“Proponents claim the trade deal would immediately eliminate existing tariffs on 70% of agriculture trade between the two countries, but don’t spend a second considering the effects this will have on Colombia’s small farmers, who produce over half the food consumed in the country,” said Stephanie Burgos, senior policy advisor for Oxfam America. ”If small-scale farmers can no longer compete with heavily subsidized US exports under the FTA, they will have little choice but to turn to illicit crops.”
Poverty and inequality in rural areas have fueled Colombia’s social and armed conflict as well as the illegal economy. The US has invested $8 billion over the last decade in counter-narcotics, counter-insurgency and alternative development efforts. The United Nations Development Program just released a human development report on Colombia, a two-year study that points to increasing rural inequality and high concentration of land ownership. The report also highlights the critical importance of addressing the needs of small farmers, who are key for the country’s long-term development, yet for decades have been neglected by effective policies and programs.
“Small scale farmers in my country, especially women, have faced enormous challenges and this trade deal is only going to make things worse for us,” said Nelly Antonia Velandia Avendano, a women’s farmer leader from the Boyacá province in Colombia who had to abandon her farm because of death threats. “This trade deal not only imposes unfair competition with subsidized American crops, but it also installs an agricultural system that will drive out small holder farmers like me and my neighbors.”
]]>“This agreement lets the US off the hook for now. But with each day that passes with no reform, millions of poor cotton farmers around the world continue to struggle. Eliminating US cotton subsidies could result in additional income that would literally feed an additional million children for a year or pay school fees for at least two million children living in extremely poor West African cotton growing households.
“The case against American cotton subsidies has been proven time and time before. The onus is on the US Congress to deliver the needed reform, in the next Farm Bill if not before.
“Until then, US taxpayers will be paying not just for wasteful subsidies to large scale US cotton producers, but also compensating Brazilian farmers for the losses incurred thanks to misguided US farm policies. If the US Congress fails to make these reforms, Brazil’s retaliation is likely to be much costlier.”
]]>
Lawyers for the National Roundtable on Metalic Mining in El Salvador reacted to the initial hearing, saying that the proceedings ignored the essential role of local communities in determining whether mining projects can or should go forward, and the environmental risks associated with such projects.
Pacific Rim applied for the operating license in 2005 to open a mining project in the department of Cabañas, in the north of the country. It is suing for losses incurred on investments made during exploration work. Pacific Rim filed the suit based on the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), specifically chapter 10 on investments and chapter 12 on dispute resolution.
The economic and investment focus of the dispute was heavily criticized by Luis López, a lawyer for the National Roundtable on Metalic Mining in El Salvador. "Environmental issues and the rights of the local communities are not being discussed," he says. "This operating license is being treated as just another permit, without taking into account the fact that this country is very small and densely populated, and those issues [the environment and people’s rights] will only be addressed as secondary issues."
That is why the Roundtable, with the support of Oxfam America and the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) will be sending an 'amicus curiae'-- a friend of the court brief-- to the ICSID. This is a way for organizations and people directly affected to get involved in a case of this kind, between a transnational company and a government. "With the 'amicus curiae' we're going to introduce new elements that will have to be taken into account, such as the environmental issue" says López. "We want all aspects of the dispute to be discussed."
A second hearing is scheduled for August, when both parties will produce further evidence to support their positions. The dispute is expected to be settled in August or September of this year.
]]>
Unfortunately, not all indigenous groups participating in these working groups felt that the discussions were productive. AIDESEP, a long-time Oxfam America partner and one of the largest federations representing indigenous peoples in Peru’s Amazon, has withdrawn from the dialogue process, citing lack of progress and reluctance on the part of the government to accept its share of the responsibility for the violence in Bagua.
While indigenous people and the government struggle to continue a meaningful dialogue, the Indigenous Federation of Madre de Dios (known as FENAMAD) has been objecting to the presence of Hunt Oil of Texas in the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve (RCA), part of the 3.5 million-acre Block 76 oil concession located in the Madre de Dios region in southeastern Peru. FENAMAD contends that Hunt Oil could be playing indigenous communities against each other to gain access to their lands. “The current strategy of the US company Hunt Oil is to negotiate directly with the members of each native community and seek to divide them and provoke open confrontation among the brother indigenous people within each community,” FENAMAD is saying in a memorandum.
There is a real danger this could emerge as the next flashpoint in a disturbing stream of conflicts between communities and oil and mining companies in Peru. The Peruvian Ombudsman Office estimates that of the 273 social and environmental conflicts in Peru in the first six months of 2009, 80 percent were related to extractive industry projects. (In 2008 there were 123 social and environmental conflicts in the same period.)
FENAMAD and other indigenous federations are insisting that foreign oil, gas, and mining companies must attain the free, prior, and informed consent from communities before they can enter any indigenous lands such as the Amarakaeri Communal Reserve. The right of free, prior, and informed consent is a right of indigenous peoples established under international law, and requires free access to full information (including independent analysis of project proposals), adequate time for a community decision free of pressure and coercion, and the option to reject a proposal--or accept under certain conditions.
The failure of oil, gas, and mining companies to gain appropriate access to communities with natural resources limits Peru’s ability to benefit from revenues it needs to help the approximately 50 percent of its population now living in poverty.
The legislature gave Peru’s President Alan Garcia broad powers to promote economic competitiveness through decrees last year, saying it was necessary to adapt legislation to comply with new requirements of the Peru-US Free Trade Agreement. Indigenous federations and many civil society organizations have strongly protested the possible consequences of these laws for the Amazon rainforest and indigenous lands, as well as the fact that they were adopted without transparency or genuine consultation. Some of these legislative decrees were rescinded following violent confrontations last June, but many are still in force.
Oxfam America's campaign—called the Right to Know, Right to Decide—aims to arm local citizens with the information they need to weigh the costs versus the benefits and decide whether to provide consent for the projects to move forward.
“There is a potential for this confrontation to escalate to violence,” says Emily Greenspan, Oxfam America’s policy advisor who monitors oil and gas projects in Peru’s Amazon. “Companies seeking to operate in any areas need to attain the free, prior, and informed consent of communities. Those that appear to be forcing their way into communities risk serious conflict, as we have seen in the recent past.”
]]>Paul O’Brien, Oxfam America’s Vice-President for Advocacy, who recently testified at a Committee on Ways and Means hearing on US Trade Preference Programs, made the following statement:
“Rep. McDermott’s initiative to substantially improve key trade preference programs will maximize benefits for all least developed countries (LDCs). At a time when the global economic crisis is hitting poor countries the hardest, providing full and permanent access to the US market will offer these countries enhanced opportunities to use trade as a means to spur economic growth and poverty reduction.
“It makes no sense that we collect from Cambodia seven times as much in tariffs as we give them in aid. Or that for every dollar in aid the US provided to Bangladesh last year, Bangladesh paid nearly $4 in tariffs on goods exported here. The New Partnership for Trade Development Act would end this contradiction in our aid and trade policies by enacting into law the US commitment – in the context of the Millennium Development Goals and at the World Trade Organization - to provide duty-free and quota-free market access to all LDCs.
“This bill will go a long way toward making a reality many of the improvements to US trade preference programs that will deliver for development. This bill would not only provide full US market access for all LDCs, it would also simplify the rules of origin to make the program easier to use, and would create a presidential-level mechanism to coordinate much-needed trade capacity building efforts to help countries take advantage of trade opportunities. Most importantly, this bill would provide stability for developing countries and American businesses alike by making these benefits for LDCs permanent.
“While some additional reforms could be made to ensure all trade preference programs are most effective for the promotion of sustainable development, this bill would greatly help poor countries harness trade for development. We look forward to working with Representative McDermott and members of the Ways and Means Committee to ensure that this bill becomes the core of new legislation to improve US trade preference programs.”
]]>
The shift in position by the world’s biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers. The announcement shows that the Obama administration is serious about reducing the negative effects caused by the uncontrolled trade in conventional weapons. The US government, under the Bush Administration, is the only government to vote against the UN process toward an ATT in the past.
As part of its support, the US government stated the condition that future negotiations must include a veto clause, stipulating that decisions at the final conference must be made by consensus.
This, Oxfam and Amnesty International say, could fatally weaken a final deal.
“The world has waited a long time for the United States to come on board to support global arms trade negotiations. However, governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause," said Oxfam International’s policy adviser Debbie Hillier.
Governments are meeting this month in New York in a make-or-break meeting to kick start formal negotiations for a global ATT.
The two international organizations say that new global standards on arms transfers must be agreed in order to prohibit the international transfer of arms likely to be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights law or to undermine sustainable development.
“At long last, the US government says that it wants a strong and robust Arms Trade Treaty with the highest possible standards,” said Brian Wood of Amnesty International. “But by giving every single government the right to scupper the UN Conference in 2012, the US position could hugely weaken or delay agreement to tackle irresponsible arms transfers that shatter countless lives worldwide.”
]]>
The economic crisis arrived as poor countries were already struggling to cope with high food prices and floods, droughts and food shortages linked to climate change.
“Green shoots of economic recovery have not reached the poorest countries which are now suffering severely in the global downturn,” said Max Lawson, Oxfam senior policy advisor.
Oxfam analysis of economic data has discovered that governments in Sub-Saharan Africa will be $70 billion worse off this year as a result of the global slump. Unlike rich countries they cannot borrow their way out of trouble. Without outside help governments will find it increasingly difficult to respond to the climate, food and economic crises and to avoid cutting spending on schools, clinics and other anti-poverty programs.
“Despite feeding their own economies a much-needed stimulus, the G20 has not yet provided even half the $50 billion bailout it promised poor countries in April.”
Oxfam is calling for a $290 billion package of measures to ease the burden on developing countries without hitting ordinary taxpayers. The package includes a ‘Tobin tax’ on currency transactions, a debt moratorium and a crackdown on tax havens.
“Existing aid levels are not enough to protect the status quo never mind reduce poverty in the face of the economic crisis, climate change and rising food prices,” said Lawson.
“The G20 has the chance to change the bad habits of the past and come up with new solutions to the problems facing poor people. A currency transaction levy on the banks that helped cause the global slump could bring in $50 billion to help those suffering in a crisis they did nothing to cause. It is time bankers paid a bonus to the world’s poor.”
Oxfam is also calling on G20 leaders to fulfill a promise made by President Obama in July to deliver new funds to help poor countries cope with climate change. This funding is vital to break the deadlock in climate change negotiations leading up to the make-or-break UN Summit in Copenhagen in December. Oxfam calculates that $50 billion per year is needed to help poor countries cope with climate change and another $100 billion is needed to help them control their emissions.
“The clock is ticking on the chances of a fair deal to prevent misery for millions at risk from climate change. It is time for G20 leaders to stand up and deliver the money needed to protect poor people,” said Oxfam climate change advisor David Waskow.
]]>“Massive government subsidies for large-scale cotton growers in the United States are unfair and hurt farmers in poor countries. The WTO confirmed today the injury caused by these subsidies and authorized Brazil to retaliate against the US,” said Gawain Kripke, policy director for Oxfam America. “American farm policy is broken and bloated, and now other sectors of the US economy may suffer as Brazil retaliates.”
Total direct support to cotton production hovered over three billion dollars in the 2008-2009 growing season, or an equivalent of 50 cents per pound of actual production, according to the International Cotton Advisory Committee.
“The global trading system depends on countries obeying rules and submitting to orderly dispute resolution,” said Kripke. “Thus far, the US has ignored the ruling of the WTO adjudication and continues large subsidies for cotton production. If the US continues this way, the integrity of the multilateral trade system is at stake.”
An Oxfam study found that with a complete removal of US cotton subsidies, the world price of cotton would increase by 6-14%, resulting in additional income that could feed an additional million children for a year or pay school fees for at least two million children living in extremely poor West African cotton growing households.
The longstanding dispute started in 2002. In 2005, the WTO ruled that US cotton subsidies harmed Brazilian cotton farmers and violated WTO rules, but the US did little to abide by the ruling and reduce its trade distorting subsidies. In September 2006, Brazil asked for a WTO “compliance panel” to determine whether the US has done enough to comply with the ruling and the WTO confirmed that the US has failed to reform its agricultural subsidies enough to comply. Today’s ruling confirms that Brazil is entitled to start retaliation procedures, and possibly cross-retaliate by lifting intellectual property protections.
]]>
"Resuscitating Doha is essential to right the rigged rules of trade, but what's been simmering on the WTO stove will simply not deliver for poor countries, said Oxfam America president Raymond C. Offenheiser. "The financial crisis, which started in developed countries but is taking its worst toll on developing countries, should be the impetus for a change in course."
In a new report released today called "Empty Promises," Oxfam details how the Doha Round has become an exercise in prying open developing country markets rather than an effort to rebalance decades of unfair agricultural and industrial trade rules. In the midst of a global economic crisis, a food crisis, and a climate crisis, nations with the least blame and with the least capacity to cope with the consequent effects must not have to pay even more to enable their economies to develop, according to the report.
Over 50 million people stand to lose their jobs, remittances are collapsing, and growth in sub-Saharan Africa is predicted to fall by 70 percent this year trapping 90 million more people in poverty, because of the crisis. Food prices meanwhile remain high for poor consumers: by the end of 2008 a further 109 million people had been added to the ranks of hungry, topping 1 billion people worldwide. As the world experiences the sharpest drop in trade in 80 years, a "development" trade deal—as originally promised—remains crucial, according to Oxfam.
"Now is the time for WTO members to come back to the negotiating table, recognize that the current crisis provides an opportunity to address urgent development needs, and change the course of negotiations, much as they did nearly eight years ago in Doha," said Offenheiser. "At this time of desperate need for a change of course, the Doha Round has to step up to deliver on its development promise. There is little credit left for another failure."
The welcome political commitment from the G8 could lead to a fresh start to negotiations, but it cannot be business as usual. In the past eight years, developed countries have used the talks to continue to push to open up new export markets. Developing countries have resisted, saying they were promised a deal that would give them space to protect their farmers and new industries, an end to rich country trade-distorting agricultural subsidies, and more access to rich markets for their farmers and industries.
The widespread food price crisis has shown that food and livelihood security cannot depend solely on market forces. Development, rather than liberalization, has to be the central objective of negotiations and trade rules must respond to the needs of the most vulnerable people first and foremost, according to Oxfam. It is the responsibility of WTO member states to analyze the role of trade in the recent global crises so that the Doha negotiations take into account the new global context and contribute to a solution, rather than exacerbate the problem.
"What's on the table is no silver bullet since it continues to favor the richest and biggest farmers and industrialists in the US and Europe and sidelines the needs of the poor," said Offenheiser. "We have seen what can be done when countries find the resolve to avert problems at home, and this resolve must be translated to the multilateral trade agenda so that the much-needed conclusion of the Doha Round can be achieved in a manner that addresses developing country needs first and foremost."
]]>"President Obama's historic visit to Ghana, so early in his presidency and on the heels of important commitments at the G8 in Italy, signals the importance of African development to US interests," said Raymond Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America. "President Obama gets it. He understands that without a strong civil society, and capable, transparent governance, efforts to fight poverty and bring about social justice in Africa will at best be incremental. Good governance and sustainable use of resources will inspire more effective international assistance and increase trade."
President Obama had several recommendations that will help Africa on the road to prosperity. Here are a few of the highlights from the speech:
"In the 21st century, capable, reliable, and transparent institutions are the key to success—strong parliaments; honest police forces; independent judges; an independent press; a vibrant private sector; a civil society. Those are the things that give life to democracy, because that is what matters in people's everyday lives." These are all important parts of a thriving democracy, and President Obama made clear in his speech that these should be a priority in Africa just as they should be on every other continent. Building strong institutions that protect the rights of citizens, and allow business and entrepreneurs to flourish, will encourage investment in Africa. Oxfam is focused on helping civil society organizations work to hold their governments accountable. Examples include our partnerships with groups promoting new laws that accord equal rights to women and girls in southern Africa, and a region-wide proposal for uniform laws governing the mining industry in West Africa.
"So in Ghana, for instance, oil brings great opportunities, and you have been very responsible in preparing for new revenue. But as so many Ghanaians know, oil cannot simply become the new cocoa... Dependence on commodities—or a single export—has a tendency to concentrate wealth in the hands of the few, and leaves people too vulnerable to downturns." Resources like gold, diamonds, and oil can bring enormous wealth and potential for development. The road to prosperity will require leaders to avoid the path of poor management, corruption, violence and war. Ghana is a promising example of what is possible: Since Ghana discovered oil near its coast, the country's President John Atta Mills pledged earlier this year to disclose all petroleum agreements, so citizens can track what money comes to the government and how revenues are spent. This pledge has not yet been turned into reality. Real transparency needs to be built into a new legislative framework for how Ghana's new oil wealth will be managed, to ensure revenues are spent on social services and poverty reduction. Oxfam is working with the US Congress on legislation to require all US and foreign companies subject to Securities and Exchange Commission rules to disclose payments to developing country governments. This will be a critically important tool for citizens working to avoid corruption and waste of natural resource revenues.
President Obama also highlighted steps that the US would take to help combat corruption, including addressing corruption in the annual State Department human rights report, a recommendation that was made by Oxfam America in its Presidential transition memos.
"Aid is not an end in itself. The purpose of foreign assistance must be creating the conditions where it's no longer needed." The United States needs to make a number of key reforms to make our foreign aid system as effective as possible in reducing poverty and creating prosperous communities throughout the developing world. The US lacks a coherent strategy for global development. Oxfam is calling on the US to keep recipient country governments and their public informed on the nature and amount of American aid, and let each recipient country lead its own development agenda. President Obama's focus on using aid to defeat poverty is on the right track—one that we hope will lead to a new strategy for global development and a reinvigorated, effective aid system that will also rebuild US leadership in the world.
"A warming planet will spread disease, shrink water resources, and deplete crops, creating conditions that produce more famine and more conflict." Climate change is already affecting the lives and livelihoods of millions of poor people in Africa, as a recent Oxfam report detailed. Tackling these impacts is essential to addressing food security and broader development objectives. President Obama must commit to help bring about a comprehensive global climate strategy that will help poor communities cope with failed crops, dwindling reserves of clean water, and displacement caused by extreme weather events. The US and other wealthier countries must curb their greenhouse gas emissions to prevent climate chaos and provide adequate financial assistance to help African countries adapt in greener and more sustainable ways.
"Now, America can also do more to promote trade and investment." The economic welfare of Americans is inextricably linked with the well-being of people across the globe. While our foreign policy seeks to address the problems of poverty, disease and lack of economic opportunity, our trade policy has often exacerbated them, by demanding greater access to export markets in the poor countries, more favorable rules for US investors that can lead to greater poverty and inequality, and limiting access to affordable medicines. President Obama must develop a new trade policy with economic development as a core objective, spreading the benefits of trade as widely as possible, in the developing world as well as in the United States. This must include focusing efforts on the multilateral trading system to achieve a successful conclusion of the Doha Development Round, while working with Congress to pass legislation providing for duty-free and quota-free market access for all Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
]]>In letters sent to Ambassador Ron Kirk, to Representatives Rangel and Camp, and to Senators Baucus and Grassley, the groups outlined a joint proposal for reform that would unify, simplify and improve existing trade preference programs. The groups also urged timely renewal of preference programs that are set to expire this year, in order to allow a full process of review and reform.
Raymond C. Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America, made the following statement:
"US trade preference programs provide important economic opportunities for developing countries because they create jobs and expand trade. But existing preference programs fail to benefit some of the world's poorest countries, while a labyrinth of different and complex rules makes them nearly impossible to use to their full extent.
"Preference programs must be expanded to enhance benefits for all of the poorest countries. And the creation of a single, comprehensive preference program to replace the myriad of existing programs will improve effectiveness, both for American businesses and poor countries.
"The recent trend to renew expiring preference programs at the last possible moment for only short periods of time left business supply chains and many thousands of jobs in poor countries shrouded in limbo. By renewing expiring programs now and initiating a process of reform to make them more effective, Congress can cement the certainty that investors, businesses and workers need in order to effectively take full advantage of such programs.
"Trade offers opportunities for growth and development for poor countries and rich countries alike. By offering more trade opportunities to the poorest, we can make a contribution to their growth and stability."
]]>Urgent action is required to make the bailout work for poor countries, complete the crackdown on tax havens and speed up reform of the IMF and World Bank, Oxfam said as it published its initial analysis of the London Summit, What Happened at the G-20?
The analysis also raises question over how much of the $50 billion promised for poor countries will be new money. Money distributed through the Multilateral Development Banks, in particular, could come from existing aid budgets.
Oxfam's recommended next steps towards for a 'new world order' are:
"The G-20 could mark an historic turning point but we have been here too many times in the past to take rich countries' promises at face value," said Duncan Green, Oxfam spokesperson. "World leaders need to take decisive steps to turn their rhetoric about a new world order into reality.
"That means an end to the damaging conditionality imposed on poor countries when they ask for assistance from the IMF. If the price of a bailout is to close health clinics and schools then the financial medicine offered by the G-20 will make the patient worse, not better.
"And it means real action to tackle climate change. It would be a tragedy if having benefited from an economic bailout, the world economy and the millions of poor people at greatest risk, quickly become the victims of climate change."
]]>Against this backdrop, how did the G20 leaders perform?
]]>There are about 200 indigenous Ashaninka people living in this area, but most of them, like 29-year-old Dante Cheresente, are not making much money and therefore can't pay for things like doctor visits when family members fall ill or education for their children. They live off of the fruits and vegetables they grow in their small plots, but these are mostly for their own consumption. "We grow yucca, plantains, lemons, oranges, and tangerines," Cheresente says. "But we just eat most of it and feed it to our animals, because prices are so low it is not worth selling."
To tap into the opportunities of the market economy and make some money, Cheresente and his father, who is the village chief, and others in their community are collaborating with a local rural organization known as SEPAR, Oxfam America's partner in this central jungle region of Peru, to carry out an experiment: growing the ancient Sacha Inchi plant, which yields a nut that is rich in nutritious omega-3 and omega-6 oils.
"There is demand in Peru for Sacha Inchi oil for cooking, but also as a health supplement internationally," says Raul Ho, Oxfam America's program officer in South America. "It is well known now, and the supply is lower than demand, both in Peru and abroad. To meet this demand, we will help indigenous farmers find the right Sacha Inchi variety for their lands and help them grow, process, and sell it in the fair trade market."
SEPAR is working with farmers like Cheresente all over the central Amazon to plant experimental plots of Sacha Inchi. In San Ramon de Pangoa, they are growing two different varieties, one from the northern Amazon and one from the southern region, to determine which will perform best in the soil and altitude found in their village. "This is being done with indigenous farmers every step of the way," says Ho. "We will help them enter this market with the right seeds and production technology, and the farmers will know the best practices for growing Sacha Inchi." The goal is to produce a high-grade, organic Sacha Inchi, for which the farmers will get the best possible price.
In San Ramon de Pangoa, the rows of Sacha Inchi plants are interspersed with corn, soy beans, potatoes, and other food crops to determine which growing patterns work best. Frank Mendoza, a tropical agriculture expert advising SEPAR, says the Sacha Inchi crop could be quite lucrative. "If we can help these farmers grow Sacha Inchi as just one of their crops, it will increase the income of the farmers considerably," he says. Cheresente and his father, for example, say if they can make decent money from Sacha Inchi, they could devote five of their eight hectares—about 12 of their nearly 20 acres—to growing the plant. Ho and Mendoza estimate that with luck, in their first year they could get as much as 500 kilos of Sacha Inchi per hectare and sell the unprocessed nuts at about seven Peruvian soles (about $2) per kilo. This could mean a gross return of as much as $5,000 per harvest. With the right variety and improved production techniques, farmers like the Cheresentes could eventually produce nearly 1,000 kilos per hectare, which would bring in over $10,000 for unprocessed Sacha Inchi nuts on their five hectares, a huge income boost in a very poor region of Peru.
Cultivating a valuable cash crop like Sacha Inchi can help the indigenous Ashaninka people in villages like San Ramon de Pangoa to connect with local and international markets on their own terms: to earn money and preserve their culture and way of life. Preserving community and the Ashaninka's legacy occupy Cheresente's mind quite a bit these days: he and his wife, Laura, have a two-month-old son, Jason Fritz Cheresente. While his father talks with visitors, Jason Fritz lays in a hammock, quietly sleeping. Attached to the hammock is a string, which his grandmother pulls gently to rock the baby as she talks with friends. She and her generation have witnessed the wholesale occupation of this central jungle region by settlers from the highlands escaping the guerilla war of the 1980s and seeking land and opportunity. The government encouraged this exodus, believing the land was unoccupied, as it ignored the indigenous inhabitants. The result is that the Ashaninka have been squeezed into smaller and smaller areas and can no longer hunt and fish. They are now settled and trying to become part of the larger economy while preserving their culture. Despite these pressures, Cheresente is optimistic that growing Sacha Inchi will help them. "We expect to increase our income, so we can support the elderly people in the community, as they were the ones who worked to get this land. We also want to improve the level of nutrition and education for children here."
Growing Sacha Inchi is just part of this economic integration for the Ashaninka. Others in the village are getting help in producing and marketing handicrafts such as woven bags and traditional garments, as well as souvenirs for tourists. Cheresente's wife even got a grant from SEPAR to open a store, where she sells food, soap, and other consumer goods. Small enterprises like this will help people earn cash they can use to pay for health care and other services. And more small enterprises will help start to move cash through the rural economy.
Growing Sacha Inchi and other money-making ventures in these indigenous communities will help people prosper and maintain their communities. Cheresente and his neighbors have worked hard to get the research plots growing despite a serious drought that set in just after planting last year. They watered the Sacha Inchi plants from a small stream near the village and tended the plots three entire days per week.
Antonio Cheresente, Dante's father, says they are looking to Sacha Inchi for their future. "We know this research will help us improve our farms," he says.
]]>