Print

Thanks to Wytze for this very useful report
---

On 8 Sep 2001, at 0:15, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. wrote:

The IFPRI conference in Bonn (4-6 September 2001) on  Sustainable Foodsecurity for all by 2020 ended yesterday. The  International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) is one of the centers of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. (CGIAR).  

The question central at the Conference was: can we, and if yes  how,  reach sustainable foodsecurity for all in 2020.  The response to the conference had been overwhelming. More than  1000 people had pre-registered and several hundreds more  registered at the beginning on tuesday. For IFPRI this was a 'mind boggling" number. Big delegations were present from African  countries, among whom the Ministers of Agriculture of South-Africa and  Uganda and there were also quite a big Asian delegation.

Public on day 1 consisted of 51% Europeans, 17% Africans, 10% Asians 12% North-Americans. North Africa and Lat. America made up for the remaining 10%. 

Prior to the conference the IFPRI had published a draft policypaper which identifies challenges and priorities. From the programme (and seeing Syngenta, Aventis and Cargill among the  sponsors ) it seemed clear what the aim was, at least for an  important group of the organisers: get Africa into GE, get the TNC's  in (Africa), bigger farms, more liberalisation, more trade focused. In  short: A gentle and very well registered push for the neo-liberal globalisation model.  In this set up on day one we heard a bit too often from all speakers how unacceptable it is that 800 million people are still hungry and how many children had gone malnourished in the 10 minutes speaking time. Too often, since the  urgency of the matter was clear enough for all participants,  especially the African people's delegates.

The only talk on day one  about a remedy came from Heinz Imhof, chair of the board of  directors who, acknowledging that hunger was a multi-faceted  problem, could promote vitamin A rice for 10 minutes as  the  solution: "some critics say that people should get access to  vegetables and carrots but that is not realistic, that is clearly not  the way forward". Mr. Imhoff had no time for questions, he had to  catch a plane to the US. Imhoff got more or less assisted by  Volker Hausmann from Deutsche Welthungerhilfe and David Beckman from Bread for the World, who both pleaded for  more, albeit free, help from industry in their work. 

The German  Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development, Heidemarie  Wieczorek-Zeul, however,  pointed out in her speech to the fact that African countries do not have the framework or the means to set up effective regulatory and control capacities just as she had more  good points in her speech. The participants as polled on day one  consisted of 40% researchers, 17% ngo's, 14% government  officials, 11% interdevelopment agencies, 6.6% private sector and  only 2.2% farmers.

The small presence of farmers was criticised among the audience  just as many (especially Africans) were very frustrated  after day  one and a number did not return on day two.

There was only one workshop (on day 2) that dealt with agro- ecological solutions and even that was abused in an attempt to  have GE accepted in this agro-ecological agriculture.  But the critiques on the present globalisation process came  through on day two when Chee Yoke Ling from the Third World  Network painted the real picture about consequences of present  globalisation, which got her the biggest and strongest applause  from the paricipants. A sense of relief could be felt through the conference hall: "finally, someone who speaks from her being and  shows the other side".   

 Another speaker who showed extremely clear where the real  threat comes from was Dunstan Spencer from Sierra Leone. He  explained how 90% of African farmers are small farmers who  produce 95% of food in Africa. The Structural Adjustment  Programmes of IMF/Worldbank totally undermine their position as  does the opening up of markets for cheap heavily subsidized  Western foods are doing. He made clear that present policies  could very well lead to a new generation of boat refugees trying to get to Europe.

 He and others pointed also to the unacceptable unfairness of  Northern literate, subsidized farmers against unsubsidized, illiterate Southern farmers. There is no level-playing field here! In a public vote the great majority of the participants voted for the right of subsidies for small Southern farmers. The story of Honduran farmer Manuel Jesus de Reyes was most impressive. He is one of the  farmers who joined agro-ecological farming. With beautiful pictures  of his field since he switched to ecological farming he explained his  way of working and how it has helped him. This silent but  very  succesful revolution, which started to grow strongly around 1990, is  now practiced at 29 million hectares worldwide and has huge  possibilities for small farmers and subsistence farmers. It was very  much a pity that it was polluted by chair Klaus Ammann from the  Botanical Gardens of Bern who (already for years) tries to  compromise organic farming with GE. Nevertheless, his story  made very clear to many how promising the ecological approach is  for farmers in the South.  

A most impressive speaker on day three was Rajul Pandya-Lorch,  Head of the 2020 Vision initiative of IFPRI. (Shows that, in spite of everything, there are some real good people at IFPRI). He talked on corruption and hit like a Buddha. Starting with naming all kind of Southern government corruption he than pointed to European  countries as a source of corruption, not forgetting the TNC's.  He pointed to the importance of good governance and of building  good institutions to combat and prevent corruption. Another wonderful speaker was Grace Akello, Minister of State for  Entandikwa, Republic of Uganda. In a very lively way she also  brought up the possibility of Africans invading Europe, coming to  ask for the same breakfast as was served in the hotel where she  stayed, a breakfast too abundant for her: "I asked just for a cup of  tea and an egg but they came with tea and egg, but also with ham  and this and that all kind of things. I did not ask for all that!"   

However, world bank, scientists and industry people were abundant  and a so-called "farmer's representative" from Kenya, Mrs. Mercy  Karanja. Mrs. Karanja indicated the quoting signs on farmers  representative herself with her fingers and rightly so apparently. I  was told by someone from Africa that actually she works for the  Biotechnology Trust and the Farmer's Union is an empty Union, but  heavily Monsanto supported. She praised the world bank and that  farmers did not care how their seeds had come about.  Also  Monsnato's Indian affiliate Mahyco seeds was present. These  people were the speakers in the sessions on prioritysetting and  whose responsability is it to end worldhunger?  

However, when participants were polled about the priority setting the outcome was: 1) Investment in human resources 2)promote good governance 3)Improving markets, infrastructure and institutions in (the sense of protecting small farmers, see pressrelease at http//:www.ifpri.org )

It remains to be seen whether Sub Saharan Africa was convinced  about GE. I heard from many African people, including  researchers,that they are wary of them but information is hardly getting there, so they are prone to much pro-GE propaganda. Most  city and rural population is totally uninformed about the subject.   

wytze