Abstract
This paper contributes to the discussion on food sovereignty and the state by analysing the case of Ecuador. It presents a theoretical framework and literature review focused on the question of food sovereignty, the state and agrarian political economy. The case study of Ecuador, one of a handful of countries that has attempted to institutionalize food sovereignty in state policy, examines the political processes that led to the institutionalization of food sovereignty and the rural development and agricultural policies of the ‘post-neoliberal’ government of Rafael Correa. The analysis of the Ecuadorian case concludes that the implementation of public policies reflecting food sovereignty principles has largely proven elusive, with the exception of some institutional changes and developments at the local levels of the state.
Generated Summary
This paper contributes to the discussion on food sovereignty and the state by analyzing the case of Ecuador. It presents a theoretical framework and literature review focused on the question of food sovereignty, the state, and agrarian political economy. The research employs a case study approach, examining the political processes that led to the institutionalization of food sovereignty and the rural development and agricultural policies of the ‘post-neoliberal’ government of Rafael Correa. The analysis explores the challenges in implementing public policies that reflect food sovereignty principles, highlighting the limited success of such efforts. The study investigates the state’s role in promoting food sovereignty and assesses the impacts of the Ecuadorian case on food sovereignty as a practical and theoretical project. The methodology includes an in-depth analysis of the historical context, the political dynamics, and the interplay between various actors, including the state, social movements, and international organizations. This allows for the evaluation of the progress, limitations, and potential of food sovereignty initiatives within a specific national context.
Key Findings & Statistics
- In 2007, the LVC adopted a definition of food sovereignty, in the Nyeleni Declaration: ‘Food sovereignty is the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. It puts those who produce, distribute and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations. It defends the interests and inclusion of the next generation. It offers a strategy to resist and dismantle the current corporate trade and food regime, and directions for food, farming, pastoral and fisheries systems
- The early definitions of FS agreed upon by LVC, such as the 1996 definition, conceptualize FS in terms of ‘national self-sufficiency’
- The Ecuadorian tax bureaucracy, the Servicio de Rentas Internas (SRI), in 2005 the government collected US$3,461,000,000 in revenues. In 2013, the SRI collected US$12,251,384,654 in revenues
- In 2007, 38.09 per cent of the budget was spent on irrigation projects, 11.33 per cent on water infrastructure, 25.96 per cent on agricultural development and innovation, or fomento agropecuario, and 14.38 per cent on salaries and administration
- In 2007, 38.09 per cent of the budget was spent on irrigation projects, 11.33 per cent on water infrastructure, 25.96 per cent on agricultural development and innovation, or fomento agropecuario, and 14.38 per cent on salaries and administration
- In 2004 most of the financing for public spending on agriculture came principally from private domestic credit (31.03%), followed by external private credit (23.76%) and, in third place, public financing from the national budget (23.11%). In 2009, the picture is very different, with public financing representing 76 per cent of public spending in agriculture, international aid only 3 per cent and external loans only 2 per cent
- In 2003 the budget of the MAGAP was US$88 million, and in 2009 reached US$318 million, which illustrates the significant increase in spending
- In 2005, prior to the election of the Correa government, the bank lent out US$176,187,218 to 49,191 borrowers at the national level. In 2012, after five years of dramatic expansion under the Correa government, the bank had lent out US$525,454,061 to 220,192 borrowers.
Other Important Findings
- The concept of food sovereignty (hereafter FS) has emerged over the past two decades as an alternative proposal to the neoliberal global food system, proposing to return more control over food systems to small-scale farmers (referred to as peasants or campesinos) and to other subsistence and small-scale food producers (fisher folk, pastoralists, indigenous peoples etc.)
- The definition of FS has evolved over time, with the most recent definition agreed upon by LVC in 2007
- While neoliberal globalization has reduced the power and policy space of national governments, states do continue to exert a great deal of control and regulatory power over food and agricultural systems.
- The advance of neoliberal globalization and reduction of national policy space for agriculture has accelerated processes of depeasantization throughout the world
- The state remains the ‘elephant in the room’ for FS, as ‘no modern state’ has yet laid the groundwork for the preconditions of FS
- Sovereignty is a highly contested concept and its centrality to FS is one reason why the various definitions of FS are so contradictory
- Neoliberal states, in alliance with transnational agribusiness interests, are conceptualized as the driving force behind depeasantization and calls for FS by rural social movements and LVC
- While there have been significant advances in the institutionalization of FS at the national level in Latin America, it is less clear what this actually means in practice
- If LVC today positions itself against agribusiness in alliance with the state, historically peasants and peasant movements have also come into conflict with Communist and Left governments, as values of autonomy and local control are central to ‘the peasant way’
- The emphasis in FS on the peasant household appears to reject a return to the collectivization experiences under ‘actually existing socialism’
- In Ecuador, the discourse of national sovereignty that is employed by the government of President Rafael Correa is used, amongst other things, to re-valorize the state as a vehicle for the post-neoliberal political and economic project of the revolucion ciudadana
- The most important ways in which the Ecuadorian state has reclaimed its economic sovereignty are through the renegotiation of royalty schemes for oil with the private sector, improved tax collection, and the renegotiation and significant reduction of the country’s foreign debt
- In the 2006 elections when Correa ran for the presidency, he did so without a slate of candidates, although he did have the support and endorsements of individuals and organizations as well as the small Ecuadorian Socialist Party (PSE)
- In 2006, the presidents of the various organizations that constituted the MA also signed an agreement with Correa. In exchange for formal political and electoral support, in the event of his election Correa would implement an ‘Agrarian Revolution’, which would focus on the ‘reactivation’ of campesino agriculture and ensure access to land and water for campesinos
- The constitutional provision on FS was developed in working groups that were formed by the various federations as part of the Constituent Assembly
- While the inclusion of FS into the 2008 Constitution should be viewed as a victory for rural social movements and the MA, it is less clear how much the formal political support of these organizations has actually forced the government to implement policies for FS
- The MA dissolved in 2009 after the Constituent Assembly process, but has taken on other forms, as some of these same organizations have coordinated around other efforts, including pressuring the government to pass a land reform law that was drafted by several different organizations through the Red Agraria
- The COPISA was created in 2010 to provide a mechanism for elected citizen representatives to lead the process of drafting nine secondary laws of the LORSA through citizen participation
- In Ecuador, and in Latin America more broadly, the shift beyond the orthodox neoliberal policies of the 1980s and 1990s towards what some authors have termed ‘post-neoliberalism’ has increased the importance of national governments in the region
- The emphasis in FS on the peasant household appears to reject a return to the collectivization experiences under ‘actually existing socialism’
- If LVC today positions itself against agribusiness in alliance with the state, historically peasants and peasant movements have also come into conflict with Communist and Left governments, as values of autonomy and local control are central to ‘the peasant way’
- The emphasis in FS on the peasant household appears to reject a return to the collectivization experiences under ‘actually existing socialism’
- The expansion of credit from the BNF is tied to monocrop commodity production, as are most of the policies of the MAGAP
- The clearest example of this policy targeted to small producers is that of the government’s Plan Maiz, or plan for corn (MAGAP 2014b). The Plan Maiz, which promotes the production of feed corn, sets the target of making the country self sufficient, or ‘food sovereign’, in feed corn used for animal feed and inputs for industrial products
- Agricultural exports have increased under the Correa government
- The movement of direct commercialization by associations of small-scale agro-ecological producers is a significant phenomenon in and around Cuenca. It dates back almost 20 years, to when the municipality established an office of urban agriculture in the 1990s to support peri-urban agro-ecological producers with technical assistance and to market their produce through ferias
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The article acknowledges that the implementation of policies reflecting food sovereignty principles has largely proven elusive, with the exception of some institutional changes and developments at the local levels of the state.
- The study does not provide a comprehensive analysis of the agricultural policies of the Correa government, focusing instead on the implementation of public policies reflecting food sovereignty principles.
- The paper’s analysis is limited to the case of Ecuador, and the findings may not be generalizable to other countries.
- The study notes that the decline of rural social movements and the return of the state is a causal linkage which is concerning, and could limit the study’s conclusion.
Conclusion
The central focus of the research is on how the state can foster food sovereignty, specifically within the context of Ecuador. The study finds that while the inclusion of food sovereignty principles in the 2008 Constitution was a victory for rural social movements, it is unclear how much this formal political support has actually influenced the government to implement related policies. The paper highlights the difficulty in implementing the principles of food sovereignty, despite the institutionalization of the concept. The authors suggest that the best approach for Ecuador may be to follow the ‘differentiated’ rural development policies of Brazil, which would require a differentiated policy framework for small-scale farms or campesino agriculture. However, the researchers conclude that the pressure of rural social movements is crucial for the success of these policies, as it was in Brazil. The study emphasizes the need for a balance between state intervention and the autonomy of civil society to effectively promote food sovereignty. The challenges and contradictions in implementing food sovereignty are a central theme, the study concludes that the state’s role is essential for advancing food sovereignty and underscores the importance of involving civil society actors in the co-construction of public policies. The study suggests that local governments, in partnership with communal and associative structures, may hold the most potential for advancing food sovereignty principles. The case of Ecuador provides lessons for activists and scholars on the complexities and challenges of the food sovereignty movement, emphasizing the need for co-governance and the recognition of plural sovereignty. While at the national level public policies do not reflect a state for food sovereignty, there have been some changes and openings for FS principles in some public institutions. At the local level, there are some promising programmes and policies favouring FS principles.