Martin Mowforth’s 2014 book, “The Violence of Development: Resource Depletion, Environmental Crises and Humans Rights Abuse in Central America,” analyses the failures of Western-led development in Central America. The book is divided by resources: agriculture, water, mining, logging, energy, and then maquílas, or sweatshops. Mowforth incorporates empirical examples of development failures to contrast neoliberal development theories. Mowforth shows how globalization, or as he calls it, “Westernization”, uses reductions in trade barriers and private-sector growth promotion to enable neocolonial capitalist forces to exploit Central American resources, production, and infrastructure. Mowforth’s core argument is that high regional rates of violence are attributed to clashes between development project proponents, environmental activists, and human rights defenders.

Mowforth, a professor at the University of Plymouth, works within a pool of academics, most notably Noam Chomsky, that see globalization and free trade as colonialism’s latest iteration. Mowforth at times incorporates dependency theory, whose champions include Andre Gunner Frank and David Collier. Dependency theory is predicated on unequal core-periphery relations, where the periphery is exploited, underdeveloped, and economically reliant on export goods.[1] Where Mowforth makes his argument distinctive is the attribution of market liberalization to increased regional violence, to the point where Central America’s northern triangle (Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras) has some of the highest global homicide rates.[2]

Mowforth makes an accessible and convincing argument about how free trade has not benefitted the vast majority of Central America. By demonstrating the number of activist assassinations, and case studies such as abuses by the Canadian mining sector in Guatemala and El Salvador, readers are led to agree that “development” has done more detriment than good. [3] However, Mowforth’s argument, while clear and compelling, is lacking several crucial components.

First, Mowforth falls short of emphasizing the importance of the region’s historic precedent in hindering state capacity and development. Mowforth focuses on post-liberalization of countries under the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement, with minimal framing of colonial legacies and subsequent American socioeconomic influence. Mowforth does not fully explore path dependency theory and the impact of corporations like the United Fruit Company (UFCo), only mentioning UFCo once in discussion of the 1954 U.S.-assisted coup of the Guatemalan president.[4] While detailing 400 years of pillaging of Latin America by (neo)colonial forces as the root of all systemic failure à la Eduardo Galeano’s “Open Veins of Latin America,” would not fit with Mowforth’s piece, the lack of historical framing leads to disproportionate blame of current institutions. This is problematic because Central American states’ rule of law, impunity, and economic stratification issues that are exacerbated by modern forms of inequality and foreign exploitation are built on past precedent.

Second, Mowforth takes a naïve perspective on social issues within Central America, positing those excluded from the upper oligarchic echelons as noble victims in a polarized system of campesinos and pastoral rural populations versus corrupt elites. In doing so, Mowforth omits a discussion on the systemic corruption that exists at almost all levels of society, glosses over deep-rooted racism between ladino societies (European descendants) towards indigenous groups, and ignores the high femicide rates unconnected to activist assassinations.[5] While these issues are linked to state incapacity, arguably from foreign exploitation of the region for centuries, Mowforth overlooks concurrent social issues and therefore limits the applicability of his argument.

Third, Mowforth’s key error is his attribution of regional violence to human rights and environmental defenders clashing with corporate forces. While Central America has high activist assassination rates, it is parochial to ascribe all of the violence to activism against natural resource development. The majority of violence in the region is attributed to criminal gangs like Mara Salvatrucha 13 or Calle 18, formed in the United States from Central American migrants who fled armed conflicts in the 1970s-1990s. Gang members upon deportation home often continue criminal activities, resulting in spiked homicide rates.[6] While the United States politically, and IFIs economically, exacerbated the Central American armed conflicts and economic stagnation causing citizens to flee north – Mowforth does not incorporate this into his argument and instead links regional violence to transnational corporate activities. Mowforth therefore fails to make a crucial link that could strengthen and expand his argument, and widely overstates the amount of activist deaths as a portion of total homicide rates.

In sum, Mowforth’s book does an excellent job of showing how post-liberalization of markets in Central America has not contributed to significant “development” by any means. Mowforth uses compelling examples and interviews across many sectors and regions within Central America, complemented by data tables. Mowforth makes an overall persuasive argument for the role of globalization and neoliberal trade policy as detrimental to Central America by exposing its natural resources and communities for exploitation. Darkly cogent to his thesis, Mowforth’s source in Honduras, activist Berta Caceres, was assassinated at her home in 2016.[7] The missing components of Mowforth’s analysis do not impale his argument, but rather demonstrate it as overly simplistic and somewhat rash in its identification of causality.

[1] Mowforth, Martin. Violence of Development : Resource Depletion, Environmental Crises and Human Rights Abuses in Central America. London, GB: Pluto Press, 2014. Page 2.

[2] Renwick, Danielle. 19 January 2016. “Central America’s Violent Northern Triangle,” Council on Foreign Relations. http://www.cfr.org/transnational-crime/central-americas-violent-northern-triangle/p37286

[3] Mowforth, Martin. Violence of Development : Resource Depletion, Environmental Crises and Human Rights Abuses in Central America. London, GB: Pluto Press, 2014. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 15 October 2016. Page 93.

[4] Ibid, page 25.

[5] “Femicide in Latin America,” UN Women. 4 April 2013. http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2013/4/femicide-in-latin-america

[6] Ribando Seelke, Clare. August 29, 2016. “Gangs in Central America,” Congressional Research Service. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34112.pdf.

[7] Lakhani, Nina. 7 July 2016. “’Time was running out’: Honduran activist’s last days marked by threats,” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/apr/25/berta-caceres-murder-honduras-death-threats-hitman-agua-zarca-dam