Helping small farmers get a better deal in Colombia

colombia-nov-2006-1032 smallscale farming collapsed after the 1980s. While national government was largely unsympathetic, city authorities, in particular in Bogotá, were in some cases more open to dialogue. So working with local partners such as ILSA, (Instituto Latinoamericano de Servicios Legales alternativos) and CICC (Comité de Interlocución Campesino Communa), and with funding from DFID and the EU, Oxfam funded a project to:  1. Support small producers to lobby Bogotá’s Mayoral Office and other municipal institutions and large private sector buyers for access to markets 2. Help the setting up of a network of women’s organizations to press for implementation of the rural women’s law The organizers sought out ‘non usual suspects’ as allies – political parties, local governments in producer communities, private sector traders. They also gave support to producer organizations to build capacity, especially of women members. All this was backed up with a public campaign through the media and farmers’ markets to change negative urban attitudes towards the peasantry. What happened? When a new and progressive city authority drew up the ‘Bogotá Food Supply Plan 2007-15’, it recognized the importance of small-scale agriculture, and included a ‘fair price’ principle for its products. It also allocated $700,000 in municipal funds to help small farmers enter supply chains. Two farmers’ association representatives were included on the plan’s oversight board. Another major city, Cali, is now following suit and the Mayor of Bogotá is championing the initiative with colleagues from other Colombian towns. As of December 2009, some 2,000 small producers were benefiting, seeing higher farmgate prices for their products and (interestingly and unexpectedly) lower prices at the farmers’ markets for poor urban consumers (due to shorter supply chains, cutting out middlemen etc). small farmers ColombiaThe lobby of Congress led two national public entities to implement the law, helping rural women get identity documents and access to social protection systems. The Ministry of Agriculture set up a round table with rural women. Peasant and women’s organizations have now established a permanent coordination body on rural women’s rights to take forward the work. Interviews with women farmers suggest they now feel more confident about marketing their products. Learning Points? Good power analysis at the outset is essential to identify potential allies (Mayors, Congress) and blockers (national government). You need to target attitudes as well as institutions – establishing the potential of smallscale agriculture in the minds of public, buyers and officials was crucial. Lobbying for implementation of existing legislation is often easier/more effective than demanding new laws. NGOs are often most effective when facilitating/coordinating to build trust between between polarized constituencies, eg farmers and local officials, rather than doing it themselves. Marketing is often a bigger barrier for smallholders than production. Organization is key and (as in the case of the rural women’s network) often takes wing and goes far beyond the aims of the initial project. [And I never used the awful word ‘livelihoods’ once!] ]]>

Subscribe to our Newsletter

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please see our .

We use MailChimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to MailChimp for processing. Learn more about MailChimp's privacy practices here.


One Response to “Helping small farmers get a better deal in Colombia”
  1. Sudha Kishore

    Thanks for sharing this interesting piece.
    My name is Sudha.I worked for Oxfam GB in the South India cotton programme for more than 4 years. I am now with Traidcraft Exchange.
    The learning points given here are quite realistic and useful.I am keen on reading From Poverty to power.
    Can i know why u said livelihoods as an awful word?
    Hi Sudha: it’s not really awful, I guess, but it is jargon – certainly in the UK, normal people talk about ‘jobs’ or ‘making a living’, not ‘livelihoods’. There are always good intellectual and conceptual justifications each time we adopt another bit of development jargon – ‘governance’, ‘rights-based approach’, ‘gender-based violence’, ‘livelihoods’ etc, but the overall result is that we speak a language that is almost entirely incomprehensible to anyone outside our little circle! The book is published in India by the Academic Foundation, by the way, best wishes Duncan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *