Below is transcribed word for word the United Nations plan to secure food controlled and distributed through global governance. Within the total plan (Agenda 21) the farming families will be relocated to urban concentrations and their land used to feed the global populations for “food security”. Here is my favorite line “USA- Publications to help inform peasants and women of other countries access to land and strengthen weaknesses.” (aka what they learn here will be used elsewhere, you know the peasants) In the “partners” section you will find Soros money everywhere!
By limiting ownership and/or use of rural lands/property, three major controls are established:
- High density populations are easier to control versus “sprawl”
- Property/land rights equals access and control of water.
- Communal farming controls the what, when, for who and value of production and farming methods.
Kansas took the lead in condemning Agenda 21 on a National basis. Just farmers with pitchforks huh?
http://www.earthsummit2002.org/ic/foodsecurity/fs_seal.html
ACTION PLAN:
Secure and Equitable Access to Land Partnership Programme (SEAL)
Lead Contact
Musa Salah SEAL Coordinator Stakeholder Forum for Our Common Future Tel: +44 0207 089 4305 E-mail: msalah@earthsummit2002.org
Definitions:
Access: The right to use land for the purposes of socio-economic empowerment and food security.
Security: Use rights that enable investment in and sound management of land
Vision:
 |
To Drive Sustainable Development in a manner that ensures: |
|
Socio-Economic Development and Empowerment |
|
Food Security |
|
Ecologically Sound Natural Resource Management. |
Aim:
To facilitate a knowledge-sharing base for participants to gain experience and where possible (in future), replicate programmes and projects on land development for the food security issue.
The workshop identified and determined measures to achieve a more responsive improvement and sustainability in food production and farmers’ livelihood through equitable land development strategies towards poverty eradication from the different parts of the world.
Objectives:
To enable secure and equitable access to land through:
|
Empowerment of women |
|
Building the capacity of civil society and government |
|
Sharing, learning and implementing Best Practices of experience |
|
Developing a network for advocacy for policy reform |
|
Effective Programme Development and Management |
Desired outcomes:
|
Nepal – Building Community Learning Centres (CLCs) to inform people of their right and provide information |
|
South Africa- Link information about organic industry with access to land issues (providing market information). |
|
Tanzania- Help people at grassroots level organise meetings between development officers and community members. |
|
South Africa- Strengthen NGO and peasant support and allow information exchange between peasant farmers (especially women). |
|
Pan-Africa/ Global- Have a conference/meeting to discuss different land laws and how different land laws are or not working. |
|
USA- Publications to help inform peasants and women of other countries access to land and strengthen weaknesses. |
|
USA- Share/ Disseminate information on access to land (data base/ mapping) |
|
Uganda- Land laws Reform Programmes through: Strengthen and mobilise communities. Strengthen civil society and NGOs to support communities.Engage the laws makers. Review and put in place relevant/appropriate land policies |
|
All SEAL partners- Regional Conferences. |
Work programme:
Two integrated Programme Strategies are:
|
Strengthening Civil Society (See diagram below) |
|
Sharing Best Practice Experiences: |
Thematic Issues for best practices include
|
Land use options. |
|
Methods of accessing land. |
|
Conflict management on land related issues. |
|
Models for using land in an environmentally sustainable manner. |
|
How gender concerns over land are addressed. |
|
Land and Governance. |
|
Strategies for accessing and using resources in protected areas e.g. Forest reserves, Games parks etc. |
Methods:
The Partners agreed to pursue Networking and Experience Sharing through:
|
Identifying, documenting and sharing of appropriate and replicable practices through workings together, meetings and conferences. |
|
Establishment of website and CD-ROMs |
|
Filming and documentation of case studies |
|
Media through Radio, print and television |
|
Exchange visits: Land users/beneficiaries Civil Society Organisations |
|
Collaborative Implementation with Research Institutions (through research publications). Inform advocacy through community based practice experiences. |
Initial Work Programme
|
Development of an initial fundraising proposal for SEAL Uganda Follow-up workshop |
|
Further programme development and drafting of programme funding proposal |
|
SEAL Uganda Follow-up meeting (Feb 2003) for programme partners to finalise action plan and programme funding proposal |
|
Submission of programme funding proposal to potential donors |
|
Launch of the partnership |
|
Implementation, accompanied by appropriate monitoring and evaluation procedures |
SEAL Partners
Environmental Liaison Centre International, Environmental Alert, Norwegian People’s Aid, Western Washington University, Green Earth Organisation, Integrated Rural Development Foundation, Campfire Association, Provisional Administrator of the Western Cape Town, Nkuzi Development Association, Common ground Consultancy, Stellenbosch Business and Leaving Centre, Stakeholder Forum for Our Common Future, Transkei Land Service Organisation, Zero Regional Environmental Organisation, Uganda Women Tree Planting Movement, Dodoma Environmental Network, Advocate Coalition on Development and Environment, Didibahini
Additional Background Information
Around the globe and at community level, securing access to agricultural land has been identified as a crucial factor in addressing the issue of food insecurity facing over 800m people in the developing countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. The Distribution of agricultural land in some communities in these countries is highly skewed from communal ownership to a more economic and profit oriented at the expense of food production by social and economic factors, thereby keeps many rural people locked in poverty. This situation is resulting in land disputes and profiteering, allowing the affluent to have more opportunity and privilege to own and control land affairs than the less advantage people in the community, usually women.
