You are on page 1of 20

Introduction:

The banana industrys economic significance in the Windward Islands can


hardly be exaggerated. Even after a considerable downturn experienced
during the 1990s, almost one-third of the arable land in these four
countries is under bananas. The industry is responsible for 43% of exports
and 21% of the gross domestic product of these islands (International
Labour Organization 1999, 5). Detailed labour force data are available
only for Dominica and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. However, the data
for these two are remarkable. In Dominica, the ILO reports that the
banana

industry

provides

direct

employment

for

10,255

people,

constituting 42.9% percent of total employment in the country. In St.


Vincent the banana industrys importance in job creation is even greater.
It provides work for 23,653 people, constituting a 70.7 percent of total
employment

(International

Labour

Organization,

1999A).

As

The

Economist correctly puts it, the Windward Islands are the true banana
republics (The Economist 1997-98, 2). Peasants produce bananas in the
Windward Islands. Over 80 percent of the banana-producing units are less
than five acres (Myers, 2004) and, as Table 1 indicates, in three of the four
of these islands the mean farm size is less than two acres.
The model of banana production used in the eastern Caribbean makes it
different from that used almost anywhere else in the world., It differs in
scale, landscape, tenure systems, trading patterns and the nature of the
farmer themselves, These characteristics are a function of the countries
histories being one of foreign domination but also a function of the nature
of the society itself. One would be surprised however that Latin American

production and eastern Caribbean production does share two common


traits that being that both were introduced from abroad and both are
dominated by foreign companies. In this particular essay, what I will aim
to bring to the reader is the reason why this unique production system
developed only in the Caribbean, with a specific focus on colonial land
ownership patterns and tenure practices. I will further seek to investigate
what has been the effect of globalization, and trade liberalism on the
smallholder farmers in who are involved in banana production in the
eastern Caribbean. Finally using the Sustainable Rural Livelihoods
Approach analytical framework I will attempt to conclude some of the best
solutions to continue providing these small holders with meaningful
employment.

A Brief historical Background


Although the importance of banana production in the Caribbean can
hardly be overstated on would be surprised that the industry itself is
relatively new (Wiley, 2008). Although the contemporary banana industry
in the Windward Islands started back in the 1950 (Grossman, 2003) it was
events further back in time that set the context for its emergence. We
now know that there were two major factors contributing to the
emergence of this industry in the Caribbean. The first, which is not given
much attention in the discourse is the fact that during the 1950`s the
former colonial economies were in a state of decline, and this brought with
it the threat of mass poverty, violence and social instability that, would

threaten the privileged status of the plantocracy that still dominated the
economies (Wiley, 2008; Grossman L. , 1998). This caused the UKs
colonial office and Imperial Committee on Marketing to issue a report
suggesting that a successful fruit trade could be developed between the
UK and its small windward island colonies (Myers, 2004). This they
rightfully

thought

would

create

jobs;

alleviate

poverty

and

the

deteriorating social conditions. The decision about which fruit should be


selected was made easy by another factor which was becoming
increasingly important at the time being, the growing American presence
in the Caribbean banana industry at the time (Reynolds, 2003; Wiley,
2008). The British governments willingness to award Geest Industries
Limited control over banana production was motivated by its desire to
prevent Fyffes, still a United Fruit Company subsidiary from further
expanding in the region. According to Wiley, Fyffe has handled much of
the Jamaican Trade, and the British Government preferred to keep the
eastern Caribbean banana industry in British Hands than entrust it to a US
based Firm. There were also additional concerns of retaining foreign
exchange, as well as reducing the amount of monies to these economies
for subsistence, and to provide jobs to the majority of small holders
(Grossman L. S., 2003; Grossman L. , 1998). However, another crucial
factor was important for the development of the Caribbean banana
industry and that was the changes in British banana import regulations.
To encourage banana imports from sterling areas Britain increased the
tariff on non-commonwealth bananas and established a quota on the
importation of fruit from Latin America. In contrast, it allowed for the

unlimited importation of bananas and this along with several aid programs
and is what helped the industry to grow in the eastern Caribbean and to
get a foothold in the British market (Mandel, 1999; Wiley, 2008; Trouillot,
1988).
System of Production
The small farmer stands at the heart of the Caribbean banana industry, as
such Wiley and Grossman in their pieces have alluded to the fact that this
make him the backbone of the national economies of the four islands that
produce bananas, but certainly at the backbone of the industry. Therefore
when one examines the system of banana production in the Caribbean it
is easy to make very simplistic assumptions about exactly why the system
evolved the way it did. In the four banana producing countries there are
approximately 25,000 (or 54% of the national workforce)people working
directly on the growth of bananas, most growing on plots that are
approximately 5 acres in size the larger plot holders grow on plots
approximately sixty to seventy acres in size (Grossman L. , 1998; Myers,
2004). One would be tempted to generalize about the efficiency of this
type of piece meal production system and would advocate for larger
amalgamated farms such as what exist in Latin America or the Pacific.
However, the production system that developed in the eastern Caribbean
developed for two primary reasons; the first is the general topography of
the lands. In the banana producing countries of the eastern Caribbean the
terrain is rugged, the landscape carved by steep hills and enormous
valleys, most of the banana production that is done on hillsides and

marginal lands, because of the islands historical association with cash


crop production. So the flatter `better` land as it were was never available
to the peasant population for ownership or the growth of food (Mandel,
1999). So it then becomes difficult to both amalgamate farms and
increase production, as the land space is just not available to do so
(Grossman L. , 1993). The other reason why the system of production
developed the way in which it did was again historical. The abolition of
slavery in the British Empire in the 1830s led to great changes in the
agricultural and landholding system in the region.

While many slaves left

the plantations and went into urban areas, others had managed to gain
control over the small parcels of land they had used to grow their food,
often as renters, squatters, or sharecroppers, if not as titled owners. These
land parcel units became smaller over time due to land fragmentation
when being passed from one generation to the next (Wiley, 2008). The
transition from estates to smallholdings continued into the twentieth
century when less profitable plantations were broken up and redistributed
to the growing peasantry adding to the ranks of the smallholder sector.
Post emancipation and societal changes were complex and again
reshaped the face of the region but one thing remains clear, that land had
a particular significance to the smallholder population in the Caribbean
(Trouillot, 1988). For many it was a means of securing an income, an
insurance policy of sorts to prevent themselves and their families from
slipping into poverty and ensuring that they can feed themselves
(Bebbington, 1999). It was a means of family heritage, and for others a
symbol of independence and wealth, the chances that the small holders of

the eastern Caribbean were going to forfeit these rights to MNC`s to allow
the land to be taken and amalgamated was unheard of. Moreover, this is
why the labour situation in the Caribbean was so much different from
Latin America. This significant class of independent small holders arose
during the decades after abolition of slavery and held on to the land until
peasant times. Most had no desire to enter into wage labour relationships
preferred by large fruit TNCs. The Economist writes that peasant banana
cultivation ...is thought to bring with it certain self-esteem (The
Economist 1997-98, 2). Michael Joseph agrees, noting that with the small
owner-regime in bananas, the descendants of slaves, once relegated to
menial roles, have gradually acquired the spirit of free enterprise.

So

instead, many peasants joined or formed cooperative societies that were


not very amendable to TNC practices. This is not to say that this type of
tenure system did not exist in other banana producing parts of the world,
we know for a fact that this type of contractual farming exists in certain
countries in Latin America, where capitalist banana production system,
exists side by side with contract small scale farming.
Some Issues that make the banana industry to Liberal Policies
However, one must be wary to make the distinction, where as in the
Caribbean this type of production is done by the small farmers, it and
other factors makes the industry incapable of competing successfully on
its own on the world banana markets. Because it is a high cost producer
compared to Central and South America, it requires a high level of
protection to be profitable. Table two reveals the magnitude of the

problem for where as it cost in excess of $460 to produce a tonne of


bananas in the eastern Caribbean it produced for less than 200 dollars in
Latin American banana growing countries. The small farm size also limits
the amount of mechanization that can be used, and the hillside farming
presents a problem for irrigation and drainage, which often lead to soil
difficulties (Grossman, 2003; Mandel, 1999). Furthermore production is
often disrupted -sometimes a seasons entire crop destroyed - by
hurricanes, leaving on to wonder about the true competitiveness of the
industry. The International Labour Organization (ILO) cites a study jointly
undertaken by the French Mission for Technical Cooperation and the InterAmerican Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture which found that over
the last three decades, the full economic potential of banana export
production has been severely constrained by a general lack of productivity
growth (ILO 1999, 3-4). In this regard, Orchard et al add that ...lack of
entrepreneurial

and

management

skills

have

been

suggested

as

contributing to the present malaise in the Windward Island industry.


Producers are not sufficiently aware of the increasingly competitive nature
of the industry and the changing nature of fruit and vegetable marketing
(Mandel, 1999).
Banana Growers Associations a Concise Overview
In any discussion about banana production in the eastern Caribbean, it is
always fitting to mention the Banana Growers Associations that operate in
the respective countries. In the countries of the eastern Caribbean, BGA`s
are needed because, there are thousands of poor independent farmers

producing fruit for the EU market as such these poor, independent farmers
acting alone cannot ensure that their fruit reaches consumers in the EU
market. The name of this association indicates that it is an organisation
run by growers that operate on their behalf to fulfil many functions that
would be impossible for individual farmers to accomplish on their own.
They play a role in coordination of the growing and production process
and as a collective voice for farmers at the regional and international level
(Wiley, 2008). In the eastern Caribbean, they also perform the role of the
guaranteed market, which is very crucial to the survival of the industry
(Grossman, 2003). In addition to shipping arrangements and generating
payments to the farmers, the BGA`s also does bulk purchasing of the
inputs for the industry, sometimes in a regional level to get better
pricings. These inputs include fertilizers, pesticides, herbicide boxes, white
lime etc (Wiley, 2008; Reynolds, 2003). These items are sold on credit and
applied to the cess, the term used for the sum of money deducted from
the payments made by the BGAS to the farmer after the fruit has been
delivered (Wiley, 2008; Grossman, 2003). Finally, the BGA`s in the
respective islands often choose to pay farmers a standard market price
when the world price for bananas falls

below a certain minimum

highlights the critical importance the institution plays in buffering the local
industries from external global shocks in price due to market gluts or
scarcity . And so would be the first body to feel the effects of the liberal
policies handed down on the eastern Caribbean producers in the wake of
the 1998 and 2004 World Trade Organisation ruling, and it would also be

the body that would directly feel the effects if farmers began turning away
from the industry for what they saw as more viable livelihood strategies.
Preferential Access and the WTO : The Onset of Disaster
Until the 1990 access to the European banana market were structured
around a set of preferential trade agreements granted to the former Africa
Caribbean and Pacific countries under the first LOM agreement of 1974.
According to Reynolds in 1993, a single EU banana market was
established by consolidating earlier privileges under a complex tariff
quota system designed to make it difficult for non-commonwealth
producers to gain access to the EU market.

The system was revised

briefly in 1995 to settle a complaint by some Latin American countries and


from then on took on the following form; Bananas from European overseas
territories were given free market access, ACP bananas were given a tariff
free quota set at the traditional 858,000 tonnes per year, and dollar
bananas were given a quota of 2,2000,000 tonnes with a 75 ECU
(European Currency Units ) per tonne (Myers, 2004). Further, an import
licensing system was established guaranteeing traditional EU and ACP
producers 30 percent of licenses and allocating the remainder to the other
producing countries. With this new regulation, ACP producers saw their
share of the EU banana market rise from 37 percent in 1992 to 39 percent
in 1997 (Wiley, 2008). This protected market has been particularly critical
for the Windward islands, for although the ACP producers have very often
not been able to fill their quotas due to various means of losses the
regulations have allowed then to market their produce at twice the price

of dollar bananas, and this generates the needed monies to keep the
industries in the eastern Caribbean afloat and preventing the society from
falling into disarray due to joblessness (Grossman L. , 1998; Mandel,
1999).
This preferential and lifesaving system was thrown into disarray when in
1994 Chiquita launched and attack that escalated into a fully fledged
trade war (Myers, 2004; Reynolds, 2003). In 1994 Chiquita charged that
the EU violated US laws by discriminating against US corporations, an
using its tremendous political clouts was able to lobby the US government
and the WTO charging that the EU regulations discriminated against US
banana corporations and against dollar banana producing countries
because they were not given favourable export shares. To rally its cause
the US trade offices recruited Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico
to sign the WTO petition. In 1997, the WTO rules that the banana
regulations did violate international free trade agreements both in
granting preferential licenses to traditional ACP importers and in allocating
preferential quota shares to the Latin American countries that signed the
1995 agreement (Reynolds, 2003; Myers, 2004). The EU revised the
banana regulations in 1999, maintaining existing tariffs and ACP dollar
banana quotas for top suppliers and import licenses for major distributers.
Chiquita rejected this proposal and the case went back to the WTO, who
again rules against the EU and authorised the United States to impose
some 191 million dollars in trade sanctions against European Imports, the
authorization was further granted to Ecuador who as granted some 202
million dollars in sanctions against European imports.

In 2000, the EU

again tried to bring the banana regulations into compliance by eliminating


country quotas and allocation import license on a first come first serve
basis but it was again rejected by the US trade office. It was not until 2001
that Chiquita and the US government finally agreed to an EU proposal o
modify the banana regime. This agreement established a transitional
banana regime scheduled to be replaced by a tariff-only system in 2006.
This transitional system firstly would eliminate individual country quotas,
and secondly would allocate import license to distributers, which would be
based on their share of imports in the 1994-1996 reference period.
The Effect of Liberalization on the Common Man
To try and understand the effect that WTO ruling had on the banana
industry and the strategies that the banana workers have employed as a
means to continue to earning an income be it within or outside

the

industry, it is best at this stage to employ an analytical framework which


best describes the situation of the eastern Caribbean farmer. In my mind,
this failure to properly understand the mechanism of the smallholder
farmer may be the fundamental reason why academics have to this point
been grappling with providing concrete solutions that can help to provide
satisfactory livelihood alternatives for farmers who have been forced out
of the industry. To do this I will adopt a sustainable rural Livelihoods
Approach as proposed by Anthony Bebbington (1999) in which he used
the framework to broadens our conception of rural livelihoods in such a
way that may help rethink the nature, location and content of
interventions so that they are more consonant with the diverse ways in

which people make a living and build their worlds. Bebbington argues that
it is important to have a wide conception of the resources that people
need to access in the process of composing a livelihood, perhaps
especially in a context where peoples livelihoods shift from being directly
based on natural resources, to livelihoods based on a range of assets,
income sources and product and labour markets. Hence this framework
thus understands these assets not only as things that allow survival,
adaptation and poverty alleviation: they are also the basis of agents
power to act and to reproduce, challenge or change the rules that govern
the control, use and transformation of resources.
With this background in mind, Myers notes that because of the WTO ruling
there has been a massive exodus of growers from the industry, he
estimates that the numbers actually declined from about 24,000 in 1992
to 7000 in 2002 as growers became discouraged by the low process and
the constant threat to the community regime. The biggest exodus came in
2001 when there was a double blow resulting from low prices in 2000 and
losses from a drought led 4000 farmers to give up banana production. It is
notes that this exodus was not the result of a planned scheme of
rationalisation based on early retirement or diversification but in
spontaneous and individual grower reaction to falling returns and
diminishing prospects.
Many of the farmers that stayed in the industry resorted to part-time work
or other sources of earnings. Grossman discovered in St Vincent that
many smallholders began doing wage labour to augment family incomes,

with one or more family members seeking off farm employment at least
on a part-time basis. Trouillot argues that this strategy is a function of
small land holding size and is a continuation of, rather than a departure
from subsistence level consumption patterns. Many turned to alternative
crops or subsistence farming. Although no official figures exist, the
literature suggests that the tourist trade has absorbed a substantial
number of the workers that have left the industry, as it is the emerging
industry on the islands. Others who have been unable to find jobs have
remained unemployed, while others migrated or indulged in illicit pursuits
like drug trafficking.

According to an article in The New York Times by

Mireya Navarro, regional officials believe that the elimination of the


banana regime would deal an economic catastrophe to countries that
have little capacity to grow anything else.... Navarro adds that some
government and business leaders say the United States risks undermining
its anti-drug efforts in the region if banana growers turn to drugs - not just
marijuana, but also trafficking in Colombian heroin and cocaine as
alternatives (Navarro, 1999) . We know that the growth of the marijuana
industry and the failure of the banana industry are directly correlated, and
in St Vincent and the Grenadines it has become the mainstay for a
significant portion of the population, and because the industry is filled
with so many hazards and unpredictability some growers prefer the safety
of the banana industry but will not depart from the growth of marijuana
for now as it does what banana failed to do with is to provide them with a
living (Wiley, 2008).
Insight through Bebbington type lenses

Clearly as we have seen from some of the ex-banana workers, some of the
smallholders have been able to continue making a living in the rural areas
without going to the urban areas as other rural livelihood options
emerging that also address household material and human needs.
However, Bebbington offers some additional insight into some of the
industries that he feels might be useful in keeping the rural poor
employed. Important insights into the possibilities for improved rural
livelihoods have come from a body of work influenced more by
Chayanovian and Boserupian theories of peasant economy than by more
Marxian positions. It suggests the emergence of what we had seen
emerging in the Dominican and Vincentian countryside being the rise of
the so called capitalized family farms'' or CFF`s farms which constituted
successful cases of accumulation and intensification in the household
peasant economy. These were farms that emerged among the small
holders instead of the mid-sized peasantry as in Latin America, in that
sense were the empirical precursor to the notion of ``viable'' units.
Common to the success of many of these CFFs have been: an ability to
access land, finance and at times labour; an ability to gain a niche in
higher value product markets; and the presence of different types of
supportive state policy.
The movement away from the banana industry has not necessarily led to
the end of rural livelihoods. A significant growth feature has been the
growth

of

rural

proletariat

working

on

smallholder

agricultural

enterprises. The rise of fruit and vegetable production for sale on the
international and regional market brought particular attention to this

phenomenon, but elsewhere the emergence of strong non-traditional agriflori- and horticultural sectors has similarly given rise to rural work forces
elsewhere: such workers are sometimes urban based, and in other cases
are members of peasant families. In many cases, this proletarianisation
does not lead to more sustainable livelihoods, especially when wages are
low and health hazards high because of the use of agrochemicals in such
enterprises.

Such

jobs

however,

can

at

times

resolve

the

rural

residence/making a living dilemma, enabling people to stay in their


communities through the complementary income coming from being a
labourer in nearby agro-enterprises.
Where agricultural intensification has been limited, and other rural
employment

absent,

the

principal

livelihood

adaptation

has

been

temporary or permanent migration. In part, this is because migration has


been an element of the Caribbean livelihood strategies for a long time;
but it is also because migration is critical to the viability of rural peoples
livelihoods (Gordon, 2004). Migration is often, of course, merely a survival
strategy in many contexts families scarcely scrape by, and the cost to the
migrant is enormous. Nevertheless, in some cases migration has allowed
significant family accumulation. Talking of the special, but by no means
unique, case of international migration in the leewards and the
windwards during the 1970 and 1980s has displayed the crucial ways
which migrants remittances from the United States allow the rest of their
families not only to keep living in communities, but also to combine
subsistence agriculture with a remarkable improvement of housing
conditions. While rural investment in housing as opposed to productive

activities might be considered far from ideal and be a result of a


continuing absence of financial institutions or asset and product markets
in rural areas, as much as a cultural preference, it is nonetheless a
measure of accumulation. It is therefore informative to look at cases
where migration has gone beyond a survival strategy and has become
part of an accumulation strategy (either in the form of housing or
productive investment), in order to understand how this has been
possible.
In the Caribbean, the encouragement of rural industries has been a critical
component of rural area recovery that some small island governments
have overlooked or avoided because of the costs associated with the
projects. Certainly, in financially strapped countries governments would
be hesitant about spending millions of dollars on micro-finance projects or
infrastructure for projects that documentation has not been put forward to
show any benefits brought to any other rural community. Bebbington
speaks differently.

He sees the encouragement of rural industries as a

possible means by which families can combine home-based work in these


industries with agriculture. Bebbington cites that in some Latin American
counties the textile, leather, metal working and other light manufacturing
industries, often associated with informal sector activities has come to
dominate the rural economy and rural livelihoods in many communities in
northern Ecuador, where relatively high value products have been made
over a long period of time. However, this led to social differentiation; it
also allowed continued rural residence in areas of quite advanced land
fragmentation.

Conclusion
From the literature, certain new factors have now become apparent. The
non-competitiveness of the Caribbean industry has now gone beyond the
ability of the industry to receive copious amounts aid and preferential
access, but also additional factors need to be included, these are
management issues, soil and attitudinal adjustments. The ILO argues that
In order to cope, Dominica, Grenada, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the
Grenadines will have to embrace globalization. In the necessity of finding
work for former banana farmers, it will be imperative that they attract
capital from abroad and that they have access to markets as extensively
as possible. In addition, this will have to be taken seriously if the industry
is going to be able to re-attract the thousands of farmers that leave the
industry every year for better pay or out of frustration. Governments and
persons in authority will have to take the hard decisions to spend more
monies on making the system of production more efficient so that it may
be more competitive on the world market and keep Caribbean small
farmers employed.

Bibliography
Bebbington, A. (1999). Capitals and Capabilities: A Framework for Analyzing
Peasant Viability, Rural Livelihoods and Poverty: World Development,. World
Development , 2021-2044.
Gordon, M. (2004). The Role of Emigration in the Caribbean Development
process. In P. Mars, & A. Young, Caribbean Labour and Politics: Legacies of
Cheddi Jagan and Michael Manley (p. 268). Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Grossman, L. S. (2003). The St. Vincent Banana Growers Association, Contract
Farming, and the Peasantry. In S. Striffler, & M. Moberg, Banana Wars: Power,
Production, and History in the Americas (pp. 286-315). Durham: Ducke University
Press.
Grossman, L. (1993). The Political Ecology of Banana Exports and Local Food
Production in St Vincent, Eastern Caribbean. Annala of the Association of
American Geographers , 347-367.
Grossman, L. (1998). The Political Ecology of Bananas: Contract Farming,
Peasants, and Agrarian Change in the Eastern Caribbean. Chapel Hill: University
of North Carolina Press.
International Labour Organisation. (1999). Restructuring and the loss of
Preference: Labour Challenges for the Caribbean Banana Industry. Geneva:
International Labour Organisation.

Joseph, M. (1997). Post Lome IV Arrangements Must Mirror the Principles and
Instruments of Lome: A Perspective from the Banana Sectors of the Windward
Islands. Maastrict: European Centre for Development Policy Management .
Mandel, J. (1999). The Crisis in and Future of the Windward Islands Banana
Industry. Washington: Organisation of American States.
Myers, G. (2004). Banana Wars: The price of free trade. London & New York: Zed
Books.
Navarro, M. (1999, May 4). New York Times. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from New
York Times: www.nytimes.com
Orchard, J., Bainbridge, Z., Blowfield, M., Fereday, N., & Malins, A. (1997).
Potential for Fair Trade and Organic Bananas from the Caribbean. Kent: The
University of Greenwich.
Reynolds, L. (2003). The Golobal Banana Trade:. In S. Striffler, & M. Moberg,
Banana Wars: Power, Production, and History in the Americas (pp. 1-25).
Durham: Duke University Press.
The Economist. (1997-1998, December 20). Expelled From Eden. Retrieved
March 20, 2009, from Northern Light Search: www.nlsearch.com
Trouillot, M.-R. (1988). Peasants and Capital: Dominica in the World Economy.
Balitmore: John Hopkins Press.
Wiley, J. (2008). The Banana: Empires, Trade Wars, and Globalization. Lincoln and
London: University of Nebraska Press.

Appendix

Country Number
of Active

Growers

Banana Acreage Grower


Acreage per
Active
Dominica
6555
12000
1.83
Grenada
600
1200
2.00
St Lucia
9500
16500
1.74
St Vincent
8000
12000
1.50
Total Windwards 24655
417000
1.69
Table 1: Showing selected characteristics of banana producing countries in
eastern Caribbean
Source: Wiley 1999

Country
Cost
Dominica
515
Grenada
503
Ivory Coast
469
St Lucia
463
St Vincent
461
Cameroon
440
Jamaica
391
Colombia
200
Costa Rica
179
Ecuador
162
Table 2: Costs per Ton of Banana Production $US
Source: Orchard et al, 1997, 25

You might also like