In my opinion, agroecological practices have already proven they improve resource efficiency, minimize ecological footprint, strengthen resilience, secure social equity and responsibility, and create decent jobs, in particular for youth, in agriculture and food systems. Case studies abound and La Via Campesina is the best repository of them.
The barriers to this sustainable approach, practiced by millions of small producers the world over, are many. But the influence of corporate agriculture to keep the industrial agricultural model, the reprehensible effect of ever increasing land grabbing displacing small farmers, the growing vertical integration of mega corporations now involved in mega-mergers… are never valiantly and proactively addressed by the HLPE. Why can so many of us see this as affecting agroecological approaches and those who are at high decision-making levels do not? Evidently, there are interests to be protected. The same need to be exposed AND addressed. …and the UN (the HLPE included) has to become part of this movement demanding changes in the global governance of these issues; so far, they have not, other than perhaps denouncing some of it --but not uniting us in announcing the regulatory measures needed to stop with this state of affairs. Creating enabling environments is not enough. We have done this for 40+ years. The root causes are never dis-enabled. Voila le probleme…
Again, quite a bit of evidence can be found in the literature about the negative impact of loaded trade and IPR rules imposed by the powerful to keep or expand their prerogatives (vide mega-mergers above).
The document under preparation by the HLPE should not used minced words about all of this. But I am afraid that another 2 years to wait till CFS46 is losing precious time. Farmers are being dispossessed, starved today --and this is not an overstatement.
Claudio Schuftan