Emile Frison: continue investing in agrobiodiversity, Australia! Jeremy unavailable for comment.
A farmer speaks. And then another.
The first day of the Governing Body meeting of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture yesterday was enlivened by two speeches from farmers. Sunda Ram Verma is from Sikar in Rajasthan, while Guy Kastler is French. Neither, of course, is a typical farmer. Typical farmers don’t come to Rome to address the Governing Body of the ITPGRFA. But each had interesting things to day.
Sunda Ram Verma has devised new techniques for saving water and was recognized for his work with cumin, guar bean and pearl millet diversity. According to the quasi-official meeting report, “Verma described his lifetime of developing and sharing improved crop varieties, said farmers would benefit from access to resources for screening new varieties, and noted that he has received no benefits from commercialization of his own improved varieties.” One might wonder why not. Because India does not permit such a thing? Or because he never sought cash benefits? I think we should be told. And in passing, one might further wonder why an NGO blog didn’t even record Sunda Ram Verma’s name. Too much respect?
Guy Kastler is no stranger to international agro-politics, having tussled to keep GMOs out of Europe and more generally for some relaxation of Europe’s draconian seed laws. Again, the quasi-official report says that Kastler “distinguished between small- and large-scale plant breeders, and called for a dynamic Treaty that supports farmers’ rights, such as the right to sell their seeds, an inventory system to support their breeding approaches and plant descriptions, and a fund to support farmers’ consultations worldwide. He said the ITPGR subjects farmers to national laws, some of which undermine their rights.” His speech, however, is available at the Via Campesina web site, so you can see for yourself whether that’s a fair summary.
I wasn’t there, but I’m told that there was some light head nodding among the delegates; I wasn’t told whether this represented gentle agreement or incipient sleep. Reading Kastler’s words, I somehow wonder whether the nodding was affirmative. He’s drawing attention to the fact that farmers (and gardeners) in Europe are the least free in the world, and that the Treaty, while guaranteeing them certain rights, does absolutely nothing to deliver those rights. Nor does it apparently admonish the governments — parties to the Treaty — who deny farmers the rights they signed up to in the Treaty. Could it be that those governments aren’t actually serious about farmers’ rights?
For all the fun of the fair, tune in to Earth Negotiations Bulletin’s daily reports.
The ITPGRFA Governing Body meets
The Second Session of the Governing Body of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture is on all week at FAO, Rome. Good opportunity to meet up with old friends. Follow the goings on daily at Earth Negotiations Bulletin.
Agriculture important, World Bank discovers
The World Bank is suddenly all concerned about agriculture. Within a few days there’s the result of an independent evaluation of its assistance to sub-Saharan Africa, and the latest World Development Report, which focuses on agriculture for development. The NY Times has an article on the African report:
At a time of growing debate about how to combat hunger in Africa, the evaluation team recommended that the bank, the single largest donor for African agriculture, concentrate on helping farmers get the basics they need to grow and market more food: fertilizer, seeds, water, credit, roads.
Ah, seeds. If only it were that easy. The World Development Report 2008 actually refers to the spread of improved varieties as “slow magic” (p. 159, chapter 7), pointing out that crop improvement “has been enormously successful, but not everywhere.” Then, on page 259, in a discussion of the “global agenda for the 21st century,” the money quote:
Conserving genetic resources for future food security. Genetic resources and seeds have been the basis for some of the most successful agricultural interventions to promote growth and reduce poverty (chapter 7). Conserving the world’s rich heritage of crop and animal genetic diversity is essential to future global food security. Gene banks and in situ resources that provide fair access to all countries and equitably share the benefits are a global public good that requires global collective action.
Chapter 8, on Making Agricultural Systems more Environmentally Sustainable, should also make for interesting reading.
The original sabbatical
Taking the easy way out, let’s just say that God was a good farmer. Every seven years, he told his chosen people, they must let the land of Israel rest and lie fallow. No sowing, no reaping, no working the vines. Just take it easy and give the land a chance. And a fallow year, called a schmita, began at the Jewish New Year last month.
“Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce, but the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, that the poor of your people may eat; and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat. In like manner you shall do with your vineyard and your olive grove.”
I don’t actualy understand that; how are the poor and the stock to eat if noone is growing anything? But no matter. The weird part is, God told all Jews to take their sabbatical in the same year. So how are they supposed to feed themselves? Some take a sophisticated approach, selling their land to an accommodating gentile for a nominal sum. Thus it is no longer “their” land, they continue to work it (and to profit, if profits there be) and at the end of the sabbatical, they buy it back again. Some use science: fruit and vegetables are grown hydroponically, or on raised platforms, not in the land of Israel. I visited a research centre that was working on systems to delay the germination of wheat, so it could be sown in the previous year, grow steadily through the schmita, and be harvested the following year. They were also researching effective ways to miss a year of pruning grapevines.
But ultra-orthodox Jews are determined to close these loopholes. They think the government should subsidize farmers who do indeed let their fields lie fallow, in fact as well as in law. And they are creating opportunities for their neighbours. Farmers in Palestine, Turkey and elsewhere are now selling into the Israeli market, and business is better for them.
It’d be nice to think that a year of trading produce would help peace to grow between Israelis and their neighbours, but given the entrenched attitudes and conservative views that seem to have given rise to the very strict interpretation, that seems unlikely from the Israeli side. I wonder whether the Palestinian farmers, who will probably enjoy a better income this year, would see it as in their interests to promote peace.