Category: Organic agriculture

Posted on

Nixing agrobiodiversity?

Richard Jonasse at Food First did a reasonable job a few days ago of rehearsing the old WEMA vs LEISA (let’s call it) dichotomy in agricultural development. He’s done it before, and so have we, ((And as luck would have it, here’s another example, just out.)) and I won’t go on any more about that. But I did want to say something about one of his assertions. In talking about the policies of USAID and the Gates Foundation, Jonasse says:

What these policies do not do is directly end African hunger by strengthening Africa’s farmers where they stand. This point was underscored recently when, after the Gates Foundation donated $270m (with a promise of $1Bn over the next few years) to CGIAR, Gates’ representatives nixed CGIAR’s agricultural biodiversity mega-programme, saying it was “unfocussed.” This logic represents precisely what is wrong with the Gates/USAID approach. Only an “unfocussed” low-tech approach that honors biological and cultural diversity is likely to be successful in Africa.

Well, that may well be, but the SciDevNet piece to which he links to support that “unfocussed” comment by a “Gates’ representative” doesn’t do that at all. What “Prabhu Pingali, deputy director of agricultural policy and statistics at the Gates Foundation, told the Global Conference for Agricultural Research Development (GCARD) (28—31 March)” is that the megapgrogrammes, as then constituted, “[b]ecause they are so fuzzy … are not likely to generate enthusiasm for increased funding.” All the megaprogrammes, note, not just the agricultural biodiversity one. The agrobiodiversity megaprogramme was indeed “nixed,” but I can find no comment by a Gates Foundation rep on it, either for or against. And anyway, everything still seems to be up in the air on these megaprogrammes. You can follow the CGIAR’s change process on their website and blog.

Posted on

Nibbles: Cassava virus, Peru’s Potato Park, Marula, Taimen, Meetings, Cornish fruits and veg

Posted on

Nibble: Conservation ag, Sahelian famines, Homegarden fertility, Annals of Botany news roundup, Carrot geneflow, Cyanide in crops, Texas rice breeding

Posted on

AVRDC’s treasure trove of diversity

I was recently at AVRDC headquarters in Taiwan and was quite taken with their demonstration garden. (Among other things. The genebank operation is also impressive, and recovering from a recent unfortunate setback.) It’s a wonderful display of both vegetable diversity and cultivation systems. I was going to blog about it, but then life intervened, or at least work did. Anyway, the latest issue of AVRDC’s newsletter has a piece on the garden, and they have kindly agreed for us to reprint it here, as the newsletter itself is not available online. Which kinda gets me off the hook. The photographs are mine. The following text (and this post’s title) are courtesy of AVRDC.

Although there are thousands of plants people can consume, humanity relies on only a relative handful for food. Indigenous vegetables — whether semi-wild or domesticated — can greatly expand the menu. Grown primarily in their centers of origin or introduced in a given area, indigenous or traditional vegetables provide food in times of scarcity for the world’s poorest people, yet these hardy, nutritious species often are underutilized.

A welcoming sign
AVRDC — The World Vegetable Center — aims to promote production and consumption of indigenous vegetables, and the Center’s Demonstration Garden showcases different species to create awareness and encourage adoption. In the first of a two-part article, Jenny Huang, a public relations and partnership consultant with AVRDC, visits the garden to see what’s growing.

What began in 2001 as an experimental field on the grounds of the AVRDC headquarters campus in Shanhua, Taiwan has blossomed into a 0.63-hectare living example of the mission and work of AVRDC — The World Vegetable Center.

“The Demonstration Garden was designed as an observation plot for indigenous vegetables when we got the project from the Taiwan Council of Agriculture in the beginning,” said Mandy Lin, an assistant specialist in AVRDC Global Technology Dissemination. After 10 years of development, more than 60 different species of indigenous vegetables are cultivated in 200 plots of various sizes and shapes to showcase the special qualities of each species and promote their wider use. The range of species grown also maintains visual interest as the seasons change.

The indigenous vegetables in the garden were selected for three significant characteristics—ease of cultivation (low input), nutritional quality, and resistance to pests and diseases. Visitors touring the Demonstration Garden often are surprised by the number and variety of indigenous vegetables, and the different edible parts, from shoots and leaves to pods and seeds. “We want to convey a simple but principal message to every visitor—that a diverse diet including many different vegetables is beneficial to health,” Mandy said.

In July 2008 the Center’s Global Technology Dissemination group expanded the function of the Demonstration Garden to highlight four major mature technologies: low-cost drip irrigation, starter solution, grafting chambers, and protective shelters. Farmers in developing countries can adopt these technologies to increase yields, improve produce quality, and reduce production costs.

Sweet potato varieties

Visitors and AVRDC staff members alike gain new ideas and inspiration as they walk through the garden, enjoy the rich diversity of plants, and see farming technologies in use. As Mandy observed: “You think you are taking care of crops, but in fact they educate you with their beauty and variety.”