This spring, the Obama administration unveiled a new initiative aimed at ending hunger in poor countries around the world. Named Feed the Future (FTF), it will initially work with 20 countries, 11 of them in Africa, to boost agricultural production through technological inputs and country-led strategies. Though many of FTF’s components are admirable, including the focus on women’s role in farming and the importance of civil society in carrying out the initiative, it will unfortunately encourage the use of genetically modified (GM) seeds and other profit-driven agricultural components.

The discourse around large-scale, government investment in agriculture emerged several years ago and is becoming an increasingly significant component of U.S.-Africa policy. Beginning with the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations’ Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), U.S. policy and humanitarian advocates claim not enough is being done to capitalize on Africa’s tremendous agricultural wealth. Yet, rather than recognizing that the roots of the problem lay with structural adjustment policies instituted in the 1980’s, violent conflict, unjust trade policies, and climate change, the prevailing wisdom is that Africans simply need to be taught how to farm better using high-tech, Western-based inputs.

The absurdity of that notion aside, it is important to recognize the power of multinational agricultural companies such as Monsanto, Cargill, and Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). All of their profits depend on a system of agriculture that hijacks the sovereignty of small farms, destroys the environment, and produces food as though it’s a product on an assembly line. Moreover, the history of these companies in the global south has been incredibly detrimental to local communities. The infusion of Monsanto’s GM seeds in Asia bankrupted farmers (who were forced to buy expensive fertilizers and were unable to save seeds from year to year) and depleted the soil of its nutrients, all the while boosting the company’s profits.

Thus, to see a Congressional oversight hearing on the FTF initiative include testimony from Monsanto and the Monsanto-funded Danforth Plant Science Center is disheartening. Only one member of the panel, Dr. Hans Herron, seemed irate at the blatant disregard of FTF for the agricultural wisdom already inherent in Africa and other developing countries. Meanwhile, the Danforth Plant Science Center hailed the creation of a nutrient and protein-rich cassava plant without recognizing that the remedy for nutrient deficiencies exists in crop diversity (and thus diet diversity). Hopefully, the initiative’s focus on country-led and civil-society led approaches will yield a shift away from biotech, but it will require careful monitoring by advocates both in Africa and in the United States.

Revision of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) also poses a threat to food sovereignty on the continent. Many policymakers now recognize AGOA’s disproportionate benefits for multinational corporations involved in extractive industries such as oil and mining, so a recent emphasis has been placed on agriculture. The idea is that approximately 75 percent of Africans are involved in the agricultural sector, so increasing agricultural trade is the best way to benefit a majority of Africans. We need to be careful here, however, as agriculture can also be an extractive industry where corporations benefit more than the small farmer.

Agricultural organizations and projects all over the Africa are skilled in farming sustainably through use of traditional seed and indigenous methods of irrigation and soil enrichment, so it’s discouraging to hear the U.S. government take such a top-down approach to agricultural growth. On the bright side, the global food sovereignty movement is growing, with organizations like Via Campesina and Biowatch South Africa taking the lead on promoting locally-based approaches to agricultural production. Additionally, American and European organizations such as Food First and GRAIN are actively campaigning against Monsanto’s involvement in the global south, providing resources to communities in Africa looking to maintain their food sovereignty

It remains to be seen how much of a contribution FTF will make to agricultural growth in Africa, particularly when hunger has more to do with power, marginalization, and inequality than successful farming. It may have a few positive effects, though the Obama administration could do more to promote agricultural growth by pushing for fair trade laws, addressing the causes and consequences of climate change, and by supporting sustainable methods of farming

Beth Tuckey
44 Comments