By Mario Steta, IBO Chairman

With the first Editorial reflecting on trade, I did not expect to be touching on this particular topic again so soon. As I write this column it is no doubt too early to visualize the reality of impact of the tariff measures that were to come into effect February 4°, and that have been differed this morning for a month in the case of Mexico and which will likely also be differed for Canada.  It is difficult to understand what lies behind the position and decisions of President Trump and the United States government, the possible short and mid-term consequences, and who really wins anything within the agricultural sector for the application of this measures. If there is one economic activity that clearly reflects the benefits of proper free trade is agriculture, with the flow of goods between the USA, Canada and Mexico being one of the best global examples, and with gains and loses within each of the countries.

As has been mostly the case, decisions of this nature end up being paid by someone, and that someone will no doubt be consumers within the USA, but also in other countries. Consumers that have benefited from year-round access to fruits and vegetables, which has helped increase consumption and bring some level of price stability. Impact will be felt also beyond North America, as Mexican and Canadian producers look for other markets, with other blueberry producer countries having access to the USA, like Peru, Chile and Morocco likely having short-term gains. How this could benefit blueberry growers within the USA is something likely still not fully visible as it will depend on how long tariffs remain in place.

Impact will also be felt beyond fresh berries or overall fresh produce, as levies will likely be applied by Canada and Mexico into frozen foods, a concern expressed by American Frozen Food Institute, or orange juice and many other food items.

Companies are working intensely now to determine impact, strategies to define how to minimize and absorb the 25% increase, and a prudent way to express a position on this extreme situation.

Since its formation, IBO has stood for open and fair free trade, for dialogue between producing countries, for sharing information and working proactively to solve issues and differences, and for how to jointly serve our global consumers. By doing this, we have also supported efforts within the produce community in which the gain of one part cannot, should not, be a loss for another, even considering the dynamics and natural volatility of our sector.

Since the early 1990’s when I started my professional activities within the greenhouse sector, I have been witness of the benefits of free trade, and what the original NAFTA generated in access to inputs and technology, improvement of food safety and labor standards, gains in efficiencies and competitiveness and the benefits to consumers in the three countries. Above all I had the opportunity to see how investments into production by growers from the three countries into the USA, Canada and Mexico, generated a unique community with shared ideas, intents and realities. An agricultural community that clearly needs to continue to recognize mistakes, issues and opportunities to improve, but that if at any time needs to stay united and cohesive, it is today.

As always, your thoughts and suggestions are more than welcome,

Mario Steta.