Dorina Minoiu
Policy Officer, SEUP, Budapest
During the second half of the 20th century, a period in which the growth of national income has been given top priority in economic policy, a considerable increase in production has been duly accompanied by an alarming destruction of environmental assets. Environmental degradation has, for the most part, been a consequence of a significant growth in production, a growth resulting largely from increases in productivity, and one in which the loss of scarce environmental assets has not been taken into account. This has led to an uncontrolled degradation of natural resources, such as deforestation, desertification, erosion, flooding, ozone depletion, landscape deterioration and a loss of biological diversity coupled with various forms of pollution and contamination. Not surprisingly, the risk of conflict between agricultural development and environmental protection has thus exacerbated.
The close but quite often detrimental link between economic growth and the environment brought to the forefront of development thinking at the beginning of the 1990s6, has lead many countries to recognize the need to pursue policies that promote Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development (SARD). An unprecedented world-wide consensus, Agenda 21, was reached on the complex programme of working towards sustainable development into the next century. Toward this end, the FAO was designated as the task manager for five key chapters of Agenda 21: planning and management of land resources (chapter 10), combating deforestation (chapter 11), combating desertification and drought (chapter 12), sustainable mountain development (chapter 13) and sustainable agricultural and rural development (chapter 14).
Agenda 21 states that SARD's aim is threefold: (i) to increase production in ways that ensure access by all people to the food they need; (ii) to help people satisfy their social and cultural aspirations; and (iii), to protect and conserve the capacity of natural resources with a view to, on the one hand, providing consumer goods and, on the other, environmental and cultural services. It thus appears that the long-term objective of food security7 can be attained through enhanced food production coupled with the sustainability of the natural resource base, with no conflict seeming to appear between these major goals. In the short-term, however, there may well be trade-offs between growth in agricultural productivity and the preservation of the environment. Currently, therefore, a major challenge is to find appropriate policies, effective institutions and feasible technologies to reconcile this towards increased food security.
Chapter 14 makes it clear that achieving SARD is not a "big bang" process but rather one of making necessarily slow, incremental steps over a wide range of social, economic and technical issues. Hence, it should be continuously monitored, evaluated and, if needs, be adjusted. Both the world community and its individual nations thus regularly monitor the status of Agenda 21's implementation and progress reports following from Rio have consequently been prepared8. The two following trends become better and better shaped:
According to the FAO Agenda 21 Progress Report of June 1997, there is a growing awareness, albeit uneven, among both developed and developing countries, including economies in transition, of the need to integrate environmental concerns in agricultural and trade policies. Indeed, the need to meet consumer demands and to open new food markets makes agricultural trade issues an important factor in this process9.
In the area of people's participation, there is now a better understanding of civil society institutions and a concomitant recognition of the need to strengthen their involvement in the decision- and policy-making processes. Coalitions and networks need to be formed in order to facilitate and effectively support the process of consensus-building with regard to the achievement of sustainable development.
Due to the ongoing processes of economic and political liberalization, agricultural systems are changing, not only at the regional and/or sub-regional levels, but on a world scale also. Consequently, these changes have resulted in the recognition of a new role for the functionality of the state alongside a new theoretical advocacy regarding the institutional structure of the agricultural system. Governments are now beginning to accept that effective policies can only emerge from a pluralistic decision-making process rooted in the participation of the key actors: stakeholders, coalitions and civil society representatives. Considering this crucial trend, governments should thus devote time to creating an appropriate institutional framework in order to facilitate the realization of this new participatory decision- and policy-making.
Most aspects of the old development model have been drastically changed, but the main feature of this period is the transition from a state-oriented agricultural and rural development model to one in which other driving forces will be present. It is broadly recognized that one of the prerequisites for successful (with regard to sustainability) agricultural and rural development is the formation of local self-help co-operatives, alongside various types of professional associations. Field evidence has shown that these bottom-up building processes create more sustainable and self-reliant organizations than those which are state-imposed. Autonomy allows every association or co-operative the ability to decide internally its choices and its policy10. It appears that the greatest contemporary challenge facing the actors in agricultural and rural development is the creation of the necessary institutional support and workable conditions for an effective articulation between states, markets, communities and associations.
In managing the move towards sustainable development in a changeable global arena, the international community has identified several key issues requiring urgent consideration by FAO. They are summarized below.
Working on how SARD can be incorporated into decision- and policy-making processes, the FAO advises governments on how to address issues such as:
(a) making efficient use of available resources, both natural and human;
(b) alleviating poverty; and
(c) efficiently transferring the productive capacity to future generations.
Fresh approaches coupled with new policy instruments are indeed required to sustain the decentralized policy-making process11 to effectively reach widely scattered smallholders.
At the international level, priority is given to developing a new approach to land resource conservation and management. In collaboration with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the FAO has been developing an improved framework for rural resource development and management12 that addresses the major weaknesses in present approaches. The new approach combines public participation in the management of local resources with appropriate information technology and extension services, the provision of incentives and an improved institutional and policy framework. More emphasis is placed on rural workers' organizations and farmer-centred participatory approaches, while carefully recording and assessing indigenous knowledge and technology. Besides developing new concepts and approaches for natural resource management, in practice the FAO actively supports the thorough use of agricultural resources and aids member nations in improving their management of land and water resources through numerous ongoing programmes. The FAO has developed land use data bases, a methodology for classifying and mapping agro-ecological zones, a land evaluation framework and methodologies for matching climate and crop environmental requirements. Moreover, it has developed a land-cover and land-use classification system in collaboration with other relevant UN agencies (i.e. the major project to map land cover and use on African continent).
Complying with Agenda 21 requirements, the FAO policy assistance division is undertaking the crucial task of disseminating existing knowledge and methodological tools by providing technical assistance and training to its member countries. There have been considerable achievements in terms of strengthening the capacity of governments to analyse the impact of agricultural policy on the environment and consequently to design sectoral development policies conducive to a wider use of environmentally friendly farming practices. In this area, the FAO is strengthening national research institutions, assisting in the development of regional co-operative networks for research and technology and helping to ensure that SARD objectives reflect the views and concerns of all stakeholders concerned: rural organizations, local governments, the private sector and NGOs.
According to the FAO definition of sustainable development13 (1988), three targets can be identified as the core of SARD strategy. These are equity, efficiency and resilience.
Equity: Presumably, if the needs of the poorest communities are not satisfied, in consequence, there will be a growing pressure on the natural resource base arising from attempts by the disadvantaged to overexploit common (community or public) resources (i.e., forests, pastures, etc.). For the most part, this is an issue of property rights and management of the common resource base, and such practices should not, therefore, necessarily be confined to the poorest elements in society. A more balanced redistribution of the incremental income from economic growth, inter alia the creation/enhancement of basic services for the poor and the creation of opportunities for a better life (access to education and investment) are all more appropriate to market-oriented systems than direct wealth redistribution.
Efficiency: This implies the use of available resources in such a way that while an acceptable (in economic terms) level of production is firmly maintained, such a process nevertheless remains (relatively) harmless with regards to the environment. This certainly requires a coherent policy package, including adequate economic incentives coupled with the required environmental instruments.
Resilience: The resilience of the system is measured in the face of the external stresses against it. This relates to the capacity of the system to maintain its structure and patterns of behaviour and its ability to cope with and to adapt to external disturbance. The collapse of the system may arise when stress (such as overgrazing) reduces resilience to the point where normal fluctuations (e.g., drought) threaten its collapse (e.g., desertification, inability to sustain population, etc.). Monitoring the extent of system resilience and its consideration in policy development is, therefore, highly important.
With a view to making the concept of sustainability more operational, the FAO has defined several guiding criteria to support of SARD policy formulation. A brief interpretation of each of these criteria is presented below.
Meeting the basic nutritional requirements of present and future generations, quantitatively and qualitatively, while providing a number of other agricultural products
The provision of basic nutritional needs does not necessarily mean self-sufficiency in all staple food products. Food security considerations certainly do not exclude trade relations among countries. Trends in the world trade of agricultural and food produce increasingly emphasize the role of comparative advantage. While producing in accordance with its comparative advantage, food security should be attained through a balanced policy of domestic production and imports financed by export sales.
Providing durable employment, sufficient income and decent living and working conditions for all those engaged in agricultural production
Off-farm, non-agricultural employment is emerging as a necessary supplement to part-time farming activity and agricultural income for most small households irrespective of the particular domestic setting. Therefore, rural employment and the income of rural dwellers should not be restricted uniquely to agricultural production. This limited sectoral perspective stimulates the need for a wider approach to rural development. The decentralized regional/local development policies play a fundamental role into this integrated vision.
Maintaining and, where possible, enhancing the productive capacity of the natural resource base as a whole and the regenerative capacity of renewable resources, without disrupting the functioning of basic ecological cycles and natural balances, destroying the social-cultural attributes of rural communities, or causing contamination of the environment.
This complex criterion embraces a number of sensitive issues which should be addressed through an adequate package of economic and environmental policy instruments, including standards and regulations, the use of relevant technologies, as well as appropriate pricing policies. Any agricultural and rural activity damaging the environment should bear the cost of negative externalities.
Reducing the vulnerability of agricultural factors to adverse natural and socio economic factors and other risks and the strengthening of self-reliance.
This essentially promotes the issue of resilience, as well as that of self-reliance. Again, given the trends in international trade, self-reliance could be interpreted as self-management at the regional, state and local level, and not necessarily as self-sufficiency. Empowerment and community self-management concepts are thus being given greater consideration. A successful community needs to be able both to harvest the benefits and bear the costs of its own actions on the resources it has at its disposal.
The FAO's initiative in Europe takes into consideration the major economic challenges and constraints to sustainable agricultural and rural development facing the region, as well as the post-World Food Summit strategic framework and FAO Mission Statement for promoting sustainable food security. Aiming toward creating favourable conditions for the growth of sustainable agriculture and to the enhancement of food security and the welfare of the rural population in developing countries, FAO committed itself inter alia to:
While addressing crucial issues affecting the agricultural and rural sector in those European economies in transition, the FAO works toward the development of an "economically, ecologically and socially sustainable agriculture which takes into account preservation of the countryside, maintaining viable rural areas and arresting job losses and migration from rural areas for both men and women"14.
The establishment of the policy assistance branch in the European regional office (FAO HQ, Rome) and of the policy co-ordinating unit in the sub-regional office for Central and Eastern Europe (Budapest), has enabled the FAO to meet most of the increasing demands from individual CEE countries for assistance in agriculture policy issues. Policy analysis and advice focuses on the comparative advantage of national agriculture and food industries, taking into account the status of reform in the private sector, plus the degree of restructuring with regard to public enterprises. Policy-makers are advised on price, taxation and trade policy options in the context of global and regional trade agreements and their implication for the agricultural sector. In this respect, special attention has been given to training activities aimed at strengthening human and institutional capacity building in agricultural policy analysis.
In 1997, the FAO prepared a number of national food security and agriculture strategies, Horizon 2010, in close co-operation with CEE experts from Ministries of Agriculture and Economic Development in their respective countries. The underlying idea behind this initiative was that there is still considerable scope for improved agricultural sector performance in most countries in the CEE sub-region15. A common feature is that all countries from CEE could contribute to a greater degree in pursuing the goals of the World Food Summit: food-exporting countries in the region could potentially export more, thus adding more substantially to world food security. Acceptance into the European Union is also another important goal for a number of CEE countries. Policy and other agricultural sector adjustments needed to pave the way for membership are, therefore, high priorities in these development strategies. National food security and agriculture strategies were, in most cases, submitted to the donor community as a basis for mobilizing resources for a country-level implementation of the World Food Summit Plan of Action.
Nevertheless, some key issues were not treated fully enough in the earlier mentioned national agricultural development strategies and will thus require a more thorough analysis. Bearing in mind that the achievement of food security involves more than just agricultural development and additionally requires not only sectoral interventions, the following remarks are perhaps deemed necessary:
The national agricultural development strategies did not attempt to cover the regional dimension. Nevertheless, it has been recognized that their harmonization within the regional framework is greatly needed, in particular in those areas where regional economic groupings exist. It was felt that issues such as research, trade, plant protection and animal health as well as environment protection could benefit from regional co-operation. Consequently, the FAO is now preparing regional strategy papers. This process will integrate the national strategy papers of those countries belonging to the major inter-governmental organizations. In accordance with Horizon 2010, these regional papers will identify common problems and issues related to agriculture and agricultural development, synthesize the resultant main recommendations, as well as initiate lines of action required at the national, regional and international levels in order to meet the targets of the World Food Summit. This kind of co-operation with the Ministries of Agriculture of the Central European countries is now underway.
In close co-operation with central governments, assistance has been provided in the formulation of medium- and long-term strategies and national programmes16 in making significant progress towards sustainable agricultural and rural sector development and national food security. Policy recommendations are based on a thorough diagnosis of the characteristics of the agricultural sector, an assessment of its macroeconomic environment, a review and analysis of agricultural policies and an identification of binding constraints to development, of potential opportunity and of priorities for agricultural development.
Advice on selected agricultural policy issues is also provided to CEE countries on request; i.e., an assessment of the implications of the Uruguay Round Agreements for agricultural trade was done for Turkey and Lithuania, and policy options relating to EU accession were formulated for the Czech Republic and Slovenia. Some other countries such as Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia are assisted in the formulation of policies and methodologies for improving land registration, cadastre and the development of farmland markets.
Taking into account that the CEE sub-region is comprised of a number of Low-Income Food Deficit Countries17 (LIFDCs), the FAO has initiated the formulation and implementation of the SPFS in those concerned18. Drawing on Agenda 21, the SPFS activities concentrate on the widespread adoption of technological packages and institutional innovations aimed at increasing both the overall availability and stability of domestic food production. They also focus on generating income in agriculture and related activities. Placing a strong emphasis on national ownership, the SPFS programme is organized mainly at the village level, and is directly implemented in conjunction with farmers in these communities. This is primarily to ensure that the direct beneficiaries of the programme are the poorest rural people and that the profits of higher production and efficiency are equitably shared.
Through direct participation, problems encountered at different levels, in particular those impeding farm profitability and farmers' access to new, more productive technology, are identified by farmers themselves and sustainable actions for their resolution are thus taken (also by the farmers). In a more advanced stage of SPFS implementation, the analysis will also include for an environmental impact assessment of proposed new technologies, while the adoption of environmentally friendly farming practices will duly be encouraged through adequate policy instruments.
Given SARD's complexity, there is perhaps no single strategy employable for its ultimate realization. For example, economists may choose to start from the point of reformulating policy in order to create incentives for SARD in the first place. Alternatively, agronomists may prefer to focus on resource management, Integrated Pest Management, Integrated Plant Nutrition Systems, or at improving the technical capacities of natural resources. And sociologists would perhaps tend to look more squarely at human resource development and grassroots actions. Undoubtedly then, for SARD there are many potential entry points and where to start is really the question. What is certain, however, is that with dwindling resources and increasing demand, unless appropriate policies are designed, the agricultural practices will continue to exacerbate environmental problems, leading inevitably to food insecurity and poverty in the subregion.
SARD policies should be directed at the questions of access to credit, to natural resources (like land tenure), to technologies, to education and to information. The objective should be to improve livelihoods of rural dwellers. In other words, to provide them with the necessary tools for the successful management of their sustainable systems. It is all too often realized that, as soon as intervention takes place, as soon as subsidization is introduced, a grain of unsustainability takes root. To make SARD more operational, participatory mechanisms, designed expressly to reach populations right down to the village level, should both be instigated and strengthened in those relevant national ministries. Moreover, investment in research, technology and in human capital is often mentioned as essential policy towards SARD.
A much larger programme of workshops is also necessary in order to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and experience needed in promoting SARD and its adequate consideration in agricultural development strategies. These kinds of events should be organized at various levels: within and among countries with similar natural resources and social-economic conditions; i.e., mainly at the regional level and at the global level too. Individual countries or groups of countries should establish action frameworks that enable states and donor institutions to collaborate voluntarily in the joint development and implementation of SARD-oriented policies and programmes. That is why CEESA initiative is not only welcome but also promising.
Crowley, E. 1998. Rural Poverty: Population Dynamics, Local Institutions and Access to Resources, paper presented at the Thematic Workshop on Population, Poverty and Environment held at FAO, Rome, 26-30 October 1998.
FAO. 1995a. Integration of Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development Issues in Agricultural Policy, Proceedings of the FAO/Winrock International Workshop on Integration of SARD Issues in Agricultural policy, Rome.
FAO. 1995b. Sustainability issues in agricultural and rural development policies, Vol. 1 Trainees' reader, Policy Analysis Division, Rome.
FAO. 1995c. Sustainability issues in agricultural and rural development policies, Vol. 2 Trainers' kit, Policy Analysis Division, Rome.
FAO. 1996a. Environment and sustainability issues in agricultural policy analysis and planning, Proceedings of a Training of Trainers Seminar, Nicosia, Cyprus, 8-19 May 1995, Cairo.
FAO. 1996b. D�claration de Rome sur la S�curit� alimentaire mondiale et Plan d'action du Sommet mondial de l'alimentation, Sommet mondial de l'alimentation, Rome.
FAO. 1997a. Issues and Opportunities for Agricultural Education and Training in 1990s and beyond, Agricultural Education Group of the Extension, Education and Communication Service (SDRE), Rome.
FAO. 1997b. Earth Summit+5:progress on the road from Rio, Agenda 21: Progress Report, Rome.
Gordillo de Anda, G. 1997. New Trends and Emerging Coalitions, Paper presented at the High-level technical seminar: Private and Public Sector Cooperation in National Land Tenure Development in Eastern and Central Europe, University Residential Center, Bertinoro, Italy, 1-5 April 1997.
Marcoux, A. 1998. Population and Environmental Change: from Linkages to Policy Issues, Modified version of the paper presented at the Thematic Workshop on Population, Poverty and Environment held at FAO, Rome, 26-30 October 1998.
6 The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) was held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.
7 In the light of an alarming prevalence of hunger in developing countries in particular, the participating countries at the World Food Summit, held in Rome in November 1996, committed themselves to implementing Agenda 21, particularly with regard to chapter 14: to halve the current number of 800 million malnourished by 2015.
8 The first series of Agenda 21 progress reports were prepared by FAO five years after the programme had been signed, and were to be discussed during the high level Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly in June 1997.
9 In this respect, progress has been made, albeit from a relatively small production base, toward introducing organic farming methods under a variety of certification schemes.
10 Autonomy also implies that the generally weak capital base of rural co-operatives in many countries should be strengthened. To this end, FAO and the Committee for the Promotion and Advancement of Co-operatives (COPAC) have launched a special research programme on sustainable capital formation.
11 Up to now, most technical advice in terms of agriculture policy including SARD considerations has been directed toward central governments, and to a lesser extent toward local/regional governments and the private sector.
12 New concepts are being introduced through publications, such as "Our Land Our Future", which briefly elucidated the fresh approach, and "Negotiating a Sustainable Future for Land" published in 1997.
13 "Sustainable development is the management and conservation of the natural resource base, and the orientation of technological and institutional change in such a manner as to ensure the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs for present and future generations. Such sustainable development (in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors) conserves land, water, plant, and animal genetic resources, is environmentally non-degrading, technically appropriate, economically viable, and socially acceptable".
14 This was stressed during the 21st FAO regional conference for Europe held in Tallinn, May 1998.
15 Many countries have the capacity to be net food exporters such as Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Moldova, Slovak Republic, Turkey, and Yugoslavia. The others have the necessary resources to obtain needed food imports. Because of the recent war, however, Bosnia-Herzegovina is a special case: its disrupted production system is unable to meet consumption needs, and currently it does not possess the means to import the food it needs - amounting to about a third of demand - to fill up this particular gap.
16 Some medium- and long-term agricultural and rural strategies were formulated (for Croatia, Estonia and Slovakia) while a number of others are currently under preparation (for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria and Malta). For countries such as Armenia, Azerbaijan and FYR of Macedonia, these are in an earlier stage of preparation.
17 Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia and Macedonia.
18 The SPFS is now in an advanced stage of its implementation in Albania, where a constraints analysis component has been launched since the formulation stage conducted both through a participatory involvement of farmers, and an extensive policy dialogue with representatives from both local and central government. The National Programme Document and the corresponding National Plan of Operations have been drafted for Bosnia-Herzegovina and are now in the process of technical revision within FAO. For the other LIFDCs, excluding Macedonia, the National Programme Document was formulated. But due to certain local circumstances (i.e., in Georgia the civil turmoil and the recent change of government), in places there are delays in its implementation.
