Solidarity technologies in agriculture should be part of the people’s food sovereignty

Farmers in Turkey are increasingly concerned about the growing influence of corporate-controlled digital technologies in agriculture, fearing that these innovations could undermine traditional farming practices and deepen economic inequality. A recent report published by Bianet highlights how the digitalization of food production is being driven by powerful agribusiness firms, often at the expense of small-scale farmers who rely on ancestral knowledge and community-based approaches to cultivation. The report outlines how modern agricultural technologies, including autonomous tractors and AI-driven farm equipment, are reshaping the landscape of rural life. These tools, marketed under labels such as “smart agriculture” and “digital agriculture,” are designed to maximize efficiency and profitability. However, critics argue that such advancements are not neutral, they reinforce existing power structures, favoring large agribusinesses while marginalizing local farmers. According to the report, the integration of digital systems into farming operations risks reducing farmers to passive users of technology, stripping them of autonomy and deepening their reliance on corporate suppliers. One key example cited in the report is the case of John Deere, a dominant player in the agricultural machinery industry. In recent years, the company has introduced autonomous tractors that operate independently of human oversight. These machines, equipped with advanced sensors and connectivity features, enable remote monitoring and automated decision-making. However, they also come with restrictions that limit farmers' ability to perform repairs or modify the equipment. The report notes that farmers are now unable to access critical diagnostic information or technical support outside of officially sanctioned channels, effectively placing them at the mercy of corporate interests. This situation has led to legal battles, particularly around the so-called “Right to Repair” movement. Farmers have challenged the restrictive practices of companies like John Deere, arguing that they violate principles of consumer rights and fair competition. In one notable case, a group of farmers successfully sued the company, resulting in a settlement that required John Deere to provide essential tools and documentation, such as diagnostic software and technical manuals, to farmers and independent repair services for a decade. This ruling marks a significant shift, empowering farmers to maintain control over their equipment and reduce dependency on corporate service networks. Despite these developments, the report emphasizes that the broader challenge lies in ensuring that technological progress serves the common good rather than reinforcing exploitative systems. It raises questions about the possibility of creating “solidarity technologies”, innovations developed through collaborative efforts and rooted in communal values. Such technologies would prioritize equitable access, transparency, and democratic control over production processes. The report suggests that historical examples, such as the Ahilik tradition in Turkey and the culture of imece, offer valuable insights into how communities can harness technology in ways that align with social justice and environmental sustainability. The debate over digital agriculture extends beyond individual farms and into policy discussions at both national and international levels. Advocacy groups are calling for regulatory frameworks that protect farmers from predatory business practices and ensure that technological innovation benefits all members of society. They argue that the current trajectory of agricultural digitization threatens not only livelihoods but also cultural heritage, as traditional farming knowledge is replaced by algorithmic decision-making. As the conflict between corporate agribusiness and grassroots movements continues to unfold, the focus remains on finding alternative models of agricultural development, one that integrates technology with the principles of food sovereignty and collective ownership. The outcome of these struggles will shape the future of farming, determining whether digital tools serve as instruments of empowerment or mechanisms of control. For now, the struggle persists, with farmers striving to reclaim agency over their land, their tools, and their futures.