The Italian government’s recent designation of a ministry responsible for “Agriculture, Food Sovereignty and Forestry” has sparked renewed debate over the meaning of food sovereignty, a concept originating with farmers and Indigenous communities facing consolidation within global food systems. The term, initially articulated in 1996 by the international peasant movement La Via Campesina, is gaining traction internationally, with governments and institutions increasingly acknowledging its importance.
Food sovereignty is defined as the right of peoples to healthy, culturally appropriate food produced through sustainable methods, and the right to define their own agricultural and food systems. This principle challenges the neoliberal globalization of food markets, advocating for localized control and prioritizing the needs of those who produce, distribute, and consume food over market demands, according to Assorurale, an Italian agricultural association.
Anthropologist Mauro Van Aken, a researcher at the University of Milan-Bicocca, argues that abandoning local agricultural practices has eroded a fundamental right to food sovereignty. “One can choose who to boycott and limit our participation in the consumer society, but we cannot stop depending on the best bidder in procuring our daily ration of food,” Van Aken stated in a recent interview. “Once we abandoned local agri-culture, we also relinquished our right to food sovereignty.”
Van Aken’s research, conducted in the north of Pakistan, Jordan, the Palestinian Territories, Egypt, and Italy, focuses on the relationship between cultures and environments. He points to traditional communal land management systems as examples of food sovereignty in practice. In Palestine, the “musha” system historically involved the periodic redistribution of land to ensure equitable access to varying qualities of soil and proximity to water sources. This system, he explains, functioned as a mechanism to reduce inequality and mitigate risks in an arid environment.
“The musha system was a classic way to redistribute inequality and prevent individualization, privatization – even though they were co-present – in an arid context where agricultural production was linked to a moral economy,” Van Aken said. Even today, vestiges of the musha system remain in water management practices in areas like Battir, near Bethlehem, where irrigation schedules are determined by the eight tribes that share access to a water source.
This communal approach to resource management contrasts sharply with the imposition of private property rights favored by colonial powers and modernization efforts, Van Aken argues. He cites the example of El Ezari Vulcani, a Polish agronomist who, in the 1920s, studied the farming practices of Palestinian fellahin. Although initially viewing them as “primitive,” Vulcani ultimately recognized their sophisticated agroecological knowledge, particularly their ability to thrive with limited water resources. However, Van Aken notes that this recognition was later suppressed as part of a broader effort to dispossess and dehumanize the Palestinian population.
The preservation of ancient seed varieties, known as “baali” seeds, is also central to food sovereignty in the region. These seeds, adapted to local conditions and requiring minimal irrigation, represent a form of resistance against the encroachment of industrial agriculture and dependence on external inputs. “These are seeds that have been kept in sacks or at home,” Van Aken explained. “They are also called ‘baladii’ seeds, which means ‘my village’ – a term that becomes ‘homeland’ in a context where having a homeland is impossible.”
Van Aken’s research highlights the political dimensions of agriculture, particularly in occupied territories where access to land and resources is contested. He points to the use of pine forests by Israel as a means of obscuring Palestinian villages and claiming territory, while simultaneously restricting grazing land for Palestinian agro-pastoral communities. The olive tree, a symbol of Palestinian identity and resilience, is often protected by law, with trees over eight years old providing a legal basis for challenging land expropriation.
The Italian government’s embrace of “food sovereignty” as a policy objective, while significant, has also drawn criticism. In 2022, the appointment of a dedicated minister for food sovereignty was met with controversy following statements made by the minister regarding the prioritization of domestic production. A proposed amendment to Article 32 of the Italian Constitution to enshrine the principle of food sovereignty is currently under consideration.