drugs such as vaccines resulting from the combined activity of biotechnology and nanotechnology (Friedland et al., 1991; Goodman and Redclift, 1991; Friedmann, 1993; Bonnano et al., 1994; McMichael, 1994; Goodman and Watts, 1998; Busch, 2001; Mooney, 2002).

     Countering these trends one finds the rise of very strong rural social movements and indigenous movements that propose alternatives for autonomy, food sovereignty, agroecology and peasant networks (Vía Campesina, MST and the World Social Forum, among others), as well as the growing number of consumers who demand local, organic, socially fair, diverse, nutritional and safe foods (Slow Food Movement and consumer associations).

      Because of these and other changes, agriculture as we know it is facing a profound transformation, with implications for its protagonists whose impacts are not yet clear, much less understood. To understand the current situation of agriculture in LAC, one must review the history to understand the models, visions and development paradigms that shaped the strategies of intervention that gave rise to the consequences
we are trying to overcome.
1.5 Regional Context

1.5.1 Evolution of development models
Development strategies in LAC were not designed in a political vacuum, but rather were decisively influenced by political events inside and outside the region that promoted and continue to promote development models that directly affect the agrarian policies of the region and AKST systems.
     With the economic expansion of the United States after the Second World War came the need to expand external markets for its products, find new investment opportunities, access cheap raw materials to support growing industry and establish a global network of military power to ensure access for consumers, markets and raw materials. Consequently, the region’s development was subordinated to U.S. interests and growth needs. To foster development and maintain economic stability internationally, the industrialized countries, led by the United States, assigned a new role to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, institutions originally created to rebuild Europe (Stiglitz, 2003). Yet the type of development promoted through the
new international institutions is highly conditioned on the economic, political and military needs of the industrialized countries, especially the United States.
     In the 1950s, President Harry Truman of the United States held great influence over the path of development in LAC. In his Fair Deal, Truman proposed the “technification” (intensification) of agriculture as one of the instruments for emerging from underdevelopment (a term he introduced in the international discourse). During his administration, a period marked by the proliferation of development projects began. In the 1960s, the program that most influenced the type of development in the region was the Alliance for Progress, a hemispheric initiative led by President John F. Kennedy to counter the potential influence of communist Cuba in the rest of LAC and to promote the U.S. economy (Smith, 1999); its development strategy entailed articulating the peasant sector to the market (Escobar, 1995). World Bank documents make clear that under this development strat

strategy, the peasants of LAC had two options: (1) to become small entrepreneurs, or, (2) to disappear from the market (or from the agricultural sector). This strategy was focused on modernizing and monetizing the rural sector and making the transition from isolation to integration with the national economy. The technological vehicle for this strategy was the Green Revolution, yet its results in terms of improving the living conditions of the rural population have been much
debated (Glaeser, 1987; Rosset et al., 2000; Evenson and Gollin, 2003). With the Green Revolution food production in LAC increased 8%, yet during the same period hunger in the region increased 19% (and this was not due to population increase, as the total amount of food per person also increased).
     During the 1960s and 1970s, this conception of development held sway. To a certain point one can say that these development policies were successful since during these two decades Latin America and the Caribbean experienced unprecedented economic growth. Most of the countries attained per capita growth of 2.4% annually during the 1960s and some countries were able to maintain this rate in the 1970s (IDB, 1989). This growth was based largely on the import substitution model developed and promulgated by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC) (Bulmer-Thomas, 1987; Glaeser, 1987). This was a period of fast-paced industrialization and economic integration at the regional level. Yet once again the benefits of this growth were not distributed equitably and in many cases they did not even reach the most impoverished sectors of the region (ICCARD, 1989; Conroy et al., 1996). This period also saw the resurgence of military dictatorships in LAC. The increase in oil prices and the energy crisis of 1973 led to high levels of borrowing, which in turn resulted in an economic crisis in the 1980s. The collapse of the Latin American and Caribbean economies in the 1980s led the Inter-
American Development Bank to name this period “The Lost Decade in Latin America” (IDB, 1989).
     Given the threats of default by Mexico, Brazil and Peru, the international financial institutions, chiefly the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, mobilized to impose structural adjustment programs on the economies of LAC. They also pressured the governments to impose austerity programs. The response to the crisis of the 1980s was the return to the liberal policies of the early years of the century, but now stronger than before and reinforced by a
neoliberal program globally (IDB, 1989).
     Guided by the international financial institutions’ structural adjustment programs, the wave of liberalization and deregulation implemented in LAC in the 1990s extended to the rural sector. In addition to policies such as freeing up the economy and open markets geared to exports, the adjustment programs fostered a reduction in national industrial protection, lowering tariffs and cutting back on social spending and social development, including investment in agriculture.
     In the last 15 years government economic policies have
been geared to applying the rules of the so-called “Washington
Consensus” (Stiglitz, 2003), in particular, policies to
(1) ensure fiscal discipline (putting finances in order, fiscal
responsibility, cutting public spending and voluntary retirement
plans, among others); (2) implement tax reform