  Climate: Putting People over Money: Facing climate change, a social movement in El Salvador fights mass flooding and toxic burning of cane fields.

Tropical Storms and Small Farmers

Small producers in El Salvador are facing a grim agricultural season this summer.  Tropical Storm Agatha started off the rainy season with torrential rains that caused landslides and massive flooding along the coastal river basins.  Last week’s Hurricane Alex brought more rain that further saturated the soil of already vulnerable communities.

The outlook for the rest of the rainy season doesn’t bode well either.  Colorado State University, NOAA, and Climate Prediction Center (CPC) are predicting a very active hurricane season in the Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean with an average of 18 tropical storms between June 1^st and November 30^th.  These storms push ample amounts of rain and wind onto El Salvador, where 95% of the population is vulnerable to the effects of natural disasters.

In a discussion with Voices on the Border’s partner community Octavio Ortiz, in the Lower Lempa, Jiquilisco we can begin to understand what this means for small subsistence farmers.

In Octavio Ortiz 60 of the 97 families farm their own land; an average of 5 acres per family.  Other community members work as day laborers, or in a handful of trade skills.  With the land overly saturated, landowners can’t count on their own harvest for their year’s supply of corn, and the day laborers have been without work.  The average pay is $4.00 for four or five hours of heavy manual labor.

Some families planted corn before Agatha and then lost it.  A few of those families decided to re-plant, only to lose that seed to Alex.  Very few farmers dare to try again, especially with the heaviest rains expected for July, September and October.  After Alex, the community reported a loss of about 66 acres of corn.  680 chickens also died.  No one had risked planting vegetables which are a much more expensive investment, so there was no need to report losses there.  Most of the fruit trees survived the storm, but about 15 families had hoped to plant mango, cocoa, and lemon trees.  They’re having trouble finding land where the young saplings won’t rot before they take hold.

Swampy fields also impact the backbone of the community’s economy – cattle.  Traditionally the rainy season is ideal for abundant pasture and local cows can thrive.  This year’s pastures are either still flooded or have become de facto swamps.  One woman said that before the storms her seven cows were producing 35 bottles of milk every day.  Now they are only able to produce between 10 or 12 bottles.  That means she has gone from earning about $14 dollars a week to just $4 dollars.

Efforts to aid the community have been piecemeal.  The mayor donated small packets of food last month.  This weekend the Red Cross donated more food aid packages that will last families at least a month or two.  Other associations and NGO’s have distributed aid to their corresponding sectors.  The Ministry of Agriculture and Cattle has collected the reported losses from the community and is offering rice and sorghum seeds come August.  They are also selling chickens at very reduced prices ($18 for 50 chicks).

The reality of the situation is that this community and others like it will have to find alternative ways to feed their families for the remainder of the year.  When conditions are favorable, farmers can produce one more harvest after the rainy season thanks to the lingering humidity in the soil.  After that, only those with access to irrigation will be able to produce a harvest during the dry season.

Several local associations such as ACUDESBAL and ADIBAL have begun pilot projects with small groups sharing portable irrigation systems in an effort to confront climate change and create more resilient communities.  However, local farmers are hesitant to try their hand at the new systems.  For many, rain has always determined the growing season, and intensive farming requires a greater commitment in time, energy and maintenance.  Just consider that to buy the few gallons of gasoline that the pump requires per week, the farmer has to travel by bus with his or her gas can to the closest gas station 12 miles away.  Initiatives such as these require time and patience.  The experiences of those participating in the pilot project serve to convince neighbors and friends over time.  Typically, communities begin to reproduce these kinds of initiatives on their own after three years.  But – with weather patterns being anything but typical, farmers could embrace such alternatives more quickly.  It may be the safest card they have left to play.

Minister of Agriculture Resigns Over Political Concerns

Last Tuesday Manuel Sevilla, now ex-minister of agriculture and livestock (MAG, in Spanish), announced his resignation from the Ministry due to increasing political pressure from the Central Government.

The Funes administration has been committed to creating greater transparency in government and reducing corruption since taking office in June 2009.  In his resignation, Sevilla said the distribution of agricultural subsidies, which include seed and fertilizer for farmers, had been heavily influenced by senior officials and corrupted by the central government.

Historically, agricultural subsidies and other government benefits have been allocated according to political affiliation.  In 2009 when Funes nominated Sevilla to head the MAG, they each promised to end the system of political party preferences and distribute government benefits equitably. Sevilla, however, cites the administration’s failure to comply with this promise as the primary reason for leaving his post.  He claims that during the negotiation process central government stepped in to ensure that more subsidies went to traditionally right-wing and conservative agricultural groups, like CAMAGRO, which support political parties like the PNC, ARENA, and GANA.

Following the announcement, President Funes heartily defended his administration.  In an impromptu press conference, Funes said he believes Sevilla resigned to take another job with an international organization, not due to political pressures. He restated his commitment to the equitable distribution of subsidies and greater transparency in the MAG.  He believe that the subsidies could be distributed unfairly, as the more conservative MAG employees have not received any benefits with regards to the subsidies.  Funes also pointed out that the distribution plan was the same as last year, and Sevilla was involved in making and implementing that plan.

Agricultural organizations are divided over the resignation and distribution of agricultural subsidies. Some that ally more with rural farmers believe that Sevilla was an excellent candidate for the position, and are impressed by his development programs, which extend all the way to 2030. Others feel that he was an inefficient and ineffective leader, and lacked the necessary experience and ability to reform the MAG and create change for Salvadoran farmers. President Funes stated that he had received complaints about Sevilla from over 120 agricultural organizations, and implied that perhaps Sevilla simply quit before he was formally relieved of his duties.

Funes Administration to Strengthen Agricultural Sector

Last week, the Funes Administration launched a program that aims to strengthen El Salvador’s agricultural system by increasing production and legalizing land possession for farmers that have been unable to obtain titles to their property.

In a ceremony launching the initiative, President Funes stated that his administration “wants to make the countryside into the driving force behind the country’s development.”  President Funes also acknowledged that the agricultural sector has been ignored for too many years.  Since the late 1980s, conservative administrations have supported industrialization and manufacturing, and built a dependency on agricultural imports.

The administration’s plan will benefit 600,000 farmers and increase agricultural outputs by 10% from 2009-2010.  Government agencies will distribute fertilizers, and seed for corn, beans, rice, and sorghum.  The government will also create a commission to address the issue of cattle rustling, which has been a growing problem in recent years.  The plan also commits to renewing a Coffee Park over the next five years, by distributing 20 million coffee plants to growers.  Farmers will also receive technical training from agricultural experts, who will stress the importance of growing more fruits and vegetables for local consumption.

Since taking office on June 1, the new administration has granted land titles to 934 families that have farmed without them for over twenty years.  The government will soon begin reviewing title requests for another 849 families in Izalco, Usulután, and Ahuachapán. The government’s goal is to grant 3000 land titles as a part of the agricultural project.  Besides the obvious benefit of protecting the farmer’s right to his or her land, studies show that land titles allow farmers greater access to credit and provide incentives for investments into a property.