And one more paper (shorter this time 🙂 ) This was for my FRE class. It is about the banana trade in Ecuador.

Yellow Gold: A Look at the Banana Trade in Ecuador

The banana industry is unarguably one of the most important sources of income for Ecuador.  In 2009, the banana sector represented approximately 61% of the countries agricultural GDP and continues to be Educator’s second largest export, trailing just behind petroleum (Vega, 2011). With one quarter of the bananas supplied to North America and Europe being from Ecuador, the rest of the world is heavily reliant on this country’s banana sector (Vivanco, 2002). Upon taking a closer look at Ecuador’s banana trade, it is evident that a blind eye has been turned on this sector. A shocking amount of human right violations occur on a daily basis, along with heavy environmental degradation, and exploitation of resources. We must ask ourselves, what is the true price of so thoughtlessly consuming that banana?

One cannot deny the banana trade has brought benefits to the economic status of the country. Ecuador is the number one exporter of bananas in the world and holds the title safe with exports continuing to increase at a rate of approximately 4% per year (Vega, 2011). While the sector directly employs over 98,000 individuals (UNEP, 2002), nearly 2.5 million people (over 17% of the total population) are indirectly involved in the industry (Vega, 2011). Ecuador’s rural economy is largely influenced by the export of bananas, as over 70% of banana growers are small rural farms (Vega, 2011). It is safe to say the role of bananas in Ecuador is extremely important, and is fact “yellow gold”. The country is heavily dependent on the trade of bananas, and it is essential to the economy that the industry remains robust and secure. However beneficial the trade is to the economy, it is important to gain a holistic view of the industry by looking at social and environmental impacts as well.

Environmentally, the banana trade poses many harmful problems. The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) states that “the cultivated surface of bananas has grown 153 per cent between 1980 and 2000” (UNEP, 2002, p. 84). This rapid and substantial growth does not come without consequences. In order to decrease pest infestations, Ecuadorian banana farmers on average use ten pesticides per farm and typically have 15 application cycles per year (Matamoros, 2001). This excessive use of pesticides results in detrimental effects to the soils and water systems, causing a network of long-term problems such as unsafe drinking water and decrease of natural biodiversity. Aquatic organisms are largely affected by presence of pesticides in rivers. Linkages have been made between dying fish and pesticides used in plantations, as well as a decline in the biodiversity present in the coral reef (Astorga, n.d.).  Moreover, large sections of rainforest are being cleared to make room for banana plantations. The clearing of rainforest means an enormous decrease in litter fall rich in organic matter. This causes the soil to be reduced to a silt texture that is easily susceptible to erosion and leaching (Astorga, n.d.). In order to combat these ill effects, the government has implemented policies stating that any future land cleared for agricultural banana use must be approved by the Ministry of Agriculture (Vega, 2011), and every farmer must receive environmental certification (UNEP, 2002). These policies signify positive changes and a brighter future for Ecuador’s environment.

The social impacts of the banana industry may be the most harmful of all. Although the government is legally bound by international law to withhold set standards of human rights, it is difficult to do so.  One of the most prevalent violations of human rights in the industry is the abuse of children for labor. Approximately 3% of workers are under the legal working age of fourteen. This percentage translates to roughly 7500 individuals (Ecuador’s economy: Banana skins, 2002). The average working day for these children is twelve hours, and with an average entrance of ten, fewer than 40% of them will still be in school by the age of fourteen (Vivanco, 2002). Many workers suffer from adverse health effects due to the nature of the work they are subjected to. The Human Rights Watch conducted a series of interviews, which revealed that 90% of child labors reported that they stayed in the field and work while “toxic fungicides were sprayed from airplanes flying overhead” (Vivanco, 2002). On average, children earn $3.50/day and adults $6.00/day. In response to extremely low wages, the government implanted a minimum price per box of bananas to ensure wages would not lower any further (UNEP, 2002). Although good in theory, there is a massive problem with this policy. In 2002, the export price of a box of bananas was over $17.00, while the government fixed price to buy that same box of bananas from growers was a mere $2.90, making the profit margin for grower next to nothing (Ecuador’s economy: Banana skins, 2002). The situation has not improved much since. According to the Ecuador’s Banana act, “the minimum support price must cover the average cost plus a reasonable profit” (Vega, 2011). However, the subjective definition of “reasonable” does not appear agree with the standard of human rights, as workers are still suffering. While the new policy stating growers must obtain environmental certification certainly has environmental benefits, it also poses problems for poor banana growers, as the certification is quite costly and they cannot afford it. This means that they cannot sell their bananas to exporters who are the main buyers, and thus, the cycle of poverty continues.

Through exploration of the economic, environmental and social impacts of Ecuador’s banana industry, it can be seen that although positive changes are being made there remains a disconnect between government and small holders. While implemented policies have good intentions, they are not benefiting the workers, but enabling the poverty cycle. If communication between policy makers and workers was strengthen, the effects of policies put in place would be exemplified, and result in a network of positive consequences including an increase in the standard of living for farmers, a healthier environment and a stable economy.