Vulnerability and transformations of the agri-food system: Current perceptions of the

Social (S: agri-food policies, migration, social and cultural changes) and ecological (ECO: environmental changes) drivers of change were obtained from in-depth interviews of key informants and literature review (see Appendix 2.4). In our case study, drivers of change are those affecting the pillars of food sovereignty, and hence, the agroecological resilience, the

individual and collective sensitivity, and capacity of adaptation to change of the local agri-food system (Fraser 2007; Fraser et al 2011).

2.5.2.1. Agri-food policies

Within international agri-food treaties and policies, local informants from peasant organizations (Perception #1) perceived that current trade agreements with the European Union would decrease the individual capacity of peasant producers, mainly those involved in livestock activities, through the introduction of imported dairy products. This trend was confirmed by Jácome (2012), Serrano (2014), and Acción Ecológica (2015). They also perceived that current national policies related to the implementation of good manufacturing practices threaten the use of artisanal methods for milk processing. Bingen and Busch (2006) suggested that these kinds of rules and regulations can entrench corporate agri-food systems and devastate those based on artisanal practices and local markets. Therefore, there is a double exposure, both from international and national levels, threatening livestock activities, which are relevant and common within the Andean agri-food system at the local level.

Regarding national agri-food policies, local informants from peasant, indigenous, governmental, and NGOs (Perceptions #2 and #7) perceived a contradiction in agricultural public policies between the current model proposed by the National Constitution (2008) based on the sumak kawsay (good living) and food sovereignty and the national projects that tend to favor the conventional production model. This contradiction was also raised by Fernandez (2014). Indeed, these policies can impact traditional agroecological practices and livelihoods based on peasant agriculture (i.e., affecting the agro-ecosystem resilience and individual capacity of peasants). Regarding access to seeds, local informants from peasant organizations (Perception #3) mentioned that current agrarian policy facilitates the future introduction of GMOs, which could affect the individual adaptive capacity of peasants through the reduction of their seed autonomy at farm level (see Cuvi 2014).

With respect to access to land, current policies supporting land legalization, which can be positive for access to public credit, are perceived as a control mechanism over peasant families for tax collection (Perception #4). Regarding this issue, Vandecandelaere et al. (2011) showed a growth trend in rural land taxes between 2010 and 2011. However, some aspects of the tax design severely limit its redistributive potential (e.g., small farmers, who generally have more difficulties to prove that they have a productive activity, end up paying more tax per hectare than large landowners, who can more easily access tax exemptions; Laforge 2008; Vandecandelaere et al. 2011). Thus, this process could result in no-linear interactions with households’ individual capacity. Indeed, previous studies (Sietz et al 2012) highlighted that

particular combinations and levels of access to resources can result in different patterns of climate vulnerability for smallholders at the household level.

Public agri-food policies also impact the production model and access to resources. Local informants from peasant, indigenous, governmental, and NGOs (Perception #5) perceived that current policies to favor access to credit encourage the use of conventional technology packages and promote agribusiness, which affect agro-ecosystem resilience through discouraging agroecological practices as well as the individual adaptive capacity of actors through limiting access to financial resources. This trend has been shown by FIAN (2010: 47) and Ospina et al. (2011). Also, informants from peasant, indigenous, and governmental organizations (Perception #6) stated that current municipal policies are not strengthening market spaces such as free fairs (references in literature not available). If confirmed, this could affect households’ individual capacity, impeding the farmer’s direct sale of products. Previous studies show that farmers selling directly to consumers have a higher adaptive capacity in their socioeconomic attributes (Eitzinger et al. 2014).

Additionally, informants from peasant, indigenous, and governmental organizations (Perception #13) perceived that the lack of regulation to food imports (e.g., fruit) encourages their sale in local markets. This may result in decreased individual capacity of both producers (e.g., decreasing economic resources from sales) and consumers (e.g., influencing eating habits and dependence of non-local foods, affecting their right to food) of the area. However, the State has recently established a temporary tariff surcharge in order to control the general level of imports (COMEX 2015) of certain fresh agri-food products.

Within local agri-food policies linked to access to public infrastructure, local informants from peasant organizations (Perception #8) suggested that the lack of a road system limits access to local markets, affecting the individual adaptive capacity through the reduction of income from the sale of food. Studies in the research area reported the relevance of rural roads to link producers to local markets (Bernardi De León 2009).

2.5.2.2. Migration: Rural to urban areas and/or to foreign countries

Local informants from peasant, indigenous, and governmental organizations (Perception #9) perceived that agri-food policies supporting the agro-export model (a chronology of national agricultural policies is presented by Rosero et al 2011) encourage rural–urban migration as shown by Carrión and Herrera (2012: 11–13). This, in turn, impacts culture (e.g., through the introduction of new, unhealthy eating habits and displacement of traditional meals; INPC 2012: 36) and social organization (e.g., limiting the possibility to participate in comuna assemblies and cooperation activities; Martínez 2005), affecting the collective adaptive capacity of peasants.

2.5.2.3. Social and cultural changes

Local informants from peasant, indigenous, and governmental organizations (Perceptions #10, #11, and #12) considered the new process of peasantry’s self-organization (i.e., RAL) as a social change that helps to increase their collective capacity to face non-favorable public policies (Vergara-Camus 2014) as well as to manage internal conflicts and advance gender issues (e.g., inclusion of women in leadership; Soliz et al. 2013). In relation to cultural changes in consumption habits, these are linked to migration (whose effects were described above) and, as Popkin (2006) showed, to global agricultural policies (e.g., those focused on creating cheaper grains and animal-source foods) along with mass media, favoring imbalanced diets with implications for health (e.g., overweight and obesity). Also, local informants perceived (Perception #13) that local foods are not valued by consumers. According to Espinosa (2004), one of the main factors affecting the production of Andean roots and tubers (e.g., Oxalis tuberosa, Tropaeolum tuberosum) is the decreasing and limited demand for these products at urban centers.

2.5.2.4. Environmental changes

Ecological drivers are prioritized by few local informants as constraints to the production model. Informants from peasant organizations (Perception #14) perceive that rainfall patterns are changing, and this could induce changes in the traditional agricultural calendar and/or change crop yields and dietary diversity. However, from available meteorological yearbooks (1990 to 2012; INAMHI 2015b), we cannot establish conclusions on this matter. Additionally, they perceive that soil fertility is decreasing (de Koning et al 1997), and this could decrease food production. These changes can affect both the individual capacity of peasants and the resilience of agro-ecosystems. Finally, other environmental drivers relevant in the literature, such as deforestation (see e.g., Pohle et al 2010), were not mentioned by the interviewed informants. Thus, in the study area, we can see that drivers of change linked to policies are perceived as the most significant influences on the local agri-food system’s vulnerability rather than ecological ones. More information about the informants and perceived drivers is detailed in Appendix 2.4.