The Global Economy and which swim together with schools of Democracy: the Tuna-Dolphin tuna. Once located, the dolphins and Controversy Revisited the tuna are encircled with nets and captured. In this process a large number of tunas are caught, but also Alessandro Bonanno· many dolphins die suffocated in the and nets. This environmentally dangerous Douglas H. Constance• practice became illegal in the United States after the adoption of the Marine Mammal Protection Act Introduction (MMPA) of 1972. In the last twenty five years, this act has been modified The dolphin-tuna controversy a number of times to establish very emerged as one of the most important stringent requirements for the tuna battles fought and won by the fishing industry. Indeed, the victory of environmental movement. Its the environmental movement implications at the social, economic consisted of the fact that in the and political levels touched a large United State in order to sell tuna variety of subjects and institutions commercially, it must be caught with world wide. Indeed, it was its global techniques other than the purse­ dimension which differentiated this seine encirclement. Only in this case case from other contemporary tuna could gain the commercially instances of environmental struggles required label of "dolphin-safe". (e.g., Bonanno and Constance 1996). Opposition to the MMPA led to The last few years have been charac­ the signing of the Panama Declaration, terized by renewed activities con­ a twelve nation international agree­ cerning the fishing of tuna by setting ment which allows the use of the on dolphins. This very profitable and purse-seine technique and redefines highly productive technique is called the concept of "dolphin-safe" tuna. In purse-seine fishing and involves this case, only tuna which is caught visual contact with groups of dolphins while dolphins are actually killed is

lnlemalional Jouma/ of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Rellista lntemalirmal de Sociologia sobre Agricultura y A/imentos VoJ_ 7198 67 banned from commercial use. movements view the Panama Declara­ Observers on board fishing vessels tion as a compromise and possible are in charge of determining which solution to the long standing dispute catch is condemned. The Panama between environmentalists and Declaration mandates that the Unites workers in the tuna industry. The States changes its domestic legisla­ latter considered the banning of the tion (e.g., the MMPA} to accommodate purse-seine technique as the primary these new requirements. cause for the crises which affected The paper explores the context tuna boats and canneries in the U.S. and implications of the signing of and Latin America after the imple­ Panama Declaration and the actions of mentation of MMPA. Labor charged the major actors involved in the case. the environmentalists with disrupting It is argued that the Declaration their livelihood for the exaggerate represents a pro-transnational protection of dolphins. corporations (TNCs) action as it favors The paper is also concerned with the strategies and interests of this the implications that the signing of segment of the tuna industry. It also the Panama Declaration has for indicates that TNCs were able to democracy. According to significant enlist the support of the U.S. segments of the literature on global­ Government m this project. The ization (e.g., Danley 1994; Harvey Clinton Administration has been very 1990; Reich 1991; Spybey 1996), supportive of the reform of MMPA. In democratization processes have been this respect, the case can be viewed hampered by the ability of TNCs to as an example of the vitality of the by-pass nationally based legislation. nation-State in the global economy This phenomenon, it is contended, but also of its subordination to the devalues decision-making processes class project of TN Cs. which involve subordinate segments Support of pro-TNC stands also of society. Because of this re­ comes from segments of the environ­ definition of democratic free spaces in mental movement and labor. In the society, the restructuring of the global paper we argue that these two order requires attention and moni-

68 /n/emational Joumal cf Sociology of Agricu/1.ura and Food-Revista lntemalional de Socio/ogla sobra Agriculture y AJ1mentos Vol. 7198 toring. The paper illustrates that the has been studied is reflected in environmental movement is split into various and contradictory interpreta­ two groups and that only one of these tions characterizing relevant litera­ two fractions retains the original anti­ ture. Some authors underscore the purse-seine posture. This change has homogenizing character of the new been interpreted as the subordination global order. In many instances, of the environmental movement to the emphasis is placed on emerging hegemonic project of TNCs. The common cultural characteristics dominance of pro-TNC discourses is forged by the advancements in interpreted to indicate that under technology, cybernetics and the globalization the contested terrain is diffusion of media delivered messages redefined in terms that restrict (e.g., Featherstone 1990; Giddens democratic free spaces. Simultane­ 1994; Robertson 1992). In other ously, it is argued that TNCs' actions views, globalization is understood in are not free of contradictions. The terms of the rupture of institutional requirement of capital realization and structures which allowed the that of broader forms of coordination fragmentation of life and politics and can limit the power of TNCs and open the recomposition of links and possibilities for resistance by solidarities which transcends subordinate groups. In this respect established national and/ or cultural we conclude that despite the growing enclaves (e.g., Beck 1995; Lash and power of TNCs and the limiting of Uny 1994). In this context, democ­ democratic spaces, conditions for racy becomes highly problematized. resistance still exist. The exhaustion of traditional structures eliminates established Globalization and Democracy channels for the development of democratic discourses and creates The globalization of the economy the condition for a struggle fi:Jr and society is arguably one of the democracy (Beck 1995). Simultane­ most debated topics in today's social ously, new avenues for democratic sciences. The impetus with which it discourses emerge outside the

lnlema/ionaJ Journal of Sociology of Agticulture and Food-Revis/a lnlemational de Soc/o/ogia sobre Agrfcultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 69 sclerotized paths of traditional Emphasizing economic dimen­ politics. This "subpolitics" contains sions, other accounts point to the the elements for the establishment of renewed possibilities of growth that democracy from below through the globalization entails. They speak of revitalization of participatory and globalization in terms of the elimina­ inclusionary strategies {Giddens tion of barriers to the circulation of 1994). Though centered on local commodities and capital and the efforts for the satisfaction of local reduced willingness of nation-States needs, it entails global links as the to impose restrictions to this free flow interconnection of today's social of resources (e.g., Fukuyama 1992; phenomena does allow the provin­ Kindleberger 1986). In these views, cialization of politics. As Anthony globalization often assumes a positive Giddens points out, there are connotation as it is opposed to state " ... shared values that come from a regulated economic policies centered situation of global interdependence, on obsolete Keynesian economic organized via the cosmopolitan strategies. Echoing calls of nee-liberal acceptance of difference. A world with theorists (Friedman 1982), these no others in one where - as a matter accounts present conservative views of principle - we all share common in which the unrestricted global interests, just as we face common market is considered the force able to risks" (Giddens 1994:253). To be produce new energies to overcome the sure, these theorists are interested in exhaustion of post World War II substantive democracy. This is the growth models. Primary agents of this system through which substantive process of economic revitalization are participation m decision-making TNCs (e.g., Rubner 1990). TNCs have processes is established for broader been able to fuse economic efficiency segments of society and in which with a vision for growth and markets these groups can address their social, expansion. Because of their scope political and economic needs (Beck and organizational capabilities, they 1995). do not require governmental support which, in tum, frees corporate and

70 lntemational Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food•Revista mtemalkmal de Sociologla sabre Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 individual resources which are no 1990; Reich 1991). For the majority of longer drained away from the them, globalization represents the economic circles (K.indleberger 1986). synthesis of attempts of corporate Progressive accounts also pro­ groups and their allies to respond to duce positive views of globalization. inroads made by subordinate groups. According to these works, the In this context, globalization, above dissolution of post World War Two all, indicates the flexibility of TNCs to socio-economic models has been bypass situations (rigidities) which replaced with new and much more favor social groups such as labor and flexible forms of accumulation (e.g., minorities, as well as alternative Piore and Sable 1984; Hirst and views such as those supported by the Zeitlan 1991). Flexibility indicates the environmental movement. In these ability of capital and labor to maneu­ accounts, the enhancement of global ver with renewed freedom in produc­ arrangements produces renewed tion and distribution spheres. New economic opportunities for the upper arrangements emerged whose positive classes in a context in which eco­ effects are felt at various levels; for nomic polarization, the shrinking of example, the alienated character of the middle class, and attacks on the earlier forms of capitalism is now welfare state characterize the replaced by a system with much more reorganization of the world order inclusive capacities. Democracy, (Mishel and Bernstein 1993; Strobel therefore, is enhanced as participa­ 1993). Despite some accounts which tory and decentralizing mechanisms describe TNCs as endowed with allow the involvement of broader unchallengeable powers (e.g., varieties of actors in the production of McMichael 1996), the globalization of social life. the economy and society is generally Despite these views, works gen­ viewed as a contested terrain in erated with the progressive camp which TNCs are dominant actors, yet have been overtly susp1c10us of their actions encounter resistance for assumed democratization processes a variety of groups {e.g., Bonanno et triggered by globalization (e.g, Harvey al. 1994; Lash and Urry 1994). The

lntemafional Joumal of Socio/0{/y of Agriculture and Food-Ravista lntemationaJ de Socio/og/a sobra Agricu/lura y A/imentos Vol. 7198 71 struggle for democracy, in these McMichael 1989; Heffernan and views, is a central concern. Sharing Constance 1994; Rieff 1993). Another the same disconcert of writers who group of authors explored the issue of underscore that the crisis of estab­ democracy in terms of the North­ lished institutions left traditional South relationship. Here attention is forms of democracy questionable, paid to the consequences that the these authors document the manners creation of global circuits has for the in which TNCs and their opponents enhancement of processes of democ­ attempt to shape social, economic ratization and socio-economic growth and political institutions. in developing nations (e.g., Liam.bi In the area of Sociology of Agri­ 1994, Llambi and Gouveia 1994: culture and Food, the concern over Marsden et. al 1996). Finally, a the crisis of democracy in the global variety of authors focused on the context has taken a variety of forms. relationship between democracy and For example, some authors focused social movements in the global on the limits that the expansion of context (e.g., Buttel 1992; Marsden global arrangements brings to 1994; Bonanno and Constance 1996). democracy within institutions such as Resistance to global powers and science, technology and research and attempts to democratize social instruction centers (e.g., Busch 1994; relations are the foci of these works. Busch et al. 1991). Others pointed Simultaneously, they offer analyses of out the existence of the de­ instances in which corporate actors' democratization patterns associated flexibility and hyper-mobility limit with the various aspects of food democratic spaces. production. The centralization of The case study presented in the decision-making processes and following pages contains insights control of resources as well as the which can be employed to address seduction generated by the expansion some of the issues dealt with in these of market options, it is claimed, debates. It is the continuation of a eliminate free spaces (e.g., Friedland struggle for the maintenance of 1994; 1995; Friedmann and democratic spaces which directly

72 International Journal cf Sociology of Agriculture and Focd-Revista /ntemarional de Sociclcgia sabre Agriculrura y Alimenlcs Ve/. 7198 pertains to the issues of the protec­ Historical Background tion of the environment and economic development. In many fundamental In the Eastern Tropical Pacific ways, it represents a test of the ability {ETP), a stretch of ocean that reaches of new social movements to lead the from California to Chile and extends struggle for democracy. But it also is about 700 miles west into the Pacific, an indication of the type of opposition dolphins swim above schools of tuna. that these efforts encounter in the In the 1950s this natural habit was global economy and society. capitalized on by tuna fishermen as they began using immense purse­ The Case seine nets that encircled the dolphin herd and then pulled tight like an The case proceeds m three enormous draw-string purse. Huge parts. First some background on the catches of valuable yellowfin tuna tuna-dolphin controversy is presented generated enormous profits for the to provide a historical context to tuna fishermen and tuna processing interpret the implications of the new firms. At this time, fishing crews did developments to this case. Next, the not work to help dolphins, turtles, specifics of the Panama Declaration and other marine life to escape from are presented. Then, the main body of these nets. Accordingly, since 1959, the case delineates the competing about 6-7 million dolphins (depending discourses regarding the necessity on whose numbers are used) drowned and implications of the Panama in the nets. Declaration. First the view from Latin In the late 1960s and early America is presented. Then the views 1970s, public outrage over the from the U.S. in support of, and in slaughter of dolphins to hruvest tuna opposition to, the Panama Declaration brought about the passage of the are presented. The competing Marine Mammal Protection Act of discourses from the U.S. focus on two 1972 (MMPA) which mandated that arenas: the political and the environ­ dolphin deaths associated with tuna mental. fishing be brought down to "insignifi-

lnl&malional Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lnlema/ional de Socio/ogia sobre Agricu/lura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 73 cant levels approaching O". For the dolphins killed by U.S. tuna fisher­ next 20 years the environmentalist men had been greatly reduced, but coalition that secured the passage of still in 1986 over 100,000 dolphins MMPA used their allies in the still died in the purse-seine nets, legislative and judicial branches of almost all of them accounted for by the U.S. Government to try to enforce tuna boats under foreign flags. the intent of the law and the tuna In the late 1960s and 1970s industry used their allies in the tuna processing companies vertically executive branch to stall its imple­ integrated through the development mentation (see Bonanno and Con­ of long term contracts with tuna stance 1996). fishermen or by owning their own In the 1970s and 1980s many boats to guarantee product for their Latin American countries rapidly processing plants, Because of MMPA expanded their tuna fishing fleets and and the increasing necessity for U.S. processing capacities to take advan­ based tuna firms to source ""dolphin­ tage of the new lucrative purse-seine safe"" tuna, the firms reversed this technology and thereby service the trend towards vertical integration, U.S. market, the largest in the world. sold their tuna boats, discontinued Indeed, as a result of MMPA, much of their long-term contracts, and the U.S. tuna fleet reflagged under sourced their product on the interna­ Latin American and other flags to tional spot market. Also, because of avoid the restrictions associated with MMPA, almost all of the remaining MMPA. These restrictions included U.S. fleet moved their operations to the adoption of new technologies the Western Pacific where tuna and such as the "backdown procedure" dolphin do not associate with each and the "medina panel" as well as the other as regularly. At the same time, requirement for U.S. tuna vessels to two of the three largest U. S. based have an onboard observer to docu­ firms sold their tuna operations to ment the number of dolphin deaths Asian firms. In 1988, Ralston Purina associated with the tuna fishing. By sold its Van Camps "Chicken of Sea" the mid-l 980s the number of operations to Mantrust of Indonesia

74 International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-.f?evista International (le Sociologia scbre Agr1Cultura y Alimen/os Vol. 7198 and in 1989 Pillsbury sold its and Mantrust's Chicken of the Sea, "Bumble Bee" brand to Unicord of the BIG 3 tuna processors announced Thailand. Heinz's "Star Kist" brand, that they would only accept "dolphin­ the world's largest tuna company, safe" tuna for processing. Second, remained U.S.-owned. with the help of a supportive judge, During the 1970s the Inter­ the environmentalist coalition American Tropical Tuna Commission obtained an embargo on all tuna that (IA TTC) became increasingly involved was not proven to be "dolphin-safe". in trying to resolve the tuna-dolphin This embargo affected the nations of controversy. The IATTC is a non­ Mexico, Venezuela, Ecuador, and governmental organization made up Vanuatu. Third, these four countries of the tuna fishing countries that fish filed a complaint with the General the ETP. In 1988 the IA'ITC began to Agreements on Tariffs and Trade staff observers on the foreign tuna (GATT now WTO or World Trade boats to document the dolphin kills. Organization) that the U.S. law was This was necessary because the 1984 unfair "environmental" (or green) and 1988 amendments to MMPA trade protectionism and should be required that for foreign countries to overruled. And fourth, through the import tuna into the U.S., they had to work of Senator Barbara Boxer (D.­ prove that their dolphin kill rates Calif.) and others, the Dolphin were no more than 1.25 times that of Protection Consumer Information Act of the U.S. fleet. The adoption of the 1990 was passed which defined backdown procedure and medina "dolphin-safe" as being tuna that was panels were also suggested as part of not caught through the technique of this voluntary program sponsored by encircling dolphins with purse-seine the IA'ITC. nets and legislated that only such In 1990 four events took place tuna could bear the label "dolphin­ that set the stage for the later signing safe" and only "dolphin-safe" labeled of the Panama Declaration. First, tuna could be sold in the U.S. beginning with Heinz, and quickly In 1991, the Bush Administra­ followed by Unicord's Bumble Bee tion tried to utilize bilateral negotia-

International Jouma/ of SocioJogyof Agriculture and Foocl-Revlsta tntemalional de Sociologia sobre Agricultura y A/imenlos Vol. 7198 75 tions to resolve the ongoing contro­ supportive judge, secured a second versy. Because the North American embargo to stop "tuna laundering" Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was through third party countries. The being negotiated, the Bush Admini­ second embargo initially affected stration did not want negative many countries in Latin America, publicity regarding environmental Europe, and Asia. Several European issues such as the tuna-dolphin countries along with Thailand again controversy. Indeed, the administra­ appealed to the WTO arguing that the tion did not want to be seen as embargo was unfair trade protection­ committing "environmental backslid­ ism. In 1994 the WTO again ruled in ing'' and the implications of a WTO their favor. The WTO also stated that ruling in favor of Mexico would reveal the controversy should be resolved that the NAFTA economic treaty via an international forum if possible. threatened democratically instituted Once again, bilateral and multi-lateral laws such as MMPA in the U.S. In agreements between the U.S. and the 1991 the WTO ruled in favor of petitioning countries were attempted Mexico and stated that a product but failed. One such attempt was the could not be embargoed because of IATTC sponsored La Jolla Agreement the way it was produced. Because of of 1992 which formalized the the NAFTA negotiations, the U.S. voluntary program of on-board requested that Mexico not press for observers and dolphin protection the enforcement of the WfO ruling techniques on foreign tuna vessels. but again promised to try to resolve Environmentalists groups welcomed the disagreements by getting the U.S. the IATTC efforts but did not accept laws changed which would then allow them as an adequate guarantee of those countries to import their tuna. continued dolphin protection. Also, The Bush Administration was not the International Dolphin Conservation successful in bringing about this Act of 1992 which would have placed agenda. a 5-year moratorium on purse-seine In 1992 the environmentalist tuna fishing and included severe coalition, again through the help of a trade sanctions on violating nations

76 lnlemationa/ Joumal of Sociology of Agrir:ullure and Food-Revis/11 lntemat/ona/ de Soclologia sobre Agrir;ullura y Alimentos Vol. 7.1l8 was passed in the U.S. but never states who have initiated steps to signed by the governments of Mexico become members. and Venezuela. 3) that a change in the labeling of canned tuna as "dolphin-safe" be The Panama Declaration made to mean that such term may not be used for any tuna caught in On October 4, 1995 the Panama the eastern Pacific Ocean by a purse­ Declaration was signed by the seine vessel in a set in which a governments of Belize, Columbia, dolphin mortality occurred as Costa Rica, Ecuador, France, documented by observers. Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Spain, Written support for these legis­ USA, Vanuatu, and Venezuela. The lative changes to accommodate the 12 governments promised to formalize Panama Declaration was provided by by January 31, 1996 this binding five mainstrerun environmental legal instrument that would incorpo­ organization: the Center for Marine rate numerous changes to the Conservation, the Environmental resolutions adopted by the IAITC Defense Fund, Greenpeace, the concerning the regulation of the National Wildlife Federation, and the tuna/ dolphin fishery since 1992. To World Wildlife Fund. The Clinton accomplish this task, U.S. law in the Administraticn and prominent form of the MMPA of 1972 and 1988 conservative members of Congress needed to be changed as follows also supported the Declaration. These (Felando 1995): environmental groups pledged to 1) the existing primary and sec­ work with the foreign governments ondary embargoes be lifted for tuna and the U.S. Congress to bring about caught in compliance with the La the final ratification of the Panama Jolla Agreement as modified by the Declaration but they noted that it was Panama Declaration. a significant challenge to obtain the 2) the access to the U.S. market legislative changes in U.S. law before be opened to tuna from states who the proposed January 31, 1996 are members of the IATTC and from deadline (Blum 1995; Felando 1995;

lnlema/ional Journal of Sociology of Agriculture anr:J Food..Ravista International r:Je Sociologia sobre Agrlcu//ura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 77 Fiore 1995). This concern was based The Panama Declaration sub­ on the fact that just before the stantially modified this program to signing of the Declaration in Panama include a total annual mortality that on October 4, on October 2 four does not exceed 5,000 dolphins that members of the U.S. Congress, two is to be used to determine the Congressmen and two Senators, mechanism for issuing mortality wrote a strong objective to the limits. Further modifications include Declaration to President Clinton. promises by participating govern­ Although this objection did not ments to establish a new per-stock, influence President Clinton to change per-year cap that would be adjusted his stance away from support of the down in future years. The participat­ Declaration, it did presage a new ing governments also agreed to chapter in the ongoing tuna-dolphin establish a per-vessel, maximum­ controversy. annual-dolphin-mortality limit that is The Panama Declaration is a consistent with the established per­ modified version of the La Jolla year mortality caps (Felando 1995). Agreement of 1992 adopted by the Besides these modifications of IATIC which instituted a seven-year the La Jolla Agreement, the 12 program of declining annual limits on governments promised to bring about dolphin mortality starting in 1993. significant changes in other areas The agreed mortality limit in the La that include a series of options Jolla Agreement was set at 9,000 for designed to ensure compliance. 1996 and then declined to 5,000 for Additionally, the Declaration contains 1999. To implement this program, promises to establish a system that individual-vessel-dolphin-mortality provides incentives to vessel captains limits were established on an annual to continue to reduce, and eventually basis. For instance, for the second eliminate, dolphin mortality. Finally, half of 1995 the dolphin-mortality in recognition of the need for qualified limit for each vessel was 57 animals advise for achieving the objectives of (Felando 1995). the Declaration, the parties promised to establish or strengthen National

78 lntomational Journal of Sociology of Agriculluro and Food-Revisla ln/emational de Soc/ologia sobro Agr/cultura y Alimenlos Vol. 7198 Scientific Advisory Committees which Declaration, this change m the would include "qualified scientists definition of "dolphin-safe" is from the public and private sector designed to recognize that currently and non-government organizations" in the ETP tuna fishery most of the who would base their decisions "on purse-seine nets set on a mixed the best scientific evidence ... designed school of tuna and dolphin result in to maintain or restore the biomass zero dolphin mortality. Fishermen levels" of harvested and associated have complained that the current stocks at or above levels capable of U.S. law is unfair because it does not producing maximum sustainable recognize the common existence of yield (Felando 1995). Regarding the zero-dolphin-mortality fishing sets. issue of changing the meaning of the Advocates of the Declaration argue term "dolphin-safe", the existing U.S. that the existing "dolphin-safe" rule law states that for tuna harvested in condemns an entire load of tuna even the ETP by a purse-seine vessel, such though zero mortality occurs during tuna is only "dolphin-safe" if an the entire fishing trip. Just one set of observer certifies in writing that the the net on a mixed school of tuna and purse-seine net was not intentionally dolphin during the entire fishing trip, deployed during the entire fishing trip whether mortality occurs or not, is on, or encircling, dolphins. This sufficient to declare the entire load current law makes encirclement of a not suitable for "dolphin-safe" mixed school of tuna and dolphin the labeling. This proposed new labeling test and not whether the fishermen definition is designed to give incen­ were successful in releasing the tives to fishermen to seek zero dolphins from the net without dolphin mortality for every fishing set mortality. The Declaration changes (Felando 1995). "dolphin-safe" to include tuna The adoption of the Panama harvested when the net is used on or Declaration would end the unilateral to encircle dolphins if no dolphin U.S. embargo on yellowfin tuna mortality is noted by an observer. imposed at present on Columbia, According to proponents of the Costa Rica, Italy, Japan, Mexico,

Jntemational Journal of Sociology of Agrk:ul/ure and Food•Revista lntemalional de Sociologla sobre Agrlcultura y Alimentos Vol. 719B 79 Panama, Vanuatu, and Venezuela smce the 1988 amendments to which allow their fishing fleets to "set MMPA. Mexico and other Latin on dolphins" or buy tuna from fleets American countries came under an that "set on dolphins". More contro­ embargo in 1990. Across Mexico, the versially, it would change the legal tuna industry estimates that due to definition of "dolphin-safe" for tuna the U.S. embargo, about 15,000 jobs can labels from the present one directly and indirectly tied to tuna (encirclement was not used to harvest fishing are gone - about half of them the tuna) to a new one (no dolphins in the town of Ensenada on the Baja were seen by accredited observers California. Mexico argues that it has aboard the tuna fishing vessels to die greatly reduced the dolphin kills in the harvest). The other signers of associated with its tuna fishing the Declaration are now waiting for operations and that the embargo is a the U.S. to ratify the agreement, "disguise to keep high quality action already long past the January Mexican yellow-fin tuna off the 31, 1996 deadline. These other American market" (Frazier 1996). The signers insist on the required change fact that the U.S. ignored the WTO in U.S. "dolphin-safe" definition, and ruling stating that the embargo is some threaten to bolt from the La illegal is presented as evidence of Jolla Agreement if the United States such green protectionism. "Dolphin­ fails to act. Opponents of the bill safe" fishing, Mexican fishermen argue that encirclement amounts to contend, has environmental baggage harassment of dolphins that can far heavier than the threat to eventually kill them out of the sight of dolphins, virtually all of which are observers (Felando 1995). freed from the nets unharmed by technology developed in recent years The Discourse from Latin America (Frazier 1996). There are three ways to fish for Imports from Latin American tuna. One involves following the countries that use the purse-seine dolphins which associate with mature method in the ETP have been blocked yellowfin tuna and using purse-seine

80 International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lnremaUona/ de Socio/ogia sobre Agricu/tura y Alimantos Vol. 7198 nets to catch the tuna, but also often percent of the dolphins now encircled catch the dolphins which sometimes by the tuna nets are freed unharmed. drown in the nets. Another involves "To have a dolphin-safe trip you have setting nets around floating objects to fish without a single set on such as logs where tuna tend to dolphins. Even if you don't kill any gather. The third is simply the visual dolphins, that catch cannot be sold as sighting of schools of tuna. Only tuna dolphin-safe. We are fighting to fishing using the last two methods change that to no mortality. If you set can be labeled "dolphin-safe". But on dolphins and there is no mortality, these two methods produce a heavy that tuna can be dolphin-safe", said bycatch of other species, especially de Alba (Frazier 1996). infant or juvenile tuna which have As part of the La Jolla Agreement not yet reproduced, have no commer­ of 1992, observers certified by the cial value, and are returned to the IA TIC are on board all tuna boats sea, often dead. While the ETP tuna with capacities of 40,000 tons or more fishery is among the most healthy in - which is most of the Mexican fleet the world, industry spokesmen say - to verify "dolphin-safe" catches. the wide demand for "dolphin-safe" "You don't see that in other areas, tuna could endanger that. According like in Africa, or France or Spain, to Carlos de Alba, a scientist with the where the captains of the boats make Mexican Chamber of Fishing Indus­ the certification," said Jose tries, "Fishing dolphin-safe is the only Velasquez, owner of the 205-foot way we can export. But if we keep Quijote. "We had a trip where we fishing this way, or increase the made 52 sets on dolphins and didn't dolphin-safe catch, the tuna popula­ kill a single one" Velasquez com­ tion in the Eastern Pacific will drop by plained. "But that tuna was not half in three years because of the dolphin-safe because we fished on bycatch of immature tuna"(Frazier dolphins" (Frazier 1996). He said the 1996). He said that detailed reports American fleet, much of which is kept by observers on Mexican tuna based in the Western Pacific at seiners show that more than 99 American Samoa, often sets on

International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revista International de Socio/ogia sobre Agricu/lura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 81 dolphins at night, increasing the risk in frozen form to Japan. Mexico has of dolphin kills. "We haven't done that increased domestic consumption of for years", said Velasquez (Frazier tuna by tenfold in the past decade 1996). although most of it is canned not in Dr. James Joseph of the IATTC Ensenada, but in Mazatlan, Manza­ said there are dolphin kills in other nilla, or other ports closer to domestic fisheries such as the Atlantic, around markets. When Pesquia de Pacifi.cio Sri Lanka sou th of India, and around was operating it turned out 88,000 the Phillippines, but that there are no cased of canned tuna a month, a lot good statistics on how many deaths of it for American firms who put their because those boats don't carry own label on it. The plant also observers. Authorities stated that the suffered when the Mexican govern­ dolphin-kill by Mexico and other ETP ment privatized it under the admini­ countries dropped from about stration of former President Carlos 140,000 a year in the mid-1980s to Salinas de Gortari. Its top selling about 3,500 in 1995. In 1986 ETP brand, Dolores, was sold separately, tuna fishermen were killing about 15 leaving the new owners with no dolphins with each set. By 1991, familiar brand. They introduced a when the embargo took place, the new brand that has not caught on number averaged 3.1, and it was less yet. "Some of our workers went to than 1.0 per two sets by 1995. other canneries, some left the area, Between the backdown procedure and some are selling tacos," said plant the finely-meshed medina panels the manager Jose Luis Gonzalez. "This number of dolphin deaths has been town (El Sauzal, a northern suburb of greatly reduced (Frazier 1996). Ensenada) used to be a fishing Mexico has replaced its U.S. village. Just about every family had markets with exports to Europe and someone who worked here" (Frazier Japan, but because of environmental I 996). pressures, most of that tuna must "Those boats that are gone aren't also be "dolphin-safe". It exports coming back, " said Alfonso Rosinol, about 50,000 tons a year, much of it vice president of Mexico's fisheries

82 lntema/ional Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntemational de Socio/ogia sabre Agrlcultura y A/imen/os Vol. 7196 chamber who has sold one of his The Political and Environmental three boats. "The boats were sold to Discourses from the United States Korea, to the United States, two to Iran. They are fishing many places" Discourses in Support of the (Frazier 1996). With the fleet aging Panama Declaration and decimated, processing tuna for foreign boats may be what's in store The Panama Declaration became for Ensenada, if the embargo is lifted. the basis for a bill introduced in the "They can bring the American boats 104th. U. S. Congress by Senator Ted here to unload and we can ship if Stevens (R-Alaska) Chairman of the precooked, frozen if they want, to the Senate Subcommittee on Oceans and United States and they can put their Fisheries. The Clinton Administration own brand on it, " Rosinal said. sided with Senator Stevens as did the Uncanned Mexican tuna enters the five mainstream environmental U.S. duty-free. "We are efficient, we organizations: Environmental Defense have low labor costs", Rosinol said. Fund, World Wildlife Fund, Center for "This could happen for Ensenada" Marine Conservation, Greenpeace, (Frazier 1996). But Rosinol, who and the National Wildlife Federation. spends a lot of his time in Washing­ The proponents argued that the ton pushing for the removal of the Declaration would protect dolphins embargo, knows many factors are at and other sea life in the ETP. More work. "The Flipper movies are back in specifically, they argued that the the theaters again," he said. "Now I alternatives to "setting on dolphins" hear they have one about a pig have proven destructive to both tuna named Babe. Pigs are supposed to be populations through the increased smarter than dolphins, so the pork bycatch of juvenile tuna that do not industry better be careful. It could be then have the chance to breed as well next" (Frazier 1996). as others species such as turtles, sharks, bill.fish, and other important marine life. They also argued that unless the Latin American nations

lntemational Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Re vista lntemational de Soclologia sobre Agricultura y A/imenlos Vol. 7198 83 were rewarded for their efforts to also indicated gratitude for the reduce dolphin mortality, they would overwhelming Republican support in revert back to their old methods the House. "While many think that which often kill dolphins. Similar environment is just a Democratic legislation introduced by Reps. Randy issue," Leape said. "I think this shows "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif. and that it can and should enjoy biparti­ Wayne Gilcrest, R-Md. cleared the san support" (Odessey 1996). house in May of 1996 (Linden 1996; Although the Clinton Administration Odessey 1996). This bill would and other supporters worked to get a implement the Panama Declaration companion bill passed in the Senate and provide for U.S. participation in after Congress returned from its the International Dolphin Conservation summer recess in September, they Program by modifying U.S. law to end were unsuccessful due to opponents' the existing tuna import embargo and threat of a filibuster (Linden 1996). to permit tuna caught with purse­ In presenting the International seine nets to be labeled "dolphin-safe" Dolphin Conservation Program Act as long as no dolphins were killed (S1420) to the U.S. Senate for when the tuna was caught (Linden approval, Senator Stevens (R-Alaska) 1996). stated (Congressional Record, 1996): Jerry Leape of Greenpeace said Our legislation is supported by: that he hoped the Senate got a strong (1) U.S. tuna boat owners; (2) the message from the House vote. "I think mainstream environmental commu­ there will be discussions over the nity including Greenpeace, the Center August recess and an effort to get this for Marine Conservation, the Envi­ issue addressed in September," he ronmental Defense Fund, the said. "We're not cocky about our National Wildlife Federation, and the chances" (Odessey 1996). He further World Wildlife Fund; (3) the American stated that the 100 or so Democrats Sportfishing Association; (4) U.S. in the House that voted for the bill Labor, including the National should encourage some Democrats in Fisherman's Union, Seafarers the Senate to vote for it as well. He International, and the United

84 International JoumaJ of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lnlemational de Soclologis sobreAgricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 Industrial Workers; (5) the 12 nations the protection of Dolphins and other who signed the Panama Declaration marine life in the Eastern Tropical (Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Pacific. In recent years, we have Ecuador, France, Honduras, Mexico, reduced dolphin mortality in the Panama, Spain, Vanuatu, and Eastern Tropical Pacific tuna fishery Venezuela); and (6) the Administra­ far below historic levels. Your tion. I ask for unanimous consent legislation will codify and interna­ that the letter I received from Vice tional agreement to lock these gains President Gore in support of S 1420 m place, further reduce dolphin be printed in the Record. mortality, and protect other marine The degree of cooperation be­ life in the region. This agreement was tween the Clinton Administration and signed last year by the United States the republican backers of the bill is and 11 other nations, but will not exemplified by the following letter effect unless your legislation 1s regarding the International Dolphin enacted into law. Sincerely, Al Gore. Conservation Program Act sent by Vice The Center for Marine Conser­ President Al Gore to Senator Stevens, vation, World Wildlife Fund, Envi­ Chairman of the Subcommittee on ronmental Defense Fund and Oceans and Fisheries (Congressional Greenpeace International, led by its Record, 1996). offices in Mexico, Brazil, Guatemala, The Vice President, Washington, and Argentina, helped draft the June 3, 1996. Hon. Ted Stevens, Declaration. According to Nina Young, Chairman, Subcommittee on Oceans marine mammal specialist at the and Fisheries, U.S. Senate, Hart Center for Marine Conservation, "The Senate Office Building, Washington, issue really has gotten more complex DC. Dear Ted, I am writing to thank than it used to be" {Greene 1996). you for your leadership on the From a similar perspective, National International Dolphin Conservation Wildlife Fund biologist Rodrigo Program Act, S1420. As you know, Prudencio explained that the Panama the Administration strongly supports Declaration would be permanent and this legislation, which is essential to replace current voluntary and difficult

lnlemationa/ Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revisla lntemafionat de Socio/ogla sabre Agricultura y AJimen/os Vol. 7198 85 to enforce "dolphin-safe" agreements Environmental Defense Fund (EDF such as the La Jolla Agreement. 1996): According to Prudencio, "Levels of Ironically, the sales ban still protection provided by the agreement prevents tuna caught this way are based on population estimates of without killing a single dolphin - each species of dolphin. Some from being labeled dolphin-safe or mortality is permitted but only if sold in the U.S. By contrast, tuna populations are not affected" (Pru­ caught by setting nets on floating logs dencio 1997). Instead of lumping all and schools of tuna can get the dolphin species into one category, dolphin-safe label, even when these countries will be obligated to keep methods kill dolphins and other careful track of the status of specific marine life. Foreign fleets that have species of dolphins. Furthermore, the reduced their dolphin deaths - but program provides accurate informa­ still can't sell their tuna in the U.S. - tion on bycatch numbers as well as have threatened to leave the volun­ dolphin deaths (Prudencio 1997). tary program. From the viewpoint of these groups, Rather than banning a fishing the Declaration will improve the technique, they believe that orienting overall ecological health of the ETP the label towards the desired result of and strengthen program which dolphin protection will give consum­ actually ensure that the tuna caught ers the best information possible, and in the ETP is indeed "dolphin-safe". fishing fleets the best incentive to These supporters of the Declara­ reduce dolphin deaths. Beyond the tion also want to change the definition issue of the label, these organizations of the "dolphin-safe" label to mean no want to protect dolphins in non-ETP dolphins died to catch that tuna. The waters which requires U.S. leadership current "dolphin-safe" label does not and international cooperation. The guarantee that no dolphins died in current version of the law means that the harvesting of the tuna, it only U.S. consumers now buy tuna means no dolphins were encircled by harvested from other oceans which do fishing nets. According to the not require on-board observers and

86 lntemaffona/ Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a Jntemauonal de SocioJogia sobre Agricu/tura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 therefore cannot guarantee the safety does require research on this of dolphins during tuna fishing question and if such evidence would outside the ETP. Meanwhile, dolphins be produced, then the legislation continue to be encircled by nets in requires that U.S. vessels stop setting the ETP regardless of the U.S. nets. Said EDF international counsel embargo and regardless of the current Annie Petsonk, "We are urging "dolphin-safe" label. This tuna is Congress to lock in the strengthened being sold m growing non-U.S. dolphin and ecosystem protections markets (Prudencio 1997). provided in the Panama Declarationn To resolve this escalating di­ (EDF 1996). lemma, these environmental organi­ zations worked together with 12 Discourses in Opposition to the participating countries that fish in the Panama Declaration ETP to secure strong, binding protection for dolphins and other At that time Senator Stevens in­ marine life. The Panama Declaration troduced his bill, Barbara Boxer (D­ and associated U.S. legislation would Calif.) introduced a competing bill replace the "intentional set" rule - a that would also lift the sanctions on technology based standard that Latin American nations but maintain inadvertently increases deaths of them on individual vessels that catch other marine life - with a perform­ tuna by encirclement of dolphins; ance-based approach ensuring that Boxer's bill was defeated. The letter no dolphins are killed to catch sent to President Clinton in opposi­ "dolphin-safe" tuna. While some tion to U.S. support for the Panama groups continue to oppose the Declaration by Senators Barbara Panama Declaration fearing that Boxer (D-Cali~, Joseph Biden (D-Del) setting nets stresses dolphins and and Representatives George Miller (D­ causes hidden mortality, "there is Cali~ and Gerry E. Studds (D-Mass) insufficient evidence to determine expressed grave concerns over the whether setting nets effects individual measure charging that the "delegation dolphins" (EDF 1996). The legislation in Panama sold out the dolphins to

lnlemationaJ Journal of Soc/oJogyof Agriculture and FoocJ..Revista tntemalional de Sociologia sobre Agricullura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 87 free trade" (Linden 1996:57). Fur­ 1977). Boxer's proponents argued thermore, they asserted that the that complicated enforcement Declaration would let foreign compa­ procedures and the potential for nies use a "dolphin-safe" label even if corruption under the Stevens bill their practices continued to endanger meant that dolphin deaths would rise dolphin populations and said that it again. They stated that the proposed "is nothing short of consumer fraud" change would allow tuna fishermen to as it would deceive conscientious chase, herd, and encircle dolphins consumers (Enviro-News Service which is cruel and stressful, sepa­ 1995). For Anthony OReilly, chair­ rates dolphin mothers from their man of H.J. Heinz Co. which owns calves, and keeps populations from Star Kist, the world's largest proces­ thriving (Linden 1996). sor of tuna, this creates problems "The whole thing is a scam being associated with the possible misinter­ put over on us by the Mexican pretation of these events by "dolphin­ government and Venezuelan govern­ loving consumers". O'Reilly said, "I ment that want access back into the believe the definition should not be U.S. market for tuna that is not changed in the absence of consensus dolphin-safe," said David Phillips, of scientists and public opinion" executive director of the Earth Island (Linden 1996:57). Institute (Ell), a San Francisco-based Environmental organizations environmental group fighting the and individuals that backed the Boxer Declaration. Phillips calls the bycatch position were Earth Island Institute argument "completely spurious". "If {Ell), Humane Society of the United you look at the amount of the bycatch States, EARTHTRUST, Cetacean since the dolphin-safe issue came up, Society International, Sierra Club, it has gone down, and the reason it Public Citizen, Friends of the Earth, has gone down is because the fishing Defenders of Wildlife, ASPCA, Sea effort in the eastern tropical Pacific Shepherd, Human Dolphin Founda­ has gone down" said Phillips. "The tion, Jean-Michel Cousteau, Jacques fishery is in excellent shape. The size Cousteau, and several others (Ell of the fish is up, the reproductive

88 Jntematiom1/ Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntemaliona/ de Socio/ogia sobre Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7196 potential is up. If there were some that they would seek a legislative fix indication that the level of the m Congress (Cockburn 1996). juvenile catch is causing problems for Cockburn (1996) states: the fishery, you would have seen it It will be recalled that at a cru­ long ago" (Linden 1996:57). According cial moment in the NAFTA battle in to Phillips, the bycatch argument is late 1993, the Clinton Administration "just an excuse. What they really was able to brandish a statement of want is to bring dolphin-unsafe tuna support for the free-trade agreement caught by killing dolphins back to the from seven major environmental lucrative U.S. market" (Linden organizations. Among them the 1996:57). Environmental Defense Fund, the According to Cockburn (1996), National Wildlife Federation, Green­ "One of the great triumphs of grass­ peace, The World Wildlife Fund and roots environmentalism in this the Center for Marine Conservation. country was the battle of the late Staffers at the Environmental Defense 1980s to ban the sale of 'dolphin Fund and National Wildlife Federation unsafe' tuna, meaning fish caught by drafted the language of the dolphin­ purse-seine nets that would also deatb bill, with tbe help of Bud ensnare dolphins". Over the fifteen Walsh, an attorney who has labored years using this method more than 7 for the Wise Use Movement. The million dolphins died. In the summer House bill fronted by the big green of 1995 Mexican government group guts the current dolphin informed Mickey Kantor, the U.S. protection law and will permit Government's Trade Representative, unlimited sale of dolphin-lethal tuna that under the terms of NAFT A and in the United States. WTO it should be permitted to sell its The mainstream green groups canned tuna in U.S. markets. Kantor call it a victory for the environment. and Al Gore told President Zedillo Cockburn disagrees. Sounding very that Clinton didn't want embarrassing much like a fully fledged free-market public demonstrations of how U.S. environmentalist, Greenpeace laws could be overturned by WTO and president Barbara Dudley says her

lntemationa/ Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntemationa/ de Sociologia sobre Agn·cultura y AJimentos Vol. 7/98 89 organization supports the bill because scientists, such legislation would in "it tears down unfair trade barriers" fact harm dolphins and does nothing for Latin American countries such as to protect other species in the fishery, Mexico, Colombia, and Chile (Cock­ such as sea turtles and immature burn 1996). tuna. These two scientists were joined Greenpeace's support of the by a third scientist, Dr. Roger Payne Panama Declaration has also been of the National Academy of Scientists heavily criticized by animal rights and tuna/ dolphin panel, in denouncing marine mammal rights groups. On the proposed legislation. Drs. Myrick, September 27, 1996, the whales Hall, and Payne contended that the rights group known as the Dolphin scientific statements of supporters of Within Society, arranged a demon­ the Declaration were couched in stration outside the Greenpeace dubious science and therefore make offices m Sydney, Australia and serious errors (Ell 1996). "entered the office in masses". They claimed that Greenpeace' support for Discussion the Panama Declaration would result in a weakening of the U.S. "dolphin­ The case study can inform con­ safe" tuna legislation, allowing tuna temporary debates on at least three from "dolphin-dangerous" fishing aspects of global capitalism. The first fleets to enter the U.S. market (High concerns the role and forms of the North News 1996). State. The second deals with the Opposition to the Declaration actions of social movements. In this was also advanced by marine case, this situation refers to the mammal scientists.Two prominent positions of the environmental and marine mammal scientists , Dr. Albert labor movements. Finally, the case Myrick Jr. and Dr. John Hall, spoke study sheds light on the actions of out against misleading and discred­ TNCs. ited testimony made by proponents of bills m support of the Panama Declaration. According to these

90 lntemaNonal Jcumal cf Scciclcgycf Agricu/11.Jf'e and Food-Revis/a lntemaNcnal de Scciclcgia scbre Agricu/lura y Alimenlcs Ve/. 7198 The Role of the State in Global It has also been argued that the Capitalism role of the State in society cannot be eliminated without creating insur­ Contemporary works on the role mountable negative consequences to of the State in global capitalism a variety of actors (e.g., Danley 1994; increasingly question the ability of Spybey 1996). These views point out nation-States to mediate opposing the difference between the concept of classes' actions while fostering capital the State and that of the nation-State. accumulation (e.g., Giddens 1994; The nation-State, it is maintained, is Harvey I 990; Hirst and Thompson simply one historical form of the State 1996). These accounts view funda­ and therefore it is not the only mental aspects of the globalization of possible form of the State. The crisis the economy and society as limiting of the nation-State signals, according the State's capacity to assert its to this position, the crisis of the relative autonomy. Global capitalism, historical forms of the State which they maintain, diminishes the State's emerged m the early phase of ability to control social actors and capitalist development. Simultane- processes within its jurisdiction. ously, the emergence of new State Extreme accounts contend that the forms, and in particular the emer­ State is withering away as transna­ gence of the embryonic transnational tional corporations can by-pass State State form, indicates the emergence established and enforced require­ of new patterns of capitalist develop­ ments and laws (e.g., Ross and ment associated with globalization Tratche 1990). Other accounts point (e.g., Bonanno and Constance 1996; to the increasing control that Danley 1994; Spybey 1996). transnational economic elites exercise The case study speaks directly over the State. In essence, according to these debates. It indicates that to these views, the State is increas­ though the State is still able to ingly turning into an instrument of performs its historical roles, the global economic elites and their allies evolution of global social relations has {e.g., McMichael and Myhre 1991). important repercussions on State

Jntemalirmal Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food·Revitlla Jntemational de Sociologia sobta Agricu/lura y A/imentos VoJ. 7/98 91 actions and forms. As far as the it has been documented that the use ability of the U.S. State to perform its of this technology was at the core of historical roles is concerned, the case the battle surrounding the imple­ indicates that the Clinton Admini­ mentation of the MMPA (Bonanno stration1 acted to increase capital and Constance 1996). In that case, a accumulation. Simultaneously, it radical pro-environmental position legitimized this action by addressing prevailed as it viewed the conse­ concerns voiced by segments of the quences of the use of this technology labor movement and by enlisting the as incompatible with a sound support of environmental groups. The management of marine resources. latter refers to main stream environ­ The succeeding view was that the mental groups' endorsement of negative consequences of purse-seine changes in the MMPA. These use could not be controlled by human historical roles of the State, however, surveillance nor could they be were performed in a context in which resolved by technical adjustments. its national form is in crisis and Accordingly, the most effective transnational (hemispheric) solutions solution to the problem of dolphin are sought to overcome this impasse. mortality was the elimination of the State actions in favor of capital use of encircling technology in tuna accumulation are exemplified by two fishing. In effect, this position gained issues characterizing the Clinton momentum and eventually prevailed Administration's proposed legislation. partially due to the fact that the U.S. The first refers to the rehabilitation of administration allowed grave the purse-seine technology. The violations of the original 1972 MMPA. second deals with its justification For instance, while the law mandated arguing that the feared negative zero dolphin mortality, its actual environmental consequences implementation allowed the killing as associated with dolphin mortality are many as 20,000 dolphins per year. vastly exaggerated and/ or simply not Perhaps the most important reason existent. As far as the ban of the for the U.S. Administration early purse-seine technology is concerned, tolerance of this limited interpretation

92 /ntemational Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Foo

Jnlemational Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntema/iona/ de Socio/ogia sabre Agricul/ura y Alimentos Vol. 7ft.lB 93 The second pro-TNC element is largely from members of the working represented by the expansion of class. As indicated by literature on markets that the redefinition of the the topic (e.g., Harvey 1990; Jameson "dolphin-safe" label would generate. It 1994; Rieff 1993), market fragmenta­ is probable that the proposed tion is an often employed corporate legislation would fragment the now strategy aimed at increasing con­ homogenous market into at least two sumption in the global economy. One parts. The first would be character­ of its characteristics is that it reaches ized by tuna caught following the previously untapped market seg­ current "dolphin-safe" requirements. ments with specialized products. In The second would be made up by this instance, the introduction of a those catches generated by less new kind of "dolphin-safe" tuna stringent rules. It is safe to assume would perform the role of a "special­ that the first market segment would ized" commodity for the working be characterized by more expensive class. This situation could also result products which would appeal to more in working class support of TNCs' affluent and environmentally actions as the former would view concerned fractions of consumers. favorably the availability of a less This group would be largely composed expensive food commodity. of members of the upper and middle U.S. State attempts to foster ac­ classes. These people have histori­ cumulation processes are not cally been better able to respond to confined to the enhancements of environmental concerns even in the production and productivity and case that this preference translated widening of markets. They are also into higher food prices. The second indicated by the redefinition of segment of the market will consist of environmental protectionism as- cheaper products which would appeal sumed by the new discourse. In this to lower segments of the spectrum of case, environmental protectionism is consumers. In this case, it can be redefined in much more relaxed argued that support for the existence terms. The new legislation supports of this type of commodity will come the idea that it is environmentally

94 lntematkmal Jouma/ of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Re vista lntemational de Sociologia sobre Agricultura y Alimento, Vol. 7198 acceptable to kill a number of violations (Bonanno and Constance dolphins as long as this practice does 1996). not exceed mortality limits within As far as the legitimation role each of the various dolphin spices. performed by the State is concerned, These are thresholds which indicate the case indicates that the Clinton the minimum number of individuals Administration justified its pro­ necessary to maintain adequate accumulation, pro-TNC attempts to dolphin population levels. In the reform the MMPA by addressing some event that killings remain within of the concerns expressed by mortality limits, there is no actual organized labor in the U. S. and Latin danger to dolphins. In effect, this America. The State, in other words, discourse implies that dolphin was able to enlist the support of labor killings are beneficial to the entire for the project of reforming the eco-system as they function as MMPA. It achieved this result by instruments of population control. supporting changes in some of the Additionally, the notion of harm to components of the law which have dolphins and other marine species is been indicated as hampering redefined in much narrower terms. employment and growth in the tuna Indeed, under the proposed legisla­ industry. tion, the only sphere of concern To illustrate this point it is im­ remains the observed killing of portant to recall that over the years, dolphins in the immediate process of the implementation of the MMPA and tuna fishing. Simultaneously, the counter actions of TNCs led to concerns about the accuracy of significant negative consequences for observes and limits of their capacity labor both in the United States and to carry out tasks are also cast aside. abroad. TNCs' attempts to bypass In previous instances, crew members MMPA led to the crisis of the tuna often harassed observers through fishing sectors along with crises in intimidation and overt physical the processing sectors in California, violence to the point of severely Puerto Rico and subsequently m hampering their ability to report law Latin American countries such as

lntematiMa! Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lnlemationel de Sociologia sobre Agricultura y Alimenlos Vol. 7198 95 Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia and National Wildlife Federation and the Ecuador. A related result was that in Center for Marine Conservation, these regions labor opposed the backed the Clinton Administration environmental movement1s actions in sponsored legislation. More radical favor of MMPA (Bonanno and environmental groups, however, Constance 1996). In essence, the strongly opposed the initiative. In implementation of MMPA was a effect, the State was able to reorgan­ victory for the environmental ize the composition of the opposing movement which generated grave camps whose interaction generated consequences for labor. It follows that the original MMPA. In that case, the the lessening of the requirements for environmental movement was unified the "dolphin-safe" label has been and provided successful opposition to viewed as a measure which could the designs of TNCs and the Bush revitalize the tuna industry in its Administration. Today, significant entirety. Simultaneously, similar segments of the environmental hopes exist in Latin America where movement agree with TNCs in the closing of canneries and the crisis supporting the new legislative of the tuna fishing sector have been measure. More importantly, environ­ particularly severe. In effect, the mental groups have also accepted opening of the U.S. market to the new discourses which share the neo­ "dolphin-safe" tuna would signify liberal tone characteristic of corporate renewed economic opportunities for postures. As indicated above, for Latin American residents. instance, the president of Greenpeace The case indicates also that the defined the MMPA in terms of "green U.S. State was able to legitimize its protectionism" evoking the free actions by drawing support from market rhetoric used by corporate segments of the environmental entities to allow internationally movement. Main stream environ­ produced tuna into the United States. mental groups, such as Greenpeace, The State fostering of accumu­ the World Wildlife Fund, the Envi- lation and pro-TNC positions and its ronmental Defense Fund, the ability to legitimate these actions to

96 Jntematkmal Joumal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revista /nfemational de Sociologia sobro Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7/98 segments of opposing groups not only transcends the State national indicate the vitality of the U.S. State jurisdiction. Three items deseive to be but stress its class character. The briefly mentioned. First, the discourse current version of the MMPA forced within which the new legislation the State to face the contradiction develops stresses transnational between demands stemming from the concepts such as "hemispheric environmental agenda and those interests" and "global concerns." The required to further capital accumula­ latter indicate the broader than tion. The former hampered the latter. national dimension necessary to The course of action selected by the regulate capital accumulation and State resolved this contradiction by social legitimation. Second, the redefining discourses and reshaping Panama Declaration mandates alliances which ultimately strength­ changes in the U.S. legislation. That ened the interests of corporate actors. is, it is the transnational arena which The class character of this action, contextualizes the actions of individ­ then, rests on the State's inability to ual nation-States. This is important promote pro-environmental discourse because, as in the cases of WTO and in the face of pressure to revitalize NAFTA, the ability of the State to accumulation strategies. The events address internal issues (in this case of the case demonstrate that con­ the dispute between environmental­ fronted with the historical possibility ists and TNCs) is framed by decisions to fortify alternative positions, the which are made outside the State State remained anchored with its sphere of action. Finally, because the support of capital accumulation nation-State alone is not able to strategies. provide sufficient support to the Contradictions for the State re­ vanous groups involved in the case, main, however. The events of the case we see the emergence of transnational support the argument that the forms of the State. In this case, the nation-State does not have the regulation of the flow of actions and instruments to fully regulate the resources is increasingly delegated to actions of actors whose scope the "hemispheric" level3.

lntema/ioniN Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revi:sta lntema/ional de Socioloriia :sobre Agricultura y Alimento:s Vol. 7198 97 The Positions of the Environmental These events indicate that the and Labor Movements environmental movement is divided and encounters significant problems in Debates on social movements organizing anti TNC actions. Two and change underscored the impor­ elements emerging from the events of tance of new social movements as case study should be stressed here. agents of emancipatory actions (e.g., The first refers to the unifying and Habermas 1987; Mayer 1991; Melucci hegemonic4 powers of the environ­ 1989; Touraine 1981). In particular, it mental movement. The second has been argued that in the postmod­ concerns its anti-TNC posture. ern post-Fordist phase of capitalism, As far as the unifying and traditional movements, such as labor, hegemonic powers of the environ­ have exhausted they emancipatory mental movement are concerned, the charge as struggles shifted away from events of case study point out that the economic area into the social the environmental movement went arena (e.g., Gorz 1982; Lash and Urry from a situation of unity to one of 1994; Melucci 1989). The environ­ division into two camps. This split is mental movement emerged-along with based on senous philosophical the feminist and civil rights move­ disagreements on the issues of ments - as perhaps the most powerful dolphin safety and understanding of counter to the rise of global capital. In the impact that purse-seine technol­ the view of many (e.g; Buttel 1994; ogy has on the environment. The Gorz 1992; Melucci 1989) this environmental organizations which movement is capable of generating joined the pro Panama Declaration the necessary charge for the estab­ camp regard current "dolphin-safe" lishment on new and more demo­ standards to be too stringent and, in cratic arrangements in society. The effect, detrimental to the sound events of the case study address the reproduction of the tuna and other role of the environmental movement marine spices populations. The other and its assumed ability to be the camp 1s determined to maintain catalyst of emancipatory struggles. "dolphin-safe" procedures as estab-

98 International Joumal,cf Sociology of Agriculture and Foo

lntemational Jouma/ of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revista International de Sociologia sobre Agricultura y Alimenlos Vol. 7198 99 talists' attempts to implement MMPA. expansion. In particular, this On the other hand, labor organiza­ situation refers to the effects of TNCs' tions positioned themselves, along hyper-mobility and their decentrali­ with TNCs, in favor of the liberaliza­ zation strategies. In the case of hyper­ tion of fishing techniques and trade. mobility, the tuna-dolphin contro­ In essence, various segments of the versy demonstrated that TNCs can labor movement selected a course of rapidly relocate their investments action which ties their demands to with serious consequences to the growth of the industry as a whole communities which depended on and to the rejection of measures TNCs' investments for socio-economic which ban encircling technology. growth. In the instance of decentrali­ Support of the tuna industry as a zation, TNCs have been able to whole has been justified in terms of delegate production risks to weaker the establishment of projects which segments of the industry exposing the could revitalize national economic latter to potential crises. sectors through the expansion of production and trade. Expansion of The Strategy of TNCs production 1S deemed possible through the reintroduction of the One of the most significant as­ purse-seine technology while pects of global capitalism is the increases in trade are linked to the emergence of TNCs. Differing from elimination of tuna embargos. Like in their multinational predecessors, the case of mainstream environ­ these corporations increasingly mental movements, labor downplays severed their activities from linkages the concerns of more radical envi­ and loyalties to countries and/ or ronmentalists and charge them with regions of ongin (Antonio and placing animal and ecosystem Bonanno 1996; Harvey 1990; Spybey concerns over those of the well-being 1996). Under global capitalism, TNCs of human beings. In so doing, limited have been viewed as extremely attention is paid to the potentially powerful entities whose actions can negative consequences of TNCs' be hardly opposed by counter

100 lntema/ional Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntemalional de Socio/ogia sobre Agricultura y Alimenlos Vol. 7198 movements and groups (e.g., Heffer­ important segments of the environ­ nan and Constance 1994; McMichael mental movement and labor, and the and Myhre 1991; Ross and Trachte existence of a dominant discourse 1990). Simultaneously, they have also which redefines environmental been described as enterprises whose protection in terms amenable to global scope allows the flourishing of capital accumulation. new initiatives and the unleashing of Perhaps the most interesting new resources which revitalize aspect of the strategy adopted by stagnant economic situations (e.g., tuna TNCs in the continuation of the Kindleberger 1986; Strange 1996). tuna-dolphin controversy 1s their Other interpretations picture TNCs in limited involvement in the events of terms of their strengths but also the case. In the early phase ( 1972- vulnerabilities (e.g., Hirst and 1992), TNCs were the subjects of Thompson 1996). The early phase of direct attacks from environmentalists the tuna-dolphin controversy has and consumers (boycotts) and the been interpreted in terms of this State (court rulings against them and latter view. Referring to that case, it legislative actions). In the contempo­ has been maintained that environ­ rary phase, the controversy finds mentalists were able to force TNCs to environmental groups, labor and adopt the "dolphin-safe" label despite vanous nation-States occupymg the fact that it involved abandoning center stage. More importantly, the the use of the lucrative purse-seine relative absence of TNCs from the technology. However, it has also been dispute is replaced by a situation in indicated that TNCs were able to which contenders are former mem­ continue the use of the technology by bers of the anti-TNC front. Key in the decentralizing and moving fishing and development of this situation is the processing operation outside the decentralization process initiated by jurisdiction of the United States. The TNCs as a response to the action of case indicates that the cu"ent status the environmental movement. of affairs is favorable to TNCs. They Resistance to the use of purse-seine enjoy the support of the State, technology prompted TNCs to dissolve

lntemetJonal Jouma/ or Soc/oJogy of Agrlcul!ure and Food-Revis/a lntemationel de Sociologla sabre Agllcullura y AJ/mentos Vol. 7198 101 previously established processes of able to decouple production and vertical integration. Indeed, from a consumption sites which translated system in which TNCs directly owned into crises for the local tuna related and controlled the various phases of labor forces but also generated the production process, new decen­ advantaged for environmentally tralization projects were initiated. conscious U.S. consumers. What was Fishing boats, for instance, were left left then was a situation in which in the hands of captains and their labor opposed environmental crews who were charged with bringing movement actions and various catches to the open market. There, nation-States were left to resolve the catches were purchased by canneries contradiction between the emergence which then were contracted by TNCs of negative economic consequences to produce tuna on their behalf. In (the crisis of the local tuna industries) essence, maneuvers of cost reduction and legitimation of demands stem­ were accomplished by delegating ming from environmentally conscious production and leaving market segments of the population. uncertainties to weaker segments of The result of TNCs' "disappear­ the production structure. ance" was that the situation was TNCs' hyper-mobility allowed framed in terms of a dispute between them to shift operation from regions labor and the environmentalists. As in which conflict was higher to areas indicated above, this conditions where a much more enhanced pro­ emerged also because the weaknesses business climate existed. However, of the environmental and labor TNCs' maneuvering away from movements. Yet, the TNCs' hegemonic contested regions did not eliminate project was clear and working. By their presence on the market. In fact, decentralizing production and their new scope of action allowed splitting resistance, TNCs put lower them to source globally for factors of segments of the society against production yet to maintain their environmentally conscious members presence in primary markets such as of the middle and upper classes and the U. S. In other words, TNCs were enlisted labor and environmentalists

102 /ntema/ional Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntemationa/ de SOCJOlogie sabre Aglicultura y Alimentos Vol. 7ft.l6 to support the reintroduction of American labor organizations and purseseine technology and the governments. Mexico, Venezuela, redefinition of the concept of "dol­ Colombia and Ecuador have been phin-safe". In the end the tuna­ explicit about the negative conse­ dolphin controversy was "colonized" quences that MMPA caused among by a view which supported capital fishing and canning communities in accumulation and a much more these countries. They view the limited definition of environmental redefinition of the "dolphin-safe" label protection. as a vehicle to re-launch the local industry and exports to the affluent Conclusions U.S. market. From this perspective, then, the amelioration of the condi­ As far as democracy in the tions of subordinate segments of global economy is concerned, the society can be interpreted as an events illustrated above have a inclusionary measure which testifies number of implications. Following to the opening of free spaces that optimistic readings of globalization, it globalization entails. can be argued that the establishment Related considerations can be of a dominant discourse - which made for the case of the environ­ redefines the concept of "dolphin­ mental movement. Segments of the safe" and allows the enhancement of environmental movement recognized capital accumulation - not only the efforts made by the tuna industry favors TNCs, but also a variety of to comply with environmental safety. other groups. The position of labor, This action established grounds for for instance, is explained by the cooperation between these two groups expectation that the overturning of which did not exist in earlier phases key components of the MMPA could of the case. Simultaneously, and as generate employment opportunities. supported by a series of expert This is a position expressed by labor opinions, the changes in the MMPA groups in the U.S., but it is also a can be viewed as an improvements of long standing position of Latin the conditions of a variety of marine

lntama/ional Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntemational de Socloloqia sobfe Agricultura y Aliment-Os Vol. 7198 103 species including dolphins. In these processes. This condition is viewed as accounts, population control and the one of the most important indicators maintenance of conditions of of the erosion of democratic spaces in equilibrium within ecosystems are global capitalism. considered more desirable than the The case, however, indicates a current status of affairs. worsening of this scenario. It shows One of the problematic dimen­ that TNCs not only exercised their sions of the above position rests in ability to bypass national decision­ the fact that claims about the making processes, but that through establishment of democratic spaces this action they have been able to are maintained without challenging colonize areas of resistance within the hierarchies of the global system. national contexts. Indeed, the case This consideration is relevant because points out that a pro-TNC position is it legitimizes TNCs' powers over now characterizing new legislation in processes which directly touch a the United States and in a number of variety of social actors, and because it other countries. This situation limits the sphere of democratic represents a double victory for TNCs solutions to the context established as they furthered their dominant by TNCs' hegemonic project. Fur­ position both at the local and global thermore, this position does not levels. In light of the latter, it is address the concerns raised by obvious that claims about the broader segments of the literature. strength of local resistance and the According to these works on global­ historical possibility of establishing ization, one of the most characterizing democratizing processes based on the actions of TNCs has been their ability local must be scrutinized with to bypass nation-State-based rules additional care (see also Swyngedouw and regulations. More specifically, it 1997). is maintained that TNCs have been Despite the apparent over­ able to disengage from democratic whelming advantage gained by TNCs, rules by avoiding restrictions imposed the events illustrated above also can by participatory decision-making be interpreted to indicate the fact that

104 lntemationaJ Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Rev/sta Jntemationa/ de SocioJog1a sobre AQricullura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 the global society and economy are against the other thereby weakening still contested terrains in which traditional forms of labor struggle and struggles, alliances and solidarities subordinating processes of socio­ are created, dissolved and renewed. economic growth to TNCs' decisions More importantly, basic contradic­ to invest in these markets. This tions pertaining to the requirements situation, in tum, is a precondition of of capital accumulation have not been global sourcing for the most desirable resolved by the enhanced scope of forms of labor use (Harvey 1990; TNCs' actions. The latter can give Heffernan and Constance 1994). subordinate groups ammunition for Indeed, it is not a coincidence that challenging the hierarchies of the the recent and most effective forms of global order and creating opportuni­ resistance to TNCs' power developed ties for establishment of democratiz­ outside traditional patterns of ing processes. mobilization and counter action. It is obvious that the creation of However, it is also obvious that new markets, the proliferation of the characteristics of the global commodities, the hyper-mobility of economy and society have not altered capital and other significant charac­ the requirements of the commodifica­ teristics of the global economy and tion of production (Marx 1977: 188- society have weakened traditional 198; 210-247). In other words, forms of resistance (e.g., Spybey processes of capital accumulation are 1996; Lash and Urry 1994). Labor, for still based on two fundamental instance, has been often used as an conditions. First, TNCs must realize example of this situation. Despite capital (see Sweezy 1942), that is, claims that capital mobility is not as they must transform commodities great as previously hypothesized and into money. This requirement makes that locality has significant restrictive TNCs vulnerable as they become impacts on processes of accumulation exposed to counter actions which can (e.g., Gertler 1997), the hypermobility affect their ability to realize capital. of capital allows TNCs to pit distant Lash and Urry ( 1994: 1-5) partially and unrelated labor markets one address this issue in their discussion

lntematiOl!al Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a lntematiOl!al de Sociologia sobre Agricu//ura y Alimentos Vol. 7/9B 105 of the significance of the circulation of is beyond the scope of the paper. In capital in the postmodern era. The the past, the environmental move­ element that is implicit in their ment has been able to mobilize argument and that emerges from the consumers against TNCs. However, it case study is that "consumers" can be was not able to develop solidarities the subjects of these counter actions. and alliances with other groups. This In principle, at least, the vulnerability situation prevented them from of TNCs rests on their inability to find creating a unified front which could receptive markets for their products. mobilize resources to address While following Marx, it can be unwanted consequences of their argued that globalization has actions. The environmental move­ accelerated processes of exploitation ment, in other words, was not able to at the production level (global create a political front which could sourcing), contradictions remain both address the labor problems associ­ at the production and realization ated with the boycott of dolphin levels. But unlike the case of labor, unsafe tuna. The most recent events contradictions are historically much of the case indicate that attempts to more mature in the case of the generate broader solidarities have realization level. This acceleration of been carried out, but they have been the circulation of commodities in contextualized outside an anti-TNC global circuits transformed realiza­ project. However, and despite the tion, but it is also opened up spaces evolution of the tuna-dolphin for the "politicization" of commodities controversy, the contradictions of (Lash and Urry 1994). The creation of global capitalism provide subordinate "dolphin-safe" tuna is an example of groups with the possibility of carrying this process of politicization which, out emancipatory projects. albeit in a temporary form, forced Second, TNCs need forms of or­ TNCs to come to terms with the ganization and coordination of their designs of alternative groups. activities which transcend their own The issue of the organization of organizational capacities (Bonanno consumers as subjects of resistance and Constance 1996). The fragmen-

106 lntemationa/ Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food•Revista International de Soclologia sobre AQrleu//ura y Alimenlos VoJ. 719/J tation of production and markets and References the global scope of their actions ANTONIO, Robert J. and Alessandro require forms of coordination which Bonanno have been historically performed by 1996 "Post-Fordism in the United the nation-States. This situation States: the poverty of market­ makes TNCs still dependent on the centered democracy.• Current Per­ spectives in Social Theory 16:3-32. State which, however, remains also BECK, Ulrich open to influences from subordinate 1995 Ecological Enlightenment. Atlantic groups. In this respect, the evolution Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press. of the State, from its national form BLUM, Ronald into its supranational form, has been 1995 "Hearing Called on NAFI'A Broken Promises." Oakland Post. 11-29. viewed as a new contested terrain for of TNCs on State forms of coordina­ BONANNO, Alessandro and Douglas Constance tion, therefore, is a potential contra­ 1996 Caught in the Net: The Global Tuna diction which can be exploited by Industry, Environmentalism, and the alternative groups. The events of the State. Lawrence, KS: University Press case indicate, however, that emerging of Kansas. BONANNO, Alessandro, Lawrence Busch, supranational forms of the State have William H. Friedland, Lourdes Gouveia been characterized by the hegemonic and Enzo Mingione (eds.) project of TNCs. While the contradic­ 1994 From Columbus to ConAgra: The tions opened up by the transforma­ Globalization and Agriculture and tion of State forms still remain, their Food. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. historical evolution has been BUSCH, Lawrence increasingly controlled by pro-TNC 1994 "The State of Agricultural Science discourses. and the Agricultural Science of the State." Pp. 69-84 in Bonanno, Ales­ sandro et al. (eds.), From Columbus to ConAgra: The Globalization and Agri-

International Jouma/ of SociolOQyof Agriculture anr:J Food-Rsvista International r:Je Socio/ogia sabra Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 107 culture and Food, Lawrence, KS: Uni­ release. html on 11/ 10/97; versity Press of Kansas. 13:23: 15> BUSCH, Lawrence, William B. Lacy, -----. 1996 "Scientists Speak Out Against Jeffrey Burkhardt and Laura Lacy Dolphin Death Act: Lapses in Con­ 1991 Plants, Power, and Profit. Oxford: gressional Testimony Cited." Earth Basil Blackwell. Island Institute. June 12. Century: Some Theoretical Observa­ ENVIRONEWS SERVICE tions." Pp. 13-31 in David Symes and 1995 "E-Link: Dolphin's Not "Safe" With Anton J. Jansen (eds.) Agricultural Tuna Anymore." Oct.11 University Wageningen. FEATHERSTONE, Mike (ed.) COCKBURN, Alexander 1990 Global Culture. Nationalism, 1996 "A Most Enounnous Penis." The Globalization and Modernity. London: Nation, August:9-10. Sage CONGRESSIONAL RECORD FELANDO, August 1996. Senate. September 30: S11969- 1995 "Declaration of Panama Signed: S11970, Twelvenation, five-environmental­ DANLEY, John R. group accord could bring sense to 1994 The Role of Modem Corporations in 'dolphin-safe' labelling." The Fisher­ a Free Society. Notre Dame, In.: Uni­ man's News. Nov. 1996 "New Efforts Could Strengthen FIORE, Faye Protection for Dolphins." Environ­ 1995 "Activists Alarmed by Bid to mental Defense Fund. Vol. XXVII, No. Reverse Dolphin-Safety Law." Los 1: Jan. Troubles on 'Dolphin-Safe' Rules." Los Ell Angeles Times, 7-21:B 1997 "The Tuna/Dolphin Compromise in FRIEDLAND, William H. Congress." Earth Island Institute. July 1995 "Globalization, Fordism- 31.

108 International Joumal of Sociology of Agriculture and Foori-Revista lntfHTlaUonal de SocioJogla sobfe AgricuJtura y Alim11ntos Vol. 7198 Paper presented at the workshop The GRAMSCI, Antonio Political Economy of the Agro-Food 1971 Selection from Prison Notebooks. System in Advanced Industrial New York: International Publishers. Countries. University of California, GREENE, Robert Berkeley, September. 1996 "Environmentalists Split Over Bill ------. 1994 "The New Globalization: The to End Ban." Columbia Daily Tribune, Case of Fresh Produce." Pp.210-231 May 17. in A. Bonanno et al. (eds.}, From HABERMAS, Jiirgen Columbus to ConAgra: The Globaliza­ 1987 Knowledge and Human Interests. tion and Agriculture and Food. Law­ Cambridge: Polity Press. rence, KS: University Press of Kan­ HARVEY,David sas, 1990 The Condition of Postmodemity. FRIEDMAN, Milton Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1982 Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: HEFFERNAN, William D. and Douglas H. The University of Chicago Press. Constance FRIEDMANN, Harriet and Philip 1994 "Transnational Corporations and McMichael the Global Food System." Pp. 29-51 1989 "Agriculture and the state system." in Alessandro Bonanno et al. (eds.), Sociologia Ruralis 29(2):93-117. From Columbus to ConAgra: The Glob­ FUKUY AMA, Francis alization of Agriculture and Food. 1992 The End of History and The last Lawrence, KS: University Press of Man. New York: The Free Press. Kansas. GERTLER, Merle S. HIGH NORTH NEWS 1997 "Between the Global and the Local: 1996 "Dolphin Friends Occupy Green­ The Spatial Limits to Productive peace Office." N°. 11. November. Capital." Pp.45-63 in Kevin R. Cox GIDDENS, Anthony HIRST, Paul and Grahame Thompson 1994 Beyond Left and Right: The Future 1996 Globalization in Question. Cam­ of Radical Politics. Stanford: Stanford bridge: Polity Press. University Press. HIRST, Paul and Jonathan Zeitlan GORZ, Andre 1991 "Flexible specialization versus 1982 Farewell to the Working Class: an post-Fordism: theory, evidence and Essay on Post-Industrial Socialism. policy implications." Economy and London: Pluto Press. Society 20 {l): 1-56.

lntema/iona/ Joumal of Sociology of Agticu//ure and Food-Re\11s/a International de SocioJogia sabre Agrlcultura y .Alimentos Vol. 7198 109 HOUSTON CHRONICLE national Journal of Socfology of Agn·­ 1997 "Dolphin-safe label changes culture and Food 4:139-160. advance." April, 7:2c. MARSDEN, Terry, Josefa Salete Barbosa JAMESON, Fredric Cavalcanti and Jose Ferreira Irma.a 1994 Postmodemism, or The Cultural 1996 "Globalisation, regionalization and Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: quality: the socio-economic recon­ Duke University Press. struction of food in the San Francisco KINDLEBERGER, Charles P. Valley, Brazil," International Journal of 1986 "International public goods without Sociology of Agriculture and Food international government." American 5:85-114. Economic Review 76 (1): 1-13. MARX, Karl LASH, Scott and John Urry 1977 Capital. Volume 1. New York: 1994 Economies of Signs and Space. Vintage Books. London: Sage. MAYER, Margit LINDEN, Eugene 1991 "Social Movement Research and 1996 "Chicken of the sea: A 'dolphinsafe' Social Movement Practice. The U.S. tuna flap makes the U.S. squirm." Pattern." Pp. 47-120 in Dieter Rucht Time, March 4:57. (ed.), Research on Social Movements. LLAMBl, Luis Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 1994 "Open Economies and Closing MCMICHAEL, Philip Markets: Latin American Agriculture's 1996 "Globalization: myths and reali­ Difficult Search for a Place in the ties." Rural Sociology (61) 1:25-55. Emerging Global Order." Pp. 184-209 MCMICHAEL, Philip and David Myhre in Alessandro Bonanno et al.(eds.), 1991 "Global regulation vs. the nation From Columbus to ConAgra: The Glob­ state: agro-food systems and the new alization and Agriculture and Food. politics of capital." Capital & Class 43 Lawrence, KS: University Press of (2):83-106. Kansas. MELUCCI, Alberto LLAMBl, Luis and Lourdes Gouveia 1989 Nomads of the Present: Social 1994 "The restructuring of the Vene• Movements and Industrial Needs in zuelan state and state theory." Inter­ Contemporary Society. London: national Journal of Sociology of Agri­ Hutchinson Radius. culture and Food 4:45-72. MlSHEL, Lawrence and Jared Bernstein MARSDEN, Terry 1993 The State of Working American: 1994 "Globalization, the State and the 1992-1993. Washington, D.C: Eco­ Environment: Exploring the Limits nomic Policy Institute and Options of State Activity." Inter-

110 lntemaUonal Jouma/ of Sociology of Agiiculture and Food-Revista JntemaUonal de Socio/ogia sabre Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 ODESSEY, Bruce STRANGE, Susan 1996 "House Passes Bill for Changing 1996 The Retreat of the State: The Dolphin-Safe Tuna Label." USIA. 8-1. diffusion of Power in the World Econ­ STROBEL, Frederick R. PIORE, Michael J. and Charles F. Sabel 1993 Upward Dreams, The Economic 1984 The Second Industrial Divide: Decline of the American Middle Class. Possibilities for Prosperity. New York: Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Basic Books. SWEE2Y, Paul PRUDENCIO, Rodrigo 1942 Theories of Capitalist Development. 1997 "NWF Efforts Lead to New Interna­ New York: Monthly Review Press. tional Dolphin Protection." National SWYNGEDOUW, Erik Wildlife Federation. Spaces of Globalization. New York: REICH, Robert B. The Guilford Press. 1991 The Work of Nations. New York: TOURAINE, Alain Alfred A. Knopf. 1981 The Voice and the Eye: An Analysis RIEFF, David of Social Movements. New York: Cam­ 1993 "Multiculturalism's silent partner." bridge University Press, Harpers. 287:62-72. ROBERTSON, Roland 1992 Globalization. Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage. ROSS, Robert J. S. and Kent C. Trachte NOTES 1990 Global Capitalism: The New Leviathan. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. * Department of Sociology Sam Houston RUBNER, Alex State University U.S.A. 1 1990 The Might of the Multinationals. The In this case the Clinton Administration Rise and Fall of the Corporate Legged. is equated with the concept of the U.S. New York: Praeger. State. Though the concept of the State SPYBEY, Toni involves a broader group of agents and 1996 Globalization and World Society. agencies, in this instance we employ the Cambridge: Polity Press. action of the U.S. Administration to illustrate State actions. It is also

Jnremational JoumaJ of Sociology of Agriculture and Food-Revis/a /ntemational de Sociologia sabre Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198 111 important to note that opposition to the the Panama Declaration realigns domestic Clinton Administration actions within the legislation with the frameworks of State apparatus exists. As indicate in the transnational bodies such as WTO and text, a number of members of Congress NAFTA. This is a situation which cannot oppose the end of the bad on purse-seine. be ignored. However, it is also important to note that 4 Here the concept of hegemony is fragmentation within the State apparatus employed in its classical meaning. As is far from being as pronounced as it was illustrated by Antonio Gramsci (1971), during the early phase of the tuna­ hegemony refers to the ability of social dolphin controversy {Bonanno and groups to develop political strategies Constance 1996). In that instance both which are supported by other segments of the legislative and judiciary branch of the the social sphere. The latter identify and State stood in sharp contrast with its share the project of the hegemonic group executive branch. and on these bases together they 2 To be sure, proponents of the Panama constitute a movement which is able to Declaration argue that the reintroduction conquer or control power in society. of the purse-seine technology is environ­ mentally sound. The core of their thesis rests, however, only on scientific evidence that shows that dolphin populations have been stable and therefore it is possible to tolerate a certain degree of mortality. Additionally claims that alternative forms of fishing hamper tuna reproductive capacities by killing young fish are only anecdotally supported. 3 It could be argued at this point that the Panama Declaration is simply an international agreement among independ­ ent nations. Therefore, it is not the indication of the emergence of transna­ tional forms of the State. This objection, however, runs counter to the fact that the Panama Declaration is an overall effort to place the regulation of domestic affairs in a transnational context. More specifically,

112 International Journal of Sociology ol Agriculture and Food-Re vista lnlemational de Sociologia sabre Agricultura y Alimentos Vol. 7198