Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

I fully support the inclusion of all plant nutrients in the CoCoFe while recognizing the limited availability of other sources of nutrients besides fertilizer in many smallholder farming systems. Integration of organic inputs (and other soil mgt implements) mostly aims at addressing those soil fertility constraints that limit the uptake and use efficiency of fertilizer. Integrated Soil Fertility Management (see attached some papers with more details) also aims at optimizing not only the supply of nutrients (in line with the 4R nutrient management strategy) but also the demand for those nutrients through inclusion of the use of improved germplasm and other good agronomic practices.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback to the development of the Code of Conduct for the Management of Fertilizers. Please find attached my contributions.

Best regards,

Cecilia G. Flocco

In attachment a contribution to CoCoFe from the Expert Pannel on Mitigating Agricultural Nitrogen, and othr members of the of theTask Force on Reactive Nitrogen (TFRN) under the Working Group on Strategies and Review of the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution.

On behalf of International Raw Materials LTD a Philadelphia based fertilizer distribution company that is actively involved in the SDG process through our industry association IFA, I would like to suggest including nutrient recycling under Objective 3 to read:

“minimizing the environmental impacts from the production and use of fertilizers including pollution by loss of nutrients via runoff, leaching, greenhouse gas emissions and other mechanisms; by facilitating broad scale implementation of nutrient recycling from both organic and industrial sources.”

The fertilizer industry is uniquely positioned to address environmental challenges through better management of chemical waste by recovering and transforming industrial by-products into useful re-purposed climate-smart crop nutrients.

These climate-smart fertilizers are re-introduced back into a circular economy, essentially feeding the soils that feed the crops that feed people. Prior to climate-smart fertilizer recycling, these molecules were lost to the environment.

Nowadays, for instance, our company, IRM, markets close to 1 million metric tons of climate-smart fertilizer captured from industrial production streams in the US, Canada, Australia and Madagascar every year. These recovered essential molecules are given a second life and are distributed across the globe in regions where soils are starved for crop nutrients.

Please find attached my contributions  on behalf of the Embrapa Soils and Rede Fertbrasil, a brazilian research network on Soil Fertility and Fertilizers.

Dr. Vinícius de Melo Benites

Head or Research and Development - Embrapa Soils

Coordinator of FertBrasil Research Network

The below summary of the status of the integrated nutrient management in Asia and the Pacific region found more than 10 years ago, but the status may stay remains the same.

A. INM issues for Asian countries

Asian agriculture is under persistent pressure to narrow the gap between food supplies and demand by the ever increasing human population, aggravated by significant loss of arable land from urbanization and pollution. As a consequence of this negative trend in the food supplying capacity of the regions natural resource base, Asian countries have mainstreamed into their national policies the promotion and use of genetically improved short food crops, including livestock and fishes, as the foundation of their food security programmes. This is further enhanced and fully supported by policy support for fertilizer subsidies to encourage farmers to use more and higher rates of fertilizers to ensure high crop yields. Common barriers and root causes of the decline in agricultural land productivity and the ensuing threat to food security in Asian countries include, but are not limited to the following:

1. Soil mining or internal loss of soil nutrient reserves to the plant and the groundwater induced by the imbalanced use of fertilizers, mostly through the excessive use of Urea;
2. Poor rationalization of chemical fertilizer importation to ensure easy access to appropriate, suitable and affordable fertilizer grades. In most cases, the importation and supply of Urea exceeded phosphates and potash;
3. Inadequate understanding and absence of dedicated national programmes for organic-based fertilization and balanced fertilization based on a sound soil testing programme;
4. Policy support for short maturing, high yield varieties (hybrid) without appropriate integrated nutrient management practices to avert the incidence of soil mining and soil/water degradation;
5. Fertilizer subsidies that are not based on the soil and plant nutrient needs of the country;
6. High population and rapid urbanization and declining man-arable land ratio; and
7. Global oil issues and uncontrolled increases in the price of chemical fertilizers.

B. INM issues for Pacific Island countries

Pacific Island countries, in contrast to their Asian counterparts, have dedicated much of their agricultural development to serving the needs of farm families and are built around the organization and success of a network of home gardens. In contrast to the capital intensive character of Asian agriculture, agricultural development in the Pacific Island countries is basically based on low external input, small-scale farming systems, supported by traditional and indigenous technologies. They are largely dedicated to home self-reliance composed of networks of small home gardens generally using simple tools and indigenous technologies to serve farm family needs and local markets. Compared to the predominance of chemical fertilizers in the more advanced Asian countries, farmers in the Pacific Islands are mainly dependent on natural fertilizer sources, recycling crop residues and natural soil fertility. Some island countries have started to experience the pressures of increasing population and rapid urbanization and declining land availability per capita, which in the long-term could become a major barrier to a long-term, sustainable agricultural development programme for food security. Increasing areas of sloping farmlands are contributing to a higher incidence of erosion and long-term loss of land productivity of scarce arable lands, particularly in coastal areas. Common issues in nutrient management and barriers to food security in Pacific Island countries, because of the very nature of small backyard or home gardens, are listed below, to wit:

1. The natural ecological convergence of upland agriculture with coastal agriculture and fishery areas justify the unique and critical role of soil erosion control and management in developing an inter-landscape transboundary INM strategy for a watershed-wide soil fertility management programme;
2. Dependence on natural soil fertility and natural fertilizer sources and traditional plants and varieties;
3. Soil erosion resulting from decreasing fallow periods, subsistence farming and increasing human demand for land and food;
4. Land use policy that protects scarce agricultural lands is in important consideration in the formulation of food security increasing population;
5. While low external inputs and multi-cropped home gardens, characterized by natural nutrient recycling and low nutrient demands, result in low food outputs, they help farmers preserve native soil nutrient reserves; and
6. Declining man-arable land ratio due to increased population and urbanization.

Three kinds of stakeholders and the manner in which information and substantive contents should be packaged and delivered.

For the farmers:

• Provision and packaging of appropriate and farmer-friendly extension materials (sketches and drawing illustration techniques, conduct of pilot on-farm demonstrations, preparation of easy-to-read soil fertility maps/charts, fertilizer recommendation charts, etc.);
• Establishment and promotion of Farmer Field Schools for community-based learning and development of Soil Doctors (adopted from Thailand’s experience) to facilitate farmer-tofarmer exchanges of knowledge and acquired technologies; and
• Elaboration and proper communication of monetary and environmental benefits of IPNS.

For the decision-makers:

• Mainstreaming of principles of nutrient management and elaboration of environmental and economic benefits derived from sound IPNS. This includes the preparation of policy briefs and position papers to elaborate the substantive economic and environmental benefits of adopting IPNS;
• Illustration of IPNS benefits through presentation of national nutrient balance analysis;
• Conduct of pilot techno-demos to showcase the impact of IPNS on yield increases supported by simple audience-friendly graphic illustrations of environmental benefits, and cost/return analysis;
• Brief on both positive and negative scenarios of IPNS adoption to address poverty and food security and long-term sustainable development; and
• Conduct and preparation of briefing materials on the environmental impacts of sound nutrient management practices.

For support institutions and change agents:

• Review of the extension approach (number of extension agents, extension methods);
• Promotion of the adoption of participatory approaches by all stakeholders (NGOs, the private sector, industry, researchers, academics, etc.);
• Provision of knowledge management to support IPNS networking (model, knowledge, scenario, scientific document); and
• Local campaign and support to IPNS.

Reference: http://www.fao.org/3/a-ag120e.pdf 

Dear all,

On behalf of the National Association of Fertilizer Manufactures (ANFFE), I want to thank the opportunity to participate in the online consultation for developing the Code of Conduct for the Management of Fertilizers and to share our views on this topic.

Please find attached ANFFE´s contribution to the online consultation.

Paloma Pérez

Code of Conduct for the Management of Fertilisers become a requirement when regulatory system perceives farmers of that nation do farming for profiteering business. Let us be candid to sense that majority of farmers have been traditional in agriculture. Modernity infused through technology / innovation invasion resulted in whichever abuse that we experience.

Self-disciplined farmers / farm families do exist and do not get into the rat-race of food production for global trade and food security (both of which are self-contradictions). All governments seek 'profitability of farmers'as socio-political rhetoric. Profitability earned due to reticence in the use of high-tech agri-inputs is out of saved money.

The conflict that has crept in over the last six decades has been the clamour for food. AS in the case of any other animals, hummans can still acquire food with smartness. Maintaining the carrying capacity with strong ecological engineering to sustain farm soil-fertility (using traditional and modern methods) may be the right solution. The Code of Conduct (not dictated) hence shall be motivational with strong impetus for managing farms for posterity and getting into the turmoil on the mission for 'feeding the rest of the world'.

Thanks and Ragards

T.P.Rajendran

1. Given the global scope of the CoCoFe, do you think the objectives are appropriate? If not, how would you add to them or modify them?     Yes the objectives are appropriate.
2. How should be the CoCoFe be structured to have the maximum positive impact?                       The structure should be guided by code of conduct regionally and sometimes culture practices for appropriate adaptations.
3. Who would be the best audience for the CoCoFe to meet our objectives and how could we broaden and diversity this audience to increase its influence? Government, Private sector and farmers. These are the most important audiences among other and responsible for the influence and guidance.
4. What should the scope of the CoCoFe be? Which nutrient input sources should be included; only synthetic fertilizers, or also manure, biosolids, compost etc? Should other products such as bio-stimulants, nitrification inhibitors, urease inhibitors, etc.. Be included as well?   Nutrients management should be applied consistently across all sources, so all should be included. This can be also tested using different soils and crops in adaptation and also can be packaged according to the crop environment.
5. Will the CoCoFe assist in promoting responsible and judicious use of fertilizers? Why or why not? What other suggestions do you have to help the CoCoFe meet our objectives?

It can assist when done well with proper application with balancing between improved production of the crops and environmental grading allowing eco-system movement. In Africa for example most farmers can’t afford the price of inorganic fertilizers and this leaves them with local options which most cases is not effectively maintained. In my opinion to policy makers, farmers and Government should be trained to understand the use of appropriate fertilizers for their own individual conditions. Understanding the reactions of fertilizers in the soil. Our forefathers used organic fertilizers, and there’s no doubt that the world is moving back to using natural fertilizers or combination of organic and inorganic fertilizers to reduce the chemical imprint on our soils and at the same time improve soils. With the population pressures, land ownership, we can’t now move from one area to another when the soils are exhausted. So now we have to implement techniques to sustain and look after our soil to reduce crop failures, land degradation and desertification.

Dear all,



On behalf of EISA, the European Initiative for Sustainable Development in Agriculture (EISA) e.V., I would like to share our view on the CoCoFe consultation.



We appreciate the organisers' efforts in facilitating this exchange.



Kind regards,



Andreas Frangenberg