Disagreement over trade rules reflects the two opposing philosophies for addressing the structural weaknesses in agriculture. The neo-liberal model advocates that food should be subject to the same market forces as manufactured goods with minimum state involvement. Small farms should be consolidated and alternative livelihoods found for surplus labour. Larger farms can then raise capital for the expensive products of modern biotechnology and compete in export markets.

Grains of hope © Greenpeace UK

The alternative philosophy of “food sovereignty” restores the absolute priority for food security. This model favours local ownership and control of the full chain of resources. It accepts small farms for what they are, encouraging their sustainability through subsidised inputs and credit. Advocates point to research showing that small farms are capable of gearing up productivity through intense husbandry and family motivation. Small farms are also better equipped for the lower input models relevant to climate change mitigation.

Backed by a World Bank estimate that growth of rural economies accelerates poverty reduction four times faster than other sectors, the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, has appealed for funds of $20 billion pa to restore food security. This figure is a tiny fraction of the cost of agriculture subsidies in Europe and US. However, the G20 London Summit in April 2009 made no promises of direct aid, nor held out any real prospect of reviving trade negotiations.

Help us to complete OneWorld Guides
Many important development issues are missing from our range of Guides. OneWorld wants to fill these gaps as part of our efforts to improve understanding of the issues faced by developing countries. We receive no funding for the production of our educational resources. Every small contribution helps!