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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

24 agroecology and the struggle for food sovereignty 2 According to “What is Food Sovereignty?”, a Via Campesina position paper available at http://www.via campesina.org/art_english.ph p3?id_article=216&PHPSESSID =432ee9b758220848ae4a2cb0 cda74dad, food sovereignty is “the peoples’, countries’ or state unions’ RIGHT to define their agricultural and food policy, without any dumping vis-à-vis third countries.” 3 Carlsen, Laura (2003), “The Mexican Farmers’ Movement: Exposing the Myths of Free Trade.” Americas Policy Report, February 25. 4 Henriques, Gisele and Raj Patel. (2004), “NAFTA, Corn, and Mexico’s Agricultural Trade Liberalization.” Silver City, NM: Interhemispheric Resource Center, January 28. 5 Cevallos, Diego. (2002), “NAFTA Equals Death, Say Peasant Farmers.” Inter Press Service, December 4. http://www.commondreams. org/headlines02/120402.htm. that something so fundamental to daily life as sustenance should not be subjected to the abstract logic of trade liberalization. 2 This brief analysis will review the current trade scenario in the Americas and highlight the consequences of trade policies that do not take these considerations into account. Drawing from experiences and lessons shared at the workshop, we describe alternative solutions to the current trade liberalization agenda, including national policies and non-governmental innovations that address farmers’ rights, rural livelihoods, economic development, and biodiversity conservation. Lastly, we point policymakers toward a set of recommendations that would reform trade negotiations and domestic policies to better protect these values. We argue not that food sovereignty should be prioritized over trade policy, but that it should be integrated into future trade agreements. Trade Policy without Food Sovereignty: Mexico under NAFTA The consequences of negotiating trade agreements that do not respect the notion of food sovereignty are apparent throughout Latin America, perhaps most clearly in Mexico. Following the passage of NAFTA in 1994, corn imports from the U.S. increased dramatically with the phasing out of Mexican import quotas. Due to U.S. farm subsidies that artificially depress the cost of production, this corn arrived at very low prices and promptly began to undersell Mexican corn in local markets. According to classic theories of competitive advantage, Mexican farmers were expected to switch to other crops they could grow more efficiently – particularly non-staple crops like fruits and vegetables that could be exported to the north. However, this argument ignored the subsidies doled out to American farmers, which render this market far from “free.” It blithely assumed that farmers were able to convert to other types of production – even though their lands are often unsuited for conversion, and their access to credit, inputs, and extension services has shriveled in the past decade due to budget cuts by the Mexican government. Finally, it failed to consider the multiple significances attached to corn in Mexico. Corn cannot be simply substituted for alternate sources of income and food; it is central to daily nutrition, rural life, and national identity. As Laura Carlsen has written, “Small-scale corn production is the millennia-old safety net for all of Mesoamerica” (2003). 3 This explains why corn production has actually remained steady in Mexico since NAFTA. 4 With neither the capacity nor the desire to shift to other crops, farmers continue to grow corn even while receiving less and less money for it. Undercutting the ability of Mexican farmers to supply local markets has led to a catastrophic series of cascading effects, including greater rural poverty and a wave of emigration to already overcrowded cities and to the United States. More than 15 million peasants had already left rural areas by 2002. 5 Such massive displacement from the land has severe ecological consequences, including soil erosion, deforestation, and the loss of biodiversity – for, as John Tuxill, Ivette Perfecto, and Robin Sears noted at the workshop, small farmers across the Americas play a key role in protecting healthy ecosystem function. (For a synopsis of the arguments made by Tuxill, Perfector and Sears please refer to the Panel Summary “Framing, Forests and Biodiversity”, Chapter 12, pg. 73 this volume.) yale school of forestry & environmental studies
steward and cook 25 In January 2003, tens of thousands demonstrated in Mexico City, decrying the government’s refusal to provide meaningful support for campesinos battered by NAFTA. The protests were organized by UNORCA, a national union of peasants’ organizations led by Alberto Gómez Flores, a participant in this workshop. UNORCA works with Vía Campesina and other international allies to promote a broad conception of food sovereignty, and argues that Mexico needs to renegotiate NAFTA to address serious flaws in its agricultural provisions. The Current Trade Scenario Despite its dismal track record with regard to small farmers and rural livelihoods, NAFTA’s agricultural provisions remain the prevailing model for trade agreements between the U.S. and Latin American countries, like the recently negotiated CAFTA and the current draft text for the FTAA. Negotiations for a regional pact between the U.S., Ecuador, and Colombia, which began in May 2004, envision a similarly liberalized agricultural sector. Yet small farmers in the Andes are already struggling from a combination of natural disasters (like droughts) and political-economic obstacles. In Ecuador, like Mexico, the government has slashed rural credit and agricultural extension programs to comply with structural adjustment policies required by the International Monetary Fund. Small farmers are concerned about an impending flood of cheap agricultural products that will arrive in their markets in the wake of a future trade agreement with the U.S. – particularly since this deal could precede any meaningful reform of U.S. agricultural subsidies and supports through the still-ongoing Doha Round of World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations. There are some encouraging recent developments with regard to agriculture and trade in the Americas. Developing nations and social movements succeeded in shifting the agenda at the 2003 WTO ministerial meetings in Cancún. The major controversy there related to agriculture – specifically, the refusal of the U.S., Europe, and Japan to reduce their production and export subsidies, which are hurting small farmers in the global South and restricting the export opportunities that should accrue to developing countries. These subsidies have encouraged Northern producers to dump surplus production abroad, reducing the opportunities for Southern farmers to sell to their own local markets. The impasse at Cancún created an embarrassing situation for Northern countries, which were widely portrayed as hypocritically advocating protectionism at home and free trade abroad. 6 The FTAA negotiations reached a similar stalemate at the Miami summit in November 2003. Consequently the U.S. and the European Union began negotiating the repeal of some export subsidies, a topic that was previously off-limits. Yet the prevailing model embodied in trade policy remains destructive for small farmers. Advocates of food sovereignty are skeptical that new negotiating positions in the WTO, FTAA, CAFTA, and other negotiations are not just old wine in new bottles. They argue that the Northern countries still pursue new market opportunities abroad, while showing little willingness to truly remove harmful distortions in their agricultural policies. They also point out that, even without subsidies, large countries 6 For example, see the New York Times series of articles and editorials entitled “Harvesting Poverty,” which appeared in 2003, particularly “The Unkept Promise” (December 30). yale school of forestry & environmental studies
Page 1 and 2: Report Number 4 Agroecology and the
Page 3: Agroecology and the Struggle for Fo
Page 6 and 7: eakout session reports Food Soverei
Page 8 and 9: 2 agroecology and the struggle for
Page 15 and 16: mcafee 9 Sustainability and Social
Page 17 and 18: mcafee 11 organizations or depicted
Page 19 and 20: mcafee 13 industrial agriculture, n
Page 21 and 22: mcafee 15 Producing Food or Produci
Page 23 and 24: mcafee 17 ● Major international d
Page 25 and 26: mcafee 19 Agroecology is not a mono
Page 27: mcafee 21 ● Land reform of a kind
Page 37 and 38: zimmerer 31 An Expanding Interface
Page 39 and 40: zimmerer 33 The Mesoamerican Biolog
Page 41 and 42: zimmerer 35 constellation of areas
Page 43 and 44: levins 37 A Whole-System View of Ag
Page 45 and 46: levins 39 Equity Versus Sustainabil
Page 47 and 48: levins 41 ● Small-scale to large-
Page 49 and 50: levins 43 commodities. The more fav
Page 51 and 52: levins 45 study is bigger than we i
Page 53 and 54: levins 47 rather, they would like t
Page 55: levins 49 lic office is auctioned o
Page 69 and 70: case study: food sovereignty in the
Page 71: case study: food sovereignty in the
Page 80 and 81:
74 agroecology and the struggle for
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 93 and 94:
case study: from local to national
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
case study: living the amazonian dr
Page 101:
case study: living the amazonian dr
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
100 agroecology and the struggle fo
Page 109 and 110:
food sovereignty 103 Food Sovereign
Page 111:
food sovereignty 105 lems are addre
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 121 and 122:
urban/rural and producer/consumer r
Page 123:
urban/rural and producer/consumer r
Page 126 and 127:
Page 129 and 130:
practicing agroecology, using local
Page 131:
practicing agroecology, using local
Page 134 and 135:
Page 137 and 138:
iodiversity, conservation, and ecos
Page 139 and 140:
interview: gómez 133 Interview: Al
Page 141:
interview: gómez 135 a maturity th
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 167 and 168:
iographies of editors 161 Biographi
Page 169 and 170:
participants 163 Workshop Participa
Page 171 and 172:
participants 165 Jean Marc von der
Page 173 and 174:
esources 167 Resources Farmer-to-Fa
Page 175 and 176:
esources 169 ATTRA - www.attra.org
Page 177 and 178:
esources 171 Just Food - www.justfo
Page 179 and 180:
esources 173 International Institut
Page 181 and 182:
cover photo captions 175 Cover Phot
Page 183 and 184:
This report originated in an intern
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?