The World Needs a Farming Revolution! Declares U.N. Report
by Tim McGee, Western Massachusetts 
on 04.17.08
Oil is setting record high prices. People are rioting over the price of food in Haiti, Egypt, parts of West Africa and the Philippines. Since March 2007 the price of soybeans is up 87%, and the price of wheat has risen 130%. Global grain stores are at the lowest levels on record. Amid this turmoil the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) released its report this week on the state of agriculture. Not surprisingly the take home message is - “business as usual is no longer an option." From the report:
"Many of the challenges facing agriculture over the next 50 years will require more integrated application of existing science and technology development (formal, traditional and community- based) as well as new approaches for agricultural and natural resource management."
The report lays out the cold hard facts. Industrial agricultural progress has traditionally focused around increasing yields, not taking into account the externalized costs of food production. However, maximizing yields (aka: business as usual), is not the rout to a sustainable future.
"Agriculture currently contributes 60 and 50% of global anthropogenic emissions of CH4 and N2O, respectively. During the last 50 years, the natural resource base on which agriculture depends has declined faster than at any other time in history due to increased global demand and degradation; 75% of the crop genetic base of agricultural crops has been lost. Degradation of ecosystem functions (e.g. nutrient and water cycling), constrains production and may limit the ability of agricultural systems to adapt to climatic and other global changes in many regions. Sustainable agricultural practices are part of the solution to current environmental change."
Policies that promote industrialized single crop planting at the expense of ecosystems, and human rights (ehem - corn for biofuel) are set squarely against the recommendations of the nearly 400 experts who spent three years on the study. Instead the focus is on creating policies that directly address the interconnected nature of agriculture. The report investigated eight themes it deemed critical to sustainable agriculture; bioenergy, biotechnology, climate change, human health; natural resource management; trade and markets; traditional and local knowledge and community-based innovation; and women in agriculture.
This shift may call for changing the incentive systems for all actors along the value chain to internalize as many externalities as possible. In terms of development and sustainability goals, these policies and institutional changes should be directed primarily at those who have been served least by previous AKST [Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology] approaches, i.e., resource-poor farmers, women and ethnic minorities.
In fact, the IAASTD encourages a broad conversation of possible sustainable solutions and highlights the importance that the media plays in communicating scenarios. It is only through a broad spectrum approach that we will find the local solutions necessary for the future of food production. Something we here at TreeHugger strive for everyday.
"By integrating expertise from other sectors there is more potential to develop solutions that increase productivity, protect natural resources and livelihoods and minimize agriculture’s negative impact on the environment. Knowledge and technology from sectors such as communication, energy and health, as well as culture and arts can enhance the capacity of agriculture to contribute to reaching development and sustainability goals. Farmers need a choice of options to respond to challenges, given their diverse needs and resources, and to address the increasing complexity of stresses under which they operate. "
:: IAASTD
:: UNESCO
via :: BBC News
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Healthy and Filling Garnet Yam and Chard Fritters
- Is School Food Harming Kids? Enlist a Labor Day Eat-In To Promote Fresh, Healthy Food
- How to Use a Solar Oven: Beans and Rice Recipe
- Emeril's Spinach and Herb Cheese Stuffed Pork Loin
- 7 Easy Vegan Recipes to Get You Through Your First Week of Veganism
- Why Grass Fed Beef? Emeril Answers (Video)
Just a few thoughts:
1) How is maximizing yields not the way to go? Assuming you want everybody to eat, not getting the full potential out of land means destroying undeveloped land (aka grasslands, wetlands, rain forrest--you get the idea).
2) As much as it really sucks that Hati is can't afford food, they're not doing themselves any favors by having a ~2.5% population growth rate (the US has .8% growth, and most of that growth is from immigration). When people over there say "it's so hard to feed my 5 kids", most people think "O, that's horrible"--which it is, but I can't help to think "Why TF did you have 5 kids?". In this country, if you can't afford to feed your kids, THE STATE TAKES THEM AWAY FROM YOU.
Maximizing the yealds can only be a short term solution, as it can lead to such ecological damage that maybe ten years from now the same are that produced the crop has turned into a desert. Best example of this is chopping down and burning forest to create farmlands, then using up all the nutrients and finally losing the soil due to erosion. Another bad example is depleting or contaminating water resources.
So I guess sustainabilty is the answer here.
It is very weird for me to read these news, as in my country the vast majority of agricultural land is unused. Maybe this can be the opportunity for countries that have the potential to produce more, but it just wasn't economically viable in the past. Then again, increased production means more pollution and eco-damage, so ecological impacts should be considered before boosting the production.
About the rising food prices, recently there was news that here in Estonia the price of cheese is the highest in Europe. The reason - most of our milk production has found China to be a more lucrative market and our dairy producers are struggeling with limited supplies.
1) It depends greatly on the sense in which you use "maximising yields". I can fertilise the crap out of my land until the oil used to produce the fertiliser runs out, and I can farm it intensively in ways that improve yield. However these things will only lead to short term gains. When the oil based fertiliser is gone I will not be on the road to adapting. My intensive farming my have ruined my topsoil. (topsoil degradation is a big topic in some parts of Australia now).
Both of these are symptoms of short term thinking. We are using more resources now than one earth can regenerate in the time period we use them - we are going into bio-capacity debt. I think you need to maximise yields, but ensure you aren't backing yourself into a path of diminishing returns.
2) The irony of population growth is that well educated wealthy populations (who could afford more children) naturally lower their birth rate (to the point of population decline in Australia). They don't need to have kids to ensure they survive their old age without massive suffering. Poorer nations have reduced access to education and proper birth control, and often no safety net to give keep them safe in old age, so they are compelled to have more children.
I also dispute the idea that these people can't afford to have children. Hunter gatherers had no money, but they could afford to feed their children. It's only since the concept of owning land has become the norm around the world that people have been unable to guarantee their own food supplies. Many of these places used to be self-sufficient in food, the problem is they ship it overseas because wealthy nations can pay more than the locals. Just like during the potato famine, potatoes were being shipped to england from ireland where the people could afford to pay, while a million people starved to death in Ireland. They had enough food to feed themselves.
I worked in Minnesota for the last two summers and throughly enjoyed reading a free publication called the Minnesota Conservation volunteer. In one of the issues they talked about the most popular crop grown in the United States and around the world; lawn grass. Most people associate their house with a nice yard filled with cleanly cut grass, but what would happen if all the yards in America became gardens? Imagine driving down a nice neighborhood and being in the midst of a corn field at the same time. Lets take the land already available and utilize it. You could get whole neighborhood together with the goal of supplying much of their own foods. Designate a few yards to wheat production, a few to corn, others to soybeans, ect ect. And in the fall there could be a collective neighborhood harvest. Imagine how wonderful the sights and smells would be!
another reason the rate of population growth is so high in the poorest nations is because women are seen only as means for producing children and cooking and cleaning. in rich nations, women have far more opportunities and are able to assume responsibility and control over child-bearing.
In nations where women have the greatest equality, the birth rate is lowest (think Japan, Australia, the US, the UK, etc)
reducing the world's population to within manageable numbers is vital, and preaching to the world's wealthy isn't going to help (as our rate of population growth is already very low, or even negative). Instead, there needs to be a greater concentration and effort to raise the status of women and to create opportunities for equality.
the bird of humanity will never reach the sky with a broken wing.
This is a must read chapter on the topic of agriculture from a great book called Natural Capitalism.
http://www.natcap.org/images/other/NCchapter10.pdf
One of the main points is that growing monoculture crops (i.e. only one species of plant in a field) is putting them at increased risk from disease, pests and climate change as they lack the biodiversity to adapt. It also mentions the overfertilisation of topsoil leading to its degradation as mentioned in comments above. Read the chapter for details.
Cuba has already had to deal with both a peak oil crisis and a food shortage crisis. Maybe we can learn from their experiences?
Interesting documentary showing how Cuba dealt with this situation in the 90's:
http://www.powerofcommunity.org/cm/index.php