THE EFFECTS OF POLITICS AND MODERNIZATION ON THIRD WORLD FARMING COMMUNITIES
The traditional farmer has encountered obstacles to
sustainability. He/she has experienced pressures from social acceptance
of the western definition of poverty, government, and international agencies.
The primarily definition of poverty is " people not being
able to meet their material and non-material needs through their own efforts".
Conversely the monetary based economy categories it according to having
money to buy the items to meet their basic needs. The acceptance of governments
in the third world of the latter definition has impacted the farmers to
a great extent.
ANALYSIS OF POVERTY
The societal acceptance of not having money when accessing
poverty reflects how monetary based economies are attempting to instill
this thinking to expand their market and demand for their products. The
hunter gathers who use personal labor to attain sustainability in providing
food and shelter is deemed to be classified as poor. These farmers often
build their own houses, equipment, educated their children by family and
friends instead of using paid teachers. This method has been maintained
for thousands of years.
Availability of food
The success of the monetary economy has established
an entitlement system where whose with money are allowed to have food.
Since " over 800 million hungry people live in the third world" the problem
of food scarcity does not exist but the distribution of food to those who
need it. The exportation of food to pay for national debts and industrial
prosperity has made citizens of those countries be deprived of local food.
Source of RevenueGOVERNMENTS
Focus of Funding
The farming revenue were used to build the infrastructure
for cities while minimal funds were reinvested for farmers. This constant
taking and not replenishing the farming needs degrated farmlands.
Farmers lacked the technological and knowledge reinvestment to maintain
their sustainability as time progressed and new methods are being found
to farm. The local government of " developing countries that favored
cities by squeezing agricultural exports and subsidizing cities exacerbated
the problems of overurbanization". This is caused by having a surplus urban
labor force that effects young and poor citizens the most. Items such as
farming equipment, irrigation methods, social services in the farming communities
and minimal land and income tax are forms of reinvestments.
Monocultures
Governments attempted to maximize the yield and cost per unit of product by replacing variety farming with few cash-crops for export. This form of farming was primarily for exporting and local consumption was limited because of the buying power of international markets. The oil crisis of 1979/80 made many farmers in third world countries go bankrupt because of accelerating cost in the distribution networks.
" Monoculture was introduced to replace the traditional
practice of self-sufficient farming while domestic prices were kept at
perpetually high levels through various forms of export tax in order to
generate income for the government". This method exploited the land by
maximizing productivity in the short run, resulting in a degration of soil
nutrients and consequently limiting future healthy haverst. This cash-crop
left farmers dependent on exchange rates and fluctuations in world demand
for their product. If farmers experienced a good harvest, it is often seen
as a net negative because of over supply from other farmers pushing the
price down, and sometimes the crop is not worth harvesting and distributing
it the international market. Local people can not benefit from this type
of over supply because of the firmly established distribution networks
the government established for the farmers to follow.
Historical Reference
This practice of exploiting the farmers for industrial
gain existed in colonial times. When Europeans entered North America
they attempted to increase their tax collections and extend the use of
money to exploit the Native Americans. One individual summarized it by
saying " we regard taxation as the only possible method to force the native
to leave their reserves and look for work". This method of making the barter
and kinship unacceptable and often illegal, has forced the heads of households
to leave the farm and work in the city to pay for land taxes and services.
This drain of farming knowledge base further hampered the farming communities
in colonial times and today.
Shifting of Labor
To further promote the farming workers to migrate to the
city, the government only provided education, social services, infracture
and social status acceptance for citizens working and living in the city.
This geographic category of assistance left farming communities with noting
in return for helping the country by exporting food for revenues.
As a result, the government created a pull factor to draw farmers away
from their knowledge based farming communities. The rural communities were
informed by the media, Government and society that they lived in poor conditions
and lack the modern facilities needed to live. This includes such items
as running water, electricity, electronic household items, new housing
and education. Often children were sent to the city to work and help to
pay for the farm in their rural communities, or constantly work on the
land to pay for taxes and maintain profit in depressed food prices. However
too often they fall victim to the city because the " Parents have been
forced to pull kids out of school to help work full time in the fields,
or as beggars on the streets, or as scavengers at the local dump. At almost
every stoplight or traffic jam in Jakarta little boys emerge from crowded
sidewalks like clockwork to strum tuneless serenades, hoping for spare
change".
Consequences
Though the farming family members live and may work in the city, they now experienced the extreme sense of poverty. When they lived off the land, they lacked the modern amenities however they were able to maintain the second definition of poverty. That being, able to meet their material and non-material needs through their own efforts, which includes adequate food, shelter and complemented with independence. In the long term, living off the land has proven to be the most reliable form of sustainability and autonomy from external social and governmental pressures.
Governments would also shift title of the land to their
favor and implement taxes and unnecessary regulation such as forms of crop
control. As a consequence " the farmer often loses his farm and is driven
into a migrant pool of cheap labor for corporate-farming operations or
is forced to seek work in the landless, teeming cities".
INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES
As countries struggle with the vicious cycle of paying off debt and attempting to maintain a functional economy, world agencies often attempt to alleviate the problem. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has had the most impact of such situations and will be used as a primary reference point. The IMF's programs usually devalue the currency, reduce trade barriers, cut the growth of money supply and slash deficits. All of these sometimes will slow the rural to urban migration.
This benefited some small communities, however the introduction of large scale projects far outweigh pockets of social and economic improvements. The IMF has contributed to the funding of hydropower projects in many countries. A notable one is the Maheshwar dam site in India. The monetary benefits of the dam were placed priority over the dislocation of farmers and their livelihood. To properly operate the dam, it must flood millions of farmland. The Indian government attempted to solve the short term problem of protests by paying for the land and relocating cost, however the long term sustainability of farming communities was bleak.
The Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze in China is deemed
to be the largest dam in the world. With a cost of $17.7 to $29.8 billion
dollars, its benefits have yet to be proven. The Gorges Dam has a profound
effect on farmlands the third world regions of China.
" Approximately 1.2 million residents of the Hubei and
Sichuan Provinces of China will need to be relocated. 54,000 acres of farmland,
17,000 acres of forest will be flooded by the reservoir". This sudden
and devastating impact on the land, people and future needs cannot be reversed
with financial aid and reflects a permanent dislocation of people.
ALTERNATIVE APPROACH
The attempts of the Indian government in the 1970/80’s to help the farmers is a model that can be used as a basis to follow. The government has used the socialist pattern of development. The investments of farming funds were used to increase the productivity of agriculture. Because of this, " India achieved self-sufficiency in food production that it maintains ahead of population growth". The government gave the farmers new technologies of agriculture, sanitation, medicine and schooling for their children right in the farming communities. The Indian government reinvested efforts established a push factor in assisting farmers to remain in the rural area and not be lured to the City. As a result, the labor force was more productively employed in the agricultural sector than having jobs in the city. Industrial countries view India as not technological advanced and also view its rural citizens as impoverished because of their low income levels. However the alternate definition of poverty recognizes the ability to provide life necessities without linkage to buying power.
The Nigerian government has also implemented a plan to
benefit the farmers. It was
" observed in 1987 that Nigeria's structural adjustment
program resulted in many people moving back to their rural hometowns".
Since then, the farming community has helped to reduce the number of hungry
families and maintained a steady work force.
CONCLUSION
The sustainability of a system is the determinant factor in deciding if it establishes a greater long term good for society. The maintenance of farming has been proven over the millennium, however the extreme pace of current world population growth has changed the pressures not felt in previous civilizations. Though the use of large metropolitan centers to maintain sustainability has not been around long, its viability can be proven in the process used to cater to all elements of society.
The usage of both farming and urban centers to maintain
communities can both be used, however the resources allocated to maintain
them need to be evenly distributed in order for its viability to be given
an equal chance of survival. Some countries such as India, Brazil
and rural China are more suitable have investments in the farming community
because of the readily available of resources and knowledge base. Each
country needs to access its own demographic and geographic makeup then
determine which method is suitable or use a combination of both urban centers
and farming communities.
I'm glad you visited my site and hope you sign my guestbook,
I would like to know more about you and your opinions.
The
reason most farmers are poor,