The success of the Zero Hunger Program in Brazil is no accident: it is one of the strategic priorities used to stimulate national food production, the quintessential way to abate the hunger of millions. If people in rural regions produce food, they eat better.
The strength of this argument is irrefutable in world history. Today's developed countries achieved strong increases in agricultural production and productivity and therein lies the explanation of how to put an end to the poverty of millions of people.
According to Madison, between 1820 and 1990 agricultural productivity in the United Kingdom increased 1,842%; the United States had an increase of 2,658%; and Japan saw an increase of 5,366% during the same period.
As a result of this emphasis on production, poverty levels in those nations fell dramatically, up to ending it. That is, the developed nations today gave priority to increasing productivity. The positive solution to poverty was the key today in the developed nations.
If these foods are mass produced and the excess is sent to market, then it lowers the price of food, a situation that leads to a decrease in food expenses for urban households and, accordingly, reduces urban poverty. Another priority of the Brazilian program was to establish a comprehensive program of minimum income for the poorest families, the Family Grant Program; these two programs, Zero Hunger and Family Grant, go hand-in-hand.
In Mexico we have had an income transfer program for sixteen years, the Opportunities program (initially called Progress), but this program lacks a productive strategy. This is so because a particular conception of reality prevailed behind the initial design of the Opportunities program as a welfare strategy for poverty in Mexico.
Designers of the Opportunities program thought it best to correct imperfections produced by a market economy by way of subsidizing demand, rather than supply. What does this mean? According to the neoliberal creed and its believers, it is better to give money directly to the poor to buy what they decide (the belief in economic liberalism par excellence), instead of giving subsidies for production of, for example, food.
The demand subsidies via the Opportunities program were to be conditional: beneficiary families would commit to taking their children to school and to health centers. According to the thinking of its mentors, this strategy would result in breaking the inter-generational transmission of poverty.
But what are the results of a strategy to combat poverty by means of the neoliberal creed? Consider the long-term results. According to official data released by CONEVAL [National Council for Evaluation of Policy and Social Development]:
- In 1994 (three years before the [Opportunities] program was created), the population in food poverty in Mexico was 19.01 million people;
- In 2010 that figure had swelled to 21.2 million people.
Which is to say, the program that has received the most government resources to fight poverty has not had favorable results, if we consider that hard number of Mexicans who still live in food poverty. Those responsible for these results are those who developed and administered this public policy, including former Secretary Beatriz Zavala [served from 2006-2008, Secretariat of Federal Social Development].
In sum: When the Opportunities program was created, it was also decided to put the final stop to the national small-holder [small farmer] food production. Given the liberal conception, it was decided to dismantle the state of well-being that existed in Mexico (particularly in rural areas) and replace it with a neoliberal strategy of direct support for demand (i.e., of those who buy food). It was also assumed, then, that it was better to import cheap food than to invest in the development of a national industry that might lead to food sovereignty.
Nations like Mexico must undertake another type of social policies, toward social inclusion. The international agenda is moving toward establishment of universal programs, toward unconditional income transfer programs and toward strategies to stimulate the domestic market and production, especially food production. In recent years, this has been the emphasis of the FAO [UN Food and Agriculture Organization]. To continue along the path taken so far will perpetuate extreme poverty in Mexico. Spanish original
Nations like Mexico must undertake another type of social policies, toward social inclusion. The international agenda is moving toward establishment of universal programs, toward unconditional income transfer programs and toward strategies to stimulate the domestic market and production, especially food production. In recent years, this has been the emphasis of the FAO [UN Food and Agriculture Organization]. To continue along the path taken so far will perpetuate extreme poverty in Mexico. Spanish original
*Genaro Aguilar Gutiérrez is a Research Professor at the School of Economics of the National Polytechnic Institute, a member of the National System of Researchers and a poverty expert.