|
|||||||||
| |
|||||||||
In response to the discussion on ?the tragedy of the commons?, I think this highlights the critical need for us to be aware that our interventions are based on our own values and perspectives. For example, some cultures and communities have their own enlightened mechanisms for control and regulation of the natural resource base for its sustainable management. Similarly, although some of us may view exploiting the NR base for our own individual needs as making ?good economic sense?, again other cultures are very aware that it does not make sense for the survival and wellbeing of their societies. Whilst our interventions are introducing the concepts of individualism and neoliberalism, I and many others have encountered reactions of horror at these, amongst grassroots societies. Rather than promote these concepts in a vacuum, we could be suggesting them as one option, along with others, and at the same time promoting awareness of their consequences ? both positive and negative ? which we have learned through our own food and farming experiences. At a more general level, many of the debates in this conference seem to be getting caught up in the detail, detail which should be the prerogative of decision-makers in-country. Aren?t we meant to be supporting and facilitating others to develop their own paths, through, for example, ensuring awareness of the full range of options available? In relation to this, if we want to ?unlock the potential? of agriculture, then we first need to be clear ourselves of just what that potential is. As long as we continue to see agriculture as just another industry producing marketable products then we are only seeing a small part of its potential. As Simon Maxwell pointed out in his early paper, times have changed and so has the situation. Change includes not only the growth of supermarkets, but also growth in local recognition of the failure of industrialised approaches to perform in fragile agroecosystems, in advances in ecological science, in understanding the implications of externalising production costs (on human and environmental health and therefore on public expenditure) and of the economic benefits of building local and bioregional complexity, and last but not least growth in empirical evidence of the success and benefits of small and medium scale agroecological farming systems. Following this, I would like to refer to two interesting projects we have been involved with which highlight the potential of agriculture. One project is on agricultural strategies to mitigate the impacts of HIV/AIDS, entailing the encouragement of grassroots, horizontal documentation, exchange conservation and use of local plant and animal genetic resources and associated local knowledge, as a means to improve nutrition, gain medicinal relief, and to some extent generate income. During our time in the field, in Southern Province, Zambia, we encountered a huge increase in confidence amongst local people to defend their ?traditional? knowledge and plant species as being more appropriate in their current adverse conditions of weakened health and vulnerable environment. Yet their realisation was limited by the dominant perspective of the public and private extension services which were still set on ?modern is best? approaches. This highlighted a huge need for increasing ecological literacy, not amongst the farming community itself as much as amongst the classically trained support sector. The second project we are currently working on is the achievement of Cuba to maintain and improve levels of food security throughout the 1990s, in the face of huge losses not only of agricultural input supplies and fuel but also of food imports. The main factor for Cuba?s success in feeding its population through a semi-organic farming approach was a cohesive cross-sectoral policy to do so (ie. political will). Other factors included ensuring equitable distribution, prioritisation of domestic and diverse food production, investment in extension and training, increasing farmer incentives (financial, and access and control of land), increasing post-harvest efficiency, and selectivity over imports. Noteworthy was that the actual farming approach (whether industrialised or ecological) was of lesser importance to achieving food security, although nationwide organic production was both technically feasible and outperformed the industrial approach. The issue of ecological literacy arose again in the Cuban example, where professionals from other sectors were able to turn their hands to low-input and organic farming more rapidly and successfully than those who had been classically trained. Another interesting issue was that of the development of an eco-agricultural service provision industry, entailing the growth of small rural enterprise to provide biological inputs. If farmers are to be encouraged in sustainable practices then it needs to be made easy for them, or at least easier than less sustainable options, and having immediate access to biological inputs was one way to encourage this. Julia Wright Manager, International Development Programme Henry Doubleday Research Association (HDRA) Ryton Organic Gardens Coventry CV8 3LG UK Tel: 44 (0)24 7630 8235 Fax: 44 (0)24 7663 9229 E-mail: <address removed> ============================================================= To send a reply to this message that goes to all list members, make sure that you send your reply to <address removed> To unsubscribe from this list, send an email to "<address removed>", with the message body: unsubscribe growth-and-poverty <your-email-address>
Please visit dfid-agriculture-consultation.nri.org.