September 2014 Archives - Ileia

Editorial – Farming communities in living landscapes

Edith van Walsum — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 12:21:23 +0000

Leading up to the December 2014 Global Landscapes Forum in Peru, this issue explores how family farming, pastoralist and forest communities are responding to the increasing pressures on their landscapes, creating space for their own development path and reconstructing their landscapes.

The ‘landscape approach’ has been increasingly promoted during recent years as a new perspective for addressing global problems. In the face of increasing and competing claims on the land, planners, scientists and policy makers have realised that sectoral approaches do not work. ‘Integrated land management’ or broad landscape level considerations have at last begun to supersede those restricted to water, forests, farming, etc., in national policies and development programmes.

The landscape approach promises to tackle the negative effects single sectors may have on the others when left to grow on their own, and it also promises to deliver complementary benefits by integrating different landscape elements. This holds the potential to improve livelihoods, food security, well being, climate change adaptation and delivering ‘environmental services’. But some serious challenges still remain in reconnecting agriculture to other functions of the landscape, and especially in finding a balance of interests in the face of unequal power relations.

Connecting to the landscape

For many family farmers, pastoralists, forest communities and fisherfolk, a holistic ‘landscapes perspective’ is not new. Their landscapes have always been shaped in dynamic interaction with others and the natural environment.

The interdependencies between different components are a given, and a logical daily reality that relates closely to the interdependencies within families and the communities they live in. Landscapes not only provide food, fodder, fuel, timber and medicine, but they also have cultural and religious significance. They are where people live, and provide the fundamental framework to all aspects of life.

Each person holds his or her own specific knowledge and perspectives about different parts of the landscape. She or he works with whatever is available in terms of highland or lowland, water sources, seeds, trees and so on, through practices that have been built up and continue to develop over generations. Women and men may use different pieces of farmland or forest for different purposes, and their animals may get a separate patch to graze. Such landscape elements are combined to fulfil various roles, often strengthening each other and the system as a whole but there is bound to be competition as well. Through these and other activities, family farmers maintain landscapes, many of which have been recognised as culturally and environmentally valuable.

Many communities however risk losing the knowledge and practices that make the landscape connection. For more than half a century, policy makers, extensionists and researchers have pushed hard for modern farming, promising that this would improve the lives of all. Production and livelihoods were seen as individual units in isolation from their environment. Focus was on maximizing productivity at farm level, and farmers were to specialise in single crops and seek growth in external, rather than their own, inputs and knowledge. Though this focus on single crops and farms may have contributed to short or medium term gains, in the long run it has contributed to degradation of landscapes and to unsustainable farming systems. In this issue we find several illustrations of such processes.

Finding balance in power

The landscape approach is hailed as inclusive, equitable and multi-stakeholder, as a new way of addressing and resolving conflicts in land and water management, but as practice shows, it is clear that the challenge of power remains.

While in some cases, such processes have resulted in agreements acceptable to all parties, all too often a seat at the table is not enough. Family farmers, local forest users and fisherfolk are confronted with powerful political and commercial interests. Even when facilitated in a fair and skilful way that addresses inherent power imbalances, the real decisions may be made behind closed doors. Or these communities are excluded from other land governance structures, natural resource management programmes or policy development that may be more decisive. This is especially the case when landscape perspectives and demands are in serious conflict, as is the case with mining or fracking. In such situations, real landscape democracy appears to be little more than rhetoric.

Reconnecting

Even when facing hugely un-level playing fields, farmers in the broadest sense, i.e. who may depend on crops, animals, trees, fish or other natural resources, are finding ways to score goals while running uphill. Where possible, they are taking control to ensure that they make the decisions about what happens in their territories. This issue of Farming Matters presents a selection of these experiences, concluded by a ten-year reflection on integrated landscape approaches .

Farmers have reconstructed and reconnected with landscapes often by building on local knowledge as a starting point for further development and innovation. We see them using their traditional knowledge in India and organising themselves into an effective ‘landscape powerhouse’. In Nepal, biodiverse farming systems come to the rescue when their orange orchards are killed by a disease. Farmers turn to the water when climate change threatens their land in Bangladesh (page 18), and take up new knowledge to make the most of invasive trees in Djibouti . As argued eloquently by Million Belay (page 21), knowledge and historical memory that exist in communities are highly inspirational in this regard. John Liu also tells us about how we need more farmers in the landscape, not less , and Jeff Campbell explains that how they organise themselves into effective organisations is key.

These family farmers, pastoralists and forest communities have used the space they have as effectively as they can. They have also managed to expand it, amplify their voice and assert their rights by organising themselves and by forging alliances. In the Netherlands, farmers formed territorial cooperatives and collaborated with scientists and civil society to change policies and implement a self-governing landscape structure .

As we see from the experiences presented here, creating a political space for family farmers and community organisations is of crucial importance, while efforts should be made to harness women’s rich knowledge and organising capacity.

This issue of Farming Matters is a call for those involved to challenge top-down concepts that frame today’s landscape approach. But we should not seek an alternative. Rather, we must provide a better platform for those who need to be heard – the real managers of the land, our landscapes. Only with them can we shape a sustainable future.

Edith van Walsum and Nick Pasiecznik

Edith van Walsum is director of ILEIA – The centre for learning on sustainable agriculture. Nick Pasiecznik is editor of Farming Matters. ILEIA is also the secretariat of the global AgriCultures Network.

The post Editorial – Farming communities in living landscapes appeared first on Ileia.

Tribal farmers reclaiming denuded landscapes

Vidhya Das — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 12:15:46 +0000

In southern Odisha state, India, the landscape and livelihoods of family farmers are threatened by large dams, changing rainfall patterns and government indifference. But tribal communities have decided how they want to conserve their land for their own benefit. And they are doing it.

Podu chaso, as shifting cultivation is called in the tribal regions of Odisha, India, is important for the diversity of crops it has helped to sustain, and the diversity of cultivation practices it has generated. Crop rotations, intercropping, and other sustainable agricultural practices are a part of the inherited knowledge system of podu farmers, and have helped to create the landscape in which they live.

However, all of this is becoming increasingly threatened. Commercial logging has devastated huge tracts forests used by the tribal communities, and the food and fuel that used to be gathered there by tribal women has almost completely disappeared. The area also continues to suffer from lopsided development, with roads, railways and dams being built to attract corporate investment at the cost of tribal land and livelihoods. In Koraput region alone, more than half a million people have been displaced due to the construction of new reservoirs, and more than ten thousand hectares of forest land destroyed.

Alternatives

Consecutive governments in India have adopted the TINA (‘there is no alternative’) philosophy for addressing poverty, based on claims that despite various policies and programmes aimed at promoting rural development, poverty persists in the tribal regions. The only solution, they say, requires the input of corporate capital. However, multimillion dollar investment projects lead to displacement and have only further impoverished tribal communities rather than helping them.

On top of this, climate change has also affected the region’s rainfall, cultivation practices and fragile environment. The combined result is an almost total end of the podu system of cultivation, threatening the livelihoods of the tribal communities. Hunger is now commonplace, and some live on the brink of starvation. Their rich forests have disappeared. Their luxurious hill slopes where they used to grow up to ten different crops together in a single season have turned to barren soil and rock. But on which they keep trying their podu in desperation, trying to relive the memories of those bountiful days from not so long ago…

Addressing the situation with a holistic, people-centred approach was seen by some as the only alternative to ‘there is no alternative’. Agragamee, a group of activists committed to working with marginalised and underprivileged communities in the tribal districts of Odisha, began talking with family farmers in the affected areas. Based on their experience, a series of consultations with 25 tribal villages began. Together, they looked for sustainable, agroecological alternatives that would help the tribal communities preserve their cropping patterns and produce enough food.

Farmers decide

In Chandragiri Panchayat in Rayagada District, farmers pointed out the need to address their problems in an organised and multipronged approach to counter the many threats they saw to their landscape. This included controlled use of communal land, improved soil and water management, moving towards settled cultivation, and rejuvenating uplands with plantations and permanent tree crops that would provide livelihood support as well as cash incomes.

This looked like a huge task, and a real challenge for tribal farmers who have few resources other than a little land and their own labour. But even the longest journey begins with a single step. Their chosen first step was to establish a framework for improving governance of their resources, and rules emerged from a process of dialogue and discussion. These were: controlling the open grazing of cattle, protection of all forests, having every child in school, ensuring collective labour for village development, everybody to have compost pits, and no use of alcohol or tobacco.

This was followed by further discussions on land use, and the first agreement was to improve agricultural practices and soil fertility, and other plans began to emerge. The community felt that they had been very short sighted in the past by neglecting plantations and orchards and allowed them to die. Less than 5% of tribal farmers had taken the trouble to maintain their cashew and mango plantations, but they were getting significant cash returns while others were in penury. The village decided they would take action at three levels. The first, governance, was to be based on the rules above. The second would be collective efforts to rejuvenate the commons – a prime need emphasised by women. The third would be to move away from shifting cultivation to settled plots, intensifying energy and resources on cropped land, and allowing other areas to regenerate.

Planning solutions

Sobha Majhi has developed exemplary hedgerows which are the key to successful family farms. Photo: Vidhya Das

The process was especially difficult on the steep stony uplands that they had decided to work on first, much of which was already very much denuded. However, the farmers took up the challenge with courage and conviction. Agragamee stepped in with support for fencing, tree seeds and seedlings, nursery equipment and other materials, and support also came from organisations including IPAF (the Indigenous People’s Assistance Facility), NABARD (the National Bank for Agricultural Development) and KKS (Karl Kubel Stiftung). A common design for farming land was created which combined plantations, orchards, rainfed cropping and hedgerows to provide an integrated agroecological system to support the livelihood of each farming family.

Women in the community felt that it was not enough to protect just the private lands, however. They pointed out that this would not provide them with enough firewood and fodder that they considered as essential as agriculture. So it was decided to protect the communal area from grazing, allowing them to rejuvenate. Women took the initiative in this, ensuring their commons were properly fenced and no cattle entered, deciding what trees to plant, and also taking up some annual intercropping.

Collective action

In Kebedi village, 35 farmers or almost the entire village decided to address their situation through collective action. Realising that the open grazing of cattle was causing considerable damage, women came together as a group to improve communal land, using a combination of live fencing, stone walls and social fencing to protect ten hectares of uplands. They also planted income generating trees like cashews along with firewood species, growing crops between them while they were still small. The returns were shared amongst them.

Every farmer agreed to take up to half a hectare of upland and develop it for settled agriculture. Farmers with common borders decided to fence the land. Good results were seen after only two years. The trees established successfully, and they are also gradually adopting zero tillage practices which is further reducing erosion and improving soil fertility.

These efforts are inspiring many other villages to take up similar efforts. Farmers have begun to fence their lands and plant and protect trees combined with seasonal crops. Ruko Majhi from Kebedi village explained. “I slogged day and night to make the fence and protect the plants, and now I am really happy with the results. In the coming season, I will grow kandul (pigeon pea, Cajanus cajan) in between the cashew trees”. But the most important work is that being taken up by women on common land, large areas of which are being reclaimed thanks to huge efforts by women’s collectives. Sonamati Majhi of Dandabad village was very happy with the results. “This programme has taught us that our own plants and crops are the best. We only need a little support and we can develop our land ourselves”.

Poverty and neglect by the government has further hampered the development of tribal communities in the south of Odisha state, eastern India. Under these circumstances, reclaiming land in the hilly terrain of Koraput had proved impossible. But with support from NGOs like Agragamee and other actors, a successful start has been seen, allowing farmers to decide for themselves what to do. With courage and determination, the tribal people and especially the women, have bravely stepped out to take up the challenge to save their landscapes. And their successes could be transferred elsewhere, for the benefit of many more farmers like themselves.

Vidhya Das

Vidhya Das works for Agragamee, Kashipur, Odisha, India, a NGO that promotes people-centred development, combining an issue-based approach in their socio-economic development programmes.
Email: vidhyadas@agragamee.org

The post Tribal farmers reclaiming denuded landscapes appeared first on Ileia.

Opinion: Remembering the landscape

Million Belay — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:40:44 +0000

Million Belay tells the story of how Aman Mame reads his landscape, and uses it to explain how social memory provides the context for responding to ecosystem change.

His name is Aman Mame. He reads the landscape as a mullah reads the Koran or as a high priest reads the Bible. We were on the second day of a participatory mapping exercise in a small village called Horo Soba overlooking the Bale Mountains in Ethiopia. I asked three teachers to each draw an eco-cultural calendar, a circular seasonal representation showing how culture, climate, nature and livelihood responds to each season.

The teachers divided the year into four seasons. But Aman Mame divided his into five. The teachers were shocked, and upset by their authority being challenged. But Aman explained his five seasons and showed how life in the landscape and his livelihood activities fit and respond to each, cultural aspects of how they welcome the coming seasons, and how the climate speaks to them.

Afterwards one of the teachers said “I was born here, but I saw places on his map that I did not know and I now feel like a total stranger. We need to teach this to our children.” Aman Mame replied, “you must know your land and remember your past. When the past is forgotten, the opportunity is lost for the present. Recalling the past will help us meet today’s challenges and those yet to come.” His community is now taking part in a social process to revive their past, compare it to the present and carry what is valuable to them to the future.

Social memory provides context for social response to ecosystem change, which is important during periods of crisis, and increases the likelihood of flexible and adaptive responses. As memory provides the framework of accumulated experience for coping with change, the mobilisation of memory through mapping has assisted local people to improve their resilience.

This collective memory is under assault in Africa. The new generation is substituting their memory of their landscape and the stories of their parents and ancestors, with the thought that they have no attachment to the land. Rural children spend hours arguing about European football clubs and players, and a generation with lost memory is easy prey for consumer culture. They have no patience and want everything now, and this has proved so detrimental to our landscape. This insatiable desire for the new and gratifying is tearing the social fabric in Africa and leaving its ugly mark on the landscape. To save it, we must remember our past.

Million Belay

Million Belay is the director of the Movement for Ecological Learning and Community Action (MELCA), Ethiopia, and the coordinator of the Africa Food Sovereignty Alliance. Dr Belay is our columnist throughout 2014.
Email: millionbelay@gmail.com

The post Opinion: Remembering the landscape appeared first on Ileia.

Making the most of invaded landscapes

Nick Pasiecznik — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:38:11 +0000

Millions of hectares of once degraded dustbowls across the world’s drylands have become ‘reforested’ in recent decades. The landscape has totally changed, but the trees were not planted. Exotic trees have spread ‘naturally’, creating dense forests over large areas. Local farmers and pastoralists must be happy then? Not at all. The trees have actually made their lives worse, invading pastures, as a weed in farmland, blocking paths and roads, and they have even forced some communities to relocate. But through the sharing of experiences from country to country, more people are learning how to make the most from this new resource, as this story from Djibouti shows.

From desert to forest

Prosopis – valuable resource or invasive weed?

In tropical dry areas of Africa and Asia, one species stands out – Prosopis juliflora. It was widely planted in the 1980s as part of reforestation programmes, and quickly spread, creating dense and impenetrable thickets in agricultural, pasture and natural areas. It out competes native species and forage plants, is very thorny, and can completely block paths and roads. But in its native American range, prosopis are appreciated as valuable trees, especially for their sweet and protein-rich golden-yellow pods which are ground into flour for making animal feeds or human food.

The wood and charcoal is of high quality, posts and poles are marketed, and the heartwood is very hard indeed making excellent flooring and furniture. Prosopis honey fetches a premium price, the resin is equivalent to gum Arabic, and all plant parts have medicinal uses. It is also a nitrogen fixing tree that improves the fertility of surrounding soil, and provides good shade, shelter and erosion control.

Most of the planted trees died and most of the native trees that were left were cut down for firewood. Sandstorms became more common. Poor soils and lack of experience meant harvests were meagre.

In the 1990s, civil war came and went, and many left for the city, or abroad if they could. But better rains came and some managed to improve their yields. The one introduced tree species that did survive began to spread, thanks to animals eating the pods and its ability to grow in the harsh desert climate.

In only a few years, large areas became covered with a mass of thorny thickets. A decade later, thickets turned into forests covering hundreds of hectares. The invasion of prosopis trees had begun.

But the wrong trees

In 2013, it was estimated that some 60,000 hectares of this small nation was covered by prosopis. And half of this is around Hanlé, where prosopis had become a huge problem for the community, having invaded huge swaths of agricultural and pasture land. The same problem is also shared by many people in other countries.

There is thought to be a million hectares of invaded prosopis in neighbouring Ethiopia, the same amount in Kenya, Sudan and Australia, two million in South Africa, five million in India, and millions more in Brazil, Mexico and the USA, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, from Senegal to Somalia, in eastern and southern Africa, and numerous island states. Prosopis is classified amongst the ‘world’s worst alien invasive species’, and is a legally declared national weed in many countries.

However, prosopis trees and ‘forests’ also produce a multitude of resources, some of which are already used to some small extent but most remain very much underutilised. Since the 1990s a small but growing group of professionals have been developing and promoting an innovative approach of ‘control by utilisation’ as a win-win solution to address this dilemma of how to manage a useful but invasive species. The aim is to turn this unappreciated tree into a source of valuable products to help alleviate poverty and improve food security in dry areas, while at the same time reducing its negative ecological and social impacts.

The need for knowledge

Ripe and highly nutritious pods hang in abundance from prosopis trees even in the drought years. Photo: S. Choge

Known as mesquite or algarrobo in their native Americas, prosopis has been introduced around the world since the 1800s. They were seen as useful, fast growing and drought tolerant trees that could provide fuel, fodder and shade, but whereas the trees were successfully introduced, the indigenous knowledge on how to manage and fully utilise them was not.

In the late 1990s, experts from Argentina, Peru and Mexico were brought to India to show people there the many uses of prosopis trees and ways to process them, such as how to mill the pods and how to saw the often twisted logs.

The experience gained was then transferred to Kenya some years later, where it took hold. Government policies changed and many businesses sprung up, with an estimated million US dollars per year now added to the collective incomes of selected communities through the sale of prosopis charcoal and pod flour. A ‘green’ power station is also being built in Kenya that will supply 5 MW of electricity by burning prosopis wood alone, based on a model in use in India.

And on to Djibouti

Thanks to the pioneering vision of Mohamed Awale, then Secretary of State for National Unity and now Minister of Agriculture, successive visits were made to transfer this knowledge to Djibouti beginning in 2008 and later supported by UNDP.

Beginning in 2012, the FAO as part of a Technical Cooperative Programme assisted the government in providing four communities with equipment and training so they could better manage and utilise the ‘free’ prosopis resource growing ever larger around them. Pod milling machines from India that were tested and proved successful in Kenya were imported and installed along with improved charcoal kilns.

Tools and protective clothing for managing thorny stands were also supplied, and training was given on stand management of invasive stands, and the operation and maintenance of these new technologies.

The cooperative in Hanlé took up this opportunity with both hands. In 2013, they organised the collection of almost six tonnes of pods from over a wide area and brought them all to the site of the mill.

Much of the milled pod flour was given out to cooperative members for mixing and feeding to their own livestock, and the people saw how the animals appreciated it, growing strong and with better milk yields. The cooperative was especially happy with their first sale of milled flour, of 110 (25 kg) sacks that were sold to livestock producers for FD1500 each (or a total of almost US$1000). There was strong demand for more, with buyers saying that it was a very nutritious, competitively priced and locally sourced concentrate that replaced some of the expensive, imported feeds that they currently rely on.

Ali Hamad said that the cooperative would certainly take up the pod processing technology and wanted to increase production from last year’s ‘experiment’. They would invest in fuel, oil and empty sacks, had already identified 10 families in each of the three main prosopis area to lead the pod collection, and would use their own cash reserves to pay FD300 for every 10 kg sack of pods collected. If production only equals that of 2013, this would mean that collectors in the local area, mostly women, would receive a total of about US$1000 thanks to the development of prosopis pod flour as a new value-added product. A neighbouring community on Gob’aad is also planning to make more use of prosopis, but they see more benefits from charcoal than from the pods. Beekeeping is another avenue worth further exploration.

Landscape management

Benefits from milling prosopis pods

When eaten whole, the hard seeds pass through the animals’ gut undigested, and germinate into new invasive plants. In the dry season when the sweet pods may be the only forage available, the sugars also tend to cause tooth decay and stomach disorders in livestock, and some animals even die. And most of the protein is in the seed, which is then ‘wasted’. By processing the pods, not only is the seed protein made available for the animals to digest, it is easier to mix, and some two million seeds are destroyed for every tonne of pods that are milled. The pod flour is also used a nutritious ingredient in human foods in its native Americas but it not eaten in Africa.

Ali also told of a recent meeting between livestock owners and charcoal makers in the area, which resulted in an agreement on the future management of dense prosopis thickets. The causal issue was the death of seven camels due to attacks by hyenas. Whereas small livestock are corralled at night, camels are left to roam freely but are normally able to evade attack. Now, however, many paths have become blocked by encroaching thorny prosopis and hyenas are able to corner camels and kill them.

Camel owners asked if charcoal makers could clear roads through the dense stands as they cut wood for charcoal instead of just clearing blocks of trees as they usually do. They agreed. This is an excellent example of different interest groups within a community being able to agree a common approach to natural resource management in a changing environment, for everyone’s mutual benefit.

Introducing new tree species or any other crop is not enough, if the traditional knowledge on how it is best used does not accompany it. Though as is seen from this example, the knowledge can come along later, and will be adopted if it is appropriate for the locality. With invasive plants, there is the added advantage that the resource is effectively ‘free’, and there is much potential for adapting the ‘control by utilisation’ approach for other weeds. Also, this case shows how knowledge from the native range been adapted in steps for each situation, and also the importance of committed development professionals in ensuring that ideas make it out into the hands of farmers.

Before leaving the shade of the doum palm, Ali Hamad summed up their experience. “Before, we didn’t know what we could do with prosopis pods, but then we milled it, people took the flour home, mixed it and gave it their animals. They ate it with relish, and now we have started selling prosopis pod flour – the pods have really become ‘gold’ for us.”

Simon Choge and Nick Pasiecznik

Simon Choge works for the Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), Marigat, Kenya.
Email: skchoge2002@yahoo.com

Nick Pasiecznik works for ILEIA, with a lifelong interest in dryland agroforestry.

The post Making the most of invaded landscapes appeared first on Ileia.

Rebuilding mountain landscapes

Sandesh Timilsina — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:35:00 +0000

Mountain landscapes have long been nurtured by family farmers, and these landscapes, in turn, sustain farmers’ livelihoods. Yet, mountain life is by no means easy. Inaccessible terrain, harsh topography and social and political marginalisation tend to undermine food security. This led farmers in some areas to look at income generation by switching to cash crops. But this caused new problems, as a community in the Nepalese Himalayas discovered, and who have been on a journey from biodiversity to monoculture, and back again.

Grains produced in mountain landscapes may fill the bellies of mountain people for a few months each year, but for the remaining months, farmers have to rely on other sources of food and income, or may have no alternative but to buy grain on the market.

In 1989, cereal production began to decline, due to poor rains, lack of labour and no technological advancement. Subsequent food shortages led farmers to focus on new cash crops for export, and commercial orange farming appeared to offer the best way out of poverty and dependence.

Around 55 household in Chitikhola, Tanahun District, began planting orange trees in 1991, and entire north-facing terraces were soon transformed into orange orchards.

“Prosperity without resilience is temporary at best”

A journey to monoculture…

Citrus decline

The name ‘citrus decline’ is open to confusion as it can be used to refer to several diseases. In Nepal, the name refers to the bacterial disease Liberibacter asiaticus, otherwise known as citrus dieback, Asian greening, yellow dragon, or huanglongbing. It is regarded as one of the most important threats to global citrus production, and by the early 1990s it was estimated that more than 60 million trees had been destroyed worldwide. In Asia, more than 100 million trees have been destroyed, and it continues to spread, with one million trees killed in Brazil in 2004.

For the first years, the results were impressive. Orange farming quickly and significantly improved the economic status of the farmers. In 2006 and 2007, these farmers produced a total of 300 tonnes of oranges, earning US$62,000 between them, or an average of US$521 per individual farmer per year. This was an increase of almost US$150 for each farming family. Every year, the land planted with oranges increased and yields per hectare also increased. However, this prosperity soon came to an abrupt end.

By 2010, in the space of a single year, around 10,000 orange trees were killed by ‘citrus decline’ disease and the whole basis of their newfound wealth and livelihood was destroyed. This left farmers who had become solely dependent on orange production with nothing but devastation, and a whole new set of challenges. The community sought help from the government but was offered little support to compensate them for their huge losses.

In the face of this disaster, farmer and community leader Basu Raj Kadariya put his creativity and intelligence to work to revive the landscape and rebuild a resilient farming system. Having learnt from the catastrophic consequences of relying on a monoculture, he diversified his farming activities to minimise risks. He started by prioritising livestock rearing, small scale vegetable farming and small scale beekeeping, introducing more varied crops, and using forest resources in a more sustainable way.

…and back again

Basu Raj Kadariya developed his farm as a learning center for other small farmers in 2011 soon after the orange orchards were killed. Being a progressive farmer, he took on the responsibility of teaching other poor farmers about new farming techniques and innovations, using seeing-is-believing and learning-by-doing as the best approach. Using his own farm as a learning and demonstration centre, other farmers come to learn new farming skills and crops.

New growing technologies for tomato and cucumber are mostly preferred by these farmers who hope to add extra income for their family. Almost all the farmers in his village have benefitted from his learning center, and besides this, he has directly shared his knowledge and farming innovations to around 160 farmers from other villages who came to visit his farm asking for help. He recently demonstrated how to use drip irrigation for producing tomatoes in plastic greenhouses.

Initially, the community was not confident about how crop diversification could restore their economy and their landscape, especially after their experience with oranges. The selection of the right crops was crucial and famers were cautious after the recent failure of their whole farming enterprise. With their traditional farming knowledge, they began to grow new crops, but their yields were not enough at first to earn an adequate living. However, this allowed them to slowly change their thinking and when they started to grow other vegetables which performed much better, the landscape begin to revive.

Integrating livestock

Livestock, and especially goats, buffalo and poultry offer Nepalese farmers numerous benefits within their diversified farming systems. Goats are affordable but are also a valuable source of ‘insurance’ if crops fail, providing milk, meat and income. Through their grazing and browsing of certain plants, animals also play an important role in maintaining the whole landscape, and help to sustain organic crop production by the manure that they produce.

Farmers in Chitikhola now raise more livestock using traditional practices which involve providing shelter, and nutritious fodder. The presence of sufficient fodder trees within the landscape is a critical factor enabling farmers to keep animals within their farming system.

Tree species being planted include khanyo (Ficus semicordata), tanki (Bauhinia purpuria), and dabdabe (Garuga pinnata), with other fodder plants being bhatmase (Flemengia congesta), napier (Pennisetum purpureum), kutmero (Litsea polyantha) and gideri (Premna barbata).

Crop diversification

Farmers are now reshaping their landscape and rebuilding resilient farming systems not only through integrating livestock but also through crop diversification. Among the various vegetables grown, surplus from some of them such as tomato and cucumber are sold on the local market.

Growing more crop species is far less risky than depending on just one, provides a greater variety of possible income sources and spreads production over more of the year. Farmers have taken control of their own seed production and storage, and this self sufficiency reduces their costs and increases their profits.

Based on recommendations from local extension officers, some high yielding varieties such as the hybrid tomato ‘Shrijana’ have been introduced and are increasingly grown. Beside vegetables, Basu Raj Kadariya, for example, is planting more cardamom on the bunds of terraces, adding yet another income from the sale of this spice while also reducing the risk of erosion.

Agroforestry is another way of diversifying their farms, and farmers have started using some space on their terraces to plant the fodder tree badhar (Artocarpus lakoocha) which further supports the integration of livestock into the landscape. Diversification is an ongoing process and with the help of extension staff, progressive farmers lead the way in exploring options for new crops such as kiwi fruit, with many other farmers now beginning to experiment on their own.

Environmentally friendly methods such as compost, manure and organic mulches are used to feed and protect the soils and the crops, which they have relearned from the days before growing oranges. Others, like botanical pesticides, are new, and their integrated use has become a turning point for developing organic crop production which is leading to healthier agroecosystems.

Botanical pesticides, known as jholmol, are made locally by fermenting local plants such as neem (Azadirachta indica), asuro (Justicia adhatoda), chilli (Capsicum frutescens) and timur (Zanthoxylum armatum) with cattle urine and curd for 45 days. Now, their organic vegetables are highly sought after on the local market as people consider them to have superior taste and quality.

Sustainable use of the forest

Local areas of woodland such as the Bageshwori Community Forest provide fodder, mulches and firewood along with various ecological services, but they also offer additional opportunities. Kadariya worked with the community forest user group that was established in 2009 and includes all the local farmers, to begin shitake mushroom cultivation.

The forest is dominated by tree species like chilaune (Schima wallichii), katus (Castanopsis indica) and sal (Shorea robusta) whose wood is suitable for mushroom cultivation. Small pieces of timber from katus trees and cool temperatures are ideal for growing shitakes. Shitake mushrooms are highly nutritious, have many stated medicinal properties, and fetch a high price on the market. Once spores are inserts into holes in small pieces of timber, it takes about 6-9 months until the first harvest, and production continues for more than five years.

Conservation of the forest areas is also a priority, with groups of farmers planting and conserving young trees, and quotas are agreed and issues to ensure sustainable harvest during regular council meetings which decide the level of sustainable harvests, equitable prices and conservation strategies. For example, each household is allowed to harvest 20 logs for free, after which they must pay US$0.21 (or Rs. 15) per piece.

Beekeeping

More bees enhances vegetable production through pollination. Photo: Sandesh Timilsina

Diverse crop and forest species support diverse and healthy bee fauna within the landscape. Apis crerena, a honey bee native to the Himalayan region of Nepal, has been reared by local farmers in small scale hives for many years, but has increased dramatically in recent years. Farmers now keep up to five hives, and produce organic honey for local markets and for sale farther afield.

Honey is considered to be a heavenly food in Nepal and it is an important source of both medicine and nutrition. Beekeeping not only provides food and another source of income to farmers, but the presence of bees also enhances vegetable production through pollination.

The government is also encouraging mountain people to take up beekeeping in a more organised way, as they have realised the benefits from the conservation of forests and crop diversity that lead to more secure livelihoods.

Better than before

Locally adapted practices are being put to work to revive and reshape an entire mountain landscape

This is a story of a community that took action to rebuild their landscape after a disaster caused by a switch to reliance on a monoculture. Well acquainted with hardship and the struggle for food security, farmers in Chitikhola were eager to improve their prospects.

Specialised orange production promised new horizons but the arrival of a new disease that caused a sudden and absolute devastation of their orange orchards changed their landscape.

A leader farmer, Basu Raj Kadariya, was quick to understand that prosperity without resilience is temporary at best. He realised that diversification offered a true pathway towards a better life, and set about to experiment and provide the leadership needed to revive the landscape. Livestock, crop diversification, sustainable use of forest products and beekeeping became complementary elements of a new farming system.

A local learning centre enabled farmers in the community to learn about and experiment with a range of practices on their own farms. Ultimately, local knowledge and creativity resulted in locally adapted practices that are being put to work to revive and reshape an entire mountain landscape.

Sandesh Timilsina

Sandesh Timilsina is completing a degree in agriculture at the Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science in Nepal.
Email: sandeshtimilsina@gmail.com

The post Rebuilding mountain landscapes appeared first on Ileia.

Locally rooted: Ideas and innovations from the field

ILEIA — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:18:57 +0000

Landscapes are rich melting pots of biological and cultural diversity which, in many cases, are under threat. Here, from across the globe, we see four examples of farming communities taking initiatives to resist the destruction of their environment, assert their rights and improve their landscapes.

Argentina: Implementing the constitution now!

Photo: M’Bigua Fuondation

In July 2014, social organisations in the province of Entre Rios in Argentina began legal action before the court of justice. They are demanding the implementation of the 2008 provincial constitution, which proposes a groundbreaking transition toward sustainability. In particular, it defends small scale producers and promotes sustainable production, trade and consumption, while discouraging latifúndio (large scale land ownership, which is widespread in the region). This is particularly significant in Entre Rios, where genetically modified soybeans are produced on 70% of the territory.

Six years after establishing the constitution, nothing has happened. So in collaboration with the university and farmer organisations, the M’Biguá Foundation has requested regulatory legislation. This would mean the promotion of agroecological belts around cities, establishing access to safe drinking water as a human right, protection of the soil, and the promotion of diverse and sustainable production.

One crucial element in the constitution is the formation of an Economic and Social Council with participation of farmers. “The new constitution is unique as it protects our rivers, soils and right to water. Turning it into law will signify a major policy change, including greater social participation in territorial planning” says Jorge Daneri of M’Biguá.

More information: Contact the M’Biguá Foundation (mbigua@mbigua.org.ar)

Australia: Lock the gate for fracking

The bright yellow signs nailed to farm gates across much of Australia’s countryside say it loud and clear: coal and gas companies are not welcome. Australian farmers and small town communities have been the new face of resistance to inappropriate mining and coal seam gas.

More than half of Australia is covered by coal or gas licenses and the recent corporate interest in unconventional gas extraction (using a process known as ‘fracking’) is threatening farmland, ground water and native vegetation on a large scale.

The rate of expansion of coal seam gas wells in Eastern Australia has been incredible and it is estimated that 40,000 new wells may be drilled in the coming decade.

Lock the Gate Alliance, a national coalition, has proven hugely successful in hampering the unprecedented push to drill holes in the landscape. Companies have been forced to pull out of existing projects. One recent win was in the Northern Rivers region of the state of New South Wales where months of direct action by local community members resulted in a suspended mining license and local councils declaring their lands to be fracking free.

Success of the continuing campaign highlights the power of new alliances between farmers and environmentalists who share a commitment to protect the fabric of rural Australia. The campaign started with landowners locking their gates but has grown to encompass entire communities taking action and building the power needed to protect their landscapes.

More information: Contact the Lock the Gate Alliance (info@lockthegate.org.au)

Brazil: Mate-scapes

Yerba mate (pronounced ‘mah-te’) is a plant used for making a traditional ‘tea’ in South America, and increasingly marketed worldwide. The shrub (Ilex paraguariensis) produces caffeine-rich leaves with medicinal properties when taken as an infusion. Less well known, however, are its benefits in conserving biologically rich landscapes. In Brazil alone, mate is grown on 700,000 hectares, although 57% of national production is still collected from native forests.

In the Planalto Norte Catarinese, Santa Catarina, pasture, forests and yerba mate co-exist as a mutually supporting agroecosystem. However, this is threatened by the artificial distinction between ‘landscapes of production’ and ‘landscapes of conservation’ that exists in the minds of experts and policy makers. Researchers and extensionists promote industrial monocropping of yerba mate with agrochemicals.

Wild collection is disregarded as something primitive, and is seen as contrary to conservation goals by many ecologists and forestry technicians. Legislation is threatening to put severe restrictions on the management of these forests, making the easiest option being to convert these forests to agriculture. But farmers in the Planalto Norte Catarinese are hesitant, knowing the benefits they gain from wild yerba mate, construction timber and firewood. This mosaic of natural forest, yerba mate fields and cattle pastures, creates a unique landscape where biodiversity conservation and family farming combine. And in Santa Catarina, farmers are ensuring this continues to be possible.

More information: Contact Anésio da Cunha Marques, environmental analyst at the Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade; Valdir Frigo Denardin, professor at the Universidade Federal do Parana; or Mauricio Sedrez dos Reis, professor at the Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.

Mexico: Defending landscapes – Mayan peasants

A small group of beekeepers caused a major problem for the multinational Monsanto company when on the 7th of August 2013, a court in the state of Yucatán cancelled permission to the company for the commercial planting of genetically modified (GM) soyabeans. The reasons were that this would have had harmful effects on beekeeping by indigenous Mayan peoples and family farmers in the region. This legal victory halts the planting of 253,500 hectares of GM soybeans in seven states in Mexico, protecting about 30 thousand indigenous farming families. Community based organisations under the umbrella name of Acción Colectiva filed a lawsuit when the permit was granted, and protests came from thousands of Mayan farmers and beekeepers, Greenpeace, the Mexican National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity, the National Commission of Natural Protected Areas and the National Institute of Ecology.

The First District Court of Yucatán said that co-existence between honey production and GM soyabeans is not possible. The permit was also revoked because it was granted without consultation, being a direct violation of the rights of the communities for adequate consultation. In addition, the court found that there is also a risk of contamination of other crops in the region from using GM seeds.

More information: Contact the Seeds of Life Foundation/ Acción Colectiva, Mexico (contacto@semillasdevida.org.mx)

The post Locally rooted: Ideas and innovations from the field appeared first on Ileia.

Sacred forest landscapes, self-reliant agroecosystems

Yinxian Shi — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:13:46 +0000

In a multi-ethnic region of Yunnan province, China, the Dai minority have thousands of sacred forests. They say, “If there were no forest, there would be no water source; if there were no water, there would be no paddy fields, and as a result, there would be no fish or rice we could live on.”

Sacred natural forests form part of the farming and forest landscape that surrounds each village and community in tropical and subtropical areas of Yunnan province, south-western China. These are strictly protected and periodically worshipped by everyone in the community.

The Dai ethnic group have three distinct kinds of sacred natural forests, each with its specific spiritual purpose. These are as a resting place of the dead, for ancestor worship and the worship of natural gods where they pray for the well being of this life that are known as ‘long’ forests, and as a place to worship Buddha where they pray for the well being of future life. Traditionally, the existence of sacred forests is also believed to grant the communities good weather, good harvests and good health.

Sacred forests and family farming

The sacred natural forest is the basis of the Dai people’s traditional farming system, that includes sacred natural forest, multi-storey home gardens, fuelwood plantations, cash crops, rice paddies and fish ponds. They see their landscape as a whole, and not as individual components. They see it as a self-reliant agroecosystem which gives them all the food they need to live on, in perpetuity.

Ecological studies have confirmed that the natural vegetation that makes up these scared forests serves several positive functions for the ‘folk farming systems’. They serve as protectors of the headwaters of nearby rivers, ensuring the continuing flow of water for irrigation and also reducing the risk of flooding. They provide organic matter for soils downstream, and provide a home for the natural enemies of crop pests, such as owls, woodpeckers, geckos, tree lizards, toads and other animals. They stabilize the soil, prevent erosion, and are buffer against natural disasters.

The Dai say that the existence of their scared forest means that they can farm well without any agricultural chemicals, dams or reservoirs, and are rarely affected by extreme climate events. They have mastered irrigation using the inexhaustible supply of water from these forests, and so paddy rice became their principal food. The Dai community were one of the first people in the region to cultivate rice and have developed more than 60 high quality rice varieties, recognised as precious crop genetic resources.

Traditional life under threat

The sacred forests serve as protectors of the headwaters
of nearby rivers, ensuring the continuing flow of water for irrigation. Photo: Yinxian Shi

Due to industrialisation and the ‘modernisation’ of traditional family farming in southern China, many sacred natural forests have been or are being destroyed. In one region alone, Xishuangbanna, there were more than one thousand protected ‘long’ forests before 1958 with a total area of 100,000 hectares.

By 1984, there were only 400 such forests covering 50,000 hectares. In addition, local farmers say that the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, the establishment of a water conservancy project, and extreme climate events, all added to the impacts on their traditional farming system. Thankfully, according to a field survey in May 2014, most of those 400 ‘long’ forests are saved, although they are much smaller than before.

Protecting traditional farming landscapes

A certain area of natural vegetation is indispensable for a self-reliant agroecosystem, and as such, protection of these sacred forests is necessary to sustain the Dai’s traditional system of family farming. Fortunately, a group of researchers and government officials working with local farmers and supported by the provincial forestry department, have in 2014 started a broad programme investigating and restoring sacred natural sites in Yunnan. This is a good sign that the focus has begun to change, with such efforts towards the maintenance of traditional family farming in the region, based on sound agroecological practices.

Yinxian Shi
Yinxian Shi is a post doctoral researcher at the Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yunnan, China.
Email: shiyinxian@mail.kib.ac.cn

The post Sacred forest landscapes, self-reliant agroecosystems appeared first on Ileia.

Perpectives: A decade of integrated landscape management

Sara Scherr — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:00:46 +0000

This ‘landscape’ issue of Farming Matters comes at a most timely moment. It presents a perfect opportunity to reflect on how agricultural landscape thinking and action has evolved during the past ten years, and the implications of this for the future of family farming.

Photo: Raffaela Kozar

It is ten years since the first international ecoagriculture conference and practitioners fair was held in Nairobi, and the resulting establishment of EcoAgriculture Partners. Experiences from that meeting also provided much content for a 2004 issue of Farming Matters (then called the LEISA Magazine) on agriculture and biodiversity conservation. At that time, we felt we were at the beginning of a new way of thinking and acting about farming and landscapes that challenged the agriculture mainstream.

A decade later in July 2014, the first conference on Landscapes for People, Food and Nature in Africa took place, also in Nairobi. And what a contrast! Nearly 200 experienced landscape champions from 20 African countries, from the grassroots to the grasstops, were confident enough with advances underway to design an ambitious African Landscape Action Plan to scale up integrated landscape management.

Agricultural landscape thinking in 2004

‘Landscape thinking’ had been around for decades, but was originally focused on achieving mainly environmental goals through large scale forest, habitat or watershed conservation. Increasing agricultural production or farmer incomes was rarely an objective, and many landscape programmes even sought to limit farming. In 2004, there was still considerable conflict between the agriculture and environmental communities, and the relationship was framed as an unavoidable trade-off, an ‘either/or’ marked by distrust and fights over the designation of land use priorities.

We coined the word ‘ecoagriculture’ in 2001 to describe the management of mosaic landscapes including farms and protected areas, with the aims of jointly enhancing agricultural production, biodiversity (of both cultivated and wild species), ecosystem conservation, and local livelihoods. LEISA Magazine in December 2004 highlighted diverse examples of this from all over the world.

For the most part, these innovations and adaptations to indigenous practices were being implemented at small landscape scales, and were rarely part of government policy or development programmes. Data on the many benefits of these approaches was still limited and analysis was in any case a challenge.

From thoughts to action

But away from the public eye, innovation was happening everywhere, as practitioners and researchers sought to find synergies between farming and conservation. Much of the world’s agricultural land is in areas that are also critically important for water resources, wild biodiversity conservation or climate change adaptation and mitigation.

The dependence of agricultural production and sustainability on healthy ecosystems was becoming increasingly recognised. As so many different people live in any single landscape and must share the same resource base, negotiating acceptable agreements among them is essential.

During the past decade, many initiatives that focused on specific ‘sectors’ such as water management, biodiversity conservation, land restoration or agricultural development, evolved to promote multifunctional landscapes that meet the needs of diverse stakeholders.

Although more than 80 terms have been used by different people to describe aspects of integrated landscape management, in 2013, the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature initiative agreed on a working definition. Such management involves long term collaboration among different groups of land managers and stakeholders in order to achieve their multiple objectives and expectations within the landscape regarding local livelihoods, health and well being. Integrated landscape management encompasses agriculture, ecosystem services, biodiversity, aesthetic landscape value, cultural identity and recreational values as well as human settlements and resource extraction industries. In seeking complementary solutions to common problems, they pursue new opportunities through technical, ecological, market, social and policy means.

As landscapes are complex socio-ecological systems, accepting dynamism and change must be inherent in their management. There are many different approaches to integrated landscape management, with different entry points, processes and institutional arrangements. Most include features of conflict management, an understanding of democratic rights, broad stakeholder participation, negotiation based on common objectives and strategies, adaptive management based on shared learning, and sustainability as a goal for human needs and ecosystem health.

Family farmers in landscape management

Photo: Raffaela Kozar

Family farmers are clearly critical stakeholders within agricultural landscapes, given the reliance of their multi-faceted livelihoods on diverse landscape features for resilience, and stewardship of resources under their management.

A recent survey documented 104 integrated landscape initiatives in Latin America and 87 in Africa. Of these, more than 80% had producer organisations as key stakeholders, and more than 40% included indigenous peoples’ organisations. However, although family farmers are involved in landscape initiatives, their roles are often restricted to being the object of actions designed by others, or they may even be defined as the ‘problem’. This can be due to their use of farming and land use practices that are perceived by some as detrimental to the interests of other stakeholders.

Weak farmer organisations and inadequate access to information also limit their ability to engage equitably in decision-making processes. This is particularly common in landscape initiatives led and funded by state or national government agencies, national or international NGOs, regional programmes such as transboundary conservation or watershed projects, or the private sector. Resolving the large power imbalances between different stakeholders remains a major challenge, and politically marginalised groups including women struggle to have their voices heard.

But some examples of integrated landscape management have been driven and largely managed by family farmers or by farming, pastoral and forest communities, such as those seen in the pages of this magazine. Many groups that first organised to protect or restore land and forest rights have evolved to address collective challenges of land and resource management.

Networks are emerging, such as International Landcare that support dozens of locally-organised landscape initiatives in Asia and Africa, and the international Model Forest Network that supports long term multi-stakeholder initiatives in 58 landscapes in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe. Together, these all suggest that producer movements have a pivotal role to play in developing, scaling up and managing increased farm production, ecosystem benefits, and in implementing multi-stakeholder planning.

Growing interest

As experience in integrated land management grew sharply in the last ten years, so did policy interest in the approach. Those involved in agriculture, environment and rural development lost confidence in the efficacy of fragmented sectoral strategies to deliver sustainable outcomes. Scientific evidence and practical experience showed that the challenges of climate change and food security required action in agriculture beyond improved seed and more fertilizers and beyond the farm scale.

Biodiversity experts began to recognise the importance of cultivated and grazing land in the conservation of wild species. And it became increasingly clear that improving the well being of family farmers would enhance their capacity for land stewardship and landscape resilience.

Although this approach is by no means dominant, it has at least become ‘respectable’. Mainstream institutions like the World Bank, CGIAR and NEPAD now have landscape programmes. Many countries have set up national initiatives or policies to support or invest in integrated landscape management, from Australia and Indonesia to Burkina Faso and Zambia. Some multinational companies are collaborating in integrated landscape initiatives to manage their reputation and sourcing risks, and impact investors are now setting up landscape investment funds.

This increasing interest and investment in landscape approaches can be of great value for family farmers. They can support more sustainable agroecosystems, create new partnerships, new market opportunities, and incorporate the conservation of cultural values.

Multi-stakeholder landscape initiatives can provide a platform for dialogue and advocacy around land and resource rights and alternative agricultural investment strategies in the face of fast-paced agro-industrial development. But the quality of landscape governance is highly variable, and there are many potential threats and challenges for family farmers involved in such initiatives.

Many have decision-making processes that marginalise family farmers and their role in reaching agricultural production objectives is not adequately acknowledged. Proposed interventions for environmental objectives are not co-designed with the farmers who are best placed to look after the landscape.

Empowering family farmers

So how can family farmers and their organisations position themselves during the next decade to realise the benefits from more integrated landscape management and investment? Firstly, farmers need to ‘step up to the plate’ in taking up leadership roles in these initiatives, and find ways to collaborate more effectively. They must bring the smallholder agriculture agenda more centrally into what has until recently been a more conservation-led approach. And farmer organisations should ensure representation of the interests and needs of all, including marginal farmers, during the negotiations that follow.

The outcomes depend upon how organisations frame their own values and goals in including farm and landscape stewardship, how they fight for the political space to engage meaningfully in multi-stakeholder processes, and how they proactively explore partnerships with other interest groups in their own landscapes.

The contributors to the 2014 African Landscape Action Plan in Nairobi defined several priority actions specifically related to family farmers and their communities. They encouraged policies that would recognise traditional land management systems, better link grassroots land managers and national policies, and improve the level and quality of community involvement in policy decisions and public accountability. They also argued for more explicit methods to address the imbalanced power relations in landscape governance. They recommended greater use of market mechanisms that benefit small and medium sized enterprises, and to provide investment in appropriate microfinance initiatives. They supported further strengthening in the capacity of farmers and their communities to plan and implement integrated landscape strategies, as well as greater youth engagement.

What should we work towards in the next ten years?

Local interests in land and resource planning can be strengthened by building engagement with family farmers into integrated landscape initiatives from the outset. Farmer federations, cooperatives and other organisations must become key players in these initiatives, and proactively develop strategies and capacities to do so. Where such multi-stakeholder platforms for landscape management do not yet exist, family farmer organisations should take the lead, developing their own capacities, engaging with new partners, committing to working collaboratively for land stewardship, and ensuring that they are not marginalised from future efforts. May the stories in this issue provide inspiration.

Sara J. Scherr

Sara J. Scherr is President of EcoAgriculture Partners, and Chair of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative. Email: sscherr@ecoagriculture.org (http://landscapes.ecoagriculture.org)

The post Perpectives: A decade of integrated landscape management appeared first on Ileia.

Opinion: We need more farmers, not less

John Liu — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:27:53 +0000

We need more farmers, not less, says John D. Liu. But as farmers can help limit climate change and increase biodiversity, so shouldn’t they be paid for more than simply the food that they produce?

Productive landscapes within functional ecosystems are critical in being able to feed the human population, and will become even more valuable as the human population continues to rise. The assumption is often made that industrial agriculture is the only effective and efficient way to provide sufficient food in the modern world and the world of the future. There is, however, much less publicity surrounding the fact that large-scale industrial agriculture often degrades the environment, and that functional ecosystems are far more productive than dysfunctional ones.

Farmers are not just growing crops that feed people and animals. Farmers are also sequestering carbon in the biomass and necromass, helping to filter water and keep it in the soil to reduce flooding, and increasing or at least maintaining biodiversity. Or they are having the reverse effect. They influence the regulation of the weather and the climate by maintaining functional ecosystems, or they disrupt it by degrading ecosystems and increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

While the trend in mainstream agriculture has been towards more mechanisation and fewer farmers, we simultaneously see hugely increasing rural unemployment leaving so many people in our countrysides without anything meaningful to do. We badly need to look at how social organisation is changing the fundamental values of our societies and how we are creating degraded landscapes that reflect the state of our consciousness. If we value food that tastes good, contains few or no chemicals, is produced in ways that are not polluting, respects the rights of farm workers and treat animals ethically, sequesters carbon and regulates the climate, we can employ many more millions of people while simultaneously restoring ecological functions on a planetary scale, and help to ensure a more peaceful world.

This summer in South Africa’s Eastern Cape, I led a team that documented efforts that are engaging more people in agriculture and that simultaneously improve ecological functions in the area. Similar initiatives are happening around the world. The result is these local people who engage in agriculture are experiencing great satisfaction, making their families and communities more sustainable and resilient and this is what the world needs more of, in order to better mitigate and adapt to climate change.

We need to realise that farmers are on the front line of climate change, and that society depends on them to sequester carbon by massively increasing organic matter in the soils. But society cannot depend on something that it is unwilling to pay for. We need more farmers, not less, and they will have to be paid for more than simply the food that they produce.

John D. Liu

John D. Liu is Director of the Environmental Education Media Project and Visiting Fellow at VU University, Amsterdam.
Email: johnliu@eempc.org

Related content

Opinions

The post Opinion: We need more farmers, not less appeared first on Ileia.

Globally connected: News from the AgriCultures Network

ILEIA — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:00:48 +0000

Members of the AgriCultures Network are working together to advance family farming and agroecology by drawing lessons from farmers’ fields, sharing knowledge, and working with social movements for policy change. Read our latest news.

A new global agenda for research on family farming

As part of the International Year of Family Farming, research institutions in Montpellier, France held a major conference on family farming and related research in June.

AgriCultures Network representatives from AS-PTA (Brazil), AME Foundation (India) and ILEIA (the Netherlands) participated. More than 200 participants from 70 countries attended, including farmers, development workers, decision makers and researchers. Together, they flagged the need for agricultural research to take ‘a systems approach’. If you change one part of the family farming system (such as by introducing a genetically modified crop), you may affect another part (like disturbing cultural habits related to crop cycles). It also highlighted the fact that many climate smart strategies are actually being developed by farmers, and which could be better integrated into research agendas. Finally, there was a call for more comparative research into the role of family farmers in global versus local food systems, and the effects of both systems on food security.

Participants called upon scientific and political communities to address two structural problems. The first is that a large part of agricultural research is funded by the private sector with little interest in family farmers. The second is the power dimension, i.e. the rich knowledge held by family farmers is often considered of less value than formal science.

Demanding appropriate policies for family farming in Brazil

BrazilWhen the Brazilian government discussed family farming in July 2014, civil society made itself heard. While acknowledging progress in public policy, a number of critical and outstanding issues were brought to the table. The most important were the marginalisation of women and indigenous peoples in public policy, access to land and other resources, as well as the continued threat posed by agribusiness.

Paulo Petersen, director of AS-PTA and vice president of the Brazilian Association of Agroecology, told the assembly that family farming carries qualities that under the right circumstances have the potential to substantially benefit society and tackle many crises that humanity is facing. He urged the Brazilian government to continue to address the factors that most disadvantage family farmers.

Paulo Petersen made the following statement. “The global market treadmill is pushing family farmers off their lands. We must have the political courage to analyse what has been happening over the past 20 years (…): a concentration of wealth and land, increasing indebtedness, environmental degradation, migration of youth, etc. Macro-structural conditions are weakening family farms despite the increasing allocation of public resources to them.” He considers the new Brazilian National Policy for Organic Production and Agroecology, the first in the world, as a resounding victory.But he adds a note of caution.“We must remain critical and should not consider agroecology as an economic sector within agriculture, but rather as a focus for rural development.”

Farm internships in the Netherlands

This year as in 2013, ILEIA is supporting the Farm Experience Internship. More than 20 international students spent several weeks on organic farms in the Netherlands, living and working with the farmers and learning about their day-to-day and long term realities.

A series of presentations and workshops ensured a solid preparation beforehand and thorough reflection afterwards. Students admitted to being very tired after long days harvesting vegetables, pruning trees and carrying boxes. But they said all the pain was more than compensated by the gain, from getting a greater understanding of the many strategic and tactical decisions farmers have to make every day, and from new knowledge about the relationships between plants and insects. They also expressed much satisfaction about eating the food they had just picked from the land.

Following a Brazilian example, the internship brings together farming practice and student theory, and strengthens the connections between farmers, universities and NGOs.

It also facilitates the development of bottom-up research, and introduces interdisciplinary and participatory approaches alongside principles of agroecology.

Photo competition

On 15 September, public voting closed in the International Year of Family Farming photo competition. From more than 1300 entries, a prestigious jury of farmer leaders, artists and activists is now selecting the photos that are considered to most beautifully represent family farmers, pastoralists, indigenous peoples and fisherfolk in action around the world.

The winners will be announced at the end of October in Rome by a representative of the Asian Farmers Association during the Global Dialogue on Family Farming. Winning photos will also feature in a 2015 calendar.

The photo competition is organised by the AgriCultures Network and the World Rural Forum, in close collaboration with the Asian Farmers Association, CLOC- La Via Campesina and the More and Better Network.

The post Globally connected: News from the AgriCultures Network appeared first on Ileia.