#Agro Economics

[market-insider]

Nano Fertilizer Market Strategies, Environmental Impact, and Sustainable Agricultural Practices

The global nano fertilizer market size is expected to reach USD 9,377.3 million by 2030, as per the new report by Grand View Research, Inc. The market is expected to grow at a robust CAGR of 14.8% from 2022 to 2030. The industry growth is primarily driven by increasing demand for better crop yields due to a significant rise in the global population and limited availability of key resources like land.

Nano Fertilizer Market Report Highlights

The global market is estimated to advance at a CAGR of 14.8% from 2022 to 2030. This is attributed to the rising demand for food crops due to the increasing population thus creating the need for using high-yield nano fertilizers

North America dominated the global market in 2021 with a revenue share of over 34%. This is owed to advancement in agriculture in developed countries such as Canada and the U.S.

Favorable policies along with technological advancements in the agricultural sector helped make the U.S., the largest consumer of nano fertilizer

Nitrogen emerged as a major raw material used for the production of nano fertilizer in 2021, with a revenue share of over 25%. Easy and cheap availability of Nitrogen makes it the topmost preference among consumers

Soil method of application captured the largest market share of over 70% in 2021. This growth is attributed to the capability of nano fertilizers to release nutrients in the soil, thus, enabling better penetration into the roots of the crops

Cereals & grains are the largest application segment in terms of revenue. It contributed over 40% to the global revenue share. The growth of this segment can be attributed to the fact that it is the major source of iron, dietary proteins, vitamins, and dietary fibers required by the human body. Thus, to fulfill the growing demand for cereals & grains continues to push food growers to purchase nano fertilizers in rising quantities

For More Details or Sample Copy please visit link @: Nano Fertilizer Market Report

Growing focus on increasing the quantity of yield has led to the indiscriminate use of fertilizers in agriculture. This can result in both environmental and agricultural catastrophes by degrading the quality of the soil. According to a report by Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), natural resources such as water and arable land are on the verge of exhaustion. Furthermore, degradation at a high rate continues due to intensive urbanization and excessive use of chemical fertilizers. Thus, the declining nutritional quality of food and degraded quality of soil continues to drive a gradual shift toward nanotechnology in agriculture. Nano fertilizers remains an ideal prospect to maintain the quality of soil while meeting production target.

The use of nano fertilizers can help in reducing chemical fertilizer consumption by 80 to 100 times, thus reducing the reliance on chemical fertilizers. For instance, the demand for nano urea is increasing worldwide as it has the ability to replace regular urea usage at a relatively lower cost while offering high yields to crops. By 2023 nano urea is expected to replace the usage of 13.7 million tons of conventional urea. Thus, the huge demand for nano fertilizer from the agriculture industry along with supportive government policies continues to promote newer and more efficient agriculture techniques.

The importance of policy framework remains paramount to promote sustainable growth, and such framework is already in place for nano fertilizers in key regions. For instance, U.S department of agriculture in 2020 announced to make USD 250 million investment through its new grant program. This initiative was taken to support new innovative and more efficient fertilizer production in the region. Additionally, USDA seeks growth in competition as it aims to allay concerns regarding supply chain. With its new initiatives, the USDA continues to introduce more transparency for consumers to make them aware of the safety of agriculture produce. These initiatives aimed at gauging the use of fertilizers, seeds, retail markets, continue to generate momentum for the eco-friendly and high-yield promising nano fertilizers.

[farmerstrend]

Cultivating Change: The Impact of Climate-Smart Agriculture on Women’s Economic Empowerment in Kenya

Discover how Christine Krapiwan transformed her life from struggling farmer to thriving entrepreneur through the Women’s Economic Empowerment and Climate-Smart Agriculture (WEE CSA) project, empowering women in Kenya’s Arid and Semi-Arid Lands. Explore the profound impact of the WEE CSA project on women farmers in Kenya, highlighting stories of empowerment, climate-smart agriculture, and…

[israelagrocons]

Crop variety and planning is Israel agro consultants of fertilization, watering, paste manage vitamins. We providing other facilities our best product are our mission. Crop Management is efficient, economical and environmentally sound crop production through using best management practices and input efficiencies. 

[probablyasocialecologist]

While Marx often shows enthusiasm for the potentiality of enhanced forms of human cooperation enabled by globalizing production, already in the nineteenth century, he observed an antagonistic separation of town and country and suggested that production chains were overstretched and wasting resources. Today, lessening the spatial disjuncture between production and consumption must be an explicit feature and aim of sustainable and just transition and, in this context, calls on the left for partial deglobalization, including the shortening of commodity chains, have merit and are quite consistent with Marx’s analysis. In a process of partial deglobalization, production for local and domestic needs—rather than production for export—would again become the center of gravity of the economy. A move away from the export orientation of domestic corporations and a process of renationalization could also allow enterprises to begin to develop their own strategies, moving away from the whims of the global market and choices taken by corporate controllers. Such transformation could enable spaces for independent development in the Global South. To do so, they could focus on shifting agrarian systems, orienting their production away from agro-export (which is a source of tremendous ecological irrationality and unequal exchange) toward food sovereignty. Such shifts would need to be accompanied by simultaneous, coordinated shifts toward enhanced local and domestic food production in Global North, alongside a move from high-input agriculture to agroecology, and, in settler colonial contexts, enhanced Indigenous sovereignty. Within domestic spaces or regions, efforts must simultaneously be made to mend a rift between the city and the country. For a model of the environmentalist city, one could look to Havana for inspiration. During Cuba’s Special Period in the 1990s, organic, low-input agriculture was developed both in the countryside, as well as in the island’s capital through urban farms. Urban agriculture is here not niche or small-scale—it covers large expanses within and at the outskirts of the city, where rich land is located. In the transition to renewables, energy production should also be localized as much as possible. This is a potentiality inherent in renewable energy “flow,” in contrast to concentrated energy “stock,” or fossil fuels. While lessening the spatial disjuncture between production and consumption is part of developing ecologically rational production, this aim should be recognized to be in some tension with economic planning (at least in the longer term), insofar as expansive planning is potentiated by the socialization of production. Thus, calls for localization of production imply a diminishment in productive association across firms and regions and the potential to plan such interconnections. Practically, it is important to recognize that such a process confronts material interdependencies, as existing productive networks and infrastructural configurations support and sustain huge swaths of human life. Different regions and cities also have different specializations and different ecological capacities. In an existing world of evolved economic interdependencies, the reproductive needs of various communities require continued global resource flows. Climate change also creates severe survival and livelihood challenges on a highly uneven basis, and global trade and divisions of labor can act as safeguards against issues such as pandemics related to water-supply failures and reduced agricultural yields. More broadly, we should carefully consider Marx’s suggestion that well-organized territorial divisions of labor are collective powers and can be a part of collaboration in human affairs. This extends to territorial specialization, which, consciously organized, could involve a collaborative partitioning of resources and capacities.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

Indigenous groups go after Lula coalition amid veto vote

With Congress set to analyze a presidential veto of a landmark indigenous land bill this week, Brazil’s Indigenous People Articulation (Apib) has launched a manifesto decrying the “anti-indigenous” sectors of the current governing coalition, affirming that traditional communities’ rights are “non-negotiable.”

In September, pro-agro sectors of Congress pushed through a bill establishing the so-called “time-frame argument” for indigenous land claims in Brazil. Said argument stipulates that traditional communities would only be able to demand ownership of territory if they could prove that they effectively inhabited it on October 5, 1988 — the day Brazil’s current Constitution was enacted.

The approval was in direct response to a Supreme Court decision that ruled the time-frame argument as unconstitutional. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva vetoed most of the bill in October, and Congress is set to ratify or overrule those vetoes this week.

While Apib hails Lula’s election last year as a “collective achievement,” it complains that the electoral context forced him to form a “broad ideological alliance, encompassing conservative and anti-indigenous economic and political sectors.”

Continue reading.

[dailyanarchistposts]

A.3.2 Are there different types of social anarchism?

Yes. Social anarchism has four major trends — mutualism, collectivism, communism and syndicalism. The differences are not great and simply involve differences in strategy. The one major difference that does exist is between mutualism and the other kinds of social anarchism. Mutualism is based around a form of market socialism — workers’ co-operatives exchanging the product of their labour via a system of community banks. This mutual bank network would be “formed by the whole community, not for the especial advantage of any individual or class, but for the benefit of all … [with] no interest … exacted on loans, except enough to cover risks and expenses.” Such a system would end capitalist exploitation and oppression for by “introducing mutualism into exchange and credit we introduce it everywhere, and labour will assume a new aspect and become truly democratic.” [Charles A. Dana, Proudhon and his “Bank of the People”, pp. 44–45 and p. 45]

The social anarchist version of mutualism differs from the individualist form by having the mutual banks owned by the local community (or commune) instead of being independent co-operatives. This would ensure that they provided investment funds to co-operatives rather than to capitalistic enterprises. Another difference is that some social anarchist mutualists support the creation of what Proudhon termed an “agro-industrial federation” to complement the federation of libertarian communities (called communes by Proudhon). This is a “confederation … intended to provide reciprocal security in commerce and industry” and large scale developments such as roads, railways and so on. The purpose of “specific federal arrangements is to protect the citizens of the federated states [sic!] from capitalist and financial feudalism, both within them and from the outside.” This is because “political right requires to be buttressed by economic right.” Thus the agro-industrial federation would be required to ensure the anarchist nature of society from the destabilising effects of market exchanges (which can generate increasing inequalities in wealth and so power). Such a system would be a practical example of solidarity, as “industries are sisters; they are parts of the same body; one cannot suffer without the others sharing in its suffering. They should therefore federate, not to be absorbed and confused together, but in order to guarantee mutually the conditions of common prosperity … Making such an agreement will not detract from their liberty; it will simply give their liberty more security and force.” [The Principle of Federation, p. 70, p. 67 and p. 72]

The other forms of social anarchism do not share the mutualists support for markets, even non-capitalist ones. Instead they think that freedom is best served by communalising production and sharing information and products freely between co-operatives. In other words, the other forms of social anarchism are based upon common (or social) ownership by federations of producers’ associations and communes rather than mutualism’s system of individual co-operatives. In Bakunin’s words, the “future social organisation must be made solely from the bottom upwards, by the free association or federation of workers, firstly in their unions, then in the communes, regions, nations and finally in a great federation, international and universal” and “the land, the instruments of work and all other capital may become the collective property of the whole of society and be utilised only by the workers, in other words by the agricultural and industrial associations.” [Michael Bakunin: Selected Writings, p. 206 and p. 174] Only by extending the principle of co-operation beyond individual workplaces can individual liberty be maximised and protected (see section I.1.3 for why most anarchists are opposed to markets). In this they share some ground with Proudhon, as can be seen. The industrial confederations would “guarantee the mutual use of the tools of production which are the property of each of these groups and which will by a reciprocal contract become the collective property of the whole … federation. In this way, the federation of groups will be able to … regulate the rate of production to meet the fluctuating needs of society.” [James Guillaume, Bakunin on Anarchism, p. 376]

These anarchists share the mutualists support for workers’ self-management of production within co-operatives but see confederations of these associations as being the focal point for expressing mutual aid, not a market. Workplace autonomy and self-management would be the basis of any federation, for “the workers in the various factories have not the slightest intention of handing over their hard-won control of the tools of production to a superior power calling itself the ‘corporation.’” [Guillaume, Op. Cit., p. 364] In addition to this industry-wide federation, there would also be cross-industry and community confederations to look after tasks which are not within the exclusive jurisdiction or capacity of any particular industrial federation or are of a social nature. Again, this has similarities to Proudhon’s mutualist ideas.

Social anarchists share a firm commitment to common ownership of the means of production (excluding those used purely by individuals) and reject the individualist idea that these can be “sold off” by those who use them. The reason, as noted earlier, is because if this could be done, capitalism and statism could regain a foothold in the free society. In addition, other social anarchists do not agree with the mutualist idea that capitalism can be reformed into libertarian socialism by introducing mutual banking. For them capitalism can only be replaced by a free society by social revolution.

The major difference between collectivists and communists is over the question of “money” after a revolution. Anarcho-communists consider the abolition of money to be essential, while anarcho-collectivists consider the end of private ownership of the means of production to be the key. As Kropotkin noted, collectivist anarchism “express[es] a state of things in which all necessaries for production are owned in common by the labour groups and the free communes, while the ways of retribution [i.e. distribution] of labour, communist or otherwise, would be settled by each group for itself.” [Anarchism, p. 295] Thus, while communism and collectivism both organise production in common via producers’ associations, they differ in how the goods produced will be distributed. Communism is based on free consumption of all while collectivism is more likely to be based on the distribution of goods according to the labour contributed. However, most anarcho-collectivists think that, over time, as productivity increases and the sense of community becomes stronger, money will disappear. Both agree that, in the end, society would be run along the lines suggested by the communist maxim: “From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.” They just disagree on how quickly this will come about (see section I.2.2).

For anarcho-communists, they think that “communism — at least partial — has more chances of being established than collectivism” after a revolution. [Op. Cit., p. 298] They think that moves towards communism are essential as collectivism “begins by abolishing private ownership of the means of production and immediately reverses itself by returning to the system of remuneration according to work performed which means the re-introduction of inequality.” [Alexander Berkman, What is Anarchism?, p. 230] The quicker the move to communism, the less chances of new inequalities developing. Needless to say, these positions are not that different and, in practice, the necessities of a social revolution and the level of political awareness of those introducing anarchism will determine which system will be applied in each area.

Syndicalism is the other major form of social anarchism. Anarcho-syndicalists, like other syndicalists, want to create an industrial union movement based on anarchist ideas. Therefore they advocate decentralised, federated unions that use direct action to get reforms under capitalism until they are strong enough to overthrow it. In many ways anarcho-syndicalism can be considered as a new version of collectivist-anarchism, which also stressed the importance of anarchists working within the labour movement and creating unions which prefigure the future free society.

Thus, even under capitalism, anarcho-syndicalists seek to create “free associations of free producers.” They think that these associations would serve as “a practical school of anarchism” and they take very seriously Bakunin’s remark that the workers’ organisations must create “not only the ideas but also the facts of the future itself” in the pre-revolutionary period.

Anarcho-syndicalists, like all social anarchists, “are convinced that a Socialist economic order cannot be created by the decrees and statutes of a government, but only by the solidaric collaboration of the workers with hand and brain in each special branch of production; that is, through the taking over of the management of all plants by the producers themselves under such form that the separate groups, plants, and branches of industry are independent members of the general economic organism and systematically carry on production and the distribution of the products in the interest of the community on the basis of free mutual agreements.” [Rudolf Rocker, Anarcho-syndicalism, p. 55]

Again, like all social anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists see the collective struggle and organisation implied in unions as the school for anarchism. As Eugene Varlin (an anarchist active in the First International who was murdered at the end of the Paris Commune) put it, unions have “the enormous advantage of making people accustomed to group life and thus preparing them for a more extended social organisation. They accustom people not only to get along with one another and to understand one another, but also to organise themselves, to discuss, and to reason from a collective perspective.” Moreover, as well as mitigating capitalist exploitation and oppression in the here and now, the unions also “form the natural elements of the social edifice of the future; it is they who can be easily transformed into producers associations; it is they who can make the social ingredients and the organisation of production work.” [quoted by Julian P. W. Archer, The First International in France, 1864–1872, p. 196]

The difference between syndicalists and other revolutionary social anarchists is slight and purely revolves around the question of anarcho-syndicalist unions. Collectivist anarchists agree that building libertarian unions is important and that work within the labour movement is essential in order to ensure “the development and organisation … of the social (and, by consequence, anti-political) power of the working masses.” [Bakunin, Michael Bakunin: Selected Writings, p. 197] Communist anarchists usually also acknowledge the importance of working in the labour movement but they generally think that syndicalistic organisations will be created by workers in struggle, and so consider encouraging the “spirit of revolt” as more important than creating syndicalist unions and hoping workers will join them (of course, anarcho-syndicalists support such autonomous struggle and organisation, so the differences are not great). Communist-anarchists also do not place as great an emphasis on the workplace, considering struggles within it to be equal in importance to other struggles against hierarchy and domination outside the workplace (most anarcho-syndicalists would agree with this, however, and often it is just a question of emphasis). A few communist-anarchists reject the labour movement as hopelessly reformist in nature and so refuse to work within it, but these are a small minority.

Both communist and collectivist anarchists recognise the need for anarchists to unite together in purely anarchist organisations. They think it is essential that anarchists work together as anarchists to clarify and spread their ideas to others. Syndicalists often deny the importance of anarchist groups and federations, arguing that revolutionary industrial and community unions are enough in themselves. Syndicalists think that the anarchist and union movements can be fused into one, but most other anarchists disagree. Non-syndicalists point out the reformist nature of unionism and urge that to keep syndicalist unions revolutionary, anarchists must work within them as part of an anarchist group or federation. Most non-syndicalists consider the fusion of anarchism and unionism a source of potential confusion that would result in the two movements failing to do their respective work correctly. For more details on anarcho-syndicalism see section J.3.8 (and section J.3.9 on why many anarchists reject aspects of it). It should be stressed that non-syndicalist anarchists do not reject the need for collective struggle and organisation by workers (see section H.2.8 on that particular Marxist myth).

In practice, few anarcho-syndicalists totally reject the need for an anarchist federation, while few anarchists are totally anti-syndicalist. For example, Bakunin inspired both anarcho-communist and anarcho-syndicalist ideas, and anarcho-communists like Kropotkin, Malatesta, Berkman and Goldman were all sympathetic to anarcho-syndicalist movements and ideas.

For further reading on the various types of social anarchism, we would recommend the following: mutualism is usually associated with the works of Proudhon, collectivism with Bakunin’s, communism with Kropotkin’s, Malatesta’s, Goldman’s and Berkman’s. Syndicalism is somewhat different, as it was far more the product of workers’ in struggle than the work of a “famous” name (although this does not stop academics calling George Sorel the father of syndicalism, even though he wrote about a syndicalist movement that already existed. The idea that working class people can develop their own ideas, by themselves, is usually lost on them). However, Rudolf Rocker is often considered a leading anarcho-syndicalist theorist and the works of Fernand Pelloutier and Emile Pouget are essential reading to understand anarcho-syndicalism. For an overview of the development of social anarchism and key works by its leading lights, Daniel Guerin’s excellent anthology No Gods No Masters cannot be bettered.

[nohkalikai]

“Jhum protects agro-biodiversity and diverse landraces within crops – 67% of India’s remaining biodiversity is found in North East India,” said Phrang Roy, chairman of the North East Slow Food and Agrobiodiversity Society in Shillong. “Indigenous people believe that their well-being and peace are very much linked to [a] shared economy.”

the harm that has come with teaching generations of children all over india that shifting cultivation is destructive and harmful can be measured and is currently being paid for by the same people who have been demonized for centuries-old subsistence agriculture. this article (and many others honestly) have been hammering on for YEARS on several points about land rights, ecological destruction, and erosion of tribal economic + cultural practices in mizoram that can be attributed to policies and legislation encouraging plantation agriculture. and it's not just mizoram.

[mariacallous]

Farmers in Greece and Romania are protesting, joining a wave of unrest in the farming community that has affected several countries in Europe.

In Karditsa, Evros, Patras, Peloponnese, and in Serres, northern Greece, farmers took to the streets on Wednesday with tractors. They have also threatened to close highways, media reported.

A bigger demonstration is planned for Friday in Thessaloniki on the occasion of the 30th Agrotica, the largest exhibition of the agro-economic sector in the country. Farmers warn that if the government does nothing by next Monday, roads will be closed.

Government spokesman Pavlos Marinakis said things should not go to such extremes. “No matter how serious the demands of a professional group are, they must not lead to the punishment of all citizens and violate the rights of society. This government has proven that it is trying, without leading to extreme tension, to solve problems,” Marinakis told the public broadcaster ERT.

Farmers, among others, demand compensation for those who haven’t received it for the damage caused by Storm Daniel, which destroyed houses, businesses, animal and plant production and roads in Thessaly region in September.

They want the construction of infrastructure projects to protect against weather phenomena, reductions in production costs and a change in the Agricultural Insurance Organisation’s regulation so that the production and capital are compensated 100 per cent for all such risks.

The Ministry of Climate Crisis and Civil Protection has already granted 33.9 million euros to 16,400 agricultural holdings and livestock units that applied for “first aid,” with payments to be completed in the next period. PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis said there will be a second cycle of aid worth 5,000 to 10,000 euros for farmers affected by the extreme flooding of September 2023 in Thessaly and other areas.

Farmers in Romania meanwhile continue to protest and demand relief from high fuel and insurance prices and better selling prices for their products. The government has devised some solutions to the demands, but many are unconvinced and continue to protest.

Large-scale protests took place on Tuesday in Brasov and Sibiu, central Romania, whwre farmers took 50 agricultural machines to the streets and staged a march. An authorized protest was also organised by farmers from Sibiu, who started in a column with tractors, trucks and cars across the municipality.

Such protests are taking place in all major cities in Romania, including on the ring road of Bucharest, where farmers have been protesting for weeks and hindering traffic. They were not allowed to enter Bucharest to protest in front of the government building to avoid disrupting the already heavy traffic in the capital.

Farmers in France, Belgium and Germany have been holding demonstrations blocking highways, with Reuters reporting that Spanish and Italian farmers will now join the movement.

They are complaining about EU measures to create “solidarity corridors” in order to provide Ukraine with income from agricultural exports, especially wheat. These products have flooded neighbouring countries and caused local production prices to fall.

The protesters also demand the cancellation of measures to limit agricultural production due to its carbon footprint and affect on climate change. They want the restoration of fuel tax exemptions. Far-right parties in Germany and in France have expressed vocal support for farmers’ demands.

[fatehbaz]

Driven by utilitarian concerns with scarcity and fears of cascading environmental degradation, colonial officials implemented tree-planting programs of all sorts -- seed farms, erosion control projects, school forests and so on. [...] Imperial forestry describes a shared set of practices, convictions and institutions that bound Japanese forestry professionals into a network that spanned the Japanese empire itself. [...] Japanese woodsmen (with a venerable forestry tradition all their own) came to terms with Western notions of natural resource management and "scientific forestry." [...] Japanese foresters tailored European ideas about ecology, sustainability, and industrial development to the particular needs of the Japanese empire and the different biomes it encompassed. [...] Japan has played an outsized role in the management and control of Asia's forests. To understand how Japan has maintained such verdant hillsides at home, [...] we need to more fully appreciate its control of sylvan landscapes abroad -- be they in the colonial empire before 1945 or in Southeast Asia thereafter. [...] [W]e ought to place tenant farmers in colonial Korea and shifting cultivators in Kalimantan in the same analytical frame. [...]

---

The most obvious legacies are material: flora introduced during colonial occupation that still grow in Korea today. [...] As part of a campaign to supposedly "beautify" the Korean landscape [...], Japanese settlers planted [...] cherry blossoms along streets, in squares, and within parks across Korea. [...] Another impact can be found in the forestry institutions founded during colonial rule. The flagship Forestry Research Station established by the colonial government, for example, only grew after liberation, becoming a hub of agro-forestry research that underpinned South Korea's economic take-off under Park Chung-hee. Many of the architects of South Korea's so-called "forest miracle" -- the wildly successful project of reforestation in the 1960s and 70s -- were trained in colonial scientific institutions. This is not to suggest that the dense forests that today blanket South Korea are somehow due to colonial rule. Reforestation under Park was born of markedly different circumstances -- its Cold War context, authoritarian rule and energy portfolio. But that doesn't mean that foresters on either side of 1945 weren't united by the same sets of anxieties and aspirations. [...] [A] set of abiding concerns [...] have animated forest conservation measures across the full sweep of the tumultuous twentieth century in Korea. [...]

---

[R]eferences to the ondol (the radiant heated floors conventional to Korean dwellings) are everywhere in the forester's archive. Japanese woodsmen quickly marked the ondol and its associated lifestyle as ground zero of deforestation. By the 1920s, forestry officials had launched an ambitious campaign to gain control over the energy consumption patterns of the home -- a crusade on caloric inefficiency that furthered the reach of the colonial state into the domestic sphere. In this sense, the ondol provides an illuminating lens through which to examine how forestry touched the lived, even bodily, experience of colonial rule in a sometimes bitterly cold environment. This is especially true of the civilian experience of the Asia-Pacific War in Korea, a period of fuel scarcity that resulted in draconian programs of caloric control. [...]

[W]e have much to gain by looking beyond the boundaries of the islands of Japan to write its environmental history. Understanding the tree-smothered hillsides of the so-called "green archipelago" requires that we pay close attention to its material linkages with the rest of Asia. It demands that we track commodity chains, supply lines, and resource politics across the Pacific.

---

All words above are the words of David Feldman. As interviewed and transcribed by Office of the Dean, School of Humanities at University of California, Irvine. Transcript titled “Seeing the forest for the trees.” Published online in the News section of UCI School of Humanities. 21 May 2020. [Some paragraph breaks and contractions added by me. Presented here for commentary, teaching, criticism purposes.]

[head-post]

Ukraine to Face Famine in Autumn

The harvesting campaign is ongoing in Ukraine. This year’s forecasts are bleak. The war with Russia and weather anomalies have led to huge losses for farmers. In the pre-war year 2021, the harvesting campaign brought 86 million tonnes of grain to the country. However, this year, if Ukraine harvests at least 50 million tonnes of grain, it will be a great victory. Owing to the reduction of sown areas, shortage of labour, as well as a lack of fertilisers and a record drought, the industry is in a deep recession. The energy crisis has only aggravated the situation in agriculture. Experts predict famine in Ukraine.

WAR FACTOR

The entire agricultural industry in Ukraine remains in an extremely difficult state today. The largest number of agricultural companies closed down in Ukraine during the war – 1,261 companies for the period from 2022 to the first quarter of 2024 inclusive. Last year too, agricultural companies closed down most often. Among all closed organisations, a record of 15 per cent fell on agro-enterprises. In the first quarter of 2024, the figures deteriorated further and totalled 18 per cent.

The output depends directly on the area sown, but it is still declining. Prior to the war, about 28 million hectares were sown. Now – a little more than 21 million hectares. The front line covers more than 400,000 hectares of agricultural land. Some of the territory is under the control of Russian troops, some lies in the front line, somewhere there are minefields and fortifications.

Apart from that, the problems with grain storage remain. More than 15 per cent of grain storage facilities are lost or damaged today. Therefore, every sixth grain storage facility of the total volume of grain enterprises has suffered damage. Out of 344 objects taken by satellites for assessment, 75 of them were found to have visible damage, according to the press service of the US Department of State, citing a study by the Conflict Observatory, a non-governmental organisation.

LABOUR SHORTAGE

The tightening of the mobilisation law has affected the entire industry. Agriculture is facing a serious labour shortage. This applies to many areas, including animal husbandry. There are almost no men under 60 years of age left in rural areas. First of all, representatives of professions that are in demand in the army, such as tractor drivers, machinists, engineers, as well as veterinarians, are drafted to the war.

On average up to 20 per cent of workers of exclusive specialities are mobilised in large companies, while in small farms sometimes up to 50-60 per cent. Agricultural enterprises have to search for workers among those who will definitely not be taken to war. Hence, they recruit mainly old people and pensioners.

NATURE’S UNPLEASANT SURPRISES

The weather has been a serious challenge for farmers this year. There were frosts in May, while the end of spring and summer in Ukraine turned out to be one of the driest in the last 30 years. The heat wave and drought affected crops in the southern and eastern regions the most. In the northern part of the country, particularly in the Zhytomyr region, spring crops such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers suffered due to hail.

The deputy head of the All-Ukrainian Agrarian Rada, Denys Marchuk, said that weather anomalies may reduce the yield of spring crops by a third: “Losses will be significant. There is no rain… The losses will amount to about 30-35 per cent. This will hit the export potential very hard. Consequently, it will affect the economic condition of farms.” Now farmers fear rains, which can negatively affect the harvest and the quality of grain.

LACK OF FERTILISER

Since the conflict broke out, most of Ukraine’s fertiliser production capacity has been halted due to the fact the plants work with explosive and toxic materials. Those of the production facilities that continue to operate today cannot compensate for the country’s fertiliser shortage.

At the beginning of the year, Ukraine recorded shortages of key fertiliser types. For instance, the supply of urea to agricultural producers for spring field work did not exceed 65 per cent. Traders and large buyers buy up this type of high-performance mineral fertiliser most often, resulting in a shortage of fertilisers, which triggered a rise in prices for these products, leading to unnecessary spending by farmers.

ENERGY CRISIS

Frequent power cuts, tariff hikes this summer and rising fuel and lubricant prices have negatively affected agriculture. The use of diesel generators means additional production costs for farmers. These factors have led to an increase in the prices of manufactured products.

Over the year, butter price increased most of all – by 16.1%, bread (+10.1%), milk (+8.3%) and cheese (+7.8%). Fish price increased by 5.9%. Moreover, the tendencies to price growth are still in place.

BLEAKING PREDICTIONS

Ukraine will face famine. Oleh Soskin, a former adviser to the second President of Ukraine, Leonid Kuchma, made the statement in his YouTube blog. The Ukrainian expert believes that despite poor crop forecasts, grain is being actively sold off, which may eventually lead to a shortage. “It is quite possible that there will be no grain left for food, it is already being actively sold. There will be left for a couple of months or so.”

Oleh Soskin accused the Ukrainian Presidential Property Management Directorate Volodymyr Zelensky of approving the sale of food stocks at the minimum price. According to the expert, with such an approach, the country’s economy is threatened with collapse as early as autumn 2024.

As of today, the economic situation in the country is extremely severe. The sociological service of the Razumkov Centre has published the survey, which shows that one third of the Ukrainian population can only afford food, and every tenth Ukrainian does not have enough money even for food. The survey took place this summer.

The majority of forecasts seem pessimistic. For example, in the last few months the price of flour has increased by 50 per cent. This will lead to the increase in bread prices by at least 20 per cent. Bakers expect supply disruptions. The main thing is that bread should not disappear from the shelves. On the background of general war fatigue, poverty and hunger, the population will be extremely furious, which may lead to various negative scenarios: from political crisis in Ukraine to civil war.

THE ARTICLE IS THE AUTHOR’S SPECULATION AND DOES NOT CLAIM TO BE TRUE. ALL INFORMATION IS TAKEN FROM OPEN SOURCES. THE AUTHOR DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY SUBJECTIVE CONCLUSIONS.

Bill Galston for Head-Post.com

[swapnil7091]

Title: The Employment System in Bihar: Challenges and OpportunitiesIntroduction: Bihar, a state in eastern India, has a unique employment landscape characterized by its demographic diversity and a mix of challenges and opportunities. In this blog, we will delve into the key aspects of Bihar's employment system, highlighting the state's strengths and areas that require improvement.Demographics and Workforce: Bihar boasts a large and youthful population, making it a potential labor powerhouse. The state's workforce comprises a mix of skilled and unskilled labor, contributing to various sectors of the economy.Government Initiatives: The Bihar government has initiated several programs to enhance employment prospects. Some of the notable schemes include:Mukhyamantri Nischay Swayam Sahayata Bhatta Yojana (MNSSBY): A financial assistance program for unemployed youth.Jeevika: A self-help group program promoting women's entrepreneurship and livelihoods.Skill Development Initiatives: Efforts to improve the skills of the youth for better employability.Challenges in Bihar's Employment System: Despite the potential, Bihar faces various challenges in its employment landscape, including:Low Industrialization: A limited industrial base compared to its population size.Agriculture Dominance: A significant reliance on agriculture, which is vulnerable to climate-related risks.Migration: Seasonal migration of labor to other states for employment opportunities.Opportunities: There are promising opportunities in Bihar's employment system:Agro-Based Industries: Leveraging the state's rich agricultural resources for agro-processing and food industries.Education and Skill Development: Investing in education and skill development to create a skilled workforce.Infrastructure Development: Building infrastructure to attract investments and create job opportunities.Conclusion: Bihar's employment system is a complex landscape with both challenges and opportunities. With strategic planning, skill development, and investment in key sectors, the state can harness the potential of its young and diverse workforce to drive economic growth and improve employment prospects for its citizens.Disclaimer: This information is based on data available up to September 2021. For the most up-to-date information, please refer to official government sources and recent news articles.

Here are the glimpse of some employees working for Automobile industry.

[indepwom101]

🇧🇪 Princess Astrid of Belgium, Archduchess of Austria-Este

Tuesday, May 23, 2023

“The first Belgian economic mission to Senegal started yesterday under the leadership of Princess Astrid. The aim is to strengthen economic and trade relations with the country, which is an important gateway to West Africa.

Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hadja Lahbib, Vice President of the Wallace Government, Willy Borsus, and Brussels Secretary of State, Pascal Smet, are on the mission, as are 155 Belgian companies and various academic institutions.

The mission will visit Dakar, Diamniado and the Fatick-Mbellacadiao region and will focus on a number of key sectors: logistics, pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, agro-food, renewable energy, water management, environment and creative industries.

After an opening seminar on women entrepreneurship, in the presence of the Senegalese Minister of Foreign Affairs, Aïssata Tall Sall, the official Belgian delegation yesterday met with President Macky Sall and Prime Minister Amadou Ba.”

[rabbitcruiser]

Day of the Mushroom

The Day of the Mushroom celebration is celebrated on April 16 and honors all things fungi. The fleshy, spore-bearing fruiting body of a fungus, which can grow anywhere above ground, on soil, or its food source, is known as a mushroom. The white button mushroom, which is grown, is the standard fungus to be called a mushroom. Therefore, fungi with a stem, cap, and gills on the underside of their cap are those to which the term “mushroom” is most frequently applied. The name “mushroom” is also relevant to describing the fleshy fruiting bodies of other Ascomycota because it is used to describe a range of different gilled fungi that may or may not have a stem.

History of Day of the Mushroom

Since they first appeared in early European communities, it is generally assumed that people have been gathering mushrooms since the beginning of time, possibly even in prehistoric times. Truffles and other types of mushrooms were prized in classical Greece and Rome. American author Cynthia Bertelsen claims in her book “Mushroom: A Global History” that both well-known historical authors, Pliny the Elder and Aristotle, wrote about fungus. She also claims that the Roman philosopher Galen wrote several paragraphs on the collection of wild mushrooms. Cynthia Bertelsen goes on to add that it is likely that China and Japan were the first places to cultivate mushrooms as early as 600 A.D.

But it took time for Americans to accept and become accustomed to mushrooms. In the cookbook “The Virginia Housewife,” mushrooms are mentioned for the first time in America (1824). Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom Soup, a classic American staple for casserole recipes, was created in the 1930s. Bertelsen adds that there may be archaeological proof of the spiritual usage of mushrooms as early as 10000 B.C. There is proof that various cultures, including the Ancient Greeks, the Mayans, the Chinese, and the Vikings, among many others, used hallucinogenic mushrooms.

Humans now consume edible mushrooms regularly, which has greatly boosted the agricultural and agro-economic development of the areas where they are grown. Around half of all farmed edible mushrooms are produced in China, which also accounts for six pounds of yearly mushroom consumption per person among the world’s 1.4 billion inhabitants. With an estimated 194,000 tonnes of yearly edible mushroom exports, Poland was the leading exporter of mushrooms in 2014.

Day of the Mushroom timeline

600 A.D. Earliest Known Cultivation of Mushrooms

Mushrooms are said to have been cultivated as far back in time as 600 A.D. in Japan and China.

1824 The Cookbook “The Virginia Housewife” is Published

The popular American cookbook “The Virginia Housewife” is released.

1966 Cynthia Berthelsen is Born

Berthelsen is born on June 1 and becomes an American author, food expert, and photographer.

2013 “Mushroom: A Global History” is Published

Berthelsen’s book “Mushroom: A Global History” is published.

Day of the Mushroom FAQs

What is Day of the Mushroom?

Day of the Mushroom, celebrated on April 16, is an American holiday created to celebrate the mushroom and its health and ecological benefits.

What are mushrooms?

Mushrooms are the fleshy, spore-bearing fruiting bodies of fungi, which are typically produced anywhere above ground, on soil, or the source of their food.

Are mushrooms edible?

Yes. Some mushrooms taste good and are safe for human consumption.

Day of the Mushroom Activities

Go mushroom hunting

Eat some mushrooms

Share the fun online

It's a good idea to go mushroom hunting on the Day of the Mushroom. Depending on a variety of variables, you can sometimes find mushrooms in your yard or the woods.

Consume some mushrooms! When used as culinary garnishing, several edible mushrooms are quite a delicacy and are also nutritious.

Don't forget to use the hashtag #DayOfTheMushroom to share your mushroom-related fun. Participate in the online discussion.

5 Interesting Facts About Mushrooms

They breathe like humans do

Fruiting bodies of mycelium

Mushrooms can be edible

China produces the most mushrooms

Mushroom spores can survive in space

Similar to how humans breathe, mushrooms take in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide.

The fruiting body of the mycelium, not the mushroom, is the primary plant. .

Some mushrooms taste good and are safe for human consumption.

In terms of producing edible mushrooms, China leads the world, followed by Japan and then the United States.

Mushroom spores can survive the radiation and vacuum in space.

Why We Love Day of the Mushroom

Some mushrooms are edible

Edible mushrooms are tasty

Mushrooms can be healthy

Some, if not most, mushrooms are edible. That’s just one more source of food for us humans!

Edible mushrooms are actually tasty as well, and they definitely make a good vegan snack. Go pick some today!

Mushrooms are plants, and as such, their consumption is healthy. We love this!

Source

[leuenbergeria]

They're absolutely right. 'Personal responsibility' is, in this context, a rightoid made-up talking point for the sole purpose of shielding certain financial interests.

Like we also have to talk about the 'production' side of things. Big Agro is a blight upon the Earth and upon humanity as a whole.

Oligarchs' and latifundists' production techniques are not predicated on providing, say, NUTRITIOUS CROPS/FOOD or anything like that. God forbid. Instead, they've linked up with gigantic multinational and national trash food companies to absolutely dominate all food supply chains. That is to say, they make sure that not only you consume their product, but that you have NO OTHER CHOICE. That's (partly) why food deserts exist.

Of course healthy food is going to be expensive if most of the prime agricultural land is dedicated to cultivating bottom-of-the-barrel crops like African palm and sugar cane. They aren't just taking space, they're actively STEALING it. The whole industry is build on unethical colonization techniques and heritage.

Of course the 'obesity epidemic' is going to be a thing if all the food production systems and chains are an absolute disaster only meant to extract maximum value from land until it's absolutely fucked and left barren for generations to come, leaving the mess to the people who originally lived there while the corps move on to annihilate some other land area. The absolute distortion of economic and ethical priorities thanks to capitalism is having nefarious effects on our health from all sides.

I don't know what that person was interviewing for but I hope they got it, because bullseye.

[dailyanarchistposts]

I.3.5 What would confederations of syndicates do?

Voluntary confederation among syndicates is considered necessary by social anarchists for numerous reasons but mostly in order to decide on the policies governing relations between syndicates and to co-ordinate their activities. This could vary from agreeing technical standards, to producing guidelines and policies on specific issues, to agreeing major investment decisions or prioritising certain large-scale economic projects or areas of research. In addition, they would be the means by which disputes could be solved and any tendencies back towards capitalism or some other class society identified and acted upon.

This can be seen from Proudhon, who was the first to suggest the need for such federations. “All my economic ideas developed over the last twenty-five years,” he stated, “can be defined in three words: Agro-industrial federation” This was required because ”[h]owever impeccable in its basic logic the federal principle may be … it will not survive if economic factors tend persistently to dissolve it. In other words, political right requires to be buttressed by economic right”. A free society could not survive if “capital and commerce” existed, as it would be “divided into two classes — one of landlords, capitalists, and entrepreneurs, the other of wage-earning proletarians, one rich, the other poor.” Thus “in an economic context, confederation may be intended to provide reciprocal security in commerce and industry … The purpose of such specific federal arrangements is to protect the citizens … from capitalist and financial exploitation, both from within and from the outside; in their aggregate they form … an agro-industrial federation” [The Principle of Federation, p. 74, p. 67 and p. 70]

While capitalism results in “interest on capital” and “wage-labour or economic servitude, in short inequality of condition”, the “agro-industrial federation … will tend to foster increasing equality … through mutualism in credit and insurance … guaranteeing the right to work and to education, and an organisation of work which allows each labourer to become a skilled worker and an artist, each wage-earner to become his own master.” The “industrial federation” will apply “on the largest scale” the “principles of mutualism” and “economic solidarity”. As “industries are sisters”, they “are parts of the same body” and “one cannot suffer without the others sharing in its suffering. They should therefore federate … in order to guarantee the conditions of common prosperity, upon which no one has an exclusive claim.” Thus mutualism sees “all industries guaranteeing one another mutually” as well as “organising all public services in an economical fashion and in hands other than the state’s.” [Op. Cit., p. 70, p. 71, p. 72 and p. 70]

Later anarchists took up, built upon and clarified these ideas of economic federation. There are two basic kinds of confederation: an industrial one (i.e., a federation of all workplaces of a certain type) and a regional one (i.e. a federation of all syndicates within a given economic area). Thus there would be a federation for each industry and a federation of all syndicates in a geographical area. Both would operate at different levels, meaning there would be confederations for both industrial and inter-industrial associations at the local and regional levels and beyond. The basic aim of this inter-industry and cross-industry networking is to ensure that the relevant information is spread across the various parts of the economy so that each can effectively co-ordinate its plans with the others in a way which minimises ecological and social harm. Thus there would be a railway workers confederation to manage the rail network but the local, regional and national depots and stations would send a delegate to meet regularly with the other syndicates in the same geographical area to discuss general economic issues.

However, it is essential to remember that each syndicate within the confederation is autonomous. The confederations seek to co-ordinate activities of joint interest (in particular investment decisions for new plant and the rationalisation of existing plant in light of reduced demand). They do not determine what work a syndicate does or how they do it:

“With the factory thus largely conducting its own concerns, the duties of the larger Guild organisations [i.e. confederations] would be mainly those of co-ordination, or regulation, and of representing the Guild in its external relations. They would, where it was necessary, co-ordinate the production of various factories, so as to make supply coincide with demand… they would organise research … This large Guild organisation… must be based directly on the various factories included in the Guild.” [Cole, Guild Socialism Restated, pp. 59–60]

So it is important to note that the lowest units of confederation — the workers’ assemblies — will control the higher levels, through their power to elect mandated and recallable delegates to meetings of higher confederal units. It would be fair to make the assumption that the “higher” up the federation a decision is made, the more general it will be. Due to the complexity of life it would be difficult for federations which cover wide areas to plan large-scale projects in any detail and so would be, in practice, more forums for agreeing guidelines and priorities than planning actual specific projects or economies. As Russian anarcho-syndicalist G.P. Maximov put it, the aim “was to co-ordinate all activity, all local interest, to create a centre but not a centre of decrees and ordinances but a centre of regulation, of guidance — and only through such a centre to organise the industrial life of the country.” [quoted by M. Brinton, For Workers’ Power, p. 330]

So this is a decentralised system, as the workers’ assemblies and councils at the base having the final say on all policy decisions, being able to revoke policies made by those with delegated decision-making power and to recall those who made them:

“When it comes to the material and technical method of production, anarchists have no preconceived solutions or absolute prescriptions, and bow to what experience and conditions in a free society recommend and prescribe. What matters is that, whatever the type of production adopted, it should be the free choice of the producers themselves, and cannot possibly be imposed, any more than any form is possible of exploitations of another’s labour… Anarchists do not a priori exclude any practical solution and likewise concede that there may be a number of different solutions at different times.” [Luigi Fabbri, “Anarchy and ‘Scientific’ Communism”, pp. 13–49, The Poverty of Statism, Albert Meltzer (ed.), p. 22]

Confederations would exist for specific reasons. Mutualists, as can be seen from Proudhon, are aware of the dangers associated with even a self-managed, socialistic market and create support structures to defend workers’ self-management. Moreover, it is likely that industrial syndicates would be linked to mutual banks (a credit syndicate). Such syndicates would exist to provide interest-free credit for self-management, new syndicate expansion and so on. And if the experience of capitalism is anything to go by, mutual banks will also reduce the business cycle as ”[c]ountries like Japan and Germany that are usually classifies as bank-centred — because banks provide more outside finance than markets, and because more firms have long-term relationships with their banks — show greater growth in and stability of investment over time than the market-centred ones, like the US and Britain … Further, studies comparing German and Japanese firms with tight bank ties to those without them also show that firms with bank ties exhibit greater stability in investment over the business cycle.” [Doug Henwood, Wall Street, pp. 174–5]

One argument against co-operatives is that they do not allow the diversification of risk (all the worker’s eggs are on one basket). Ignoring the obvious point that most workers today do not have shares and are dependent on their job to survive, this objection can be addressed by means of “the horizontal association or grouping of enterprises to pool their business risk. The Mondragon co-operatives are associated together in a number of regional groups that pool their profits in varying degrees. Instead of a worker diversifying his or her capital in six companies, six companies partially pool their profits in a group or federation and accomplish the same risk-reduction purpose without transferable equity capital.” Thus “risk-pooling in federations of co-operatives” ensure that “transferable equity capital is not necessary to obtain risk diversification in the flow of annual worker income.” [David Ellerman, The Democratic Worker-Owned Firm, p. 104] Moreover, as the example of many isolated co-operatives under capitalism have shown, support networks are essential for co-operatives to survive. It is no co-incidence that the Mondragon co-operative complex in the Basque region of Spain has a credit union and mutual support networks between its co-operatives and is by far the most successful co-operative system in the world. The “agro-industrial federation” exists precisely for these reasons.

Under collectivist and communist anarchism, the federations would have addition tasks. There are two key roles. Firstly, the sharing and co-ordination of information produced by the syndicates and, secondly, determining the response to the changes in production and consumption indicated by this information.

Confederations (negotiated-co-ordination bodies) would be responsible for clearly defined branches of production, and in general, production units would operate in only one branch of production. These confederations would have direct links to other confederations and the relevant communal confederations, which supply the syndicates with guidelines for decision making (see section I.4.4) and ensure that common problems can be highlighted and discussed. These confederations exist to ensure that information is spread between workplaces and to ensure that the industry responds to changes in social demand. In other words, these confederations exist to co-ordinate major new investment decisions (i.e. if demand exceeds supply) and to determine how to respond if there is excess capacity (i.e. if supply exceeds demand).

It should be pointed out that these confederated investment decisions will exist along with the investments associated with the creation of new syndicates, plus internal syndicate investment decisions. We are not suggesting that every investment decision is to be made by the confederations. (This would be particularly impossible for new industries, for which a confederation would not exist!) Therefore, in addition to co-ordinated production units, an anarchist society would see numerous small-scale, local activities which would ensure creativity, diversity, and flexibility. Only after these activities had spread across society would confederal co-ordination become necessary. So while production will be based on autonomous networking, the investment response to consumer actions would, to some degree, be co-ordinated by a confederation of syndicates in that branch of production. By such means, the confederation can ensure that resources are not wasted by individual syndicates over-producing goods or over-investing in response to changes in production. By communicating across workplaces, people can overcome the barriers to co-ordinating their plans which one finds in market systems (see section C.7.2) and so avoid the economic and social disruptions associated with them.

Thus, major investment decisions would be made at congresses and plenums of the industry’s syndicates, by a process of horizontal, negotiated co-ordination. Major investment decisions are co-ordinated at an appropriate level, with each unit in the confederation being autonomous, deciding what to do with its own productive capacity in order to meet social demand. Thus we have self-governing production units co-ordinated by confederations (horizontal negotiation), which ensures local initiative (a vital source of flexibility, creativity, and diversity) and a rational response to changes in social demand. As links between syndicates are non-hierarchical, each syndicate remains self-governing. This ensures decentralisation of power and direct control, initiative, and experimentation by those involved in doing the work.

It should be noted that during the Spanish Revolution successfully federated in different ways. Gaston Leval noted that these forms of confederation did not harm the libertarian nature of self-management:

“Everything was controlled by the syndicates. But it must not therefore be assumed that everything was decided by a few higher bureaucratic committees without consulting the rank and file members of the union. Here libertarian democracy was practised. As in the C.N.T. there was a reciprocal double structure; from the grass roots at the base … upwards, and in the other direction a reciprocal influence from the federation of these same local units at all levels downwards, from the source back to the source.” [The Anarchist Collectives, p. 105]

The exact nature of any confederal responsibilities will vary, although we “prefer decentralised management; but ultimately, in practical and technical problems, we defer to free experience.” [Luigi Fabbri, Op. Cit., p. 24] The specific form of organisation will obviously vary as required from industry to industry, area to area, but the underlying ideas of self-management and free association will be the same. Moreover, the “essential thing … is that its [the confederation or guild] function should be kept down to the minimum possible for each industry.” [Cole, Op. Cit., p. 61]

Another important role for inter-syndicate federations is to even-out inequalities. After all, each area will not be identical in terms of natural resources, quality of land, situation, accessibility, and so on. Simply put, social anarchists “believe that because of natural differences in fertility, health and location of the soil it would be impossible to ensure that every individual enjoyed equal working conditions.” Under such circumstances, it would be “impossible to achieve a state of equality from the beginning” and so “justice and equity are, for natural reasons, impossible to achieve … and that freedom would thus also be unachievable.” [Malatesta, The Anarchist Revolution, p. 16 and p. 21]

This was recognised by Proudhon, who saw the need for economic federation due to differences in raw materials, quality of land and so on, and as such argued that a portion of income from agricultural produce be paid into a central fund which would be used to make equalisation payments to compensate farmers with less favourably situated or less fertile land. As he put it, economic rent “in agriculture has no other cause than the inequality in the quality of land … if anyone has a claim on account of this inequality … [it is] the other land workers who hold inferior land. That is why in our scheme for liquidation [of capitalism] we stipulated that every variety of cultivation should pay a proportional contribution, destined to accomplish a balancing of returns among farm workers and an assurance of products.” In addition, “all the towns of the Republic shall come to an understanding for equalising among them the quality of tracts of land, as well as accidents of culture.” [General Idea of the Revolution, p. 209 and p. 200]

By federating together, workers can ensure that “the earth will … be an economic domain available to everyone, the riches of which will be enjoyed by all human beings.” [Malatesta, Errico Malatesta: His Life and Ideas, p. 93] Local deficiencies of raw materials, in the quality of land, and, therefore, supplies would be compensated from outside, by the socialisation of production and consumption. This would allow all of humanity to share and benefit from economic activity, so ensuring that well-being for all is possible.

Federation would eliminate the possibility of rich and poor collectives and syndicates co-existing side by side. As Kropotkin argued, ”[c]ommon possession of the necessities for production implies the common enjoyment of the fruits of common production … when everybody, contributing for the common well-being to the full extent of his [or her] capacities, shall enjoy also from the common stock of society to the fullest possible extent of his [or her] needs.” [Anarchism, p. 59] Hence we find the CNT arguing in its 1936 resolution on libertarian communism that ”[a]s far as the interchange of produce between communes is concerned, the communal councils are to liase with the regional federations of communes and with the confederal council of production and distribution, applying for whatever they may need and [giving] any available surplus stocks.” [quoted by Jose Peirats, The CNT in the Spanish Revolution, vol. 1, p. 107] This clearly followed Kropotkin’s comments that the “socialising of production, consumption, and exchange” would be based on workplaces “belong[ing] to federated Communes.” [The Conquest of Bread, p. 136]

The legacy of capitalism, with its rich and poor areas, its rich and poor workplaces, will be a problem any revolution will face. The inequalities produced by centuries of class society will take time to change. This is one of the tasks of the confederation, to ensure the socialisation of both production and consumption so that people are not penalised for the accidents of history and that each commune can develop itself to an adequate level. In the words of the CNT during the Spanish Revolution:

“Many arguments are used against the idea of socialisation; one of these — the most delightful — says that by socialising an industry we simply take it over and run it with the consequence that we have flourishing industries where the workers are privileged, and unfortunate industries where the workers get less benefits but have to work harder than workers elsewhere … There are differences between the workers in prosperous industries and those which barely survive… Such anomalies, which we don’t deny exist, are attributed to the attempts at socialisation. We firmly assert that the opposite is true; such anomalies are the logical result of the absence of socialisation. “The socialisation which we propose will resolve these problems which are used to attack it. Were Catalan industry socialised, everything would be organically linked — industry, agriculture, and the trade union organisations, in accordance with the council for the economy. They would become normalised, the working day would become more equal or what comes to the same thing, the differences between workers of different activities would end … “Socialisation is — and let its detractors hear it — the genuine authentic organisation of the economy. Undoubtedly the economy has to be organised; but not according to the old methods, which are precisely those which we are destroying, but in accordance with new norms which will make our people become an example to the world proletariat.” [Solidaridad Obrera, 30 April 1937, p. l2]

Workers’ self-management does not automatically mean that all forms of economic domination and exploitation would be eliminated. After all, in a market economy firms can accrue super-profits simply because of their size or control over a specific technology or resource. Hence Proudhon’s suggestion that “advocates of mutualism” would “regulate the market” to ensure “an honest breakdown of cost prices”, fix “after amicable discussion of a maximum and minimum profit margin” and “the organising of regulating societies.” [Selected Writings of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, p. 70] It seems likely that the agro-industrial federation would be the body which ensures that. Similarly, the federation would be the means by which to air, and deal with, suggestions that syndicates are monopolising their resources, i.e., treating them as private property rather than socialised possessions. Thus the federation would unite workers “to guarantee the mutual use of the tools of production” which are, “by a reciprocal contract”, the “collective property of the whole.” [James Guillaume, “On Building the New Social Order”, pp. 356–79, Bakunin on Anarchism, p. 376]

The inter-industry confederations help ensure that when the members of a syndicate change work to another syndicate in another (or the same) branch of industry, they have the same rights as the members of their new syndicate. In other words, by being part of the confederation, a worker ensures that s/he has the same rights and an equal say in whatever workplace is joined. This is essential to ensure that a co-operative society remains co-operative, as the system is based on the principle of “one person, one vote” by all those involved the work process. If specific syndicates are restricting access and so producing wage-labour, monopolising resources and so charging monopoly prices, the federation would be forum to publicly shame such syndicates and organise boycotts of them. Such anti-social activity is unlikely to be tolerated by a free people seeking to protect that freedom.

However, it could again be argued that these confederations are still centralised and that workers would still be following orders coming from above. This is incorrect, for any decisions concerning an industry or plant are under the direct control of those involved. For example, the steel industry confederation may decide to rationalise itself at one of its congresses. Murray Bookchin sketches the response to this situation as follows:

”[L]et us suppose that a board of highly qualified technicians is established [by this congress] to propose changes in the steel industry. This board … advances proposals to rationalise the industry by closing down some plants and expanding the operation of others … Is this a ‘centralised’ body or not? The answer is both yes and no. Yes, only in the sense that the board is dealing with problems that concern the country as a whole; no, because it can make no decision that must be executed for the country as a whole. The board’s plan must be examined by all the workers in the plants [that are affected] … The board itself has no power to enforce ‘decisions’; it merely makes recommendations. Additionally, its personnel are controlled by the plant in which they work and the locality in which they live … they would have no decision-making powers. The adoption, modification or rejection of their plans would rest entirely with … [those] involved.” [Post Scarcity Anarchism, p. 180]

Therefore, confederations would not be in positions of power over the individual syndicates. No attempt is made to determine which plants produce which steel for which customers in which manner. Thus, the confederations of syndicates ensure a decentralised, spontaneous economic order without the negative side-effects of capitalism (namely power concentrations within firms and in the market, periodic crises, etc.).

As one can imagine, an essential feature of these confederations will be the collection and processing of information in order to determine how an industry is developing. This does not imply bureaucracy or centralised control at the top. Taking the issue of centralisation first, the confederation is run by delegate assemblies, meaning that any officers elected at a congress only implement the decisions made by the delegates of the relevant syndicates. It is in the congresses and plenums of the confederation that new investment decisions, for example, are made. The key point to remember is that the confederation exists purely to co-ordinate joint activity and share information, it does not take an interest in how a workplace is run or what orders from consumers it fills. (Of course, if a given workplace introduces policies which other syndicates disapprove of, it can be expelled). As the delegates to these congresses and plenums are mandated and their decisions subject to rejection and modification by each productive unit, the confederation is not centralised.

As far as bureaucracy goes, the collecting and processing of information does necessitate an administrative staff to do the work. However, this problem affects capitalist firms as well; and since syndicates are based on bottom-up decision making, its clear that, unlike a centralised capitalist corporation, administration would be smaller. In fact, it is likely that a fixed administration staff for the confederation would not exist in the first place! At the regular congresses, a particular syndicate may be selected to do the confederation’s information processing, with this job being rotated regularly around different syndicates. In this way, a specific administrative body and equipment can be avoided and the task of collating information placed directly in the hands of ordinary workers. Further, it prevents the development of a bureaucratic elite by ensuring that all participants are versed in information-processing procedures.

Lastly, what information would be collected? That depends on the context. Individual syndicates would record inputs and outputs, producing summary sheets of information. For example, total energy input, in kilowatts and by type, raw material inputs, labour hours spent, orders received, orders accepted, output, and so forth. This information can be processed into energy use and labour time per product (for example), in order to give an idea of how efficient production is and how it is changing over time. For confederations, the output of individual syndicates can be aggregated and local and other averages can be calculated. In addition, changes in demand can be identified by this aggregation process and used to identify when investment will be needed or plants closed down. In this way the chronic slumps and booms of capitalism can be avoided without creating a system which is even more centralised than capitalism.

[darlingkeyzblog]

Sectors Dominated by Women Entrepreneurs in Eritrea

Women entrepreneurs in Eritrea are making a substantial impact across various industries, contributing to economic growth and community development. Here are some of the key sectors where Eritrean women are driving change and showcasing resilience and innovation. 1. Agriculture and Agro-Processing Role of Women: Women play a crucial role in Eritrea’s agricultural sector, working both on family…