The New Green Revolution

                                                      “There can be no peace without understanding” – African Proverb

            The term “Green Revolution” has been stated in many papers that I have read throughout my research on water and agriculture in Africa. I was inspired this week to investigate this idea and learn the basics of what the green revolution means for agriculture in Africa, and if it has helped in anyway with food security issues. 


            The new Green Revolution dates back to 2006 when the term was first coined and built into the overall institute of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (Gates Foundation). AGRA was formed in partnership with the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, with the belief that “investing in agriculture is the surest path to reducing poverty and hunger in Africa” (Gates Foundation). To reach this goal, AGRA plans to give access to “good” seeds, to provide operation support, to market high-quality seeds that small scale farmers can buy and to give farmers access to fertilizer and seeds in small village shops (Gates Foundation). AGRA carefully claims to recognize that Africa is a country rooted in traditional methods, therefore they state they are building an “alliance of partners”. This means that the small holder farmers are continuously in conversation with businesses and companies and projects are “tailored” to the unique conditions of Africa. I will discuss in the next paragraph whether the fundamentals of AGRA have been successful in African agriculture. 

AGRA's logo, smartly choosing the color green (Source)

            One of AGRA’s goals is the implementation of new seeds, which has garnered alot of critique. Case studies have seen that these new seeds are more of a hindrance to the small-scale farmers. Farmers end up struggling with the new types because these seeds are not suited for the traditional farm that is still in place. AGRA’s seeds cannot respond to weather changes, are only suited for industrial monocultures, and have been found to not be more superior to local varieties of seeds (GRAIN, 2007). A study that was done in Gambia depicted that with these new AGRA seeds and farming techniques did not improve farms for the better. The study stated that there were higher crop yields in the crops that used the new seeds, yet this was “at the expense of women’s labor and led to decreases in other crops as well as agro-ecological knowledge” (Kerr, 2012). The chart in figure 1 shows these different variables. In addition, the paper concluded that the crop yields were marked unsustainable. Despite having an increase in that one crop due to AGRA's help, that same year there was an increase in imported rice in Gambia, and the percent of undernourished people increased from 20 to 30 (Kerr, 2012). 

Figure 1: Chart showing the different variables tested in Gambia (Source)

            Regarding the holistic view of AGRA and what they stand for there has been a lot of backlash from the local small holder farms and with some of the scientific community that studies agriculture in Africa. Much of the critique of AGRA is the idea that they are setting up these new farming techniques in the hope to privatize the market in their interest alone. Although they claim to be working directly with the local communities, before the launch of their multi-million-dollar strategy there was absolutely no consultation with small scale family farmers. Rather, AGRA partnered with large biotech companies as well as the one chairman, Kofi Annan, whom in no way can represent 50 countries and 680 million people (Mittal, 2009). With this privatization of the market and exclusion of the local community, there is the increased worry that AGRA is setting up a conglomeration of a few large-scale agribusinesses that farmers will have to rely on for seeds and fertilizers (Kerr, 2012). One of these companies that AGRA has paired up with is Monsanto, which is seen in the poster in figure 2. To make things messier there is the added layer that AGRA  has partnered with certain politicians to make their business now of political and economic interests (GRAIN, 2007). 

Figure 2: One of the companies that AGRA has paired with is Monsanto (Source)

            As I think back to the first post where I talk about the importance of the farmer’s expertise and traditional knowledge of their methods and land, all these critiques of the new Green Revolution, specifically stemming from AGRA, come from the utter lack of this recognition of farmers being the experts. Adding to this is the importance that if local family farms are not prioritized this is extremely dangerous, as they account for 70% of the work force and are already growing food in a food insecure place. Therefore, if AGRA is just trying to privatize the market without respecting the small farmers at stake then I believe this is morally wrong and will also not fix the problem of food insecurity.