Papers - Conference 2009 - Institute of Latin American Studies

such, its main function is to give room for a meeting place where discussions and changing ofideas can take place between its participants (WSF 2002).The heterogeneity of the WSF is quite different from earlier forms of civil society, whichwas organized within nations and distinguishably homogenous (Nash 2004: 437f). Similarlyto such observation, Boaventura de Sousa Santos argues that the WSF not only raises “[…]analytic and theoretical questions, but also epistemological questions” (2008: 250). Thisreflection poses questions to whether conceptual and theoretical tools available to social (andother) scientists of today are adequate to grasp what kind of phenomenon the WSF truly is.Nevertheless, what ever the definition may or should be, there is no doubt that the WSF is animportant part of the globalization from below; both as an example of what seems to be aparticipatory democracy (Teivainen 2002: 629) and as a global think tank for an alternativeworld.Food sovereignty: A way towards empowerment?Abdurazack Karriem argues, in his Gramscian analysis of MST, that“[…] to forge an alternative hegemony, counter-hegemonic movements needs to do more than simply resistthe dominant model: they have to develop alternative forms of production and reproduction or alternativeconceptions of nature-society relations” (2008: 3).According to Stedile, MST has an alternative proposal which is based on family-run and ruralagriculture and in which production of healthy food, freed from pesticides is prioritized(Stedile 2007: 51). Of central importance to the struggle for such alternative proposal is theconcept of “food sovereignty”, developed by La Via Campesina in the movements verybeginning (Borras Jr. et al. 2008: 190; La Via Campesina 2007). Stedile argues that sincerequired for human survival, food should not be considered a commodity on whichmultinational corporations make profits (Stedile 2004: 11). Neither MST nor La ViaCampesina is against trade in itself. However, they oppose the negotiations put forward byWTO in favor of agribusiness through agricultural liberalization, as well as the market ledagrarian reform (MLAR) program, launched by the World Bank. 11 In their oppositionalposition they define food as a basic human right (Karriem 2008: 7). As an alternative to thedominant neo-liberal agro export model embedded in the World Bank and IMF driven11 For relevant discussions on the MLAR, see Borras Jr. 2003 and Servolo de Medeiros 2007.7