HAPPY EASTER

Dear Friends of the rural world

This is the day that The lord has made, let’s rejoice and be glad in it (ps 118\26) This is The day of The Resurrection, The Day of The victory of Lambs on the wolfs, the proclaim of new hope for all, for us, who raised with Jesus Christ, The Risen lord. Happy Easter for you, and for your families.

If we think in our lives, we ‘ll find many difficult issues to be understood, or to be accepted in our daily life, meaning of life and death, of course, life has a meaning but at the same time, every one has a time to die, to leave this world, to go and live the eternal life which he was invited to. By this way the death has no meaning. If we have one of our dear relatives who suffers from cancer, that means he suffers from sharp pain, and may be die through a short time, that means too that we ‘ll miss him, what’s the meaning here? There is no meaning. Only one who gave meaning to death, his death has a deep meaning, because his death gave us life; life from death, this is the meaning of Passover; is to pass from case to case, from low to high, from land to heaven, and from time to time.

In our local and global level we experience many crises, some are easy, and some are serious. if we stopped against that crisis, without searching for the meaning behind our lives, we will not grow, if we will not look forward to the depth, replying to the call of our lord to Simon peter, to search for the real meaning behind the crisis, the no –meaning. Life behind death, growth behind crisis.

As we celebrate the Resurrection, Easter, we have to think about the relationship between resurrection and solidarity. Resurrection is the fullness of solidarity. Solidarity is an action of honest, comes from humans, towards the lord. Feast is a sign of solidarity between us and the poor, when we live with each other, we have to be united in solidarity, and we do this in the image of God, who felt our lives, shared us our humanity, and invited us to share him his theology, He united in solidarity with us when he came to our world since more than 2000 years, to save us, to redeem us, to raise us from hell to paradise of Glory, his solidarity with us, his searching for a world of love, justice, mercy from people to people led him to death, to be raised on his modest throne, on a wood of cross. Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet, a man powerful in deed and in word before God and all the people; and who the chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death and crucified him. We had hope that he was the one to ransom Israel; but now, also with all these things (lu 24\20-21) This is the way of thinking that the two disciples of Emmaus read the story of salvation. But in fact, he succeeded in his mission of love, of salvation for all. He found the meaning of life from the no meaning of death.

Corresponding to the issues of our concern, Economy solidarity can’t be appreciate if we can’t united in solidarity with ourselves, to be one with him, on the vertical axis, and to be one with ourselves on the horizontal axis, then we can appreciate these issues.

• • • • • • • • Happy Easter

Fr Abraam Maher

International Chaplain

Dear Friends

Warm loving greetings and Happy Easter also from the secretariat.

As you already know, we will be soon in the process of preparation of the World meeting. The Executive Committee members will be together in Assesse for some days by the end of April to precise the theme of the study session, to select the host country and to work out the way to raise the necessary funds for the same.

This is one of the reason of this short message.  We will come back soon to you with all relevant information in regards with the RM10 and by the end of June with the 2 first numbers of the VMR.

Wishing you again a very happy Easter in the joy of the resurrection !

Daisy Herman

Secretary general

Dear Friends of the rural world
In Christmas we commemorate in our hearts the memory of a great event; “Christ birth” that came to us in the crispness of our humankind, taking the last position, to show us that’s in the modest of incarnation and the cross is the way of salvation. “Who, being from the beginning in the form of God, did not regard being equal with God, something to be grasped. But he emptied himself taking on the form of a bondsman; coming in the likeness of people…. he humbled himself becoming obedient unto death”. (Ph2\6-11)

Christmas prepares us for solidarity, to view much attention, and to attend men and women who have no identity, who are sentenced by different forms of slavery; it is not enough to tell them just traditional answer or show them sense of compassion at the same time our luxury separates us from them. God refuses to follow the pass of humankind history and the hard life of poor. God came and dwell among us, he descend to the bowels of the land to share our life, to make a path with us towards a future full of hope, freedom and salvation.

This is the great truth that our people, our farmers, our families, our churches, our organizations and every one of us must enjoy. This is the certainty that we must keep present in these current conditions, when we loose our hope, especially when we think that people go without target… He himself became man to live among us, to speak to us, and to say what our God the father want to inform us through our lord Jesus.

Its hard for us to believe in this truth, as if it was hard for people of Bethlehem, that  was colonized by Romans “The saviour is coming for us” to free us from slavery

Today, people are caring about the financial and economic crisis; it has a great effect on every thing, means of information and mentalities. Media speak about it because it affects the rich countries and the great economic forces. But the economic need and the hard crisis that is happening through the international system in the poor countries is still continuing without solving the main problems.

At the same time, the natural disasters remind us the suffering of poor people, their abilities to be hurt and their disabilities of control on a nature appears its sharp violence. These phenomenon have a regression per years in a way of growth and development of population, which their poverty is increasing day by day. The human missionaries towards the disasters are so important, but it stills not enough. Solidarity must be converted into useful programs and processes for the development of people in every place.

All these things invite to create a new international economic system, inspired from love, justice and protection of poor people. Not from competition or seeking for profit or activation of markets. This is the meaning of coming of the kingdom of God; it will come, the son “ward of God” comes to spread joy of God for all… this is the great light who shines all human things; politics, economy and culture…etc. this is the coming of new creation and a new humanity.

This is the great mission of the church today, also the only, necessary work is; to give people the bread of ward of God, to identify Jesus Christ, to be his witnesses; the cooperation and the acceptance to the action of the holy spirit is to help the ward to take a body and a form in the world today. This is the real mission today.

Merry Christmas and happy New Year

Fr. Abraam Maher

International Chaplain

Dear friends,

Following our chaplain, I would like to wish you a very bright Christmas and very best wishes for a wonderful year in 2009.  This is rather difficult to send this kind of wishes in our period of crisis of all types, to wish you so good things while in the same time we hear everywhere spoken about recession, financial, energy and food crisis.

But this is exactly the challenge we want to raise in FIAMRC.  The period of Christmas, as Father Abraam reminds us in the editorial, is a period of hope, of welcoming of the poorest.  But we also have the ambition to make this period our daily life.

The challenges of our world are complex and one of FIMARC mission is to raise the voice of the rural world wherever it’s possible, in the United Nations bodies, in the civil society and in the church.  But we will have a credible voice only if you, yourselves tell bout your realities, your understanding of the challenges and your alternatives proposals.  This is why we have sent you recently a document on agrofuels and another one on the right to food.¹ Those documents have been drafted with the FIMARC Human Rights Group and their objective is to equip you to help you to understand the complexity of the challenges, to built your alternatives and to help us to really raise the voice of the rural world.  In 2009, we will continue in this dynamic and we are already preparing a document on the climatic changes, another one on the different concepts we have worked out over the past years and a last one on a new mechanism settled by the ECOSOC, the Universal Periodic Exam.

We hope that you receive the Voice of the Rural World that allows you to follow the actuality of FIMARC movements and organizations.

2009 will be an important year for our Federation as this will be the preparation year of the 2010 World Assembly that should be celebrated in Latin America in April most probably.  We hope that you will be enthusiastic to contribute to this preparation while responding to the different letters or mails you will receive all year long!

I’m sending you together with this LMR, the message of the Holy Father for the celebration of the World Day of Peace that we will celebrate on January 1^st;

Peace,, joy in your families and in your communities, full success in your movements activities, this are our wishes from Anne and my self.

Daisy Herman

Secretary general

MESSAGE OF HIS HOLINESS
POPE BENEDICT XVI

FOR THE CELEBRATION OF THE
WORLD DAY OF PEACE -  1st JANUARY 2009

FIGHTING POVERTY TO BUILD PEACE

Once again, as the new year begins, I want to extend good wishes for peace to people everywhere. With this Message I would like to propose a reflection on the theme: Fighting Poverty to Build Peace. Back in 1993, my venerable Predecessor Pope John Paul II, in his Message for the World Day of Peace that year, drew attention to the negative repercussions for peace when entire populations live in poverty. Poverty is often a contributory factor or a compounding element in conflicts, including armed ones. In turn, these conflicts fuel further tragic situations of poverty. “Our world”, he wrote, “shows increasing evidence of another grave threat to peace: many individuals and indeed whole peoples are living today in conditions of extreme poverty. The gap between rich and poor has become more marked, even in the most economically developed nations. This is a problem which the conscience of humanity cannot ignore, since the conditions in which a great number of people are living are an insult to their innate dignity and as a result are a threat to the authentic and harmonious progress of the world community” [1].

In this context, fighting poverty requires attentive consideration of the complex phenomenon of globalization. This is important from a methodological standpoint, because it suggests drawing upon the fruits of economic and sociological research into the many different aspects of poverty. Yet the reference to globalization should also alert us to the spiritual and moral implications of the question, urging us, in our dealings with the poor, to set out from the clear recognition that we all share in a single divine plan: we are called to form one family in which all – individuals, peoples and nations – model their behaviour according to the principles of fraternity and responsibility.

This perspective requires an understanding of poverty that is wide-ranging and well articulated. If it were a question of material poverty alone, then the social sciences, which enable us to measure phenomena on the basis of mainly quantitative data, would be sufficient to illustrate its principal characteristics. Yet we know that other, non-material forms of poverty exist which are not the direct and automatic consequence of material deprivation. For example, in advanced wealthy societies, there is evidence of marginalization, as well as affective, moral and spiritual poverty, seen in people whose interior lives are disoriented and who experience various forms of malaise despite their economic prosperity. On the one hand, I have in mind what is known as “moral underdevelopment”[2], and on the other hand the negative consequences of “superdevelopment”[3]. Nor can I forget that, in so-called “poor” societies, economic growth is often hampered by cultural impediments which lead to inefficient use of available resources. It remains true, however, that every form of externally imposed poverty has at its root a lack of respect for the transcendent dignity of the human person. When man is not considered within the total context of his vocation, and when the demands of a true “human ecology” [4] are not respected, the cruel forces of poverty are unleashed, as is evident in certain specific areas that I shall now consider briefly one by one.

Poverty and moral implications

Poverty is often considered a consequence of demographic change. For this reason, there are international campaigns afoot to reduce birth-rates, sometimes using methods that respect neither the dignity of the woman, nor the right of parents to choose responsibly how many children to have[5]; graver still, these methods often fail to respect even the right to life. The extermination of millions of unborn children, in the name of the fight against poverty, actually constitutes the destruction of the poorest of all human beings. And yet it remains the case that in 1981, around 40% of the world’s population was below the threshold of absolute poverty, while today that percentage has been reduced by as much as a half, and whole peoples have escaped from poverty despite experiencing substantial demographic growth. This goes to show that resources to solve the problem of poverty do exist, even in the face of an increasing population. Nor must it be forgotten that, since the end of the Second World War, the world’s population has grown by four billion, largely because of certain countries that have recently emerged on the international scene as new economic powers, and have experienced rapid development specifically because of the large number of their inhabitants. Moreover, among the most developed nations, those with higher birth-rates enjoy better opportunities for development. In other words, population is proving to be an asset, not a factor that contributes to poverty.

Another area of concern has to do with pandemic diseases, such as malaria, tuberculosis and AIDS. Insofar as they affect the wealth-producing sectors of the population, they are a significant factor in the overall deterioration of conditions in the country concerned. Efforts to rein in the consequences of these diseases on the population do not always achieve significant results. It also happens that countries afflicted by some of these pandemics find themselves held hostage, when they try to address them, by those who make economic aid conditional upon the implementation of anti-life policies. It is especially hard to combat AIDS, a major cause of poverty, unless the moral issues connected with the spread of the virus are also addressed. First and foremost, educational campaigns are needed, aimed especially at the young, to promote a sexual ethic that fully corresponds to the dignity of the person; initiatives of this kind have already borne important fruits, causing a reduction in the spread of AIDS. Then, too, the necessary medicines and treatment must be made available to poorer peoples as well. This presupposes a determined effort to promote medical research and innovative forms of treatment, as well as flexible application, when required, of the international rules protecting intellectual property, so as to guarantee necessary basic healthcare to all people.

A third area requiring attention in programmes for fighting poverty, which once again highlights its intrinsic moral dimension, is child poverty. When poverty strikes a family, the children prove to be the most vulnerable victims: almost half of those living in absolute poverty today are children. To take the side of children when considering poverty means giving priority to those objectives which concern them most directly, such as caring for mothers, commitment to education, access to vaccines, medical care and drinking water, safeguarding the environment, and above all, commitment to defence of the family and the stability of relations within it. When the family is weakened, it is inevitably children who suffer. If the dignity of women and mothers is not protected, it is the children who are affected most.

A fourth area needing particular attention from the moral standpoint is the relationship between disarmament and development. The current level of world military expenditure gives cause for concern. As I have pointed out before, it can happen that “immense military expenditure, involving material and human resources and arms, is in fact diverted from development projects for peoples, especially the poorest who are most in need of aid. This is contrary to what is stated in the Charter of the United Nations, which engages the international community and States in particular ‘to promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources’ (art. 26)” [6].

This state of affairs does nothing to promote, and indeed seriously impedes, attainment of the ambitious development targets of the international community. What is more, an excessive increase in military expenditure risks accelerating the arms race, producing pockets of underdevelopment and desperation, so that it can paradoxically become a cause of instability, tension and conflict. As my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely observed, “the new name for peace is development”[7]. States are therefore invited to reflect seriously on the underlying reasons for conflicts, often provoked by injustice, and to practise courageous self-criticism. If relations can be improved, it should be possible to reduce expenditure on arms. The resources saved could then be earmarked for development projects to assist the poorest and most needy individuals and peoples: efforts expended in this way would be efforts for peace within the human family.

A fifth area connected with the fight against material poverty concerns the current food crisis, which places in jeopardy the fulfilment of basic needs. This crisis is characterized not so much by a shortage of food, as by difficulty in gaining access to it and by different forms of speculation: in other words, by a structural lack of political and economic institutions capable of addressing needs and emergencies. Malnutrition can also cause grave mental and physical damage to the population, depriving many people of the energy necessary to escape from poverty unaided. This contributes to the widening gap of inequality, and can provoke violent reactions. All the indicators of relative poverty in recent years point to an increased disparity between rich and poor. No doubt the principal reasons for this are, on the one hand, advances in technology, which mainly benefit the more affluent, and on the other hand, changes in the prices of industrial products, which rise much faster than those of agricultural products and raw materials in the possession of poorer countries. In this way, the majority of the population in the poorest countries suffers a double marginalization, through the adverse effects of lower incomes and higher prices.

Global solidarity and the fight against poverty

One of the most important ways of building peace is through a form of globalization directed towards the interests of the whole human family[8]. In order to govern globalization, however, there needs to be a strong sense of global solidarity [9] between rich and poor countries, as well as within individual countries, including affluent ones.

A “common code of ethics”[10]is also needed, consisting of norms based not upon mere consensus, but rooted in the natural law inscribed by the Creator on the conscience of every human being (cf. Rom 2:14-15). Does not every one of us sense deep within his or her conscience a call to make a personal contribution to the common good and to peace in society? Globalization eliminates certain barriers, but is still able to build new ones; it brings peoples together, but spatial and temporal proximity does not of itself create the conditions for true communion and authentic peace. Effective means to redress the marginalization of the world’s poor through globalization will only be found if people everywhere feel personally outraged by the injustices in the world and by the concomitant violations of human rights. The Church, which is the “sign and instrument of communion with God and of the unity of the entire human race” [11] will continue to offer her contribution so that injustices and misunderstandings may be resolved, leading to a world of greater peace and solidarity.

In the field of international commerce and finance, there are processes at work today which permit a positive integration of economies, leading to an overall improvement in conditions, but there are also processes tending in the opposite direction, dividing and marginalizing peoples, and creating dangerous situations that can erupt into wars and conflicts. Since the Second World War, international trade in goods and services has grown extraordinarily fast, with a momentum unprecedented in history. Much of this global trade has involved countries that were industrialized early, with the significant addition of many newly- emerging countries which have now entered onto the world stage. Yet there are other low-income countries which are still seriously marginalized in terms of trade. Their growth has been negatively influenced by the rapid decline, seen in recent decades, in the prices of commodities, which constitute practically the whole of their exports. In these countries, which are mostly in Africa, dependence on the exportation of commodities continues to constitute a potent risk factor. Here I should like to renew an appeal for all countries to be given equal opportunities of access to the world market, without exclusion or marginalization.

A similar reflection may be made in the area of finance, which is a key aspect of the phenomenon of globalization, owing to the development of technology and policies of liberalization in the flow of capital between countries. Objectively, the most important function of finance is to sustain the possibility of long- term investment and hence of development. Today this appears extremely fragile: it is experiencing the negative repercussions of a system of financial dealings – both national and global – based upon very short-term thinking, which aims at increasing the value of financial operations and concentrates on the technical management of various forms of risk. The recent crisis demonstrates how financial activity can at times be completely turned in on itself, lacking any long-term consideration of the common good. This lowering of the objectives of global finance to the very short term reduces its capacity to function as a bridge between the present and the future, and as a stimulus to the creation of new opportunities for production and for work in the long term. Finance limited in this way to the short and very short term becomes dangerous for everyone, even for those who benefit when the markets perform well[12].

All of this would indicate that the fight against poverty requires cooperation both on the economic level and on the legal level, so as to allow the international community, and especially poorer countries, to identify and implement coordinated strategies to deal with the problems discussed above, thereby providing an effective legal framework for the economy. Incentives are needed for establishing efficient participatory institutions, and support is needed in fighting crime and fostering a culture of legality. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that policies which place too much emphasis on assistance underlie many of the failures in providing aid to poor countries. Investing in the formation of people and developing a specific and well-integrated culture of enterprise would seem at present to be the right approach in the medium and long term. If economic activities require a favourable context in order to develop, this must not distract attention from the need to generate revenue. While it has been rightly emphasized that increasing per capita income cannot be the ultimate goal of political and economic activity, it is still an important means of attaining the objective of the fight against hunger and absolute poverty. Hence, the illusion that a policy of mere redistribution of existing wealth can definitively resolve the problem must be set aside. In a modern economy, the value of assets is utterly dependent on the capacity to generate revenue in the present and the future. Wealth creation therefore becomes an inescapable duty, which must be kept in mind if the fight against material poverty is to be effective in the long term.

If the poor are to be given priority, then there has to be enough room for an ethical approach to economics on the part of those active in the international market, an ethical approach to politics on the part of those in public office, and an ethical approach to participation capable of harnessing the contributions of civil society at local and international levels. International agencies themselves have come to recognize the value and advantage of economic initiatives taken by civil society or local administrations to promote the emancipation and social inclusion of those sectors of the population that often fall below the threshold of extreme poverty and yet are not easily reached by official aid. The history of twentieth-century economic development teaches us that good development policies depend for their effectiveness on responsible implementation by human agents and on the creation of positive partnerships between markets, civil society and States. Civil society in particular plays a key part in every process of development, since development is essentially a cultural phenomenon, and culture is born and develops in the civil sphere[13].

As my venerable Predecessor Pope John Paul II had occasion to remark, globalization “is notably ambivalent”[14] and therefore needs to be managed with great prudence. This will include giving priority to the needs of the world’s poor, and overcoming the scandal of the imbalance between the problems of poverty and the measures which have been adopted in order to address them. The imbalance lies both in the cultural and political order and in the spiritual and moral order. In fact we often consider only the superficial and instrumental causes of poverty without attending to those harboured within the human heart, like greed and narrow vision. The problems of development, aid and international cooperation are sometimes addressed without any real attention to the human element, but as merely technical questions – limited, that is, to establishing structures, setting up trade agreements, and allocating funding impersonally. What the fight against poverty really needs are men and women who live in a profoundly fraternal way and are able to accompany individuals, families and communities on journeys of authentic human development.

Conclusion

In the Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, John Paul II warned of the need to “abandon a mentality in which the poor – as individuals and as peoples – are considered a burden, as irksome intruders trying to consume what others have produced.” The poor, he wrote, “ask for the right to share in enjoying material goods and to make good use of their capacity for work, thus creating a world that is more just and prosperous for all” [15]. In today’s globalized world, it is increasingly evident that peace can be built only if everyone is assured the possibility of reasonable growth: sooner or later, the distortions produced by unjust systems have to be paid for by everyone. It is utterly foolish to build a luxury home in the midst of desert or decay. Globalization on its own is incapable of building peace, and in many cases, it actually creates divisions and conflicts. If anything it points to a need: to be oriented towards a goal of profound solidarity that seeks the good of each and all. In this sense, globalization should be seen as a good opportunity to achieve something important in the fight against poverty, and to place at the disposal of justice and peace resources which were scarcely conceivable previously.15. The Church’s social teaching has always been concerned with the poor. At the time of the Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum, the poor were identified mainly as the workers in the new industrial society; in the social Magisterium of Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II, new forms of poverty were gradually explored, as the scope of the social question widened to reach global proportions[16]. This expansion of the social question to the worldwide scale has to be considered not just as a quantitative extension, but also as a qualitative growth in the understanding of man and the needs of the human family. For this reason, while attentively following the current phenomena of globalization and their impact on human poverty, the Church points out the new aspects of the social question, not only in their breadth but also in their depth, insofar as they concern man’s identity and his relationship with God. These principles of social teaching tend to clarify the links between poverty and globalization and they help to guide action towards the building of peace. Among these principles, it is timely to recall in particular the “preferential love for the poor”[17], in the light of the primacy of charity, which is attested throughout Christian tradition, beginning with that of the early Church (cf. Acts 4:32-36; 1 Cor 16:1; 2 Cor 8-9; Gal 2:10).

“Everyone should put his hand to the work which falls to his share, at once and immediately”, wrote Leo XIII in 1891, and he added: “In regard to the Church, her cooperation will never be wanting, be the time or the occasion what it may”[18]. It is in the same spirit that the Church to this day carries out her work for the poor, in whom she sees Christ[19], and she constantly hears echoing in her heart the command of the Prince of Peace to his Apostles: “Vos date illis manducare – Give them something to eat yourselves” (Lk 9:13). Faithful to this summons from the Lord, the Christian community will never fail, then, to assure the entire human family of her support through gestures of creative solidarity, not only by “giving from one’s surplus”, but above all by “a change of life- styles, of models of production and consumption, and of the established structures of power which today govern societies” [20]. At the start of the New Year, then, I extend to every disciple of Christ and to every person of good will a warm invitation to expand their hearts to meet the needs of the poor and to take whatever practical steps are possible in order to help them. The truth of the axiom cannot be refuted: “to fight poverty is to build peace.”

From the Vatican, 8 December 2008 BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

Last version of the VMR

Agrofuels – Our Cars Versus Our Food Needs

Summary

Introduction          2

Definitions           3

Situations and Perspectives        4

Agrofuels Against Human Rights       8

Perspectives for Actions       12

Annexes          14

Realization: September 2008

FIMARC

15 rue Jaumain – 5330 ASSESSE – Belgium

Tél et fax : +32/83 65 62 36

e-mail : fimarc@skynet.be

Introduction

The debate on agrofuels is very real these days. Some present it as the solution to the problem of the lack of fossil fuels. Others denounce agrofuels because they will be in direct competition with the food products necessary both to human beings and cattle-breeding. FIMARC’s position is the same as that of the former Rapporteur on the Right to Food, M. Jean Ziegler, who says he is very worried about this competition…

« The Special Rapporteur is very worried about the fact that biofuels will provoke hunger.   [This production] could very well lead to a competition between food and fuels which will leave the poor and hunger-stricken in the developing countries at the mercy of increasingly high prices of food, land and water. The use of methods from the agro-industrial sector for transforming food into fuels will lead to unemployment and to the violation of the right to food »¹

We wanted to present you with a document that will allow you to better understand the situation and forge your own opinion taking your country’s or continent’s specific situation into account.

The document will be divided in three main sections. The first part will be centered on the facts, numbers and impacts of agrofuel consumption. The second part will deal with the negative consequences of agrofuels on human rights and the third part will focus on possible ideas for actions. You will also find two annexes to the document which are also important since they explain the terms and technical procedures related to agrofuel production.

This document, aside from its information purposes, is also set out to be a pedagogical document at your disposal. At the end of the chapters, you will find a grid of questions that allow you to reflect on your country’s or region’s situation. This document is your document and should be a tool that allows you to search, understand and analyze the situation specific to your region.

There is a lot of information on the agrofuels question. You can find it easily on the internet and in various publications. But what are talking about? This document should allow you to search the most objective information and thus understand the situation in your area and maybe to take up actions which will allow counteracting the current trend if necessary.

We would like to warmly thank the FIMARC Working Group on Human Rights which, mandated by the Executive Committee, produced this document. This was an interesting and enriching work, but it meant reading dozens of documents, analyzing them and synthesizing piles of information. We extend our thanks to this Working Group for all this work, which we hope will meet your expectations in this wish to be better informed and able to better analyze the agrofuel situation.

We wish you a fruitful work and do not hesitate to ask for our help for any further information and to let us know more about your analysis and discoveries, seeing that this debate is definitely an ongoing one and that it will even certainly be amplified, as is already the case with the debate starting on the second generation of agrofuels.

Kind regards,

Daisy Herman

Secretary General

Definitions

We talk about agrofuels to refer to the fuels made from agricultural produce. They are liquid, solid or gas fuels which can replace, in engines, oil-derived fuels. Hence the importance of the terms used to designate them.

The term « biofuels » is used by the industrial players and public authorities, within the framework of the marketing set up for their promotion. There isn’t an ounce of « bio » in these productivist industries : huge monocultures, massive use of fertilizers and pesticides, GMOs foreseen, etc.

Another term used is « necro fuels », because their can provoke death : agrofuels are made from agricultural products destined to feed millions of people, mainly in the most vulnerable regions.

Agrofuels are used in three main industries:

• For gasoline engines : ethanol and its derivatives from cereals (wheat, corn) or sugar plants (sugar beet, sugar cane) ;

• For diesters (diesel engines) : extracts from vegetable oil, animal fats and derived products (diester), extracts of oleaginous plants (oil palm tree, jatropha, soya, colza, sunflower, etc) ;

• For biogases : methane which is made from the fermentation of organic matter (food waste, straw, crop products, etc).

1 – Situation and Perspectives

The world agrofuel production is currently dominated by the Americas and by one type of fuel : ethanol, extracted from US corn and Brazilian sugar cane. These two countries control 72% of the world ethanol production.

At world level we have 1400 million hectares of arable land at our disposal. Counting one ton of fuel per hectare, we would obtain 1400 million tons of oil equivalent (toe), if we were to use all this land for its production. In other words, without eating anything at all we could run – with the fuel made from agricultural products – 40% of the cars now in circulation.

In 2007, agrofuels represented 1% of the fuel used in the world. The aim is to reach 3.5% and more if possible ; hence the pressure on the prices of food products. To answer their needs, the industrialized countries of the North turn to the Southern hemisphere for production.

Brazil can produce 6,000 liters of ethanol from one hectare of sugar cane, i.e. five times more than the United Kingdom is able to produce from colza. Moreover, ethanol production is twice less expensive in Brazil than in the United Kingdom. Brazil wants to replace 10% of the world fuel consumption before 2025, thus multiplying by 5 its land used for sugar cane production. 200 million hectares of dry tropical forests, swamps and damaged land have already been deemed apt for agrofuel production by the government. Soya is already used for 40% of the agrofuel production.

More and More Agricultural Land Used for Agrofuel Production?

In the United States, in 2006, the production reached 19 billion liters of ethanol, with 55 million tons of corn used for its production (i.e. 20% of the corn production in the country) ; and by 2022, the foreseen production will reach 136 billion liters, which should cost at least 135 billion dollars for the country’s taxpayers, due to subsidies. This ethanol is produced from corn which is free of taxes (51% of its normal price), which reduces its production costs.

In Europe, it is foreseen that these fuels will cover 20% of the road fuel used in 2020. In France, the aim is to mix agrofuels with traditional fuels up to 7% by 2010 and up to 10% by 2020. Surfaces : in 2006, of 13 million hectares of cultivated land, it is foreseen that 2 million hectares will be used for agrofuel production, i.e. 15% of the cultivated land.

These objectives go way beyond the agricultural production capacities of the industrial countries in the Northern hemisphere. Europe would have to mobilize 70% of its arable land to honor that bet and all the corn and soya production of the United States would have to be processed to make ethanol and biodiesel.

In Burkina Faso, a company massively produces jatropha seeds and wants to create tree nurseries in order to introduce this crop in the whole country. A study is currently being carried out on the treatment and processing of cotton seeds for agrofuel production, with a grinding and distillation plant for ethanol production. The country’s production capacity could reach up to 60,000 tons of oil for fuel use if all the production and investment condition were met, which is still far from being the case.

In Cameroon, the Bolloré Company (France) controls 40,000 hectare of palm oil trees. From 2001 to 2006, 30,000 hectares have been cleared for oil palm cultivation. The aim for 2010 : 50,000 additional hectares, with subsidies from the IMF (International Monetary Fund) and the WB (World Bank).

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, the State signed a contract with a Chinese company to use 30,000 hectares for planting oil palms.

Indonesia and Malaysia provide 85% of the world agrofuel production from oil palms. This agro-industry employs in South-East Asia more than one million people and generates billions of dollars in revenues. These two countries want to increase their production by 6 million tons a year to respond to the countries in demand. Indonesia, the second world exporter, aims at becoming the main provider at world level by 2009.

In Colombia, the land used for agrofuel production has increased all over the country and went from 170,000 hectares in 2001 to 300,000 hectares in 2007, with the project of reaching 6 million hectares in 2015. In March 2007, Colombia declared that it wanted to become the first Latin American biodiesel producer, thus reaching the fifth rank in the world’s palm oil producers.

Alliances between Oil Producers, Cereal Growers, Agro-Food Companies and Distributors

The International Energy Agency estimates that, in the 23 coming years – i.e. by 2030 – the world could produce up to 147 million tons of agrofuels. This represents an increase multiplied by ten in 25 years. Moreover, the annual increase of oil consumption is of 136 million tons : this production increase will consequently not compensate for the annual increase in oil demand.

For the future, the companies aim at producing cellulose GMO plants, and more specifically fast-growing trees that decompose easily to liberate sugars, these are called « soft trees ». They are genetically modified trees, only to produce more cellulose : not wind-resistant, with GMO pollen disseminating everywhere. They also have projects to make corn stalks and leaves more cost-effective or the using of « Elephant Grass » – also called « Chinese reed » to produce ethanol. These are the so-called « second-generation agrofuels ».  They are thus agrofuels made from non-edible plants or from edible plant waste which therefore are not in competition with the food chain. There is a lot of research going on and each day brings many new developments.

The oil groups, cereal growers and transgenic crop producers reinforce their presence in the whole agrofuel production and processing chain. Cargill and ADM control 65% of the seed market while Monsanto and Syngenta, two agro-food industry pillars, dominate the GMO market. They are surrounded by a cohort just as powerful of raw material processors and distributors, themselves associated with supermarket chains as well as agro-chemical, cereal-growing and agricultural machinery companies (out of 5 dollars used for buying food in the world, 4 dollars correspond to the activities of all these companies).

The Golden Hope Company (Malaysia), which has processing plants in Malaysia and Indonesia, owns a palm oil processing unit in Rotterdam (The Netherlands) where the boats from Asia arrive.

• The Actions of the Trans-National Companies (TNCs)

Present in the whole agrofuel process, the TNCs act and put pressure in different fields :

• On the States, so that they grant permits to use forest land – sometimes playing arsonists to speed up the process and also to have cash crops. For example, the Malaysian company Golden Hope convinced Venezuela to triple its surface of palm oil tree plantations in a few years.

• On the indigenous people : especially those who live in the forest – expulsion, immigration, threats with violence and military repression, violations of their basic human rights.

• On farmers : they are dispossessed of their land which is annexed and bought for ridiculously low prices. These companies supported by the States even go as far as using their armies to get want they want. The farmers are compelled to work on their plantation, to get into debt so as to buy the raw materials and transport means and to wait for three years for hypothetic results.

• On the world market : competitiveness, concentration of capital power in the hands of a few players. When the companies set up a cooperative-type of organization it is only a façade, the power is in the hands of someone chosen by them or in those of the local authorities who are only there to make sure their order is respected. An example : the three main actors from Malaysia have decided to merge and created an industrial giant which already controls 6% of the world production.

By creating a new industry for corn, the demand was artificially swollen and thus voluntarily triggered the price increase. Behind this speculative manipulation, we find the players of the industrial agriculture, the giants of the chemical and GMO seeds sectors and their allies in the automobile industry as well as the large banks. It is in the interest of all the industries that invest in agrofuel production to see it developed. Meanwhile, the citizens pay – as taxpayers – for the tax exemption schemes on the hectares of land destined for ethanol production while being the victims – as consumers – of the rise in food prices.

The speed with which the mobilization of capital and the concentration of power take place in the agrofuel industry is breathtaking. Private funding proposals flood the public research institutions, as in the half-billion dollars subvention granted by BP to the University Of California (USA). The large oil-producing companies, cereal growers, automobile and genetic engineering companies reach strong partnership agreements.

The States, accomplices of the TNCs almost always favor the development of intensive industrial production modes, with objectives that are based on the use of large-scale farms where everything is calculated. A French bank, associated with another group, holds 40 % of the Diester Industrial International Company and owns millions of hectares of land in Argentina and Uruguay to produce green fuels.

In South Africa, Ethanol Africa aims at having set up 8 plants by 2010. The number of cars in Africa should increase by 50 % in the next 10 years. Ethanol Africa also foresees to invest in the neighboring countries. It is the only continent with a vast surplus in cultivable land.

Which Impacts?

The main thing is to keep a certain distance before jumping without thinking into these productions, it is essential to maintain the precaution principle.

Which are the short and long-term impacts of an intensive agriculture ? Some questions have to be raised :

• What is the outcome in terms of ecological and environmental protection, which fertilizers, which pesticides, what is the risk for the population (allergies, infertility risks for instance)?

• What level of water consumption, knowing that certain cloned plants use up a lot more water than « wild » plants and that an industrial type of production requires much more water than « family» agriculture ?

• What emissions (CO2 and other greenhouse gases) in the packaging, consumption, waste management and transport of these agrofuels ?

We should not forget that an agrofuel can be a source of life for a rural community and a source of death when produced on a large-scale basis and that all agrofuels are not environmentally equal.

To avoid slip-ups, it is necessary to set up production criteria that are environmentally and socially acceptable in order to avoid taking large surfaces of land away from food-producing agriculture and creating an agriculture that uses polluting methods. It is necessary to focus on the human aspects before profit.

2 – Agrofuels Versus Human Rights

Intensive monocultures for agrofuel production make food-producing cultures disappear and do not leave any room for food self-sufficiency. This competition endangers the right to food, land, drinking water, farm seeds, natural resources, as well as the right to produce, process and sell products in a fair way. It endangers the right to live in dignity without repression, violence or torture; it questions the right for indigenous people to live in their ancestral land and the right for communities to live in peace in a healthy environment.

2-1 – Right to Food

Reminder : The right to an adequate diet requires everyone to have access – physically and economically – to sufficient food from a nutritional point of view. It imposes on the governments the obligation to respect, protect and ensure the implementation of this right.

The traditional function of agriculture is in grave danger. It is no longer used to provide food to human beings, but rather to hijack from the food chain raw material – that is essential to life – to the benefit of the automobile industry. It is a competition between the production of food and agricultural production to make agrofuels. Many countries of the South already have a deficit in food production for their population. The development of the agrofuel industries will only reinforce their food « insecurity ».

The poorest people spend 50 to 80% of their earnings on food. They suffer when food prices rise due to the high prices of fuel-producing cultures. Every time the price of food rises by 1%, 16 million people fall into food insecurity. If the current trend continues, 1.2 billion inhabitants could chronically suffer from hunger by 2025. In that case, international food aid will probably not be a great help since our agricultural surpluses will go … into our fuel tanks.

The agricultural production to make 50 liters of agrofuel equals the food a child needs in a year. In order to fill up the tank of a 4×4 you need what equals to a portion of cereal for one person for a year.

In Mexico – that imports 30% of its corn – the growing demand for ethanol triggered a huge pressure on the price of that cereal with a dramatic increase in the price of tortilla, a basic component of the Mexican food diet : more than 14% in 2006.

Ethanol production from manioc threatens especially those who are most destitute. Manioc satisfies one third of the caloric needs of Sub-Saharan African populations and is the main food ingredient for more than 200 million Africans who are among the poorest of the continent. Because of its high starch content, manioc represents an excellent ethanol source.

« After the production of foodstuffs, the renewable energy culture is about to become the second objective of Fribourg farmers » says a Swiss agricultural representative. The Swiss movement – ACAR – thus poses the question of a society choice : « There is indeed a risk that our food will increasingly come from products from elsewhere, which means : transport, high costs, pollution. Do we want the short food channel to prevail? And what, then, of the food sovereignty we defend ?? »

2-2 – The Right to the Land

The development of agrofuels creates conflicts in the access to the land : expropriations, land allocated to agrofuel production, to the detriment of local and indigenous communities. For instance, in Ghana, a Swedish company owns 10,000 hectares used to produce sugar cane.

Hundreds of thousands of people – farmers and indigenous – are displaced in a geographic area called « The Soya Republic » (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia). The expulsions are brutal, often with the help of paramilitary brigades which seized the opportunity to take away the indigenous people’s land. Trade-unionists, social and farmer leaders are murdered, massacres and unforeseen disappearances occur, money is laundered.

In Indonesia, indigenous tribes who live from hunting, fishing and plant-picking are chased away in large proportions from their forest villages by fires ; their land-ownership rights are not recognized ; this violence already led to a dozen murders and hundreds of torture cases.

The sell-off of food-producing cultures is not the only fear : agrofuel production necessarily means the concentration of land ownership, deforestation, soil, water and air pollution and the expulsion of the farmers.

2-3 – The Rights of the Displaced People

On the one hand, we are faced with a forced displacement of populations. It is estimated that there are in the world 60 million displaced people, due to agrofuel production, out of which 5 million are in Indonesia. The multinationals, and even the States, force populations to leave their homes so as to use their land for oil palm production, when the States – according to International Human Rights – should protect people who are obligated to be displaced within their State.

On the other hand, populations are compelled to integrate themselves into the financial mechanisms of agrofuel production. The indigenous people have to buy their land in order to be able to stay, and by so doing get into debt. In this way, they become dependant from the banks and trans-national companies (TNCs), thus becoming slaves who work in the sugar cane fields or in oil palm production.

2-4 – The Right to Health

In Indonesia, those who work in the plantations and extraction plants do so in very bad salary and status conditions and are in a dependency situation. There are dangers to the health : skin and nail illnesses, nosebleeds, eye infections, stomach ulcers, fertility and pregnancy problems, etc. provoked by the use without precautions of more than twenty pesticides (among which paraquat, the most harmful herbicide, which is banned from use in many countries).

Ethanol is as unhealthy for the lungs as gasoline. It is considered as toxic as gasoline by the American Environmental Agency. If all the cars in North-America were to run on super ethanol (85% ethanol, 15% unleaded by 2020), the respiratory problems due to air pollution would occur with an over-mortality rate of 4%.

2-5 – The Right to Decent Working Conditions

Oil palm production is not very remunerative for producers : the preparation of the land is expensive and so are the seeds. Most farmers go into debt to make the necessary investments. The reimbursement of their loans cut their modest earnings by 30%.

Salaries and working conditions in the oil palm plantations are often appalling, especially in the countries where social rights are very limited or non-existent. The workforce, made up of seasonal workers who earn 1.28 dollars per ton of cut sugar cane, is grossly exploited. These extreme conditions already led hundreds of workers to their deaths.

In Brazil, 100 hectares used in family farms provide at least 35 jobs, when 100 hectares used for industrial sugar cane production and oil palms only provide 10 jobs.

2-6 – The Right to a Healthy Environment

Deforestation

Important destruction of the forests : In Malaysia, between 1985 and 2000, the development of oil palms for agrofuel production was responsible for 87% of the deforestation. In Indonesia, the oil palm plantations are the main cause of forest decline ; by around 2020, these surfaces will have tripled, to reach 16.5 million hectares (the surface covered by England and Whales together) with a loss of 98% of the forest area.

Soya already provides 40% of agrofuels in Brazil : the more soya price increase, the faster the destruction of the Amazonian humid forest : 325,000 hectares a year, at the current pace.

Pollution and Global Warming

The industrial cultures used for agrofuel production require massive spreads of fertilizers. These are produced from oil – their world consumption is of 45 million tons a year. As a consequence, the level of biologically available nitrogen has doubled, thus contributing to nitrous oxide emissions, a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential 300 times higher than that of carbon dioxide.

Each ton of palm oil contains as much carbon dioxide as oil. Ethanol produced from sugar cane cultivated on cleared tropical forests releases more greenhouse gas than the production and use of the equivalent quantity of gasoline.

To obtain a liter of ethanol you need 3 to 5 liters of water and you produce up to 13 liters of waste water. You would need the equivalent of 113 liters of natural gas to treat this waste water, hence the high probability of rejecting it in the environment without treatment, thus polluting rivers, streams and ground waters.

Even the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), in a report from 2007, points out all the weaknesses of agrofuels : their response to the global warming challenge is negligible; they provoke food deficits, the destruction of natural habitats and will be very costly in terms of production subsidies.

Biodiversity

Millions of species are at stake and many ecosystems will be destroyed. The forests of Papua New Guinea, which only cover 0.3% of the world’s surface but harbor 5% of the world’s biodiversity are coveted by the trans-national companies for oil palm production.

In 15 years, 98% of the Malaysian and Indonesian rainforests will have disappeared and with them, many wild species due to the destruction of their habitat. Indeed, many forests are currently being cut in a rampant rush to produce palm oil.

In Indonesia, oil palms threaten human beings, orang-outans and the Indian elephant. In Africa, the Congo basin is threatened. In Brazil and Latin America, sugar cane and soya are planted everywhere – to fill up car tanks – to the detriment of the forest and the « cerrado », which are unique ecosystems. Agrofuels are war and death weapons.

3 – Perspectives for Actions

The production of agrofuels is unacceptable if it triggers more hunger and water shortages, as well as human rights violations. What, then, can we do? This is not a catalogue of possible actions but rather a series of ideas and perspectives for possible actions. It is up to each movement to find on the ground the means to have human rights respected and to ensure the future of humanity.

Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur for the Right to Food in the UN Human Rights Council, in his 2008 report, recommends that the States observe a 5 year moratorium in agrofuel production. In his report, J. Ziegler says : « The States should impose a 5 year moratorium on all initiatives aiming at producing biofuels from foodstuffs. They should make sure that biofuels are produced from non-food producing plants, agricultural and vegetal waste rather than food crops, in order to avoid a massive increase of food, water and land prices and to avoid the use of these resources for any other end than food production. For this, they will have to immediately and massively invest in « second generation » technologies to produce biofuels ». (Report A/HCR/7/5 – N° 77 e). Let us underline here that J. Ziegler uses the term « biofuel » where we believe the term agrofuel « agrofuel » should be used (see « Definitions » at the beginning of this document).

Various measures can be implemented during this moratorium to make sure that the right to food and other human rights are respected :

+ Are agrofuels necessary ? It is the first question to ask ourselves in our own country’s situation. Locally, what are the possibilities to develop truly alternative energy sources, without depending on agrofuels ? How to act in order to make sure that the right to food and the right to food sovereignty are respected and implemented ? We should also look at how agrofuel production destroys local food agriculture and destroys the rights mentioned in the former part of this document.

+ Raising the awareness of the public opinion on the need to reduce global energy consumption and focus efforts on all other methods that allow improving the energy yield. This requires a true and contradictory public debate.

+ Act collectively to save energy – Starting with massive energy savings ! Then, consuming « our » local biomass and our urban and rural waste. It is necessary to collectively elaborate alternative solutions, turn them into demands and mobilize the oppressed and exploited in order to implement them. In the rich countries, the demands should be extended and combined with emergency demands such as the radical reduction of fossil fuel consumption, the setting up of oil reserves destined exclusively to emergency transport, social equipment, winter heating and the production of necessary goods.

+ Developing local productions of energy sources which are not in competition with food cultures :

• On relatively reduced surfaces which do not infringe on food cultures ;
• Within the framework of projects implemented and managed by local communities, so that a real ownership can take place among producers, users and beneficiaries – the only guarantee for success ;
• First for their local energy needs : access to electricity by supplying generators for the essential energy needs, such as running a mill or a husking plant, lighting the maternity ward or the study group for children in the evenings, maintaining the cold chain or other local community needs ;
• To carry out well-managed local projects, such as the use of cotton seeds in Burkina-Faso, or the replacement of the groundnut crop by sunflower in Senegal. And setting up strategies at short, medium and long term.

+ Adopting technologies that use non-food cultures, specifically those which can be cultivated in arid regions. This would be the case of the « jatropha curcas », a small shrub that produces large oleaginous seeds and that can be grown on very dry land. This crop could increase soil productivity, offer a means of subsistence – for instance in Africa – and reverse the land degradation and desertification.

We should however be very careful : many large surfaces are deforested, and people are starting to use arable land to increase the jathropha yield. Always in the name of productivity, people use more and more water – which is precious in the semi-arid regions. Moreover, many projects were taken over by the TNCs and no longer benefit the poorest local populations.

+ Making sure that agrofuels are produced by a family and farmer agriculture rather than industrial agriculture. In this, the States have a responsibility in protecting and respecting the right to food. For example, by creating cooperatives of small producers who would give their harvests to processing companies in order to create more employment and rural development.

Annex N° 1 – Glossary of Key Words

• • Agrofuel or biofuel:  See «  Definitions » at the beginning of this document ;

• • Agro diesel Fuel produced from oleaginous plants (colza, sunflower, groundnut, and soya) by low-temperature pressure). Added to diesel oil, it can be used in diesel engines ;

• • Agro ethanol Fuel obtained from vegetal material (cereal, sugar beet, sugar cane, wood) that can be added to gasoline ;

• • Biomass Material from vegetal or animal origin which is used from producing electricity, heat or fuel. E.g. : wood, composting waste or from water purification plants, cultivated plants ;

• • Esterisation Extraction (for instance from oil) through a chemical process – contrary to pressure which is a physical extraction ;

• • Fermentation Transformation with yeasts (naturally present or added) into ethyl alcohol ;

• • Hydrolysis Decomposition of certain chemical components through water ;

• • Methanisation Transformation into gas.

Last version of the VMR

FIMARC EUROPEAN CONGRESS Luznica – Croatia – September 2008

The FIMARC gathered 30 Militants from 12 European countries[i] invited from 7^th to 15^th September to Luznica (Croatia) around the theme: “Concrete steps towards food sovereignty[ii] and solidarity economy”.

The European Coordination of the FIMARC strongly denounces the causes of the current global food crisis and expresses its solidarity to the poorest people of the world. It supports and joins all the efforts and struggles of the social movement of the planet for the access to water, seeds and defends a true food sovereignty as well as a solidarity economy. The right to food, a fundamental right mentioned in the Charter of Human Rights is flouted every day and it is unacceptable that the farmers who produce food for the planet constitute the big majority of those who suffer and die every day from hunger.

On the basis of the analysis of the experiments presented by participants and the ones visited in Croatia, the participants to the seminar observed a disconnection between decision making authorities and the promoters of initiatives. They underlined the presence of alarming indicators related to the conservation of planet Earth and the need for an action towards change based on solidarity and trust between producers and consumers. First of all, it requires changes in our ways of life and consumption at a personal level, which will lead to a collective change.

Consequently, in memory of Jesus who shared his life with the inhabitants of Galilee, the seminar plenary assembly invites its member movements to analyze their practices of rural development and Christian militancy in the eyes of criteria that allow, in the framework of solidarity economy, personal fulfillment and primacy of the human being over monetary profit, the production of common goods and services that respect the environment, and that are organized on the basis of a participatory economy.

In the framework of food sovereignty, we are in favor of a fair allocation of land and an access to resources in the respect for peasants’ and consumers’ autonomy in terms of setting selling prices and incomes and the choice of products quality for a sustainable development in all countries.

On the basis of these criteria, the movements of all countries will have to define specific evaluation criteria.

The European Coordination proposes that its movements should:

· Evaluate their local initiatives to build on the acquired knowledge on the basis of these experiments.

· Share the evaluations of successful experiments using FIMARC’s communication tools

· Actively contribute to public policies on agrarian reforms and access to funds

· Participate to the elaboration of an international charter of Solidarity Economy and Food Sovereignty in partnership and network with other organizations and to integrate it at the national and local level in order to activate the system of Solidarity Economy and Food Sovereignty.

---

[i] Germany, Belgium, Spain, France, Italy, Switzerland, Poland, Croatia, Rumania, Ukraine, Bosnia, Bulgaria.

[ii] According to Via Campesina, Food Sovereignty designates the RIGHT of populations, their countries or Unions to define their agricultural and food policy, without dumping vis-à-vis third countries.

Dear Friends! Here is a new edition of VMR!

If You want to read it yust click the picture bellow.

Press Release

Dear Friends! Here is a new edition of VMR!

If You want to read it yust click the picture bellow.

FIMARC FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DES MOUVEMENTS D’ADULTES RURAUX CATHOLIQUES
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RURAL ADULT CATHOLIC MOVEMENTS
FEDERACION INTERNACIONAL DE MOVIMIENTOS DE ADULTOS RURALES CATOLICOS
FEDERACAO INTERNACIONAL DOS MOVIMENTOS DE ADULTOS RURAIS CATOLICOS

Facing the Food Crisis: Decrease

In many areas of the world we hear about dramatic stories caused by the world food crisis. Despite
the fact that farmers are the ones who produce the food, they are the ones who most suffer from
hunger. The price of basic food products are constantly on the increase, e.g. the 25 million poor
farmers who suffer from increased rice prices.
FIMARC, the International Federation of Adult Rural Catholic Movements, gathered in Assesse
(Belgium), with representatives from the 4 continents, analyzed and reflected on the world food
crisis.
Natural resources are in the world for the development of human beings. Natural resources are,
however, increasingly being privatized and are mainly now in the hands of transnational companies
– supported by international finance organizations such as the WTO, the World Bank and the IMF
– who manage them without taking the main objective into account : feeding the whole of mankind.
The land used for monocrop production is extending for the production of agrofuels which the multinational
companies mainly present as an alternative to fossil fuels and as a solution for the environment.
However, this is bringing about the destruction of numerous forests and traditional crops
in order to produce ethanol or similar fuels, in huge areas of Africa, Asia and America, due to their
land concentration.
We are moving towards a world which is upside down: cars, not people, will be needing to consume
the yearly cereal production.
We suggest as an alternative farmer and family agriculture that contributes to guaranteeing food
sovereignty for millions of people. This agriculture respects nature, soils, water, promotes biodiversity,
local development and puts the people within their communities at the heart of the system.
In a world with a consumerist minority and a majority who lives on the threshold of poverty, it is necessary
to propose an alternative. To the neoliberal system – only measured by the growth indicator
– we propose a different lifestyle : decrease – promoting responsible consumption in order to
maintain the values of justice and re-distribution, within the framework of solidarity economy, a model
which secures the principle of food for all, respects diversity of cultures, local initiatives and the
rural world.
Assesse, 5 May 2008

Facing the Food Crisis: Decrease

In many areas of the world we hear about dramatic stories caused by the world food crisis. Despite the fact that farmers are the ones who produce the food, they are the ones who most suffer from hunger. The price of basic food products are constantly on the increase, e.g. the 25 million poor farmers who suffer from increased rice prices.

FIMARC, the International Federation of Adult Rural Catholic Movements, gathered in Assesse (Belgium), with representatives from the 4 continents, analyzed and reflected on the world food crisis.

Natural resources are in the world for the development of human beings. Natural resources are, however, increasingly being privatized and are mainly now in the hands of transnational companies – supported by international finance organizations such as the WTO, the World Bank and the IMF – who manage them without taking the main objective into account : feeding the whole of mankind.

The land used for monocrop production is extending for the production of agrofuels which the multinational companies mainly present as an alternative to fossil fuels and as a solution for the environment. However, this is bringing about the destruction of numerous forests and traditional crops in order to produce ethanol or similar fuels, in huge areas of Africa, Asia and America, due to their land concentration.

We are moving towards a world which is upside down: cars, not people, will be needing to consume the yearly cereal production.

We suggest as an alternative farmer and family agriculture that contributes to guaranteeing food sovereignty for millions of people. This agriculture respects nature, soils, water, promotes biodiversity, local development and puts the people within their communities at the heart of the system.

In a world with a consumerist minority and a majority who lives on the threshold of poverty, it is necessary to propose an alternative. To the neoliberal system – only measured by the growth indicator – we propose a different lifestyle : decrease – promoting responsible consumption in order to maintain the values of justice and re-distribution, within the framework of solidarity economy, a model which secures the principle of food for all, respects diversity of cultures, local initiatives and the rural world.

Visiting Croatia 2008

Last week, President a General Secretary of Fimarc was in working visit in Croatia. We bring  a small slide show of that event.