Andrea Ferrante, Technical Coordinator of the Secretariat for the Forum of NGOs/CSOs on Food Sovereignty: "If the groups of the Network are successful in participating actively in the formulation of political agricultural agendas, we will be close to the concept of food sovereignty that we are pursuing with such eagerness."

Andrea Ferrante, one of the organizers of the Forum of NGOs/CSOs that will accompany the World Food Summit: five years later in Rome from 8 to 13 June, explains in this interview what the expectations are for this meeting, what role the NGOs/CSOs will play in development, and what the potentials are of the Network, in order to assure the food sovereignty of all countries

What is the main message that the forum will try to transmit in June?

The principal message is that we have to begin to talk about rights. In fact, we are talking about food security as a right that people have to decide their own agricultural and agrofood policies. We do not want this to remain a problem of access, but rather a question of fundamental right to food. With regard to individuals, to formulate their own policies and exercise their right to land, water and the control of genetic resources. We intend for all countries in the world to adopt a code of conduct that includes the right to food as one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by national constitutions. This is an initiative of some 900 NGOs that enjoy the complete support of the forum and is one of the results that we wish to take home with us. We want all nations to make the commitment to support this. Another result on which we place our expectations is the ratification of the treaty on genetic resources. The entire issue of patents for genetic resources and Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are of extreme importance and have to be regulated with urgency. This does not mean only counteracting environmental risks but also assuring the right of the rural population to maintain their own genetic heritage.

What realistic expectations have the NGOs and CSOs placed on the summit in June?

The problem of the summit is that it starts from a position of weakness, from a position in which the conclusions of 1996 are accepted, while the fact that no progress has been achieved in five years is identified as a lack of political will. This, for us, is in a certain way a weak position because no effort has been made to determine the causes of this failure. The seven commitments of the Action Plan approved in Rome in 1996, for example, correspond to a logic in which the market has a basic importance in resolving problems of food security. Today, we know that this is not the problem - moreover, we know that one of the fundamental problems involves the ill-fated consequences of applying the Agreement on Agriculture, signed in Marrakech. These are agreements that have opened the markets of the north but not those of the south, and we can see their consequences ever since the end of the 1990s. Furthermore, northern agriculture continues to be overprotected and there is no sign of the slightest intention to change this.

Does this mean that the forum criticizes the fundamental terms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the European Union?

It's a very delicate matter. We do not seek to dismantle the CAP, which is of vital importance for European farmers. But this policy should be ecologically sustainable, on the one hand, and, on the other, it cannot have harmful effects on agriculture in the south. We propose the elimination of the subsidies on exportation, which today represent 13% of the overall budget of the CAP. This money does not even go into the pockets of the European farmers, but rather of the large multinational corporations that trade in cereals throughout the world.

Where have the NGOs placed their greatest hopes for the summit? Some head of state or some event in particular?

We firmly believe in debate. Personally, I do not believe very much in the fact that we all have to be in agreement, as intended in the Multistakeholder Dialogue or dialogues between partners in development. So that we understand each other, we will never arrive at a common position with Monsanto, although we recognize it as the private sector at one of these tables. It is highly important to sit down and debate, but a common position cannot always be reached. This is my main criticism regarding the process at Johannesburg. On the other hand, the World Food Summit is being prepared in a much more interesting way, especially because, on the part of the FAO, there has been much greater recognition of the role of the NGOs and CSOs. The NGO/CSO International Planning Committee (IPC) is a non-elective structure, but is has the representation of indigenous peoples, NGOs, peasant and farmer organizations, fisher folks, trade unions and, in this sphere, a number of experts. In addition, the regional conferences of the FAO, which are held every two years, have been preceded by regional consultation of NGOs/CSOs, which have been of fundamental importance. In Rome, we are working on the basis of such consultation.

How are you organizing the forum?

It will revolve around three large themes:

--Rights: the rights to food, rights to access to resources (land, water, genetics and credit), rights of indigenous peoples and rights of workers.

--The alternative models of agricultural production, given that the current model of agricultural production carries numerous environmental and economic risks, and it causes hunger in the south because it feeds indebtedness of country people (the green revolution, for example, has converted a number of countries into net exporters but their farmers get poorer and poorer).

--Food sovereignty. This means the right of peoples to decide their own agricultural and food policies, and this leads back to the debate on whether agriculture should or should not be subject to the accords of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Today, we can affirm that the treaties of international commerce have worsened the condition of farmers in the south.

With regard to these themes, numerous workshops and seminars have been organized, to be held during the afternoons. These constitute the core of the declaration that will be delivered on Sunday to the Director-General of the FAO, Jacques Diouf, with the common position of the NGOs and CSOs. During the mornings from Monday to Thursday, in the plenary assembly, we will work on our plan of action, which rests on the foundation of regional consultation. We have also studied a careful system of representation to avoid the overpresence of certain countries or sectors, as usually occurs in similar forums. The participants in the plenary will be 600 people (450 from southern countries and 150 from northern, as corresponds to worldwide population distribution). For each geographic area, there is a proportional representation of fishermen, indigenous peoples, NGOs, agricultural organizations, and syndicates of agricultural workers.

How can the role of NGOs and CSOs in development be defined?

The NGOs have primarily one role of advocacy, of taking up the interests of the poor countries in the places where decisions are made (because we know that world democracy is relative and that the decisions that concern the planet are made predominantly in the EU, USA and the G8). They also have an important function of supporting the NGOs of the south. The CSOs of the south have a basic role because they are the true bastion of democracy in these countries, being the ones that are responding day to day to the needs in each country, and they constitute a treasure trove of solutions and proposals to solve the crises in their respective countries.

Has the Monterrey Conference on financing and development changed anything in this role?

Monterrey unfortunately has not changed very much of anything. Not only has the allocation of 0.7% of the GDP for official aid to development that the rich countries committed several decades ago not been forthcoming, but furthermore the funds that are being released are becoming more and more conditional. The World Food Summit can be very different. Partly because of a much more democratic preparatory process and because the theme is of fundamental importance, since the rural world can fulfil a crucial role on the planet. Johannesburg, on the other hand, runs the risk of ending up like Monterrey.

What potential does the Network have in dealing with all these themes that we have been talking about?

It is fundamental that debate be opened among the different partners in development. We cannot necessarily count on reaching a consensus, but it is important that debate be opened in all countries. The structure of the Network is vital for this, because it is not centralized in Rome, but rather reaches the national level. From this debate, we will derive results. It is the idea of a different governability, a governability with more participation.

What themes would you propose at this moment for the agendas of the national Thematic Groups?

The three themes that we will deal with in the forum. The alternative models of agriculture, for example, these should be studied at the national level, because they change from country to country. In addition, everything related to rights is crucial: land reform, access to land, patenting, water distribution, etc. If the Thematic Groups manage to formulate policies on all these aspects, we will succeed in arriving at the concept of food sovereignty that we are so fervently pursuing.

How much importance is there in cooperation among the NGOs of the south?

A great deal. This is now being demonstrated in the movements of country people that are organizing at the national and regional level, as for example in western Africa. This gives them grand potential for participating actively in the formulation of agricultural policies.

How can collaboration between NGOs and the United Nations be improved?

The FAO, for example, has undertaken all the restructuring of its manner of working - the famous PAIAs (Priority Areas for Inter-disciplinary Action). It is important that, in these PAIAs, there is a real possibility of participation not only for the NGOs of the north, being much better prepared, but also for the civil society of the south. The civil society recognizes that in the FAO, and in other technical agencies, there is an accumulation of knowledge and they wish to make use of this. But this recognition should be reciprocal. The agencies should take into account that the organizations of civil society also have a great deal of experience and also have the capacity to share it.