16.4

For the definition of the assigned category and the development of the assessment, the responses to the following information requests were taken into account:

Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (Ministry of Economy)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ugt-y6W-SuiGYnSZXLN_D9p7UfMeOpqx/view?usp=drive_link

Further information:

As noted under Objective 16.3, family-farming EAPs number approximately 76,869 units according to the latest National Agricultural Census (2018). The intended reach (26,956) represents, in relative terms, 35% (bearing in mind that one EAP is synonymous with one producer). According to the First Progress Report on the Implementation of the Second National Plan for Adaptation and Mitigation to Climate Change (2024), “In 2023, 16 projects were funded, 578 families were reached, and a specific training was conducted on the subject. A total of 29 agroecology trainings were carried out across the country, reaching 813 producers.” Based on these data, progress to date is 5.2%. During 2024 and 2025, no public policies were implemented to conduct trainings; these were generally provided by universities, INTA, and regional research institutions.

Several provinces advanced in designing specific agroecology promotion laws, such as Misiones (Law to Promote Agroecological Production), Río Negro (Framework Law on Agroecological Production and creation of the Ecomarcal SPG), and La Pampa (Law 3298 on the Promotion of Agroecological Development). In parallel, other jurisdictions developed operational provincial programs such as PRODA in Neuquén, the Agroecology Promotion Program in Buenos Aires, “Activá tu Huerta” in San Luis, and urban and family garden programs in Santa Fe and Córdoba.

Likewise, in many NOA provinces (Santiago del Estero, Salta, Catamarca, Jujuy, La Rioja), provincial roundtables on organic and agroecological production were established which, while representing relevant coordination spaces, do not provide public data on the population reached.

A strategic instrument for advancing this objective was the Territorial Agroecological Nodes (NAT) Program, created in 2022 by the then National Directorate of Agroecology (DNAe), in coordination with RENAMA, the Argentine Society of Agroecology (SAAE), INTA, INAFCI, universities, and local governments. Its purpose was to foster the territorial scaling of agroecology through coordination among producers, technicians, municipalities, and educational institutions. Its design contemplated participatory stakeholder mapping, local diagnostics, technical training, co-management, and interinstitutional planning with a federal approach. However, the program did not receive funding in 2023 and was interrupted following the dissolution of the DNAe, severely weakening the institutional tools available to achieve the objective.

The Territorial Agroecological Nodes (NAT) Program managed to establish—or initiate formation processes—in at least eight Argentine provinces, covering every region of the country. These nodes were co-organized with public universities (such as UNR, UNL, UNRC, UNLPam, UNLu, and UNMdP), INTA, and local actors.

A report by the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS) and the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (2024) surveyed 51 public policies related to production. Of these, 49 were implemented to the detriment of production, and at least 34 directly affect peasant and Indigenous agriculture, as well as family producers.

Major interventions include the dissolution of the National Directorate of Agroecology, the intervention of INAFCI, the elimination of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs (INAI) and the Territorial Emergency Law, as well as a ban on INTA research in areas such as agroecology, climate change, and sustainability. Fundamental programs were also discontinued, including Sembrar Soberanía Alimentaria, Mujeres Produciendo Alimentos, Sembrar Igualdad, Critical Assistance to Family Farming, and the Economic Inclusion Program for Family Producers. The elimination of the Single Registry of the Agri-Food Chain (RUCA), budget cuts at INTA, and the loss of legal protection frameworks such as national procurement laws and yerba mate settlement policies have deepened the setback.