Call to Latin American governments regarding the 2021 UN-promoted Food Systems Summit
CLACSO Working Group on Political Agroecology
With the intention of launching “new and bold measures"[1] To advance the achievement of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the United Nations will hold the Food Systems Summit in September 2021. The objective is to agree on proposals to make food systems “healthier, more sustainable and more equitable"[2]In this context, the United Nations called for collaborative efforts to transform how we produce, consume, and understand food. To this end, it proposes five "Pathways to Action."[3] and the broad participation of all sectors: academia, the private sector, civil society, farmers, Indigenous peoples, youth organizations, women, consumer groups, environmental activists, among others. It is mentioned that before, during, and after the Summit, concerted decisions will be made to achieve tangible and positive changes in the world's food systems.
As a result of this call, national and international forums have been held with broad participation from different sectors and countries. Work has also been done to develop documents that will serve as a reference for decisions during the Summit and the Pre-Summit discussions in Rome in July. Some of these documents include the “Voluntary Guidelines for Agri-food Systems and Nutrition” and “Policy Recommendations on Agroecology and Other Innovative Approaches.” These and other documents were submitted as input to the Pre-Summit in Rome, where high-level officials from Member Countries will be present, along with the various positions that countries will take to the Summit in September, to inform decision-making. However, the aforementioned documents, already approved by the World Food Security Council (WFS), have been strongly rejected by civil society movements, peasant organizations, and indigenous peoples.
While the discussion on food systems with the participation of the various sectors that make up global society is very timely, the preparatory process for the Summit already calls into question its means, ends, and results. This is due to the direct participation and influence of the agribusiness sector, driven by its own interests; the omission of the conclusions of the various forums and expert work carried out; and the exclusion of transformative approaches, such as agroecology and food sovereignty.
That is why the organizations signing this statement make an urgent call to governments to respect and include the results of the independent national and international consultation dialogues, organized by civil society and representatives of social sectors, as well as the preparatory work carried out by experts within the framework of the Summit.
A growing number of organizations from academia, Indigenous communities, farmers, youth, and civil society in general have expressed their concerns and demands regarding the clear influence of agribusiness on the preparatory work for the Summit. One of the many pieces of evidence is the “Policy Recommendations on Agroecology and Other Innovative Approaches,” which includes highly ambiguous texts designed to favor the use of inputs such as agrochemicals, or which omit the importance of the human right to fair, healthy, and affordable food.
This appeal argues that the Summit and the documents generated for discussion marginalize sectors historically linked to food systems—namely, Indigenous and peasant communities worldwide and their traditional knowledge systems. Thus far, the process leading up to the Summit has ignored the enormous and historical work these sectors have carried out in establishing sustainable and biodiverse food systems in their territories around the world, and especially in Latin America. This work undoubtedly constitutes one of the fundamental bases for the transformation and new food measures advocated by the United Nations.
On the other hand, the Summit reinforces the central role of scientific knowledge and technology in generating solutions to the complex problems facing food systems today. This emphasis on only one form of knowledge ignores the fact that it was precisely this approach to science—centered on the development of costly and highly risky technologies, such as genetic modification and editing, and more recently, “digital agriculture”—that led to the current crisis.[4] — which are responsible for pollution, negative health effects, social and environmental crises originating in industrial systems, and a technological dependence that limits and inhibits local creativity and innovation.
Finally, the official process leading up to the Summit also fails to recognize agroecology as a scientific, political, and social approach that integrates diverse forms of knowledge and wisdom—including Indigenous and peasant knowledge—and that has the potential to transform food systems to achieve sovereignty and sustainability. Peasant and Indigenous movements worldwide, along with a broad community of researchers and civil society, have based their accumulated evidence on this issue.[5]They advocate for agroecology as the path to building sovereign and healthy food systems. The aversion, within the dynamics of the Summit, to mentioning agroecology is expressed in the restriction of the discussion to broad terms without concrete guidance—such as “sustainable agriculture”—or to technical aspects—such as “regenerative agriculture” and “other innovative approaches.” This deliberate omission of agroecology implies a continued postponement of comprehensive, effective, and responsible strategies, especially considering the state of the planet due to the COVID-19 syndemic.[6]And epidemics like malnutrition, which increase year after year, point to the urgent need to radically transform unhealthy, unjust, and unsustainable food systems. Therefore, by omitting agroecology and traditional food knowledge and systems (indigenous and peasant), the exercise of human rights is also restricted, which we consider illegitimate and exclusionary.
Based on the above, we reiterate:
- The urgent need for governments, especially those in Latin America and the Caribbean, to improve the legitimacy of the Food Systems Summit processes, taking into account the diverse voices calling for real transformative change based on health and other fundamental rights, and configured around food sovereignty and agroecology.
- Our support for the various declarations of the agroecology and food sovereignty movements in Latin America that have expressed their concerns and questions about the Summit process.
- Our support for Latin American collaboration to curb the interests of agribusiness, currently being promoted at the Summit on Food Systems.
July 2021
CLACSO Working Group on Political Agroecology
Latin American Scientific Society of Agroecology (SOCLA)
Brazilian Association of Agroecology (ABA)
Mexican Society of Agroecology (SOMEXA)
National Network of Family Farming (RENAF) – Colombia
Agroecology Research Group - National University of Colombia (GIAUN)
Alimentta – Spain
Association of Afro Descendants Guasá and Bombo – Ecuador
Chapingo Alumni Association in Oaxaca AC – Mexico
National Association of Professionals in Agroecology – Chapingo – Mexico
Organic Waste Bank – Mexico
Blueberries and Trade Company – Mexico
Chair of Food Sovereignty – National University of La Plata – Argentina
Center for Innovation in Sustainable Small-Scale Agriculture AC – Mexico
Research and Resources Center for Development AC – Mexico
Latin American Center for Agroecological Research (CELIA) – Colombia
Misanteco Collective – Mexico
Postgraduate College (COLPOS) – Mexico
Magical Communities – Mexico
Awareness and Research for Health, AC – Mexico
Agroecology Coordination UASLP – Mexico
Dean's Office of Research, Production and Socialization of Knowledge of the National Experimental University of the Central Plains Rómulo – Venezuela
Development and Solidarity Learning AC - Mexico
Producers' Fair – Mexico
Don Gervasio Agroecological Farm – Mexico
Glocal Bej AC – Mexico
Academic Group on Agroecology, Department of Environmental Systems – Faculty of Agronomy, University of the Republic – Uruguay
Huizache Orchard - School - Mexico
Janikua de San Pedro Pareo – Mexico
Kitralma SpA – Chile
La Lagunilla de Santo Domingo Cacalotepec, SPR – Mexico
Laboratory of the History of Agroecosystems – Spain
Maela (Agroecological Movement of Latin America and the Caribbean) – Mexico
Rómulo Gallegos National Experimental University of the Central Plains, Unerg, Venezuela
Agroecological Producers of the Lagoon
RAPAM – Pesticide Action Network and Alternatives – Mexico
Agroecology Network Costa Rica
Network of Sustainable Agricultural Alternatives of Jalisco – Mexico
Chipiltepec Re-origins – Mexico
Agricultural Technical Services of Bajio SA de CV – Mexico
Organic Tanguis Producers Cooperative Society Chapingo – Mexico
SWISSAID Ecuador
Xalapa Agroecological Market – Mexico
New Land – Paraguay
National University of Colombia – Palmira Campus
Pedagogical and Technological University of Colombia
Vitalapia – Mexico
This statement expresses the position of the Working Group Political agroecology and of the other Groups that accompany it and not necessarily that of the centers and institutions that make up the CLACSO international network, its Steering Committee or its Executive Secretariat.
[1] UN. Summit on Food Systems. https://www.un.org/es/food-systems-summit/about
[2] Ibid.
[3] Action Path 1: Ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all; Action Path 2: Adopt sustainable consumption patterns; Action Path 3: Boost nature-friendly production; Action Path 4: Promote equitable livelihoods; Action Path 5: Build resilience to vulnerabilities, shocks, and stresses.
[4] A critical and pedagogical description is available in GRAIN (2021). Digital Control: How Tech Giants Are Moving Into the Food and Agriculture Sector. Available at: https://grain.org/es/article/6597-control-digital-como-se-mueven-los-gigantes-tecnologicos-hacia-el-sector-de-la-alimentacion-y-a-la-agricultura-y-que-significa-esto
[5] Altieri M.; Nicholls I.; Astier M.; Vázquez L.; Henao A.; Infante A. (2021). Documenting the evidence in agroecology: The Latin American perspective. Scientific Bulletin No. 5. CELIA. Available in: http://celia.agroeco.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Evidencias-agroecologicas-CELIA-Boletin-5.pdf
[6] Altieri M.; Nicholls I. (2020). Agroecology in times of COVID-19. Available at http://celia.agroeco.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/ultima-CELIA-Agroecologia-COVID19-19Mar20.pdf
