Category: Policy

Posted on

Seed Regulation: How much is enough?

Earlier this year we posted about how EU Regulations destroy agricultural biodiversity and proposed rules to allow the marketing of European traditional varieties. Eliseu Bettencourt, a colleague with a close interest, said then that he didn’t have enough time to intervene in the discussion. Now, he says, he has a chance. Which would be kind of dull except that he’s seen the very latest drafts of the documents …

The post of 19th February 2007 refers to the “Draft Commission Directive establishing the specific conditions under which seed and propagating material of agricultural and vegetable species may be marketed in relation to the conservation in situ and the sustainable use of plant genetic resources through growing and marketing”, supposedly due to come into force on 1st April 2007. The Directive did indeed materialize as the writer of the post so rightly guessed then, though he even refrained from the obvious joke.

I guess the writer was referring to the draft document of May 2006, which bore that title. According to the drafts I have had access to later, in February 2007, that document was sub-divided intro three different documents, respectively: Continue reading “Seed Regulation: How much is enough?”

Posted on

CBD to listen to farmers

Interesting news for agricultural biodiversity from the margins of the latest SBSTTA meeting. That’s the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The Meridian Institute’s Food Security and Ag-Biotech News service summarizes a press release by the CBD secretariat announcing that it has:

signed an agreement with the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP) aimed at strengthening communication and collaboration between the secretariat and farmers’ organizations, which have a “major role” to play in the management and conservation of biodiversity. IFAP represents 115 farmers’ organizations in over 80 countries, most of them developing, with a strong representation of small-scale farming interests. The federation’s mandate is to develop the capacities of farmers to influence the decisions that affect them at the domestic and international levels. Under the new agreement, IFAP will contribute to improving the effectiveness of the CBD’s program of work on agricultural biodiversity by representing farmers’ views at CBD processes and by raising awareness among its members of the importance of biodiversity in the context of sustainable agricultural development.

The next SBSTTA meeting (18-22 Feb. 2008) will review the CBD’s program of work on agricultural biodiversity. A couple of months later, “Biodiversity and agriculture” will be the theme for 2008’s International Day for Biological Diversity on May 22. Sounds like we’ll have to plan something special for that period here at the Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog.

Posted on

Small farms and diversity

IFPRI has an interesting paper out called The Future of Small Farms for Poverty Reduction and Growth. It makes the point that agricultural development must reach smallholders if it is to have any impact on poverty, and to reach them “the policy agenda … must change to meet the new challenges facing small farms: improv(ing) the workings of markets for outputs, inputs, and financial services to overcome market failures.”

Fair enough, I suppose, but the thing that got me was the almost complete failure to address agricultural biodiversity. Surely there are differences between small and large farms in the biodiversity they maintain. Surely there are differences between small and large farms in their reliance on diversity. Surely there are differences between small and large farms in the role that diversity can play in lifting the families that work on them out of poverty. Maybe, but you won’t hear about it here. Pity.

Posted on

Ecosystems services to the fore

316 1866 F1

The map shows human impact; the percentage of human influence relative to the maximum influence recorded for each biome. I got it from Resilience Science, which got it from Science magazine (where, I confess, I missed it). It deals with reshaping ecological processes on domesticated land. Anyway, rather than write my own version of the paper by Peter Karieva and his collaborators (which is behind a paywall), I point you straight to Resilience Science, noting in passing that I am certain I would not have done as good a job.

Posted on

Biodiversity for people

David Kaimowitz, ex Director General of CIFOR, and Douglas Shiel, have written a paper that asks Conserving What and for Whom? Why Conservation Should Help Meet Basic Human Needs in the Tropics. It argues strongly for “pro-poor conservation”. The thousands of species on which poor people depend for their basic needs and livelihoods are more deserving of conservation and protection than many of the current favourites among conservationists. Unfortunately, the paper seems to be behind a paywall. Fortunately, Mongabay has an extended post about it.