Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee (SOCHUM)

Trade Organization (WTO) suggested these actions
as a means of increasing free trade globally, which
would lead to substantial economic growth in the long
term. This logic, however, did not take into account
the negative impact that the WTO Agreement on
Agriculture would bear for on indigenous populations.
This impact has two distinct manifestations. The first
is the flooding of international markets with large
volumes of agricultural crops from the developed
industries of a small number of countries, which
drives down prices on these products for all countries.
Without any tariff protections and exposed to the
free market, indigenous farmers who grow the same
crops are unable to make a suitable living with their
traditional techniques. Because they do not have
the resources to compete with the large agricultural
companies in developed countries, they are also
unable to adapt to more modern methods of farming.
One of the primary producers of agricultural products
for the past century has been the United States, and
its companies have inadvertently destroyed many
indigenous industries, notably Mexico’s corn industry
and the coffee industries of other Latin American
countries like Brazil, Guatemala, and Costa Rica. 120
Effects on local agriculture also occur when
transnational companies move onto local lands
to increase their production capabilities. The
transnational companies sign agreements with
governments to convert “unused” land into
plantations that produce huge amounts of cash crops. 121
these lands are often not actually unused, of course,
but are rather employed by indigenous populations
for small-scale farming. A common view held by many
majority populations and the governments that they
inevitably control is that such small-scale agriculture
does not contribute to economic growth and that
in order to increase growth they have to turn the
land over to foreign companies that will generate
profits. Even though many indigenous agricultural
practices are environmentally sustainable, the
majority population sees them as outdated and
unproductive. 122 Worse still, the crops grown by these
foreign companies are almost always exclusively
bound for international destinations, so they do
not even help feed the indigenous populations that
were pushed off of the land. Thus, through the direct
intervention of transnational agricultural companies
into local farming lands, indigenous peoples lose their
livelihoods and find themselves in extreme poverty.
One specific indigenous system that majority
populations and governments often disrespect and
ignore is pastoralism. Pastoralism is a method of
raising livestock on lands that are not very good for
agriculture by constantly moving the animals onto
new territory in search of grazing areas and water.
Approximately 25% of the world’s land coverage is
currently used for pastoralism, which accounts for
10% of the world’s meat production and well over
50% of the agricultural gross domestic products of
many nations in Sub-Saharan Africa. 123 Pastoralism is
therefore vital for the economy of Africa and is used
by indigenous populations throughout the continent,
including the Tuareg camel breeders in the Sahara,
the Maasai cattle breeders of Eastern Africa, and the
Fulani cattle breeders of the West African savannah. 124
Pastoralism is thus an extremely common farming
practice, usually employed by indigenous peoples.
Historically, colonial governments considered
pastoral lands to be unoccupied, and many postcolonial
governments have since taken control
of these territories from indigenous populations
for sedentary agriculture, resource extraction, or
infrastructural projects. The governments take this
action even though pastoralism is an extremely
environmentally sustainable practice and is one
of the most effective ways of utilizing drylands. 125
Recent years have seen an increase in expulsions of
indigenous populations from pastoral lands in Sub-
33
Melbourne Host Directorate PTY LTD | Office of Media and Design