On January 13, 2001, a powerful earthquake shook El Salvador. In San José Costa Rica, houses collapsed, many residents suffered broken bones, and a four-year-old girl was killed. The main road was destroyed, so for a time the community was cut off from outside help.
In the aftermath of the 2001 earthquake, Oxfam teamed up with local partner REDES with the goal of helping Costa Rica and many other Salvadoran communities prevent future earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural events from becoming full-scale disasters.
The REDES program in Costa Rica is grounded in a community emergency committee whose members have taken charge of evacuation, communications, shelter, first aid, and other key tasks. After mapping out the risks and resources of the village, REDES and the committee developed an emergency-response plan designed to ensure that everyone—including those living in hazardous locations and people with limited mobility—could reach safety in the early hours of an emergency. A two-way radio was installed, providing the community with access to the REDES base, which is staffed 24 hours a day to handle emergency communications. REDES trained community members in first aid and other skills that are essential for first responders, and the community held drills to simulate emergencies.
In October of 2005, Hurricane Stan pounded El Salvador and put Costa Rica's preparations to the test. High winds, heavy rains, landslides, and washed-out roads that isolated the village all portended tragedy, yet the town suffered no deaths or serious injuries. At a gathering of the community's emergency committee and Oxfam and REDES staff, we heard about what happened from the people who lived through it.
As quickly as possible after the hurricane struck, Claudia Dalila Sánchez, who headed up the evacuation committee, led her team on a tour of the community. They evacuated people trapped by landslides and caught in other precarious situations, and they monitored the rising waters of Lago de Ilopango. "When the earthquake happened, we didn't know enough," she said. "For Stan, we had better information about how to take people out of danger."
"In both the 2001 earthquake and Hurricane Stan, the roads were destroyed so no vehicles could come in," explained Miguel Martínez, San José Costa Rica's emergency committee coordinator. "But the difference with Stan was that we were organized. After the earthquake, people didn't have the consciousness to help each other, but after Stan, the community was united. We scheduled turns so people could work on the road, and in a short time, we were able to clear it."
Carmen Sosa is a shy woman who waited until all seven of the committee leaders had spoken before telling her story. "During the earthquake, we didn't know what to do. My house fell. My husband was hurt by a roof tile that fell on his head. And since I didn't know what to do, I just cried. I saw all my things destroyed and thought, 'This is it. I don't have anything left.' But since REDES has given us training, we now know what we can do in these cases."
Carmen concluded with a self-assured smile that left us feeling that something about this program—either the new skills she's learned or the knowledge that she no longer has to face emergencies alone—has added a measure of confidence to her life.
Oxfam's partners work in many communities around the country, helping them take charge effectively at times of emergency. But our program goes far beyond teaching the nuts and bolts of emergency response: one of our partners co-authored a law that has created a role for communities in El Salvador's national system of disaster preparedness and response, and which requires for the first time that disaster preparedness be incorporated into development planning.
"We are working to help impoverished communities gain both the skills and the voice in the political process that they need to prevent future emergencies from becoming disasters," says Michael Delaney, Oxfam America's Director of Humanitarian Response. "So far, signs point to success."
Working through REDES and other partners, Oxfam America's disaster risk reduction programs in El Salvador are now reaching an estimated 200,000 people.
]]>Launched by Red Tomato, one of Oxfam America's partners, in collaboration with two other organizations, Oké USA is a new, Massachusetts-based tropical fruit importer with a simple mission: To improve the lives of poor banana farmers and workers by making sure they get a fair price for their fruit.
"The banana industry is a pretty brutal industry," said Jonathan Rosenthal, Oké USA's chief executive officer. "In Ecuador, a typical banana worker earns a couple of dollars a day, and if you get sick or someone in your family gets sick, you're in trouble. If people don't have their basic needs met, it's hard to envision a better future."
But hope for that future is what Oké USA wants to help banana workers build, and fair trade is the engine that will drive it.
"Fair trade is a whole economic model based on direct trade, fair price, dignity, and collaboration," said Rosenthal. "With fair trade, small farmers are getting a higher price and they're getting it directly."
In a way, the birth of Oké USA completes the circle for Red Tomato, a non-profit marketing organization that helps small farmers in the northeast and minority farmers in the southeast gain brand loyalty and better prices for their produce through large supermarket chains. Its business model is based on principals that include fair prices for farmers and a commitment to ecological farming.
Michael Rozyne is the founder of Red Tomato. With Rosenthal and Rink Dickinson, he was also a founder of Equal Exchange, which pioneered the fair trade coffee industry in the US. Now, carrying the spirit of those two enterprises to a new level, Red Tomato and Equal Exchange have joined forces with AgroFair, a European-based fair trade company jointly owned by growers and NGOs, to start Oké USA.
"We aim to build a fair trade business that changes the terms of trade in bananas just as we did in coffee-challenging the cut-throat race to the bottom of the big banana companies," Rosenthal told supporters in an e-mail announcing the new venture.
At the head of that race are a handful of giant importers, some of whom own their own ships and banana plantations and who are striving to increase their profits by cutting production costs wherever they can. For banana workers and small growers, those cuts translate into shrinking wages and dangerous working conditions.
"Traditionally, workers get very low wages and are exposed to awful chemicals and have health problems," said Shayna Harris, an Oxfam America coffee organizer. "The banana industry is fraught with human rights abuses."
In Ecuador, the largest banana exporter in the world, the government has set the legal minimum price for bananas at $3.35 for a 40-pound box, said Jordan Bar Am, Oké USA's operations manager. But in reality, he added, some farmers get as little as 80 cents. By contrast, bananas sold by small-scale farmers on the fair trade market command $7.75 for the same 40-pound box.
"That's the price that's needed to cover the cost of production and allow farmers to invest in the futures of their businesses and communities, and to provide adequate health care and send their kids to schools," said Bar Am.
Oké USA is now forging relationships with small-scale banana farmers, such as those in Ecuador's El Guabo cooperative, to help them get their products directly to the American market. Besides higher prices, farmers also receive a fair trade premium that helps them strengthen their communities by investing in things like education, clean water, and housing.
"Oké USA is a little guy with a big mission going up against a big marketplace," said Jaeda Harmon, a program officer for Oxfam's US regional office. "Its hope is that by working with small farmers and non-governmental organizations, and promoting consumer awareness, they'll sell a quality product that will give the farmers a chance."
Oxfam America has helped the whole process along by providing a grant that laid the groundwork for Oké USA's launch, as well as giving Red Tomato a two-year general support grant that included exploration of the joint venture with AgroFair.
Now, the hard work has really started for Oké USA.
The company received its first shipment of 100,000 fair trade certified bananas-about 38,000 pounds-on August 17 in Boston. After parking them at a ripening facility for four days, Oké USA shipped the bananas throughout New England to about 70 different locations including co-op supermarkets, natural food stores, and college campuses. Since then, eight more shipments have reached Boston's shores and found their way into the bellies of Americans who, on average, each eat 33 pounds of bananas a year.
Regardless of how fast people consume them, the fruit is perishable-and that's just one of the mammoth challenges confronting Oké USA in this venture. Bananas are not like coffee: They can't sit on the shelf for weeks.
"With bananas, I'm bringing in 38,000 pounds and they can go bad in less than a week, so I've got to move them all the time," said Bar Am. "The perishability factor is huge."
Besides that, Oké USA is going head to head with the biggest banana companies in the country, and it doesn't have millions of dollars to spend on marketing. Educating consumers about the story behind fair trade bananas will be key-particularly as the retail prices for the fruit range from 69 cents to 99 cents a pound.
But once consumers are sold on the concept behind fair trade bananas, they might convince their local supermarkets to buy into the idea, too.
"Supermarkets are incredibly sensitive to consumer demand," said Bar Am. "If they find out it's popular, and there's a hook, they'll get behind it."
To help spread the word, Oké USA and Red Tomato sponsored a three-farmer tour of New England October 22 -28. Among the farmers were Sylvia Arevalo, a banana grower in Ecuador. Sylvia is a founding member of El Guabo cooperative, a pioneer in fair trade for producers. Sylvia raises both organic and conventional bananas, for which she receives a fair price that helps support her family and community.
The tour also featured Shirley Sherrod, Georgia director of the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, representing black family farmers in the southeastern US, and several New England fruit and vegetable growers. All spoke about their struggles to maintain family farming in a global economy. A commitment to ecological production methods, fair prices, and top quality produce are the common ground that connects not only Red Tomato and Oké USA, but also these farmers and others like them who depend on fair trade for their future.
]]>Across Ethiopia, these are the images tied to cycles of drought that plague one of the poorest countries in the world. Most recently, a drought triggered a humanitarian crisis in early 2006 for more than 2.5 million people. Many of them were herders dependent on the rain to nourish pastureland for their animals—their central source of food and income.
Oxfam and the local organizations with which it works respond to these cycles of drought with both emergency assistance to ease the immediate suffering of people and their animals, and with programs aimed at longer-term solutions to address the region's severe water shortages and to improve the health of its livestock.
For example, in Afar, one of Ethiopia's northern regions, a water shortage in 2005 forced some people to walk up to four hours one way in search of the critical resource. Irregular and weak rainfall in the previous few years had caused pastureland to shrivel and water sources to disappear. About 90 percent of the people in Afar are herders, and many of their animals died as a consequence of the drought.
To help families survive, Oxfam and one of the local groups with which it works, the Afar Pastoralist Development Association (APDA), launched a project to truck water to three sites in Afar's Dubti district. The agencies set up 12 large tanks that could each hold 1,321 gallons of water. The trucks made daily deliveries to the tanks—the furthest of which was 70 miles from the well that provided the water.
Though only a temporary solution—and a costly one—the water trucking substantially relieved stress on the herders. Women who had been walking for eight to 10 hours to fetch water from a neighboring district had their trek cut to just a few kilometers.
In another area of Afar, Oxfam provided APDA with an $83,000 grant to offer veterinary care to 410,000 animals. The goal was to prevent the spread of common diseases such as Anthrax, Blackleg, and Pastereulosis.
More recently, in southern Ethiopia, Oxfam and another local partner, the Gayo Pastoral Development Initiative, worked on the restoration of a local pond so it could hold enough water to last between the sporadic rainy seasons. The pond is a central source of drinking water for the community's animals. As in Afar, many people in this part of the Oromiya region are herders.
The 2006 pond project did two things. It provided temporary work for local people hired to deepen the pond, thereby giving them a source of income to help tide them through the drought that was killing their animals. And secondly, the improvements will last into the future, ensuring that when the next drought comes the pond will be able to retain whatever limited amount of rain does fall.
Shortages of critical resources, such as water and pasture, can often spark conflict among different ethnic groups. A key part of Oxfam's work in parts of Ethiopia is peace-building—helping people find ways to resolve disputes without resorting to violence. Around the border town of Moyale in southern Ethiopia, for instance, Oxfam and the Research Center for Civic and Human Rights Education have established a series of peace councils whose job it is to intervene among sparring groups when tension begins to run high.
Elsewhere in Oromiya, Oxfam has been working with the Oromo Self-Reliance Association on a series of water supply projects that have improved the lives of 1,800 people in three communities about 50 miles southwest of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia's capital. Oxfam contributed $42,000 to underwrite the cost of wells, pumps, bathing sheds, and laundry stations.
Before these improvements, women in one of the communities, Gura, were walking up to three hours a day to fetch water—and often it was dirty. The parasites that occasionally contaminated the water sickened the children who drank it. Now, for families in Gura, clean, cool water is just minutes away. A nearby pump taps into an aquifer 200 feet deep.
The water supply projects have made such a marked difference in people's lives that neighboring communities are now asking officials to make similar improvements in their villages.
Easy access to clean water, through projects like these, is critical in stemming the poverty that affects so much of Ethiopia. And they are part of the global drive to meet the Millennium Development Goals—a series of international targets aimed at cutting by half by 2015 the number of people around the world who do not have access to clean drinking water.
]]>Many experts thought these tight-knit communities were relatively safe from the AIDS epidemic, but with the death and displacement of hundreds of thousands, the social landscape—like the coastline itself—was recreated in a moment.
The rumors reached Jose Michael, director of Oxfam's HIV program in India—that people living in crowded temporary houses and communities were experiencing new pressures that could increase their risk of HIV infection.
"There were many possible triggers, but we had no evidence," says Michael, so while he continued the Oxfam HIV/AIDS awareness program, he and Hari Krishna, an Oxfam disaster response specialist, engaged a well-known Indian health research organization to determine whether and how the tsunami disaster and its aftermath was increasing the vulnerability of the coastal communities to HIV infection.
"We did not set out to determine actual rates of HIV infection in the villages," says Hari Krishna. "That would have revealed very little about the changes precipitated by the disaster and even less about how and why they took place." Instead, the research focused on how people felt their own HIV-related behavior had changed since the tsunami, and what brought about those changes.
The central difficulty in carrying out the research is obvious: who wants to talk about your own behavior if it's something dangerous or strongly condemned in your community? But the inventive staff of the Swasti Health Resource Center, Oxfam's research partner, came up with a plan and a new research tool, which they call the polling booth.
Eight women sit in a circle, each with a cardboard box in front of her to conceal the choice of cards she places in a jar. In the center of the circle stands a facilitator who asks a set of questions aimed at determining how vulnerable these women are to contracting HIV.
This is a demonstration of the polling booth technique. The equipment involved is simple: a jar, a cardboard box, and a stack of numbered cards—green to indicate yes and red for no—are all it takes to build a "booth." But with willing participants—and researchers who have earned their trust—it can be used to carry out the very delicate task of eliciting honest answers to tough questions.
After the polling booth survey, the facilitator and participants tabulate and discuss the results. In a real-life situation, the facilitator might begin by saying, "Two people answered that they use condoms and six said they don't. Why do you suppose people in this village might choose not to use condoms?" Such a question could launch a valuable discussion of community perceptions of condom use and the spread of HIV—with no one having to reveal his or her own personal decision.
"What we share in a polling booth is fact," says S. K. Shashikala, who participated in the Swasti research and later helped demonstrate the technique to observers. "In this process, there is no inhibition."
Researcher Manoj T.J. led groups of men in these polling booth sessions. "The participants had a chance to talk about issues that they might otherwise be silent about," he says. "The discussion often revealed realities on the ground. When you know those realities, you can plan accordingly."
A research participant named Vasanthamma added a gender dimension: "This is good for women where we come from a culture of silence."
Although the researchers were successful in their mission, they had bad news to report. After interviewing around 1,000 people in 30 tsunami-affected communities, they determined that in 10 out of 11 of the temporary shelter settlements studied, HIV vulnerability rose in the aftermath of the tsunami. (Read a summary of the report.)
The lingering trauma of the tsunami disaster combined with life in the crowded temporary shelter settlements and disruptions in employment triggered changes in sexual behavior which, in the absence of strong knowledge about safe sex practices, put men and women at risk. Strict community standards of behavior were unenforceable when villages were scattered into temporary camps, and many survivors were drawn to alcohol and extramarital relations—including commercial sex—as a means of coping with stress, boredom, and overwhelming grief.
Now that the tsunami recovery is well underway, many of the conditions that caused HIV vulnerability to spike have been resolved. The need for AIDS education and services remains acute, but most people can report that they've moved out of temporary shelters and are back to work, and that the trauma of the tsunami has subsided. But for emergency aid providers, the research has implications far beyond the coast of India.
"If aid providers don't supply enough water or food or shelter after an emergency, it's clear to everyone what's wrong, but a rise in HIV risk after a disaster can go undetected until it's too late," says Mike Delaney, Oxfam America's Director of Humanitarian Response. "Now we know much more about how responders in future emergencies can help communities reduce their vulnerability. This is research that could save lives."
]]>A crowd has gathered, as it always does, to watch this momentous event: Wayongo and his crew are drilling a well in a place that looks so dry one wonders if water could possibly be percolating down below. But Wayongo, a public health engineer and well driller for Oxfam, is optimistic.
"We have not struck water, but the formation is giving us courage," he shouts over the roar of the hydraulic drill. "The problem is during the dry season, the water table is very far down."
This will be the fourth deep well Wayango and his crew of five men have drilled recently in the rural areas around Kebkabiya in North Darfur. The water improvements are part of an Oxfam program to help the people in 11 small villages in this region manage as the conflict that has consumed Darfur for more than three years rages on. The initiative also includes constructing latrines and distributing farming tools.
While most of Oxfam's work during the conflict has been geared toward preventing the spread of waterborne diseases among hundreds of thousands of people who have fled from their homes, the agency recognizes that the needs in Darfur extend far beyond the temporary camps to which displaced people have flocked.
"Although there are two million internally displaced people in camps, there are many others remaining in villages who need help too," said Alun McDonald, Oxfam's communications officer based in Khartoum.
And some of them are here on this small hill in Igro. Under a scorching sun, Wayongo is making his second attempt of the day to locate a new source of water for the inhabitants of this village. After drilling about 90 feet down on a nearby rise—and coming up empty—Wayongo decided to move a little closer to a dry river bed and try his luck there.
If he hits water, he'll quickly send a sample to El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, to have it analyzed for salt and other contaminants. If it passes the test, the work crew will install a pump and build a platform around the well to keep the water clean when people draw it up.
Wayongo prefers to drill for water during the dry season because he knows that if he does strike it when the water table is at its lowest, then the supply will be a reliable one. Besides, during the rainy season, which typically stretches between June and October, this kind of work is difficult. The rain swamps the dirt tracks that serve as roads, turning them into mud that can swallow heavy trucks loaded with drilling equipment.
But it is not just the rain that makes movement difficult for Wayongo and his team. As with much of Darfur, the area around Kebkabiya is prone to hijackings and militia activity, and is not always safe to travel around, particularly after dark. When things are secure enough for the team to travel to the villages, they work late—and stay where they are.
So, after a hot and dusty day, Wayongo's crew won't be heading to Oxfam's headquarters and their own comfortable beds in Kebkabiya. They'll camp at Igro—and get an early start on the next day's drilling operation.
]]>As violence in this part of the remote region of western Sudan increases again, there is an expectation at Abu Shouk—and across Darfur—that no one will be heading back to their villages any time soon. In the face of that reality, the camp has undergone a slow transformation from a settlement of plastic-covered shelters hastily constructed with branches, to a community that has many of the trappings of permanence—and home.
"The camp now looks like a town," said Hind Adam Ali, an Oxfam public health promoter as she led visitors into the dense by neatly laid out settlement, divided into blocks with broad paths of sand, much like streets, running in between. Oxfam has been providing water, sanitation, and public health outreach to more than 50,000 people in the camp.
Abu Shouk lies close to El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur and the place where the first serious fighting of the on-going conflict erupted more than three years ago. Since the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement last May, fighting has actually intensified in this area and has again devastated many towns and villages north of El Fasher—the places that many of the people who have sought refuge in Abu Shouk originate from.
Increasingly, the camp has the feel of a sprawling capital neighborhood, within walking distance of El Fasher's main market and linked to the city by periodic family compounds that have recently sprouted on the plain between the camp and the capital.
By one estimate, 80 percent of Abu Shouk's shelters are now made of mud brick, and signs of that industry—the pocked ground from which the dirt is dug and mixed with water—dot the camp.
But the consequence of all that liquid-intensive building was that by the middle of July, the lines at the camp's pumps where people gather to fill their large plastic jerry cans with water to lug home for drinking and washing, were up to three hours long. At midsummer, only 23 of the camp's 33 hand pumps were producing any water. The other 10 had gone dry.
Housing isn't the only thing that is sucking up great volumes of water. Aid workers also say that camp residents, needing to provide for their families beyond the basics offered by aid groups, are collecting water at the camp and hauling it into the capital for sale.
The massive human need for water is simply outstripping the natural resources of the land, which is not meant to house so many thousands of people for such a long time.
"We've been talking to the leaders about it, but it's still going on," said Hind.
On the outskirts of Al Salaam, a newer camp established nearby to relieve some of the over-population at Abu Shouk, a brick works, masterminded by a gang of little boys, was also underway.
Despite the midday heat, one boy hardly noticed the visitors who appeared, so intent was he on shoveling dirt from the pit in which he stood. Jugs of water ringed some of the other pits. Another boy scooped fistfuls of mud into a sloppy heap onto which he stomped to squeeze out the extra water before packing the mud into a metal form, shaped like a rectangular bread pan. Set out in the sun, a row of the soggy bricks slowly dried. It would take two days before they would be done
Abdal Azim Tigani, 9 and caked in mud, announced that he had made 51 bricks which he planned to sell for 10 dinars—or 4 cents—each.
How many had he sold so far?
None, he replied, clearly content to be messing about in the cool mud on a hot day, and undaunted by the sales task ahead. But judging by the widespread use of the bricks throughout Abu Shouk, Abdal would have a ready market for his product.
At Abu Shouk, family plots once ringed with prickly branches now stand protected by thick walls. Many of the plots have morphed into mini-compounds with separate rooms for cooking, shelters for chickens, and stalls for donkeys—all made with mud bricks.
At one compound, the owner proudly showed off his satellite dish, tucked behind a curtain made from cut-up food sacks. The TV, he said, was stashed carefully in the bedroom of one of his wives, and electricity to power the high-tech production came from a neighbor who owned a generator. Every evening the whole neighborhood gathers around his screen to watch the news and keep up with the world outside Darfur. The biggest crowd, he added, was for this year's World Cup final.
Alleyways have formed between the compound walls, connecting to the broader "streets." Hurrying down one of them was Hawa Sulieman Ahmed, a member of one of the health committees Oxfam has organized at Abu Shouk to help promote good hygiene practices throughout the camp.
Coming upon Hind and her visitors, Hawa insisted on inviting the small crowd back to her "home,"—a small complex of tiny structures tucked behind a heavy mud wall with a metal door. When Hawa's family first arrived at the camp, a plastic sheet was their only shelter. Now, a dwelling of straw walls—paid for with the bricks they made and sold—houses a bed along with several mats and a carpet unfurled on the sandy ground. Recycled plastic grain sacks serve as the roof. In the corner of her compound, a stall for sponge-bathing and another housing a latrine, completed the makeshift creature comforts.
But despite appearances, Abu Shouk is no substitute for home. Time passes slowly, said Hawa, and she longs to see her family.
"When we are in our villages, we are so busy farming and doing other things, but here, there are no activities," she said. "And we're not happy because our family is separated. My mother is in one place, my sister is in another, and me here."
Mud bricks make a show of permanence. But what Hawa wants is something more important than that. Bidding farewell to the visitors, she asked them a final question: "Why is there no peace?"
]]>"Our ancestors can become angry because we don't respect them," said Hilario Muthembe, a local activist working with Oxfam America's partner MULEIDE in the bustling suburb of Jorge Dimitrov outside Maputo, Mozambique. The solution? Consult a traditional healer, who can help. "A small ceremony can show we respect them," Muthembe said, "and can cure the problem."
"Traditional healers play a number of very important roles in traditional society," said anthropoligist Gordon Chavanduka, president of the Zimbabwe Traditional Healer Association. "Firstly, they are the medical experts. Secondly, they are the cultural experts, and regard themselves as the guardians of their culture.
"They are also counselors, in all issues. Even the chiefs and headmen, who are the political leaders, almost all of them have a traditional healer as an advisor, to assist them in their governing."
Susan LeClerb Madlala, an anthropologist at the University of KwaZulu Natal, says that people find a certain satisfaction in consulting a traditional healer, who can not only treat the immediate illness or problem, but provide an explanation of the ultimate source of the problem itself, something a medical doctor can't do.
"Let's say you are hanging your wash on the line behind your house, and a snake bites you. Well, a medical doctor will treat the snake bite, but he can't answer a lot of important questions: Why did the snake bite you? Why was it at your house? Who sent that snake?"
Given the prominence of the spirit world in many areas, it is essential for rights organizations like MULEIDE to acknowledge the role of traditional healers in communities where they seek to intervene. Showing them respect and working with them, instead of dismissing them as "witch doctors," will help make the gradual changes in society that can lead to better respect for women, and recognition of their rights as full citizens, protected in Mozambique's Family Law.
]]>But first, they sing and dance, accompanied by whistles and drums. The entire neighborhood arrives to see what is happening. They sing songs of solidarity, and the power of women to overcome poverty and illiteracy, and about a new law in Mozambique they are using to redefine their entire society, one family at a time.
The Mozambique Family Law, promulgated in 2004 is designed to bring women's rights under law in line with international standards. Thanks to this new law, women now have a chance to inherit and own financial assets such as cash and property, and have a job that earns wages—without the permission of a husband or male family member.
And the Family Law recognizes customary marriages registered with local government—an important distinction in places like Jorge Dimitrov where couples can't always afford formal marriage ceremonies. Now, women living with a husband for more than a year have the right to a share of family assets if the marriage breaks up.
However, some people in Hulene and the greater Jorge Dimitrov area are basically unaware of the new law, and live by customs and traditions that are at odds with it. The problems this creates are most obvious in cases of domestic violence and other family conflicts.
"We see a lot of problems with couples," said Hilario Muthembe, an activist in Hulene. "Maybe the husband has an illness, and says his wife is a witch and wishes him to be dead."
And when families consult local traditional leaders or healers, the matter can be resolved based on traditions and local customs that favor those with the most power: men. The activists in Hulene said this opens up the possibility of domestic violence, and an abrupt "divorce" leaving a woman and her children on the street with no means of support.
Encouraging local leaders to respect women's rights under the Family Law is the mission of MULEIDE, Oxfam America's partner in Mozambique. The organization has trained more than 400 legal advisors in three provinces who work with traditional healers, the main custodians of local culture in neighborhoods like Bario Hulene.
Their mission is to make sure that women understand their new rights, and that traditional healers help protect them. "We want the illiterate grassroots women of Mozambique to know that there is a legal instrument that can help overcome decades of suffering," said Rafa Machava, executive director of MULEIDE. "So we need to engage everyone to balance their customs with the new law."
Traditional healers are the key to the strategy, as they advise local elites and families, and can be the ones to help create the long-term shift in culture that will promote respect for women's rights. Noemia Fernando, one of MULEIDE's trained legal advisors in Bario Hulene, said it is essential for her and the other activists in the community to enlist traditional healers to help women. "Traditional healers have the power to treat them, get the problem resolved, and unify the family," she said. "That is why we need them with us, they can help us do our work." Fernando and her MULEIDE colleagues explained the new law to the traditional healers in Hulene, and some healers are now helping them explain the new law to their clients, and develop non-violent solutions to conflicts.
Fatima Coelho, a traditional healer for three years, got her training on the new Family Law in 2005. And she is using her training to help ensure that women's rights are respected in her work. Coelho said it is a real challenge to help couples avoid violence. "I'm trying to teach that it is better to sit down and talk instead of beating each other—this is not the way to build up a family. This is the strongest value I gained from my training with MULEIDE in 2005, it is the best way to address these family issues."
Cecilia Reis, an elderly woman active as a healer since 1962, has been an ardent promoter of women's rights and has been working with MULEIDE since 1994. She is at the leading edge of creating a new culture of respect for women in Mozambique. Her comments show her commitment, her realistic outlook, and her aspirations. And at the root of her dedication are her own personal commitment and the training she got from MULEIDE, which is critical to her work as a spiritual advisor.
"Women and men should be equal. Women have to open their eyes and claim their rights. These issues will not change overnight—we have to fight, and get our men to [understand], because they are very difficult and don't want to change. But we still have to stand up, look them in the eye and say to them, "we have to share, because the Family Law says we have equal rights."
"There is no one who will chase me away from my house, not even my husband, he knows that I have my own rights. This is what we are trying to teach our women. But some are not open minded, and they are dependent on their husbands, sometimes they accept being beaten all the time, and sometimes they die of domestic violence, because they have nowhere to go.
"And they don't even know that there are lawyers at MULEIDE, and at the courts, who can defend them. We have lost many members of our community to domestic violence.
"But what can we do? We are a poor country, so we have to work hard. The few of us who are able to do this work, we have to stand up and work strongly."
]]>With the US looking to increase trade with Africa and Asia as well, Oxfam and its partners knew the negotiations around DR-CAFTA would set the stage for the US free trade agenda.
"In the US, this was a symbolic vote and symbolic debate. It was about much more than US trade with these Central American countries," Weinberg said. "For Oxfam and others, it was important to draw the line in the sand to say 'stop negotiating trade rules that fail poor people.' Our message to the US Congress and administration is 'get back to the negotiating table at the World Trade Organization to ensure a meaningful outcome that addresses key concerns for development.'"
The campaign operated on several levels. In Central America, civil society groups largely barred from democratic processes worked hard to open up avenues of debate with their government representatives negotiating the agreement. They also carried out grassroots education campaigns and mobilized people from across their countries to pressure their governments to stop DR-CAFTA.
At the same time, Oxfam sponsored delegations from all six Latin American countries that are party to the agreement.
Ten groups—made up of economists, small-scale farmers, generic drug company representatives, women's rights activists, environmentalists and former elected officials—came to Washington, DC, between 2003 and 2005 to speak directly with Congress members and their staff.
"It was an education for many in the US Congress, as well as a capacity building exercise for those who participated, because the people who came up learned a lot about how the US Congress and political system functions," Weinberg said.
At the same time, elected officials in the US learned about the reality on the ground in Central America, which provided a different story than the ones they constantly heard from Central American ministers and ambassadors. In one example, Oxfam America helped facilitate visits by rice farmers from Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic last April. They met with 20 different undecided members of Congress and their staff, and helped them hear directly from farming communities vulnerable to low-priced imports from the US. Congressman Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and his staff heard this message about rice, and issued a statement to his colleagues in Congress explaining the potential for unfair trade.
"While Central American countries will be forced to eliminate import tariffs on rice, the United States will continue to maintain generous subsidies for domestic rice producers. The US produces $850 million in rice each year, but subsidizes the industry to the tune of $1.3 billion; $450 million over the market price. These artificial supports lead to dumping on the international market, distorting trade. Huge agri-business reaps the profits, as 20 percent of US rice producers receive 85 percent of price support revenues," the statement read.
"Central American rice producers face an uncertain and bleak future with an imminent flood of unfair imports."
]]>Then there was the way DR-CAFTA was negotiated. The US insisted that the entire agreement be developed in just one year, and that the Central American countries negotiate as a bloc. This was an ambitious request, and asked a lot of countries which had little capacity to negotiate trade agreements with an economic superpower.
As DR-CAFTA was being negotiated, the countries in the region had few meaningful democratic traditions in place. The poorest and least politically connected members of society were unable to influence the negotiations. And with elite business interests dominating the input to trade ministries, DR-CAFTA was less likely to really help the poor farmers and others who really needed to experience the benefits of increased trade.
"Most of the region's organized poor were skeptical that a free trade agreement with the United States could in any way help improve their situation," said Thea Gelbspan, Oxfam America's Program Manager for Latin America. "DR-CAFTA ignored the rural poverty so many Central American farmers live with, and its claims to guarantee economic growth for the region weren't backed up by the policies it contains."
To address this concern, Oxfam America gave grant funding to a coalition of economic research and advocacy organizations working to inform the public about the details of the agreement, and seek meaningful participation by all members of society. Called "Iniciativa CID," the group included organizations in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.
Members of Iniciativa CID carried out research projects to inform legislators about the concerns of farmers and low-wage workers, provided training to farmers and farm workers about the DR-CAFTA proposal, and helped bring together citizens and their elected representatives to discuss international trade and poverty.
"The rules of the game really need to be changed... as well as the content of the agreements," said Rene Rivera, an economist at El Salvador's National Foundation for Development.
]]>DR-CAFTA is a regional trade agreement between the US and Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic. If approved, the agreement would further open Central American economies to US exports and foreign investors. It would reduce local decision-making and fail to ensure international labor and environmental standards.
With Oxfam's support, representatives from El Salvador's FUNDE, Guatemala's CIDECA and Nicaragua's Centro Humboldt met with US Congresspeople and their staff.
Oxfam provides grants to the Central American partners, which lobby against DR-CAFTA and educate citizens about the consequences of the trade agreement, if ratified.
"Oxfam has allowed us to do a lot of research. And Oxfam has been instrumental in helping us come to the US to say, 'We really don't want CAFTA,' face-to-face," said Mario Rodriguez, 40, an economist specializing in intellectual property with CIDECA.
It's important for US citizens to lobby their Congressional representatives to make trade fair. But it also makes a big difference when Central American civil society representatives can speak directly to the US Congress to explain how their countries' development will be affected, said Stephanie Weinberg, Oxfam America policy advisor.
In addition to providing direct support to the Central American groups, Oxfam America also fosters connections between US farmers and farmers in other countries around policy debates like CAFTA. Working with US partners such as the National Family Farm Coalition, Oxfam has funded exchanges where American farmers from the National Family Farm Coalition meet with farmers in Mexico and Central America, and vice versa, with Mexican farmers touring US farms.
The exchanges help farmers from the North and South understand each other's situation and make tangible connections, farmer to farmer, about the impacts of agricultural and trade policies on their daily lives.
"My ability to explain to my fellow farmers why we should help didn't come naturally," said George Naylor, president of NFFC and a farmer from Iowa. "Meeting with farmers from other countries helped me understand."
After hearing the stories from the Central American and Mexican farmers he met, Naylor said he realized that CAFTA would further depress prices abroad and push more farmers off their land.
Any farmer can understand that threat.
"When everybody in the family ends up working off the farm, then what you used to think of as a 'family farm'—where everyone is involved in caring for the land and producing food—can't happen anymore," Naylor said.
]]>I am writing in regard to the imminent Congressional action on the US-Peru free trade agreement, titled the US-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA). Oxfam America believes that trade can be an engine for development and poverty reduction, and we strongly support measures to improve trading opportunities that can reduce poverty. However, we also believe that trade agreements must take into account the economic and social disparities between trading partners and include rules that allow the poor to realize these important potential benefits. Unfortunately, as a recent Oxfam report indicates, the PTPA will cause greater hardship and could undermine development in Peru. For this reason, Oxfam is calling on Members of Congress to oppose this legislation.
The PTPA, as negotiated, will harm many thousands of Peru's small farmers who supply food to their domestic market, as they will be forced into an unfair competition with subsidized US agricultural exports. The agreement will limit access to affordable new medicines in Peru by unduly extending the monopoly rights of the international pharmaceutical industry. The PTPA will also restrict Peru's ability to regulate foreign investment to ensure it serves national development.
Agriculture
More than half of Peru's nearly 28 million inhabitants live in poverty, many of them in rural areas, and the PTPA will adversely affect the livelihoods of many of the poor if passed. Agriculture is the main source of jobs in rural areas, generating nearly a third of all employment nationally. The vast majority of Peru's agricultural production is for domestic consumption. The trade agreement makes permanent the export opportunities that Peru currently enjoys under US trade preference programs and will thereby benefit certain export sectors. Yet barely 8 per cent of Peruvian agricultural production is for export, only one third of which is destined for the US (coffee, as well as non-traditional products such as asparagus and artichokes).
On the other hand, the PTPA will fully eliminate tariff protection on basic crops, which the US International Trade Commission has estimated will lead to large increases in Peru's imports of US basic grains, such as wheat, rice and corn. This means that Peruvian farmers who supply their domestic market will be undercut by heavily subsidized, cheaper US imports that are dumped in Peru below their real cost of production. As a result, there is a risk that many Peruvian farmers who are no longer able to earn a living by producing basic grains will turn to coca cultivation, thereby undermining years of US foreign policy and drug eradication efforts.
It has been suggested that Peru's farmers could be compensated for the loss of their livelihoods. However, Peruvian agricultural leaders have stated that farmers would need close to $1 billion to compensate for their annual losses from the PTPA, nearly 30 times what the Peruvian government has committed to make available. This is also a far less effective way to promote development than providing full and effective safeguards for crops that are vital to livelihoods and food security.
Access to Medicines
The PTPA could lead to significant increases in medicine prices, another issue of major concern for poor people in Peru. Stringent, new intellectual property provisions in the PTPA will restrict generic competition and lead to higher prices for new medicines in Peru. Only half of all Peruvians have health insurance and about one-fifth of the population has no access to health care. Medicines account for one-quarter of all public health expenditures and 44 percent of household spending on health. People living in poverty are, for the most part, not insured and must either pay out of pocket or receive no treatment at all. Given these conditions, any increase in the price of medicines is likely to have significant negative consequences for the
The PTPA will unduly extend monopoly protections for the international pharmaceutical industry, which will mean that fewer Peruvians, particularly the poor, will be able to get the medicines they need. A study commissioned by the Ministry of Health in Peru has shown that provisions in the PTPA will increase the cost of new medicines, and the Health Minister has reported that an increase in public health care expenditures will likely be required in future years. Imposing new burdens on an already cash-strapped health care system will further exacerbate poverty and inequality in Peru. The primacy of public health over private patents has already been well-established at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Yet the PTPA ignores this by restricting the use of public health safeguards allowed under the WTO and requiring adoption of new intellectual property rules that exceed the WTO standards.
Investment
The rules on investment in the PTPA give foreign companies leeway to challenge investment regulations, such as laws to protect the environment and public health. This will undermine Peru's ability to ensure that foreign investment contributes to national development, rather than exacerbating poverty. For example, Peru's Law for the Promotion of the Agricultural Sector grants the farming industry certain tax benefits if at least 90 percent of its inputs are sourced nationally. Under the PTPA, this law could be challenged and potentially repealed. Likewise, efforts to regulate the operation of the mining industry to address its health and environmental effects could be challenged.
Conclusion
While the economic impact of the PTPA on the US is likely to be negligible, the economic and social costs to Peru will be high, especially among the poor. Peruvian agricultural exports to the US will expand little, as noted by the ITC, given that these products have already enjoyed duty-free access to the US market under Andean trade preference programs for the last 15 years. Contrary to promoting stability in Peru and the Andean region, the PTPA is likely to exacerbate the existing problems of poverty and inequality and undermine regional integration and development.
Although the PTPA has been actively promoted by Peru's outgoing president and approved by its lame-duck Congress, there is deep concern among much of Peru's population about agreement. Broad cross-sections of civil society in Peru have actively opposed or questioned the trade agreement. The PTPA was a significant campaign issue in the recent presidential elections, and the winner, incoming President Alan Garcia, campaigned on a promise to closely review the agreement's potential impact and renegotiate it if necessary.
Oxfam believes that in order for trade to truly be "win-win" for developed and developing countries, trade rules should be negotiated under the multilateral trading system at the WTO. The Doha Development Round was launched with the understanding that it would deliver on the promise of development for poor countries. A successful conclusion to these WTO negotiations that provides new opportunities for developing countries will also benefit the US by promoting more stable economies and increased purchasing power in the developing world.
Bilateral trade deals like the PTPA complicate the global trading system and divert efforts to achieve a more valuable global agreement at the WTO. Furthermore, the PTPA includes rules that weaken the ability of Peru to enact policies that reduce poverty and further national development.
For these reasons, and because of the harm it will cause to the poor in Peru, I urge you to vote no on the US-Peru free trade agreement.
Sincerely yours,
Raymond C. Offenheiser
President
I believe there are interests that we share that are very important to the work we do in Nicaragua—natural disaster preparedness work, extractive industries, and irrigation issues.
Oxfam also helps build campaign support, political understanding and meaningful participation.
We have firsthand information about what's going on with CAFTA. We are trying to provide that information to those people who don't have access to it.
We are influencing public opinion and pressuring the government to prevent the agreement from being ratified in the countries throughout Central America.
At the international level, we are trying to convince members of Congress who are undecided that CAFTA is not the thing to do.
CAFTA will have very serious consequences on the Central American environment. Even though there is a chapter on the environment in the agreement, it is not enough to mitigate the negative effects CAFTA will produce if approved.
The intellectual property rights provisions will allow exploitation of all the local environmental capital that Central America has. This chapter will just benefit big corporations at the expense of local companies and communities.
The big corporations will tap the genetic information in tropical forests and use it for their own needs. In this agreement, foreign investors will benefit to the detriment of local businesses in Central America.
Biodiversity is an area in which Central America is very rich. And those resources are at risk under CAFTA.
Another major problem for the environment is genetically modified organisms. US agriculture allows the use of these kinds of products without a problem. If CAFTA takes effect, increased trade will bring these products to Central America. Right now, these genetically engineered products don't exist in Central America. This would lead to contamination of the local resources.
We don't know what type of problems these new seeds will introduce. We don't know what consequences there will be.
After the agreement was negotiated, the nature of the activities changed. We moved from a phase where we constructed proposals to a second stage, which involved getting information to the people about what had been negotiated.
I believe that the US Congress is near a decision. It will be very tight, a very close call. So, this is a very important time. This is the time to influence the decision.
We still have to wait for the final result, but we have provided them with important information so they can make an informed decision.
]]>Oxfam has allowed us to do a lot of research. And Oxfam has been instrumental in helping us come to the US to say, "We really don't want CAFTA," face-to-face.
We believe that public opinion has been manipulated. The business sector, which is pushing CAFTA, has said that people in Central America want CAFTA. The reality is totally different
For example, in El Salvador, this agreement was approved late at night and behind closed doors. In Honduras, when they approved it, the legislature had to leave through the back door because there were protestors out front. In Guatemala, the people are asking for a national referendum even though the president says they can't afford it.
We believe that this is an important decision for the future of our countries. There has to be a national referendum so people can say what they think.
I believe that the negotiations and ratification process is totally undemocratic—because the negotiations have been carried out, and still are being carried out, by a very small group of people. We have asked the Congressional representatives in Guatemala if they understand the agreement. And they say they don't even have a copy to look at. But they have been pressured to vote in favor of CAFTA. That's not democratic and says a lot about the process.
If CAFTA really is a good thing, why do they have to hide negotiations and do it behind the people's back?
I got news of the police repressing local people who were protesting against CAFTA. I don't think CAFTA has been approved yet, but it can happen at any moment. (Guatamala's congress ratified CAFTA on March 10, 2005. The agreement is awaiting ratification by the US congress).
We lobby the Guatemalan congress. At the national level, we are part of Mesa Global, which has been leading the protests this week. We also present proposals and research on issues related to the negotiation process and the potential impact of the trade agreement. We have been working with people involved in the negotiations and ratification of CAFTA, as well as with local organizations.
I'm very sad because I feel that the future, whatever it is, will be decided here in the US. They don't have the right to make decisions about our lives.
]]>Other students held events on their college campuses. Creative ideas included a "CAFTA Carnival" that featured rigged games to illustrate unfair trade. In one, participants were challenged to shoot a basketball at a net—the distance was determined by whether they were representing a US- or Central American-based business. Students and other activists also held more formal debates and discussions with experts on trade policy. Activists held more than 250 events during the Week of Action, a significant proportion of which were focused on DR-CAFTA.
At the end of July, the day before the last debate in the House on CAFTA, a small group even staged mock tug of war before the votes on Capitol Hill to show the uneven trade benefits DR-CAFTA provides.
In the end, watching the DR-CAFTA floor vote during the last week of July was "gut wrenching," said Sophia Lafontant, Student Trade Campaign Organizer at Oxfam America. But she was comforted by the many memories of activists around the country showing such passion in their grassroots efforts to defeat the agreement.
"I have to admit that I took this loss hard. It is difficult to pour all of your energy and passion into one issue and have the outcome end up not as you hoped, especially when the impacts of DR-CAFTA are so real," Lafontant said. "However, I am consoled by the fact that DR-CAFTA passed by such a slim margin. Let that be a reminder to us that we are doing our job and that we are being effective. The impact that trade has on development was a theme in the debate."
]]>