Dear HLPE-FSN Secretariat,
Please find in attachment some inputs that we hope will provide a valuable contribution to your work for the development of this important report. We look forward to the opportunity to further collaborate on this significant endeavor.
Sincerely,
Stefano Marras
Director of Global Partnerships - UN Affairs
Bayer AG, Crop Science Division
HLPE – FSN Consultation
Inputs provided by
Bayer AG, Crop Science Division
DIFFERENT WAYS OF DEFINING RESILIENCE
How do farmers define resilience?
From a farmers’ perspective, resilience encompasses their capacity to adapt to and withstand climate and environmental stressors (e.g. droughts, floods, extreme weather events, water scarcity, soil erosion, pests, diseases, etc.) as well as socio-economic challenges (e.g. trade and market disruption, unrests and conflicts, pandemics, labor shortages, price fluctuations, etc.) while ensuring the productivity and economic viability of their farming operations both in the short and long term, by preserving and enhancing key natural assets such as soil, water, and pollinators that are critical to achieving that in a sustained way.
What are the main types of vulnerabilities facing farmers and what are the potential consequences for them, considering different kinds of potential shocks?
The main types of vulnerabilities faced by farmers include climate and environmental stressors – e.g. droughts, floods, extreme weather events, water scarcity, soil erosion, pests, and diseases, as well as socio-economic challenges – e.g. trade and market disruption, unrests and conflicts, pandemics, labor shortages, and price fluctuations. The potential consequences for farmers include reduced agricultural productivity, financial losses, increased food insecurity, and long-term environmental degradation.
What kind of inequities and power imbalances are present in food systems and how do they affect resilient FSN and especially for those groups facing multidimensional and intersectional aspects of inequality and vulnerability?
In food systems, inequities and power imbalances can impact the resilience of farmers facing multidimensional and intersectional aspects of inequality and vulnerability. Some of the key inequities and power imbalances include:
- Access to Resources: Farmers from marginalized communities often face challenges in accessing essential resources such as land, water, and capital, which are critical for building resilience in the face of environmental and socio-economic challenges.
- Market Access: Small-scale and subsistence farmers often encounter barriers to accessing markets and fair prices for their produce, leading to economic vulnerability and limited capacity to invest in resilience-building measures.
- Gender Inequality: Women farmers frequently face unequal access to resources, land ownership, and decision-making power within agricultural systems, impacting their ability to build resilience and adapt to challenges.
- Knowledge and Technology Disparities: There are disparities in access to agricultural knowledge, training, and technology, with marginalized farmers often lacking the resources and support needed to adopt resilient farming practices and technologies.
- Policy and Governance: Power imbalances in policy and governance structures can lead to unequal representation and limited voice for small-scale farmers and marginalized communities, hindering their ability to influence decisions that affect their resilience.
These inequities and power imbalances have significant implications for the resilience of farmers. They can exacerbate vulnerability to climate and environmental stressors, limit the adoption of sustainable and resilient farming practices, and perpetuate cycles of poverty and food insecurity. Additionally, intersecting aspects of inequality, such as gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, can compound the challenges faced by farmers, further undermining their resilience in the face of complex and interconnected vulnerabilities. Addressing these inequities and power imbalances is essential for building inclusive and resilient food systems that support the well-being and livelihoods of all farmers.
What resilience frameworks are there that should be explored?
The world faces the urgent challenge to create agricultural systems that help farmers adapt to climate change impacts and run a commercially viable business, while also protecting our planet, limiting the further expansion of farmland and renewing Earth’s natural ecosystems. The way forward is to radically transform today’s farming systems and switch to practices that “produce more with less, while restoring more.” Regenerative Agriculture (RA) can provide the framework to achieve this and thus increase farmers’ resilience. RA refers to an outcome-based production model aimed at improving the overall environment with a strong focus on improving soil health and enhancing the ecosystem services provided by agricultural systems. While improving soil health is a key part and often foundational to RA, other key aspects include mitigation of climate change through greenhouse gas emissions reductions and increased carbon removals, maintaining, preserving or restoring on-farm biodiversity, conserving water resources through improved water retention and decreases in water run-off, and improving the social and economic well-being of farmers and communities. If adopted widely, RA has the potential to drive production gains and income growth for farmers while also providing net benefits to nature, such as sequestering carbon on a global scale. This would make the future of farming more sustainable and create a win-win-win for farmers, society and our planet.
RA builds on sustainable agriculture and has many of the same aims. Regenerative agriculture goes one step further, however. It places an emphasis not just on minimizing agriculture’s negative impact on the environment (for example, by reducing carbon emissions and the impact of crop protection) but also on delivering positive benefits to nature and leaving the land in a better condition than before (for example, by sequestering carbon, improving soil health, and restoring biodiversity). Sustainable agriculture, narrowly defined, is mainly a ‘do no harm’ approach. It is about reducing the negative impact of agriculture and limiting its environmental and climate footprint while producing more yield (“producing more with less”). RA is similar in that it focuses on lessening agriculture’s negative impact on the environment and our climate. In addition, it also aims to provide positive benefits to nature and help farmers adapt to shifting climate conditions, so that they are able to produce more yield and raise incomes in a sustainable way (“producing more with less, while restoring more”).
What are the determinants, assets and skills that lead to resilience?
What makes RA a model enabling to fully unlock farmers’ resilience is its outcome-based and system approach to farming. First of all, it’s all about focusing on what we want to achieve (the outcomes) – be that water conservation, carbon emissions reductions or sequestration, yield and output increases, or limiting deforestation – and then using a combination of existing and new technologies in efficient and adaptive ways to create the most impact, adjusting as we go along and doubling down on the solutions that work best. Secondly, keeping a system approach gives us the ability to truly manage the variability from farm to farm in a tailored way, unlocking productivity and sustainability at the same time. Fundamentally, the RA approach treats each farm as an individual ecosystem. It combines innovations (e.g. in seed breeding, crop protection and digital) to deliver a holistic set of solutions, tailored to each individual farm and its specific soil conditions. Farmer centricity is key to understanding and properly addressing farmers’ needs with the optimal mix of solutions. Implementing RA means establishing a farming operation that, when combining the optimal mix of solutions and practices, not only yields better harvests with a lower climate and environmental footprint but also delivers nature-positive outcomes – where aspects of the natural world, such as species and ecosystems, are being restored and the land is left in a better condition than before. In the absence of a single one-size-fits-all product or solution, the only way to achieve these benefits is by adopting an outcome-driven, system approach that aims to deliver measurable outcomes in terms of both productive capacity and sustainability – and then bringing it to scale.
For farmers, RA creates long-term value by future-proofing farming operations and making them more climate-resilient. It opens new opportunities for farmers to meet future expectations at a time of uncertainty and change. For example, it lets farmers tap into new sources of revenue, such as receiving payments for carbon sequestered, and grow their business in compliance with stringent new climate regulations, such as policies under the EU Green Deal. In addition, a digitally-enabled, system-wide approach to RA enables traceability in the food chain, which helps connect what is happening on the farm to consumers who are demanding and buying food with new expectations.
Digital precision farming is a key enabler in finding the optimal solution for each farming system. Data-driven insights from sensors and other digital field technologies can be used to tailor the right solution to the specific conditions of each individual farm. This allows farmers to make informed decisions about where and when to apply nutrients, crop protection and water on their land, which means they not only grow more crops with fewer resources and less environmental impact, but also improve the profitability of each acre.
Besides data and digital technologies, precision breeding and precision crop protection – which involves designing new seeds and traits and small molecules levering artificial intelligence and big data – can play a key role because they help adapt individual cropping systems to changing climatic and environmental conditions and offer the right solution for each farmer.
Broadly speaking, key innovations that have potential to shape the regenerative future of agriculture include, but are not limited to:
- Next generation breeding and biotechnology (e.g. gene editing) to develop improved crops that can better withstand biotic and abiotic stressors (e.g. short corn, hybrid wheat, improved orphan crops).
- Smart cropping systems (e.g. direct seeded rice, cover crops).
- Sustainable crop protection based on Integrated Pest Management (IPM) including biologicals and new chemical profiles based on small molecules.
- Nitrogen fixation.
- Innovations in carbon farming, data and digital solutions.
It’s worth stressing that there is not one single solution, but always a combination of these solutions, that deliver a regenerative agriculture system and its benefits.
How can farmers’ resilience be evaluated and/or measured? What indicators would measure that food production is resilient?
RA most be supported by a foundational set of metrics and harmonized methods so that farmers, governments, and all the other stakeholders involved in agriculture and along the food value chain can establish a baseline and track progress. Metrics should be based on the following principles and criteria:
- Metrics should be as simple as possible while maintain scientific rigor and robustness.
- Metrics should be easy to understand and feasible to measure.
- Metrics should be clearly linked to ultimate outcomes desired.
- Since certain outcomes are hard to measure (i.e., biodiversity impacts) metrics can be based on a combination of practice and outcomes measurements utilizing the best available science.
- Assessments should be risk-based, not hazard-based.
- Innovative technologies and practices leading to an environmental improvement should be taken into account by the metrics, meaning a metric should allow for progress to be demonstrated by levers that a farmer can use.
- Example: many crop protection-related metrics are not able to consider modern application technologies.
- Metrics sets should provide the ability to demonstrate both intensity-based improvements and absolute improvements. For instance:
- Need for food production will increase, so absolute reduction in GHG emissions will be a challenge in the near term, but should be the ultimate goal to align with the current state of science and the global carbon budget for agriculture
- Intensity based in the short term (kg CO2/kg; or m3/kg) with longer term strategy focused on absolute reductions and decouple of growth and emissions/impacts
- Thresholds or reference values that are rigid and do not allow for the local conditions to be respected should not be supported. Examples include:
- Environmental Impact Reduction (EIR): Some food value chain companies define thresholds (e.g. McCain for EIQ). Thresholds should make agronomic sense and should not cause trade-offs such as yield loss or risk for resistance.
- Soil Health of arable land: a soil under arable land has different properties than a soil under natural vegetation. This does not mean that soils under arable land are unhealthy. Reference values for healthy soils should take site conditions into consideration as well as soil functionality;
- % natural/ semi-natural habitats: general thresholds like minimum of 20 % natural/ semi-natural habitat should not be used, because this is not realistic for many crop regions. Rather than demanding such a high threshold for RA, it is better to ensure that whatever % of natural or semi-natural habitat exits or is desired, it should be established with the support of local experts to make sure that desired species are attracted and that habitats are connected - without causing agronomic problems for farmers (e.g. increased weed/ disease pressure)
- Spatial scope (i.e., field, farm, corporate, project, etc.) of metric should be clearly articulated and metrics should ideally only be used for the scope intended.
Which and where are the weak points in global food systems in terms of ensuring the resilience of food security and nutrition?
Food and nutrition security has become a topic of concern for all of us as we see climate change, geopolitical tensions and economic volatility impacting food production, distribution and access. We have also seen significant food price inflation in some parts of the world further impacting affordability and availability of a healthy diet for millions of people.
Agriculture is a core field to focus on. While farmers primarily run an operation, they all play an essential role for the greater good. Without farmers, there is no food security.
Agricultural productivity continues to differ significantly between regions and countries, despite scientific breakthroughs, and we see the impact of changing and more extreme weather patterns on yield, commodity prices and more. Farmers today are under pressure to produce more nutritious food for more people with less environmental impact and less resources. It’s a Herculean task that is not fully or adequately recognized by society.
The private sector, the market economy, and investments in research and development play a crucial role in combating hunger. Currently, siloed work can slow progress, there needs to be more connectivity across sectors which includes working side by side with farmers to help them sustainably grow more abundant, diverse, and nutritious food. Higher productivity needs to be achieved with regenerative practices, reducing agriculture’s environmental impact, respecting planetary boundaries and restoring nature.
Political and regulatory frameworks need to be reliable and consistent across country borders as well as more supportive of innovations, for example biotechnology, that can be game changers for food production in the face of climate change.
What evidence bases are there to measure resilience and the effectiveness of interventions?
Some solutions that are proving to help farmers be more resilient:
- CoverCress (low-input winter oilseed cover crop) + Short stature corn + Soybean + Digital tools
- Supports reduced/minimum till settings.
- Provides a living root in the ground to support soil biology.
- Carbon sequestration due to extensive root system.
- Utilizes residual N when following corn crop.
- Keeps the soil covered and protected from erosion.
- Improves soil health, specifically building soil structure and improving nutrient cycling.
- Low carbon intensity biofuel vs. fossil fuel/electric grid.
- Adds diversity to typical corn:soy rotation.
- Support pollinators with early spring flowering.
- Suppresses winter annual and early spring weed pressure.
- Potential for early seeding when built into the Preceon Corn System.
- Have a complementary Roundup Ready Xtend Flex soybean portfolio for use after CoverCress harvest.
- Have a complementary herbicide portfolio to enable successful use of CoverCress.
Business Potential: net $50/acre profit for growers with potential for growth based on yield and policy improvement. This would create opportunities for growers and compete well against winter wheat. Market of renewable oils from oilseeds is expected to increase.
- Ansal tomato (India, Kenya)
- Improve productivity, social and economic well-being: Most Ansal tomato farmers surveyed last year in Kenya reported positive effects: 86% increased production, 91% increased income, 89% improved quality of life.
- Mitigation of climate change: Because of the great shelf life and fruit firmness Ansal significantly contributes to lower postharvest losses from about 20-25% to less than 8-10%* resulting in ~23% reduction of GHG emissions per kg of marketable crop (versus the same leading competitor variety) (*based in a 2019 case study by Wageningen University for Bayer,* using product performance data from 2013-2017 from ~65 Bayer internal trials and post-harvest data from ~60 growers and ~10 dealers and exporters for the south and west India markets)
- Aryaman tomato (India)
- Conservation of Water: Seminis® Aryaman is one of the major hybrids helping smallholder growers with better crop protection management with its disease resistance package and earliness as well as contributing to lesser food loss with its excellent fruit quality attributes. Because of its earliness, we can expect a week early in maturity which potentially could save ~6.5% of water per acre. It also has a potential to increase yield in 10-15% while reducing the losses in 8-9%. (Based on 62 trials in 2016-2019 by Bayer in the primary target market - central west India - Maharashtra region)
- SVTE8444 tomato (Mexico)
- High performing in its fruit class with optimum disease package and excellent yield potential which can result in more potential income for growers in Mexico. SVTE8444 is a vigorous and productive saladette tomato, which can be used for both long and short cycles with high resistance to tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV). In 21 Bayer trials in Sinaloa, Mexico (2020-2021), Seminis® SVTE8444 has shown advantages over Seminis® SV8579TE’ of +22% yield potential and +36% income potential for growers in XL fruit class
- SVTE 6653 tomato (Kenya)
- Climate resilient tomato variety for smallholder farmers in Africa. SVTE 6653 has good disease resistance package, compact plants with high vigor and it has shown uniform fruit from truss to truss and adapts well in adverse weather conditions. Data from five trials in 2020 conducted by Bayer in Kajiado, Machakos, Laikipia, Baringo and Nakuru in Kenya show SVTE 6653 had +4% yield potential and -44% cost in crop protection on average when compared to Bayer’s variety DRD8551.
Д-р. Stefano Marras