The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) issued a response in May detailing their position on the UN Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) planned for Fall 2021, and conditions for their participation. Since the UNFSS was announced in 2019, there has been widespread criticism of the event from civil society and farmers’ movements around the world who see the summit as a corporate power grab on the global food and agriculture agenda, wresting leadership away from more democratic and participatory spaces like the UN Food & Agriculture Organization’s Committee on World Food Security. 

AFSA is a network of 36 regional networks in Africa made up of farmers’ associations and local civil society organizations who share a common vision for sustainable and equitable food systems in Africa. In the face of a massive push to industrialize Africa’s agriculture and open its markets up to capture and exploitation by outside interests, AFSA is demanding that food and agriculture systems be led instead by Africa’s farmers and food producers.

With appropriate redirection of policies and investment, the wealth of our seed, agrobiodiversity, land, vibrant cultures and nature can contribute to solving the food crisis affecting so many of our people. The answer lies in our collective ability to effect holistic and systemic transformation of our food systems. Such a fundamental transformation would tackle the climate crisis, lift millions out of chronic poverty, help our people defeat hunger, nurture a healthy life for all, revive vibrant cultural practices, address structural inequality, and rejuvenate the biosphere. 

We are deeply concerned that the current rushed, corporate-controlled, unaccountable and opaque process for this UNFSS will not lead towards the transformation we envision of revitalised, sustainable and healthy food systems. A summit geared towards repeating the agribusiness-as-usual model to solve the food and climate crisis cannot deliver on this visionary future.

This recent statement from AFSA comes after they initially declined the invitation to participate in the summit due to these concerns. In this revised position, AFSA has stated its willingness to participate if the following conditions are addressed:

  • A transition to agroecology should be central to any outcomes of the UNFSS, based on the 13 principles of agroecology outlined in the High Level Panel of Experts for Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE) report on agroecology and how these can effectively be implemented globally in support of the Sustainable Development Goals.
  • The formal UNFSS process should establish an additional track to focus on the transformation of corporate food systems to food sovereignty, as also demanded by the Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples’ Mechanism (CSM) of the Committee on World Food Security.
  • The CSM should be given the mandate to lead proceedings of this 6th Action Track, in collaboration with relevant UN bodies and governments, and attention must be given to cross-cutting implications in the other Action Tracks.
  • The traditional knowledge and practices of people, inclusive of Indigenous peoples, must be included in all processes and outcomes in a clear and demonstrable way.
  • The AFSA strongly believes that the ideal and legitimate forum to host and facilitate debates as significant, complex, and crucial as rethinking global food systems should remain under the United Nation’s Committee for World Food Security (CFS).
  • The UNFSS must commit to turning over any recommendations or outcomes to the CFS for implementation, and commit resources to strengthening the CFS and reversing its capture by corporate interests and governments.

Related reading: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) is widely regarded as being the facilitator and champion for the expansion of corporate industrial agriculture in Africa, and has been criticized for being a Western-born initiative that has commanded massive financial resources from donors, built outsized and undemocratic political influence on the continent, including influencing the UNFSS process. Read the study documenting the group’s negative impacts on the continent.