Indigenous Peoples And Social Movements Reaffirm Unity And Support To ICARRD+20 Organisers, But Reject Conference Declaration

By La Via Campesina (28 February 2026)

PRESS RELEASE | CARTAGENA DE INDIAS, COLOMBIA

At the closing session of the International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD+20), Indigenous Peoples and social movements, represented by the International Planning Committee for food sovereignty (IPC)*, issued a strong political statement affirming their “irreducible unity” in the face of ongoing attacks on their rights.

The movements expressed appreciation for the Government of Colombia and Brazil for bringing agrarian reform back into the agenda of the international policy dialogue, and for including their voices in the conference process. They also highlighted the need for Global South governments and peoples to stand united in defense of international law and human rights, noting that Iran is currently facing what they describe as another imperialist attack.

The IPC statement reaffirmed that the rights of Indigenous Peoples and peasants are firmly recognized under international law, including instruments adopted by the United Nations General Assembly such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP). The IPC rejected any attempt to roll back these recognised rights.

A central concern raised was the conflation of Indigenous Peoples with the vague concept of “local communities”, repeated multiple times in the declaration of governments presented to the plenary. While acknowledging the importance of the Conference, the movements stated that they “cannot accept the declaration” adopted at its conclusion. They committed to continued engagement in follow-up processes to ensure that their rights are respected, protected, and guaranteed.

Indigenous Peoples organisations articulating through the IPC under the International Indian Treaty Coouncil (IITC), emphasised that the three UN mechanisms on the rights of Indigenous Peoples have clearly distinguished the unique characteristics, origins, and legal status of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, and warned that grouping them with undefined communities undermines those protections. Similar concerns were expressed for fisher peoples, nomadic pastoralists, peasants, rural workers, and mobile and artisanal communities whose territorial and mobility rights must be explicitly recognized.

The declaration called for a 21st-century agrarian reform that is inclusive of Indigenous Peoples, peasants, fisher peoples, pastoralists, women, youth, gender-diverse people, Afro-descendant communities, family farmers, and rural workers. It stressed that agrarian reform must go beyond land redistribution to encompass forests, oceans, rivers, grazing lands, and migratory routes. Redistribution, Recognition, Restitution and Regulation must form the mutually reinforcing axes of an intergal agrarian reform – speaking to the different realities that exists worldwide. Food sovereignty and agroecology, they affirmed, must be central pillars of this transformation. The strategy and the concrete steps towards a transformative agrarian reform are laid out in the IPC position paper launched ahead of ICARRD+20.

The statement concluded with a call to all governments to engage in good-faith dialogue on Indigenous Peoples’ rights, the rights of fisher peoples and nomadic pastoralists, women’s rights, and agroecology.

“Agrarian reform, food sovereignty, and social, agrarian, and environmental justice will only be achieved through struggle”, the declaration affirmed. “We are going home to organize our peoples and defend the future of our communities and Mother Earth”.

* WHO WE ARE: The International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty

The International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC) is an autonomous and self-organised global platform of small-scale food producers and rural workers organisations and grassroots/community-based social movements whose goal is to advance the Food Sovereignty agenda at the global and regional level.More than 6000 organizations and 300 millions of small-scale food producers self-organise themselves through the IPC, sharing the principles and the 6 pillars of Food Sovereignty as outlined in the Nyeleni 2007 Declaration and synthesis report. 

The IPC facilitates dialogue and debate among actors from civil society, governments and other actors in the field of Food Security and Nutrition, creating a space of discussion autonomous from political parties, institutions, governments and the private sector.

The legitimacy of the IPC is based on the ability to voice the concerns and struggles that a wide variety of civil society organisations and social movements face in their daily practice of advocacy at local, sub-national, regional and global levels.

View the closing statement

View the IPC position paper in the three languages

View the LVC briefing note on agrarian reform

Collaborative interview on the conclusions of ICARRD+20 and the Forum of Peoples and Social Movements (Spanish only)

La entrada The outcomes of the ICARRD+20 from the perspective of rural and indigenous movements se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

Background

The Working Group on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas, established by Human Rights Council resolution 54/9, is preparing its fourth thematic report, addressing Peasant Territories of Sea and Land. This report analyses how the impairment of rights based on land, water, and forests affects the dignity, stability, and livelihoods of peasants and rural workers.

Access to land, water, forests, and marine territories is central to the survival, identity, and autonomy of rural populations. These groups, including peasants, indigenous peoples, pastoralists, nomads, migrant communities, rural workers, and artisanal fishers, are rights-holders recognized by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP).

However, “peasant territorialities,” defined as socio-ecological and cultural spaces where lifestyles, sustainable production, and collective governance intersect, face increasing pressure. Pressure arising from resource concentration, fragmentation, privatization, and extraction not only threaten livelihoods and stability but also exacerbate rural conflicts and forced displacement, often leading to systemic human rights violations.

This report recognizes that peasant territories are not merely resource “containers,” but spaces of material and symbolic life where the rights to food, water, a healthy environment, participation, and self-determination converge. The report will consider international frameworks such as UNDROP, the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure, the work of Treaty Bodies, as well as indigenous and environmental rights standards, to address violations of UNDROP stakeholder rights.

There is a growing trend toward rural ownership concentration and the corporate capture of natural resources. The expansion of the “blue economy” can, without adequate safeguards, excludes traditional fishing communities. “Green grabbing” (appropriation disguised as conservation) and “blue grabbing” (appropriation of coastal spaces for tourism or energy projects), alongside armed conflict and structural violence, often lead to dispossession.

Finally, the Report will identify good practices, structural challenges, and concrete recommendations to protect rural and coastal peasant territories.

The Working Group invites governments, peasants and other people working in rural areas, international and regional organizations, national human rights institutions, civil society, academics, companies and any other interested individuals and organizations to provide written inputs.

Key questions and types of input/comments sought

1. How is the concept of “peasant territory” understood in your local or regional context?
2. What legal, political, cultural or customary instruments exist in your country or region that recognize or protect peasant territories (land, water, forests, sea)?
3. How does Article 17 of the UNDROP relate to the processes of access to land and nature in their local realities?
   
   Concentration and Access to Resources
4. What is causing the concentration of rural property in your region? Is there data available on fragmentation or grabbing?
5. What impact does water privatization or industrial forest exploitation have on peasant communities?
6. How does the maritime economy affect fishing and coastal communities? Are there cases of dispossession or exclusion?
7. How do nature conservation agendas intersect with peasant lands and agrarian reform processes?
   
   Challenges and good practices
8. What are the main obstacles faced by peasant, ethnic or fishing communities in accessing, controlling and managing their territories?
9. What strategies, laws, movements or initiatives have been successful in defending or recovering territories? (Examples: agrarian reforms, collective titling, strategic litigation, community resistance).
10. How are the phenomena of “Green Grabbing” or “Blue Grabbing” being dealt with in context?
11. What role do peasant and young women play in the defense and management of territories? Are there good practices of empowerment and participation?
12. How do armed conflicts or political violence affect territorial dispossession? Are there examples of post-conflict recovery?
    
    Recommendations
13. What concrete actions should States, international organizations (UN, FAO, UNDP), civil society organizations and communities themselves take to protect and strengthen peasant territorialities?
14. What justice, public policy or financing mechanisms are urgent to reverse the concentration and guarantee equitable access to resources?

How inputs will be used?

Please send your submission via email to hrc-wg-peasants@un.org by 19 February 2026, with the subject:Input for UNGA Report on Territory.

Contributions must be sent in WORD/PDF format, in English, French, or Spanish, with a maximum of 1,000 words. Please indicate your details (name, government/ institution/ organization, contact details) for any follow up queries.

Additional supporting materials, such as reports, academic studies, and other background materials may be linked in the body of the submission or annexed to the submission.

Unless otherwise specified by those making a submission, submissions will be made public on the Working Group’s website.

Please feel free to circulate this call for inputs widely in your networks.

La entrada Call for Inputs: Report of the UNDROP Working Group on Land, Territories and Sea se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

1: What is the Rural Women’s Assembly and what are your key areas of work?

The Rural Women Assembly is a network of movements of peasants, fisher folks, farm workers, migrant and landless women, all living and working in the rural areas in the Southern Africa region. We are in 11 countries, with a membership of close to 200,000 members. So it’s a very unique movement of rural women in the region.

Essentially, the Rural Women Assembly builds the voice of rural women and builds agency in relation to questions of access to land and water; the right to food; the right to seeds; and of course, we deal with patriarchal issues that affect women particularly in rural areas. Also central to our work is the issue of climate justice, which has a substantial impact on the region, largely due to the many cyclones that strike it repeatedly, as well as other climate-related crises.

Furthermore, we deal with cases of gender-based violence. In this regard, we develop study cycles in different countries, which are spaces that allow us to discuss on issues related to violence against women.

We are also the guardians of our seeds, because we believe that seeds are our lives, our heritage, our identity, which we don’t want to lose. We have a situation where the transnational corporations, the seed companies, want us to do away with our seeds, which we have inherited for generations and generations – and we’re resisting against that.

2: Why are you here in Geneva this week? What are your expectations?

We are here in Geneva for the 11th session of negotiation on a legally binding treaty to regulate transnational corporations (TNCs). We are here because our communities are experiencing violence from transnational corporations every day. The people in the communities are being grabbed off their land, where we do farming as women. We also have issues of climate crisis, as already said. These companies should pay for the pollution, the damages and the losses that we’re experiencing each and every year. It’s drought, it’s floods… So that is why we are here, so that we can contribute to the elaboration of a binding treaty to hold these companies accountable. Our goal is for the treaty to be out so that we are able to prevent these catastrophes.

We are here to have our voices heard, because when we’re in our countries we can issue statements, but they don’t reach the United Nations. So we are here in multiple movements and communities, and a collective voice from different countries can carry weight.

We are here as part of the Global Campaign to Reclaim Peoples’ Sovereignty, Dismantle Corporate Power and Stop Impunity – a powerful coalition of social movements, progressive organisations and communities affected by transnational corporations – to raise the issues of the rural women in the Global South. Being here is critical for us and it’s part of our advocacy strategy as Rural Women’s Assembly. We want to invest and participate in different platforms to advocate locally, nationally, and internationally, and use these global policy-making spaces or even UN instruments to really amplify our voice.

3: How does the struggle for a strong binding treaty to regulate transnational corporations relate to the protection and implementation of peasants’ rights as outlined in the UNDROP declaration?

There is a strong connection. I was very pleased to hear about the inclusion, in Article 15.7 of the draft text of the binding treaty, of a provision on the rights of peasants and rural peoples, which received strong support from almost all countries, particularly from Colombia and Palestine. It speaks to the UNDROP that the rights of the peasants are included in this treaty. This instrument will help us to push forward the agenda of ours, which is pushing for the implementation of UNDROP in our countries. Whilst our countries, for example, South Africa, signed the declaration in 2018, we still don’t have a policy that implements UNDROP. Having this binding treaty in place will strengthen our advocacy and work back home to ensure that we hold our governments to account to implement both instruments. So, these two legal frameworks are going to be key vehicles for us to utilize in our advocacy strategies.

It is necessary to note that the violations committed by transnational corporations directly affect the very rights granted to us by UNDROP. In particular, the right to seeds, the right to land, and the right to water. Once this treaty is adopted, we will have a binding instrument to which we can refer in order to defend ourselves.

4: How do TNCs activities impact your communities?

Firstly, TNCs want to take away our seeds and impose their own industrial seeds.. These enterprises pollute our water, causing a lot of diseases. The pollution affects not only people, but also animals and crops. As a result, we suffer from illnesses we don’t even recognise – sometimes even our own countries tell us they don’t know how to treat them. These are the impacts we are facing as a result of what TNCs are doing in our communities.

Seed sovereignty is no longer a right. Seeds have been commodified by transnational corporations. They have become a source of capital accumulation at the detriment of the rural poor. Our governments ignore that our seeds are resistant when it comes to the effects of climate change. Our seeds can be planted several times. When you buy hybrid seeds, they only last for a year. If you try to plant those seeds afterwards, they won’t germinate. Our seeds, on the other hand, are resistant – we can plant them for many years. Hence, we have food security at home and in the community. Our seeds are perfect. They are not harmful. They have healing properties and a lot of nutrients. You can cook the food coming from them in different ways. Sometimes they say there’s hunger in Zambia. It’s because they are following the corporate world’s thinking. If we could think like the rural women are thinking, there would be a lot of food in Zambia. There shouldn’t be even hunger in there. So, this treaty will also help us protect our seeds and our lives.

Hybrid seeds are expensive compared to our own kept seeds because they require fertilizers and chemicals. If you plant hybrids without any fertilizer, you get nothing. So, we are also trying to promote our own indigenous seeds, despite the threats we face from our governments. With the support of our governments, TNCs steal our seeds, make them hybrid, and make us pay the price for them. We have the right to say no to what they want to offer us.

Furthermore, they’re polluting the environment and they’re telling us we shouldn’t cut our trees so that the trees can clean up the carbon. They are interested in developing the carbon credit markets. They come into our areas, they grab big portions of land. They say, we shouldn’t even go and pick the mushrooms in there; we shouldn’t go pick the caterpillars in there. They put guards, so that we can’t go get the firewood. So, we have our own land, but we don’t have control of our own land. It’s very intimidating. They sell carbon with a lot of money, but we don’t get to get anything from there.

They grab land also because they want to do their mining, meanwhile we are displaced from a land where we’ve lived for so many years. They even damage the graves that are on the land. That is very de-humansing. There’s a lot of impunity in what they’re doing.

These TNCs have destroyed our land with pollution. You have a field that you cannot use for the next 10 years because it has been damaged with unknown toxic minerals that have passed through the area. In the Zambian Copperbelt province, which is near where we stay, TNCs polluted the Kafue River, which runs across the whole country. We can’t access the water in three quarters of the land through which the Kafue River passes. We can’t eat any fish from there.

In South Africa, fisher folks have taken up our government – particularly our Department of Mineral Resource and Energy – for blasting on the oceans, for working and collaborating with the Shell company, which was looking for oil in the ocean in the eastern part of South Africa. We have a similar case in terms of Titanium that has been going on for a long time also in the eastern part of South Africa, in Mbizana, where the communities are standing up and saying, ‘we have the right to say no’.The principle of free, prior and informed consent of the concerned communities should be respected. This has been a long process of litigation and these transnational corporations must be held accountable. They need to pay. We need reparations. Through the process of resisting, lives were lost, defenders have been killed and many are being threatened as we speak.

5: How have you been mobilising the UNDROP declaration in Southern Africa in favour of rural women’s rights?

Firstly, we made sure that our members understand what this declaration stands for and therefore what are the rights that are contained in it. We went through a strong move of capacitating, educating and building awareness amongst our members on their rights and how to engage to defend them. It is a declaration adopted by the United Nations that every country must implement, so it was critical for us to make sure our communities understood their rights. Each country has an advocacy strategy, they amplify the UNDROP in their communities. We have a booklet which is featured on our website, and we carry it everywhere. In every opportunity we have in engaging the duty bearers or government officials, we use this as a tool to engage and empower communities.

For example, in South Africa, we have been running a campaign called “One Woman, One Hectare of Land”, to provide more land for women. We combine that campaign with the UNDROP, especially the right to land, the right to food sovereignty, the right to use our seeds.

As rural women across different countries, we hold food and seed festivals every year. We do that to identify what seeds were lost, what we still have, how we can make better use of each seed. We now want to make seed banks and demo fields where we can be planting these seeds, so that we can multiply them. We also develop seed sharing initiatives. We work to increase our seed stocks so that, as we resist transnational corporations, we also show the strength of what we have.

In Swaziland, for instance, we are engaging government officials in the implementation of UNDROP. We have engaged with several ministries, including the Ministry of Agriculture, but concrete results are yet to come as they have not yet prioritised the issue. We also started with translating the UNDROP to the local languages so that it is accessible to our people, to the women.

6: What is your message for Southern African states regarding their engagement in the Binding Treaty process?

What is critical in this podium is to hear the voices of the Global South, especially our African governments. We want them to stop corporate impunity. The should take action for our people, for our communities, for the poor, for our nations. In South Africa, for example, we have a great human rights constitution. South Africa has signed declarations, and has been historically committed to the UNDROP. Therefore, we demand that our voices are heard and that these instruments are implemented.

We wish more African countries were actively engaging in this Binding Treaty negotiation process. The governments should step in, find markets for our indigenous foods and promote them, and help the peasants. If we don’t have maize, there’s sorghum, there’s different types of beans, there’s cassava. We can make a meal from that. So they should put the lives of their people first rather than protecting these so-called investors that are coming into our countries just to plunder. They extract the minerals, take them away, and when they return, we are forced to buy our own resources back at a very high price.

If corporations are coming as investors in our countries, let them build schools, roads, hospitals. The government should stand up and fight for us. Stop looking at the profits, and look at the lives of our people!

La entrada Corporate impunity and seed sovereignty: Interview with the Rural Womens’ Assembly (RWA) se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

This article draws on the example of Brazil to illustrate the synergies and complementarities between agroecology and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP).

What do we actually mean by agroecology? In summary, one could say that agroecology is a life project: living in greater harmony with nature. However, this concept has also undergone many reinterpretations. Agroecology seems to have become fashionable worldwide, especially after Brazilian José Graziano da Silva, as Director-General of the FAO, opened ‘a window in the cathedral of the Green Revolution’ through it. What is the problem with a term being fashionable? That people try to use it for almost anything. If, for example, we start from a concept of agroecology that is reduced to science, then there is a danger of neglecting it as an agricultural practice and a social movement! We could then imagine it as something that arises more from academic activity. It thus becomes reduced to an agricultural science subject, and could also be called something else. 

For us, however, agroecology is first and foremost a farming practice. And if agroecology can be a path to food sovereignty, then we must clearly ask whether this is with or without peasants. After all, agroecology emerged in Latin America as a peasant response to the negative effects of the so-called Green Revolution. Peasants should therefore have a central role in agroecology.

The UNDROP clearly affirms the obligation of States to promote agroecological production (Article 16.4), to adopt appropriate measures for the conservation and sustainable use of land and natural resources through agroecology (Article 17.7), and to protect and promote the traditional knowledge of rural communities, particularly agroecological practices essential for conserving and sustainably using biodiversity (Article 20.2). It also upholds the right of peasants and other rural peoples to receive adequate training tailored to their specific agroecological, sociocultural, and economic contexts (Article 25.1). 

Food sovereignty – enshrined as a rural peoples’ right in Article 15.4 of UNDROP – is about food production. And agroecology is about peasants. In other words, it is about agriculture. However, agriculture should not be reduced to economics. Agriculture is also culture, i.e. agri-culture. And culture is knowledge. It is nourishment. It is history. And it is life! And this is where the problem of agricultural science comes into play. Because peasants and indigenous peoples still see the world as a whole. When a peasant grows all kinds of plants, it is also because he/she can feed himself or herself from them! It is important to realize that peasants have existed for 10,000 years and that many of them have managed to be self-sufficient!

So, if everything else goes wrong, peasants still have their own food! It is the only profession that can claim this. Or will a shoemaker eat shoes, for example? Or will a tailor eat clothes? No. Only peasants have this autonomy. But what does that mean? It should mean deciding what is produced, who produces it, who it is produced for, how it is produced (some people think that agroecology is only about the ‘how’) and why something is produced.

If we hold the answers to these five questions (i.e., what, who, for whom, how and why), then we have food sovereignty. It is local power. It is self-determination. Can agroecology help to strengthen the right of peasants and food sovereignty? Yes, it can!

I will present ten reasons why peasants and small-scale food producers should practice agroecology in Brazil and in other countries, and make links with the rights outlined in the UNDROP.

1. Agroecology reduces production costs in agriculture. We have already seen operating costs reduced by up to 40 percent in organic farming. This directly contributes to an increase in the final income of peasants, in line with their right to a decent income recognized in UNDROP’s Article 16.

2. Agroecology increases conservation of natural resources. In 1713, Hans Carl von Carlowitz wrote a book entitled ‘Sylvicultura Oeconomica’. Carlowitz believed that sustainability meant not taking more wood from a forest than it could grow back. This idea that foresters should not take more from a forest than it can regrow is the same as that of fishermen who know that they should not catch more fish than nature can replenish. This corresponds to the sustainability philosophy of most indigenous peoples!

Why is this example relevant to agroecology? Because the idea of agroforestry allows us to go beyond agroecology. I think the model that comes closest to nature is the forest. But please, not monocultures of pine or eucalyptus! Forests are diverse. And industrial agriculture cannot use natural resources sustainably. According to this model, everything should be produced as quickly and as much as possible. Nature is thus overburdened and destroyed. And what follows? Investments simply shift elsewhere. Preserving natural resources means considering water, soil and the life in the soil as essential for agriculture, which are also peasants’ rights as outlined in UNDROP’s Articles 17 (right to land), 18 (right to environment) and 21 (right to water). Every farming family wants their son, grandson and great-grandson to continue farming. So, they will not necessarily think that they are planting a tree to use it right away. In 100 years, it may be their grandchild who uses it. That is the idea behind preserving natural resources. An agriculture that is suitable for grandchildren!

3. Agroecology is able to better reward the work of people in rural areas. But how can this be achieved? First of all, the use of labour-saving agricultural technology increases the amount of non-working time, because the dependence on nature means that production time in agriculture is separate from the necessary working time. If less work is required for production but the waiting time until harvest remains the same, this creates either free time or more time for other activities. And how will farming families use this time? At the very least, production will have to be diversified. With agroecology, it is impossible to practice monoculture. The success of agroecology is therefore closely linked to the concept of multifunctionality in agriculture, which means that more can be paid for labour. Better remuneration for labour means that peasants ultimately receive more for their work. Normally they don’t even factor these costs in. But isn’t it precisely labour that creates the value of goods? And if you preserve nature, shouldn’t you be paid more for it? Yes! There are already places in the world where peasants are rewarded for this. They are remunerated by society because, for example, nature-friendly agriculture means lower costs for public health. Every community can do this. If we use fewer pesticides, if we avoid GMOs, we will have fewer health problems and lower public spending. So, yes: it is possible to better remunerate those who work with agroecology, in accordance with UNDROP’s Article 16, which protects peasants’ right to decent income and an adequate standard of living. But that requires more knowledge, and that is another challenge. The time freed up by agroecology can also be devoted to developing knowledge.

4. Agroecology is a way to optimise agricultural ecosystems. It is possible to reduce external inputs in agriculture through agroecology. With agroecology, production is increasingly local and in closed cycles with less energy waste, reducing reliance on long transport routes. This reduces the negative impact on the environment, in line with UNDROP’s Article 18. With agroecology, it is possible to reduce erosion, soil leaching and desertification.

5. Agroecology allows for increased production, which is important to realise UNDROP’s Articles 16 and 15. For example, through mixed cropping, which thrives particularly well in tropical climates. In Brazil, for example, growing corn and beans in the same field ultimately yields more than just corn. Mixed cropping produces higher yields on the same amount of land. Ecological intensification is a solution, especially in countries with limited arable land. This solution is already practiced in many places, as recognized by the FAO. That gives us an advantage. But we should be a little careful, because productivity can decline in the first few years. The balance must first be restored. It is necessary to build up humus in the soil and prioritise plants with diverse roots that allow water, air and organic matter to circulate. Then the soil will regenerate. In these first few years, governments should help peasants. Because in the short term, agroecology may lead to low productivity. But in the medium and long terms, it can actually produce more than the industrial model. There are plenty of reports from peasants in Brazil who have already proven this.

6. Young people and women are protagonists in the agroecological process. And that is very important when it comes to the rights of people in rural areas and their future. So, when we talk about peasants, we must also talk about young peasants – and especially female young peasants, in accordance with UNDROP’s Article 4 on the rights of rural women. 

7. There is another aspect of small-scale farming that is consistent with the concept of agroecology: it is the special relationship that farming families have with knowledge. Farming families exchange their discoveries, they share their knowledge, they pass it on. Instead of keeping it to themselves, peasants spread their knowledge within a community, and by doing so they realize UNDROP’s Article 26 on the right to culture and traditional knowledge. 

8. There are various ways to make the transition to agroecology, and States should take appropriate measures to ensure that their programmes and policies contribute effectively to the transition to sustainable agricultural models, as stipulated in UNDROP’s Article 16.4. Agroecology can serve as an umbrella under which various forms of agriculture are promoted – many of which we do not yet know because we have not yet made contact with many indigenous peoples who practice agriculture. This type of agriculture can be pointed out as part of what we usually call ‘agroecological’. It is a type that could be described as traditional, but it is not only that. It is also innovative. And it will help us to achieve these 10 goals that we present here, and to realize food sovereignty.

9. One important innovation we need to implement is ensuring market access (enshrined in UNDROP’s Articles 2.6e, 16.3) – along with market education (Article 25) and information (Article 11). In the past, peasants were unable to achieve this innovation on their own. But we have good examples of this in Brazil with government programmes. For example, with the school meals programme and public procurement, through which food is bought directly from local and regional peasant organizations. These initiatives led Brazil to be removed from the UN’s hunger map in 2014. However, after six years of conservative-led governments that dismantled these policies, hunger returned in alarming numbers by 2022, with over 15% of the population suffering from acute hunger – most of them in rural areas! More recently, thanks to renewed efforts by the current government, Brazil was once again removed from the hunger map in 2025.

These institutional markets support the agroecological transition. The organization between peasants and consumers also enables organic food to reach people’s tables, which is an element of food sovereignty. So, it is not just about food security, because food security can mean that someone else feeds you. Of course, if someone is starving, they should be provided with food. But that is an emergency. No one should be made dependent on it. It would be even worse to make farming families dependent on it. If we can produce, process and market food as close as possible to where it is produced, farming families will also be better nourished. And that already increases food sovereignty. When they produce for the region, it also increases the availability of local food. That is what agroecology can achieve. Food security means the availability of food in terms of quantity, quality and regularity throughout the year. But that’s not all! We must also know who will produce this food? Which types of food will be produced? With which technology? With the use of pesticides and genetic engineering, or not? Agriculture without people is not agroecology either. Agroecology is agriculture with people and for people in harmony with nature.

10. But to do this, we must use the latest scientific findings. But be careful: there are interests behind modern science. It is not value-neutral! When it comes to science that serves agroecology, we must remember that without the modern science we have had so far, the industrialisation of agriculture would not have been possible. So, it is not innocent. The science that is to serve agroecology must be different. It must be context-dependent and transdisciplinary, bringing together traditional and scientific knowledge.

This science must not be oppressive or prejudiced, and above all, it must not displace people from their land and home. We must avoid this, as well as pandemics, famines, climate crises – all of that. The real answer to this is connected to our food, the right food and food sovereignty.

Agroecology is about real food produced by peasants, organic agriculture and traditional peoples. UNDROP reinforces the multiple principles of agroecology and food sovereignty. It confirms the primacy of the rights of peasants and other rural communities, and reminds States of their obligation to respect, protect and fulfil these rights. Why is it important? Because we want humanity to continue to exist after us.

La entrada Synergies and Complementarity between Agroecology and the UNDROP: The Example of Brazil se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

The Colombian Constitutional Court’s decision establishes a new legal precedent that advances the process of protecting peasants’ rights at the national level and consolidates UNDROP as a key reference instrument in this area.

The case behind this ruling concerns an elderly peasant couple from Saravena, in the department of Arauca, who lived on their farm called “El Paraíso.” After multiple floods caused by the overflowing of the Bojabá River, their home became uninhabitable. Since then, they have been living precariously with their son, without being recognized as internally displaced by the authorities or receiving any assistance from the Colombian state. The Court ruled that their right to a dignified life had been violated and that the state was obligated to provide them with appropriate protection.

In reaching its decision, the Court based its reasoning on Article 64 of the Constitution, as amended in 2023. This provision now recognizes peasants as rights-bearing subjects and requires the state to grant them special protection. It highlights the importance of peasant communities in territorial development, food sovereignty, and cultural diversity. On this basis, the Court affirmed that people displaced for environmental reasons, particularly peasants, must receive enhanced protection.

Although UNDROP is not explicitly mentioned in the ruling, its influence is evident. Indeed, the Declaration served as the reference for the reform of Article 64. UNDROP recognizes specific rights for peasants, such as the right to land, a healthy environment, and political participation. It also emphasizes the need for differentiated treatment for rural populations in vulnerable situations. Regarding forced displacement, UNDROP includes specific provisions to protect peasants from this practice:

Article 12.5 (Right to Justice): States shall provide peasants and other people working in rural areas with effective mechanisms for the prevention of and redress for any action that has the aim or effect of violating their human rights, arbitrarily dispossessing them of their land and natural resources or of depriving them of their means of subsistence and integrity, and for any form of forced sedentarization or population displacement.

Article 17.4 (Right to Land): Peasants and other people working in rural areas have the right to be protected against arbitrary and unlawful displacement from their land or place of habitual residence, or from other natural resources used in their activities and necessary for the enjoyment of adequate living conditions. States shall incorporate protections against displacement into domestic legislation that are consistent with international human rights and humanitarian law. States shall prohibit arbitrary and unlawful forced eviction, the destruction of agricultural areas and the confiscation or expropriation of land and other natural resources, including as a punitive measure or as a means or method of war.

Article 24.3 (Right to Housing): States shall not, arbitrarily or unlawfully, either temporarily or permanently, remove peasants or other people working in rural areas against their will from the homes or land that they occupy without providing or affording access to appropriate forms of legal or other protection. When eviction is unavoidable, the State must provide or ensure fair and just compensation for any material or other losses.

The Court’s decision thus demonstrates that UNDROP can produce concrete effects through domestic law. By inspiring the Colombian Constitution, it has helped establish a strong legal foundation on which the Court can now rely to protect peasants. Notably, it has expanded the concept of internal displacement beyond armed conflict to include the impacts of natural disasters.

In its ruling, the Court also calls on authorities to develop a specific public policy to address environmental displacement. It stresses the importance of considering the unique realities of rural areas and peasant populations, who often face multiple forms of vulnerability.

Ultimately, Ruling T-123/24 paves the way for broader application of peasants’ rights in Colombia. Thanks to UNDROP’s influence – which has been mobilised by the Colombian peasant movement vis-à-vis their national institutions – Colombian peasants now benefit from increased recognition of their rights, particularly in the face of climate change effects and inadequate institutional responses. This jurisprudence could set an important precedent for strengthening social and environmental justice in rural areas, serving as inspiration for judicial systems in other UN member states.

For more information on peasants’ rights in Colombia, you can read our article on the recognition of peasants in the Colombian Constitution.

La entrada Colombia: Constitutional Court Decision Protects Peasants Displaced by Natural Disasters se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

The Movement for Land and Agriculture Reform (MONLAR), representing over 5,000 peasant workers in Sri Lanka, recently made a submission to the government listing out several instances of the violation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas, to which Sri Lanka is a signatory. They also called upon the UN Working Group on the Declaration to initiate an assessment of how the conditions of the IMF, other IFIs, and global debt architecture violate the human rights of peasants and workers. The submission, an excerpt of which is reproduced below, also reveals how global financial institutions have enforced economic reforms that transferred the burden of economic stabilization to the poorer sections of society through austerity measures.

1.65 million peasants and small-scale food producers in Sri Lanka work on less than 2 hectares each, yet produce 80% of the country’s food. But debt-driven economic policies advocated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and Asian Development Bank (ADB) have wrecked peasants’ and fishers’ autonomy in food production and their ability to ensure food sovereignty.

Through various structural adjustment programs, the International Finance Institutions (IFIs) push Sri Lanka to prioritize cash crops for exports over food for domestic consumption. Export-oriented agricultural reforms that mainstreamed capital-intensive farming have favored agribusinesses and weakened peasants and small fishers by making them dependent on the market for inputs such as seeds, fertilizer, fishing nets, and boats. As a result of the increasing cost of food production, peasants and fishers are deeply in debt, dispossessed of their land, rendered agricultural laborers on their lands, and migrating to local industrial zones or abroad as indentured workers.

The current agriculture system’s failure to create dignified livelihoods for peasants and other workers in rural areas is evident in the extremely high levels of poverty concentration in rural and plantation areas, where more than 80% of Sri Lanka’s poor live.

Sri Lanka faced one of the worst economic crises in 2022 as it defaulted on its foreign debt payments in April 2022. The economic crisis had a devastating impact on rural communities, resulting in a doubling of poverty rates. The IMF, other IFIs, and private creditors have used the crisis and the debt default to push Sri Lanka into its 17th IMF program, a 48-month Extended Fund Facility worth around 3 billion dollars.

Violation of Article 2: State Responsibility
Two days before the September 2024 presidential election, Sri Lanka was forced to sign an agreement with international creditors to restructure its debt to private lenders. This agreement, which was neither disclosed nor discussed with the public or even in the Sri Lankan Parliament, forced the country to prioritize debt payment over the rights of people in Sri Lanka. It will severely impact the government’s ability to invest in food production, development of rural livelihoods, and social security of rural communities.

Violation of Article 4: No Discrimination Against Women
Despite their contribution being neither recognized nor reflected in national policy frameworks, the involvement of peasant women in Sri Lanka’s food production is critical. Peasant women face numerous barriers that inhibit them from reaching their full potential—the lack of access and control over natural resources, markets, financial services, technology, and care responsibilities. Yet, peasant women support food production as unpaid family members, agricultural workers, or through home gardens. However, they are neither acknowledged nor given any significance in government spending at the macro level. Hence, they are excluded at two levels—as women and as small-scale food producers.

Violation of Article 15: Right to Food and Food Sovereignty
Malnutrition and undernourishment have always been serious concerns in Sri Lanka, with 32.6% of women aged 15 to 49 years found to be anemic and 15.9% of infants handicapped by low weight at birth. The situation has been worse among agriculture worker families in the plantation sector. Despite being considered an ‘agricultural’ country, Sri Lanka depends heavily on food imports. Our food security’s vulnerability is evidenced during crises such as the pandemic, geopolitical conflicts like the Ukraine-Russia War, and scarce foreign exchange.

The economic crisis in 2022 has further worsened the situation. According to the World Food Program, by January 2023, 6.3 million people, or over 30 percent of Sri Lanka’s population, were “food insecure” and needed humanitarian assistance. Of these, around 5.3 million people were either reducing or skipping meals, and at least 65,600 people were severely food insecure. An increase in VAT also drove up food inflation.

Violation of Article 16: Right to Decent Income and Livelihoods and the Means of Production
The economic reforms enforced through the 17th IMF program have transferred the burden of economic stabilization to the poorer sections of society through austerity measures. Implementation of the IMF-recommended cost-recovery energy pricing has almost tripled fuel and electricity prices, having devastating effects on the livelihoods of peasant farmers and fisheries. Taxes on equipment, seeds, and chemical inputs have increased production costs, throwing peasant farmers into poverty and indebtedness.

Indebtedness among peasants and fishers is mainly linked to expansions in capital-intensive agriculture and the proliferation of pro-profit lending by banks and finance companies such as microfinance loans. With the withdrawal of the State from the provision of agrarian credit, indebtedness has become a permanent feature in the lives of peasants, peasant women, and fishers. Suicides among the peasant farmers in the 1990s and among the peasant women after 2015 illustrate the protracted nature of indebtedness in the agrarian sector. According to national statistics in 2019, indebtedness is more prevalent in the rural and estate sectors than in the urban sector. 60.9% and 64.4% of households in the rural and estate sectors, respectively, are in debt. Vavuniya and Polonnaruwa, predominantly agricultural areas, also located near the biggest rice mills owned by private individuals, recorded the highest incidences of indebtedness, with 76.1% and 70.3% of households in debt.

Violation of Article 17: Right to Land
IFIs like the IMF and World Bank have long advocated privatizing land markets in Sri Lanka. Freehold land titles are distributed to farmers by lifting restrictions for peasants to sell their land provided by the State to outsiders, which has been a long-standing demand from these IFIs. With the ongoing IMF program, this demand has returned to the fore, with the government introducing a new program to provide freehold land titles to peasants. With the ongoing economic crisis and indebtedness among peasants, MONLAR and many other organizations fear that this move will lead to large-scale dispossession of peasants’ land.

Currently, the State does not recognize the customary right to land; hence, many peasants have lost land they have been cultivating and living on for generations. Due to the absence of tenure recognition, many communities are displaced when large-scale projects and developments come to their villages.

Even though it has been 15 years since the end of the war, large portions of land in the North are still under the occupation of the military. Minoritized communities have used these lands for generations before and during the war and hold a key place in their livelihood and culture. Some of the residents of these lands are internally displaced, while some are still living in IDP camps.

Violation of Article 24: Right to Housing
Even after 200 years, the descendants of people brought to Sri Lanka from South India as indentured workers (Malaiyaga community) in tea and rubber plantations in Sri Lanka do not own their housing and land. They were forced to live on plantation land (owned by the State and privately owned companies) in extremely low-quality housing. They lack access to land for their food production and remain vulnerable to evictions by the landowners—the plantation companies.

Recommendations to the Government of Sri Lanka

1. Immediately exit the ongoing IMF and debt restructuring agreements, as they are unfavorable and harmful. The government should negotiate new agreements that ensure the country’s sustainable economic development and the socio-economic rights of peasants, workers, and other poor and vulnerable communities.
2. Introduce the necessary reforms to the local legal and policy framework to enforce the rights enshrined in the UNDROP. Some immediate actions can include:
   • Revise the current laws regarding land, seeds, water, biodiversity, and other natural resources to ensure the rights of peasants and other workers in rural areas.
   • Codification of a new Constitution that integrates the social, economic, and cultural rights of peasants, workers, and others as fundamental human rights.
3. Recognize food sovereignty and the rights of peasants and rural workers as key priorities in its agriculture, development, and economic policy formulation.
4. Conduct an agrarian debt audit and provide debt relief, including debt cancellation.
5. Recognize women as key actors in agriculture, food production, and the rural economy. Allocate resources through national and local budgets to ensure women have access to accessible and just financial resources. The government should support the collective actions of peasant women in food production, processing, marketing, and saving systems.
6. Release all the land occupied by the military in the North and East to their original owners, and support peasants and other food producers in restarting their livelihoods in those lands.
7. Recognize and fulfill the demand by the Malaiyaga community to allocate land for their housing and food production.

MONLAR also called upon the UN Working Group on the Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas to initiate an assessment of how the conditions of the IMF, other IFIs, and global debt architecture violate the human rights of peasants and workers, and also initiate a cross-country study to examine the impact of microfinance on women and rural development.

La entrada Sri Lanka: MONLAR asks the governement to reform the Law to Align with UNDROP se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

“Building on this tapestry of human rights configurations, the UNDROP’s affirmation of peasants’ right to land represents a turning point in longstanding efforts to connect land to human rights. It raises questions about the legal contours of the right to land and how this newly affirmed right complements, and intersects with, other human rights. Although such questions are theoretical, they also have practical implications. Restrictive interpretations can hollow out the emancipatory potential of a new right from within, while clarifying the full reverberations of that right can facilitate its use in processes of change. It is therefore important to explore the social, economic, and political circumstances that led to the affirmation of the right to land, what the right to land entails in practice and its potential for bringing about the change peasant movements are fighting for around the world.“

La entrada THE RIGHT TO LAND se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

Abstract

This chapter explores the human right to land from both a historical and a normative perspective. It analyzes the key developments that have led to the recognition of the human right to land in international human rights law. The 􀁿rst part of the chapter explores land as a key component of other human rights, such as the rights to food, housing, property, and other economic, social, and cultural rights. The second part then describes how various international legal instruments came to recognize land as a self-standing human right. It discusses the various dimensions of the right to land and what this right means for di􀁼erent groups, with a focus on Indigenous Peoples, peasants, and other people working in rural areas. Finally, the third part explores current challenges for the implementation of the right to land, with an emphasis on forced evictions and displacements, the gender and intersectional dimensions, and the impacts of transnational corporations. The overall objective is to highlight the benefits of adopting a human rights approach to land issues, seeing land, not as a mere commodity, but as central to the realization of human rights.

La entrada Land Is a Human Right se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

La Via Campesina and CETIM have organized a training course for La Via Campesina members in August 2023, and are now making training materials available to all. This material is also available in PDF version here.

Session 2 of the UNDROP training seminar aims to provide a general overview and analysis of the key rights of the UNDROP, those that form the backbone of the instrument. This does not mean that other rights are less important, but we have identified these “key rights” as being the most buoyant and, in a way, the most claimed: right to land and natural resources; right to food and food sovereignty; right of rural women; right to social security; right to seeds; right to the environment, water and biodiversity; right to participation; right to an adequate standard of living and means of production; economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights in the context of peasant activities.

Objective of Session 2 “Key rights”: To gain a practical understanding of the core content of the UNDROP and what these articles mean in practice for peasants in the field.

Methodology: Participants will follow a series of video training sessions on key UNDROP rights. They will also be asked to read some key documents relating to each right.

RIGHT TO FOOD SOVEREIGNTY (art.15)

• Read the definition established at the Nyeléni Forum in 2007
• Read article 15 of the UNDROP
• See video training on food sovereignty, by Elizabeth Mpofu (ZIMSOFF, Zimbabwe)

• See the video of La Via Campesina “What is food sovereignty”?

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Peasants’ rights and food production”
• CETIM’s training sheet “The right to food and food sovereignty”

Complementary materials for further reading:

• FIAN International’s briefing “Right to Adequate Food and Nutrition, and to Food Sovereignty”
• Research brief from the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights “The rights to food and to food sovereignty
• Report from Friends of the Earth International “The UN Declaration on the rights of peasants as a tool for promoting collective rights“

RIGHT TO LAND (art.17)

• Read article 17 of the UNDROP
• See video training on right to land, by Paola Gioia (ABL, Germany)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Access to resources and means of production” (see in particular pages 4-5-6)
• CETIM’s training sheet “The right to land and natural resources”

Complementary materials for further reading:

• FIAN International briefing “The right to land and other natural resources”
• Research brief on the right to land by the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights “The right to land and other natural resources”
• CETIM’s book “Right to land”
• International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPCFS) “People’s Manual on the Guidelines on Governance of Land, Fisheries and Forests“

RIGHT TO AN ADEQUATE STANDARD OF LIVING, A DECENT LIVELIHOOD AND THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION (art.16)

• Read article 16 of the UNDROP
• See video training on this right, by Diego Monton (MNCI Somos Tierra – UTRST, Argentina)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklets “Access to resources and means of production” (see in particular pages 9-10) and “Peasants’ Dignified Lives and Livelihoods“
• CETIM’s training sheet “The right to an adequate standard of living, a decent livelihood and the means of production”

Complementary materials for further reading:

RIGHT TO SEEDS (art.19)

• Read article 19 of the UNDROP
• See video training on right to seeds, by Christophe Golay from the Geneva Academy (Switzerland)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Access to resources and means of production” (see in particular page 8)
• CETIM’s training sheet “The right to seeds”

Complementary materials for further reading:

• FIAN International briefing “The rights to seeds and biodiversity”
• Research brief on the right to land by the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights “Right to seeds and intellectual property rights”
• Research brief on the right to land by the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights “The right to seeds in Africa”
• Research brief on the right to land by the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights “The right to seeds in Europe”

RIGHT TO PARTICIPATION (art.10)

• Read article 10 of the UNDROP
• See video training on right to participation, by Michelle Zufferey (UNITERRE, Switzerland)

Compulsory training sheets to read:Training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Access to resources and means of production” (see in particular page 10)
• CETIM’s training sheet “The right to participation”

RIGHTS TO THE ENVIRONEMENT, BIODIVERSITY AND WATER (art. 18, 20 and 21)

• Read articles 18, 20 and 21 of the UNDROP
• See video training on right to participation, by Morgan Ody (Confédération paysanne, France)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Access to resources and means of production” (see in particular page 8)
• CETIM’s training sheet “The right to the environement”

Complementary materials for further reading:

• FIAN International briefing “Environmental and Climat Justice”
• FIAN International briefing “Rights to water and sanitation”

RIGHTS OF RURAL WOMEN (art. 4)

• Read article 4 of the UNDROP
• See video training on right to participation, by Chengeto Zumira (ZIMSOFF, Zimbabwe)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklets “Peasants as political subjects” and “Peasants’ Dignified Lives and Livelihoods” (see in particular pages 6-7)
• CETIM’s training sheet “Non-discrimination against rural women“

Complementary materials for further reading:

• FIAN International’s briefing “Rural Women’s Rights“

RIGHT TO SOCIAL SECURITY (art. 22)

• Read article 22 of the UNDROP
• See video training on right to participation, by Pramesh Pokharel (All Nepal Peasants Federation, Nepal)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Peasants’ Dignified Lives and Livelihoods” (see in particular pages 2-3-4)
• CETIM’s training sheet “Right to social security“

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS (art. 5, 13, 14, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26)

• Read articles 5, 13, 14, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26 of the UNDROP
• See video training on economic, social and cultural rights, by Melik Özden (CETIM)

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• CETIM’s training sheet “Economic, social and cultural rights“

CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS (art. 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12)

• Read articles 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 of the UNDROP
• See video training on civil and political rights, by Melik Özden (CETIM) see above

Compulsory training sheets to read:

• La Via Campesina’s Thematic Booklet “Peasants as political subjects“
• CETIM’s training sheet “Civil and political rights“

La entrada TRAINING ON THE UNDROP – SESSION 2 “KEY RIGHTS OF THE UNDROP” se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

The recognition of the right to land, a historic demand by peasant movements throughout the world, is gaining momentum at the international level. This publication takes stock of this major issue of our times, fundamental not only for all peasants but also for the rest of humanity, at a time when we are rediscovering the importance of peasants for food security and the fulfillment of the right to food, the conservation of biodiversity and the fight against climate change. Whereas hundreds of millions of peasants are still deprived of access to land or survive on tiny plots, others are daily evicted, and land grabbing is increasing. The recognition of a right to land for peasants is more relevant than ever.

This publication is the result of major research and inquiry, and the fruit of close collaboration with La Vía Campesina. It presents the main issues regarding land in rural areas, in particular from the perspective of agriculture and the right to food, and explains why a recognition of the right to land is necessary. Four peasant organizations (from Colombia, France, Indonesia, and Zimbabwe), members of La Vía Campesina, present their struggles for the right to land as well the practices of their governments in land management at the national level. The text also analyzes in detail the content of existing instruments and presents specific examples of jurisprudence that plead in favor of a recognition of the right to land, at the international, regional and national level. Finally, several issues related to the content and implementation of the right to land are revisited, on the basis of the proposals formulated within the framework of the negotiations regarding the Declaration on the rights of peasants at the United Nations Human Rights Council.

You can read the book in PDF version here

See also CETIM’s training sheet on the right to land

La entrada The right to land se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

After adopting the Declaration, we are now in a new phase: implementation. It is absolutely vital to bring the Declaration to life so that peasants and other people working in rural areas can make the content their own, to use it in their daily advocacy work. For this reason, CETIM, alongside La Via Campesina, organizes seminars aimed at peasant leaders. These courses allow them to consolidate their practices, advocacy strategies and other projects linked to the Declaration. Through this type of training, we are striving for a multiplier effect. Once the leaders have been trained, they disseminate their knowledge to their members, to other peasants and allies. The aim in the long term is for everyone to have access to this crucial knowledge.

Training sheets

The twelve fact sheets have been produced in a spirit of popularisation of the content and scope of the rights contained in the Declaration. Produced in several languages in an A5 format, the sheets explain in an accessible way one or a series of rights of the Declaration grouped by theme:

1. Introduction of the UNDROP
2. Right to land
3. Right to seeds
4. Right to food and food sovereignty
5. Right to an adequate standard of living, a decent livelihood and to means of production
6. Non-discrimination against rural women
7. Right to participation
8. Right to the environment
9. Right to social security
10. Economic, social and cultural rights
11. Civil and political rights
12. Strategies for implementation

La entrada Training sheets on peasants’ rights se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.

These briefings take a close look at the rights, principles and states obligations adopted in UNDROP by the United Nations General Assembly on 17 December 2018.
 

1.    Rural Women’s Rights
How are the rights of women rural in rural areas now strengthened by UNDROP?

2.    The Rights to Biodiversity and Seeds
Why are biodiversity and seeds essential for peasants and other people in rural areas, and how should they be internationally protected? 

3.    Rights to Water and Sanitation
Water plays a key role in the lives of peasants and rural population, how are these rights defined and how should access be fulfilled?

4.    Right to Adequate Food and Nutrition, and to Food Sovereignty
How are right to food and the right to food sovereignty recognized in UNDROP?

5.    Environmental and Climate Justice
Environmental destruction and climate change are threatening the human rights of peasants and other people working in rural areas around the world, how does UNDROP contribute to achieving environmental and climate justice?

6. Agroecology
Agroecology promotes a set of agricultural practices that are environmentally sustainable and socially just. How is UNDROP helping foster agroecology?

7. Filling the gaps in protecting the human rights of a diverse rural world
People living in the countryside are diverse. While their identities are dynamic and fluid, they face similar systemic challenges for the realization of their human rights. How can a mutually supportive interpretation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and UNDROP help advance the rights of the rural world?

8. The right to land and other natural resources

Land is a common good. Access, control, management and use of land is essential for rural communities to live a dignified life. How is the human right to land recognized in UNDROP?

La entrada Peasants’ rights briefings se publicó primero en Defending Peasants' Rights.