Peru’s presidential runoff race has brought the country’s agricultural sector into sharp focus, with the two leading candidates presenting contrasting visions for one of the nation’s most vital economic engines. As voters prepare to choose between Keiko Fujimori and Pedro Castillo in the June 6 runoff, their proposals for revitalizing Peru’s agroindustry have become central to the debate, reflecting broader tensions over land use, rural investment, and food security in a country where agriculture employs nearly a quarter of the workforce.
The runoff scenario emerged after Peru’s first-round election on April 11, in which no candidate secured the 50% threshold needed to avoid a second vote. Castillo, a rural schoolteacher and union leader from the northern Andes, surprised analysts by finishing first with approximately 19% of the vote, while Fujimori, the daughter of former president Alberto Fujimori, followed closely with around 13%. Their divergent backgrounds have shaped sharply different approaches to agricultural policy, particularly regarding smallholder farmers, agroexports, and state intervention in rural economies.
According to Peru’s National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI), agriculture contributed 7.3% to the country’s GDP in 2020 and employed 24.5% of the economically active population. The sector is also a major foreign exchange earner, with agricultural exports reaching $7.1 billion in 2020, led by products such as grapes, avocados, blueberries, and coffee. These figures underscore why both candidates have prioritized agricultural development in their platforms, even as they disagree on the best path forward.
Castillo’s Vision: State-Led Support for Slight Farmers
Pedro Castillo, representing the left-wing Perú Libre party, has framed his agricultural policy around empowering small and medium-sized producers, particularly in the highlands and jungle regions where poverty rates remain high. His platform calls for the creation of a state-backed agricultural development bank to provide low-interest loans to farmers lacking access to traditional credit. He has also proposed reinstating price controls on basic food staples and expanding state procurement programs to buy directly from smallholder cooperatives for inclusion in national food assistance programs.
Castillo’s agenda includes renegotiating certain free trade agreements to include stronger safeguards for domestic producers, arguing that current treaties have exposed Peruvian farmers to unfair competition from subsidized imports. He has emphasized the demand to revitalize rural infrastructure, including irrigation systems and rural roads, citing data from the Ministry of Agriculture showing that only 30% of Peru’s arable land has access to modern irrigation. His campaign has highlighted successful models from Bolivia and Ecuador, where state-supported agroecology programs have increased yields while reducing input costs for small farmers.
In a speech delivered in Huancayo on May 18, Castillo stated, “We will not allow our farmers to be priced out of their own markets. The state must return as a partner in production, not just a regulator.” The remark was widely circulated by Peruvian media outlets and later referenced in a policy analysis by the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO) Peru office, which noted that Castillo’s proposals align with growing regional interest in food sovereignty frameworks.
Fujimori’s Approach: Export Growth and Private Investment
Keiko Fujimori, leading the Fuerza Popular coalition, has positioned her agricultural strategy as a continuation of market-oriented policies aimed at boosting export competitiveness. Her plan focuses on expanding Peru’s agricultural frontier through public-private partnerships, particularly in underutilized areas of the coast and northern highlands. She has proposed creating special agroindustrial zones with tax incentives and streamlined permitting to attract foreign investment in processing, packaging, and logistics.
Fujimori’s platform emphasizes the importance of maintaining and deepening Peru’s existing trade agreements, which she argues have been instrumental in doubling non-traditional agricultural exports over the past decade. She has pointed to the success of sectors like avocado and blueberry farming—where Peru is now among the world’s top exporters—as proof that export-led growth can lift rural incomes when paired with technical assistance and access to global value chains.
Her campaign has also proposed expanding the Sierra Exportadora program, a government initiative that provides technical support and market access to highland farmers seeking to enter export markets. According to the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism (MINCETUR), Sierra Exportadora has assisted over 120,000 families since its launch in 2006, helping them increase average incomes by 40% in participating regions. Fujimori has pledged to double the program’s budget and extend its reach to include more indigenous communities in the Amazon basin.
In a televised debate on May 23, Fujimori warned against what she described as “populist shortcuts” that could jeopardize Peru’s hard-won gains in agricultural exports. “We cannot sacrifice decades of progress in pursuit of ideological purity,” she said. “Our farmers need access to capital, technology, and markets—not price controls that discourage investment and lead to shortages.”
Points of Convergence and Divergence
Despite their differences, both candidates acknowledge critical challenges facing Peru’s agricultural sector. Climate change adaptation ranks high on both agendas, with each proposing increased investment in drought-resistant crops and water management systems. The Peruvian government’s own National Adaptation Plan estimates that climate variability could reduce yields of key crops like potatoes and maize by up to 20% in some regions by 2050 without intervention.
Both also express concern over land titling and access, particularly for indigenous communities in the Amazon where overlapping claims between farmers, miners, and conservation areas have led to recurring conflicts. Castillo has advocated for accelerating the titling process through specialized rural courts, while Fujimori has proposed strengthening inter-agency coordination to resolve disputes more efficiently.
Where they diverge most sharply is in the role of the state. Castillo sees an active, interventionist state as essential to correcting market failures and reducing rural inequality. Fujimori, while acknowledging the need for targeted support, warns that excessive state involvement could deter the private investment necessary to sustain long-term growth in export-oriented agriculture.
Stakeholder Reactions and Regional Implications
The contrasting visions have elicited strong responses from Peru’s agricultural stakeholders. The National Agrarian Confederation (CNA), which represents thousands of smallholder farmers, has cautiously welcomed Castillo’s emphasis on state support but urged concrete details on financing and implementation. Meanwhile, the Association of Agricultural Producers’ Guilds (AGAP), which includes major exporters, has expressed concern over Castillo’s proposals to revisit trade agreements, warning that such moves could trigger retaliatory measures from trading partners.
Regional governments have also weighed in. In Lambayeque, a northern coastal region responsible for a significant share of Peru’s fruit exports, the regional president has endorsed Fujimori’s focus on export expansion, citing the need to maintain competitiveness in global markets. In contrast, leaders in Puno and Cusco, where subsistence farming remains prevalent, have expressed greater alignment with Castillo’s call for strengthened domestic market mechanisms and agroecological transitions.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) office in Lima has noted that Peru’s agricultural future will require balancing export growth with inclusive rural development. In a May 2021 report, the FAO stressed that policies promoting sustainability, access to finance, and climate resilience—elements present in both candidates’ platforms to varying degrees—will be critical to achieving the country’s Sustainable Development Goals related to zero hunger and responsible consumption.
What Happens Next
As the June 6 runoff approaches, both campaigns are intensifying their outreach in rural areas, where voter turnout has historically played a decisive role in Peruvian elections. Election authorities have confirmed that overseas voting will conclude on June 5, with domestic voting taking place from 8:00 a.m. To 4:00 p.m. On election day. The National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE) has stated that preliminary results will begin to be published shortly after polls close, with a official count expected to be completed within 24 to 48 hours.
Regardless of the outcome, the next administration will face immediate pressure to address rising input costs, particularly for fertilizers, whose prices have increased globally due to supply chain disruptions and heightened demand. The Ministry of Agriculture has indicated that it will convene a multisectoral working group in July to assess short-term mitigation measures, including potential subsidies or buffer stocks, pending verification of final election results.
For Peru’s agricultural sector, the runoff represents more than a choice between two candidates—it reflects a broader debate about the kind of rural future the country seeks to build. Whether through state-led empowerment or export-driven growth, the path chosen will shape livelihoods, landscapes, and food systems for years to come.
We encourage readers to share their thoughts on Peru’s agricultural future in the comments below and to spread this analysis to others interested in Latin American development.