When you took on the role of Executive Director of the International Sugar Organisation (ISO) in 2014, what were your three main priorities, and did you manage to achieve them?
My top three priorities were:
- Delivering the quality professional service that members deserve.
- Incorporating new stakeholders, especially the trade, which had not previously engaged with ISO.
- Positioning sugar as a credible food ingredient within a healthy, balanced diet.
The ISO has significantly expanded its scope and strives for participatory growth, serving as a conduit among parties across all regions. The trade now finds it easier to engage with the ISO while respecting its nature as an international organisation that no longer directly intervenes in the market. The effort to reposition sugar as part of a healthy diet has made considerable progress, though the work remains incomplete.
How have your priorities shifted as the sucro‑energetic sector has evolved – especially with biofuels, bioplastics, and meat proteins?
Sustainability, climate change, and the COP process have elevated decarbonisation on the agenda; around 40% of our work now centres on biofuels and related energy alternatives. More countries are warming to ethanol, and the ISO’s role is to provide the intelligence that enables countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia to make informed choices rather than to direct them on what to do.
Our focus has widened to include bioplastics and polymers. A popular example among young audiences is Coldplay’s wristbands, which, for one tour, were made from sugarcane-based bioplastic – a tangible illustration of sugar’s role in fostering cleaner, more efficient processes.
At the last ISO Seminar, Planetary discussed sugar‑based meat-protein alternatives. Is this a significant opportunity for the sugar industry?
It was very interesting, certainly a novel arena.
It’s important to note that a recent survey found that 20–30 per cent of UK consumers are reducing meat or are willing to try alternative proteins. Companies such as Südzucker are investing heavily in this sector, and it is another “tip of the fork” into which sugar can feed.
What achievements are you personally most proud of during your tenure, and is there anything you wish you had started earlier or pushed harder for?
One of my main missions has been to promote greater respect for developing countries like Guatemala. Regardless of their size, the achievements of nations such as Colombia and Eswatini in water management, and Guatemala and Nicaragua in cogeneration, as well as their contributions to the national energy matrix, deserve recognition.
The ISO’s platform – seminars, conferences, and information sharing – has helped bring those examples to the forefront so others can extrapolate them to their own realities.
The process of adding new members has been frustrating: you gain two, you lose two. My predecessor did an excellent job of increasing membership, and the ISO is now the leading commodity organisation by member numbers. Yet, some countries still do not fully see the return on investment.
I am increasingly frustrated by the declining importance of multilateral “glue”. Sometimes, one wonders whether another major event will be necessary to remind governments that UN organisations like the ISO matter.
Are the USA, Russia and China members of the ISO?
Russia is a member but is currently suspended due to sanctions that have prevented it from paying its contribution, although we are making progress towards resolving the issue.
The United States is more frustrating: in Congress, producers and users are aligned, and farm bills consistently include language in our favour. However, at the executive level, we have never “landed the plane.”
China is similar but for different reasons: it is hesitant to join bodies like the ISO, fearing that membership would undermine sovereignty. We closely collaborate with the Chinese sector and share information, but full membership remains unavailable, which is frustrating given the value ISO can provide.
In 2019, you told me that the ISO was about people, not just statistics. Can you give an example where personal relationships mattered more than numbers?
One example is the ISO’s contribution to the African Continental Free Trade Agreement, where we brought together decision-makers from industry and governments. Concepts such as African‑produced sugar, net-exporter status, and tariff differentiation by origin were incorporated into the text through these personal contacts.
When Fiji needed new cane varieties, the Guatemalan research institute supplied two that are now Fiji’s leading performers. In Uganda, two Colombian varieties are in their second season and performing well.
We still favour face-to-face contact – perhaps “caveman-like” – because being in the same room, sharing coffee breaks, and chatting in corridors often leads to the “white smoke” on contentious issues.
Traders often approach us to ask whom to contact in India, Southern Africa, or Zimbabwe, and the fact that we can pick up the phone and introduce them is often decisive compared with a cold email.
Why did the ISO abandon the economic provisions of the International Sugar Agreement (ISA)?
Members agreed that the market – the interaction of supply and demand – was better suited to determining prices than a post-World War II international interventionist mechanism designed to artificially support prices for food security reasons.
Today, the market is left to perform that role, but there are concerns. We have just experienced a deficit year where prices should have been more favourable for both small and large producers, yet speculative funds kept prices suppressed. This speculative activity undermines the genuine functioning of supply and demand. I sometimes wish those old economic powers still existed to control such distortions.
With food security back on the agenda, could an ISA‑type system ever come back?
I do not believe so. Food security is primarily addressed at the national or regional level: countries safeguard their borders, and blocs such as the EU, the United States, and China protect their own production. International organisations are unlikely to be given that kind of mandate again. The current form of “territorial protectionism” is driven by major powers, not by multilateral commodity agreements.
Moreover, by the time everyone agrees, several generations will have passed.
Why is sugar important to a country? What role does it play in economic development?
First, sugar remains an essential carbohydrate for human nutrition, especially in many developing countries where it plays a vital role in ensuring adequate calorie intake.
Second, sugar often catalyses development: the signs of prosperity in towns and villages where sugar is produced are evident across Latin America and Africa alike. Sugar supports social development. I often compare sugar to the hub of a bicycle wheel: a strong hub allows many spokes – energy, jobs, social programmes – to expand and foster greater speed and progress.
Third, sugar serves as a vehicle for health: UNICEF regards sugar fortification with vitamin A as the most successful micronutrient programme in history. It has contributed to eradicating infant blindness and improving the health of lactating mothers in several Latin American and African countries, and ongoing work is underway to fortify sugar with other micronutrients, such as iron.
Sugar’s sweetening role in many essential foods remains largely irreplaceable. While other sweeteners can contribute, particularly in drinks, sugar remains pivotal in many processed foods.
What effect has the “war on sugar” had on consumption and production?
Per capita sugar consumption has decreased in many industrialised, “first‑world” countries, including the United States and those in Europe. However, following the WHO report on artificial sweeteners and concerns that aspartame and other sweeteners may be carcinogenic, younger consumers have begun returning to natural sugars. There is a rising preference for raw and so-called brown sugars, as well as for honey, panela, and molasses.
The challenge remains to communicate evidence-based science effectively in a social media environment dominated by sound bites. When I became Executive Director, sugar was at the centre of the nutrition debate. Today, conditions have improved somewhat thanks to better communication. More stakeholders are willing to speak out, although some parts of the industry still resist engaging in that discussion.
When I published my book in 2016, I felt almost alone in defending sugar. Why were sugar companies so reluctant to speak up?
It was the “ostrich trick”: the idea that, when faced with a difficult issue, you bury your head in the sand and avoid discussing it, hoping that, when you bring it out, the problem will have gone away. I inherited an organisation where many members believed that debating sugar and health was merely stoking the fire. That strategy backfired. Silence allowed half‑truths to harden into mantras. Instead of disappearing, the problem worsened, and the sector’s position weakened.
We observe a similar pattern in debates on good practices and traceability. Certification can sometimes become a checklist that conceals the real conditions of labour and environmental performance. Companies that genuinely uphold their commitments, like those in Colombia with excellent water management or Pantaleon in Guatemala with strong worker ownership and services, should promote their stories more loudly.
Looking ahead, what is the greatest risk to the traditional sugar sector – health regulation, alternative sweeteners, climate change, or something else?
All the above points matter, but the biggest single risk is that, regardless of how productive and efficient you are, world market prices do not reflect true supply‑demand fundamentals. Algorithmic and speculative trading exert persistent downward pressure on prices. Producing sugar fairly and efficiently is not always enough to earn an adequate return on investment.
Climate change presents a significant challenge. We must not only respond to floods and droughts but also proactively work with climate institutes and research bodies to stay ahead.
Africa is projected to experience the fastest population growth over the next 25 years. Will sugar production and investment keep pace?
Yes, the current trends support that perspective.
There have been substantial investments in countries like Nigeria, where recent initiatives have enhanced the legal environment for investors. Morocco, Egypt, and the Eastern Africa region – including Kenya, Malawi, and Tanzania – are also experiencing growth.
Infrastructure is a crucial issue. To foster investment and increase productivity, Africa requires better land transport and shipping links to move sugar from surplus areas such as Eswatini and southern producers to net importers in the west.
The African Union would do well to prioritise infrastructure alongside education and health. Efficiently moving goods from production sites to consumption points is crucial for unlocking Africa’s development potential.
If you were advising your successor, what key messages would you emphasise?
Firstly, start work early to build credibility and strong relationships with key decision-makers in the European Union, India, and Brazil, so they understand and support your proposals.
Second, keep the ISO as a big tent, inclusive of all stakeholders and geared towards participatory growth.
Third, continue enhancing the quality and accessibility of information. The ISO has perhaps the best sucro‑energetic database in the world, but translating it into clear language remains a persistent challenge.
Fourth, surround yourself with qualified professionals and build a team that rows towards the same shore.
Do you have any regrets?
I have experienced moments of frustration due to the lack of support from certain key members, especially when their reasons seem based on personal or political issues rather than performance. It can be disheartening to dedicate much of your life to moving the ball closer to the goal while some people throw banana skins in your way. I hope my successor faces less of this and that members can “row together”, demanding performance but also supporting the organisation they belong to.
When does your term end? What are your plans?
My term concludes on 31 December 2026. Since my two sons reside in Europe, my wife and I will need to balance our lives between Guatemala and Spain, where our eldest son lives.
I would like to undertake some consulting or advisory work, but my immediate priority is simpler: swimming in Lake Atitlán and genuinely taking a break after years of intensive travel.
I have realised that trying to define the future too precisely can be pointless; it’s better to adapt, stay positive, treat others kindly, and practice random acts of kindness. One clear goal is to increase my efforts in Guatemala to support grassroots initiatives that help impoverished people through microfinance, housing, or health projects, probably through NGOs rather than government bodies.
Is there anything you would like to add as a final message?
We must intensify our efforts to decarbonise our sector, produce sustainably, and adopt greener practices, while also highlighting the sector’s achievements. I encourage people to speak out more, engage with platforms like your blog, share experiences, and remember that we live in a global village. Communication is vital: talking to one another, sharing what has worked, what has failed, and what needs improvement.
Thank you, José, for your time and input.
© Commodity Conversations®2026