Resilient scientists

I don’t know enough about resilience science, only that I would like to know more. A large body of knowledge has built up around the ideas associated with C.S. “Buzz” Holling that, as far as I can tell, focuses on the system in ecosystems. There’s a Resilience Alliance blog that we have linked to before, and where I learned about the launch of a wiki version of the key document Assessing and Managing Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems: A Practitioner’s Handbook.

The practitioners in question do indeed discuss agricultural systems from time to time, but I have neither the time nor the practical experience to know whether the workbook would be any use to people whose main focus is agricultural ecosystems. I have a feeling that it would be, so I’m putting out a plea:

Can anyone out there enlighten the rest of us as to the ways in which resilience assessment might be put to work to understand farming systems? As a corollary, has resilience science learned anything from agricultural systems?

Nibbles: Hotspots, tea, silk, photos, food prices, basil, AGRA, rice, Denmark, SADC

The EU and “geographic indications”

CTA’s Brussels Office has a useful blog tracking relations between the EU and ACP countries in the fields of agriculture and fisheries. There was an interesting entry yesterday, but unfortunately it doesn’t have a permalink, so I’ll quote it in full:

In its March 2008 issue, ICTSD Trade negotiations insight indicates that EPA negotiations include discussions on intellectual property rights (IPRs). Within the chapters on intellectual property rights, the draft EU texts enclose detailed provisions on ‘geographical indications’. Geographical Indications (GI) is a designation which identifies certain qualities, characteristics or the reputation of a particular product to a specific geographical locality. For centuries communities across Africa have produced goods with a quality associated to a special area and which enjoy a strong reputation with national and international consumers, such as Nile Perch from Lake Victoria, Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda. Geographical indications are by essence a collective right. They allow for the protection of existing products and traditional methods of production and knowledge. GIs encourage variety and diversity of production and allow for a better redistribution of ‘added value’ in the production chain – from the raw material producer to the manufacturer. Yet, GIs come at a certain price: it can take time and effort to build a strong quality product including labelling and marketing. Moreover, a legal framework allowing for registration of indications needs to be put into place, which covers production methods, the technical standards of the product and a verification process safeguarding the specifications set. ACP countries or regions must begin by evaluating the potential benefits GIs could bring to key products such as fish. These must be weighed against the potential costs they could generate. But in the long term, if ACP countries can focus on developing, identifying and protecting GIs on the domestic market, the system could be a valuable tool for sustainable development and economic growth.

Source: ICTSD