executive committee - Canadian Federation of Agriculture

International Federation of
Agricultural Producers
________________________________________________________________________
Document EX 11/09
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
152nd Session
Hotel Clarion, Copenhagen, 28-29 May 2009
SUMMARY REPORT
Members present:
President:
Ajay Vashee (Zambia)
Vice-Presidents:
Elisabeth Gauffin (Sweden)
Raul Montemayor (Philippines)
Carlos Simancas (Colombia)
Treasurer:
Peter Gaemelke (Denmark) accompanied by Niels Lindberg Madsen
Members:
Mohamed Ould Hocine (Algeria) accompanied by Bechra Ait Ali
Alan Burgess (Australia) represented by Justin Macdonnell,
accompanied by Jed Matz and Charles McElhone
Hermann Schultes (Austria) accompanied by Nik Morawitz
Katia Abreu (Brazil) accompanied by Luiza Castello Branco Pereira da
Silva
Laurent Pellerin (Canada) accompanied by Ron Maynard, Don
McCabe and Greg Northey
Aka Mathias N’Goan (Cote d’Ivoire)
Luc Guyau (France), accompanied by Daniel Bigou
Rishi Wahi (India) accompanied by K.P. Singh and Sarala Gopalan
Giuseppe Politi (Italy) accompanied by Chiara Marinai
Isami Miyata (Japan) represented by Masahiro Konno
Ahmad Al Faour (Jordan)
Won – Byung Choi (Korea) represented by Hanho Choi
Albert Jan Maat (Netherlands) accompanied by Frank Van Oorschot
Wladyslaw Serafin (Poland)
Samba Gueye (Senegal)
Frank Tumwebaze (Uganda) accompanied by Morrison Twesigye
Peter Kendall (United Kingdom) represented by Thomas Hind
Roger Johnson (U.S.A.) accompanied by Douglas Peterson
Doug-Taylor Freeme (Zimbabwe)
Committee chairs:
• Development Co-operation Committee: Elisabeth Gauffin (Sweden)
• Committee on Agricultural Co-operatives: Marcus Borgstrom (Finland)
• Committee on Women in Agriculture: Karen Serres (France)
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
Young Farmers Committee: Kati Partanen (Finland)
Group on Tropical Products: Mathias N’Goan (Cote d’Ivoire)
African Committee: Nduati Kariuki (Kenya)
Latin American and the Caribbean Committee: Carlos Simancas (Colombia)
Asian Committee: K.P. Singh (India) accompanied by Sarala Gopalan
Mediterranean Committee: Giuseppe Politi (Italy)
Observers
From member organizations
• Carlos Bergia (FAA, Argentina)
• Vardan Hambardzumyan, Vardan Urutyan (FAA, Armenia)
• Sok Sotha, (CAMFAD, Cambodia)
• Issa Mhadji (Comores)
• Tapio Kytola, Simo Tiainen (MTK, Finland)
• Tiffanie Stephani (DBV, Germany)
• Adotei Brown (FONG, Ghana)
• Prabhakara Reddy (FFI, India)
• H. Rakotomandimby (FEKRITAMA, Madagascar)
• Moulay Abdelkader Alaoui (UNCAM, Morocco)
• Idrissa Bagnou (FCMN, Niger)
• Pål Haugstad, Johannes Ingvoldstad, Christian Anton Smedshaug (Norges
Bondelag, Norway)
• Hildegunn Gjengedal (Federation of Norwegian Agricultural Coops, Norway)
• Dalal Atari (Palestine Authority)
• Lucila Quintana (JNC, Peru)
• Vicente Fabe (Pakisama, Philippines)
• Serge Benstrong (SFA, Seychelles)
• Hänni Heinz (USP, Switzerland)
• Khaled Khazal (GUP, Syrian A.R.)
• Fidelis Lubinza (Mviwata, Tanzania)
• Agnes Namuhisa (TFC, Tanzania)
• Ahmed Khalfalli (UTAP, Tunisia)
• Gaston Rico, Pablo Waksman, Patricia Cespedes (CAF, Uruguay)
• Nguyen Cuu Quoc, Hoang Nghia Trung (VCA, Vietnam)
• Nguyen Quoc Cuong, Nguyen Xuan Dinh (VNFU, Vietnam)
From AgriCord
• Ignace Coussement, Managing Director, AgriCord accompanied by Pekka Jamsen
and Marina Vanhecke
• Kees Blokland, Managing Director, Agriterra
• Marie-Christine Talbot, General Manager, UPA-DI
• Anne Panel, Director, FERT
2
3
Secretariat
• David King, Secretary General
• Michèle Gay-Peiller, Director for Finance and Administration
• Nora Ourabah, Senior Policy Officer
• Fabienne Derrien, Senior Policy Officer
• Neil Sorensen, Communications Coordinator
• Adriana Millot, Administrative Assistant
Apologies for absence:
• Alejandro Delfino (Argentina)
• Semsi Bayraktar (Turkey)
• Group on Dairy Products: Wes Judd (Australia)
• Group on Grains and Oilseeds: Xavier Beulin (France)
• Group on Meats and Feeds: Lourie Bosman (South Africa)
• World Association of Beet and Cane Growers: Alf Cristaudo (Australia)
Introduction
The Danish Agricultural Council hosted the 152nd session of IFAP’s Executive Committee in
Copenhagen, 28-29 May 2009. This session was linked to a meeting of IFAP’s Committee on
Agricultural Cooperatives on 26 May and an IFAP Conference on “Climate Change:
Farmers’ solutions on 27 May. During its deliberations, the Committee: examined a report on
IFAP activities undertaken over the last six months, discussed draft policy statements in key
priority areas and examined the financial and membership situation of IFAP. In addition,
there were good discussions among members on “Achieving global food security through
new investments in agriculture” and on “The situation of world farming in a global recession
and financial crisis”. Particular items of interest concerning questions on internal organization
included: discussions on development of the Secretariat, relations with AgriCord, changes to
election rules and the place of the next World Farmers’ Congress.
The main results of these discussions are as follows:
IFAP activities
The Secretary General reported that the last six months had been one of the most intense
periods in the work of IFAP. Following the 2007-08 “food crisis” agriculture has risen to the
top on the global agenda, are there are many national and international meetings on how to
deal with food security and price volatility questions. IFAP gave the farmers views at 66 such
events over the last six months. In addition, IFAP organized a record 27 of its own events.
For the future, IFAP is reviewing its structure and functioning to make sure that it is
optimally adapted to meeting the challenges of a growing membership to service, a more
intense international agricultural agenda, and resource limitations.
3
4
Members were pleased with IFAP’s achievements, and made the following observations:
• IFAP is at the limit of its ‘means’ but not its ‘capacity’ – more resources should be
found to respond to expectations of members
• IFAP must be present in all major international forums or others will speak for
farmers in our place
• Increased attention should be given to the following subjects: renewable energy –
especially lobbying for biofuels, land tenure, payment for environmental services
• Strengthening of IFAP’s presence in the regions was necessary on the condition that
good coordination with headquarters is assured
• More feedback on work program priorities should be sought from the members
Development Co-operation – strengthening synergies with AgriCord
It was noted that AgriCord is running 251 projects with farmers’ organisations in developing
countries for strengthening their role and organization. Over 30 million Euros were spent in
2008 and 1 million farmers reached. 30 percent of these funds go to IFAP member
organisations. Another 13 percent goes to IFAP headquarters to strengthen the participation
of developing country farmer leaders in IFAP policy and advocacy work. The Managing
Director of AgriCord told the Executive that his organisation faced four main challenges,
namely:
•
Mobilizing resources
•
Increasing support from more OECD countries
•
Increasing cooperation among agri-agencies
•
Having a stronger role for IFAP’s Development Cooperation Committee (DCC)
As part of the AgriCord presentation, the Managing Director of Agriterra addressed the
meeting and expressed the following concerns (Agriterra manages IFAP’s AgriCord project):
• IFAP should not lose its self-financing ability
• IFAP should use its Agriterra funding to support new members in policy-making
processes in their own organisations
• The Secretariat should reorganize itself to respond to the new reality of growing
membership, and submit its 2009 work plan to Agriterra as soon as possible
In the discussion, members said that IFAP should continue to be demand driven. It was
necessary to clarify roles among Agriterra, the Executive Committee and the DCC, and also
be strategic. The Committee decided to set up an ad hoc Sub-Committee to look into IFAP’s
governance, organisational structure, procedures and responsibilities. The Sub-Committee’s
mandate would go beyond the process already underway in IFAP of examining the structure
and functioning of the Secretariat with a view to achieving ISO 9001 certification by the end
of 2010.
Situation of World Farming in a Global Recession and Financial Crisis
Short reports on how farmers were facing up to the present recession and financial crisis were
4
5
presented by farm leaders from 21 countries (Americas 6, Europe 6, Africa 6, Asia 3).
Farmers are suffering from: falling prices, high input costs and the consequences of
consumers switching their purchases to cheaper food products. Livestock farmers seem to be
hit particularly hard, especially in shrinking export markets as a result of the recession. Lack
of profitability was leading to a fall in land values which acerbated problems of access to
credit in many countries.
On the positive side, net farm incomes were exceptional in several grain and oilseed
exporting countries in 2007 and 2008. Also, farmers in net-importing countries are benefiting
in many cases from more favourable farm policies following the shock of the ‘food price
crisis’ e.g. in North Africa. Interest rates have fallen as a result of the stimulus packages in
countries like the UK.
The Executive Committee insisted that a worldwide strategy is needed to increase food
production, even in a time of recession. Further, this strategy should be based on a sustainable
development model with government regulation to ensure that markets function
competitively. Speculation should be kept out of food markets.
Achieving global food security through new investments in agriculture
IFAP is calling for increased investment in agriculture in order to achieve global food
security. The Executive Committee was asked to elaborate further on this call to increase
investment in agriculture in two areas. The first concerns the place where investment should
take place, e.g. in port facilities to facilitate increased imports and exports or, preferably, in
local food production for markets (concept of food sovereignty). The second area concerns
the conditions under which foreign investment in land is allowed to take place, especially
when it is intended for production of food for export back to consumers in the investor’s
country.
In response, members said that foreign direct investment (FDI) was necessary to develop
agriculture. The conditions in which this takes place should be decided by each country
according to its own national circumstances. In many countries, foreigners are not allowed to
buy land but can rent it on a long-term basis. Committee members said that IFAP should
insist that when FDI enters agriculture in a country, the conditions should be properly
negotiated and the benefits shared. A code of good behaviour needs to be established that
gives a framework for avoiding extremes. Human Rights law is in force in many countries to
protect the weak and IFAP should insist on respect for ‘the rights of the farmer’. This
requires farmers’ organisations to be involved in discussions concerning the conditions in
which foreign investment enters agriculture in their country.
Agricultural Policy Questions
The Executive Committee endorsed IFAP’s Copenhagen Declaration on “Farmers’
Solutions to Climate Change” that was agreed the previous day at a special IFAP
5
6
Conference on Climate Change. It also adopted the IFAP Issue Brief on Climate Change.
IFAP is calling for agriculture to be included in a new ‘Copenhagen’ climate deal.
Three other policy papers were approved. These are on: Animal Welfare and Trade, Animal
Welfare and Biotechnologies, and Animal Traceability.
Three particular policy issues were discussed in more detail by the Executive Committee Water, Risk Management and Rural Employment.
Water -the Secretariat explained that a first draft of a policy statement on Water had been
drawn up for the World Water Forum which took place in March 2009. This was done with
support from IFAP’s Working Group on Water and Land. The policy is based on six key
messages, as follows:
1. Water, food and energy constitute an increasingly inter-dependant nexus in which
agriculture takes a central position. This should be recognized
2. Farmers should be rewarded for sustainable water management practises (rain water
harvesting and storage; sustainable irrigation)
3. Integrated Water Resource Management strategies should recognize farmers as a key
user community
4. Farmers should be involved in water management policies through consultation
frameworks
5. Farmers should benefit from fair water pricing policies as well as funding of and
investments in sustainable water infrastructures
6. Farmers need secure land and water entitlements in order to achieve the long-term
security needed to make investments.
Members agreed with this approach and suggested that IFAP’s policy on sustainable water
management should be integrated with its policy on climate change.
Risk Management – the Secretariat explained that IFAP is elaborating three documents on
this subject - an issue brief, a policy brief, and case studies of farmers experiences. The
Executive Committee gave particular attention to the policy brief, making recommendations
on the seven types of risk laid out in the document. These are: climate and natural disaster
risks, plant and animal disease and pest risks, food safety risks, price and market-related
risks, credit lending risks, individual risks for farmers and their families, and policy and
regulatory risks.
It was stressed that the best way for farmers to deal with risk is if risks in agriculture are
reduced. For this, market regulation is needed. Further, policy makers were called upon to
deal with the risk that farmers could not manage individually, e.g. social protection for a
farmer and his family. Volatility of currencies was also mentioned as a risk for farmers. The
role of farmer cooperatives in managing risk should be emphasized more in the document.
Rural Employment – the Secretariat said that an outline of the IFAP policy statement on
rural employment had been prepared based on discussions in the Working Group. Members
appreciated the document which called for measures to maintain economic activity in the
6
7
rural areas so that services could be maintained and living standards improved. The
Committee said that the profession of ‘farmer’ should be recognized, as should the status of
‘farm spouse’ (concept of a farming couple).
IFAP’s Asian Farmers’ Committee drew attention to its regional initiative with APAARI on
bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides. This emerged from concerns over price rises and safety
concerns of chemical inputs.
Communications activities
The Communications Coordinator made an audio-visual presentation on how developments
in communications are significantly raising the profile of IFAP. He noted in particular:
professionalizing of publications, generating media interest, contribution to lobby activities,
strengthening regional communications capacities, real-time reporting, and website redesign.
Members reacted very positively.
Finance and Budget
Financial situation 2008 - the Treasurer was pleased to report that IFAP had an excellent
financial year in 2008. The Director for Finance and Administration explained that, for the
first time since 2005, IFAP’s financial situation at 31 December 2008 shows a surplus and all
the funds are positive. This is due to: 100 percent payment of subscriptions by full members for the first time, to the costs of the World Farmers’ Congress held in Poland in June 2008
being entirely covered by registration fees, and to support from AgriCord.
IFAP financial statements for 2008 incorporate, for the first time, the financial report on
IFAP’s AgriCord project. The Executive Committee adopted the auditor’s report for 2008.
IFAP’s subscription formula – every five years the country data in the subscription formula
is updated and member subscriptions recalculated for the next five year period. The
Executive Committee examined the first draft of the updated subscription calculations for the
period 2010-2014. The Committee also took the opportunity of this updating of the formula
to examine the structure of the formula itself to see whether it was still appropriate in the
light of certain developing countries having problems meeting their subscription obligations.
In the discussion, the following concerns were raised:
ƒ IFAP needs to have a sustainable membership base, so the discussion on the
subscription formula was as much a strategic issue as a budget issue.
ƒ While most members supported the recommendation of the Finance of Budget
Committee to continue with the same formula structure, some other members
asked for alternative formulas to be developed
ƒ Several members called for a ceiling on the level of subscriptions for individual
organizations in each category to be to be included in the formula. The Executive
7
8
ƒ
ƒ
Committee asked the Budget and Finance Committee to study the matter and
come back with recommendations at the next Executive Committee session.
The change in the data series used to calculate subscriptions in OECD countries
had produced some surprising increases e.g. for Japan and Austria - the previous
data series from OECD has been discontinued. The Treasurer gave an assurance
that the Budget and Finance Committee will cooperate with member organisations
to agree on the appropriate figures to use in calculating their subscription
IFAP needs to continue to explore other sources of finance to supplement
subscription income; funding from sponsorship will be examined. It was noted
that supplementary financial support from AgriCord provides member
organisations a level of services from IFAP that are worth three times more than
what they pay for in subscriptions.
The President concluded that work will continue on the formula calculations with member
organizations from now until the next Executive Committee session in October 2009 to
ensure the best fit so everyone feels comfortable.
Special considerations for developing country subscriptions – the Executive Committee
approved the following recommendations from the Finance and Budget Committee
concerning the level of developing country fees:
1. To raise the level of DCC fees to: 500 Euros in the first year, 750 Euros in the second
year, and 1000 Euros in the third year
2. To evaluate after the third year of membership the capacity of each DCC member to
move to full membership (phasing in of the full amount), or whether they should
remain for another period as a DCC member
3. To increase the period for phasing in full subscription payments from 5 years to 8
years.
4. To study on a case-by-case basis individual problems in order to ensure that member
organisations are able to stay in IFAP
These changes will take effect from the year 2010:
Increasing income from other sources and reviewing costs to make savings - the
Executive Committee approved the recommendations from the Finance and Budget
Committee concerning increased efforts to raise supplementary income from outside sources
and to review costs to make additional savings (Document EX 6/09).
Membership and related questions
New applications for membership – upon recommendation of the chairs of the relevant
regional committees, IFAP was pleased to accept the following organizations into
membership:
•
Sanduguan, Philippines
•
National Association for Dehkan Farmers (NADF), Tajikistan
•
Confédération des Associations de Producteurs Agricoles pour le Développement,
8
9
•
Burundi
Confederacion Campesina CONAGRO, Chile
Withdrawals from membership – it was reported that the following organizations had
announced their intention to withdraw from IFAP - all for financial reasons:
•
NFF, Australia
•
SRA, Argentina
•
CNFR, Uruguay
These organizations recognize the role and importance of IFAP and the value of their
membership. Strenuous efforts are being made to enable them to continue in IFAP.
Relations with sub-regional farmers’ groups – the President of SACAU (Southern African
Confederation of Agricultural Unions) asked for a MoU to be signed between SACAU and
IFAP. The Executive Committee favoured dialogue with sub-regional farmers’ organizations.
Such dialogue would also allow small, non-member organizations to have a link with IFAP.
In order to recommend the best way to relate to sub-regional farmer organization structures,
and strengthen a dialogue with them, the Executive decided to set up a Sub-Committee with
the regional committee chairs to develop a discussion paper for the next session of the IFAP
Executive Committee.
Changes to the rules of procedure for the election of officers for a third term
The new IFAP rules for the election of a President for a third term were applied for the first
time during the elections of the African Regional Committee in Nairobi in April 2009. As a
result of this experience, the Executive was asked to make the following modification to the
rules:
“The vote on eligibility of a President to run for a third term will be taken before
closing the list of nominations for candidates for President. Thus, the vote on
eligibility of a president to run for a third term could take place during the morning
coffee break, the list of nominations for President opened after that and announced
after lunch, and the election held at the end of the session”.
The Executive Committee unanimously approved this change. In addition, the Executive
Committee made it clear that the rules applying to the election of the IFAP President apply to
the election of all presidents throughout the IFAP structures e.g. Committee Chairs. Some
members raised the questions of: limiting a president’s mandate to two terms without the
possibility of a third term, and applying the election rules for president also to vicepresidents. These need further discussion.
Secretariat Development
The Secretary General reported on three issues concerning Secretariat development. These
are: i) Changes in the IFAP Secretariat, ii) Proposals for decentralized IFAP representation,
9
10
and iii) Respective responsibilities of the Congress, President, Executive, and Secretariat.
Concerning the Secretariat, IFAP was asked to maintain the title of ‘Regional Coordinator’
for its regional staff since it implies a field function.
Concerning decentralized IFAP representation there was wide support for IFAP to have a
physical presence in all places where international decisions affecting farmers are made e.g.
in Rome to lobby FAO, IFAD and WFP. However, IFAP was cautioned against creating any
structures that it cannot finance and control. Members called for a greater role for regional
committees, including a communications program for each region, and the holding of annual
coordination meetings among the regional chairs. The importance of avoiding duplication
with regional farmer organisation platforms was stressed.
Concerning respective responsibilities, the President recalled the Committee’s decision to
set up an ad hoc Sub-Committee to look into IFAP’s governance (accountability),
organisational structure (regional offices), procedures and responsibilities.
World Farmers Congress
The Executive Committee was informed that IFAP’s African Regional Committee had made
a proposal to host the 39th IFAP World Farmers’ Congress in May/ June 2010 in South
Africa in the case of members hesitating to support a Congress if it was held in Algeria. The
President of the Chambers of Agriculture of Algeria replied that the Congress in Algeria
would take place under the best conditions. There was strong support from the Algerian
government for hosting and financing the Congress in Algeria and considerable experience of
Algeria in hosting international conferences. He called on the Committee to respect the
decision of the IFAP Congress in Warsaw – confirmed in Canberra by the Executive
Committee - to hold the 39th Congress in Algeria. By a large majority vote, Executive
Committee confirmed the holding of the 39th IFAP World Farmers’ Congress in Algeria with
members committing to bring strong delegations from their country to support this Congress.
The Committee confirmed that the 40th IFAP World Farmers’ Congress would take place
in May 2012 in the Netherlands, hosted by LTO, and linked to the ‘Floriade’ - World Flower
Show that takes place there every 10 years.
Reports from committee chairs
Owing to lack of time, only the chairs of the Committee for Women in Agriculture and the
Asian Regional Committee were able to give their reports. The President said that at the next
session of the Executive Committee, adequate time would be given for all committees to give
reports.
10
11
Date and place for the next session of the Executive Committee
The President of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture confirmed the invitation of his
organisation to host the next session of the Executive Committee in Niagara Falls, Canada,
22-23 October 2009.
Any other business
The newly-elected President of the National Farmers Union of the USA said that he had
gained a lot from his first IFAP Executive Committee meeting; he thanked the IFAP
leadership and the host organisation.
There being no other business the President adjourned the session at 13:40 hours on Friday
29 May 2009.
11