The Class Dynamics of Food Sovereignty in Mexico and Ecuador

Abstract

This paper examines the class dynamics of food sovereignty in Mexico and Ecuador. It argues that the nature of contemporary demands for food sovereignty is heavily influenced by the outcomes of peasant movements' historical and ongoing internal class dynamics. Processes of class differentiation within peasant organizations in both countries have led to the interests of certain classes predominating over or at the expense of others. Despite La Vía Campesina's projection of 'unity in diversity', incorporating sometimes conflicting class interests into the movement is particularly challenging. As such, class analysis must be brought back into debates around food sovereignty in order to gauge (and potentially further) the movement's transformative potential.

Agrarian social movements: The absurdly difficult but not impossible agenda of defeating right‐wing populism and exploring a socialist future

“…This is a double‐edge sword, depending on specific context, because the agendas of agrarian movements can be, and have been, vulnerable to co‐optation by the establishment they detest or by other populist groups, left wing, or right wing. There are ample examples of this in Latin America's “pink tide” countries where food sovereignty has been enshrined in the constitution or in national governmental policies but interpreted in ways that contradict social movements' understanding, such as the incorporation of food sovereignty into the broader buen vivir platforms, funded, ironically, through neoextractivism (see Andrade, ; Clark, ; Giunta, ; Henderson, ; McKay, Nehring, & Walsh‐Dilley, ; Vergara‐Camus & Kay, ). The Zero Budget Natural Farming movement founded by Subhash Palekar in India has gained much momentum, praise, and support from Prime Minister Modi, but its awkward or even troubling overlap with the right‐wing Hindu nationalist current poses difficult challenges and dilemmas even for its supporters from among the organized progressive agrarian populists.…”

State–peasant movement relations and the politics of food sovereignty in Mexico and Ecuador

“…4 In reality, representation within peasant organizations is a complex issue. Most movements are built on partial rather than full representation of a specific constituency (Robbins 2015, 453), and the social base(s) they represent are often dynamic and shift over time (Henderson 2016).…”

Agronegocio, Campesinos, Estado Y Gobiernos De Izquierda en América Latina:

“…Por lo tanto, es necesario reorganizar el Estado una vez más si se quieren alcanzar los objetivos de la soberanía alimentaria y el Buen Vivir (Clark, 2016). Incluso en los casos en que el Estado ha comenzado a recuperar algunas de sus capacidades institucionales, sus políticas no siempre se han orientado hacia el logro de estos objetivos (Henderson, 2016), e incluso han tomado formas asistencialistas o clientelistas muy arraigadas en la historia latinoamericana. Además, los movimientos sociales más vinculados a los objetivos de la soberanía alimentaria y el Buen Vivir no han sido capaces de tener una influencia real sobre el Estado.…”