African Farmers Question Biotech Revolution

Vandana Shiva warns against AGRA at the WSF, 2007. Photo: Food First

At the World Social Forum (WSF) in Nairobi, Kenya, African civil society rejected the Rockefeller and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundations' $150 million Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa -- AGRA. The Green Revolution consisted of converting cropland to "high-yield" seeds which need to be purchased each season, and which require intensive fertilizer and pesticide use.

The creators of AGRA promise to bring benefits to the African continent's 180 million impoverished farmers who, they claim, have until now been bypassed by the first Green Revolution.

But in a statement signed by over 70 organizations, African farmers' unions and sustainable agricultural development NGOs criticized AGRA for its industry-driven, chemically-dependent approach to production, and accused the foundations of using hunger to introduce genetically modified crops to the continent.

Farmers' resistance is understandable. The specious assertion that the Green Revolution "missed" Africa is disproved by the fact that over the last twenty years, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, which brings together all the key Green Revolution research institutions, has invested 40-45% of its $350-million-a-year budget in Africa. Either the Green Revolution's institutions don't work, or the Green Revolution itself doesn't work, or both. The Green Revolution did not "bypass" Africa. It failed.

Because AGRA ignores, misinterprets, and misrepresents the harsh lessons of the first Green Revolution's multiple failures, it will likely worsen, rather than alleviate hunger. There are ten reasons why:

1. The Green Revolution actually deepens the divide between rich and poor farmers.

2. Over time, Green Revolution technologies degrade tropical agro-ecosystems and expose already vulnerable farmers to increased environmental risk.

3. The Green Revolution leads to the loss of agro-biodiversity, the basis for smallholder livelihood security and regional environmental sustainability.

4. Hunger is not primarily due to a lack of food, but because the hungry are too poor to buy the food that is available.

5. Without addressing structural inequities in the market and political systems, approaches relying on high input technological solutions fail.

6. The private sector alone will not solve the problems of production, marketing, and distribution.

7. Introduction of genetic engineering, the driving force behind the AGRA initiative, will make smallholder systems more environmentally vulnerable.

8. Introducing genetically engineered crops into smallholder agriculture will likely lead to the indebtedness of farmers.

9. AGRA's assertion that "There Is No Alternative" ignores the many successful agro-ecological and non-corporate approaches to agricultural development that have grown in the wake of the Green Revolution's failures.

10. AGRA's "alliance" does not place smallholder farmers, the principal actors in agricultural improvement, in the driver's seat.

In fact, peasant organizations have already proposed a more coherent alternative: "food sovereignty." Food sovereignty focuses on creating indigenous agricultural systems which are both ecologically and economically sustainable. AGRA directors have yet to consult farmers' organizations.

Lawrence Sismka, a representative of Participatory Ecological Land Use Management, a regional network of 160 African NGOs working in sustainable agricultural development, proposed, "We should not totally refuse the initiative of the Gates Foundation in offering an intervention for Africa's food shortages. We should rather make an effort to promote talks between the foundations, African farmer-led organizations, and civil society to share the thoughts and priorities of farmers, as the food effort belongs to them. There are great examples of farmer-led alternative development initiatives which are environmentally sound and sustainable, and need to be supported and encouraged."

Sarah Mujuri of Volunteer Efforts for Development Concerns in Uganda said, "If the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations are going to introduce this plan, it is going to have heavy consequences on the environment, the indigenous seed-preserving culture of farmers, and also possible social costs…. Everybody should do a persistent campaign against the plan and say no to this Green Revolution."

In the coming months, African groups and their international allies will be mounting campaigns to monitor, inform, and challenge AGRA. The initiative will also be addressed at the upcoming Via Campesina conference on Food Sovereignty in Bamako, Mali, February 21-27. Organizations working on hunger, sustainable agriculture, and food sovereignty can join these efforts by helping to amplify farmers' voices in Africa's agricultural development debate.

Editor's Note: Peter Costiglio, a spokesperson for the Rockefeller Foundation, refused to comment, except to suggest that readers peruse the foundation's website. When asked if the foundation would initiate a dialogue with these organizations, Costiglio replied, "I know of no such plans at this time." However, when asked if the foundation would discuss concerns if representatives requested a meeting, Costiglio replied, "Yes. We are open to dialogue."