*3.3. A Case Study from SeedChange*

SeedChange is an NGO founded in Canada in 1945 by Dr. Lotta Hitschmanova as the Unitarian Service Committee of Canada (USC Canada). SeedChange relies on funding from the Government of Canada, foundations and public donations. It is a medium-sized NGO, with an office in Ottawa and remote-based staff in several provinces, totaling 30 staff. The board includes directors with experience in organizational governance and food sovereignty, with Indigenous and international directors playing crucial roles 8. SeedChange's role was recently publicly clarified and defined as supporting local organizations as trainers and facilitators for sharing knowledge, as fundraisers and funders for partners' work, and in supporting policy advocacy [65].

SeedChange works with local organizations in mostly medium- to long-term partnerships both domestically and internationally with 14 partners in 10 countries. Due to the focus on seeds, programs are primarily located in the centers of crop origin and/or diversity in Mesoamerica, the Andes, West Africa, East Africa and Asia. International partners have been small- to medium-sized local NGOs and institutes, and smallholder and Indigenous cooperative associations. Their work overall focuses on the use of participatory and farmer-led methods to promote seed security, agroecology, agrobiodiversity, collective marketing, farmers' rights and gender equality. Collaborations for technical assistance on seeds is an important aspect.

SeedChange was initially created for post-conflict humanitarian assistance. Canadians were encouraged to donate and provide in-kind and material support, with appeals based on "human dignity". It was a policy of the organization to not send Canadian staff or volunteers abroad, although SeedChange had local offices in some countries. In the 1960s and 1970s, the organization became more centered on an international development focus. During that period, the humanitarian focus was still prominent, including in food aid programs 9. In the 1980s there was a focus on community "self-help" projects, including in agriculture such as irrigation, reforestation and home gardens 10. A pivotal moment came in the late 1980s, when SeedChange began work on seed security with the Ethiopian Institute of Biodiversity Conservation as part of efforts to support famine recovery. This raised awareness of the importance of seed diversity for food security and led to the creation of a major program called Seeds of Survival (SoS) to strengthen farmers' seed systems and agrobiodiversity in several countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America [66]. South-South and South-North knowledge exchanges and international training workshops were key to sharing methodologies [66]. It was generally acknowledged that SoS approaches were directed by partners in the global South. SoS methods included strengthening access to diverse, local seeds through conservation on farms and in community seed banks, participatory plant breeding and varietal selection, and policy advocacy for farmers' rights to seeds.

Participatory plant breeding and varietal selection are based on collaborative processes between farmers and agronomists. These methods can include the selection of local varieties to maintain and strengthen them, or the crossing of local and external varieties

to improve certain characteristics. Trials happen in local fields, and it is the community criteria (including criteria that may vary by gender) that matter the most in the selection process. These may include growing characteristics (e.g., length of cycle), yield, color, marketability, storability, cooking time, taste and others [29]. In Honduras, for example, participatory plant breeding with maize and beans has resulted in locally adapted, quality seeds in farmers' hands that have made a crucial difference in local food security [67]. This work is also linked to policy advocacy to defend community rights to freely save, exchange and sell their seeds [29]. It presents an alternative to top-down agricultural development. SeedChange and partners in at least six countries have also contributed to policy initiatives to improve national seed laws. This work for seed sovereignty–an essential aspect of food sovereignty–is a form of resistance to the expansion of the industrial agricultural model.

Inspired by the approach and results of the SoS program, it increasingly became the priority of the organization. Programs for sustainable agriculture, agrobiodiversity and farmers' seed systems became the sole focus by 2007. During these years, SeedChange also turned increasingly toward alternatives such as food sovereignty and agroecology, and away from concepts of development. Learning from partners and from international movements such as La Via Campesina led to the growing realization of common alignment with food sovereignty principles and critique of neoliberal agro-industrial models. This has meant integrating a greater focus on the root causes of problems. For example, rather than presenting hunger as being due to a lack of productivity, a food sovereignty approach has encouraged the organization to recognize "hunger as a problem of food governance, unequal distribution and injustice" 11. SeedChange staff had also engaged in research that led them to question mainstream development, including the publication of a book on problematic agricultural aid in Bolivia by the SeedChange executive director in 2014 [68]. Beginning in 2007, remaining local offices were phased out in a gradual process. In some cases, this resulted in the creation of new local organizations or a merger with local organizations. This "localization" strategy was deliberate and was fully achieved by 2020. The importance of working in partnership with local civil society organizations is emphasized in SeedChange communications 12.

SeedChange's work in Canada was also influenced by SoS and food sovereignty. In 2013, SeedChange created a domestic program for participatory plant breeding, learning from the importance of this approach from partners in the global South 13. SeedChange was contacted by an Indigenous community group in Northern Manitoba for collaboration, which led to internal learning at SeedChange 14. SeedChange has also been a key actor in the creation of Farmers for Climate Solutions, an initiative to reduce emissions and improve climate resilience 15. Other advocacy over the last two decades has included coalition work to influence national and foreign policies on agriculture and trade, such as in civil society campaigns to counter the promotion of transgenic technologies in Canada and by the Canadian government abroad 16. SeedChange included the establishment of an organizational approach for actions to support decolonization as a goal in their strategic plan. Some resulting actions included initial efforts to build relationships with Indigenousled seed keepers within the borders of Canada. SeedChange is undertaking anti-racism and anti-oppression training to inform its policies (see [71]).

In terms of international partnership relationships, SeedChange is in the process of building mechanisms to improve decision-making. While SeedChange has engaged in a spectrum of relationships with different partners, directly discussing the issue of power dynamics has been rare. Internally, as indicated in the draft international partnership document, SeedChange has been identifying some guiding principles and tools. One of the conclusions, as outlined in its accompanying background paper, is the hope that integrating processes to clarify expectations in a partnership (through the discussion of aspirations for shared decision-making, for example), can be a way to help mitigate the depth and breadth of power differences, as Fowler encourages. The draft principles include a commitment to support struggles against inequality and for just and sustainable food systems, support community organizing and participatory decision-making, employ feminist methodologies, promote food sovereignty and agroecology, support the sharing and co-creation of knowledge, and promote transparent communication and mutual accountability.

Some of the main challenges identified arise from how to reach a balance to meet the reporting requirements of funding bodies while ensuring that these do not dominate partnership relationships, impose Western/colonial concepts, and negatively affect work on the ground (e.g., by taking time and energy away from supporting community actions and engaging with movement building). As noted in the document, this requires listening, questioning assumptions, and a responsibility to raise awareness and dialogue with funders and other actors working in international solidarity. These draft principles were shared with some partners in an initial online discussion in October 2021. At the time of writing this article, the organization has not yet outlined a strategy for how to facilitate a broader discussion with partners, but it was identified as a necessary next step.

A related area of learning has been on feminist approaches. SeedChange has taken an intersectional feminist approach in recent years and today includes partnerships with women's rights organizations, supported through the Feminist International Assistance Policy of the Government of Canada (FIAP). Working with a feminist lens includes acknowledging and helping to redress power asymmetries through a solidarity approach and valuing more egalitarian processes [24,72]. SeedChange has thus articulated a feminist agroecology approach that emphasizes women's leadership and organizing, decisionmaking and access to productive resources, and addressing inequality by working with both women and men [73]. As noted in SeedChange's unpublished background paper on international partnerships, there is interest in being "guided by feminist approaches that centre the people most vulnerable to the negative impacts of patriarchal systems [...] and recognize how patriarchy intersects and exacerbates other types of inequality and oppression—hence also the reason to understand local, anti-racist and anti-colonial feminist struggles" as well as visibilizing the distinct struggles and contributions of 2SLGBTQQIAP+ people [74].

As part of SeedChange's feminist approach, a recently launched project called Rural Women Cultivating Change (RWCC) supported by Global Affairs Canada, engages with seven partners in three East African countries to implement three main objectives: strengthen women's leadership roles in local, regional and national contexts; support the prevention and mitigation of sexual- and gender-based violence; and contribute to women's access to productive resources and agroecological production and marketing. Local partners consist of women's rights organizations and agroecology organizations based in Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia. Project design, planning and implementation of RWCC follows a collaborative approach where partners co-lead the activities. To ensure ongoing collaboration, the program was set up with a "gender equality and inclusion working group" that includes key staff from each partner organization. Collectively, they work to guide the overarching priorities of addressing gender equality through a transformative process, where both the structural and individual barriers and opportunities are identified and addressed throughout the project. Collaborative project implementation also aims to provide spaces for peer-to-peer learning between women's rights and food sovereignty groups in each country and to establish long-term foundational networking for feminist agroecology practice. For example, partner representatives in the working group discuss their own organizational limitations and opportunities while also learning from other partners' experience. The working group continues to identify learning opportunities while also addressing gaps in policy, staffing, and financial opportunities.

Staff consulted for this paper confirmed that recent reflections and learning on partnerships and localization have been meaningful, but also brought up several observations on the limitations, tensions and gaps. These include: (1) Time-sensitive administrative needs to meet funder requirements often shape interactions and take precedence over more respectful processes and shared decision-making; (2) Contradictory aspects exist in our work at all levels as an NGO, and there is often insufficient time or priority given to attempt to address these contradictions; (3) Sharing power is our responsibility and actions are more

important than words; and (4) We must ensure meaningful ways to genuinely discuss these issues with partners. They also reaffirmed that food sovereignty and agroecology provide important guiding principles to share power and prioritize community-led approaches. There is a high level of interest in learning from the new collaboration with women's rights organizations, to co-create feminist methodologies and learn how feminist approaches can help strengthen actions both in work on the ground and in partnership relationships.

#### **4. Conclusions**

This paper has looked at how calls for the localization and decolonization of aid and development are encouraging deeper listening to feminist, Indigenous, anti-racism and global South perspectives and social movements. A commitment to localization requires identifying and working to address inequality in partnership relationships between global North and South organizations. As noted in the discussions among NGOs and studies on localization and decolonizing aid, there is a need for NGOs in the global North to deeply listen to partners and allies, critically question assumptions, and share control over resources and decision-making processes. This would help to strengthen dialogue and equitable processes for the collaborative creation of programs and joint policy advocacy guided by local knowledge and priorities.

Applying the lens of localization to food systems indicates the critical need for food sovereignty approaches. It is crucial to shine light on how the dominant agricultural development model is leading to increased inequality and environmental and health crises, and how these disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Technology transfer approaches have proven problematic for agrobiodiverse Indigenous and smallholder systems around the world. In contrast, agroecology requires community-led methods. Working with food sovereignty and agroecology principles can thus strengthen the processes and outcomes of international solidarity work and programs for sustainable agriculture and food systems.

In the case of SeedChange's international work, learning from partners in the Seeds of Survival program, led to changes which eventually resulted in the adoption of agroecology and food sovereignty as frameworks for programs and policy advocacy. These, in turn, have further influenced the organization's interest in localization, recognizing that partners and community groups are the main experts, while SeedChange's role is to facilitate the sharing of knowledge, seek funding for partners' work, and support international policy advocacy. In summary, food sovereignty and agroecology (1) provided an alternative to problematic development concepts, and (2) encouraged localization and greater priority to global South perspectives. Working with women's rights organizations–supporting the important links between agroecology and feminist movements through collaborative project design, planning and implementation–is currently strengthening the use of feminist approaches at SeedChange. However, important contradictions and setbacks to material actions for change exist, and working to resolve these will require commitment and ongoing reflexivity and learning informed by partners' perspectives.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, B.O., L.A.D.; writing—original draft, B.O. and S.R.; writing—review and editing, B.O., L.A.D. and S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all persons involved in the consultative workshop on the paper.

**Data Availability Statement:** Data supporting the reported results can be found at SeedChange (unpublished internal documents and authors' notes).

**Acknowledgments:** The authors wish to thank the staff at SeedChange–both past and present–who participated in discussions informing this paper. Special thank you to Kate Green, Lauren Brander, Gioconda Ortega-Alarie, Aabir Dey and Priscilla Settee for your input on the ideas in this paper. The authors of the paper are responsible for the content and opinions expressed.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors are employed at SeedChange, the organization featured in the case study in this article.
