Remember the somewhat controversial System of Rice Intensification (SRI)? Well here’s a video of it being taught in farmer field schools in Thailand. The work is being done by the Asian Institute of Technology and Thai Education Foundation on a small grant from the CGIAR Challenge Programme on Water and Food. I found a report on the project from mid-2006, but it seems only preliminary.
What’s your poison?
One of the more interesting — and controversial — uses of biodiversity, both wild and agricultural, is to cause altered states of consciousness. As luck would have it, there were three things sort of on this topic which caught my eye today.
First, a short article from the New Scientist appeared in my feed reader about how the UN Environment Programme has singled out for conservation a chunk of desert in Chihuahua, northern Mexico. The importance of this area comes from the fact that it is the home of the peyote cactus, source of the hallucinogenic alkaloid mescaline, and objective of an annual pilgrimage by the Huichol people.
Then there was a EurekAlert piece about funding for an attempt to breed new varieties of the opium poppy and of cannabis that could be used to produce useful bioproducts, but not illicit drugs. This is apparently all going to take place in an ultra-secure Canadian mine shaft. Maybe they could then store the resulting seed in another famous hole in the ground?
And finally, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography has a cool interactive map where you can find out about famous British brewers.
Mescaline, dope and beer. In the words of Major T.J. “King” Kong, “Shoot, a fella’ could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that agrobiodiversity.” Well, he almost said that.
The Value of Biodiversity to Food and Agriculture
CALL FOR PAPERS
Special Issue of Biodiversity
The Value of Biodiversity to Food and Agriculture
To be released at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD/COP9) in Bonn, Germany, 19-30 May 2008. The issue will coincide with the review of the Programme of work on Agricultural Biodiversity, as well as with the celebrations of the International Day for Biological Diversity on 22 May on the theme of Agriculture and Biodiversity. The following topics will be considered for publication:Â
Other related topics will also be considered. Please submit your abstracts (250 words or less) by 16 November 2007 to the Managing Editor, Stephen Aitken (aitken@tc-biodiversity.org). Space is limited. For more information on Biodiversity please visit www.tc-biodiversity.org. Final papers will be due 7 January 2008, and the publication is scheduled for 15 April 2008.
Produced in cooperation with the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and partial support from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the Ontario Trillium Foundation and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC).
First International Breadfruit Symposium report
I mentioned the First International Breadfruit Symposium some time back, but then never again. Which made me feel guilty when I got an email from Lois Englberger this morning saying that there’s a report on the meeting in the latest Chronica Horticulturae. But at least now I don’t really have to say anything more about it myself! Nice pictures too.
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.