The Tale of Two Meetings: Post Malabo and My Food is African

Writes Dr. Million Belay

I arrived at the Lukenya Getaway around midnight, exhausted, angry, and famished. My journey from Lusaka had been mentally exhausting, after a frustrating meeting on the Post-Malabo process. Lukenya Getaway, located on the outskirts of Nairobi in the Machakos region, is known for its outdoor activities and wildlife, a stark contrast to my mood and the venue I had just come from in Lusaka.

Maggie from 11th Hour had once asked me if I knew about the Center for Story-Based Strategy. I checked their website and liked their methodology and shared it with John. He was equally fascinated, and we reached out to Gopal Dayaneni who had worked with the approach. Gopal guided us through a process virtually for weeks to introduce us to this approach. This contributed to our design for a campaign promoting African food, developed in Kampala in May 2022. As you know, we call the campaign “My Food is African.” The reason that we are meeting at Lukenya Getaway is to train members from 15 countries in the Story Based Strategy methodology.

Story-Based Strategy stands out because it uses stories, not just logic, to frame conflicts and uncover assumptions, crafting a strategy based on the meaning we give to the truth rather than the truth itself. This approach emphasizes that it’s not the truth that moves people to change, but the meaning they assign to it.

As I write this, on the third day of our Nairobi meeting, the contrast with the Lusaka meeting couldn’t be starker. To give some background, in 2003, African leaders met in Maputo, Mozambique, and agreed on the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program (CAADP), where they committed to allocate at least 10 percent of their GDP to agriculture and increase productivity by 6%. The first ten-year cycle ended in 2013, and they reconvened in Malabo in 2014, resulting in the Malabo Declaration. With the next ten-year cycle ending soon, the AU is coordinating the Kampala Declaration, set to be approved in January 2025.

It is the AU Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Blue Economy and Sustainable Development (DARBE) that is coordinating the process but as the DARBE is cash-stripped and has little staff capacity, the process is facilitated mainly by the USAID-funded agencies and mostly funded by entities like AGRA. The Lusaka meeting, mostly funded by AGRA, saw limited participation from farmer organizations and other CSOs, but numerous experts from universities, FAO, and regional economic commissions. The invisible hand driving the process was palpable.

The culmination of the Lusaka meeting was the presentation of the Theory of Change, which was the result of the 13 working groups, created by Academia 2063. How these 13 Groups were formed is not clear. That one of them was on emerging technologies including GMOs and Gene-edited crops tells where the influence is coming from. There is no talk of digital governance or the politics of technology in these groups. Despite some good elements to it, I had the following major concerns.

1. Alignment with AfDB Compacts: We were told at the end of the meeting that there will be an alignment between AfDB compacts and the Kampala program of work, which comes after kampala declaration. I hope you all have read AFSA’s critique of the AfDB compacts. The AFSA publication shows the impact of the compacts on land and rights, seed and food diversity, biodiversity, community life and in general Africa’s agricultural future. The compacts, and their alighnemnt with Kampala program of work, will accelerate Africa’s dependence on corporations.

2. Controversy over Agroecology and Food Sovereignty: We were told at the conclusion of the meeting that agroecology and food sovereignty are controversial concepts that will face problems with It was mentioned that several actors are not happy about these concepts. This is after a number of organizations and AFSA demanded that agroecology be included in the Kampala declaration. Therefore, we have to prepare ourselves for the possibility that we will not see agroecology and food sovereignty in the Post Malabo outcome or the Kampala declaration.
3. Integration of GMOs and Gene-Edited Crops: GMOs and gene-edited crops are now visibly integrated into the Post Malabo I fought as hard as I could, but they are included under emerging technologies in the Theory of Change and will be part of the Kampala declaration. I do not think we can do anything to prevent that. Several participants told me they agree that we do not need GMOs, but nobody speaks up in these meetings.
4. Neglect of African Food Systems: There is very little mention of African food, revitalizing African seeds, or farmer-managed seed systems in the These aspects are totally ignored. I was working with Working Group 3, and we included Farmers Managed Seed System, agroecology, food sovereignty, and the right to food, but they are not featured in the final Theory of Change. The implication of this neglect to Africa’s food future is huge.
5. AGRA’s Influence: AGRA’s influence is evident throughout the AGRA drives the Post Malabo agenda and has shifted from practical green revolution activities on the ground to influencing policies and strategies. Most of the funding for this process comes from AGRA and that gives them the power to drive the process. They have funded the dialogues of Regional Economic Commissions and meetings of Non State Actors, including farmers groups. This should be a concern to anyone who is keen in having a food system framwerok for our continent coming from the needs and the vision of the citizen of the continent.
6. Closed Process: The majority of the processes are I informed you that we have no notion what criteria the 13 Working Groups are constituted under. Following

Lusaka meeting, beginning on August 5th, a group of people will spend ten days in a hotel in Kampala developing the first draft. The manuscript will then be given to reviewers, who will meet for three days to validate it. I asked if we might join this draughting group, and the answer was no. I asked to see the draft before validation, and I’m not sure if we’ll get it. They claimed we would be invited to the validation. Obviously, they will defend their actions and correct some commas and spelling problems throughout the validation process, but the overall foundation will remain intact. I do not believe any big and fundamental changes will be entertained.

You can understand why I was emotionally drained and angry when I arrived in Nairobi.

The Nairobi meeting, however, is a breath of fresh air. We’ve unanimously agreed that our campaign for African food needs revitalization. After all, our food is the source of our identity, and it’s nutritious, healthy, and produced and consumed based on our people’s knowledge. And we possess the knowledge to enhance productivity and nutrition, and the techniques to reduce post-harvest loss. There is no invisible hand in our meeting here. Everyone contributes and is listened to with no strict time limits. The atmosphere is collaborative. We are fostering a sense of unity and resolve to clarify our advocacy agenda and push for fundamental change.

A luta continua.

Million Belay (PHD) is the General Coordinator of AFSA

www.afsafrica.org @Million_Belay