Luigi’s nibble of the keyhole gardens of Lesotho resonated with me for a couple of reasons. First, it showed that at least some people are not sitting about waiting for the rest of the world to solve the food crisis for them. More than that, though, it set me to thinking about this type of garden.
The BBC, with its customary ahistoricity, seems to think keyhole gardens are utterly novel and “home-grown” in Lesotho. Actually, they have a long history. I first came across them in a demonstration garden by Horticulture Therapy (now known as Thrive). They are round beds, raised to make it easy for people in a wheelchair to tend to the plants, and sized so that one can reach the middle of the bed either from outside the circle or from inside the slot that gives the garden its name. To be honest, I’m not sure who invented them. Permaculture practitioners often take credit for popularising the concept, but I’m sure I’ve seen earlier designs, including lung-like ones in which branching paths end in alveoli that allow access to the entire bed.
The point about keyhole type designs (whether raised for wheelchair users or not) is that they eliminate the need to tread on the soil, which is bad because it can lead to compaction and all the evils that brings. Keyholes, however, are just one manifestation of no-dig gardening. ((Which I am not going to link to because there are so many sites, I don’t want to single out any one of them.)) The shape of the bed is immaterial; what matters is that you don’t step on it and that you don’t destroy the soil structure by turning it upside down once or twice a year. And no-dig of this sort is just one manifestation of very intensive horticulture. ((To which I will definitely link: John Jeavons and Mel Bartholomew are the gurus, although there are others.)) And the weird part about no-dig, intensive horticulture is that it seems to be the child of affluence and self-sufficiency.
The poor, who need more than ever to be self-sufficient, have not generally been treated to these techniques.
It isn’t glamorous and it isn’t high tech, but it can deliver far more food than any other method. Not the calories of starchy staples, perhaps, although potatoes and other roots and tubers certainly do well in no-dig beds, but a wonderfully nutritious and satisfying diversity of fruit and vegetables. Furthermore, as the Lesotho example shows, there’s often a surplus to sell nearby.
One problem, I suspect, is that precisely because it isn’t high-tech and glamorous, intensive no-dig horticulture requires cadres of trainers. The system also needs to be tailored to people’s preferences and local conditions. I expect that the best way to propagate it would be to have demonstration villages that could train trainers and send them out into their world to spread the news. Wait a minute! Isn’t that something that Jeffrey Sachs’ Millennium Villages could be doing? ((What do you mean they don’t work?)) But I digress.
It seems to me, sitting here at the back of the Hall of Flags in the belly of the FAO beast, that widespread adoption of intensive, no-dig horticulture wherever poor people have access to at least a little land could do an enormous amount of good. There are opportunities for entrepreneurship and empowerment, and a prospect of real improvement. I just have no idea how to get something like that rolling.
The snatches I’m hearing from the statements and discussions (and I’m not privy to much corridor conversation) are all about high-yielding seeds and fertilizers (made from expensive oil) and irrigation. That package may have done as much good as it can.
Would it hurt to devote a small percentage of the millions being pledged to a different approach? Come to that, would anybody who is as appalled as I am about the same-old same-old being peddled as a solution care to bankroll something different?
I served as Peace Corps volunteer in rural Lesotho from 2005-07. Gardens included some of the projects in which I was involved.
As much as I applaud the BBC for noting the industry and initiative of local populations(which is quite true), I have to contest the assertions of munificent production and self-sufficiency noted in this article. Such an exaggeration does a disservice to the Basotho in that it misrepresents both the extent of the food crisis and the types of solutions that should be supported by outside donors and agencies.
I saw a number of keyhole gardens up and running and never did they provide the sole source of produce/vegetables. Every household that had a keyhole garden also had a larger fenced garden of at least 1000 sq. ft, and only one of those families had surplus to sell(and they had a policeman’s cash pension to buy high end seeds from South Africa’s agrobusinesses). The other families with keyhole gardens often had to buy vegetables from South Africa. To suggest that 3 keyhole gardens could provide the yearly supply of vegetables for 10 people with even more left over to sell is, honestly, quite ludicrous. If my anecdotal(and granted myopic) accounts of the villages that I knew are not enough to convince you, please see Jean Jeavous’s “How to Grow More Vegetables.” Jeavous’s book, which specializes in intensive, small area gardening techniques very similar to keyhole gardens, states that 1100 sq. ft. of intensively dug, organically fertilized, and planted area is needed to provide a yearly produce supply for a family of 4. 3 Keyhole gardens, which, at the very most are 2 meters or 6ft+/- in diameter, total about 100 sq. ft. Even allowing high yield varieties of seed and planting twice a year, it is an enormous stretch to arrive at a full year’s supply of produce for a group of 10.
Why go into this detail? Lesotho’s problems with agricultural production and food supply go far beyond the realm of agriculture. The Basotho, until 150 years ago, were semi-pastoral and migratory. Due to several historical factors, including Dutch colonization, the rise of the Zulu and the brutality of Apartheid, the Basotho have been confined to poor agricultural lands. Even if they were well managed and restored to peak production, it is unlikely that this country could ever grow enough food for itself. What they need are other avenues of economic production which they can then exchange for food. The AGOA treaty was a partial answer, which brought in textile factories and 40-50,000 jobs, but the US Congress allowed that treaty to expire and most of the factories closed. In addition, the poor education system and the lack of civil protections(such as unfettered banking for women), and antiquated, constricted land policies further limit development.
If the outside world wishes to play a role in improving Lesotho, they need to be ready to put up real investments that open up non-agricultural means of economic development. Short of that, the Basotho themselves need to implement the educational, social, and land reforms necessary to give those struggling keyhole gardeners the option of leaving the land. Praise of their industriousness is welcome, but what they truly need are choices. The land can longer support them.
Jack Conviser,
RPCV
Many thanks for your considered views. And I’m sure you’re right, that three keyhole gardens couldn’t support a family of 10 (unless they ate very, very small portions).
But don’t you think a little more home-grown self-sufficiency would generally be a good thing, even in Lesotho?
Jeremy, Thanks for your reply. A few balancing considerations.
Of course, home grown self sufficiency is a necessity, and here are a few other examples of local, self-started initiatives in Lesotho.
Briefly, I have seen small scale pig and chicken operations, hand craft operations, collaborative gardens for orphans and more. All of these things were run and often proposed by locals and in some cases, entirely self-funded by village collections or by those few entrepreneurs who had access to a steady income(such as a relative working in South Africa). Quite incredible stuff. They are not and nor have they ever been passive sufferers relying solely on handouts to get by. They would not have survived that way.
However, the World Food Program subsidized the food supply of about 1/4 of the households in my area of the Fatima Mission of Ha Ramabanta. The problems are large and systemic.
My fear is this:
Any reporting that distorts basic truths by citing a technical(and wildly exaggerated) panacea does all of us a disservice. It misinforms the general public as to the kinds and manner of commitments needed to address problems. For example, can we solve the current food shortages in East Asia by planting keyhole gardens in their villages and cities?
That being said, I know that this article is about hope and I have no desire to quash that. Hope and faith in self-empowerment are essential, but what is also needed is the recognition of the real reforms necessary for change. And, the article is right in suggesting that the UN may not be the best agent here. They may need to do it themselves. But, rather than sit back and applaud their struggles, we should be finding ways to understand and support those home-grown efforts that create genuine, lasting improvements.
This article, through misinformation, prevents that.
Jack
Correction on earlier writing.
“How to Grow More Vegetables(Than you ever possible on less land than you can imagine)”
was written by John Jeavons, not Jean Jeavous as written earlier.
Jack
Thanks for the correction; not to blow my own trumpet too much, but you’ll note that I had indeed cited John Jeavons as a source in the original piece.
Anyway, you are absolutely right; universal panaceas cure nothing.
I see the reference Jeavons now, sorry that I missed it earlier.
BTW, all of my ranting aside, what are other solutions out there that you would recommend to create self-sufficiency in Lesotho(or similar areas in developing world)?