Jeremy Cherfas

January 25, 2012January 24, 2012

Contract farming is good for you — official

Many people say that giving smallholder farmers a stronger position in market chains is one of the best methods of helping them out of poverty, and that applies particularly to the neglected, orphaned, underused etc crops that are our bread and butter. Is it true? A new study in World Development says it is. ((The study, by Marc Bellemare, is of poor farmers in Madagascar, so I’m guessing they farm rice, like the boy in the photo, found on Jaaskier1’s Flickr stream.)) The article is behind a paywall, and even if it weren’t I am pretty confident that I wouldn’t understand the details. So how do I know that “participation in agricultural value chains make[s] smallholders better off”?

Because the author says so.

Which of course he would, although in this case he does so with a blog post explaining just why his study is so much more conclusive than anything that has gone before. And that I could understand. Not the details of how he got there, which is still a long way outside my expertise. But where he got to, which was here:

At the end of the day, I find that contract farming significantly increases the income of participants. Perhaps more importantly, I find that contract farming increases the income net of contract farming revenue of participants. In other words, there are positive spillovers on other sources of income (here, income from from sales of livestock and income from other agricultural sources such as the sales of non-contracted crops and animal byproducts).

More broadly, I’m seeing, and liking, more of these blog posts from scientists about their science. And while not all scientists are capable, not by a long shot, those who can are, I am sure, adding to their reach and impact. Just sayin’

January 23, 2012January 23, 2012

EU seed law in turmoil?

Good reasons to take the weekend off include the fact that by not being too keen, one avoids certain errors. So I’m glad I didn’t see Patrick’s original post on an opinion delivered by an EU Advocate General in the matter of Association Kokopelli vs Graines Baumaux SAS. ((And by no means the first time they’ve come to blows, as it were.)) At least, not until after he had got things straighter. Here is Patrick’s view of the Advocate General’s views:

First of all the Advocate-General said it is not legal to interpret EU or French Seed Laws as meaning you cannot sell unlisted varieties. YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SELL UNLISTED VARIETIES.

Secondly, the provisions of EU Seed Law that refer to the DUS standard are NOT VALID.

Don’t get your hopes too high for a legal seed supply revolution in Europe. As Patrick explains, there’s a lot more that still needs to happen. But the possibility is that it just might happen, and then Europeans will be in the happy state enjoyed by the entire rest of world, able to buy, sell and grow whatsoever varieties they choose.

January 20, 2012January 20, 2012

Nibbles: Bananas, No Bananas, Climate change and agriculture, Biodiversity loss, Malnutrition and property, Breeding

The Archaeobotanist reviews the domestication and spread of bananas …
… and says that bananas weren’t important to the first farmers of Central Africa.
New York Times blog dissects the climate change and agriculture paper that’s making waves.
But biodiversity loss is a bigger threat than climate change. No mention of ag; do these guys ever talk to one another?
In India, children of women who farm their own land are less malnourished.
So what if 11 plant species “account for 93 percent of all that humans eat”? Rachel Laudan thinks that fine, and I agree.
The patent on one of the Roundup-Ready genes is about to expire. So?

January 19, 2012January 19, 2012

Telling it like it is for rice in Nepal

I’d like to pretend that our absence yesterday was a mark of solidarity with all the netizens protesting against the proposed SOPA/PIPA laws in the US. It wasn’t; we were just both snowed under. But we do think SOPA/PIPA is a mistake.

The latest issue of IRRI’s magnificent organ Rice Today contains an article on Seeds of life in Nepal. All good stuff, about how private companies and the state supply less than 10% of Nepal’s rice seed needs. The rest comes from the informal seed sector. IRRI stigmatizes those seeds as being “low quality”. So, along with the National Rice Research Program, IRRI swung into action, setting up farmer trials of modern varieties, which “within a short time … were identified as superior to local lines”.

They were Radha-32, Ghaiya-2, IR55435-5, Pakhejhinuwa, Radha-4, Ram Dhan, Barkhe-3017, Sunaulo sugandha, Barkhe-2024, and NR-1824-21-1-1.

To get seed to farmers, the project helped set up local seed producer groups, which ramped up production from 4 tonnes to 30 tonnes over three years. Even that, however, was enough for only about 1 in 10 of the farmers in the immediate neighbourhood. More groups followed in other villages, and everyone is now happy.

Except us and some people in Nepal.

The article boasts that “millet and maize that used to replace rice on the table are now feeds for livestock and poultry”. Is that an unalloyed good thing?

Were the local varieties really that bad, and were they conserved? Nepal has a good record of participatory plant breeding (PPB) and community seedbanks and seed producers, set up with local NGOs and other research centres, although one wouldn’t know it from IRRI’s article. Some of the PPB varieties produced in those projects were used by IRRI in the on-farm trials; no mention of those either. Were they rubbish? Or are their names in the list without saying where they came from? LI-BIRD, the NGO most closely associated with PPB and seed producer groups in Nepal, recently published its report for 2009-2010; it contains an article on Community based seed production and another on Community seed banks.

January 19, 2012January 19, 2012

Nibbles: Doggy-style diversity, Livestock diversity, Pomato, Non timber, Non beer, Popcorn, Drying rice, Svalbard

“[D]iversity in domestic dogs derives from a small genetic tool kit.” Really, really small. Like, 50 genes.
ILRI says we need to maintain indigenous farm animal diversity in Asia. They eat dogs, don’t they?
You say pomato, I say totato: “Tomato-potato cross benefits farmers.” Fine, but it’s a graft. So why call it a cross?
Non timber forest products important “in times of crisis” shock.
Sumerian beer non-alcoholic? Not even beer, but “fermented cereal beverage“.
Then again, ancient Peruvians discovered popcorn. But not movies.
IRRI wants a student to re-examine optimal drying conditions for rice.
The Svalbard Global Seed Vault– is it important for plant genetic resources? Answers here, next week.