Via Campesina
International farmers movement
Movimiento campesino internacional
Mouvement paysan international
secretaria operativa/operative secretariat: Apdo Postal 3628 Tegucigalpa, MDC Honduras, C.A.
Tel & fax : + 504 235 99 15 E-mail: viacam@gbm.hn
Proposals of Via Campesina for sustainable, farmer based agricultural
production
August, 2002
Introduction
World-wide, the prevailing neo-liberal economic system has been the primary cause of the
increasing impoverishment and the displacement of farmers and rural peoples everywhere. It is
responsible for the increasing degradation of nature, including the land, water, plants, animals and
natural resources, having put all these vital resources under centralized systems of production,
procurement and distribution within the frame of a global market oriented system. The international
‘agrifood sector’ is largely controlled by transnational corporations and the governments that actively
support or passively accept the market ideology as the principle on which to base all of agriculture.
This economic system treats both nature and people as a means to an end with the sole aim of
generating profits. The resulting concentration of wealth and control in the hands of a small minority
has created dramatic constraints on farmers throughout the world, pushing them to the brink of
irredeemable extinction.
Agricultural and other policies, the role of governments and industry, as well as the objectives
of research and trade, must all be fundamentally reshaped to give priority to protecting biological and
cultural diversity, the land and people of the land, in order to reverse the dangerous current destruction.
The major impediment to achieving sustainable ways of producing food is not the lack of appropriate
technologies or the lack of knowledge of people working the land. The biggest obstacle is the way in
which international and national policies, as well as the agro industry, are interfering in the food
production system, forcing farmers to adopt unsustainable methods of production through a model of
competition and ongoing industrialisation. This undermines all forms of small-scale family farm and
peasant agriculture which are based on the sustainable use of local resources for the production of
quality food for local consumption.
The current model of industrialized food production is inherently unsustainable. It makes
farmers increasingly dependent on external inputs (pesticides, fertilisers, veterinary treatment, growth
promoters, etc.) and external capital. This industrialized production is often very intensive, and not
linked to the soil, as for example, is the case for intensive pork production in Europe and Brazil. It is
often export orientated, as with big cereal producers in Europe and North America. These export
oriented production systems are not geared to enhance local ecological conditions or to meet local food
needs. In this model farmers lose control over production decisions. There are a growing number of
examples of this. A large number pork producers in Flanders (Belgium), facing bankruptcy, are being
forced to accept very unfair contracts from the animal feed industry which divest them of the
ownership of their animals and stables, and constrain them to buy feedstuffs from the contracting firm
which sets all the prices but leaves the production risks (illness and animal deaths) to the producer. In
countries such Brazil or the Philippines farmers are driven off their land and are reduced to ill-paid
workers on plantations or big properties, having lost their autonomy as food producer. Large, investorowned dairy operations in California and New Mexico make profits milking thousands of cows by
exploiting cheap Mexican labour.
Such so called “advantages” as industrialized food production boasts are gained at great cost.
These modes of production do not respect farming people, their cultures or their animals and cause
extensive (in many cases, irreversible) damage to the environment. They frequently disrupt
environments and livelihoods far beyond their immediate reach when surplus production is dumped
elsewhere in the world. They contribute to the decline of food quality and safety. For example, the
BSE or dioxin crisis in Europe and the increasing risk of salmonella poisoning from intensive poultry
production in North America signal but a few of the problems generated by this mode of production.
Health and safety problems with pesticide use are well documented. The economic advantages are yet
to be demonstrated as this model receives most of the public financial support currently available to
agriculture. Uncapped income support to large producers in the Europe and the United States along
with credits for export commodities in Brazil and the Philippines illustrate how dependent on public
treasuries much of the industrialized production really is. At the same time, small-scale farmers are
denied any form of public support or credit in many countries. . Contrary to much of the conventional
propaganda, intensive industrial methods often create more problems than they resolve and are highly
expensive for society.
The model of family farm or peasant based sustainable production makes use of
traditional low input methods. Farmers rely on their long historic experience with their local resources
(water, soil, climate, plant and animal varieties) and are capable of producing the optimal quantity and
quality of food with few, if any, external inputs. Products are mainly grown for their own families and
consumers of the same region. This assures contact and transparency between farmers and consumers.
Having access to land and security of tenure is the best possible incentive for individual farmers to
preserve and improve soil fertility. In order to avoid dependency on external financiers, credit can be
organised through credit groups or co-operatives. This model is labour intensive (a resource that is
available in abundance in most regions of the world) instead of capital intensive. The production is
linked to the soil. It has been demonstrated to be sustainable over thousands of years in diverse
ecologies.
Although in the neo-liberal theory the model of industrial production is “sold” to the public as
the most efficient one, the contrary is true. Studies show that the capacity of food production per
hectare is higher on small farms than on big industrial farms if the measurement is not restricted to
monocultural production. For example, the traditional rice paddies in many southern countries
afforded a whole range of other products besides rice: fish, shrimps, straw, herbs, medical plants etc.
Where this highly effective production system was replaced by high yielding rice varieties of the socalled “green revolution” using a lot of expensive pesticides and fertilisers, these varieties gave little
extra yield, short straw and far fewer other food products. Furthermore, drought and disease resistance
decreased. Careful research is revealing a host of other examples where an abundant variety of
production is successfully integrated within one system achieving greater efficiency along with longterm ecological sustainability.
Genuine and sustainable development in agriculture will have to abandon the dominant model
of intensive, high-input industrialized farming in favour of models which are more attune to nature and
peasant culture. A truly future orientated way of farming must be based on the traditional knowledge
of the people working the land who are able to make full use of local resources while respecting the
environment. This does not mean that all new technologies must be rejected or that no food exports
can be permitted. But it does mean that new technologies must support and further develop sustainable
peasant based food production instead of destroying it and that international trade must be organized to
benefit farmers and consumers instead of a handful trans-national corporations and their stake holders.
1. Choices in agricultural production techniques, consumption patterns and
safety regulations: Potentials and threats to sustainable agriculture.
Production techniques
Concern
Currently, production techniques imposed on farmers are increasingly standardized world
wide, disregarding local situations. With the adoptions of these techniques farmers become more
dependent on industry. While agribusiness corporations promise increased production, farmer profits
and hunger eradication with their technology packages, including genetically engineered seeds, the
results to date are increased corporate profits and farmer losses. Farmers become more dependent on
corporations and credit with need to buy seed and inputs annually and more financially vulnerable.
One harvest failure can mean the loss of the farm. Meanwhile, local production systems are destroyed,
often resulting in greater food insecurity in the community.
The excessive and uncontrolled use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides along with the heavy
machinery of the industry driven model provoke harmful secondary effects on the environment, such as
erosion, loss of tilt and fertility in the soil, damage to biodiversity, degradation of natural resources and
contamination of water resources.
Only production techniques rooted in local communities, controlled by these communities and
sensitive to local ecology can best use and preserve local resources over the long term. Such
production techniques are most likely to produce good quality food, respect people and their cultures
and strengthen local economies. These are some of the key elements which must characterize a truly
sustainable food system.
Family farm and community based systems respond much better to the needs of the (local)
populations than do corporate dependent systems, achieve a higher and more diverse output and are, in
most instances, the best guarantee in achieving food security. The current pressure on small-scale
production and the displacement of farmers is leading to more poverty in the rural areas, more adverse
effects for the environment and increasing food in-security.
Proposals:
That the governments and other international bodies undertake an objective evaluation of industrial,
large-scale food production compared to family farm production based on local resources including
criteria such as: production output, stability of production, adverse effects on the environment, risks
involved for the producer, employment, quality of the product involved, affects on the food security of
vulnerable populations.
That all governments implements policies which limit the adverse effects of industrial production and
effectively support, family farm based sustainable farming practises.
Sustainable use of resources
Concerns
A very grave concern is the privatisation of natural resources. Agricultural and non-agricultural
biodiversity is being patented or brought under severe breeders rights regulations. Both undermine
farmers’ rights to free access to erstwhile common genetic resources and the right to develop and
market their own seed varieties.
Genetic resources are the result of millenia of evolution and belong to all of humanity. Agro
biodiversity represents the careful work and knowledge of many generations of rural and indigenous
peoples. Farming communities have the right to freely use and protect the diverse genetic resources,
including seeds, which have been developed by them throughout history.
Water resources are also falling increasingly into the hands of private industrial interests. This is
another major threat to sustainable food production. Industrial, high input, agriculture is guilty of
terrible wastes of precious water resources because of increased need for irrigation. Some of the major
irrigation projects required by high input production have cost the displacement of thousands of
farmers and the loss of large food production areas.
The adverse effects of industrial production have to be fully recognised and assessed in terms of
environmental impacts, inefficient resource use, and creating food insecurity. The solutions are not
likely to be more of the same i.e. more intrusive technologies, such as genetically modified organisms.
Genuine solutions will require a fundamental change of the dominant industrial model, a change of
attitude towards the role of farmers and their rights, the role of industry, a redefinition of “efficient
food production” , and the necessary changes of policies to implement the new direction.
Proposals
That governments make the sustainable use of natural resources their highest priority to be realised
through support for a family farm based low (external) input agriculture. That governments make longterm investments of public resources in the development of socially and ecologically appropriate rural
infrastructure. That governments establish and support decentralized rural credit systems that priorize
the production of food for domestic consumption to ensure food sovereignty. Production capacity
rather than land should be used as security to guarantee credit. The privatisation of water resources has
to be stopped.
That governments and international bodies act to stop the privatisation of natural resources necessary
for food production to prevent and reverse the corporate ownership and control of these resources.
That the patenting of life forms be forbidden as well as the use of technologies that produce sterile
seeds (GURTS (Genetic Use Restriction Technologies) like the “terminator technology).
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s) should be banned from agricultural production.
Farmers should maintain or regain the full right to grow, multiply and sell their own seeds.
Consumption patterns
Concern
The distance between farmer and consumer is increasing. This leads to unsustainable practises such as
increased transportation of vast quantities of food and increased processing and use of preservatives in
food by the industry.
An important problem created by this increasing distance is the lack of transparency in the production
chain. This can lead to anxiety about food safety and a variety of food crises such as BSE, hormones
and antibiotics in feedstuffs, the attempt to force GMOs down the throats of consumers, the ‘mad cow’
disease scare, to name only a few. The cultural impact of changes to the food system must also to be
considered. Food and its production is often a defining part of a people’s culture and identity. This has
to be respected as such.
Proposal
That governments, financial and trade mechanisms implement policies which promote the trade of
good quality food to the nearest consumers, avoiding unnecessary transportation and processing and
giving the highest possible degree of transparency to consumers. Product labels should always contain
the origin of the product as well as content.
That governments and international agencies, including the United Nations and the World Trade
Organization recognize that food is a basic human right. Everyone must have access to safe, nutritious
and culturally appropriate food in sufficient quantity and quality to sustain a healthy life with full
human dignity. Each nation should declare that access to food as a constitutional right and guarantee
the development of the primary sector to ensure the concrete realization of this fundamental right.
Safety regulations and regulation to promote sustainable practises
Concerns
International policies, especially those formulated within the WTO, undermine the possibilities of
national governments implementing safety regulations to define sustainable practises according to their
own standards. This is a clear threat for the development of sustainable agriculture.
An obvious example of this concern is the ways in which genetic engineering is being imposed. In a
recent move the United States and the European Union tried to bring the discussion on bio safety and
GMO’s – in essence, whether any country has the right to protect itself against the importation of GMO
products - into the WTO through a “Biotechnology working group”. If this succeeds it will circumvent
the more broadly based discussion of bio safety protocols under the Convention of Biological
Diversity.
Proposal
That the international forums develop and commit to policies which respect the right to safe, culturally
appropriate food for all people and support the right of countries to regulate food safety and impose
import restrictions on the basis of clearly defined safety and quality requirements as well as on the
impact of any imports on sustainable domestic food production practises.
-
1. “Globalisation, trade liberalisation and investment patterns" economic
incentives and framework conditions to promote sustainable agriculture.
Concerns
The liberalization of trade and its economic policies of structural adjustment have globalized poverty
and hunger in the world and are destroying local productive capacities and rural societies. It is
unacceptable that the trade in foodstuffs continues to be based on the economic exploitation of the most
vulnerable -- the lowest earning producers -- and the further degradation of the environment.
Destruction of food production capacity in some regions is coupled with surpluses in
others. Structural adjustment programmes, shifting domestic production to intensive production for
exportation, are accelerated under the terms of the WTO and are forcing millions of peasants, small
and medium-sized farmers and indigenous peoples into bankruptcy . In India, in the state of Andhra
Pradesh, more than 400 producers of cotton committed suicide during the winter of 1998 due to the
financial failure brought on by their adoption of agro-industrial technology and the attendant debt. The
WTO policy, which permits dumping, drives intensive production deliberately creating surpluses in
some regions while in others it produces social disasters such as unemployment, rural exodus, social
degradation, violence and suicides. It is also leading to irreparable damage to the environment
including loss of soils, biodiversity, contamination of land, water and air.
There are many examples of food dumping, especially on the part of the United Sates (USA), European
Union (EU) and other industrialised countries into less-industrialised countries. This disruptive
practice is legalised in the "Blair-house" agreement of the WTO. Equally damaging is the dumping,
often in the form of social dumping, of products that characterises the trade from some Southern
countries.
Of course these practises militate against the development of any form of sustainable
agriculture.
Increased ruthless expulsion of rural people from the land into cities.. There is heavy
pressure for deregulation of international investment policies. Such a policy will be disastrous for the
management of natural resources necessary for food production. Governments will no longer have the
possibility of managing land tenure and land use which will facilitate the corporate take over of land
further limiting access for farm families and indigenous communities. World-wide millions of
peasants have been forced to leave the land including two million in Brazil alone in recent years. As the
main basis of sustainable agriculture are the people working the land and taking care of the natural
resources the adverse effects on sustainability are clear.
Through the World Trade Organisation, corporations are imposing genetically
engineered organisms and hormone fed animal products on consumers. For example, European
markets are being forced to accept genetically modified soya from Monsanto and hormone fed meat
and dairy products against people's wishes.
Some countries and corporations are seeking legislation allowing biopiracy in the WTO
through imposing patents on life "Intellectual Property Rights « on genes from plants, animals,
parts of human beings. Everywhere in the world from Brazil to Europe there is heavy corporate
lobbying for this right to control life forms.
Neo-liberal policies push countries into cash crop export production at the expense of
domestic food production. These policies contribute to low commodity prices that are far lower than
the real cost of production. Developing countries are forced to adopt these policies in order to pay their
external debt. Trade and production decisions are increasingly dictated by the need for foreign currency
to meet high debt loads. These debts place a disproportionate burden on rural peoples. These countries
are also constrained to open their borders to the importation of food, which leads to even greater debt.
The governments of the rich countries are giving massive subsidies without limit per
farm in order to compensate for low prices, which allow the transnational corporations to buy cheaply.
In this way public funds are an indirect support for industry more than a support for farmers.
Proposals
Food is a basic human right. This right can only be realized in a system where food sovereignty is
guaranteed. Food sovereignty is the right of each nation to maintain and develop its own capacity to
produce its basic foods respecting cultural and productive diversity. Farmers have the right to produce
food in their own territory. Food sovereignty is a precondition to genuine food security. The concept of
food sovereignty has to be part of the concept of sustainable agriculture.
Farmers should be able, within the context of the agricultural policies to generate their own
production models, according to their conditions and possibilities.
Trade policies must be subsumed under the priorities of food sovereignty and sustainability. Food is
first and foremost a source of nutrition and only secondarily an item of trade. Food imports must not
displace local production nor depress prices. This means that export dumping or subsidized export
must cease. Peasants and small farmers have the right to produce essential food staples for their
countries and to control the marketing of their products.
Food prices in domestic and international markets must be regulated and reflect the true costs
of sustainably producing that food. This would ensure that peasant and farmer families have adequate
incomes.
Peasants and small farmers must have direct input into formulating agricultural policies at all levels.
The United Nations and related organizations will have to undergo a process of democratization to
enable this to become a reality. Everyone has the right to honest, accurate information and open and
democratic decision-making. These rights form the basis of good governance, accountability and equal
participation in economic, political and social life, free from all forms of discrimination. Rural
women, in particular, must be granted direct and active decision-making on food and rural issues.
In international trading agreements governments have to :
-Conduct a world-wide audit on the serious consequences resulting from the inclusion of agriculture in
the GATT/WTO agreements and an immediate correction of existing injustices.
-Immediately cancel the obligation within the WTO of accepting the minimum importation of 5% of
internal consumption. All compulsory market access clauses must be cancelled.
-Remove all negotiation in the areas of food production and marketing from the WTO and from all
regional and bilateral agreements and to create genuine international democratic mechanisms to
regulate food trade while respecting food sovereignty in each country.
-Secure food sovereignty in each and every country giving priority to food production for its people,
social aspects and the environment.
-Give each country the right to define its own agricultural policies in order to meet internal needs. This
includes the right to prohibit imports in order to protect domestic production and to implement
Agrarian Reform providing peasants and small to medium-sized producers with access to land.
-Stop all forms of dumping. To protect the production of staple domestic foods.
-Prohibit biopiracy and patents on life (animal, plants, parts of the human body) including the
development of sterile varieties through genetic engineering.
-Allow countries the right to establish food quality criteria appropriate to the preference of its people.
2. Best practices in land resources management to achieve sustainable
food cycles.
Concerns
Millions of farmers do not have access to land, and because of the neo liberal policies their number is
increasing rapidly. Much of the best land has been withdrawn from small-scale farmers and taken over
by large land owners and TNCs in order to produce (high input and therefor unsustainable) cash crops
for external markets.
Land tenure in communal systems is threatened everywhere. In countries like Mexico it was abolished
under pressure of the NAFTA agreement. If small food producers do not have access and long term
control of the land they work on, the development of sustainable practises is impossible.
The “Popular Coalition to eliminate hunger and poverty” (with main actors the World bank, IFAD and
the FAO) pays much attention to land reform. However the main tool they want to develop is the
privatisation of the transfer of land. This means a strengthening of the current neo-liberal policies
which will create yet more landless farmers.
Proposals
-That truly agrarian reforms are carried out by the governments which will not only distribute the land
to the peasants and farmers, but will also provide means, resources and facilities to turn such land
productive and additionally offer protection and legality to the land distributed. Sustainable
managment of natural resources and the preservation of biological diversity can only be undertaken
successfully from a sound economic basis with security of tenure.
Farmers’ access to land needs to be understood as a form of guarantee of their cultture, autonomy of
community and with the purpose of preserving natural resources for future generations. Land is a good
of nature that needs to be used in a sustainable way for the welfare of all, including those yet to come.
-Women play a central role in household and community food sovereignty. Hence they have an
inherent right to resources for food production, land, credit, capital, technology, education and social
services, and equal opportunity to develop and employ their skills.
3. Knowledge for a sustainable food system: identifying and providing means
for education, training, knowledge-sharing and information needs.
Research
Concern: International and national agricultural research is mainly financed by corporations and rich
countries. This research mostly supports the industrialisation of agriculture based on increased use of
inputs and dependence of external, international markets. It leads to mono-cultures and a loss of agro
biodiversity. It is focused primarily on increasing yields. It tends to develop production techniques
that can be applied on a world wide scale without respecting and making use of the unique local
resources. Its orientation often favours the production of raw materials to feed industry instead of the
production of good quality food for nearby consumers.
Research on genetic engineering, mainly conducted through TNCs fits within these
parameters. In addition, genetic engineering bring a whole category of new risks into the food system
without producing any benefits to consumers or farmers. Through patenting industry is increasing their
control over food production and making farmers (and consumers) more dependent on their inputs and
the commercialisation of the products through their channels. The risks of genetic pollution and loss of
biodiversity, the threat to food safety and quality, and the anti-democratic corporate control over an
essential good combine to make genetic engineering a technology which undermines the key
components of sustainable agriculture.
Proposals:
In general agricultural research should be resource orientated and not input orientated. This research
should be farmer and consumer driven as opposed to the current industry driven model. It should start
from the local production system, trying to improve it respecting the objectives of the people that
depend on it.
Agricultural research (by farmers and other bodies) should be decentralised, and financed and
supported through governments with public purpose rather than private profit as a motivation.
Research to improve environmental sustainability would lead to a de-intensification of current inputintensive agriculture. It must contribute to a strengthening of existing farmer based sustainable
production systems. Family farm based organic agriculture is one of the options that needs more
support.
Training and education
Concerns
Current training and education programs are nearly exclusively focused on the promotion of
industrial agriculture, do not respect the knowledge of farmers themselves and do not support efforts to
maintain or improve the sustainability of family farm based production models.
A program which assumes that farming and indigenous people of the land are “the problem”
due to lack of formal education and training is for the most part misguided. The gravest environmental
problems have consistently been created by the negative interference of national and international
policies that have denigrated local, traditional knowledge and replaced it with “modern” technologies.
Education for sustainable practises must begin with listening and learning from farmers rather than
imposing models formulated by industry.
The policies of the World Bank and the IMF reduce the capacity of governments in
developing nations to provide basic services. Instead of finding a lasting solution to the debt crisis
those policies have only worsened the situation. Many of these debts are unpayable. These debts
should be written off and the destructive structural adjustment program be discontinued in favour of
investment in basic services like training and education, rural
extension and credit programs.
Proposals
- Develop and improve the skills and exchange of experiences among the different regions of the
world, considering the experiences of the Program Peasant to Peasant, which is successfully carried out
in Central America and the Caribbean.
-To promote women to attain the leadership to which they are entitled in the struggle for social
equality, forming an active part of the economic and social life and contributing with their capability
and intelligence to decision making.
-To allow the development of farmers organisations in order to promote economic relations of equality
and social justice, protection of land, food sovereignty, sustainable and equitable agricultural
production based on small-scale farming operations.
-New technologies in education should not be imposed on farming communities. The need for their use
will emerge from the communities and organisations themselves if they are allowed to strengthen
themselves.
Training methods, offering new information or technology, should respect the local knowledge of
farmers by supporting and enriching it instead of degrading and denying it.