Newsletters Nyéléni in English

The international Nyéléni newsletter is the voice of the international movement for Food Sovereignty. Its main goal is to strengthen the grassroots of the movement, by providing accessible material on key issues and creating a space – for individuals and organisations involved in the struggle – to exchange their experiences and share information.

Voices from the field

Newsletter no 58 - Nyéléni process: creating a joint political agenda for systemic transformation

Nyéléni 2025 process

Indigenous Peoples heading to the third Nyéléni Global Forum

Saúl Vicente Vázquez, Unidad de la Fuerza Indígena y Campesina (UFIC), IPC facilitating committee

Indigenous Peoples have struggled alongside other social movements of small-scale food producers since 1996, when the vision of Food Sovereignty was launched at the World Food Summit in Rome and became a reference in the global debate on trade, food and agriculture; a people-centred vision. The need for stable, healthy and affordable, culturally appropriate food, primarily produced locally and removed from neoliberal policies, privatisation and free trade and dependence on global markets, became the central reference at the global level for all key movements and organisations working on these issues.

Since then, we have managed to build a widespread movement within the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC), influencing the policies of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), through autonomous organisation, mobilisation and the holding of two Nyéléni Global Forums for Food Sovereignty, with important achievements such as the Voluntary Guidelines on Tenure, the Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries (SSF Guidelines), the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), a reform of the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS), along with the adoption of the Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples Mechanism for its relationship with the CFS, the adoption of the principles and elements of agroecology within the FAO and the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition, among others. All these international agreements and policies have led the way and have already begun to influence national and regional public policies and initiatives.

Despite these achievements, over the past decades we have approached a fundamental crossroads. People are increasingly worried and feel increasingly threatened. Governments have so far been unable to find sufficiently robust responses to people’s concerns and to the risks of multiple crises related to climate, biodiversity and extractive practices that continue to destroy the planet. There is a crisis of governance at the UN and at the national level.

We are convinced that we can take a different course, but we urgently need to join forces to push for the necessary changes. We need to fight for economic solidarity, climate justice and against the dominant influence of transnational corporations (TNCs) and big tech companies.

It is in this context that the third Nyéléni Global Forum is taking place, from where we propose to build a broader and stronger movement with a common platform and actions that can make a difference, promoting a profound transformation, a systemic change that allows the participation of the people, of the social movements that advocate for food sovereignty, participatory democracy, community empowerment, human rights, solidarity, cooperation between peoples and peace, and to promote real solutions to these multi-faceted crises.

Nyéléni 2025 process

Near East and North Africa (NENA) region

Jana Nakhal, World March of Women

We prepare for the 2025 Nyéléni Global Forum as our region goes through an Israeli terrorist war, including a genocide on Gaza, a destructive war on Lebanon, and continuous attacks on Syria and Yemen, in addition to a plunderous war by the Gulf princes on Sudan.

The amount and extent of wars that the NENA region has experienced in the last 100 years and is still experiencing, has affected its food sovereignty, amongst other people’s rights in the region.

This, in addition to indirect and political intervention from the global north, has meant that the region’s food sovereignty has also been absent from the agendas of the civil society and states’ policies. Additionally, it is approached through the food security lens, while dismissing a very much needed intersectional approach to the issue. 

Consequently, and while developing the Nyéléni process, we are also producing a list of expectations from and hopes for the Nyéléni Global Forum. We think that this forum is an opportunity for our region to globalize its causes and find solidarity, but also to learn from other contexts and experiences, and to pitch in with our local culture and the heritage of our decolonial movements.

In this sense, the Global Forum seems like an opportunity for our region as well as other regions, to process the rooted intersectional character of food sovereignty, and create a space of sharing knowledge, learning and radicalizing our conceptions and movements.

There is no doubt that patriarchal, capitalist, colonizing powers are launching renewed terrorist offensives on peoples of the global south. And we can only resist them through a collective grassroots and intersectional world view, which posits food sovereignty, access to basic human rights—such as access to housing, land and resources, education, health, etc.—the liberation of peoples and women, as well as personal liberties, as inalienable rights.

Nyéléni 2025 process

Africa region

Ali Aii Shatou, IPACC

The African regional consultation, held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in July 2024, played a central role in framing Africa’s position. Participants reflected on their food systems, identified key issues, and developed a declaration that emphasizes the following outcomes:

Small scale food producers are recognized as the backbone of Africa’s food security. Support for these producers through access to natural resources and recognition of the value of peoples’ knowledge is critical to ensuring sustainable food systems.

Agroecology emerged as a key solution to the interconnected challenges of climate change, land degradation, and food insecurity. The consultations emphasized the need for policy support to scale up agroecological practices, including resilient seed systems and climate adapted farming methods.

A strong call was made for policies that empower women and youth in agriculture. This includes access to resources, promoting youth engagement in agriculture, and ensuring that women’s leadership is central to food sovereignty efforts.

Protecting land and water rights for small scale producers, pastoralists, fisherfolk and Indigenous communities was highlighted as essential to preventing land and water grabbing and ensuring that these resources remain a basis for food production and cultural survival.

Despite numerous positive outcomes, food sovereignty movements in Africa face significant challenges:

Many African governments remain aligned with industrial agriculture models, which prioritize export-oriented farming and undermine local food systems.

Multinational agribusinesses dominate food systems, pushing profit-driven agendas that prioritize genetically modified crops over local, traditional varieties.

Climate shocks are threatening agricultural productivity, while migration from rural areas undermines the sustainability of smallholder farming.

The African movement expects Nyéléni 2025 to be a platform for bold policy advocacy which challenges existing power structures and prioritize people-centred, sustainable food systems. Key demands include policies that prioritize small scale producers, agroecology, and land and water rights, as well as a call for an end to land and water grabbing and corporate control of food systems. There is also a desire to amplify the voices of marginalized groups, such as women, youth, and Indigenous communities, and to foster cross-border solidarity to address shared challenges like climate change and food insecurity.

Nyéléni 2025 process

Asia and Pacific region

Tammi Jonas, Australian Food Sovereignty Network

Sixty representatives from 12 countries and more than 20 global and regional social movements and civil society organisations across Asia and the Pacific came together in Negombo, Sri Lanka, to reflect on the current polycrises caused by patriarchal colonial capitalism, and to collectively build our strategies towards the third Nyéléni Global Forum. From the fields and local halls to the plenary, we shared stories of struggle and resistance specific to Asia and the Pacific, yet generalisable to all regions of the world. Whether at the level of micro-finance peddled to smallholders or World Bank loans to sovereign states, debt is crushing families, communities and countries, propped up by neoliberal policy reforms introduced by the IMF across the region. Disaster capitalism is rife across a region suffering greatly under climate change, from corporate tourism that robs fisherfolk of access to their customary waters while destroying natural barriers against tsunami, to mega-infrastructure projects purported to stem salinity from rising sea levels thereby inundating peasants’ rice paddies.

From land and water grabbing to the new frontier of carbon and data grabbing, colonial capitalism is moving to the cellular and even digital level. The struggle for food sovereignty is founded on knowledge, territory and sovereignty, asserting rights as enshrined in the UNDROP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas) and UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples), which require a profound restructuring of who holds, uses, and shares power and knowledge in agri-food systems, and puts control of the means of production back in the hands of Indigenous Peoples, dalit, landless, peasants and local communities, starting with land, our mother.

Working with invited allies from other key global movements for health, debt justice, climate justice, social and solidarity economy, labour, and gender diversities, we look towards Nyéléni 2025, active in our optimism to work collectively for everyone’s right to nutritious and culturally-determined food grown in harmony with nature, processed and distributed by and within our communities, and democratically governed by us, for us.

Nyéléni 2025 process

North America region

Cicely Garrett, National Black Food and Justice Alliance (NBFJA)

The food sovereignty movement in North America (N.A.) is active, even if decentralized and lacking a core coordination support structure. For the purposes of the Global Nyéléni process, North America region is made up of more than the two nations of Canada and the United States (U.S.). There are over 1,200 sovereign Indigenous, Native, Metís, and Inuit nations that call the land home. Many of these are active in the regional food sovereignty movement.

The food sovereignty and food justice movements have faced a growing set of challenges in both Canada and the U.S., as a systems approach to food is still mostly missing from most levels of government, public sectors (i.e. health, education), and public awareness. In the U.S. in particular, the government has cut thousands of families from food assistance and other social programs and institutions use violence and incarceration against social movement communities.

At the same time, signs of a new wave of popular, mass movements for #BlackLivesMatter, Climate Justice, and actions against Monsanto and other corporations have emerged. New and existing national alliances are strengthening the leadership of working-class families and communities of colour to reclaim their lives and their bodies from structural racism and defend justice and food sovereignty.

The North American consultations happened virtually on May 8th and 9th, 2024. There were 125 participants, including coordination members, support staff and translators, representing over 70 organizations, coalitions, networks, farms and community food centres, based in the many nations that make up Turtle Island. While a lot of conversation focused on the challenges to achieving land justice and food sovereignty, there was a great focus on amplifying successful strategic interventions and root causes systemic changes. There was a renewed call and commitment to solidarity and transformative actions to build collective power. All in all the consultation was a beginning, a catalyst if you will, to continued coordination in route to the 2025 in-person Global Nyéléni convening and beyond. 

Nyéléni 2025 process

Latin America and Caribbean region

Perla Álvarez Britez, CONAMURI/CLOC

In our region, we are determined that this third Nyéléni Global process will help us to strengthen the movement for food sovereignty: to convene a widespread popular movement, to build new relationships between humans and nature and among each other, so that we can leave this beautiful land to the next generations.

In our Popular Consultation in February 2024, we called for new waves of popular agrarian reforms and for the expansion of agroecological food systems to achieve food sovereignty: we are aware that this implies a systemic change.

In our consultation we involved some twenty organisations from the continental, regional and national levels, including peasants, Indigenous Peoples, fisherfolk, fisherwomen, women, youth, the movement for human rights, climate justice and health, among others. Our children deserve a better world, the possibility of a total meltdown is more certain than ever and ever closer if we do not act. Therefore, we call on all emerging movements, the climate justice movement, the feminist movement, the workers’ movement, youth and academia committed to the struggles of the people to join this call to the Global Forum in India in 2025.

We call for joint action with our allies to demand that governments take responsibility for ensuring public policies based on human rights and the rights of nature, to fight against corporations that devastate our territories, to build new subjectivities based on feminist contributions, and to take on diversity as a challenge for the future. We are therefore organising a series of open webinars to build a common agenda.

We hope that the Global Forum will conclude with a powerful call to humanity, to governments and intergovernmental bodies to act with real solutions, not false solutions; a call for peace, with social and environmental justice, with respect for the diversity of life and people. Therefore, from Latin America and the Caribbean we propose a new ICARRD+20 (International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development), where we will have active and leading participation of the people.

Nyéléni 2025 process

Europe and Central Asia (ECA) region

Ia Ebralidze, ELKANA

In recent years the Nyéléni ECA movement has made significant strides across Eastern Europe and Central Asia in fostering solidarity among individuals and organizations committed to food sovereignty and working on connecting local agroecology initiatives. Collaboration with the FAO regional office has amplified civil society voices, enabling meaningful contributions to regional policy debates. The National-level mobilization efforts despite pandemic challenges, have continued their efforts. However, as the region is characterized by diverse political and social cultures, country development levels, and agricultural systems, the Nyéléni working strategy of the region is still under formation. A new strategy aims to achieve clear processes and transparency within the network to build trust and boost strategic action.

Politically the region faces intersecting crises – the Russian invasion in Ukraine, frozen and/or ongoing armed conflicts in Caucasus and Central Asia, as well impacts of war in Palestine,  preceded by the effects of climate change, especially water shortage, and natural disasters resulted not only in loss of thousands of lives, displacements of millions, destruction of civil infrastructure and cutting supply chains but also highly destabilized the whole region. The rise of authoritarianism and populism all over Eastern Europe and Central Asia, using the traumatic and fragile conditions of the populations, the introduction of so-called “Agent laws” backed up by the Russian Federation, results in stigmatization and marginalization of civil society organizations including individuals and organizations working on peasants’ and indigenous’ rights or food sovereignty.

Meanwhile, skyrocketing food prices, disrupted supply chains, and limited access to essential resources—land, water, and labour—are devastating local food producers. These pressures have intensified working migration, marginalized small-scale farmers, and deepened regional food insecurity.

Yet, amidst these crises, agroecology has proven its critical importance. As a low-input, family-based farming system, agroecology offers a foundation for food security and resilience during extreme events. The small-scale food producers, despite immense challenges, remain the backbone of sustainable food systems. To support them, public policies must strengthen civil society and Indigenous organizations, prioritize human rights, include vulnerable constituencies, and bolster local economies.

Boxes

Newsletter no 58 - Nyéléni process: creating a joint political agenda for systemic transformation

Box 1

Political debates in the FAO and CFS get heated as governments stall

The long wave of the Covid pandemic, the food crisis, and multiple conflicts affected political discussion in the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) spaces. Trade shocks and their impact on food systems have been extensively discussed in the Committee on Commodity Problems (CCP). Most countries continued to support neoliberal policies, while some isolated voices mentioned local markets as a response to the global market volatility and fragility. The Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples’ Mechanism (CSIPM) joined the new Committee on World Food Security (CFS)’s workstream to develop an Action Plan that could serve as a roadmap to strengthen the dissemination and implementation of the policy documents agreed by CFS at local, national, regional and global levels.

The same need for implementation was raised by the fisheries movements at the Committee on Fisheries (COFI), where they advocated for the implementation of the Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines at the national level. Another space to promote the food sovereignty agenda was the Global Forum on Family Farming within the United Nations’ Decade on Family Farming (UNDFF).  The IPC Working Group on Youth participated to bring the voices of young farmers and Indigenous Peoples and create a toolkit to facilitate generational turnover in agriculture. In the meantime, negotiations in the Plant Treaty (ITPGRFA) are at a critical stage. By refusing to regulate digitised version of seeds (DSI), governments are allowing corporations to bypass the Treaty rules, creating space for a huge new wave of biopiracy on peasant and Indigenous Peoples’ biodiversity. The coming years will be pivotal for peasants and Indigenous Peoples movements, as efforts will soon converge towards organizing a new International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD+20).

Box 2

Let’s counter the corporate offensive on global governance!

Many fronts important for the food sovereignty movement

The right of communities to grow their food and to feed themselves is increasingly under threat, including in global policy spaces such as the United Nations. Large corporations and their political allies are taking advantage of current wars, climate, biodiversity and social crises to prioritise the industrial food system, serving profits instead of people.

The UN bodies negotiating climate (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – UNFCCC) and biodiversity (Convention on Biological Diversity – CBD) policies are in the cyclone’s eye. Over time, the UNFCCC has fostered a surge of false solutions such as carbon markets that are turning nature into profit, without bringing any benefit to the climate. Risky geoengineering technologies that are supposed to ‘fix the climate’ by manipulating solar radiation or industrially capturing carbon are also on the rise. All these ‘technofixes’ threaten to increase land-grabbing and could destroy ecosystems that food producers rely on. Even though the CBD has shown a lack of ambition and financial power at the last COP16 in Cali, it has maintained a de facto moratorium on geoengineering, thanks to a strong civil society mobilisation.

The digitalisation of agriculture and AI technologies are also entering policy spaces, threatening farmers rights, as seen in the recent UN Summit of the Future. Now or never, solidarity and strong resistance at all levels of power are needed and will allow us to transform the food system.

For more info: listen to the podcast mini-series “Who will control the food system?” , read Trojan Horses on the Farm: Challenging the digitalization of agriculture – and watch the animated video: Big Brother is Coming to the Farm (in 12 languages).

In the spotlight

Newsletter no 58 - Nyéléni process: creating a joint political agenda for systemic transformation

Building a stronger movement: gearing up for the third Nyéléni Global Forum

Launched in 1996 at the World Food Summit, food sovereignty promotes a people-focused approach to food systems, prioritizing locally produced, stable, healthy, and affordable food over dependence on global markets and neoliberal policies. The Nyéléni Forum in Mali (2007) established this vision as a global standard, uniting movements and organizations dedicated to food sovereignty and social justice. In 2015, the Nyéléni International Forum on Agroecology reinforced this, placing peasant, indigenous, family agroecology at the centre of a strategy for addressing climate and biodiversity crises.

Despite these achievements, we now face interconnected crises — economic, social, political, environmental and health-related—which are rooted in the oppressive capitalist system. These crises require systemic, transformative change beyond what existing frameworks offer. To achieve this, a broader, stronger movement with a unified agenda and coordinated action is essential. Expanding the food sovereignty movement with new voices and perspectives can drive impactful change that addresses current global challenges.

In response, the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC) has initiated the “Nyéléni process,” a global mobilization that builds on the successes of the 2007 and 2015 forums. Named to honour the past gatherings, the Nyéléni process calls on social movements worldwide to unite in joint proposals for systemic transformation. The process will celebrate a key milestone in September 2025 at the third Nyéléni Global Forum in Karnataka, India, offering a unique chance to set the agenda for just, sustainable food systems and system change. By fostering an inclusive, intersectional movement, the Nyéléni process aims to inspire and direct coordinated global efforts towards a hopeful, just future.

Building momentum toward the third Nyéléni Global Forum, social movements advocating for transformative change are already shaping the agenda for September 2025. Central to the Nyéléni movement political goal is the development of a joint political action agenda – a pivotal step towards realizing the Nyéléni process’s main objectives. This joint political action agenda will focus on key aspects that have emerged from the Nyéléni regional consultations organised in 2024 to provide a unified direction for social movements in the years ahead.

On a more technical level, while the host organisation is finalising logistics to allow the forum to take place, the regions are already building the delegations that will attend the Global Forum, striving to have all sectors represented, including those organizations or groups outside the food sovereignty movement, and respecting intersectional criteria. Meanwhile, many working groups— composed of representatives of social movements and support organizations—have emerged and are developing the work towards the forum: methodology, communication, fundraising, logistics, involvement of researchers, care and respectful processes, interpretation, and political formation.

Newsletter no 58 – Editorial

Newsletter no 58 - Nyéléni process: creating a joint political agenda for systemic transformation

Nyéléni process: creating a joint political agenda for systemic transformation

Illustration: First poster (of three) created for the Nyéléni Forum 2025

Seventeen years have passed since 2007, when the first Nyéléni Forum took place in Mali, bringing together social movements for food sovereignty from all over the world. The movement has been growing and gaining momentum, advocating at all levels for collective rights, human rights and food sovereignty. However, much remains to be done.

The world is in unprecedented turmoil, and we are all facing deep-rooted overlapping crises. We need a paradigm shift to reclaim the right to shape our own food systems for the well-being of people and the planet.

That is why we are calling for a new mobilization within and beyond the food sovereignty movement, to build our response at both global and local levels, and tighten alliances with climate justice, antiracism, health, labour, feminist, and social and solidarity economy movements and organisations. Systemic transformation is now or never.

We, the small-scale food producers and their allies, launched a new Nyéléni process, inviting global social movements, organizations, and networks to articulate an intersectional convergence towards joint proposals for a system change. Through this multi-year process, we’ve brought together thousands of grassroots organizations and other allies across six world regions, to discuss and put forward joint proposals for a system change and a strong political agenda for the years to come. The Nyéléni Global Forum, to be held in 2025 in India, will be the space for strategy and organization, and to kick off this new phase of the food sovereignty movement.

IPC for food sovereignty

Icon

Nyéléni process, no 58

1 file(s) 0.00 KB
Download

Voices from the field

Newsletter no 57 – A new framework for trade based on food sovereignty

Voices from the field 1

Morocco: appropriating food sovereignty for markets!

Ali Aznague, Siyada Network

In the Arab region, agriculture is at the heart of neoliberal policies that grant generous financial subsidies to large investors while marginalizing small farmers. The World Trade Organization, major donor institutions (such as the IMF and World Bank), and comprehensive free trade agreements have exacerbated this situation.

In Morocco, agricultural policy consists of two strategic plans aimed at furthering commercial and export-oriented agriculture: “The Green Plan (2008/2018)” and “The Green Generation (2020/2030).” Ironically, the government maintains the concept of “food sovereignty” but strips it of its political and social content. Similarly, agricultural policies in the Arab Republic of Egypt, such as Article 79 of the 2014 Constitution, outline the principles of food sovereignty; yet actual practices follow a market logic rather than the emancipatory potential of food sovereignty.

The situation in the Arab region is becoming increasingly difficult and complex due to rising food prices, the resurgence of counter-revolutionary forces, and the Israeli war of extermination against the Palestinian people. Therefore, there is an urgent need to build a militant agricultural movement against hunger and the commodification of food, and to increase pressure to adopt the actual principles of food sovereignty in both words and actions. The principal slogan of the “Siyada Network in the Arab Region” involves establishing partnership relations with countries of the Global South based on cooperation and breaking away from food dependency.

Voices from the field 2

India’s price support policy

Nandini Jayaram, Karnataka State Farmers Association (KRRS), India

The food shortages India faced in the 1960s led the government to adopt measures to boost agricultural productivity. The Price Support policy began during this time with the establishment of the Agricultural Price Commission in 1965, later reconstituted as the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) in March 1985. This body announces the Minimum Support Price (MSP) for 23 crops, including cereals, pulses, oilseeds, and commercial crops, before each cropping season. The MSP acts as a safety net for farmers, ensuring they receive a fair price for their crops even if market prices fall below a certain threshold. It also aims to incentivize the production of key crops, preventing shortages of staple food grains. The government procures food grains at MSP for distribution through the Public Distribution System (PDS), subsidizing food for millions. So, it is indeed a policy that promotes food sovereignty.

Farmers’ movements have long demanded that the CACP revise cost calculations by including rentals and interest for owned land and fixed capital assets and adjust for inflation. We also seek a legal guarantee for MSP to prevent purchases below the announced price. Currently, there is no legal backing for MSP, forcing many farmers to sell crops at lower rates due to inadequate procurement mechanisms and market access issues.

Voices from the field 3

Mali’s agricultural orientation law

Ibrahim Sidibe, CNOP, Mali

Mali regulates markets in a general manner, and for the trade of agricultural products this responsibility has been given to the Agricultural Orientation Law (LOA) and the  Agricultural Development Policy (PDA). Enacted in 2006, the LOA covers all economic activities in the agricultural and peri-agricultural sectors, including agriculture, livestock farming, fishing and pisciculture, aquaculture, beekeeping, hunting, forestry, gathering, processing, transportation, trade, distribution, and other agricultural services, as well as their social and environmental functions. It aims to guarantee food sovereignty and to become the engine of the national economy with a view to ensuring the well-being of the populations.

The Agricultural Development Policy (PDA) is based on the accountability of the State, territorial collectivities, agricultural professionals, farmers and civil society. It emphasizes promoting food sovereignty, the reduction of rural poverty, social advancement of women, youth, and men in rural and suburban areas, partnerships and creating common markets within large economic entities at sub-regional, regional, and international levels. Following developments in national and international contexts (such as the Paris Declaration and new modalities of development assistance), Mali and its Technical and Financial Partners have formally committed, since 2008, to a sectoral approach for the agricultural sector. Currently, institutional or organizational sales are not formalized, and we are still in the process of negotiating an appropriate framework.

Voices from the field 4

Spain’s food chain law

Andoni García, COAG, Spain

The Food Chain Law, passed in Spain in 2013, aims to improve the food chain’s functioning by requiring written contracts for producers that include prices. In February 2020, it was amended to mandate that prices paid throughout the food chain, starting with farmers, must legally cover production costs. This change followed protests by agricultural organizations demanding fair prices. In December 2021, the law was further amended to incorporate the EU directive on unfair trading practices and several COAG proposals, achieving significant regulatory elements within the European political framework.

Two key instruments enforce the Food Chain Law: the Food Information and Control Agency (AICA), which collects complaints from farmers and other entities, conducts inspections on price abuse, contract issues, and other abuses, and the Chain Observatory, which conducts price and cost studies across the value chain for each agricultural and livestock production. The 2021 reform also prohibits selling at a loss by large distributors, ensuring products cannot be sold below purchase price. However, the law faces limitations due to competition laws, which prevent collective price negotiation, price fixing, or strict linkage of cost and price studies to contracts. Moreover, the law aims to protect each farmer and livestock breeder individually, not collectively, except for certain exceptions for cooperatives.

Voice from the field 5

Territorial markets in Colombia

Juliana Millán, RENAF, Colombia

In RENAF we have created a campaign to identify territorial markets across the country, enhancing their visibility and combined success. The aim is to understand and share the many different ways in which these diverse markets work, their various forms of association and production, including traditional production that does not need or use agrochemicals. RENAF members and other regional small producers are empowered by access to this information, which has facilitated collective network responses to crises such as COVID-19, empowering territorial markets and enabling their survival, and enhancing ecological food diversity.

Voice from the field 6

Canada’s supply management system

Cathy Holtslander, National Farmers’ Union, Canada

Canada’s supply management system provides stability in the dairy, laying hen (egg), broiler chicken, turkey and hatching egg sectors by controlling the amount produced, preventing shortages, and keeping under-priced imports from being dumped into Canada’s market. A transparent, cost-of-production pricing formula ensures that farmers receive a fair income. As a result, Canada does not experience wide fluctuations in supply and prices – nor the need for massive government subsidies to farmers.

Farm size remains small to moderate, particularly when compared with these commodities in the USA. Each commodity is governed by farmers elected to their provincial marketing board according to provincial regulations under federal framework legislation. Supply management allows farmers to invest in equipment, training, animal husbandry, genetics and land stewardship for the future while requiring them to produce the right amount of product at the right time and meeting quality standards.

The system also insulates dairy, eggs and poultry from currency exchange fluctuations and other shocks that affect export-oriented and import-dependent sectors of the food and farming system. It also avoids competition for the markets of farmers in other countries who are providing food for their own populations.

Export-dependent dairy nations (USA, Europe, New Zealand, Australia, Argentina) frequently attack the system in order to get access to Canada’s market. Within Canada, corporate actors attack the system both to force prices paid to farmers below the cost of production (benefiting food manufacturers), and as a bargaining chip to gain concessions for other sectors in trade negotiations.

Some smaller farmers who direct-market would like to see more flexibility in the system. To improve its ability to face these challenges, supply management boards can improve and expand new-entrant mechanisms to provide more affordable access to production quotas, and encourage alternative production systems that promote renewal, resilience and response to consumer desires for diversity, and develop a ‘triple bottom line’ approach to cost of production pricing formulae to ensure environmental and social costs are not externalized.

Boxes

Newsletter no 57 – A new framework for trade based on food sovereignty

Box 1

A trade system that prioritizes peasants’ rights: Collaboration over competition

Efforts to build a developmental and equitable trading system have occurred in the past. One notable example is the Havana Charter, which aimed to ensure full employment and domestic industrialization in the post-war international trade order. It sought to establish comprehensive rules for trade, investment, services, and business and employment practices. However, under pressure from corporate lobbies and the United States, the charter was abandoned and replaced by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which eventually evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Another significant initiative is the Global System of Trade Preferences (GSTP), established over three decades ago by the Group of 77 (G77), a coalition of developing countries. The GSTP aims to boost trade among developing nations. In late 2022, Brazil ratified commitments under the GSTP, reigniting international interest in the agreement, which is now just one ratification away from coming into effect. However, these initiatives are often constrained by the prevailing neo-liberal framework, which focuses on promoting trade in agro-industrial products and technology-intensive manufactured goods.

What is needed now is an alternative framework that emphasizes cooperation and collaboration over competition, and solidarity over sanctions. This framework should support rural economies, enable diverse food systems to thrive, and ensure that the rights of peasants, Indigenous peoples, workers in both rural and urban areas and migrants are central to transnational trade.

Box 2

A brief history of agricultural marketing boards

The dismantling of public marketing boards has been a major feature of the shift in agrarian policy from state-led to market-led development.

Historically, marketing boards have a mixed record. Many marketing boards were extractive in nature, used by governments to squeeze surpluses out of their farming populations and to contain urban wages through price restraints on staple foods. This speaks to the particular geopolitical context in which many of them arose in the 1960s and 70s, during which time development strategies heavily favoured industrialisation. Corrupt and authoritarian regimes have also used marketing boards as a means of consolidating power by placing political appointees on to the board.

Despite some of these flaws, marketing boards performed valuable functions. They were often an important instrument to ensure the distribution of staple foods. Mexico’s former grain trading agency, CONASUPO, for example, offered an official purchase price for basic grains, providing a buffer against international market swings and subsidized competition. Marketing boards continue to operate in a number of countries, notably in sub-Saharan Africa, where they handle the majority of the marketing and distribution of export crops.

The criticism that is often levied against marketing boards must also be balanced against the alternatives. State monopolies in agricultural marketing systems have now largely been replaced by the oligopolistic practices of multinational food buyers and retailers. There is thus ample scope to think (again) about the potentials and pitfalls of public marketing boards.

More in here.

Box 3

Rethinking the regulation of agricultural markets for agroecological transition in Europe

The wave of farmers’ protests that have swept across Europe in recent months, including in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Greece, Poland, Romania and Lithuania, have set in motion new calls for rethinking Europe’s approach to the regulation of agricultural and food markets.

While the particular politics, concerns and demands vary by country, these protests all respond to the extraordinary cost price squeeze farmers are experiencing: in 11 EU countries, prices paid to farmers fell by more than ten percent from 2022 to 2023. The economic precarity experienced by farmers must be set against the backdrop of the longer-term structural crisis in European agriculture.

It is clear that current EU policy frameworks, in particularly the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), has not been able to meet the scale of the current challenge to ensure fair prices and decent incomes for farmers. This was not always the case. The CAP used to deploy a whole panoply of instruments aimed at maintaining relatively high and stable prices for farmers producing foodstuffs deemed strategic, so as to ensure sufficient production to cover the food needs of European populations and reasonable prices for consumers. These tools were nearly all abandoned from 1992 onwards in order to comply with the commitments of the World Trade Organisation’s Agreement on Agriculture, with market regulation instruments replaced by direct income support for farmers. Over time, this support was made conditional on compliance with an increasing number of standards.

What lessons can be learned from the successes and failures of past policies to regulate agricultural markets, in Europe and elsewhere in the world, in order to rebuild the CAP on the basis of food sovereignty and enable the agroecological transition?

This key question will be the focus of a groundbreaking conference taking place on ‘Rethinking the Regulation of Agricultural Markets for Agroecological Transition in Europe’ organised by the European Coordination Via Campesina with partners. Scheduled for 3-4 March 2025 in Brussels, the conference will bring together academics, peasants, and small- and medium-sized farmers from across Europe to promote the co-construction of knowledge in service of a new CAP that is fit for purpose.

More information on the conference, here.

In the spotlight

Newsletter no 57 – A new framework for trade based on food sovereignty

In the spotlight 1

It’s time to change the way we do global trade

Since its creation, social movements, including La Via Campesina, have fought against free trade, particularly the World Trade Organization (WTO), uniting farmers’ organizations worldwide. We’ve mobilized in cities like Seattle, Cancun, Hong Kong, Buenos Aires and Geneva. These struggles have significantly contributed to the WTO’s ongoing crisis, and it has remained stagnant since the 2001 Doha agreements.

Despite these victories, free trade continues to harm the global peasantry. The 1995 WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) still authorizes the aggressive trade policies of the US and EU while criminalizing market regulation and support for small producers in many Southern countries. Furthermore, bilateral and regional free trade agreements (FTAs) have proliferated: exacerbating the destruction of market regulation and opening markets to agro-industrial imports (including GM crops); promoting stricter rules on intellectual property (TRIPS+) including enforcement with criminal punishment for infringement; and consolidating corporate control over land by dismantling collective lands ownership. All of which has strengthened transnational companies’ control over food systems and deepened the state of poverty that peasant farmers find themselves in.

Since 1995, international agricultural trade dependency has increased, although it should be remembered that this dependence is still very relative, since only 15% of the world’s food production goes through international markets. However, when La Via Campesina representatives demand governments to leave the WTO, they are systematically refused, even by those sharing our values. Governments view severing ties with international trade as unthinkable and potentially disastrous.

In June 2022, during the anti-WTO demonstrations in Geneva, social movements highlighted the institution’s extreme fragility. Southern countries continue to protest against unjust trade rules, particularly the AoA. This process has been led by India, which defends its market regulation model. Amid intense geopolitical conflict, criticism of the Western-dominated trade order has grown. However, despite our efforts, an agreement, though minimal, was still reached in Geneva to maintain the WTO. WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala seeks to save the institution through proposed reforms.  Yet the WTO reform is doomed to fail because of its own inherent contradictions and it will eventually disappear. Social movements must aid its demise by proposing a new framework for international trade that countries can adopt without fear of isolation. This alternative would offer a more equitable system benefiting global populations.

The goal is to create a discussion and negotiation tool for governments, especially those in the South dissatisfied with the WTO’s unfair rules, encouraging them to negotiate a new international trade framework. Success requires this process and our proposals to be well understood and supported by peasant and small-scale farmer organizations and their allies. The process must be inclusive with accessible language and intensive internal training.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Others Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP) serves as a profound inspiration for this work. This was both an internal process within La Via Campesina to build a tool supported by farmers’ organizations globally and a diplomatic process involving institutions (such as the Human Rights Council for UNDROP, UNCTAD, FAO, and others for the international trade framework) and states (like Bolivia’s key role in UNDROP). UNDROP took 17 years to be adopted by the UN General Assembly. Similarly, this work on trade will take time. As peasants, patience and endurance are our hallmarks, and we are not afraid of the long haul.

An international trade framework based on food sovereignty is essential. We must build it, step by step from the ground up, convincing governments and UN institutions that the time has come to create international trade by and for the people.

In the spotlight 2

Territorial markets: Food chains building stronger communities

Behind the huge power and visibility of the corporate food chains, closer-to-home markets are actually playing a vital role. Far away from the business spotlights, and with much less support and resources, they feed a large part of the world and have proven to be much more resilient to crises and shocks.

A new report published by IPES-Food reveals that local markets and food chains boost food security and resilience, provide nutritious food for poorer populations, support livelihoods, protect the environment, and strengthen communities. These ‘territorial markets’, include a wide range of realities in all parts of the world, from public markets to street vendors, cooperatives, urban agriculture, community kitchens, online direct sales and many more.

While agribusiness uses more than two third of agricultural land and resources and keeps pretending to feed the world, data shows that huge volumes of fresh foods are supplied outside of corporate chains, often direct-to-consumer. In sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, small-scale and family farmers produce 80% of the food supply; while global chains account for only roughly 15-20% of total food consumption. In Dhaka, Bangladesh, over 400 markets feed more than 25 million people every day, and 95% of the city’s urban poor purchase most of their food from these fresh food markets. In Mexico, open-air and traditional markets account for half of all fruit and vegetables that are sold for retail; in Kenya, Zambia, and Nicaragua, it is over 90%.

In contrast to this we have seen, in recent times, the pandemic, the invasion of Ukraine, and escalating climate shocks leading to supply chain chaos, volatile food prices, empty shelves, and a surge in hunger levels. In times of crises, corporate food chains tend to break down, while localized food supply offers a much more adaptable and equitable solution. Additionally, territorial markets support the livelihoods of millions of small-scale producers and nurture strong food cultures and diverse therapeutic traditions in a more sustainable way. They bring people together, opening spaces for popular education and strengthening social fabric. All over the world, interest is now growing in the variety of vibrant food provisioning systems that exist beyond global food chains and corporate control.

However, territorial markets are delivering these benefits against the current of unfavorable policies and economic conditions. Around the world, investment and government support has been skewed towards industrial export agriculture, global trade and large-scale infrastructures. Meanwhile, informal markets and street vendors lack basic services like clean water and sanitation facilities, while facing unsuitable, corporate-oriented health and hygiene rules – as well as the risk of violent closures and evictions. Wholesale markets have often been starved of government investment.  

Globally, 70% of smallholders’ needs for financing go unmet, and in Africa less than 10% have access to formal credit. Without adequate storage facilities, they are forced to sell at low prices when there is a glut on the market. Institutional purchasers like schools and hospitals lack on-site processing capacity, driving them to larger corporate vendors.

There is clearly an urgent need to invest in territorial markets. There is also huge potential for governments to strengthen and support these markets, making them a cornerstone of food security, vibrant economies, and climate resilience for years to come.

Read more in IPES-Food’s new report : Food From Somewhere

Newsletter no 57 – Editorial

Newsletter no 57 – A new framework for trade based on food sovereignty

A new framework for trade based on food sovereignty

Illustration: Marcia Miranda

The current international trade order was established to support the expansion of transnational companies and to keep colonial powers in control of the world’s natural resources.

The World Trade Organization, the IMF, the World Bank, and free-trade agreements have been used to dismantle national policies that ensured people’s sovereignty over national resources and local markets. For this reason, this edition of the Nyéléni Newsletter analyzes the impact of the current global trade system on national policies, particularly those that ensure fair prices for food producers and consumers.

We are striving to rebuild food sovereignty, which means changing the global trade system and allowing countries to develop policies that ensure a decent livelihood for all people, particularly small-scale food producers. Minimum support prices, public stock-holdings, supply management, public food procurement, and so forth: there are plenty of inspiring examples of public policies that ensure a fair income for rural people, guaranteeing that how our food systems are organized is a democratic discussion and not left to the ‘markets’.

This edition of the Nyéléni Newsletter calls for an end to the exploitative model of capital expansion through free trade agreements. We explore the urgent need to break the hegemony of free trade and build an alternative that upholds solidarity and internationalism, and respects the diversity, autonomy, and food sovereignty of nations and communities.

La Via Campesina, ETC Group, Transnational Institute

Icon

A new framework for trade, no 57

1 file(s) 0.00 KB
Download

Voices from the field

Newsletter no 56 – Challenging the financing behind green and blue grabbing

Voices from the field 1

Herman Kumara, National Convener, NAFSO; General Secretary, WFFP

The climate crisis is being used as an opportunity for vested interests to propagate false solutions like blue carbon, so-called ‘nature based solutions’, seawalls, the 30×30 agenda, debt-for-ocean swaps and more. Under these false solutions, farmers, fishers, Indigenous peoples and peasants are being displaced from their original lands, water bodies and forests, dispossessed of their customary tenure rights, and are facing disruption to their peaceful living with nature.  We urge caution against adopting ineffective climate solutions like 30×30, carbon credits, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Marine Spatial Planning (MSP).

Instead, the focus should be on restoring the legitimate traditional, customary, or Indigenous tenure rights of fishing communities and redistributing such rights where they have been infringed upon. Fishers are among the most vulnerable groups during storms and cyclones and the victims of the climate crisis as they often work in open waters and are exposed to the elements. It is important that the state provides better accessible early warning systems and search and rescue operations to ensure the safety and security of fishers during such events. States should prioritize community-centred climate solutions based on traditional ecological knowledge and practices of small-scale fisher communities, instead of technocratic and market-based approaches such as seawalls, tetra pods, blue carbon, and conservation carbon credit solutions. WFFP is fighting back against this trend by strengthening campaigns that seek to educate and warn policy makers and communities against false solutions and instead push for real solutions that are developed in consultation with the affected communities.

Voices from the field 2

Tom Goldtooth IEN presentation to United Nations permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples, April 2024

Last year we requested a special session [of the UN Indigenous Peoples permanent forum] to address climate false solutions, the green economy and their impacts on Indigenous peoples. This request included a moratorium on all false solutions activities until affected Indigenous peoples from the south to the north can thoroughly investigate the impacts and make appropriate demands…

I have been involved with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) since 1998. Our network has complied over 20 years of undeniable evidence showing how carbon markets, pricing and carbon offsets mechanisms do not reduce emissions at source.

Carbon markets provide the loophole that many of you have talked to us about. They provide a loophole the fossil fuel industry needs to continue extraction, combustion and with a fossil extractive economy that is wreaking the harmony of mother earth and father sky. We are long overdue for demanding a permanent moratorium on false solutions being negotiated in article 6 of the Paris [climate] agreement. The UNFCCC has goals to finalise these negotiations this year, after 2 decades of polluters profiting from causing human rights violations, land grabbing, division harm and exploiting Indigenous Peoples through carbon markets and REDD[1] plus.”

See the whole event here.

Voices from the field 3

Extract from the Statement of the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty at the Convention on Biological Diversity COP 15 (Conference of the Parties), December 2022

[…] This is the first biodiversity COP since the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants (UNDROP) was ratified, and small-scale food producers should be respected as rights holders by referencing UNDROP alongside UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) in the new Global Biodiversity Framework and the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). Every time those in power fail to uphold the human and collective rights of the best custodians of biodiversity, you fail to uphold your duty to protect biodiversity.

We sit in these meetings as people of the land, for the land, listening to so-called debates about land and life, wondering what will happen if you continue to separate people from nature with false solutions? What is Nature to each of you here?

Some propose DSI (Digital Sequence Information), to save biodiversity, as if you can just de-materialise our Mother and piece her back together and hope she functions better. Turning nature into capital is anything but ‘living in harmony with nature’. The ‘nature-based solutions’ debated here and at the climate COP put nature on a ledger and then sell her to polluters at the expense of biodiversity, land, and the rights of Indigenous Peoples, small-scale food producers, and local communities.

We sit in these rooms bearing grim witness to the greed of a handful of big exporting countries and their corporations who seek to destroy 30 years of multilateral agreements. It is easy to see why the most powerful and least accountable prefer to set targets towards a so-called ‘nature-positive world’ than talk about Mother Earth. You don’t need to lock up land away from her careful custodians as proposed in the 30×30 target, you need to protect her from corporate and state greed.[…]

[1] More info in the newsletter no. 32.

Boxes

Newsletter no 56 – Challenging the financing behind green and blue grabbing

Box 1

The Africa Carbon Markets Initiative

The Africa Carbon Markets Initiative (ACMI) claims to “help shape and harness the potential for carbon markets in Africa”. Its steering committee boasts the who’s who of fossil fuel, big tech and agribusiness supporters—including The Gates Foundation who promote industrial agriculture and GMOs across Africa and The Bezos Earth Fund of Amazon corporation. The ACMI claims that “with carbon credits valued at roughly $2 billion globally and potentially growing 5-50x by 2030, high-integrity carbon markets could provide significant benefits to African people and be a critical source of climate finance for the continent.” Yet they recognise that “there is intense scepticism that credits are used for greenwashing, an excuse to keep polluting” and that “some people are asking whether carbon credits, particularly large land-use projects, are causing Africans to lose their land to facilitate continued pollution by rich countries—driving concerns about a form of recolonisation in Africa.”

Despite these astonishing admissions and no real answers for them, ACMI is pushing ahead with trying to expand and build buy in for carbon markets across the continent. Yet this push is going against the principle of historical responsibility and justice which demands that climate finance should be publicly funded from developed country governments and not reinforce the debt spiral in Africa.

Box 2

Land grabs from green economy

By 2030, Shell intends to offset 120 Megatonnes (Mt) in emissions a year, which represents about 85% of current annual CO2 emissions of all citizens and companies in the Netherlands. As of August 2022, Shell is or had been involved in 30 ‘nature based’ offset projects, in 17 countries. An analysis of Shell’s pathway to 1.5 degrees shows that it is essentially the same as its 2 degree pathway, but with an added plan to “extensive scale-up of nature-based solutions”, specifically planting trees over an “area approaching that of Brazil”. When Shell plants trees, they often just plant one tree species. Usually this is the fast-growing eucalyptus tree, which can actually damage biodiversity in the surrounding area. A lot of land is needed to offset Shell’s emissions. The land they choose is often located in the global South. For this, (agricultural) land belonging to local communities is used, which can lead to human rights violations and food shortages.

More info here and here.

Box 3

What is carbon farming and why is it a false solution? 

Carbon farming is an offset scheme wherein farmers are paid to sequester carbon to offset continued carbon emissions of a company, country, or individual. Carbon farming schemes involve paying farmers to implement ‘climate-smart’ farming practices that supposedly increase the amount of carbon stored in their farms. The change in practices is used to verify the creation of carbon credits which are sold to corporations or governments, through ‘carbon markets’. Though the buyers are still emitting greenhouse gases, they claim to have ‘offset’ these emissions. Demand for offsets is increasing, with 82 countries and 44% of the world’s 2000 largest companies having made ‘net zero’ commitments. Most existing carbon farming schemes rely on carbon stored in trees with agroforestry and tree plantations, but the number of ‘soil carbon farming’ schemes is growing.
 
Soil carbon offsets are dangerous for climate justice and food sovereignty because…
 
Soil carbon offsets increase the entrenchment of unsustainable corporate-controlled seeds and agrochemicals. Schemes often encourage or require specific farming practices that rely on proprietary seeds and agrochemicals, like using affiliated pesticides to control weeds instead of tilling. Algorithms and digital farm machinery that are needed to earn carbon credits may require specific crop varieties and practices to function.
 
Soil carbon offsets are an excuse for data grabbing, increasing the power of the food and technology corporations that control the digital platforms which monitor and market soil carbon credits.
 
Soil carbon schemes drive farm consolidation and mechanisation, giving an advantage to the largest farmers because large farms can more easily adopt the technology and practises and also generate large quantities of carbon credits.
 
Carbon farming schemes accelerate the loss of traditional agricultural knowledge by teaching that traditional practices degrade soil and by locking farmers into contracts requiring ‘climate-smart’ practices.
 
Not all carbon is equal. The “carbon is carbon” assumption behind offsets ignores the violence, health consequences, and economic and socioecological damage created locally around mines, fossil fuel extraction and factory farms. In addition, biological carbon in soil cannot compensate for the release of fossil carbon.
 
Offset schemes distract from real solutions and shift public subsidies from agroecology to carbon farming.

Box 4

Sinking seaweed to fix the climate: a new wave of false solutions

While the earth is burning, investors keep finding new and ever more unlikely ways to increase profits without reducing carbon emissions. Oceans are now in the line of fire: a new seaweed—or “macroalgae”—industry is invading coasts and seas under the umbrella of the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change. By mid-2023 there were more than 1,300 companies involved in commercial seaweed, including more than 200 start-ups.

The new big profit-focused promise of the so-called “seaweed revolution” is to sell carbon credits, pretending industrial seaweed captures carbon. Surfing on the “blue carbon” wave, even though there is no formal carbon market for seaweed cultivation yet, industrial players such as Canopy Blue, The Seaweed Company and Running Tide are already selling carbon offsets to corporations on the voluntary market.

However, their promises do not hold. First of all, seaweed does not capture very much carbon. Once the maths is done, it appears that industrial seaweed ecosystems may actually be net emitters of CO2. Increasing industrial seaweed acres could therefore lead to more CO2 in the atmosphere, not less.

Second, the development of marine monocultures and the use of chemical inputs could cause harm to existing ecosystems that naturally capture carbon and provide livelihoods to local communities. The potential risks of seaweed plantations include shading the seabed, seagrasses and natural algae, altering local ocean currents, contaminating genetic diversity, and robbing plankton of vital nutrients, affecting not only marine ecosystems but also coastal livelihoods.

Finally, carbon financiers are attracted to the ocean for its vast size, presented as a huge unexploited gold mine. But the oceans are not empty. Industrial seaweed farms would need to occupy a significant portion of global coastlines, which would deprive local communities of their rights to live and to work in all these coastal areas.

On land, the expansion of monocultures has been destroying forests and its inhabitants for decades. If we don’t put an urgent end to the so-called “seaweed revolution”, industrial algae plantations will follow the same course, destroying marine ecosystems and marginalising coastal communities even more.

To learn more, you can read: “The Seaweed Delusion: Industrial seaweed will not cool the climate or save nature”

Box 5

Nyéléni process, towards a Global Food Sovereignty forum 2025

Voices from our allies

Mariam Mayet,  African Centre for Biodiversity, acbio.org.za

From 10 to 11 June 2023, I represented the African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB), as part of the global food sovereignty movement, at a meeting of social movement activists convened by the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty in Rome Italy.

The main aim of my participation was to contribute towards building new strategies to transform the global system towards economic, social, gender, race, climate, and environmental justice, to inform and co-create the Nyéléni Process. Rich discussions were had regarding the need to address and co-generate discourses at the intersections of the biodiversity, climate change, agriculture, and food systems crises, particularly in the Global South, and strengthen alternatives to capitalism, which is driving us all towards ecocide.

We reflected on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly that it has accelerated the processes of the disintegration of the capitalist project through: the sharp rise in inequality across the globe; economic decay, precarity, and vulnerability; authoritarianism and fascism; racism; femicide; and conflict and social unrest. We committed ourselves to the Nyéléni Process as being pivotal to supporting the active resistance against extractivist/capitalist encroachment, which will build upon continued critical analysis and reflection, and deconstruct and challenge corporate and false narratives on transformation.

We fully understand that capitalism, while in its dying stages, is in fact doubling down on extraction and dispossession – voraciously and constantly seeking new frontiers to exploit – particularly in biologically and mineral resource-rich Africa. The Rome meeting represented an important kick-off point for the Nyéléni Process, which is viewed as an opportunity to strengthen and support democratic and progressive spaces rooted in mass-based, democratic organisations and networks, driving toward the systemic transformation of the global food system.