[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Definition "Sustainable Agriculture"flong



Another press release they is on topic: May 1996
Press information 

Address by Hervé la Prairie
President of IFOAM at press conference in Copenhagen, 2 May 1996.


Is organic agriculture a possible solution to world hunger 

A proposal to the FAO World Food Summit 

The FAO is of the optimistic opinion that the number of undernourished
people in the world will decline from the present 800 million to 650 million
over the next 15 years. This view is based on the assumption that production
per capita will continue its steady rise in the future. The World Watch
Institute takes a much more pessimistic view, claiming that cereal
production will decline from its all time high of 346kg per capita in 1984,
to 248kg by the year 2030. The Consultancy Group on International
Agriculture Research (CGIAR) shares this view and forecasts a deficiency in
cereals by 2025 of 700 million tonnes. This figure should be compared with
present world cereal production of 2100 million tonnes. 

The FAO's optimistic view is based on the belief that the so-called new
green revolution will manage to keep per hectare yield rising steadily. The
World Watch Institute on the other hand points to a number of disturbing
factors which makes it difficult to share FAO's optimism: 



•Per hectare yield is declining. Between 1950 and 1984 mean cereal yield
increased about 4% per year. From 1984 to 1990 this figure declined to only
1%, and from 1990 to 1993 yield per hectare worldwide declined steadily.
•Even if the new green revolution and the genetic engineering it is based on
succeeds in fabricating varieties that are even higher yielding than the old
'high yield varieties', they will share the old HYV need for input - water,
fertilizers and pesticides. •Agricultural land area on the planet is
shrinking. Agricultural productivity is declining due to soil erosion, loss
of soil humus, salination, waterlogging in irrigated areas and depletion of
groundwater resources. 



The market solution 

It is compelling to point to the fact that overall world food production is
sufficient to nourish all and that the problem is therefore one of
distribution. The free market is the most efficient means of distributing
resources and the conclusion reached is that total free trade in
agricultural produce will solve the problem of hunger. 

To me the issue of food security and eradicating hunger is a question of
providing everyone with sufficient food. The above line of argument is
flawed in one very important respect - it ignores the fact that the market
reacts to purchasing power. At the moment pigs and cattle have greater
purchasing power than the human poor. This means that cereal production goes
to animal fodder and not to the undernour-ished. 

There are no signs of a change on the way. Quite the opposite. With living
standards rising in China the Chinese demand for meat will increase. This in
turn will give rise to an increase in demand for cereals as animal fodder.
This trend is already visible. In 1978 only 7% of cereals consumed in China
was used as fodder. By 1990 the figure had risen to 20%. With a population
of 1200 million small changes in Chinese habits will have major effects on
the world market: one beer more to every Chinese person a year demands
370,000 tonnes of barley. And higher demand for grain will lead to higher
prices. This may be fine for cereal producing farmers but even if they
succeed in increasing yields, this will not produce more food for human
consumption. 

To secure sufficient food for all it will be necessary to create the
opportunities for people in the developing world to produce their own food,
shielded from the free market and from the dumping of agricultural surpluses
from industrial countries. Local farmers must not be outcompeted by cheap
imports. Small farmers in the developing countries should be given the
possibility to farm. In other words, farmland must be made available. This
is all too often not the case. To give one example. Shrimp production in
many coastal areas in tropical countries is occupying and devastating
farmland on a unbelievable scale. The shrimps of course are not used to
improve the diet of the locals. They end up on the high priced markets of
industrial countries. 

Given space to farm poor farmers need a cheap farming method. Such a method
is organic agriculture, relying solely on local resources. Organic farming
is the realistic option in that it provides high yields, is environmentally
accountable and is sustainable in the true sense of the word. 



Organic agriculture - the realistic alternative 

The general view in industrial countries where conventional, intensive
farming is prevalent is that large-scale conversion to organic methods would
aggravate world hunger. Organic agricultural methods are less intensive and
in industrial countries yields are somewhat lower than those of conventional
agriculture. But it would be erroneous to globalise this view. In the
developing countries, and especially among the most impoverished groups,
land is farmed at a very low level of intensity. Small farmers in the
developing world do not have the means to buy fertilizers, pesticides, HYVs
or other substances used in conventional agriculture. In this situation
training farmers to make compost from household waste for use as manure and
other little tricks of organic agriculture can increase yields dramatically.
Double, treble and even higher increases in yields have been experienced in
experimental projects. There is no need to transport artificial fertilizers
over long distances and equally there is no need for excessive irrigation. 

Organic agriculture is environmentally accountable The widespread use of
pesticides is a serious problem in all parts of the world. Pesticides are
threatening biological diversity directly by poisoning insects, birds and
other organisms and indirectly by eliminating the food sources of many
organisms. The use of pesticides is directly responsible for illness and
death in the developing countries. Pesticide residues may also have harmful
effects on human health and reproduction wider afield. In addition the
danger of major accidents in pesticide production is always present, as the
catastrophe in Bhopal is a glaring reminder of. 

All these problems are nonexistent in organic agriculture. The only
pesticides used are natural products, as, for instance, extracts of the Neem
tree. 

Soil erosion is another serious environmental problem solved by organic
methods. The main cause of soil erosion is lack of humus in the soil and
lack of top soil. Soil covering - mulching - is an important aspect of
organic agriculture. With mulching and the use of compost as fertilizer the
humus content of the soil is enriched and soil erosion prevented. 

The environmental problems being experienced in industrial countries will
force the change to organic methods within a short span of time. To mention
just one example. The costs of purifying drinking water are far higher than
the economic gains of using conventional farming methods. 



Organic agriculture is sustainable 

The term "sustainable" has been used and misused extensively in recent
years. I would like to point out here that IFOAM used the term long before
it became fashionable. Our very first international conference in 1977 was
held under the slogan: "Towards Sustainable Agriculture". Organic
agriculture is sustainable in the very literal sense of the word. By using
organic farming methods agricultural production can continue indefinitely.
Organic agriculture does not place limits on human life. It must be pointed
out, however, that the use of fossil fuels in the industrialised version of
organic agriculture is not sustainable and the machinery used on a modern
farm in industrial countries is not integral to organic agriculture. 

The reasons why organic agriculture is sustainable are quite simple: the
methods used 



•are all in accordance with biological principles, i.e. diversity, and •have
been used by farmers for centuries. 

Conventional farming can never be sustainable because the methods used are
contrary to fundamental biological principles. I do not have time to go into
detail here but I will give one example to illustrate the different thinking
of organic and conventional farming. When a conventional farmer sees an
aphid or other pest he will reach for his spray to kill the pest. This poses
a challenge to nature. The first reaction is a build-up of resistance in
pest and the second is the production of even more pests, as the pests'
natural predators are killed by the pesticide. In the long term nature wins.
This has been demonstrated, for instance, in cotton growing regions in many
parts of world, where entire crops have been devastated by pests that no
pesticide could eradicate. 

The organic farmer on the other hand sees the pest as an indication that his
plants have been weakened for some reason. He may use some natural pesticide
with no long-term effects but his main concern will be to correct his
growing methods to help the plants free themselves of pests. 

The principles of organic farming have been tried and tested for centuries:
composting, mulching, mixed cultures etc. Over the years these methods have
been developed and refined but the basic principles remain the same. To me
this is very reassuring. Organic methods have stood the test of time and
have proven their efficiency. In many parts of the world organic methods are
simply the only way of eradicating hunger and ensuring food for all. 

Finally, I would like to contrast organic agriculture with the new green
revolution: genetic engineering has never been used before. We know nothing
of the long-term consequences of releasing genetically modified organisms
into the environment. And we know just as little about what affect the
presence of these organisms, and products derived from these organisms in
food and fodder, will have on human and animal life. 

Therefore, to secure sufficient food for all in a manner that neither
compromises human prosperity nor threatens the balance of nature, in the
short or long term, I invite the FAO to give serious consideration to
organic agriculture by placing it on the agenda of the World Food Summit, in
Rome, in November. We have invited the Director General of the FAO, Jacques
Diouf, to attend the International Conference on Organic Agriculture in
Copenhagen in August, so that we can exchange knowledge and experiences. We
have in fact invited him to deliver the closing address to the conference.
We in the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements consider
that organic agriculture has matured sufficiently to be taken seriously by
world leaders, as an agricultural type capable of eradicating hunger and
supplying food for all. We are calling on the FAO therefore to give due
recognition to the organic alternative. 


At 02:31 PM 8/14/96 GMT, bbbean@sheltonlink.com wrote:
>In <4uopnv$40r@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, tco4@aol.com (TCO4) writes:
>>Can anyone give me a quick and useful definition of "sustainable
>>agriculture" and a short discussion of the goals and an example of what is
>>done.  Thanks
>
>As I understand "sustainable agriculture," SA is an approach to 
>agriculture that combines economic, environmental, and cultural practices,
>standards and needs. 
>
>An approach that ignores any of these three will fall outside the SA 
>framework.
>
>BBB
>
>
>B.B. Bean                               bbbean@sheltonlink.com
>Peach Orchard, MO                       http://www.cris.com/~Bbbean
>
>
>
http://www.rain.org/~sals/my.html
a homepage for organic farmers
sals@rain.org