b'THE RISK CORNER BY: DAVID ZARUKTRACKING THE AGROECOLOGY FUNDT he Agroecology Fund dramaticallyis to raise doubts on the achievements andagers that take a commission on what they increased its fundraising in 2024.sustainability of conventional farming.raise and spend. One year on, it is time to revisitAgroecology could easily be ignored as aAs the number of foundations have this activist group to see how it has beencult dogma until the movement came intomushroomed following a series of tech-distributing this new cash windfall. Whatsuch significant foundation funding. nology revolutions, fiscal sponsors have I discovered was more than a list of organ- enabled such groups to be more efficient in izations; it was something more disturbing. THE GRANTING NUMBERS their giving, often grouping donations from In 2024, the Agroecology Fund websitemultiple foundations into single projects. THE WINDFALL claimed to have granted over $20 millionAs many NGOs have their own objectives Established in 2012 by four foundationsdollars from 2012 to 2023. This year, theand character, fiscal sponsors have started pooling funds together, the Agroecologysite has been updated to take into accountcreating their own activist campaign organi-Fund originally aimed to support, trainthe 2024 $100 million windfall, claimingzations that they manage in-house while still and promote agroecology solutions. It wasregranting of $33 million since 2012. Wepromoting them, fraudulently, as separate a small operation, raising and granting $2can assume then that only 13% of last yearsnon-profit organizations.million to $3 million a year, until it changedtotal funding intake has been regranted toSome advantages to this tactic:its fiscal sponsor several years ago to theagroecology projects.While the Global Greengrants Global Greengrants Fund. These consult- I use the term we can assume becauseFund considers itself as an Interconnected ants advised another fundraising tactic:the Agroecology Fund is not at all trans- Network of Grassroots Advisors (i.e. con-identifying agroecology, counter-intuitively,parent. It does not file an IRS 990 reportsultants), it is established as a non-profit. as a climate mitigation strategy for agricul- because the organization, technically, doesAny monies they receive are tax deductible. ture. The new fiscal sponsor then tappednot exist. It is not a registered non-profit, With commissions on average of 10% into its network of tech billionaires, tickingand it does not have 501(c)(3) status, so it(plus administrative fees), fiscal sponsors like all of their boxes (climate, poverty, Africandoes not have to publish reports on its rev- the Global Greengrants Fund do well when development, ), to pull in over $100 mil- enues or expenses. The Agroecology Fundprojects like the Agroecology Fund strike lion in foundation donations in 2024. is run and managed by its fiscal sponsor,it rich.How did they spend it? the Global Greengrants Fund, which sub-Managing non-existent entities (pro-sumes all of its accounts within the largerjects) within fiscal sponsorship umbrellas THE CASH OBJECTIVES Greengrants IRS declaration (including theleaves no separate transparency require-As the Agroecology Fund is a regrantingsalary it pays the Agroecology Funds direc- ments, no means of scrutiny and more flex-non-profit, it is expected to give this wind- tor, Daniel Moss). ible capital opportunities. fall away in the form of grants, assumedlySome other peculiarities with this cha-With close relationships with fiscal to help peasant farmers in developingrade: sponsors, foundation boards and fund countries dig wells and obtain better seeds. With no office and no registered iden- managers, often infiltrated by activist cam-But much of this $100 million is tied totity, the Agroecology Fund staff have topaigners, have more control over how their lobbying against conventional agricultureofficially operate in the name of their fiscaldonations are being spent. and research including $10 million fromsponsor, a small detail most partners and A project like the Agroecology Fund the Waverley Street Foundation (Laurenemedia overlook.does not need to be accountable and cannot Powell Jobs) and $9 million from the Little is known about which organiza- be held liable for any damages coming from Ballmer Group (Steve Ballmer). Thesetions receive funding from this shadow body.its false claims. funds are earmarked for advocacy cam- There are no lists.The hypocrisy is quite rich. These activ-paigns in countries where agricultural The website says it does not acceptists often criticize industry for corruption, technology issues are heating up the policysolicitations and only grants to projects ornon-transparency and high lobbying budg-debates (including Washington, Brusselsgroups upon advice from its partners (trust- ets. It reminds me of Willy Sutton who and Rome, where the FAO is located). UNbased grantmaking). Who are these part- once stated the reason he robbed banks was organizations are becoming more reliant onners? Once againsmoke and mirrors. because thats where the money is. foundation funding so it should come as no surprise to see the UNEP and FAO agro- THE FISCAL SPONSORDavid Zaruk is a professor based in Brussels ecology campaigns becoming more vocal. REVOLUTION writing on environmental-health risk policy As agroecology imposes arbitraryFiscal sponsors are consultancies that bridgewithin the EU Bubble. The views expressed in political restrictions on agriculture (nothe gap between the philanthropic com- this article are solely those of the author and do industry involvement, global trade, inno- munity and civil society. They are usuallynot necessarily reflect the views of Seed World. vative technologies or synthetic inputs), awell-connected consultants with a network principle ambition of the Agroecology Fundof foundation administrators and fund man-40ISEED WORLD EUROPEISEEDWORLD.COM/EUROPE | SEPTEMBER 2025'