Society, Science & Food Security : Sustainable Agriculture Options?

1. Society, Science & Food Security : Sustainable Agriculture Options? • Outline of Coursework Essay - Choice • Global Problems – Hunger, Climate Change & Degradation • GM Options – UK and African Perspectives • Past Experiences of Agricultural Technology • Low External Input Agricultural Options • Local Food Debates & Possible Futures

2. Example of Sustainability Science Debates – Niger Farming Systems

3. Example of Sustainability Science Debates • See Sahelian Soils debates of Warren et al., 2001 – The Geographical Journal, 167(4), 324-341. • Examines whether ‘capitals’ framework helps assessments of sustainability ‘strength’ • “Strong sustainability” - no loss of natural capital (e.g. soil) • “Sensible sustainability” - conversion of some natural into other forms of capital • “Weak sustainability” - just increase total capital

4. Sahelian Soil Erosion - E. Niger • “Despite high rates of erosion, we find it difficult to decide whether the system is sustainable (using the capitals or any other framework). It is even dubious whether sustainability is an urgent concern” • Warren et al., 2001; p.324 • Other (more important?) concerns - • Rainfall (climate change) • pests • lack of labour / illness • prices • Livestock / urbanisation futures => why conserve soils ?? • Shows need to extend science into worlds of sociology, politics and commerce

5. Problems of Environmental Sustainability • Drive for soil conservation from agronomists and soil scientists, rather than from local communities • Can the sustainability of natural capital conflict with the sustainability of livelihoods (social sustainability) • “to be ‘socially sustainable’, some farmers must engage in practices that lead to erosion” (Warren et al., 2001; p.333) • How can you monitor / assess the ‘critical natural capacity’ needed for ‘sensible sustainability’ ? • Often relates to maintaining environmental diversity that enables risk management by societies • Concept has serious operational and methodological difficulties

6. Links to Context of Food System Sustainability • Modern agricultural methods have been able to increase food production, yet over 800 million people remain food insecure (affected by hunger & malnutrition) • Poor & hungry people need low-cost readily available technologies & practices to increase food production without envt damage = low external input agriculture (typically local & organic)

7. Agricultural Sustainability • Sustainable Agricultural Systems typically – • Integrate natural processes (e.g. nutrient cycling, natural pest enemies) into food production system; • Minimise the use of non-renewable inputs that damage local environment or human health • Make productive use of local knowledge & skills (human capital) • Maximise people’s capabilities to work together & share best practice (social capital) • (Pretty et al. 2003)

8. Coursework Essay (25% of module mark) • EITHER - • Outline current understandings of the threats to global food security caused by land degradation & climate change & analyse the potential for GM agricultural technology to reduce hunger and malnutrition. • OR – • Outline the socio-economic and environmental issues surrounding food globalization and analyse the usefulness of ‘food miles’ as an indicator of food system sustainability. • Submit to UG Earth & Environment office (via pigeon holes in Level 9 Reception of Earth Sciences) by Tuesday November 7th

9. Good Practice in Essay Writing • Introduction – including your specific aim of the essay and brief overview of structure followed (ie. in your words from the start!) • Main body – • Contrasting views and your analysis to show your understanding • Use diagrams where possible to cut the waffle • Always reference secondary data / views in text of essay (author, year) eg. (FAO, 2000; UNEP, 1997; DEFRA, 2003; Dougill, 2006) • Logical flow to arguments • Conclusion – synthesis of main views and your views on key messages for future • Reference list – write out in full sources used – essential for all coursework, though not expected in exam!

10. Q1 Context - Global Hunger Map - FAO 2000

11. Social / Political Context • MDG 1, Target 2 – “Halve between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger” • In South Asia the challenge is improving the distribution of plentifully available food • In Sub-Saharan Africa the challenge also involves agricultural productivity • UNDP HDR2003 states that – “Increased investments are needed to research & develop better technologies & disseminate them through extension services. Yet public investments & donor support for agriculture have fallen in recent decades” • FAO 2004 – “genetic engineering is a ‘global war of rhetoric’ …biotechnology can overcome production constraints that are more difficult or intractable with conventional breeding .. But it’s not a panacea”

12. Global Trends in Food Production

13. Global Environmental Degradation & Poverty Links • Global and National Degradation Estimates • Degradation - Poverty - Famine links • Failings of soil science & problems caused

14. Poverty - Environment Linkages - Conventional Views “Predominantly the poor of the world depend directly on natural resources, through cultivation, herding, collecting or hunting for their livelihoods. Therefore, for the livelihoods to be sustainable, the natural resources must be sustained” • Rennie and Singh, 1996; p.9 • “There is no doubt that human societal development depends on the physical resource base of the globe” • Potter et al., 1999; p.132 • “land degradation is the single most pressing global environmental problem (especially for the world’s poor)” • Stocking, 2000; p.287

15. Poverty - Environment Linkages - Conventional Views “Land degradation is the ‘quiet crisis’ (making) land users more vulnerable to adverse conditions such as drought” • Blaikie and Brookfield (1987) “Ultimately land degradation is a social problem with economic costs attached to it” • Enters, 1997 “2.6 billion people affected by land degradation, influencing over 33 % of the Earth’s land surface” • Snel and Bot, 2002 - http://www.fao.org/landandwater/agll/lada/emailconf.stm

16. Nitrogen Application by Region – Green Revolution Technology • Source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), FAOSTAT Statistical Database (FAO, Rome, 1997).

17. Tractor Use http://www.ourplanet.com/aaas/pages/population02.html#

18. Desertification (Land Degradation in Drylands): The first big environmental issue

19. Desertification : context “land degradation in dryland areas resulting from various factors, including climatic variations and human activities” • UNCCD, 1995 • Degradation is “a reduction of the resource potential by one or a number of processes operating on the land” (UNEP, 1997) • i.e. has impact on land’s economic value “dryland degradation is occurring (&) is a v. serious threat to to the well being of the billion or so people in drylands” • Stiles, 1995; p.3 • Controversial issue as “at the interface between science, politics and decision makers” • Thomas, 1997; p.583

20. Conventional views on aid - ‘top down’ • Global extent of problems such as famine, poverty & land degradation requires regional or global scale solutions • Imposed measures aimed at resource conservation the key to environmental sustainability

21. Conventional approaches to Development Intervention • Standard solutions to standard problems - often focused on mechanical conservation of soil, reducing overgrazing based on ecological indicator species presence only • Often strictly enforced against desires of local people and undermining traditional practices • Lack of local involvement meant poorly maintained after initial expenditure

22. Recent change of emphasis (UNCED and UNCCD) Aid and development initiatives now recognise need for: • Locally appropriate solutions based on integrated resource management • Local community involvement at all stages, esp. project formulation • Interdisciplinary research

23. IPCC (2001) Impacts, Adaptation & Vulnerability - Key Findings • Key emerging findings 1. High confidence of regional climate changes 2. Increase in extreme events (see Table SPM-1), difficult to quantify relative impact of climate and other s-e factors 3. Well established science on vulnerability of key ecosystems 4. Sensitivity of human systems recognised, varies with location, time, and social, economic and env conditions - both adverse and beneficial impacts outlined 5. Impacts of increased frequency of extreme events expected to fall disproportionately on the poor (See Table SPM-1)

24. IPCC (2001) Impacts, Adaptation & Vulnerability - Key Findings • Cont... 6. Potential of CC leading to irreversible changes in Earth systems not yet evaluated (a further cause of uncertainty / scaremongering) 7. Adaptation necessary, but will incur costs and will not prevent all damages. Can draw on existing eg’s of adaptation strategies 8. Ability to adapt depends on wealth, technology, education, information, skills, infrastructure & resource access …=> poorer societies have less adaptive capacity and are more vulnerable to CC changes 9. Policies for improved env management and poverty reduction offer potential ‘win-win’ options

25. Emergence of GM in world agriculture: risks and benefits - Pretty, 2001 • Biotechnology includes conventional breeding that has resulted in many yield increases & nutritional improvements to major crop types (see cassava e.g. in FAO World Hunger Report, 2000) • GM is the transfer of DNA from one organism to another, so allowing the recipient to express traits of the donor • Research focused in developed nations (now 3 generations of products) & calls for moratorium on research in developing world (e.g. Oxfam) • Environmental and health impacts remain unknown - need for precautionary stance?

26. Cassava research: West African success story • Cassava root - excellent energy source; leaves rich in vit A, C, Fe and Ca • New varieties produced using biotechnology (cross-breeding) in 1980s; reduced undernourishment markedly - Ghana from 62 to 10%; Nigeria 44 to 8% (1981-1998) • Improved drought resistance crucial

27. Genetic Modification of Food – Gene Revolution? • Genetic Modification (GM) – “involves moving genetic material from the cells of one organism to those of another, be they related or unrelated” (DEFRA, 2003) • The first GM plants were bred in the 1980s, and the first commercial crops were grown on a large scale in 1996. • Globally, the four main GM crops being grown commercially are soybean (62 % of global soybean), maize (19 %), cotton (13 %) and oilseed rape (5 %). • In 2002, GM crops grown worldwide covered twice the land area of Britain (58.7 million hectares) • Globally, approximately 6 million farmers in 16 countries (7 developed; 9 developing) grow GM crops, with 75 per cent of these farmers coming from the developing world • All from DEFRA, 2003 - http://www.gmnation.org.uk/

28. Global Distribution of GM Crop Growth

29. GM – Scientific Context • See scientific debates at – • http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/gm/ • http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/gm/ • An acceptance that major communication / public awareness required, but an assumption that GM crops are here to stay & need to ensure benefits reach developing nations • Stress need to move away from opinionated views on ‘good’ or ‘bad’ to recognise that must assess safety of each new product on its own individual merit • UK field trials showed that GM maize had no detrimental impact on soil biodiversity of fields; beet and rape significantly reduced biodiversity

30. GM Nation? The Main Findings • People are generally uneasy about GM • The more people engage in GM issues, the harder their attitudes – narrow-but-deep group surveyed across 2 weeks of information provision • There is little support for early commercialisation • There is widespread mistrust of Government and MNC’s • There is a broad desire to know more and for more research to be done – “no one knows enough at the moment” • Developing countries have special interests • The debate was welcomed and valued

31. UK Media Portrayal of GM debate - Frankenstein Foods • Much media attention and concern in tabloid press decrying “unnatural” process • Much confusion with mad cow disease and distrust of food safety issues of great public concern since the early 1990s • Campaigns driven by prominent Environmental groups (FoE, Greenpeace) & media figures (Prince of Wales, celebrity chefs) - taken on-board by producers / supermarkets due to consumer pressure

32. Some GM headlines in last 10 years – “A Hot Potato” • “Frankenstein Food Fiasco” - Daily Express, 99 • “Mutant tomatoes not to our taste” - Daily Mail, 99 • “GM foods to avoid like the plague” - Guardian, 00 • “Frankenstein foods - are we being hysterical?” - London Evening Standard, 00 • => Catchy headlines helped turn Europeans so strongly against GM foods, while Americans have barely noticed their spread

33. UK - Lessons to be Learned • The Precautionary Principle drives the need for more scientific investigation, but uncertainty in scientific messages prone to mis-representation • Public concerns (over role of science & MNC’s) and consumer patterns are more important drivers of change than scientific arguments or Government support • Health and environment remain high on the agenda and unlikely that UK public views will change even with further scientific studies

34. Hunger & GM • GM Nation recognised that developing countries have special interests and class this as “debate within the debate” • Active participants reject view that GM could benefit developing countries, by a majority • Opposition based less on negative feelings to GM, but more on the view that there are better ways to promote development (fair trade, better food distribution, better governance etc.) • People sceptical as to whether MNC’s will deliver benefits to people of developing world

35. GM - An African perspective • Clear message delivered to OECD Conference on Food Safety, July 2000 (quoted from Krebs, 2000) • “We would like to be like you, with plenty of food for our people. We need every tool at our disposal to achieve this, including biotechnology, which will allow us to grow things without costly chemicals and irrigation systems we cannot afford” • “GM may be better for Africa than older technologies, like those of the Green Revolution .. Which failed Africa because it came from the West” • Wambungu, 2000 • Many African opponents – • “Africa’s genetic resources are being exploited byglobal transnational corporations” • Wangari Maathai, 2004

36. Additional Reading for Q 1 DEFRA (2003) GM Nation? The findings of the public debate. Available @ http://www.gmnation.org.uk/docs/GMNation_FinalReport.pdf FAO (2004) The State of Food and Agriculture 2003 – 2004: Agricultural Biotechnology: meeting the needs of the poor? Available @ http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/006/Y5160E/Y5160E00.HTM Krebs, J. (2000) Seeds of hope. New Scientist, 5/8/00, 48-49. See also - http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/gm/ Rowell, A. (2003) Don’t Worry It’s Safe to Eat: The True story of GM food, BSE and Foot and Mouth. Earthscan, London. Chapter 1. UNDP (2003) Human Development Report 2003. See overview from - http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/

37. Q2 Specific Context – Food System Sustainability & Local Food • Local v. Global Conflict in Hunger & Environment Debate • Local food – an argument for using ‘Food Miles’ as an indicator of the sustainability of our food buying choices • Global trade – strong focus on fair/ethical trade as a better route to poverty alleviation than simply aid-based approach • => Is ‘Food Miles’ concept being used as an ethical trade barrier by vested interests in western food industry?

38. Problems of Global Food Flows • Agri-businesses developing taking fertile agricultural land out of hands of local communities across developing world => Local food often best solution for the South too !? • CO2 emissions associated with food transport • Dependence on surplus food aid makes poor consumers vulnerable to climate change elsewhere (e.g. drought in US => hunger in West Africa)

39. Additional Reading for Q2 • Sustain. (2001) Eating Oil: food supply in a changing climate. [Internet] Available form http://www.sustainweb.org/pdf/eatoil_sumary.PDF • DEFRA . (2005) The Validity of Food Miles as an Indicator of Sustainable • Development. [Internet] Available from • http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/reports/foodmiles/execsumm.pdf • Pretty, J. et al. (2005) Farm costs and food miles: An assessment of the full cost of the UK weekly food basket. Food Policy. 30. pp 1-19. • Blanke, M. & Burdick, B. (2005) Food (miles) for Thought - Energy Balance for Locally-grown versus Imported Apple Fruit. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 12 (3). Pp 125-127. • Halweil, B (2004) Eat Here: reclaiming homegrown pleasures in a global supermarket. New York, W.W. Norton and Company • Lang, T. & Heasman, M (2004) Food Wars: the global battle for mouths, minds and markets. London, Earthscan. • Norberg-Hodge, H. et al. (2002) Bringing the food economy home : local alternatives to global agribusiness. London, Zed Books.