Chinese Post-90s Ecological Smallholders and 17 Young Farmers Urgently Call for Food System Transformation
Foodthink Commentary
At the Foodthink Sharing Session on 16 February, Yingying outlined the core arguments of the position paper. The document lays bare the deep-seated contradictions within the global agricultural system: the monopolisation of seeds, land and supply chains by multinational corporations; the destabilisation of production in the face of the climate crisis; and the systematic marginalisation of smallholder farmers in policy-making…
Foodthink has translated and compiled this position paper. As young farmers speak out on the international stage, how should policymakers, civil society, scientists and the public better understand the complexities of agricultural transition? And how will young farmers bridge cultural and institutional divides to collectively tackle the myriad challenges posed by the ecological crisis?
I. Challenges Facing the Global Food System and the Core Demands of Young Farmers
What crises is the current global food system facing?
Climate change triggers frequent extreme weather events, with droughts, floods, and pest outbreaks causing reduced crop yields or even total harvest failure; geopolitical conflicts have sparked energy crises and broken supply chains, where soaring fertiliser prices and disrupted transport further undermine food security; multinational agribusinesses, by controlling seeds, pesticides, and agricultural trade markets, are squeezing out smallholder farmers; fossil-fuel-driven industrial agriculture is driving land degradation, biodiversity loss, and water resource depletion.
Most critically, women, young farmers, Indigenous peoples, and smallholder groups—who make up the majority of the population—are excluded from decision-making processes, yet bear the brunt of climate impacts and economic inequality.
What core solutions are young farmers proposing?
Secondly, they call for the promotion of circular economic models centred on agroecology, reducing reliance on fossil fuels through biodiversity conservation, organic farming, and localised food systems. At the same time, they insist on securing land rights, technological autonomy, and a voice in policy-making for young people, marginalised groups, and Indigenous communities, ensuring their needs are reflected in global governance frameworks.
The ultimate goal is to build an inclusive, equitable, and climate-resilient food system where agricultural production advances alongside ecological restoration, achieving intergenerational equity and social justice.
II. The Bioeconomy
What is the bioeconomy? What are the risks of developing it?
However, young farmers argue that while its emphasis on resource circulation is commendable, under the current global economic system, the bioeconomy risks becoming a‘technological fix’ driven by industrialised nations. Multinational corporations could seize the opportunity to expand their control over biomass resources. For instance, biofuel policies might force farmers into monocropping, exacerbating land grabs and competition for water resources.
Furthermore, the convergence of biotechnology with nanotechnology and gene editing could further entrench control over nature and farmers, turning these innovations into tools for perpetuating capital accumulation rather than genuine pathways to sustainable transition.
If the bioeconomy is not tightly aligned with ecological conservation and social equity, it will merely perpetuate high-consumption, high-pollution production models, serving the economic interests of a few rather than the actual needs of countries in the Global South.
III. Agroecology
Why is agroecology regarded as the genuine solution?
Young farmers are calling for all stakeholders to be included in bioeconomic assessments, including recognising nature as an independent stakeholder with inherent rights. Agroecology ensures this, standing as the genuine solution to confronting the climate crisis and moving away from fossil-fuel-dependent industrialised food systems.
Furthermore, agroecology supports local economies, promotes equitable access to resources, lowers barriers to entry for young people in agriculture, and empowers rural communities.In stark contrast to the input-heavy and pollution-prone characteristics of industrial agriculture, agroecology proves viable on economic, ecological, and social fronts.
IV. Youth Involvement in Land Reform
This includes enacting legislation to prohibit foreign investment from purchasing agricultural land beyond a certain threshold, and reallocating fallow or unused land to marginalised groups; integrating land, climate, and water management policies to tie land tenure to ecosystem service functions, while recognising communities’ collective rights to natural resources; establishing regional, democratically governed land arbitration bodies to replace current dispute-resolution mechanisms dominated by transnational arbitration firms, thereby securing access to judicial remedies for vulnerable populations.
What structural barriers do young farmers face in agricultural policy?
Secondly, agricultural policy-making has long been dominated by multinational corporations, financial institutions, and think tanks, leaving young farmers without institutionalised channels to voice their concerns. In many countries, agricultural subsidies flow disproportionately to large-scale farms, while smallholders and young agri-entrepreneurs are overlooked.
Furthermore, agricultural education systems often fail to align with practical needs. School curricula tend to prioritise commercialised techniques over agroecology and collaborative community practices, leaving young people ill-equipped with the practical skills needed to address the climate crisis.
V. Food Sovereignty
What is food sovereignty, and why do young farmers emphasise its importance?
Young farmers highlight the importance of this concept because food sovereignty effectively safeguards local agriculture against the encroachment of transnational food retailers and free-trade agreements; it protects the diversity and adaptability of food cultures, enabling communities to select crops suited to local climates based on ecological conditions and traditional knowledge. During crises such as the pandemic, nations with robust local food systems and strong food sovereignty have demonstrated greater resilience.
What policy support is required to achieve food sovereignty?
On a financial level, governments should raise the proportion of agricultural subsidies, prioritising ecologically friendly smallholders, and curb speculative land transactions through tax policy.
In trade, harmful provisions in trade agreements must be abolished, and regional food reserve networks established to stabilise market price fluctuations.
Technologically, efforts must be made to promoteopen-source seed banks and farmer-led research and development systems, such as India’s “Biodiversity Conservation and Seed Sovereignty Movement”.
Finally, legislation must establish a “Global Food Security Convention”, incorporating food sovereignty into the international human rights framework to regulate the market dominance of transnational corporations.
VI. Technological Sovereignty and the Reconfiguration of Power
What is the stance of young farmers towards agricultural technology?
Technological monopolies risk stripping smallholders of their production autonomy; for instance, GM seed patents that force farmers to purchase new varieties every season, exacerbating economic vulnerability. Knowledge barriers limit the accessibility of technological dissemination. Transnational corporations shelve technology behind complex licensing agreements, while public research institutions often lack the resources to support localised adaptation.
How do young farmers propose to achieve technological sovereignty?
Technology should complement, rather than replace, traditional and indigenous practices, and must always be developed with the participation of local communities to ensure it meets their needs.Consequently, young farmers argue that technological development must follow the principle of “co-design and co-ownership”, ensuring that farmers and scientists are jointly involved in research, development, and decision-making.
Moreover, the adoption of technology should not create dependencies that undermine producers’ autonomy over their production, land, culture, and livelihoods. Farmers must have the right to decide for themselves whether to integrate new technologies into their farming systems, rather than being pushed to adopt them by corporations.
Click “here” to read the original manifesto
*This article was translated and edited with the assistance of AI tools.
Editor: qiqi