Food producers and suppliers are increasingly seeking to develop more environmentally-friendly production methods. But shifting to sustainable food systems impacts workers. New research is examining the human dimension of shifting to sustainable food production.
Insight by Holly Woodward-Davey, Project coordinator, Banana Link
Originally published at https://www.iied.org/
Repetitive manual work, such as removing banana leaves infected by disease on hundreds of plants each week, can cause musculoskeletal disorders (Photo: Banana Link)
Green initiatives in international supply chains are ever-expanding, with companies often quick to publicise them. And emerging human rights due diligence legislation in Europe has helped trigger a cultural shift, with retailers beginning to take more care about where and how commodities are purchased.
The global banana trade provides an opportunity to examine the issues raised by green initiatives. Bananas are one of the world’s most consumed fruits and among the most traded agricultural commodities globally, providing a significant proportion of export revenues for many Latin American and Caribbean countries.
However, the benefits come at a cost for workers and the environment. Banana growing is a leading consumer of pesticides globally, and growers often get unsustainably low prices for their fruit, with a direct impact on workers’ wages – which can account for up to 45% of the total production costs. Banana Link campaigns for fair and equitable production and trade in bananas.
Momentum towards green transitions in bananas has been spurred by more specific threats relating to climate change and disease, and the possibility that alternative production systems may produce more resilient crops. But while many reports, webinars and toolkits have focused on water management, soil health and crop diversification, few have asked how workers are affected.
To begin exploring this question, Banana Link has partnered with colleagues at Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) and IIED to review literature and interview producers and food systems experts. Below are some initial insights.
Reducing pesticide use: consequences for worker health and gender equity
One of the most crucial outcomes of green transitions is reducing or eliminating the risk of agrochemical poisoning for workers, their communities and the environment. The Pesticide Action Network UK (PAN UK) estimates that more than 350 million people suffer pesticide poisoning every year, describing this as ‘a global health emergency’.
Some 1,500 banana workers in Costa Rica say they have been made sterile by exposure to Dibromochloropropane (DBCP) – a pesticide banned in the USA in the 1970s, but used for many more years by fruit companies in their supply chains.
Governments in some producer countries have banned aerial pesticide spraying, making it necessary for workers to apply them using backpack sprays. But as the climate heats up, this means applying chemicals in full protective clothing – waterproof boots and overalls, goggles, masks, hats and gloves – in 35°-plus heat.
Thus, reducing the risk of chemical poisoning is itself exposing the workers to the secondary risk of heat stress: a situation that is both dangerous and counter-productive, as the temptation to remove protective gear becomes increasingly overwhelming as the mercury rises.
Transitioning to organic, diversified production systems could deliver immediate and tangible results for workers: cover crops can generate more comfortable microclimates for workers, while eliminating pesticides would negate the need for most protective clothing.
Phasing out routine pesticide use can have implications for gender equity. Male workers account for 85-88% of the global banana growing workforce: they generally work outside on the plantation, while women work in the packing houses.
This division of labour remains entrenched partly because pregnant women and their fetuses are at heightened risk from pesticide exposure, and there is a strong indication of recruitment discrimination against women due to their reproductive function in some producer countries. Meanwhile, where organic banana production is expanding, the proportion of female workers is rising.
Reallocating tasks in a green transition: potential pitfalls and opportunities
We can’t assume that improvements in environmental credentials will automatically benefit workers. Without pesticides, many of the tasks relating to pest control, disease resilience and soil health will be done by workers. This can imply tedious and repetitive work – such as manually removing leaves infected by disease on hundreds of plants every week – with associated mental health and musculoskeletal risks for workers.
However, many of the people we spoke to said that diversifying workers’ tasks, increasing their knowledge and broadening their skill sets, can and is having important benefits for self-esteem and job satisfaction.
This could lead to reduced staff turnover, although there is no evidence of this yet. From an employer perspective, there is a need to make large investments not only in the material costs of transition but also in worker education and training, and a complete re-evaluation of workplace risks.
Where sustainable transitions and smart agriculture, which uses new technology to improve production, overlap, we’re likely to see more technical roles opening up, potentially drawing a new, highly educated workforce from urban centres to the countryside. This risks creating a divided workforce between those who work digitally (for example, managing a fleet of drones or interpreting datasets) and those who work manually (for example, planting suckers and harvesting crops).
However, smart agriculture approaches may also open up new opportunities for young people in rural areas who may not be attracted by traditional agricultural work.
Irrespective of specific roles, there is a strong indication that transitions to sustainable production methods are part of the solution to engaging younger workers. As one informant put it: “Young people today have seen the struggle of farming or working on plantations for their parents. They have a deeply held desire to be part of something constructive and not just repeat the mistakes of the past or be blamed for all of society’s problems.”
We need a fuller understanding of impacts
Many more questions have been raised than answered by this initial exploration of the labour impacts of sustainable transitions in agriculture.
More research is needed to explore the roles of companies, unions, certification schemes, retailers and governments at both ends of the banana supply chain in ensuring that the industry transitions in a just way, leaving no one behind.
We need to examine the measures being implemented in plantations of all sizes and how they are already affecting workers. Bananas are a labour-intensive crop, and workers are needed 52 weeks of the year to harvest and pack fruit – the impacts of sustainability measures are being felt now.
As green transitions gather momentum, it is crucial to understand and clearly identify both the human rights risks associated with them and the decent work opportunities that these transitions bring.
