New Protagonists in Global Economic Governance: Brazilian Agribusiness at the WTO

Abstract

The existing international economic order has been heavily shaped by US power and the US has been a key driver of globalisation and neoliberal economic restructuring, prompting speculation about whether the rise of new developing country powers could rupture the current trajectory of neoliberal globalisation. This paper analyses the case of Brazil at the World Trade Organization (WTO), a core institution in global economic governance. In the last decade, Brazil successfully waged two landmark trade disputes against the US and EU and created a coalition of developing countries – the G20 – which brought an end to the dominance of the US and EU at the WTO and made their trade policies a central target of the Doha Round. Brazil's activism has been widely hailed as a major victory for developing countries. However, I argue that rather than challenging the neoliberal agenda of the WTO, Brazil has emerged as one of the most vocal advocates of free market globalisation and the push to expand and liberalise global markets. I show that Brazil's stance has been driven by the rise of its export-oriented agribusiness sector. This case demonstrates that business actors from the Global South are becoming significant new protagonists in global economic governance; they are taking the tools created by the states and corporations of the Global North – in this case, the WTO and its neoliberal discourse – and turning them against their originators. At the same time, their interests are being wrapped in and advanced through a discourse of development and social justice and a strategic mobilisation of the politics of the North-South divide

Governing the Global Land Grab: Multipolarity, Ideas, and Complexity in Transnational Governance

“…First, the sources of capital for foreign direct investment in the food-feed-fuel complex are more varied then before, including private investors that have not otherwise specialized in agriculture and sovereign wealth funds or stateowned enterprises from emerging developing countries. Second, current land grabs are taking place in the context of a broader shifts in the agrifood industry where deregulated global trade, financialization, and advances in biotechnology and production methods are rapidly reorganizing the sector, precipitating a decline of the relative power of traditional agrifood corporations such as Cargill in favour of retailers such as Walmart and agrifood transnationals from the Global South (e.g., Brazil's JBS now boasts the status as the world largest producer of beef) (Clapp and Fuchs, 2009;Hopewell 2012;McMichael 2012). Third, there is an upswing in interest in direct foreign investment in land as a new asset class, notably by new actors such as private and public (i.e., national) pension funds estimated to be over $US 5 billion (GRAIN, 2011(GRAIN, : 2012.…”

Cracking the nut of agribusiness and global food insecurity: In search of a critical agenda of research

“…A related phenomenon has been the rapid appearance of large Brazilian transnational corporations in the agri-food sector, such as JBS, BR Food, Marfrig and Amaggi, which are among the largest and most aggressive players in the world. Not unexpectedly Brazil has been a strong advocate of free market globalisation and has pushed for further liberalisation of agriculture trade (Hopewell, 2013).…”

GFT - SYNTHESIS - The uneasy relationship between international trade and agriculture

“…This is an open and unresolved question. Hopewell (2013; argues that Brazil and India really only have power in WTO negotiations where they are bolstering neoliberal trade practices and are not necessarily system challengers. In his paper, Kripke argues U.S. opposition to the India Right to Food program is a demonstration of it playing what is essentially the role of the guerilla at the WTO.…”

“…Others have cited the absence of space for global civil society to engage with the WTO, contrasting it against the favoured space granted to the private sector. In comparison, other multilateral institutions have reformed to formally give civil society an equal vote in decision-making processes (Desmarais, 2007;Hopewell, 2013).…”