The Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda: a Golden Opportunity to Mainstream Agroecology

The eight UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – which range from halving extreme poverty, to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, all by the target date of 2015 – form a blueprint agreed to by all the world’s countries and the world’s leading development institutions.  The Post-2015 Agenda will be determined through critical evaluation of how the MDGs have worked as a framework for development, identifying what has worked well and areas for improvement, especially in response to current development challenges. 

Recently I listened to an interesting talk by Jeffrey Sachs, who heads the UN Sustainable Solutions Network and has been tasked with shaping the Post-2015 Agenda.  He called for the new UN Development Goals, to be applicable to all nations and incorporate both the post MDG agenda and the Sustainable Development agenda that was agreed in Rio last year.  This convergence would drive the policy changes that are needed to reduce global warming, which threatens people in both the developing and the developed world.

Sachs envisages a single set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with 4 pillars:

• Ending extreme poverty
• Reducing inequality
• Promoting good governance
• Protecting the environment and cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

The inclusion of environmental protection and GHG emission reduction in the post 2015 SDG’s, would place enormous pressure on industrial agriculture, particularly where production depends on the use of synthetic fertilisers, pesticides and manure slurry and where cattle are reared intensively. This is because high input agriculture emits two of the most potent GHGs - nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4). In terms of global warming, N2O is 310 times as powerful as CO2, while CH4 is 21 times as powerful as CO2.

N20 is emitted directly from cultivated soils when crop residues are ploughed in, synthetic fertiliser or farmyard manure is applied and when leeching and run-off occur; also during nitrogen fixation by leguminous plants. Excess nitrogen that runs off into streams and lakes causes toxic algal blooms and reduces bio-diversity.

CH4 is emitted from enteric fermentation, during ruminant digestion, especially in beef and dairy cattle and during anaerobic decomposition of manure, e.g. in slurry tanks and lagoons.

In addition, CO2 is emitted from fossil fuels used to power agricultural machinery and transport and during the manufacture of fertilisers and pesticides.
 
This means that the Post-2015 agenda presents us with a golden opportunity to promote smallholder agriculture and mainstream agroecology as an environmentally sustainable, low GHG emitting form of agriculture: Agroecology has been already been recommended by the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food – as there is evidence that in Africa, organic farms, using agroecological methods, can produce 2, 641 – 4, 381 calories per person per day, without the use of synthetic fertilisers or pesticides.  Agroecological farming can also increase diversity through reduced tillage, mixing and rotating crops and planting live fences and trees within and around fields.

More, highly successful, agroecology projects are documented by Miguel Altieri, et al, here…. 

However, for agroecology to score highly as an environmentally sustainable, low GHG emitting form of agriculture post-2015, the UN Key Indicators of Sustainable Development will need to be extended to include the following:

• GHG emissions 
• Carbon sequestration methods
• Nitrate levels in rivers and lakes
• Number of species in surrounding aquatic and terrestrial environments
• Crop diversity
• Nutritive value of food crops
• Frequency of antibiotic use in animal production
• Number of farming households above the poverty line

Do we need to pay an organic premium?

Farmers are encouraged to convert to organic agriculture, not only by the possibility of creating a safer, more diverse environment, but also  by the promise of a financial ‘premium’ which may increase the price that consumers have to pay for their produce, by up to 16%.  The organic premium is said to compensate farmers for the cost of the less intensive production systems that they use, as well as the costs of certification.

This means that essential, nutritious, pesticide-free foodstuffs – fruit, vegetables, grain and meat - that is produced organically, is marketed primarily to the affluent middle classes.  This is a policy that blatantly discriminates against poorer families, despite the fact that children and the elderly are more susceptible to the damaging effects of pesticide residues that are found in some common non-organic foods (PAN UK). 

Can this organic premium continue to be justified?

Surely high input-using, conventional farmers are now at a disadvantage, compared to organic farmers, considering that the costs of oil or methane gas-based inputs, such as fertilisers and pesticides, also the cost of imported animal feed, have increased dramatically over the past few years.

Meanwhile, the sales of organic produce are said to have slumped by 23% from an all-time high of almost £2bn in 2008. If organic certification organisations, such as Ecocert and the Soil Association want to help farmers both in Europe as well as in lesser developed countries, increase demand for their produce, they should abolish this premium and adopt a more equitable pricing and marketing policy which ensures fair access by even the poorest of consumers.

Rio+20: Meeting urban food demands sustainably- can the Private Sector embrace Agroecology?

According to the UN’s latest Sustainable Development report, our population trajectory means that from now until 2030, the world will need to build the equivalent of a city of one million people in developing countries, every five days!  

How will all these billions be fed without destroying our planet? 

Delegates to the Rio+20 will try to address this massive problem by focusing on two key themes:

(a) defining a ‘green economy’

(b) creating an institutional framework for ‘sustainable development’

It is hoped that this will enable nations to promote sustainable economic growth alongside increased food production, using agro-ecological methods.

What is a ‘Green Economy?’

UNEP says that in a green economy, growth in income and employment are driven by public and private investments that reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. 

Nevertheless, there is little agreement amongst Rio+20 delegates on the definition or functional parameters of a green economy, particularly on the role of the private sector and market forces.  

La Via Campesina is campaigning against private sector involvement in food production on the grounds that it relies on fossil fuels, promotes monocultures and exploits farmers – they are calling for a system which is based on food sovereignty and does not wreck the environment. 

Meanwhile, several multinational food processing companies are expanding the numbers of smallholder farmers in their supply chains.  This has the potential of enabling smallholder farming families to become self-reliant in terms of food and financial capital.  The question is, can the private sector embrace the sustainable farming methods, i.e. agroecology, as required by a green economy?  

In an effort to increase public trust in their concern for farmers’ livelihoods and the environment, many food processing companies are implementing voluntary standards such as Organic, Fair Trade, Rainforest Alliance, UTZ Certified, Social Accountability, 4C, and Forest Stewardship Council. 

As a result, certification of agricultural products is now a growth industry - in 2011 there were 426 different, sustainability labels.  The voluntary standards behind each of these labels emphasise many different aspects of sustainable agriculture, from reducing the use of toxic agro-chemicals, protecting rainforests, conserving water and safe-guarding bio-diversity - to protecting the rights of workers and farmers, as well as orang-utans and other endangered species.  With such an array of special interests to choose from and with so little information readily available it’s easy for consumers to get confused.  So here are some links to help:

• 4C
• Ecocert 
• Ethical Tea Partnership
• Fairtrade
• International Organic Standards (IFOAM)
• Rainforest Alliance
• Social Accountability
• Soil Association
• Sustainable Agriculture Network
• UTZ Certified

..... so we can judge for ourselves.

BBC's Sport Relief raises £50 million for Slum Dwellers in Africa...

This is a fantastic effort by the British public.


But wouldn't it have been better if we had paid farmers a fair price for their crops, such as cocoa, coffee and cotton? Farming families would then have been able to stay on their land, instead of being forced to relocate into miserable slums.


But I guess that wouldn't have been so much fun...

Bill Gates calls for more funds for agricultural innovation

"Given the central role that food plays in human welfare and national stability, it is shocking—not to mention short-sighted and potentially dangerous—how little money is spent on agricultural research. In total, only $3 billion per year is spent on researching the seven most important crops. This includes $1.5 billion spent by countries, $1.2 billion by private companies, and $300 million by an agency called the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). Even though the CGIAR money is only 10 percent of the spending, it is critical because it focuses on the needs of poor countries. Very little of the country and private spending goes toward the priorities of small farmers in Africa or South Asia."  Read more...

Africa's smallholder farmers living on the brink...

Decades of under-investment in small-scale food production is being blamed for up to 100, 000 unnecessary deaths from starvation in the Horn of Africa, in 2011.  2.4 billion dollars is being spent on trying to mitigate the impacts of this disaster rather than on developing rural livelihoods during the period before the drought.


Thirty international relief agencies are now calling on richer nations to pledge their support for the Charter to End Extreme Hunger which, among other things, urges G8 nations to 'fulfill urgently and rapidly the pledges made to the l'Aquila Food Security Initiative' in 2009. This initiative commits USD20 billion over three years for sustainable development and safety nets for vulnerable populations.


But what will these billions be spent on?  High tech research in international institutions or funding local Extension Workers to promote the wide range of simple best practices that already exist, to all small-scale farmers?


Best practices to mitigate the impacts of climate change for Africa's farmers include;

• the provision of OPVs that have good pest resistance, drought tolerance and storage qualities
• training farmers in the selection and storage of good seed
• adjusting soil pH by adding lime where necessary
• water harvesting by building ridges, contour bunds, pot holes and small earth dams
• planting winter thorn trees, Faidherbia albida, within arable lands to increase organic matter, improve soil fertility and feed livestock
• alley cropping with Gliricidium sepium to increase organic matter, promote vegetable production and provide goat fodder
• planting pigeon pea as a climate change tolerant, nutritious food crop
• planting indigenous fruit trees
• training farmers in record-keeping and linking them with markets

While it is clear that the amount needed to bring about sustainable development in Africa's rural areas would be a fraction of the cost of disaster relief - the unglamorous nature of the above interventions mean that international donors may prefer to wait until the next disaster...

AIDS-related deaths: How to get to Zero in Africa's rural areas

UNAIDS' latest report is upbeat about the future prospects for a world with zero new HIV infections and zero AIDS-related deaths. Such aspirations also imply 100% access to antiretroviral drug treatment (ART). Although Sub-Saharan Africa accounted for 70% of all new HIV infections in 2010, there is said to be a decline in the regional rate of new infections. For example in countries with high exposure, such as Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe, this rate has declined by more than 25% in the past 10 years. Nevertheless, more than 50% of Africans who are already HIV+ are unable to access treatment. Most of these unfortunate people reside in rural areas, where it is many hours’ walk to the nearest clinic. For example, research has shown that a vigorous treatment programme has led to the decline of HIV in Botswana’s urban areas, while prevalence in the rural areas has remained unchanged. It is estimated that the need for ART in Botswana will increase by 60% by 2016.

Men have proven to be the hardest group to reach, as far as providing successful treatment is concerned: Workers in Malawi have shown that men only go for treatment once they are ill. This means that their disease is often too advanced to benefit from successful treatment. And, whereas women, particularly mothers, are motivated to seek voluntary counselling and testing, men are much more reluctant to go, probably because of the stigma that they will attract. To make matters worse men are also more likely to migrate in search of work and this reduces their adherence to treatment, leading to higher mortality from AIDS.

UNAIDS recommends community-based, participatory learning approaches in order to challenge social gender norms that increase vulnerability to HIV/AIDS. 

Hundreds of rural communities, across Africa have already benefitted from ‘Positive Living’ participatory workshops, where women, men and young people learn how to reduce their vulnerability to HIV, ways to ensure a healthy diet and how to prevent diseases associated with poor hygiene and opportunistic infections. The training manual - How to Live Positively, which is used to facilitate these workshops was written by me and Fortunate Nyakanda; it increases treatment preparedness and carries a message of hope that reduces the fear that leads to stigma. The How to Live Positively training manual can be downloaded in English for free here, or obtained in French, Portuguese or English, from CTA.