This is a CTP of initiative: La Via Campesina/RMRU (Uruguay)
This CTP focuses on the redefinition of the RMRU's public discourse through its participation in the activities carried out within the framework of the Uruguay Social Forum (Foro Social Uruguay) in 2002 and 2003. Until then, the main concerns of the RMRU were associated with problems related to the quality of life and access to public health services for the rural population, but since the Uruguay Social Forum, environmental issues and criticism of transgenic crops were also incorporated. From its origins, the RMRU had promoted productive projects based on agroecology as an alternative to solve the crisis suffered by the traditional agricultural sector in the 80s and 90s. When the Uruguayan government approved the use of transgenic seeds in 1998, its projects were resignified. In this way, along with other rural organizations, they began to interact more fluidly with environmental organizations. A wide spectrum of rural organizations collaborated in denouncing the authorization of GM maize (ocurred in 2002). The arguments were the damage to Uruguay's reputation as a producer of natural foods and the impacts of this technology with regard to the environment and social inequities. This CTP marked a definitive change in the trajectory of the RMRU as it led it to assume an openly critical position regarding the productive changes experienced by Uruguay. In addition, participation in the Uruguay Social Forum was the first experience of collaboration with other organizations in the country (such as the NGO REDES-Friends of the earth, REDES-AT in it spanish initials) that became a central practice in the organization's strategy (At national and international level).
The critical position on GM Crops assumed by the RMRU in 2003 was part of a process of co-production in which political decisions taken by the national government and the implementation of concrete actions by different social organizations interacted.
In 1996, the government of Uruguay authorizes the use of genetically modified soybeans. This was the first step in a policy that in the following years approved transgenic varieties of maize, barley and forest crops. In this context, began in those years different activities promoted by different social organizations.
In November 2002, the Uruguay Social Forum (Foro Social Uruguay), collectively organized by diverse civil society organizations, demonstrated what is an increasing collaboration between social movements—labour, human rights, public health, environmental, and others. About 4,000 people participated, with high levels of youth and women. Sustainable Uruguay workshops held as part of the Uruguayan forum included presentations and participation from organizations of small producers and of rural women, along with workers’ unions, housing cooperatives and academics.
Efforts during 2002 and 2003 focused on updating the analysis and elaborating the political platform—the policy recommendations of the forum. It is not possible to separate the issues discussed in the forums in Uruguay from global debates. Some organizations as REDES-AT is a member of several international networks. In addition to campaigns, these networks share information and experiences, through email and publications and in periodic international meetings, and often organizing meetings at major events such as the World Social Forum. REDES-AT regularly brings this information to Sustainable Uruguay meetings and forums, contributing an international perspective to local issues. In part due to links with REDES-AT, RMRU has become involved with La Vía Campesina. For RMRU referents, was necessary to join efforts with others in the global struggle against neoliberalism:
"We believe it is necessary to globalize the hope and the struggle. […] We have to see it at a more general scale.” While the push for food sovereignty in Uruguay may be considered an incipient movement within the country, the organizations involved are clearly forging strong alliances with international movements.”
This CTP is directly related to two events that occurred in those years: the expansion of GM crops in Uruguay and the emergence of the movement associated with the World Social Forum.
In Latin America, the advance of GM crops gained its greatest momentum in the mid-1990s, associated with a globalized, heavily concentrated and transnationalized agroindustrial model. The Uruguayan case followed this model as the national government authorized the use of the first transgenic soybean seed in 1996 to which it later added maize varieties. The incorporation of these transgenic crops generated an important expansion of the commercial agriculture, causing in turn a transformation of the productive structure of the agricultural sector in the country.
On the other hand, these results were quickly questioned by different social organizations and environmental movements that denounced the negative effects of this techno-productive change such as soil erosion processes, loss of fertility, decreased runoff and soil infiltration, loss of genetic diversity. Social and economic effects such as the abandonment of other productive activities and the depopulation of rural areas were also questioned.
While these changes were taking place in Latin America, a large anti-globalization movement was organized, which was called the World Social Forum with the organization of the first meeting held in 2001 in the Brazilian city of Porto Alegre. Since then, annual meetings have been held to organize global campaigns, share and polish meeting strategies, and for the different members to inform each other of new movements.
From these experiences, national forums began to be created, imitating the World Social Forum model. This was the case of the Uruguay Social Forum, which had its first meeting in november 2002 and had three main areas of work: gender, environment and youth. From its participation in this space, the RMRU began to define its change of discourse about GM Crops.
The changes experienced by the RMRU under this CTP are clearly expressed in the form of contestation. Up to that time, the actions developed by the organization had focused on problem solving experienced by the rural population, but had no position taken on the causes of those problems. The RMRU had not raised specific complaints about the current productive model, a situation that changed since 2003.
The referents of the RMRU adopted a new discourse proposing the existence of two productive models faced:
“The production models that we face in the rural world are two: the one that is based on companies that use massive amounts of capital in machinery, agrochemicals and waged workers, oriented towards the production of a few products for export; and the one that employs family labour, environmentally friendly technologies, and that basically seeks to satisfy the needs of producers and local consumers. While the first model inexorably leads to the concentration of land ownership, the degradation of the environment, and the impoverishment and expulsion of producers, the second is the only one that can make its democratization and maintenance possible in the long term. It is necessary to keep in mind that the former— currently hegemonic—encompasses the various forms of production. […] Two different models of agrarian reform match them. One that considers land, seeds and water simply as merchandises that the market, with its logic of capitalist accumulation, should distribute, and the other one that values those resources as social assets and puts the well-being of producers and consumers above all other considerations.”
This new position arose from a process of internal debate and with other organizations in which different points of view and interests were put into play.
The referents of the RMRU were carrying out different reflection activities to exchange opinions, visions and concerns about the situation of the Uruguayan rural sector.
"In these spaces we analyzed the problems that affect us day by day and we find that there are deficiencies that need to be remedied as soon as possible to avoid the continuous deterioration of the quality of life of the sector. But we also rescue valuable experiences that groups have accumulated in recent years, particularly those that have been positive in relation to state institutions. Years later, this work was consolidated based on the collaboration we started with REDES-AT within the framework of the Sustainable Uruguay program. Throughout the activities carried out during 5 years the environmental problem and the introduction of transgenics in Uruguay became a central topic of debate."
Also, the change that occurred in the speech of the RMRU from 2003 was recognized as a CTP from the beginning by the referents of the organization.
The experience of participating in the activities of the Social Forum Uruguay was recognized by the referents of the RMRU as a great learning experience.
According them, the contact with other organizations and the ideas exchanged through Sustainable Uruguay have been useful for learning new information and sharing their perspectives. They have also been useful for collaboration in campaigns such as against GM crops. In addition, participants share practical ideas regarding more sustainable forms of production with each other. For example, rural workers’ unions from the north of the country are organizing to access land for subsistence production to supplement inadequate incomes. Others explain their experiences with school vegetable gardens for consumption and education, organic farming cooperatives, seed conservation and exchange networks.
Stay informed. Subscribe for project updates by e-mail.
