The world is in the middle of a food crisis. How we produce
food is a deeply political issue that affects the lives and livelihoods of
billions of people. In our global economy, it is not the amount of food
produced which dictates whether people eat or starve. If it was, we would not
see the inhumane but common spectacle of people malnourished while surrounded
by food. Rather, it is the increasing grip which big business exerts over our
food system, in accordance with the
power of profits and the market.
Agroecology encompasses the science of ecological principles
as applied to food systems, the practices and techniques of sustainable
farming, and a movement that addresses the social, economic and political
aspects of food systems. A study of sustainable farming should focus as much on
the rights of farmers, issues of land distribution, and the impact of big
business on people’s livelihoods, as it should on farming methods and yields. Agroecology
isn’t just a set of farming practices – it’s also about who controls our food.
The term agroecology is that, together with the term food
sovereignty, it is widely used by the international movement La Via Campesina,
which has over 200 million peasant farmer members in 160 organisations and 79
countries. La Via Campesina are careful
to point out that they support farming principles rather than focusing on terms
alone:
“We can find examples of sustainable peasant and family farm
agriculture all over the planet, though the names we use vary greatly from one
place to another, whether agroecology, organic farming, natural farming, low
external input sustainable agriculture, or others. In La Via Campesina we do
not want to say that one name is better than another, but rather we want to specify
the key principles that we defend…”
Food sovereignty is about the right of peoples to define
their own food systems. Advocates of food sovereignty put the people who
produce, distribute and consume food at the centre of decisions on food systems
and policies, rather than the demands of global markets and corporations that
have come to dominate the industrial food system.
There is now extremely good evidence that small-scale
sustainable farming can deliver as much if not more food than large-scale
corporate-controlled agriculture. For example, research by the UN showed that
switching to agroecological farming methods has increased yields across Africa
by 116% and by 128% in East Africa compared to conventional farming.
There is also plenty of evidence that the livelihoods of
farmers and communities can be improved, and that agroecology can deliver a
huge range of other benefits, including reducing the gender gap, creating jobs,
improving people’s health, increasing biodiversity, and increasing the
resilience of food systems to cope with climate change.
So why are governments, development agencies, policy makers
and funders so focused on large-scale, high-input solutions which marginalise
poor and small-scale farmers, have a negative impact on our environment, and do
little to increase the resilience of our food system as a whole? The short
answer is corporate power. A longer answer is that there is a significant
economic and political bias in favour of large-scale industrial agriculture.
This bias is created through an economic system which privileges industrial
farming, large-scale land owners and monopolistic corporations, leading to
political support for these vested interests.
As the eminent agroecologist Professor Miguel Altieri has
put it:
“The issue seems to be political or ideological rather than
evidence or science based. No matter what data is presented, governments and
donors influenced by big interests marginalize agroecological approaches
focusing on quick-fix, external input intensive ‘solutions’ and proprietary
technologies such as transgenic crops and chemical fertilisers. It is time for
the international community to recognize that there is no other more viable
path to food production in the twenty-first century than agroecology.”
An estimated 90% of rural land in Africa is unregistered,
making it particularly susceptible to land grabs and unfair expropriation by
governments on behalf of multinational corporations. Behind the problem of
insecure land tenure is a deeper rooted problem of land ownership inequality,
which goes back to the colonial era and before and looms large to this day.
Across the continent, households in the highest income per capita quartile
control up to fifteen times more land than people in the lowest quartile.
Land tenure is a complex issue and improving tenure rights
and the growth of private property rights can, in some cases, facilitate
corporate land grabbing and strengthen private land ownership by already rich
investors and farmers. Corporations and other powerful actors can increase
their control of land either directly, with medium and long-term leases, or
through direct land purchases, but they can also control land and labour
through contract farming arrangements. Improving land tenure arrangements
should go hand in hand with land reform and land redistribution which
prioritises the needs of small-scale farmers and farming communities and
reduces land ownership inequality.
We need a complete shift in who controls our food system. Power
must be taken away from corporations and put back into the hands of the people
and communities that produce and consume food. Only a movement of people
calling for food sovereignty and agroecology will create this sort of change. No
matter how many reports the UN publishes, or how many intimidating graphs are
thrown at us, sustainable growth is not being taken seriously.
1 comment:
To add support there is a new post on Vandana Shiva's blog -
BIODIVERSITY OR GMOS: WILL THE FUTURE OF NUTRITION BE IN WOMEN’S HANDS OR UNDER CORPORATE CONTROL? - http://www.navdanya.org/blog/?p=2017
Everything she claims is backed up by empirical evidence. As with Via Campesina V. Shiva is fully supportive of the vast majority of the world's population having control over the world's food supply. Let's just add that in socialism all decisions will be made democratically and food, as every other necessity, will be available free to all.
Post a Comment