This post originally appeared on www.ruralsociologywageningen.nl. Here you can find the original version.
—
Last November, the SWIFT consortium gathered in Geneva for an inspiring and thought-provoking mid-term meeting. Over four days, researchers, farmers, and activists came together to share progress, exchange ideas, and discuss the future of gender and diversity in agriculture. From immersive discussions at Ferme du Lignon to policy debates at the Geneva Graduate Institute, the event highlighted the importance of feminist and queer perspectives in shaping agricultural policies.
Key topics included:
– Building feminist viability indicators with women farmers
– Participatory video-making for agroecological storytelling
– Gendered analysis of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy
– Strengthening visibility and rights of LGBTQIA+ farmers
Georgia Diamanti and Clara Lina Bader have captured these moments beautifully in their reflections, from engaging panels to farm visits that demonstrated alternative models of agriculture in action. Read their insights on the challenges and opportunities ahead for gender justice in food and farming!
SWIFT in Geneva – by Georgia Diamanti
Arrival in Geneva
In the early hours of Sunday, November 17th of 2024, Els, Vivian and I started on a long road trip from Zwiep to Geneva, where the mid-term meeting of the SWIFT project was to take place for the coming 4 days. The roads were quiet and the myriads of snacks, the company and the odd overpriced German gas station stops made the time go by much faster than we expected. Tired but happy, we arrived to our hotel. The first evening, slowly and in groups, we poured into the hotel living room – where we had arranged to greet each other with a communal potluck. Spanish fuet, pickles from Poland, cheese from Holland, all and more decorated the hostel table which soon enough was overflowing with goods. After all the food and story sharing, we all went to bed, with stomachs full of food and anticipation for the week to come.
The first two days of the conference were spent at a local urban farm, before moving our activities to the more formal environment of the Geneva Graduate Institute for the remainder of the meeting. The first, “Ferme du Lignon” was a beautiful old farm located at the outskirts of Geneva, that was composed of two beautiful old buildings, standing tall over the cobble-stone grounds. On one side of the buildings was a greenhouse, while on the other stretched a vast and impressive downhill expanse of green.
The conference
The first two days we were immersed in a number of engaging panels – it is difficult to cover them all here. Some of those panels centered around concrete SWIFT activities; for example we heard of the work of work package 4, working with Spanish women farmers to develop feminist viability indicators, and of the work of work package 2 of Charlotte and Els who, together with women from Toekomstboeren are working on building a common agroecological narrative through participatory video making. Snippets of the videos were played for everyone. Other panel topics focused more broadly on relevant thematic categories such as gender diversities and (Clara Bader writes about it in more detail). In this latter one some experiences and difficulties faced by advocates of gender diversity in policy spaces were shared. The very topic of Gender diversities in such spaces is after all incredibly recent, noted a representative of Rock Steady farm, further adding that we (feminists) should consider moving away from words such as ‘allyship’ because it “invokes that we are separate”. If we all embody each other’s problems, then we move toward a true collectivism. When we work under a system that divides, what’s needed if we want to imagine things being done differently is to invest in uniting.
To close the first day, we visited a sauna in Geneva’s center, located right next to Geneva’s lake – more than a few of us were brave enough to also take a dip (or rather, a few) in the lake. Even in the dark of night, we were awestruck by how clear the water was (huge contrast from the murky Amsterdam canal’s which I am used to). Our swim was followed by fondue paired with a glass of wine and lively conversation. Any leftover nervousness from the hecticness of the past days, had by then melted out of my system and that night I slept like a baby.
The WUR/Oxfam/FIAN panel presentation: “Cooking up Political Agendas”
On Tuesday night my thoughts were very much preoccupied with next day’s presentation. knowing that the presentation I was to give on behalf of Wageningen’s work in SWIFT, would be not only dense with information but also focused on policy content – something which is not always easy to make, well.. not.. dry. This work was the result of our feminist policy analysis of the latest reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2023-2027 (linked here). Doing the work was definitely dry at times, and I remember a handful of late evenings spent at the Leeuwenborch building; Marije and Me, third machine coffee of the day clutched in hand, and crouched over Regulation (EU) 2021/2115. Reading and rereading that one same badly phrased article we were stuck on, truly at a loss of how we should do this policy analysis. How are we supposed to tease out this invisible and elusive ‘gender’ element from a document that seldom even mentions it? Other examples of such work were also hard to find, and so it felt like we didn’t simply have this task to do but that we also had to invent the way to do it. These were some of the feelings that were part of the process when first picking up this task. Though soon enough we got a little better at reading the documents. We started being able to not just understand, but also remember, differentiate and link the different regulations and article numbers. Almost like learning a language, we became just a little more fluent in CAP-speak. Things began to feel not only like work but also like play. After several months of deep immersion, we even had inside jokes (unfortunately the jokes write themselves when your topic is gender equality in EU policy). Under Jessica’s guidance and marvelous ability to make fruitful connections and order chaos, the report started taking shape.
So here I was, preparing to share this work with the whole SWIFT consortium. I wanted to do justice to all our hard work, and to show it in a way that conveys how interesting it is. So, I peppered the presentation with the occasional humorous remark. But mainly, I focused on making a narrative out of it, as much as possible. The night before I decided that in order to do this, I needed to kill my darlings and completely scrap the framework and methodology from the presentation. I felt that the biggest challenge was to craft a story, in the 15 minute slot that I was given, one that would engage all sorts of persons in the room (researchers, farmers, civil society etc). That night, I think I fell asleep rehearsing it in my mind…
The morning of the presentation arrived, me and Louise (representing Oxfam, and with whom I was to share a panel session) wolfed down some breakfast and started our slow walk to the Geneva Graduate Institute. The moment had come, and I was eager to start our panel. It’s a special feeling when you’re presenting, and you can feel the room’s attention is with you the whole time. All around the room, people nodding, others taking notes. I couldn’t have had a better and more attentive audience, and I could feel that I was giving them information which really resonated with them.
After the presentation (which went a bit overtime) and with both my head and my heart feeling about to burst, I went to grab coffee and snacks. On my way there I caught the eye of our interpreters and went over to apologize jokingly. Leo joked that my presentation was like a bag of chips – not big but as high in density as the chips are in caloric content. Nevertheless, they assured me that they had managed fine. We shared a laugh and hung out until it was time to go back. The interest that was expressed during the Q&A session that followed, and primarily from Spanish speakers, confirmed to me that the interpreters had not just told me that to make me feel better.
During our first SWIFT meeting in Spain, there had been a slightly different dynamic between the researchers and the farmers – who had cautiously inquired as to what we, as researchers can do for them. There was an air of uncertainty, probably on both parts. In this sense our second meeting in Geneva was very different, this time we were not ‘empty handed’ but could share samples of the work we had spent the last two years building. A lot of the time me and Marije had struggled with feelings that we’re somehow not saying much, or enough. One example is that gender diversities are absent from this work, and working with binary data (in this case, EU Regulations) without wanting to reproduce the same biases has been a constant tension. “One day I hope that I won’t have to make this disclaimer in my work” I had added, apologetically almost, right after clarifying that this gendered analysis of the CAP focuses on women. Gender equality is a niche (at least when compared to other policy priorities), and gender equality in the rural space a niche wrapped inside another niche. A niche squared, if you will. Yet seeing, this many different people value and validate the work we do, was something very special.
The week left me feeling curious. Curious to see where all this wonderful work being done in the SWIFT project will end up going. Especially as we enter the second half of the 4 year project, during which many of advocacy related activities are planned. How will SWIFT work toward living on past its formal end date, in 2027?
—
About Georgia: Besides my work with SWIFT, I am in the second year of my PhD with RSO. Currently, I write this blogpost from Greece where I am staying for the coming few months, as part of my fieldwork. Looking at the Common Agricultural Policy alone is not enough – while it sets up the general framework for EU agriculture, many of the important decisions are still made at the Member State level. I am interested to see how those intentions to incorporate gender equality that are set in the CAP trickle down to the Member State level. For example; what national frameworks are in place to complement these efforts and are they implemented and effective (or not)? Each Member States drafts their own National Strategic Plan (NSP) for the CAP, but there are for example also broader gender mainstreaming laws in many states (including Greece). However a common phenomenon is that while these legal frameworks might be in place, gender does not end up being mainstreamed into agricultural (or other) policy. Where (and why) does gender evaporate? It is a very big and very relevant question – one that’s always looming in the background.
Another common issues in agriculture across the EU, is generational renewal. Not only is it crucial in light of a rapidly ageing farmer population but it also offers a window of opportunity for policy to reflect and pursue the kind of future it wants, a future which should arguably prioritize gender equality. And so, I am interested to know how young women farmers deal with the realities of farming, in the absence of a framework that considers their needs. Delving into these topics, I hope to get valuable insights on how policy could amplify these efforts in the future and how gender can be substantially included into the CAP – beyond just ‘ticking’ the gender box.
SWIFT PROJECT MEETING IN GENEVA 2024 – by Clara Lina Bader
In November 2024, following the kick-off meeting in Agres, Spain, in 2023, the SWIFT Consortium met for a second time in Geneva, Switzerland, to validate the accomplished work, to identify how to translate the research into future activities and consolidate linkages and networks between social movements and other individuals, groups and institutions working on gender, food and agriculture in Europe and internationally. From RSO, a total of four people attended the meeting, including Els Hegger, Georgia Diamanti, Vivian Aidoko and me. As master students currently in the process of writing their thesis with Jessica Duncan in the SWIFT context, Vivan and I were lucky enough to be able to join.
The four days were filled with engagement, with many conversations, moments of laughter and silence, many great presentations, and “a conversation that has been a long time coming”. This conversation was specifically interesting for my research towards a queer agricultural policy framework and took place within the session on gender diversities and intersectional feminisms in rural social movements. It was organised as a plenary first and then split up into small groups, where we had space to reflect and discuss.
It was expressed how there is an increasing interest in struggles and organising around LGBTQIA+ identities in policy and agricultural spaces. Visibility is gaining ground since the Diversities Articulation from ECVC met for the first time in 2015 and many initiatives are popping up in the US. One panel member reminded us that “LGBT workers have always existed” and have been active within their movement for over 40 years. Strong concerns were raised about how it becomes increasingly more difficult to remain in the space in the current political climate. People expressed both specific struggles within agricultural practices touching upon access to material resources, specifically to land, access to affirming health care, gender-affirming operations, social services and mental health spaces, especially in rural areas, as well as experiences of isolation and discrimination and struggles for recognition and representation in political spaces. Limited data and thus limited recognition and visibility were mentioned and met with the statement “data is political”.
An example of how violent policy spaces still are, is the struggle around the recognition of gender-diverse identities in the Voluntary Guidelines on Gender Equality and Women’s and Girls’ Empowerment at the CFS. ECVC was actively involved in the negotiations and issued an open call with CSIPM to recognise all diversities. When going through the document, it is nowhere to be found – “we brought our lived experiences and bodies and were met with violence.” Connecting not only with farming and rural mandates but with gender and sexual-orientation mandates such as the UN independent expert on sexual orientation and gender identity, organisations such as ILGA and learning from trade unions in this regard work were discussed as means to push for more space and recognition in the political arena. However, participants in the plenary also explained their work on their farms and how that can create spaces that feel safe, uplifting, and hold at the core anti-capitalist value creation. The emphasis was laid upon health; mentally and physically, upon relationship and commitment, to each other and the food produced and consumed, and far and foremost upon the importance of diversity and joy.
The importance of these conversations is undeniable and is greatly informing my work towards a queer agricultural and food policy framework. For my thesis, I am exploring questions around representation and equal opportunities for LGBTQIA+ identities in agricultural (policy) spaces while problematising the focus of policy studies on LGBTQIA+ studies by drawing on ideas and thoughts of queer theory. Currently, food and agricultural policy and its decision-making processes fail to appropriately address gendered and sexualised experiences of discrimination in agriculture and rural areas, reproducing gender inequities and power imbalances that discriminate against women and queer farmers. However, there has been rightful critique towards identity-focused policies or affirmative action concerning identity essentialism. Queer ontologies can help challenge and question for granted taken categories, ominously present in policymaking, such as the family farm or the idea of binary gender, to gain policy insights for a more just world by asking the question: would I use these categories if society was completely different?
On the fourth day, after three days of being inside discussing, thinking and barely moving our body, the farm visit to La Touvière was a welcome change. La Touviere is part of Uniterre, the Swiss section of La Via Campesina. It covers around 35 ha of land and is fully organically certified. Around 20 farmers are organised in two collectives from which one is fully female-led, with an extensive grazing system with goats and cheese making on the farm. The cheese is sold to organic shops all around Geneva and in their farm shop, which was seldom empty. Their cheese was delicious and so was the fondue lunch to which we were spontaneously invited. It was something special they told us, as a celebration of the first snow of the year. Farm visits are essential to understand the complex realities that farmers navigate in their daily activities, to experience practised alternatives to the industrial agro-industry and to keep believing in a liveable future.
Coming together in the way that we did, with warmth, laughter and critical minds, throughout this 4-day meeting is, I feel, of great importance for any projects, specifically those that include social movements actors. In which difficult conversations are given space, where you meet in the flesh and with the possibility to see and feel other people’s presence. The way this meeting was carried out would not have been possible if it had not been for the facilitation team and the organisers. Thank you for setting up such a well-organised, fruitful and intense four days from which we leave with a need for rest and great motivation to continue with Supporting Women-Led Innovations in Farming and Rural Territories.
