Social Movement for Local Food and Income security

By Walaiporn Od-ompanich

Food is a basic human right and need. The right to food is the right to life. People have the right to food as well as an adequate standard of living and equal access to food for both women and men. Trade can not achieve food security. It is a threat to human life when food and agriculture are put on the table for trade negotiation. While Thailand is proud of its food production capacity and ranked as a leading food exporter, FAO has indicated that 21% (12.2 million peoples) of the Thai population are experiencing hunger). The promotion of commercial crops for export has paved the way for farmers to shift from producing food for their families to producing non-food crops such as cassava, palm oil, sugar cane, flower, etc. Yet,
There is no more food security among small farmers in Thai rural societies. The Bank of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooeratives has indicated that 4.65 million farmers are indebted by a total of 403,300 million baht (87,673 baht/2,190 US$ per farmer). Are, therefore, trade and cash crops the right options for Thai farmers to secure their livelihood, if in reality they lead to bankruptcy?

Background

The Thai government has pursued the policy of export orientation and high external input farming systems for more than 4 decades. This has created a wildening gap between the agricultural and other sectors of the Thai society, as well as among the farmers themselves. The degradation of natural resources, contamination of soil, water, air and the environment as a whole, as well as the disapperance of genetic resources, are consequences of this. The government’s policy on free trade with agricultural products including trade related intellectual property rights (TRIPs), opened wide possibilities for transnational corporations to access Thailand’s agricultural commodities and genetic resources. Neo-liberal theories with exclusive orientation on liberalisation, privatisation, delegulation and commercialisation of food and agricultural products have so far only lead to threatening the existence of the Thai small farmers sector and therefore, can not be accepted. Instead, the Thai government futher exacerbates the situation by e.g. charging for the use of basic natural resources such as irrigation water-under the pressure of the ADB (Asian Development Bank) which farmers consider a violation of their basic rights over the
use of natural resources.

The Alternative Agriculture Network and the different farmer movements are opposing the roles of global institutions such as the WTO, World Bank, IMF and ADB in directing the Thai national policy towards further liberalization and commercialization of Thai agriculture and foods. The exported oriented agriculture and food policy, as well as the structural adjustment program will further destroy farmers’ food security, particularly in the small farmer sector- and with it, the whole rural Thai culture. Taking into consideration previous experiences, small farmers will then continue to lose their rights over land, genetic resource, natural resources through bankruptcy and thus lose their livelihood. Small farmers should be protected from a one-sided policy orientation and unfair competition.

The AAN has defied food security as follows:
• Availability of enough food for all members of the society;
• Availability of safe food that meets the full nutritional needs and in line with the local culture;
• The food production system should improve or maintain the ecological bio-diversity of the region and use appropriate technologies and local knowledge;
• The food distribution system should ensure fair and equitable access for all members of society; and
• Fair and equal access to means of production land, water, genetic resources must be secured.

Alternative Agriculture Network(AAN)

The Alternative Agriculture movement in Thailand has emerged as a result of the government’s policy failure. Instead, the AAN and farmer movements are promoting sustainable agriculture, and community based resource management as viable ways to achieve food security.
Small farmers practising alternative agriculture report that they have enough food for all family members, as well as others, both inside and outside their community.

The AAN of Thailand founded in 1990, is a body under whose umbrella gather the NGOs and farmer organizations concerned with sustainable production of food - and the security of income of the producers. It also looks at the issues of safe and healthy food for the consumers and the conservation of the environment. To date, 70 member organizations from all across the country are small NGOs working closely with small farmers.

Alternative, sustainable agriculture takes many different forms in Thailand. Since 1989 rice-fish culture is widely practiced among farmers in the Northeast. Integrated farming is found in lowland areas in the Northeast and central regions. Farmers grow diversified crops, vegetables and raise animals. Farmers in the South practise multiple cropping. The karen people’s rotational farming is said to be the most diversified cropping pattern. Appropriate techniques such as crop rotation, green manure, alternative pest management, bio-intensive gardening, fermented plant juice, bogashi, etc. have been developed and shared among farmers who practice alternative agriculture. An increasing number of farmers are adopting these farming systems. In Northeast Thailand, a farmer can earn at least 300 baht (7.5 US$) daily from selling products from his farm. While the government is promoting primary cash crops with high ecternal inputs, farmers and NGOs continue to develop and promote alternative systems of agricultural production.

The alternative agriculture systems promoted take many forms and use various techniques which farmers themselves consider appropriate to their environment, socio-economic and cultural situation. But all forms share the same principle: no use of agrochemicals, preference on use of local plant varieties and consideration of local knowledge or wisdom. A number of learning activities such as farmer-to-farmer exchange, on-farm technology development, forums, seminars, etc. were organized during the previous years. In order to solve marketing problems, farmers are encouraged to form groups to develop alternative marketing strategies. In Northern Thailand, NGOs and farmers have opened green shops in Chiengmai, to sell organic produce such as rice, vegetables, strawberry (fresh and jam), herbal medicines, etc. Women cooeperatives engage in promoting alternative agriculture and food processing. Mills have been established to process organic and pesticide-free paddy rice.

The main alternative marketing strategies have been thoroughly developed:

a) alternative shops run by farmers, NGOs, and friends: as of 1998, 110 shops were operating throughout the country;
b) local markets, open for producers and consumers to meet in big cities such as Chiengmai, Khon Kaen;
c) public awareness campaigns through events such as alternative agriculture fairs, forums, and different publications,

For more than 15 years, farmers, NGOs and consumer groups poured continuous efforts into the development and the promotion of alternatives-without attracting much government interest.

99-Days of mass mobilization in front of the government house.

??We are poor people,
We have no money, no honour,
No power, no weapon,
Only our feet we have,
To walk together,
Enhance our alliances,
Only then we will listen to.
Only from demonstration,
The power of the poor can be seen.??
(The song singed by the Assembly of the poor)

On December, 10,1995 , the Assembly of the Poor, initially known as “Forum of the Poor”, a network of farmers victimized by more than four decades of Thailand’s economic and industrailization development policies, was formed. The member groups represented five networks, namely: people who were affected by dam projects, land and forest conflicts, government infrastructure projects, but also slum dwellers, and exploited workers. They gathered to voice their problems and demand their rights as well as social justice.

Between March 1996 and May 1997, the AOP organized three rallies of 12,000 to 30,000 farmers. The so-called “Village of the Poor” was established right in front of the government house. The second rallly lasted 23 days. At the outcome, the government promised to solve a number of identified critical issues. However, after the rally, the government officials took no action to solve the problems, especially at local authority level.

The third, and the longest mobilization lasted for 99 days, starting on January 25th , and ending on May 6th, 1997. The participating networks were : the Assembly of dam-affected vilagers, the Assembly of Isan (Northeast) Small Scale Farmers, The Northern farmers Network, the Alternative Agriculture Network, the network of workers with vocational diseases and the slum for Democracy Organization. During these 99 days of occupation of the land around the Government house, farmer groups from all four regions got organized under the the Alternative Agriculture Network and joined the Assembly of the poor.

“It is time for farmers to mobilise and put pressure on the government. We can not achieve our goal (in promoting sustainable agriculture effectively) unless the government change its policy” said Daycha Siripatra, chairperson of the Alternative Agriculture Network.

Dissatisfaction was great because the government had allocated its agricultural budget primarily to commercial farming and cash crops, and very little went to the promotion and support the development of sustainable agriculture. Therefore, the promising results of more than 15 years of grassroot-based development of SA could grow on a larger scale.

In terms of its structure during the "99-Day Occupation", the process of gathering and working with and among people reflected grassroots democracy. Every morning, the core members of each group come to the community center to discuss strategy, problems and future plans. In the evening, they hold a meeting to which each group sends a representative. In order to survive in a big city, the farmers contributed one baht a day to the central fund overseen by the committee. They set a donation box and also received support from the public both in cash and kind. Many farmers had to find work in Bangkok during that time. They set up a donation box and also received support from the public, both in cash and in kind. Many farmers had to find work in Bangkok during that time. They also got support from their son or daughter who already worked in Bangkok. They even started to grow vegetables along the canal at the protest site. The farmers organised themselves in such a fashion as to take turns staying at the village of the poor, while others went back to their farms for a few days. When they came back, they brought along food to cook and share. Both women and men farmers joined and cooperated in many ways --such as cooking, cleaning, nursing the ill, guarding the village, and entertaining the public.
The AOP demanded the government to solve the 121 problems areas, and formulated the following recommendations for policy improvement and political reform. The concret recommendations were:

• The community Forest Act for cooperation between government and communities; to mutually protect and conserve the forest;
• The Agricultural Rights Act, to support roles of farmers to conserve and develop plant diversity;
• The Rights to information Act, to support the public access of information especially governmental infroamtion;
• The Slums Act, to include security in housing rights for slum dwellers;

• The Administration Act, to settle disputes between the people and the government;
• The adoption of a policy on fair distribution of land by using the progressive tax system;
• The adoption of a principle of public participation hearing and referendum when an international agreement which will affect the public is to be made.

Moving towards Sustainble Agriculture for Food and Income Security.

As mentioned earlier, the farmers network on Alternative Agriculture has joined the Assembly of the poor for the demand to support the alternative agriculture. Aside from working with the AOP, the farmer network on Alternative Agriculture and the Alternative Agriculture network worked together to lobby and propose their agenda and policy recoomendations. In the process of negotiation, they nominated representatives both from farmer leaders and NGOs senior to be their key negotiators. The demand is to convert the land area of 25 million rai (4.2 million ha.) into sustainable agriculture as stated in the 8th National Economic and Social development plan. They also demand the government to approve “the pilot project of small farmers for sustainable agriculture development” with the total buget of 950 million baht (24 million US $) for 4 years( 1998-2001). The pilot project should be directly managed and run by grass-root organizations. It aims to search for the process, pattern, technology and methodology to support small farmers to be self reliant through sustainable agriculture and coastal resource recovery. The pilot project targeted7,035 families;of which 3,500 families are engaged in agriculture and 3,535 families in fishery and covers an area of 27,100 rai (4,500 ha) and 116.4 km length of coastline.

During the negotiation, both farmer leaders and NGOs representatives had to work closely in preparing the project document and back up papers. After several meetings and dialouge with the government negotiation team, the cabinet approved both demands by the AAN on March 18th, 1997. The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives took on responsibility of putting the plan into action.

On November 1997, Prime Minister Chavalit resigned and Chuan Leekpai took over the country leadership. Day after day, the new admistration turned downed the results negotiated under the Chavalit Administration. The AOP returned and appealed for their right. Many groups of farmers rallied and stayed in front of the government house but no response came from the government. The Chuan Administration even increased the violence against the farmer groups. For example, policemen hit farmers with truncheons during the confrontation. Some policemen released police dogs to bite demonstrators. Key farmers and NGOs representatives were put in jail without any possibility of bail.

Another 2 years of negotiation.
The pilot project “small farmers for sustainable agriculture development” was never put into execution under the Chuan government. Under the next administration system of the new government, the farmers began, once again, to explain all the details of the project, to the new government’s representatives, with the new representatives of the government on all project details again. The government agreed to set up a joint committee to work with the network’s representatives, but the process is complicated, slow and full of government rule and regulations. The project documents were shifted from one desk to another. After a series of consultations, the Sustainable Agriculture Foundation, Thailand was registered as being the responsible body for the pilot project. The budget system was established, in accordance with the government’s regulations. In order to foster more understanding for the pilot project, the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives asked the Alternative Agriculture Network to organize a study tour for government officials.

As a result of intensive negotiation between the government, NGOs and farmers, details on structure, activities, plan of action, budget, and administration have been elaborated. An executive committee has been installed comprising of representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives, experts, NGOs, and farmers, (altogether 20 members). The role of the executive committee is to review projects and activities submitted by the regional sub-committees on implementation of a pilot project at eco-geographical area, prepare project and activities at national level It will supervise and monitor operation and expenditures of the project, define the accounting system, the reporting and the allocatation of the budget among the four eco-geographical areas. It will also appoint advisers, sub-committees and working groups for effective project operation. The sub-committee comprises of local scholars, development workers and farmers, about 10-20 members per eco-geographical area. A working group, at the eco logical level, reviews project proposals before these are sent to the executive committee. It also coaches and monitors the activities and projects to ensure that set objectives are met.

On July 15th ,1998, a budget of 633 million baht (14 million US$) was approved by the Ministry of Finance for the duration of 3 years (1999-2001).

On May 16th , 2000, the cabinet approved the pilot project and authorised the Ministry of Agriculture to set the regulation and allocate the budget. And finally, on September 23rd , 2000, the house of representatives approved the pilot project “Small Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture Development”, as well as a budget of 224,630,00 baht (4,991,778 $) for the first year.

Summary of the Negotiation Marathon

• After almost 4 years of negotiation, lobbying, supplying piles of documents, discussions, meetings, rallies, seminar, and others, the pilot project of the Small Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture Development is now operated. From day one on, after joining the Assembly of the Poor, they provided a lot of support for each other. During the 99 days of staying together in the Village of the Poor, they had the opportunity to learn and share problems and alternatives with different groups of farmers. For example, the farmers affected by dam construction learned alternative techniques from the farmers from the alternative agriculture network. Study tours were organized for farmers so as to visit alternative agriculture farms and community enterprises close to Bangkok. The political school established inside the Village of the Poor provided the protesters with knowledge on national agricultual policies.
• The Small Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture development network learned that they could increase their negotiation power with the government, if they united to act. Farmers increasingly understood that they need to expand their network and co-operation with other groups, if the conversion to alternative agriculture is to substantially develop.
• Even though, at the same time, it may view this network as trouble maker, the government realises that farmers do have a great capapcity in their livelihood development. During the negotiation, the government especially the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives’s officers learned about alternative farming pattern, methods and people's effort towards sustainable agriculture. At policy level, it can be claimed that community based projects on sustainable agriculture meanwhile have been accepted among government officers. They have accepted that farmers have the capacity to develop and manage the project that are addressing food and income security. They also started to accept that commercial agriculture is not the only pattern for small farmers in Thailand.

Slowing gaining public support.

During this past process, the Small Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture Development netwotk received substantial support from NGOs, scholars, and consumer groups. Altogether, for more than 15 years, they have been promoting sustainable agriculture and they are recognising as the major movement were the local NGOs and the Alternative Agriculture network at national level. They worked closely with the farmers and actively took part in negotiating and lobbying with the government. As a result of the experiences acquired, an increasing number of farmers are now able to achieve food security and earn an income from their farms.

Concluding notes and recommendations

It took almost two decades for farmers and NGOs to reap their first successes in directing the agricultural towards sustainable agriculture and local food security. This is the first time in the Thai history that the Ministry of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives has approved and supported a small farmers pilot project for sustainable agriculture development managed by grass-root farmer organizations. Further more, the Department of Agriculture also initiated their Sustainable Agricultural Development Project to promote systematic implementation strategies and training and learning programmes for the promotion of sustainable agriculture. However, despitethe chievements obtained, thanks to the continuous complementary co-peration between the Assembly of the Poor, NGOs, Academies, and consumers, a lot still needs to be addressed and promoted.

The “ Small Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture Develoment” pilot project has to be run and managed largely by farmers. The competence of farmers in managing these projects still a matter of concern. At, present, farmers and NGOs are working together to maange the projects at eco-geographical and national levels. A management structure has been set up to facilitate the work. The Sustainable Agriculture Foundation has established, an evaluation team to define a monitoring and information system including indicators. This team is composed of representatives of farmers, NGOs, academies and government. This pilot project is a big challenge for farmers to work together and co-ordinate with other sectors. It is a challenge for them to prove that they can succeed in improving sustainable agriculture and that this is a viable strategy for the Thai agriculture and rural sector.

While the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives has widened its policy by partly addressing the demands of the sustainable agriculture initatives, the government’s major agricultural policy , however, still pursues the promotion of commercial crops for export. It still aims at increasing agricultural productivity and enhance export competitiveness. Therefore, there is a continued need to analyse farmers’ experiences with the pilot project, and to share these with the government. It is a time for government officials, farmers, NGOs, and academies to work together in a more system fashion, and to learn from one another. The Small Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture Development network, the Sustainable Agriculture Foundation and the Alterantive Agriculture Network are planing to promote a Bill on Sustainable Agriculture to protect farmers’ rights in promoting sustainable agriculture and food security.

In terms of alliance building, it is the role of farmers engaged in the pilot project, to share their experiences and conclusion with other groups, especially the Assembly of the Poor. Farmer to farmer exchange of knowledge and experiences on alternatives will help other group to move towards sustainable farming and a way of life. Farmers in other groups also seek alternatives to solve their problems, and the lesson from the farmer network on sustainable agriculture could help other group to develop alternatives that are responding to the need and problems of the poor. There is also a need to develop producer-consumer linkage.

“It is only when people come together as a social movement, that then the power can be seen”

References

1. Alternative Agriculture Network. Two year of the pilot project of small farmers for sustainable agriculture development: why it has taken so long before the launching? Paper circulated during the network meeting, no date.

2. “a peace message” appealing for public understanding, Bangkok post, 3 August 2000
3. Baker,Chris. “Assembly of the Poor: the new drama of village, city and state” In Thai Development Newsletter,No 37,July-December 1999, page 15-21.
4. Bantorn Ondam and Boonthan T Verawongse, Assembly of the Poor: the other grassroots movement experiences from Thailand, In Thai Development Newsletter,No 37,July-December 1999; page 15-21
5. Praphat Pintobtang, politic on the street: 99 days, the Assembly of the poor and the historical event of social movement in Thai society. Bangkok, Tontamrab,1998, In Thai.
6. Prasittiporn Kan-Onsri, Assembly of the Poor, Friend of the Poor’s paper, no date.