ABSTRACT
Agriculture has changed dramatically, especially since
the end of World War II. Food and fiber productivity soared due to new
technologies, mechanization, increased chemical use, specialization and
government policies that favored maximizing production. These changes allowed
fewer farmers with reduced labor demands to produce the majority of the food
and fiber in the U.S.
Although these changes have had many positive effects
and reduced many risks in farming, there have also been significant
costs.Prominent among these are topsoil depletion, groundwater contamination,
the decline of family farms, continued neglect of the living and working
conditions for farm laborers, increasing costs of production, and the
disintegration of economic and social conditions in rural communities.
A growing movement has
emerged during the past two decades to question the role of the agricultural
establishment in promoting practices that contribute to these social problems.
Today this movement for sustainable agriculture is garnering increasing support
and acceptance within mainstream agriculture. Not only does sustainable
agriculture address many environmental and social concerns, but it offers
innovative and economically viable opportunities for growers, laborers,
consumers, policymakers and many others in the entire food system.
This paper is an effort to
identify the ideas, practices and policies that constitute our concept of
sustainable agriculture. We do so for two reasons: 1) to clarify the research
agenda and priorities of our program, and 2) to suggest to others practical
steps that may be appropriate for them in moving toward sustainable
agriculture.Because the concept of sustainable agriculture is still evolving,
we intend the paper not as a definitive or final statement, but as an
invitation to continue the dialogue.
INTRODUCTION
Sustainable
agriculture is the act of farming using
principles of ecology,
the study of relationships between organisms and their environment. The phrase
was reportedly coined by Australian agricultural scientist Gordon McClymont.[1]
It has been defined as "an integrated system of plant and animal
production practices having a site-specific application that will last over the
long term" For Example:
- Satisfy human food and fiber needs
- Enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends
- Make the most efficient use of non-renewable resources and on-farm resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls
- Sustain the economic viability of farm operations
- Enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole
Sustainable
agriculture can be understood as an ecosystem approach to agriculture.[3]
Practices that can cause long-term damage to soil include excessive tilling
of the soil(leading to erosion)
and irrigation
without adequate drainage (leading to salinization).
Long-term
experiments have provided some of the best data
on how various practices affect soil properties essential to sustainability. In
the United States a federal agency, USDA-Natural Resources Conservation
Service, specializes in providing technical and financial assistance for those
interested in pursuing natural resource conservation and production agriculture
as compatible goals.
The
most important factors for an individual site are sun, air, soil, nutrients,
and water. Of the five, water and soil quality
and quantity are most amenable to human intervention through time and labor.
Although
air and sunlight are available everywhere on Earth, crops also depend on soil nutrients
and the availability of water.
When farmers grow and harvest crops, they remove some of these nutrients from
the soil. Without replenishment, land suffers from nutrient depletion and
becomes either unusable or suffers from reduced yields.
Sustainable agriculture depends on replenishing the soil while minimizing the
use or need of non-renewable resources, such as natural gas
(used in converting atmospheric nitrogen into synthetic fertilizer), or mineral
ores (e.g., phosphate). Possible sources of nitrogen that would, in principle,
be available indefinitely, include:
1.
recycling crop waste and livestock
or treated human manure
2.
growing legume crops and forages such as peanuts or alfalfa
that form symbioses with nitrogen-fixing bacteria
called rhizobia
3.
industrial production of nitrogen by
the Haber process uses hydrogen, which is currently derived from natural gas,
(but this hydrogen could instead be made by electrolysis
of water using electricity (perhaps from solar cells or windmills)) or
4.
genetically engineering (non-legume)
crops to form nitrogen-fixing symbioses or fix nitrogen without microbial
symbionts.
The
last option was proposed in the 1970s, but is only recently becoming feasible.[4][5]
Sustainable options for replacing other nutrient inputs (phosphorus, potassium,
etc.) are more limited.
More
realistic, and often overlooked, options include long-term crop
rotations, returning to natural cycles that
annually flood cultivated lands (returning lost nutrients indefinitely) such as
the Flooding of the Nile, the long-term use of biochar,
and use of crop and livestock landraces that are adapted to less than ideal conditions such as
pests, drought, or lack of nutrients.
Crops
that require high levels of soil nutrients can be cultivated in a more
sustainable manner if certain fertilizer management practices are adhered to.
Water
In
some areas sufficient rainfall is available for crop growth, but many other
areas require irrigation. For irrigation systems to be sustainable, they
require proper management (to avoid salinization) and must not use more water
from their source than is naturally replenishable. Otherwise, the water source
effectively becomes a non-renewable resource. Improvements in water well drilling
technology and submersible pumps, combined with the development of drip irrigation and low pressure pivots, have made it possible to regularly
achieve high crop yields in areas where reliance on rainfall alone had
previously made successful agriculture unpredictable. However, this progress
has come at a price. In many areas, such as the Ogallala Aquifer, the water is
being used faster than it can be replenished.
Several
steps must be taken to develop drought-resistant farming systems even in
"normal" years with average rainfall. These measures include both
policy and management actions: 1) improving water conservation and storage
measures, 2) providing incentives for selection of drought-tolerant crop
species, 3) using reduced-volume irrigation systems, 4) managing crops to
reduce water loss, or 5) not planting crops at all.
Indicators
for sustainable water resource development are:
- Internal renewable water resources. This is the average annual flow of rivers and groundwater generated from endogenous precipitation, after ensuring that there is no double counting. It represents the maximum amount of water resource produced within the boundaries of a country. This value, which is expressed as an average on a yearly basis, is invariant in time (except in the case of proved climate change). The indicator can be expressed in three different units: in absolute terms (km3/yr), in mm/yr (it is a measure of the humidity of the country), and as a function of population (m3/person per yr).
- Global renewable water resources. This is the sum of internal renewable water resources and incoming flow originating outside the country. Unlike internal resources, this value can vary with time if upstream development reduces water availability at the border. Treaties ensuring a specific flow to be reserved from upstream to downstream countries may be taken into account in the computation of global water resources in both countries.
- Dependency ratio. This is the proportion of the global renewable water resources originating outside the country, expressed in percentage. It is an expression of the level to which the water resources of a country depend on neighbouring countries.
- Water withdrawal. In view of the limitations described above, only gross water withdrawal can be computed systematically on a country basis as a measure of water use. Absolute or per-person value of yearly water withdrawal gives a measure of the importance of water in the country's economy. When expressed in percentage of water resources, it shows the degree of pressure on water resources. A rough estimate shows that if water withdrawal exceeds a quarter of global renewable water resources of a country, water can be considered a limiting factor to development and, reciprocally, the pressure on water resources can have a direct impact on all sectors, from agriculture to environment and fisheries.[7]
Soil
Soil erosion
is fast becoming one of the worlds greatest problems. It is estimated that
"more than a thousand million tonnes of southern Africa's soil are eroded
every year. Experts predict that crop yields will be halved within thirty to
fifty years if erosion continues at present rates."[8]
Soil erosion is not unique to Africa but is occurring worldwide. The phenomenon
is being called Peak Soil as present large scale factory farming
techniques are jeopardizing humanity's ability to grow food in the present and
in the future.[9]
Without efforts to improve soil management practices, the availability of arable soil
will become increasingly problematic.[10]
Some
soil management techniques
1.
No-till farming
2.
Keyline design
3.
Growing wind
breaks to hold the soil
4.
Incorporating organic matter back into fields
5.
Stop using chemical fertilizers (which contain salt)
6.
Protecting soil from water run
off(soil erosion)
Phosphate
Phosphate
is a primary component in the chemical fertilizer which is applied in modern
agricultural production. However, scientists estimate that rock phosphate
reserves will be depleted in 50–100 years and that Peak phosphorus will occur in about 2030.[11]
The phenomenon of Peak phosphorus is expected to increase food prices as fertilizer costs
increase as rock phosphate reserves become more difficult to extract. In the
long term, phosphate will therefore have to be recovered and recycled from
human and animal waste in order to maintain food production.
Land
As
the global population increases and demand for food increases, there is
pressure on land resources. Land can also be considered a finite resource on
Earth. Expansion of agricultural land has an impact on biodiversity
and contributes to deforestation. The Food
and Agriculture Organisation
of the United Nations estimates that in coming decades, cropland will continue
to be lost to industrial and urban development, along with reclamation of
wetlands, and conversion of forest to cultivation, resulting in the loss of
biodiversity and increased soil erosion.[12]
Energy for agriculture
Main article: Renewable energy
Energy
is used all the way down the food chain from farm to fork. In industrial
agriculture, energy is used in on-farm mechanisation, food processing, storage,
and transportation processes.[13]
It has therefore been found that energy prices are closely linked to food
prices.[14]
Oil is also used as an input in agricultural chemicals. Higher prices of
non-renewable energy resources are projected by the International Energy
Agency. Increased energy prices as a
result of fossil fuel resources being depleted may therefore impact negatively
on the global food security unless action is taken to 'decouple' fossil fuel
energy from food production, with a move towards 'Energy-Smart' agricultural
systems.[14]
The use of solar powered irrigation in Pakistan
has come to be recognized as a leading example of energy use in creating a
closed system for water irrigation in agricultural activity.
CONCEPT OF AGRCULTURAL SUSTAINABLITY
Sustainable agriculture integrates three main
goals--environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity. A variety of
philosophies, policies and practices
have contributed to these goals.
People in many different capacities,
from farmers to consumers, have shared
this vision and contributed to it. Despite
the diversity of people and perspectives, the following themes commonly weave through definitions of sustainable agriculture.
Sustainability rests on the principle that we must
meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.
Therefore, stewardship
of both natural and
human resources is of prime importance. Stewardship of human resources includes consideration
of social responsibilities such as working and
living conditions of laborers, the needs of rural communities, and consumer health and safety both in the present and the future. Stewardship of land and
natural resources involves maintaining or enhancing this vital resource base
for the long term.
A systems perspective is essential to understanding
sustainability. The system is envisioned
in its broadest sense, from the individual
farm, to the local ecosystem, and
to communities affected by this farming system both locally and globally. An emphasis on the system allows
a larger and more thorough view of the
consequences of farming practices on both human communities and the environment. A systems approach gives
us the tools to explore the interconnections between farming and other aspects of our environment.
A systems approach also implies interdisciplinary efforts in research
and education. This requires not
only the input of researchers from various disciplines,
but also farmers, farmworkers, consumers, policymakers and others.
Making the transition to sustainable agriculture is a
process. For farmers, the transition
to sustainable agriculture normally requires a series of small, realistic
steps. Family economics and personal
goals influence how fast or how far participants can go in the transition. It
is important to realize that each small decision
can make a difference and contribute to advancing the entire system further on the
"sustainable agriculture continuum." The key to moving forward is the will to take the next step.
Finally, it is important to point out that reaching toward the goal of sustainable agriculture is the responsibility of all participants in the system, including farmers, laborers, policymakers, researchers, retailers, and consumers. Each group has its own part to play, its own unique contribution to make to strengthen the sustainable agriculture community.
The remainder of this document considers specific strategies for realizing these broad themes or goals. The strategies are grouped according to three separate though related areas of concern: Farming and Natural Resources, Plant and Animal Production Practices, and the Economic, Social and Political Context. They represent a range of potential ideas for individuals committed to interpreting the vision of sustainable agriculture within their own circumstances.
Finally, it is important to point out that reaching toward the goal of sustainable agriculture is the responsibility of all participants in the system, including farmers, laborers, policymakers, researchers, retailers, and consumers. Each group has its own part to play, its own unique contribution to make to strengthen the sustainable agriculture community.
The remainder of this document considers specific strategies for realizing these broad themes or goals. The strategies are grouped according to three separate though related areas of concern: Farming and Natural Resources, Plant and Animal Production Practices, and the Economic, Social and Political Context. They represent a range of potential ideas for individuals committed to interpreting the vision of sustainable agriculture within their own circumstances.
COMPARATIVE ON SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
Agricultural biodiversity
1.
The
CBD defines agricultural biodiversity (AgBD) as “all components of biological
diversity of relevance to food and agriculture, and all components of
biological diversity that constitute the agro-ecosystem: the variety and
variability of animals, plants and micro-organisms, at the genetic, species and
ecosystem levels, which are necessary to sustain key functions of the
agro-ecosystem, its structure and processes..”[1].
2.
Agricultural
systems are very complex and for proper functioning rely not only on the
biodiversity of agriculturally used areas but also on the services of biota
from the wider agricultural environment (e.g. pollinators, crop wild
relatives). Broadly speaking, AgBD can be subdivided in two major categories
that share a number of properties (also see Table 1).
3.
The
first category consists of the genetic resources for food and agriculture
(GRFA)[2]
that provide food and other essential harvested products from domesticated crops,
crop wild relatives (CWR), domestic animals
(including fish and other managed aquatic animals), fungal and microbial
genetic resources (the latter particularly for post-harvest processes). GRFA
have been the traditional focus of most of the work on AgBD for a number of
reasons. The genetic resources embodied in agricultural seed and animal stocks
are the most important assets of agricultural systems to deliver their
principal ecosystem service, which is the provision of food and other
agriculture-based commodities. As such they have overwhelming importance for
human nutrition, dietary diversity and farmer income and economies. Moreover,
the domestication of crops and livestock is inextricably linked to human
intervention and management, and they have cultural and aesthetic significance.
In response to genetic erosion, and because of the dependence of GRFA on human
management, ex situ conservation
efforts have focused on GRFA.
4.
The
second category of AgBD comprises all those non-harvested components that
contribute to, and sustain, agricultural productivity by provisioning
supporting and regulating ecosystem services.
This is attracting growing attention to the extent to which the
continued intensification and industrialization of agriculture is being
questioned on sustainability grounds. The most significant organisms of this
category of AgBD include soil micro-biota, pollinators and the antagonists of
pest and diseases. Soil micro-biota are of immense diversity, and perform a
number of vital functions that regulate soil fertility through the
decomposition of litter and harvest residues and the cycling of nutrients such
as nitrogen. Pollinators, both managed honey bees and the great diversity of
wild pollinators, are essential for the production of a large number of crops,
especially tree crops and horticultural species. Management of wild pollinators
requires an ecosystem approach with boundaries of the system drawn beyond
fields, into the broader agroecosystem. Finally, improved pest control is
dependent on a diversity of natural enemies of pests from non-crop habitats (in
addition to crop habitats) and the presence and survival of these biological
control agents (predators, parasitoids) is essential for decreasing
agriculture’s current reliance on pesticides. Unlike GRFA, soil biota,
pollinators and pest control agents are mostly not unique to agricultural
systems, and their continued abundance and diversity in agricultural systems is
more a utilitarian rather than conservationist concern.
5.
The
previous paragraphs illustrate the complexity and multifaceted nature of AgBD
in terms of the taxonomic groups involved (plants, animals, fungi,
micro-organisms), the varying degrees of its reliance on human intervention,
the occurrence in agricultural areas and the wider ecosystem, the type and
importance of services AgBD components provide, etc. It is therefore probably
more difficult to make generalized statements on the management or sustainable
use of AgBD as compared with other types of biodiversity.
Table 1: Attributes of AgBD components
Attribute
|
Cropsa
|
Livestock breedsb
|
Crop wild relatives and gathered food
|
Soil biota
|
Pollinators
|
Diseases, pests and their antagonists
|
Uniqueness
in agric. systems
|
yes
|
yes
|
partial
|
no
|
no
|
partial
|
Principal
contribution to ecosystem services
|
Provisioning
food & agricultural products
|
Provisioning
food & agricultural products
|
Food
& agricultural products
|
Supporting
soil formation, & nutrient cycling
|
food
|
Regulating
pests and diseases
|
Relevance
of intra-specific diversity to delivery of ecosystem services
|
high
|
high
|
high
|
low
|
low
|
high
|
Threats
to intra-specific diversity
|
high
|
high
|
intermediate
|
low
|
?
|
?
|
Species
richness
|
intermediate
|
low
|
high
|
very
high
|
high
|
intermediate
|
Importance
of ex situ conservation
|
high
|
high
|
high
|
low
|
low
|
low
|
Importance
of in situ management
|
high
|
high
|
high
|
intermediate
|
high
|
high
|
a)
Crop varieties, landraces, breeding materials, b) including aquatic animals in
managed inland fisheries
6.
Further
complicating the description of AgBD is the huge variation of agricultural
systems. For example, management practices and AgBD use in an intensively
cropped sugarcane production system for biofuel production are radically
different from those in an extensively managed cacao agro-forest. Recommendations
for best practices of sustainable use of AgBD need to take these differences
into account and may therefore arrive at different or even opposing conclusions
depending on the context of a particular agricultural system.
7.
It is
generally observed that greater diversity or complexity of agricultural
landscapes is associated with greater diversity of all organisms that
constitute AgBD, and the uniformization of traditional into intensively managed
agricultural systems is accompanied with overall loss of AgBD. It is often
argued that a more diverse agricultural ecosystem offers a shield against
perturbations, natural or human-made, contributing to agro-ecosystem
resilience. Greater AgBD may create “pest suppressive” conditions and greater
resistance to invasion of farming systems by noxious species. It can provide
protection against uncertainties in the market, especially for less capitalized
producers (e.g. AnGR), and increase the opportunities to add value and exploit
new markets (crop variants, neglected species). However, greater AgBD in terms
of the variety of crops and breeds can also translate into a hindrance for the
participation in markets that require standardized and uniform products.
Sustainability
8.
In a
broad sense, sustainability is the capacity to endure[3].
The concept is applied to ecosystems and human development efforts and its
meaning is to a considerable extent contextual. Ecosystems are sustainable when
they maintain ecological processes, functions, biodiversity and productivity
into the future. For humans, sustainability is the potential for long-term
maintenance of wellbeing, which will in turn depend on the responsible use of natural
resources.
9.
The
Global Environment Outlook 4 (UNEP, 2005, p. 524-525) defines sustainability as
“a characteristic or state whereby the needs of the present and local
population can be met without compromising the ability of future generations or
populations in other locations to meet their needs” thus capturing two
fundamental issues: the intra-generational equity (meeting human needs now) and
inter-generational equity (fulfilment of basic needs of all global citizens in
the future; see also Orr 2006).
10.
Sustainability
is often defined as resting on three pillars or having three dimensions:
environmental, social and economic sustainability. While some have argued the
need to integrate these dimensions or redress the balance between them, others
have pointed out the vagueness of the concept. Adams (2006) contrasts the
hugely expanded awareness for sustainable development in recent years with the
mounting evidence for the “global human enterprise becoming rapidly less
sustainable” putting this down, in part, on the looseness of the concept and
that it means different things to different people.
11.
The
conventional understanding of sustainable development, based on the ‘three
pillars’ implies that trade-offs can be made between environmental, social and
economic dimensions of sustainability. A distinction is often drawn between
‘strong’ sustainability (where such trade-offs are not allowed or are
restricted) and ‘weak’ sustainability (where they are permissible) (Adams
2006). The concept of ‘critical natural capital’ is also used to describe
elements of the biosphere that cannot be traded off (e.g. critical ecosystems).
However, in practice, development decisions by governments, industries and
other actors do allow trade-offs and have traditionally put greatest emphasis
on the economy above other dimensions of sustainability. This is a major reason
why the environment continues to be degraded and development does not achieve
desirable equity goals (Adams 2006).
Sustainable agriculture
12.
Agreement
on a universally accepted definition of sustainable agriculture has proved to
be elusive, given the extraordinary diversity and complexity of agricultural
land use, and the perspective taken (producer, consumer, etc.). For the purpose
of this information paper, sustainable agriculture is defined as the ability of farmland to produce food and
other agricultural products to satisfy human needs indefinitely as well as
having sustainable impacts on the broader environment. This requires
agriculture to avoid severe or irreversible damage to the endogenous or
external ecosystem services upon which it depends, notably soil fertility,
irrigation water, genetic variability, pollinators, etc. and have acceptable
impacts on the broader environment (environmental stewardship).
13.
The
principle of sustainability implies the use of resources at rates that do not
exceed the capacity of ecosystems to replace them. By definition, dependency on
non-renewable inputs is unsustainable, even if in the short term it is
necessary as part of a trajectory toward sustainability. There are many
difficulties in making sustainability operational. Over what spatial scale
should food production be sustainable? Clearly an overarching goal is global
sustainability, but should this goal also apply at lower levels, such as
regions, nations, or farms? Could high levels of consumption or negative
externalities in some regions be mitigated by improvements in other areas, or
could some unsustainable activities in the food system be offset by actions in
the non-food sector (through carbon-trading, for example)? Though simple
definitions of sustainability are independent of time scale, in practice, how
fast should we seek to move from the status quo to a sustainable food system?
The challenges of climate change and competition for water, fossil fuels, and
other resources suggest that a rapid transition is essential (Godfray et al. 2010).
14.
It is
for human societies to negotiate and decide the nature of the trade-offs
involved in reaching global agricultural sustainability. Such considerations
are difficult or impossible to capture in the definition of the concept, as
trade-offs may change with scale, time, societal preferences, internationally
agreed targets, etc.
15.
There
is a growing portfolio of enhanced agricultural practices that farmers can use
to make agriculture more sustainable, for example those resulting in greater
nutrient and water efficiencies, targeted plant protection (see section 4.2).
However, it is argued that improved farming practices are only a part of the solution.
Despite the insight that the biosphere is limited, the richer part of humankind
manifestly fails to adjust consumption to the biosphere’s limits. Continued
physical expansion of commodity supply systems means that rich consumers in
developed and developing countries continue to perceive resource flows as
bountiful, and develop no sense of limits to consumption. Few consumers show
awareness of production systems as ecologically constrained. Belief in the
opportunity to consume without limits in an ecologically limited world is a
global risk. Adams (2006) argues that politicians fear backlash from citizens
reacting as consumers to anything that alters their lifestyle in ways they
perceive as adverse. This results in demands for low fuel prices, profligate
material and energy consumption, ignorance and/or disregard of the social and
environmental conditions under which global products are created.
16.
It is
also well established (and implicit in some definitions of sustainable
agriculture) that prices for agricultural inputs and outputs do not account for
their true environmental cost and result in market failure. Farmers operate in
economic and regulatory frameworks and such frameworks determine to a large
extent whether farmers can engage in more sustainable practices.
Sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity
17.
CBD
texts and commentaries use the terms “sustainable use of agricultural
biodiversity” and “sustainable agriculture” interchangeably suggesting
synonymous meaning of these overlapping but different concepts. As described in
the previous section, sustainable agriculture is a broad issue which includes
considerations of productivity goals, environmental stewardship, farm
profitability and rural welfare objectives as well as consumer health. AgBD is
a component of agriculture, and as such it cannot be equated with agriculture.
Some principles underpinning sustainable agriculture will apply to enhanced or
sustainable use of AgBD. However, the links between sustainable use of AgBD and
sustainable agriculture may not be always as straightforward as they are
occasionally perceived. For example, well-managed agricultural systems can be
relatively poor in AgBD and yet provide ecosystem services in the broadest
sense (food, nutrient cycling, sustainably managed soil biota and pollinators)
(Wood and Lenne 2005). Conversely, economically or environmentally
unsustainable agricultural systems can be rich in AgBD (e.g.
“organically”-certified systems that deplete soil nutrients). Most tellingly,
work on agricultural sustainability and certification standards of “organic”
production methods are often remarkably silent on AgBD implications, especially
in reference to the management of intra-specific crop diversity.
18.
In
other words, the use or deployment of AgBD can be of strategic importance in
making agriculture more sustainable, but sustainable agriculture will depend on
a range of other management components, notably nutrient, pest and disease
management, etc. Statements that refer to “sustainable agriculture” and “sustainable
use of agricultural biodiversity” at the same time must necessarily have
blurred meaning. In this paper, the two concepts are diferentiated.
19.
Definitions
of sustainable use relative to ecosystems or particular biological resources
(fish stocks, forest products) generally reflect the concern over the widely
observed excessive consumptive use of biological resources leading to levels
below critical thresholds, beyond which their long-term viability or very
existence is put in jeopardy[4].
However, concerns of over-exploitation of a resource do not directly apply to AgBD, for the
biological diversity embodied in crops and animals is perpetuated as
agricultural seeds and reproduced animals. The term “sustainable use” conjures
the notion of the need for reconciling conservation and use of AgBD as somehow
antagonistic goals when indeed conservation of AgBD, particularly of PGR and
AnGR, is only possible through use, and benefits arising from its actual or
potential use (or value) provide the only incentive for its conservation. The
principal threat to AgBD is ultimately not over-use but rather the under-use in
agricultural systems and breeding programs. “Sustainable use” is a concept
rarely used in the AgBD community, which prefers to speak of the “management”,
"deployment” or “enhancement” of genetic resources (Rischkowsky 2008).
20.
A
distinctive feature of the use of AgBD vis-Ã -vis
the use of biodiversity in natural ecosystems is that agricultural practice
typically requires trade-offs between the on-farm diversity and livelihood and
development goals, particularly at the plot and farm level. Productivity needs
and crop uniformity requirements arising from crop and post-harvest management
as well as market integration all tend to reduce AgBD in agricultural systems.
Trade-offs vary in intensity, or may not be observed in exceptional situations,
but they need to be recognized as a reality that is unlikely to go away,
particularly against the background of continued population growth, and the
need to meet development and poverty alleviation goals. In general such
trade-offs have lead, and continue to lead, to diminished overall crop and
animal diversity in agricultural systems, causing genetic erosion, which
provides the rationale for ex situ
conservation.
21.
This
is not to say that current trade-offs should be taken for granted. The improved
management of agro-ecosystems can result in greater crop and ecological
diversity of production areas. Agricultural and trade policies need to be
amended to mitigate trade-offs rather than accentuate the decline of on-farm
maintenance of crop and animal diversity as is currently the case[5].
Even markets, particularly emerging demands for highly differentiated products,
can provide incentives for greater use of AgBD.
22.
Based
on the above considerations, and for the purpose of this information paper,
“sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity” is defined as “all uses of AgBD that
contribute to its conservation and perpetual availability as an input to
agriculture”.
Organic agriculture
23.
Unease
over agriculture’s growing reliance on pesticides and synthetic fertilizers led
to the emergence of the “organic” movement starting in the 1940s. There is a
variety of organic schools and philosophies, but they all eschew the use of
synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, herbicides, plant growth regulators,
genetically modified organisms and livestock feed additives. To replace these
inputs, organic farming relies on crop rotation (in particular using
nitrogen-fixing legumes), the use of manure, composting, mechanical cultivation
and biological pest control. Consumer demand for organic food is very much
driven by the notion of the purportedly superior quality and safety of organic
food (a claim not borne out by a recent meta-study, see Dangour et al. 2009). However, the rationale for
organic production methods goes far beyond consumer concerns about healthy
food, to include reducing the ecological “footprint” of farmed areas through
managing nutrient cycles, protecting pollinators and beneficial
micro-organisms, maintaining healthy soils and conserving water.
24.
Organic
farming practices are regulated, based in large part on the standards set by
the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM[6]).
For farmers to obtain on the market the price premiums for organic produce,
they need certificates that require farm audits to prove compliance with
organic production standards.
25.
In
2007, agriculture certified as “organic” covered some 32 million hectares or
0.8% of total global farmland[7].
However, the de facto area of organic
agriculture is much larger, if traditional agricultural systems that largely
are in conformity with IFOAM standards but not certified, would count as such.
Much subsistence farming, some slash and burn farming, traditional pastures and
cacao production, inter alia, are
overwhelmingly “organic”, not necessarily by intent but rather because of the
unavailability of farm-external inputs.
26.
Modern
organic farming has been much more influential than its share of total farmland
would suggest. The long-standing controversy surrounding the benefits of
“organic” versus “conventional” farming has drawn awareness to the problems
associated with 'chemical-happy' farming. Where substantiated by scientific
methods, principles of organic farming have been assimilated by the
“integrated” nutrient and pest management methods that are now standard
repertoire of conventional agriculture. Conventional farming uses extremely
varied methods and modes: mixed or stockless farms, dairy or arable, intensive
or extensive, no-till or minimum-tillage, mono-crops or mixed crops. It is
therefore not quite appropriate to portray conventional or mainstream farming
as diametrically opposed to organic farming.
27.
A
review of comparative studies of the two systems by Holea et al (2005) identified a wide range of wild taxa that benefit from
organic management through increases in abundance and/or species richness. It
also highlighted three broad management practices (prohibition/reduced use of
chemical pesticides and synthetic fertilizers; sympathetic management of
non-cropped habitats; and preservation of mixed farming) that are intrinsic
(but not exclusive) to organic farming, and that are particularly beneficial
for farmland wildlife. However, the review remained inconclusive as to whether
a ‘holistic’ farm approach (i.e. organic) provides greater benefits to
biodiversity than carefully targeted prescriptions applied to relatively small
areas of cropped and/or non-cropped habitats within conventional agriculture.
It further concluded that many comparative studies encounter methodological
problems, limiting their ability to draw quantitative conclusions and that more
research is needed to determine the impacts of organic farming, before a full
appraisal of its potential role in biodiversity conservation in agro-ecosystems
can be made.
28.
There
is much debate around the proposition by advocates of organic agriculture that
it can contribute significantly to the global food supply. There is evidence in
support of and against that proposition. Analysing a global dataset of 293
comparative studies, Badgley et al.
(2007) found that yields from organic farming were slightly inferior to
conventional low-input systems in developed countries, but the inverse was true
for developing countries. The authors concluded that “organic methods could
produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current
human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing
the agricultural land base”. Extrapolating from modeling results they further
concluded that leguminous cover crops could fix enough nitrogen to replace the
amount of synthetic fertilizer currently in use.
29.
Others
have dismissed the notion that organic farming could sustain a world population
of 9 billion without substantially increasing the area dedicated to
agriculture, arguing that biological nitrogen fixation and sources of manure
are insufficient to increase agricultural productivity to meet future needs
(Trewavas 2001, 2002). According to MEA (2005), the human population may have
already exceeded the maximum number that can be supported without chemical
fertilizers. In Sub-SaharanAfrica, where soils are mostly of poor quality and
nutrient-depleted, and food production will have to meet the needs of a
population 80% greater in 20 years than today, judicial application of P and N
fertilizers appears to be inescapable if further soil mining and expansion of
low-intensity agricultural areas through destruction of habitat is to be
avoided (Smaling et al. 2006, Grenz & Sauerborn 2007, Henao 2002-quoted in
MEA 2005, p.335-336).
30.
The
nature and quantification of nitrogen flows in agricultural systems is of
considerable importance in the assessment of their sustainability. Nitrogen in
the form of nitrate and ammonia is often the limiting factor in agricultural
productivity, but because of leakage and gaseous loss, particularly under
sub-optimal agricultural practices, has much negative environmental impact (MEA
2005). Organic nitrogen sources, such as livestock manure and legume cover
crops used in organic production systems, can be a substitute to commercial
nitrogen fertilizers. But these practices are not always feasible in the
high-potential cereal production systems of developing countries, where
population density is high and arable land resources are limited (Ali 1999).
31.
Organic
production systems that rely entirely on organic nitrogen sources are becoming
more popular in Europe and North America. Organic systems are feasible, and
even profitable, in these countries because people can afford to pay higher
prices for their food, and there is adequate land to support the crop
rotations, legume cover crops, and forages that are needed to supply adequate
nitrogen. It is not clear, however, that environmental benefits would accrue
from widespread adoption of organic agriculture if these systems were forced to
produce as much grain as conventional systems do today, because it is just as
difficult to control losses of nitrogen from organic sources as it is from
nitrogen fertilizer (Cassman et al.
2003). Use of both organic or fertilizer nitrogen need not be an ‘‘either-or’’
decision. In most conventional systems, farmers use organic nitrogen sources
and rotate with legume crops to minimize the need for nitrogen fertilizer when
it is cost-effective to do so.
32.
Avoidance
of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers as mandated by organic standards certainly
implies reduced emissions of greenhouse gases embodied in nitrogen fertilizers.
But biological N fixation has also been harnessed by mainstream agriculture.
Worldwide plantings of N-fixing crops, such as soybeans, now capture about 40
million tons of nitrogen a year, an ecosystem service worth several billion
dollars annually in avoided fertilizer costs (MEA 2005). However, the negative
consequences from biological N-fixation are ultimately similar to those
resulting from industrial N fixation: increased emissions of N2O and
leaching of N from the land into water bodies once organic N has been
mineralized (MEA 2005).
33.
A
recent comparative study in the United Kingdom has shown that the carbon foot
print of milk (per litre) is only slightly smaller in organic dairy farming,
owing to the fact that emissions of methane from enteric fermentation and
nitric oxide from soils and manure accounted in both farms for most of
greenhouse gas emissions (in terms of CO2 equivalents) (Plassmann &
Edwards-Jones 2009).
34.
It is
interesting to note that the Haber–Bosch process in which atmospheric nitrogen
is fixed and used to manufacture synthetic nitrogen fertilizer does not
necessarily require the use of fossil fuel. If coupled to renewable energy
sources the process has the potential to provide unlimited supplies of
climate-neutral nitrogen fertilizer. The use of synthetic fertilizers in the
future could therefore be perfectly compatible with sustainable agricultural
practices.
35.
It has
also been argued that the categorical opposition of organic agriculture to GMOs
is unreasonable[8],
where these have the potential to contribute, in a complementary manner to
other approaches, to the much needed agricultural intensification and
resource-use efficiency (Fedoroff et al.
2010; see also section 4). For example, reviewing the
findings of a number of studies on the use of transgenic cotton in India, Morse
et al. (2005) concluded that
insecticide use against ballworms was greatly reduced in insect-resistant BT
cotton as compared to non-BT cotton. In addition, BT cotton also provided
substantial benefits to farmers in terms of increased gross margins (39% and
63% higher vis-Ã -vis non-BT cotton). It would also seem unreasonable to
ignore transgenic technologies, particularly if funded and owned by the public
sector, that make crops more nutrient-efficient and productive, and food more
nutritious (Trewavas 2002, Good et al.
2007, Gregory et al. 2009). Godfray et al.
(2010) therefore contend that “genetic modification is a potentially valuable
technology whose advantages and disadvantages need to be considered rigorously
on an evidential, inclusive, case-by-case basis: Genetic modification should
neither be privileged nor automatically dismissed.”
36.
The
demand for organic food continues to grow fast although it is more expensive
than conventionally produced food[9].
The fact that consumers are willing to pay farmers a premium to do what they
perceive as the “right thing” is encouraging, but still limited to relatively
wealthy consumers in rich countries who spend a small part of their income on
food. However, Capper (2009) shows that consumers often are mislead in thinking
they are making virtuous food choices, when, in truth, they are supporting
production practices that consume more natural resources, cause greater
pollution and create a larger carbon footprint than more efficient,
technology-driven, conventional methods.
37.
Likewise,
‘locally grown’ food is thought to have a lower environmental impact than food
transported over long distances due to carbon emissions from fuel used in
transport. However, it is incorrect to assume that the distance that food travels
from point of origin to point of consumption is an accurate reflection of
environmental impact. This simplistic approach fails to consider the
productivity of the transportation system, which has tremendous impact on the
energy expended per unit of food. As an example, one dozen eggs, transported
several hundred miles to a grocery store in a tractor-trailer that can carry
23,400 dozen eggs is a more fuel-efficient, eco-friendly option than a dozen
eggs purchased at a farmers’ market (4.5 times more fuel used) or local farm
(17.2 times more fuel used). Instead, it is life-cycle assessments, which
evaluate all inputs and outputs within the food-production system that allow
correct comparisons of different production systems (Capper 2009).
In conclusion, organic and conventional agriculture should not be seen as contradictions, or intrinsically “good” or “bad” for agricultural sustainability, but as complementary sources from which the best elements should be borrowed and applied in appropriate contexts.
Sustainable Agriculture Techniques
Sustainable agriculture provides high yields without
undermining the natural systems and resources that productivity depends on.
Farmers who take a sustainable approach work efficiently with natural processes
rather than ignoring or struggling against them – and use the best of current
knowledge and technology to avoid the unintended consequences of industrial,
chemical-based agriculture. One important result is that farmers are able to
minimize their use of pesticides and fertilizers, thereby saving money and
protecting future productivity, as well as the environment.
Below are some of the most common sustainable
agriculture techniques employed by farmers today to achieve the key goals of
weed control, pest control, disease control, erosion control and high soil
quality:
- Crop Rotation
- Cover Crops
- Soil Enrichment
- Natural Pest Predators
- Biointensive Integrated Pest Management
Crop Rotation
Crop rotation—growing different crops in succession in
the same field—is one of the most powerful techniques of sustainable
agriculture, and avoids the unintended consequences of putting the same plants
in the same soil year after year. It is a key element of the permanent and
effective solution to pest problems because many pests have preferences for
specific crops, and continuous growth of the same crop guarantees them a steady
food supply, so that populations increase. For example, right now European corn
borers are often a significant pest in the United States because most corn is
grown in continuous cultivation or in two-year rotations with soybeans. Four-
or five-year rotations would control not only corn borers, but many other corn
pests as well. In fact, rotation reduces pest pressure on all the crops in the
rotation by breaking the pest reproductive cycles.
In rotations, farmers can also plant crops, like
soybeans and other legumes, that replenish plant nutrients, thereby reducing
the need for chemical fertilizers. For instance, corn grown in a field
previously used to grow soybeans needs less added nitrogen to produce high
yields.
On a related note, the importance of crop rotation as
a defense against pest infestations should be a key part of any discussion
about growing crops for bioenergy purposes. Government policies to encourage bioenergy
crops should not inadvertently encourage farmers to forgo crop rotation in
favor of planting corn year after year.
Cover Crops
Many farmers also take advantage of the benefits of
having plants growing in the soil at all times, rather than leaving the ground
bare between cropping periods, which produces unintended problems. The planting
of cover crops such as hairy vetch, clover, or oats helps farmers achieve the
basic goals of:
- preventing soil erosion,
- suppressing weeds, and
- enhancing soil quality.
Using appropriate cover crops is worth the extra
effort because it reduces the need for chemical inputs like herbicides,
insecticides, and fertilizers.
Soil Enrichment
Soil is arguably the single most prized element of
agricultural ecosystems. Healthy soil teems with life, including many
beneficial microbes and insects, but these are often killed off by the overuse
of pesticides. Good soils can improve yields and produce robust crops less
vulnerable to pests; abused soils often require heavy fertilizer application to
produce high yields. Soil quality can be maintained and enhanced in many ways,
including leaving crop residues in the field after harvest, plowing under cover
crops, or adding composted plant material or animal manure.
Natural Pest Predators
Understanding a farm as an ecosystem rather than a
factory offers exciting opportunities for effective pest control. For example,
many birds, insects, and spiders are natural predators of agricultural pests.
Managing farms so that they harbor populations of pest predators is a
sophisticated and effective pest-control technique. One of the unfortunate
consequences of intensive use of chemical pesticides is the indiscriminate
killing of birds, bats, and other pest predators.
Biointensive Integrated Pest Management
One of the most promising technologies is the control
of pests through integrated pest management (IPM). This approach relies to the
greatest possible extent on biological rather than chemical measures, and
emphasizes the prevention of pest problems with crop rotation; the
reintroduction of natural, disease-fighting microbes into plants/soil, and
release of beneficial organisms that prey on the pests. Once a particular pest
problem is identified, responses include the use of sterile males, biocontrol
agents like ladybugs. Chemical pesticides are only used as a last resort.
How Sustainable Agriculture Works
Main Components of Sustainable Agriculture
The main components of both sustainable farming and
conventional farming are exactly the same: soil management, crop management,
water management, disease/pest management and waste management. It's the
methods used that are often radically different. We'll discuss them in order,
starting with soil management.
On a conventional farm, managing and maintaining soil
fertility is as simple as running a soil test and applying the recommended
doses of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and other nutrients to meet crop
needs. In sustainable agriculture, soil fertility is maintained and improved
through a careful rotation of crops and generous amounts of compost and green
manure, which are cover crops that are plowed back into the soil to
enrich organic matter.
Monoculture is the term for agriculture that only produces one crop, year after
year. The danger of monoculture is that it requires more and more chemical
fertilizer to replenish lost nutrients, and more and stronger chemical
pesticides and fungicides to kill off the bugs and diseases that evolve
alongside the same crop year after year. Sustainable agriculture employs a
broad crop diversity and careful rotation, so that nutrients are replenished
naturally and no single pest or disease is allowed to get out of control.
Unhealthy soils are easily eroded, and careless water
management can allow chemical fertilizers, pesticides and fresh manure slurry
to leach into rivers, streams and the drinking water supply [source: Sustainable
Agriculture Initiative]. Sustainable water management views water as
a precious resource, efficiently watering crops using drip irrigation, which
cuts down on erosion and evaporation. Efficient water use is hugely important
in arid climates, where sustainable farmers plant drought-resistant crops and
limit animal grazing [source: Feenstra].
On a factory farm, the key to fighting infections and
disease among confined animals is to treat them with prophylactic antibiotics.
Conventional growers rid the soil of any potentially harmful diseases by
spraying it with fungicides before planting, then bathing the growing plants in
strong pesticides to kill off bugs. In sustainable farming, plants and animals
are encouraged to use their natural resistance rather than chemical solutions.
Animals that freely graze on a healthy diet are more resistant to infection and
disease. Healthy plants grown in microbe- and nutrient-rich soil are more
resistant to invading bugs and disease. When necessary, sustainable farmers
will use natural solutions to pest and disease problems, including row covers
and sprays made from natural ingredients.
Dairy farms, in particular, create an impressive
amount of manure. In a sustainable waste management plan, the manure would be
properly composted (which requires sufficient internal heat and turning of the
compost piles) and applied to field or food crops. One promising new technology
called an anaerobic digestor can convert animal waste into methane, which can
provide a renewable on-farm source of electricity
How to Practice Sustainable Agriculture
If
you want to farm sustainably, there are certain measures you need to undertake
in order to move toward that goal. And if you're looking for a farm that
practices sustainable methods, then you can use these steps as your criteria.
Designing Your Dream Farm
Don't confuse
"sustainable" with "organic". An organic label means that the food was grown or raised
without the use of synthetic chemicals (but there are exceptions).
- Lots of people confuse sustainable agriculture with organic farming. Both are aimed at using more ecologically sensible practices, but they are judged by a distinct set of standards.
- Organic farming, especially when carried out on a large, industrial scale, can still damage the environment and threaten public health in a variety of ways: Ecosystems can still be ruined by widespread monoculture; pesticides can still be applied; soils can still be depleted of nutrients and organic matter; pollution can still be created; and exorbitant amounts of fossil fuels can still be spent (and wasted), all under an organic label.
Know what sustainability means: Farming a single area so that it produces food
indefinitely. In order to move in this direction, a farm has to:
- avoid irreversible changes to the land (for example, erosion)
- withdraw no resources from the environment that cannot be replenished (for example, not using more water than can be replaced regularly by rainfall)
- produce enough income to remain on a farm in face of worldwide farm consolidation and infrastructure development
Consider the source. Determine where your resources come from and whether you're
taking more than can be replaced, either through natural processes or your own
practices.
- Where are your resources and inputs coming from? Think specifically about water, energy, soil amendments, and feed (if you have livestock). Also think about long-term, capital investments, such as structural building materials, tools, etc.
- Keep in mind that no farm is an island: complete self-sufficiency is not a requirement of sustainable agriculture. Long-term stability and productivity is. The more renewable and varied your resources are, the longer your farm will last.
Make Changes
Eliminate waste. There is no "away" to "throw" to.
Everything is connected. The three "R"s apply here more than ever: reduce,
reuse, recycle. It'll not only be more sustainable, but it's cheaper, too.
- Examine every bit of garbage and waste that your operation produces and ask "What else can I do with this?"
- If you can't do anything to do with it, try to think of ways someone else in the community can use it. Be creative.
Encourage
diversity within the farm. Choosing "polyculture" over
"monoculture" results in less waste and often, reduced fossil fuel
consumption.
- Use varieties and breeds that are well-adapted to the conditions in your locale, rather than bred for maximum productivity and storage (with a sacrifice in hardiness and flavor).
- Rotate crops and pasture. Use companion planting and green manures to keep the land perpetually fertile and to prevent topsoil loss. Don't let any one piece of land lose an irreplaceable amount of nutrients.
- Keep plants and animals around that indirectly benefit the farm's stability and productivity. For example, yarrow and nettles add to the nutritional value of plants grown near them, as well as increase the volatile oil content of plants grown for oils. Plant extra basil to serve as an insecticide, and keep guinea fowl around to keep ticks at bay. As they roam your farm (and the surrounding countryside), guineas eat the ticks left by browsing deer off tall grasses. They are traditionally reputed to kill or keep rattlesnakes away as well.
- If guinea fowls are not common to your area, try growing ducks (if you have a fish pond) and/or chickens. Chickens can eat crop trimmings and vegetable waste. If they can't eat them all, they claw and step on it, enough to make it into organic fertilizers rich in nitrogen (especially when added to their poop).
- Raise both livestock and crops, and set up a mutually beneficial relationship between them. The simplest way to do this is to use manure from your livestock to fertilize crops, and use some of your crops to feed the livestock. If you are unable to raise both, find a neighbor who's specializing in the opposite and set up an exchange.
Encourage
the diversity surrounding the farm. The ecology of your farm does not end
at the property lines.
- Plant trees around the farm that act as windbreaks and also provide habitat for local birds (which can prey on insects that prey on crops).
- Tolerate natural predators that keep pests at bay (for example, snakes that feed on gophers, ladybugs that feed on aphids, spiders that feed on insects which spread diseases to crops).
Diversify
financially.
An ecologically sustainable farming operation won't do anybody much good if it
can't generate a profit and keep itself running. Unless you or someone else is
willing and able to sponsor the farm with an off-farm day job or another
external source of income, you're going to have to crunch the numbers until
you're in the black.
- Take advantage of the options available to you as far as direct marketing is concerned. That includes: CSA/subscriptions, farmers markets, roadside stands, and even the Internet.
- Adding value to products is a smart way to differentiate this farm's lettuce from that farm's lettuce. When you take your lettuce and make it part of delicious burger made from healthy meat that was pasture-raised in your own fields and top it with a slice of tasty, red tomato that grew in your own soil, you stand to appeal to a wider audience and rake in more profits. In other words, don't just grow a wider variety of stuff––do a wider variety of things with the stuff you grow, and consider selling it from an on-farm store or restaurant (as well as on the Internet).
- Cater to every economic level and ethnic group in the community. People of varying wealth seek different things from a farm. Certain ethnic groups value farm products that the mainstream community has no interest in (for example, many Caribbean immigrants seek male, uncastrated goats for meat as well as amaranth, a widespread weed, which they use to make a dish called calalloo).
- Publicize. Talk to everyone about what you're doing at the farm. Provide educational tours and workshops. Keep your farm looking nice, because if it ever comes down to it, the local community may fight development proposals because they perceive your farm to be a haven of agricultural heritage.
Find good, reliable labor. Find people who are committed to sustainable agriculture
(not just dabbling in it) and who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty as they
apply their minds.
- A reduced dependence on fossil fuels means an increased dependence on human labor, and not just physical, manual labor––you're going to need knowledgeable workers who understand the complexity of the system you're running and can enhance it with every decision they make.
Enjoy
your life.
Farming is hard work, but the most successful farmers know when to call it a
day and circumvent burnout. Remember why you're farming and why, in particular,
you're aiming for a sustainable operation. For most people, it's because they
like knowing they're leaving land in better shape than they found it.
References
1.
Rural Science Graduates
Association (2002). "In Memorium - Former
Staff and Students of Rural Science at UNE". University of New England. Retrieved 21 October 2012.
2.
Gold, M. (July
2009). What is Sustainable
Agriculture?. United States Department of
Agriculture, Alternative Farming Systems Information Center.
3.
Altieri,
Miguel A. (1995) Agroecology: The science of
sustainable agriculture. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
4.
"Scientists
discover genetics of nitrogen fixation in plants - potential implications for
future agriculture". News.mongabay.com.
2008-03-08. Retrieved 2013-09-10.
5.
Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, March 25,
2008 vol. 105 no. 12 4928–4932 [1]
6.
"What is Sustainable
Agriculture? — ASI". Sarep.ucdavis.edu. Retrieved 2013-09-10.
7.
"Indicators for
sustainable water resources development". Fao.org. Retrieved 2013-09-10.
8.
"CEP
Factsheet". Musokotwane Environment Resource
Centre for Southern Africa.
9.
"Peak
Soil: Why cellulosic ethanol, biofuels are unsustainable and a threat to
America". Culturechange.org.
10. "Soil
erosion". Copperwiki.org.
11. "Cordell
et al, 2009". Sciencedirect.com. Retrieved 2013-09-10.
12. "FAO World
Agriculture towards 2015/2030". Fao.org. Retrieved 2013-09-10.
13. "FAO
World Agriculture towards 2015/2030". Fao.org. Retrieved 2013-09-10.
14. "FAO 2011 Energy
Smart Food" (PDF). Retrieved 2013-09-10.
15. "Advances
in Sustainable Agriculture: Solar-powered Irrigation Systems in Pakistan". McGill University. 2014-02-12. Retrieved 2014-02-12.
[1]
COP V/5 Appendix, paragraph 1
[2] For example the ITPGRFA defines
[PGRFA] as "any genetic material of plant origin of actual or potential
value for food and agriculture".
[3] The word "sustain" is derived
from the Latin verb sustinere (to keep in existence or maintain) and implies
long-term support or permanence
[4] For example, the CBD defines
sustainable use in article 2 as “the use of components of biological diversity
in a way and at a rate that does not lead to the long-term decline of
biological diversity, thereby maintaining its potential to meet the needs and
aspirations of present and future generations.”
[5] Examples: 1) seed and seed systems
policies unsupportive of informal seed systems and on-farm crop diversity; 2)
trade and food safety policies that discriminate against neglected crops; 3)
pricing in of externalities in the prices of agricultural products.
[6] IFOAM definition of organic
agriculture: “Organic agriculture is a production system that sustains the
health of soils, ecosystems and people. It relies on ecological processes,
biodiversity and cycles adapted to local conditions, rather than the use of
inputs with adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation
and science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships
and a good quality of life for all involved."
[7]
http://www.organic-world.net/graphs-2009.html
[8] New Scientist 12 Sep 2009 “Learn to love genetic engineering”
[9] http://www.ifoam.org/sub/faq.html