Bibliography

This article analyses the effectiveness of the joint ‘Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa’ (AGRA), a project of the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation aimed at reducing poverty, hunger and malnutrition. The authors argue that, based on the first Green Revolution experience, this initiative will not succeed because: 1. The Green Revolution actually deepens the divide between rich and poor farmers; 2. Over time, Green Revolution technologies degrade tropical agro-ecosystems and increase environmental risk; 3. The Green Revolution leads to the loss of agro-biodiversity; 4. Hunger is not primarily due to a lack of food, but rather because the hungry are too poor to buy the food that is available; 5. Without addressing structural inequities in the market and political systems, approaches relying on high input technologies fail; 6. The private sector alone will not solve the problems; 7. Genetic engineering (GE) will make Sub-Saharan smallholder systems more environmentally vulnerable; 8. GE crops into smallholder agriculture will likely lead to farmer indebtedness; 9. The assertion that “There Is No Alternative” (TINA) ignores the many successful agro-ecological and non-corporate approaches to agricultural development; 10. AGRA’s “alliance” does not allow peasant farmers to be the principal actors in agricultural improvement. The authors conclude that if the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations want to end hunger, poverty and malnutrition in rural Africa, then they should invest in the service of the struggle by peasant and farmer organisations and their allies to truly achieve food sovereignty.