Agroecology and the Struggle for Food Sovereignty ... - Yale University

128
agroecology and the struggle for food sovereignty
2 As seen in the Green
Revolution: increased use of
inputs, economy of labor, and
improved seeds.
Who are these new farmers? Catherine Murphy, from FLACSO in Cuba, explained
that the new farmers with whom she has worked are urban residents of Havana.
These urban farmers began farming out of necessity – spurred by a food crisis in
Cuba during the early 1990s, sparked by the sudden decline in food imports when the
Soviet Union collapsed. Murphy sees many positives from this upsurge in urban
farming. She emphasized that opportunities for policymakers and academics to
provide support to new farmers should not be overshadowed by current trends of
rural “crisis” and farmer exodus.
Jose Montenegro, from CIDERS (Centro Internacional para el Desarrollo Rural
Sostentable), noted that in Central California, many new farmers are immigrants and
the children of immigrants. The children of established farmers seem less likely to
take up farming. Montenegro suggested that the choice to farm in California appears
not to be financially based. While stable employment might be less of a financial risk
than farming, Montenegro said many new farmers feel more comfortable farming
than working other kinds of jobs. They value the way of life, with its senses of
independence and ownership. Montenegro pointed out that while farming might not
be as financially stable as wage labor, the latter may not be good enough to make it
more appealing than farming on one’s own. He suggested that when 17 wage laborers
are living in a two-bedroom apartment – a situation he has observed in Central
California – this must surely be an indicator of the limited opportunities wage labor
provides.
Montenegro’s mention of the feeling of independence brought on by farming
turned the discussion to one of the central themes of the workshop: sovereignty.
Avery Cohn, also from the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, asked if
sovereignty, such as the kind Montenegro’s new farmers say they feel as farmers
instead of wage laborers, is antithetical to rural development. Mary Gable of World
Hunger Year said that if development is defined as the extension and expansion of
economic interests controlled by the elite, then sovereignty and development do not
mix. As evidence, she suggested that communities’ relative lack of power to mobilize
against powerful economic interests indicates just how dependent these communities
are on those interests.
Gable’s point sparked a conversation about new farmers in terms of resistance.
Cohn reminded the group of a question prevalent throughout the workshop: What
happens when the new becomes old, or when the marginalized becomes the norm? A
great deal of advocacy for the rights of small farmers seems to arise in the form of
resistance to the corporate and statist push to “modernize” agricultural production. 2
To counter the modernization stance, movements of small farmers often work to
establish the value of alternative practices. Because social movements speak out
against this myopic “modernist” vision, these groups are often perceived as advocates
for traditional farming practices, even though they may also advocate practices that
embrace many new methods and actors. The groups are challenged to draw a
distinction between the modern or new form of agriculture they advocate, and the
modernist agricultural discourse a government produces. Anand emphasized the
need to see beyond the dichotomy of the powerful and the marginalized. He
yale school of forestry & environmental studies