Global Trade as a lever for growth and employment

Opinion article by: Nathalia Rios Ballesteros* (nriosba@eafit.edu.co)
Economics student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

According to the European Commission (2010) in the past few years, global trade has expanded rapidly. From the late 1990s until now, the value of world merchandise trade grew by 73%. This growth has been mainly driven by growth in incomes and demand, falling in transport and communication costs, significant increases in foreign direct investment (FDI) in emerging market economies, improvements in efficient economic policies along with the implementation of trade policies and reductions in tariff and non-tariff barriers without ignoring the increasing competitive pressures that drive the search and pace of innovation and the implementation of costcutting, outsourcing and economies of scale in many industries.

In this context, although it is difficult to make general statements about the impact of trade opening and its growth per se; trade should not be considered in isolation from national, international and global realities. In this sense, one can establish that “trade growth is not pursued for its own sake”[1]; it brings along a triple major benefit for the ongoing country: more economic growth; greater consumer welfare translated into higher incomes and lower prices of goods and increased in employment conditions – greater and better-paid jobs-.

As a matter of fact, U.S is the world's largest economy and the largest exporter and importer of goods and services nowadays, which implies an active and relevant role of trade as an important engine for its economic growth and employment market -considering that more than 30 percent of U.S. GDP is tied to international trade and investment, and more than one in five U.S. jobs are supported by trade according to the Trade Benefits America Coalition (2013)-. This is the reason why U.S. engagement in the international marketplace today, is more important to this nation’s economy than ever before, exhibiting and showing the key role that trade plays in the economic current situation of countries worldwide.

Moreover, trade openness stands as an important lever that lift developing countries out of poverty allowing them to reap and reproduce the benefits of globalization into their own economies, taking into account the strong increase in the share of this economies in the international trade flow . This rapid economic rise and increasing involvement in global trade of these emerging market economies -especially major performers such as the BRIC members- has made enormous contributions to growth, development and prosperity within these economies. As part of a comprehensive set of policies and internal circumstances, it has helped to lift millions out of poverty and spread the benefits of higher living standards through lower living costs. It has brought nations closer together, fostering mutual understanding and promoting world peace while equipping the involved countries with the necessary tools to meet the challenges carried along with the hazard of this economic activity; challenges towards jobless growth management, high unemployment, poverty, unequal distribution and allocation of resources, environment and sustainable development, and the role of trade routes as well as investment decisions in this context.

For all the above, and considering today’s climate of “weak economic recovery, high unemployment and pressure on public finances”[2], one of the effective solutions that governments might adopt to boost growth and employment could be to foster global trade thus keeping global markets open; which provides two important implications; a result and a challenge for the involved country. The result: better economic performance -trade and market openness becomes a more prevailing tool for generating better quality jobs and boosting the much-needed growth-; the challenge: to construct coherent national and international policy frameworks that seek and drive towards inclusive growth of trade among countries because “it is their design, not their absence, that makes the difference”[3].

References

European Commission. (2010). Trade as a driver of prosperity. Recuperado el 20 de 09 de 2013, de http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/november/tradoc_146940.pdf

OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate (TAD). (Mayo de 2012). Better policies for better lives. Recuperado el 17 de Septiembre de 2013, de http://www.oecd.org/tad/tradedev/50447052.pdf

Trade benefits America Coalition. (2013). Trade benefits America|. Recuperado el 20 de 09 de 2013, de http://tradebenefitsamerica.org/contact

World Trade Organization (WTO). (2013). The Future of Trade: The Challenges of Convergence. Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade.

---

[1] European Commission (2010)

[2] (OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate (TAD), 2012)

[3] (World Trade Organization (WTO), 2013)

Políticas de desarrollo ante las demandas de la opinión pública

Artículo de opinión por: Carolina Herrera Cano (caroherca@gmail.com) y David Ricardo Murcia Sanchez (dmurcias@gmail.com)
Undergraduate students at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

El conflicto armado que vive Colombia ha ganado especial protagonismo en la prensa durante los últimos meses, en gran parte debido a las discusiones que suscitan las alternativas pacíficas de la nueva política de gobierno. Las mesas de negociación de La Habana pretenden tener en cuenta los intereses de cada uno de los actores del conflicto, sin embargo no es posible pretender una plena convergencia entre las demandas de cada una de las partes.
Los principios democráticos de las sociedades de hoy han modificado fuertemente la manera en la que funcionan los Estados, es este el caso de la importancia que han ganado los medios de comunicación por la capacidad que éstos tienen de promover movilizaciones sociales. Es por esto que la opinión pública en Colombia se debate entre la crítica y el incentivo de las promesas de reparación y amnistías en el marco de los diálogos de paz. Sin embargo, ante esta indudable divergencia de propuestas por parte de los diferentes actores de la sociedad civil, hay un deseo en común al parecer innegable: el fin del conflicto armado.
El peligro que nace ante este panorama no es la confrontación de ideas como tal, sino la manera como ésta puede influir las decisiones del gobierno: en un territorio marcado por prácticas populistas, una verdadera política de Estado dirigida hacia el objetivo común se ve amenazada por sus intentos de atender las demandas meramente coyunturales de la nación. Un contraejemplo válido en este punto es la gestión realizada por el presidente Juan Manuel Santos en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, donde buscó legitimar internacionalmente su política de gobierno a pesar de las fuertes críticas que ha recibido por parte de la opinión pública nacional.
El anterior argumento es el respaldo necesario para la hipótesis de esta columna: antes de prestar atención a la opinión pública y tratar de complacerla, en su pluralidad de presentaciones, un Estado debe tomar una perspectiva tecnocrática para la construcción de una política de desarrollo verdaderamente efectiva -para este caso el logro del fin del conflicto-. Lo anterior puede ser entendido como una de las interpretaciones pesimistas de Schumpeter, donde el pueblo en general se ve dominado por la dictadura de los que saben gobernar, debido a la incapacidad del pueblo, como multitud, de decidir (Bovero, 2002) cuál es la mejor opción para el desarrollo de su sociedad. Sin importar si esta es una interpretación correcta de Schumpeter, el panorama sombrío que presenta, hace preciso matizar: ignorar la opinión pública no significa relegar el bienestar del pueblo, sino no dejarse llevar por la volubilidad y efervescencia de los deseos de sus habitantes a la hora de tomar decisiones para la consecución de lo que todos quieren, pero que no se ponen de acuerdo en cómo. De ahí, que se plantee la conveniencia de manejar el desarrollo de los países desde un la técnica, pero no sólo con base en análisis econométricos, como podría pensarse, este grupo de técnicos requiere nutrirse, además, de la sabiduría de las ciencias sociales para lograr un acercamiento, lo más preciso posible, a las necesidades de la nación.
Otra consideración pertinente para refrendar esta hipótesis es que, sumado a la separación y tecnificación de los gestores de política, no puede dejarse de lado la conciencia del orden social. Ninguna política pública, si quiere ser exitosa, puede alterar de manera súbita el orden social que le precede. Es por esto que se planteó con anterioridad que la separación entre el gobierno y el pueblo debe ser prudente, pues si el pueblo perdiese identificación con la parte propiamente política de un Estado, éste perdería legitimidad y no podría gobernar (Vid. Schmitt, 2004), ni implementar sus políticas por muy técnicamente formuladas que estén. En este sentido, es vital no sólo la conciencia de la estructura social de un pueblo desde un institucionalismo economicista, sino también sus relaciones políticas en un sentido antropológico y sociológico .
El difícil contexto social que el Estado colombiano tiene que sortear le dificulta la implementación de políticas para estimular el desarrollo, pues en su formulación no sólo tiene que asegurarse de cumplir con su objetivo principal: facilitar el desarrollo, sino que debe, además, afrontar problemas como la fragmentación de la población, la presencia de cárteles de droga y la pronunciada debilidad de las instituciones gubernamentales, al tiempo que se ocupa de satisfacer a la opinión pública. En este sentido, los esfuerzos del Estado deberían estar centrados en brindar un contexto económico y político estable, que promueva actividades económicas, alternativas a la extracción de materia prima, que generen desarrollo sostenible e incluyente (UNCTAD, 2013), en lugar de tratar de complacer a la mayoría de los segmentos de la población (posiblemente con fines electorales) en sus demandas inmediatistas. La combinación de técnica y espíritu político puede brindar el mayor rédito a la hora de pensar en el desarrollo de un pueblo.

Referencias

UNCTAD. (2013). World Invesment Report 2013.
Michelangelo Bovero (2002) Una gramática de la democracia. Contra el gobierno de los peores. Madrid, Trotta.
Schmitt, C. (2004). El concepto de lo político (E. Molina y Vedia y R. Crisafio, Trads.). En H. Orestes Aguilar (Comp.) Carl Schmitt, Teólogo de la política (pp.167-223). (El trabajo original fue publicado en 1939)

Value Chain and Entrepreneurs: causality or correlation?

Opinion article by Nathalia Rios Ballesteros* (nriosba@eafit.edu.co)

Economics student at Universidad EAFIT

In colloquial sense, entrepreneurship is usually associated with starting a business, but strictly, this definition and application goes much further and hides behind its words, a wide history and conceptual interpretation of it. The term “entrepreneur” derives its origin from French economists who first introduced the term in the 18th century. According to the Oxford Dictionary, it comes from the French word “entreprendre” which means someone who “undertakes” or “carry out” a significant project or activity. More specifically, it appeals to describe the daring individuals who stimulate economic progress by finding new and better ways of doing things. The French economist most commonly linked and credited for giving the term this particular meaning is Jean Baptiste Say. By the 19th century, Say stated; “The entrepreneur shifts economic resources out of an area of lower and into an area of higher productivity and greater yield”[1]. In brief, entrepreneurs create value.

Along with this “economic conception” of entrepreneurs, Joseph Schumpeter based his definition affirming that the function of entrepreneurs is to reform, change or modify the production pattern through various ways: “by exploiting an invention or, more generally, an untried technological possibility for producing a new commodity or producing an old one in a new way, by opening up a new source of supply of materials or a new outlet for products, by reorganizing an industry and so on.”[2] In a nutshell, Schumpeter’s entrepreneurs are the change agents in the economy.

Following this theoretical conceptions, arise the notion of value chain, which along with entrepreneurs are responsible for creating value. Regarding this, entrepreneurship and innovation cannot be fully understood without a proper understanding of the position and behavior of entrepreneurs in the value chain. Although entrepreneurship involves changes, transformations and improvements in products or services, entrepreneurial opportunities can, in fact, occur as a result of changes in a variety of parts of the value chain, thus raising the value generated by entrepreneurs. In this sense, the entrepreneur’s idea, then, may span several parts of an industry’s through the value chain; entrepreneurs are key for spreading success throughout the value chains which indicates that the presence of entrepreneurship may involve a better outcome obtained through the implementation of value chains.

"Entrepreneur" in this sense may result as an strategic element for; identifying, evaluating and exploiting undiscovered or new business opportunities; for revitalizing, energizing or renewing existing organizations in response to the perceived opportunity and for boosting the economy-innovation, competition, creation of employment through the creation of additional and new value and thus, in sum improving the general welfare of society.

---

[1] (Say, (1803, tr. from the 4th ed. 1821))

[2] (Schumpeter, 1911)

Global value chains: Emerging opportunity for developing countries

Opinion Article by: Estefanía Tirado * (etirado2@eafit.edu.co)
*Economics and International Business Student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia.

During the last couple of decades the world has experienced a trade phenomenon that consist in the expansion of the production networks between affiliates and partners all over the globe. This process has been led especially by multinational companies that seek for better production costs, better access to the necessary production inputs, diversification of risks, access to certain specialized services and between other interest, looking for tax benefits.

Though sometimes this phenomenon is considered as an opportunity for multinational enterprises to overexploit at a low cost developing countries’ human and physical resources, there is an undeniable great contribution of this process, and it has been the redistribution of value added that had been generated by developed economies for a large number of decades. Despite the fact that an amount of value is allocated within the local economy just by the establishment of an international company in the national territory, it is not enough, and the challenge comes at maximizing the percentage of value kept, taking advantage of the real technological transference and becoming conscious of the exhaustibility of natural resources so new non-extractive economic activities can emerge. By doing this, a tangible opportunity comes for developing countries to join the global production chain and generate value added, that with fair redistributive mechanisms, would have a positive impact on peoples’ welfare.
Taking into account that 60% of global trade consists in the exchange of intermediate goods and services (UNCTAD, 2013), and they are being incorporated everyday, in several parts of the world, into the final service or product, this is a massive opportunity for developing countries to integrate trade benefits into the local economies. There would be not only an increase in the number of people employed, but also, as technological transference occurs, both capital and human resources will have a higher marginal productivity, what would elevate the entire economy’s productivity and will end up in more product per capita.

Although it sounds like an extremely palpable opportunity, there are certain factors that must be taking into consideration before a country can boost development by embracing global value chains. Policies of social contribution by foreign companies, concise redistributive mechanisms and building productive capacity through educational programs that train the labor force for the technological absorption, are key factors for maximizing benefits of this kind of trade. If policymakers have this in their minds, the country's integration in global trade will be more than successful, and most importantly it will have a positive impact on the population’s welfare.

Reference:

UNCTAD. (2013). World Investment Report 2013. UNCTAD. United Nations.

Institutions and entrepreneurs: A team effort towards development

Opinion article by: Estefanía Tirado *. (etirado2@eafit.edu.co)
*Economics and International Business Student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia.

Considering institutions as a mechanism of social character that pursues order and regulation of conduct within a group of individuals and therefore has an influencing power on people’s acts and notions, it is undeniable that it has an impact on diverse areas of the social atmosphere, including people’s capacity and willingness to develop, organize and manage a business, what could be commonly define as entrepreneurship.

The order and regulation institutions pursue are based on the principle of reducing transaction costs, what are commonly defined as the costs incurred in the process of carrying out any transaction and in this case, economic transactions. When a country has inefficient institutions, as has been the case of most Latin-America and the Caribbean, where opening a business takes 52 days, 4.4 times the time it take in the OECD economies (World Bank, 2013), and the time for both importing and exporting takes the double than in OECD economies, there will be an evident disincentive for both local and foreign entrepreneurs to invest and star new projects. 

Taking into account that the corruption index of Transparency International for Latin-American has fluctuated between 3.6 and 3.4,10 being least corrupt (ECLAC, 2013), it is evident that in this region there are not only inefficient institutions, in terms of extremely high bureaucracy, but they are also immersed in a significant level of corruption. When there is such a low level of transparency, it makes it very hard for projects to reach their ultimate goals, so no matter the amount of resources expended in improving infrastructure, education, health or promoting entrepreneurship, as resources are not managed transparently, institutions lose their character and contribute to the underdevelopment of most of these countries.

In this context the beginning of an efficiency program inside institutions, that has the support and commitment of both citizens and government, is necessary to reduce bureaucracy and barriers to entrepreneurship. This process must be accompanied by strict anti-corruption policies that allow the maximum use of resources by the entire population. Upon reaching a level of transparency favorable for the economic activity, the path of entrepreneurs for driving economic development, by the new ventures that add value to the entire economy, would be extremely facilitated. 

The key role of entrepreneurs lies especially in their ability to create new value, and therefore strengthening a country’s economic growth as well as speeding up modernization, what would have an impact in both the amount of people employed and the life quality of individuals. Taking this into account, if institutions give entrepreneurs security and a propitious atmosphere to celebrate their business, both private and public sector will find their way to work together towards the country’s development, but it is extremely important to keep in mind that this can only happen in a society that is structured under principles such as transparency and respect for other individuals’ property.

References:

World Bank (2013). Doing Business 2013. Available online at:
http://espanol.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/colombia/#trading-across-borders

CEPALSTATS (2013). Statistics. Available online at: http://interwp.cepal.org/sisgen/ConsultaIntegradaFlashProc.asp

Transparency International (2013) Corruption Perception Index. Available online at: http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview

Global Value Chains: Governance and Interventions

Opinion article by: Manuela Ramírez Cardenas (mramir67@eafit.edu.co)*
International Business and Political Sciences student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia.

UNCTAD’s World Investment Report for 2013 highlights the importance of Global Value Chains as contributors for development, stating that they “have a direct economic impact on value added, jobs and income” (UNCTAD, 2013) as well as providing opportunities to build the productive capability of a country that would give it the chance for long term industrial upgrading. The WIR 2013 also highlights the risk in participating in GVC because countries, specially poorer developing countries, capture only a small share of the value created in the chain as they only participate on the low value added activities, like the supply of natural resources, and they risk remaining locked on those low value added activities without actually upgrading in the long term.

To avoid the risk of remaining on the lower part of the value chain it is important to implement policies that would enable GVC to actually work for development and the improvement of a country’s productive capability, however this is difficult due to the governance of the chain. According to John Humphrey & Hubert Schmitz governance “refers to the inter-firm relationships and institutional mechanisms through which nonmarket coordination of activities in the chain is achieved” (Humphrey & Schmitz, 2001), usually done by firms in developed countries, who are the ones that have the intangible competences– i.e. marketing, R&D, etc.- that are characterized by high barriers of entry and high economic returns that allow them to be located on a higher part of the value chain. Access to those intangible competences is tough due to those high barriers of entry that require investment, so developing countries usually remained locked in tangible activities which must follow the requirements set by the governors of the chain, that is, the developed countries’ firms.

The governors of the chain impose requirements that those on the lower part of the chain must meet in order to participate in it, and often developing countries are expected to comply with requirements that do not apply yet to their own domestic market, and this highlights the competitive challenges these countries face, with the possibility of an eventual exclusion in the participation of those markets, and makes it nearly impossible for those countries to implement actual policies that would eventually give them access to a higher value gain in the chain.

In my opinion, if GVC are to be successful tools for development, the governors of the GVC must implement value chain interventions focused on the support for development, not from an economic perspective but instead from a holistic viewpoint, by taking decisions that target the improvement of the quality of the lives of the different actors involved in the value chain and the reduction of poverty.

One of those value chain interventions that could have a positive impact in the reduction of poverty is related to the agricultural sector. There are studies that show that the growth generated by agriculture is more effective in reducing poverty that the growth generated in other sectors (Seville, Buxton, & Vorley, 2011), so it is paramount that developing countries that have a precarious agricultural sector, characterized by the poverty of the small-scale farmers, implement strategies to allow those small-scale farmers and producers to connect to value chains in formal markets to give them opportunities to actually overcome poverty, as it has been theorized that “linking smallholders with well-functioning local or global markets – ranging from local ‘street markets’ to formal global value chains – plays a critical part in long-term strategies to reduce rural poverty and hunger” (Seville, Buxton, & Vorley, 2011). However for countries like Colombia, the process of linking the small-scale farmers to global value chains is complicated, as the agricultural sector in the country has several structural challenges, ranging from lack of adequate infrastructure to lack of skills and training.

References: 

Humphrey, J., & Schmitz, H. (2001). Governance in Global Value Chains . Retrieved August 27, 2013, from Institute of development Studies: http://www.ids.ac.uk/files/dmfile/humphreyschmitz32.3.pdf 

Seville, D., Buxton, A., & Vorley, B. (2011). Under what conditions are value chains effective tools for pro-poor development?. Sustainable Food Lab & The International Institute for Environment and Development . International Institute for Environment and Development/Sustainable Food Lab . 

UNCTAD. (2013). World Investment Report 2013. UNCTAD. United Nations.

The Regional Innovation Paradox: the case of Colombia

Opinion article by: Carolina Herrera Cano* (caroherca@gmail.com )

International Business student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

The identification of strong sectors in nowadays economy seems to be one of the most effective strategies for the actual creation of a competitive advantage in the international economy panorama. In this context, the innovation has become a goal by itself, and governments are investing in the acceleration of the time response to new demands. During this week it was inaugurated the biggest science and technology district in Colombia: Medellin Innovation, a place where national and international technology and research enterprises will be based. This place was created by Ruta N, the business and innovation center created by Alcaldía de Medellín, EPM, and UNE (Rojas T., 2013).

These kinds of public initiates are created to diminish the levels of inequality, and to guarantee the access to new technologies to a higher percentage of the society. In this sense, public administration is increasingly aware of social capital improvement and its insertion (as a production factor) to the international markets. But these efforts are probably not enough for the actual necessities the nation has, as Prof. Juan Carlos López (Director of the Study Group in Business History) argues, in Colombia the processes needed to actually take advantage from innovation were not well developed, as a example: the agriculture sector was not good enough to guarantee the later process of industrialization.

At this point it is useful to analyze the situation that Christine Oughton, Mikel Landabaso, and Kevin Morgan present in The Regional Innovation Paradox. These authors refer to inequality in terms of innovation policy and industrial policy, especially in developing countries, where they find a contradiction: “between the comparatively greater need to spend on innovation… …and their relative lower capacity to absorb public funds” (Oughton, Landabaso & Morgan, 2002: 98). The lack of coordination between industrial and technological investment, and an appropriate agricultural policy is a good example of this paradox in Colombia. The government must be aware about how society actually receives these incentives, and how they generate value in a sustainable and inclusive way.

The purpose of this analysis is not to only criticize how innovation policies are been undertaken, but to highlight the need to coordinate industrial policies with the real processes in which the Colombian society is. Of course, nowadays countries are looking for better positions in innovation and competitive rankings around the world, but the Colombian government cannot pretend to reach the same goals by the same means. Economic, historical, and social background need to be well understood when designing the national strategies. Public initiatives like the establishment of a science and technology district must promote both the access to new technologies, and its absorption by the civil society.

References

Rojas. T, J. F. (2013). “Medellín Innovation” se llamará distrito tecnológico. El Colombiano, Available in: http://www.elcolombiano.com/BancoConocimiento/M/medellin_innovation_se_llamara_distrito_tecnologico/medellin_innovation_se_llamara_distrito_tecnologico.asp. (September 12, 2013).

 Oughton, C. , Landabaso, M. & Morgan, K. (2002). The Regional Innovation Paradox: Innovation Policy and Industrial Policy. The Journal of Technology Transfer. Vol. 27(1), pp. 97-110.

Colombia: A country where everything happens and nothing ever happens

Opinion article by: Catalina Tamayo Posada* (ctamayo8@eafit.edu.co) 

Economics students at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

If you think about it you will realize that it is actually true. Some many things happen in this magnificent land but we, the Colombians, do nothing about it. It is not necessary to go back in time to see that indifference has always been part of our culture. For instance, the agricultural strike.  For almost 3 weeks Colombian farmers and workers from different sectors have been protesting against the Government because of the lack of policies that can protect them and their products. A lot of people argue that all of these protests are only because of the free trade agreements (FTA), but they are not. The problem in Colombia, as I said before, is the enormous absence of policies that can protect and stimulate our own products.

This whole situation has made me ask myself, why don’t we pay attention to the agriculture sector if, for a country like Colombia with all the resources we have, truly investing in it can actually make us more competitive?

Prof. Juan Carlos López Díaz (Universidad EAFIT)

In a conversation with Prof. Juan Carlos Lopez (Director of the Study Group in Business History), we could evidence that this problem has always been there but less has been done to try to solve it, this is what I call indifference. He spoke about what he denominates the three stadiums of industrialization which are the pre-industrialization, the industrialization and the post-industrialization. The first stadium refers to the period where gathering resources from coffee growers and traders established the basis for the industrialization. In addition to this, the war of a thousand days forced the creation of new industries such as the textiles, foods and brewers. All of these circumstances led to the second stadium, which denotes the time of the actual industrialization that is the change from the agriculture to the manufactures. For so long Antioquia was the leader region in terms of industrialization, but after the Second World War and because of issues such as the centralization of the country and the narco-terrorism situation, many companies emigrated to the capital, Bogota, and to Cali. And finally, the services sector is what Prof. Juan Carlos Lopez Díez may call the third stadium. This sector has gained a huge importance because almost all the products require the services sector in one or more ways. In the Colombian case, I think that, in a rush to be as industrialized as other countries, we changed so fast to the manufactures that we did not give the primary sector enough time to fully develop and left it completely forgotten.

What is done is done and there is nothing that we can do to change the past, but it is possible to do something to have a brighter future. It is necessary, and fair, to focus on what we think can make us more competitive. Personally, I do not think that is a matter of choosing whether centering on the agro or the industries. It is about making them work out together, creating value chains, especially on the areas that Colombia has strength on, for example coffee, oil, mining, bananas and flowers.
In conclusion, I would like to say that in order to achieve this enormous goal, we must do an giant effort to invest in technology, infrastructure and education, make more technical the crops in order to be more efficient, reinforce our institutions, and create fair policies that can benefit our farmers. This way we can fully compete in global markets and make our economy grow.