Voices from the field

Voices from the field: Testimonies from children belonging to food producer’s communities

1 – Colombia

My name is Juan Simón Briceño Ávila and I’m 7 years old. I come from a town called Barinitas in Venezuela. Now we live in a hamlet called Brasil in Viotá, Cundinamarca, Colombia. We live in the country and I like living here, because I’m free to walk and play. My favourite game is boy superheroes, and I play football with my school friends. My favourite dish is egg salad, with lettuce and carrot.

The eggs come from some chickens that we have in the coop behind our house. The lettuces come from seeds that we plant in our vegetable patch, and the carrots come from seeds that we also plant in our vegetable patch. The lettuces are ready to be picked when they’re big and have many leaves, and the carrots are ready when they have big leaves and the stem is sticking out (the neck of the carrot). I like this salad because I know how to make it, but how I make it is a secret.

When it comes to household tasks, I like to give the corn to the hens, although sometimes when I go to collect the eggs I drop them, and sometimes they break. I also feed the rabbits. We have two rabbits : Ramona and Pepe. Ramona is sweet-natured but Pepe doesn’t like being cuddled. They really like the leaves from a plant that’s called Yellow Dock, but there’s another plant that we don’t give them because it’s bad for them. Its leaves are wrinkled and dark green. I also plant sweet corn and beans with my mum. These are both multicoloured, like a rainbow, and I plant potatoes with my dad and little brother Martin. We like planting lots of things so we always have different things to eat.

2 – Spain

My name is Salome Schranz Moreno and I’m 12 years old. I go to the Doce Olivos school in Órgiva, La Alpujarra (Granada, Andalucía). My family and our friends go to an allotment to work on a collective vegetable patch project. A few days ago we went there for a specific reason : some weeds had grown in the allotment that stopped us from planting. So we decided to do a “torna peón”* there to speed things up. I put myself in charge of the kids because they’re all between the ages of 3 and 6 years old, and I’m 12.

While the mums and dads got to work getting rid of the bad weeds, I looked after the little ones. First I told them some stories and then we went to a nearby park. We played, laughed and had fun. Eventually it was dinner time. We went back to the allotment to go for dinner. There was omelette and every kind of vegetable-based thing to eat. We ate, and we enjoyed it.

We also go to that allotment to do other things, like sowing and planting. My mum, my dad, Yvon and Raúl, who are two friends of ours, my brother and I, we all went there to harvest olives, including my brother who’s 3 years old. When we harvest, we do it from 10am until 5 or 6pm. From 10 to 10.30am we prepare the netting, from 10.30 till 1.30pm we harvest, from 1.30 to 2.30pm we rest and have lunch, and finally from 3pm to 5 or 6pm we carry on harvesting. After a few days we take the olives to the press and then we share out the oil.

*El torna peón is : when someone offers to help a friend in their allotment or farm, and after the person has been helped, they in turn help their companion.

3 – Philippines

Elsa Novo, president of the NKP (Aeta Womens Federation) and Fernando Luis, area manager of Peoples Development Institute (PDI) conducted an interview based on three questions (1) What are your favorite dishes ; 2) What tasks in food production do you like most ? ; 3) What are your favorite games and places to play and have fun ?) with 10 Aeta indigenous kids in Zambales participating, ages ranging from 7 to 13 with 5 males and 5 females respectively.

From the group, Miss Elsa Novo, president of the Women Federation of the Aeta Indigenous People in Eastern Barangay of Mt. Pinatubo, Municipality of Botolan facilitated the workshop on drawings, while Fernando Luis noted the answers during the interview.

Of the ten kids, six of them like Filipino meat dishes like sinigang pork, pork adobo and chicken adobo while the other four like fruits and Filipino vegetables dishes like pinakbet, kare-kare and others.
On the second question regarding agricultural activities, four of them like planting vegetables, root crops and legumes, two like watering the plants and the other two kids like weeding, but one Aeta child likes plowing and the other one likes to do fallow work.
On the question of games, three of them like basketball and badminton, and 7 Aeta kids like to do traditional games such as hide and seek and Chinese garter.

Voice from the field 4 

Breastfeeding and food sovereignty for infants and young children – experience from India

Dr. JP Dadhich MD, FNNF [1]

The Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life and continued breastfeeding for two years or beyond along with appropriate complementary feeding after six months. Breastfeeding is a sustainable and sovereign method of providing food and nutrition to infants and young children, which is critical to the survival, health, and development of children as well as health of their mothers.

In India, about 25 million babies are born each year out of which only 41.6% infants are breastfed within one hour of birth. Moreover, only 54.9 infants under age 6 months are exclusively breastfed and only 67.5% children continue breastfeeding at age 20-23 months [2]. It means, a large proportion of children below 2 years are deprived of their right to have a sovereign method of feeding and are dependent on commercially manufactured and marketed products. This is more critical in infants below 6 months for whom breastmilk is the only recommended food.

The underlying reason for the dismal status of breastfeeding practices is a very slow action over a decade on various policies and programmes on infant and young child feeding. This is evident from the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative (WBTi [3]) report , which reflects there is a need to effectively implement the law to protect breastfeeding (IMS Act [4]), universalize maternity protection, provide access to breastfeeding counseling services by trained and skilled personnel to all pregnant and lactating mothers including during special circumstances like emergencies and HIV and effective monitoring and evaluation of breastfeeding programmes.


[1] Director – Technical, Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India (BPNI) and member, International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) Global Council.

[2] http://rchiips.org/NFHS/pdf/NFHS4/India.pdf y https://data.unicef.org/topic/nutrition/infant-and-young-child-feeding/

[3] http://www.worldbreastfeedingtrends.org/GenerateReports/report/WBTi-India-Report-2015.pdf

[4] The Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 1992 as Amended in 2003 (IMS Act).

Boxes

Box 1

Fighting against the impact of “Big Food” advertising on children in Colombia

Children have been seen as a lucrative market niche for big food companies responsible for producing ultra-processed edible products, i.e. those with high concentration of sugar, salt and fat. Such products and also sweetened drinks have been one of the main reasons for the growing numbers of diabetes and obesity among children and teenagers around the world. In Colombia, 15.7% of the children aged 5-17 years are overweight; the rates in some provinces such as San Andres Islands are close to 30% putting close to similar rates as Mexico, the country known for having the highest rates of child obesity in the world.

The obesity pandemic among children has expanded at a very fast pace in Colombia: companies see children and teenagers as main consumers of nutrient-poor products. 96% of all advertisement targeted to children in one of Colombian major TV channels was on junk food in a sample done in 2012. Corporations target young audiences through aggressive advertising campaigns, especially via television, the internet and billboards close to schools. The Colombian parents association “Red Papaz” and FIAN Colombia in cooperation with Educar Consumidores, Vital Strategies and Global Health Advocacy Incubator have therefore developed a broad campaign in the country called “Do not eat more lies; do not give them to your children”. This campaign highlights 1) that children are not just consumers but first and foremost rights holders under special protection in the Colombian constitution; 2) that the obesity pandemic is not about wrong individual life-style choices but rather the result of systemic choices favoring a corporate diet. In this sense, the campaign urges the Colombian state to mandatorily ban advertisement of junk food for children and to transform the existing agro-food system towards agro-ecology and food sovereignty.

Box 2

Children and fishing, in Katosi community

“Though Katosi landing site in Mukono district central Uganda has grown into a commercial landing site handling fish for export, the volume of activities at the landing site has declined over the years. Images of a very lively and busy trading centre when we were children are so vivid in my mind. The sunrise off the lakeshore gave it a golden look. Between 9- 12 in the morning, the place would get busier with boats landing fish, and women processors and traders from all over the country would come to the landing site to buy fish. My mother was entitled to fish from her two fishermen sons in-law daily. Fish was our daily food, eaten in all forms, shapes and sizes as the whole village would be filled with the aroma of smoking fish in the evening.” Margaret Nakato, Coordinator Katosi Women Development Trust (KWDT), and Executive Director WFF.

The recently concluded baseline study by KWDT in fishing communities reveals that children constitute more than 54% of the entire population in fishing communities (KWDT Baseline report for project inception, 2017). Access to adequate fish for consumption at household level is essential to meet the dietary requirements of children. However, reduced access to fishing grounds and fisheries resources, coupled with fish export has greatly reduced fish consumption by children, as much as adults (if not more).

During an interview with one of the women in Nangoma Landing site she narrated: “if your husband is not a fisherman, you cannot eat fish these days. And even when he is a fisherman, sometimes he cannot get fish for selling and again fish for eating at home”.

KWDT has actively engaged women and children in development activities and enhancing their role in restoring the fish stocks as well as reducing pressure on the fisheries sector by supporting women into diverse income generating activities. The best way to ensure children’s right to fish consumption is through ensuring access to fish for women and the local communities.

Box 3

“Sem-Terrinha”: Brazilian landless workers’ movement, children and food sovereignty

Founded 34 years ago, the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) is organized around three main objectives: Struggles for land, agrarian reform and for socialism. We are organized on several fronts; namely production, health, youth, culture, education and human rights.

The participation of our children, the so-called “Sem-Terrinha” (Landless Children), within the organization has been present since the beginning in the first occupations, because we believe everyone should be involved in the collective struggles.

This conception led MST to develop over time activities with our children as protagonists. Some examples are: children’s “cirandas” (pedagogical spaces for development and care); gatherings of the “Sem-Terrinha”, the Journey of Struggles for rural schools, as well as publications such as the “Sem-Terrinha” newspaper and the “Sem Terrinha” Magazine.

Our most recent experience with the “Sem Terrinha” has been the Cultural Journey: entitled “Healthy Eating: A Right of All”, this Journey has taken place since 2015 and is at the heart of the debate on Popular Agrarian Reform. It involves children and adolescents in rural schools and encampment schools throughout the country. The main objectives of the Journey are:

1. To strengthen and disseminate different experiences from different regions on healthy eating and its relation with Popular Agrarian Reform;
2. To work together with families on the issue of food and food production in both settlements and encampments;
3. To contribute to the food education of landless families and to the general struggle for the right to adequate food free of pesticides;
4. To strengthen initiatives to reorganize school canteens;
5. To study and debate the relations between healthy eating, food sovereignty, agroecology, peasant agriculture and Popular Agrarian Reform;
6. To introduce, in elementary schools, the debate on agroecology and on practices of ecological agriculture;
7. To resume the debate on how the link between education, socially productive work and educational content needs to be guaranteed.

During the Journey hundreds of activities were carried out throughout the country – specific studies in schools on eating habits and food history, understanding what is produced in settlements and research on agro-eco-systems, workshops related to local cooking, field practices and agroecology experiences.

The founding elements of MST’s struggles were also present during the activities of the Journey, i.e., there were theatrical interventions, awareness campaigns, public hearings, marches seeking to denounce the use of pesticides and of transgenic seeds, as well as the monopoly and food standardization that has been imposed by transnational corporations and agribusiness.

During the Journey itself, substantial changes took place in the schools where the debate was promoted, abolishing the use of soft drinks and processed foods from school meals, introducing agroecological food produced in the settlements, starting vegetable gardens to supply schools and initiating a native seed bank.

Educate for an understanding that eating is a political act! This is a great challenge that motivates our struggles! Fight and build a Popular Land Reform!

Box 4

“SATU PO IMPARAI” (Learning from the countryside) Environmental and food rural education project

The project was founded in 2007 to bring the school world closer to the rural one while valuing the multifunctional role of farms. For the farms it also aimed to enhance their role in passing on the knowledge, heritage and flavours of local food production while highlighting environmental, social and economic sustainability.

The three principal actions are: school walks on educational farms, development of networks of educational farms and the School Canteen Actions, which we will discuss here.

Stakeholders in this action are the Province of the Medio Campidano, The Regional Agency of Laore Sardinia, the local health office, the schools, the farms, the managers of the school canteens and relevant associations that established a working group in 2011 with the following work programme:

1. Analysis of the actual situation of school canteens;
2. Development of a public tendering document for quality, 0km sustainable school meals;
3. Distribution of the tendering document to local councils, monitoring of the school canteen service according to the document and experimentation with new practices.

The Tendering document was developed in June of 2011 and sent to the 24 local councils in the province who provide school canteen services. The document contained the following proposals:

1. 70% of produce should be certified quality (DOP, IGP, Organic), traditional, local and with a short supply chain, of which 30% should be organic;
2. Snack foods should be provided from local products;
3. A food education plan should be developed;
4. Other elements of environmental sustainability: water networks, disposable dishware and cutlery should be biodegradable and compostable, ecological detergents and soaps, energy-saving appliances, waste management.

The tender document was adapted in 2011 by three councils and through 2012 and 2013 was adopted by the majority of the rest.
In light of subsequent monitoring and recognition received we can say that the project (about which a publication came out in 2015) obtained its objectives with a margin well beyond its best expectations.

The project has given food a “social” value, stimulating positive community relationships and built consciousness and awareness between producers and consumers. It has also opened up a broader discussion about “food education”, equality (equal and quality school food for all), as well as Food Sovereignty.

In the spotlight

The place of child nutrition in food sovereignty

In our political work to raise awareness, educate and mobilize for food sovereignty, what importance do we attach to feeding our daughters and sons around us? Is this a minor issue, of interest only to mothers? Below are some thoughts on why the topic of child nutrition and the active participation, in their own right, of children in our movement is vital for the future of food sovereignty.

From malnutrition to childhood obesity – what is the dominant discourse?

The public discourse on nutrition and childhood has been dominated by a medical-scientific approach: for decades, the main concern has been undernutrition, so the debate has centered mainly on anthropometric measures such as statistics about weight index by height and age or vitamin deficiency. Recently, increasing rates of global obesity and the overweight have started attracting public attention. FAO’s latest report on The State of Food Insecurity in the World (SOFI) states that although malnutrition rates continue to decline, the obesity rate continues to rise. The issue of childhood obesity is therefore likely to become a priority issue on the policy agenda of international agencies.

Obese and overweight children and adults were often seen as problems of high-income countries. However, the prevalence of these disorders is growing in low and middle-income countries, mainly in urban areas. In Africa, the number of overweight and obese girls has doubled from 5.4 million in 1990 to 10.6 million in 2014. In 2014, about half of all overweight girls were from Asia, while in Mexico it is estimated that about 30 per cent of girls are overweight.

What factors explain this pandemic? There are different approaches. On the one hand, international institutions and agencies propagate an individualistic and moralist approach that subtly blames families for not feeding children properly and letting them watch television or the Internet all day long instead of playing sports. According to this approach, the urban lifestyle, with its specific organization of the day, its types of work and its social relations, has changed “traditional” (read “healthy”) dietary habits and replaced them with more “modern” habits, generated by so-called development. The solution proposed by this approach is to better inform and educate consumers so that they make healthier food choices in the supermarkets and encourage them to exercise.

The geopolitics of the “Western” regime

Obviously, this approach does not question the historical, political, socio-economic and cultural determinants that determine the type of food produced, nor the factors that shape the dietary habits of communities. It is an approach that ignores power relations, oppression and discrimination. It does not ask who makes the decisions and how the urban or “western” diet was imposed on the whole world, a diet rich in fats, sugars, refined carbohydrates, meat and animal products but low in vegetables, legumes and coarse grains. The increase in consumption of these products is closely linked to the agricultural policies of the world’s major agricultural powers. These policies introduced a series of incentives (production subsidies, public research, export subsidies), which led to a concentration of production on basic cereals (wheat, maize, rice) and oilseeds. On the other hand, the liberalization of trade in agri-food products and fisheries, as well as the promotion of foreign investment in the entire food chain, have played a central role in the expansion of the role of transnational corporations throughout the food chain.

This global food system made it possible for the diet of “junk food” or highly processed edible foods – such as french fries, refined flour pasta, hamburgers and sweetened beverages – to spread so rapidly around the world.

The “Western” diet has not only imposed itself through physical factors such as geopolitics and economics. It has also relied on a cultural superstructure that allowed it to change attitudes and thus change dietary and cultural habits in order to align them with the goals of the agro-industrial food system. All you need to do is look at the aggressive advertisements of big companies whose aim is to attract the attention of children and young people in order to train their tastes and eating habits from an early age. The table below on the situation in Colombia illustrates this.

School canteens and peasant agriculture

So far, the main meeting point between child nutrition and food sovereignty has been school canteens and public policies to promote peasant agriculture. Public school feeding programs are part of social policy in several countries around the world. Although these programs have shown to have a positive effect on both regular school attendance and improvement in nutritional status, coverage remains relatively low and is estimated at 15% of the child population. Countries such as India, Brazil and South Africa have important school feeding programs. In the case of Brazil, public school feeding policy aims to guarantee the right of pupils to a healthy diet and, for this reason, has been designed as part of the public policy to encourage local peasant agriculture by establishing a compulsory quota for the provision of at least 30 per cent of food from peasant agriculture to each school. Similar systems exist at the municipal level in Europe and the United States. See below the experience on the Mediterranean island of Sardinia.

The transcendental importance of child nutrition

A healthy and nutritious diet is essential for the healthy development and growth of children during pregnancy. It is perhaps at this stage of human life that food is most important: not only does it lay the foundations for all subsequent physical and spiritual development, but it gives taste, aroma, flavour, colour and texture to the deepest bonds that connect us, through food, to our families and communities, and to our homeland.

Despite this transcendental importance, the movement for food sovereignty has given little thought to the issue of child nutrition. Is it because this topic is perceived as not being part of the traditional “male” sphere of power but rather related to the spaces associated with femininity and reproduction/childcare?

The fact is that major institutions and health professionals are defining the interpretation of this dimension of food. More recently, food and nutrition has become the focus of major corporate nutrition initiatives such as those of the Gates Foundation.

Several questions then arise: what is our understanding of child nutrition from a food sovereignty perspective? How do we build this perspective in dialogue with the children themselves, but also the teachers, cooks, farmers, vendors, midwives, health educators and others in charge of our food and our community health practices? How can we achieve a fair distribution of tasks and time devoted to reproductive care between mothers and fathers so as to feed our children in a healthy and nutritious way? Within our movement, it is time to give child nutrition the importance it deserves.

Newsletter no 33 – Editorial

Kids and food sovereignty

We are aware that to achieving a world where peoples’ food sovereignty is a reality demands crucial discussions about food systems, access to and control over natural resources, political and legal debates on gender and on seeds, as well as social struggles and mobilization. But one essential element among these – and progressively gaining more attention – is the role of children.

The future of the struggles for the realization of food sovereignty and the right to food depends on how our children are aware of the challenges regarding how we produce our food, by whom and for whom it is produced. Instead of perceiving children as a market niche, as big food companies have been, we see the youngest generations as the foundation for transforming our food systems. The examples presented in this edition show us how this has been happening all around the world.

Many children also shared drawings and testimonies with us, willing to tell us directly about their perceptions and experiences. These many drawings, pictures and testimonies from children from Ecuador, the Philippines, Colombia and Spain, provide us with inspiration and hope for peoples’ struggles for their right to food and food sovereignty.

FIAN International

Voices from the field

Voices from the COP23

Manuel Pereira Araujo, MOKATIL – East Timor:
We believe that the Earth is our body, water our blood and sunlight our energy.

Marthin Hadiwinata, Kesatuan Nelayan Tradisional Indonesia (Traditional Fisherfolk Union of Indonesia) – Indonesia:
The United Nations is promoting ‘blue carbon’ as a solution to climate change. Blue carbon refers to the carbon that is stored in coastal ecosystems, including mangroves. The mangroves can absorb ten times more carbon than a pristine forest. However, the so-called blue carbon schemes are similar to Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD). The problem is that these schemes exclude people who have relied on the costal ecosystems for generations as a source of food and medicine. The blue carbon schemes are also leading to the criminalization of fisherfolk. Under coastal law in Indonesia, people who try to gain access to these ‘protected’ mangroves can be arrested and charged. Blue carbon further endangers people by privatizing their means of subsistence.

Katia Avilés-Vásquez, Organization Boricuá for Agroecology – Puerto Rico:
In Puerto Rico, after the hurricanes of September 2017, the forces of nature quickly turned into disastrous social problems created by the men in power. Those most affected were women. In almost every work brigade that was organized to get people resources, the major emergency was getting women to safety because the conditions that were abusive before had become literally life or death. In one instance, in Vieques, we used a big luggage that was brought in with food to help a woman escape violence. Women bear the brunt of the damage when a disaster happens. But then we also have the biggest role in the recovery.
Most of those who are organizing in the work brigades are women. However, the spokespeople and decision makers still tend to be mostly men because the characteristics associated with those who pick up the microphone and stand up are mostly masculine characteristics. We are taught to refuse the feminine. In talking about a just transition in the Caribbean, it is very important to challenge this notion of what we consider to be strong, what we consider to be leadership, and what we consider to be success.
Mother Earth is feminine. The powerful feminine sent us a hurricane to shake us up and remind us that these men need to stop their addiction to oil and fossil fuels.

Massa Koné, Global Convergence of Land and Water Struggles – Mali:
It was important for us to show our resistance by being at COP23. First, I think that out of the many actions we did at COP23, the Ende Gelände (‘Here and No Further’) direct action against the massive German coal mine was very symbolic. Germany should not have held the COP23 while they have a big open pit mine. It is like they were laughing at us. Second, I think that the capitalist system is finishing off the Earth. It is going to drown it. Therefore, we need to converge together to come up with concrete proposals to get out from where we are.
What we need to do is to bring together the interests of all the different streams: the peasants, fisherfolk, pastoralists—everyone together. We cannot develop an answer for just one stream, but for all of them. All of them get their answers through concrete solutions that we call agroecology and food sovereignty. This proposal includes the acknowledgement of common rights, the autonomy of seeds, and autonomy for everyone involved in food production. At some point, as we grow, we will be a large mass going against the system. This mass will amplify our struggle. We will get results one day when a whole mass of people stand up and go against the system.

Fanny Métrat, Confédération Paysanne – France :
The solutions being proposed by governments at COP23 benefit multinationals. Governments never speak about reducing reliance on fossil fuels or reducing consumption and waste. They speak instead about carbon markets. Carbon markets give corporations who have the most money the ability to pay, in order to continue polluting. Carbon markets are a false solution because they promote corporate profits. Governments and corporations ask peasants to accept new genetically modified organisms and all the latest technologies while continuing at the same time to promote big factory farms.
It is important to recognize that false solutions are rooted in patriarchy. We see only men at the negotiating tables and in corporate board rooms. It is the men at COP23 who decide which false solutions they will put in place. In contrast, in La Via Campesina the feminist fight is very strong. We understand the importance of feminist revolution. And with more and more gender parity in La Via Campesina, we will succeed at being a structure that speaks the voice of feminism with force.

Boxes

Box 1

Carbon burning, oceans rising

Though the actual meetings took place in Bonn, Germany, Fiji was the official host of COP23. Fiji, a country made up of 330 small islands in the South Pacific Ocean, claimed it did not have the infrastructure to host such a global encounter. While Germany continues to burn coal and other fossil fuels that produce 53% of its electricity, the 870,000 citizens of Fiji face the deadly wrath of climate change. Heavy flooding and rains are becoming an ever-increasing reality.

One major threat to Fiji and all coastal nations are rising sea levels. Sea levels are currently rising 3.4 mm per year — the fastest rate in over 2,000 years! The immediate cause is additional water added to oceans by melting ice caps, and made worse by the expansion of water as it heats up. But this is all linked to increased GHG emissions from the continued burning of fossil fuels. In July 2017, a gigantic break in Antarctica’s Larson ‘C’ Ice Shelf sent 5,800 square kilometres of ice into the ocean, producing a new iceberg four times the size of London, England. All coastal and island nations, their people and ecosystems, are at great risk as the climate crisis worsens. Efforts to promote food sovereignty and agroecology as a pathway for reducing emissions help to promote justice for the peoples of low-lying nation states, including Fiji.

Box 2

What is capitalism?

In an open forum during COP22, LVC and ally participants gave short statements defining capitalism. They said that capitalism is …

– a system that goes against collective property, against the collectivity and socialization of the means of production.
– an economic system based on profit that does not take into account general interest.
– not just an economic system but a political system because governments’ policies support accumulation. People are not allowed to decide how to organize production.
– a global system. Capitalists solve their crises by becoming more and more global. They impose exploitation on all people around the world. Capitalist development is not for the nation but for a small group of powerful people.
– individualism and each for their own. In contrast, the people go for solidarity!
– the exploitation of nature. Small farmers do not produce excessive CO2 emissions, capitalist agribusiness does!
– a system where only some members of our community are valued. People are given value based on their location, gender, race, and sexuality. Capitalism creates disposable people.
– a destructive system that forces us to work together to overcome it.

Box 3

Convergence

Just Recovery & Just Transition

In the struggle for climate justice, we have so much to learn from one another and even more to do together. Collective action, matured through moments of critical reflection with allied movements and organizations, is creating the conditions for greater and greater convergence. Today, the global struggle for Food Sovereignty has become an integral part of the larger movement for climate justice, just transitions, and just recoveries.

As is described by the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance (GGJA) in their COP23 Call to Action:

Just Transition is a vision-led, unifying and place-based set of principles, processes and practices that build economic and political power to shift from an extractive economy to a regenerative economy that recognizes the rights of local ecosystems and nature to maintain their vital natural cycles of life. This means approaching production and consumption cycles holistically and waste free. The transition itself must be just and equitable; redressing past harms, ecological restoration and creating new relationships of power for the future through reparations. If the process of transition is not just, the outcome will never be. Just Transition describes both where we are going and how we get there.

Just Recovery is a visionary framework promoted by environmental justice and labor communities for recovery efforts during moments of climate disasters. A Just Recovery calls for not restoring the same level of failing and extractive fossil fuel and extreme energy infrastructure, but instead follows the leadership of frontline communities in defining what kind of recovery they need, and takes the opportunity for rebuilding post-disaster to transition and secure renewable energies and regenerative economies that can create jobs, protect the environment, and lead to resilient communities.

When the Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015, the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance released the “We Are Mother Earth’s Red Line” report, outlining 5 core weaknesses about the global climate agreement:

1. The Agreement relies on voluntary versus mandatory emission cuts that do not meet targets scientists say are necessary to avoid climate catastrophe.
2. The Agreement advances pollution trading mechanisms that allow polluters to purchase “offsets” and continue extremely dangerous levels of emissions.
3. The Agreement relies on dirty energies and false promises including hydraulic fracturing (fracking), nuclear power, agro-fuels, carbon capture and sequestration and other technological proposals that pose serious ecological risks.

4. The operating text of the Agreement omits any mention of human rights or the rights of Indigenous Peoples and women.
5. The Agreement weakens or strips the rights of reparations owed to the Global South by the Global North.

The United Nations own analysis of the pledges made by countries of the world in adopting the Paris Agreement in 2015 assesses that these pledges are likely to still lead to global temperature increases of nearly 3 degrees celsius over the coming century. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) found that even if every country that made an emissions-cutting pledge in the Paris Agreement keeps its promise, the world will still fall 12 to 14 gigatons short each year of keeping temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius over preindustrial levels.

Just Transition solutions, including models of Food Sovereignty, Sustainable Housing and Energy Democracy, are where we are seeing inspiring campaigns that refuse the false choice between economic development and the protection of land, water, the health of Mother Earth, and the health of our communities. Just Transition also recognizes that Nature’s needs are also our own and must be elevated and protected by legal rights, and maintained through life-sustaining systems of exchange and reciprocity.

To learn more visit Grassroots Global Justice Alliance.

Box 4

Geoengineering: new threats to food sovereignty

One of the most dangerous proposals around climate change is called geoengineering: the large-scale manipulation of the global climate by technological means to counteract the symtoms of climate chaos.

Behind the geoengineering proposals exists a confluence of interests, among them powerful industries and military forces. For countries and their transnational corporations with high levels of carbon emissions, geoengineering appears as a “technological solution” which would permit them to continue emitting greenhouse gases while doing more business — selling technologies for lowering the temperature or remove and store carbon.

Geoengineering means using technological means to intervene in terrestrial ecosystems, oceans and the atmosphere. In some cases to block or reflect part of the light from the sun which arrives to the Earth and so lower the temperature, in others to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it in the sea floor or in the soil. It also includes techniques to manipulate the local and regional climate such as cloud seeding and other proposals to redirect or dissolve hurricanes. All the proposals have serious environmental, social and geopolitical impacts. None of them are directed at changing the causes of climate change — if they work it would be only to manage the symptoms. Climate change will continue to increase, because geoengineering creates captive markets.

One proposal very commonly discussed among geoengineers is to create a huge artificial volcanic-type cloud over the Arctic by injecting sulphates into the stratosphere in order to block the light from the sun. According to scientific studies this could lower the temperature but also unbalance winds and rains in the southern hemisphere, disturbing the monsoon in Asia, producing droughts in Africa and increasing floods in Latin America, threatening water sources and the food supplies of millions of people. There would also be the need to continue injecting sulphites for an unspecified amount of time because if interrupted temperatures would rise rapidly and the impacts would be even harder to deal with than before the process was started. In spite of these enormous risks, the geoengineering program of Harvard University in the United States is already planning experiments in Arizona, in indigenous territories.

Another of the techniques being promoted — especially since the signing of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change — is the so called Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), and Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). CCS is a technology invented by the oil industry in order to extract oil from extreme depths. Pressurized Carbon Dioxide is injected in order to push out the oil, with the CO2 theoretically remaining at the bottom. The oil industry stopped using the technique (originally called Enhanced Oil Recovery) because it was not financially viable. However, if now there are subsidies and payments available for “sequestering” and storing carbon dioxide, they can create a circular business: they can extract more oil, making increased profits — in spite of being one of the principle culprits of climate change.

Even more perverse is the proposal Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). This involves enormous plantations of trees and crops to capture carbon while they grow, and then burn them to produce bioenergy, while burying the carbon produced by the combustion using CCS systems. To maintain the temperature below 2 degrees by 2100 with BECSS, it would be necessary to plant between 500 million and 6,000 million hectares of industrial monocultures, the impact of which would be devastating. Currently all the land cultivated in the world is around 1,500 million hectares. Obviously BECSS would compete with the production of food, with indigenous territories, with nature reserves and so on.

Even if BECSS in unviable, there are governments and businesses which promote it in order to “comply” with the Paris Agreement and to obtain carbon credits, with which the dispute for land and water, the threats and violence used to displace peasant farmers and indigenous peoples from their land, will only increase.

Geoengineering projects are so full of risk and potential impacts on the environment, indigenous peoples and peasant farmers that the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) decreed a moratorium on their use. However, the industries and governments that stand to make profits from climate change continue to promote their use.

Given the grave threats to Food Sovereignty, peasant life and cultures, indigenous peoples, the environment and biodiversity, it is crucial that movements and social organisaitons reject any experiment or proposal of geoengineering and fight for their complete prohibition.

More information on geoengineering and its impacts: Silvia Ribeiro, Grupo ETC, here.

In the spotlight

Climate justice from below

At the 2015 United Nations (UN) climate summit (also known as COP21) movements from around the world converged on Paris, France to demand that governments come to a binding agreement to reverse the global climate crisis. The movements demanded climate justice – understanding that unless serious action is taken, unpredictable and extreme weather events will continue to threaten the lives of hundreds of millions of people, including and especially peasants, Indigenous peoples, fisherfolk, small-and-medium size farmers, women and youth.
With the signing of the Paris Agreement, governments gave top priority to a host of antidotes they claimed would reduce dangerous greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). Some even claimed they cared about increasing peasants’ resilience to the impacts of global warming. These false solutions, including geoengineering, carbon markets, so-called Climate Smart Agriculture, Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) and other schemes all further degrade life on Mother Earth. With the focus on green and blue money-making reforms and business-as-usual fossil fuel burning and extraction the corporate sector, backed by international finance was given a green light to grab more and more land, water, seeds, and livelihoods from the people and the Earth. Yet, in Paris and beyond, La Via Campesina (LVC) has worked with our allies to challenge capitalists’ false solutions and to put forward food sovereignty as a fundamental, ‘true’ solution to the multiple crises generated by the corporate food system.

One year after COP21 — and just days after the Paris Agreement officially came into force — La Via Campesina met on the outskirts of Marrakech, Morocco for a movement-led Climate Justice Seminar and Training held parallel to COP22. The goals of the seminar were to deepen and create a shared understanding of the climate crisis and improve our capacities to build and strengthen solutions to capitalism and its crisis. LVC delegates and allies came from Zimbabwe, Ghana, Palestine, Morocco, Tunisia, Guatemala, Venezuela, Brazil, Indonesia, India, France, Germany, Canada and the United States.

In dialogue with one another, and based on first-hand experience in popular struggle, training participants developed a framework for realizing climate justice grounded in food sovereignty called climate justice from below. Climate justice from below is a radical commitment to movement building that seeks to strengthen a fundamentally different, life-affirming society with its political economy that is controlled by and for grassroots communities, including peasants, Indigenous peoples, fisherfolk, landless rural workers, informal sector workers, and especially women and youth amongst them.

At the Marrakech seminar participants discussed and developed four themes of struggle to guide their commitment to climate justice from below:

1. False Solutions to the Climate Crisis: governments and corporations at the UN COPs are making decisions that go against the interests of the Earth and her citizens. From the perspective of the capitalists and their supporters, carbon markets, Climate Smart Agriculture and other false solutions are needed because they promote corporate profits. From the perspective of the people, these mechanisms are not solutions at all because they serve only to worsen global warming and further privatize and commodify Mother Earth and human lives. According to Dena Hoff (National Family Farm Coalition, USA), “Climate Smart Agriculture is just another scheme. It is another method for the corporations to gain more control over the food system by subordinating local food chains and extracting wealth from the soil.”

2. Capitalism as one of the root causes of the Climate Crisis: Even if all economies based on coal and other fossil fuels’ extraction contribute to climate change; the seminar participants agreed that capitalist relations are the main root cause of global economic, social and ecological crises. Capitalism is understood as a system of exploitation and dispossession that is based on private ownership over nature and the means of production while imposing a hierarchy of labour power that keeps working people, peasants, and indigenous peoples from uniting against capital. In this hierarchy, working men [Men dispossessed by their resources, working men with or without wage.], mostly white, are close to the top and are given privilege – a wage. Women, especially women of colour and Indigenous women, are at the bottom of this hierarchy, largely excluded from the wage and most exploited and threatened by capitalism. With the deepening crisis of neoliberalism, younger generations are forced into exploitative conditions at the bottom of the hierarchy. However, these groups are not just victims of exploitation but agents of change who are using their power within the commons to build movements for system change from below. Isabelle soc Carrillo (Coordinadora Nacional de Viudas de Guatemala) highlights the centrality of Indigenous women’s actions and perspectives to climate justice movements: “The women who have led our struggles have been clear when defining our position against the business deals made with the government because we don’t want companies imposing their way of life on us. We will continue our struggles, and will never stop, until the government listens to us. In Guatemala we have our own cosmovision and we are struggling so that one day it will be respected. Mother Earth is not a business, she is not a commodity, and she cannot be priced. … An understanding must be reached between the land and us, as we are the land. We are one; we are all one with the Earth. The Earth can perhaps survive without us, but we cannot survive without Mother Earth.”

3. Convergence of movements to strengthen grassroots global justice: Delegates to the Marrakech climate seminar agreed that convergence and alliance building was a priority for achieving climate justice from below. Convergence is a process of forming alliances and solidarities across movements. It is often the case that groups working on issues of energy sovereignty, human rights, desconstruction of patriarchy, Indigenous sovereignty, and food sovereignty are separate – doing their ‘own things’. This separation makes it difficult for movements to harmonize our views and develop joint actions. Collectively, grassroots coalitions, social movements, peasants and farmers working for climate justice are on the frontlines leading the struggle. By forming alliances, we are taking concrete steps to embolden our struggle. Alliances help us bring successes and therefore more hope to the hearts of people to continue to fight capitalism and defend life on Mother Earth.

4. Stories of struggle for climate justice from below: delegates to the seminar shared stories about the work they are doing in their own territories to strengthen climate justice from below and resist ‘green’ agribusiness and Big Energy. For example, we heard delegates from: Brazil fighting mega energy projects and promoting community controlled energy and food systems; Palestine working for farmers to have access to the land, water, and local seeds; Tunisia defending peasant land occupations that build agroecology and autonomous communities; Indonesia defending and reclaiming land in order to implement agroecological projects; India challenging corporate control over seeds and promoting peasant control over food production; Morocco organizing on multiple fronts to regain democratic control over land and establish social justice and; United States confronting environmental racism and colonialism through anti-fossil fuel and pro-food sovereignty direct actions and initiatives. These local solutions are globalized through our networks to create a global movement of movements with women and youth at the forefront.

Outcomes: The insights generated by participants at the Marrakech seminar are especially useful now as more and more people, organizations, and movements — with women and youth at the forefront — rise up against capitalisms’ multiple crises. In the context of dramatic evidence that climate change is happening now and everywhere, mobilizing for climate justice from below is ever more urgent. As our movements expand and multiply, we strengthen our capacities to fight successfully against capitalism and for a truly just society that benefits all peoples and Mother Earth.

Newsletter no 32 – Editorial

Illustration: Alex Nabaum – alexnabaum.com

Climate justice poem

Oh! Oh! Nature mourns, Humanity perishes!
Why? Seasons have changed
Now unpredictable and unreliable!
Hotter, drier and shorter!
Winds and storms harsher and destructive
Mother Earth mourns, the land is barren.
Women, men and children, plants and animals perish!

Capitalist industrial agriculture, what have you done?
Everywhere, Mother Earth crumbles
As toxics and harmful GMO seeds swell her belly.
Heavy machines trample her belly
Their dark plumes polluting the sky,
A new baby, Climate Change, is conceived and born!

Oh! What is all this?
Ecological niches shrink
Biodiversity fast disappears
Greater uncertainty hovers everywhere
Heightened risks for us the food producers
Traditional agriculture knowledge is fast eroding
What and who shall save us?

Climate change knows no peace,
Hungers only for destruction!
Greed for profits feeds him!
Extreme, extreme, extreme weather phenomena are your fruits!
Environmental and humanitarian disasters!
Floods, droughts, landslides, diseases!
Humanity cries: No Food!
Nature cries: Inhabitable! Inhabitable!

Is there a remedy?
Yes but we hear only false solutions!
Free Markets, REDD, Climate Smart agriculture,
Green economy, Agrofuels, Carbon trading, land grabbing, more
industrial farming,
Massive use of herbicides, inorganic fertilizers and
More GMOs!

Oh Lord! All to grow climate change! Why?
Profits! Profits! More profits! Cries Capitalism, his father!

But hope looms in the horizon
Food sovereignty, our hope!
Comes to restore social justice to humanity,
Ecological sustainability to nature
Biodiversity and cultural diversity to all peoples of Mother Earth!
Arise ye peoples, women and men, the landless, peasants, indigenous
farmers, forest and fisherfolks,
Let your hope be heard in all the corners of the earth!

Peasant Agroecology for Climate Justice NOW!
Globalise Struggle! Globalise Hope!

Zimbabwean Peasant Movement

Voices from the field

Voice from the field 1

Strengthening the role of fisherwomen

Rehema Bavumu and Margaret Nakato, WFF and the Katosi Women Development Trust (KWDT), Uganda.

The understanding of fishing as an activity that involves men going into the lake with boats, ignores the enormous work done by women, in processing, distribution and marketing of fish. Responsibilities for provision of food to fisher households disproportionally rests on women who fend for fish for household consumption as the men are more motivated to fish for the market to service the credit for fishing supplies and income to support livelihoods. Women have to supplement food requirements with agriculture and they operate the numerous food restaurants in fisher communities to feed the mobile fishing community. While the fishermen establish homes at the landing sites, but often move from one site to another in search of more lucrative fishing grounds, women often settle on particular fish landing sites and take on all household responsibilities.

Unfortunately, challenges such as conflicts on land and water in fisher communities lead to loss of access to fishing grounds, as new landlords extend their ownership to the lake and restrict fishers to access such grounds. As a result, women lose land for processing fish, leading to post harvest losses and less fish available in the fisher communities, both for consumption and sale. Lives are directly affected as families have to separate, when men are arrested for trespassing on restricted fishing grounds and the burden of rescuing them rests on women.

Katosi Women Development Trust (KWDT) has subsequently engaged women in addressing land issues to ensure that they are included in local land pressure groups, to understand and become active in resisting evictions from land. Women are further supported to acquire knowledge and skills to improve their livelihoods, including improved fish processing technologies, developing marketing strategies, access to credit as well as working in groups to address social cultural norms that impede women’s autonomy.

To cause and trigger change, sustain the change and transform lives, women need to be involved in development initiatives in fishing communities. Their enormous efforts must not only be recognized, but boosted as well.

Voice from the field 2

The case of El Molo

Christiana Saiti Louwa, El Molo Forum and Thibault Josse, Mafifundise, Kenia.

El Molo is a traditional fishing community living around Lake Turkana situated in Northern Kenya, near the Kenyan-Ethiopian border. For El Molo, fishing is life — it is cultural practice, spiritual well-being and the main source of sustenance. El Molo practices traditional fishing methods such as net casting, hooking, harpooning, and basket fishing. Indigenous fishing knowledge has been preserved and passed on through oral traditions and practices from generation to generation. The fishery is managed by the elders of the community, applying rotational and migratory fishing. The weather, wind, moon and the waves tell El Molo where, what, and how to catch fish.

Fisheries policies in Kenya were mainly formulated for marine fisheries without the participation and involvement of fishers, fishing communities, and their organizations, failing therefore to recognize the rights, interests, and traditional knowledge and customary fishery management. Later, inland fisheries were merely added without any substantial implication. Also when the policy was reviewed in 2016, the word “inland” was only cosmetically added throughout. The policy, for example, addresses conservation and management of breeding grounds in Lake Navisha, but the government promotes tourism and industrialization around lakes. Regular conflicts between government and fishing communites are caused by the lack of focus on small-scale fishing in the policy. This, however, is starting to change now following sustained advocacy and lobbying of small-scale fishers. El Molo fishing representatives are now using the Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines (see Box 2) and the Kenyan Constitution to push for a policy that will truly recognize the traditional fishery management.

Voices from the field 3

Struggle for traditional and customary land

Herman Kumare, National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO), member of WFFP, Sri Lanka.

“This is the land where we lived, this is the land where we will die.” Community member from Lahugala

On July 17th, 2010, Paanama people from 5 villages in Lahugala divisional secretariat in Ampara District were forcibly evicted from their 1200 acres of coastal lands and lagoons by unidentified masked persons who were equipped with machineguns. In nearby villages, around 365 acres of land was captured by the Air Force and demarcated with an electric fence, while additional 860 acres of land from three other neighbouring villages were captured by the Navy and also enclosed by a fence.

Later, the villagers have witnessed the development of a tourist resort “Paanama Lagoon Cabana” on the land from which they were dispossessed. The tourist resort is run by the Navy who also pockets the profit. The land acquired by the Air Force was turned into the Air Force base. Also, the areas acquired by the Air Force and Navy were connected with the Lahugala National Sanctuary, which is an elephant sanctuary area as well as a forest conservation area. In addition, the Navy has restricted and even banned fishing activities during daytime and night in some areas. The forcible displacement has affected the livelihood of 350 families who depend on paddy farming, fishing and traditional agricultural practice known as Chena cultivation. The villagers lost their entire source of income and their lifeline was cut.

In order to campaign against these land grabs and to demand the fulfillment of their human rights, the Paanama people established the Organization for Protection of Paanama Paththu (OPPP), in which National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO) facilitated to form the same. On February 11, 2015, the Paanama people witnessed the first ever victory of their struggle — The Cabinet issued an order to release 340 acres among the 365 acres of land taken away by the Air Force. However, the decision was not executed by the local authorities even after 13 months, thus anxiety was raised among the Paanama community who, then, decided to occupy their own land even without having legal backing. To date, 35 families have forcefully re-occupied their lands since 26th March 2016 and started cultivating the land.

By forcibly displacing the Paanama people, the Navy and Air Force have grabbed the people’s traditional and customary land on the pretext of public purposes. However, the construction of Air Force base and hotels cannot be considered as public purposes. Further, present and past actions have confirmed that the Paanama coastal land grabbing is well organized and supported by government officials, and the forceful evictions have taken place with the knowledge of the Divisional Secretary, the Police, the Special Task Force, and the Navy and Air Force. Today, the OPPP continues to fight for their lost land by launching advocacy and lobby campaigns and taking legal actions. Specific actions such as determining and firming up land ownership documents are being undertaken as well as expanding the base of supporters within Sri Lanka and internationally.

Boxes

Box 1

The UN Oceans Conference – Who’s Oceans Conference?

On 5-9 June 2017, the Governments of Fiji and Sweden co-hosted the high-level UN Oceans Conference at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. The aim was to support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.
Almost regardless of where we look, the outcomes are presented as a great success, and if you dare to question this you better be prepared to confront hegemony. So let’s start preparing.

Already in advance of the conference, the World Forum of Fisher Peoples (WFFP) and the World Forum of Fish Harvesters and Fish Workers (WFF) explained the lack of democratic involvement in the process of developing the SDGs, and concluded that “the process of developing the SDGs have, at best, left the global fisher movements [WFFP and WFF]… at the fringe of participation, while providing influential space for the corporate sector and large NGOs to inform the goals throughout the process”(More on the statement in Box 3). It is therefore not a surprise that a clear commitment to human rights – when looking at SDG14 – is notably absent, whereas the emphasis on the need for more natural science, marine technology, macro-economic development, and Marine Protected Areas is prominent.

So what kind of ‘game changer’ – as expressed by the UN chief of Economic and Social Affairs, Wu Hongbo – was this conference? Was it about a fundamental change in the way the political and economic elites govern and control oceans resources? Or was it an opportunity to change gear and do more of the same but with accelerated determination?

By looking at the two main and official outcomes of the conference – the Call for Action and the 1372 Voluntary Committments— we get very close the answer.
The call itself is made up of a list of 22 specific calls of which one addresses small-scale fisheries specifically: “(o) Strengthen capacity building and technical assistance provided to small-scale and artisanal fishers in developing countries, to enable and enhance their access to marine resources and markets…” There is, however, no indication on how to get there and the choice of words makes this call open for any interpretation. As explained elsewhere by the WFFP, this is an open door for privatisation of fisheries and dispossession of small-scale fishing communities. In addition, this specific call is only for developing countries; this is deeply problematic considering small-scale fishing communities are confronted with the same threats all over the world. The Call for Action will be tabled for endorsement at the seventy first session of the UN General Assembly.

Of the no-less-than 1372 Voluntary Commitments made predominantly by governments, corporations and international conservation organisations, 240 are claimed to target SDG14b: “Provide access for small-scale artisanal fishers to marine resources and markets”. While these commitments might in fact target 14b, it is again important to look at how? It is noteworthy that only a handful of these addresses the International Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries, the by far most comprehensive international instrument on small-scale fisheries endorsed by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation in 2014.

Taking a look at the webcastings and official report of the conference brings us even closer to the answer. The emphasis on Marine Protected Areas, Blue Economy and Marine Spatial Planning — to mention a few key themes – is pronounced, whereas the lack of emphasis on the SSF Guidelines and a Human Rights Based approach to small-scale fisheries is the exact opposite. To some this might seem shocking; to others it is what could be expected. But what we can conclude is that Heads of State and Government and High Level Representatives have agreed to yet another Call for Action and opened the door far and wide for non-stake actors to inform and provide funding for the Voluntary Commitments aimed at implementing SDG14.

So maybe Wu Hongbo is absolutely correct when he said the conference would be a ‘game changer’. The implementation process of SDG14 – through a vague call for action and voluntary commitments – is handed over to powerful non-state actors with enough capital and human resources. This handing over of sovereignty from the United Nations bodies to the transnational corporations started close to 20 years ago, but the SDG on Oceans opens up a new chapter for unprecedented corporate capture of oceans governance.

For this reason, WFF and WFFP issued a “Statement on the SDGs and the UN’s Ocean Conference” to expose this biased scenario that populated the Conference. Below you can read what are the way ahead in their struggles!

Box 2

Implementation of the international small-scale fisheries guidelines

With the adoption of the Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines (hereafter SSF Guidelines) by the Committee on Fisheries of the FAO, the importance and the contribution of small-scale fishers to livelihoods and food security, especially amongst some of the world’s poorest and remote communities world-wide, have been acknowledged for the first time. Based on the international human rights standards, the SSF Guidelines are global in scope, holistic in its coverage, and apply to small-scale fisheries in all contexts, with a specific focus on the needs of small-scale fishing communities in developing countries.

Not only have small scale fishers themselves contributed to the drafting and the negotiation process of the Guidelines, they are currently playing a key role in spearheading the awareness-raising and implementation of the SSF Guidelines. During the last 16 months, the fisher folks belonging to the two international forums – World Forum of Fish Harvesters & Fish Workers (WFF) and World Forum of Fisher Peoples (WFFP) with the support of the International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF), Crocevia Centro Internazionale and Transnational Institute (TNI) organized 8 national level workshops and 3 sub-regional level workshops on the SSF Guidelines and their implementation. One of the key aspects was to raise awareness amongst organizations of small-scale fishers, fish workers and their communities through actions at local, national and sub-regional levels and to build their capacities to use the SSF Guidelines in pilot countries. Similarly, the Fisheries Working Group of the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC) has geared toward making the SSF Guidelines a vibrant tool for the small-scale fishers. The SSF Guidelines have been summarized, simplified, and translated into several languages such as Khmer, Vietnamese Laotian, Urdu, Sindhi and Kiswahili (Swahili). Many audio-visual materials and infographics have also been produced. Furthermore, in order to highlight the importance of gender in the sector, ICSF was commissioned to develop a Gender Implementation Guide which involved the participation of the civil society and social movements.

The SSF Guidelines represent a real milestone for millions of women and men fishers who are working and depend on the small-scale fisheries sector. Not only Civil Society Organisations, but Governments should also implement the SSF Guidelines and contribute toward progressive realization of the right to adequate food. One positive example is Tanzania. Acknowledging the importance of the sector, Government of Tanzania has recently pledged to use the SSF Guidelines as a tool to fight hunger and eradicate poverty and committed to include the SSF Guidelines within the national regulatory framework.

Box 3

WFF and WFFP statement on the SDGS and the UN’s Ocean Conference

4 June 2017, this is an excerpt of the WFF and WFFP statement. Full document here.

” […]Our solution:
We pledge our support to the United Nations that is firmly rooted in the values that form the basis of the UN Charter: peace, justice, respect, human rights, tolerance and solidarity. To uphold these values, each country should draw more consistently from parliaments, sub-national governments, civil society as well as the executive branch of government in democratic country-led governance on which the UN is founded. The International Guidelines on Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries in the context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication (SSF guidelines15) were endorsed by the Committee on Fisheries of the FAO in 2014. These SSF guidelines are the result of a bottom-up participatory development process facilitated by the FAO and involving more than 4000 representatives of governments, small-scale fishing communities, WFF and WFFP, and other actors from more than 120 countries globally. Their development resembles a legitimate, democratic country-led process, and the guidelines themselves build on the core UN principles of justice, respect, human rights, tolerance and solidarity and international human rights standards and principles. We express our recognition and appreciation of the stewardship of the FAO in the process of developing the SSF Guidelines.

At its 32nd session in July 2016, the Committee on Fisheries (COFI) of the FAO unanimously adopted the Global Strategic Framework (GSF) to facilitate the implementation of the SSF guidelines. The GSF aims at facilitating interaction between governments and civil society to support the implementation of the SSF Guidelines at all levels, and to promote a common vision and implementation approach, which is based on the principles of the SSF Guidelines themselves. We remain committed towards working with FAO on the further development of the GSF in order to advance the key principles of the SSF guidelines, with emphasis on the human rights based approach to small-scale fisheries; the recognition and protection of tenure rights of small-scale fishing communities; the rights of smallscale fishing communities to maintain control and ownership of the value chain, including marketing at local and regional levels; and promoting the full and effective participation of small-scale fisheries actors in the SSF guidelines implementation, in particular smallscale fishing communities including women, youth and Indigenous Peoples.

We, the representatives of over 20 million fisher peoples globally, will continue our constructive cooperation with national governments and the FAO in pursuit of the implementation of the SSF Guidelines and the further development of the GSF. We call upon the UN member states to work with us to ensure the progressive realization of our right to adequate food and related rights, and the protection of the natural environment. This can all be achieved through the development of the GSF and the implementation of the SSF guidelines.”