When public programmes miss the farmers they’re meant for – and how philanthropy can help.
Picture a farmer in Brazil, growing beans, cassava, and vegetables on just a few hectares. He learns from his neighbor that the government has created a public financing program for small farmers, called PRONAF, or the National Program for Strengthening Family Farming. The program offers low-interest loans to help farmers invest in their land and livelihoods.
But when he goes to the bank, the farmer is asked for guarantees, documents, and technical assistance that he doesn’t have. He leaves confused, frustrated and empty-handed.
This scene, repeated across Brazil, reveals the distance between agroecology and public policy. Despite well-meaning attempts to make government policy more responsive to the needs of farmers and agroecology practitioners, policies often seem to not be designed for the communities they are meant to serve.
For almost three years, I have dedicated myself to addressing this challenge. I have done it first by listening: to grassroots rural movements, family farmers, academics, researchers, and government representatives.
What I’ve learned is that the obstacles to accessing public resources aren’t clear to everyone. In the case of PRONAF, some see it as progress, while others view it as an unreachable showcase. What’s certain is that, according to the data, the program isn’t reaching the scale needed to transform family farming: while family farmers and small holder farmers account for 75% of rural properties in Brazil, only about 15% of them can obtain credit. Resources exist, but farmers can’t reach them.
This dynamic plays out with so many other public policies in Brazil, and government policies around the world that are meant to advance agroecology. A law is passed, and a decade later data shows that only a fraction of the intended beneficiaries were served, or a false assumption led to problematic outcomes.
The good news is that philanthropy can play a role in bridging the gap when policy doesn’t meet reality.
To understand why PRONAF has fallen short and what can be done about it, last September the Porticus regenerative agriculture challenge team brought together actors who don’t usually talk to each other — grassroots movements with divergent views, a climate foundation/regranter, an agribusiness consultancy, local credit implementers, a cause-driven communication agency, and community led funds with both territorial reach and technological expertise.
Around this diverse table, it became clear that the problems with PRONAF stemmed from a structural problem: policymakers and those in the field aren’t aligned. In many cases, they aren’t speaking the same language. The policy was not built to acknowledge bottlenecks like lack of collateral, land regularization, and limited access to risk management instruments.
But the group also agreed that we can come together as an ecosystem, including funders, to promote improvements to PRONAF and create better public policy in general.
This is where philanthropy can play a strategic role. Not just as a funder, but as a bridge between public policy and the people who need to access it. Transforming rural economies requires more than funding projects — it demands relationships, shared knowledge, and the ability to connect farmers, policymakers, and markets around a common vision of change.
Also, philanthropy can play a catalytic role in several ways:
Facilitate access to finance. Access to credit remains one of the main barriers for small and mid-sized producers. Philanthropy can support intermediaries and local implementers that work directly in territories — for example, Conexsus, whose network of community credit agents and partnership with Banco do Brasil has expanded financial inclusion by building trust and simplifying credit processes. Similarly, Fundo Casa Socioambiental channels resources to local initiatives, including in collaboration with Banco CAIXA.
Support data that informs policy reform. Reliable, publicly accessible data is one of the most powerful levers for policy transformation. Institutions such as the Climate Policy Initiative, Instituto Escolhas, the Cátedra Josué de Castro at USP, and Catedra de Inclusao Produtiva Rural, are advancing research that sheds light on land use, rural credit, and production costs. When shared openly, this evidence enables policymakers, social movements, and funders to align incentives around regenerative and inclusive goals.
Back tech innovation that cuts through bureaucracy. New technologies and tools can make rural finance more transparent and accessible, and help simplify access to public programs. The KAWA Fund, operated by Violet and connected with the Central Bank of Brazil, is developing digital tools that make rural finance more transparent and accessible.
Through grants or impact investments, philanthropy can back tech solutions and help them reach small and mid-sized farmers who are otherwise excluded from credit markets.
Practice inclusive and integrated grantmaking. The most effective funders listen closely and co-design programs with grassroots movements and territorial organizations. Partnerships with groups such as CEDAC, the Movimento dos Pequenos Agricultores (MPA), UNICAFES, and the Agroecology Fund show how combining technical assistance, flexible support, and peer learning can help small producers scale regenerative practices.
Treat communications as core to systemic change. Organizations such as Purpose Brasil and the Instituto Cultura, Comunicação e Incidência (ICCI) work with family farmers and local movements to translate field experience into narratives that inform and influence policy debates. Supporting this kind of storytelling strengthens visibility for those on the frontlines of agricultural transition.
Farmers aren’t asking for favours. They want to enable conditions to produce, innovate, and stay on the land.
A public policy that fails to recognize this reality turns into a labyrinth. Agroecology can be the pathway to a more just and sustainable food future, but only if support mechanisms truly reach the ground.
Given that, I offer an invitation. If we want agroecology to be more than a discourse, we need to turn PRONAF — and other public policies — into living instruments that truly engage with those who grow the food on our tables.
Think about the ideas above, which represent a shift in how philanthropy operates — less about directing and more about connecting. By linking local implementers, data producers, innovators, communicators, and community leaders, funders can help strengthen the foundations of a more resilient and inclusive rural economy.
Mike Oliveira is Regenerative Agriculture Senior programme manager at Porticus, works at the intersection of regenerative agriculture, climate, and philanthropy in Latin America. For the past years, he has focused on bridging public policy, grassroots movements, and finance to accelerate the transition towards regenerative agriculture.
This article is part of a series of pieces exploring agroecology and philanthropy, published in partnership with Proximate.
Read more on Alliance magazine
