Blog Posts

Refleksaun husi Comandante Fidel Castro: Presu husi Lia Los

12/7/2016

Refleksaun husi Comandante Fidel Castro
Presu husi lia los
Author; Fidel Castro
Tradutor; Tomas Freitas

Iha buat ida mak obriga hau hodi hakerek faktus kona ba eventu seriu balun nebe sei akontese iha tempo mai dadaun ne.

Iha ita nian tempo, ita nudar ema, susar atu gasta tempu tinan sanulu ou sanulu resin lima par hodi enfrenta risku mak lolos, risku nebe mak ema barak lakohi rekunyese. Mesmo nia atu Obama fali ou ema seluk, nia sei la fo tempo atu rekunyese. Hau hateten ida ne husi perspektiva realistiku, so uniku lia-los sei fo ita kontente no dada i’is esperansa nian. Ita tenke enfrenta tempo wainhira ita kolia kona ba kunyesementu. Ita laiha direitu para manipula ema seluk ou manipula ita nian a’an.

Mayoria opiniaun publiku iha kunyesementu naton kona ba risku nebe mai dadaun ne.
Buat ne la simples katak rudal misiles ne aponta hela ba akampomentu militar balun iha Syria neba. Maybe ninian faktus mak ne Corazem husi nasaun ida ne nian, nebe alokadu iha centru muslumano biliaun ida resin, nebe luta ho esperito nebe Proverbial mak kunyesidu ho ‘resiste to mate hodi defende sira nian nasaun’.

Ema hotu hatene katak Bashar Al-Assad la’os politik nain. Nia estuda medicina, graduadu iha 1988 no especialista iha Ophthalmology. Nia foti pozisaun politiku ne depois de nian aman Hafez Al-Assad, mate iha tinan 2000 no depois insidente grave ida akontese ba ninian maun, molok nia simu kargu ne.

Membro hotu kedas husi NATO nian, nebe mak halo koaligasaun sein kondisaun (tanpa syarat) ho Estadus Unidos, inklui mos nasaun riku mina nebe halo aliadu ho imperiu sira iha mediu-oriente neba hodi kontinua fornese kombustivel, produtu nebe mak sira fiar sei kontinua akumula durante tinan biliaun ida resin. Maibe, energia nebe produs husi partikel hydrogenetiku nebe hodi halo nuclear, sei mohu iha tinan 60 nulu nian laran, tanba, Konsekuensia husi akumulasaun efeitu gas carbo-dioxida (gas berracun) nebe’e sei kontinua aumenta ho rytmu ida nebe lao makas los, depois de investementu bot husi teknolojia ho ekipamentus.

Buat seluk tan, sei serteza katak wainhira tama iha 2040, iha tinan 27 mai ne, servisu barak iha futuru mai, ijemplu hanesan polisia nian servisu sei ezekuta husi robot sira. Ita bot sira bele imajina tok oinsa ita deskuti ho robot ida, makina komputador nebe bele halo kalkulasaun barak iha minutu ida nian laran. Ne mak faktus ida ita la imajina iha tempo uluk liu ba.

Iha oras balun liu ba, iha loron Segunda, 26 de Agostu, iha relatoriu lubun mak publika husi husi ajensia noticia klasiku balun, nebe kunyesidu hanesan servisu sophistikadu no hetan selu husi Estadus Unidos, komesa desimina informasaun balun mak mai husi Edward Snowden, nebe hateten Snowden tenke hela iha Rusia tanba Cuba agora hetan pressaun husi Estadus Unidos.

Hau la hatene sekarik iha ema ida iha fatin seluk, mak fo hatene ba Edward Snowden kona ba informasaun klasifikadu hirak ne, tanba ne laos hau nian servisu. Maibe hau le’e no hare’e noticias, livros nebe publika iha mundo. Hau admira korazem no statementu nebe justu hateten husi Edward Snowden, tuir hau nian opiniaun nia selu tusan ona ba mundo, desde nia esklarese buat ladiak kona ba implementasaun politika dihonestidade ou bosok ten, nebe mai husi emperiu mak forca tebes, emperiu nebe sempre hateten lia bosok hodi manipula mundo tomak.

Maibe, hau sei la konkorda ho se-se deit, mesmo que ida ne ninian qualifikasaun servisu, atu koalia e nome Cuba.

Folin husi lia-los. Se mak deklara? Journal ida iha Russian “Kommersant”. Journal ne halo defamasaun saida? Bazeia ba ajensia noticia Reuters, journal Kommersant halo quotasaun bazeia ba fontes balun mak mai husi State Department Estadus Unidos America nian. “razaun mak, iha minutu ikus, Autoridade Cubano officialmente hetan autorizasaun hodi hapara Edward Snowden molok nia sae aviaun Aeroflot”.

Bazeia ba noticia husi journal ne, Snowden toba kalan rua iha Konsuladu Russia iha Hong-Kong wainhira nia deklara ninian intensaun atu semo ba America Latina liu husi Russia.

Sekarik hau hakarak, hau bele koalia kona ba asuntu ne, tamba hau hatene didiak asuntu ne ninian lalaok.

Ohin hau asiste imajem intersante ida Presidente Republika Bolivarian Venezuela nian, Nicolas Maduro, durante ninian vizita iha Ro’o Ahi funu Naval Russia nian nebe halo destakasaun vizita iha Venezuela, depois de vizita tiha Havana ho Nicaragua.

Hau mos admira hare liu husi imajem visual, wainhira presidente Venezuela ba vizita Ro’o-Ahi funu ne. iha imajem ne hatudu movemento radars, kapabilidade monitoriza, abilidade aktividade operasional mak avansadu liu iha Ro’o-Ahi naval ne.

Apar de ida ne, hau mos levanta tiha ona atu halo investigasaun ida husi statement journal ambisiozu “Kommersant”.

Iha kualker tempu, ne hanesan uniku preserve media ida mak halo servisu extreme direita nian mak kontra-revolusionario, nebe mak kontente tebes hare’e oinsa governu konservativu husi London haruka sira nian bombardeio ba bomba baze-aeroportu iha Cyprus, kontente mos hare’e wainhira sira atu lansa sira nian bomba nebe atu hatun forsa patriota sira iha Syria, journal ne mos kontente publika, ema rihun ba rihun nebe’e hetan oho husi author sira nebe halo golpe foer iha Egyptu, nudar rai ida nebe hanesan mos fuan husi mundo arabi nian.

Ida ne mos kontra historia (Backdrop) katak naval ho aero signifika emperiu sira atu prepara lansa sira nian genocida hasoru povu Arabi.

Buat hirak ne malorek los katak Estadus Unidos sei no sempre koko fo presaun ba cuba, hanesan sira halo bain-bain tiha ona iha Nasoens Unidos ou iha instituisaun publiko no privado iha mundo. Ida ne mak identidade ou karakteristik governu husi nasaun ida ne; sei imposible atu hetan expektasaun seluk husi sira. Ida ne mak razaun ita halo resistensia durante tinan 54 nian laran – no ita sei kontinua resisti ba kualker tempu adisional mak sei iha, ita la persija komprimisu wainhira defende ita nian nasaun no konfronta kriminozus bklokeio ekonomia sira nebe mai husi emperiu nebe forte.

Ita nian falansu durante ne mak, ladun konsege estuda barak iha tempu nebe limitadu ne.

Fidel Castro Ruz,
27 Agostu 2013
8:34Pm

Versaun original iha lian Inglesh ho titulu “The Tariffed Truth”
fontes: http://en.cubadebate.cu/reflections-fidel/2013/12/23/tariffed-truth/#respond

0 Comments

Legendario El Comandante Fidel Castro lori cuba survevivo hasoru blokeia ekonomia

11/28/2016

0 Comments

Legendario El Comandante Fidel Castro
Lori Cuba Survevivo hasoru blokeia ekonomia
Author Tomas Freitas

Introdusaun

Moris ho naran kumpletu Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz, iha sidade kiik-oan ida naran Biran, povinsia Holguin, Cuba, loron 13 de Agostu 1926. Fidel, iha bin alin nain nen; mane tolu no feto tolu; mane rua seluk mak inklui Ramon, no Raul, no feton nain tolu mak; Angela, Emma no Agustina. Sira nian aman imigrante mak mai husi Spanyol, hela kleur iha Cuba no iha plantasaun bot. nudar ema riku nian oan, tan ne Fidel bele estuda iha eskola privado Jesuita nebe diak, no atende iha kolegio Dolores no kolegiao Belen iha Havana, depois akava tiha kolegio, Fidel kontinua estudu iha fakuldade direito iha Universidade Havana.

Wainhira esstudu iha universidade, Fidel gosta liu joga bola-basket, tebe-bola no bisbol. Alende ne, Fidel mos gosta halimar Catur, iha 1966 Fidel konsege organiza Olimpiade Catur iha Havana, no Fidel konsege halimar catur hasoru pecatur kunyesidu mak hanesan Tigran Petrosian no Bobby Fischer. Hafoin tiha manan revolusaun, Fidel mos promove modalidade seluk mak hanesan, Bola Voley, atletik, Judo, Gulat, Anggar, Boxer no seluk tan.

Haktuir sasin husi Fidel nian alin rasik Ramon Castro, hateten katak sira nian aman fo eskola Fidel iha fakuldade direitu ho intensaun atu aban bain rua, Fidel bele sai advogadu diak ida hodi defende sira nian rai no plantasaun. Maibe realidade hatudu oin seluk, depois remata remata tiha ninian estudu, Fidel aplika lei reforma agraria, nebe’e fahe hotu rai no plantasaun bot ba iha povu no agrikultores nebe mak la iha rai, inklui fahe rasik ninian aman nian plantasaun ba povu kamponeses.

Vida Aktivista

Moris iha vida aktivista, Fidel komunga tiha ona valor justica social, hahu’u kedas husi tinan 1947-1950, Fidel ba nasaun Republika Dominicana hamutuk ho aktivista sira iha neba hodi luta hatun ditadura Rafael Trujillo, maibe iha momentu neba sira la konsege hatun rejime ditadura ne. Fidel mos iha momentu neba ba Bogota, Columbia hamutuk ho aktivista revolusionariu sira hodi halo demonstrasaun hasoru Governu Columbia iha tempo neba.

Iha tinan 1950 wainhira Fidel kontinua fali ninian estuda iha universidade, situasaun politika Cuba hahu’u manas, movementu iha universitario komesa bok a’an tanba la gosta ho rejime ditadura Ramon Grau (1944-1948) nebe kunyesidu koruptu no represivu. Fidel iha tempu neba involve mos iha movementu ne, ninian kolega sira kunyese Fidel hanesan aktivista mak progresivu no revolusionario. Iha tempo neba, Fidel hetan influensa barak husi ideas-ideas herois Cubano Jose Marti, Fidel mos hola parte nudar membru Partidu Ortodoxo ho ideologia Nasionalista-Esquerda. Partido ne popular los, no iha momentu neba iha prediksaun katak partidu Ortodoxo ne sei manan elisaun iha tinan 1953, maibe molok elisaun Flugencio Batista halo golpe (kudeta) uluk no ukun Cuba ho represivu, no ditadura. Wainhira Batista ukun, partidu hotu nia taka, universidade barak nia hapara, media jornalista sira nian fo presaun para labele koalia, maibe demonstrasaun kontinua nafatin, no paple Fidel nian iha tempu neba halo rekrutamentu ba estudante sira para hola parte iha movementu klandestina. Fidel, ho ninian kompanhero sira komesa organizadu inklui mos aprende kona ba oinsa halo gerilya urbana hasoru rezime ditadura Flugencio Batista.

Nudar Gereleiro

Iha loron 26 de Julio 1953, Fidel hamutuk ho ninian kompanheros atus ida lima nulu resin ba halo atakasaun iha akampomentu military ida iha Moncada, fora husi sidade Santiago. Maibe atakasaun ne falha tiha, Fidel ho ninian kolega sira ema kaer, barak mak hetan tiru mate, no tortura, barak mak hatama ba kadeia inklui Fidel mos. Iha Septembro 1953, Fidel ho ninian kolega sira ema lori ba tribunal, no iha neba, iha Fidel nian pledoi hateten katak “Historia mak sei liberta hau” (History will Absolve Me). Iha testamunha jornalista ida hateten katak, momentu neba, Fidel tuku meja maka’as no hateten “Historia mak sei liberta hau” juiz no procurador sira nonok deit e la koalia liafuan ida. Fidel simu kadeia prizaun ba tinan sanulu-resin lima, hamutuk ho nian alin Raul Castro. Fidel ho Raul tama kadeia ladun kleur tanba iha tinan 1955 Fidel ho ninian compatriotas sira simu Amnestia no livre husi governu Batista. Durante iha kadeia laran, Fidel le’e livro barak nebe’e mak hakerek husi Karl Marx, Lenin, Jose Marti, Freud inklui mos Shakespeare. Hafoin sai husi kadeia, Fidel deside ho Raul halao viagem ba Mexico hodi planu fali sira nian revolusaun, wainhira iha Mexico, Fidel hasoru Ernesto “Che” Guevara, nebe mos iha ideas no ideologia komunismo mak hanesan. Che Guevara, konkorda ho Fidel nian planu no hola parte mos iha asaun hirak mai.

Depois se’es a’an tiha ba Mexico, Fidel ho ninian Compatriotas nain 81 halo planu tama fali mai Cuba uza ro’o bero ida naran “Granma”, maibe planu ne falha tanba hetan atakasaun husi Batista nian ema sira wainhira ro’o Granma ne halo destakasaun, entre sira nain walu nulu resin ida ne, so 21 peasoas deit mak konsege moris, nebe inklui Fidel, Raul no Che, sira nain rua nulu resin ida ne, konsege se’es an ba iha foho Sierra Maestra, iha foho ne Fidel hamutuk ho ninian Compatriotas sira halo akampomentu de baze vermelha, no halao gerilya durante tinan tolu resin, no konsege hatun forca Batista nian iha loron 1 de Janeiro 1959, no loron ne mos kunyesidu hanesan loron revolusaun Cuba nian.

Revolusaun Cuba

Iha fulan Janeiro 1959, provizoriumente governante Cuba lidera husi ema liberal ida naran Manuel Urrutia Lleo, liu tiha fulan ida, iha loron 16 de Fevereiro 1959, Fidel hetan tomada de pose nudar Primeiro Ministro Cubano. Depois simu tiha tomada de pose, Fidel halao vizita ida ba iha nasaun Estadus Unidos, no iha fulan Maio 1959, Fidel fila fali mai Cuba no halo kedas lei ida kona ba reforma agraria. Politika reforma agraria hetan opozisaun maka’as husi konkistador sira (tuan tanah) nebe iha rai no plantasaun bot iha Cuba. Fidel, nian politika fahe rai ba ema rai laiha, rai primeiro mak nia fahe, ninian aman nian plantasaun, nebe Fidel fahe ba kamponeses sira mak rai laiha.

Fidel nian politika reforma agrarian, hetan opzisaun maka’as husi governu Manuel Urrutia, tan ne iha loron 23 de Julio 1959, Povo barak inklui Camponeses sira ezizi Fidel para sae ba Presidente da Republika hodi troka tiha Manuel Urrutia.

Revolusaun iha Cuba la’os deit mak reforma agraria, maibe mos inklui politika elimina analfabeto, nebe depois de revolusaun, Fidel halao programa kampanye “Se’e mak hatene tenke hanorin, no se mak la hatene tenke aprende”. Fidel konsege mobiliza ema sira iha sidade hodi tun hotu ba baze, area rural. Politika kontra analfebetismo ne halao durante fulan 6 nian laran, no wainhira iha tempu kalan sira uza Petro-Max hodi hanorin lee no hakerek ba sira nian povo tomak iha baze neba. Iha tempo rai-loron sira ajuda Agrikultor, Camponeses sira hodi servisu iha to’os no plantasaun.

Revolusaun seluk mak Fidel ho ninian Camarada Companhero sira implementa mak nasionaliza kompania estranzeiro sira, no mos komesa dezenho politika saude no Edukasaun gratuitu, inklui mos promove seitor agrikultura urbana.

Tentasaun Asasinadu husi CIA

Tanba deit Fidel nian politika revolusionario kontra maka’as ideologia kapitalista, Fidel sai hanesan tarjetu numer 1 husi kualker tentasaun asasinadu nebe organiza husi CIA Estadus Unidos. Durante iha ninian vida moris, iha tentasaun atu oho Fidel hamutuk dala 638, tentasaun hirak ne liu husi; tau veneno iha kaneta (lapizera), tau veneno iha Cerutu mak Fidel gosta fuma, tau veneno iha roupa luku tasi Fidel nian, no buat seluk-seluk tan.

Ajuda liberta nasaun seluk iha Africa

So uniku lider nasaun nian mak orienta ninian forca armada ba funu hodi liberta nasaun seluk mak Fidel Castro. Mais ou menus iha nasaun lubuk ida iha Africa mak hetan apoiu militar direitamente husi Forca Armada Cubano, nasaun hirak ne mak hanesan; Africa do Sul, Algeria, Angola, Congo, Eitophia, Guine-Bissau, Guinea-Equatoria, Libya, Namibia, Sierra-Leonne, Somalia, Zimbabwe, no seluk seluk tan.

Iha tinan 1991, Nelson Mandela, halao vizita ba Cuba, no to’o iha neba, Mandela hato’o obrigado no rekunyese povu Cubano nian apoiu ba Mandela nian grupo nebe’e funu kontra forca rasista Apartheid. Iha tinan 1975, Fidel hato’o orientasaun ba Cuba ninian forca armada ba funu hasoru rejime Apartheid, rejime nebe’e lidera husi Cuito Cuanavale, rejime mak hakarak malae mutin deit mak ukun iha Africa do Sul. Mandela louva tebes ba prinsipio Internasionalism Cuba nian, nebe’e laos koalia deit ho ibun maibe aplika dunik iha pratika.

Bloku Soviet no Blokeia Ekonomia

Cuba konsege survevivo wainhira Soviet rahun, iha period 1986 Revolusaun Cuba tama iha period Rectifikasaun ba Erru no tendensia Negativu hodi resposta ba stagnasi politika no ekonomia Cuba nian. Rectifikasaun no mudansa ba politika no ekonomia Cuba nian ne akontese hanesan konsekuensia ba Soviet nian manajementu ekonomia no Sistema planeamentu iha Cuba desde 1973. Fidel dissolve tiha Sistema ne, hodi troka fali ho Che Guevara nian ideas, hodi redus exportasaun mas-midar ba fali diversifikasaun produsaun domestiko, ou iha termus ekonomia dehan; redus interese kapitalista nian mak hakarak halo exportasaun liu husi hasae produsaun rai laran. Che Guevara nian ideas prefere liu aumenta atendementu iha parte saude, edukasaun no social nian (Welfare provision) duke servisu maka’as exporta uniku produtu ba rai-liur. Durante bloku Soviet rahun, Cuba nian merkadu exporta mos tun husi $6bn iha 1990 to’o $2bn iha 1993, kresimentu ekonomia mos tun ba 35%, investementu internasional most un ba 80% (Brundenius,a 2002). Krizi hirak ne akontese tanba Estadus Unidos forma blokeia ekonomia hasoru Cuba.

Durante period especial ne, birokrasia estadu Cuba nian halo reforma nebe’e pragmatiku hodi introdus estimulasaun ekonomia ba sira nian povu mak hanesan; #Desentraliza Empressa publiku estadu nian (State Owned Enterprises) nebe fornese kompetensia ba autonomia financeiru, #Entrega 75% rai estadu nian transfere ba kooperativa nebe bele halo produsaun ai-han, #Inisia joint venture ho capital estranjeiru sira, #Introdus moeda dollar iha transaksaun merkadu domestiku, #Promove tourismo lokal, no #Fo licensa ba empressa privada nebe ninian skala-kiik (Brundenius,a 2002).

Iha tempo neba Cuba simu kritika barak husi liur nebe’e hateten katak Cuba implementa ekonomia liberal nian, kritika hirak ne dehan katak reforma ne konsidera sei fo impaktu negative ba mekanismu merkadu mak durante ne establese tiha ona. Maibe Cuba konsege kanaliza idea ”ekonomia liberal” ne ba fali Cuba nian modelu dezenvolvementu socialista nian nebe’e promove; produtu organiku (Organic Farming), tekniku rotasaun hodi produs ai-han (Crop rotation techniques), promove Agrikultura Urbana (Organoponicos), utilizasaun fali biskleta ba servisu, introdus enerjia alternative (solar energy) no promove eco-tourismu (Brundenius,a 2002).

Cuba nudar nasaun socialista depois de Soviet nakfera, no Estadus Unidos halo blokeia ba ekonomia ba sira. Iha periodu ne, Cuba tenke buka parseiru foun hodi introdus sira nian modelu diversifikasaun ekonomia. Cuba konsege konvense investementu husi nasaun liur balun mai iha Cuba, dadus hatudu katak, investementu rai-liur iha tinan 1996 to’o 2000 sae husi miliaun $82 to’o miliaun $400 (Brundenius,b 2002). Iha tinan 2000 Cuba konsege establese 400 joint ventures entre investementu rai liur ho estadu Cubano, nebe iha lei investementu klaru hateten katak Shares (saham) estadu Cubano nian tenke liu 51% kompara ho investidor rai-liur nian. Governu Cubano iha regulamentu que forte, mak entrega kompetensia ba governu ho halo mediasaun entre interese investidor estranjeiros ho interese trabalhadores Cubano sira. Governu Cubano iha regulamentu regirozu tebes, inklui regulamento kona ba pagamento nian, kondisaun trabalhadores nian, no mos iha regulamento mak regulariza impaktu produsaun ba iha enviromento. Investor sira husi nasaun liur mak investe sira nian osan iha tempo neba mak hanesan; Spanyol investe (23%), Canada (19%), Italia (9%), Fraanca (4%), Britania & Mexico (3.5% husi kada nasaun), numeros presentajem hirak ne hatudu katak Cuba nian poitika diversifikasaun merkadu suksesu no implementa ho diak (Brundenius,b 2002).

Hodi ultrapasa blokeiu ekonomia durante tinan 50 resin, alende diversifika ekonomia no bolu investidor estranzeiros mai Cuba. Fidel halo kooperasaun ho China nebe’e fo kreditu ba Cuba hodi hadiak Sistema transporte mak efisiensi. Halo mos kooperasaun ho Malaysia nebe’e ajuda iha parte Informasaun Technologia nian, nebe’e fa’an komputador ho folin baratu ba Cuba. Fidel mos liu husi Aliadu Bolivariano (ALBA) hamutuk ho nasaun America latina nain 9, halo kooperasaun iha parte ekonomia nian, mak hanesan; #hari’I Banco Regional ida hosi fo imprestimo ba AlBA nininian membru sira do que ba impresta fali iha Banku Mundial ou FMI, #kria televizaun ALBA nian para fo fo noticia mak independente sobre dezenvolvementu iha nasaun America Latina, #Atu kria no establese America Latina nian osan rasik para halo balansu ba Dollar Americano, no Euro. Alende koperasaun regional, Cuba mos halo kooperasaun bilateral ho Venezeula, liu husi lideransa Presidente Hugo Chaves. Kooperasaun ne mak hanesan barter ho Venezuela, nebe’e Venezuela husu 20.000 doutor Cubano, inklui professor eskola desportu nian, iha parte seluk Venezuela faan mina baratu ba Cuba.

Investe iha seitor Saude

Kunyesido nudar nasaun socialista nebe’e bazeia ba prinsipio soidariadade e humanismo, Fidel konsege lori Povu Cubano miliaun sanulu resin ida hodi ultra-pasa krizi no blokeiu ekonomia nebe Estadus Unidos aplika ba Cuba. Iha parte Saude nian, entre tinan 1990 – 2003, numeros doutor Cubano aumenta 76%, numero dentista aumenta 46%, numeros parteiras aumenta 16% (Caller, 2009), numeros centro nebe tau matan ba ema katuas ho ferik sira aumenta 107%, uma ba ema difisiente sira aumenta ba 47%, numeros labarik kiik mate tun maka’as husi 11.1% iha tinan 1989 to’o 6.4% iha tinan 1999.

Entre tinan 1992 – 1996, Cuba investe osan liu $1bn ba iha industria biotechnology no pharmaceutical, no haruka sira nian scientista sira ba aprende iha centro piskiza e laboratoriu sira mak iha America Latina, Swedia, Spanyol, no Alemanha (Chinweizu, 2009). Resultadu husi treinamentu ne, konsege produs numero Scientista hamutuk 12,000 no establese centru biotechnology laboratoriu 52 iha Cuba (Fawthrop, 2004). Iha tinan 2009, numeros cluster scientista aumenta tan ba 14, nebe’e namkare iha ilha tomak, halo kooperasaun ho 120 centru peskiza no fo servisu ba 30,000 pesoas resin (Revolutionary Communist Group, 2009).

Industria biotechnology ne, konsege asegura Cuba nian sistema saude liu husi produs 160 product no halo produsaun aimoruk rasik ba sira nian populasaun liu miliaun 11 resin. Industria hirak ne, hanesan empressa publiko estadu nian nebe’e responde ba nesisidade povu Cubano nian. Alende fornese aimoruk ba iha rai-laran, Cuba mos produs (inventions) aimoruk oin atus ida resin iha nivel internasional desde tinan 1959. Iha tinan 1996, Cuba exporta produtu pharmacia no hetan osan kuaze miliaun $54 resin. Iha tinan 2009, Cuba nian produtu pharmacia konsege export aba iha nasaun 58 resin no hetan ninian retornu miliaun $500 resin (Yaffe, 2009).

Fidel mos establese Cuba nian programa Mediku Internasionalismo, hahu’u husi wainhira fo apoiu emergensia iha Chile wainhira akontese rai-nakdoko iha tinan 1960, no liu tiha tinan rua nulu resin, brigade mediku mos haruka ba nasaun sanulu resin nen (Kirk & Erisman 2009). Iha fulan Novembro 2008, Cuba iha 17,697 doutor mediku nebe servisu iha 75 nasaun, numero ne la inklui 20,847 Cuba nian professional saude sira. Cuba nian brigade mediku halao servisu nasaun 27, no barak liu mak fora de nasaun America Latina. Cuba mos iha programa uza doutor Cubano durante tinan sanulu nian laran depois sei troka fali ho estundante medicina iha nasaun refere nebe treinadu husi doutor Cubano sira (Caller, 2009).

Comandante Fidel Castro mos hari’i Eskola Medisina America Latina (ELAM) nebe’e inagura iha Novembro 1999, iha estudantes hamutuk rihun rua resin (2,000) husi nasaun 18. Estudantes hirak ne, eskola gratuitu, han no kustu moris mos gratuitu durante eskola no hela iha Cuba. Graduadu Eskola Medisina Amerika Latina ne hahu’u iha tinan 2005 nebe representa estudantes husi nasaun 28 husi America Latina, inklui mos estudantes husi nasaun Estadus Unidos America no mos estudantes rihun ida resin husi Timor-Leste.

Iha 2001, eskola internasional kona ba Edukasaun physical no desportu establese, no iha 2005 konsege halo graduasaun ba estudantes liu 1,200 resin husi nasaun 75 nebe mai husi Africa, Asia no America Latina (Porter, 2012).

Asistensia Edukasional

Cuba laos deit kunyesidu ho programa saude, maibe iha mos programa kampanye ba kontra analfabeto, kampanye hodi hanorin ema lee no hakerek. Durante Fidel nian governancia, Fidel Castro introdus programa kampanye ba literacia, Cuba hahu’u fornese sira nian asistensia ba iha nasaun Angola iha tinan 1978 no 1981. Iha tinan 1987 mais ou menus estudantes Angolanos rihun hat resin (4,000) estuda iha Cuba, no iha tinan 1980, profesores husi Cuba join Cruzada iha Nicaragua, liu husi dezenvolve metodu hanorin simples, Cubano sira konsege dezenvolve programa literacia nebe’e adapta lian mak oin-oin husi nasaun 28. Programa ne implementa iha nasaun 15 iha America Latina nebe’e kordena husi specialist Cubana sira. Programa ne involve ema liu miliaun 3.6 resin husi 23 nasaun (Muhr, 2013:109). Husi Nova Zelandia to’o Nigeria, no husi Guatemala to’o Equatorial Guinea, aprende tiha ona le’e no hakerek uza programa ne. programa ne iha lingua versaun kuaze sanulu resin rua, nebe inklui uza lian Quechua no Aymara ba nasaun Bolivia, uza lian Creole ba nasaun Haiti, uza lian tetum ba Timor-Leste, no uza lian Swahili ba nasaun lubukida iha Africa neba.

Konkluzaun

Artiklu ne, konsege hatudu katak Comandante Fidel Castro, ema ida nebe komunga prinsipio socialism no Comunismo nian, nebe sempre kontra injustica, no kontra rejime ditadura iha nasaun nebe deit, ijemplu liu husi pratika hatudu iha nasaun lubuk ida iha Africa neba, laos koalia slogan deit maibe fo tulun nebe laiha interese. Liu husi Fidel ninian lideransa Cuba konsege ultrapasa krizi ekonomia wainhira hasoru sanksaun blokeia ekonomia, Fidel adopta Che Guevara nian ideas diversifikasaun ekonomia nebe’e prefere liu asegura atendementu baziku iha parte saude no Edukasaun, no kanaliza investementu rai liur ba iha seitor productivo nebe’e lao ho orientasaun ekonomia popular no alternativu. Adeus Comandante Fidel Castro, Faleceu 25 de Novembro 2016.

Referensia

Brundenius, C., 2002. ‘Whither the Cuban Economy after Recovery? The Reform Process, Upgrading Strategies and the Question of Transition’, Journal of Latin American Studies, No. 34:2, pp. 365-95, pp. 374 and 384.

Brundenius, C., 2002 ‘Cuban Economy’, Journal of Latin American Studies, No. 34:2, pp. 383-84.
Caller, H., 2009. ‘Socialism is Healthier’, Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism! 208, April-May 2009, availbale at http://www.ratb.org.uk/frfi/208.html

Castro, F., 1989. ‘Fidel Castro Speech, 26 July 1989’, available at http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/1989/esp/f260789e.html

Castro, R.,2009. ‘Raul Castro speech to the National Assembly of People’s Power, 1 August 2009, Available at http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/rauldiscursos/2009/ing/r010809i.html

Che Guevara, E., 1970. ‘Algeria’, in Ernesto Che Guevara: Obras 1957-1967, Vol. 2, Havana, Casa de Las Americas, pp. 574-75.

Che Guevara, E., 2003. ‘Fidel Castro Speech, 8 October 1987’, in Ernesto Che Guevara: el gran debate, Havana, Ocean Press, p. 399.

Chinweizu, C., 2009. ‘Cuban Socialism Shows the Way for Biotech and Pharma’, Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism!,210, AugustSeptember 2009, Available at http://www.ratb.org.uk/frfi/210.html

Díaz, M, E.,2009. ‘Cuba: Economic Restructuring, Recent Trends and Major Challenges’, on Monthly Review website, 19th April 2009, Available at http://monthlyreview.org/mrzine/molina130409.html

Fawthrop, T., 2004. ‘Cuba Ailing? Not Its Biomedical Industry’, The Straits Times, 26 January 2004, Available at http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/cuba-ailing-not-its-biomedical-industry

Kirk, M, J., & Erisman, M, H., 2009. ‘Cuban Medical Internationalism: Origins, Evolution, and Goals, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, p. 93.

Mesa-Lago, C.,2007. ‘The Cuban Economy in 2006-2007: Fidel’s Legacy and Raul’s Policies’, paper presented at the Association for the Study of the Cuban Economy annual conference, 2-4 August.

Muhr, T., 2013. ‘Counter-Globalization and Socialism in the 21st Century: The Bolivarian Alliance for People of Our America’, Routledge, New York.

Porter, C., 2012. ‘Cuba-trained doctors making difference around the world’, the Star, available at https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2012/06/02/cubatrained_doctors_making_difference_around_the_world.html

Revolutionary Communist Group., 2009. ‘50 Years of Cuban Socialist Achievements of the Cuban Revolution’, Available at https://www.scribd.com/document/49208741/50-years-of-Cuban-Socialism-achievements-of-the-Cuban-revolution

Yaffe, H., 2009. ‘Journal of Iberian and Latin American Research’ (JILAR), vol. 15:2, December 2009, pp 145-162. Available at http://ratbnews.blogspot.com/p/cuban-development-inspiration-for-alba.html

0 Comments

Komparasaun entre ekonomia Marxismo no Neoclassical Analiza ba diferensia entre individualista no klasse iha ekonomia

4/30/2016

0 Comments

ESSAY PAPER
Analiza ba diferensia entre individualista no klasse iha ekonomia;
Komparasaun entre ekonomia Marxismo no Neoclassical
Hakerek-Nain: Tomas Freitas

Introdusaun
Neoclassical economics iha influensa ba ekonomia kapitalista ohin loron; buat nee bele hare’e iha konseitus balun ‘merkadu mak determina presu’, no tama iha etapa ida mak konsege ultra-pasa teoria ‘Labour Theory of Value’, nebe eziste iha tempu inisiu Classical Economics nian. Banati tuir teoria ‘Marshalian Cross’ nebe esplika kona ba teoria Supply and Demand, Neoclassical economics fiar maka’as katak merkadu mak sei fo equilibriu ba presu (Stilwell, 2002). Hanesan konsagra tiha ona iha ‘Say’s Law’ hateten katak supply ba bens e servicos bele kria rasik sira nia merkadu, (Baumol, 1999). Deklarasaun hirak nee persija halo ezaminasaun liu husi estudu empirical, inklui mos neoclassical ninian methodologia deduktivo (Deductive Methodology) mak sei susar hodi justifika. Artiklu nee sei aprezenta diferensia entre ekonomia Marxismo no Neoclassical liu-liu iha kontekstu pontu da vista individualista kontra klasses iha ekonomia agora nian (Contemporary Economy). Essay ida nee mos sei hato’o historia (Background) kona ba oinsa ideas ka teoria original mak funda Neoclassical economics, nebe moris husi ‘Proto-Marginalists’, ‘Revolutionaries’ no ‘Consolidators’, nebe sai nudar ideologia mak forte tebes iha era Capitalismo ohin loron nian.

Historia
Tradisionalmente, idea Neoclassical mai husi ema ulun bot balun iha tempu Classical economics ho ninian politica economist sira mak hanesan Adam Smith ho ninian konseitu Merkadu Livre nebe’e nia ilustra liu husi ninian livro ‘The Wealth of The Nation’, (Smith, 1776), David Ricardo ho ninian ideas ‘Marginal Principle’ (Kaldor, 1956), John Stuart Mill (2007) ho ninian teoria ‘Utilitarianism’, Jeremy Bentham (2009) ho ninian ‘Greatest Happiness’, no Jean Baptiste Say ho ninian teoria famozu ‘Say’s Law’ (Kates, 2003). Idea sira nee hotu mak fo’o inspirasaun ba ekonomista neoclassical sira balun.
Doutrina Neoclassical economy hahu’u husi ultimo 1830s to’o meiu 1850s no sai forte e influensa iha inisiu 1870s, buras no sai famozu ba klasse mediu sira iha meiu 1880s to’o meiu 1890s. Historia ida nee ita bele hare’e hanesan evolusaun ba etapa tolu ka ‘three evolutionary’ nebe inklui ‘The Proto-marginalist’, ‘The Revolutionaries’, no ‘The Consolidators’ nebe sai hanesan ideas original husi Neoclassical economy.

Proto-Marginalistas
Historikamente, evolusaun Neoclassical Economics mai husi fundador lubun balu mak konsidera hanesan autores ba Proto-Marginalists inklui Augustin Cournot, Jules Dupuit, Johann Thunen no Heinrich Gossen. Iha tinan 1838, Agustin Cournot dezenvolve tiha ona ninian ideas Research into the Mathematical Principles of Wealth (2008), Cournot mos dezenvolve no analiza teoria monopoly mak ikus mai hamosu konseitu ‘Profit-maximising producer’. Jules Dupuit hanesan engineer ba Pontes ho ninian ideas ‘Curve of Diminishing Marginal Utility’ iha 1844, (Vickers, 1995), mesmu nee, iha tinan 1861, Dupuit mos iha argumentu kapas no konsege hamosu idea ‘Free Exchange’. Johann Thunen hanesan ema Alemanha mak iha rai no plantasaun barak (German landowner) ema nee dezenvolve esensia husi ‘The Marginal Productivity Theory of Distribution’ iha tinan 1850 (Ekelund & Hebert, 1999). Ikus liu husi fundador Protagonist Marginalist mak Heinrich Gossen ho ninian idea famozu ‘Gossen Second Law’ iha tinan 1854, no deskreve; ‘equalisation between the ratios of exchange of goods to the ratio of marginal disutility of work’ (Blaug, 2003)’. Ho ninian sentido equilibriu entre lojika troka sasan no lojika marginal husi desutilizasaun de servisu. Protagonista nain hat nee hetan suksesu in termus hato’o sira nian teoria original mak ikus mai sai hanesan embrio ba teoria marginal husi neoclassical economics.

Revolusionario
Depois de Proto-Marginalista sira marka no funda tiha ideas ‘Marginal Theory’ husi 1838 to’o ba 1854, Neoclassical Economics komesa hakroat fila fali sira nia nehan liu husi revolusionario-marginalista sira mak hanesan; William Stanley Jevons, Carl Menger no Leon Walras. Iha lansamentu ba ‘Marginal Revolution’, Jevons komesa tau ninian ideas ‘Theory of Political Economy’ iha tinan 1871, Nia komesa fo emphaze ba prinsipiu husi ‘Diminishing marginal utility’ no halo introdusaun ba preferensia individual (Steedman, 1997). Depois nee iha tempu hanesan 1871, revolusionario marginalista seluk Carl Menger husi Austria introdus ninian konseitu ‘Grunds tze’ nebe konsidera hanesan idea baziku husi ‘Marginal value theory’ ka ‘Marginal utility theory’ mesmu la direitamente nia uza termus ‘Marginal’ maibe nia deklara katak konsumedores normalmente iha lista kona ba saida mak nia atu sosa no iha preferensia kona ba sasan ho kualidade diak liu nebe sei fo satisfeitu ba nia a’an, no konsumedores mos iha lista kona ba sasan nebe ladun urjente atu sosa, no sira sei sosa wainhira iha osan restu, (Streissler & Streissler, 1994). Depois de Menger reforsa ninian hanoin kona ba ‘Marginal Utility Theory’, iha tinan 1874 ekonomista ida husi Franca naran Leon Walras, nebe dezenvolve liu tan (Marginalist Theory) no ikus mai formalmente ‘Marginalist Theory’ nakfila a’an ba ‘General Equilibrium Theory’. Iha parte seluk, Walras mos hato’o ninian kontribuisaun ideas balun mak hanesan refleksaun ba monopoly merkadu no kompetisaun mak imperfecto (Tieben, 2009).

Konsolidor
Wainhira halao konsolidasaun ba ideas ekonomia neoclassical husi famozu revolusionariu-marginalista nain-tolu hanesan esplika tiha ona iha palavras mak iha leten, sei iha tan numerous ekonomista seluk mak hakarak hametin liu tan ideas nee. Ekonomista hirak nee mak hanesan; Eugen Bohm-Bawerk ho ninian ideas ‘Capital and Interest’ hakerek iha tinan 1884, iha livro ne’e esplika kona ba parte positivu husi investementu capital ho ninian retornu osan funan (Pressman, 1999). Iha mos Friedrich von Wieser nebe iha tinan 1889 hakarek teoria kona ba Imputasaun ‘Imputation Theory’ nebe deklara katak factor presu determina husi output presu (Albertazzi et al, 1996). Alfred Marshall iha tinan 1890 sai famozu tamba ninian teoria kona ba ‘Marshallian Cross’ nebe analiza merkadu bazeia ba ninian teoria ‘Supply and Demand’, (Stilwell, 2002). John Bates Clark iha tinan 1891 husi Estadus Unidos Americano, fornese ninian konseitu ho naran ‘Marginal Productivity Concept’ ho ninian fiar katak kontribuisaun ba output husi trabaladores adisional sei determina mos valor pagamentu ba trabalhador sira seluk mak persija kampo de trabalho, (Geetika et al, 2008). Irving Fisher mos hola parte iha konsolidador famozu hirak nee, nia inventa ‘Curve Device invention’ hodi kompleta Walras nian teoria ‘Equilibrium Price’ iha 1892 (Fisher, 2007). Fisher ninian servisu ikus nebe kunyesidu iha era post-Keynesian mak ‘deb-deflation theory’ iha 1933, no teoria nee mak Hyman Minsky uza hodi dezenvolve ninian teoria ‘Financial Instability Hypothesis’, (Minsky, 1986).

Hafoin Irving Fisher, ekonomista neoclassical konsolida sira servisu liu husi Knut Wicksell ho ninian ideas Value, Capital and Rent iha 1893 (Lutz, 2006). Philip Wicksteed iha tinan 1894 produs mos ninian hakerek kona ba Co-ordination of Laws of Distribution, no halo ninian kritika ba ekonomista sira balun mak prefere hodi reorganiza fali teoria kona ba distribuisaun. Wicksteed prefere atu uza matematika hanesan metodu investigasaun ho garantia alokasaun de distribuisaun (Marchionatti, 2004). Vilfredo Pareto iha tinan 1896 mos hola parte hanesan jerasaun segundu husi revolusionarios neoclassical nebe’e fornese mos ninian kontribuisaun liu husi hakerek livro kona ba Tastes-and-obstacles (Gomes, 2003) nebe’e kontinua hamoris fila fali general equilibrium theory, mesmu nee Vilfredo kunyesidu hanesan lider ida husi eskola Lausanne mak famozu hanesan eskola neoclassical mak konstrui Leon Walras nian konseitu kona ba General equilibrium theory (Andersen, 2009).

Konsolidador ikus husi neoclassical economics mak Enrico Barone, ekonomista Italiano ida mak entrega ninian dedikasaun tomak hodi banati tuir Leon Walras no Vilfredo Pareto nian ain fatin, ninian kontribuisaun bot liu ba neoclassical school mak halo influensa ba Walras hodi integra ideas balun ba tekniku produsaun (Production Technique), ninian ideas nee konsidera hanesan ekstensaun ida ba marginal productivity theory (Jaffe & Walker, 1983).

Hale’u no hatene tiha konsolidasaun ba iha teoria bar-barak mak hodi suporta ‘Neoclassical economics’ Alfred Marshall deit mak sai famozu liu no bele halo sintesa ba Jevons, Menger no Walras nian teoria. Sintesa nee kunyesidu ho ‘Marshallian Cross’ ho ilustrasaun Supply no Demand mak sai factor determina ba presu mak equilibriu, no nia fiar katak sei fo’o mos satisfeitu ba parte rua konsumedores no vendedores.

Debates Konseitus
Estuda no akompanya tiha prosesu transformasaun husi Classical Economics ba iha Neoclassical Economics, Ita bele hare’e katak originalidade husi prinsipiu merkadu livre mak sirkulasaun sasan iha merkadu (Supply & Demand) no merkadu mak sei determina presu sasan. Teoria ne’e sei desvaloriza tiha Karl Marx nian teoria ‘Labour Theory of Value’ nebe’e Marx fiar katak kualidade husi trabalhadores mak sai factor determinante ba presu sasan nian.

Atu justifika teoria bot rua mak iha leten, tuir mai artiklu nee hakarak apresenta analiza no interpretasaun klean kona ba konseitos no argumentus mak hola parte tiha ona iha teoria rua nee nian laran.

Komparasaun entre Neoclassical no Marxismo;

Deductivismo Vs Materialismo Dialetika Historia
Iha Neoclassical uza metodologia deductivismo, nebe bazeia ba John Stuart Mill, hateten katak; “ a complex subject matter like political economy can only be studied scientifically by means of the deductive method. Since so many causal factors influence economic phenomena, and experimentation is generally not possible, there is no way to employ the methods of induction directly”, (Hausman, 1992, pp14). Sentido husi palavras iha leten hateten katak; “kestaun mak komplexu hanesan political economy so bele scientifikamente estuda liu husi methodologia deductivo. Desde faktor casual barak mak influensa phenomena ekonomia no generalmente experimento la konsege halo, tamba nee mak laiha dalan hodi implementa metodologia direitamente ka ‘induction’.

La han malun ho aproximasaun Neoclassical nian kona ba Methodologia deductivo, ekonomista Marxista nian prefere liu estuda historia no prosesu, mak hanesan ejemplu balun; Materialismo Dialetika Historia, Klase Bourgesa, no Sociadade Capitalista, (Stilwell, 2002), Marxista sira hatene katak liu husi kunyesementu hirak nee sei bele fo’o imagem bot hodi kumprende konstruksaun Capitalismo modern nian, (Lunn, 1982).

Sekuandu aplika methodologia rua nee ba iha ekonomia agora nian (Contemporary Economy), sei mosu diferensia balun. Deductivismo iha era ida ne’e, sei utiliza nafatin husi ekonomista Rationalista sira (Rationalists Economists), (Katouzian, 1980) ezemplu mak hanesan instituisaun financeiru internasional sira hanesan Banku Mundial no Fundo Monetario Internasional, instituisaun rua nee sei kaer nafatin engkontru regular kona ba Annual General Meeting-AGM (IMF, 2010) hodi halo evaluasaun ba sira nian estrategia no methodologia, liu husi AGM nee mos sira bele estuda aktividade ekonomia mak sira suporta tiha ona liu husi sira nian programa, nebe dala barak sira mak deside rasik durante fulan sanulu resin rua nian laran.

Deductivismo karik bele diak mos ba ekonomista sira balun hodi halo sira nian justifikasaun depois to’o iha projeitu ninian rohan. Iha kritika balun mak ita tenke konsidera katak observasaun direita (Induction Methodology) dalaruma mos bele la konsege halo kobertura ba evidensia balun mak akontese iha fatin diferente ho tempu mak hanesan durante prosesu observasaun nian laran.
Iha biban seluk opozisaun ba deductivismo, Marxista sira fiar katak ho historia materialismo mak sei fo’o kunyesementu profundu kona ba sociadade bourgesa iha termos kumprende sistema ‘Mode of Production’ (Rockmore, 2002), Haktuir Stalin nian liafuan dehan katak “historical materialism is the extension of the principle of dialectical materialism to study of social life” (Rockmore, 2002, pp7). Nebe ho ninian sentido hateten katak “historia materialismo nee hanesan ekstensaun husi prinsipiu dialetika materialismo nebe estuda kona ba sociadade nian moris”.

Marxista sira fiar katak konseitu materialismo dialetika historia sei halo ema kumprende didiak kona ba ekonomia capitalista ohin loron nian, tamba capitalismo hanesan ‘mode of production’ ka Meius de Produsaun nebe involve karakter techniko no social, no halo produsaun ba bens e servicos. Karakter social signifika katak relasaun entre klasse, nebe’e trabalhadores hanesan klasse proletariadu no bourgesa hanesan klasse mediu mak sai nain ba fabrika ka industria, inklui mos nain ba technologia no material prima ka ‘raw material’ (Stilwell, 2002).

Individual Vs Klasses
Se’es malun ho teoria Neoclassical, ekonomista Marxista sira halo analiza foka liu ba klasse laos individual. Klasse signifika grupo proletariadu hanesan forsa de trabalho mak halo produsaun ba bens e servicos, no bourgesa hanesan capitalista mak sai nain ba meius da produsaun. Individual bazeia ba teoria Neoclassical mak konsumedor no vendedor nebe’e livre faan no sosa sira nian sasan; iha lianguazem seluk hateten katak alokasaun iha ekonomia merkadu livre, faan no sosa sasan sei akontese voluntariamente entre individual sira (Bergh, et al, 1997). Idea ‘free exchange’ ka Merkadu livre nee implementa tiha ona iha siklu 19th century nebe’e adopta husi ekonomista neo-liberal sira no ikus mai sai famozu hanesan ideologia capitalismo, mak hetan ninian suporta maka’as husi instituisaun financeiru internasionais.

Terminologia rua iha leten to’o agora sei relevante nafatin, tamba iha tendensia katak individual bazeia ba teoria Neoclassical nudar konsumedor sei iha forsa ultimo hodi determina presu sasan. Klasse iha ‘Contemporary economy’ ka ekonomia modernu mos sei relevante tamba problema ekonomia agora ninian nebe kumplexu hamosu injustisa iha fatin servisu bar-barak, trabalhadores hanesan klasse proletariadu mak siempre lakon sira nian direitu, tamba nee iha fatin barak ona trabalhadores sira organiza a’an hodi establese sira nian sindikatu, uniaun no organizasaun legais rasik hodi proteze sira nian direitu no halo advokasia ba sira nian interese komun.

Utility Vs Value
Diferente husi teoria Neoclassical, Ekonomista Marxista sira halo analiza ba produsaun bazeia ba ‘Labour Theory of Value’ ka teoria nebe’e mak valoriza servisu trabalhadores sira bazeia ba kuantidade no kualidade forsa de trabalhadores nian. Maibe Neoclassical halo analiza ba merkadu bazeia ba ‘Theory of Utility’ ka teoria de utilizasaun, ejemplu mak hanesan sasan mak produs ba iha merkadu ninian folin sei determina husi ‘Consumer satisfaction’ ka konsumedores nian gostu, (Stilwell, 2002).

Banati tuir Carl Menger nian teoria ‘Marginal Utility Theory’, hateten katak wainhira konsumedor deside atu gasta sira nian osan hodi sosa sasan ka produtu, sira sei depende ba sasan ka produtu nebe mak hatudu ninian kualidade diak no fo satisfeitu ba konsumedor nee. Haklaken tuir William Stanley Jevons ninian teoria ‘Diminishing Marginal Utility’ katak wainhira konsumedor deside atu aloka ninian pagamentu ba iha sasan balun, konsumedor ne’e sei koko ka ezamina sasan ida ba ida no koko hodi identifika sasan ida nebe mak hatudu liu ninian kualidade ka sasan nebe mak fo liu ninian satisfeitu ba konsumedor nee, ijemplu simples mak hanesan sosa roupa ka vistidu, ema nee sei koko no hatais ida ba ida to’o nia satisfeitu no komfortavel ho ninian desizaun. Satisfeitu ho vistidu nebe mak nia deside tiha ona atu sosa, ne sei determina vistidu nian folin, tamba vendedor hatene tiha ona konsumedor nian hakarak, entaun vendedor vistidu nee sei tau folin mak a’as para atu bele hetan lukru mak maximu.

Iha realidade ‘Utiliy theory’ no ‘Labour theory of value’ sei relevante nafatin, tamba teoria rua nee bele aplika depende ba iha merkadu ka industria mak bot ka largo. Ijemplu; kuandu hau nudar konsumedor ba iha negosiante local iha area rural ou remota nebe kategoria kiik hanesan business furniture ba produs kadeira ka meja, teoria utility ka marginal utility sei susar hodi implementa tamba hau nian satisfeitu sei la bele aplika ho razaun kadeira ho meja laiha kuantidade mak barak para hau hodi ezamina ka koko tamba fatin business furniture nee laos dealer mak hatama sasan bar-barak. Business kiikoan hanesan nee normalmente determina sira nian presu rasik depende ba iha presu material prima no kustu de trabalho inklui mos lukru balun hodi hatutan ka halo bot sira nian business. Iha parte seluk sekuandu hau hanesan konsumedor no hau ba atu kompra meja ka kadeira balun iha loja bot furniture nian nebe hanesan mos ‘dealer’ ka ‘retailer’ parese hau bele aplika Utility theory tamba vendedor loja nee reprezenta kompania bot nebe iha kuantidade meja no kadeira barak hamutuk ho presu nebe variable ba hau, atu nune hau bele koko no ezamina tuir hau nian hakarak no gostu.

Equilibrium Vs Underconsumption
Bazeia ba teoria neoclassical, ‘General Equilibrium theory’ signifika katak presu ba sasan no factor mak halo produsaun ba sasan nee sei determina husi balansu ‘supply & demand’. Hanesan mos deklara tiha ona iha ‘Say’s Law’ nebe hateten katak ‘supply’ sei kria ninian ‘demand’ iha ijemplu rua mak sei bele esplika konseitu ida nee, ida; ijemplu wainhira iha tempu natal loja bar-barak hatama roupa ho kuantidade barak tamba sira fiar katak iha tempu natal konsumedores sei sosa sira nian roupa hodi ba misa no hatais ba iha loron bot. Entaun saida mak akontese wainhira roupa tama barak ema sosa mos aumenta barak no iha tempo hanesan vendedores mos hasae ninian folin makas atu hodi hetan ninian lukru barak, maibe wainhira loron bot liu tiha, folin sasan sira nee sei tun ba presu normal. Ijemplu ida temi tiha ona nee, mos reflekta teoria Marshallian Cross, nebe hateten determinasaun ba presu sei depende ba iha quantidade demand no supply, ijemplu mak hanesan ita bele hare’e iha nasaun seluk hanesan Australia, Inglatera, Estadus Unidos America ka nasaun nebe ninian ekonomia diferente ho ita, depois de natal roupa iha loja sira folin tun makas, entaun saida mak akontese iha loron ‘Boxing Day’ 26 de Dezembro dadersan sedu deit ema ba forma-linha naruk iha odamatan loja nian oin, molok loja nee loke para konsumedor sira tama ho hadauk malun sasan hodi sosa. Maibe tuir Marxian economics, sira hateten katak ‘Oversupply’ sei prejudika ‘Underconsumption’ nebe signifika katak faan sasan barak liu iha merkadu sei afekta ba konsumedores nian forsa de kompra, nebe sei bele akontese falansu iha merkadu. Ijemplu ba kazu ida nee ita la persija ba rai liur, wainhira governu hasai osan barak hodi sosa fo’os toneladas ba toneladas husi Vietnam no Laos, no laiha kalkulasaun fiksu husi forsa de kompra kada familia ida-idak, entaun saida mak akontese fo’os barak mak sai a’at iha armazem no tinan tinan ita rona katak governu sunu fo’os tamba a’at no lahuk. Ita labele fo sala ba iha falansu distribuisaun tamba distribuisaun mos hola parte sistema merkadu nian laran.

Hanesan refleksaun ba sistema merkadu iha era agora nian, wainhira presu folin tun sei provoka konsumedores hodi sosa, no wainhira konsumedores barak sosa entaun supply sasan tenke aumenta, no derepente deit vendedores hasae ninian folin no persija aumenta stock husi fabrika; no wainhira fabrika aumenta ninian suply, presu sasan nian monu fila fali. Fenomena nee mak hanesan siklus ida-idak mak kesi-malun tuir ninian movimentu nee rasik. No bazeia ba Marx nee mak ‘unstable economy’ ka ekonomia la estabil nebe’e signifika supply barak liu sei resulta konsumu menus (underconsumption), no merkadu bele monu ba krize.

Marginal Vs Structural
Originalidade teoria ‘Marginal Analysis’ mai husi David Ricardo ninian teoria ‘Marginal Principle’ nebe uza tiha ona hodi halo analiza ba ‘Rent’, ‘Leasing’ ka Aluga no ekonomista Neoclassical sira adopta tiha ona teoria nee, tamba sira fiar katak factors hotu-hotu iha relasaun ba malun. Maibe, atu aplika ba Marginal Principle Ricardo introdus tiha ona prinsipiu de substituisaun ka ‘Principle of Substitution’ ho razaun atu hodi kumprende relasaun entre trabalhadores no rai (Kaldor, 1956).
Kontradiksaun ba iha neoclassical nian teoria marginal analysis, Marx nian structural analysis halo kritika ba iha estado hanesan capitalista mak iha poder. Iha ninian manifesto communist Marx esplika exploitasaun mak halo husi bourgesa ba iha trabalhadores, no Marx identifika katak bourgesa mak iha klasses mediu ka sociadade affluente (affluent society) kontinua halo manipulasaun ho razaun hodi mantein nafatin poder capitalista. Marx konsidera sistema capitalista hanesan meius ida husi estado atu hodi proteze sira nian rezime, no iha rezime nee inklui instituisaun estado nian mak hanesan; policia, Sistema judiciariu, universidade no religiaun sira. Kritika ba iha instituisaun hirak nee ho razaun katak instituisaun sira nee mak siempre fo sira nian bensa no grasa ba estado no kria konsensia falsu ‘false consciousness’ (Newton & Deth, 2005).

Konkluzaun
Idea original mak mai husi classical economist hanesan Ricardo ho ninian marginal principle, John Stuart Mil ho Utilitarianism, Jeremy Bentham ho ninian great happiness inklui mos Jean Baptiste Say ho ninian Say’s Law, hato’o tiha ona mai katak teoria grande hirak nee hotu to’o agora sei relevante iha sociadade nian let. Transformasaun ideas husi classical mai ba neoclassical no husi neoclassical ba neo-liberal no to’o merkadu livre nee hatudu katak ekonomia iha mundo nee lao progresivu tebes.

Evolusaun husi proto-marginalista mak hanesan Cournot, Dupuit, Thunen and Gossen tun mai revolucionariu sira mak hanesan Jevons, Menger and Walras, Hamutuk ho konsolidador sira mak hanesan Bohm-Bawerk, Wieser, Marshal, Clark, Fisher, Wicksell, Wicksteed, Pareto and Barone hatudu katak ideas neoclassical halo ninian evolusaun duni bazeia ba iha dinamiku tempu neba nian no to’o agora konseitus hirak nee sei adopta nafatin iha ekonomia modern.

Essay nee explora tiha ona ideas fundamental barak husi konseitus bot rua mak mai husi ekonomia Neoclassical no Marxismo nian. Liu husi expozisaun ida nee, hato’o tiha ona mos komparasaun entre teoria elegante rua nee, liu-liu neoclassical sira nian teoria kona ba utility, marginal utility no supply & demand nebe mak desvaloriza tiha Marx nian teoria labour value of theory. Maibe iha realidade teoria hirak nee sei relevante nafatin no sei bele implementa bazeia ba kondisaun merkadu.

Iha parte seluk mos, Karl Marx hato’o tiha ona kontribuisaun teoria fundamento balun mak sei eziste iha phenomena ekonomia agora ninian. Liu husi konseitus mak hanesan materialism dialetika historia, analiza klasse, labour theory of value, underconsumption no structural analysis, argumentus no konseitus hirak nee uza tiha ona iha debates bar-barak iha arena politika ekonomia nian laran. Ijemplu mak hanesan; Marx nian teoria kona ba ‘underconsumption’ nebe iha ekonomia marxismo nian hateten katak; ‘oversupply’ sei prejudika ‘underconsumption’ no sei resulta falansu iha sistema merkadu. Mesmu iha kestaun nee ekonomista neoclassical sira fiar nafatin katak supply no demand mak sei bele kria equilibriu presu iha merkadu.

Referensia
Albertazzi, L., Libardi, M., & Poli, R., 1996. ‘The school of Franz Brentano’, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Netherlands

Andersen, S, E., 2009. ‘Schumpeter's Evolutionary Economics: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Engine of Capitalism’, Anthem Press, United Kingdom

Baumol, J, W., 1999. ‘Retrospectives Say’s Law’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol 13, No 1, pp 195-204

Bentham, J., 2009. ‘Deontology or, the science of morality: In which the harmony and co-incidence of duty and self-interest’, Bibliobazaar LLC, United States

Bergh, V, D, C, J, M, J., Straaten, V, D, J., & International Society for Ecological Economics., 1997. ‘Economy and ecosystems in change: analytical and historical approaches’, Edward Elgar Publishing, United States

Blaug, M., 2003. ‘Economic theory in retrospect’, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom

Cournot, A, A., 2008. ‘Researches into the Mathematical Principles of Wealth’, Bibliobazaar, New York

Ekelund, B, R., & Hebert, F, R., 1999. ‘Secret origins of modern microeconomics: Dupuit and the engineers’, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Fisher, I., 2007. ‘The nature of capital and income’, Cosimo Inc, New York

Geetika., Ghosh, P., & Choudhury, R, P., 2008. ‘Managerial economics’, Tata McGraw-Hill, India

Gomes, L., 2003. ‘The economics and ideology of free trade: a historical review’, Edward Elgar Publishing, United Kingdom

Hausman, M, D., 1992. ‘Essays on philosophy and economic methodology’, Cambridge University Press, United States

International Monetary Fund., 2010. ‘About the annual meetings’, available from http://www.imf.org/external/am/2010/about.htm

Jaffe, W., & Walker, A, D., 1983. ‘William Jaffe’s Essays on Walras’, Cambridge University Press, United States

Kaldor, N., 1956. ‘Alternative theories of distribution’, The Review of Economic Studies, Vol 23, No 2, pp 83-100

Kates, S., 2003. ‘Two Hundred Years of Say's Law: Essays on Economic Theory's Most Controversial Principle’, Edward Elgar Publishing, United Kingdom

Katouzian, H., 1980. ‘Ideology and method in economics’, Macmillan, London

Lunn, E., 1982. ‘Marxism and modernism: an historical study of Lukacs, Brecht, Benjamin, and Adorno’, University of California Press, United States

Lutz, A, F., 2006. ‘The theory of interest’, Transaction Publisher, New Jersey

Marchionatti, R., 2004. ‘Early mathematical economics’, 1871-1915’, Routledge, New York

Mill, S, J., 2007. ‘Utilitarianism, Liberty & Representative Government’, Wildside Press LLC, United States

Minsky, P, H., 1986. ‘Stabilizing an unstable economy’, Yale University Press, United States

Newton, K., & Deth, W, J., 2005. ‘Foundations of comparative politics: democracies of the modern world’, Cambridge University Press, United States

Pressman, S., 1999. ‘Fifty major economists’, Routledge, New York

Rockmore, T., 2002. ‘Marx after Marxism: the philosophy of Karl Marx’, Wiley-Blackwell, Great Britain

Steedman, I., 1997. Jevons's Theory of Political Economy and the 'Marginalist Revolution’, The European Journal off the History of Economic Thought, Vol 4, No 1, pp 43-64 available from: http://pdfserve.informaworld.com.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/50145_731193556_739386890.pdf

Stilwell, F., 2002. ‘Political Economy: the contest of economic ideas’ Oxford University Press, Singapore.

Streissler, W, E., & Streissler, M., 1994. ‘Carl Menger’s lectures to crown Prince Rudolph of Austria’, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, United Kingdom

Tieben, B., 2009. ‘The concept of equilibrium in different economic traditions: a historical investigation’, Rozenberg Publishers, Amsterdam

Vickers, D., 1995. ‘The tyranny of the market: a critique of theoretical foundations’, The University of Michigan Press, United States

0 Comments

Does the informal economy benefit the poor? Women Roadside Sellers in Madang Province of Papua New Guinea

4/28/2016

0 Comments

Does the informal economy benefit the poor?
Women Roadside Sellers in Madang Province of Papua New Guinea
Author: Tomas Freitas

Introduction

The tendency for rural people to engage in multiple, informal occupations is widespread. Women often take on small business training and technical assistance, are encouraged to form stakeholder associations, and to participate in additional community-level activities sponsored by various projects (Asian Development Bank 2002). The proliferation of informal professions in developing countries has been seen both as a phase in the process of development and a negative path leading a country back into underdevelopment (Arizpe 1977).

Both of these positions are often subscribed to by modernist scholars, who prefer the small informal sector to take a step-by-step approach in developing their business, with the possibility of access to more credit, which can be provided by big institutions with high interest. Is it possible that rural women in the informal economy will one day become rich and living in an affluent society? This is unlikely; the reason why many engage in the informal economy is because they are marginalised by the modern economy, which has left them with no choice.

Presenting the case study of roadside sellers in Madang province in Papua New Guinea, this essay will explore a number of reasons for why the informal economy does benefit the poor.
The paper will in particular focus on the way that the informal sector provides economic benefit to women in rural areas.

Definition
The informal economy has been described in various ways. Writing about the informal sector in Sri Lanka, Sandaratne (2002) explains that the informal economy has various definitions including,

the ‘unorganised sector’, ‘unregistered economy’, ‘third economy’, ‘parallel economy’, ‘non-institutional’, ‘bazaar economy’, ‘lower circuit’, ‘black economy’, ‘shadow economy’, ‘underground economy’, ‘peasant form of production’, ‘peddlers’, ‘the unremunerated’, (Sandaratne, 2002,4).

This paper will adopt a definition of the informal economy which applies to the case study of roadside sellers in Papua New Guinea, and will refer to the informal economy variously as the ‘unregistered economy’, ‘non-institutional economy’ and as a ‘peasant form of mode of production’ as described by Karl Marx in his economic model ‘relations of production’, concerned with how people are organised for the purpose of producing goods and services (Marx, cited in Stilwell, 2002). ‘Unregistered economy’, refers to the characteristic of the informal economy as being mobile, moving from one place to another, making registration or documentation of their existence difficult (Kari, 2005) and ‘non-institutional economy’ because they are not institutionalised, or integrated into any legal entity in the form of big institutions. Some, however, have organised themselves into small cooperatives whose members are composed of families and neighbours (Gustafsson, 2002); these small cooperatives have existed in the rural economy as a type of social protection (Ratuva, 2010). A peasant form of ‘mode of production’ according to Karl Marx is a type of economic structure of a society which focuses only on the social organisational aspect of the production process (Marx, cited in Mackenzie, 1984). In other words, this is a relationship of production which is concerned only with how these rural farmers have organised and produced their crops.

Demographics

Papua New Guinea is a poor country in the Pacific region. According to the census data of 2008, the total population is about 6.468 million, with a growth rate of 2.7%. The annual Gross National Income per person is $1.040 and the real GDP annual growth rate is 4.5%. The percentage of the population below the poverty line is 39.6%. Enrolment in primary education is 63.6%, with the balance of gender parity in primary education 91 girls for every 100 boys. The mortality rate for children under five years old is 69 per 1000 births, and the maternal mortality rate is 733 per 100.000 live of births (Ausaid, 2011). The benefits that the informal economy can bring to poor farmers are substantial.

Social and Cultural Advantage

Most of the Pacific Island communities such as Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Tonga, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Nauru, Marshall Islands, and Cook Islands, have a strong dependence on subsistence agriculture, which is closely linked to their social context. The culture of exchange has been practically implemented generation by generation in this society as a means of building social and economic relationships. In Vanuatu about 80 percent of the population is engaged in the informal economy in some way, which is based on commodities exchange and social networking activities (Ratuva, 2010). The informal economy, based on subsistence agriculture, is a strong component of these communities’ social and cultural context. One of the fundamental advantages of the informal economy in these Pacific Island countries is that the majority of the population live on thousands of hectares of land under customary land tenure.

Customary land tenure

Customary land refers to ‘communal ownership’, and land boundaries are normally based on rivers, trees, or even mountains, which have no official demarcation and the land title has not been registered under the formal law. The title is however recognised by custom through the elders, which usually does not allow the sale of land to persons outside the kin group or other than relatives, and also prevents individual or groups selling the land to foreigners (Cooter, 1991).

Customary tenure in PNG accounts for about 97 percent are of the land (47 million hectares). Less than three percent (1.2 million hectares) is alienated land, meaning that it does not belong to the customary landowners. Of this three percent, about 125,000 hectares is owned by missionaries or churches and about 950,000 hectares belongs to the government. The government has also leased to other parties about 120,000 hectares, under 99 year leases (Trebilcock, 1983). The 97 percent of land owned by customary tenure forms the livelihoods of around 85 percent of the 6.7 million people of PNG (Bismarck Ramu Group, 2009). As far back as 1990, about 7 million hectares of land were used for cultivation, which at that time was about 1.5 hectares per person (Anderson, 2006b). In other words, 7 million hectares were utilised for subsistence-based agriculture, which the majority of the people use for plant-food crops.

The existence of customary land tenure has made it possible for many rural farmers to base their subsistence on plant food crops, which is beneficial in a number of ways. Plant-food crops form part of the economic structure of the society; they are important because if at the end of the day the crops are not bought by consumers, they will be consumed at home. In addition, plant-food crops are not for the export market, which means that there is not demand to produce huge quantities, meaning that rural subsistence farmers do not need to borrow a lot of money from microcredit institutions to meet the cost of production.

Women and the informal economy

There are two types of custodianship land applied in Papua New Guinea: the majority have adopted a patrilineal system, however some of the islands have implemented a matrilineal system. Under a patrilineal system, the senior male in the family has the right to determine and distribute land within the family. However, in some of the eastern islands, such as in the region of Milne Bay, only the matrilineal system is recognised, which means that women have control over the land. Men in this context can also have access to the land through their mothers, sisters or wives (Anderson, 2008).
In contrast to the World Bank opinion of traditional women hardly having access to land (Deininger, 2003), the case of customary land in PNG is different. For instance a woman from Madang province has testified that even though she is married to her husband from another province, when she returns to her father’s village she is still respected and still has access to land title, no matter where she is living (Bismarck Ramu Group, 2009).

The advantages of having access to land and the consideration of the culture of exchange as mutual gifts has benefited women in the informal sector in Papua New Guinea, especially rural women in Madang province. Despite utilising four to six hectares of land for oil palm farming, and two to four hectares for vanilla and cocoa plantations, most rural farmers still have one to two hectares just for the cultivation of crops and vegetables (Anderson, 2010). The average cash income from palm oil Palm is around 4,000 kina per year, which is less than cocoa and vanilla cash returns of 14,000-16,000 kina per year, and cash crop returns of around 13,500 kina per year (Anderson, 2006a).

Higher income

Women and men in PNG including in Madang province also have the potential to generate more income by participating in the informal as opposed to the formal economy. Activity in the informal economy has the potential to earn more income compared to national standard wages. In Madang province, a survey has been conducted which focuses on roadside seller activity in eleven different places. The Watta Rais roadside market has 30 sellers, Sausi has 40 sellers, Yakumbu 20 sellers, Usino 50 sellers, Mambu 70 sellers, Four Mile 200 sellers, Maiwara 13 sellers, Pau 120 sellers, Selon 40 sellers, Nagada 10 sellers and Baitabag 20 sellers, and the minimum average income per week in these eleven places is 138 kina higher than the national minimum wage which is only 37.20 kina per week (Anderson, 2008). These particular roadside sellers sell their local produce along the main roads, and target people who are travelling from one province to another (Ausaid, 2010).

According to a rural informal sector survey report, the informal sector income in four other provinces including Central, East New Britain, Morobe, and Western Highlands is three times higher than the normal national minimum wage. Daily activities that these informal sectors conduct are buying and selling fish, local transport, trade store, selling cattle, potatoes, cocoa, coffee, food crops, betel nuts and copra (Sowei, et al, 2003).

It might be asked why these roadside sellers do not want to sell their local produce at the normal local market; the fact is that they do not have a choice - there is not enough infrastructure at the local market that the government can provide to rural subsistence farmers (AusAid, 2000). Due to the difficulty of distance, some of the women who do sell at the marketplace have to organise themselves into groups for walking there together, and carry their produce on their heads to get to there, (Epstein, 1982).

The difficulty of accessing the local market and not having many local markets around is one factor that highlights the importance of the 47 million hectares of customary owned land in PNG. We might ask why the roadside sellers have set themselves up alongside most of the national roads. One of the reasons is because they are tired of fighting for a place in the regular marketplace, and also because many of these sellers live close to main roads, and they don’t have to pay too much for local transport to carry their crops and vegetables.

Interestingly, most of the sellers are housewives, who do multiple tasks by selling their local produce as well as looking after their children (Porter & Porter, 2008). Every day their husbands work in the fields, and some of them have other jobs as well such as working as labourers on construction sites or doing some other informal activity. Roadside sellers primarily sell local produce from their home farms including sweet potato, bananas, taro, coconuts, sugar cane, cassava, yams, sago, peanuts, aibika, betel nuts, eggs, chicken, lamb, pork, and rice.

Price control

Customary land tenure again proves to play an important part in the informal economy as regards price control. As the owners of the land, the roadside sellers are also able to control the price of their goods in the market by controlling the supply, because most of the crops and vegetables are seasonally grown. These roadside sellers also know how much they will charge for each specific crop after deducting their labour costs, including costs for local transport to transport their goods to the market place or main road. Such a system is unusual from a neoclassical economic perspective, which always maintains that prices are determined by consumers, not sellers (Stilwell, 2002).

Sustainability

Inspired by the ability to control the supply in the market, it has given self-confidence to rural farmers to sustain their productivity. In contrast to large farms which use chemicals or fertiliser, these rural farmers only produce their own organic compost which is why they usually produce good quality crops and rarely experience delays in harvesting (Sillitoe, 1998). As a tropical country, typically most of the crops are seasonal, and the rural farmers generally know very well when it is time for them to start planting their seeds (Allen et al, 1995). This activity is repeated season by season and continues year after year, which is why such a system is well maintained and sustainable.

Secure and Protected

Because their system is well maintained and sustainable, it has protected the activity of roadside sellers from external intervention. The women roadside sellers of Madang are different to women in other countries. If we compare to women in Bangladesh, the microcredit institutions have exploited Bangladeshi women and maintained a strong patriarchal system (Karim, 2008). This is not the case in PNG, because rural women in PNG have always relied on their families’ contribution. The culture of exchange has been considered as mutual gifts, and this has become a barrier for external intervention such as the introduction of micro-credit or micro-finance.

The culture of exchange has been a part of rural economy activities, for example canoes are traded as gifts rather than commodities (Gregory, 1982). Such a form of commodity exchange has been discussed many years ago by great philosophers, for example according to Karl Marx (1867) in his social pre-conditions for commodity exchange:

“The reality of the value of commodities differs in this respect from Dame Quickly, that we don’t know “where to have it.” The value of commodities is the very opposite of the coarse materiality of their substance, not an atom of matter enters into its composition. Turn and examine a single commodity, by itself, as we will, yet in so far as it remains an object of value, it seems impossible to grasp it. If, however, we bear in mind that the value of commodities has a purely social reality, and that they acquire this reality only in so far as they are expressions or embodiments of one identical social substance, viz., human labour, it follows as a matter of course, that value can only manifest itself in the social relation of commodity to commodity. In fact we started from exchange value, or the exchange relation of commodities, in order to get at the value that lies hidden behind it. We must now return to this form under which value first appeared to us.” (Marx, 1867; 16).

If we analyse this paragraph and link it into Melanesian communities in Papua New Guinea and other Pacific countries, it shows that commodity exchange depends on the value of the commodity itself, and that this is determined by the social relation between two commodities. The ‘social relation’ in this case might refer to the culture of exchange that has been applied generation by generation as anthropologists referred to in ‘primitive societies’.

Another barrier that has protected this informal activity from external intervention is customary land tenure (Fingleton, 2004). The financial institutions such as microcredit and microfinance prefer to grant credit for individual land ownership rather than communal (Gosarevski, et al, 2004). Despite the existence of individual property rights, many attempts to introduce a land registration system by the government and western institutions have failed (Yala, 2006).

Conclusion

In this paper land has been identified as a fundamental structure of the rural economy, which has empowered subsistence rural agriculture and become a strong factor in economic production. In particular customary land tenure and women’s access to land in matrilineal societies such as that of Madang province in Papua New Guinea has been shown to benefit the poor. Supporting the view that the informal economy does benefit the poor, this essay has explored a number of points that support this view. These benefits are strongly contingent on the large basis of customary land ownership in Papua New Guinea. The informal sector in PNG has been shown to earn more income compared to average national standard wages. Sellers can control the price in the market, which is actually a counter argument to the neo-classical economy which maintains that consumers have the ultimate power in determining price. In addition, due to the basic subsistence agricultural system and the geographic condition of seasonal harvesting in PNG that is repeated year after year, a sustainable cycle of productivity has developed. The culture of exchange has become a barrier of protection from external intervention, and the collective ownership of land title has become an obstacle for financial institutions to implement their programs of borrowing and microcredit. The system of customary land ownership is a strong factor in the benefits that the informal economy can bring to rural subsistence farmers in Papua New Guinea. In some provinces, such as Madang, the matrilineal system that operates has benefited poor women, giving them more control over land and produce.

References

Allen, J, B., Bourke, M, R., & Hide, L, R., 1995. ‘The Sustainability of Papua New Guinea agriculture systems: the conceptual background’, Global Environmental Change, Vol 5, No 4, Pp 297-312.

Anderson, T., 2006a. ‘Oil Palm and Small Farmers in Papua New Guinea’, Report for the Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights on the economic prospects for small farmers in PNG’s oil palm industry. Available from https://files.pbworks.com/download/dbes3v7EBj/np-net/12638881/Anderson%20(2006)%20Oil%20palm%20and%20small%20farmers%20in%20PNG,%20CELCR.pdf

Anderson, T., 2006b. ‘On the economic value of customary land in Papua New Guinea’, Pacific Economic Bulletin, Vol 21, No 1, Pp 138-152.

Anderson, T., 2008. ‘Women Roadside Sellers in Madang’, Pacific Economic Bulletin, Vol 23, No 1, pp. 59-73.

Anderson, T., 2010. ‘Land registration, land markets and livelihoods in Papua New Guinea’, Aidwatch. Available from http://www.aidwatch.org.au/sites/aidwatch.org.au/files/Tim%20Anderson.pdf

Arizpe, L., 1977. ‘Women in the Informal labor Sector’: The case of Mexico City, The University of Chicago Press. Vol. 3, No.1, pp 25-37

Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2002. Papua New Guinea Country Strategy and Program Update, 2003 – 05, Asian Development Bank, Manila. Available from www.adb.org/Documents/CSPs/PNG/2002 .

Australian Agency for International Development., 2000. ‘Income generation for the rural poor: The Australian aid program’s rural development strategy’, Available from http://www.ausaid.gov.au/publications/pdf/ruralstrategy.pdf

Australian Agency for International Development., 2010. ‘The Socio Economic Impact of AusAID Funded Road Maintenance And Rehabilitation On National Priority Roads in Ten Province of Papua New Guinea’, Available from http://www.pngtssp.com/publications/pdf/SEIS%20Report%20October%202010.pdf

Australian Agency for International Development., 2011. ‘Papua New Guinea: Country Profile’, Available at http://www.ausaid.gov.au/country/papua.cfm

Bismarck Ramu Group, 2009, ‘Defending Melanesian Land’, Available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmolHFFdNyc

Cooter, R., 1991. ‘Inventing Market Property: The Land Courts of Papua New Guinea’, Law & Society Review, Vol 25, No 4. Available at http://works.bepress.com/robert_cooter/42

Deininger, K., 2003, ‘Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction’, A World Bank Policy Research Report, Oxford University Press, Washington. Available at http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/34919/landpoliciesexecsummary.pdf

Epstein., S, T., 1982.‘Urban Food Marketing and Third World Rural Development’, Biddles Ltd, Guildford and King’s Lynn, London.

Flingleton, J., 2004. ‘Is Papua New Guinea viable without customary groups?’, Pacific Economic Bulletin, Vol 19, No 2, Pp 96-103.

Gosarevski, G., Hughes, H., & Windybank, S., 2004. ‘Is Papua New Guinea Viable with Customary Land Ownership?’, Pacific Economic Bulletin, Vol 19, No 3, Pp 133-136.

Gregory, C.A., 1982. ‘Gifts and Commodities’, Academic Press, London.

Gustafsson, B., 2002. ‘Rural Households and Resource Management in Papua New Guinea’, Resource Management in Asia Pacific Program, Canberra.

Kari, S, S., 2005. ‘The Origin and Setting of the National Goals and Directive Principles in the process of writing the Constitution of Papua New Guinea’, Centre for Social Change Research. Available from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16071/1/Sam_Kari_Thesis.pdf

Karim, L., 2008. ‘Demystifying micro-credit: the Grameen Bank, NGOs and neoliberalism in Bangladesh’. Cultural Dynamics, Vol 20, No 1, Pp 5-29.

Mackenzie, D., 1984. ‘Marx and the Machine’, Technology and Culture, Vol 25, No 3, Pp 473-502.

Marx, K., 1867. ‘Capital’, Progress Publisher, Moscow.

Porter, J., & Porter, J., 2008. ‘The Markets of Madang Papua New Guinea’, Available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96-gA8IGxqo&feature=related

Ratuva, S., 2010. ‘Back to basics: towards integrated social protection for vulnerable groups in Vanuatu’. Pacific Economic Bulletin, Vol 25, No 3, Pp 40-63

Sandaratne, N., 2002. ‘The Informal sector in Sri Lanka: its nature and extent and the impact of globalisation’, International Labour Organization, Geneva. Available from http://ilo-mirror.library.cornell.edu/public/english/region/asro/colombo/download/nmlfml01.pdf

Sillitoe, P., 1998. ‘It’s All in the Mound: Fertility Management Under Stationary Shifting Cultivation in the Papua New Guinea Highlands,’ Mountain Research and Development, Vol 18, No 2, Pp 123-134.

Sowei, J.W., Lahari, W., & Vatnabar, M., 2003. ‘Rural Informal Sector survey Report’, National Research Institute (Social and Environmental Studies Division), Port Moresby.

Stilwell, F., 2002. ‘Political Economy: The Contest of Economic Ideas’ Oxford University Press, Singapore.

Trebilcock, J, M., 1983. ‘Customary Land Law Reform in Papua New Guinea: Law, Economics and Property Rights in a Traditional Culture’, Port Moresby. Available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AdelLawRw/1983/17.pdf

Yala, C., 2006. ‘Rethinking customary land tenure issues in Papua New Guinea’, Pacific Economic Bulletin, Vol 21, No 1, Pp 129-137.

0 Comments

Iha interese saida Indonesia-Australia Asina Akordu Plataforma Kontinente? Revista kritiku kona ba Akordu Plataforma-Kontinente (Continental-self) 1972

2/26/2016

1 Comment

Iha interese saida Indonesia-Australia Asina Akordu Plataforma Kontinente?
Revista kritiku kona ba Akordu Plataforma-Kontinente (Continental-self) 1972
Hakerek-Nain
Tomas Freitas

Introdusaun
Hanesan vizinho ba Australia no Indonesia, iha inisiu tinan 2015, Primeiro Ministro Timor-Leste Dr. Rui Maria de Araujo Hamutuk ho ninian ministros ba vizita Indonesia, no fas parte ba ajenda Primeiro Ministro deskuti ho Presidente Indonesia Joko Widodo kona ba fronteira maritima no terestre ho Indonesia (Gabinette do Primeiro Ministro, 2015).

Iha parte seluk relasaun entre Dili no Canberra bele dehan ladun harmonia, especialmente des de intelijente Australia (ASIO) ba asaltu Timor-Leste nian dokumentus iha Canberra, no mos Governu Australia nebe lakon iha tribunal internasional iha Den Haque relasiona ho kazu espionaze. Timor-Leste la iha inimigu, bazeia ba deklarasaun husi eis Primeiru Ministro Xanana Gusmao iha Manila loron 7 fulan Junho 2013 nebe esklarese katak Timor-Leste nian politika estranzeiru mak Zero Inimigo, relasiona ho Australia no Indonesia, Timor-Leste iha relasaun que diak tebes (Government of Timor-Leste 2013).

Essay ida ne, sei la tenta atu analiza politika estratejia externa ou relasaun diplomatiku Timor-Leste nian, maibe sei halo revista kritiku ba akordu Plataforma kontinente (Continental-Self Agreement) iha tinan 1972, no sei hare mos interese entre eis Presidente Indonesia Soeharto no eis Primeiro Ministro Australia nian Willian McMahon iha tinan 1970’s. Estudu empirical ida ne mos sei hato’o evidensia tekniku balun mak hanesan data geolozia nebe provas Plataforma Kontinente ilha Timor partense ba.

Historia
Ba dahuluk, faktus hateten katak Akordu Plataforma Kontinente entre Australia no Indonesia asina iha loron 9 fulan Outubro 1972 (United Nations, 1975). Haktuir Senator Australia Ian Sinclair, hateten katak iha 1956 Portugal koko deklara soverania Tasi-Timor bazeia ba prinsipiu (median-line) ou ho lian Portugues dehan Linha-Mediana ou tetum dehan risku-klaran (Sinclair, 1977), maibe Australia rezeita no la rekunyese deklarasaun ne, Australia reklama fila-fali Tasi-Timor bazeia ba Plataforma Kontinente (King, 2002). Governu Australia kontinua fo presaun iha tinan 1971, wainhira Portugal kontinua la-simu idea fronteira maritima bazeia ba Plataforma-kontinente (Seabed Boundary) hanesan baliza permanente entre rai rua (House of Representatives Hansard, 1973). Iha biban seluk, komesa husi fulan Novembru 1970 to’o iha Abril 1971, Ambasador Portugal iha Canberra, Carlos Empis Wemans buka hela halo konsultasaun ho Vice-Secretario Owen Harry, maibe la konsege tamba Canberra prefere liu halo negosiu ho Jakarta nebe apoiu liu idea Plataforma-Kontinente (la Haye, 1991). Razaun saida mak Portugal hakarak halo engkontru ho Departementu Relasaun Externa Australia nian, tamba iha publikasaun ida husi Boletim Oficial de Timor loron 24 Outubro 1970 nebe publika dokumentu rekizito (document request) husi Kompania Mina internasional Oceanic Exploration ho data 31 Dezembru 1968 ba Ministro do Ultramar, nebe iha dokumentu nian laran hakerek kona ba fo lisensa ba Kompania Oceanic Exploration hodi halao explorasaun iha area Tasi-Timor, no mos lisensa ne kovre area tetek-malun (overlapping) ka area nebe sei konflitu hela entre Australia no Portugal iha tempu neba (King, 2002). Administrasaun Portuguese laos deit fo lisensa ba kompania mina Oceanic Exploration, maibe sira mos iha Dezembru 1974 garantia kontratu ba Kompania Petrotimor hanesan grupo konsorsium, hamutuk ho Oceanic Exploration no mos interese Portugal nian (The Age, 1974), lisensa ne kovre 23,192 milhas kuadradus ou 60,700 kilometro kuadradus (King, 2002).

Molok, kompania jigante Oceanic Exploration nebe ninian baze iha Colorado, Estadus Unidos America hetan lisensa iha tinan 1968 hodi kaer projeitu Tasi-Timor, iha tinan 1962 kompania bot balun husi Australia mak hanesan Australian Aquitaine Pty Ltd, Arco Australia Ltd no Esso Australia Ltd, komesa tiha ona halo explorasaun geofizika (Laws & Kraus, 1974) no kontinua ho Aeromagnetic survey iha tinan 1963 husi kompania Woodside Petroleum, Kompania Burmah Oil, no Anglo-Ducth Shell Oil Company, no depois kontinua ho estudu seismiku iha tinan 1964-1968 (Mollan et al, 1969). Estudu hirak ne halao iha area Bonaparte Basin nebe ikus mai kunyesidu ho Area Konjunta Dezenvolvementu Petroleum (JPDA). Iha 1970 area Bonaparte deskobre potensia minarai no gas, nebe ho ninian estimasaun iha tempu neba entre milaun 500 to’o bilaun 5 barrel mina matak, no kuantidade gas Hamutuk 50,000 billion cubic feet (king, 2002).
Kontente ho informasaun kona ba potensia rezerva iha leten, iha loron 23 fulan Maio 1973, Senator Justin O’Byrne husi Australia deklara dehan;

“ buat ne bele fo vantazen diak ba ita sekuandu ita deskuti ho didiak, no ida ne bele sai ita nian rikusoin tamba area ne potensia tebes. Deklara tiha ona mos katak area ne riku ho hydrocarboneta nebe barak liu iha mundo. Nebe kontamina ho gas no minarai ho ninian kuantidade mak hanesan mos nasaun rikeza sira iha mediu-oriente.
Futuru Australia nian, ate a data akontesementu krizi mina iha nasaun dezenvolvidu hanesan Estadu Unidos America, no wainhira rekursu tradisional nebe nakonu ho suply hydrocarboneta ne signifika sei fo preparasaun ida diak tebes, nebe serteza ho pratika tradisional mak iha mudansa tiha ona, inklui mos presu ida nebe diak. Ita sente privileziu tebes, tamba ne mak momentum ida diak ba ita atu hodi tama ba iha era auto-suffisiente ka besik Auto-sufisiente tamba ita iha supply hydrocarbonetas” (Senate Hansard, 1973:1838-1840).

Depois prosesu explorasaun husi Kompanias Australia nian iha 1962, no sira atinzi tiha resultadu iha 1970. Estrazikamente, Canberra mos halao progressu makas hodi establese koperasaun official ida ho Indonesia. Mesmo que deskonfia fo suporta direita no indireita ba rezime foun liu husi Komando Jeneral Soeharto iha 1965 hodi kontra Primeiro Presidente da Republika Indonesia Soekarno, kooperasaun entre Australia ho Indonesia iha 1966 hetan suksesu liu husi engkontru Inter-Government Group on Indonesia (IGGI) nebe konkorda Australia hodi fo Miliaun 20 AUSD hanesan ajudus ba programa bilaterais Indonesia nian ba periodu tinan tolu 1972-1975. Ajudus osan ne hodi uza ba sosa aviaun Jet-Militar nian hanesan sosa Sabre jets Hamutuk miliaun $6.1 AUSD, no miliaun $2m hodi halo mapamentu iha Indonesia (King, 2002). Iha loron 16 Outubro 1970 Indonesia hatudu sira nian mapa fronteira maritima nebe bazeia ba Plataforma-Kontinente hanesan baliza entre Australia ho Timor (Robinson, 1970). Iha Febreiru 1972, segundu Presidente Indonesia Soeharto halao vizita ba Australia (King, 2002), no husu ninian kolega Primeiro Ministro Australia William McMahon iha tempu neba atu servisu makas hodi konklui lalais akordu Plataforma-Kontinente, nebe ikus mai asina duni iha loron 9 Outubro 1972 (McMahon, 1972).

Diskusaun kona ba Plataforma-Kontinente entre Indonesia ho Australia hahu’u Novembro 1969 iha konferensia ida naran Economic Commission of Asia and the Far East (Sorby, 1969). Maibe molok konferensia ne, Iha 1953 Australia prepara ho diak tiha ona atu hodi deklara Plataforma-Kontinente hanesan sira nian pozisaun fronteira maritima (Prescott, 1972) liu husi dezenvolve sira nian interpretasaun rasik ba artiklu 6.1 konvensaun Geneva kona ba lei tasi nian, nebe koalia kona ba delimitasaun fronteira internasional.
Iha orijinalidade artiklu 6.1 ne hateten:

“Wainhira estadu rua hari’i iha Plataforma kontinente mak hanesan nebe sira nian teritoria hasoru ba malun ka fo opozisaun ba malun, baliza mak bele aplika mak tenke iha konkordansia entre sira nain rua. Sekarik la hetan konkordansia, no sekarik iha eksepsaun seluk mak hanesan iha linha fronteira nebe bele justifika hanesan kondisaun especial ka Special Circumstances, entaun linha baliza (boundary-line) mak linha-mediana, nebe tenke sukat bazeia ba tasi ninin husi teritoriu ida ba teritoriu seluk no hafahe iha klaran” (King, 2002:2).

Interpretasaun ba dahuluk, Australia tauk-oituan (concerned) kona ba linha mak dada tiha ona iha Tasi Arafura nian, nebe ho ninian medida East Longitude 133o 14’, Razaun tamba governu Australia entrega tiha ona lisensa ba explorasaun petroleum iha area entre West Irian no Aru Island (King, 2002). Tamba ne, Australia fiar katak area mak hetan lisensa, monu iha Plataforma-kontinental nebe legalmente regulariza husi Australia no Indonesia (Prescott, 1972).

Interpretasaun segundu, Australia fiar katak lakuna (Timor Trough) hanesan kuak ida mak klean los hodi hafahe kontinente rua, bazeia ba deklarasaun husi eis ministro estranjeiru Australia nian William McMahon iha loron 30 Outubro 1970 iha uma fukun Parlementu Australia, hateten katak lakuna (Timor tranche) ho ninian distansia naruk 550 Milhas Nautical ka 1017.5 kilometros kuadradu, ho ninian luan mais ou menus 40 milhas ka 74 kilometros, ho ninian tasi klean liu 10,000 feet ka liu 3000 metros, no bazeia ba fontes nebe iha nia hateten katak ida ne mak “unmistakably morphological” iha lian tetum dehan “formasaun estrutura nebe la falha” Haktuir McMahon signifika katak lakuna (Timor Trough) iha Tasi Timor hafahe tiha ona baliza entre Australia no Timor, nebe haketak Plataforma kontinente rua ne (Minister for External Affairs, 1970).

Banati-tuir eis ministro justice Indoensia nian iha tinan 1976, Dr Mochtar Kusumaatmaja, sai mos hanesan eis ministro estranjeiru iha tinan 1977, nebe deklara iha journal akademiku Far Eastern Economic Review hateten “la los katak lakuna iha Tasi Timor hanesan baliza nebe natural hodi haketak Plataforma rua” (Richardson, 1979:45). Nudar peritus kona ba lei tasi nian, Dr. Mochtar esplika iha Journal APPEA nebe hateten katak “Lakuna iha Tasi Timor ne hanesan kuak kiik ida husi bathymetric modern nebe ninian klean liu 10,000 feet ka 3000 metros….formasaun husi lakuna ne ho ninian probabilidade bazeia ba ajustamentu Isostatic (Isostatic Adjustment) nebe nudar kontinuasaun husi soke malun entre Plataforma Australia nian no Plataforma Asian husi parte northe Ilha Timor nian, iha era inisiu Miocene (early Miocene)” (Laws & Kraus, 1974:80). Dr. Mochtar mos esklarese iha journal Sydney Morning Herald iha loron 3 fulan Junho 1972 nebe hateten katak “wainhira Plataforma rua soke malun ninian konsikuensia mak kria lakuna nebe tun ba tasi-okos, no ida ne la’os ninin husi Plataforma rua” (Hastings, 1972). Mosaun hanesan mai husi Charles Hutchison, nebe deklara katak “Plataforma Kontinental hanesan unidade ida deit nebe hanesan mos extensaun husi Plataforma Australia Shaul nian inklui lakuna no ilha Timor nebe hit A’an no hatudu A’an’ (Smith, 2011:51).

Imajem iha leten hatudu klaru kona ba Plataforma Kontinental Australia nian nebe inklui Sumba, Timor no Ilha Papua. Imajem ne apresenta husi Asesor Geir Ytreland nebe servisu iha Ministerio Rekurso Naturais no Politika Enerjetika (MNREP) Timor-Leste, iha primeiro governasaun konstitusional (2005).
Piskiza ida ne, gasta tiha ona tempu barak hodi halibur evidensia empirical mak hanesan Estudu Survey Seismiku nebe mak produs husi Departementu Minerais no Energia Australia nian. Hakerek-Nain ba essay ida ne, iha evidensia mak sufisiente hodi kontra argumentu husi William McMahon nebe hateten katak “Lakuna iha Tasi Timor hanesan baliza entre kontinente Australia ho Ilha Timor” statementu ida ne falsu no laiha evidensia. Favor hare’e dokumentus iha kraik nebe nakonu ho statementu tekniku mak kontrariu ho McMahon nian deklarasaun.

Estudu Seismiku

Liafuan iha leten ne hateten katak “informasaun mak iha relatoriu nia laran mai husi Departementu Mineral no Energia, fas parte husi politika governu Australia nian hodi fo asistensia ba explorasaun no dezenvolvimentu rekursu minerais. Dokumentu ne sei la publika iha kualker forma, ka uza sein lisensa eskrita husi Direitor, Biro Rekursu minerais, geolojia no geofizika”.

Imajem scanned dokumentus hirak ne publika husi Departementu Mineral e Energia Australia nian, no halao tiha ona survey seismiku ida iha area lakuna Tasi-Timor iha tinan 1975, no sira hetan ninian evidensia katak Ilha Timor fas parte ba Plataforma kontinente Australia nian; deklarasaun ne totalmente kontrario ho statementu husi William McMahon. Hare didiak statement deklara husi dokumentu ne.

Tuir ita nian dalen tetum deklarasaun iha leten haklaken katak “Lakuna Tasi Timor eziste klaramente mai husi divizaun bathymetric nebe koko haketak Timor husi enkuadramentu Plataforma kontinental norte Australia nian. Proposta ne mai husi Fitch, Warris no seluk tan, nebe hateten lakuna ne resulta husi soke-malun fundamental entre Plataforma rua nia ninin, maibe agora la aktivu ona. Audley-Charles no seluk tan konsidera katak ninin husi Plataforma mak parte norte Ilha Timor nian, maibe lakuna iha Tasi Timor ne hanesan resultadu husi soke malun entre kontinente Australia ho “subduction zone” nebe iha baliza neba”.

Deklarasaun iha leten bele interpreta katak, Ilha Timor mosu bazeia ba resultadu soke-malun entre continental Australia no Zona seluk, signifika kontinente Asia.

Interpretasaun husi paragraph ne hateten katak; karakteristik husi seksaun seismiku halao provolta plataforma husi parte ninin norte to’o ba sul. Distansia seismiku provolta refleksaun 0.5 seconds (500 m) tiru tun tasi okos (seabed), no ninian resultadu hatudu distorsaun ba sedimentariu. Refleksaun tiru klean liu konsege to ba iha tasi kidun (crystalline basement) tamba area magnetic iha okos neba kaber los (smooth). Resultadu seismiku ne hatudu katak iha mos difikuldade hodi hare ba tasi klean liu tamba iha disturbansia makas wainhira akontesementu natural husi formasaun fatuk iha ninin husi parte norte lakuna nian. Probabilidade fatuk sedimentary hirak ne hanesan mos ho fatuk iha Bobonaro no hetan mos fatuk hanesan iha formasaun kosta sul Timor nian.

Orijinalidade husi lakuna ne ladun klaru, maibe teoria reprezenta expresaun leten (surface expression) husi parte norte nian monu tun (dipping) liu-liu iha parte zona soke-malun (subduction-zone) no ne ita labele diskonta ka ignora ba iha evidensia seismiku ida ne. Desturbu natural sai kauza ba fatuk barak nebe monu iha lakuna no evidensia ne hatudu katak mosu laletek, ka iha lian Bahasa dehan (tumpukan) no inglesh hateten (overlie) nebe rezulta naksuli no halis-tun ba parte ninin husi lakuna sul nian.

Liafuan iha leten hateten katak parese kose-malun (over-thrusting) ka iha lian Indonesia ita dehan “gesekan” iha parte norte mai husi (gravity sliding) ka “gesekan gravitasi” entre “lempengan” (scaly clays), nebe rezulta Ilha Timor hit-a’an iha era Miocene. Sekarik distorsaun Pliocene oozes mak hetan iha baze lakuna nian hanesan rezulta hikar-malun ka namkurut (folding), no laos interupsaun, karik, buat rua ne hanesan prosesu mak mai husi kontinuasaun nebe kleuk-tiha ona (downwarp).

Paragraph ne deskobre oinsa ilha Timor hit-a’an iha era Miocene, bazeia ba tinan geologia nian signifika formasaun ba ilha Timor akontese entre tinan miliaun 5-24 liu ba.

Imajem seismiku iha leten, hatudu katak lakuna iha Tasi Timor la klean liu 3000 metros.
Molok ita kontinua ita nian diskusaun ba oin, artiklu ida ne hakarak halo revista ba artigu ida ba ida nebe mak hakerek iha akordu Plataforma-Kontinental entre Jakarta ho Canberra iha 18 Maio 1971, akordu ne hetan asinatura husi eis Ministro Estranjeiru Australia nian Nigel Bowen ho is Ministro Minerais Indonesia nian Soemantri Brodjonegoro iha loron 9 Outubro 1972 iha Jakarta.

Akordu Plataforma-Kontinental 1972

Tradusaun iha leten hateten katak; Akordu Plataforma Kontinental 1972. No. 14123, Entre Australia no Indonesia. Akordu establesementu serteza kona ba Fronteira Tasi-Okos iha area Timor no Tasi Arafura nian, akordu ne hodi kumpleta ba agrementu 18 Maio 1971. Asina iha Jakarta loron 9 Outubro 1972. Tekstu Autentink: Inglesh no Indonesia. Rejistu husi Australia iha loron 7 Agostu 1975.

Wainhira hare didiak kover husi akordu ne, klaru hatudu Australia nian interese makas hodi ba rejistu iha ONU sein partisipasaun Indonesia nian. Karik ida ne mak sai razaun ba Dr. Mochtar Kusuma Atmaja hodi hateten katak “Australia halo Indonesia sai hanesan sira nian kriadu (pembantu)”; favour hare’e iha komentario Michael Richardson (1978), Peter Hastings (1978).

Interpretasaun;
Governu Commonwealth Australia no Governu Republika Indonesia,
Reafirma akordu entre Governua nain rua, asina iha loron sanulu-resin-walu fulan Maio tinan rihun ida atus sia hitu nulu resin ida, establese fronteira tasi-okos (seabed-boundary) iha Tasi Arafura, no iha area serteza balun iha kosta ilha Nova-Guinea (Irian),
            Reafirma liu tan saida mak mensiona iha akordu governu rua, nebe husik hela ba diskusaun ikus mak kestiona delimitasaun iha area mak deside tiha ona, entre tasi-okos iha Arafura no Tasi Timor parte weste nian ho Longitu 133023’ Leste,
            Rezolve hanesan vizinho diak no iha espiritu kooperasaun ho fraternidade, hodi hatu’ur permanente limitasaun husi areas nebe refere bazeia ba paragraph mak governu rua konkorda tiha ona hodi exerciu sira nian direitu ba explorasaun iha tasi-okos no exploitasaun rekursu naturais, hanesan konkorda tuir mai:

Paragraf ikus husi preamblu iha leten reflekta mosaun hypothetical husi parte Australia nian. Hanesan mensiona husi hakerek-nain iha paragraph inisiu essay ida ne, katak husi 1962-1970 Kompanias mina Australia halo tiha ona explorasaun no identifika tiha ona rezerva mina no gas iha Plataforma-kontinente nian okos. Kestaun mak ne, tamba sa iha tempu neba Indonesia la hatene katak iha pontu A16 no A17 nian okos toba hela mina matak Hamutuk barrel biliaun lima (5), no gas rihun lima nulu (50,000)bcf.

Interpretasaun Artigu 1.
Iha area kosta sul husi ilha Tanimbar, fronteira entre area husi tasi-okos hasoru malun ho parte Commonwealth Australia nian no mos area husi tasi-okos nebe hasoru malun ho parte Republika Indonesia nian sei dada linha los nebe mak hatudu iha chart no 3 anexu iha akordu nebe komesa husi pontus latitude 8o53’ sul, longitude 133o23’ leste (pontu 12, specifikamente iha akordu entre nasaun rua, loron sanulu resin walu, fulan Maio, tinan rihun ida, atus sia, hitu nulu resin ida), tuir mai koneksaun iha dirasaun westerly bazeia ba pontus specifiku iha aranjamentu specifiku:

Interpretasaun Artigu 2.
Iha area sul ilha Roti no Ilha Timor, fronteira entre area husi tasi-okos hasoru malun ho parte Commonwealth Australia nian no mos area husi tasi-okos nebe hasoru malun ho parte Republika Indonesia nian sei dada linha los nebe mak hatudu iha chart no 3 mak anexu iha akordu nebe komesa husi pontus latitude 10028’ sul, longitude 126000’ leste (pontu A17, specifikamente iha akordu entre nasaun rua, tuir mai koneksaun iha dirasaun westerly bazeia ba pontus specifiku iha aranjamentu specifiku:

Interpretasaun Artigu 3.
Linha entre Pontus A15 no A16 no entre Pontus A17 no A18 refere ba artigu 1 no 2, indika dirasaun proporsionalidade husi fronteira. Wainhira iha eventu kona ba kontinuasaun akordu delimitasaun ka akordu mak konkorda tiha ona entre governu rua hodi halo exercisio ba direitu soverania, nebe involve explorasaun iha tasi-okos no exploitasaun ba rekursu naturais iha area Tasi Timor, Governu Commonwealth Australia no Governu Republik Indonesia tenke konsulta ba malun hodi hare no hetan konkordansia ba ajustamentu ka ajustamentus, sekarik iha, nesesidade ba iha porsaun linha baliza entre pontus A15 no A16 no entre pontus A17 no A18.

Sekarik ita halo komparasaun entre artigus 1,2 no 3 iha leten, klaru katak akordu plataforma-kontinental la rasional, tamba iha artigu 1 no 2, defini medidas pontus kordinat bazeia ba pozisaun nasaun rua mak hasoru malun, maibe iha atigu 3, governu nain rua ‘tenke konsulta ba malun ho vizaun ida mak konkorda ba malun hodi halo ajustamentu’, perguntas mak ne, tamba sa mak sira tenke konsulta ba malun? Sekuandu pontus kordinat bazeia ba spiritu Plataforma-kontinental, tan sa mak Australia no Indonesia preokupa los kona ba pontus kordinat hat ikus ne? karik tamba pontus A16 no A17 sai hanesan pontus savi nebe favorese ba rezevoar jigante balun? Mai ita hare, iha nebe lolos pontus A16 no A17 kona lolos.

Fontes: Woodside
Mapa iha leten ne Kompania Woodside uza ba internal deit, no mapa ne klaru hatudu katak pontu A17 besik lolos kampo Laminaria, Corallina, no Bufalo. Sekarik linha ne para deit iha pontu A18, ne signifika kampo minarai hirak ne bele tama hotu Area Konjunta Dezenvolvementu Petroleum (JPDA).

Fontes ba mapa kampo Sunrise no Troubadour ne, mai husi dokumentu Akordu Unitizasaun Internasional (IUA).
Imajem iha leten hatudu ezatamente kona ba pontus kordinat A15 no A16, bazeia ba Akordu Unitizasaun Internasional iha pajina ikus liu, hatudu pontus A15 no A16 mak hafahe kampo Sunrise no Troubadour ba 20.1% tama iha area JPDA no 79.9% konsidera area Australia nian. Perguntas mak ne, iha tempu neba Indonesia hatene kalae katak pontus kordinat A15 no A16 kona lolos iha rezevoar jigante mak iha gas barak?

Artigu 4,
Governu Commonwealth Australia no Governu Republika Indonesia mutualmente rekunyese direitu governu rua nian iha no liu area Tasi-Okos (Seabed) ho ninian limitasaun nebe establese iha akordu ne, ho nune sira bele hapara hodi okupa (claim) ou bele halo exercio direitu soverania nian ba explorasaun husi tasi-okos no exploitasaun ba rekursu natureza nebe fora husi baliza mak establese.

Artigu 4 hateten katak ho respeita ba explorasaun iha tasi-okos no exploitasaun ba kada rekursu natureza, bele fora liu linha fronteira “beyond the boundaries” nebe konkorda. Oinsa mak Indonesia bele konkorda hodi husik Australia halao explorasaun no exploitasaun fora husi linha fronteira? Emphaze husi artigu 5 deklara katak tasi-okos (seabed) inklui kamada-rai (subsoil), no ida ne sei iha eksepsaun (exemption) nebe signifika katak ne laos rekerementu husi diskonkordansia kona ba explorasaun no exploitasaun husi tasi-okos.

Artigu 5,
relasiona ho akordu ida ne, “tasi-okos” (seabed) inklui kamada-rai (subsoil) iha tasi okos, exepsaun wainhira iha kontekstu mak diferente.

Artigu 6. 1.
Pontus kordinat nebe specifikamente iha artigu 1 no 2 husi akordu ne mak kordinates jeografika, no ninian lokalidade aktual husi pontu hirak ne mak linha sira ligasaun ba malun nebe sei determina husi metodu mak hetan konkordansia husi autoridade kompotente governu rua nian.

Artigu 6.2.
proposta husi paragraf 1 husi artigu ida ne, hateten katak autoridade kompetensia nebe iha relasaun ho Commonwealth Australia mak hanesan Director Nasional Mapamentu ka ema ida mak reprezenta autoridade ne, no relasaun ho Repuplika Indonesia mak hanesan Chefe husi kordinador survey nasional no mapamentu (Ketua Badan Koordinasi Survey dan Pemetaan Nasional) ka ema seluk mak reprezenta autoridade ne. (United Nations, 1975).

Artigu 6, hateten katak instituisaun regulatoriu Australia ho Badan Koordinasi Survei dan Pemetaan Nasional, mak sei determina Hamutuk pontus linha Plataforma-kontinental hirak ne. bazeia ba evidensia mak hakarek-nain informa iha paragraph balun iha leten, hateten katak Australia fo ajudus bilaterais miliaun $20 AUD, no husi osan ne, miliaun $6.1 sei uza ba sosa aviaun funu, no miliaun $2.0 hodi halao mapamentu ba fronteira Indonesia nian, no ajudus ne sei fo durante durasaun periodu 1972-1975. Iha informasaun seluk mos hateten katak iha 16 de Outubro 1970, Indonesia iha tiha ona sira nian mapa kumpleta nebe bazeia ba Plataforma-kontinente. Oinsa mak Indonesia bele iha lalais tiha mapa kumpleta iha tinan 1970 kona ba fronteira maritima no bazeia ba Plataforma-kontinental nebe persija osan barak hodi halo estudus? Hakerek-nain deskonfia (curiga) katak Australia mak prepara tiha ona mapa ne, hodi foba Indonesia hodi aprezenta, tan ne artigu 6.1 no 2 ne so para taka falta deit. Estranyu tebes ba Indonesia hodi asina akordu Plataforma-kontinente ne, sekuandu sira iha tiha ona mapamentu mak klaru kona ba informasaun tasi-okos (seabed) no kamada-rai (subsoil) iha Tasi Timor neba.

Artigu 7.
Sekarik iha kualker akumulasaun hydrocarbonetas likidu ou natural gas, ka kualker deposito minerais mak hetan iha tasi-okos neba, bele halo extensaun ba kada linha nebe specifikamente ka hanesan deskreve tiha ona iha artigu 1 no 2 husi akordu ne, no husi parte kada akumulasaun ka deposito nebe hetan iha linha nian sorin seluk no bele rekopera iha formasaun likidu, governu rua bele buka dalan hodi konkorda atu oinsa halo exploitasaun mak efektive no fahe lukru mak hanesan ba akumulasaun ka deposito nebe iha.

Artigu 7, ne hatudu katak governu Australia iha ambisaun makas hodi buka minarai no gas iha depositos, mesmo que rezevoar balun dok liu kordinat points.

Artigu 8.1
Nebe Governu Commonwealth Australia bele grante lisensa explorasaun ba petrolifero ou lisensa produsaun ba petrolifero bazeia ba lei (Submerged Lands) lei nebe husi Commonwealth Australia, liu parte tasi-okos nian nebe governu tenta atu exersiu direitu soverania liu husi kualidade akordu ne, no fo lisensa tenke imidiatamente sai prioridade hodi legaliza akordu ne, Governu Republika Indonesia ka ninian autoridade ajente sei simu aplikasaun husi sosiu rejistradu (registered holder) nebe iha lisensa, ou sosiu rejistradu nebe barak liu ema nain ida, sira bele temporariamente kombina ba malun, iha boa-vontade hodi oferese no negosia Kontratu Fahe Produsaun (PSC) bazeia ba Indonesia nian lei, hodi explora no halo produsaun ba minarai no natural gas.

Analiza ba artigu 8.1 hatudu katak Australia nian determinasaun bot liu hodi hasai lisensa ba kompania mina sira, no obriga kompania sira tenke kumpri lei Asutralia nian (Submereged Lands) nebe regula futuru industria ne. hakerek-nain la hetan evidensia involvement Indonesia nian iha hasai lisensa ba area Tasi Timor nian, ne hatudu katak akordu ida ne (seabed boundary) so fo deit benefisiu ba parte ida mak Governu Australia.

Artigu 8.2
Aplikasaun ba negosiasaun bazeia ba konkordansia iha paragraph 1 husi artigu ne tenke deside liu husi sosiu rejistradu ka sosiu rejistradu sira seluk iha fulan sia nia laran depois de akordu ne aplika. Sekarik laiha aplikasaun mak halo durante period ne, ka oferesementu halo bazeia ba konkordansia ho paragraph 1 husi artigu ne, depois negosiasaun, la aseita, ka la permiti ou la fo lisensa, Governu Republika Indonesia sei la iha obrigasaun hodi rejistru sosiu sira, no sei la permiti hodi fo lisensa bazeia ba paragraph 1 husi aplikasaun akordu ne.

Pontu 2, klaru hateten katak, Governu Australia halo tauk no ameasa Indonesia, liu husi desizaun fulan sia deit ba Indoensia hodi prosesa aplikasaun no halo rejistasaun ba sosiu sira. Tamba sa mak regulamentu fulan sia ne aplika deit ba parte Indonesia nian? Sekuandu akordu ne bazeia ba relasaun mutual, entaun tenke aplika mos ba nasaun rua, laos ba Indonesia deit.

Artigu 8.3
Haktuir proposta husi artigu ne, “sosiu rejistradu” (registered holder) signifika kompania ida nebe rejistu sosiu (saham) no hetan lisensa ba explorasaun petroleum ou lisensa ba halao produsaun, iha kazu ne bazeia ba lei (Submerged Lands Acts) husi Commonwealth Australia nebe imidiatamente aplika tiha ona iha akordu ne.

Iha pontu numero 3, iha tendensaun makas Australia refere liu ba sira nian lei, laos Indonesia nian lei.

Artigu 9
Sekarik iha desputa entre governu rua mosu husi interpretasaun ka implementasaun husi akordu ne, tuir mai so bele resolve ho hakmatek (peacefully) liu husi konsultasaun ka negosiasaun.

Artigu 9, reflekta tipiku attitude nasaun iha ambisaun makas, nebe la justu iha negosisaun, sira sempre prevene disputa iha futuru liu husi aplika seksaun ne, nebe kualker problema so bele resolve liu husi dalan hakmatek (peacefully) konsultasaun no negosiasaun, signifika sira lakohi atu lori ba Tribunal Internasional.

Artigu 10.
Akordu ne sei ratifika bazeia ba konstituisaun mak vigora iha nasaun rua, no sei aplika ba lei iha loron nebe instrumentu husi ratifikasaun ne troka ba malun.

Sai sasin ba asina, sira nebe hetan autorizasaun husi governu rua, mak sei asina akordu ne.

Kumpleta no duplika iha Jakarta iha loron sia fulan Outubro 1972 iha lian Ingles no Indonesia.

Reprezenta Governu Commonwealth Australia:
Nigel Bowen nudar ministro estranjeiru Australia nian,
Reprezenta husi Governu Republika Indonesia:
Sumantri Brodjonegoro, nudar Ministro Minerais Indonesia nian.

Konkluzaun

Essay ne hato’o tiha ona evidensia balun mak iha relasaun ho Australia nian interese iha Tasi Timor, nebe hatudu klaru sira nian interese ekonomia bot liu Indonesia. Involvementu husi eis Presidente Indonesia Soeharto no eis Primeiro Ministro Australia William McMahon klaru tebes, no ita bele hare ne liu husi fa’an akordu Plataforma-kontinente ho osan miliaun $20 ba ajudus bilaterais, mesmo que ida ne, iha mos evidensia empirical hanesan data survey seismiku prova tiha ona katak kontinente Australia mos fas parte ilha Timor, maibe sira kontinua ignora faktus hirak ne. Governu Australia sei halo buat hotu atu hodi legaliza aktividade exploitasaun ba rezerva minarai no gas; no buat ne hatudu tiha ona iha akordu Plataforma kontinente ne, nebe hahu’u husi artigu 1 to 10 so favorese deit ba Australia laos Indonesia.

References
Australian Parliament House., 1999. ‘CHAPTER 7 AUSTRALIA’S POLICY: LATE 1975–99’, Available at http://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/wopapub/senate/committee/fadt_ctte/completed_inquiries/1999_02/east_timor/report/c07_pdf.ashx

Cook, C., 1981. ‘Filling the Gap - Delimiting the Australia-Indonesia Maritime Boundary’, Australian Year Book of International Law, Available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUYrBkIntLaw/1983/4.pdf

Cour Internationale de Justice., 1992. ‘Portugal C Australie’, Vol 1. Available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/84/6838.pdf

Garnett, P, A, R., 1975. ‘SEISMIC REFLECTION PROFILES ACROSS THE TIMOR TROUGH’, Bureau of Minerals, Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Department of Minerals and Energy. Available at http://www.ga.gov.au/corporate_data/13272/Rec1975_032.pdf

Government of Timor-Leste., 2015, ‘Prime Minister and Delegation return from successful Official Visit to Indonesia’, accessible 30 of August 2015, available at http://timor-leste.gov.tl/?p=13158&lang=en

Government of Timor-Leste., 2013, ‘Peace and Reconciliation- The Timorese Experiences’, Accessible 7 of June 2013, available at http://timor-leste.gov.tl/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Peace-and-Reconciliation-UP-College-of-Law.pdf

Hastings, P., 1978. 'Re-arranging The Sea Bed A Task For Diplomacy', Sydney Morning Herald, 22 December.

House of Representative Hansard., 1970. ‘Continental Self of Australia: Ministerial Statement’, Page 3107-3109 Accessible 4 November 2015. Available at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1970-10-30/toc_pdf/19701030_reps_27_hor70.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201970%22

House of Representatives Hansard.,1972. ‘Australia – Indonesia: Seabed Boundaries, (Question No 6214). 26 October, Pp 3380-3381; Accessible 4 November 2015, available at
http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1972-10-26/toc_pdf/19721026_reps_27_hor81.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201972%22

House of Representatives Hansard., 1973. 2 May 1973, Pp.1586 Available at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1973-05-02/toc_pdf/19730502_reps_28_hor83.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201973%2005%22

House of Representatives Hansard.,1977. Vol.105, 2 June 1977, Pp.2589 available at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1977-06-02/toc_pdf/19770602_reps_30_hor105.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201977%2006%22

Jonesl, J, P., & Nicoll, S,R., 1985. ‘Late Triassic conodonts from Sahul Shoals No.1, Ashmore Block, north western Australia’, Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics, Vol 9, Pp 361-364. Available at http://www.ga.gov.au/corporate_data/81199/Jou1984_v9_n4_p361.pdf

King, J, R., 2002. ‘The Timor Gap 1972 – 2002’, The Free Library. Available at:   http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Timor+Gap,+Wonosobo+and+the+fate+of+Portuguese+Timor.-a087146249
Laws, R., and Kraus, C., 1974. 'The Regional Geology of the Bonaparte Gulf-Timor Sea Area', APEA Journal, 1974, 14 (1) Pp.77-84.

Mills, A., 1985. ‘Australian-Indonesian Relations A Study of the Timor Sea
Maritime Delimitation Negotiations’, Bachelor of Arts (Honours) Thesis, University of
Adelaide.

Prescott, J,R,V.,1981.’Maritime Jurisdiction In South East Asia: A Commentary and Map’, East West Environment And Policy Institute, Research Report No 2. Available at https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10125/21969/EAPIResRep002MaritimeJurisdictionInSoutheastAsia1981%5Bpdfa%5D.PDF?sequence=1

Richardson, M., 1978.'Boundary threat to seabed leases', The Sydney Morning Herald, 21 December

Richardson, M., 1978.'Jakarta's Tough Sea Boundary Claim', The Australian Financial Review, 20 December.

Robinson, P., 1970. ‘Aust’s “expanding rim” offshore minerals doctrine in question’, Australian Financial Review, 16 October 1970.

Senate Hansard House of Representative.,1973. ’Australian Senator Justin O’Byrne has declared that potential hydrocarbon in the Timor Sea’. Accessible on 28 of October 2015 at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/genpdf/hansard80/hansards80/1973-05-23/0000/hansard_frag.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf

Smith, J, M., 2011. ‘Australian Claims to The Timor Sea’s Petroleum Resources: Clever, Cunning, or Criminal?, Monash University Law Review, Vol 37, No 3. Pp 42-72. Available at
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MonashULawRw/2011/28.pdf

Sorby, R., 1969. 'Indo-Aust. Talks on who owns Off-shore Oil', The Australian Financial Review, 4 of November.

The Age., 1974. 'Australia calls for report on oil leases', The Age, 14 December 1974.
United Nations.,1975. ‘Agreement Between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia Establishing Certain Seabed Boundaries 1972’, Accessible on 3 of November 2015, Available at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREATIES/AUS-IDN1972TA.pdf

Wynn, C, J.,1979. ‘Electromagnetic Coupling with a Collinear Array on a Two-Layer Anisotropic Earth’, Geological Survey Professional Paper, Vol 1077, Pp 121. Available at https://books.google.com.au/books?id=PbQ-AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA323&lpg=PA323&dq=who+is+R+A+Laws+and+C+Kraus&source=bl&ots=DGuvgruVj3&sig=xbkXEzM6qZphat8Eeb31-nhusOc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAGoVChMI5fi52bP0yAIVZh2mCh1ACQI4#v=onepage&q=who%20is%20R%20A%20Laws%20and%20C%20Kraus&f=false

Ytreland, G., 2005. ‘Petroleum Potential and commercial advantages’, Oil and Gas Energy Directorate. Power Point presentation on 16 November 2005.

1 Comment

What is the interest behind the Indonesia-Australia Seabed Boundary? A critical review of the Continental Shelf Agreement of 1972

11/10/2015

6 Comments

What is the interest behind the Indonesia-Australia Seabed Boundary?
A critical review of the Continental Shelf Agreement of 1972
Author
Tomas Freitas

Introduction
As a neighbour to Australian and Indonesia, early this year Timor-Leste Prime Minister Dr. Rui Maria de Araujo with his ministers visited Indonesia, and as part of the agenda the Prime Minister had a discussion with the President of Indonesia Joko Widodo about the maritime and terrestrial boundary with Indonesia (Gabinette do Primeiro Ministro, 2015).

On the other side the relationship between Dili and Canberra could be said to be a little bit rough, especially since the ASIO raid on Timor-Leste documents in Canberra, followed by the Australian Government loss in the International Court of Justice in the Hague, which was related to the espionage case. As stated by former prime minister of Timor-Leste Xanana Gusmao in Manila on 7 June 2013, Timor-Leste foreign policy has zero enemies, and in particular Australia and Indonesia currently had an excellent relationship with Timor-Leste (Government of Timor-Leste, 2013).

This essay will not challenge Timor-Leste foreign policy strategy or diplomatic relationships, however it will critically review the continental shelf agreement of 1972, and will look at the interest between former Indonesian President Soeharto and former Prime Minister of Australia William McMahon back in the 1970’s. This empirical study will also will provide some technical evidence of geological data which proves where the continental shelf of the island of Timor belongs.

History
First for some facts behind the continental shelf agreement between Australia and Indonesia which was signed in 9 October 1972 (United Nations, 1975). According to one of the Australian Senators Ian Sinclair, in 1956 Portugal claimed Timor-Sea sovereignty based on the median-line principle (Sinclair, 1977), however Australia refused to recognise this and reclaimed sovereignty with the Continental Shelf platform (King, 2002). The pressure continued on by the Australian government in 1971, when the Portuguese still refused the seabed boundary as a border between two countries (House of Representatives Hansard, 1973). On the other hand, from November 1970 up until April 1971, the Portuguese Ambassador in Canberra, Carlos Empis Wemans was seeking consultation with Canberra, specifically with Deputy Secretary Owen Harry, however it did not happen because Canberra preferred to negotiate with Jakarta in favour of the seabed boundary (La Haye, 1991). The reason why Portugal was seeking a meeting with the Australian Department of External Affairs was because the Boletim Oficial de Timor of 24 October 1970 published a document request from the Oceanic Exploration Company with the date 31 December 1968 to the Ministro do Ultramar regarding an exploration concession in the Timor Sea area, and also because the licensing covered an overlapping area which was claimed by Australia (King, 2002). The Portuguese not only provided license to the Oceanic Exploration, but they also in December 1974 provided permits to the Petrotimor Company as a group consortium together with Oceanic Exploration and Portuguese Interests (The Age, 1974), for which the licensing covered 23,192 square miles or around 60,700 square kilometres (King, 2002).

Previously, before the giant company Oceanic Exploration which was based in Colorado United States touched the Timor Sea, in 1962 some large Australian oil companies such as Australian Aquitaine Pty Ltd, Arco Australia Ltd and Esso Austra1ia Ltd, has started geophysical exploration (Laws & Kraus, 1974) and followed aeromagnetic survey in 1963 by Woodside Petroleum, Burmah Oil Company and Anglo-Dutch Shell Oil Company, and continued on with seismic study in 1964-1968 (Mollan et al, 1969). The study was conducted around the Bonaparte Basin which later on was to be called the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA). In 1970 Bonaparte Gulf was revealed as potential fossil fuels region, which was estimated to contain between 500 million – 5 billion barrels of oil, and 50,000 billion cubic feet of gas (King, 2002).
In spite of potential reserves information above, on 23rd May 1973, Australian Senator Justin O’Byrne declared that;

“It can only be to our advantage to have this matter settled amicably. We have the very good fortune to possess a defined area that is potentially rich. It has been stated that this area could become the richest hydrocarbon empire in the world. It contains gas and oil in quantities that could match even the fabulous riches of the Middle East. The future of Australia, at a time when a fuel crisis is developing in the United States of America and when the traditional source of supply of hydrocarbons is the subject of very delicate arrangements, with certain traditional practices being changed and the prices being under barter, is bright. We are extremely fortunate that at this time we are emerging into an era of self-sufficiency or near self-sufficiency in the supply of hydrocarbons” (Senate Hansard, 1973:1838-1840).

After the exploration process by the Australian lead companies in 1962, they achieved a result in 1970. Strategically, Canberra was moving fast by establishing an official cooperation with Indonesia. Apparently, with or without direct support to the coup of the new regime under Commander General Soeharto in 1965 against the first President Indonesia Soekarno, the cooperation between Australia and Indonesia in 1966 was successful via the Inter-Government Group on Indonesia (IGGI) which agreed to a $20 million aid program to Indonesia for the period 1972 – 1975. The aid included a military air-strike plane, Sabre jets [$6.1m] and mapping in Indonesia [$2m] (King, 2002). On 16 October 1970 Indonesia showed their own maps which were based on the continental shelf as the median line between Australian and Timor (Robinson, 1970). In February 1972, second Indonesian President Soeharto visited Australia (King, 2002), and asked fellow Prime Minister William McMahon in that time to work hard and fast to conclude the seabed boundary or continental self agreement, which was finally achieved on 9 October 1972 (McMahon, 1972).

The continental self talks between Indonesia and Australia began in November 1969 at the Economic Commission of Asia and the Far East conference (Sorby, 1969). In 1953 Australia had well prepared to claim its continental self as their maritime boundary position (Prescott, 1972), by developing two interpretations of Article 6.1 of the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Law of the Sea, which in regard to delimitation of international boundaries states:

“Where the same continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of two or more States whose coasts are opposite each other, the boundary of the continental shelf appertaining to such States shall be determined by agreement between them. In absence of agreement, and unless another boundary line is justified by special circumstances, the boundary line is the median line, every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points of the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of each state is measured” (King, 2002:2).

First Australia was concerned about drawing the line at the Arafura Sea, east of longitude 133o 14’ East. The reason for the line was because the Australian government had already provided a license for petroleum explorations, which is in between West Irian and Aru Island (King, 2002). Therefore, Australia strongly believed the permits area was lying in the continental shelf which arbitrated to both Australian and Indonesia (Prescott, 1972).

A second interpretation is that Australia believed that the Timor Trough was a ‘huge steep cleft or declivity’ as state by former minister for External Affairs William McMahon on 30 October 1970 at Parliament House; the Timor tranche is more than 550 nautical miles long or 1017.5 kilometres long with an average of 40 miles wide or 74 kilometres, and with the slopes down a depth of over 10,000 feet or over 3000 meters, and according to his source above, it is therefore what he called “unmistakably morphological”, meaning he claimed that the Timor Trough is consequently a boundary between Australia and Timor, which unravelling the continental shelf (Minister for External Affairs, 1970).

According to former Indonesian Justice Minister in 1976 and Foreign Minister in 1977, Dr. Mochtar Kusamaatmadja as stated in the academic journal Far Eastern Economic Review it “is not true that the Timor Trench constituted a natural boundary between the two shelves” (Richardson, 1979:45). As a law of the sea expert, Dr. Mochtar explained in the APPEA Journal that “The Timor Trough is a modern bathymetric trench in which water depths exceed 10,000 feet (3000m) ….The formation of the trough is probably due to isostatic adjustment following the collision in the Early Miocene of the Australian and Asian Plates in the region immediately north of the island of Timor” (Laws & Kraus, 1974:80). Dr. Mochtar also stated in the newspaper the Sydney Morning Herald on 3rd of June 1972 “If the plates collided north of Timor then the Trough/Trench was indeed merely 'an incidental depression in the sea-floor, not the definitive edge of two shelves” (Hastings, 1972). The same notions also came from Charles Hutchison, which declared that “the continental shelf unit extends from the Australia Shaul shelf, beneath the axis of the Timor Through, to reappear uplifted and folded on the island, where it is widely exposed” (Smith, 2011:51)

The images above clearly show that the Australian continental self included Sumba, Timor and Papua Islands. These images were presented by one of the advisors (Geir Ytreland) working at the Timor-Leste Ministry of Natural Resources and Energy Policy (MNREP) in the first constitutional government (2005).

Seismic Survey

The scanned image above states that the Department of Minerals and Energy Australia has conducted a seismic survey across the Timor Trough, in which they found that the Timor Island was a part of the Australian Continental Shelf; this is in contrast to what William McMahon had declared. See the following statement as declared by that document.

The statement above can be interpreted that the island of Timor was formed by a collision between Australian continents with another zone at that boundary, meaning the Indonesian continent.

The last sentence in this paragraph refers to the same sedimentary rocks in the Timor Trough as similar to clays in Bobonaro.

This paragraph states that because of gravity sliding, this has lifted the island of Timor since the Miocene time which according to the geologic time scale means the formation of the island has happened around 5 to 24 million years ago.

The above images which were published with the above documents prove that the Timor Trough did not go a further 3000 meters downward.

Before entering further discussion this paper would like to review each of the articles (as written in italic fonts) that were comprised in the continental shelf agreement between Jakarta and Canberra of 18 May 1971, which were signed by former Australian Foreign Minister Nigel Bowen and Indonesian Mining Minister Soemantri Brodjonegoro on 9 October 1972 in Jakarta.

Continental Shelf Agreement of 1972

No.14123
“Agreement Between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia Establishing Certain Seabed Boundaries in the Area of the Timor and Arafura Seas, Supplementary to the Agreement of 18 May 1971 (9 October 1972)” Authentic text: English and Indonesian. Registered by Australia on 7 August 1975 (United Nations, 1975).

The cover of the agreement clearly illustrated Australian interest by registering the agreement without Indonesia participation. This could be the reason why Dr Mochtar Kusuma Atmaja stated that “Australia had taken Indonesia to the cleaners”; see Michael Richardson (1978), Peter Hastings (1978).

The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia,

“Recalling the Agreement between the two Governments, signed on the eighteenth day of May One thousand nine hundred and seventy-one, establishing seabed boundaries in the Arafura Sea and in certain areas off the coasts of the island of New Guinea (Irian),
Recalling further that in the aforesaid Agreement the two Governments left for later discussion the question of the delimitation of the respective areas of adjacent seabed in the Arafura and Timor Seas westward of Longitude 133° 23' East,
Resolving, as good neighbours and in a spirit of co-operation and friendship, to settle permanently the limits of the areas referred to in the preceding paragraph within which the respective Governments shall exercise sovereign rights with respect to the exploration of the seabed and the exploitation of its natural resources,
Have agreed as follows:” (United Nations, 1975).

The last paragraph of the preamble above reflects the hypothetical motion of the Australian side. As mentioned earlier in this essay, from 1962 to 1970 Australian oil companies had explored and identified fossil fuel resources beneath the continental shelf. The question is how could Indonesia at that time not notice that under the coordinated points A16 and A17 lay five billion barrels of oil and fifty thousand billion cubic feet of gas.

Article 1
“In the area to the south of the Tanimbar Islands, the boundary between the area of seabed that is adjacent to and appertains to the Commonwealth of Australia and the area of seabed that is adjacent to and appertains to the Republic of Indonesia shall be the straight lines shown on the Chart annexed to this Agreement commencing at the Point of Latitude 8°53' South, Longitude 133° 23' (Point A 12 specified in the Agreement between the two countries dated the eighteenth day of May One thousand nine hundred and seventy-one), thence connecting in a westerly direction the points specified hereunder in the sequence so specified:

A 13. The point of Latitude 8° 54' South, Longitude 133° 14' East
A 14. The point of Latitude 9° 25' South, Longitude 130° 10' East
A 15. The point of Latitude 9° 25' South, Longitude 128° 00' East
A 16. The point of Latitude 9° 28' South, Longitude 127° 56' East” (United Nations, 1975)

Article 2
“In the area south of Roti and Timor Islands, the boundary between the area of seabed that is adjacent to and appertains to the Commonwealth of Australia and the area of seabed that is adjacent to and appertains to the Republic of Indonesia shall be the straight lines, shown on the Chart annexed to this Agreement commencing at the point of Latitude 10°28' South, Longitude 126° 00' East (Point A 17), and thence connecting in a westerly direction the points specified hereunder in the sequence so specified:

A 18. The point of Latitude 10° 37' South, Longitude 125° 41' East
A 19. The point of Latitude 11° 01' South, Longitude 125° 19' East
A 20. The point of Latitude 11° 07' South, Longitude 124° 34' East
A 21. The point of Latitude 11° 25' South, Longitude 124° 10' East
A 22. The point of Latitude 11° 26' South, Longitude 124° 00' East
A 23. The point of Latitude 11° 28' South, Longitude 123° 40' East
A 24. The point of Latitude 11° 23' South, Longitude 123° 26' East
A 25. The point of Latitude 11° 35' South, Longitude 123° 14' East” (United Nations, 1975).

Article 3
“The lines between Points A 15 and A 16 and between Points A 17 and A 18 referred to in Article 1 and Article 2 respectively, indicate the direction of those portions of the boundary. In the event of any further delimitation agreement or agreements being concluded between governments exercising sovereign rights with respect to the exploration of the seabed and the exploitation of its natural resources in the area of the Timor Sea, the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia shall consult each other with a view to agreeing on such adjustment or adjustments, if any, as may be necessary in those portions of the boundary lines between Points A 15 and A 16 and between Points A 17 and A 18.” (United Nations, 1975).

If we compare and analyse the Article 1,2 and 3 above, it’s clear that these continental self agreements are not rational because in Article 1 and 2 it clearly states the measurement coordinate points based on the adjacent position of two countries, but in Article 3, both governments ‘shall consult each other with a view agreeing on such adjustment or adjustments’, n terms of points A15 to A16 and A17 to A18. The question is, why do they have to consult with each other? If the coordinates are based on the spirit of the continental shelf, why are Australia and Indonesia concerned about these last four coordinate points? Is it because points A16 and A17 are the key coordinate points which are in favour of some large reservoir? Let’s see where exactly points A16 and A17 lie.

Source: Woodside
The images above are for Woodside’s internal use only, however the point of A17 is laid exactly near Laminaria, Corallina, and Buffalo fields. If the line just stopped at A18, this could mean that most of the fields lie inside the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA).

Source for the images above is Greater Sunrise International Unitisation Agreement.

The above images show exactly where the coordinate points A15 and A16 are. According to the Seabed Boundary Agreement on the last page of the document, coordinate points A15 and A16 are divided between Sunrise and Troubadour fields, with 20.1% belonging to the JPDA and 79.9% belonging to Australia. The question is would Indonesia have agreed knowing that coordinate points A15 and A16 are lying on a gigantic gas field?

Article 4
“The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia mutually acknowledge the sovereign rights of the respective Governments in and over the seabed areas within the limits established by this Agreement and that they will cease to claim or to exercise sovereign rights with respect to the exploration of the seabed and the exploitation of its natural resources beyond the boundaries so established.” (United Nations, 1975).

Article 5
“For the purpose of this Agreement, "seabed" includes the subsoil thereof, except where the context otherwise requires.”(United Nations, 1975).

Article 6
“1.The co-ordinates of the points specified in Articles 1 and 2 of this Agreement are geographical co-ordinates, and the actual location of these points and of the lines joining them shall be determined by a method to be agreed upon by the competent authorities of the two Governments.

2. For the purpose of paragraph 1 of this Article, the competent authorities in relation to the Commonwealth of Australia shall be the Director of National Mapping and any person acting with his authority, and in relation to the Republic of Indonesia shall be the Chief of the Co-ordinating Body for National Survey and Mapping (Ketua Badan Koordinasi Survey Dan Pemetaan Nasional) and any person acting with his authority.” (United Nations, 1975).

Article 4 states that with respect to the exploration of the seabed and the exploitation of its natural resources, “beyond the boundaries” is agreed to. How could Indonesia agree to let Australia explore and exploit beyond the boundaries? The emphasis is on Article 5 which re-declares that the seabed includes the subsoil, and that it will be an exemption which means that there is no requirement of disagreement on exploration and exploitation under the seabed. In Article 6, it clearly shows that the Australian regulatory body did not consult the Indonesian Badan Koordinasi Survei dan Pemetaan Nasional; it would be strange if Indonesia had noticed but still signed the agreement.

Article 7
“If any single accumulation of liquid hydrocarbons or natural gas, or if any other mineral deposit beneath the seabed, extends across any of the lines that are specified or described in Articles 1 and 2 of this Agreement, and the part of such accumulation or deposit that is situated on one side of the line is recoverable in fluid form wholly or in part from the other side of the line, the two Governments will seek to reach agreement on the manner in which the accumulation or deposit shall be most effectively exploited and on the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from such exploitation.” (United Nations, 1975).

Article 7 shows the ambition of the Australian government for seeking oil and gas deposits even though the reservoir extended beyond the coordinate points.

Article 8
“1. Where the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia has granted an exploration permit for petroleum or a production licence for petroleum under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Acts of the Commonwealth of Australia over a part of the seabed over which that Government ceases to exercise sovereign rights by virtue of this Agreement, and that permit or licence is in force immediately prior to the entry into force of this Agreement, the Government of Indonesia or its authorised agent shall, upon application by the registered holder of the permit or licence, or where there is more than one registered holder, by the registered holders acting jointly, be willing to offer and to negotiate a production sharing contract under Indonesian law to explore for and to produce oil and natural gas in respect of the same part of the seabed on terms that are not less favourable than those provided under Indonesian law in existing production sharing contracts in other parts of the seabed under Indonesian jurisdiction.

2. An application for negotiation in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article must be made by the registered holder or holders within nine months after the entry into force of this Agreement. If no application is made within this period, or if an offer made in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is, after negotiation, not accepted by the permittee or licensee, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia shall have no further obligation to the registered holder or holders of a permit or licence to which paragraph 1 of this Article applies.

3. For the purpose of this Article, "registered holder" means a company that was a registered holder of an exploration permit for petroleum or a production licence for petroleum, as the case may be, under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Acts of the Commonwealth of Australia immediately prior to the entry into force of this Agreement.” (United Nations, 1975).

Article 8 shows the Australian determination for releasing licensing to oil companies, and urges the Australian Act of (Submerged Lands) to rule this future industry. By finding no evidence over Indonesian involvement in release licensing around the Timor Sea area, it is proved that this Seabed Boundary agreement only provided one sided benefits to the Australian government.
Point number 2 clearly states that the Australian government frightened Indonesia by giving a nine month period to process the application of the registered holders. Why would this rule only apply to Indonesia; if this agreement is based on a relationship of mutual respect, it should be written for both, not just Indonesia.
At point number 3, tendentiously Australia refers to their laws not Indonesia.

Article 9
“Any dispute between the two Governments arising out of the interpretation or implementation of thisAgreement shall be settled peacefully by consultation or negotiation.” (United Nations, 1975).

Article 10
“This Agreement is subject to ratification in accordance with the constitutional requirements of each
country, and shall enter into force on the day on which the Instruments of Ratification are exchanged.I

N WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized by their respective Governments, have signed this Agreement.

DONE in duplicate at Jakarta this ninth day of October 1972 in the English and Indonesian languages.” (United Nations 1975).

Article 9 reflects a typical attitude of any country that has been ambitious or not fair in negotiations or agreements, that they always prevent future disputes by applying this section, in which any type of settlement has to be achieved “peacefully by consultation or negotiation”, meaning not to be taken to the International Court of Justice.

Conclusion
This essay has provided some evidence related to the history of Australian Interest in the Timor-Sea, which clearly shows economic interest over Indonesia. The involvement of former Indonesia President Soeharto and former Australian Prime Minister William McMahon are very obvious, which we can see through trading over the continental shelf agreement with the twenty million Australian dollar aid program. Even though the empirical evidence such as seismic data survey has proven that the island of Timor is part of the same continental shelf with Australia, still they ignored the facts. The Australian government will do everything to legalise the action of exploiting natural resources; we can see as a good example the continental self agreement, which from Articles 1 to 10 is in favour of Australia and not Indonesia.

References

Australian Parliament House., 1999. ‘CHAPTER 7 AUSTRALIA’S POLICY: LATE 1975–99’, Available at http://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/wopapub/senate/committee/fadt_ctte/completed_inquiries/1999_02/east_timor/report/c07_pdf.ashx

Cook, C., 1981. ‘Filling the Gap - Delimiting the Australia-Indonesia Maritime Boundary’, Australian Year Book of International Law, Available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUYrBkIntLaw/1983/4.pdf

Cour Internationale de Justice., 1992. ‘Portugal C Australie’, Vol 1. Available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/84/6838.pdf

Forbes,L, V.,2010. ‘The Hate/Love Triangle in The Timor Sea: Australia, Indonesia and East Timor-Part One’, Strategy Analysis Paper. Available at http://www.futuredirections.org.au/files/1273648322-FDI%20Strategic%20Analysis%20Paper%20-%2012%20May%202010%20(Part%20One).pdf

Garnett, P, A, R., 1975. ‘SEISMIC REFLECTION PROFILES ACROSS THE TIMOR TROUGH’, Bureau of Minerals, Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Department of Minerals and Energy. Available at http://www.ga.gov.au/corporate_data/13272/Rec1975_032.pdf

Government of Timor-Leste., 2015, ‘Prime Minister and Delegation return from successful Official Visit to Indonesia’, accessible 30 of August 2015, available at http://timor-leste.gov.tl/?p=13158&lang=en

Government of Timor-Leste., 2013, ‘Peace and Reconciliation- The Timorese Experiences’, Accessible 7 of June 2013, available at http://timor-leste.gov.tl/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Peace-and-Reconciliation-UP-College-of-Law.pdf

Hastings, P., 1978. 'Re-arranging The Sea Bed A Task For Diplomacy', Sydney Morning Herald, 22 December.

House of Representative Hansard., 1970. ‘Continental Self of Australia: Ministerial Statement’, Page 3107-3109 Accessible 4 November 2015. Available at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1970-10-30/toc_pdf/19701030_reps_27_hor70.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201970%22

House of Representatives Hansard.,1972. ‘Australia – Indonesia: Seabed Boundaries, (Question No 6214). 26 October, Pp 3380-3381; Accessible 4 November 2015, available at
http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1972-10-26/toc_pdf/19721026_reps_27_hor81.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201972%22

House of Representatives Hansard., 1973. 2 May 1973, Pp.1586 Available at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1973-05-02/toc_pdf/19730502_reps_28_hor83.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201973%2005%22

House of Representatives Hansard.,1977. Vol.105, 2 June 1977, Pp.2589 available at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/hansard80/hansardr80/1977-06-02/toc_pdf/19770602_reps_30_hor105.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%221970s%201977%2006%22

Jonesl, J, P., & Nicoll, S,R., 1985. ‘Late Triassic conodonts from Sahul Shoals No.1, Ashmore Block, north western Australia’, Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics, Vol 9, Pp 361-364. Available at http://www.ga.gov.au/corporate_data/81199/Jou1984_v9_n4_p361.pdf

King, J, R., 2002. ‘The Timor Gap 1972 – 2002’, The Free Library. Available at: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Timor+Gap,+Wonosobo+and+the+fate+of+Portuguese+Timor.-a087146249

Laws, R., and Kraus, C., 1974. 'The Regional Geology of the Bonaparte Gulf-Timor Sea Area', APEA Journal, 1974, 14 (1) Pp.77-84.

Mills, A., 1985. ‘Australian-Indonesian Relations A Study of the Timor Sea
Maritime Delimitation Negotiations’, Bachelor of Arts (Honours) Thesis, University of
Adelaide.

Munton, J, A.,2006. ‘A Study of The Offshore Petroleum Negotiations Between Australia, The U.N. and East Timor: A Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctoral of Philosophy of The Australian National University.

Prescott, J,R,V.,1981.’Maritime Jurisdiction In South East Asia: A Commentary and Map’, East West Environment And Policy Institute, Research Report No 2. Available at https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10125/21969/EAPIResRep002MaritimeJurisdictionInSoutheastAsia1981%5Bpdfa%5D.PDF?sequence=1

Richardson, et al., 2002. ‘Geophysical Data Sets Over Continental Australia’, Geoscience Australia.

Richardson, M., 1978.'Boundary threat to seabed leases', The Sydney Morning Herald, 21 December

Richardson, M., 1978.'Jakarta's Tough Sea Boundary Claim', The Australian Financial Review, 20 December.

Robinson, P., 1970. ‘Aust’s “expanding rim” offshore minerals doctrine in question’, Australian Financial Review, 16 October 1970.

Senate Hansard House of Representative.,1973. ’Australian Senator Justin O’Byrne has declared that potential hydrocarbon in the Timor Sea’. Accessible on 28 of October 2015 at http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/genpdf/hansard80/hansards80/1973-05-23/0000/hansard_frag.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf

Smith, J, M., 2011. ‘Australian Claims to The Timor Sea’s Petroleum Resources: Clever, Cunning, or Criminal?, Monash University Law Review, Vol 37, No 3. Pp 42-72. Available at
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MonashULawRw/2011/28.pdf

Sorby, R., 1969. 'Indo-Aust. Talks on who owns Off-shore Oil', The Australian Financial Review, 4 of November.

The Age., 1974. 'Australia calls for report on oil leases', The Age, 14 December 1974.
The Parliament Of The Commonwealth Of Australia., 1997. ‘Australia-Indonesia Maritime Delimitation Treaty: 12th Report’ November 1997.

United Nations.,1975. ‘Agreement Between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia Establishing Certain Seabed Boundaries 1972’, Accessible on 3 of November 2015, Available at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREATIES/AUS-IDN1972TA.pdf

Willheim, E.,1989. ‘ Australia-Indonesia Sea-Bed Boundary Negotiation: Proposals for a Joint Development Zone in the “Timor Gap”’, Natural Resources Journal, Vol 29, Pp 821-842. Available at http://lawschool.unm.edu/nrj/volumes/29/3/09_willheim_austrailia.pdf

Wynn, C, J.,1979. ‘Electromagnetic Coupling with a Collinear Array on a Two-Layer Anisotropic Earth’, Geological Survey Professional Paper, Vol 1077, Pp 121. Available at https://books.google.com.au/books?id=PbQ-AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA323&lpg=PA323&dq=who+is+R+A+Laws+and+C+Kraus&source=bl&ots=DGuvgruVj3&sig=xbkXEzM6qZphat8Eeb31-nhusOc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAGoVChMI5fi52bP0yAIVZh2mCh1ACQI4#v=onepage&q=who%20is%20R%20A%20Laws%20and%20C%20Kraus&f=false

Ytreland, G., 2005. ‘Petroleum Potential and commercial advantages’, Oil and Gas Energy Directorate. Power Point presentation on 16 November 2005.

6 Comments

A Critical Review of World Development Report: “Understanding the Links between Development and Climate Change”

8/23/2015

1 Comment

A Critical Review of World Development Report:

“Understanding the Links between Development and Climate Change”

Author: Tomas Freitas

Introduction

According to the World Development Report 2010, climate change has affected economic growth both in developed and developing countries. Developing economies will be more affected however because of their exposure to climate shocks and low adaptive capacity, therefore urgent action is needed in order to mitigate the global warming (World Bank, 2010).

The report describes many facts of the implications of climate change including lower rainfall which affects agriculture production, reduced water on glacier plateaus, temperature rises which also cause an increase in malaria and dengue, and an unprecedented number of hurricanes and floods, all of which affect the financing of disaster prevention. The report also discusses the types of mitigation policies that could reduce global warming, such as green taxes, hydro power projects, and biofuels. Analysis of the report demonstrates that the policy recommendations for climate change mitigation have been designed to suit the neoliberal concept of free market orientation.

This essay will critically evaluate the report from a political economy perspective, while also analysing the content and recommendations as provided by the report. Some of the issues that will be referred to in the report include purchasing power parity of affluent and not so affluent societies; the power of large companies and institutions; women’s participation in innovation; food security; the potential for hydropower projects and debt and structural adjustment policies; expansion of non-subsistence food production crops such as sugarcane; and the introduction of green taxes.

Apart from the facts outlined above, the report also provides data relating to individual contributions to green gas houses emissions based on high, medium and low income counties, as shown in Figure 1.1 in the Report. Moreover, high income countries such as Australia, Canada and the United States are in the top three greenhouse gas emitting states. Looking at the contribution of emissions by high income in comparison to medium and low income countries, the discrepancy is very obvious, because the high income countries have more capacity in terms of their purchasing power parity compared to the others. This means that as a consumer with a high income, it will have more options to choose products according to its interest. In this situation it is possible to apply the neoclassical theory of ‘consumer rationality’, which is ‘utility maximisation’, meaning that with the knowledge and preferences about the products, the consumer spend their disposal income to their satisfaction (Stilwell, 2002).

The table below which describes the percentages of the four main gas emissions into atmosphere, based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report 2007.

Table 1. Sources: IPCC Report (2007) and Earth Reform (2012)

If we have a look the table above, it is very clear that high income countries have contributed the most gas emissions into the ozone, especially the contribution of fluorinated gasses. This is very typical of affluent society consumption, which adopts utility maximisation of consumer rationality theory. This data has been calculated taking into account the pre-industrial era, around 250 years ago (IPCC, 2007).

The data in the table clearly shows that the contribution of burning fossil fuels is very high; however the World Development Report 2010 did not refer to any international corporate or giant oil companies, who are the main actors for extracting fossil fuels. According to one professor of geology James Lawrence Powel, the first organisation that denies global warming is the Global Climate Coalition which is founded by Exxon Mobile, Chevron, Shell, Texaco, American Petroleum Institute, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Amoco, American Forest and Paper Association and U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The coalition has campaigned strongly against the Kyoto Protocol (Powel, 2011, Chapter 9). The question is why does the report not mention those giant corporate companies?

As described in Box 1.1, the report specifically highlights women’s participation in all productive sectors, for example women’s participation in natural disaster management in La Masica- Honduras, women’s participation and innovation in water resources management in Zammour- Tunisia, and that women’s participation enhances food security and forest protection in Central America countries (World Bank, 2010).

This paper does not intend to underestimate the capacity of women in natural disaster management; rather, the intention is to analyse the sources of evidence which have been brought by the World Bank, which typically reflects an epistemology or anti foundationalist position, which means that their interpretation is based on another observation, what David Marsh and Paul Furlong (2002) called ‘double hermeneutics’ or indirect observation.

Information regarding women’s participation in the early warning system of disaster management in La Masica Honduras after Hurricane Mitch in 1998 was not clear. Actually, the information has been cited from one report to other reports with the result that the content of the information has been modified slightly to feed the interest of readers. The report has been cited by the World Bank from the World Health Organisation, which WHO also has quoted from the Inter-American Development Bank, (WHO, 2005), and the IADB also has cited the information from another consultant, (Buvinic, 1999). However, the information did not appear in local community reports (Alonzo, 2000). Moreover, the training project for an early warning system was funded by the German government through the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ), and the report published by GTZ does not specifically refer to women’s participation but rather remains very general, referring to strong participation from local NGOs, local leaders and community (GTZ, 2005).

Women participation in water resources management in Zammour, Tunisia is an example of innovation from seventy-year old women who invented a system for watering water melon plants using plastic bottle for collecting raining water. This kind of innovation is supported by local indigenous organisations (UNESCO, 2003). So where is the support from climate change finance?

Women in Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Peru and Haiti plant and collect Maya nuts as a staple food. The original story came from the Maya Nut Institution (2012), an organisation that has trained more than 17,000 thousand women from 1200 communities. The Maya Nut institution was founded by agriculturist and florist activist Erika Vohman. The organisation has received several awards and funding from donors including from the World Bank (Buffle & Vohman, 2011). According to the financial information, the total budget for 2008 was $226,974, in 2009 it was $136,106, 2010 it was $96,694, and in 2011 $128,991 (Maya Nut Institute, 2012). The financial allocation does not seem much, but the organisation performed well in managing programs and activities in several countries. The organisation has proved that big funding is not the answer for everything; however, at the same time it also confronted issues in regards to trading of their products. The Maya Nut Institution website, declares that the organisation will form an alternative trade organisation, to protect the rights of Maya Nut producers (Maya Nut Institution 2012). The problem of trading has always been an obstacle for farmers in developing countries, because developed countries always protect their own agriculture by subsidising their farmers and applying high tariffs for import grains from developing counties (Khor, 2005).

If we analyse the participation of women in Maya Nut productivities above, we might wonder why the World Bank also funds these kinds of activities, even though the contribution from the World Bank is unclear. It is possible that the World Bank might think not to provide big funding, because the market for Maya Nut may not be large enough, and the production may not yet be ready for global export orientation, meaning that it is not like coffee beans or tea leafs that can be exported to European and Western countries. For example in the film “The End of Poverty? Think Again”, the Kenyan Agriculture Minister, Kipruto Arap Kirwa, talks about how Sudanese tea farmers export tea leaves to Europe, which are bought by Lipton and then processed and marketed to the world as final products ready for consumption (Diaz, 2008).

Maya Nut also has a positive impact on food security, as the food product can be consumed as a daily meal as well as in the school feeding program. So far this kind of root crops can only be found in Central America and Caribbean countries throughout the bushland, where the crop grows together with other different types of trees. Historically, roots crops are the subsistence food of indigenous Mayan society, preceding corn cultivation during the Mesoamerican period (Bronson, 1966). A testimony from a female farmer declares that the Mayan Nut has saved their lives during the war in El Salvador (Maya Nut institution, 2012).

“During the war my father could not plant the corn or anything. He could not even go outside, none of us could; it was too dangerous. My grandmother went out at night and collected Maya Nut seed from beneath the big trees by the river. We had to eat them raw because a fire was not possible. We survived almost a month on the Maya Nut and other things my grandmother scavenged at night. She saved our lives, Maya Nut saved our lives. Elvia Sanchez, Morazan, El Salvador”. (Source: Maya Nut Institute, 2012, Available at http://mayanutinstitute.org/)

This testimony reminds us of the history of colonialism as seen in the film “The End of Poverty? Think Again”, where the colonial power took productive land and used it for planting commodities such as sugar, cocoa, coffee, copra and other cash crops. When it came time to harvest, this merchandise was exported back to the county of the colonisers (Diaz, 2008). Productive land is normally flat or containing volcanic soils, which is perfect for growing export crops (Rosset, 2005). If we compare the above testimony about the location of the Maya Nut tree near the river, it does make sense that this kind of staple food was not an export commodity during colonial times, because normally this kind of tree is found in the bushland, rainforest, and riverside (Maya Nut Institution, 2012b).

The testimony also clearly indicates that this Maya Nut is an original food, which could possibly become an alternative food for rural communities in Central American and Caribbean countries, which could become a vanguard against famine. If this ancient food was successfully introduced to the entire region of Latin American countries as a daily meal, it would become an obstacle for giant companies such as Monsanto to introduce their genetically modified seeds, and will become a barrier for food companies in the United States, Canada and Europe to export their food products to Latin America. This movement could become a form of resistance to monopolisation of the food market by the north in the entire region. This is why the World Bank does not want to fully support the program of the Maya Nut institution; because it could become food security against transgenic crops from big companies.

Despite unclear support from the World Bank toward this movement, on the other hand the Bank wants to show to the public that it supports the actions of women in mitigating climate change.

According to the report, mitigation policies have also been discussed around the potential of hydropower projects in Sub-Saharan Africa, as presented on Map 1.5. This policy is a typical Keynesian idea of spending on infrastructure (Stilwell, 2002). Yes, hydropower is a kind of alternative energy but to build the infrastructure is not cheap. There are questions around who will finance the project? And where will the Sub-Saharan government get the money from? To build a mini-hydropower with total capacity production of energy of 30 megawatts, from the experience of Timor-Leste and the case study of the Ira Lalaro Hydropower, it will cost at least US $64 million up to US $112 million. This can be seen in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Sources: Asian Development Bank (2004,pp 73,75,80 & 81) and Ministry of Transport, Communication & Public Works 92005,pp33)

If we compare the total estimated costs of 2004 and 2005, the cost has increased by 100%. The above costs were estimated eight or nine years ago; however, the project has been cancelled because of the uncertainty of the cost of development of the project, as well as because the new government has been warned by local civil society about the negative impact on the environmental that could be caused by the project, (Haburas Foundation, 2006) and (Lao Hamutuk, 2004:17).

According to Map 1.5 in the Report, Tanzania is one of the economically feasible countries for hydropower projects. Since 1964 the country has built a few hydropower plants, in particular the Kidatu hydropower funded with World Bank loans of US $30 million, for generation of 50 megawatts of energy electricity (World Bank, 2012a). This can be seen in Table 3 below.

Table 3. Sources: Tanesco "The Power Sector in Tanzania", ESI Africa2 (2006): 16, cited in Hoag & Ohman (2008:642)

If the World Bank has provided $30 million in loans for the Kidatu Hydropower Project, how much would it cost for all of the projects in the above table? Will climate change finance provide grants to build new hydropower projects? Or will the Tanzanian government need to ask for more loans. See Table 4 below:

Table 4. Source: The World Bank (2012b)

This table shows that it is impossible for the Tanzanian government to build more hydropower plants. Where they will get the money from? They still have to pay back the existing loans; how will it be possible to get other loans. The World Development Report 2010 does not make sense in recommending mitigation policies in tackling global warming with feasibility hydropower projects for sub-Saharan African countries such as Tanzania.

The Tanzanian case is actually not about where the Tanzanian government will get the money from; but rather, when a country engages with loans they are usually never able to pay back the loan, and there are conditions and structural adjustment imposed on the loan (Bracking, 1999). The Tanzanian government is already engaged with structural adjustment programs as conditionality for existing loans. This essay will not explore further SAP implementation in Tanzania; but will make the point that the intention of mitigating climate change from institutions such as the World Bank includes strategies to force poor countries to adopt and implement SAP policies.

The utilisation of corn-based ethanol has been condemned by many people especially by activists fighting against hunger, including Fidel Castro (former Cuban President). Fidel Castro (2007) has criticised his counterpart Lula Da Silva, President of Brazil, because Lula has exported 27,300,000 of high protein soy beans to the United States, which Castro believes will use for biofuels. According to Castro, ninety percent of eight states in Brazil including Paraná, Minas Gerais, Sao Paulo, Goiás, Mato Grosso, Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Catarina and Mato Grosso do Sul are producing corn, and only four states, that is sixty percent are producing sugar cane including Sao Paulo, Paraná, Pernambuco and Alagoas. However, according to the Sugar Cane Industry Association (UNICA) (2012), in the last three decades sugar cane plantations and production has expanded enormously. The graphic below shows that except for two states, sugar cane production has increased rapidly, particularly since 2005.

Table 5. Source: Sugar Cane Industry Association (2012)

An analysis of the graphic in Table 5 indicates that the expansion of sugar cane plantations has indirectly affected 90% of corn production, as referred to by Fidel Castro. Further, corn production will continue to remain under stress, because early in 2012, the U.S. Congress has moved to deregulate tariff imports against ethanol-54 cents-per-gallon, which will encourage more productivity in sugar cane plantation as opposed to corn plantations (Mathews, 2012).

As mentioned in the World Development Report 2010, Brazil could become the “next big energy supplier of ethanol”; it is quite possible that this will happen because as can be seen in the graphic in Table 6 below, sugar cane plantations are expanding to almost reach ten million hectares in 2010, and according to the new bill of land permission, 64 million hectares of national land will be secured for sugarcane farming (Secretariat for Social Communication, 2012).

Table 6. Source: Sugar Cane Industry Association (2012)

The World Development Report (2010) also refers to a green tax as one of the mitigation policies for climate change. The World Bank’s commentaries on this policy are very general, and it does not particularly favour this policy, because the World Bank believes carbon tax should affect direct and indirectly household economies. In the explanation, it is stated that green tax will contribute directly to rising energy prices like electricity bills and fuel for transportation and will indirectly affects household expenditure because the price of goods will increase (World Bank, 2010, Ch1).

Some countries have applied green tax as part of mitigation policies, such as Australia’s carbon tax, which has been introduced as part of the package of the Energy Trading Scheme (ETS), which collects AU $23 per ton of gas emissions, and handles over five billion dollars as a carbon price mechanism to help companies reduce their gas emissions (Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, 2012). According to an environmental organisation, Friends of the Earth Australia, the scheme will provide benefits to the polluters (mining and oil companies) and keep polluting the atmosphere. The Gillard government has provided five billion dollars every year for polluters, which includes 1.5 billion for emission reductions in power stations, 1 billion for energy renewables and 2.5 billion for compensation of loss in competitiveness (Goodman, 2011). Ideally, if the government is serious in tackling global warming, it should increase the rate of the carbon tax, and provide 100% investment in energy renewables.

However, mitigation policies are not only the responsibility of government, but should also involve giant corporate business, which are purely profit orientated. This is why to convince the mining and oil companies to reduce their emissions, the government has to provide incentives otherwise the carbon tax will be passed on to household economies as explained in the Report. The carbon price is an incentive; according to the business sector, it is considered to be a deposit to guarantee the deal. According to Anderson (2011), the energy trading scheme is based on the spirit of market transaction or “market mechanism”, a neoliberal concept, which is why the carbon price can be considered as a “deal” to avoid conflict of interest between mining companies and government.

Conclusion

This paper has considered a number of issues in relation to the World Development Report “Understanding the Links between Development and Climate Change”. The paper began with the viewpoint that developing economies will be more affected by climate change however because of their low adaptive capacity to be able to make the changes needed to mitigate climate change.

The analysis has included review of the expenditure of disposal income, showing us that purchasing power parity is still dominated by an affluent society which has become the major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. It has also referred to the ignorance of the global climate coalition to the Kyoto Protocol, showing that giant corporate companies remain powerful. Further on, the paper has looked at the participation of women and the evidence that local indigenous organisations are more proactive in support innovations in rural areas compared to external organisations and funding.

The paper has also discussed at some length the re-forestation of the ancient Maya Nut trees in Central American and Caribbean countries, which has become an opponent to transgenic imports of food. Further, the potential to build new hydropower projects is a strategy to force poor countries into debt and then to adopt SAP policies. The interpretation of these observations becomes typical knowledge of the mainstream scholar. In addition, the expansion of sugar cane plantation will become dangerous to food production.

Finally, this paper has considered some of the issues around green tax, using Australia’s mining tax as an example. The paper has concluded that mining companies will come on board with green tax initiatives as long as the transactions include a carbon price as part of the deal.

The focus of the paper has been on the intentions and actions of large institutions and the corporate sector, in the context of the neoliberal global economy. The analysis has shown, through a number of examples as outlined above, that the policy recommendations for climate change mitigation have been designed to suit the neoliberal concept of free market orientation.

References

Alonzo, D, R., 2004. ‘Honduras: Early Warning System of La Masica municipality’, Available from

http://www.gwptoolbox.org/images/stories/cases/en/cs_392_honduras_final.pdf

Anderson, T., 2011. ‘Green Illusions and the Carbon Tax Scam’, Climate Capitalism, Available from http://climateandcapitalism.com/2011/04/30/green-illusions-and-the-carbon-tax-scam/

Asian Development Bank., 2004. ‘Power Sector Development Plan for Timor-Leste’, Available at http://www.laohamutuk.org/Oil/LNG/Refs/004ADBPowerSector.pdf

Earth Reform., 2012. ‘Climate Change Cause and Effect’, Available from http://earthreform.org/videos/

Bracking, S., 1999. ‘Structural Adjustment: Why It Wasn't Necessary & Why It Did Work’, Review of African Political Economy, Vol. 26, No. 80, pp207-226 Available from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au/stable/4006560

Bronson, B., 1966. ‘Roots and the Subsistence of the Ancient Maya’, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 251-279. Available from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/stable/pdfplus/3629373.pdf?acceptTC=true

Buffle, P., & Vohman, E., 2011. ‘Using the Maya Nut tree to increase tropical agroecosystem Resilience to climate change in Central America and Mexico’, Ecosystems & Livelihoods Adaption Network. Available from http://owe.unu-mc.org/3925/Maya_nut_case_study.pdf

Buvinic, M., 1999. ‘Hurricane Mitch: Women's Needs and Contributions’, Inter-American Development Bank’, Available from https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:j2EreR3GQ3YJ:ipcc-wg2.gov/njlite_download.php?id%3D5817+La+masica+by+Buvinic&hl=en&gl=au&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESh0_olur8xUVUByJQF4IwEOEzW00fjsdwR_X7vBvxBw5tMaSCfoSgOgIjUb-EPjpFhVAV3QseQiE1kvIvZq4J1QLjQJeSkrjQao4q6JbJBi6IbH0LKmcpDIM5azNgFR1aNBCbKb&sig=AHIEtbT-hLcqnnxp4klLoX5AnGMsTni3SQ

Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, 2012. ‘Reducing Australia's emissions’, Available from http://www.climatechange.gov.au/government/reduce.aspx

Diaz, P., 2008. ‘The End of Poverty? Think Again’, Cinema Libre Studio, Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pktOXJr1vOQ&feature=watch-now-button&wide=1

German Technical Cooperation., 2005. ‘Community-based disaster risk management and intermunicipal cooperation’, Available from

http://www.giz.de/Themen/en/SID-2BC9BC2E-0E3ADB63/dokumente/en-hn-community-based-disaster-risk-mamagement.pdf

Goodman, J., 2011. ‘Australia’s carbon price plan: The greatest corporate windfall of our time’, Friends of Earth., Available from http://climateandcapitalism.com/2011/07/11/australias-carbon-price-plan-the-greatest-corporate-windfall-of-our-time/

Haburas Foundation., 2006. ‘Report Of Findings On The Proposed Ira Lalaro Hydro-Electric Power Scheme Timor-Leste: A report to The Haburas Foundation and The Australian Conservation Foundation’, Available at http://www.laohamutuk.org/Oil/LNG/Refs/115Iralalauro.pdf

Hoag, J, H., & Ohman, B, M., 2008. ‘Turning Water into Power: Debates over the Development of Tanzania Rufiji River Basin, 1945-1985’, Technology and Culture, Vol 49, No 3, pp. 624-651 Available from http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/technology_and_culture/v049/49.3.hoag.html

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change., 2007. ‘Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis’, Available from http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-3.html

Khor, M., 2005. ‘The Commodities Crisis and The Global Trade in Agriculture: Problems And Proposals’, Third World Network, Available from www.twnside.org.sg/title2/par/td25.doc

Lao Hamutuk., 2004. ‘Observation regarding The RESPECT Program in East Timor’, Bulletin Lao Hamutuk., Vol 5, No 5-6, Pp17. Available from http://www.laohamutuk.org/Bulletin/2004/Dec/lhbl5n56e.pdf

Maya Nut Institution., 2012. ‘Financial Information’, available from http://mayanutinstitute.org/page.cfm?pageid=19062

Maya Nut Institution., 2012. ‘Maya Nut found in Jamaica’, available from http://mayanutinstitute.org/page.cfm?pageid=16191

Marsh, D., & Furlong, P., 2002. A Skin, not a Sweater: Ontology and Epistemology in Political Science’ in David Marsh and Gerry Stoker (2nd Eds) (2002) Theory and Methods in Political Science, Palgrave MacMilan, London.

Mathews, J., 2012. ‘The End of the U.S. Ethanol Tariff’, Sugar Cane Industry Association, Available from http://english.unica.com.br/opiniao/show.asp?msgCode={61FB3F4B-1644-4445-B05F-577F96C38BED}

Ministry of Transport, Communication & Public Works., 2005. ‘Power: Priorities and Proposed Sector Investment Program’, Available from http://www.laohamutuk.org/Oil/Power/PowerSIP2005.pdf

Powel, L, J., 2011. ‘The Inquisition of Climate Science’, Columbia University Press, New York.

Rosset, M, P., 2005. ‘Transgenic Crops to Address Third World Hunger? A Critical Analysis’, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, Vol 25, No 4, Pp 306-313. Available from http://bst.sagepub.com.ezproxy1.library.usyd.edu.au/content/25/4/306.full.pdf+html

Ruz, C, F., 2007. ‘On Biofuels and an Energy Revolution’, The Monthly Review, Available from http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2007/castro040507.html

Secretariat for Social Communication., 2012. ‘Brazil increases environmental preservation measures with sugarcane zoning proposal’, Press Release, Available from http://www.brasil.gov.br/para/press/press-releases/february/brazil-increases-environmental-preservation-measures-with-sugarcane-zoning-proposal

Stilwell, F., 2002. ‘Political Economy: The Contest of Economic Ideas’, (1st Edition) Oxford University Press, Singapore.

Sugar Cane Industry Association., 2012. ‘Sugar Cane Planted Area’, Available from

http://www.unicadata.com.br/historico-de-area-ibge.php?idMn=33&tipoHistorico=5&acao=visualizar&idTabela=1179&produto=Planted+area&anoIni=1980&anoFim=2010&estado=RS%2CSC%2CPR%2CSP%2CRJ%2CMG%2CES%2CMS%2CMT%2CGO%2CDF%2CBA%2CSE%2CAL%2CPE%2CPB%2CRN%2CCE%2CPI%2CMA%2CTO%2CPA%2CAP%2CRO%2CAM%2CAC%2CRR

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation., 2003. ‘Best Practices on Indigenous Knowledge: Women’s innovations in rural livelihood systems in arid areas of Tunisia’, Available from http://www.unesco.org/most/bpik6-2.htm

World Bank., 2001. ‘Hurricane Mitch-the gender effects of coping and crises’, Prem Notes, No 57. Available from

http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/PREMNotes/premnote57.pdf

World Bank., 2010. ‘World Development Report 2010’, World Development Report Archives, Available from http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTWDRS/0,,contentMDK:23079906~pagePK:478093~piPK:477627~theSitePK:477624,00.html

World Bank., 2012a. ‘Kidatu Hydroelectric project’, Available from http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P002710/kidatu-hydroelectric-project-02?lang=en

World Bank., 2012b. ‘Tanzania Country Profile’, Available from http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/tanzania

World Health Organisation., 2005. ‘Gender, Climate change and Health’, Draft Discussion Paper, available from

http://www.who.int/globalchange/publications/reports/final_who_gender.pdf

1 Comment

Can Marxism explain economic crises? Comparison Asian and Sub-prime mortgage crises

3/30/2015

1 Comment

Can Marxism explain economic crises?

Comparison Asian and Sub-prime mortgage crises

Author: Tomas Freitas

Introduction

The first economic crisis broke out in the year 1815, followed by 1825, 1836, 1847, 1857, 1866, 1873, 1882, and 1891 and again in 1895. The alternation between prosperity and crisis had become a regular occurrence between 1873 and 1895. Another crisis occurred again in 1907 (Kautsky, 1911, 12). However, why were those crises so very extensive affecting the whole of society at regular periods? This short essay will not discuss the historical background of these various crises as has been discussed by Kautsky, but will examine two recent crises which occurred in East Asia in 1997 and in the United States just recently in 2008. This short essay will attempt to link the Sub-prime mortgage crises and Marx theories of economic crises.

After the Asian monetary crisis of the mid-1990s, the economic crisis has returned and is affecting the global economy, global financial markets, companies, banks, and jobs. Global stock markets have declined, big financial institutions have shrunk or been bought out, millions of workers have lost their jobs and governments in even the wealthiest countries have had to respond with economic stimulus packages. However, what are the causes of this crisis? And why the Marxist tendency questions the crises rather than the recovery? These questions challenge the main hypotheses of Marx economic theory in explaining economic crises. This essay will present a number of contradictory arguments around the proposition that Marxism can explain economic crises.

Do these phenomena correspond to Marxist theory of the failure of capitalism? How do these crises correlate with Marx’ criticism of capitalism? Can Marx prove his theories of economic crises? This essay will explore the relevance of these notions to reality in the 21st century.

Marx Theories of Economic Crises

There are three distinct theories of crises that Marx strongly believes in which are discussed in detail in Capital II and III. Those theories are the theory of ‘disproportionalities’, the theory of, ‘the tendency of the rate of profit to fall (TRPF)’ and the theory of ‘underconsumption’. To understand how those theories work, Marx has illustrated three components to analyse total value of goods and services produced in each industry in a capitalist economy. These components include ‘Constant capital (c)’ the value of all means of production in other words is as an instrument of labour such as capital goods, like buildings, machinery and labouring animals etc., and circulating constant capital, such as raw and auxiliary materials, semi-finished products, etc. ‘Variable capital (v), so far as its value is concerned, is equal to the value of the social labour-power employed; in other words, it consists of the labour-power in action, is the direct contribution of the workforce. The third item, ‘Surplus value(s) ’, is that part of the total value created that is used by the employer (Marx, 1885).

Frank Stilwell in his book Political Economy: The Contest of Economic Ideas (2002), has simplified some of Marx’ terminologies such as ‘disproportionalities’. This terminology officially refers to inequalities among the two sectors. It is the Marxist economic model to scrutinize the crucial circumstances for reproduction and growth of the economy, for instance dividing into two groups according to whether they produce capital goods (Department 1) or consumer goods (Department 2): Department 1: total value = c1 + v1 + s1 and Department 2: total value = c2 + v2 + s2 . Marx argued that the economy can reproduce itself if the two conditions met each other. The first condition is that the value of capital goods which has been used in the production process during any time period (c1 + c2) must be matched by new disbursements on capital goods (c1 + v1 + s1): (c1 + c2) = (c1 + v1 + s1). If this condition is met, the ability production of industry is sustained. The second condition is that total non-refundable incomes of the workers (v1 + v2) and the capitalists (s1 + s2) should be equal to the value of the output of consumer goods (c1 + v1 + s1): v1 + v2 + s1 + s2 = c2 + v2 + s2. If this condition is met, all the commodities made will be sold (Marx cited in Stilwell, 2002, 122).

To illustrate the second theory of TRPF, Marx has used three important ratios defined as follows: s/v is the rate of surplus value (sometimes called rate of exploitation), c/v is the organic composition of capital: s / (c + v) is the rate of profit. This rate of profit can be expressed in terms of the rate of surplus value and the organic composition of capital by dividing each term in the numerator and denominator by v, that is: s / v divide into c / v + 1 But why does this rate of profit tend to fall as capital accumulation takes place? Consider the effect of a rise in c / v, caused by businesses installing more plants and machinery in their production processes (Marx cited in Stilwell, 2002, 139).

Marx’ third theory of crises is ‘underconsumptionist’ or ‘Overproduction’; this theory is not entirely Marx, but in different categories of analysis development, John Maynard Keynes and Kalecki (1971) also explain the problem of inadequacies in effective demand. This theory explains that the periods in which capitalist production applies all its forces are always phases of overproduction, because the forces of production can never be utilised beyond the point at which surplus value can be not only produced but also realised.

Correlation between theories and evidence

Asian Crises

As mentioned in the introduction, this essay will only examine two current crises, namely the East Asian crisis of 1997 and 2008 crisis in the United States caused by the collapse of sub-prime mortgages.

First, the Asian economic crisis, and some preliminary methodological remarks on what it means to “cause” a crisis. How did the East Asian miracle unravel into a deep crisis? Some arguments state that an important change was the detection of swift financial liberalisation and capital accounts opening without the development of strength supervision and regulation. There were difficulties faced by East Asian policymakers in coping with the in-flows of capital that resulted from rapid capital market liberalisation. And the ability to undertake preventative macroeconomic policy was not present (Berg, 1999).

An IMF working paper states:

The crises had their origins in fundamental deficiencies in the affected countries. In Thailand, some role was played by traditional macroeconomic problems, particularly current account deficits that became unsustainably large and an exchange rate that had become overvalued. Generally, though, the weaknesses in the crisis countries derived from the interaction of weak domestic financial institutions with large capital inflows (Berg, 1999, 3).

To simplify the IMF statement above, Bill Lucarelli has stated that the causes of the economic crises in Thailand, Indonesia, The Philippines and Korea is due to speculator attacks on their respective currencies (Lucarelli, 2008).

If we analyse the IMF statement above, it shows a mutual connection between investments in ‘large capital inflows’ and the Marxist theory of ‘TRPF’. It makes sense because those Asian countries invested enormous amount of equities in foreign financial markets with deficits in local currencies, and with a lack of supervision and regulation (traditional Macroeconomic theory), which is then easily attacked by speculators. In Thailand, the government tried to support their own national currency by selling dollars from its reserves, and buying up the local currency to sustain its value. But eventually, the government ran out of hard currency, there were no more dollars to sell, the currency plunged and the speculators were satisfied (Stiglitz, 2002). The former of the head of World Bank, Joseph Stiglitz, states that: “I believe that capital account liberalisation was the single most important factor leading to the crisis” (2002, 99). He pointed out that the capital account liberalisation represents risk without return. Stiglitz (2002) also analysed that there has been a trend in the last quarter century for investors to prefer huge outflows to inflows.

Marx theory of TRPF can be seen in relation to the Asian crisis in that bankers bought more equities in foreign currencies, while their management was still in a process of improvement. On the other hand, governments held strong their national currency, but at the same time created deficits. And ‘capital account liberalisation’ can accumulate profit, however this leads to major consequences in a downturn.

Sub-prime Mortgage Crisis

So what are the causes of this 2008 crisis? One common approach has been to lay the blame on the collapse of sub-prime mortgage markets in the United States, which is a credit crisis in US mortgages investment. This has happened because faced with a loss of equity capital, banks are unwilling to make ordinary business loans. Without credit, many businesses are facing bankruptcy and liquidation. This means a rising rate of joblessness, reduced individual expenses rating, and declining industry revenues (Cobb, 2009).

Bill Lucarelli has described the sub-prime mortgage crisis as simple to follow. The commercial banks failed in properly monitoring the risk and value of the credit borrowers, which were sold to the secondary market in the form of collateralised debt obligation (CDO) assets. This meant that the conventional function of banks in examining risk was handed over to the prevailing credit agencies. The main reason for the banks doing this was to sell CDOs in order to accumulate a payment or a commission. In other words, financial deregulation permitted banks to issue credits and sell these assets into the second level of the markets, which were then renewed and mixed into other classes of financial assets (Lucarelli, 2008).

A similar perspective has been visualised by Jonathan Jarvis (2009) about the sub-prime mortgage credit crisis, starting with diversification of the CDOs into three different rates of categories: AAA for safe investments where interest rates are lower; category BBB called good investments; and category CCC, high risk investment that comes with high interest rates. The banks created category CCC because they had run out of the mortgage market for safe investment. However, category CCC was the one used to sell to lower-income families in the United States. This lower income family is called ‘sub-prime’, where the banks sell the entire category CCC. The banks also added high risk for new owners of sub-prime mortgage; no down payment, no free money and must have proof of income or the banks will take back the money. Then however when the banks try to re-sell the mortgage, it cannot be done because the mortgage price has dropped (Jarvis, 2009). Lower prices increase the necessity to sell and reinforce the excess supply, making it even more difficult for the investor to fully repay his/her loan from asset sales (Kregel, 2008).

The credit crisis in sub-prime mortgage became popular as a topic for economists to analyse the crisis. Aside from Lucarelli and Jarvis, Michael Dooley and Michael Hutchison have both provided strong analyses of this current crisis. They describe the sub-prime mortgage credit crisis as a result of ‘emerging markets’ which have had large impacts on Credit Default Swaps (CDS) spreads in emerging markets, which efficiently transmitted the financial crisis in the U.S. to markets abroad (Dooley & Hutchison, 2009).

If we analyse the chronologies of the credit crisis in the sub-prime mortgage industry, it shares a common understanding with the Marx theory of ‘underconsumption’ or ‘overproduction’, where the banks and the investors in mortgages in the United States ‘run out the market’ and try to re-sell it through the CDOs, failing at this however and finally resulting in bankruptcy which affected the entire global economy. Oversupply (overproduction) of housing was exacerbated when interest rates were increased and hundreds of thousands of lower middle income borrowers could no longer afford their mortgage payments and the houses came back onto the market (Gupta, 2008). Another once-popular theory was that a chronic problem of “under-consumption” the inability of households to purchase enough goods and services to utilise the economy’s productive capacity had exacerbated the slump (Bernanke, cited in Foster & Magdoff, 2009).

Conclusion

It is still unclear as per explanations from political economists as to why the economic crises occur periodically through the decades without any recipe for cure. There are many definitions of economic crisis, even to the extent that some political economists consider the crisis as whole cycle beginning from recession to recovery, with some only questioning recession rather than recovery. The international financial institutions still blame the Asian economic crises on a lack of experience in supervision and regulation which is a traditionally macroeconomic viewpoint. The same reasons have been applied to the credit crisis in subprime mortgages in the United States, which is lack of supervision by the commercial banks in controlling the credit agencies. Marxist classical theories of disproportionality seem to be correlated in the earlier years but have not really been discussed in relation to the more recent crises. However, this essay has attempted to demonstrate that Marx’ theory of ‘TRPF’ and ‘underconsumption or overproduction’ seem to have more of a place for debate as one of the unpredictable reasons relevant to contemporary economic crises.

References

Bellamy, F., & Magdoff, F., 2009. ‘Financial implosion and stagnation: Back to the real economy’. The Monthly Review. Available from: http://tomweston.net/FinStag.pdf

Berg, A., 1999. The Asia crisis: causes, policy responses, and outcomes. Social Science Research Network. Available from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=880665

Cobb, C., 2009. Editor’s Introduction. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology. Volume 68, No 4

Dooley, M & Hutchison, M., 2009. Transmission of the U.S. subprime crisis to emerging markets: Evidence on the decoupling–recoupling hypothesis. Journal of International Money and Finance. Volume 28, Issue 8, pp 1331-1349

Gupta, A., 2008. ‘How to Wreck the Economy’. The Independent. Available from: http://www.indypendent.org/2008/10/02/how-to-wreck-the-economy/

Jarvis, J., 2009. The crisis of credit visualised. Available from: http://crisisofcredit.com/

Kalecki, M., 1971, Selected essays on the dynamics of the capitalist economy 1933-1970. Cambridge University Press.

Kautsky, K., 1911. Finance – capital and crises. Available from: http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1911/xx/finance.htm

Kregel, J., 2008. Minsky’s cushions of safety: Systemic risk and the crisis in the U.S. subprime mortgage market. The Public Policy Brief, Volume 93.Washinton DC.

Lucarelli, B., 2008. The United States Empire of debt: The roots of the financial crisis. Journal of Australian Political Economy, Edition 62, pp 16-38

Marx, K., 1885. Capital Volume II. Available from: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_Capital_Vol_2.pdf

Stiglitz, J., 2002. ‘Globalization and its Discontents, Chapter 4: The East Asia Crisis’. Allen lane, London

1 Comment

A critical review to Jeffrey Sachs concept of how to end the poverty

3/15/2015

2 Comments

The End of Poverty?

A critical review to Jeffrey Sachs concept of how to end the poverty

Author: Tomas Freitas

Introduction

Generally speaking by mainstream economist has claimed that the causes of the poverty are corruption and less of accountability in the government. Jeffrey Sachs is one of them, which taking position in this view, however, he does not only blamed government as the key factor for responsible of the poverty, but he pointed the finger at several factors that has surrounding and integrated with the poverty which he believed become traps to the poverty, and those kind of factors are; ‘Physical geographic, fiscal trap, governances failures, demographic trap, cultural barriers, geopolitics and lack of innovations,’ (Sachs, 2005, 57-61). Sachs has argued that with one action can solve all the problems, and he called that action is “A big Push”, which he believes that with the help of Official Development Aid (ODA) in provide grant for three to four years in advance; it will help the poor farmers to be release from the trap.

This essay wills analysis the idea of “a big push” in comparable to the film of the end of poverty? Think Again, this paper also will try to capture the fundamental reason that has engaged the poverty.

Poverty Trap

Sachs has argued that people stuck in the poverty because their income is under subsistence, which is left no money for saving. He complains about population growth, climate change, environmental degradation, poor governance and conflict, which he thinks are leading to further decline (Sachs, 2005). However, Sachs has proposal for the solution, which he proposed five crucial point of intervention such as; Food Production, which means provide fertilizer, seeds, irrigation to the agriculture, Free meal and School for the children, access to Health Care such as medical supplies, upgrading hospitals and provide mosquito nets to the family, investment in Infrastructure such as; build the roads, power, water and sanitation, telephone and internet, and Business development (Sachs, 2005, 256). Sachs believed that to pass the threshold the poorest need “a big push”.

Let’s discuss the idea of “a big push” which is he provided an example in the agriculture sector for one of Millennium villages ; if a farmer wants to leave in subsistence agriculture the farmer needs $300 per person per year, but the farmer income is only $200 per year, no saving because it’s under subsistence, and if the farmer wants to improve their inputs by buying seeds and fertilizer he or she can invested in $1 dollar and in the return they will get $2.50 back as output (Sachs, 2010). On this scenario Sachs believed that if the farmer get help with three or four years investment in advance from the ODA, he certainly sure that the farmer will be able to buy seeds and fertilizer for the next following years, without any more help.

Mechanism of Distribution

The illustration above supposedly easy to say but the reality might talk differently. Let’s assumed before the money get into the farmer hands, we have to discuss the mechanism of distribution, who will decide which farmer will get how much? Let’s say if donors from the north will provide $30.000 US dollar to one hundred farmers in one of villages in Kenya, if the money divided equally, yes, each farmer will get $300, the question is who will decide? For instance, if the donors transfer the money through local microfinance NGOs, normally 10% of that amount of money will stay with the NGO as ‘institutional fee’ to pay the salary of staff for doing the jobs of re-distribution the money. The 10% is about $3000 US Dollar, which is spouse to give to ten farmers. There are few possibilities could happen with that 10%, the money could go to the pocket of the director, either could be also use for paying the salary of ten members of local staff which each member might received $300 per month.

High Fees

The amount of money above is only 10% of $30 000 US Dollar, if donors provide $3 million US dollar as a grant for the project which will benefits 10 000 farmers, who could possibly manage the money? With that big amount of money, probably the local staff will not working along by themselves, the project might require international advisors with the salary around $85.000-$120.000 per/annum, that salary only for one advisor, for example if the requirement says 10 advisors for ten NGOs which is running the same project, 10 x $120.000, it will be $1.2 million just for the international advisors and that is not including wages for 100 local staff from ten NGOs. Let’s assumed total of the running cost for the projects is about $1.3 million, the initial plan was $3 million US dollar grant for 10 000 farmers, but because $1.3 million has been used, it will affect 4333 farmer’s life’s which will receive nothing. High salaries for international advisors are not something new in Aid industry, for example in Sub-Saharan African in the late 1980s the official development aid has spent almost 35% just for the salaries for international advisors, (Cohen, 1992), there is another similar argument that has been stated by John Christensen in the film of The End of Poverty? Think Again, which he has emphasises that the fees for paying international consultancy, is very high, (Diaz, 2008). This type of example is out of the picture when Sachs calculated how to ending the poverty in the Millennium Villages program.

Local Structure

After $1.3 million has been used for the running cost, it does not guarantee that the rest of money $1.7 million will distributed equally to the farmers. The reason why, because nowadays, the members of the NGOs preferred engaged directly to community or farmers, which is good from donors perspective, however, without involvement of local structure such as chief of villages or local kings, the possibility of corruption could exist in between the members of NGOs and the farmers. Without the knowledge of chief villages or local kings, the members of NGOs could possibly priorities their family and close friend as the first priority for receive the funding. This typical attitude is reflected free market orientation which avoiding the engagement of local structures, (Stilwell, 2002).

The involvement of local structure are very crucial because places like in Africa have their own traditional class of structure which they have their own local king or chief of villages for taking care their rule of lives, in this case the kingship or chief of villages play a very important rule in the African society, which can minimise unequal distribution. According to one of the African sociologist, that African society in pre-colonial stage already exist chief of villages which ruling their community with the advice by their own council of elders, (Sangmpam, 1995).

Without the involvement of local structure, what does could happen? The first scenario; without the involvement of local structure, the chance of miss-management are high. For example, if some of the farmers do not want to buy fertilizer, but they preferred to spend the money for something else, and they could do it behind you. The second scenario; if the NGOs might decide to buy the fertilizer and re-distribute to the farmers instead than given money. Well, the same thing could happen, some of the farmers might just use a half of the fertilizer and sell the rest, they could also sell the whole fertilizer so they can get money to buy something else. Those two scenarios above are tricky but that normally exist in aid industry in developing countries. According to one of the empirical research that has been done in Kenya, stated that re-selling the fertilizer has satisfy the farmer for doing so, which also possibly to minimise the farmers for using it, (Duflo, et all, 2009).

The examples above is not only highlighted the problem of mechanism distribution but also tell us that social and cultural in the villages are very important to understand. Sachs approach of “a big push of Aid” it seems does not really touch the reality of complexity of social life in the African society, which has been stagnated generation by generation. As stated by professor Michael Watts, in one of the interviews on the film The End of Poverty? Think Again, he has declared that, the fundamental reasons of poverty in the South, start in the early 16 centuries, the capitalism system has been benefits the North from free labour by slavery and monopoly power of strategic natural resources from the South, which have left countries in the South, still fighting against; Hunger, Malaria, Tuberculosis, and AIDS diseases from centuries, (Diaz, 2008).

The fundamental reasons above, according to Author and Historian, Clifford Cobb, in one of the interview, can be minimise by stop paying debt from South to North, and if the North forgiving the debt, it would be automatically the government from the South will have some saving, therefore the South government could possibly eliminate or reduce the taxes to the poor people, and the South government also can invested more in Health, Education and Infrastructure, if the transnational companies from North release their monopoly of power to natural resources which belongs to people in the South, (Diaz, 2008).

Conclusion

Sachs ideas of ending the poverty with his prescription of “a big push” it’s hard to measure the result because the mechanism of distribution is complex and tricky. Ending the poverty in the context of aid industry, just will benefits the international advisors, which the bigger proportion for paying the salary and small proportion for peoples. Involving the local structure is not only for delivery aid and guarantee the distribution, but also pays respect to social and culture of the local community. People from South will survive together as long as, the North forgiving the debt, and hands off their natural resources which belongs to the South.

References

Cohen, M, J., 1992. ‘Foreign advisors and capacity building: the case of Kenya’, Public Administration and Development, Vol 12, Pp 493-510. Available from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/doi/10.1002/pad.4230120506/pdf

Diaz, P., 2008. ‘The End of Poverty? Think Again’, Cinema Libre Studio, Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pktOXJr1vOQ&feature=watch-now-button&wide=1

Duflo, E., Kremer, M., and Robinson, J.,2009. ‘Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer: Theory and Experimental Evidence From Kenya’, National Bureau Of Economic Research. Working Paper No 15131, Available from http://www.nber.org.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/papers/w15131.pdf?new_window=1

Sachs, J., 2005. ‘The End of Poverty: How We Can Make It Happen In Our Lifetime’, Penguin Books Ltd, London.

Sachs, J., 2010. ‘Ending Poverty In Our Generation: Still Time if We Try’, Rockefeller Center, Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k67RoMi73I

Sangmpam, S, N., 1995. “ Sociology of "Primitive Societies," Evolutionism, and Africa”, Sociological Forum, Vol, 10, No 4, Pp 609-632. Available from http://www.springerlink.com.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/content/m8k4335q285t640w/fulltext.pdf

Stilwell, F., 2002. ‘Political Economy: The Contest of Economic Ideas’, Oxford University Press, Singapore.

2 Comments

Diferensia entre individualista no klasse iha ekonomia: Komparasaun entre ekonomia Marxismo no Neoclassical

3/6/2015

0 Comments

Diferensia entre individualista no klasse iha ekonomia:

Komparasaun entre ekonomia Marxismo no Neoclassical

Hakerek-Nain: Tomas Freitas

Introdusaun

Neoclassical economics iha influensa ba ekonomia kapitalista ohin loron; buat nee bele hare’e iha konseitus balun ‘merkadu mak determina presu’, no tama iha etapa ida mak konsege ultra-pasa teoria ‘Labour Theory of Value’, nebe eziste iha tempu inisiu Classical Economics nian. Banati tuir teoria ‘Marshalian Cross’ nebe esplika kona ba teoria Supply and Demand, Neoclassical economics fiar maka’as katak merkadu mak sei fo equilibriu ba presu (Stilwell, 2002). Hanesan konsagra tiha ona iha ‘Say’s Law’ hateten katak supply ba bens e servicos bele kria rasik sira nia merkadu, (Baumol, 1999). Deklarasaun hirak nee persija halo ezaminasaun liu husi estudu empirical, inklui mos neoclassical ninian methodologia deduktivo (Deductive Methodology) mak sei susar hodi justifika. Artiklu nee sei aprezenta diferensia entre ekonomia Marxismo no Neoclassical liu-liu iha kontekstu pontu da vista individualista kontra klasses iha ekonomia agora nian (Contemporary Economy). Essay ida nee mos sei hato’o historia (Background) kona ba oinsa ideas ka teoria original mak funda Neoclassical economics, nebe moris husi ‘Proto-Marginalists’, ‘Revolutionaries’ no ‘Consolidators’, nebe sai nudar ideologia mak forte tebes iha era Capitalismo ohin loron nian.

Historia

Tradisionalmente, idea Neoclassical mai husi ema ulun bot balun iha tempu Classical economics ho ninian politica economist sira mak hanesan David Ricardo ho ninian ideas ‘Marginal Principle’ (Kaldor, 1956), John Stuart Mill (2007) ho ninian teoria ‘Utilitarianism’, Jeremy Bentham (2009) ho ninian ‘Greatest Happiness’, no Jean Baptiste Say ho ninian teoria famozu ‘Say’s Law’ (Kates, 2003). Idea sira nee hotu mak fo’o inspirasaun ba ekonomista neoclassical sira balun.

Doutrina Neoclassical economy hahu’u husi ultimo 1830s to’o meiu 1850s no sai forte e influensa iha inisiu 1870s, buras no sai famozu ba klasse mediu sira iha meiu 1880s to’o meiu 1890s. Historia ida nee ita bele hare’e hanesan evolusaun ba etapa tolu ka ‘three evolutionary’ nebe inklui ‘The Proto-marginalist’, ‘The Revolutionaries’, no ‘The Consolidators’ nebe sai hanesan ideas original husi Neoclassical economy.

Proto-Marginalistas

Historikamente, evolusaun Neoclassical Economics mai husi fundador lubun balu mak konsidera hanesan autores ba Proto-Marginalists inklui Augustin Cournot, Jules Dupuit, Johann Thunen no Heinrich Gossen. Iha tinan 1838, Agustin Cournot dezenvolve tiha ona ninian ideas Research into the Mathematical Principles of Wealth (2008), Cournot mos dezenvolve no analiza teoria monopoly mak ikus mai hamosu konseitu ‘Profit-maximising producer’. Jules Dupuit hanesan engineer ba Pontes ho ninian ideas ‘Curve of Diminishing Marginal Utility’ iha 1844, (Vickers, 1995), mesmu nee, iha tinan 1861, Dupuit mos iha argumentu kapas no konsege hamosu idea ‘Free Exchange’. Johann Thunen hanesan ema Alemanha mak iha rai no plantasaun barak (German landowner) ema nee dezenvolve esensia husi ‘The Marginal Productivity Theory of Distribution’ iha tinan 1850 (Ekelund & Hebert, 1999). Ikus liu husi fundador Protagonist Marginalist mak Heinrich Gossen ho ninian idea famozu ‘Gossen Second Law’ iha tinan 1854, no deskreve; ‘equalisation between the ratios of exchange of goods to the ratio of marginal disutility of work’ (Blaug, 2003)’. Ho ninian sentido equilibriu entre lojika troka sasan no lojika marginal husi desutilizasaun de servisu. Protagonista nain hat nee hetan suksesu in termus hato’o sira nian teoria original mak ikus mai sai hanesan embrio ba teoria marginal husi neoclassical economics.

Revolusionario

Depois de Proto-Marginalista sira marka no funda tiha ideas ‘Marginal Theory’ husi 1838 to’o ba 1854, Neoclassical Economics komesa hakroat fila fali sira nia nehan liu husi revolusionario-marginalista sira mak hanesan; William Stanley Jevons, Carl Menger no Leon Walras. Iha lansamentu ba ‘Marginal Revolution’, Jevons komesa tau ninian ideas ‘Theory of Political Economy’ iha tinan 1871, Nia komesa fo emphaze ba prinsipiu husi ‘Diminishing marginal utility’ no halo introdusaun ba preferensia individual (Steedman, 1997). Depois nee iha tempu hanesan 1871, revolusionario marginalista seluk Carl Menger husi Austria introdus ninian konseitu ‘Grunds tze’ nebe konsidera hanesan idea baziku husi ‘Marginal value theory’ ka ‘Marginal utility theory’ mesmu la direitamente nia uza termus ‘Marginal’ maibe nia deklara katak konsumedores normalmente iha lista kona ba saida mak nia atu sosa no iha preferensia kona ba sasan ho kualidade diak liu nebe sei fo satisfeitu ba nia a’an, no konsumedores mos iha lista kona ba sasan nebe ladun urjente atu sosa, no sira sei sosa wainhira iha osan restu, (Streissler & Streissler, 1994). Depois de Menger reforsa ninian hanoin kona ba ‘Marginal Utility Theory’, iha tinan 1874 ekonomista ida husi Franca naran Leon Walras, nebe dezenvolve liu tan (Marginalist Theory) no ikus mai formalmente ‘Marginalist Theory’ nakfila a’an ba ‘General Equilibrium Theory’. Iha parte seluk, Walras mos hato’o ninian kontribuisaun ideas balun mak hanesan refleksaun ba monopoly merkadu no kompetisaun mak imperfecto (Tieben, 2009).

Konsolidador

Wainhira halao konsolidasaun ba ideas ekonomia neoclassical husi famozu revolusionariu-marginalista nain-tolu hanesan esplika tiha ona iha palavras mak iha leten, sei iha tan numerous ekonomista seluk mak hakarak hametin liu tan ideas nee. Ekonomista hirak nee mak hanesan; Eugen Bohm-Bawerk ho ninian ideas ‘Capital and Interest’ hakerek iha tinan 1884, iha livro ne’e esplika kona ba parte positivu husi investementu capital ho ninian retornu osan funan (Pressman, 1999). Iha mos Friedrich von Wieser nebe iha tinan 1889 hakarek teoria kona ba Imputasaun ‘Imputation Theory’ nebe deklara katak factor presu determina husi output presu (Albertazzi et al, 1996). Alfred Marshall iha tinan 1890 sai famozu tamba ninian teoria kona ba ‘Marshallian Cross’ nebe analiza merkadu bazeia ba ninian teoria ‘Supply and Demand’, (Stilwell, 2002). John Bates Clark iha tinan 1891 husi Estadus Unidos Americano, fornese ninian konseitu ho naran ‘Marginal Productivity Concept’ ho ninian fiar katak kontribuisaun ba output husi trabaladores adisional sei determina mos valor pagamentu ba trabalhador sira seluk mak persija kampo de trabalho, (Geetika et al, 2008). Irving Fisher mos hola parte iha konsolidador famozu hirak nee, nia inventa ‘Curve Device invention’ hodi kompleta Walras nian teoria ‘Equilibrium Price’ iha 1892 (Fisher, 2007). Fisher ninian servisu ikus nebe kunyesidu iha era post-Keynesian mak ‘deb-deflation theory’ iha 1933, no teoria nee mak Hyman Minsky uza hodi dezenvolve ninian teoria ‘Financial Instability Hypothesis’, (Minsky, 1986).

Hafoin Irving Fisher, ekonomista neoclassical konsolida sira servisu liu husi Knut Wicksell ho ninian ideas Value, Capital and Rent iha 1893 (Lutz, 2006). Philip Wicksteed iha tinan 1894 produs mos ninian hakerek kona ba Co-ordination of Laws of Distribution, no halo ninian kritika ba ekonomista sira balun mak prefere hodi reorganiza fali teoria kona ba distribuisaun. Wicksteed prefere atu uza matematika hanesan metodu investigasaun ho garantia alokasaun de distribuisaun (Marchionatti, 2004). Vilfredo Pareto iha tinan 1896 mos hola parte hanesan jerasaun segundu husi revolusionarios neoclassical nebe’e fornese mos ninian kontribuisaun liu husi hakerek livro kona ba Tastes-and-obstacles (Gomes, 2003) nebe’e kontinua hamoris fila fali general equilibrium theory, mesmu nee Vilfredo kunyesidu hanesan lider ida husi eskola Lausanne mak famozu hanesan eskola neoclassical mak konstrui Leon Walras nian konseitu kona ba General equilibrium theory (Andersen, 2009).

Konsolidador ikus husi neoclassical economics mak Enrico Barone, ekonomista Italiano ida mak entrega ninian dedikasaun tomak hodi banati tuir Leon Walras no Vilfredo Pareto nian ain fatin, ninian kontribuisaun bot liu ba neoclassical school mak halo influensa ba Walras hodi integra ideas balun ba tekniku produsaun (Production Technique), ninian ideas nee konsidera hanesan ekstensaun ida ba marginal productivity theory (Jaffe & Walker, 1983).

Hale’u no hatene tiha konsolidasaun ba iha teoria bar-barak mak hodi suporta ‘Neoclassical economics’ Alfred Marshall deit mak sai famozu liu no bele halo sintesa ba Jevons, Menger no Walras nian teoria. Sintesa nee kunyesidu ho ‘Marshallian Cross’ ho ilustrasaun Supply no Demand mak sai factor determina ba presu mak equilibriu, no nia fiar katak sei fo’o mos satisfeitu ba parte rua konsumedores no vendedores.

Debates Konseitus

Estuda no akompanya tiha prosesu transformasaun husi Classical Economics ba iha Neoclassical Economics, Ita bele hare’e katak originalidade husi prinsipiu merkadu livre mak sirkulasaun sasan iha merkadu (Supply & Demand) no merkadu mak sei determina presu sasan. Teoria ne’e sei desvaloriza tiha Karl Marx nian teoria ‘Labour Theory of Value’ nebe’e Marx fiar katak kualidade husi trabalhadores mak sai factor determinante ba presu sasan nian.

Atu justifika teoria bot rua mak iha leten, tuir mai artiklu nee hakarak apresenta analiza no interpretasaun klean kona ba konseitos no argumentus mak hola parte tiha ona iha teoria rua nee nian laran.

Komparasaun entre Neoclassical no Marxismo;

Deductivismo Vs Materialismo Dialetika Historia

Iha Neoclassical uza metodologia deductivismo, nebe bazeia ba John Stuart Mill, hateten katak; “ a complex subject matter like political economy can only be studied scientifically by means of the deductive method. Since so many causal factors influence economic phenomena, and experimentation is generally not possible, there is no way to employ the methods of induction directly”, (Hausman, 1992, pp14). Sentido husi palavras iha leten hateten katak; “kestaun mak komplexu hanesan political economy so bele scientifikamente estuda liu husi methodologia deductivo. Desde faktor casual barak mak influensa phenomena ekonomia no generalmente experimento la konsege halo, tamba nee mak laiha dalan hodi implementa metodologia direitamente ka ‘induction’.

La han malun ho aproximasaun Neoclassical nian kona ba Methodologia deductivo, ekonomista Marxista nian prefere liu estuda historia no prosesu, mak hanesan ejemplu balun; Materialismo Dialetika Historia, Klase Bourgesa, no Sociadade Capitalista, (Stilwell, 2002), Marxista sira hatene katak liu husi kunyesementu hirak nee sei bele fo’o imagem bot hodi kumprende konstruksaun Capitalismo modern nian, (Lunn, 1982).

Sekuandu aplika methodologia rua nee ba iha ekonomia agora nian (Contemporary Economy), sei mosu diferensia balun. Deductivismo iha era ida ne’e, sei utiliza nafatin husi ekonomista Rationalista sira (Rationalists Economists), (Katouzian, 1980) ezemplu mak hanesan instituisaun financeiru internasional sira hanesan Banku Mundial no Fundo Monetario Internasional, instituisaun rua nee sei kaer nafatin engkontru regular kona ba Annual General Meeting-AGM (IMF, 2010) hodi halo evaluasaun ba sira nian estrategia no methodologia, liu husi AGM nee mos sira bele estuda aktividade ekonomia mak sira suporta tiha ona liu husi sira nian programa, nebe dala barak sira mak deside rasik durante fulan sanulu resin rua nian laran.

Deductivismo karik bele diak mos ba ekonomista sira balun hodi halo sira nian justifikasaun depois to’o iha projeitu ninian rohan. Iha kritika balun mak ita tenke konsidera katak observasaun direita (Induction Methodology) dalaruma mos bele la konsege halo kobertura ba evidensia balun mak akontese iha fatin diferente ho tempu mak hanesan durante prosesu observasaun nian laran.

Iha biban seluk opozisaun ba deductivismo, Marxista sira fiar katak ho historia materialismo mak sei fo’o kunyesementu profundu kona ba sociadade bourgesa iha termos kumprende sistema ‘Mode of Production’ (Rockmore, 2002), Haktuir Stalin nian liafuan dehan katak “historical materialism is the extension of the principle of dialectical materialism to study of social life” (Rockmore, 2002, pp7). Nebe ho ninian sentido hateten katak “historia materialismo nee hanesan ekstensaun husi prinsipiu dialetika materialismo nebe estuda kona ba sociadade nian moris”.

Marxista sira fiar katak konseitu materialismo dialetika historia sei halo ema kumprende didiak kona ba ekonomia capitalista ohin loron nian, tamba capitalismo hanesan ‘mode of production’ ka Meius de Produsaun nebe involve karakter techniko no social, no halo produsaun ba bens e servicos. Karakter social signifika katak relasaun entre klasse, nebe’e trabalhadores hanesan klasse proletariadu no bourgesa hanesan klasse mediu mak sai nain ba fabrika ka industria, inklui mos nain ba technologia no material prima ka ‘raw material’ (Stilwell, 2002).

Individuals Vs Klasses

Se’es malun ho teoria Neoclassical, ekonomista Marxista sira halo analiza foka liu ba klasse laos individual. Klasse signifika grupo proletariadu hanesan forsa de trabalho mak halo produsaun ba bens e servicos, no bourgesa hanesan capitalista mak sai nain ba meius da produsaun. Individual bazeia ba teoria Neoclassical mak konsumedor no vendedor nebe’e livre faan no sosa sira nian sasan; iha lianguazem seluk hateten katak alokasaun iha ekonomia merkadu livre, faan no sosa sasan sei akontese voluntariamente entre individual sira (Bergh, et al, 1997). Idea ‘free exchange’ ka Merkadu livre nee implementa tiha ona iha siklu 19th century nebe’e adopta husi ekonomista neo-liberal sira no ikus mai sai famozu hanesan ideologia capitalismo, mak hetan ninian suporta maka’as husi instituisaun financeiru internasionais.

Terminologia rua iha leten to’o agora sei relevante nafatin, tamba iha tendensia katak individual bazeia ba teoria Neoclassical nudar konsumedor sei iha forsa ultimo hodi determina presu sasan. Klasse iha ‘Contemporary economy’ ka ekonomia modernu mos sei relevante tamba problema ekonomia agora ninian nebe kumplexu hamosu injustisa iha fatin servisu bar-barak, trabalhadores hanesan klasse proletariadu mak siempre lakon sira nian direitu, tamba nee iha fatin barak ona trabalhadores sira organiza a’an hodi establese sira nian sindikatu, uniaun no organizasaun legais rasik hodi proteze sira nian direitu no halo advokasia ba sira nian interese komun.

Utility Vs Value

Diferente husi teoria Neoclassical, Ekonomista Marxista sira halo analiza ba produsaun bazeia ba ‘Labour Theory of Value’ ka teoria nebe’e mak valoriza servisu trabalhadores sira bazeia ba kuantidade no kualidade forsa de trabalhadores nian. Maibe Neoclassical halo analiza ba merkadu bazeia ba ‘Theory of Utility’ ka teoria de utilizasaun, ejemplu mak hanesan sasan mak produs ba iha merkadu ninian folin sei determina husi ‘Consumer satisfaction’ ka konsumedores nian gostu, (Stilwell, 2002).

Banati tuir Carl Menger nian teoria ‘Marginal Utility Theory’, hateten katak wainhira konsumedor deside atu gasta sira nian osan hodi sosa sasan ka produtu, sira sei depende ba sasan ka produtu nebe mak hatudu ninian kualidade diak no fo satisfeitu ba konsumedor nee.

Haklaken tuir William Stanley Jevons ninian teoria ‘Diminishing Marginal Utility’ katak wainhira konsumedor deside atu aloka ninian pagamentu ba iha sasan balun, konsumedor ne’e sei koko ka ezamina sasan ida ba ida no koko hodi identifika sasan ida nebe mak hatudu liu ninian kualidade ka sasan nebe mak fo liu ninian satisfeitu ba konsumedor nee, ijemplu simples mak hanesan sosa ropa ka vistidu, ema nee sei koko no hatais ida ba ida to’o nia satisfeitu no komfortavel ho ninian desizaun. Satisfeitu ho vistidu nebe mak nia deside tiha ona atu sosa, ne sei determina vistidu nian folin, tamba vendedor hatene tiha ona konsumedor nian hakarak, entaun vendedor vistidu nee sei tau folin mak a’as para atu bele hetan lukru mak maximu.

Iha realidade ‘Utiliy theory’ no ‘Labour theory of value’ sei relevante nafatin, tamba teoria rua nee bele aplika depende ba iha merkadu ka industria mak bot ka largo. Ijemplu; kuandu hau nudar konsumedor ba iha negosiante lokal nebe kategoria kiik hanesan business furniture ba produs kadeira ka meja, teoria utility ka marginal utility sei susar hodi implementa tamba hau nian satisfeitu sei la bele aplika ho razaun kadeira ho meja laiha kuantidade mak barak para hau hodi ezamina ka koko tamba fatin business furniture nee laos dealer mak hatama sasan bar-barak. Business kiikoan hanesan nee normalmente determina sira nian presu rasik depende ba iha presu material prima no kustu de trabalho inklui mos lukru balun hodi hatutan ka halo bot sira nian business. Iha parte seluk sekuandu hau hanesan konsumedor no hau ba atu kompra meja ka kadeira balun iha loja bot furniture nian nebe hanesan mos ‘dealer’ ka ‘retailer’ parese hau bele aplika Utility theory tamba vendedor loja nee reprezenta kompania bot nebe iha kuantidade meja no kadeira barak hamutuk ho presu nebe variable ba hau, atu nune hau bele koko no ezamina tuir hau nian hakarak no gostu.

Equilibrium Vs Underconsumption

Bazeia ba teoria neoclassical, ‘General Equilibrium theory’ signifika katak presu ba sasan no factor mak halo produsaun ba sasan nee sei determina husi balansu ‘supply & demand’. Hanesan mos deklara tiha ona iha ‘Say’s Law’ nebe hateten katak ‘supply’ sei kria ninian ‘demand’ iha ijemplu rua mak sei bele esplika konseitu ida nee, ida; ijemplu wainhira iha tempu natal loja bar-barak hatama roupa ho kuantidade barak tamba sira fiar katak iha tempu natal konsumedores sei sosa sira nian roupa hodi ba misa no hatais ba iha loron bot. Entaun saida mak akontese wainhira roupa tama barak ema sosa mos aumenta barak no iha tempo hanesan vendedores mos hasae ninian folin makas atu hodi hetan ninian lukru barak, maibe wainhira loron bot liu tiha, folin sasan sira nee sei tun ba presu normal.

Ijemplu ida temi tiha ona nee, mos reflekta teoria Marshallian Cross, nebe hateten determinasaun ba presu sei depende ba iha quantidade demand no supply, ijemplu mak hanesan ita bele hare’e iha nasaun seluk hanesan Australia, Inglatera, Estadus Unidos America ka nasaun nebe ninian ekonomia diferente ho ita, depois de natal roupa iha loja sira folin tun makas, entaun saida mak akontese iha loron ‘Boxing Day’ 26 de Dezembro dadersan sedu deit ema ba forma-linha naruk iha odamatan loja nian oin, molok loja nee loke para konsumedor sira tama ho hadauk malun sasan hodi sosa.

Maibe tuir Marxian economics, sira hateten katak ‘Oversupply’ sei prejudika ‘Underconsumption’ nebe signifika katak faan sasan barak liu iha merkadu sei afekta ba konsumedores nian forsa de kompra, nebe sei bele akontese falansu iha merkadu. Ijemplu ba kazu ida nee ita la persija ba rai liur, wainhira governu hasai osan barak hodi sosa fo’os toneladas ba toneladas husi Vietnam no Laos, no laiha kalkulasaun fiksu husi forsa de kompra kada familia ida-idak, entaun saida mak akontese fo’os barak mak sai a’at iha armazem no tinan tinan ita rona katak governu sunu fo’os tamba a’at no lahuk. Ita labele fo sala ba iha falansu distribuisaun tamba distribuisaun mos hola parte sistema merkadu nian laran.

Hanesan refleksaun ba sistema merkadu iha era agora nian, wainhira presu folin tun sei provoka konsumedores hodi sosa, no wainhira konsumedores barak sosa entaun supply sasan tenke aumenta, no derepente deit vendedores hasae ninian folin no persija aumenta stock husi fabrika; no wainhira fabrika aumenta ninian suply, presu sasan nian monu fila fali. Fenomena nee mak hanesan siklus ida-idak mak kesi-malun tuir ninian movimentu nee rasik. No bazeia ba Marx nee mak ‘unstable economy’ ka ekonomia la estabil nebe’e signifika supply barak liu sei resulta konsumu menus (underconsumption), no merkadu bele monu ba krize.

Marginal Vs Structural

Originalidade teoria ‘Marginal Analysis’ mai husi David Ricardo ninian teoria ‘Marginal Principle’ nebe uza tiha ona hodi halo analiza ba ‘Rent’, ‘Leasing’ ka Aluga no ekonomista Neoclassical sira adopta tiha ona teoria nee, tamba sira fiar katak factors hotu-hotu iha relasaun ba malun. Maibe, atu aplika ba Marginal Principle Ricardo introdus tiha ona prinsipiu de substituisaun ka ‘Principle of Substitution’ ho razaun atu hodi kumprende relasaun entre trabalhadores no rai (Kaldor, 1956).

Kontradiksaun ba iha neoclassical nian teoria marginal analysis, Marx nian structural analysis halo kritika ba iha estado hanesan capitalista mak iha poder. Iha ninian manifesto communist Marx esplika exploitasaun mak halo husi bourgesa ba iha trabalhadores, no Marx identifika katak bourgesa mak iha klasses mediu ka sociadade affluente (affluent society) kontinua halo manipulasaun ho razaun hodi mantein nafatin poder capitalista. Marx konsidera sistema capitalista hanesan meius ida husi estado atu hodi proteze sira nian rezime, no iha rezime nee inklui instituisaun estado nian mak hanesan; policia, Sistema judiciariu, universidade no religiaun sira. Kritika ba iha instituisaun hirak nee ho razaun katak instituisaun sira nee mak siempre fo sira nian bensa no grasa ba estado no kria konsensia falsu ‘false consciousness’ (Newton & Deth, 2005).

Konkluzaun

Idea original mak mai husi classical economist hanesan Ricardo ho ninian marginal principle, John Stuart Mil ho Utilitarianism, Jeremy Bentham ho ninian great happiness inklui mos Jean Baptiste Say ho ninian Say’s Law, hato’o tiha ona mai katak teoria grande hirak nee hotu to’o agora sei relevante iha sociadade nian let. Transformasaun ideas husi classical mai ba neoclassical no husi neoclassical ba neo-liberal no to’o merkadu livre nee hatudu katak ekonomia iha mundo nee lao progresivu tebes.

Evolusaun husi proto-marginalista mak hanesan Cournot, Dupuit, Thunen and Gossen tun mai revolucionariu sira mak hanesan Jevons, Menger and Walras, Hamutuk ho konsolidador sira mak hanesan Bohm-Bawerk, Wieser, Marshal, Clark, Fisher, Wicksell, Wicksteed, Pareto and Barone hatudu katak ideas neoclassical halo ninian evolusaun duni bazeia ba iha dinamiku tempu neba nian no to’o agora konseitus hirak nee sei adopta nafatin iha ekonomia modern.

Essay nee explora tiha ona ideas fundamental barak husi konseitus bot rua mak mai husi ekonomia Neoclassical no Marxismo nian. Liu husi expozisaun ida nee, hato’o tiha ona mos komparasaun entre teoria elegante rua nee, liu-liu neoclassical sira nian teoria kona ba utility, marginal utility no supply & demand nebe mak desvaloriza tiha Marx nian teoria labour value of theory. Maibe iha realidade teoria hirak nee sei relevante nafatin no sei bele implementa bazeia ba kondisaun merkadu.

Iha parte seluk mos, Karl Marx hato’o tiha ona kontribuisaun teoria fundamento balun mak sei eziste iha phenomena ekonomia agora ninian. Liu husi konseitus mak hanesan materialism dialetika historia, analiza klasse, labour theory of value, underconsumption no structural analysis, argumentus no konseitus hirak nee uza tiha ona iha debates bar-barak iha arena politika ekonomia nian laran. Ijemplu mak hanesan; Marx nian teoria kona ba ‘underconsumption’ nebe iha ekonomia marxismo nian hateten katak; ‘oversupply’ sei prejudika ‘underconsumption’ no sei resulta falansu iha sistema merkadu. Mesmu iha kestaun nee ekonomista neoclassical sira fiar nafatin katak supply no demand mak sei bele kria equilibriu presu iha merkadu.

Referensia

Albertazzi, L., Libardi, M., & Poli, R., 1996. ‘The school of Franz Brentano’, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Netherlands

Andersen, S, E., 2009. ‘Schumpeter's Evolutionary Economics: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Engine of Capitalism’, Anthem Press, United Kingdom

Baumol, J, W., 1999. ‘Retrospectives Say’s Law’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol 13, No 1, pp 195-204

Bentham, J., 2009. ‘Deontology or, the science of morality: In which the harmony and co-incidence of duty and self-interest’, Bibliobazaar LLC, United States

Bergh, V, D, C, J, M, J., Straaten, V, D, J., & International Society for Ecological Economics., 1997. ‘Economy and ecosystems in change: analytical and historical approaches’, Edward Elgar Publishing, United States

Blaug, M., 2003. ‘Economic theory in retrospect’, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom

Cournot, A, A., 2008. ‘Researches into the Mathematical Principles of Wealth’, Bibliobazaar, New York

Ekelund, B, R., & Hebert, F, R., 1999. ‘Secret origins of modern microeconomics: Dupuit and the engineers’, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Fisher, I., 2007. ‘The nature of capital and income’, Cosimo Inc, New York

Geetika., Ghosh, P., & Choudhury, R, P., 2008. ‘Managerial economics’, Tata McGraw-Hill, India

Gomes, L., 2003. ‘The economics and ideology of free trade: a historical review’, Edward Elgar Publishing, United Kingdom

Hausman, M, D., 1992. ‘Essays on philosophy and economic methodology’, Cambridge University Press, United States

International Monetary Fund., 2010. ‘About the annual meetings’, available from http://www.imf.org/external/am/2010/about.htm

Jaffe, W., & Walker, A, D., 1983. ‘William Jaffe’s Essays on Walras’, Cambridge University Press, United States

Kaldor, N., 1956. ‘Alternative theories of distribution’, The Review of Economic Studies, Vol 23, No 2, pp 83-100

Kates, S., 2003. ‘Two Hundred Years of Say's Law: Essays on Economic Theory's Most Controversial Principle’, Edward Elgar Publishing, United Kingdom

Katouzian, H., 1980. ‘Ideology and method in economics’, Macmillan, London

Lunn, E., 1982. ‘Marxism and modernism: an historical study of Lukacs, Brecht, Benjamin, and Adorno’, University of California Press, United States

Lutz, A, F., 2006. ‘The theory of interest’, Transaction Publisher, New Jersey

Marchionatti, R., 2004. ‘Early mathematical economics’, 1871-1915’, Routledge, New York

Mill, S, J., 2007. ‘Utilitarianism, Liberty & Representative Government’, Wildside Press LLC, United States

Minsky, P, H., 1986. ‘Stabilizing an unstable economy’, Yale University Press, United States

Newton, K., & Deth, W, J., 2005. ‘Foundations of comparative politics: democracies of the modern world’, Cambridge University Press, United States

Pressman, S., 1999. ‘Fifty major economists’, Routledge, New York

Rockmore, T., 2002. ‘Marx after Marxism: the philosophy of Karl Marx’, Wiley-Blackwell, Great Britain

Steedman, I., 1997. Jevons's Theory of Political Economy and the 'Marginalist Revolution’, The European Journal off the History of Economic Thought, Vol 4, No 1, pp 43-64 available from: http://pdfserve.informaworld.com.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/50145_731193556_739386890.pdf

Stilwell, F., 2002. ‘Political Economy: the contest of economic ideas’ Oxford University Press, Singapore.

Streissler, W, E., & Streissler, M., 1994. ‘Carl Menger’s lectures to crown Prince Rudolph of Austria’, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, United Kingdom

Tieben, B., 2009. ‘The concept of equilibrium in different economic traditions: a historical investigation’, Rozenberg Publishers, Amsterdam

Vickers, D., 1995. ‘The tyranny of the market: a critique of theoretical foundations’, The University of Michigan Press, United States

0 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

﻿TheThAuthor﻿

TheThAuthor