A breath of fresh air for Haiti

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

Clintons preside at star-studded opening of Haitian industrial park
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/22/haiti-clinton-caracol-idUSL1E8LM3BF20121022

This is what I meant when I was talking about corporations having the responsibility to be "good citizens", i.e. helping communities (or entire countries) in distress not through simply dumping money at problems and pouring resources into bottomless broken buckets, but doing smart investments that would benefit all sides involved.

A South Korean textile company is opening a complex of factories in North Haiti, hoping to do good business, produce textiles, use the cheap labour force of the impoverished country, all the while creating jobs, building infrastructure, placing Haiti back on the map of industrial production, and hopefully creating opportunities for Haitians to help themselves and alleviate their lives.

This of course would require a favourable combination of positive circumstances, and I think I can understand the concerns of the critics that it wouldn't work quite so well in the Haitian case because of the many challenges. The concerns go into several directions:

- Thousands of people have been lured off the rural areas and into the urban areas around the capital and north, depopulating rural communities and creating demographic imbalance and social problems in the cities (like the expansion of slums with horrible living conditions).

- There might be a problem with the "return to factory-based economic initiatives", which, critics argue, would hardly provide opportunities for a long-term sustainable economic development of these communities and only create short-term distortions.

On the other hand, providing jobs and creating the infrastructure to run such a large-scale enterprise in a country that otherwise is at the bottom of any global rankings in terms of living standard, living conditions, economic stability and even health and longevity, is much preferable to having nothing at all.

Indeed, many farmers from the area where the factory is going to be built, have been displaced. Indeed, the Haitian government is not exactly incorruptible and would probably misappropriate a portion of the benefits from the industry, or create all sorts of obstacles for doing business transparently. But meanwhile, the South Koreans must know what they are doing, they ought to have measured all the pros and cons, the risks and benefits for both their business and the local community. Otherwise they wouldn't have invested there. I doubt they are going to Haiti just because Bill Clinton is a very persuasive guy. I just hope they wouldn't turn this factory into yet another sweat-shop for the sake of mere profit. Now that the world's focus has been set upon their undertaking, and influential public figures like both Clintons and a few famous people have been involved, this might be something like a guarantee that that won't happen. Or it could just be my wishful thinking.

All said, we'll be watching with increased interest. This could be the first step to a real recovery for Haiti. Or not. It better be.

I, too, do have a dream. It's not much that I want. I wish that my 6-year-old Haitian boy that I adopted a few years ago, could go back to his country of origin one day, and be amazed of the positive transformation it has gone through. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. :-)

Comments

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

It is great that you were able to adopt a child from Haiti. I have my doubts that one industrial park will make much of a dent in the Haitian economy, though.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

One probably won't. Five or six, maybe.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

One of anything won't make much of a dent in Haiti, a situation like that is an ongoing struggle.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

I agree that with all that publicity around this project, there'll be extra scrutiny about both the way it treats its workers and the way the local government handles the industry. That can only be a good thing.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

That would be terrible if it were true, of course. I mean the part about minimum wages. Besides, if the payment conditions were so minimum, would so many thousands of people have moved off the rural areas, and into that factory?

The alternative to building that factory would be... not building it. And that would mean Haiti would remain with zero prospect for doing anything to alleviate its situation.

It very much depends how this initiative would develop, of course. It could all go terribly wrong, or it could be a new beginning. Not trying anything in that respect means disaster for Haiti, because time is not on the Haitians' side.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

Yes, starting wages. You do know what a starting wage is, I trust.

The living conditions in the workers slums of Port-au-Prince are indeed bad. If the country can make some money from this new industry, that could change. In case the money is used properly. Yes, there are many "if"-s. And many concerns.

The farmers should be compensated.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

Fair enough, you have your doubts. I have my concerns, too. I prefer to be cautiously optimistic.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Sounds like what's been happening in China for the past few decades except on a smaller scale. It resulted in the largest reduction of extreme poverty in history. Life is certainly still a struggle for many in China, but far better than if no foreign factories had started up.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Besides, if the payment conditions were so minimum, would so many thousands of people have moved off the rural areas, and into that factory?

Food donations and subsidizes have destroyed local food production profits, so the only option is to flock to industrial centers. Perhaps this excerpt will help explain things:

[At an international Slow Food meet-up, author Joel Salatin] made a point to attend every African delegation presentation I could. . . . Every single one of the African presenters I heard said something like this: "What is killing our local food system is cheap Western dumping. We have plenty of resources. We have plenty of knowledge. We have plenty of workers. If you westerners (primarily American, often via the Untied Nations and other relief organizations) would just stay out and quit displacing our indigenous economy and food systems with poor-quality commodities, we can feed ourselves, thank you."

In fact our American delegation spent most of our time apologizing for our nation's actions and assuring delegates from other countries that we did not agree with America's food and agricultural policies.

(Joel Salatin, Folks, This Ain't Normal, Center Street, 2011, p. 45, I emboldened.)

The farm policies of (mostly) the US have created too much food. Excess food is therefore bought by the US government, stamped with the flag and distributed as "food aid" to a gazillion places that "need" food, which kills local agriculture (like post-earthquake Haiti). Why grow when it's free? Local economies thus become deprived of local economic opportunities and totally dependent upon foreign industry jobs. (Personally, I think this is the goal, too keep the applicant pool high and therefore the negotiating power of each worker low.)

One irony? The same people concerned about illegal immigration to the US need only stop or at least curtail this dumping practice and many coming to the US seeking jobs will suddenly find themselves a better living back home.