Note on Proceedings of the Tripartite meeting on moving to sustainable agricultural development through the modernization of agriculture and employment in a globalized economy

Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy

Introduction

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy was held at the International Labour Office in Geneva from 18 to 22 September 2000.

The Office had issued a report^[1] to serve as a basis for the Meeting's deliberations. The report focused on globalization and agriculture, highlighting the fundamental role of agriculture in achieving sustainable development. Its presentation of major trends in production and export performance as well as the macroeconomic issues affecting the sector provided the context for discussion of current social issues, such as child labour, gender, occupational safety and health, genetically modified crops and voluntary initiatives. The report concluded by suggesting broad guidelines for policy action to raise productivity and yield levels in agriculture, while at the same time improving the conditions of work of rural workers.

The Governing Body had designated Mr. C. Schlettwein of the Government of Namibia to represent it and to chair the Meeting. The three Vice-Chairpersons elected by the Meeting were: Ms. C. Rodríguez Mancía (Guatemala) from the Government group; Mr. E. Korah from the Employers' group; and Ms. V. Griffith from the Workers' group.

The Meeting was attended by Government representatives from Benin, Brazil, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenya, Nigeria, Philippines, Romania and South Africa; 26 Employer members and 26 Worker members. A representative of the Government of Argentina was present at the sittings.

Representatives from the following international organizations attended as observers: Arab Labour Organization; European Commission; and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

Representatives from the following non-governmental organizations also attended as observers: Friends World Committee for Consultation; International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations; International Federation of University Women; International Organization of Employers; World Confederation of Labour; World Federation of Agricultural and Food Workers; and World Federation of Trade Unions.

The three groups elected their Officers as follows:


Government group:
	Chairperson:	Mr. Zhang Junfeng (China)
	Vice-Chairperson:	Mr. Tube (South Africa)
	Secretary:	Ms. Nair (India)
Employers' group:
	Chairperson:	Mr. Hermida Martínez
	Vice-Chairperson	Mr. Korah
	Secretary:	Mr. Dejardin (International Organization of Employers) (IOE)
Workers' group:
	Chairperson:	Mr. Atwoli
	Vice-Chairperson:	Ms. Trejo Sánchez
	Secretary:	Ms. Longley (International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations) (IUF)

The Secretary-General of the Meeting was Mr. O. de Vries Reilingh of the Sectoral Activities Department. The Deputy Secretary-General was Ms. C. Doumbia-Henry of the Sectoral Activities Department. The Executive Secretary was Mr. V. Jamal of the Sectoral Activities Department. The Experts were Ms. A. Herbert and Ms. C. Foucault-Mohammed. The Clerk of the Meeting was Ms. S. Maybud of the Management Services Unit of the Social Dialogue Sector.

The Chairperson opened the Meeting and noted the appropriateness of the topic. The role of agriculture in a globalizing economy deserved prominence on the international agenda, since agricultural development provided the foundation for economic development. A strong and productive agricultural sector could enable a country to feed its growing urban population, generate foreign exchange through exports, provide raw materials for local industries, and provide a market for industrial products. Agriculture employed almost one-half of the world's labour force, many of whom lived in poverty and worked in substandard conditions. Longstanding social issues, such as child labour, women's participation and occupational safety and health, deserved paramount attention if working conditions were to be improved. New issues for deliberation included the implications of genetically modified organisms as well as voluntary initiatives, such as social labelling and codes of conduct. The Tripartite Meeting offered a forum for delegates from countries at different levels of agricultural development and with varied economic policies to learn from each other's experience, to address and resolve problems and to develop new policy directions through tripartite discussion. He urged participants to work in a spirit of cooperation towards developing practical conclusions that the tripartite partners could implement and that could be of assistance to the ILO in charting a course of follow-up action.

Ms. K. Hagen, Executive Director (Social Dialogue), welcomed the participants to the ILO. She noted that when the topic of the Meeting was suggested at the last Tripartite Meeting on the Rural Sector in October 1996, globalization was mainly being discussed with regard to the manufacturing sector, which was considered the engine of growth in globalizing economies. Since the Asian financial crisis in late 1997, however, the importance of the agricultural sector for sustainable development had been underscored. Increases in agricultural productivity had been the traditional path to industrialization; those countries which industrialized rapidly had already built up a sound agricultural base. While globalization facilitated "leap-frogging" to industrialization, development would remain precarious if the creation of a productive agricultural sector were omitted. Also, in many countries, the agriculturally based rural sector would need to be the locus for job creation to ensure sustainable development, since the urban sector could simply not provide sufficient employment. The agricultural sector contained the bulk of the world's poor, working long hours for meagre returns and under hazardous and difficult conditions. It was hoped that the Meeting would give rise to practical conclusions for enhancing the sector's role in development and for improving the conditions of work of the world's agricultural workers.

Ms. Hagen said that the report examined three dimensions of globalization: increasing trade, increasing foreign direct investment and the transmission of new ideas as a result of the revolution in information technology. The fast spread of knowledge about labour practices, in particular, had increased consumer and stakeholder awareness of the conditions in which products were being produced, a factor that producers must now take into account. The issues discussed in the report – employment, poverty and conditions of work – went to the heart of the ILO's mandate. Decent work encompassed notions of productive, remunerative and safe work in which workers' rights were protected with adequate social protection. The four strategic objectives of the ILO included: the promotion of fundamental principles and rights at work; employment; social protection; and social dialogue. Social dialogue was a means by which rights were defended, employment promoted and conditions of work improved. Social dialogue was also an objective in itself, because participatory processes of decision-making were essential for a society to have just, fair and equitable social and economic development.

Ms. Hagen concluded by noting that over the past four years ILO work on the rural sector had focused on three key areas: the accumulation and dissemination of knowledge, the advocacy of workers' rights and the overall conditions for decent work, and services to constituents. Research had been conducted on the impact of globalization on agriculture, on the diversification of the agricultural export base, and on social labelling. National-level workshops had proven very useful to countries concerned and it was hoped that more such meetings might be held in future to propagate the message of the report as well as the conclusions of the Meeting.

Part 1 Consideration of the agenda item

Report of the discussion ^[2]

Introduction

1. The Meeting met to examine the item on the agenda. In accordance with the provisions of article 7 of the Standing Orders for sectoral meetings, the Officers presided in turn over the discussion.

2. The spokesperson for the Employers' group was Mr. Platt and the spokesperson for the Workers' group was Mr. Atwoli.

Composition of the Working Party

4. At its fifth plenary sitting, in accordance with the provisions of article 13, paragraph 2, of the Standing Orders, the Meeting set up a Working Party to draw up draft conclusions reflecting the views expressed in the course of the Meeting's discussion of the report. The Working Party, presided over by the Government Vice-Chairperson (Ms. Rodríguez Mancía, Guatemala), was composed of the following members:


Government members:
	Benin:	Mr. Adam
	Denmark:	Mr. Bejer
	El Salvador:	Ms. Avila
	Guatemala:	Ms. Rodríguez Mancía
	Philippines:	Ms. Soriano
Employer members:
	Mr. Nordin Hassan
	Mr. Hermida Martínez
	Mr. N'Guissan
	Mr. Platt
	Mr. Tiitola
Worker members:
	Mr. Atwoli
	Mr. Brumatti
	Mr. Ganguly
	Mr. Leathwood
	Ms. Ssentongo

Presentation of the report and general discussion

Presentation of the report

5. The report for the Meeting prepared by the International Labour Office was introduced by the Executive Secretary. He observed that the Meeting had brought together delegates from countries which were fairly representative in terms of the problems faced in the agricultural sector. Most of the countries represented were agricultural countries on the way to development. Upwards of two-thirds of their labour force was employed in agriculture, there was vast poverty and conditions of work were probably worse than in other sectors. Other countries represented at the Meeting included those with economies in transition or which had recently liberalized, as well as one developed country. It was hoped that this varied experience would provide opportunities for fruitful discussion. The agricultural sector held an important place in the world economy. It was the largest employer worldwide and the repository of most of the world's poverty. Surplus agricultural production provided raw materials for industries and for exchange, and thus provided the basis for industrialization. Globalization had already brought certain benefits to agriculture in terms of the diversification of the export base, the opening up of markets, and advances in technology, storage, communications and transportation. It had also brought an influx of foreign direct investment to some countries. However, the benefits had not been universally distributed. The capital costs associated with the diversification into modern crops – such as investment in greenhouses and access to rapid transportation systems – had been prohibitively high for many smallholders, for example. Some of the parameters of globalization might therefore need to be changed to ensure that as many people as possible were included among the beneficiaries of the globalization process and to avoid widening income gaps. While globalization provided a path to further growth, it was important to ensure that vulnerable groups in society were not left behind. Enjoyment of the protection provided by core labour standards should not be the prerogative of a small minority in modern sectors, but should be the right of all workers, including those in agriculture. Sustainable agriculture implied the creation of viable employment for generations to come.

6. Before beginning the general discussion, the Employer spokesperson noted his group's desire that the points for discussion be prioritized in the following order: 1,4, 5, 6 (reworded), 8, 9, 7. Points 2 and 3, which concerned price fixing, the competitive trading of exports and foreign direct investment should be omitted, since these issues fell within the purview of the World Trade Organization (WTO), not the ILO. The Employer Vice-Chairperson affirmed that points 1, 2 and 3 were concerned with trade and commercial issues, not labour relations issues. An Employer member from Argentina observed that the time available for discussion was short, and that the Employers had merely wished to confine the debate to topics on which they, as employers, could have an opinion. They had indicated the points which would lead to progress in the Meeting and to conclusions which could be adopted by consensus. The speaker requested the Chairperson of the Meeting to explain what aspects of the ILO mandate provided a basis for dealing with points 2 and 3, since the establishment of guidelines on foreign investment or on price fixing seemed beyond the competence of the Organization. An Employer member from Mauritania drew attention to the fragile set-ups in Africa which required state intervention, and where minimum prices were set for production and for export. He supported inclusion of points 1, 2 and 3 in the discussions.

7. The Worker spokesperson could not agree to delete any points, preferring that all the points be considered. He added that it was no new phenomenon to discuss trade issues in ILO forums, citing examples of conclusions from previous meetings. A Worker member from India added that in the course of collective bargaining, employers seized the opportunity to discuss price fixing, subsidies and the role of the government, usually as obstacles which prevented them from increasing wages and improving working conditions.

8. The representative of the Government of Egypt supported the view that all the points proposed were valid issues and should be discussed. The representative of the Government of Guatemala pointed out that macroeconomic policy issues provided a framework for discussion of issues concerning the creation of jobs and social policy. She urged the Meeting to discuss the points in the order proposed by the secretariat. She noted also that according to paragraph 24(c) of the general characteristics of sectoral meetings, it would be for the Governing Body to decide on the effect to be given to conclusions and resolutions which involved proposals which the Governing Body might wish to bring to the attention of the United Nations or of other international organizations.

9. The representatives of the Governments of Chile, Costa Rica, Denmark and India were in favour of opening the discussions on the substantive issues. Reservations regarding certain points might be expressed formally at a later stage.

10. The Secretary-General advised that within the macroeconomic analysis, links had been established between trade, investment and employment, so the points for discussion were thought to be legitimate. He appealed to the Meeting to engage in a good general discussion and to sort out their differences in informal consultations.

11. The Chairperson referred to the Governing Body decision at its 273rd Session (November 1998) in which the mandate of the Meeting was stated to be: "To exchange views on the agricultural sector in the twenty-first century: Its contribution to employment, incomes and prospects for productivity gains." That mandate was broad and could include points 2 and 3 which would necessarily have an impact on social security, employment, etc. He proposed to start the general discussion. The general statements could first be presented, following which the points could be prioritized in a subsequent discussion. It was so agreed.

General discussion

12. The Worker spokesperson welcomed the opportunity to engage in a discussion on sustainable agriculture in a globalized economy, a subject of critical importance to world development. Agriculture was a sector which equally affected governments, employers and workers. It represented the backbone of any economy, especially within a context of globalization, privatization and the pressing need for promoting sustainable development. He congratulated the ILO on the content and scope of the report. The Workers' group welcomed the emphasis on employment, since sustainable agriculture had to include sustainable employment. Agriculture was precarious by its very nature. Outcomes depended on the seasons, the weather and soil types. But employment in agriculture should not suffer a similar precarious fate. Workers had had to accept precarious contracts in order to ensure production. Therefore, the Workers' group wished to examine the question of employment security along with the issues of the promotion and protection of the sector. Globalization and its impact on the agricultural sector were addressed in the report and they were realities to be contended with. Civil society had been increasingly concerned with the agricultural sector since the WTO negotiations had focused on this sector. The demonstrations in Seattle had drawn world attention. The Director-General of the ILO had noted that "Globalization as we know it today will not survive unless its benefits reach more people. ... The basic test of the global economy will be its capacity to deliver decent work for all." Some attention should be paid to defining "sustainable agriculture". Agriculture which denied workers freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively was not sustainable. Agriculture which relied on poverty wages, poor working conditions and lack of social protection was not sustainable. Agriculture which maintained an appalling record on safety and health, accounting for half of all workplace fatalities and millions of serious injuries every year, was not sustainable. The discussions would not be complete if commodity pricing were not mentioned. Fear surrounded the issue of pricing, but the pertinent question was how much could be paid for what a poor man produced. The Workers did not wish to deny any other organizations the right to take part in the debate on this question. They did wish, however, to ensure that trade unions be part of the decision-making process and have the right to put forward their opinions. He concluded by expressing the hope that a constructive and positive debate would lead to practical outcomes from the Meeting.

13. The Employer spokesperson strongly urged the Meeting not to reach decisions by a majority decision, but rather on the basis of consensus. Consensus-based decisions always had more effect upon participants than imposed decisions. The classic example of the process of reaching decision through consensus was to be found in the adoption of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), which had attracted the support of all the tripartite partners in the ILO. This contrasted strongly with the fate of Conventions adopted by a majority vote, such as the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), and the Chemicals Convention, 1990 (No. 170), all of which were poorly ratified. Since this Meeting would serve as a basis for future decisions and Conventions, the Employers proposed that the discretion offered by article 12 of the Standing Orders not be applied, but instead that consensus on decisions should be reached. The Employers' group acknowledged the amount of work that had gone into the report, but could not accept its content in totality. While statistics had been taken from a number of sources, many were derived from the UNDP Human Development Report, which had fallen under considerable criticism in recent years, in particular for the unprofessional treatment – not to say manipulation and misuse – of statistical evidence by the United Nations. Critics had highlighted the flawed methodology behind the claim in the UNDP Human Development Report that income gaps between the richest and the poorest countries had widened in the 1990s. No objective evidence provided support for this view. Indeed, the last decade of the millennium had almost certainly been the first decade in history in which average real incomes of most countries in which the world's poor lived had increased at an average rate of 3per cent or more. The Employers' group objected to unverifiable claims in the report, for example, the forecast that by 2028 the world's agribusiness would be worth US$10 trillion with the farmers' share declining to only 10 per cent. Projections some 27years into the future should be viewed with some scepticism, given the speed of technological change. Delegates ought to question the content of the report and consider any underlying agendas. The wording of certain points for discussion revealed a certain amount of bias. The report had focused on only the negative effects of genetic engineering, for example. It had drawn unjustified conclusions by suggesting that existing bans on hazardous chemicals were not being enforced. The manner in which some questions were drafted seemed to prejudge or attempt to predetermine the course of the debate. In summary, the points for discussion were loaded questions. Turning to the issue of trade, he noted that the ILO should acknowledge that the WTO was primarily responsible for ensuring trade on a free basis. The WTO had acknowledged that it held no competence in labour matters. There was legitimate concern that linking labour standards with trade issues might implicitly advance a protectionist agenda. The multilateral rules-based trading system had made great advances over the 50 years since it was instituted. Global tariffs had dropped from an average of 40 per cent in the late 1940s to 4 per cent today. The WTO clearly had a role to play in promoting economic growth and development. The ILO had a long and valid history and should continue in social and labour areas, leaving trade issues to the WTO.

14. A member of the ILO secretariat stated that the question regarding potential negative consequences of GMOs did not reflect a negative bias, but rather the fact that public concern had been widespread and had spurred debate on this matter. Similarly, it was appropriate to address increasing inequality as part of the process of globalization, since social justice was a prime objective of the ILO.

15. The Worker member from the Philippines did not wish to see doubts cast on the validity of the UNDP Human Development Report. The report had proved useful to many over the past ten years, particularly since it offered an alternative to using GNP alone to measure development. The report had been a pioneer in providing indices of human development in a way that was easy to understand.

16. The representative of the Government of Egypt noted that in his country, government policy did not link labour issues with international trade. He raised three sets of issues included in the report, notably the environment, labour issues and the diversification of exports. Environmental criteria were being used as discriminatory elements in the framework of world trade. Some developed countries insisted on tying trade liberalization to environmental and labour issues. They had sought to impose binding conditions in this area, which would deprive the developing countries of a competitive advantage by imposing international standards for employment and wages which did not suit their economic and social conditions. Non-compliance with such rules would result in restrictions on their exports. Such measures had been successfully opposed by the developing countries. Turning to labour questions, the speaker noted that child labour was linked to poverty, which was being gradually alleviated through extensive development efforts. In Egypt studies had revealed that small farming units were more efficient in economic terms than large-scale farms. On small farms, most work was provided by self-employed farmers and their family members, who were readily available at all times. Suitable work could be found for family members of every age group. On the question of diversification of exports, Egypt's experience had been dramatic. Major efforts had been deployed to shift from traditional crops to horticultural export crops, to enhance the quality and quantity of produce and to reallocate limited land and water resources for the production of these crops. However, enormous obstacles had been encountered when attempts were made to export those crops to Western Europe, where the market was already flooded with such produce. So the recommendation to diversify production in this way needed to be re-examined and re-evaluated in the light of its implications. Regarding genetic engineering, continued research was vital to ensure that new technologies would be developed to further increase the food supply. More studies needed to be done on the side effects on human beings and the environment. Products needed to be labelled to inform customers what genes had been modified.

17. The representative of the Government of Denmark judged the report to be a good basis for discussion. In Denmark, although services and industry employed far more people than agriculture, the social issues related to agriculture remained important. In Denmark occupational safety and health was a critical concern. In terms of occupational risk, agriculture was a sector in which the risk of fatal accidents was five to six times higher than in other sectors. Many agricultural accidents involved children. Genetic engineering was a complex issue involving both risks and new possibilities. Caution should be the guiding principle. Agriculture was also a sector where women needed to be more involved in the decision-making process. Women should be independent in the labour market and enjoy equal access to economic resources. He concluded by stressing the importance of social dialogue between government and the social partners.

18. The representative of the Government of Nigeria stated that the timing of the Meeting could not be more auspicious. In Nigeria, agriculture was the second largest contributor to the economy, second only to oil, and 70 per cent of the population earned their living through farming. However, this group was largely composed of impoverished farmers and poor, small landholders cultivating less than one hectare. The Government had recognized that these rural workers needed to be supported by a conducive environment which would facilitate: (1) the acquisition of appropriate technology; (2) agricultural extension services for assessing the numerous findings and consolidating development in the sector; (3)multiplication and distribution of improved seedlings and farm inputs; (4)cooperative societies with funds to promote decent work; (5) rural infrastructure; (6) the absorption of the unemployed; (7) resource availability through micro-lending to improve the efficiency and size of farm holdings; and (8) natural resource conservation for sustainable agricultural production. Therefore an action plan had been set up targeting self-sufficiency in food production, food security and the provision of material to domestic and export markets. The plan would guarantee diversification through modernization of production processes, storage and distribution. Nigeria had already ratified most of the ILO core Conventions. Decent work for men and women could not be achieved without health and safety protection for workers in agriculture. Nigeria was opposed to the practice of linking labour standards to international trade. As for genetic engineering, negative effects could take a long time to become manifest. Nigeria supported labelling of genetically modified products. Agriculture remained the lynchpin of social and economic development. The Government of Nigeria expressed its gratitude to the ILO and all donor countries for their support for democracy.

19. The representative of the Government of Benin observed that among the matters to be addressed in such a meeting was the rural-urban exodus. The Government was trying to help rural workers to improve their living standards by providing health care, drinking water, education, rural infrastructure and communications. It would be useful if the Meeting could address these issues.

20. The representative of the Government of India drew attention to the rapid strides India had made in recent times. Grain production had been increased fourfold in 30 years. India ranked among the three largest producers of milk, fruit and vegetables and had achieved self-sufficiency in food production. However, agriculture had become an unrewarding profession. Unfavourable price regimes and the vagaries of weather had increased migration from rural areas. The Government had shaped a new agricultural policy which aimed to step up the pace of agricultural development, create rural employment and secure a fair standard of living for farmers, agricultural workers and their families. Over the next two decades the target was to achieve a growth rate of over 4 per cent in agricultural production based on the efficient use of soil, water and other resources. Growth with equity would ensure sustainable agriculture. Workers in the agricultural sector were unorganized and a host of employment and labour issues were still to be addressed. Some 70 per cent of farmers cultivated less than one hectare of land. Most farming was undertaken by self-employed small farmers and the entire family contributed. The issue was not so much workers' rights as it was to find ways and means to enhance total farm incomes as a whole. There was a need to develop dry land agriculture, where productivity was low, but this would require massive public investment. In India 80 per cent of all economically active women were to be found in agriculture, but they had little access to resources such as land, credit and technology. They had developed traditional skills, but they needed to upgrade their skills so that the drudgery of their work could be reduced. The introduction of genetically modified organisms into developing countries was a matter of great concern. There was a need to avoid panic reactions arising from uncertainty and misinformation. Globalization was changing the face of the world economy. Livelihood, security and genuine concern for the uplifting of farming families should be at the heart of the country's agenda for agricultural development.

21. The representative of the Government of China held that agriculture was the sector which was being most influenced by globalization. Greater investment and new technology were undoubtedly beneficial to developing countries, but at the same time posed many challenges. The most obvious example was the drop in agricultural prices and the influx of imports which damaged local production. So while developing countries welcomed globalization, they needed to take initiatives to stave off its negative consequences. The statistical data provided in the report showed the share of overall employment in the agricultural sector in many developing countries to be over 50 per cent. This meant that developing countries were faced with major challenges in the area of employment. Investments were needed to modernize agricultural technology. Similarly, gender equality needed to be addressed. Such issues needed to be addressed in a comprehensive manner if sustainable agriculture was to be achieved.

22. The representative of the Government of El Salvador informed the Meeting that her country had recently ratified four ILO Conventions: the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182); the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155); the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156); and the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No.100). El Salvador was currently implementing a project which set out to eradicate child labour in the agricultural sector. It was being run with the help of IPEC. She concluded by noting that vocational training was crucial to employment in the sector and should be discussed.

23. The representative of the Government of the Philippines informed the Meeting that her Government had launched a poverty alleviation programme where the agricultural sector was given priority attention. Growth in the agricultural sector had been increasing, and had already surpassed the target set, however employment continued to decline. Critical to the sustainability of growth in the sector was the empowerment of the rural or farm communities to become self-sufficient, this was where the ILO could play a critical role. An integrated approach to capacity building in the rural communities would have to be developed to improve their productivity, efficiency and self-sufficiency in the long run. Synergies needed to be developed with other rural activities. Multifunctionality could contribute to self-sustaining rural communities, but it was a controversial issue in the WTO since it was related to discussions on subsidies. The ILO could contribute to the debate by conducting research on issues related to multifunctionality.

24. The representative of the Government of Egypt stressed that poverty was the major contributing factor to the prevalence of child labour. The Government was combating child labour jointly with NGOs and civil society. It was adopting gradual measures since a severe clampdown might well lead to counter-productive results, such as clandestine child labour. Applying commercial sanctions in the fight against child labour would only aggravate matters: children taken away from work, if not provided with proper alternatives, might turn to prostitution, drugs or crime. The use of social labelling seemed a way of putting the cart before the horse and might well lead to increased poverty. The international community needed to make a more concerted effort to put an end to child exploitation, forced labour and hazardous work in agriculture. Many countries were not equipped with the financial or technical resources required to resolve such problems on their own. Above all, awareness-building programmes for the public at large needed to be launched in all sectors, including agriculture. Egypt had already ratified the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), and had taken steps to ratify the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182).

25. An observer (International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF)) noted that over half of the more than 300,000 fatal workplace accidents each year took place in agriculture, one of the most dangerous sectors. Agricultural workers also figured disproportionately among the more than 250 million workers injured each year and among the more than 160 million who fell ill due to workplace hazards and exposures. Yet agricultural workers were often denied the most basic protection. The core Conventions of the ILO included in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work were too often blatantly disregarded. These basic rights were central to any serious discussion about sustainable agriculture. Agriculture and rural development that denied workers freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, that did not recognize the major contribution of agricultural workers and their trade unions, that relied on poverty wages, poor working conditions and lack of social protection, that maintained an indefensible record on safety and health, and that too often made extensive use of child labour were certainly not sustainable.

26. An observer (World Federation of Agricultural and Food Workers (WFAFW)) said that the report focused on three main forces in globalization B foreign investment, trade and the transmission of ideas, but excluded the central factor in human progress, which was human labour. Globalization seemed to run counter to human labour. It led to increased trade, higher production and rising foreign investment, but at the same time led to less employment, higher unemployment and fewer rights for workers. The rich got richer and the poor got poorer. Globalization had a negative impact on Third World workers and their families. Alternative approaches needed to be created and single-track thinking avoided. As for genetically modified organisms, they held out the possibility of greater food production, but also had negative environmental effects and could potentially pose health hazards for human beings. Technology should be used to help the weak, but instead multinational enterprises had appropriated science for their own economic gain. Genetically modified agricultural products from rich countries, especially from the UnitedStates, were overwhelming international markets, driving local producers out of business and increasing unemployment and misery in poor countries. The WFAFW advocated natural, organic products both as producers and as consumers. Unemployment, low wages and lack of social services, such as education and health, were driving agricultural workers and their families off the land. The principal cause of child labour was the terrible conditions in which families lived. Men and women needed decent work which would enable them to support their children financially and permit them to go to school. In conclusion, the speaker said that workers should be treated as human beings and not as factors of production.

27. An observer from UNCTAD noted that his organization's concern with trade and development issues was closely linked with the themes of the Meeting – globalization and the need to improve working conditions, increase employment and ensure decent work for men and women. Globalization was not a new process, but some new aspects had recently developed. Rules were supposed to guide the process and communications were supposed to make it easier for all to participate. In fact, competition had been enhanced. In many cases, the interests of employers and workers now coincided, particularly in developing countries and in the agricultural sector. Over the past 20-30 years, agricultural production had increased faster in developing countries than in developed countries. The increase in developing countries had largely gone for domestic consumption, whereas developed countries' production had gone into exports. Developed countries share of the export market had grown very large, partly due to export subsidies and partly due to the fact that developed countries traded not only their own agricultural produce, but also products such as coffee, cocoa and tea which were produced in developing countries, but marketed by developed countries. The main beneficiaries of expanding trade in agricultural products were expected to be the developed countries, mainly the United States. Trade patterns were changing, due to export subsidies, liberalization in developing countries, changing market structures, changing rules of international trade, as well as market exigencies. Subsidies in OECD countries in 1999 stood at US$362 billion – roughly ten times the amount provided as official development assistance to developing countries, twice the direct foreign investment in developing countries, and about two-thirds of world agricultural trade. There were serious implications such as declining production in countries that did not provide subsidies, higher costs in developed countries which were paying for those subsidies, and job loss in both. When developing countries liberalized their trade and lowered import barriers, national industries were suddenly forced to compete with heavily subsidized imports, with potentially devastating results, as was illustrated in the case of the tomato industry in Senegal. Liberalization and privatization together had resulted in the takeover of domestic enterprises by foreign firms. Some consequences had been positive. Firms with links to foreign buyers had improved their productivity, increased their earnings, and provided good, well-paid employment. On the negative side, automation and job loss had occurred and the portion of the final product price which went to farmers and farm workers had declined considerably. There was a need for capacity building both for employers and workers to meet these challenges.

28. An observer (International Federation of University Women) commented on the World Bank's recent World Development Report on the theme "Attack on poverty". The report stated that "the most pervasive forms of gender inequality appear where both inheritance and marriage rules are heavily weighted in favour of men". In the agricultural sector, such forms of gender inequality were pervasive. In most developing countries, family laws were heavily weighted against women in terms of the right to divorce or to inherit land or other productive resources. Land ownership was normally vested in men. Economic policies and programmes for women were often couched in welfare terms, rather than as measures to ensure sustainable growth and development. Gender-equal rights to acquisition of property should be backed by legislation to allow women agricultural workers to have access to credit facilities. Land and property rights gave a permanent status and sense of security to women, which could unshackle them from being treated as dependent minors. Land titles also increased business incentives. The UN Human Rights Commission in its 56th Session adopted a resolution on women's equal ownership of, access to, and control over land and their equal rights to own property and to adequate housing. It affirmed that discrimination in law against women with respect to acquiring and securing land, property and housing, as well as to financing for land, property and housing, constituted a violation of women's human rights to protection against discrimination and undermined their capacity to acquire and retain those resources. Such exclusion contributed to the feminization of poverty. Despite de jure laws, customary laws were still pervasive. Women needed legal education and awareness-training to know what their rights were and how to obtain them. Country studies had demonstrated that raising women's education made them more efficient producers, by increasing their adoption of new technologies and their efficiency in using resources. Analysis from Kenya suggested that giving women farmers the same education and inputs as those given to men increased yields by as much as 22 per cent. Educating women also improved child survival.

29. The Chairperson informed the Meeting that informal consultations had led to an agreement to consolidate points 1, 2 and 3 into a single point for discussion. The agreed point read as follows:

Given the importance of agriculture in many developing countries and given the importance of globalization and its effects on their economies, how should government policy be oriented to ensure that agriculture contributes to decent work (poverty reduction), sustainable employment creation and overall sustainable development? How should workers' and employers' organizations facilitate decent work in the agricultural sector?

The speaker observed that such an approach would have the benefit of including all issues, both listed and unlisted. The proposal was accepted and the point-by-point discussion followed.

Point-by-point discussion

Ensuring decent work, employment creation and sustainable development in agriculture

30. The Employer spokesperson presented his group's position on government policy and agriculture. In order to ensure that agriculture continued to contribute to employment creation and overall sustainable development, government should be a stable entity. It should provide an appropriate level of infrastructure, including the following measures: non-intervention in financial and trade markets; free access to any market; policies which result in low interest rates and low inflation; the accelerated transfer of technology from more developed countries to developing countries; development of greater management expertise; guaranteed legal property rights and an enforceable land tenure system; encouragement of value-adding processes as opposed to the export of raw materials; increased investment in research and development; recognition and protection of natural resources; increased recycling of by-products and waste; and increased involvement in agricultural programmes, particularly by the lower or regional levels of government.

31. The Worker spokesperson recalled the purpose of the Meeting and the serious consideration to be given to the ILO report. Issues such as freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining were well known to the international community. The application of ILO core standards was a means to achieve sustainable agriculture. All social partners should support that international call. After all, how could poverty be eradicated if the rights to better pay and conditions for poor workers were not respected? How could working conditions improve without attention to the question of workers' health and safety? A certain school of thought was in vogue to diminish the role of the ILO, despite the progress achieved in industrial and economic development. The speaker warned that the entire future of the industrial relations machinery would be in jeopardy if the tripartite approach were undercut. Regarding the role of governments in ensuring sustainable agriculture and rural development, policy should be aimed at maintaining or even extending the multifunctional character of agriculture. There was a need to diversify agricultural production by introducing mixed crops and livestock systems and to move away from over-dependence on monoculture and over-intensive livestock units. Governments should develop programmes to promote organic agriculture, including transition arrangements for producers wishing to make the change from conventional to organic production, and to develop markets for organic products. Agricultural diversification and promotion of organic agriculture should be seen in the context of creating agricultural employment, a major concern. A prime responsibility of government was to ensure food security, given the problem of major food shortages. Finally, multifunctionality was important in protecting rural environments and governments had a role to play in integrating this aspect into agricultural policy. The speaker concluded by noting that the Employer spokesperson had not addressed the question of how workers' and employers' organizations might facilitate decent work in agriculture.

32. The Chairperson expressed appreciation for the precise presentations. In calling for stable governments, however, it was important to make clear that the Employers meant democratic governments and not dictatorships or autocratic governments, which might also be stable. That distinction should be made explicit. Governments clearly had responsibilities with regard to safeguarding natural resources, regulating land tenure and access to land. When it came to non-intervention in markets, however, the speaker affirmed that governments which chose to liberalize trade in basic commodities had a responsibility to put into place some kind of control mechanism which would ensure at least minimum access to such basic necessities as food, water and shelter, without which dignified living conditions were impossible. Governments had an important role as the main facilitator of development, as a regulator and as the guardian of social justice and human rights.

33. The representative of the Government of China noted that most of the proposals discussed so far were actually being implemented the world over. China had a population of 1.3 billion people. With only 7 per cent of the world's arable land, China supported 22 per cent of the world's population. Over the past 50 years China had invested considerably in sustainable development and stable growth. Food production had increased by 3.5 times. Millions of dollars had been invested in setting up enterprises in rural townships and in the countryside in order to create jobs for farmers, including in non-agricultural activities. One billion people lived in rural areas, but the overall development level remained low and the agricultural market was not mature. Sustainable development could not be separated from sustainable employment. In China, there was a surplus labour supply of 150 million people living on the land. Many were leaving rural areas and moving to cities in a somewhat chaotic exodus. For the past decade, the Government had undertaken a project to organize such migration in a more orderly fashion, to assist migrants in finding well-paid jobs and to improve their living conditions. Other measures included incentives to foster the development of enterprises, such as food-processing activities, in rural areas. China was being assisted by the ILO in this area. Experience with this project could provide valuable lessons for other countries as well. General education and vocational training were not to be neglected. In particular, training schools and distance learning through radio broadcasts were putting farmers in touch with the outside world and introducing them to new technology. In China, men and women were considered to be equal. In order to achieve sustainable agriculture, developing countries had to rely on their own efforts in the first instance. Nonetheless, the industrialized countries should encourage investment in developing countries in order to achieve global sustainable development in the end. He expressed the hope that industrialized countries would facilitate the transfer of technology to developing countries through reasonable pricing. The Meeting was a forum where the experiences of developing countries could be shared.

34. The representative of the Government of El Salvador noted that agriculture was a very dynamic element in her nation's economy. Government policies should establish clear, precise and stable rules to ensure that investment decisions regarding agriculture would contribute to sustainable employment and development. Mechanisms were being sought to foster conditions of fair competition with other countries and with due respect for the basic principles of international trade. In El Salvador, agriculture was a private sector activity, but the Government had an integrated programme (1999-2004) for enhancing the role of agriculture, with a view to job creation. The Government supported reconversion efforts for traditional producers, provided technical assistance services to increase national production, built drainage systems, established meteorological stations, set up commercial channels to market goods and encouraged the transfer of technology to improve the quality of services. These efforts were aimed at enabling producers and workers to attain the desired level of production and to enjoy permanent employment and decent incomes.

35. The representative of the Government of South Africa observed that agricultural growth did not occur for its own sake, but to meet certain national objectives. Government policy needed to balance the competing needs of producers, workers and consumers. Government should avoid the two extremes of total control or complete non-intervention. A more moderate approach would seek to ensure that the benefits of globalization reached all parties concerned. The Government recognized the unique problems faced by farm workers and had adopted legislation to protect their rights. It had also established a tripartite body so that the Government, employers and workers could meet regularly to discuss problems and seek solutions.

36. The representative of the Government of Egypt explained that recent discussions on multifunctionality had highlighted the various non-trade concerns that were linked to agriculture, issues such as food security, the improvement of rural amenities and enhancing the quality of life for the rural population. The major message conveyed by this multifunctional perspective was that agriculture should be removed from the discipline imposed by liberalization and world trade rules. In other words, agriculture was seen as a way of life, which deserved to be subsidized. The food security issue deserved attention. On the one hand, it was important to achieve some minimum self-reliance in order to meet the basic needs of every citizen, but no more than a minimum subsistence level could be ensured. It was simply too costly to go beyond that. On the other hand, there was the question of relating national agricultural production to world markets, producing crops at competitive prices and exporting them. This was a risky venture and not all segments of the population could cope with the demands of international markets. So there were some limitations which had to be accepted and a delicate balance achieved in order to develop an appropriate food security system.

37. A Worker member from the United Kingdom affirmed that workers wanted to see agriculture become efficient and prosper throughout the world, but without damage to the environment and without harm to workers. Malpractices in agro-industry had done much harm to working people and their families, therefore non-intervention by government was not an option. Governments needed to accept ILO core standards as central components and, indeed, a measure of sustainable agriculture. Governments had demonstrated very responsible attitudes towards the problems of the agricultural sector and there was much that they could do to ensure decent work. Governments could set up tripartite national and possibly regional bodies to examine all aspects of agricultural policy, including trade, technical questions and social issues. They could encourage cooperatives and provide technical support. Pesticide reduction strategies could be adopted and these would contribute greatly to improving the health and welfare of workers, safeguarding the environment and also saving employers money. There was a growing body of evidence that organic farming systems would also be beneficial to the environment and encourage employment. Organic production in the United Kingdom was growing by 40 per cent annually. Whereas large segments of the industry were in trouble, the organic sector was doing exceedingly well. Organic production provided a price premium, employed about 30 per cent more labour than conventional systems and paid better wages as well. Several European governments had already set targets for organic production and were providing conversion assistance.

38. The Employer spokesperson agreed with the Workers' desire to move away from over-intensive cropping. In a perfect world, totally organic production might be the norm, but in the imperfect world in which we lived, pesticides were needed if farmers were to combat locust plagues, fill their orders and survive financially. Yields could be somewhat lower in organic farming, and that made it somewhat of a luxury, particularly for developing countries with growing populations. Regarding earlier comments on non-intervention, it was important to recognize that all government intervention – whether in terms of restrictions on trade or protection of employment – came at a cost to the community. Some communities might not be willing or able to bear the costs of intervention.

39. A Worker member from the Philippines observed that non-intervention also came at a cost. She cited the class action suits filed by banana workers in Costa Rica and in Mindinao for infertility and sterility caused by work with pesticides. Exposure to high doses of pesticides was also causing various forms of cancer in pineapple and banana workers. The price of non-intervention was clearly being paid with workers' lives and health. How could such human suffering be costed?

40. A Worker member from Denmark described the measures taken by his Government in the 1980s when agricultural chemicals had begun to contaminate drinking water and had polluted the sea to such an extent that the fishing industry was threatened. Government was forced to intervene. It offered both financial support and education programmes to encourage a shift from conventional to organic agriculture. Without the economic assistance provided by the Government – that is, without intervention – no such shift towards sustainable agriculture would have occurred.

41. The Employer spokesperson responded to the concerns expressed regarding excessive pesticide use. When speaking of non-intervention, the Employers' group was referring to agricultural subsidies, tariff barriers and non-economic sanctions which might restrict trade. The Employers' group supported the reduced use of pesticides and, in particular, the use of pesticides in a manner which would lessen the likelihood of injury or illness. He noted that genetically modified organisms which were more resistant to disease could considerably reduce reliance on pesticides. This was one positive outcome of GMOs. The speaker congratulated the Government of Denmark on its work, but noted that since only 4 per cent of the population was engaged in agriculture, the cost of subsidizing their shift to organic farming could be shared by the other 96 per cent of Danish taxpayers. In other countries, that would not be possible. Regarding employers' activities to promote decent work, employers' organizations ought to lobby governments to carry out the policies proposed earlier by the Employers' group. They should assist in training their members and their managers to run businesses effectively, to compete in technology and to work in a globalized economy.

Child labour

42. The Worker spokesperson congratulated the ILO on the tremendous job it had done in the area of child labour. The problem of child labour in agriculture was well known and well documented. Children worked because their parents were unable to earn enough to support the household. Adult wages were undermined by child labour. Trade unions were at the forefront of the struggle to break this vicious link and to raise adult wages to a level sufficient to support a family. For their part, governments had to take measures to ensure an adequate education for children in rural areas and to move children out of work and into education. Infrastructure had to be improved, free education provided and good educational policies implemented in order to attract pupils who had left school to return. Girls were too often denied an education and this situation needed to be remedied. A distinction might be drawn between children working on the family farm and those engaged in commercial agriculture. In the latter case, a child's progress was stunted and the child might be more or less abused by the nature of work on commercial farms. In Kenya, there was a problem with AIDS orphans living and working on farms and plantations, often sharing their living quarters and being exposed to the risks of HIV/AIDS themselves. They formed a cheap labour pool, had to work in order to survive and therefore suffered terrible exploitation. Another problem involved unrealistic task assignment, which was common on sisal, tea and coffee plantations. When parents were unable to complete a task in time, they called upon their children to help. This created an indirect form of child labour. The employer could claim that he did not employ children, yet because of excessive task loading, children were involved in completing the work. Trade unions, especially those representing plantation workers, were negotiating collective agreements which contained guarantees against child labour. They were very appreciative of the response that they had received from employers in this effort. The speaker appealed to governments to ratify and implement Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 and urged the ILO to continue to provide technical assistance to those governments wishing to eliminate child labour.

43. The Employer spokesperson was pleased to express the Employers' almost total agreement with the Workers' views on the question of child labour. They did, however, recognize that in the case of subsistence farming, child labour was used to ensure family survival. It was not a question of cheap labour or a desire to exploit children, but rather poverty which forced children to work. The Employers' group supported the prohibition of child labour where the work prevented the child from receiving a primary education, could be injurious to the child's health, was immoral or indecent, or when it prevented the physical, educational and moral development of the child. They believed that the ILO should continue its important work with governments, employers and workers in developing nations to assist them in resolving this problem. The Employers were working together with workers and governments to achieve this common goal.

44. The Chairperson observed that two of the ILO's core Conventions (Nos. 138 and 182) provided appropriate guidance on what to do to eliminate child labour. The ILO should continue to assist governments which ratified those Conventions to achieve full compliance. Governments could develop and implement legislation to prohibit and eliminate child labour. With regard to the roles of the social partners, it was obvious that employers should not employ children. Beyond that, however, employers' organizations had an educational role to play within their community to inform their members about the relevant issues, to encourage their members not to employ children and to make it unpleasant for those of their members who did so. Workers had a significant role as watchdogs to assist both employers and governments in preventing and eliminating child labour. Workers were also parents and had an educational role to play as well.

45. The representative of the Government of Egypt congratulated the Employers on their precise and useful contribution. She emphasized the need for cooperation and commitment on the part of the international community. Developed countries had to make a greater effort to assist developing countries in eliminating the economic exploitation of children. Joint action was required.

46. The representative of the Government of Chile affirmed the strong commitment of his Government both to eliminating child labour and to providing social protection for young people over 15 years of age who were legally permitted to work. The Government had recently held an international seminar in cooperation with UNICEF and the ILO during which clear commitments were made to eradicate child labour, to punish offenders, and to provide obligatory schooling. Although there were relatively low rates of child labour in Chile, child workers were concentrated in commerce and agriculture. The Ministry of Labour, through its inspection services and labour directorate, had taken important measures to prevent and punish the illegal employment of children. Nonetheless, there were some occasions in the agricultural sector on which the agreement of parents to prevent their children from working was difficult to secure. It was also difficult to count on the employer's total agreement regarding the non-employment of children for agricultural work. In any case, it is a problem that cannot be dealt with through labour legislation alone. There was a need to educate parents to understand the importance of sending their children to school, so that they do not start working at an early age. Child labour was both a consequence and a cause of poverty. Finally, this delegation of the Government of Chile urged all countries to ratify and implement Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 to eliminate child labour.

47. The representative of the Government of Denmark stated that the elimination of child labour was a priority for his Government and that an action programme for a clean working environment by 2005 included the issue of child labour. The Government of Denmark had ratified Convention No. 182 and indeed all of the ILO core Conventions. In Denmark, child labour in agriculture posed a problem principally in terms of the accident rate among children, compared to the rate in other sectors. It was important to make a distinction between work as such and dangerous work, which children should never be permitted to perform.

48. The representative of the Government of India described the efforts of her Government to ban the employment of children below the age of 14 in factories, mines and hazardous employment and to regulate the working conditions of children in other types of employment. In 1996 the Indian Supreme Court had rendered a landmark judgement which included awarding the payment of compensation amounting to 20,000 rupees by the offending employer for every child employed in contravention of the provisions of the Child Labour Act. It also provided that a child labour welfare fund be constituted to provide alternative employment to an adult family member of a child withdrawn from a hazardous occupation. The Government had already taken steps to give effect to this Supreme Court decision.

49. The representative of the Government of El Salvador described the tripartite approach adopted in her country to eliminate child labour. El Salvador gave priority to eradicating the worst forms of child labour and was developing both a national policy as well as sectoral action plans. The Government was supervising the production of statistics on child labour. The social partners were participating actively in the search for solutions to the problem of child labour. El Salvador had ratified both Conventions Nos. 138 and 182. The latter was ratified in June 2000 following a tripartite seminar organized by the ILO. The speaker expressed the gratitude of her Government for the ILO's support in this connection.

50. The representative of the Government of the Philippines described a strategy being implemented in her country which is multisectoral in approach (Tripartite + +), where representatives from government, employers' and workers' organizations as well as NGOs and private organizations work jointly or complement each other's programmes to fight child labour, particularly in hazardous occupations.

51. A Worker member from the Philippines returned to the issue of task work. When work was assigned in such a way that it was impossible for an individual worker to complete it, that worker would necessarily call on family members to assist. Child labour in those circumstances did not simply arise from poverty, but from the way work was structured and organized.

Women in agriculture

52. The Employer spokesperson confirmed the Employer's group's support for equal treatment of women in the workplace. They recognized, however, that in some countries the physical requirements of particular jobs had impeded women's access to such work. These practical difficulties had prevented some countries from ratifying the ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100). Improvements in mechanization and the introduction of labour-saving devices might allow for greater access by women to jobs traditionally performed by men, for example, those involving heavy manual labour. The Employers' group supported the notion that work of the same nature should attract the same wage regardless of gender. They urged ILO to continue to work with governments, employers and workers to achieve the aims of Convention No. 100.

53. The Worker spokesperson pointed out that women in agriculture were responsible for growing, processing, cooking and serving food. They were often forced by family circumstances to work on farms in addition to their domestic tasks. The ILO report made a number of useful comments on women's role in agriculture, but had focused more on the position of women as farmers or as members of small farming households, than as wage-earning agricultural workers. Many women employed in agriculture worked in precarious forms of employment, as seasonal, casual or temporary workers. Many were excluded from employment rights because of their contractual status. The Workers' group firmly believed in equal pay for equal work. However, when most male workers were engaged on a permanent basis and most women workers were engaged in precarious forms of employment, the pay differential was difficult to resolve. The issues facing women agricultural workers were serious ones. It was vital to place women workers on an equal footing with their male counterparts. After all, any work that a man could do, a woman could do as well. The Workers welcomed the Employers' commitment to increasing women's employment opportunities in agriculture, but expressed concern that one result of mechanization might be job loss. The ILO had a major role to play in ensuring that governments ratified and applied the Conventions relating to equality and the social protection of women. Capacity building was needed among employers' and workers' organizations to raise gender awareness, to move women into leadership positions and to ensure that bargaining agendas adequately reflected the needs of women workers. Trade unions were creating structures that would enable women to be better represented on negotiating teams and encourage them to assume leadership positions.

54. The representative of the Government of El Salvador described the four fundamental pillars to ensuring equal treatment for women in agriculture in her country. These included equality of access to training and vocational orientation; labour regulations which included support for the promotion of careers; the application of labour standards; and proper labour inspection to monitor the application of existing laws. Vocational training was being strengthened to reinforce women's skills, improve their professional opportunities and qualify them for better salaries. Employers were also being made more aware of equality issues.

55. The representative of the Government of Denmark affirmed the importance of integrating the principle of equal opportunities into other policy areas. Full involvement of women at all stages in decision-making processes was very important. Women should be independent in the labour market and should have the full right to inherit land and have access to capital. Legislation should prohibit discriminatory treatment.

56. The representative of the Government of Egypt stated that the Constitution as well as national legislation required equal pay for equal work without discrimination. Recently a National Council for Women had been set up to develop the necessary strategies to guarantee equality between men and women in all fields of work and especially in decision-making positions.

57. The representative of the Government of Chile stated that gender equality and non-discrimination at work were fundamental, especially considering the value of women's work. Women were a growing portion of the labour force, which was especially obvious in the agriculture sector, where 50 per cent of the workers were women. Many women who worked in agriculture or in agro-industry were engaged on a part-time, temporary or seasonal basis. Their hours of work and remuneration were lower than men's, yet their activities were vital to agricultural production. Through the National Service for Women and the Labour Division, the Government had implemented policies to train and inform women seasonal labourers about their fundamental rights at work.

58. A Worker member from the Philippines commented on the question of equal opportunity in the light of the major domestic burdens which women bore. Equal opportunity was meaningless without appropriate support services, such as childcare. Access to resources and entitlement to land were other important aspects of equality. Mechanization was not an unmixed blessing for women. Increasing task sizes and the speeding up of machines in order to raise productivity and competitiveness had aggravated the problems of women workers. One very basic problem for women working in agriculture was the lack of toilets. There was also a problem with sexual harassment, since women were often employed in insecure positions as casual or contractual labourers. Sexual harassment was thus an additional gender dimension in the problem of job insecurity. The speaker concluded by mentioning a project undertaken by the Employers' Confederation of the Philippines on gender-friendly firms, which she considered to be a step in the right direction.

59. The Chairperson concurred with the previous speaker on the need for support services for rural women. One good example was maternity protection. The playing field had to be level if equal rights for women were to be realized. Maternity protection was an important area in which the agricultural sector was especially weak. A second point concerned reducing the vulnerability of women in the agricultural sector to both disease and injury. The increase in HIV/AIDS among rural women was an indicator of the need for action in this area.

60. The representative of the Government of India mentioned a government initiative to encourage the development of agricultural equipment that was gender-friendly, that is, which was ergonomically suited to women. She noted with pleasure the complete consensus among the three groups with regard to women's rights and child labour.

Safety and health in agriculture

61. The Worker spokesperson noted that agriculture was one of the three most hazardous sectors. He cited ILO statistics which showed that 170,000 fatalities had occurred in agriculture in 1997, out of a total of 330,000 deaths at work. Agricultural workers also suffered disproportionately among the 250 million workers injured and the 160 million who fell ill due to their work. Such rates were not sustainable either in human or in economic terms. The majority of deaths, accidents and injuries were preventable. Governments needed to shape a proper regulatory and policy framework for addressing health and safety issues in agriculture, linking them to environmental issues where appropriate. Agricultural workers should enjoy the same standards of protection as other categories of workers. Employers bore the main responsibility for effective implementation of health and safety standards, but agricultural workers' trade unions would benefit from capacity building in this area. The Workers' group encouraged the ILO to work with other UN agencies to enforce the existing bans on hazardous chemicals and to contribute to the work on prior informed consent under the Rotterdam Convention. The speaker also urged the ILO to conduct further statistical research on occupational safety and health in the agricultural sector.

62. The Employer spokesperson observed with regard to the statistics cited that no one could change the past, but all could influence the future. Any death was one death too many. All parties involved in the sector should work to ensure that the workplace was a safe place. It had to be recognized that all work carried the risk of injury, but different industries had different risk profiles. Even within an industry, risk profiles varied. In some of the more developed countries, the notion that agricultural work was high in risk appeared to be counter-intuitive. There was a prevalent view that life in the countryside was idyllic and far removed from the dangerous traffic and pollution of urban areas. Responsibility for safe work was not the sole province of employers. It was a joint responsibility to be shared by workers, their employers, and government. Accidents did not have a negative impact only on the lives of employees. Employers were negatively affected as well through absence from work, the costs of rehabilitating the employee and providing medical assistance, lower productivity levels, and the lowering of the image of the agricultural sector. The primary focus should be on preventing workplace deaths and injuries. Governments could assist in this effort by developing health and safety education, information and training programmes to educate both workers and employers in identifying risks and preventing injuries. These programmes should provide information on chemicals and the hazards associated with their use and investigate alternative ways of performing work which could reduce the likelihood of injury. Governments should provide initiatives to employers to improve the level of safety at the workplace. The speaker observed that some governments allowed the production and export of chemicals, the use of which was prohibited in the country of origin. Employers also recognized that in less developed countries, restrictions on the performance of work could impose yet another obstacle to growth. Safety equipment might be more difficult to acquire, for example, or the dissemination of up-to-date safety information to remote regions could be harder to ensure, especially in countries without universal Internet access. The best method to attack poverty was to foster growth, not to impose sanctions. The Employers' group proposed that the following measures be adopted to reduce the incidence of accidents in all employment sectors, including agriculture: research and the dissemination of definitive statistical evidence on workplace experiences in terms of safety and health; the development of national tripartite training programmes on occupational safety and health; and information sharing among different countries. Nations which were well advanced in safety and health matters could provide information to enable less developed countries to progress more rapidly.

63. The representative of the Government of Egypt reported that Egypt ranked first in the world in terms of yields in rice and sugar cane. Egypt's fertile soil combined with a well-managed irrigation system were vital to achieving such results, but credit must also be given to the abundant use of fertilizers, pesticides, labour, high-quality seeds and machinery. The application of pesticides, insecticides and other chemicals had fallen by almost 90 per cent in the past ten years', however, chemical fertilizers were still used intensively. Experiments had shown that without fertilizers, yields were very low, so phasing out the use of chemical fertilizers would only be achieved over time. A growing population had to be fed and bread had to be available at subsidized prices. Agricultural machinery was in wide use in Egypt. To minimize the risk of injuries, the Government had established mechanization centres to educate farmers in the proper use of machinery and in systematic machine maintenance.

64. The representative of the Government of Denmark stated that although workers had an obligation to comply with health and safety rules, the responsibility for providing a safe working environment clearly rested with the employers. Workers or their safety representatives should be involved when new equipment or chemicals were introduced. Workplace assessment could help to set priorities for future action. Governments, after consulting with employers and workers, should adopt rules and regulations on the safe use of chemicals and machinery and those rules should apply to self-employed workers as well.

65. The Chairperson agreed that the employer was principally responsible for ensuring a safe and healthy working environment, but workers also carried a large share of responsibility with regard to their own health. The central issue with regard to shared responsibilities was the question of empowerment. Bipartite or tripartite workplace health and safety committees could emphasize the importance of accident prevention. Since safety and health issues were the source of numerous industrial disputes, some attention should be accorded to preventing disputes. Guidelines and codes of practice on such matters as how to deal with hazardous materials might be an appropriate tool for prevention. Increasing the frequency of inspection would also be effective, particularly if employers and workers carried out the inspection together and reported on the results. Such an approach would have the advantage of saving scarce resources, especially in countries which could not afford a high frequency of inspection. It would also involve the empowerment of workers.

66. A Worker member from the United Kingdom welcomed the Employers' view that there was a good business case for occupational health and safety protection. It should be borne in mind, however, that agricultural workers were at the bottom of the earnings league, and the family's situation became dire when a major breadwinner was killed or disabled at work. Agricultural safety and health was very high on the agenda of the Workers' group. While workers were ready to accept their share of responsibility in ensuring safe work, it was primarily the responsibility of employers. Nowhere were agricultural workers sufficiently empowered to demand safe working conditions. Governments had an important role in both establishing essential regulations and enforcing them. Governments should impose sanctions for deliberate non-compliance with standards. The speaker concurred with the Chairperson's comments on the role workers could play in inspection and on the need for empowerment. He added that under-reporting of accidents was widespread.

67. The representative of the Government of South Africa recognized that responsibility for safety and health should be tripartite. Shared responsibility did not necessarily imply equal responsibility, however. In situations where workers were not sufficiently empowered, employers and governments naturally had to assume a larger share of responsibility. The bargaining power of workers should be strengthened, so that they could better ensure their own safety. Although risks might be higher in developing countries, adherence to basic principles of safety and health would ensure that growth benefited, rather than harmed, workers. The speaker noted that statistics could be misleading. Almost any accident involving a tractor or any injury reported from a rural area was categorized as agricultural, even if the accident originated from other causes than agriculture. Statistics did not show the direct causes of accidents.

68. The Employer member from Argentina added that since many workers lived on plantations, many reported accidents were actually domestic accidents. No distinctions were usually made in recording such accidents. It would be good to know the proportion of workplace accidents involving children, as well as those which occurred in commuting to and from the workplace.

Genetic engineering

69. The Employer spokesperson noted that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) had the capacity to benefit humanity. The question was not whether new technology should be used, but rather how the potential benefits might be harnessed. Genetic engineering had already yielded positive results in agriculture. These included the ability to grow crops on land which would not otherwise have supported agriculture, for example, land with high salt levels; a reduction in the use of pesticides and artificial fertilizers, which would lower production costs and lessen environmental impacts; higher product yields for producers and lower costs for the consumer; and quality improvements, such as better tasting produce with more nutritive value and better storage and handling properties. The Employers believed that embracing modern technology and using its benefits could alleviate poverty and improve living standards for all.

70. The Worker spokesperson stressed that the ILO report had clearly pointed out that the negative effects of GMOs were still unknown. The speaker did not wish to elaborate in further detail. It sufficed to say that the Employers' contention that genetic engineering would eliminate poverty was no more than fine words unsupported by any credible data. The speaker had welcomed the Government of Denmark's earlier note of caution. He questioned the employment effects of genetic engineering. If sugar were suddenly to be produced in the laboratories of the north, would the millions of sugar workers in East Africa be left without jobs? The Workers considered the following actions to be an absolute minimum requirement in view of the lack of adequate research and data: mandatory labelling of any genetically modified products; strengthening of risk testing requirements; and strengthening of workers' and consumers' right to know.

71. The Chairperson recognized that GMOs held a lot of potential, but it could not be denied that they could have serious negative effects as well. GMOs presented the risk of loss of genetic material as traditional crop varieties were abandoned in favour of genetically modified varieties. GMOs posed a threat to the self-sufficiency of rural communities in seed production, when sterile crop varieties were introduced. Finally the issue of patenting and ownership rights to genetic material had to be considered. Often the genetic material used in GMOs originated in developing countries, but was patented in developed countries, creating yet another form of dependency. This issue had to be dealt with in a just way.

72. An Employer member from Kenya expressed the view that GMOs would have a favourable impact on employment creation, since more people were engaged in the multiplication of seeds. It was important to protect traditional varieties, for example, by storing genetic material in gene banks. Suspicion with regard to new technologies could be overcome if the necessary measures were taken to protect the collective rights of the community as a whole.

73. A Worker member from Brazil stated that the impact of GMOs on the environment, in terms of erosion and genetic pollution, could in turn adversely affect sustainable employment. The development of disease-resistant GMOs could lead to the emergence of more virulent strains of disease. Finally, multinational enterprises should not be allowed to dominate this new technology and use it to exploit farmers.

74. The representative of the Government of Egypt viewed genetic engineering as a breakthrough in terms of developing new plant varieties more resistant to disease and insects. Previously perishable fruits and vegetables could now be stored for longer periods. Exports were facilitated as a result. Egypt had established a Genetic Engineering Institute which has asked for patent rights on a number of products. Such requests first needed to be approved both by the Biosafety Committee and the Agricultural Economics Institute. In terms of cost, genetic engineering techniques were usually much more expensive than traditional techniques. In terms of risks, it would take a long time before the impacts on human health were known.

75. The representative of the Government of South Africa was of the opinion that GMOs were not totally new. Selective breeding had long been practised. However, new techniques, such as gene splicing, had been introduced. As with any new technology, there would be costs as well as benefits. Governments should act cautiously and responsibly to ensure that the greatest benefits were derived, rather than condemning the technology out of hand. The ILO might monitor progress, but the main responsibility should be delegated to specialized organizations.

76. The representative of the Government of Denmark advised that the use of GMOs should be evaluated case by case. Permits should be required prior to their use. The international trade in GMOs should not imply lower safety levels. A debate involving industry, agriculture, green organizations and consumers should have high priority.

77. An Employer member from Argentina expressed the view that GMOs were not a topic for the ILO. They should be dealt with by other bodies. Global yields in cereals had increased fourfold in the past 40 years. Such results would have been difficult to achieve without genetic engineering. The speaker warned that the demand for labelling might well create a new trade barrier and further loss of jobs.

78. The Worker spokesperson did not share the view that the ILO mandate did not include questions related to GMOs and their use. Any ILO tripartite meeting addressing agricultural issues in a globalized economy could surely discuss GMOs and their impact on agricultural production, human resources and human health.

79. The representative of the Government of Romania supported the Workers' position. GMOs were an ILO issue due to their implications for working conditions. The ILO could set rules in this regard and reject problematic approaches. Workers would otherwise have to bear the consequences of any mistakes alone.

Voluntary private initiatives

80. A member of the ILO secretariat explained that "voluntary private initiative" (VPI) was an elastic term with no clear boundaries. As used in the ILO, the term VPI referred to voluntary actions which were not enforceable by law, but which enhanced or complemented the behaviour regulated by law with regard to labour issues. Such actions as codes of conduct and investor initiatives were examples of VPIs. Collective agreements did not feature among VPIs since they were enforceable in national law courts. Framework agreements concluded between some international trade secretariats and multinational enterprises at headquarters level were also of a different character. They were arguably subject to contract law, but it was still not clear to what extent they could be enforced in courts. Such framework agreements should not be lumped together either with other sorts of voluntary initiatives or with other types of collective agreements.

81. The Worker spokesperson did not believe that VPIs were instruments which could enhance the application of core labour standards. The best placed persons for enforcing labour standards were those directly involved in tripartism. Companies issued codes of conduct everyday, but neither workers nor consumers were consulted in drawing them up. They were simply attempts to reassure the public. Research had shown that while such codes included issues of child labour and forced labour, they failed to include freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. How could they enhance the implementation of core labour standards if they failed to include those important principles? Governments had to ensure that VPIs did not pave the way to privatizing regulatory mechanisms. Workers had major concerns with respect to the inspection, monitoring and evaluation of VPIs. These were not carried out in a transparent manner. Labelling initiatives would only be credible if they were negotiated by the social partners. Trade unions must be involved. The speaker's own union was affiliated to the IUF which had concluded the IUF/Danone agreement. It had been a negotiated agreement, not a VPI. The ILO had to ensure that the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) was applied and upheld. The ILO should also enhance the capacity of trade unions to participate in VPIs. It might have a role to play as well in "verifying the verifiers" of VPIs, in the interest of transparency, accountability and effectiveness.

82. The Employer spokesperson thanked both the Worker spokesperson for his comments and the member of the ILO secretariat for explaining what "private voluntary initiatives" meant and, more importantly, what they did not mean. Collective and framework agreements were not considered to be VPIs, since they were enforceable under labour law in many countries. Thus there was no need to engage in a lengthy debate on collective bargaining agreements in relation to the subject under consideration. The Employers had understood VPIs to be initiatives developed and implemented by individual enterprises or groups of individual enterprises rather than by governments, NGOs or international bodies. They maintained that the promotion of international labour standards was primarily the responsibility of governments. Consensus decisions were preferable to imposed decisions. It followed therefore that VPIs were preferable to government legislation or other requirements imposed by third parties. VPIs should not be used as a vehicle to obstruct or restrict free trade. It would be unfair to prevent exports from developing countries which did not comply with the higher standards of industrialized countries. Such a practice could be regarded as a non-tariff barrier to trade.

83. The Chairperson agreed that VPIs could never replace legislation or regulations, but he believed that such initiatives could be an important tool to promote social dialogue and could prove useful in preventing disputes. So while such forms of soft law, or VPIs, should not be disregarded, they could not replace tripartism, collective agreements or national legislation.

84. A Worker member from Australia observed that all over the world there was a general move towards private initiatives and away from legislation or regulations. Collective bargaining and ILO core standards should be protected and override private initiatives. The Employers' preference for consensus was all very well, but in the absence of consensus, what was to be done? Employees often had no choice but to accept any job offered. The Employer laid down the terms of employment on a "take it or leave it" basis. In industrial relations, consensus did not always work. Nonetheless, the Australian Workers' Union supported consensus whenever it could be achieved. The Employer spokesperson had referred to certain "third parties" imposing conditions. This was a common phrase in Australia, where employers and the Government considered the trade union movement to be a third party. Trade unions were the elected representatives of workers and must not be treated like outsiders. The ILO needed to take some action to encourage countries to ratify and apply its Conventions. Perhaps the ILO could embarrass countries that failed to implement ratified Conventions by withholding funds or attacking them in the press and challenge these countries in the international courts. Workers and their families had waited long enough for decent treatment. It was about time the ILO stood up and defended its values and workers were given a fair go.

85. The Employer spokesperson apologized for any misunderstanding. He fully recognized that Australian trade unions represented 25 per cent of the workforce. The term "third party" referred to anyone who did not directly participate in the workplace. In a bipartite agreement between a worker and an employer, the government was a third party. The ILO was a third party too for that matter. There was no intention to include trade unions among "third parties". Contracts of employment – whether collective, individual, written, informal – were enforceable in a court of law, so any discussion of that topic was unrelated to VPIs. In the Employers' view, VPIs included initiatives whereby a company might choose, for example, to announce on its labels that it did not use child labour, or to let its customers know that it produced furniture using wood from sustainable, renewable sources rather than using timber from forest tracts which were being depleted, or to say that it caught fish in dolphin-friendly nets. VPIs referred neither to contracts of employment nor to collective agreements.

86. The Worker spokesperson declared that the ILO was the organization best suited to ensuring the promotion and application of core labour standards. Collective agreements were not the only means of ensuring that core labour standards were respected, but they were the most effective way to ensure respect for standards and to improve working conditions in agriculture.

87. The representative of the Government of Denmark held the view that core labour standards should be guaranteed in legislation or in collective agreements. In Denmark the power of labelling had become manifest. Consumers had shown their readiness to pay a higher price for green products. Why would they not be willing to pay more for items produced in safe working conditions? The Danish Government was intending to introduce a working environment label, which companies could have on a voluntary basis if they maintained a higher health and safety standard than was required by Danish law. A survey of Danish workers had shown that safe working conditions were more important to them than higher wages. Companies knew that to recruit workers and sell their products they had to show evidence of safe working conditions.

Role of the ILO

88. The Employer spokesperson indicated that his group's proposals were not listed according to priority. Employers would like to see ILO action in the following areas: ILO should assess the positive social impacts of globalization in selected countries; identify and assess the impacts of mulifunctionality and the negative effects that subsidies had upon employment; identify and assess the social benefits of foreign investment in agriculture; research the positive potential of GMOs in alleviating poverty; compare and contrast the social effects of safety net programmes conducted in Asia since 1955; provide the technical assistance of experts to develop alternative agricultural employment programmes in light of the effects of globalization; and develop training programmes to assist developing countries in creating markets in a globalized economy.

89. The Worker spokesperson mentioned a number of priority areas which had arisen in the course of the debates. The ILO should promote core agriculture labour standards as a measure of sustainable agriculture. The Workers' group would welcome further research on the employment potential with regard to organic agriculture and on the measures needed to facilitate organic agriculture, both in terms of structural support and vocational training. The Workers once again conveyed their gratitude to the ILO for its efforts to eradicate child labour. The Workers welcomed IPEC projects, but noted that more research was needed on the nature and extent of child labour in commercial agriculture. As part of its activities with regard to gender issues, the ILO should provide vocational training to women in the agricultural sector, especially with regard to promoting sustainable agriculture. The Workers had welcomed the decision of the Governing Body to place occupational safety and health in agriculture on the agenda of the International Labour Conference with a view to shaping and adopting international labour standards. Better and more accurate statistics on health and safety questions would be useful. Also, the problem of the under-reporting of accidents needed to be addressed. The ILO should support capacity building for trade unions on health and safety in the workplace, both at national and international levels. It should conduct research on GMOs with regard to their employment implications and workers' health and safety. The ILO should also study the impact of GMOs on the environment and organize workshops on these themes. Research was also needed to assess the monitoring, inspection and verification procedures being used to evaluate the impact of private voluntary initiatives. Finally, the ILO should cooperate with other international agencies like the FAO, the UN Commission for Sustainable Development, and with WIPO with regard to intellectual property rights. In particular, the ILO should work with WIPO on the employment implications of GMOs.

90. The Chairperson considered the point under discussion to be very important, and cautioned against venturing into proposals for the ILO that were too general. The ILO was first and foremost a value-based organization, so its first task would be to protect and promote its values within the agricultural sector. These values were clearly spelt out in the Director-General's Report Decent work and included labour standards, employment, social protection and social dialogue. The ILO needed to conduct further research on labour standards with a view to establishing the extent to which globalization affected the ILO's ability to maintain and advance adherence to core labour standards. Globalization afforded an opportunity to make strides in social dialogue, so research could focus on how to uphold tripartism and maintain freedom of association. Social protection networks were seriously threatened by globalization, especially in the developing world. The ILO could launch a research project to examine the impact of globalization on social protection and to see how social protection networks might be improved in spite of globalization. The speaker had reserved his most important research proposal for the last. Research should be carried out on the impact of globalization on employment in the agricultural sector. Research would help bring to light the positive and negative ways in which employment might be affected in the future and the means to promote sustainable employment in the sector.

91. The representative of the Government of Chile expressed support for the Workers' proposals and those of the Chairperson with regard to the impact of globalization on agriculture. It was important that the ILO conduct as many studies as possible to provide both the qualitative and quantitative information, which would enable governments and the social partners to adopt all due measures to secure and protect employment. Therefore, the ILO should further develop its programmes of professional training and dissemination of the standards and principles pertaining to child labour and gender equality, particularly in the field of agriculture. The speaker noted with satisfaction that safety and health in agriculture figured on the agenda of the next session of the International Labour Conference. The ILO should adopt measures to provide information and training and to ensure the dissemination of knowledge on the topic of sustainable agriculture in a globalized economy.

92. The representative of the Government of India expressed support for the Chairperson's statement. One important threat to sustainable agriculture all over the world was the use of hazardous chemicals. A number of pesticides companies held free sway over the market and the farmers and agricultural workers did not know how to handle the sprayers and the equipment. The ILO could therefore assist developing countries both financially and technically to raise awareness of hazards among agricultural workers, pesticides companies and their vast network of retail dealers, to sensitize government officials as to the need for safe use of chemicals, and to support capacity building among agricultural workers. It was urgent that the ILO examine closely the state of ratification and application of international labour standards, especially those on health and safety questions, which were at the core of sustainable agriculture.

93. The representative of the Government of Denmark expressed strong support for the continued promotion by the ILO of core labour standards. The issues of subsidies and patents should be dealt with in other forums.

94. A Worker member from the Philippines expressed support for proposals that the ILO conduct research on the effects of globalization on core labour standards, but with a proviso that the "gender lens" be applied. Any research conducted would need to take into account the gender dimension of health and safety. Cancers of the breast and uterus were becoming more and more prevalent among women agricultural workers and infertility among male banana workers had been a problem, especially in the past. The speaker drew attention to the increasing contractualization of wage labour in agriculture. How did that affect women? On the question of social protection networks, it was clear that the "caring economy" of health and services had been eroded and women had figured largely therein.

95. The representative of the Government of the Philippines expressed full support for the comments of her colleague from the Workers' group. It would be useful if the ILO could document the practices so far in the area of private voluntary initiatives and their impact, both positive and negative, on tripartite processes. The ILO should study the structural changes taking place in agriculture. The study could include changes in collective bargaining, which was somewhat threatened by emerging employment arrangements. The ILO could also conduct research on multifunctionality and the negative effects of subsidies on agricultural employment. Lastly, the ILO should conduct research on the successful experiences of self-sufficient rural communities. Their independence and self-sufficiency were a vital indicator of sustainable agricultural employment.

96. The representative of the Government of Romania noted that for globalization to have positive effects, rules needed to be set and respected by all involved in the process. The ILO could play a key role by exerting its influence with respect to health and safety standards. Any new standards adopted should provide for the evaluation of risks in the workplace and should take due account of the general principles involved in prevention. The ILO could design and run training programmes for workers, their representatives and employers. Workers needed to have access to all available information on harmful substances in the workplace. Women needed to be sensitized to the relationship between their work and the environment. Child labour remained another serious problem. The speaker hoped that the ILO would continue to establish standards in those fields of activity.

Consideration and adoption of the draft report and the draft conclusions by the Meeting

97. The Working Party on Conclusions submitted its draft conclusions to the Meeting at the latter's seventh sitting.

98. At the same sitting, the Meeting adopted the present report and the draft conclusions.

Conclusions on moving to sustainable agricultural development through the modernization of agriculture and employment in a globalized economy ^[3]

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy,

General considerations

1. Agriculture is by far the largest employer of the labour force in the world, with almost one-half of the world's workers. From an historic viewpoint the sector has to facilitate the process of industrialization. The experience of the financial crisis of the late 1990s in various developing countries has underlined the need to redirect attention to the agricultural sector to ensure sustainable development and food security. Productivity gains are at the heart of this and the ongoing globalization of world economies may contribute towards this.

2. Globalization is the backdrop against which all economic issues will be decided in the future. Globalization has, in part, opened up the agricultural sector with new markets for non-traditional exports, and this trend is likely to intensify with advances in production technologies, infrastructure, transportation and storage facilities. Much of new production activities in non-traditional exports will occur as a result of increasing foreign direct investment, another aspect of globalization. The important thing is to ensure that globalization benefits all sections of the population and delivers decent work, food security, and eliminates poverty for all.

3. Historically, parts of the agricultural sector have had to deal with problems related to health and safety, child labour, and women's marginalization. There is a need for these problems to be continued to be addressed. The focus is now to meet the new challenges posed by globalization by effectively using the rapid and widespread access to information to create opportunities in employment and improve conditions of work.

4. Any meaningful advances in the agricultural sector must be based on the notion of "sustainable agriculture and rural development" with an explicit concern for secure and sustainable employment and conditions of work, based on the application of the core Conventions, and other relevant, up-to-date labour standards concerning the agricultural sector. Freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining to ensure effective participation of workers and employers in the sector may assist in the achievement of sustainable social development, and profitable modernization in agriculture. Achieving global self-sufficiency in food production should be a goal of sustainable agriculture. Sustainable agricultural practices include the use of safe nutrients, crop rotations, integrated pest management, and supporting biological diversity. Such practices are not only environmentally friendly but also capable of delivering higher yields and potentially increased employment. Protection of the environment is one of the extended roles of the agricultural sector. Safeguarding this role could contribute to the development of self-sustained rural communities. Governments have a responsibility to provide appropriate economic conditions to assist the growth of the agricultural sector.

5. "Modernization" of the agricultural sector is imperative to achieve sustainable productivity gains and conform labour practices to core standards. Security of land tenure is a part of the modernization process, and transfer of technology is a key factor. The parties should work together to reduce the displacement of labour, as a result of mechanization. Improving conditions of work – e.g. in the area of occupational safety and health – is also an essential aspect of the modernization process.

Specific issues in agriculture

Macroeconomic issues

6. Government policies for the agricultural sector have to facilitate the transfer of new technologies. This requires at the macroeconomic level removing distortions so as to create a level playing field. At the same time, government macroeconomic policies should contribute to the implementation of the ILO's objectives.

7. Part of the role of the State should be in developing the infrastructure requirements in rural areas, as well as the continuous provision of training and upgrading the skills of agricultural workers and farmers (including self-employed farmers) to improve productivity, efficiency and employability. For example, this could be provided through distance teaching. Governments should continue to provide extension services, technical training, and research on farm techniques and new inputs in developing countries.

8. A more profitable agricultural sector could be created by encouraging value-adding (i.e. more processing of raw materials) in developing countries and by focusing on high-value crops. This could result in increased internal consumption and exports. The goal of diversification to reduce the reliance of farmers on a limited number of crops could also be achieved by encouraging non-farm activities. Such activities have the advantage of being linked to the agricultural sector and of stemming the exodus from the rural areas and thus easing the burden of employment creation in the urban areas. Provision of infrastructure could be crucial in encouraging non-farm activities in the rural areas.

Social issues

Child labour

9. Many children work on farms, usually in the context of family workers. Some children work on commercial farms and, even worse, as bonded labour. This is contrary to ILO Conventions Nos. 29, 138 and 182. Children are at a greater risk of injury as a result of exposure to chemicals, operating dangerous machinery and carrying heavy loads. AIDS is an emerging problem. The loss of working parents as a result of AIDS is becoming a common cause of continuing child labour. The ILO must continue education in this area.

10. The ILO's recently adopted Convention No. 182 constitutes the minimum action necessary in the area of child labour – i.e. to eliminate children's work which by its very nature is likely to harm their health, safety or morals. The goal should be to eliminate all forms of child labour. The approach of the ILO's International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour provides a starting point for the fight against child labour and should be supported. The long-term solution to child labour will be found in attacking one of its root causes – poverty. All member States should ratify and implement Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 as soon as possible.

Women workers

11. Agriculture is the primary source of employment for women in most developing countries and women's participation in the domain of work is increasing. This, however, is a mixed blessing since such work is in addition to women's role as primary caregivers. Women are vulnerable to particular health problems in the agricultural sector and sexual harassment is a threat. Equality of opportunity is still a long way off. Considering worldwide variations, problems may be of a cultural, social, economic or legal nature.

12. Improving women's situation is necessary. Education should be an important part of this and enhanced capacity building a prerequisite. Standard setting and monitoring, technical cooperation, advisory services, and dissemination of information are some of the means of action that should be applied. The increased effective participation of women in decision-making should be encouraged. Improved technology to reduce workloads in women-specific tasks should be a part of any effective policy for gender equality. The implied selective mechanization could enable women to find employment in hitherto male-dominated jobs. Moreover, translating the goal of gender equality into practice would require appropriate supporting services.

Occupational safety and health

13. Agriculture ranks among the three most hazardous occupations in both developing and developed countries, alongside mining and construction. The improper use of machinery and chemicals is the leading cause of injuries on the farms. Lack of awareness about safe practices and unavailability or inappropriateness of protective equipment also contribute to injuries. Animal- and plant-related diseases and allergies are also common and heavy loads inflict their own toll.

14. In terms of prevention and reduction of fatalities, accidents and ill health, the basic responsibility for safety and health in agriculture rests with the employer, though all tripartite partners have their respective contributions to make to improve safety and health. Bipartite or tripartite health and safety committees could be helpful in improving OSH conditions. Other measures to be taken include:

Role of the ILO

15. A programme of work is suggested as a result of this Meeting to give it an appropriate follow-up. Globalization and its impact on the agricultural sector should continue to be researched by the ILO. Training programmes should be conducted to assist developing countries in taking advantage of new employment opportunities in a globalized economy. Successful examples of agricultural practices should be studied, and case studies of selected countries, both developing as well as developed, should be undertaken and disseminated. Better and more accurate statistics on health and safety should be collected and publicized as an aid to policy-making. Gender disaggregated statistics should be included. Research should be carried out on the effects of AIDS on the nature and extent of child labour in commercial agriculture. The work of IPEC should be supported. Further research should be carried out on the role of women in agriculture to assist women in playing a more effective role in decision-making. Vocational training should be an integral part of all this work. Research should be conducted on the impact of GMOs on employment and working conditions within the ILO's mandate. The results of the suggested programme of work should be disseminated through national tripartite workshops, publications, and advisory services should be grounded on appropriate research. The overall goal of the suggested follow-up activities should be the promotion of core ILO labour standards. The "Decent work" programme should be used as a guide to establish fair labour practices.

Part 2 Resolutions

Consideration and adoption by theMeeting of the draft resolutions

At its fourth plenary sitting, the Meeting set up a Working Party on Resolutions, in accordance with article 13, paragraph 1, of the Standing Orders.

The Working Party, presided over by the Chairperson of the Meeting, consisted of the Officers of the Meeting and three representatives from each of the groups. The members of the Working Party were:


Officers of the Meeting
	Mr. Schlettwein (Chairperson)
	Ms. Rodríguez Mancía (Government Vice-Chairperson)
	Mr. Korah (Employer Vice-Chairperson)
	Ms. Griffith (Worker Vice-Chairperson)
Government members
	Chile:	Mr. Albornoz Serrano
	India:	Ms. Nair
	Nigeria:	Mr. Ahmad
Employer members
	Mr. Hermida Martínez
	Mr. Contreras (adviser)
	Mr. Rondain
Worker members
	Mr. Bathily
	Ms. Honculada
	Mr. Melhan

At the Meeting's sixth plenary sitting, the Chairperson, in his capacity as Chairperson of the Working Party on Resolutions and in accordance with article 14, paragraph 8, of the Standing Orders, submitted the recommendation of the Working Party on Resolutions regarding the draft resolutions before the Meeting. As required by the same provisions of the Standing Orders, the three Vice-Chairpersons of the Meeting had been consulted on the contents of his oral report.

The Working Party had before it five draft resolutions submitted by the Workers' group, which were declared receivable. The Working Party amended the texts of three of the resolutions on the basis of proposals made by its members within the time limit set by the Officers of the Meeting. The two remaining resolutions could not be discussed and amended within the time limit. The Working Party recommended the adoption by the Meeting of the amended draft resolutions.

Resolution concerning future activities of the ILO

Resolution concerning women's participation in future tripartite meetings on agriculture

Resolution concerning freedom of association and labour standards for agricultural workers

Texts of the resolutions adopted by the Meeting

Resolution concerning future activities of the ILO ^[4]

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy,

Observing that ILO activities in the field of agriculture should be guided by the outcomes of this Meeting;

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy invites the Governing Body of the ILO:

Resolution concerning women's participation in future tripartite meetings on agriculture ^[6]

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy,

Observing that ILO activities in the field of agriculture should be guided by the outcomes of this Meeting,

Noting that women both as farmers and farmworkers account for almost half the world's agricultural labour force and are responsible for a great part of the world's food production;

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy invites the Governing Body of the ILO:

Resolution concerning freedom of association and labour standards for agricultural workers ^[7]

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy,

Observing that ILO activities in the field of agriculture should be guided by the outcomes of this Meeting;

The Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy invites the Governing Body of the ILO:

Part 3 Other proceedings

Panel discussions

Social dialogue: Spreading the seeds to the farms

Mr. Ghellab explained that social dialogue was a "tool" in the hands of the social partners. It could be used to solve problems in the agricultural sector, where the social partners faced major challenges. Experience had shown that no player could tackle these challenges alone. Other sectors had resorted to social dialogue and there was no reason why the agricultural sector should not do so also. However, there were certain preconditions for social dialogue to succeed, such as:

The ILO could help to ensure these preconditions were in place and had a number of special programmes for this purpose.

Mr. Jorquin pointed out that after 35 years of armed conflict, peace had been eventually achieved in his country, Guatemala, through social dialogue. If social dialogue could end a civil war between conflicting factions then certainly it could achieve results in agriculture where the partners had much in common. Social dialogue was now being practised in Guatemala in many areas, sometimes on a tripartite basis. The preconditions for success included: a positive attitude amongst the partners; representativeness; and the inclusion in the discussion of all those affected by a decision. However, the process still faced enormous challenges. One problem was a lack of credibility amongst some of the partners. For example, the ILO had been promoting social dialogue on a broad range of development issues and strengthening links with NGOs, but many of these NGOs were not representative or accountable.

Mr. van der Horst cited the ILO definition of social dialogue as "all types of consultation between representatives of workers, employers and governments on issues of common interest related to economic and social policy". The unions agreed with this definition but would have included "negotiation" without which there could be no outcome. Attempts to impose conditions or exclude social issues could not be construed as social dialogue. The most important condition for social dialogue was mutual recognition of each other's equal but different responsibilities and tasks. Other conditions were clarity of mandates, good infrastructure (the existence of bodies within which dialogue could take place) and continuity of discussions. Threats to the process included losing contact with the people represented, weakening of the content of negotiation and sterilization. Private voluntary initiatives could also be seen as a threat. The major challenge was the realisation that all three partners acting together had the power to change the future.

Discussion

There was general agreement that social dialogue needed to be strengthened in many countries and that the process must be based on trust and mutual respect amongst the partners.

Some speakers reported that social dialogue was well established in their countries. An Employer member from Finland said that 50 years of social dialogue, with good trust between the social partners, had led to the development of comprehensive collective agreements in the agricultural sector with a sound basis in labour legislation. The representative of the Government of Denmark said that his country had just celebrated 100 years of the "constitution of the Danish labour market", which was an agreement between employers and workers recognizing the right to negotiate.

In a number of other countries, procedures for social dialogue were being established or enhanced. The representative of the Government of El Salvador described how, after a long conflict, peace had been achieved and there was an ongoing process of social dialogue. Worker members from El Salvador and from Honduras also spoke of progress in social dialogue in their counties, although many problems remain. An Employer member from Malaysia stressed the role of government in setting the framework for social dialogue. Government had done this in the agricultural sector in his country by recognizing the importance of agriculture in the economy, outlining plans for its future expansion and encouraging employers and workers to work together to realize the policy objectives.

A Worker member from Romania said that experience of social dialogue in that country had not been very positive. There was growing emphasis on tripartite social dialogue, with strategies in each ministry, but in enterprises social dialogue did not really work. Negotiations were not genuine, which had led to strikes. Government decision-making bodies (who were the mediators) were biased, and decisions of the courts (which had ruled in favour of the workers) were not abided by. The ILO should be more involved in finding solutions to such problems. A Worker member from Sri Lanka said that the absence of trade unions, and hence of workers' representatives, in the free trade zone was a hindrance to social dialogue. Employers were also not always represented on the site. Hence two of the three partners in social dialogue were missing. A Worker member from Zimbabwe said that in her country farm workers and trade union leaders were currently not allowed to contact each other, which made social dialogue impossible.

Several interventions focused on the subject of minimum wages. A Worker member from Ghana complained that the Government of his country had not yet been able to establish a minimum wage and was not providing the trade unions with the information they needed to take an active part in negotiations. A Worker member from Uganda complained that her Government had signed the minimum wage convention and the Parliament had passed an Act to institute a minimum wage but the President had refused his assent, possibly because of the fear of deterring foreign investment.

There was some disagreement on the role of NGOs and other civil society organizations in social dialogue. The representative of the Government of Honduras reported that the labour administration in that country mediated in social dialogue and tried to include civil society. For example they were currently drafting a document on poverty alleviation and NGOs were included in discussions with workers and employers. An Employer representative from Uganda felt that NGOs could be invited to participate in social dialogue but they should be neutral. In his country the Government always supported the employers and there was no proper recognition of the rights of the workers, so intervention by organizations like NGOs, the ILO or other civil rights organizations was needed. However, an Employer representative from Togo questioned the inclusion of NGOs in social dialogue (which he saw as a move towards "quadripartism") on the grounds that it was not easy to determine how representative they were.

Responding to the debate on the question of minimum wages, Mr. Ghellab (ILO) observed that Convention No. 131 on the minimum wage did not specify whether it should be fixed by legislation or collective bargaining. However the parties to the negotiation should be provided with all the information on which the minimum wage was to be based. Research at the ILO had shown that a low minimum wage was not a major condition for attracting foreign investment. The ILO had helped some countries to find the right solution to this problem, as noted in the document "Negotiating flexibility".

Responding to the debate on social dialogue, Mr. Jorquin cautioned against opening the door to NGOs, a large number of whom were opposed to free trade. They were also unaccountable and could harbour extremists. If the ILO was opening up to NGOs then we needed to know who they were and who they were representing.

Mr. van der Horst suggested four factors that could facilitate trust and mutual recognition amongst the social partners: (i) care in the choice of representatives; (ii)non-avoidance of conflict; (iii) access for all three partners; and (iv) equal information.

Occupational safety and health: Protecting the agricultural workers

Ms. Forestieri de Viggiano began her presentation by pointing out that 50 per cent of all accidents in the workplace occured in agriculture which, together with mining and construction, was one of the three most hazardous sectors of the economy in both developing and industrialized countries. But the agricultural workforce was concentrated in the developing countries, as was poverty. While in other sectors there had been some improvement in health and safety, the number of deaths and accidents at work in agriculture was stable or increasing. It was estimated that there were 335,000 deaths and 250 million accidents in the sector each year, but we did not know the real picture because of under-reporting. Most accidents were caused by machinery or exposure to agro-chemicals, the long-term effects of which were unknown.

There had been less technical support for health and safety in agriculture than in other sectors. Some major difficulties were: (i) inadequate legislation (with a lack of guidance on how to implement preventive measures in less developed countries); (ii) the complexity of the work; (iii) problems of definition of different categories of workers, and (iv) demographic and social constraints. The other two most hazardous sectors (mining and construction) had a specific Convention on occupational safety and health and a new Convention was now in the process of development for OSH in agriculture. Ms. Forestieri de Viggiano then outlined some of the details of the proposed Convention and its accompanying Recommendation.

Mr. Tum noted that agriculture was the oldest occupation in the world, employing more than 60 per cent of the population in less developed countries. The creation of a working environment free from the risk of accidents or occupational diseases was beneficial to both workers and employers. When an employee suffered injury, the employer also suffered. The three social partners must therefore work closely together to get OSH in the workplace. The employer had responsibility for ensuring safety, but the employee must cooperate to ensure that procedures (e.g. for the use of chemicals) were observed and that protective gear was worn. The government also had an important role in providing the enabling environment.

The agricultural workforce lacked education on health hazards. The main hazards in agriculture were chemicals and here there was a need for more exchange of data. Industrialized countries who manufactured chemicals should not be allowed to export to developing countries without adequate information. New innovations (like GMOs) were necessary but it was important that they not harm the users. Any new innovation must be assessed impartially. There was an element of danger in everything but the main concern was to minimize the dangers. In conclusion Mr. Tum noted that HIV/AIDS had a major impact on work and life in his country. It was not specifically mentioned as an OSH hazard but it was a reality and a threat. A comprehensive approach was needed to tackle this issue.

Mr. Kangah noted that OSH in agriculture touched every agricultural worker. In African countries, where there was no clear distinction between working and living conditions, it touched their families as well. The effect of toxic chemicals was felt even more widely as the chemicals got into the soil, water and the food chain. Thus, poor living conditions, climate and other factors meant that the problems of OSH in agriculture were far worse in the less developed countries. These countries, for example, used 20 per cent of pesticides but suffered 90 per cent of deaths from pesticide poisoning. At the same time, serious unemployment meant that people would accept jobs with risks because they had no choice.

Mr. Kangah called on all present to support the new convention and ensure that it was passed at the next ILO Conference. He called also for effective tripartite structures from the national to the local level, for strengthening the capacity for implementation of legislation, for women's health and safety in agriculture to be recognized as a priority health and safety issue (and not a women's issue), and for the ILO to treat health and safety in agriculture as a special issue, similar to that of child labour.

Mr. Kangah raised the issue of protective clothing. Workers were often reluctant to wear such clothing because the requirement was imposed upon them, rather than resulting from a decision in which they had been involved. Ms.Forestieri de Viggiano agreed that research was needed into awareness and comfort issues related to personal protective equipment. Much of this equipment was designed for use in the developed countries and by men. Research was needed to make equipment that was more acceptable and more suited to the climate and culture of developing countries and to women. However, protective clothing should be regarded as a "last line of defence", the priority being to avoid the use of hazardous materials or activities.

Discussion

A Worker member from Australia welcomed the move to a new standard on occupational safety and health in agriculture, to put it on the same footing as other sectors. He hoped to see the new Convention ratified by the ILO Governing Body and by member States. Each of the three social partners had a role to play in implementing standards for OSH. The government's role was primarily that of enforcement. The Government of Victoria issued new legislation last year whereby employers could be charged with manslaughter if employees were killed at work. Other countries might not wish to go this far but the prosecution of offenders was important. There must also be OSH committees at each workplace and representatives on these committee must receive training. Trade unions had a role in research and education: his union had a health and safety department where employers came for assistance. Employers needed to realize that health and safety was not incompatible with profit. In fact accidents were costly and employers who ensured high standards of OSH could be more profitable.

Both Mr. Tum and Ms. Forastieri de Viggiano agreed that health and safety was a benefit to employers rather than a burden. However hard evidence was still lacking and research was now under way in the ILO into the costs and benefits of OSH. A Worker member from the IUFAW agreed that improvements in OSH would increase profitability. Besides, agriculture would never be "modernized" unless agricultural workers enjoyed the same standards as workers in other sectors. He called for an extended safety system with mobile safety representative schemes.

An Employer member from Mauritania suggested that the implementation of improved OSH was country specific. In his country agriculture took place along the river valleys where malaria was endemic. The poor sanitary and general living conditions weakened workers who often contracted malaria in the first few weeks. In this context it was clear that agriculture had a problem in meeting the basic requirements for the health of the population. International help was needed to support the development of agriculture and enable workers and employers to enter into partnership. An Employer member from Ghana agreed that 80 per cent of disease cases on farms concerned malaria. His company had provided canteen facilities to serve nutritious food and build resistance. Ms. Forestieri de Viggiano said that malaria was indeed an important issue and drew attention to the reference in the Recommendation to the control of endemic diseases.

The representative of the Government of Romania said that her Government had a national policy on health and safety at work. There was a legislative framework that was considered adequate for the enforcement of ILO and European standards and a labour inspection system. Health and safety committees had been set up at the workplace under a tripartite framework. However, the unions were more active than the employers at present.

A Worker member from the Philippines spoke of the difficulties of restricting the use of chemicals in the plantations in the south of the country. For example, chemicals that had been banned were still in use or had appeared in new guises, or without labels. Some companies managed to obtain exemptions. Also some country markets required stronger chemicals to be used against pests. The need for global competitiveness had led to increased workloads with adverse effects on health.

Voluntary private initiatives: Clearing the ground in the agricultural sector

Mr. Jon McLin opened the discussion with a description of voluntary private initiatives (VPIs), a relatively new development, at least at the ILO, where its Governing Body had recently studied this trend. He stressed that the ILO's interest in VPIs did not call into question its traditional approach which consisted of promoting international Conventions, collective bargaining and tripartism. This new development, however, had led the Governing Body to examine these new tools – VPIs – which could offer more flexibility when traditional approaches failed.

There were various types of voluntary initiatives, such as codes of conduct (general principles established unilaterally or with the participation of workers in the form of a charter which business pledged to uphold) and social labelling, particularly in connection with child labour in the textiles/clothing/footwear sector and with fair trade in the agricultural sector. Others included initiatives by investors who set ethical requirements for their investments or those which sought out other actors such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), labour unions and business.

The origins and purpose of the United Nations Global Compact were elaborated. This project, based on the principle of tripartism and the participation of NGOs, the ILO, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), aimed to foster universal values, including all those relating to decent work in international business.

Several examples of VPIs were given, especially in the agricultural sector (Fair Trade Labelling Organizations, the Better Banana Project and the IUF/ITGA^[9] agreement on child labour in the tobacco sector). The scope of these initiatives was still limited, freedom of association was rarely mentioned in codes, monitoring systems were not entirely satisfactory and were difficult to implement uniformly throughout the production line.

Ms. Hella Alikuru stressed that VPIs should not be a substitute for collective bargaining, which could lead to the privatization of regulatory prerogatives. VPIs were often launched unilaterally, lacked transparency and tended to overlook workers' representatives. They tended to favour the participation of other actors of civil society such as NGOs, at the risk of upsetting priorities set by labour unions. An initiative aimed at restricting the use of pesticides was chosen to illustrate this. In this case, farm workers, despite the fact that they were the first to be exposed to these substances, had not participated in either their development or implementation. To prevent this,. IUF sought to increase worker participation in such initiatives and urged the ILO to provide labour unions with the tools to enable them to do so.

Mr. Rodolfo Coto Pacheco stressed the key role played by agribusiness and agriculture in Costa Rica's economy and outlined the approach adopted by the National Chamber of Agriculture and Agroindustry which promoted social welfare and more effective social dialogue between workers and employers. The Costa Rican Constitution guaranteed freedom of association, and labour laws were negotiated on a tripartite basis. The Chamber could call to account businesses that did not meet requirements, and in addition, favoured environmental respect and protection. These voluntary initiatives – particularly labelling initiatives – however, were cause for concern in Costa Rica because they had been proven to work against the workers' interests if they resulted in boycotts and, in turn, job loss. It was preferable to lend greater support to small and medium-sized enterprises, enhance productivity, train the workforce and develop programmes to involve the informal sector.

Ms. Suzanne Vaupel defined organic agriculture as an agricultural system which favoured an integrated approach, incorporating environmental, economic and social factors. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) had an accreditation and certification system which took into account compliance with key ILO Conventions. Cooperation with the ILO might be worth considering. The IFOAM, with representatives in 107 countries, felt that training farmers and agricultural workers, developing markets and mastering technology should be given priority over their objectives. It exercised great caution, however, with regard to inputs, censured the use of genetically modified organisms and in this connection called for a moratorium to stop its spread.

Discussion

The VPI debate sparked various reactions among the participants, ranging from interest to scepticism, but, above all, a sense of wariness of the development of VPIs as a substitute for social dialogue.

An Employer representative expressed surprise at the concern caused by the codes of conduct and by the emphasis placed on their drawbacks. He stated that these initiatives had, above all, produced significant positive results in Guatemala and that they had not been designed to limit the power of the labour unions or to replace collective bargaining.

The ambiguity of the private nature of voluntary initiatives was pointed out by various Employee representatives. Indeed, while some of these initiatives received financial support from the public sector, guarantees of transparency appeared necessary, particularly to ensure that workers were actually the beneficiaries. Further, the very use of the word "private" to describe voluntary initiatives was debated because it could be misleading. In this respect, Mr. McLin stated that a clear distinction should be drawn between VPIs and government-led traditional regulatory activities.

The effectiveness of VPIs was discussed. To what extent could they facilitate the enforcement of fundamental workers' rights more effectively than the workers themselves, in particular by collective bargaining? A Worker pointed out that in Australia, for example, many VPIs were launched unilaterally by employers. But the ILO, which appeared favourable to these initiatives, was likely to encourage their proliferation. It was therefore vital that the ILO set up a body to monitor its development. Mr. McLin said that the ILO encouraged only those initiatives that increased worker participation and ensured the promotion of basic human rights in the workplace: under these conditions they were a new tool which could further the implementation of ILO principles. He did acknowledge that it was difficult to evaluate their effectiveness and impact at this point, but that the issue was currently under review at the ILO.

Closing speeches

The Secretary-General provided information on participation in the Meeting, noting that women made up 28 per cent of the total number of delegates. The Meeting had been an important landmark in the ILO's efforts to address the social and labour issues affecting the agricultural sector. Discussions during the plenary sessions and in the two working parties had demonstrated the topicality of the question at hand: the impact of globalization on agriculture. The three panel discussions had provided an opportunity for the direct exchange of information and experience on important new developments in the field. The spirit of dialogue which had prevailed had enabled the Meeting to adopt important conclusions and three resolutions. The Secretary-General highlighted the importance for ILO constituents as well as for the Office of putting the adopted conclusions and resolutions into action at both the national and international levels. He stressed that many of the areas identified for future action would require the continued contribution of knowledge and experience on the part of the tripartite constituents and he looked forward to ongoing collaboration.

Ms. K. Hagen, Executive Director (Social Dialogue), speaking on behalf of the Director-General, congratulated the participants on a job well done. The Meeting had been a prime example of social dialogue, which the ILO was promoting around the world. It provided the opportunity to develop common strategies and contribute to the identification of priorities for the Office and the ILO tripartite constituents to pursue together in the coming years. The Meeting's recommendations would enable the ILO to support the agricultural sector in terms of promoting fundamental labour standards, encouraging employment creation, strengthening social protection and promoting social dialogue. Two important cross-cutting themes were being integrated into all the work of the Organization: development and gender-mainstreaming. The challenge of development was evident for those involved in agricultural activities, but it was also vital to fully integrate the concept and practice of gender mainstreaming. These two cross-cutting themes would help to ensure that development and the pursuit of gender equity, fairness and social justice went hand in hand. Ms. Hagen recalled that in opening the Meeting, she had referred to the fact that both her grandfather and uncle had been farmers. Upon later reflection, she had asked herself why she had not mentioned her grandmother and aunt as well, since they had been fully involved in farming activities, dealing with the full range of challenges posed by rural life. She had lived in a rural area in India and had observed men and women working side by side with their backs bent as they transplanted rice seedlings. It was important to be sensitive to the concerns of both women and men in the world of work, to ensure genuine opportunities for all.

Mr. J. Zhang (representative of the Government of China; Chairperson of the Government group) stated that the Meeting had taken place at an opportune time and its results would be far-reaching. Perhaps it was due to the fact that so many of the participants had had direct personal experiences in the agricultural sector or had a family background in farming that the discussions had been so intense. Given the constructive spirit which had reigned and the good results obtained, he felt that the discussion had made important contributions to the future of the sector.

Mr. D. Hermida Martínez (Chairperson of the Employers' group) was pleased to note that the Meeting had successfully completed an arduous task. The experience had demonstrated the importance of choosing and defining the theme of a meeting clearly and correctly, given the large number of social and labour-related issues pending in the sector. He also stressed the need to respect the rules which defined the relations among the parties. The speaker noted with satisfaction that the texts which had resulted from the discussions had been arrived at through consensus; now it was time to work towards their implementation.

Mr. F. Atwoli (Chairperson of the Workers' group) encouraged the ILO to allocate more resources to widen the scope of its work on agriculture and to ensure that the responsible department was effectively staffed. Expressing satisfaction with the theme of the Meeting and the conclusions reached, he urged the ILO to organize meetings at both the national and international level to follow up on the issues discussed. The agricultural sector employed half the world's workers. It was important to remain responsive to their needs.

The Chairperson agreed that the importance of agriculture should not be underestimated. Agriculture was not simply the seeds being planted, the fruits harvested, or the profits made; it was the people who planted the seeds, harvested the fruits and earned the money that were the focus of our attention. Products and processes had to be considered, but the mandate of the ILO was to look after people and people's interests. This people-centred focus was vital to the discussion of the impact of globalization on the agricultural sector. The speaker commended the delegates for the significant role they had played in making the Meeting both successful and exciting. The Chairperson declared the Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy closed.

Evaluation questionnaire

The following tabulations show the results from a questionnaire distributed during the Meeting designed to elicit participants' views on its various aspects. Altogether 30 Government, Worker and Employer participants responded, equivalent to around 40 per cent of the total present. Overall, counting all the enumerable items (Meeting, report, and arrangements) an average score of 3.7 was obtained, or near the "good" level. The Meeting part proper (choice of agenda item, points for discussion) was rated as "good", while the panels obtained a somewhat lower score. The quality of the report and its objectivity were rated at just under the "good" level, with an overall score of 3.8 – or 76 per cent of the maximum possible. The practical and administrative arrangements scored at 4.5 – i.e. at nearly the "excellent" level. The consolidated results are produced hereunder.

1. How do you rate the Meeting as regards the following?
	5 Excellent	4 Good	3 Satis- factory	2 Poor	1 Unsatis- factory	Average score
The choice of agenda item (subject of the Meeting)	10	14	4	1	1	4.0
The points for discussion	6	14	8	2		3.8
The quality of the discussion	4	13	9	3	1	3.5
The Meeting's benefits to the sector	6	13	9	2		3.4
The conclusions	5	15	8	1	1	3.7
The resolution	3	12	8	2	1	3.1
Panel discussion on social dialogue	5	12	8	1		3.8
Panel discussion on occupational safety and health	3	12	9	1	1	3.6
Panel discussion on voluntary private initiatives	1	8	12	2	3	2.9
Opportunity for networking	8	11	8	1	2	3.7
2. How do you rate the quality of the report in terms of the following?
	5 Excellent	4 Good	3 Satis- factory	2 Poor	1 Unsatis- factory	Average score
Quality of analysis	8	16	4	2		4.0
Objectivity	7	13	7	2	1	3.8
Comprehensiveness of coverage	7	6	15	1	1	3.6
Presentation and readability	10	10	8	2		3.9
Amount and relevance of information	5	12	10	3		3.6

3. How do you consider the time allotted for discussion?
	Too much	Enough	Too little
Discussion of the report	4	20	6
Panel discussions	1	24	5
Groups	1	20	9
Working Party on Resolutions	1	21	8
Working Party on Conclusions	1	18	10

4. How do you rate the practical and administrative arrangements (secretariat, document services, translation, interpretation)?
5 Excellent	4 Good		3 Satis- factory		2 Poor	1 Unsatis- factory		Average score
6	13		1					4.5
5. Respondents to the questionnaire
	Government			Employers		Workers		Total
	6			13		11		30
6. Participants at the Meeting
Government	Employers		Workers	Technical advisers		Observers		Total
17	26		26		18	19		106
7. Delegates/technical advisers
Government					Employers	Workers		Total
Delegates		17			26	26		69
Technical advisers		11				7		18
8. Female participation (without observers)
Government			Employers		Workers	Total	% women delegates
Delegates	9		–		10	19		28
Technical advisers	5		–		1	7

List of participants

Liste des participants

Lista de participantes

Representante del Consejo de Administración
de la Oficina Internacional del Trabajo

M. Imorou Adam, Directeur de l'agriculture, Ministère du Développement rural (Direction de l'agriculture), Porto-Novo

Sra. Lylian Comelli, Assessora do Secretário Executivo, Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego, Brasilia

Sr. Marcelo Albornoz Serrano, Sub-director del Trabajo, Ministerio del Trabajo y Previsión Social, Dirección del Trabajo, Santiago

Sra. Nora Ruiz de Angulo, Embajador, Representante Permanente, Misión permanente de Costa Rica en Ginebra

Mr. Mahmoud Mansour, Director, Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation, Cairo

Sra. Elia Estela Avila, Directora de Relaciones Internacionales de Trabajo, Ministerio de Trabajo y Previsión Social, San Salvador

Sra. Carla Maria Rodríguez Mancía, Ministre Conseiller, Misión Permanente de Guatemala in Geneva

Sra. Rita Fabiola Licona Azcona, Tercer Secretario, Misión Permanente de Honduras en Ginebra

Ms. Sathi Nair, Additional Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi

Ms. Lois N. Asugha, Permanent Secretary, Federal Ministry of Employment, Labour and Productivity, Abuja

Ms. M. Teresa Soriano, Executive Director, Institute for Labour Studies, Department of Labour and Employment, Manila

Mme Mariana Basuc, Inspecteur général d'Etat en chef, Ministère du Travail, Inspection du travail, Bucarest

Mr. Aris Christodoulou, Chairman, Cyprus Employers' Association of Packers Exporters of Citrus and Grapes, Limassol

Sr. Carlos Contreras-Solorzano, Director de la Comisión Laboral, NECSA, Guatemala

Sr. Rodolfo Coto Pacheco, Presidente, Cámara Nacional de Agricultura, San José

Mr. Kwabena Darko, Chairman and Managing Director, Darko Farms and Co. Ltd., Kumasi

Sr. Dario Hermida Martínez, Departamento de Política Social, Unión Industrial Argentina (UIA), Buenos Aires

Mr. Eli Korah, Vice-Chairman of Labour Committee, Farmers' Federation of Israel, Tel-Aviv

Mr. Leonid Kozachenko, President, Ukrainian League of Entrepreneurs in Agriculture, Kiev

Mr. Patrice Legris, Secretary, Mauritius Sugar Producers' Association (MSPA), Port-Louis

M. Ali M'Kaissi, Conseiller, Directeur central du social, Union tunisienne de l'industrie, du commerce et de l'artisanat (UTICA), Tunis

Mr. Julius Peter Moto, Deputy Chief Executive Secretary, Uganda National Farmers Association, Kampala

M. Joseph Mukania Kabwe, Secrétaire général, Fédération des entreprises du Congo (FEC), Kinshasa

M. Ouattara Komlan N'Guissan, Exploitant agricole, Conseil national du patronat du Togo, Lomé

Mr. N. Nordin Hassan, Director, Malaysian Employers' Organization, Petaling Jaya

M. Cheikhany Ould Sidina, Secrétaire général, Fédération de l'agriculture et de l'élevage de Mauritanie (FAEM), Nouakchott

Mr. Christopher Platt, Executive Officer, Agribusiness Employers Federation, Adelaide

Sr. Alvaro Quijandría Salmón, Director, Confederación de Instituciones Empresariales Privadas (CONFIEP), Lima

Sr. Luis Horacio Quiroga Arrau, Secretario General, Sociedad Nacional de Agricultura, Santiago

Mr. Eduardo Rondain, Governor, Employers Confederation of the Philippines, Quezon City

Mr. Duncan Simpson, Chief Executive Officer, Otago Southland Employers' Association (OSEA), Dunedin

Mr. Dirk Sobotta, Chairman, Agricultural Employers' Association of Namibia, AEP, Okahandja

Sr. Reinmar Tejeira, Asesor, Consejo Nacional de Empresa Privada (CONEP), Panamá

Mr. Mohammed Abdelhalem Ahmed, President, General Trade Union of Agriculture and Irrigation, Cairo

Mr. Francis Atwoli, General Secretary, Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers' Union (KPAWU), Nakuru

Sr. Ramón Barrantes Cascante, Presidente, Coordinadora de Sindicatos Bananeros de Costa Rica (COSIBA), c/o SITAGAH, Heredia

M. Sourakhé Mamadou Bathily, Secrétaire général, Syndicat national de la production (SYNAPRO), Bamako

Ms. Falgunee Boonerjee, Chairperson, Women Committee, Bangladesh Cha Sramik Union (BCSU), Srimangal

Sr. José Geronimo Brumatti, Vice-Presidente, Confederação Nacional dos Trabalhadores Na Agricultura (CONTAG), Brasilia

Mr. Carlos Antonio Flores Perdomo, Asociación Nacional de Trabajadores Agropecuarios (ANTA), San Salvador

Mr. Swapan Ganguly, General Secretary, Pashim Banga Khet Majoor Samity, Pargamas

Mr. Ephraim Moses George, President, Agriculture and Food Workers (NWC), Colombo

Ms. Veronica Griffith, Research Supervisor, Barbados Workers' Union (BWU), Bridgetown

Ms. Jurgette Honculada, Women's Secretary, National Federation of Labour (NFL), Quezon City

Mr. Samuel Kangah, General Secretary, General Agricultural Workers' Union of TUC (GAWU-TUC), Accra

Mr. Barry Leathwood, National Secretary, Rural, Agricultural and Allied Workers, Transport and General Workers' Union, London

Mr. Christian Hjorth, Adviser, Health and Safety, General Workers Union (SID), Copenhagen

Mr. Cesar Melhem, State Organizer, Australian Workers Union (AWU-FIME), West Melbourne

Sra. Maria Moya, Secretaria Relaciones Internacionales, Confederación Nacional Campesina, Santiago

Ms. Getrude Mutasa, Education Officer, General Agriculture and Plantation Workers' Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ), Harare

Mr. Thamsanqa Myeza, Deputy General Secretary, South African Agricultural, Plantation and Allied Workers Union (SAAPAWU), Johannesburg

Sra. Selfa Sandoval Carranza, Secretaria de Actas y Acuerdos del Comité Ejecutivo Central, Sindicato de Trabajadores Bananeros de Izabal (SITRABI), Morales Izabal

Ms. Elena Sporea, President, The National Federation of Rural Workers' Unions (AGROSTAR), Bucarest

Ms. Theopista Ssentongo, General Secretary, National Union of Cooperative Movement and Allied Workers (NUCMAW), Kampala

Sra. Maria Martha Trejo Sánchez, Presidenta, Central Nacional Agropecuaria de Campesinos de Honduras, Tegucigalpa

Sra. Lourdes Sosa-Márquez, Segunda Secretaria, Misión Permanente de México en Ginebra

Representatives of United Nations, specialized agencies and other official international organizations

Représentants des Nations Unies, des institutions spécialisées et d'autres organisations internationales officielles

Representantes de las Naciones Unidas, de los Organismos Especializados y de otras Organizaciones Internacionales Oficiales

Mr. M. Arda, Chief, Diversification and Natural Resources Section, Division on International Trade in Goods and Services and Commodities, Geneva

Ms. Le Thi Hoai Phuong, Agricultural Programme Officer, Quaker Service Viet Nam, Hanoi

International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF)

Union internationale des travailleurs de l'alimentation, de l'agriculture, de l'hôtellerie-restauration, du tabac et des branches connexes (UITA)

Unión Internacional de Trabajadores de la Alimentación, Agrícolas, Hoteles, Restaurantes, Tabaco y Afines

Fédération mondiale des travailleurs de l'agriculture et de l'alimentation (FEMTAA)

^[1] ILO, Tripartite Meeting on Moving to Sustainable Agricultural Development through the Modernization of Agriculture and Employment in a Globalized Economy, Geneva, 2000: Sustainable agriculture in a globalized economy, 68 pp.

^[5] Freedom of association: Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No.87); Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). The abolition of forced labour: Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29); Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105). Equality: Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No.111); Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100). The elimination of child labour: Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138); Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182).

^[8] http://www.isnar.org/isnar/publications/briefing/Bp37.htm ("find in page").


Moderator:	Ms. Rodríguez Mancía, Government of Guatemala
Panellists:	Mr. Youcef Ghellab, InFocus Programme on Strengthening Social Dialogue, ILO, Geneva
	Mr. Humberto Preti Jorquin, Induago SA, Guatemala
	Mr. Jac van der Horst, FNV Bondgenoten, Netherlands


Moderator:	Mr. Korah, Employer Vice-Chairperson of the Meeting
Panellists:	Ms. Valentina Forestieri de Viggiano, Programme on Safety, Health and the Environment, ILO, Geneva
	Mr. Nathaniel K. Tum, Kenya Seed Company, Kenya
	Mr. Samuel Kangah, General Agricultural Workers Union of TUC, Ghana


Chairperson:	Ms. Griffith, Worker Vice-Chairperson of the Meeting
Panellists:	Mr. Jon McLin, Voluntary Private Initiatives Programme, ILO, Geneva
	Ms. Hella Alikuru, International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF), Kenya
	Mr. Rodolfo Coto Pacheco, National Chamber of Agriculture and Agroindustry,^[8] Costa Rica
	Ms. Suzanne Vaupel, International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), United States


Geneva, 22 September 2000.	(Signed) Mr. C. Schlettwein, Chairperson.