Globalizing resistance, resilience and hope through agroecology (x-posted from IATP’s ThinkForward blog)

Originally posted September 28, 2015

Part of the meeting included area farm tours.

IATP’s long-time ally in Mexico, ANEC (the National Association of Producers’ Enterprises) held a three-day conference recently (Aug. 31 – Sept. 2) celebrating its 20th anniversary, and more significantly, discussing what should be the next steps in creating an international agenda for agroecology in Latin America. Momentum in favor of agroecology is growing in response to a number of documents and events including our own report on Scaling Up Agroecology, several open letters by prominentscientists, International Seminars in Rome and Brasilia organized by the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the Nyéléni Declaration of the International Forum on Agroecology, and upcoming meetings in Senegal and Thailand, to name a few examples.  Building on that momentum, the meeting’s theme was “Peasant Economies and Agroecology: Social Movements, Knowledge Exchange, and Public Policies.”

The meeting included more than 300 participants from 16 countries and 15 Mexican states. Following the opening remarks of Olga Alcaraz (Secretary of ANEC’s Governing Board) and Victor Suárez (Executive Director of ANEC and former IATP board member), I gave my own welcoming comments (IATP assisted as co-coordinators of the conference). Looking out into the crowd before I began my formal talk, I asked how many campesinos[i] were in the audience; I figured there was a good number due to the many Stetson hats in the crowd. Around a third of the attendees—100 people or so—raised their hands. This, I noted, was an excellent sign, and one of the most exciting and significant elements of this anniversary and conference: there are very few conferences I have attended as a professor or as a staff member at a nonprofit that had so many farmer attendees. Having a critical mass of the people living the challenges we’re confronting is so important, and alongside the numerous extensionists and academics, the ANEC meeting showed the power of bringing scientists and farmers together directly to talk and exchange experiences. What’s more, the scientists in attendance included some of the most prominent agroecologists in Mexico and in the Americas more generally. The full program is available on ANEC’s website, but several highlights include Dr. Victor Toledo of the National University of Mexico, whose nearly 300 articles and presentations have again and again lent scientific support to the vibrancy and importance of campesino agriculture and innovation, and Dr. Clara Nicholls, the current president of the Latin American Scientific Society for Agroecology.

Those two prominent scientists barely scratch the surface of the numerous dedicated, knowledgeable, and deeply passionate researchers in attendance. And in addition to farmers, researchers, activists, university administrators, financial authorities, and representatives of charitable foundations who support agroecology, the new national Secretary of Agriculture of Mexico, José Eduardo Calzada Rovirosa, and the Mexican representative to the FAO, Dr. Fernando Agustín Soto Baquero gave remarks and support.

After presentations by many of these figures, the conference broke into working groups on Day Two. The groups covered five separate topics of fundamental importance to realizing and supporting peasant agroecology:

  • Peasant and social movements in agroecology
  • Technological alternatives and the dialogue of knowledges
  • Gender equality and inter-generational turnover
  • Biodiversity and climate change
  • Nutrition and food sovereignty

What’s interesting is that these five themes are relevant not just in Latin America, but in the U.S., and throughout the world. We’re seeing this in forum after forum, not just at the FAO Regional Meetings nor simply from the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Agroecology in the UK, or even in recent discussion and debate with the European Parliament.  These themes appear in scholarly papers and demands by social movement members themselves. We’re seeing these their relevance in the continued study and implementation of “dialogues between ways of knowing” and alternative practices, in the focus on supporting women and youth and their leadership and also supporting men to assume a wider diversity of new and shared roles. And we continue to learn ever more about the potential for agroecology to support biodiversity, address climate change and resilience, and to enhance nutrition and food sovereignty.

The meeting in Mexico ended with a powerful joint statement, agreed to by acclamation from the conference floor, acknowledging that “Because the model of peasant agroecology is an alternative paradigm, not only for agriculture, food, and climate change, but for of all life against the collapse of civilization in which we live, we consider it a duty of solidarity and an unavoidable political commitment to share it, to divulge it, to advance it for all of our America.” The final statement also agreed to a number of commitments from the attendees, including:

  • To initiate a process in which we involve all to follow up on the agreements of this meeting; to build a space of convergence, of research and investigation in common.
  • To launch the permanent process of building a movement of peasant agroecology.
  • To generate networks between producers and consumers;
  • To push for gender equality at all levels: familial, organizational, societal and institutional, and to demand [corresponding] public policy and programs in all the countries.
  • To fight for and demand opportunities to celebrate and promote the role of young boys and girls in rural areas through educational reforms that recognize multiculturalism and multiple identities, and that provide jobs and other opportunities to facilitate intergenerational relief in the countryside.
  • To promote through all media the continuous interchange of both scientific and peasant knowledge and experiences as an actual alternative of agroecology.
  • To work with peasants, consumers, academics, and civil society organizations to articulate a proposal toward the transition, recognizing legally the collective rights of the indigenous peoples and peasants, promoting the conservation of the richness of biocultural patrimony and pushing for the development of agroecological lands, resilient and adaptable in the face of climate change.

[Some points have been summarized here for brevity; read the full declaration in Spanish or an English translation of the declaration.]

With the FAO Regional Meetings on Agroecology in Africa and Asia to come this November, commitments from the ANEC meeting attendees to participate in worldwide days of action against free trade agreements (October 10–17, 2015), the upcoming United Nations Conference on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris, possible regional meetings on agroecology in Europe and more still, we are seeing the beginning—and maybe beginning to see the middle—of the transition towards a truly just, sustainable, sovereign and agroecological system happening right before our eyes. That said, we cannot wait for it to happen. It will happen because we work together to keep this momentum, collectively and around the world, and keep pushing the agendas of agroecology forward.

See a slideshow of my trip there at the original post on IATP’s blog, or directly through this link.

– See the original post at:

[i] “Campesino” translates more or less as “peasant”, but in Spanish it carries more of its original connotations of “a person of the land” and is not considered insulting as it is customarily in English. It refers to small and medium-scale farmers, who in many cases are experiencing the same struggles around the world—including in the US and Europe. For the purposes of this piece, I use campesino, peasant, and farmer interchangeably.

Posted in Agroecology/Organic agriculture, Cross-posts | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Goals of science vs Goals of scientists (& a love letter to PLOS One)


Fantastic insights–ones that seem to me to be underappreciated or even actively avoided by too many scientists (academics).

Originally posted on social bat .org -- Gerald Carter:

This monster post has been sitting on my computer hard-drive for a few months (seriously). For awhile, I was too scared to publish it. What I’ve written below is based on a (very) informal talk I gave at a graduate student seminar series at University of Maryland. To get the gist, the slides for that talk are below (all the way down) or here.

It’s also based on my stewing thoughts in response to dozens of conversations I’ve had about science and academia over the last year or so. My question is: does being a “good academic” and being a “good scientist” ever conflict? And if so, how often? And more importantly, can we fix academia (or science) to eliminate this conflict?

I’ll get to that in a moment, but I’m going to start with a related discussion of the journal PLOS One. If you are thinking…

View original 6,682 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How to just effing write the thing.


Spot-on advice for early–and established–writers out there.

Originally posted on This Liminal Space:

I started this blog several months ago with a goal: I wanted to improve my writing through the simple act of practising. I hoped that, by stringing enough words into sentences, I would become a ‘good’ writer. I’m still working on it. I’m no expert, so it seems presumptuous to give advice, but a few people have asked me how I continue to churn out weekly posts.

In fact, I write in much higher volume than what appears on this blog. In addition to my weekly posts here, I am often working on a piece of fiction for a book I hope to publish sometime in the next few years. I have recently begun contributing pieces to HippoReads, and that takes time and effort, especially since I am given topics and must write with prescribed themes in mind, something I haven’t done since undergrad. I spend a lot of…

View original 860 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Paper recommendation: Claire Kremen on land sparing and sharing


I share Joern’s admiration for this excellent recent paper. Though it does leave room for further and deeper engagement on policy issues and political science, it is an amazing synthesis covering numerous issues in the “spare/share” debate and deserves to be widely read.

Originally posted on Ideas for Sustainability:

By Joern Fischer

Finally: an authoritative must-read paper that provides an in-depth critique on the framework of land sparing versus land sharing. I highly recommend this new paper by Claire Kremen, published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (and freely available here).

The paper is an impressive synthesis of a vast amount of literature on land sparing and land sharing. While it takes a critical perspective of the framework, it also acknowledges some of the key strengths of the work by the original proponents – including density-based field sampling, and a field design that allows the careful assessment of yield-density relationships.

The paper also addresses numerous other issues that have caused controversy and confusion in the past, including inconsistent terminology, and whether higher-yielding farming will actually spare land for nature. It synthesizes nicely up-to-date insights from a governance perspective, too – showing that without effective…

View original 278 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Not even an “oldie”: Why Don’t We Have Sustainable Agriculture Now?

Just came across this piece by UMN Professor Emeritus Richard A. Levins (not to be confused with the recently-honored Harvard Professor Dick Levins), “Why don’t we have sustainable agriculture now?” His answers to the question are unsurprising, to those who have paid attention, but it is obliging to see him spell out the facts at hand–that most of the power in our food systems is not held by farmers, nor consumers, and thus if we want changes, we have to think beyond simply acting as members of one of those groups, but rather, act to support and generate more power for those groups. In other words, more power for people–for citizens–and less for corporations.

I don’t know the copyright status of Levins’s piece, so here’s an excerpt. Read the rest here.

Why has it been so difficult to bring about sustainable agriculture on a large scale in the United States?  Or, for that matter, why don’t we already have an agricultural system that would better fit most definitions of sustainable? Judging by our university efforts, we would have to answer both questions with something like “We don’t yet know how to do sustainable agriculture”. From this, we assume that if we did, agriculture would then become more sustainable.

In response, my friends in agronomy, animal science, and related fields busy themselves developing non‐chemical weed controls, cover crops, rotation schemes, and hoop houses. A person visiting our universities might also conclude that we have made relatively little progress in sustainable agriculture because farmers don’t know enough about sustainable practices.  In response, we have education and outreach programs to show conventional farmers the errors in their ways.  There is an implicit assumption that once farmers know more about sustainable practices, they will adopt those practices…

I think we would be closer to answering these questions if we face the fact that farmers no longer sit in the driver’s seat of our contemporary food system.   We are entirely too quick to say, for example, that we have problems with farm chemicals because farmers use them, not because farm chemical companies develop, manufacture, and promote them.  Clearly, farmers are not the decision makers in poultry production and much of hog production due to contracting.  Beyond that, the economic environment in which farmers work is increasingly established by agribusiness and retailers, not by farmers…

Let me put it even more bluntly.  Which do you think was larger in 2006, net farm income, or the cost for food packaging materials?  The materials in which farm products were packaged were valued at over $10 billion more than the income of the farmers that produced those products. So we want to change the direction of an $881 billion dollar food system, and we look to a $59 billion component of that system to make the change.  This flies in the face of the principal lesson I tried to get across when I was teaching ECON 101—“money talks.”

From Why Don’t We Have Sustainable Agriculture Now? by Richard A. Levins

Posted in Agriculture, Agroecology/Organic agriculture | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Megacities: Environmental Friend or Foe?

Originally posted on Mark Bessoudo:


Note: This article appears in the Summer 2015 issue of Sustainable Building & Design magazine.

As of last year, more than half the world’s population was living in cities. By the end of this decade, it’s estimated that three out of five people will live not only in cities, but in megacities.

View original 614 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Anthropocene debate: Why is such a useful concept starting to fall apart?

Originally posted on ENTITLE blog:

by Aaron Vansintjan*

Like ‘sustainability’, ‘development’, ‘natural’, or ‘green’, the term is so vague that it can be used by anyone, whether they want to challenge the powers that be, just want to make a quick buck, or score a research grant. While the term can be used to support arguments for action on climate change, it can just as well be used to support digging more oil wells (“oh what the heck, we live in the age of human superiority anyway!”).

View original 1,884 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Political ecology gone wrong

Originally posted on ENTITLE blog:

 By Giorgos Kallis*

Against pro-nuclear ‘ecomodernism’, we should reaffirm the fundamental incompatibility between ecologism and modernization.

View original 1,155 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

GM Foods: A Moment of Honesty

Originally posted on fieldquestions:

Note: the FieldQuestions blog has been dormant for several months due to some academic writing projects and fieldwork. But with a new debate raging on GMO labeling, it’s time to get back to it.

As the latest controversy over GMO’s unfolds – this time it’s about a House Bill that would ban labeling laws – it’s time for a moment of honesty about science and safety. Of course safety is hardly the only bone of contention in GMO debates, but safety is the issue that’s most hotly contested and that’s most central to the labeling bill.

Rep. Mike Pompeo, the sponsor of the bill, writes that activists are misleading consumers with false claims about unsafe food.  Actually, “more than 100 research projects over 25 years” have “affirmed and reaffirmed the safety” of GM foods.

I must point out to my GMO-doubting friends that Pompeo’s statement about the research is accurate…

View original 2,251 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Sustainability Scientist’s Perspective on the ‘Refugee Crisis’

Originally posted on Ideas for Sustainability:

Today, I was motivated to focus on a more social manifestation of our lack of sustainability: the refugee crisis. In my research I tend to focus on the environmental expressions of sustainability problems. But sustainability is also about social sustainability. My perspectives on the refugee crisis are therefore based on some of the framings I have developed while studying the local and global connections in environmental problems.

**Note: This blog post has been written in anger and disgust, and therefore may not be as articulate as I would like.**

I’m distressed by state of humanity in Western Europe.

  • PEOPLE are ‘living’ in appalling camps around Calais, waiting to enter Britain.
  • PEOPLE are ‘living’ in over-crowded refugee centres with little sanitation and facilities.
  • PEOPLE are suffering danger and exploitation, and arduous journeys to arrive in these camps.
  • PEOPLE are drowning as they try to cross the Mediterranean on rubber dinghies.


View original 480 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment