Food sovereignty and control over natural resources

Food sovereignty and control over natural resources

Introduction

Throughout history, “humankind’s relationship with land, forests, and sea has been complex and gone well beyond the actual space from which they make a living. Land, oceans, rivers, forests and nature as a whole, are not only a means of production, but also the foundations of life itself, of cultures and identities. They fulfil a social, environmental, cultural and spiritual function.”[55] In fact, peasants, Indigenous Peoples,[56] pastoralists, small- scale fishers and other small-scale food producers, among others, sometimes refer to the term ‘territory’ to emphasize that all natural resources and their uses are interconnected in the realities of their lives and livelihoods for the realization of their human right to adequate food and nutrition (RtFN). It is therefore impossible to separate land, fisheries, seeds and forests from one another, or from the communities that manage them.[57] These resources are critical in achieving food sovereignty, which is defined as “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.”[58] Food sovereignty entails peoples’ right to participate in decision-making and to define their own food and agriculture systems.

Since the 2008 global food crisis, the world has witnessed a new wave of land and resource grabbing, leading to new levels of concentration of natural resources in the hands of powerful actors. It has also resulted in unprecedented levels of marginalization, dispossession, eviction and destruction of the ways of living of local communities, often peasants, small-scale fishers, pastoralists, and Indigenous Peoples. Trans- and multinational corporate agro-industries and other extractive/industrial operations (mining, infrastructure, etc.) play a colossal role in these dispossessions, often aided by states and development banks who shroud these in the language of ‘attracting investments,’ ‘creating an enabling environment for private investments’, and ‘easing of regulations to attract investors for economic development and job creation’.[59] The global crisis since 2008 has also shed a light on the increasing role that financial actors and markets play in fueling dispossession, ecosystem destruction and resulting human rights violations. They operate through opaque investment webs, tax havens and offshore centers, thus deliberately seeking to obfuscate their operations and avoid regulation and accountability.[60]

States’ obligations

States have the obligation to respect the right to land and natural resources by recognizing and respecting customary rights and the natural commons and refraining from forced evictions or any practice or activity that destroys or arbitrarily impairs existing access to, use and management of land and natural resources. States have the obligation to protect the right to land and natural resources by preventing third parties (for example individuals, groups, corporations) from interfering with the enjoyment of this right. The obligation to protect, includes, for example, adopting the necessary and effective legislative and other measures to regulate third parties and to sanction them when promoting or participating in forced evictions, dispossessing women of their rights, encroaching on customary rights, or polluting and destroying natural resources. States have the obligation to fulfil the right to land and natural resources, for example, by implementing an agrarian and/or aquatic reform when individuals and communities live in poverty due to a lack of or insufficient access to land and natural resources.

This can require prioritizing the allocation of public lands, water bodies, fisheries and forests to marginalized groups, especially when these were unlawfully taken from them. In the context of climate change and rapid loss of biodiversity, states are also required to ensure the restoration and sustainable use of land and other natural resources, thus protecting and strengthening the tenure and management systems of people and communities.

List of key words

  • Access and control over natural resources
  • Agrarian reform
  • Agroecology
  • Agro-toxics
  • Biodiversity
  • Climate change
  • Collective rights/tenure systems
  • Commons
  • Corporations
  • Customary rights/tenure systems
  • Digital technologies/digital registries
  • Ecosystems
  • Evictions
  • Extractive activities
  • Financial investors
  • Fisheries
  • Food sovereignty
  • Forests
  • Free, Prior and Informed Consent
  • Gender justice
  • GMOs
  • Indigenous Peoples
  • Industrial food production
  • Intellectual property rights
  • Land
  • Pastoralists
  • Peasants
  • Resource grabbing
  • Restitution
  • Seeds/seed systems
  • Small-scale fishers
  • Tenure rights/systems
  • Traditional knowledge, practices and innovations
  • Water and water cycles
  • Women

Main instruments

Guiding Questions

Governance of natural resources

    • Are there existing constitutional and other legal provisions to respect, guarantee and enforce the right to land, water and other natural resources, in particular, for peasants, Indigenous Peoples, small-scale fishers, pastoralists, and other ethnic and marginalized groups?
    • Are existing measures to respect, protect, guarantee and promote legitimate tenure rights effectively implemented in a non-discriminatory way? Do they give priority to the above-mentioned groups and other marginalized groups?
    • Do existing national extractive policies (especially around the governance of sub-soil resources) impede communities’ access to and control over their lands, forests, fisheries, water resources, biodiversity and other natural resources?

  • For example, when a mining company pollutes community water resources, destroys aquatic organisms, dumps wastes on forests and grazing lands or on farmland leading to loss of crops?

    • Which measures are in place to recognize and protect collective and/or customary tenure rights and systems?
    • Which measures are in place to guarantee legitimate rights over publicly owned lands, fisheries and forests, including those used and managed collectively (‘the commons‘)? How are issues such as adequate compensation, resettlement and restitution safeguarded in constitutional and legal provisions? Is the notion of ‘public purpose or public interest’ defined in law?
    • Are there accessible, transparent, participatory and gender-sensitive programs and mechanisms to effectively monitor the outcome of land and associated natural resource governance in order to achieve food sovereignty, poverty eradication, sustainable rural development, and social stability, among others?

  • What measures are in place to avoid infringement of legitimate tenure rights that are not currently protected by law, of women, peasants, Indigenous Peoples, small-scale fishers, pastoralists, ethnic groups, and other marginalized groups?

  • For example, are legal provisions in place to rule out forced evictions?

    • Are there contradictions between laws and frameworks regulating natural resource management, tenure, agriculture, fisheries and frameworks regulating other sectors such as extractive activities, mining, trade, environmental protection and climate change among others? What mechanisms are in place to address existing contradictions to ensure policy coherence based on human rights?

  • Are there also measures in place to regulate, monitor and hold accountable non-state actors, such as corporations and/or financial investors who operate in the land sector?

  • Are there bills or laws, which limit access to and the use of water by rural or urban communities, especially for food producers in villages or in other ethnic communities?

  • Are there also measures taken to protect vulnerable persons (e.g. orphans/child-headed households) against the loss of their tenure rights and access to natural resources?

  • What mechanisms are in place to ensure that women, peasants, small-scale fishers, Indigenous Peoples, pastoralists, ethnic groups and other marginalized groups have effective access to justice?

    • What measures are in place to ensure that processes to identify, demarcate and record tenure rights are non-discriminatory (including through digital technologies), transparent and ensure effective participation by all rights holders, in particular marginalized people, taking into account existing power imbalances between different actors? Are tenure rights recorded in a way that ensure accessibility and socio-cultural appropriateness (including in the context of digital registries)?[61]
    • Are nomadic pastoralists and forest dwellers entitled to use traditional (transhumance) routes? Are such provisions effectively implemented?
    • Can small-scale food producers, including peasants, indigenous peoples, pastoralists, small-scale fishers and fish workers, agricultural workers and ethnic groups freely organize in associations to defend their rights over natural resources?
    • What mechanisms exist to ensure the effective participation of social organizations in policy processes, in particular the organizations of peasants, Indigenous Peoples, pastoralists, small-scale fishers (and fish workers), agricultural workers and ethnic groups? Do these take into account existing power imbalances between different actors?

Seeds and biodiversity

    • What measures are in place to respect, protect, support and promote the conservation and sustainable use of land, fisheries and forests as well as plant and animal biodiversity by peasants, small-scale fishers, pastoralists and Indigenous Peoples, in particular agroecological, biodiverse production and management practices and systems?

  • Are peasants‘ and Indigenous Peoples’ distinct seed systems and management practices recognized and protected by law? Are there any public policies and/or programs supporting peasants‘ and Indigenous Peoples’ seed systems and collective seed management practices?

    • Are there measures to recognize and protect traditional knowledge, practices and innovations of peasants, Indigenous Peoples, pastoralists, small-scale fishers and fish workers, etc.?
    • Are the rights to seeds of peasants and Indigenous Peoples limited by intellectual property rights, in particular their rights to conserve, use, exchange and sell seeds that they select in their fields (“farm-saved seeds”), particularly regarding seeds derived from protected varieties?
    • What measures are in place to outlaw or regulate the use of GMOs, including organisms developed through new biotechnologies, in order to avoid risks for human health, the environment and ecosystems?

  • What measures are in place to address risks arising from the use of emerging technologies, such as digital sequencing of genetic information and gene editing?

    • Do legal frameworks allow patents over genetic sequences?
    • Is the use of pesticides and other agrotoxics regulated and monitored, in order to avoid risks for health and the environment?

  • Do these respect, protect and promote the rights and management practices of Indigenous Peoples, peasants and other people and communities who have a special relationship with biodiversity and ecosystems and rely on them for their livelihoods and ways of living?

    • Do existing policy and legal frameworks recognize the contribution of small-scale food producers to address climate change?
    • Are there any regulations on the protection of natural pollinators (bees etc.) indispensable for the perpetuity of seed management by peasants and Indigenous Peoples?
    • Are any measures in place to support and promote the protection and/or regeneration of natural water cycles and soil structure (e.g. peat soil)?
    • Are there comprehensive and inclusive regulations, monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure the prevention of land degradation, deforestation and pollution of water, soils and ecosystems through extractive activities, including the use of pesticides and other agro-toxics?
    • Are there any provisions creating fishing areas that are accessible only to small-scale fishers, or other measures to protect them from industrial fishing? What regulations are in place to avoid ecological harm and caused by aquaculture?
    • Are environmental provisions regarding the prevention of contamination of land, water and ecosystems enforced?
    • What measures are in place to regulate, monitor and hold accountable non-state actors, such as corporations who engage or invest in activities that may cause environmental harm, including financial investors involved in the financing of such activities (banks, investment funds, insurance companies etc.)?
    • What measures are in place to ensure the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of Indigenous Peoples and other communities, including peasants, pastoralists, small-scale fishers, among others, whenever their seeds, breeds, ecosystems and resources as well as their traditional knowledge, practices and innovations are accessed, collected or used?
    • Is there effective oversight and control on imports and aid to avoid the contamination of seeds used by small-scale food producers (e.g. through the introduction of GMOs and foreign diseases)?
    • Are there measures in place, which restrict and limit the marketing of farm produce deriving from peasant and/or Indigenous Peoples’ seeds? (e.g. certification requirements, phytosanitary measures, etc.?)

  • Are there any collaborative agricultural research programs that involve small-scale food producers on an equal standing with researchers at all levels (design, implementation and monitoring), ensuring that the outcomes of the research benefits them? Are adequate financial resources made available for public agricultural research, and is there transparency regarding private (co-)funding of such research, including safeguards to avoid domination of research by corporate interests and conflicts of interest?

Access to markets and digital technologies

    • Are there policies to support local and territorial markets? If so, do they respect and ensure communities’ access to natural resources?
    • Are there any measures in place to support short food supply chains and the marketing of produce through direct producer-consumer relationships, such as community supported agriculture (CSA) and other solidarity partnerships?
    • Is the access to local markets by small-scale food producers subject to the use of specific production models?[62]
    • Are there any policies, programs or other measures promoting the use of digital technologies in the context of food and agriculture? Do such measures take into account the rights, realities and needs of small-scale food producers, or are they promoting industrial food production?

On Discrimination

    • Do women and other frequently discriminated gender groups have the right to inherit and possess land and other property, independently of their marital status?
    • Are there any measures to recognize and protect customary tenure rights and systems, especially those of marginalized groups, such as ethnic minorities/groups, Indigenous Peoples, Dalits etc.?
    • Do women or other marginalized groups suffer exclusion or discrimination in the entitlement to rights over natural resources? 63
    • Do mechanisms exist for women, peasants, Indigenous Peoples, fisher folks, pastoralists and all rural communities to participate in an informed and effective manner in the formulation, adoption, implementation and monitoring of all policies that affect them, including agrarian, trade, mining and rural development policies, taking into account existing power imbalances between different actors?
    • Do policy and legal frameworks in the context of agriculture and seeds discriminate (de jure and/or de facto) against peasant and Indigenous Peoples’ seeds and seed systems to the benefit of industrial seeds? What mechanisms are in place to promote gender justice and address situations of discrimination against women or other marginalized groups within customary law or tenure and management systems, aiming at fostering collaboration with customary authorities?
    • Do the existing legal and regulatory frameworks recognize the specific rights of Indigenous Peoples as enshrined in ILO Convention No. 169 and UNDRIP? Are the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral territories and to Free, Prior and Informed Consent about any project affecting their territories and traditional lands respected?

Where to find answers to the questions

  • National ministries, such as agriculture and rural development, lands, water and mining, environment and nature protection, scientific research and innovation, trade and investment, gender and minority issues. Information on policies/ guidelines/ programs/reports.
  • National institute of national lands and forest registries, government websites dedicated to the easing of regulations and business attractiveness / those creating special economic zones. All these will enable you to get baseline statistics that are useful for highlighting the scale of a violation.
  • Organizations that represent small-scale food producers, agricultural and food workers, Indigenous Peoples, women, ethnic groups at national and local levels.
  • Investigative journalists who have produced reports on the issue in question. Sometimes they have additional information and statistics that will strengthen your report.
  • Like-minded CSOs working towards social justice (e.g. their reports and information on websites)

Useful resources on the topic

Food sovereignty and control over natural resources

Sariaya – Reversal of agrarian reform and its impact on the RtFN of small-scale farmers

Landless peasants and small farmers in the Philippines traditionally celebrate June 10 as the agrarian reform day in the Philippines. In 1988, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was enacted to promote equity and social justice and redistribute lands under the “land to the tiller” principle in the Constitution. To this day, 4.8 million hectares of land have been distributed to around 3 million agrarian reform beneficiaries. While many were able to benefit from the fruits of the land, what is not on official record are those peasants who subsequently lost their reformed lands due to agrarian reform reversals. The smallholders in Sariaya is one such case. The municipality of Sariaya located in Quezon Province is a first class agricultural municipality, covering a total land area of 24,631 hectares. According to the Department of Agrarian Reform, more than 98% of the land distribution target (6,263 hectares) has been covered under the CARP and distributed to 5,073 rural families. The land redistribution in Sariaya was complemented by support services, among others, farm-to-market roads, warehouses, solar dryers for rice farmers, a trading post, and required trainings, which truly provided the basis for peasants to use their land and realize their right to food and nutrition. Over time, Sariaya successfully transformed into a food basket, catering to the diversified and nutritious food requirements of millions of Filipinos that include  not only the Quezon Province, but also the southern Tagalog Provinces, Bicol region, and Metro Manila.

Within 10 years of redistribution, the poverty rate drastically dropped, and Sariaya became a true success story, giving hopes and encouraging many who continued to struggle for their access to land. However, these reform gains are being reversed and continually threatened due to attempts to revoke land redistribution using an outdated zoning ordinance, which reclassifies agricultural into non-agricultural uses.

Two cases of reversals, one as early as 2004 and another in 2013, have already affected some 100 farming families. In the latest case, in November 2020, the Supreme Court denied with finality a motion filed by 255 peasants to reconsider a lower court resolution of June 2018, which favored the former landowner to exempt already reformed land from the CARP. The decision of the Supreme Court will gravely threaten the right to food and nutrition of 255 peasants and their families, as well as many others whose cases of CLOA (Certificate of Land Ownership Award) cancellation are currently pending at various levels of legal processes. To date, a total of 349 farming families cultivating a total of 680 hectares of land have been stripped of their titles through decisions exempting already reformed lands. At a time of great food insecurity and growing hunger in the country, registering a record high of 20% in 2020 due to the combined impact of Covid-19 induced lockdowns and devastations of agricultural production due to a series of strong typhoons, the reversal of agrarian reform in areas providing food for millions, such as Sariaya, will further erode the capacity of the country to feed itself in the coming years.