Abstract

This paper describes and critically reflects on a participatory policy process which resulted in a government decision not to introduce genetically modified (GM) cotton in farmers’ fields in Mali (West Africa). In January 2006, 45 Malian farmers gathered in Sikasso to deliberate on GM cotton and the future of farming in Mali. As an invited policy space convened by the government of Sikasso region, this first-time farmers' jury was unique in West Africa. It was known as l’ECID—Espace Citoyen d’Interpellation Démocratique (Citizen’s Space for Democratic Deliberation)—and it had an unprecedented impact on the region. In this Deliberative and Inclusive Process (DIP), the ECID combined the citizens’ jury method with indigenous methods for debate and dialogue, including the traditional African palaver. The ECID brought together male and female producers representing every district in the Sikasso region of southern Mali, specialist witnesses from various continents and a panel of independent observers, as well as resource persons and members of the national and international press and media. As an experiment in deliberative democracy, the ECID of Sikasso aimed to give men and women farmers the opportunity to share knowledge on the benefits and risks of GM cotton, and make policy recommendations on the future of GM technology in Malian agriculture. Designed as a bottom-up and participatory process, the ECID’s outcomes significantly changed national policy on the release of GM technology and have had an enduring influence in Mali. In this paper, we describe our positionality as action researchers and co-organisers of the ECID. We explain the methodology used for the ECID of Sikasso and critically reflect on the safeguards that were put in place to ensure a balanced and trustworthy deliberative process. The ECID and its key outcomes are discussed in the context of the political economy of GM cotton in West Africa. Last, we briefly highlight the relevance of the ECID for current international debates on racism in the theory and practice deliberative democracy; the production of post-normal transdisciplinary knowledge for technology risk-assessments; and the politics of knowledge in participatory policy-making for food and agriculture.

Highlights

  • Mirroring its colonial past, West Africa today is at the receiving end of externally-led interventions designed to radically transform its food and agriculture (Schnurr 2015;1 3 Vol.:(0123456789)M

  • We briefly highlight the relevance of the ECID for current international debates on racism in the theory and practice deliberative democracy; the production of post-normal transdisciplinary knowledge for technology risk-assessments; and the politics of knowledge in participatory policy-making for food and agriculture

  • This paper has offered critical reflections on the methodology, process, and immediate outcomes of the Citizen Space for Democratic Deliberation (ECID) on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the future of farming in Mali

Read more

Summary

Introduction

West Africa today is at the receiving end of externally-led interventions designed to radically transform its food and agriculture We wrote this paper in direct response to recent requests made by different actors in West Africa who have asked for detailed published information on the ECID’s methodology and its overall design This is because they wish to use the ECID’s process-oriented methodology to facilitate citizen deliberations on two critical issues in their region: i) Public health impacts of releasing genetically malesterile mosquitoes in the wild to reduce the transmission of malaria in Burkina Faso, Mali and the Ivory Coast. The ECID of Sikasso aimed to give men and women farmers the opportunity to share knowledge on the benefits and risks of GM cotton, and make policy recommendations on the future of GM technology in Malian agriculture It brought together 45 male and female producers representing every district in the Sikasso region (Fig. 1), specialist witnesses from various continents, a panel of independent observers, as well as resource persons and members of the national and international media. Within our iterative cycles of reflection, planning and action (Online Appendix Box A), we used specific methods and processes to co-produce, gather, analyse, and disseminate information

Methods
Findings
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.