Case Study La via Campesina-1

8/7/2019 Case Study La via Campesina-1

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/case-study-la-via-campesina-1 1/24

Policy AdvocacyAnna Baker and Molly MeehanCase Study AssignmentJeff Unsicker

La Via Campesina

Context

The modern global food system faces economic, social, and environment issues.

Post industrial revolution, the face of agriculture has transformed from primarily small

scale locally controlled and operated subsistence farming and food systems to large scale,

agro-chemical and fossil fuel intensive mono-agricultural conglomerates. The ecological,

social, cultural, and economic impacts of these changes have been vast and devastating in

many ways. The increase in transnational agribusiness has left local communities unable

to determine they way they produce, distribute and consume their own food. Trade

policies that favor large scale production for export has compromised the ability of

communities to have say and control over their food systems, and many have been

forcibly displaced from their lands, have had to leave their cultural and family lands to

work as farm laborers, and are continually exposed to various toxic chemicals and

exploitative working conditions, etc. Many times richer countries “dump” their crops

such as wheat and corn on poorer nations which drives down local prices and eliminates

farmers ability to compete. The negative effects of this system tend to fall

disproportionately on the poor, especially the rural poor. Interestingly, many of the

worlds poor and hungry are agricultural workers themselves. Many of the resources are

concentrated in the hands of a few, including land and capitol. The elimination of

cultures, traditional practices, has caused the rapid decrease in biodiversity as it is



replaced by dependence on a few crops, some of which are genetically modified. This

shift has caused alarm and been a pivotal catalyst for movements such as La Via

Campesina to get organized and to begin to have a voice to represent their interests and

needs. (Grassroots International, 2009)

La Via Campesina believes that the largest obstacle to a just and sustainable food

system are both international and national policies as well as the agro industry instating

practices which force farmers to adopt unsustainable methods. “The current model of

industrialized food production is inherently unsustainable. It makes farmers increasingly

dependent on external inputs (pesticides, fertilizers, veterinary treatment, growth

promoters, etc.) and external capital. It is often export orientated, as with big cereal

producers in Europe and North America. These export oriented production systems are

not geared to enhance local ecological conditions or to meet local food needs. In this

model farmers lose control over production decisions.” (La Via Campesina, 2002)

The food sovereignty movement has grown out of the broken and unjust system.

The term food sovereignty was coined by La Via Campesina and it is a movement of

small farmers, fishers, consumers, environmentalists and indigenous peoples, all seeking

to reclaim the right of nations and communities to define their own agricultural, labor,

fishing, food and land policies. The food sovereignty movement calls for policies that are

ecologically, socially, economically and culturally appropriate for their circumstances.

(Grassroots International, 2009)

La Via Campesina is an international movement of peasants, small and medium-

sized producers, landless, rural women, indigenous people, rural youth and agricultural

workers. The movement is actually an umbrella of hundreds of organizations and



millions of people organizing to promote justice and change and defend their livelihoods,

cultures, interests, and values. (www.viacampesina.org) Before holding their first

conference, a group of peasant leaders from Central, North America and Europe met in

Nicaragua at the Congress of the National Union of Farmers and Livestock Owners to

discuss issues involving Cold War food aid as well as economic “development”

programs, all under the contemporary neo liberal agricultural policy context. In order to

transform these policies and address what the state seemed unable to do, they formed La

Via Campesina. La Via Campesina does not just aim to critique neo liberalism and what

they perceive to be unjust policy, they actively seek to change these policies. (Menser,

2008) In May of 1993 La Via Campesina held its first conferences, where its first

strategic guidelines and structure were defined. La Via Campesina has held worldwide

conferences every four years since then, as well as participating in various other large-

scale conferences worldwide (www.viacampesina.org).

The goal of La Via Campesina is to develop solidarity among various farming

organizations world wide, and they are present in over 70 countries in Asia, Africa,

Europe and the Americas. It is an international advocacy network. Small farmers and

producers as well as rural peasants face many of the same challenges world wide and La

Via Campesina is seeks to bring unity among its members as well as be a unifying voice

while doing advocacy work internationally.

The Case of Syngenta in Brazil

One example of an advocacy case taken on by La Via Campesina in the name of



peasant solidarity, food sovereignty, and biodiversity in recent years is that of Syngenta

in Brazil. The history of this Swiss corporation in Brazil is decades old, but has become

more prominent in the last 15 years since Brazil became the last Latin American country

to open up its policies to genetically modified crops. The company Syngenta officially

entered Brazil in February 2001, opening two subsidiaries to focus on sales, production,

and research. (La Via Campesina, 2008)

Upon opening these subsidiaries, the company established a testing site of 127

hectares in Santa Tereza de Oeste in Paraná where it was experimenting on genetically

modified corn and soy (La Via Campesina, 2008) located 6 kilometers from a protected

conservation area, Iguacu National Park.

It was proved that Syngenta planted GM crops on its testing site despite its close

proximity to the Park after a site visit by the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and

Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA), prompted by complaints by neighboring

farmers. IBAMA then issued a press release stating that “all activities involving GMOs

that the multinational conducted at its testing site were prohibited (. . .) a fine of one

million reais is being assessed”. (La Via Campesina, 2008)

Advocates

La Via Campesina is an international advocacy network, providing a voice for its

members and member organizations. They have clear mission and objectives that

member organizations are aware of when joining. La Via Campesina is made up

primarily of peasants, small and medium-sized producers, environmentalists, landless,

rural women, indigenous, rural youth as well as agricultural laborers. Member



organizations are all over the world in over 70 countries. Structurally La Via Campesina

considers itself “autonomous, pluralist and multicultural movement, independent of any

political, economic, or other type of affiliation.” (www.viacampesina.org) Within La Via

Campesina are many member organizations which all define their own structures,

leadership etc.

“La Via Campesina stands out as a robust case of a transnational political

organization not only because of its size but because of its geographic scope and

cultural diversity. Many so-called global organizations and NGOs are made up of

and/or run by organizations from only a few (often very wealthy) countries or

many countries from only one or two regions. This is not the case with LVC. It

operates in dozens of countries from the First to Third World, North and South,

including South Korea, India, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Mexico,

United States, Brazil, Chile, Thailand, France, Italy, Madagascar, Senegal, and

Mali. Furthermore, as this list indicates, it is not only geographically inclusive but

also is extremely diverse with respect to race, language, and religion.35 And all are

united in their opposition to neo liberalism and the realization of an alternative

kind of agricultural production.” (Menser, 2008)

The headquarters of La Via Campesina is located in Jakarta, Indonesia. La Via

Campesina has an International Coordinating Committee. Mr. Henry Saragih is the

General Coordinator of La Via Campesina and very present in the media as a

representive. La Via Campesina website does not publicize their internal organizational

structure, employees, funding sources etc. Various Internet searches as well as looking in

journals have lead to somewhat vague results as described above.



Their defined constituency of La Via Campesina is the various member

organizations. These organizations really partner with La Via Campesina and take on

issues in their respective countries and areas, weather it is workers strikes and protests,

factory take overs etc. In this way La Via Campesina on the ground is really rooted in

local communities taking action on local issues, all of course part of the larger issues of a

just food system.

One document, a pamphlet describing the basic mission, vision, goals and values

of Via Campesina includes contacts all over the world for those who would like to get

involved. It includes contact information for people in North, Central, and South

America, the Caribbean, Europe, South East Asia, South Asia and Africa. Most contacts

are affiliated with other organizations, member organizations of La Via Campesina. It is

not indicated whether they are employees of the organization or not.

Upon contacting them through their website, an email was received back from

Tejo Pramono stating the following, “Related to your questions, yes we have secretariat

in Indonesia . . . We are non vertical organization then the political decisions making is

decided in the national, to regional level. Things comes from Via Campesina is based on

the consultation with farmers. There are some organizations interest in the work of food

sovereignty and agrarian reform then support the work of Via Campesina.” (Tejo

Pramono, Via Campesina , 2009) Apparently they have what they refer to as a secretariat

in Indonesia. Tejo states at all decisions are based upon consultation with the farmers

and that decisions are made on the national or even regional level. This coincides with

their decentralized approach to leadership and decision making. Their exact

organizational structure is unclear in terms of paid employees and leadership, location of



offices, funding sources, and the sources of information appearing in position papers that

La Via Campesina produces etc. This could merely represent their decentralized nature,

or could have other intentional reasons. This could also be a protective measure.

There is little or no information available about the funding sources of Via

Campesina. Tejo explained that various organizations that are interested in food

sovereignty and agrarian reform support La Via Campesina. The one example found was

a grant was given from Frances Moore Lappe’s Small Planet Fund to Via Campesina’s

efforts in the Tsnami relief. (http://www.smallplanetfund.org/grantees/) However it

remains unclear how such a mass movement and advocacy group works as far as funding.

Advocates of the Syngenta Case

Several groups have banded together to advocate for the transition of Syngenta’s

testing site in Santa Tereza de Oeste to a agroecology center intended to reverse the

environmental harm they claimed was inflicted by the Swiss corporation. Farmers

identifying themselves as members of La Via Campesina and Movimento dos

Trablhadores Ruais Sem Terra (MST) (Brazil’s Landless Workers Movement) make up

the majority of the group involved. They have worked together with the Brazilian

Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) to publicly

denounce the actions of Syngenta as illegal and call for a fine of 1,000,000 reais

($500,000 US$).

Policy

“Almost half of the people in the world are peasants. Even in the high-tech

world, people eat food produced by peasants. Small-scale agriculture is not just an

http://www.smallplanetfund.org/grantees/




economic activity; it means life for many people. The security of the population depends

on the well being of peasants and sustainable agriculture. To protect human life it is

important to respect, protect, and fulfill the rights of peasants.” (La Via Campesina,

2009)

The principle objectives of La Via Campesina are to develop solidarity and unity

among their members, including the organizations as well as the millions of members

within. They promote social justice in the context of fair economic relations, the

preservation of land, water, seeds, and other natural resources, food sovereignty,

sustainable agricultural production based on small and medium-sized producers.

(www.viacampesina.org)

The main solutions La Via Campesina advocates include peasant, family farm-

based production, food sovereignty, and the decentralization of food production and

supply chains. They describe the model of peasant and family-farm agriculture using

sustainable practices as well as local resources that respect and do not replace local

tradition and culture. They argue against the increased use of external inputs such as

agro-chemicals, machinery, capitol etc. and production is instead labor (not capitol)

intensive, mainly for local and domestic distribution and consumption, which helps local

economies thrive, as well as decreases dependency. (www.viacampesina.org)

La Via Campesina also advocates for food sovereignty, a term it has coined and is

at the forefront of this movement. They define food sovereignty as the right of peoples,

countries, and state unions to define their agricultural and food. Food sovereignty

organizes food production and consumption according to the needs of local communities,

giving priority to production for local consumption. Food sovereignty includes the right



to protect and regulate the national agricultural and livestock production and to shield the

domestic market from the dumping of agricultural surpluses and low-price imports from

other countries. Landless people, peasants, and small farmers must get access to land,

water, and seed as well as productive resources and adequate public services.


The third main area of advocacy pertains to the decentralization of food

production and supply chains. As opposed to our current system dominated and

controlled by large transnational agribusiness, La Via Campesina proposes a replacement

of the current system with one is decentralized, “where production, processing,

distribution and consumption are controlled by the people the communities themselves

and not by transnational corporations.” (www.viacampesina.org)

A few examples of general policy changes La Via Campesina has outlined and

advocates include governments making the sustainable and non exploitative use of

natural resources a high priority, that they support family farm based low external output

agriculture, that governments make long term investments into public resources in the

development of socially and ecologically appropriate rural infrastructure. The

establishment of decentralized rural credit systems, the end to the privatization of water

resources as the end to the privatization of natural resources for food production

including the reversal and prevention of corporate ownership of these resources, the ban

the patenting of life forms, banning of genetically modified seeds, return the right of

farmers to grow, save, sell their own seeds. Also they advocate trade policies that

prioritize local trade to the nearest consumers reducing unnecessary transportation as well

as insuring transparency to customers. They advocate for more specific changes within



trade policy such as, “international trade policy makers must “ conduct a worldwide audit

on the serious consequences resulting from the inclusion of agriculture in the

GATT/WTO agreements and an immediate correction of existing injustices.

Immediately cancel the obligation within the WTO of accepting the minimum

importation of 5% of internal consumption. All compulsory market access clauses must

be cancelled.” (La Via Campesina, 2002)

La Via Campesina is on a self-proclaimed fight against neo liberal globalization

that places economic interests over and above social and environmental conditions. Via

Campesina are proponents of participatory democracy, especially at the local level, and

contest that it is a viable and spreading phenomenon. This model of participatory

democracy also forwards a unique conceptual frame-work for linking together social and

environmental issues by way of understanding democracy not just as reason-giving,

deliberation, and/or representation but as self-determination and socio-ecologically

sustainable production. (Menser, 2008)

La Via Campesina is counter to many of the large development institutions

policies such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade

Organization. They implore the United Nations to enforce policies that will serve as

protection as well as truly nurture sustainable development in these countries. La Via

Campesina is against large scale, cookie cutter, neo-liberal economic based approaches to

development, and they see the World Bank, IMF, and WTO perpetuating these

development models. Instead, they are in favor of countries and regions making their

own decisions based on their social, ecological, and economic health and welfare, as

opposed to purely economically driven policy that is in the hands of a few.



La Via Campesina’s ideals and goals are applaudable. They have solid points and

their advocacy uses language and tactics that has successfully mobilized a large

movement which has gained attention around these important issues. They do

magnificent work unifying and giving voice to organizations and people who may not

usually have a voice. One issue that could give them more credibility is citing more

thoroughly their position papers and documents they distribute, as well as having a more

transparent view into the organization and their funding. They have great points, but

could emphasize their credibility if their points were well documented and backed up.

Case Study Policy

When Syngenta began planting GM crops on its testing site in Santa Teresa de

Oeste, there were legal barriers in place to de-legitimize its actions. Law 10.814/2003

prohibits the planting of GM crops within 10 kilometers of established conservation areas

such as the Iguacu National Park, and the site was located approximately 6 kilometers

away from this park. During the course of the struggle, however, Syngenta lobbied the

Brazilian government of President Lula de Silva to reduce this buffer zone to only 5

meters. (Via Campesina, 2008)

Nonetheless, the actions of the corporate giant are still illegal given the existence

of Law 14.980, passed on December 28th, 2006 designated the area for the Paraná Center

for Agroecology to research sustainable agricultural models in semi-deciduous forest

areas. (Via Campesina, 2008). Considering this law, the continued testing of GM crops

would invoke unnecessary damage on the environment in a site that should be temporary.

The 70 peasant families who occupied the site from March 14, 2006 to November

2006 did so July 17, 2007 did so on the grounds that the Clause 186 in the Brazilian



Constitution states that private property must serve a public function, which the Syngenta

property was not doing (Ahni, 2007). These families left after Syngenta filed a law suit

forcing them off the land, but several members of the movement returned in October

when Syngenta was suspected of continuing to plant GM crops on the testing site.

Politics

The targets as identified by La Via Campesina are the international corporations

that produce genetically modified crops and actively pursue the planting of these crops in

countries whose governments allow. Furthermore, La Via Campesina targets the

“neoliberal policies promoted by the World Trade Organization, Free Trade Agreements

(FTAs), other institutions and many governments in the North as well as in the South”.

(La Via Campesina,2009). Also included in the targets of La Via Campesina are the

transnational corporations responsible for spreading the genetically modified seeds used

to produce large scale, monoculture crops around the world. These corporations, such as

Monsanto, Syngenta, Margil, and Bayer, have proven to be the actors most responsible

for the downfall of food sovereignty and biodiversity in the agricultural world.

Intermediary targets tend to be the governments who have some stake in the

actions of corporations that carry specific threats to the peasants living in any given

country. These governments, provided they are stable, have the ability to create and

enforce laws which prevent the corporations from carrying out certain actions. It is also

interesting to note that the governments are also the targets of the corporations

themselves, as in the Syngenta case in Brazil.

The significant group of stakeholders involved in the mission of La Via



Campesina who are not directly advocating for solidarity among peasants, peasant rights,

and food sovereignty are the environmental groups whose stake in smaller scale farming

is directly tied to the end of GMOs and monoculture crops. These groups are allies and

have worked with La Via Campesina in various projects to this effect. Their stake is the

environmental health that would be promoted by increased biodiversity across the globe,

which is being destroyed by the current systems of large scale corporate farms and

genetically modified crops.

Case Study Politics

The case of Syngenta in Brazil is one example of a very publicized advocacy

campaign in which La Via Campesina was involved alongside several other national and

international groups. Although global awareness was arguably heightened by the violent

nature of one particular incident relating to this campaign, this case represents some of

the integral values for which La Via Campesina struggles.

The corporation Syngenta is the primary opposing player in this specific case.

Syngenta has had a lucrative 80 year history in Brazil, making $973 million in the first

nine months of 2007 (Food First, 2007). The local groups that worked with Syngenta

were the Rural Society of the West (SRO), an association of large landowners opposed to

agrarian reform, and the Movement of Rural Producers (MPR), formed by SRO to

oppose supporters of agrarian reform such as the peasants of La Via Campesina and

MST. An additional group was NF Security, contracted by SRO to act against the

peasants of La Via Campesina who were occupying the site in Santa Teresa de Oeste.

The government of Paraná has the power to enforce Law 14.980, which would

effectively end Syngenta’s ability to continue to plant GM crops on its testing site in



Santa Teresa de Oeste. The corporation has repeatedly appealed the fine for planting

within the buffer zone outside of the National Park and still has not paid (La Via

Campesina, 2008).

Syngenta was part of a coalition of multinational corporations that lobbied the

Brazilian government to accept GM crops, which have been legal since 1998. (Reed

Business Information Limited, 1998). These corporations along with several others,

including Monsanto, have been lobbying the government to reduce restrictions on the

planting of GM soy and corn crops nationally. Over the years, they have succeeded in

reducing restrictions around GMO planting dramatically. It is worth noting that during

the struggle with La Via Campesina and the MST, Syngenta successfully lobbied the

Brazilian government to reduce the buffer zone between nationally conserved areas and

land on which GM crops could legally be planted from 10 kilometers to 5 meters.

Although the peasant movement continued its struggle against this testing site, the actual

legal barriers to the experimental planting of GM crops have been removed since the

onset of this specific struggle.

Strategies

The strategies used to advocate for the policies of Via Campesina vary from

grassroots organizing to coalition building between organizations to lobbying local and

international governmental institutions. The specific strategy is dependent on the context

and generally relies on a combination of methods over the course of time. The long-term

objective of La Via Campesina as stated on its website is to “defend peasant and family



farm agriculture, and cultures and our right to exist as peoples with our own identity.” As

mentioned above, many of the goals of this organization revolve around the solidarity of

peasants and small farmers worldwide, as well as food sovereignty and a sustainable

method of agriculture. Currently, this means promoting more biodiversity in crops and

small farmer owned production of food that sustains us and provides livelihood for the

population of peasant farmers.

The short term goals and objectives depend on the location of the specific case.

Generally, short-term goals focus on the preventing of key corporations from

implementing specific pieces of legislation that would solidify their ability to produce on

the mass level despite the loss of work and environmental degradation that would result.

Constituency

La Via Campesina is composed of peasant workers from across the international

community. This constituency is developed through shared interest in the safety of

farmers and agricultural workers everywhere as the interconnection of the problems that

are commonly faced grow more evident.

La Via Campesina serves as a coalition which includes the work done on the topic

of GMOs and monoculture is done as part of the work by La Via Campesina as a whole,

who also work on several other topics related to peasant rights. This larger network

allows them to utilize communities and connections that are already existent in order to

function more effectively in the short term.

This coalition has several messages that are communicated among its constituents

and targets. These messages primarily focus around the general vision of La Via

Campesina, but are articulated through different lenses to accommodate a variety of



audiences and address a spectrum of issues. Some of the messages as posted on the La

Via Campesina website include:

- “Via Campesina demands the end of corporate driven, monoculture-based

production of agrofuels”. (www.viacampesina.org)

- “Ban Terminator”: ‘terminator seeds’ are an inherently unsustainable method of

agriculture and should be banned universally. (www.viacampesina.org)

- The promotion and development of small scale production and local consumption

models and the rejection of consumerism as necessary to the sustained

development of the world.

- “Combat Monsanto: Building a World Free From Monsanto”


- The positive effect that a continued struggle for biodiversity would have on global

warming, articulating the poignant argument that fertile soils are the best way to

capture CO2.

- The reorientation of agricultural policies towards sustainable rural communities

and livelihoods based on food sovereignty and genuine agrarian reform as a form

of protecting this lifestyle that is a right of peasants everywhere.

- The promotion and development of responsible consumption models

Tactics Used to Engage the Media

The media have been engaged in the struggle of La Via Campesina through

educational conferences, press releases, and public protests around specific issues across

the globe. (Friends of the MST, 2007)

The advocates have utilized a variety of methods to educate the public, catering to the



specific context of each country. Some examples include educational conferences,

videos, pamphlets, website, publications. Via Campesina has utilized new technology,

specifically the internet, very effectively in order to raise awareness on the global level

between specific local member organizations. This allows organizations to learn from

each other and voice support across large geographical distances.

Many methods and tactics have been used to influence the targets, varying in degree

and scope in accordance with the geographical region and specific policy case. Some

examples of these include hunger strikes in France, the destruction of trees and other

property at research and production sites (Rising Tide 2008), the peaceful occupation of

key locations such as the Syngenta testing site in Brazil (Via Campesina 2008), and

public protests in Germany and throughout most countries in which member groups of La

Via Campesina are active. In addition, many groups lobby specific governments to

change or reverse legislation such as Law 14.980 in Brazil (La Via Campesina 2008).

Most of the lobbying and protests that take place do require mobilization of

constituents and the public; various member groups have used publicity via internet

websites, conferences, emails, local meetings, and press conferences to raise awareness

and call for action around specific policy cases. One example of annual dates for action

include the 17th of April, which is named the International Peasant Struggle Day in

commemoration of the murder of nineteen peasants participating in the struggle in

Eldorado dos Carajas (Brazil) on April 17, 1996. Another important day of the movement

is the 10th of September, which is the international struggle day against WTO. On that

date in 2003, Mr. Lee Kyun Hae, a Korean peasant, stabbed himself to death during a

massive protest against the WTO in Cancun, Mexico. He was holding a banner saying



“WTO kills farmers”. (Agence France Presse, 2003)

Case Study Strategies

The long term goals of the group working against Syngenta in the case study were

in line with those of La Via Campesina, but the short term goals in this movement were

much more measurable. In this case, La Via Campesina and the MST demanded that

Syngenta paid a fine of $500,000 US for planting experimental GM crops within the 10

kilometer buffer zone established by the Brazilian national government. An additional

short term goal was to shift the testing site in Santa Teresa de Oeste to an agroecology

center which would be used to research and develop sustainable agricultural models.

The strategies utilized by the La Via Campesina and Movimento dos

Trabalhadores were centered on the peaceful occupation of the testing site for more than

a year. These protests were carried out in conjunction with lobbying of the government of

Paraná to establish Law 14.980, to change the Syngenta testing site to the Paraná Center

for Agroecology. Member groups throughout the world supported the groups involved in

the case by spreading the word in action alerts and several individuals from all over the

world flew into Brazil to participate in the peaceful occupation.

Tactics Messages and Media

Many of the tactics used by the member groups of La Via Campesina on the

grassroots level involve some form of peaceful protest. For example, on the International

Day of Peasant’s Struggle, April 17th, the La Via Campesina website celebrated 100

actions around the world taken in solidarity with the growing resistance among farmer,



including “demonstrations, street theater, video screenings, direct action, conferences, art

shows, local food markets, publications and exchanges. . . “ (www.viacampesina.org).

Additionally, member groups of La Via Campesina participate in direct lobbying efforts

to change the policies shaping the agricultural community.

The mainstream media has given little to no coverage of the issues that La Via

Campesina is raising around the topic. Smaller left-wing media sources cover certain

events and developments fairly accurately, but on the global scale the possible media

coverage that this campaign has not received has probably hampered the awareness of

many groups and individuals who would be possible allies in the struggles of this

movement. Conversely, there is a fairly high level of alternative media coverage on the

policy cases in which member groups are involved, which means that individuals seeking

out information regarding certain campaigns.

Case Study Tactics Messages and Media

The tactics used in the Syngenta case were parallel to many of the global efforts

of La Via Campesina. This group of peasants used a combination of peaceful protest with

policy advocacy in the Brazilian government in order to be more effective. The message

used was in this case shifted over the course of the campaign, after the peasants returned

to the testing site in October 2007. This group of peasants was attacked by a group called

NF Security, hired by Syngenta in the case of peasants’ return. Although weapons by

such security services is illegal, this group carried guns and shot six of the protesters,

killing one of the leaders named Valmir Mota, also known as Keno. NF Security was

established as an armed gang in the Criminal Case No. 2007.3982-4 of the Criminal



Court of Cascavel (La Via Campesina, 2008). After this event, the focus and message of

the campaign were re-centered around human rights. There was no substantial

mainstream media coverage of this case before or after the events of October 2007, but in

the alternative media the Syngenta case became famous worldwide; synonymous with

human rights violations in addition to corporate GM crops and peasant rights.

Analysis

Although La Via Campesina has made monumental progress in bringing these

crucial issues to international awareness, some aspects of its work could be made more

effective. While La Via Campesina is inclusive in the diversity among its members, the

fact that members and member organizations is necessarily exclusionary. Little is known

about the membership process and how to become a member. There is evidence of

tensions between member organizations within the movement, involving politics or other

specific differences. Additionally, La Via Campesina has succeeded in adapting

recognition and the inclusion of such organizations at the table with other

intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations; however, language used to

mandate such inclusion dictates representation for only the organized. This excludes

groups and/or individuals who are not formally organized as well as those unable to

organize as a result of political or unsafe conditions in their country.

Questions have emerged concerning whether La Via Campesina qualifies

as a movement or a network, the definitions of each of these words and the significance

of such a distinction. While movements tend to be more open, La Via Campesina has

limited its membership to those exclusively listed in its publications or on its website.

Despite the fact that La Via Campesina describes itself as a multilateral and decentralized



movement, it has an international coordinating committee as well as certain central

figures and is not forthcoming with information about who they are, their exact roles, or

the selection process for these individuals.

Decentralizing as far as having a wide variety of member organizations, but

somehow received funding to continue operations, including producing position papers,

holding international conferences, and the maintenance of a website. Lastly, with regards

to transparency, La Via Campesina publish position papers as well as advocacy

concerning issues of food justice and food sovereignty. However, these are all poorly

documented. While it is our belief that they have strong points, they lose credibility in the

eyes of critics when they are unable or un-inclined to back up their claims with specific

sources.

Another notable area for improvement of La Via Campesina is its lack of success

to date in achieving large scale policy change. While they have achieved in taking a

human rights based approach to food and convinced organizations such as the United

Nations to adopt language that includes this ideology, we do not see effective long-term

policy change towards food policy and justice. Despite this critique of its current

achievements, it is our belief that in time, through the success of the advocacy and

organization on which La Via Campesina has focused its efforts, these long-term policy

changes will be achieved.

La Via Campesina has been extraordinarily successful in bringing together a

unified and powerful voice to an extremely diverse and often marginalized body of

people. Due to their decentralized organizational structure based in local communities, La

Via Campesina is able to be especially responsive to its members. The power is truly



from below. Additionally, La Via Campesina enjoys international recognition of its

mission and actions due to its effective advocacy.

References

Ahni. (2007, October 24). Syngenta-Hired Militia Attacks Peaceful Occupation. Message

posted to http://intercontinentalcry.org/syngenta-hired-militia-attacks-peaceful-

occupation

Agence France Presse. (2003, September 11). Korean Activist Kills Himself, Others

Injured in Cancun Protest. Commondreams.org. Author: Retrieved April 28,



2009 from http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0911-06.htm

Ewing, Reese. (2005, Mar 1). End of Brazil GMO Ban to Curb Rampant Black Market.

USA Today: Reuters Limited. Retrieved Apr 20, 2009, from

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/biotech/2005-03-01-brazil-

gmo-ban_x.htm

Friends of the MST. 2006, March 16). La Via Campesina Holds a Parallel Conference to

Coincide with UN Conferences. Global Exchange: San Francisco: Author.

Retrieved May 3, 2009 from http://globalexchange.org/countries/brazil/3824.html

Food First Institute for Food and Development Policy. (2007, Nov 14). MST and Via

Campesina Work to Expel Syngenta After Murder of Campesino Activist.

Oakland, CA: Author. Retrieved Apr 20, 2009, from

http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/1802

Grassroots International. (2009, Feb. 10). Food for Thought and Action: A Food

Sovereignty Curriculum Boston, MA: Author. Retrieved Apr. 20, 2009,

from www.http://grassrootsonline.org/publications/educational-resources/food-

thought-action-a-food-sovereignty-curriculum

International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development. (2002, Feb. 21).

Government Panel to Review Brazil’s GMO Policy. Geneva, Switzerland. Author.

Retrieved Apr. 20, 2009, from http://ictsd.net/i/news/biores/8712/

La Via Campesina - International Peasant Movement. (2002, Aug.). Proposals of Via

Campesina for Sustainable, Farmer based Agricultural Production Johannesburg:

Author.

La Via Campesina - International Peasants Movement. (2007). Contacts By Region

http://www.http//grassrootsonline.org/publications/educational-resources/food-

http://www.http//grassrootsonline.org/publications/educational-resources/food-



Jakarta: Author.

La Via Campesina International Peasant Movement. (2009, Mar.). Declaration of Rights

of Peasants - Women and Men Seoul, 20: Author.

La Via Campesina Website. (April 28,2009).

http://www.viacampesina.org/main_en/index.php.

La Via Campesina. Email response Tejo Pramonoa. (April 30, 2009)

Menser, M. (2008). Transnational Participatory Democracy in Action: The Case of La

Via Campesina. Journal of Social Philosophy, 39(1), 20-41.

Ribeiro, Silvia. (2007, Nov 23). Syngenta: Murder and Private Militias In Brazil. La

Jornada and Ecoportal: Author. Retrieved Apr 15, 2009 from

http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/17297

Rising Tide North America. (2008, Mar 9.) Brazilian Women Destroy Monsanto GMO

Corn and Trees). Author: Retrieved Apr 28, 2009) from

http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/2008/03/09/brazilian-women-

destroy-monsanto-gmo-corn-and-trees

Small Planet Fund, (2008). Small Planet Fund Emergency Grantees Message posted to


http://www.viacampesina.org/main_en/index.php




http://www.viacampesina.org/main_en/index.php




Case Study La via Campesina-1

Documents

Transcript of Case Study La via Campesina-1