Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
AbstractInternational agricultural commodity trade is central to the livelihoods of millions of farmers across the globe, and to most countries' food security strategies. Yet global trade policies are contributing to food insecurity and are undermining livelihoods. Food Sovereignty emerged in part as the articulation of resistance to the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) and the imposition of multilateral trade disciplines on domestic agriculture policy. While not explicitly rejecting trade, the food sovereignty movement is identified with a strong preference for local markets. It challenges existing international trade structures, and on the whole its official position on trade remains ambiguous. We argue that trade remains important to the realization of the livelihoods of small-scale producers, including peasants active in the Food Sovereignty movement. It also matters for food security. That it remains underexplored by the movement risks marginalizing millions of smallholder producers, and risks overlooking opportunities to shape trade rules along more food sovereign lines. The authors suggest further development of the movement's position on trade is strategically important.Keywords: food sovereigntyLa Via Campesinaagricultural tradefood securityfood crisisworld trade organizationfair tradedevelopment Sophia Murphy is the grateful recipient of a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship and a scholarship from the Trudeau Foundation. She thanks both for their support. Kim Burnett expresses gratitude to the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Council for a Joseph-Armand Bombardier CGS Doctoral Scholarship, #767-2008-1014 and to the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Ontario for funding through Balsillie Fellowships. The authors also thank Stuart Clark for his comments on the paper and Hannah Wittman for helping put the paper on track early on in the process. The article is in large part the result of many years of conversation, debate and heated argument with many, many people in many parts of the world. The authors are indebted to all who took the time to engage. Thank you.Additional informationNotes on contributorsKim Burnett is a SSHRC-funded doctoral student with the University of Waterloo's Global Governance program. Her research focuses on governance of agricultural production and trade, examining how Fair Trade and Food Sovereignty challenge neoliberal structures of agricultural production and trade, and with what efficacy. Kim worked in the private, public and non-profit sectors before her studies, was a research fellow with Oxfam America in 2009, and has held research contracts with Oxfam America and World Vision. Kim authored a recently published article in Geopolitics on Fair Trade and Food Sovereignty responses to governance opportunities after the global food crisis.Notes on contributorsSophia Murphy has 20 years' experience in public policy analysis. She is a writer, researcher and occasional teacher whose work is focused on agriculture, market power and food systems. She is a PhD student at the Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia, working on trade and food security. She has a Trudeau Foundation scholarship and a Vanier scholarship from the Canadian Government. Sophia is a member of the High Level Panel of Experts to the UN Committee on World Food Security. She is also a member of the ActionAid USA board. Email: Sophia@foodresilience.net
Burnett et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: