Глобальный форум по продовольственной безопасности и питанию (Форум FSN)

Given the emerging challenges pose by climate change and severe environmental degradation, there are observed, both small and huge practices, that could help promote food security and improve nutrition of marginalized families (undernourishment as well as obesity) in the Philippines, Northern Luzon in particular. They are as follows:

1. On landscapes:  Degraded forests can no longer immediately rehabilitated, thus those settlers were given optins to plant fruit beaing trees, forest trees and shrubs that have high value and could serve as both sources of food and as weindbreaks to strong typhoons; families who have farms (both with small lots and larger lots) were also encouraged to plant fruit trees as well as high value cash crops as sources of income of families and as good sources of nutrition for their families. As staple foods, cornlands and ricelands are also being maintained and expanded further (in idle areas with no existing cash crop) where minimal irrigation is required.  In order to also promote healthy benefits of foods, indigenous food sources are being propagated and organic farming promoted.

2. In relation to livestock, conservation of native stocks are being promoted through research and development and community-based interventions.  It is also encouraged among households to rear native chickens and other poultry and native swine to support their protein needs.  This is being sustained through local or village level ordinances or policies to promote both food security, nutrition and economic and social empowerment. 

3. The role of women in gardening and home-based rearing of animals cannot be undermined.  In fact, in this part of teh country, women initiates farming most of the times while men will provide for inputs.

Challenges:

Policy implementation about these matters should be further strengthened and government should provide incentives to initiatives of farming communities.   

Contaminant bioaccumulation is a challenge in industrial agricultural production and global urbanisation is a driver that warrant consideration in the context of the report. 

The scope covers the broad range of issues necessary to address this topic.

There are two issues that I would  like to see included in the analysis - these have been alluded to by other commentators.  One relates to gender issues:  women play a key role in the provision of nutritious food to their families through choices they make; and also through the food that they produce as small holder farmers.  What are the barriers that women face in increasing their production (education, access to money)?  Will shifts in agricultural practices enhance or decrease women's ability to participation in food production? 

The second issue relates to section 5Bc: access to education, training, access to knowledge need also to be considered.  It is not only about technological solutions but it is also enabling farmers and those in the supply chains to have the knowledge to exploit the wide range of possible options for enhancing production.

I am an organic tennant dairy farmer in Scotland. We have diversified into added value dairy and beef products and tourism, exporting as far as Sth. Korea.

Over the past 10 years we have developed and implemented a sustainable foood model which has been independantly assessed and relative to an average UK dairy, cuts soluble fertiliser, weed-killers and vaccines by 100%, anti-biotic and pesticide use by 90%, GHG emissions and energy use per unit of product by 50%, enhances biodiversity by 300% and substantially cuts diffuse pollution while doubling the productive lifetime of the cows.

The model requires 20% less hours per worker and achieves award-winning animal welfare standards, while delivering a net gain to the global food supply. By its nature it relies substantially less on purchased inputs and as such displays a greatly enhanced robustness against global commodity price fluctuations.

The model is a management-based system and has been developed around the principles of Lean Production - waste minimisation, simplification and cost internalisation, and applies the techniques used by agri-ecology, agri-forestry and renewable energy systems.

It is profitable, even at current prices.

The major hurdle against achieving full implementation is the cost of conversion. We have sought assistance from funding bodies and research organisations to no avail. We have taken the model to the industry, agricultural journalists, research organisations and consumer groups. Apart from the consumers, the reaction has ranged from dis-belief through dis-interest to out-right hostility.

We have achieved 80% of the model targets and need the funding to achieve the final, but most difficult, part of the model.

It seems to us that the only way forward is to raise the funding required through some kind of crowd-funding/private share-issue approach. The industry is clearly disinterested in what seems to me to achieve the elusive goal of sustainable intensification.

The reason for the industry reaction, I fear, is that we have a consumption-based food system and, let's face it, its over-consumption that is driving all the issues arising from western agriculture. Our management-based model flies in the face of that mantra.

So, I'm afraid, your search for sustainable farming systems is not going to be seriously helped by the existing agricultural establishment.

I hope this example might help you in formulating your approach to this crucial issue.

Good luck! 

Model of a resilient village for sustainable agricultural development for food security and nutrition, including the role of livestock:

In Bangladesh to achieve “sustainable agricultural development for food security and nutrition, including the role of livestock”,  resilience at village level is necessary incorporating the people and their resources, land and production practices, available input and product, inflow and outflow of cash capital,  and their excess to external  information, services and capitals. A village is the smallest administrative boundary at rural areas of Bangladesh. The peoples who live in the village directly or indirectly depends on agriculture for their livelihood. Usually five to several hundred farm family living together who belongs to the same ancestor, building their homes in a cluster across the village locally known as “Para” and thus a village is consisted of several “Paras”. The father-workable person in a family is the head of the family used to manage the outdoor activities including agricultural production practices  while the mother used to manage the post-harvest activities including the livestock. Besides, the homestead areas that managed by mother for growing seasonal vegetables and raising poultry. The children and the older person are the main dependant of a farm family. The main resources of a farm family is their home and homestead area that used for growing vegetable and local fruit trees, post harvest operations as well as play ground for small children and the grazing area of domestic animal; a shared pond-water of that used for bathing, cleaning and cooking food, used for fresh water fish farming and sometime  as a source of irrigation  water to crop land nearby during dry period; and some piece of land used for crop cultivation. A farm family uses family labour together with hired labour in growing crops and sometime work at other  farmer’s field as a hired labour that are the main sources of their income. They used to purchase inputs like seeds, fertilizer and pesticide from the nearby village market  also sell their product over there. Most of them have no access to formal financial institutions, few of them have access to microcredit with higher interest rates, majority of them depend on informal cash from local lender with the highest interest rate and most of the time it become burden to them. Likewise, their access  to the information is limited. They are vulnerable to various natural disaster that are aggravated by the climate change. The social capital at village level is high as they share each other in well  and woe.

In this context, sustainable agricultural development at Bangladeshi village never be achieved considering the linear factor in general like provide inputs and obtain yield and improve the farm family food security. Rather we have to identify the complexity of food security and identifying the factors and should take appropriate measures. I would like to propose indicators based  “sustainable agricultural development for food security and nutrition, including the role of livestock” applicable to a village level of Bangladesh as a pilot project. The key areas of intervention are: selection of a village, collecting current demographic, agricultural including livestock, socioeconomic and livelihood data, setting the current status at various rank from 1 to 10 at farm family level and the average at village level. Targeting the  raising of key areas rank within a given time frame as an indicators of sustainable development  by providing necessary support to  adopt appropriate practices by the farm families.

Once the metrics and key data needed for your analysis have been identified, the crucial issues of availability and quality must be resolved - we believe these issues need a specific work item and recognition as a barrier to change.

What decision-making framework will you use to determine the trade-offs between different metrics and farm practices?  There are very few available which address the necessary scale whilst linking practical farm issues to diet, health and policy options.

Global Assault on Seed Sovereignty through Trade Deals Is Assault on Human Rights, 

 

'The New meta-analysis, providing evidence to show organic can feed the world'.

 A new meta-analysis shows that the low cost organic yields don't lag much behind the high cost high risk conventional. 

An earlier study, conducted over 21 years at the Rodale Institute, found even more promising results for organic. Corn and soy yields were about equal between conventional and organic farming systems, but in drought years the organic systems had significantly higher corn yields (31% higher) than the conventional system. There's more about the Rodale study here and here.

The new analysis "tackles the lingering perception that organic farming, while offering an environmentally sustainable alternative to chemically intensive agriculture, cannot produce enough food to satisfy the world's increasing requirements."

1. Can organic crops compete with industrial agriculture?

Phys.org, 9 Dec 2014

http://phys.org/news/2014-12-crops-industrial-agriculture.html

A systematic overview of more than 100 studies comparing organic and conventional farming finds that the crop yields of organic agriculture are higher than previously thought. The study, conducted by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, also found that certain practices could further shrink the productivity gap between organic crops and conventional farming.

The study, to be published online Wednesday, Dec. 10, in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, tackles the lingering perception that organic farming, while offering an environmentally sustainable alternative to chemically intensive agriculture, cannot produce enough food to satisfy the world's appetite.

"In terms of comparing productivity among the two systems, this paper sets the record straight on the comparison between organic and conventional agriculture," said the study's senior author, Claire Kremen, professor of environmental science, policy and management and co-director of the Berkeley Food Institute. "With global food needs predicted to greatly increase in the next 50 years, it's critical to look more closely at organic farming because, aside from the environmental impacts of industrial agriculture, the ability of synthetic fertilizers to increase crop yields has been declining."

The researchers conducted a meta-analysis of 115 studies - a dataset three times greater than previously published work - comparing organic and conventional agriculture. They found that organic yields are about 19.2 percent lower than conventional ones, a smaller difference than in previous estimates.

The researchers pointed out that the available studies comparing farming methods were often biased in favor of conventional agriculture, so this estimate of the yield gap is likely overestimated. They also found that taking into account methods that optimize the productivity of organic agriculture could minimize the yield gap. They specifically highlighted two agricultural practices - multi-cropping (growing several crops together on the same field) and crop rotation - that would substantially reduce the organic-to-conventional yield gap to 9 percent and 8 percent, respectively.

The yields also depended upon the type of crop grown, the researchers found. There were no significant differences in organic and conventional yields for leguminous crops, such as beans, peas and lentils.

"Our study suggests that through appropriate investment in agroecological research to improve organic management and in breeding cultivars for organic farming systems, the yield gap could be reduced or even eliminated for some crops or regions," said the study's lead author, Lauren Ponisio, a graduate student in environmental science, policy and management. "This is especially true if we mimic nature by creating ecologically diverse farms that harness important ecological interactions like the nitrogen-fixing benefits of intercropping or cover-cropping with legumes."

The researchers suggest that organic farming can be a very competitive alternative to industrial agriculture when it comes to food production.

"It's important to remember that our current agricultural system produces far more food than is needed to provide for everyone on the planet," said Kremen. "Eradicating world hunger requires increasing the access to food, not simply the production. Also, increasing the proportion of agriculture that uses sustainable, organic methods of farming is not a choice, it's a necessity. We simply can't continue to produce food far into the future without taking care of our soils, water and biodiversity."

---

2. Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap

Lauren C. Ponisio, Leithen K. M'Gonigle, Kevi C. Mace, Jenny Palomino, Perry de Valpine, Claire Kremen

Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences

DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2014.1396Published 10 December 2014

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/282/1799/20141396

Abstract

Agriculture today places great strains on biodiversity, soils, water and the atmosphere, and these strains will be exacerbated if current trends in population growth, meat and energy consumption, and food waste continue. Thus, farming systems that are both highly productive and minimize environmental harms are critically needed. How organic agriculture may contribute to world food production has been subject to vigorous debate over the past decade. Here, we revisit this topic comparing organic and conventional yields with a new meta-dataset three times larger than previously used (115 studies containing more than 1000 observations) and a new hierarchical analytical framework that can better account for the heterogeneity and structure in the data. We find organic yields are only 19.2% (±3.7%) lower than conventional yields, a smaller yield gap than previous estimates. More importantly, we find entirely different effects of crop types and management practices on the yield gap compared with previous studies. For example, we found no significant differences in yields for leguminous versus non-leguminous crops, perennials versus annuals or developed versus developing countries. Instead, we found the novel result that two agricultural diversification practices, multi-cropping and crop rotations, substantially reduce the yield gap (to 9 ± 4% and 8 ± 5%, respectively) when the methods were applied in only organic systems. These promising results, based on robust analysis of a larger meta-dataset, suggest that appropriate investment in agroecological research to improve organic management systems could greatly reduce or eliminate the yield gap for some crops or regions.

---

3. Organic nearly as productive as industrial farming, new study says

Doug Gurian-Sherman

Civil Eats, 10 Dec 2014

http://civileats.com/2014/12/10/organic-nearly-as-productive-as-industrial-farming-new-study-says/

[Excerpt only below, full article at link above]

Industrial agriculture has huge, unsustainable impacts on our environment. And while organic and other ecologically based farming systems (agroecology) have huge benefits, some have suggested that it will never produce enough food. Production is only one of the challenges for food security. But, according to new research, even by this measure, critics seem to have substantially underestimated the productivity of organic farming.

Impressive research from Iowa State University has already begun to show that agroecological systems that don’t completely eliminate synthetic chemicals can match or exceed yields from U.S. industrial grain production and provide equal or higher profits to farmers. Now, new research by a team of U.C. Berkeley scientists shows that organic systems can also be highly productive.

I want to point out that, despite the fact that we currently produce more than enough crops to feed our global population, around a billion people are hungry around the globe. And, in the meantime, we waste between 30 to 40 percent of the food we produce. In other words, crop productivity is only one piece of the food security puzzle. Food sovereignty is another important one…

[Read on at http://civileats.com/2014/12/10/organic-nearly-as-productive-as-industrial-farming-new-study-says/]

Soil,climate,vegetation,tradition,science,livestock and people are all part of the ecosystem

Presentation by Mr. Jethro Greene,

Chief Coordinator of the Caribbean Farmers Network (CaFAN)

About CaFAN

Formed in 2002 and legally registered in 2007, the Caribbean Farmers Network (CaFAN) is a regional network of farmers’ associations and NGOs representing over 500,000 farmers in 15 countries. With a secretariat in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, CaFAN works to strengthen producer groups across the Caribbean.

CaFAN’s mission is to enhance Caribbean food and nutrition security, foreign exchange earnings and foreign savings, by repositioning agriculture through the capacity building of farmers and he institutional strengthening of farmers organisations.

Its members are directly involved in production and marketing for the domestic, regional and extra regional markets. They are also involved in farmers training, promotion of nutritional Caribbean foods, market access, agro-processing and value addition, testing of agronomic practices and organic farming.

The CaFAN’s Secretariat is mandated to speak on behalf of its membership and to develop programmes and projects aimed at improving livelihoods. CaFAN also focuses on market led sustainable mechanisms and structures, working in collaboration with all stakeholders in the agriculture sector to the strategic advantage of its farmers.

CaFAN assists with policy advocacy with its national, regional and international partners, which can result in better-crafted programs and projects to create sustainable opportunities for youth in agribusinesses. The focus on youth supports the regional policy thrust led by CARICOM through the Caribbean Community Common Agricultural Policy (CCAP). This policy is built on five key pillars, the fourth of which was advocated by the CaFAN Secretariat – Youth and Rural Modernization. Under this pillar, CaFAN has been advocating for modern amenities and infrastructure in rural communities that will stem the rural to urban drift.

CaFAN’s focus on Holistic Agriculture

CaFAN’s focus on Agriculture is beyond just food security. CaFAN believes that Agriculture should be linked to providing solutions to the various other challenges including, unemployment, high national debts, foreign resource earning and overall economic growth and social growth and stability.

Why the focus on Small Farm Families?

• Small farm families represent a key platform for social and economic stability.

• Making them viable business will help to promote increased employment, curtailing rural urban migration, reduce poverty and creating greater food and nutrition security.

• Access to market is key to promoting smallholders viability for sustainable business enterprise.

• Strengthening this key sector by supporting farmers / small holders groups and clusters is a key strategy for them to gain economies of scale and compete in the global environment.

• Large farmers will always have better access to financing and technical support.

Linkages

We have a tendency to focus services within the regional plan without looking at strategic linkages. For example, since the decline in production of traditional commodities such as bananas, rice and sugar, the Caribbean region has been largely dependent on tourism and services. But this focus on tourism and services should not lead to the death of agriculture as a sector. Tourism provides an excellent opportunity to boosting agriculture. Currently, agriculture is on the up and this is largely as a result of the contribution of small-scale farmers, which more than half of them are women. Over the last 10 years or so, small-scale farmers have found solace in vegetable, fruit and root crop production. These farmers have refocused their efforts to supplying domestic markets and sending surplus to regional markets. In so doing, they have been playing a key role in moving the Caribbean territories closer to achieving food security.

Other important linkages of agriculture include:

• Export markets - tertiary exchange;

• Employment;

• Food as nutrition security;

• Conservation and environmental preservation. Agriculture has a very positive or negative impact on the environment and as such we should be looking to promote environmentally sound practices in Agriculture;

• Foreign exchange earning to help reduce foreign debt;

• Poverty alleviation;

• Rural modernization and focus on youth to prevent rural urban migration;

• Facilitate the strengthening of existing CAFAN farmers' groups and clusters and ensuring technical and financial assistance are available to farmers for disaster risk management mitigation.

Placing Agriculture at the center of social and economic development of the region would afford us the advantages of building sustainable growth models which will be under our control.

The Caribbean Food & Nutrition Security Agenda

The Issues

1. There is an apparent disparity between the sheer volume of proposals and policies to advance food and nutrition security in the Caribbean Region and their traction to advance this agenda at the national level. Several policy framework and related food and nutrition security policies exist at the Regional level (e.g., the Regional Transformation Program (RTP); The Jagdeo Initiative; The Liliendaal Declaration; the Regional Food & Nutrition Security Policy and Action Plan; The Regional Agri-Business Strategy; etc.). Similarly, many countries have their national agriculture policy and strategy, national food and nutrition policy and action plan both of which are situated within these countries national development plans. Both at the Regional and National Levels these policy framework and related policies and action plans have been in existence for many decades.

2. Despite (1) above, CARICOM countries, with the exception of Guyana and Belize, are net food importers. Indeed, the regional food import bill is now in excess of US 5billion, with our major food imports being food from animals (~US$900M/yr), wheat. Maize and derived products (~US $500M/yr), processed foods (~US$500M/yr), which, together account for over 40% of the region’s food imports. In effect, the region has not solved its agricultural supply-side problems.

3. Poverty is a serious problem and cannot be characterized as existing in pockets in the countries. Absolute poverty rates (inability of individuals to meet food and non-food needs), average 11-28% in the region. Additionally, another 10-20% of the population is vulnerable to poverty, i.e., are at risk of falling below some given poverty threshold should an unanticipated event such as a natural disaster or economic shock were to occur).

   1. The poor are now moving are moving out from urban into the peri-urban areas and from rural to parishes surrounding the capital parish;

   2. Children (0-14, and young adolescent/teenagers, 15-19) and the “working poor” (persons who are working but below the poverty line), are disproportionately represented in the poverty rates. This has serious implications for cognition, educational achievement/certification and inter-generational transfer of poverty;

   3. Well-intentioned national poverty alleviation programs are stymied by frequent shocks—natural disasters, world economy crises, etc.;

4. Nutrition/food-related chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the main public health problems in the region. It has been estimated that if the region were to treat just two of these diseases (diabetes and hypertension), the direst cost (doctors’ fees, hospitalization and medications) will be more than 60% of what the region is currently spending on public health. These NCDs are linked to hunger, poverty, inappropriate diets (low in fruits and vegetables and high in fats, oils, salt and sweeteners), and lifestyle choices (low physical activity, smoking and alcohol use).

5. The issues raised in 2-4 above reveal that all four components of food and nutrition security (food availability, access, consumption/utilization and stability), in the Caribbean are compromised.

The Way Forward

The responsibility to overcome poverty, hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition ultimately lies ultimately with the individual. But, as elsewhere, there are significant inequalities in health, incomes, education, governance, etc., in CARICOM countries. This makes policies operationalized into targeted interventions imperative, with specific roles for the international community, regional agencies and national governments. At the minimum, international support both at the regional and national levels, must exercise greater diligence (at program development, monitoring and evaluation stages), to ensure that funds allocated are efficiently utilized to achieve program outcomes. Relatedly, the international community needs to scale up their technical and financial assistance to support the region’s agriculture, farmers and the population generally. National governments/policy makers must exercise similar diligence and also address in a focused and deliberate way the issues raised in 1-5 above.

Advantages

Over the last few years, CAFAN noted the renewed emphasis of key players in the Regional Agriculture sectors who are working together to strengthen agriculture within the Region with CARICOM leading by creating the Policy Frameworks such as the Regional Food and Nutrition Security Policy (RFNS) and the Community Agricultural Policy (CAPS).

CaFAN sat on both technical working committees and were pleased that the suggestions of the farmers/farmers organisations were included in the final policy document. In fact, CaFAN recommended the fourth pillar of the CAP; Youth and Rural Modernization to help address some of the issues affecting Youth and Women in the sector. The pillar seeks to “promote the modernization of rural communities by improving the quality of life through increasing opportunities in agribusiness, strengthening institutions supporting agribusiness and community development at all levels and building social Capital in rural communities”, and targeting youth and women especially.

Currently, CaFAN has a one year project with the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) to help contribute to the design and effective implementation of the CAP Youth and Rural Modernization pillar by getting inputs from regional youths. Several activities have already taken place and the recommendations will be presented to COTED and the Alliance at the upcoming Caribbean Week of Agriculture 2013.

CaFAN commends the high level of collaboration amongst the key regional and international agriculture institutions and organizations working within the region - FAO, CARDI, IICA, CTA, CEDEMA, OECS and the Universities who are making it easier for organizations like CaFAN and other farmers organization to see greater opportunities for growth and development thought agriculture. This is certainly a great movement to build on.

Jethro Greene

Chief Coordinator

Caribbean Farmers Network (CaFAN)

Tel: 784 453 1004

cell 1784-4953020

TWITTER Angel Greene

SKYPE  jethro.greene

facebook tertius greene

Fax: 784 453 1239

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.caribbeanfarmers.org