Reference Document: FAMILY FARMING AND ACCESS TO RESOURCES

Co-ordinator: GONZALO GALILEO RIVAS PLATERO / Agroforestry Research Program and Sustainable Agriculture ISABEL ADRIANA GUTIRREZ MONTES / Mesoamerican Agroenvironmental Program

INDEX
1. - Conceptualisation ................................................................................................................... 1 2. - The productive system and access to resources.................................................................... 4 3. - Some questions .................................................................................................................... 14 4. - Concrete demands and proposals........................................................................................ 17 5. - References ........................................................................................................................... 18

1.- Conceptualisation of Family Farming and access to resources

Family Farming is much more than a model of agricultural economics: it is the foundation of sustainable food production in order to advance towards food security and sovereignty, environmental management of the rural and marine territory, and its biodiversity, a source of important cultural dimensions for each town and, in short, a fundamental mainstay of the integral development of nations (World Rural Forum 2010). Echenique (2009) indicates that there are four factors that differentiate FF from agricultural companies: a) The predominant use of the strength of family work. b) Limited access to land, water and capital resources. c) The use of multiple strategies and strategies for income generation. d) Its marked heterogeneity, particularly as regards its articulation in factors and products markets.

These indicators, allow Family Farming to be grouped into three different types: a) Subsistence Family Farming. This first category is characterised for being more focused on self-supply, it has a productive structure requiring very low capital and technology which does not allow it to generate sufficient income to guarantee family welfare. Therefore, it must sell labour services elsewhere to obtain more income. If restricted access to capital and technology is maintained, the continuance in the market is at risk. b) Family Farming in transition. This type has a higher level of capitalization and better land resources that allow production for own consumption and sale of surplus on the market. Although it does not generate sufficient economic surpluses to profit from the farm and achieve greater productive development. The situation of this type of FF is unstable as regards production and has greater dependence on public support to conserve the situation. It needs access to credit, technological innovations and better coordination with the market in order to develop. c) Consolidated Family Farming. Unlike the previous type, it has better access to the main factors of production like land, capital and technology. In addition, it has managed to introduce itself in the market in such a way that it generates surpluses for capitalization and growth. The reduction of the available agricultural area, the exhaustion of water resources, both made worse by the effects of climate change, the reduction in performance based on losses in soil fertility and land grabbing will mark agricultural development worldwide. The usable and/or available agricultural area is no longer solely dependent on food production, but rather, it is increasingly becoming the substrate on which important non-food crop production is developed. Meanwhile, the agricultural sector must continue attending to the food demands of a global population in constant growth, guaranteeing the production of healthy food and preserving, insofar as is possible, the natural resources it uses. In this context, the development of research and public-private investment requires our full attention in order to tackle the new global agricultural scene. In reference to the Family Farming model that concerns us, we can state that family farmers in all regions of the world are especially subjected to pressures and risks directly related to access to resources (natural, productive, etc.).

We must start from a key reality, and the truth is that a vicious circle exists between the lack of access to resources by family farmers, and more specifically by young people and women, and the persistence of poverty and hunger in the world. Consequently, this document will aim to decipher the special situation of this group of family farmers in reference to the subject of access to land and water resources, identified as the most basic, in order to propose specific measures to aim to break the vicious circle. In future documents we will have to take a closer look at access to other natural (biodiversity, seeds, climate), financial (saving, loans and credit), technological, physical (infrastructure), human (training) and social resources (organisation, community).

The Latin American Example: Family Farming (FF) on the Latin American continent represents the type of farming with the highest number of farms. In accordance with a joint report from the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (Soto et al. 2007) approximately two out of every three farmers from this region correspond to Family Farming. This type of farming is characterised for having a highly fragmented productive structure where labour productivity is very low. As a result, it generates low income for the family unit. However, despite these restrictions, FF has great importance in Latin America in the supply of food for the national market as well as for export. In Brazil this stratum of farmers generates 87% of the supply of beans, 84% of tapioca, 49% of corn and 52% of milk. In Ecuador, FF produces 64% of the supply of potatoes, 85% of the production of onions, 70% of corn, and 83% of the production of lamb and mutton. A similar situation can be observed in all the other countries in the region. Table 1 indicates the main characteristics of FF in various countries in the region. As we can see, regarding the share in the value of sectoral production and the share in the total number of farms there is a similarity between Paraguay and the other countries. Despite the fact that Brazil and Mexico are among the 10 largest economies in the world, they still maintain a strong productive base in Family Farming (Gattini 2011).

Table 1. Main features of Family Farming in Latin America. Characteristics Share of sectoral production value (%) Share of sectoral employment (%) Total number of agricultural farms (in thousands) Share of total of farms (%) Paraguay Brazil Chile Sectorial importance 32(*) 38 27 77 57 Ecuador 45 Mexico 39 70 Nicaragua 67

Number of farms 289,6(**) 4.139 285 84 85 87 Surface of farms 5.5 26 23

740 88

4.834 78

287 98

Medium surface of farm units 7 6 16 associated to Family Farming (Ha) Medium surface of unities not 624 433 1.090 71 343 associated to Family Farming (Ha) Source: Information from Paraguay, own research based on Agricultural Census 2008 All other information: Technical Cooperation Project FAO-IADB (2007) Policies for family farming in Latin America and the Caribbean (*) Own estimates based on information on gross value of agricultural production of the BCP for 2008 (**) The farm area up to 20 ha is taken as a parameter. Source: Gattini 2011

2.- The productive system and access to resources

In a global sense, around 90% of the farms worldwide have less than two hectares of land; they provide jobs to 1,300 million people and they are the predominant form of farming in developing countries. This type of farming is multifunctional, as it provides most of the rural employment, food production and ecosystemic services, contributing to the preservation of natural resources, the custody of territory and biological diversity in rural areas. This type of farming is a mainstay of the economy and significantly contributes to Food Security, not only in developing countries (in many African countries it represents the main activity of the private sector), but also in

various industrialised countries of Asia and Europe. Not only does it feed families, but it also generates employment and favours the growth of rural businesses, particularly in the micro and small company sector. In turn, it is also important in urban areas, particularly in Asia but it is on the increase in Africa and Latin America and the industrialised world. Urban and fringe farming increases the quantity and quality of food available for the population living in the cities, which is already over 50% of the worlds population. Almost one million people in the world practice urban farming and produce approximately 15% of the worlds food (IFOAM 2010). Furthermore, many of these farmers develop their farms on marginal and degraded soil, or they often use unsustainable production systems that erode the soil and diminish biodiversity. Poverty is also a cause of erosion and over-exploitation of natural resources, leaving the most vulnerable communities to food insecurity, climate change and natural disasters. Therefore, many millions do not manage to generate sufficient income to reach an acceptable standard of living, and many poor rural people do not have access to land and other resources they require for their own food. At present, sufficient support is not given to small farmers and rural communities: only 4% of official international aid for development is allocated to agriculture, and many national governments give priority to investments for the development of large-scale agriculture. This situation is seriously affecting efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (ibid.). In order to view access to resources of the family production systems (FPS), we can consider the diagram proposed in Figure 1 and from this, we can project and bear in mind that FPS demand a series of resources according to the determining factors highlighted in the diagram. The diagram shows the interrelations of these determining factors of the farm systems and, therefore, of the agricultural production systems. Some of these factors are inherent in the production system, whilst others are external. The main exogenous (external) factors that influence the development of the agricultural production systems - policies, institutions, public assets, markets and information - are indicated on the left of the Figure and are outside of the dotted area that marks the limits of the system. The availability of markets and supply prices has a direct influence on the farmers decisions regarding their companies standard, in relation to the purchase of inputs and in the productions sales schedule. The availability of economic and social infrastructure in rural areas determines transport costs and availability of services to which family farming has access particularly as regards human and animal health. Similarly, information and education services affect the strategies and decisions of farming family. The technologies that determine the nature of the production and processing and use of the natural resources are mainly endogenous (internal) factors, which is why they are represented inside the limits of the agricultural production system. In general terms, the biophysical factors tend to define the set of possible agricultural production systems, whilst the socioeconomic factors determine the real characteristics of the agricultural production system which can be analysed in a given time (FAO 2001).

Fig. 1 Diagram of an agricultural production system (Taken from: FAO 2001) In another way, we can consider that the farm systems are the product of three general strengths: the characteristics of the physical-biologic environment, the characteristics of the socioeconomic environment and the farmers goals and skills. Likewise, as ecological systems, the farms cannot act outside of the limits set by the physiological processes that arise within their biological components: these are limited by the competition with other non-agricultural biological processes and those characteristics of the physical environment. We also have to bear in mind the fact that the farms behaviour as socioeconomic systems is limited by the extent of the farmers decision-making capacity allowed by the social system, by the value that the economic system assigns to the resources and products of the farm, by the availability of land, labour and capital, as well as by the availability of technology and information and the capacity of combining the farms components in the productive activity (Malagn and Praguer 2001). Land (healthy soil) and water are the main limiting factors for agricultural production. Access to these resources is very important, given that they can only invest in improving production and caring for resources when a certain level of security exists. At regulatory level, the Right to Food establishes that people or groups have the right to physically or economically access food or the

means to produce it. This last option involves measures to improve access to land (agricultural reforms) and other natural resources with special emphasis on the poorest population. Indigenous people, small farmers, shepherds, and stockbreeders, as well as fishermen and women are particularly vulnerable in the face of the violation of their Right to Food (FAO 2009, IIASTD 2009, UN 2010). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005a) states that the physical and/or functional availability of natural resources is being reduced. Shortage will be an important factor in the future. Soil degradation, water shortage and loss of biodiversity are the result of a system of food production with high environmental impact, the greater use of fertilizers, pesticides and single-crop farming. In combination with the effects of climate change, which will include more extreme climate phenomena, agricultural production is in danger. Therefore, any proposal to improve access to natural resources must take into account their sustainable use. This last point is decisive in order to assure a base for sustainable life, that is, to maintain the productive capacity of the ecosystem. Therefore, we can highlight that agriculture can have as many negative as positive effects on soil, water and air (IAASTD 2009).

Access to natural resources: Land

Land is a fundamental productive asset in the livelihood of the rural population. Access to land is defined as the process via which people or groups gain rights and opportunities to occupy and use land temporarily or permanently. It is carried out via the formal or informal market, social networks or ties of kinship, inheritance or awarding by the State or other institutions that control lands. Land rights are necessary to provide refuge, access to services, social and political participation, source of income etc. In addition, it creates an incentive for investment as work, money and time in order to maintain their productivity and increase their value (Quan 2006). On the continents, the situation regarding access to land is very diverse. However, there are many common problems, such as the concentration of land in the hands of a small few, discrimination against women, indigenous people and farmers with few resources and other groups, national legislations that do not allow land to be registered in a simple and transparent way, etc. The average size of land of Southern farmers is between half a hectare and twelve hectares whilst most of the land is in the hands of a few large landowners. In Peru, as in other countries, the recent concentration of land has been detrimental to the redistributive effect of the agricultural reform of the 1970s. Particularly in Africa less so in Latin America instead of land-owning systems, methods of community organisation are predominant. In total, it is

estimated that over 500 million people do not have the rights to the land they work. (Burneo 2011, European Parliament 2011). In India, the size of the land owned has reduced considerably: in 1960 the average was 2.6 hectares and in 2000 it was 1.4 hectares. For Bangladesh, the Philippines and Thailand the figures are similar. In Cambodia, land tenure is at approximately 30% and in East and South Africa, arable land per capita has decreased by 50%. Despite the fact that is usually assumed that Africa has large extensions of land available, only one quarter of the arable land can be used due to the abandoning of farming, the lack of public investment, crop rotation, soil degradation, irregular rainfall and water shortage. Furthermore, the use of land for the production of non-food crops and land grabbing contribute to the low availability of land for food crops. In some countries, the average amount of cultivated land is less than 0.3 Ha per capita (FIDA 2008, Friends of the Earth Europe 2010). In Thailand, a study revealed that men and women farmers who did not own land had access to less credit. In Burkina Faso, on the other hand, land deeds do not stimulate investment. This is due to the informal systems of land rights which do not require official deeds, guaranteeing the de facto rights of use. In many cases, the costs of the formal procedure are too high for people. Therefore, we can highlight that the cultural and social context, as well as the different models of land rights play a very important role (European Parliament 2011). Other Asian countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh show that in this context, land tenure, however small, reduces the levels of poverty. In Cambodia, an interesting system of land ownership establishes that the lands belong to the indigenous communities, however, an individual can separate a part if there is no objection by the community (Quan 2006, UN 2010). In India, various states have promoted subsidised land purchase programmes. Facilitating the purchase is a great help for poor farmers. In other regions of the world, such as West Africa, there are many different forms of land tenure and management. The land market compensates for limited access via inheritance and the intra-community system, particularly when dealing with very small plots which can no longer feed their owners (Quan 2006). In Europe, various different forms of land tenure are also present. There are family farmers with little land and others with very large extensions of land. Some countries have established laws which do not allow land fragmentation (like Germany). In general, they have better conditions as ownership is more affordable, although it can be difficult for them due to environmental problems, soil degradation, low profitability of small farms etc. In the European Union efforts are being made to unify the relevant legal frameworks (USAID 2007, Comby 2010). In short, access to land is a basic need for the welfare of rural homes, in order to stimulate economic growth in the agricultural sector and for the reduction of poverty in rural areas. Nevertheless, the lack of access to land and its very unfair distribution affects large sectors of

the rural population. In particular, access by women and indigenous people is very restricted. For that reason, access to land, fairer land distribution and security in land tenure rights are central issues on the agenda and in debates on agricultural policy, Food Security and rural development. Despite the land distribution and ownership rights regularisation programmes undertaken over the last few decades, the demand for land and insecurity in land tenure continue to be obstacles to encourage investment and economic growth in the rural sector in most countries. In that sense, the agricultural reform (as a land distribution measure) can contribute directly to those objectives (FAO 2002, FIDA 2009, CEPES 2010). In this delicate but necessary process, decentralisation is an important factor to assure the redistribution of land. In any case, irrespective of the States administrative organisation, the local communities and governments must have a say in the management of their lands. We can highlight that the adaptation of laws and procedures is not sufficient to guarantee the equality of access, respect for the environment, resolution of conflicts related to land tenure and competing uses (food production vs. biofuel production, mining, natural parks, etc.). It is very common for people and companies who already have land rights to have greater power, particularly as regards their political representation and access to other resources such as credit, training etc. (FAO 2003). Although security through ownership is very important, there are various models with which to achieve it. Not only can it be obtained via land rights markets, but rather by strengthening customary systems and reviewing national ownership laws. These last measures would better protect the rights of the land users. We can point out that the redistribution of the lands is necessary in order to reduce poverty and achieve a higher level of social justice, avoiding land concentrations (UN 2010). In the same way, it is recognised that access to land is a major condition, but not the only one, in tackling the problem of rural poverty and Food Security. It is necessary to have an environment which allows the effective and optimum use of land and its resources, in the production and generation of income. This environment includes credit markets, support system for production (access to technology, infrastructure, training) and access to markets. In this respect, in order for the agricultural reform (or other land distribution mechanisms) to be effective as a means of alleviating poverty and increasing food security, it must entail (besides access to land) measures which contribute to creating the aforementioned environment (FAO 2002, CEPES 2010). In the technological environment, the lack of capital and inputs limits Family Farming, when technologies are required which involve more inputs, capital, mechanisation or high levels of education, these requirements are a disadvantage for small farmers and make it practically unviable for the appropriate technological innovations for family farming systems to be standardised. This situation has generated a very restrictive innovation framework and a

general lack of adequate technologies for Family Farming in most countries of Latin America; this outlook can be taken to other regions of the world. This very characteristic situation of Family Farming is joined by other factors, such as the progressive marginalisation that it has experienced since the 1980s, and the reduction in public resources for research, particularly in matters regarding Family Farming, sustainability and natural resources (Echenique 2009). According to this author, in the past, the transfer of technology depended on the national research institutes, the public extension services, the universities and certain suppliers of inputs. Nowadays, knowledge is obtained from the agroindustries and the market, the direct observation of avant-garde farmers and horizontal diffusion between farmers. This situation makes it even more difficult for small farmers to access technology. In the light of this perspective, it is necessary to intensify regional and cooperation efforts between countries for the promotion and development of innovations aimed at Family Farming, which are low cost and low risk, such as those implemented in the Trifinio region (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras) with vegetable farmers, who decided to leave the conventional system of production for the implementation of agro-ecological practices and technologies (CATIE 2010). As regards the effects of climate change, the change in climate regions, the increase in sea levels and the greater prevalence of extreme climate events will lead to migrations and will force people to adapt to the new conditions. These factors can have a negative influence on land access systems. In conflict zones or areas affected by natural disasters, the difficulties of accessing land will be considerable. For instance, displaced people will lose their de facto access (FAO 2008).

Access to water
Access to water and sanitation is a human right recognised in almost all countries constitutions and in various international treaties, and it is constituted as one of the transversal axes of rural development. The vital liquid plays a predominant role in agricultural production and in the quality of health of inhabitants, as it is the means that enables hygiene and it is the physical carrier of numerous diseases. Those in the sectors with the least resources encounter the most health vulnerabilities, that is, the rural and indigenous people, who have the most restricted access to drinking water compared to other sectors of society. Half of the undernourished people in the world are farmers with little land and who depend on the access to water for food production, health, income and employment (IAASTD 2009). Limited access to the water resource for the various different activities carried out by small farmers conditions the volume of production, defines the dynamics of the handling of the territory and elevates the fragility of the productive systems. In particular, this last point fundamentally affects the growth possibilities and the decisions the farmers take in relation to

10

the risks they take on attempting to incorporate new handling technologies. In this sense, we observe the need to develop water technologies appropriate to the reality of Family Farming and generate accessibility opportunities for them. Until 2050, 800 million people will live in countries or regions with water shortages. These countries are in the Middle East, North Africa, Mexico, Pakistan, South Africa, and a large part of China and India. In these last two there are areas with many water resources and areas with very few. In other very dry countries, the rivers are used to meet their water needs (Egypt, Mauritania, Turkmenistan etc.). In these conditions, the irrigation of farming areas is fed from underground water, which causes a high risk of exhaustion. In total, it is estimated that 70% of the water consumed is used for agriculture, in some Southern countries this figure even reaches 95%. Therefore, the irrigation systems, and the selection of the types of crop and their processing are important for the future of agriculture and require certain investment and innovation to increase the efficiency of their use (FAO 2007). The access to water limitations presented by farmers in the world lead to other consequences in the territory, such as important displacements of the family group and domestic animals in search of water and pasturelands, which increases the erosive processes and desertification of soils, the scarce natural coverage is lost, the mortality of the stock increases and above all, it is presented as a detriment to the welfare and quality of life of small farmers. The access they have at present is what is offered by nature without practically any type of technological intervention in the water resource other than ancestral knowledge, depending on most of the cases of the randomness of the precipitations. Water shortage is not the only water problem. The lack of appropriate technologies for handling water surplus causes losses in the productive systems and affectation of the scarce communications channels in the communities. We must highlight the need to strengthen the communities capacities for the management of risks related to water (drought, torrential rain, landslides, floods, etc.). The water problem is complex and is displayed in multiple facets: women and children travelling large distances on a daily basis to collect water from a source; contamination of drinking water from agro-chemicals, sewage filtrations, parasites and other waste; shortage of water for irrigation due to capturing problems or due to excessive infiltration in the distribution system; concentration of the water by business sectors, always affecting the most vulnerable; problems of excessive salinity or presence of minerals incompatible with human health, such as arsenic (present in some areas of Chile); obsolete irrigation systems that have come to a standstill due to lack of public investment in infrastructure, delivered in these conditions to the consortiums which cannot undertake the improvements due to lack of resources; irrigation shifts that are too far apart, and with insufficient flows to maintain the crops in optimum conditions. And the list goes on and on.

11

In the watersheds, different players set out different strategies for access to water, configuring a heterogeneous mosaic of interests and power relationships. Such is the case of small farmers, stockbreeders, mining industries and agro-industrial undertakings. The pressure exerted by certain sectors with high economic power and political influence on quality aspects and availability of the water resource, does not allow a fair distribution of water, generating strong competition over its use and propitiating the appearance of socioenvironmental conflicts. We can highlight that artisanal fishermen and women also have the right to access water resources and their products. For them, water contamination and overfishing represent serious problems that threaten their survival.

Climate change and land grabbing

It is expected that climate change, partly caused by agriculture, will increase soil degradation and water shortages in many areas of the worlds over the coming years and decades. Around the year 2050, 200 million people may be displaced every year due to famine, environmental degradation and the loss of land (OSRC 2008). The melting of glaciers and loss of snow on the mountains due to climate change will increase the risk of flooding during the rainy season, and during the dry season the water supplies of a sixth of the worlds population will be threatened (Stern 2006). By the year 2050, it is believed that climate change will have reduced the availability of water by 10-30 percent in dry regions (IPCC 2007). In short, this will force people to share a smaller and poorer pie. The search for a new balance is already causing armed conflicts, environmental refugees and the externalisation of food production in some regions of the world. It is forecast that the new global climate system, which is still being designed in different multilateral processes, will increase the possible uses of these resources and will divert them from their traditional food-related functions. Crop production in developing countries to respond to the global demand for biofuel promoted by law and the investments related to the carbon market (purchase of carbon credits in agriculture or forests in developing countries) are just two of the examples of a reality which is already knocking at the door of many developing countries (Rosegrant et al. 2006). We can mention the recent land grabbing in Southern countries, particularly in Africa and Latin America. Although land purchases already existed, since 2008 there has been a dramatic increase in them between October 2008 and August 2009, 46.6 million hectares of arable land were purchased, 32 million hectares of these in Sub-Saharan Africa- with the aim of producing food for the population of other countries or other agricultural products. Land grabbing is a threat to Food Security and Sovereignty, as the production is not aimed at the local or national

12

population, but rather, it is exclusively for export. In many cases, crop growing has not even started on these lands. As regards water, the purchase of land brings with it a hidden appropriation of the water present, which reduces its availability for the local population and can cause serious problems (European Parliament 2011, Prez, Gistelinck and Karbala 2011). High demographic growth, combined with the increase in urbanisation rates and the expansion of unsustainable diet patterns, is among the factors that lead to the increase in the global demand for land and water, mainly due to the increase in the need for food. It is forecast that by 2030, global production of cereals and meat must be50 and 85 percent higher, respectively, than the levels for the year 2000 in order to be able to respond to the expected global demand. The middle classes of many developing countries are adopting western eating habits (meat consumption, to be precise). These habits are based on unsustainable stockbreeding models and consumption patterns which are exhausting the natural resources and damaging the 10 ecosystems of the world . With around 70 percent of the worlds population living in cities or urban areas in 2050, compared to the current 49 percent, the demand for water and land around cities will increase, together with the percentage of the worlds population that will depend on the purchase of food.

The virtuous circle

Based on the approach of sustainable livelihoods and community capitals (Flora et al. 2004, Emery et al. 2006, Gutirrez y Siles 2009, Gutierrez- Montes et al. 2009) Family Farming can be strengthened through a territory management perspective; where a sustainable and balanced development of rural territories and the recovery of Family Farming is encouraged. This way, we can create spaces for proactive and articulated participation of all players with the public and private institutions, with the aim of favouring a better quality of life for rural families (Andean Community 2011, MAG 2011, Seplveda 2008). Therefore, as we strengthen community capitals in the territorial environment, opportunities will arise which allow farmers immersed in FF to develop their productive systems in a competitive, sustainable, and environmentally friendly way with better economic profits (Figure 2).

13

Fig. 2 Virtuous Circle towards Sustainable and Balanced Development of Rural Territories and the Recovery of Family Farming (adapted from Soares et al. 2011)

The FAO is drawing up a proposal for Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land and other Natural Resources. Still to be published (European Parliament 2011).

3.- Some questions

How can we achieve competitive FF to tackle the challenges posed by production and the market? The competitiveness of Family Farming will be determined by the degree to which the farmers have the ability to innovate and increase their productivity on the level of the farms they own, by moving forward to give the production greater added value, and due to the presence of efficient markets for goods and services that are outside of the farm: availability of all-weather roads, infrastructure for commercialisation, financial services in line with the terms of production and finally a stable macroeconomic and legal environment, which facilitates a fluid exchange of goods and services, whilst minimising transaction costs. Consequently, the final competitiveness of FF will be subject to the correct performance of each of the abovementioned levels, at farm level, regional territorial level and national level. In the national environment, for example, the countrys health status is a necessary condition for the competitiveness of FF. The absence of this prevents the commercialisation of the agricultural products in international markets.

14

In order to achieve the above, FF needs appropriate technology adapted to its environment, here technological innovation will play a predominant role as will participative research processes that allow the adaptation of suitable technologies, machinery and equipment to their culture and their type of production. Likewise, the recovery of local knowledge will be of interest in order to adjust the technological processes to the territories.

Can FF base its principles on a change of paradigm aimed at Agro-Ecology and with this improve the situation of access to resources? An example for a change of paradigm could be the groups of farmers in South America who have started processes aimed at the development of Agro-Ecological Family Farming (AEFF). This type of farming can transform farms like few other agricultural systems towards better productivity due to better soil fertility and stability, optimization of the water resource, diversification of crops and incomes, adaptation to climate change, better performances in adverse conditions (water stress, hillside soils and top soils) and the creation of new markets. AEFF contributes to re-establishing, recovering, maintaining and enriching the biodiversity from a respect for the natural capacity of the soil, plants, animals and the ecosystem. In the same way, AEFF maintains the biodiversity of the agricultural landscape and therefore maintains plague organism regulation processes via natural methods. From the point of view of the protection of natural resources, this agricultural model bases its use on locally adapted varieties and on participative plant and animal improvement programmes; this way the seed and breed varieties are maintained at local level for future needs and continually adapt to the environmental pressures caused by climate change. AEFF also makes a special contribution to food security (Spieldoch and Murphy 2010, ANDEAN COMMUNITY 2011). The adoption of agro-ecological systems can have an important impact as regards human, social and cultural capital (for more details, see Rivas Platero 2007).

How does FF favour womens participation regarding access to resources? The knowledge of the situation and the contribution of rural women in the framework of Family Farming must be viewed as an approach obtained from the population data available, as those which refer directly to the agricultural sector (mainly the censuses) strongly underestimate their participation. In order to achieve the empowerment of rural woman in the area of access to resources, gender equality mechanisms must be encouraged, where opportunities for women are the same as for men. In the same way, opportunities must be created to allow women to access technical training, education and market management services; which could be the step to ensure women farmers take on the role they deserve in society. Likewise, the circumstances must be right to allow organisation in trade unions and therefore achieve community leadership. Some experiences which back the gender approach in Family Farming are those developed by the National Council for Ecological Production (CNAPE) in Bolivia; which has started a Joint Programme called Integration of indigenous Andean ecological farmers to new national and

15

global value chains. This programme aims to promote gender equality through the training of ecological promoters (2500 women and 2500 men) who strengthen their capacities regarding agro-ecological production and access to markets. In the same way, in Colombia we have the case of Agrosolidaria, an association which brings together men and women farmers from different agricultural areas. In the situation of quinoa farmers, this activity is basically carried out by women, as they are the ones who maintain and make the decisions regarding this crop (Higuera Mora et l. 2011).

How to strengthen men and women farmers as regards knowledge management resources? As we have highlighted, it is important to establish a training system for family farmers in primary production techniques and in rural micro-industries, leadership, rural development and merchandising. This way, it would encourage the forward integration of farmers in such a way that it would give added value to their production and it would minimise the loss of production which normally occurs in the period of abundant harvest. The industrialisation of the production will allow food to be conserved for longer periods, avoiding spending on food from which the resources could be allocated to the capitalisation of the farm. On the other hand, the application of constructivist methods mediated by Field Schools will be of great help in developing the communities capacities in the territories (Figure 2). In this process, the diffusion and socialisation of the information will be necessary; for this purpose it will be imperative to develop educational support materials for the production and commercialisation of the production. At present, the potential for the use of multimedia technology (videos, photos and audio), has not been developed, when it could be a support tool for the development of Family Farming. The use of Communications and Information Technologies (CIT) and multimedia resources on the crop handling techniques can be developed for the different areas and crops in a territory and they can be made available to the population via Agricultural Extension Services, Municipalities, Governments and NGOs which work with farmers. In the same way, database information centres on prices and commercialisation volumes and their respective analysis in the countrys main markets can be placed on internet platforms in such a way that the advisors or the actual farmers use the information to plan their farms based on market demand.

How to empower the commercialisation approach of FF to capture more financial resources? At present, there is a general awareness among the population about the need to establish and improve the living conditions of family farmers. This is due to the problems generated by internal migration from the country to the city and the frequent conflicts that exist between peasants and owners of farms or intensive capital and technology agricultural productions. The large trade unions of farmers permanently insist on the need for the development and consolidation of

16

family farmers. This level of general awareness, coupled with a campaign to promote Family Farming products can act as a base for what would be the consumers demand towards a Family Farming brand, in the knowledge that buying a product with this brand generates work in Family Farming. Parallel to this, the State must incorporate within its purchases, at least in a certain percentage, the supply of food and other products from this sector. It will also be important to develop a technical assistance system aimed at improving the commercialisation, where the farmers establish production strategies aimed at capturing the best market opportunities, that is, allowing them to access processes for the identification of customers in the home and foreign markets, with the aim of positioning supply and demand products, taking into account the productivity, quality and competitiveness factors. Among these we can mention the supply of niche markets: gourmet, market windows, Fair Trade, organic farming preserved identity and other types of product differentiation. Linked to this approach, the value of association should be encouraged, which will give farmers greater negotiating power with their suppliers and customers, a situation which leads to lower purchase prices and higher sales prices.

4.- Concrete demands and proposals

To the Governments: They must regulate, through laws and regulations, the different forms of ownership and use of land as well as the access and handling of natural resources. They must favour the poor, women, indigenous people, shepherds, young people and in general people who cultivate these lands, taking into account the environment with special emphasis on traditional and ecologically vulnerable areas. With this aim, they will create or formalise in a participative way the property registers which give a legal base and protection to the tenure of the land. They must be simple, transparent and accessible procedures for all the interested groups which prevent greater land concentration. In addition, they must take into account customary regulations and promote communal ownership systems, by establishing collective rights. They will also develop, in a participative way, strategies for handling natural resources in favour of the poor based on traditional innovations and select and appropriate external interventions. They will focus on the respectful use of the natural resources (efficiency, conservation, recycling, ecological methodologies etc.). It is crucial to strengthen local institutional capacities and improve the farmers access to the training services, technology, market advice etc. This requires cooperation between governments, international agencies, NGOs, the committed private sector, research people and organised groups.

17

Develop participatory public policies to ensure universal access to safe drinking water and water for irrigation. Moreover, ensure universal access to basic sanitation. Moratoriums will be established on large purchase or renting of land to governments or foreign or national companies, with the aim of strengthening Family Farming and priority access of the land and water resources for the production of food for domestic consumption.

To Researchers and other External Agents They will need to translate the general ecological principles and the concepts on handling natural resources into practical recommendations that respond directly to the needs of the poor, and have an impact on the situation of small owners. The new technological approaches must incorporate agro-ecological perspectives or combine knowledge and skills of the farmers with those from external agents in such a way that appropriate farming techniques can be developed and/or adapted. Emphasis must be placed on participative processes that involve the farmers in order to strengthen local research and the populations capacity to resolve their problems. Research into the sustainable use of natural resources. Creation of platforms for the exchange of experiences, empowerment.

5.- References
Friends of the Earth Europe 2010. frica: El acaparamiento de tierras. Un estudio sobre el alcance y el impacto de los acaparamientos de tierras para agrocombustibles. Friends of the Earth Europe. Brussels. 36p. Bernabe, M. D./Penunia, E. 2009. Gender links in agriculture and climate change. Isis International. Manila. Braun, J. v.; Meinzen-Dick, R. 2009. Land grabbing by Foreign Investors in developing countries. Risks and opportunities. IFPRI Policy Brief 13, April 2009. 9p. Burneo, Z. 2011. El proceso de concentracin de la tierra en el Per. International Land Coalition, CEPES, Cirad. CATIE 2010. Familias. El Boletn de las familias innovadoras del Trifinio. No.1. CATIE. Costa Rica. CEPES 2010. Legislacin sobre la tierra agrcola. CEPES. Lima, Peru. 60p. Comby, J. 2010. Overlapping of land rights in Europe. Pedagogic Factsheet. Agence Francaise de Dveloppement. Paris. 3p. COMUNIDAD ANDINA 2011. Agricultura Familiar Agroecolgica Campesina en la Comunidad Andina. Lima, Peru. 93p.

18

Echenique, M. 2009. Innovaciones institucionales y tecnolgicas para sistemas productivos basados en agricultura familiar. IICA. Costa Rica. 50 p. Emery, M; Fey, S; Flora, CB. 2006. Using community capitals to build assets for positive community change. Kansas, US, Community Development Society. 19 p. European Parliament 2011. An assessment of land ownership and land grab on development with a particular focus on small-holdings and rural areas. European Parliament. Brussels. 32p. FAO 2001. Sistemas de Produccin Agropecuaria y Pobreza. Cmo mejorar los medios de subsistencia de los pequeos agricultores en un mundo de subsistencia?. FAOBM. Washington, USA. 40p. FAO 2002. Arrendamiento de tierras en Amrica Latina: una alternativa de acceso para los pobres rurales. FAO. Santiago de Chile. 35p. FAO 2003. FAO Estudios sobre la tenencia de la tierra 3. Tenencia de la tierra y desarrollo rural. FAO. Rome. 62p. FAO 2008. Land tenure support sustainable development. FAO. Rome. 2p. FAO 2009. The right to food and access to natural resources. Using Human Rights arguments and mechanisms to improve resource access for the rural poor. FAO. Rome. 70p. FAO; UNWATER 2007. Coping with water scarcity. Challenge of the twenty-first century. World Water Day 2007. FIDA 2008. Improving access to land and tenure security. FIDA. Rome. 44p. FIDA 2009. The growing demand for land. Risks and opportunities for smallholder farmers. Discussion Paper for Round Table 2, Governing Council 18-19 February 2009. FIDA. Rome. 19p. Flora, CB; Flora, JL; Fey, S. 2004. Rural communities: legacy and change. US, Westview Press. 352 p. World Rural Forum 2010. Documento conceptual de la campaa en favor de un ao internacional de la agricultura familiar-AIAF. Spain. 14p. Gattini, J. 2011. Competitividad de la Agricultura Familiar en Paraguay. CADEP/CINVE/IDRC. Paraguay. 29p. GROOTS/UNDP. 2011. Leading resilient development. Grassroots womens priorities, practices and innovations. GROOTS/UNDP. Nueva York. Gutirrez, I; Siles, J. 2009. Dignostico de medios de vida y capitales de la comunidad de humedales de medio queso. Los Chiles, Costa Rica. San Jos, Costa Rica. 138 p. Gutierrez-Montes, I., Emery, M. and Fernandez-Baca, E. 2009. Guest Editors Introduction: The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach and the Community Capitals Framework: The Importance of System-level Approaches to Community Change Efforts. Community Development, 40 (2): 106- 113. Gutirrez-Montes, I; Emery, M; Fernndez-Baca, E. 2011. Why Gender Matters to Ecological Management and Poverty Reduction, En: Ingram, J.C., F.A.J. DeClerck, and C. Rumbaitis del Rio (eds), Integrating Ecology and Poverty Alleviation and International Development Efforts: opportunities and solutions. Vol. 2. Springer. New York.

19

Higuera Mora, N.C.; Rivas Platero, G.G.; Gutirrez Montes, I.A.; Snchez Castro, A.; Crdenas Chacn, J.M.; Crdenas Bejarano, G.; Garca Gonzlez, D. 2011. La quinua: una alternativa para la seguridad alimentaria y medios de vida de pequeas familias productoras. Consideraciones para polticas de fomento en Colombia. Sntesis para decisores. June 2011. IICA/AGROSOLIDARIA/PBA/CATIE. Costa Rica. IAASTD 2009. Agriculture at a crossroads. Global report. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development. Washington D.C. IFOAM 2010. El Rol de los Pequeos Agricultores en la Produccin Orgnica. IFOAM. Argentina. 4 p. IPCC 2007. WGII Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Chapter 3: Kundzewicz Z. y Mata JL. Freshwater Resources and their Management. MAG. 2011. Poltica de Estado para el Sector Agroalimentario y el Desarrollo Rural Costarricense 2010-2021. Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock. San Jos, Costa Rica. 86p. Malagn M. R ; Praguer Mosquera, M. 2001. El enfoque de sistemas: Una opcin para el anlisis de las unidades de produccin. National University of Colombia. Palmira Site. Colombia, 190p. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005a. Ecosystems and human well-being. Abstract. Island Press. Washington D.C. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005b. Ecosystems and human well-being. Vol. 1. Current state and trends. Island Press. Washington D.C. NNUU 2010. El derecho a la alimentacin. Informe del Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la alimentacin. UN. New York. 25p. Oxford Refugee Studies Centre. 2008. Climate Change and Displacement, en: Forced Migration Review. Edition 31st October 2008. Oxford. Oxford University. Prez, J.; Gistelinck, M.; Karbala, D. 2011. Sleeping lions. Tratados internacionales de inversin, conflictos Estado-inversor y acceso a alimentos, tierra y agua. OXFAM. Oxford. st Quan, J. 2006. Land access in the 21 century. Issues, trends, linkages and policy options. LSP Working Paper 24. FAO LSP. Rome. 87p. Rivas Platero, G.G,. 2007. Hacia una nueva concepcin del manejo de plagas: el enfoque agroecolgico. In: R.H. Lira-Saldvar, Editor. Bioplaguicidas y Control biolgico. p.203-212. Saltillo, Mexico. Rosegrant, M. W.; Siwa, M.; Sulser, T.; Ringler, C. 2006. Future Scenarios for Agriculture: Plausible Futures to 2030 and Key Trends in Agricultural Growth. World Bank World Development Report 2008. Seplveda, S. 2008. Gestin de Desarrollo Sostenible en Territorios Rurales. Mtodos para la Planificacin. IICA. Costa Rica. 416p. Seshia, S.; Scoones, I. 2003. Understanding access to seeds and plant genetic resources. What can a livelihood perspective offer? LSP Working Paper 6. FAO. Rome. 50p.

20

Spieldoch, A.; Murphy, S. 2010. Agricultural land acquisitions: implications for food security and poverty alleviation. In: Land Grab. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Asia Program. p. 39-54. Soares, D.; Gutirrez Montes, I.A.; Romero Prez,R.; Lpez Mera, R.V. ; Rivas Platero, G.G.; Pinto Decelis, G. 2011. Capitales de la comunidad, medios de vida y vulnerabilidad social ante huracanes en la costa yucateca. Serie Tcnica Informe Tcnico No.385. CATIE. Costa Rica. 54p. Stern, N. 2006. The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. USAID 2007. Land tenure and property rights regional report. Vol. 2.9: Eastern Europe. USAID. Washington D.C.

21