The message from farmers’ groups in Tanzania is clear. They
don’t want an agricultural system that is dominated by large transnational
companies; they don’t want to be dependent on purchasing synthetic fertilizer,
pesticides and herbicides; and they certainly don’t want a commercialized seed
system that sees them being forced in to purchasing new seeds every season.
‘Tell your government to stop helping big corporations
coming to Tanzania and profiting from small-scale farmers in order to build
their corporate empires,’ was just one of Janet Moro’s impassioned messages she
had for the UK. As the founding director of Sustainable Agriculture Tanzania
(SAT). SAT’s focuses on organic farming techniques that use only locally
available resources means farmers are entirely self-sufficient and the soils
and local environment are protected.
It’s not just SAT; there are other projects across the
country where small-scale farmers are rejecting synthetic inputs and mechanized
production methods. Chololo Eco-village in Dodoma, a particularly dry part of
the country, is another such example. Between 2011 and 2014 farmers have more
than doubled their crop yields following the adoption of techniques such as
crop rotation, intercropping and open pollinated breeding for improved seeds.
Tanzanian farmers do not need schemes like the G7’s New
Alliance to improve their yields and continue to feed the world’s population.
This argument is all the more convincing because these farmers aren’t driven by
an inherently anti-corporate agenda; they simply want to see their produce
flourish. And what increases yields the fastest involves utilizing local
natural resources, rather than purchasing foreign synthetic inputs and
technologies. It is clear that the future of our food systems rests on ensuring
small-scale farmers – not corporations – are the ones in control.
Schemes such as the G7’s New Alliance for Food Security and
Nutrition, which, despite its name, is all about pushing policy reforms to
expand industrial agriculture and attract private investments. In the three
years since its launch, the New Alliance has been widely criticized by numerous
civil-society groups that have highlighted how the policy reforms and
investments have had an array of disastrous outcomes. From landgrabs to farmer
debts, and from policy reforms that favour businesses over farmers to seed law
amendments which endanger century-old farming practices, the evidence is clear:
the New Alliance is going against the interests of small-scale farmers, rather
than supporting them.
Stanslaus Nyembea, the policy analyst and legal officer at
Mviwata, a nationwide farmers’ group that represents some 200,000 small-scale
Tanzanian farmers is worried about the encroaching takeover of Tanzania’s
agriculture sector by transnational corporations. ‘We see a big risk that foreign
corporations want to control the agricultural sector in Tanzania, especially
the markets around seeds, fertilizers, chemicals and other agro inputs,’ he
said. ‘This is a serious risk to small-scale farmers who might lose their land,
which is integral to their livelihoods.’
The former rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De
Schutter, an expert on food security reports that the New Alliance is
‘seriously deficient in a number of areas’, in particular for its silence ‘on
the need to shift to sustainable modes of agricultural production’, its failure
to ‘support farmers’ seed systems’ and its inability to recognize ‘the dangers
associated with the emergence of a market for land rights’. He goes on to
berate the New Alliance for ‘only selectively [referring] to existing
international standards that define responsible investment in agriculture’ and
only paying ‘lip service’ to addressing the needs of women, which is
‘effectively creating the risk that women’s rights will be negatively affected
as a result’. Most crucially for a programme designed for food security and
nutrition, it is ‘weak on nutrition, hardly acknowledging the links between
agricultural production, food and health, and the need to support healthy and
diversified diets’.
No comments:
Post a Comment