Report on the Impact of U.S. Immigration Policies on Food Systems and Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Current U.S. immigration enforcement policies are creating significant disruptions within the nation’s food system. These policies have direct and adverse effects on agricultural labor, food prices, and the socioeconomic stability of rural communities. This report analyzes these impacts through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighting contradictions with goals related to poverty, hunger, decent work, inequality, and sustainable communities.

Analysis of Agricultural Labor and Food Security

The Essential Role of Immigrant Labor

Immigrant workers are fundamental to the U.S. food production and supply chain. Their contributions are critical across various stages:

• An estimated 61% of all farmworkers in the United States are immigrants.
• They perform essential tasks including crop harvesting, food processing, and working in meatpacking plants.
• Enforcement actions, such as raids on farms and processing facilities, create a climate of fear and instability, leading to significant labor shortages.

Implications for SDG 2: Zero Hunger

The disruption of the agricultural workforce directly threatens food security and affordability, undermining the objectives of SDG 2.

1. Labor Shortages and Food Waste: A direct consequence of labor shortages is the inability to harvest crops, leading to significant food loss as produce rots in fields.
2. Reduced Production: Uncertainty in labor availability forces farmers to plant fewer crops, reducing the overall food supply.
3. Increased Food Prices: Labor shortages contribute to decreased productivity and higher operational costs for farmers, which are passed on to consumers. The USDA projects food price increases of 2.9% in 2025 and 2.2% in 2026, making food less accessible for low-income households.
4. Corporate Price Gouging: Market instability creates opportunities for large corporations to inflate prices beyond their cost increases, further exacerbating food affordability challenges.

Socioeconomic Consequences and SDG Alignment

Challenges to SDG 8 (Decent Work) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Communities)

The policies have profound socioeconomic consequences for both workers and the communities they live in.

• Erosion of Decent Work (SDG 8): Immigrant workers frequently face exploitation and hazardous working conditions. Current policies intensify their vulnerability and undermine efforts to ensure decent work and economic security for this essential workforce.
• Destabilization of Rural Communities (SDG 11): Immigrants have been vital to revitalizing rural areas experiencing population decline. They contribute to local economies by supporting businesses, schools, and public services. The removal of these residents threatens the economic and social fabric of these communities.

Contradiction with SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

The implementation of these immigration policies raises significant concerns regarding human rights and social equity.

1. Increased Inequality (SDG 10): The policies disproportionately target vulnerable populations, primarily from South and Central American countries, thereby exacerbating existing inequalities.
2. Undermining Justice and Well-being (SDG 16): Actions such as family separation and the use of detention centers with deplorable conditions conflict with the principles of promoting just, peaceful, and inclusive societies. These measures inflict severe physical and psychological harm, challenging fundamental human rights.

Systemic Issues and the Path to Sustainable Reform

Corporate Consolidation and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)

The focus on immigrant labor diverts attention from the systemic issue of corporate consolidation in the food system, which is a primary driver of unsustainable practices.

• Corporate Power: The administration’s policies often favor large corporations by reducing oversight, such as allowing faster line speeds in meatpacking plants. This deregulation prioritizes corporate profit over worker safety and food quality, contradicting the principles of responsible production outlined in SDG 12.
• Misaligned Priorities: While immigrant workers face punitive measures, the corporate entities responsible for creating an unsafe and unsustainable food system receive less scrutiny.

Conclusion and Recommendations for Reform

A sustainable and just food system requires comprehensive reform that addresses root causes rather than targeting essential workers. Achieving the SDGs necessitates a shift in policy towards:

• Addressing Corporate Control: Implementing policies that break up corporate monopolies and hold them accountable for labor and environmental standards.
• Protecting Workers’ Rights: Ensuring fair wages, safe working conditions, and legal protections for all agricultural workers, in line with SDG 8.
• Humane Immigration Reform: Developing a just and orderly immigration system that recognizes the essential contributions of immigrants and upholds human rights, aligning with SDG 10 and SDG 16.

Violent and exclusionary policies against immigrants are counterproductive to building a resilient, equitable, and sustainable food system for the future.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article highlights several interconnected issues related to immigration policies, labor, food security, and economic stability, which directly or indirectly connect to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger: The article discusses threats to food availability, rising food prices, and food waste (crops rotting in fields), all of which are central to ensuring food security and ending hunger.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The exploitation of immigrant farmworkers, dangerous working conditions, and the importance of their labor for the agricultural economy are key themes that fall under this goal.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article explicitly frames the immigration policies as “racist,” “violent,” and “exclusionary,” directly addressing the issue of inequality and discrimination against a specific group of people (immigrants).
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The text points out the vital role immigrants play in the economic and social well-being of rural and agricultural communities, linking their presence to the sustainability and revitalization of these areas.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: The article touches upon unsustainable aspects of the food system, including food loss due to labor shortages (“crops are rotting in fields”) and the negative environmental impacts of corporate agriculture.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The discussion of “violent” policies, families being torn apart, and the deployment of ICE agents points to a breakdown of just and humane institutions and practices.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified as being directly relevant:

1. Under SDG 2 (Zero Hunger):
   • Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round. The article connects immigration policies to “higher food prices” and reduced “food availability,” which directly threaten this target.
   • Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices. The article calls for reform to make the food system “safer for our environment and climate,” highlighting the unsustainability of the current system.
2. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, and in particular women migrants, and those in precarious employment. The article directly addresses this by mentioning that immigrant workers “routinely face exploitation and dangerous working conditions,” and that policy changes like “faster line speeds” will “risk more worker injuries.”
3. Under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities):
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices. The article describes the immigration policies as “racist and cruel,” which are examples of the discriminatory policies this target aims to eliminate.
   • Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies. The policies described in the article—involving ICE raids, a “fear campaign,” and “tearing families apart”—are the antithesis of the orderly, safe, and responsible migration this target promotes.
4. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Target 11.a: Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas. The article highlights how immigrants have been “vital to the economic well-being of many rural and agricultural communities” and “helped revitalize them,” demonstrating the positive links that are being threatened by the policies.
5. Under SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production):
   • Target 12.3: By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses. The article provides a direct example of post-harvest loss by stating that “crops are rotting in fields” and that “one cherry farmer in Oregon will lose 30 acres of fruit because of immigration crackdowns.”
6. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children. The policy of “tearing families apart” is a form of abuse and violence against families and children.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that could be used to measure the impact of the policies discussed:

• Indicator for SDG 2 (Food Prices): The article provides a specific forecast from the USDA that “U.S. food prices will increase by 2.9% in 2025 and by another 2.2% in 2026.” This directly relates to Indicator 2.c.1 (Indicator of food price anomalies) and measures the affordability aspect of food security.
• Indicator for SDG 12 (Food Loss): The article gives a concrete example of food loss: “one cherry farmer in Oregon will lose 30 acres of fruit.” This serves as a direct, albeit anecdotal, indicator of post-harvest losses (related to Indicator 12.3.1a: Food Loss Index).
• Indicator for SDG 8 (Labor Force Demographics): The statistic that immigrants “make up an estimated 61% of farmworkers” is a demographic indicator that highlights the dependency of the food system on this specific labor force. Changes in this percentage could indicate the impact of immigration policies.
• Indicator for SDG 8 (Worker Safety): The mention of increased “worker injuries” due to faster line speeds implies that the frequency of occupational injuries (Indicator 8.8.1) is a relevant metric for assessing the safety of the working environment for food processing workers.
• Indicator for SDG 10 (Immigration Enforcement): The article’s reference to ICE agents who “arrest, jail, and deport people” implies that the number of arrests, detentions, and deportations of immigrant workers can be used as an indicator to measure the intensity and impact of the described discriminatory policies.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: foodandwaterwatch.org