5.5 Environmental Impact of Globalization

The value of the Amazon Rain forest

• Biodiversity: The Amazon is the largest and most diverse ecosystem in the world. It is home to more than half the world's rain forest. It supports millions of species of plants, animals, and insects. Plants from the rain forest are used to produce pharmaceutical drugs, and more plant species are currently being studied for future benefits. One square kilometre of this rain forest contains nearly 100 000 tonnes of living plants. More than 100 pharmaceutical companies are funding projects studying Indigenous plants used by Indigenous healers.

• Climate change: The rain forest accounts for about 10% of the world's carbon stores in ecosystems. Amazonian forests accumulated about 0.5 tonnes of carbon per hectare per year between 1975 and 1996. However, fires related to Amazonian deforestation have made Brazil one of the top greenhouse gas producers, with nearly 200 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide a year coming from logging and burning.

Rondônia, Brazil

In the 1980s, the government of Brazil recognized that it had a great deal of poverty. They decided to do something about it. The Polonoroeste Project in Rondônia, Brazil, was established to open a large area of the rain forest to human development. The original project called for a large, decentralized community of self-reliant pioneer farmers stretched along a central highway. It was funded by the government of Brazil and the World Bank, which contributed over $500 billion.

Goals

• to promote the occupation of northeastern Brazil

• to reduce inequalities among people

• to provide employment to economically marginalized people

• to increase the region's production and revenue

• to ensure growth in harmony with nature and the protection of Indigenous communities

Over 500 000 migrants from other parts of Brazil were given plots of land. A large highway was built through the rainforest, increasing access to the land and improving opportunities for the movement of goods. The settlers used slash-and-burn techniques to clear the land; then they planted manioc, beans, and rice, which have quick yields.  Although high yield crops were initially successful, they failed as soon as the soil was depleted. The settlers moved on to deforest more areas, and the cleared lands were taken over by ranchers, who also moved on after the land was found unsuitable for livestock.

Negative results

• Between 1980 and 1987, 20% of the state of Rondônia was deforested.

• The Indigenous people of the area have lost some of their lands and culture; many have died of diseases brought by the settlers.

• Predictions are that if the current rate of deforestation continues, an additional two million square kilometers of rain forest will disappear in the next fifty years.

Positive results

• Nearly one million urban poor and landless peasant farmers have migrated to the region, where they have been able to experience some degree of prosperity.

Rondônia, Brazil, June 1985: This photograph shows the unique Brazilian pattern of clearing land only along transportation routes. Land clearings in the southern Amazon Basin usually radiate out in a perpendicular pattern from streams or roads. The clearings usually have a "herringbone" appearance. While the spacing of the perpendicular roads or tracts can vary, most of the intervals between these roads are four to five kilometers.

Deforestation, State of Rondônia, Brazil, August 1992: The rate of deforestation can be calculated by comparing photographs of an area over time. Seven years after the previous photo was taken, this view shows the increased devastation of the rain forest. Despite dense cloud cover along the western edge of this photograph, this view shows more than half of the total acreage in the State of Rondônia, Brazil. You can see the main northwest-southeast highway that begins in the city of Pôrto Velho (under cloud cover), located along the south side of the Madeira River. Several smaller cities (areas of higher reflection) can be seen along the main highway. The city of Rondônia is located near the center of the photograph. The solid, darker area is tropical rain forest, with several wispy smoke palls blowing toward the north.

Alternatives to deforestation

Without harvesting trees, the rain forest can be used in many ways to produce sustainable and positive economic results. Some studies have shown that the harvest of medicinal plants, fruits, nuts, oils, and other resources, such as rubber and chocolate, can provide greater economic benefit over the long term than if the rain forest is burned for cattle or farming operations. Some studies show that rain forest land converted to cattle operations yields the land owner $60 per acre. If the timber is harvested, the land is worth $400 per acre. However, if renewable and sustainable resources are harvested, the land can yield the land owner $2400 per acre. This second approach provides an income today and for generations to come while still preserving the biodiversity of this natural treasure.

If the wild products of the Amazon were harvested, this practice could also provide employment for Indigenous people without forcing them to abandon their culture. Today, some Indigenous tribes earn five to ten times more money harvesting wild medicinal plants, fruits, nuts, and oils than by destroying the forest and planting subsistence crops. Handicraft production is another growing industry that allows the Indigenous people to use native materials and their cultural expertise to create marketable products that do not damage the environment.

Why organic? Many consumers around the world have been demanding more organic foods, because many people want to eat foods low in synthetic chemicals, hormones, and antibiotics. They also want to protect the environment from excessive use of chemicals, especially pesticides and herbicides. They want food that is healthy for themselves and grown in sustainable ways.

What does organic mean?

To be labelled organic, a product must meet certain requirements. However, it does not necessarily mean that it is grown on a little family farm in an old-fashioned way. Quite the contrary. Organic farming has become big business with a great deal of scientific research behind the farming processes. As well, although organic crops are not grown with synthetic pesticides, pesticides are so common in our world that no crop can actually be declared pesticide free. Other terms you might see on food include natural or 100% pure. These terms have no legal definition and, therefore, are meaningless.

Canada's government defines organic food as that which comes "from a farm system employing management practices that seek to nurture ecosystems to achieve sustainable productivity; and that provide weed, pest, and disease control through a diverse mix of mutually dependent life forms, recycling of plant and animal residues, crop selection, and rotation, water management, tillage and cultivation". (Organic Production Systems General Principles and Management Standards, Government of Canada: 1999)

Guidelines: To be certified as an organic food in Canada, a crop must

• be free of commercial fertilizers for three years

• be free of herbicides for three years

• grow from seed not genetically modified

• include a buffer zone between organic plants and non-organic plants

In addition, some of the substances banned from use include synthetic pesticides, fungicides, insecticides, rodenticides, and wood preservatives; synthetic fertilizers; materials and products produced from genetic engineering; sewage sludge; hormones; and synthetic veterinary drugs, including antibiotics and parasiticides.

Problems with certification: Foods that meet these standards are stamped with Certified Organic labels. An organic grower pays several hundred dollars a year to become certified, and much of that money goes to the inspectors, who ensure standards are met. Much paperwork is needed to prove organic standards have been followed.

However, these standards are voluntary. There are twenty-seven independent certifiers of organic food in Canada. If the certifying agency finds the grower has violated the standards, the only consequence is that the product can no longer carry the "Certified Organic" label. No fines are levied, except in British Columbia and Quebec, where the industry is regulated.

Problems with organic food: Some people have expressed concern that organically produced food has a lower yield than food produced using synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and genetic engineering. Because no chemicals are used, weeds are a problem. Crops can use soil nutrients that are not replaced by fertilizers. If organic crops yield smaller harvests, then more land is required to feed the world's people. Other studies show the opposite—that organic farming actually yields better results. Research at England's Essex University has shown that farmers in India, Kenya, Brazil, Guatemala, and Honduras have doubled or tripled their yields by using the techniques of organic agriculture. Cuban farmers, who cannot access fertilizers and pesticides because of a United States embargo, have also realized greater yields by taking up organic farming. Organic farming is also more labor intensive, and more workers are required to produce crops. Yet, because no chemicals are used and no equipment is needed to spread chemicals, production costs and energy costs are lower.

Consumer demand has increased. Until recently, organic products occupied a small niche in  the Canadian agricultural products scene. People looking for natural products, free of pesticides and other chemicals, had a limited selection of relatively expensive products.

The corporatization of organics: The organic food industry has been growing at a rate of 15-20% per year over the past decade and is now a billion-dollar industry. It is a huge industry in Europe, the United States, and Canada. Organic foods have become so popular that supply cannot keep up with demand, leading to shortages in organic products for consumers. With such high demand and such potential for profit, many large retailers are beginning to move into the organic market. In March of 2006, Walmart announced that it plans to become the leading retailer of organic food. The company plans to double its selection of organic products. Loblaws, owner of Superstore and Extra Foods stores in Alberta, now carries over 300 products as part of their President's Choice Organics line and plans to expand.

Conflict of interest?

Those devoted to natural products see a conflict of interest between the principles of big business and the principles of organic agriculture. Because one of the chief objectives of organic farming is sustainability and the main motive of big business is profit, there is cause for concern. In the United States, large companies have successfully lobbied to change the definition of "organic" foods to allow certain synthetic substances in the preparation, processing, and packaging of organic foods. Organic foods, once produced on small local farms, are now being imported to North America from developing countries such as China and Brazil, where standards might be questionable.

A win-win situation?

However, companies such as Walmart can see that money is to be made selling organic goods. As quoted in "Business Week Online", March 2006, Walmart CEO Lee Scott talked about selling organic cotton yoga clothing. "We sold out in just 10 weeks...by using organic cotton instead of regular cotton, we saved the equivalent of two jumbo jets of pesticides", says Scott. His comments show that organic farming could benefit the producer and the consumer, while at the same time providing environmental benefits.

Sources: Edmonton Journal, April 2006

CBC In Depth: Food Supply, September 2006

BusinessWeek, "Wal-mart's Organic Offensive", March 2006