|
|
| |
| |
Date Published: 22/12/2000
Author: John Zarb Modern agriculture is in crisis and the alternative is clear – a move towards sustainable farming. But is this any more than a pipe dream? Definitely, says John Zarb – because across the world, it is already happening. |
 |
We hear it all the time: farming is ‘in crisis’. In Britain, and across the ‘developed’ world, not a day goes by without more reports of farmers going to the wall, even committing suicide in despair at the state of their industry. Farmers can often be heard to cry that this is the greatest crisis on the land since the depression of the 1930s. And it isn’t getting any better.
So far, the answers coming from governments have been a combination of short-termism and defeatism. Throw more money at the farmers, in the form of ever-larger subsidies, whilst accepting that, in the long term, traditional farming is finished, and the only way forward can be ever-more intensification, combined with ‘diversification’ for those who don’t have the machines, money or land area to compete in the new global agricultural market.
At the other end of the spectrum, mostly in the ‘Third World’, are peasant subsistence farmers struggling to survive whilst their centuries-old farming systems are being undermined by global politics and economics, and who count themselves lucky if they produce enough food for their families, let alone a surplus for sale.
There is a clear link between the problems of farmers in the rich and poor worlds. Both are caused by a global trade in agriculture which subsidises and promotes vast, intensive, capital-rich farmers and destroys everyone else. This approach is good for big ‘agribusinesses’ and for supermarkets, but bad for the countryside, smaller farmers and the communities that they could support. It takes no account of the ecological, social and cultural factors vital to real agriculture. On the contrary, it undermines centuries-old traditional farming practices and forces farmers already in a desperate situation into a vicious circle of technological dependence that further weakens their vital cultural links with the land.
The system that is destroying farmers and farming all over the world is a system that sees agriculture as just another industry – a global food factory, subject to the same rules of ‘free’ trade as car factories or coal mines. This is a fallacy, but within the current system, it is one which remains virtually unchallenged. For within the current paradigm of global-trade-comes-before-all-else there is, as Margaret Thatcher once famously put it, ‘no alternative’.
But there is. And it works.
Learning lessons
For the fact is that there are sustainable ways forward for farming – ways that nurture the land, provide enough food and support real farms that are the linchpins of their communities. Real, ecological, sustainable farming is not, as some would like us to believe, a romantic fantasy propagated by nostalgic environmentalists. It is a workable alternative. How do we know? We know because – all over the world – it is working already.
If the governments of Britain and other rich countries, then, want to find real long-term solutions to the current farming crisis – solutions which will benefit consumers, farmers, communities and the rural environment, rather than just agribusiness corporations and their shareholders – they should learn some hard but inspiring lessons from various rural communities all over the world who are already making this happen.
Making it happen
Faced with greater crises than farmers in the ‘developed’ world, Latin American, African and Asian farmers have found ways to reverse their seemingly inexorable decline from which the West could, and should, learn. Most have managed this through the formation of non-government organisations (NGOs) whose philosophy is rooted in an understanding of the ecological and social basis of agriculture. These NGOs work closely with researchers, farmers and communities as part of a broad strategy for sustainable agricultural and rural development. Their achievements have been immense.
Although initially severely limited by technical expertise, wider co-operation with other non-government groups over the years has enabled these organisations to develop an approach to technology generation and education that effectively disseminates new knowledge to those who need it most and helps adapt technical information to suit traditional farming strategies. By circumventing conventional political and economic stumbling blocks (like political apathy, corporate interests and poverty), farmers and communities at the receiving end of these initiatives have become more self-reliant and efficient. British, European and North American farmers could do the same.
Agroecology
Agroecology is an alternative approach to agricultural development which may help forge a new way forward for struggling farmers and suffering environments the world over. It is a multidisciplinary science that defines, classifies and examines agricultural systems from ecological and socio-economic perspectives. It provides the ecological concepts and principles for the analysis, design and management of productive, resource-conserving and socially equitable agricultural systems.
Agroecology is unique because it integrates indigenous and modern farming and technical knowledge. In contrast to conventional
agricultural research that tends to create resource-dependent commercial solutions to agricultural problems, agroecology emphasises the vital importance of biodiversity, nutrient recycling and the ecological interactions between crops, animals and micro-organisms.
It also emphasises the social role of agriculture – for farming has always been about much more than just producing food. In agroecological development, the use of local skills and resources is supported through education and research tailored to local conditions. By teaching communities to be self-supporting through the use of sustainable farming systems, conditions are created for the establishment of stable local economies. Sustainable farming practices allow the natural integration of farming, wildlife, conservation and society whereas currently conventional thinking attempts to compartmentalise these as separate concerns.
Agroecology, in other words, is an approach to farming in which the land and the people who depend on it are placed at the centre – and as the examples which follow show – it has succeeded where conventional agricultural policies have failed.
Bolivia – rebuilding productivity
The Bolivian highlands are characterised by cold, dry conditions, with seasonal scarcity of water and soils of low fertility. Frost, erosion, deforestation, endemic poverty, and low access to credit, markets or public services add up to a formidable environment in which to make farming work at all – let alone make it profitable.
Yet despite all this, the NGO Centro de Servicios Multiples de Tecnologias Apropriadas (SEMTA) is running a successful project to help local, sustainable farming work. It promotes small-scale vegetable production, potato and cereal production, the production of traditional Andean crops, and sheep, alpaca and cattle farming. The-
- overall strategy of the project is to halt the environmental degradation and soil erosion that has occurred through deforestation and tin mining in order to allow improvements in soil fertility. In practice this has been achieved in several ways:
• The use of organically managed mud-built greenhouses has enabled year-round vegetable production with markets in La Paz, the capital city. Income from these enterprises has significantly improved the lives and food security of local farmers.
• Steep hillsides prone to erosion from extensive livestock grazing have been terraced using local stone and labour. Farm-produced manures, along with crop residues and other organic matter are used to fertilise terraced beds for long-season crop production. Terrace walls afford some frost protection.
• The planting of native trees has further enhanced soil stability and fertility. Trees also provide shelter, shade, leaf mulch, fencing and firewood.
• Native pastures are being managed for livestock production. Producing a range of other crops reduces reliance on livestock farming. This allows improvements in income and food security, reductions in soil erosion from grazing stock and the regeneration of native trees.
Taken in the round, this project has shown that sustainable farming really can work, even in the most hostile conditions.
A similarly ambitious Bolivian project was initiated in 1984 by an amalgamation of several NGOs and other organisations to reconstruct ancient systems of terraces, which traditionally made local farming work. These terraces (waru-warus) contained soil and organic residues and were surrounded by water-filled ditches. The combination of a raised bed (to limit the effect of severe ground frosts) and canals (to limit the severity of freezing air temperatures) enabled successful long-season crop production at an altitude of 4,000m. By investing the time and effort in rebuilding these traditional structures, the project has helped the productivity of local farmers to shoot up.
A similar terrace restoration project in Cajamarca in north-eastern Peru, begun in 1983 and involving several NGOs and local government agencies, shows what a difference such a project can make. Ten years of traditional farmland reconstruction there achieved results including:
• 550,000 trees planted to stabilise steep slopes, limit soil erosion and provide mulch, timber and wind protection
• 1,124 hectares of land (32 per cent of total arable land) under conservation management bringing benefit to 1,247 families (52 per cent of the local population)
• potato yield increased from 5 to 8 tonnes per hectare
• cattle finishing on improved pasture
• alpaca wool production
• annual family income increased from $108 to $500.
Although there is clear evidence that alternative agroecological production systems are more energy efficient and profitable than either unimproved traditional or modern systems, one of the most important factors in their favour is the strong support for them shown by farmers. One of the terrace-sponsoring NGOs in Peru revealed that farmers preferred the alternative systems because they allowed optimal use of scarce resources, brought tangible returns on labour and investment, were compatible with traditional technologies and were accessible even to poor producers.
These impressive results teach one important lesson; working with nature, and with local people, can produce uniquely adapted farming systems which can also be very productive. Obviously the terraces of Bolivia and Peru are unique to that region, but the lesson is applicable worldwide.
Cuba – restoring the balance
The agricultural crisis that we are faced with in prosperous Britain and Europe reached its climax in Cuba 10 years ago. When the US trade embargo of 1959 forced Cuba to look to the USSR for support, favourable trading conditions allowed Cuba to become entirely dependent on cheap Soviet imports of fuel, fertiliser and agrochemicals to support farming. But when Cuban trade with the Soviet bloc ended in 1990, the folly of this dependency on non-renewable inputs was revealed.
Faced with a dramatic reduction in these commodities, Cuban agriculture was forced to shift from an industrialised input-dependent system (like the one we have in the UK for example) to a self-supporting, low-input one, very rapidly. In effect, there was an immediate need to double food production whilst at the same time halving inputs in order to feed the country.
In UK agriculture there is the same dependency on purchased, synthesised, non-renewable inputs (fuel, fertiliser, agrochemicals) and machinery. And as we discovered recently, it only takes a small interruption in fuel supply, or a small shift towards unfavourable global trading conditions to bring the country to its knees. The case of Cuba should provide a salutary alternative.
With government support, Cuban agriculture began to react to its immediate needs: to develop a sustainable, self-supporting agricultural system using renewable resources. A number of NGOs consisting of scientists, extension workers and farmers, including the Asociacion Cubana de Agricultura Organica (ACAO) and in 1994 Sustainable Agriculture Networking and Extension (SANE), a UN programme, became active in this role. Their aim was to support the establishment of model farms (which they called ‘agroecological lighthouses’) from which vital training and information could be disseminated.
In 1995, agricultural co-operatives were set up at each of the agroecological lighthouses and production systems based on sound ecological resource management were developed. After only six months, crop production, biodiversity, soil fertility and soil quality all improved. Through innovations as simple as tree planting, composting, crop rotations, polyculture, biological pest control and the production of multi-use crops for food, fibre and fertility, the way was paved for the development of effective sustainable cropping systems suited to local conditions.
The use of polycultures in Cuba has been a particularly effective method of improving yields and resource use. A polyculture, or intercropping, system is one in which two or more complementary crop species are grown together, either in alternate strips or freely interspersed, on the same field. The crops grown in polyculture do not compete directly with each other for resources. For example, a deep-rooting crop planted with a shallow-rooting one will not compete with the other for water. Similarly, an early-maturing crop might be sown at the same time as a late-maturing one. After the earlier crop is harvested, the later one will be left to mature. Sorghum and pigeon pea, for example, are grown as intercrops in drier parts of India. Polycultures have several advantages over the production of single species crops:
• Polycultures make efficient use of land and resources because two or more crops can be grown on the same area of land.
• Complementary interactions occur between certain crops that tend to suppress pests and disease and promote plant growth.
• Polycultures can give higher yields per unit area than if either crop had been grown alone. This ability is expressed in terms of the land equivalent ratio (LER). LER is the ratio between the yield of the crop in polyculture and the yield of the sole crop. Therefore LER values greater than 1 show that the polyculture is effective in improving crop yield.
Polycultures are not limited to tropical farming systems either – Brussels sprouts/spring cabbage, cereals/clover, leek/lettuce and livestock/fruit tree are all perfectly feasible crop combinations for temperate regions including the UK.
The Cuban experience also shows how other components of agricultural systems – energy consumption, food production and labour – can be optimised through sustainable agricultural practices (see
table above). It also shows how, with sufficient political will and government support, sustainable farming practices can be made to work.
Chile – triumph of the Campesinos
In south central Chile, a region with hot dry summers and mild wet winters, small farmers (campesinos) have evolved complex farming systems designed to make the most efficient use of scant resources. Farming often marginal land, the campesinos are able to grow a range of crops including cereals (wheat, rice, barley), vegetables (potatoes, corn, beans, squashes, tomatoes, aubergines) and fruit (grapes, citrus, apples, pears, apricots, avocados, peaches, figs, cherries), as well as trees, medicinal plants and livestock.
The campesino systems can be divided into two major groups: firstly, small-scale intensive systems of up to one hectare that supply much, but not all, of the family food. Income from other work is needed to support the family. And secondly, larger semi-commercial enterprises of between five and twenty hectares, designed to produce a surplus for sale.
Vegetable production dominates the smaller farms, but chickens, ducks, rabbits and sometimes pigs are also kept. Farms may have five or 10 tree crops and around 15 annual crops, plus medicinal herbs. Tree crops supply shade, fodder, leaf or bark mulch, firewood, shelter, soil protection and fencing. Animals forage on harvested plots or beneath orchards where they eat weeds, crop residues and soil pests. Manure is collected for composting. Intercropping is usual and the cropping season is extended by sowing the next crop in the field straight after the first has been harvested.
On the larger semi-commercial systems, grain and livestock production is possible and more trees can be grown for firewood and building. High-value commercial crops such as peach, cherry and apple are grown for local markets whilst beans, squash, potato and corn are grown for home consumption.
The system works wonderfully – and very productively, by any standards. One typical 12-hectare farm provides food for an entire family as well as clothing, housing and capital. The farm consists of an area of fruit trees interplanted with annual vegetables, a mixed orchard of fruit trees with rows of beehives between the trees, 5 hectares of pasture, three hectares of wheat and a plantation of native pines. Apart from generating food and cash from fruit and annual crops, the farmer harvests 380kg of honey a year from 26 hives, 12 litres of milk a day from three cows, a dozen eggs from his free-range hens and flour for breadmaking for the family of five. Wood from the plantation is used for building the house and barns and supplies charcoal for cooking and heating. All animal manure and crop residues are collected for composting.
This is a system, and an environment, very different from those of Peru or Bolivia. But the principles underlying its success are the same – local co-operation, and working with the land and its resources rather than blasting them into submission with chemicals and machinery.
North Yorkshire – sustainability comes North
In case it seems that such systems can, or do, only exist in the ‘Third World’, a look at how they also work in Britain can be enlightening.
In upland Britain, lamb and beef production are often the sole agricultural enterprises. In these systems, animals spend much of the year grazing extensively. Some grass is grown on the farm for hay or silage, together with swede, turnip or kale for winter forage because grass growth declines drastically in the winter. Some upland areas support cereal production. In many cases however, hay and straw, along with concentrated feeds are purchased for livestock for the winter months. And although manure is spread on the land, fertiliser is also bought in to support grass production. With the land dedicated to animal production on what can often be cold, wet, sloping ground there seems little opportunity for the production of other crops and many hill farmers rely totally on sheep, beef or a mixture of both for their income.
Howard and Rosemary Wass farm about 190 acres at Newfield Farm, Fadmoor, North Yorkshire, an upland area on the southern edge of the North York Moors. Like many of their neighbours, they produce beef and lamb from 25 cows and 200 sheep. But in an area not noted for vegetable production, Newfield also produces potatoes, carrots, parsnips, leeks, onions, cabbages, Brussels sprouts and swedes, along with seed potatoes and 45 acres of wheat, oats and barley, 12 acres of which provide all animal feed requirements.
Vegetables and home-produced eggs are sold at the farm gate. This generates cash, reduces energy-demanding transport, storage and distribution, cuts out packaging and grading, and supplies fresh food locally. The rest of the vegetable crop is supplied to the UK market.
Clover supplies nitrogen for crop growth and precedes arable crops in the rotation. In common with other organic systems, subsequent crops then benefit from residual fertility. The cereal straw (high in the mineral nutrient potassium) provides animal bedding. Dung and bedding, along with all other crop residues, are returned to the land to replenish soil nutrients.
Given the availability of labour, a lot of upland farms have the capacity to produce a diversity of crops in this way. And there is no biological reason why the UK could not go a step further and create terraced hillsides for intensive vegetable production as in the Andes. The practical challenges of soil management for long-term fertility can be overcome. The policy support needed to promote such drastic change in farming might be too much to expect but it may have to be forthcoming if hill farming in the UK is to be transformed into a more efficient, diverse and sustainable enterprise.
Opening the gate to the future
The key argument used by those who continue to support the intensive, essentially destructive farming practices pioneered by the West is that sustainable farming technologies will be unable to support economic and population growth. And it is true that sustainable technologies will not support the current socio-economic infrastructure – but then sustainable technologies are not designed to fit in to this framework. They are designed to entirely replace it. And with political will and the commitment of the people involved, it is entirely realistic that they could do so.
The examples included in this article show that sustainable technologies have succeeded in bringing about significant improvements in agriculture under crippling economic, environmental and political conditions. So just imagine how much more successfully they could be implemented in Europe or the US, where structures such as transport systems and markets already exist.
It won’t be an easy road, and no one is pretending it will be. But whilst the wider establishment of sustainable farming requires fundamental changes in all areas of politics and society, there is unequivocal evidence that sustainable agroecological technologies can alleviate food shortages, poverty and environmental degradation, and promote social stability at the same time - and it is worth pointing out that, 50 years on from the ‘Green Revolution’, modern intensive farming has signally failed to do any of these things.
The basic message for the future is a simple one: governments and policy-makers in the so-called developed world could create the conditions necessary to allow sustainable farming to flourish. Given the overwhelming evidence of the environmental, economic and social benefits of sustainable farming technologies, they no longer have any real excuse for carrying on as usual.
Dr John Zarb is a consultant researcher in sustainable farming.
|
| |
| Back to articles related to Food |
| |
 |
|
|
|
'contentbuilder is a service provided by etribes Limited - www.communitybuilder.com' |
| |
|
|
