semi-progressive governments propose that wereregulate the food commodity markets that werederegulated under neoliberalism. It is also pro-posed that they be regulated better than beforethey were deregulated, withgenuine supply man-agement, making it possible to set prices that arefair to both farmers and consumers alike, as out-lined inTable1 (Rosset,2006).That necessarily means a return to protectionof the national food production of nations,both against the dumping of artificially cheapfood that undercuts local farmers, and againstthe artificially expensive food imports thatwe encounter today. It means rebuilding the na-tional grain reserves and parastatal marketingboards, in new and improved versions that ac-tively include farmer organizations as ownersand administrators of public reserves. This is akey step toward taking our food system backfrom the TNCs that hoard food stocks to driveprices up (Rosset,2006).Countries urgently need to stimulate therecoveryoftheirnationalfoodproducingcapacity,specifically that capacity located in the peasantand family farm sectors.This means public sectorbudgets, floor prices, credit and other forms of support, and genuine agrarian reform. Landreform is urgently needed in many countriesto rebuild the peasant and family farm sectorswhose vocation is growing food for people, sincethe largest farms and agribusinesses seem toonly produce for cars and for export (Rosset
.,2006). Also, many countries need to implementexport controls, as a number of governmentshave done in recent days, to stop the forcedexportation of food desperately needed by theirownpopulations.Finally, we must change dominant technologi-cal practices in farming, toward an agriculturebasedonagroecologicalprinciples,thatissustain-able, and that is based on respect for and is inequilibrium with nature, local cultures and tradi-tional farming knowledge (Altieri, 2008, http://www.landaction.org/spip/spip.php?article315,accessed 29 July 2008). It has been scientificallydemonstrated that ecological farming systemscan be more productive, can better resist droughtand other manifestations of climate change,and are more economically sustainable becausethey use less fossil fuel. We can no longerafford the luxury of food whose price is linked tothe price of petroleum (Schill, 2008, http://www.ethanolproducer.com/issue.jsp?issue_id
84,acces-sed 29 July 2008), much less whose industrialmonoculture production model ^ with pesticidesand GMOs ^ damages the future productive capa-cityof our soils.All of these recommendations, which addresseach of the major causes of the crisis, are partof the food sovereignty proposal (Rosset, 2006;
Food sovereignty policies to address the global food price crisis
Protect domestic food markets against both dumping (artificially low prices) and artificiallyhigh prices driven by speculation and volatility in global markets.
A return to improved versions of supply management policies at the national level andimproved international commodity agreements at a global level.
Recovery of the productive capacity of peasant and family farm sectors, via floor prices,improved marketing boards, public sector budgets and genuine agrarian reform.
Rebuild improved versions of public sector and or farmer-owned basic food inventories,elimination of TNCs and the private sector as the principal owners of national food stocks.
Controls against hoarding and forced export of needed foodstuffs.
An immediate moratorium on agrofuels.
The technological transformation of farming systems, based on agroecology, to break thelink between food and petroleum prices, and to conserve and restore the productivecapacity of farm lands.
Development 51(4): Thematic Section