Study Notes on Hazardous Exports and Maquiladora Centers

Hazardous products, processes, and wastes from the core (developed countries) are transferred to peripheral zones (developing countries) by transnational corporations (TNCs).
- Source References: Adeola 2001; Castleman and Navarro 1987; Clapp 2001, 2002a, 2002b; Frey 1997, 1998a, 1998b, 2001, 2002.
Peripheral countries lack resources to assess/manage hazards, increasing health, environmental, and safety risks.
- Source References: Aguilar-Madrid et al. 2003; Brenner et al. 2000; Brown 2002; Kasperson and Kasperson 2001; Millen and Holtz 2000.
Many impoverished peripheral states seek industry and foreign currency, contributing to risk transfer by creating export processing zones (EPZs) with minimal regulations.
TNCs have relocated production to over 60 countries, taking advantage of lower costs and regulations in EPZs.
This practice appropriates the ecological capacity of the core by distancing hazardous outputs.

The maquiladoras on the Mexican side of the U.S. border exemplify the transfer of hazardous industries.
The examination proceeds in five steps:
1. Description of the Mexico-U.S. border region.
2. Political and economic forces driving transfer of industries.
3. Examination of health, safety, and environmental risks in Northern Mexico.
4. Critical evaluation of the neoliberal perspective on benefits of transferring hazardous industries.
5. Emerging political responses to these issues.

The border spans nearly 2,100 miles from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico, cutting through four U.S. states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas) and six Mexican states (Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León, Tamaulipas).
The defined border region includes 60 miles on both sides, totaling about 250,000 square miles.
Population: Over 12 million people reside in the border area (2000 estimate).
- Breakdown: 7 million (U.S.), over 5 million (Mexico); 70% live in 14 twin cities, with San Diego-Tijuana being the largest (4.5 million).
Population pressure has increased since 1980, resulting in inadequate infrastructure, including issues with water, sewage, housing, garbage disposal, and pollution.
- Growth Rate of Colonias: Unincorporated poor settlements grow at 10% per year (over 1.5 million estimated).
Economic disparities: average U.S. per capita income is ten times higher than Mexico's.

Globalization leads to the relocation of hazardous production to peripheral regions.
Key Drivers: TNCs seek lower production costs and expanded markets, aided by export-oriented industrial policies from peripheral states like Mexico.
Supporting Organizations: International institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO promote these policies and TNC practices.

Growing concern over health and environmental safety since the 1970s resulted in stricter regulations in core countries.
TNCs relocated hazardous industries to avoid increased production costs due to these regulations.
Debate exists over the actual impact of such regulations, with studies suggesting mixed evidence.
- Evidence:
- Leonard (1988): Claims little support for extensive relocation due to regulation; only marginal processes transferred.
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Observation that firms were not relocating to evade pollution control costs.
- Pollution Abatement Studies: Findings by Eskeland and Harrison (1997) indicate low impact of pollution costs on investment decisions.
Factors influencing transfer to the periphery include economic conditions, resource availability, tax strategies, labor costs, and general investment climates.

Production in Mexico thrives due to:
- Low wages.
- Abundant resources.
- Tax incentives and weak environmental regulations.
These aspects create an “absolute advantage” for TNCs operating in Mexico, conducive to capital accumulation.

Post-World War II, many Mexican workers filled labor shortages in the U.S. due to the Bracero Program, canceled in 1964, leading to unemployment in Mexico.
The Border Industrialization Program (BIP) initiated in 1965 aimed to boost employment and industry by allowing maquiladoras duty-free imports of materials for export.
Maquiladora growth intensified after economic liberalization in the mid-1980s with the GATT agreement in 1986.
By 2000, there were 3,486 maquiladoras, predominantly located in Northern Mexico, employing over 1.2 million workers.

The maquiladora sector has seen a qualitative transition from basic assembly work to more sophisticated manufacturing.
Current Industry Breakdown:
- Textiles: 24%
- Electric & electronic components: 30%
- Food processing: 2.3%
- Chemical products: 10.6%
Major TNCs involved include Alcoa, BMW, Ford, and General Motors, producing consumer goods and hazardous waste.
Some TNCs have introduced safety standards, but many have not, leading to environmental hazards.

Adverse Effects on Environment and Health:
- Occupational hazards lead to diseases like cancer, respiratory issues, and congenital abnormalities among workers.
- Areas around maquiladoras face high contamination rates for air and water.
Economic Costs:
- Cleanup of contaminated sites and treatment for illness are financially burdensome.
Social Disparity:
- Benefits are concentrated in TNCs and local elites, while marginalized groups bear adverse health impacts and economic burden.

Movements, led by NGOs, are working towards policy improvements and better standards in maquiladora operations.
- Examples of NGOs: Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras, Maquila Solidarity Network, etc.
Successful campaigns have led to increased awareness and some regulatory changes, but challenges remain due to economic globalization and regulatory weaknesses.

Key questions arise regarding whether benefits from hazardous industry transfers outweigh costs.
Arguments suggest that the model of transferring polluting industries underestimates health, environmental, and social impacts.
Economic rationality that promotes lower costs overlooks the disproportionate risks borne by peripheral populations.
Reforming global labor standards and environmental regulations emerges as a potential pathway for mitigating these adverse effects.
Final Note: The existing contrasting viewpoints necessitate continued examination, advocacy, and action to address the balance of costs and benefits in this complex dynamic.