The global population is predicted to be 9.7 billion people
by 2050 despite fall in fertility.
The rush to increase food production has caused catastrophic
environmental degradation – we need to make agriculture climate-resilient and
more efficient. The World Bank’s view that we need to grow 50% more food by
2050 to feed 9 billion people, while finding ways to reduce carbon emissions
from agriculture at the same time, ignores one very simple fact – we already
grow enough food for 10 billion people. But a combination of storage losses
after harvest, overconsumption and waste mean that some 800 million people in
developing countries are malnourished.
Today the environmental toll from this boom is all too
evident. 38% of the planet’s cropland is degraded, 11% of the irrigated area is
salt contaminated, 90% of the biodiversity of the 20 main staple crops has been
lost, nitrogen fertiliser produces 6% of greenhouse gases and its runoff
creates 400 marine “dead zones” (areas where oxygen concentration is so low
that animal life suffocates), and more than 350,000 people die every year from
pesticide toxicity.
Research on planetary boundaries estimates that nitrogen
fertiliser use needs to decline by 75% to avoid large-scale environmental
impact of this kind. The focus on productivity over efficiency has meant that
the amount of energy needed to grow the same quantity of food has increased by
between one-quarter and one-third over the last 25 years. Even without climate
change, conventional chemical agriculture is driving humanity towards a
food-security cliff.
A Christian Aid briefing paper argues that if we are to
reverse this situation in the face of climate change, agriculture needs a
transformative change in the way it addresses climate resilience. Small-scale
farmers and pastoralists, who manage 60% of agricultural land and produce 50%
of the planet’s food, should be central to this agenda. Research to solve their problems should be guided by their
priorities, and take place largely on their farms. The kind of support
farmers want often includes advice on soil management and testing, reliable
climate forecasts, and development of their own seed and livestock breeding
processes. The advice they get usually revolves around unaffordable chemical
fertilisers and pesticides, while their ability to exchange and sell locally
adapted crop seeds is threatened by corporate-inspired legislation promoting
crop varieties developed in distant biotech labs. Small-scale women farmers
manage up to 90% of staple food production but only 15% of agricultural
advisers are women, and only 5% of advice reaches women.
For farmers to invest in resilience, they need secure land
tenure, especially when they participate in communal land-tenure systems. Land
deals with largely foreign buyers have increased to 55 million hectares. This not only
dispossesses farmers but also undermines the confidence that others need to invest
in measures to control land erosion, in trees and in other adaptations that pay
off over several years.
The "rush to production" was simply about profit -
primitive accumulation of capital - it has absolutely nothing to do with
feeding dispossessed people who can't pay for it. The rape of land and
resources, the driving off the land of subsistence farmers, the domination and
control of seeds (deliberated engineered to produce plants that produce
infertile seeds), the creation of dependency on insecticides and fertilisers
... and finally the ulitmate insult to hungry people - the deliberate hoarding
and destruction of food to keep market prices from falling so that profits are
maintained. Nothing has changed since the "Great Irish Famine": when 1
milllion starved while those who owned farms and livestock carried on exporting
to markets that could pay for the produce. The reason people in developing
countries are malnourished is that they are poor, and don't have enough money
to feed themselves properly.
No comments:
Post a Comment