1. The Fight for Food Sovereignty:
Agroecology, Sumak Kawsay, and Food Sovereignty Experiments in Ecuador
Gabriella McDaniel
Cambio Social y Participación Communitario
HECUA CILA
Profesora Moscoso
December 2, 2015

2. 2
Table of Contents
Chapter Page
Introduction 3 - 4
Food Sovereignty: History, Agroecology, Sumak Kawsay, Politics 5 - 19
History of the Food Sovereignty Movement 5 - 10
Food Regimes 5 - 7
La Via Campesina 7 - 10
The Development of Agroecology 10 - 16
Industrial Agriculture 10 - 13
Agroecology 13 - 16
Sumak Kawsay, Political Reformation, & Food Sovereignty in Ecuador 16 - 19
Sumak Kawsay 16 - 17
Political Reformation & Food Sovereignty 17 - 19
Agroecology & Food Sovereignty in Ecuador: La Granja Integral Pachamama 19 - 25
Objectives 19 - 21
Agroecology 21 - 24
Food Sovereignty & Connection to Sumak Kawsay 24 - 25
Conclusion 25 - 27
Bibliography 28 - 30
Annex 31 - 38

3. 3
Introduction
As the world has become smaller with the rise of globalization and neoliberalism, it
has become more difficult for small-scale farmers to maintain their own forms of
sustainable agriculture. With globalization, wealthy corporations and international
businesses have gained control of a huge portion of the agricultural and food sectors within
the world. This control has begun to destroy the lives of farmers and the environment. In
1993, a group of farmers’ representatives came together to form La Via Campesina in order
to fight for agricultural rights and be a voice for farmers throughout the world.1 Today,
more than twenty years later, La Via Campesina is an extremely well known organization
within the global debate stage regarding food and agricultural practices.
La Via Campesina originally introduced the concept of food sovereignty in 1996.
Since then, this concept has developed from solely an idea into a global populist movement
that is recognized by many institutions and state governments. In 2007, more than 500
advocates from 80 countries came together to write the first food sovereignty declaration.
The Nyéléni Declaration argues:
“Food sovereignty is the right of peoples to healthy… food produced through
ecologically sound and sustainable methods… It puts the aspirations and needs of
those who produce, distribute and consume food at the heart of food systems and
policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations.”2
Over the past twenty years, the food sovereignty movement has gained a substantial
amount of support from social actors within every sector. With the growing support for
food sovereignty, especially within Ecuador, Ecuador became the first country to include
the right to food sovereignty within its Constitution. Therefore, this research paper will
analyze the history of the food sovereignty movement, the development of agroecology,
and the way food sovereignty and agroecology exist within Ecuador.
1 “The International Peasant’s Voice,” La Via Campesina, accessed October 27, 2015,
http://www.viacampesina.org/en/index.php/organisation-mainmenu-44
2 Alberto Alonso-Fradejas, Saturnino M. Borras Jr, Todd Holmes, Eric Holt-Giménez & Martha Jane Robbins,
“Food sovereignty: convergence and contradictions, conditions and challenges,” Third World Quarterly
(2015), 36:3, 432, DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2015.1023567

4. 4
By focusing on the global food sovereignty movement, I will analyze the way
neoliberalism and a global capitalist economy has altered agricultural sectors within the
world which will allow me to look at the agroecology response to the agro-industrial crisis.
From there, I will connect agroecology and food sovereignty to the movement for “Sumak
Kawsay” within Ecuador and develop an understanding of the way the 2008 constitution
influenced these movements.
We live in a world where “one in nine people… do not have enough food to lead a
healthy active life” and a “vast majority of the world’s hungry people live in developing
countries.”3 This research topic is extremely vital to developing an understanding of how
we, as global citizens, can not only raise awareness surrounding this issue, but also work to
end world hunger through alternative and sustainable means and allow developing nations
to develop their own agricultural sectors without falling trap to the neoliberal development
model.
In order to pursue my investigation, I will combine a variety of different resources. I
will utilize secondary sources by looking at peer-reviewed academic journals, scholarly
articles, books, government reports, etc. I will also be using primary sources by completing
my own interviews within the community along with finding news articles, conference
proceedings, etc. Ultimately, my objectives with pursuing this research topic are the
following:
1. To determine the causes and history of the food sovereignty movement
2. To understand the development of agroecology in agricultural sectors
3. To connect Sumak Kawsay to food sovereignty and political reformation in Ecuador
4. To analyze the way La Granja Integral Pachamama has utilized agroecology in the
21st century
5. To explain how small scale farms within Quito contribute to the global food
sovereignty movement.
3 “Hunger Statistics,” World Food Programme, accessed October 28, 2015,
https://www.wfp.org/hunger/stats

5. 5
Food Sovereignty: Theory, Agroecology, Sumak Kawsay
History of the Food Sovereignty Movement
Food Regimes
Although the “food sovereignty” movement only began in the early 1990s, some of
its biggest influences come from decades earlier. In the 1980s, Harriet Friedmann and
Philip McMichael—professors of sociology—came together to propose the concept of food
regimes. The basic definition of a food regime is a “rule-governed structure of production
and consumption of food on a world scale.”4 Food regimes are the way the global system is
set up to both produce and consume food. The main actors within food regimes are
“interstate power relations, norms, and institutional rules and
socioecological/geographical specializations.”5 Combined, these actors “link the global
relations of food production and consumption to periods of capital accumulation.”6
Through their research and proposal of a food regime system, Friedmann and McMichael
are able to historicize food production and consumption while looking at power structures
and capital growth.
Friedmann and McMichael point out three main food regimes throughout history.
The first, from 1870s to the 1930s, was characterized by colonial food trade between
settler colonies and Europe. The second food regime followed World War II. From the
1950s to 1970s the United States sent subsidized food to developing nation states. This
food regime served as a ‘development project’ that allowed the U.S. to expand
industrialization, limit communism, and ultimately set up its “informal empire of
postcolonial states on the strategic perimeters of the Cold War.”7 Ultimately, the second
international food regime created the very financial and food dependency on global
institutions and cheap agricultural imports we see today.
4 Philip McMichael, “A Food Regime Genealogy,” The journal of Peasant Studies 36:1 (2009): 142, accessed
October 28, 2015, doi:10.1080/03066150902820354
5 Hannah Witman, “Food Sovereignty: A New Rights Framework for Food and Nature?” Environment and
Society: Advances in Research 2 (2011): 89, accessed October 28, 2015, doi:10.3167/ares.2011.020106
6 Hannah Witman, “Food Sovereignty: A New Rights Framework for Food and Nature?” 89
7 Philip McMichael, “A Food Regime Genealogy,” 142

6. 6
The third food regime explained by Friedmann and McMichael began in the late
1980s and currently exists today. This regime is defined by ‘food miles’ that increase the
cost of food imports, mass production of processed food, a growth in corporate agriculture
that displaces small-scale farmers, and an increase in international institutions that
influence global agricultural policies. This food regime has become heavily prevalent in
developing countries, especially Ecuador and the rest of Latin America. American
corporations have come in and taken over agricultural policies creating the dependence
that exists today. For example, the World Trade Organization has a strong hand in
agricultural trade policies and in 1995, when national governments joined the WTO they
“relinquished their powers to unilaterally set their own food and agricultural policies.”8
Agriculture became a part of the WTO in 1995 and its purpose was to increase the power of
global food corporations— namely corporations within countries with a strong economy—
and to increase inequality within the world stage.
Through the power of the third food regime, the industrial agricultural sector has
grown. Today, industrial agriculture is the predominant practice within world agricultural
sectors. This form of farming utilizes large, specialized plantations that “run like factories
with large inputs of fossil fuels, pesticides and other chemicals, and synthetic fertilizers
derived from oil.”9 However, this very style of farming has greatly harmed our environment
and developing countries within the global economy. Industrial agriculture allow for
corporations to come into developing countries and either completely push native farm
workers out of business or force them to switch to a monoculture production for
exportation. In today’s global capitalist economy, the development of industrial agriculture
has forced farmers in developing countries to export their products at an extremely low
price while towns have to buy imported food at severely high prices.10 Because of this form
8 Hannah Witman, “Food Sovereignty: A New Rights Framework for Food and Nature?” 90
9 “Hidden Costs of Industrial Agriculture,” Union of Concerned Scientists, accessed November 14, 2015,
http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-system/industrial-agriculture/hidden-costs-
of-industrial.html#.VkewZ66rTo8
10 Traducido por Adriana Latrónico y María Elena Martínez de: Rosset, Peter. “Food Sovereignty: Global
Rallying Cry of Farmer Movements.” Institute for Food and Development Policy Background, vol. 9, no. 4, Fall
2003

7. 7
of agriculture and economy, all of the profits are extracted from local economies and
instead, contribute to the continued growth of already developed economies.
Between the influences of both the second and third food regime along with the
development of the industrial agriculture sector, the resistance by peasants, small-scale
farmers, and NGOs to the current global agricultural trading system has grown. The trade
policies put into place over the last sixty years, along with the unequal accumulation of
wealth due to these policies, has led to the growth of the global populist food sovereignty
movement. The food sovereignty movement hopes to act as an alternative method of
sustainable agriculture in a world where transnational corporations have taken control of
our food.
La Via Campesina
With food regimes and their influences defined by the late 1980s and the growth of
industrial agriculture, concerns regarding the effects of globalization and neoliberalism on
food systems began to grow. Over the past few decades, governments in developing
countries eliminated many of the economic policies and institutions that were put in place
to protect peasant farmers. Instead, they’ve invited supranational corporations into their
countries and have hoped that global trade policies and the promise of neoliberal
development would bring sudden wealth. However, by cutting these policies and
eliminating these institutions, governments also silenced peasants and took away any form
of power they once had. Due to these policies, many analysts believed that peasant
communities would ultimately disappear after having been silenced by their governments,
and by the world.11 Although all odds seemed stacked against them, the peasant
community resisted.
11 Maria Elena Martinez- Torres and Peter Rosset, “La Via Campesina: The Evolution of a Transnational
Movement,” Global Policy Forum, last modified February 8, 2010. https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-
economic-policy/world-hunger/land-ownership-and-hunger/48733-la-via-campesina-the-evolution-of-a-
transnational-movement.html

8. 8
In 1993, an international coalition of peasants, small-scale farmers, and indigenous
peoples from four different continents came together to create La Via Campesina, or “the
peasant way.” Because of the existence of food regimes and other regional peasant
movements that came to life in the 1980s, La Via Campesina became the sole alliance that
allowed these organizations to unite and create an international coalition. Representing
both the global north and the global south, La Via Campesina was the first supranational
organization to unify peasant voices to defend small-scale sustainable agriculture, move
towards food sovereignty, and most importantly search for alternative ways of living in the
modern world. Today, La Via Campesina represents 164 national social movements from
over 73 countries.12 Solely within Ecuador, there are 5 different organizations that work
with La Via Campesina to promote food sovereignty.13 La Via Campesina has helped unite
organizations from all over the world with a similar goal in mind—to take back agriculture
and create a sustainable model that respects people and their traditions.
Although formed in 1993, La Via Campesina introduced itself on the world stage at
the World Food Summit in 1996. The World Food Summit provided world leaders, leading
NGOS, and other nonprofit organizations the space to come together in order to discuss and
determine the necessary steps to reaffirming the global commitment to fighting world
hunger. La Via Campesina partook in the World Food Summit and launched the concept of
food sovereignty at the global level. According to La Via Campesina, food sovereignty is a
right and most importantly:
“Food sovereignty prioritizes local food production and consumption. It gives a
country the right to protect its local producers from cheap imports and to control
production. It ensures that the rights to use and manage lands, territories, water,
seeds, livestock and biodiversity are in the hands of those who produce food and not
of the corporate sector.”14
12 Saturnino M. Borras Jr., “La Via Campesina and its Global Campaign for Agrarian Reform,” Journal of
Agrarian Change 8 (2008): 260
13 “Our Members,” La Via Campesina, accessed December 1,2015,
http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/organisation-mainmenu-44/our-members-mainmenu-71
14 “The International´s Peasant Voice.”

9. 9
Utilizing this definition of food sovereignty, non-governmental organizations were able to
expand this concept into policy proposals.
Over the course of the World Food Summit, a multitude of non-governmental
organizations came together to develop this idea of food sovereignty and respond with
their own statement regarding the ideas and issues discussed. Within this statement, they
presented their own civil society proposals to achieving food security through a new
alternative model. In this response, the NGO forum introduced the six vital elements of this
alternative model to food security and ultimately development. One of these very elements
relates to the concept of food sovereignty. To coalition of NGOs argues:
“International law must guarantee the right to food, ensuring that food sovereignty
takes precedence over macro-economic policies and trade liberalization. Food
cannot be considered as a commodity, because of its social and cultural
dimension.”15
By allowing individual countries the right to their own food sovereignty and prohibiting
market policies that infringe on small-scale agriculture, nations would be able to ensure
that agricultural profits stayed within their own economies and their citizens had access to
healthy and sustainably grown food.
The importance of La Via Campesina to the food sovereignty movement is
undeniable—it united several different peasant organizations under one strong alliance
and coined the concept at the 1996 World Food Summit. It continues to work for food
sovereignty and land rights (along with a multitude of other causes) and most importantly,
has created a community of peasants, farmers, indigenous peoples, and activists who are all
fighting for something they believe in. La Via Campesina plays an active role in farmers´
lives all around the world. In regards to his membership with La Via Campesina, one
member of the National Farmers Union remarked, “When I look across my fields at the end
15 NGO Forum, “Civil Society Proposals to Achieve Food Security” (statement presented at the 1996 World
Food Summit, Rome, Italy, November 11-17, 1996).

10. 10
of the day, I now know I am not alone.”16 Ultimately, La Via Campesina has proven to be one
of the world’s largest, transnational populist movements with support from individuals all
around the world. The sense of unity and solidarity that has come from the growth of the
food sovereignty movement allows La Via Campesina to continue to fight for the rights of
peasants, farmers, and indigenous people.
The Development of Agroecology
Industrial Agriculture
Over the course of the twentieth century, many factors contributed to the creation
of the food sovereignty movement. These factors—food regimes, agricultural subsidies,
infringement of land rights, etc.—had a strong influence on creating the movement we see
today, however, one of the strongest factors is the development of industrial agriculture.
The agro-industrial crisis that exists today has long roots that trace back to the beginning of
the industrial revolution. As the “stronger, better, faster” desire took grip of the world,
agriculture practices also began to change.
Today, due to globalization and neoliberal trade policies, industrial agriculture is the
dominant model regarding food production and food distribution. This model is
characterized by intense agricultural production solely for profits within the global market.
The agro-industry has become its own type of global business that includes a variety of
actors: governments, international corporations, factories, farmers, and even the World
Trade Organization. Industrial agriculture and a global capitalist economy propose a high
level use of fertilizers and agrochemicals along with planting transgenic and genetically
modified seeds. This model of industrial agriculture has led to the increase of genetically
modified food, monoculture exports, and an extensive use of pesticides around the world.17
These effects harm farmers, especially peasant farmers, who cannot compete with the
growing power of agricultural industries such as Monolitos, Cargill, and Monsanto.
16 Annette Aurelie Desmarais, “The Power of Peasants: Reflections on the meanings of La Via Campesina,”
Journal of Rural Studies 24 (2008): 141
17 Xavier Alejandro León Vega. “Transgénicos, agroindustria y soberanía alimentaria,” Letras Verdes. Revista
Latinoamericana de Estudios Socio ambiéntales 16 (2014): 30-32

11. 11
Because of the power of industrial agriculture, we are seeing a shift towards this
type of extractive, monoculture production all over the world. Peasant farmers are either
forced to sign into a contract with powerful agricultural businesses and agree to produce a
specific crop solely for exportation or they are run out of business because they are unable
to compete with the price of imported food. When a farmer signs this type of contract, he or
she is agreeing to multiple provisions: a pre-determined, set value of the crop and
assistance in seeds, equipment, and transportation from the company. Once the crop is
ready to be sold, the company will pay the farmer the agreed upon amount only after
deducting the cost of assistance. Most of the time, when peasant farmers agree to agro-
industrial contracts they make very little in profit in the end.18
Obviously this type of agricultural production harms both the environment and the
farmer. Farmers are forced to join the intensive agricultural industry or they scrape by to
make ends meet until they are nearly forgotten. However, in the case of the environment,
the effects are much less known. Because of the development and use of genetically
modified seeds, the traditional seeds native to different regions around the world are
disappearing and this has resulted in an extreme loss of agricultural biodiversity in the last
century, especially within developing countries.19 Along with this loss in agricultural
biodiversity, the physical elements of industrial agriculture—such as, artificial irrigation, a
high use of pesticides, manufacturing, transportation, monoculture exports, etc.— are
extremely harmful to the environment and contribute to the climate change crisis that
exists today. This model of producing food uses an obnoxious amount of water, energy and
chemicals that have long-term negative effects on the environment.
The use of chemical fertilizers has increased more than 10-fold in the last half
century and contributes to an increase in soil acidity and over time, impedes plant growth.
Along with chemical fertilizers, toxic pesticides have proven to have harmful
18 Acción Ecológica. “Cadenas Agroindustriales, Agricultura Bajo Contrato y su Impacto en la Soberanía
Alimentaria,” Soberanía Alimentara para el Sumak Kawsay. March 30, 2011, 5
19 Blanca Bustos and Hortencia Bustos. Hacia la Soberanía Alimentaria: Agroecología y Comercio Asociativo
desde Experiencias Andino-Amazónicas.(Quito: Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar y Ediciones La Tierra,
2010).

12. 12
environmental effects as well. According to David Pimentel, a Cornell entomologist, “It has
been estimated that only 0.1% of applied pesticides reach the target pests, leaving the bulk
of the pesticides (99.9%) to impact the environment.”20 Because pesticides are usually
applied through mass spraying methods, a majority of the pesticides are left to impact the
environment and this contributes to a decline in the beneficial insect population and also
affects other animal populations.
The growth of monoculture exportation has also harmed the land and led to the
deterioration of soil. With the lack of biodiversity, soil ultimately becomes dry and desert-
like, limiting its ability to be used for agricultural production. These types of unsustainable
farming practices have contributed to the growing phenomenon of desertification: the clear
decline in the amount of arable land available. As seen in the chart below, the amount of
arable land available has steadily declined since the mid-twentieth century.
Lastly, the agricultural industry either uses or pollutes a majority of the world’s
available water. Modern irrigation systems typically rely on aquifers—an underground
layer of water in which water is extracted via a water well for above ground
consumption—and the rate at which modern agricultural practices utilize this water
source depletes the water faster than it can be replenished. Industrial agricultural practices
20 Leo Horrigan, Robert S. Lawrence and Polly Walker, “How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the
Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture,” Environmental Health Perspectives 110:5
(2002): 446

13. 13
also often pollute these very water sources and other surface water which reduces the
amount of water available to be used for both farming and other forms of consumption.
Agricultural water use, compared to industrial and municipal use, accounts for 69% of all
global water use.21
This rate of water consumption is completely unsustainable and is proving to have
extremely harmful effects on our environment as the quantity of usable water continues to
decline.
The environmental effects of industrial agricultural practices can be summarized by
looking at biodiversity, pesticides and fertilizers, soil, and water. Agricultural biodiversity
has sharply declined as genetically modified seeds have infiltrated farming practices and an
emphasis on monoculture exports has grown. Chemical pesticides and fertilizers may work
for a little bit but ultimately become impractical as insects develop resistance and toxins
are spread into the soil, water, and air. Monoculture exportation ruins soil and has led to
the decline the amount of arable land worldwide. And lastly, water consumption by the
agricultural sector is currently at an extremely unsustainable rate. These pervasive
agricultural practices have contributed to the severe climate change we are witnessing
today.
21 “How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial
Agriculture” 446

14. 14
Agroecology
“When we, Indigenous Peoples, speak about agroecology we are really speaking about
our ancestors. For us agroecology happens when we can apply our traditional
knowledge celebrate our ceremonies, and respect our traditions… For us it is a circle, for
which we need our native seeds, our songs, our water and lands”
-Nicole, Maria Yanes (International Indian Treaty Council)
As the environmental effects of industrial agriculture become more and more
known, peasant farmers, indigenous people, and other environmental and agricultural
activists have suggested a new alternative model to address agricultural practices. This
model, known as agroecology, is a way to practice sustainable farming while also allowing
for agriculture to be put back into the hands of the people instead of corporations.
Agroecology utilizes ecological theory in order to design and maintain alternative and
holistic agricultural systems that “center on food production that makes the best use of
nature’s goods and services while not damaging resources.”22
Typically organic and sustainable farming are both a part of agroecology practices.
According to N.H. Lampkin, a well-known researcher in the agricultural and organic
farming fields, the goal of organic farming is:
“To create integrated, humane, environmentally and economically sustainable
production systems, which maximize reliance on farm-derived renewable resources
and the management of ecological and biological processes and interactions, so as to
provide acceptable levels of crop, livestock and human nutrition, protection from
pests and disease, and an appropriate return to the human and other resources.”23
This very goal is supported by hundreds of thousands of small and medium sized farmers
all around the world. Because of the practices of industrial agriculture, farmers and
peasants have come together under organizations like La Via Campesina in order to
22 “Agroecological Farming,” Groundswell International, accessed November 28, 2015,
http://www.groundswellinternational.org/how-we-work/agroecological-farming/
23 Krishna Prasad Vadrevu. "Agroecosystems." Salem Press Encyclopedia Of Science (January 2015): Research
Starters, EBSCOhost (accessed November 28, 2015).

15. 15
promote and fight for this new alternative model to agriculture that is more than just an
approach to food production.
Agroecology is an entire way of life that utilizes a holistic approach to alimentation.
In February of 2015, small scale farmers and food producers came together at the very first
International Forum for Agroecology. This forum led to the creation of the Declaration of
Nyéléni which addresses and defines the many different aspects of agroecology. Although
agroecological farming utilizes ecological principles in order to produce healthier food in a
more sustainable manner, it utilizes and fights for so much more. It includes understanding
the language of nature that is taught through campesino tradition and heritage. It values
communities’ and peoples’ relationships to their lands. It recognizes the importance of
communal laws, traditions, and customs along with collective rights. It preaches that
knowledge through dialogue and peer-to peer based education is the best way to learn and
develop agricultural practices.24 It realizes that humans are a part of the vital web of life
and it is our job to protect the environment and all living beings. It challenges the current
agribusiness control of the food system and proposes that solidarity and self-organization
will allow agroecology to flourish. Through this self-organization and self-governance,
communities can take back their right to control “seeds, biodiversity, land and territories,
water, knowledge, culture and the commons in the hands of the peoples who feed the
world.”25 Ultimately, the movement for agroecology as an alternative method to
alimentation, mirrors and is a part of the same movement known as sumak kawsay—the
Ecuadorian indigenous movement to live in harmony within our communities, ourselves,
and our environment.26
24 La Via Campesina. “Peasant Agroecology for Food Sovereignty and Mother Earth: Experiences of La Via
Campesina,” La Via Campesina Notebok 7(2015): 1.
25 International Forum of Agroecology. 2015 Declaration of Nyéléni 2015, Nyéléni Center, Sélingué, Mali, 24-27
February, 2015
26 “Sumak Kawsay: Ancient Teachings of Indigenous Peoples,” The Pachamama Alliance, accessed November
29, 2015, http://www.pachamama.org/sumak-kawsay

16. 16
Sumak Kawsay, Political Reformation, and Food Sovereignty in Ecuador
Sumak Kawsay
Sumak Kawsay, or “buen vivir”, is a way of life that has been present throughout the
indigenous way of life for centuries. As a sociopolitical movement within Ecuador, sumak
kawsay has strongly been supported by indigenous groups as a new and different model
and way of life to approach development in the modern world. Because today’s global
economy is ruled by neoliberal capitalistic development, supporters of sumak kawsay
recognize the importance to live with a sense of harmony between individuals,
communities, and nature.27 The objectives of the sumak kawsay movement are to improve
one’s quality of life, protect the environment, and create a multicultural influence that
allows individuals from different cultures to learn from one another.
According to Santiago Garcia Alvarez, there are four base principles to
understanding sumak kawsay that are based on Andean indigenous traditions and values:
the interconnection of elements; the reciprocal relation between the world, humans, and
nature; the importance of living in a harmonious and proportional manner; and the
understanding that opposites can be complementary.28 Along with these principles, the
Development Council of the Nationalities and Peoples of Ecuador’s (CODENPE) definition of
sumak kawsay shows it as a new movement and way of life in response to the development
model that exists today. According to CODENPE, sumak kawsay means the following:
“El SK en su máxima expresión es vivir en comunidad, plenitud, hermandad,
complementariedad, relacionalidad entre seres humanos, seres humanos y la
naturaleza, seres humanos y espiritualidad. En este sentido, resaltamos que el
pensamiento ancestral es eminentemente colectivo: necesariamente recurre a la
idea del nosotros porque el mundo no puede ser entendido desde la perspectiva del
individualismo.”29
27 Maria Arboleda, “Ecuador: Introduction.” Class lecture, Politics and Development in Ecuador from HECUA,
Quito, Ecuador, September 7, 2015.
28 Santiago Garcia Alvarez, “Que es el sumak kawsay o buen vivir,” accessed September 14, 2015.
http://www.academia.edu/6429107/Qu%C3%A9_es_el_sumak_kawsay_ o_buen_vivir
29 Santiago Garcia Alvarez, “Sumak Kawsay”

17. 17
Solely through these principles and the definition provided by CODENEP, we are able to
recognize that the sumak kawsay movement within Ecuador values a sustainable
development model that allows communities the right to their own sovereignty and creates
an environment of intercultural understanding.
As mentioned previously, agroecology is so much more than a set of agricultural
principles. It encompasses health, tradition and culture, personal and communal liberty,
ecosystems and the environment, and so much more. Both the agroecology movement and
the push for sumak kawsay mirror eachother in that they both believe in a new approach to
development and to life in today’s modern world. Agroecology is vital to the lives of
indigenous peoples, peasants, and farmers who hope to take back control of the food
system in order to improve both their livelihoods and that of others along with the
environment; while sumak kawsay pushes society to understand the importance of living
in harmony amongst ourselves and with the environment. These movements are
interconnected through their objectives and goals in creating a new and alternative model
for development in the 21st century.
Political Reformation and Food Sovereignty in Ecuador
After years of the Ecuadorian government following neoliberal capitalist policies
and constantly pushing for development, the 2006 election provided supporters of the
sumak kawsay and food sovereignty movements with hope. In 2006 Rafael Correa won the
presidential election as a populist candidate who promised a “citizen’s revolution.” A huge
part of this revolution included rewriting the constitution to represent the desires of the
population as a whole. Through the Constituent Assembly, Correa allowed for citizens to be
a part of the process of rewriting the constitution and “one of the strongest demands from
social movements and civil society was for the constitutional right to food sovereignty and
agrarian reform.”30
30 Ben McKay, Ryan Nehring & Marygold Walsh-Dilley, “The ‘state’ of food sovereignty in Latin America:
political projects and alternative pathways in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia,” The Journal of Peasant Studies
41:6 (2014), 1185, DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2014.964217

18. 18
Ultimately, in 2008 the new Ecuadorian Constitution was legalized and within it the
“rights of the good way of living,” or sumak kawsay, were recognized. Within the Rights
section of the constitution, the government devotes an entire section to the rights to buen
vivir, or sumak kawsay. By institutionalizing sumak kawsay within the Ecuadorian
constitution, the government legitimized the concerns and hopes of the indigenous
movement and recognized the importance of broadening the conversation around
alternative models to development.31 Within this section, the government also
institutionalizes the right to food sovereignty. Article 13 states:
“Persons and community groups have the right to safe and permanent access to
healthy, sufficient and nutritional food, preferably produced locally and in keeping
with their various identities and cultural traditions… The Ecuadorian State shall
promote food sovereignty.”32
Twelve years after La Via Campesina introduced the concept of food sovereignty to the
world, the Ecuadorian state became the first country to legally recognize its importance
within civil society.
Not only did the state determine that food sovereignty was a clear right of the
people, the Ecuadorian government also recognized the role of the state in ensuring food
sovereignty. Within the constitution, the government lays out a specific set of measures to
achieve true food sovereignty. These 14 steps detail the necessary actions the government
needs to take, for example: transforming the food industry into forms of economic
solidarity; adopting fiscal policies to protect the domestic food industry and eliminate
dependency on foreign imports; promo redistributive politics to improve access to land
and water; preserve agro biodiversity, conservation, and free seed exchange; ensure
animals are raised in healthy and sound manners; strengthen producer to consumer
networks; impede monopolistic agricultural practices by generating fair distribution
31 Isabella Giunta, “Food Sovereignty in Ecuador: Peasant Struggles and the Challenge of Institutionalization,”
The Journal of Peasant Studies 41:6 (2014): 1213, DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2014.938057
32 2008 Ecuadorian Constitution, Title II, Chapter II, Section One, Article 13

19. 19
systems; and much more.33 These measures are extremely visionary and ambitious in a
world that is predominately run by an extractive, business approach to agriculture. In
order to further ensure that the state would fulfill its promise in achieving food sovereignty
as outlined in the Constitution, the Ley Orgánica del Regimen de la Soberanía Alimentaria
(LORSA), a national food sovereignty law, was approved.34 This law expands on the
necessary measures stated in Article 281 of the 2008 Constitution and further
institutionalizes the goal of achieving food sovereignty in Ecuador.
Now, seven years after Ecuador passed the 2008 Constitution and the Ley Orgánica
del Regimen de la Soberanía Alimentaria, very little progress has been made in achieving
the goals and demands set forth by these two documents. The progress made by Ecuador
solely recognizes the right and movement for food sovereignty and sumak kawsay but has
done little to actually attain the proposed changes. Although this is the case, the
movements for sumak kawsay and food sovereignty were brought to the forefront of
political conversations and debates allowing supporters of these movements “to garner
support of diverse social groups and social sectors, bridging heterogeneous struggles to a
collectivity of identities.”35 From here, political and social organizations must continue to
push the people of Ecuador to think of both the politics of food and their approach to life in
an alternative way. Through citizen organization we will be able to see food sovereignty
develop into the type of alternative to the agribusiness model that the 2008 Constitution
had originally preached.
Agroecology and Food Sovereignty in Ecuador: La Granja Pachamama
Objectives
As the government has failed to take initiative and follow through with the multiple
steps set forth by both the 2008 Constitution and the Ley Orgánica del Regimen de la
33 2008 Ecuadorian Constitution, Title IV, Chapter Three, Article 281
34 Karl Pena, “Institutionalizing Food Sovereignty in Ecuador” (paper presented at Food Sovereignty: A
Critical Dialogue, an international conference, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, September 14-15,
2013).
35 Karl Pena, “Institutionalizing Food Sovereignty in Ecuador”

20. 20
Soberanía Alimentaria regarding food sovereignty and sumak kawsay, citizens must now
create their own forms of food sovereignty by utilizing agroecology. Within Ecuador, there
are a variety of organizations who are continuing this fight to achieve true food
sovereignty. However, one organization, La Granja Integral Pachamama, or “The Integral
Farm of Mother Earth,” is contributing to both food sovereignty and sumak kawsay in its
own way by utilizing agroecology.
La Granja Pachamama is an organization based in the north of Quito, Ecuador that
works to help women escape poverty and violence. As a community organic farm, la Granja
Pachamama utilizes agroecological practices while also developing interpersonal and
technical skills for the group of women who work there. By producing a variety of organic
products, the farm is able to market and sell their products to a loyal client base. Although
the farm is relatively small in size, its effects on the surrounding community and in the lives
of these women are incredible. By utilizing agroecology, La Granja Pachamama illustrates
the importance of holistic farming in order to achieve both food sovereignty and buen vivir.
According to Lupe Lituma, the manager of the farm, the entire foundation of La
Granja Pachamama is based in the idea that “la producción de las verduras es un medio, no
es el fin.”36 Through the production of fruits and vegetables with agroecological practices,
the main goals—helping the women create their own sense of empowerment—can be
achieved. With this foundation La Granja Pachamama also defines four specific objectives
for the organization:
1. To contribute to improving the standard of living for a group of women,
generating incomes within the model of economic solidarity
2. To develop the women’s skills and abilities, of the Carapungo and Calderon
regions, through the capacitation in different activities
3. To promote the individual and collective development of the women form
the Christian humanitarian perspective, as social and political actors in the
transformation of society
36 Lupe Lituma, interview by Gabriella McDaniel, November 18, 2015, transcript.

21. 21
4. To show that it is possible to construct other forms of production and living,
especially within marginalized sections
These objectives highlight the primary focus of the farm—to improve the lives of
women in marginalized regions. The 5 women who currently work at the farm all came
from a background of either violence or poverty. Their husbands left them, they lost their
job, their child was sick. And the farm has allowed them to not only have a job and a salary,
but also find a community of strong women who will support them no matter what. The
farm is “de mujeres, por mujeres” and this motto shows the power of female community.
Ultimately, La Granja Pachamama utilizes agroecology and agriculture in order to provide
the women with a medium to achieve a sense of self-empowerment and create a
community that they’ve never had before. By doing so, La Granja Pachamama proves that
agroecology is more than just an approach to agriculture, but more importantly an
alternative model to living within the modern day world.
Agroecology
Women empowerment, the biggest objective of La Granja Pachamama, is achieved
through the production of agricultural while using agroecological practices. The farm
utilizes a variety of agroecological practices in order produce high quality, healthy food for
its clients. Through the use of these practices, La Granja Pachamama demonstrates that
agroecology can be used to build and sustain a high-producing farm in the midst of an
agricultural sector ruled by genetically modified and chemically bathed produce.
Lupe Lituma, who grew up with a campesina background, wholeheartedly
understands the importance of agroecology and utilizing these types of practices within La
Granja Pachamama. Although her campesina traditions have influenced the practices of the
farm, she also recognizes the importance of combining campesino knowledge with the
scientific and technical developments of today. Lituma believes that by combining
agroecology with scientific developments, food sovereignty can be attainable throughout
Ecuador. She argues:

22. 22
“Si usas insecticidas, abonos sintéticos de petróleo, se matas todo de las
microbiológicas. Entonces, el suelo cada vez se vuelve más ácido, se muera todo, y
resulta que cada vez que pones más cosas para producir con la tierra. Y el cambio, la
idea de agroecología es el revés. Vas abonando el suelo en requisando, a veces mejor
y tiene más elementos para ayudan a producir más.“37
Through this understanding, Lupe shows that agroecological practices are not only better
for the health of consumers but also are much more sustainable in the long run. La Granja
Pachamama utilizes a variety of agroecology based practices in order to produce their
fruits and vegetables in an organic and sustainable manner but three of these practices are
extremely vital to the existence of the farm—the water system, pest control, and fertilizer.
As climate change continues to exist and farms all around the world struggle to
survive with very little water, farmers need to ensure they have some sort of backup plan
for seasons with very little rain. As the drought in Quito continues to worsen, Lupe has
already created structures in which to collect any possible excess rain water. All of the
greenhouses around the farm are built in a manner that collects rain water and feeds it into
various wells around the farm that all drain into an underground storage tank. Along with
the greenhouses, the nuns’ house behind the farm also collects rain water that drains into
the underground storage. As every drop of water is precious to the production of the farm,
this storage tank provides the La Granja Pachamama with a little bit of peace of mind.
Although the farm receives a majority of its water supply from the government, the storage
tank serves as a security net for the women to utilize when needed.
As an organic farm, La Granja Pachamama has to control insects and pests in an
entirely different manner than its agribusiness pears. Within the greenhouses, a species of
tiny white butterflies’ flourishes; however, these insects can cause great harm to any
organically treated produce due to the lack of pesticides. In order to combat and control the
species, the farm utilizes a variety of tactics. The first is a form of suffocation. When
weeding, workers sort the weeds by the type the guinea pigs can eat and the type that are
37 Lupe Lituma, interview

23. 23
toxic. Once all the toxic weeds are collected, they dry out in a bucket for eight days until
they are ready to be burnt. Following these eight days, workers place all the weeds in the
center of the greenhouses and light them on fire to create a powerful smoke that ultimately
suffocates the species. Another way to control the population is through a fermentation of
fruit known as chicha. Because chicha has a very strong and rich smell, the liquid is placed
in bottles above the infested lines of fruit in order to attract the insects and trap them
inside. Although these approaches to insecticide do not completely rid the farm of all types
of pests, they are able to control it and maintain it at a healthy level. These types of
sustainable approaches are functioning alternatives to today’s chemically based pesticides
that harm the health of the population and the environment as a whole.
Lastly, the most vital aspect of the agroecological practices used at the farm comes
from the abono, or fertilizers. According to Lupe, “Si no tienes abono su suelo no te produce
nada.”38 Fertilizer is essential to creating a healthy land that will grow fruits and
vegetables. At la Granja Pachamama, the fertilizer can represent life itself. As a farm that
practices agroecology, every part of the fertilizer is organic and comes from elements on
the farm. The only part of the fertilizer that the farm must buy is cow feces; however, every
other aspect of the farms’ fertilizer comes from a mix of weeds, chicken feces, compostable
items, etc. Through a detailed and excruciating process, the women are able to create a
fertilizer rich in nutrients and minerals. When used in conjunction with the dirt from
compost, the fertilizer is able to create a very strong and healthy land to produce organic
fruits and vegetables.
One of the biggest lessons from the farm regarding agroecology and organic farming
practices is that every part of the farm has a purpose. Whether that is the design of the
greenhouses to collect water, the use of weeds to serve as a type of insecticide, or chicken
feces to create a rich fertilizer, everything we do and everything we use has a purpose and
continues this cycle of life. These types of practices illustrate the importance of agroecology
in a world that is losing valuable resources every minute due to an extractive agricultural
38 Lupe Lituma, interview

24. 24
model. La Granja Pachamama represents the very collective, community farms that utilize
agroecology in a sustainable and productive manner and more importantly, are necessary
to achieving food sovereignty within Ecuador.
Food Sovereignty and Sumak Kawsay
As an organic farm utilizing agroecology, La Granja Pachamama contributes to food
sovereignty in its own way. This may not be a specific goal of the farm, and Lupe Lituma
doesn’t directly state that the farm contributes to food sovereignty, however, once we look
closer into the process of production and the achievements of La Granja Pachamama, it
becomes obvious that this little farm in the north of Quito is doing its part to advance food
sovereignty. Lituma’s personal definition and understanding of food sovereignty shows
that La Granja Pachamama contributes to the food sovereignty movement:
“Para mí, significa a no depender de otros lados y a tener autosuficiente… Entonces,
en ese sentido el hecho a lograr soberanía alimentaria significaría que el país no
depende de cosas que vienen de afuera para alimentar a toda la población que nadie
pase hambre.”39
La Granja Pachamama aligns with this idea of food sovereignty in almost every
manner. All of their fruits and vegetables are produced on site and fertilizer is created
through a cycle that utilizes all aspects of the farm. They don’t rely on imported pesticides
and instead utilize agroecology and campesino practices to limit and control pest
populations. All of the feed for the chickens is bought from local producers while all of the
feed for the guinea pigs is taken from the weeds and extra produce on the farm. Yet, most
importantly, the farm has the power to self-sovereignty. Lupe and the women decide what
food to produce and how to do so in a healthy and sustainable manner. By utilizing and
respecting campesina heritage, the farm respects and celebrates traditional agricultural
practices. Although it may be a small farm, La Granja Pachamama produces healthy
products in a sustainable manner that feeds the local community without having to rely on
39 Lupe Lituma, interview

25. 25
outside imports. Ultimately, La Granja Pachamama has “prioritized local food production
and consumption”40 and contributes to food sovereignty in its own manner.
The connection between La Granja Pachamama and food sovereignty is more easily
understood and recognizable than its connection to Sumak Kawsay; however, by analyzing
the main objectives and outcomes, outside of food production, the connection becomes
clearer. As stated previously, the farm utilizes the production of fruits and vegetables as a
way to achieve its larger objectives relating to the development of female empowerment
and a community. According to the Development Council for Nationalities and Peoples of
Ecuador, when sumak kawsay is achieved in its full potential it allows us to “vivir en
comunidad, plenitud, hermandad, complementariedad, relacionalidad entre seres
humanos, seres humanos y la naturaleza, seres humanos y espiritualidad.”41 And yet, La
Granja Pachamama achieves just that for the women that find refuge in the work.
According to Lituma, it’s vital that women understand they can be the main
character in their lives instead of just an object in the lives of others. Through this self-
empowerment, they have the power to change not only their lives but the lives of their
children, their spouses, and their community. By providing the women with the technical
and social skills, they are able to have a holistic development that improves their self-image
and allows them to have a purpose to their life and their work. By creating a community of
strong women who understand their importance as individuals and to the community, they
are achieving sumak kawsay in its fullest potential by living with community, fullness,
sisterhood amongst themselves, with nature, and with spirituality.
Conclusion
By looking at food regimes and the global networks of power, it is clear that the
agribusiness model began to form following the industrial revolution. Developed nations
have utilized this agribusiness model to create an extractive global network that harms
developing countries, creates a reliance on imports from other nations and enforces an
40 “The International Peasant’s Voice”
41 Santiago Garcia Alvarez, “Sumak Kawsay”

26. 26
industrial agricultural model. This type of industrial agriculture not only harms
communities by forcing farmers to relinquish their campesino traditions and practices, but
also causes great harm to the environment due to its extractive and unsustainable
approach to agriculture.
In 1993 a coalition of peasant farmers and indigenous peoples came together to
create La Via Campesina—the largest social organization that fights for indigenous rights
and food sovereignty. In 1996, La Via Campesina introduced the idea of food sovereignty to
the world and from there it has gained global support as an alternative model to
agriculture. By utilizing agroecology, the world has the opportunity to truly move towards
a global food sovereignty system that is better for both our communities and for the
environment.
These desires to achieve food sovereignty through the use of agroecology tie into
the indigenous movement for sumak kawsay within Ecuador. Sumak Kawsay, or “buen
vivir,” represents an indigenous way of life that values human relationships with other
humans, the environment, and spirituality. The importance of the environment to sumak
kawsay is vital and it recognizes that the current global model of development is
completely unsustainable.
In the 2008 Constitution, the Ecuadorian government recognized the rights to buen
vivir along with the right to food sovereignty. By including the rights to food sovereign
within the constitution, the government institutionalized both food sovereignty and its role
in achieving it. Through the Constitution and the Organic Food Sovereignty Law, specific
actions were deemed necessary to achieve food sovereignty. Although the government has
failed to follow through with these actions, the inclusion of both food sovereignty and
sumak kawsay within the 2008 Constitution can still be considered a success. Supporters of
food sovereignty and sumak kawsay were able to include their movements within the
political debates of the country and ultimately improve understanding and broaden their
base for the future.
Moving forward, citizens and communities can continue to fight for food sovereignty
by producing and consuming locally as much as possible and La Granja Pachamama does

27. 27
just that. By utilizing agroecology and respecting campesino tradition, Lituma and the
women on the farm represent the future of the food sovereignty and sumak kawsay
movements. La Granja Pachamama is not just a holistic agricultural organization, but a
holistic communal organization that works to empower women and the community. By
analyzing the goals, practices, and outcomes of La Granja Pachamama it is an evident
example of how to achieve food sovereignty within Ecuador.

28. 28
Bibliography
2008 Ecuadorian Constitution, Title II, Chapter II, Section One, Article 13 & 14
Acción Ecológica. “Cadenas Agroindustriales, Agricultura Bajo Contrato y su Impacto en la
Soberania Alimentaria,” Soberania Alimentara para el Sumak Kawsay. March 30, 2011,
1-8
“Agroecological Farming,” Groundswell International, accessed November 28, 2015,
http://www.groundswellinternational.org/how-we-work/agroecological-farming/
Alonso-Fradejas, Alberto; Borras Jr., Saturnino M.; Holmes, Todd; Holt-Giménez, Eric and
Robbins, Martha Jane, “Food sovereignty: convergence and contradictions, conditions
and challenges,” Third World Quarterly (2015), 36:3, 432, DOI:
10.1080/01436597.2015.1023567
Alvarez, Santiago Garcia, “Que es el sumak kawsay o buen vivir,” accessed September 14,
2015. http://www.academia.edu/6429107/Qu%C3%A9_es_el_sumak_kawsay_
o_buen_vivir
Arboleda, Maria, “Ecuador: Introduction.” Class lecture, Politics and Development in
Ecuador from HECUA, Quito, Ecuador, September 7, 2015.
Borras Jr., Saturnino M. , “La Via Campesina and its Global Campaign for Agrarian Reform,”
Journal of Agrarian Change 8 (2008): 260
Bustos, Blanca and Hortencia Bustos. Hacia la Soberanía Alimentaria: Agroecología y
Comercio Asociativo desde Experiencias Andino- Amazónicas. Quito: Universidad
Andina Simon Bolivar y Ediciones La Tierra, 2010.
Desmarais, Annette Aurelie, “The Power of Peasants: Reflections on the meanings of La Via
Campesina,” Journal of Rural Studies 24 (2008): 138-149
Giunta, Isabella, “Food Sovereignty in Ecuador: Peasant Struggles and the Challenge of
Institutionalization,” The Journal of Peasant Studies 41:6 (2014): 1213, DOI:
10.1080/03066150.2014.938057
“Hidden Costs of Industrial Agriculture,” Union of Concerned Scientists, accessed November
14, 2015, http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-
system/industrial-agriculture/hidden-costs-of-industrial.html#.VkewZ66rTo8

29. 29
Horrigan, Leo; Lawrence, Robert S. and Polly Walker, “How Sustainable Agriculture Can
Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture,”
Environmental Health Perspectives 110:5 (2002): 445-456
International Forum of Agroecology. 2015 Declaration of Nyéléni 2015, Nyéléni Center,
Sélingué, Mali, 24-27 February, 2015.
La Via Campesina. “Peasant Agroecology for Food Sovereignty and Mother Earth:
Experiences of La Via Campesina,” La Via Campesina Notebok 7(2015): 1-66.
Lituma, Lupe, interview by Gabriella McDaniel, November 18, 2015, transcript.
Martinez- Torres, Maria Elena and Peter Rosset, “La Via Campesina: The Evolution of a
Transnational Movement,” Global Policy Forum, last modified February 8, 2010.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/world-hunger/land-
ownership-and-hunger/48733-la-via-campesina-the-evolution-of-a-transnational-
movement.html9. Saturnino M. Borras Jr., “La Via Campesina and its Global Campaign
for Agrarian Reform,” Journal of Agrarian Change 8 (2008): 258-289
McKay, Ben; Nehring, Ryan & Walsh-Dilley, Marygold, “The ‘state’ of food sovereignty in
Latin America: political projects and alternative pathways in Venezuela, Ecuador and
Bolivia,” The Journal of Peasant Studies 41:6 (2014), 1175-1200, DOI:
10.1080/03066150.2014.964217
McMichael, Philip, “A Food Regime Genealogy,” The journal of Peasant Studies 36:1 (2009):
142, accessed October 28, 2015, doi:10.1080/03066150902820354
NGO Forum, “Civil Society Proposals to Achieve Food Security” (statement presented at the
1996 World Food Summit, Rome, Italy, November 11-17, 1996).11.
“Our Members,” La Via Campesina, accessed December 1,2015,
http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/organisation-mainmenu-44/our-members-
mainmenu-71
Pena, Karl, “Institutionalizing Food Sovereignty in Ecuador.” Paper presented at Food
Sovereignty: A Critical Dialogue, an international conference, Yale University, New
Haven, Connecticut, September 14-15, 2013.

30. 30
“Sumak Kawsay: Ancient Teachings of Indigenous Peoples,” The Pachamama Alliance,
accessed November 29, 2015, http://www.pachamama.org/sumak-kawsay
“The International Peasant’s Voice,” La Via Campesina, accessed October 27, 2015,
http://www.viacampesina.org/en/index.php/organisation-mainmenu-44
Traducido por Adriana Latrónico y María Elena Martínez de: Rosset, Peter. “Food
Sovereignty: Global Rallying Cry of Farmer Movements.” Institute for Food and
Development Policy Background, vol. 9, no. 4, Fall 2003
Vadrevu, Krishna Prasad, "Agroecosystems." Salem Press Encyclopedia Of Science (January
2015): Research Starters, EBSCOhost (accessed November 28, 2015).
Vega, Xavier Alejandro Leon, “Transgenicos, agroindustria y soberanía alimentaria,” Letras
Verdes. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Socioambientales 16 (2014): 29-53
Witman, Hannah, “Food Sovereignty: A New Rights Framework for Food and Nature?”
Environment and Society: Advances in Research 2 (2011): 89, accessed October 28,
2015, doi:10.3167/ares.2011.020106
Annex
Interview with Lupe Lituma, Director of La Granja Integral Pachamama
Conducted in person and recorded via iPhone, November 18th, 2015
1. ¿Qué es la significa a soberanía alimentaria a Usted?

31. 31
Para mí, significa a no depender de otros lados y a tener autosuficiente. Por ejemplo,
no depender de las importaciones de trigo. Nosotros produjéramos nuestro propio trigo y
no tendríamos que importar. Eso garantizaría nuestra parte de soberanía alimentaria.
Mientras que ahora nosotros dependemos de las importaciones de trigo para el pan y por
eso por ejemplo, el estado está ahora propasando requerir la gente empecen usar harina de
plátano, harina de yuca para suprimir la harina que se importa y el trigo que se importa.
Entonces, en ese sentido el hecho a lograr soberanía alimentaria significaría que el país no
depende de cosas que vienen de afuera para alimentar a toda la población que nadie pase
hambre.
2. ¿Y cree que este es posible en Ecuador y el mundo en general?
Miras, el problema de hambre en el mundo no es el problema de la producción, no es
un problema de que falta. Es un problema de la distribución. Por ejemplo, yo creo que
debemos cambiar los hábitos de consumo. Esto le ayudaría mucho. Deberíamos a dejar a
realmente mucha carne. Eso permitiría que en vez de gastarse no sé cuántos miles de litros
de agua que necesitan una vaca. Esa agua se podría arreglar mucho maíz, muchas papas,
trigo, y podríamos comer alcanzaría para más. Entonces, yo no sé me parece que el vaca
necesita para vivir dos hectáreas por tierra me parece. ¿Entonces, me imagina que esas dos
hectáreas… cuantos se pueden producir para comer? ¿Por cuantos familias? Claro que
nosotros son acostumbrada a comer mucho carne, muchos alimentos procesando adentras
de animales y eso no está conociendo lo porque a ser humano en vez de sembrar maíz para
hacer los tortillas y de sembrar mucho maíz para dar a las gallinas y para después que la
gallina crezca comer sus huevos y comer su carne. ¿Entonces, es un poco adonde hemos ido
a la humanidad ha ido a hacer eso a no?
3. ¿Qué son las metas y objetivos de la granja y que es la meta más importante a
usted?
Hay muchos problemas en general de violencia doméstica. Entonces, por eso
porque, las hermanas decidan a hacer algo con ese tierra. Siempre ellas trabajaron con
sectores sociales vulnerables. Entonces, ellas dicen que quieren trabajar en la promoción
social de la mujer. Cuando ellas compraron esta tierra, construyen la casa de la izquierda.

32. 32
Lo primero que dicen en la planta baja, vamos a hacer actividades para ir las mujeres.
Entonces, empezaron en ese época había la idea que aprenden a coser, que aprenden a
bordar, que aprenden a hacer cosas las mujeres podrían usar en sus vidas. Entonces, poco a
poco si avanzando y luego dicen no, el mejor para apoyar los mujeres de aquí de Carapungo
es a hacer una guardería y entonces, ya van guarderías. Entonces, hicieron una guardería
que siempre tiene no más de cien niños allí. Los niños están aquí cuidados, alimentados y
las madres pueden salir a trabajar. Entonces, después de más de 20 años las mujeres han
mantenido la guardería solamente con apoyo de familias Italia.
Ellas siempre están pensando de actividades para mujeres. Entonces, inicialmente
ellas pensaban de hacer un lugar de cogida para eses mujeres que tenían problemas de
violencia domestica porque ellas han trabajado con mujeres en un proyecto con madres y
niños de menores de un ano. Allí, conocieron muchas mujeres que vinieron golpeadas que
no tienen cosas para comer que estaban con los niños- tres, cuatro niños… Y todos censan
allí es que es deciden a hagamos un lugar para coger estas mujeres. Y la idea era darles
vivienda, darles ayudarlas profesionales para subir su estema, para tratar a subir las
traumas que trajeron por prono de violencia y ayudarles a recuperarse a aprender alguna
actividad para poder defenderse y que luego, pueden irse y pueden vivir mejor. Entonces,
hay cuestionamos mucho eso porque este es una visión muy paternalista… El
cuestionamiento era decidíamos soluciones para estas mujeres y luego, como les dices,
“ahora sí, les vayas.” No puedes, es muy complicada.
Entonces, allí cuando yo les conocieron las hermanas les cuestiona mucho eso y
después veíamos las posibilidades a hacer una proyecto en este tierra. Entonces, allí
decidimos a hacer la posibilidad a hacer la granja como una forma de genera trabajo.
Entonces el objetivo en concreto es contribuir a mejorar las condiciones de vida de un
grupo de mujeres pobres de la zona de Carapungo y Calderon. No solución a todos las
problemas porque son muy grandes pero hacemos algo.
Para nosotras la producción de las verduras es un medio, no es el fin. Es
entrenamiento para lograr, a través de producir la granja de dan trabajo de autoempleo,
genera ingresos con lo que se vende para que estas mujeres tienen sus ingresos y tienen

33. 33
trabajo. Aquí, hacemos inclusos. Estoy muy flexible con sus horas para apoyarles porque
como madres en nuestra sociedad te evoca el mayor de responsabilidades con los niños. Y
ellas mismas no rompen eso. Se necesitan mucha formación, mucha capacitación, y una
buena autoestima para poder también involucrada la pareja y la pareja también asuma las
responsabilidades de crecer un hijo porque un hijo es de dos personas.
Creo que hicieron todos de los objetivos de proyecto porque para lograr los
objetivos de proyecto estamos cuidando el medio ambiente, hacer el agroecología, siempre
hacer agricultura orgánica, y hemos ampliado al concepto agroecología en el sentido de que
hemos sembrado árboles, cuidamos el medio ambiente. Esto es una pequeña ecosistema
que se produce muchas aves que viven allí. Por otro lado, cuidan la tierra, cuidan también la
gente que trabajan y la gente que consumen los productos. Entonces, hacemos esto.
Después, hemos trabajado mucho en la cuestión de los valores con las mujeres.
Normalmente, se hecho mucho para las mujeres con psicólogos, con gente que ayude un
poco a superar los traumas.
Mientras que nosotras hacemos trabajado mucho le dice al compañero, “No, tiene
que involucrarle en las actividades de la familia también,” al marido. Aquí es muy frecuente
que trabajan los dos, el marido y la mujer, llegaron a la casa a las seis de la noche y al
marido se llega y se sienta enfrente de la televisión y pásenme un vaso de agua. Y la mujer
también se levanta más temprano de la pareja para hacer la desayuna, manda los hijos a
escuela y regresa cansada de su trabajo de todo el día, llega a la casa y cocina, lava las
platas, y más hasta las diez u once de la noche. Y aparte de eso, a las once de la noche el
marido está durmiendo en la cama. Entonces, eso es muy frecuente y nosotras siempre
hablado de que como involucrar el marido en las actividades de la familia. El fin del
proyecto es a contribuir a la dignidad de las mujeres y a ser humanos mejores. No es el
objetivo a producir alimento, ese es un medio para llegar al fin.
Nuestra sociedad capitalista es en vuelve donde el fundamental no es a ser
humana… es la colonización de riqueza y a extraer riqueza de las otras. Aquí, no hay
apropiación de riqueza. No hay una relación patronal. Yo no soy la patronal, yo soy parte
del grupo. Yo también reciben ingresos en dependiente en que producen aquí. Yo no tengo

34. 34
más. Entonces, igualmente las hermanas, muy solidaridad amenté ellas nos apuestan este
terreno. Nunca pagamos dinero, un centavo, por ocupamos. No es simplemente, la
sociedad capitalista donde prevenir ese—el valor de cambio más del valor de uso.
Entonces, nosotras queremos que se puedan hacer algo diferente. Todo del trabajo aquí
puede ser un testimonio al proyecto para hacer una modelo diferente.
Allí eso va intrínsecos muchos valores que tan bien como tratar de cultivar en las
mujeres como el asunto de solidaridad, el respecto a los diferentes, el amor a trabajo, el
respecto a la vida en toda de su expresión. También, queremos cultivar con esos valores. Y
también, un poco de esa perspectiva es cristiano. Una otra cosa más que es muy importante
es, “De mujeres, para mujeres.” Pero nosotras no tenemos una visión que te digo feminista.
Nosotros hemos visto si tu trabajas con una mujer, le ayudas a subir su autoestima, le
ayudas a formarse, y a aprender cosas a capacitarse. Y ese mujer tiene un radio de
influencia muy amble. Si esta mujer cambia, los que están cerca también pueden cambiar.
Pueden cambiar sus hijos para primerito, para marido, para pareja sus hermanos, y para
todo en turno.
4. ¿Cree que hay una conexión entre sumak kawsay, las metas de la Granja,
agroecología, y soberanía alimentaria?
Sí, yo creo que hay muchas conexiones. ¡Es más como nosotras somos pioneras,
comenzamos con ese idea—de la economía solidaria, la agroecología, y el buen vivir que se
dice ahora sumak kawsay! Con eso, trata que todo el mundo tiene trabajo en donde es
prevalecen los valores del ser humano y hacer que la gente se desarrolle, que las mujeres
sepan que ellas pueden ser sujetos de su vida en vez de un objeto, y que ellas sepan que
pueden cambiar las cosas. Ellas pueden cambiar en torno de sus familias, de las
comunidades, ¿y porqué no del país? Con nuestro cambio, influimos el cambio de otros y
eso implica muchas cosas. Y también, lo que propiciamos a hacer es la formación de la
gente. Y la formación es eso-- sentamos, conversamos, analizamos las cosas…
Muchas veces las compañeras vienen y me preguntan, “¿Qué quiere decir el
empoderamiento?” Entonces, yo les explico… O bueno si, palabras que a veces yo me
quedaba acostumbrada de que no entiende. Son palabras tan simples, tan comunes, tan

35. 35
corrientes, pero ellas no saben. Porque, hay estado del mar de la formación así excluidas.
Por ser, ellas han vivido aquí en Calderón. Calderón está a los boteras de Quito y mira que
entendido muchas limitaciones. Están sin trabajo, trabajando yendo la lavarropa, a
trabajando de empleadas domésticas… Entonces, o sea, el reflexionar cada cosa, cada acto
de la vida de eso es la formación.
Por un lado, también la capacitación. La formación, cuando hablo sobre la formación
yo refiere a este desarrollo humano, a ser humana. Aprender los valores, aprender
empodérame de mi vida, de mis cosas. Además de eso, a ser autocritica. Todo de eso me va
haciendo donde ellas están formando y me va capacitando en cambio de todo que lo
aprendo. También, les han aprendido el manejo de muchos productos aquí en la granja.
Muchas veces se olvidan pero muchas cosas si ya lo saben y lo hacen muy bien. Entonces,
eso es parte de la capacitación técnica para que la granja y para producir ingresos. Lo otro
entrenamiento a ser humano es a subir su autoestima y sentir ser útil, sentir ser valiosa
porque cuando una siente con un autoestima baja todo el mundo le ve mal.
5. ¿Cómo afecta las prácticas de la granja de su fondo de campesino?
Me gusta mucho la naturaleza y me gusta trabajar con la gente. Yo estudie sociología
y este me ayuda mucho con el análisis de crítica. Me da muchos elementos. De allí, la
cuestión de mis orígenes… una granja agroecológica rescata mucho de esa práctica
ancestral de la agricultura. Pero tiene sin riqueza elementos nuevos y allí entra el
desarrollo científico técnico que tú puedes aplicar. Por ejemplo, a nombre de la soberanía y
la seguridad alimentaria, yo pienso que no es correcto decir que no queremos el brócoli. El
brócoli no es nuestra. Pero mucha gente al corriente que está involucrada en la seguridad y
soberanía alimentaria habla mucho de consumir solo nuestros productos que son propios
de nuestra tierra.
Pero, la sociedad está cambiando sus hábitos de consumo, la producción, y todo.
Entonces, han producido los híbridos. Por ejemplo, los tomates propios de los Andes es
nuestra. Pero, resulta en un tomate que es propio nuestro, tú le coches hermosa, todo bien
y llevas a la casa y si no te comes esa rato al siguiente día el tomate esta todo flujo y suave y
ya no sirve. En cambio, los científicos e investigadores han cogido ese tomate y le puesto

36. 36
en la hibridado con otro de su especie que puede ser el tomatillo. Por ejemplo, este
tomatillo es un pariente del tomate riñón, es de la misma familia. El tomatillo es duro
mientras que el tomate de aquí sea muy suave. Entonces, en los laboratorios, ellos han
hecho un mezclado de las fortalezas de tomatillo y los de tomate riñón. Y el tomate que
tenemos ahora es un tomate rojo y bonito pero tiene características del tomatillo y las otras
variedades que son de la misma familia. Entonces, el tomate de ahora cuando tú le cosechas
y duran pecha por una semana o mas también.
Este es la hibridación, y yo creo que ese es precisamente a provechar con el
desarrollo científico técnico. Hay personas en contra de los híbridos pero yo tengo que
producir un tipo de tomate que yo puedo vender y que la gente tenga que comer que le
dure cuatro, cinco días. No puede vender un tomate que no puede servir en un día.
Entonces, en ese sentido yo creo que necesites a revisar ciertos conceptos e ideas. Entonces
que, es súper importante la soberanía alimentaria y la seguridad sobre todo. Eso se refiere
que no necesitamos depender en la comida de otros afuera y además de eso no vamos a
pasar hambre. Yo creo que haciendo el agroecología se puede lograr eso. Si usas
insecticidas, abonos sintéticos de petróleo, se matas todo de las microbiológicas. Entonces,
el suelo cada vez se vuelve más ácido, se muera todo, y resulta que cada vez que pones más
cosas que producen la tierra. Y el cambio, la idea de agroecología es el revés. Vas abonando
el suelo en requisando, a veces mejor y tiene más elementos para ayudan a producir más.
6. ¿Dónde compran las semillas para la granja?
Eso es un problema nacional… Nosotros dependemos en las semillas de afuera. Eso
es el problema. Por ejemplo, el tomate es muy caro. Un sobre de mil semillas vale como cien
dólares. Y las mil semillas son tan chiquitas. Entonces… es muy caro. En cambio, una libra
de semillas que no son híbridos solo vale triente dólares. Por la problema es la semilla que
compramos es un tomate hibrido y esto cuesta mucho. Igualmente, por ejemplo eso es una
de los limitantes de los híbridos. Por ejemplo, todos los brócolis que producen bien so
híbridos. Y allí hay dependencia pero nosotros reclamamos el estado de que el estado se
preocupa a producir esas semillas. Igual, hay una problema de por ejemplo hay semillas en

37. 37
el mercado que tiene mucho demanda y otras que no tiene mucho demanda. Entonces, todo
está cambiando pero nosotras dependimos muchos en las semillas de afuera.
7. ¿Qué es la importancia del abono?
El abono es fundamental. Hay elementos son básicos—el agua, la tierra, la luz, y el
abono. Si no tienes abono el suelo no te produce nada. Y por eso, es tan importante a hacer
un abono y que el abono sea súper buena. Nosotros hacemos casi abonos. Bueno, nos
traigan la caca de vaca y el resto… tu sabes, hacemos todo aquí. El agua que esta del abono,
eso para re-abonar y es muy bueno, muy rico, tiene mucho nitrógeno, tiene minerales.
Entonces, es completaría al otro abono. Este bueno como el compost. Si el compost tiene la
ventaja de que da consistencia al suelo porque tiene mucho reboñar materia orgánica y
este suelo es puro arena. Pero cuando incorporar materia orgánica es mejor para la tierra.
8. ¿Qué maneras usan para proteger las verduras y frutas?
Hicimos una asfixia. Primero, cosechamos hierbas pequeñas y pusimos en un balde.
Hay estaban ocho días y luego encendimos eso y eso aplicamos para controlar la mariposa
blanca. Algo ayuda, no mata todos pero baja la población. Tambien, ahora hacemos hecho
con ortiga. El otra dia, Maria Elena aplico en el tomate aji con ajos y con trago. Eso es para
las moscas. Y en las botellas cerca de los tomates es un fermento de fruta se llama chicha.
Huele muy rico y las mariposas vengan allá y le matan.
9. ¿Dónde recibimos el agua para la granja?
El agua es del sistema público. Pero cuando no llueve, no hay nada agua. Es muy
poco. Entonces, trajeron el truncara de agua. Eso logramos un apoyo del municipio porque
ellos tienen el trucara y el agua es de municipio. Logramos y regalan agua cada semana. No
es mucho pero nos ayudan a tener agua. También hay un tanque debajo de la tierra donde
toda el agua de lluvia puede ir. Hay un sistema para colectar con los invernaderos y la casa
de las hermanas y este sistema conecta al tanque.
10. ¿Por qué crees que los clientes compran comida de la granja?
La gente que nos compran es porque saben que esto es sano y la gente que es un
poco mas consciente y por qué nosotros llamamos a nuestros clientes como clientes
solidarias. Es muy importante a tener clientes que valor en el producto por el trabajo que

38. 38
tienen esto y además de eso sea que sepan con el consumo de ellos están apoyando estas
mujeres, una grupo de mujeres que no tiene trabajo del otra forma. Por otro lado, porque
nosotros estamos produciendo aquí oxigeno gratis por ejemplo y eso la comunidad no
valora. Es una forma de consuma que cuida el medio ambiente y ayudan las mujeres.