Agrobiodiversity is crops, livestock, foodways, microbes, pollinators, wild relatives …
Kevin Murphy wants to steal their livelihoods from under the noses of poor Bolivian farmers.
No, wait …
Kevin Murphy wants to allow Bolivian farmers to improve their nutrition by enabling them to eat the quinoa they grow instead of selling it.
No, wait …
I give up. Go along to his talk and make your own mind up. Then come back here and tell us about it.
Jenny likes nothing better than a CGIAR comms smackdown, but doesn’t think that’s what going on here:
Not that I don’t love a good CIMMYT-IRRI comms competition – ha! – but I think it’s only fair to point out that John Vidal crapped all over CIMMYT’s mission and Borlaug in another recent article.
There’s much more, have a look.
The Open Source Seeds Initiative is actually sending out seed as of this week, according to a press release from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
29 new varieties of broccoli, celery, kale, quinoa and other vegetables and grains … are being publicly released using a novel form of ownership agreement known as the Open Source Seed Pledge.
The pledge is far simpler than many of the alternatives that were being discussed as recently as last summer, when we spoke to Jack Kloppenburg, one of the OSSI’s founders.
“It’s almost like a haiku,” says Irwin Goldman a professor of horticulture at UW-Madison and plant breeder, who has released two of his carrot varieties under the OSSI. “It basically says these seeds are free to use in any way you want. They can’t be legally protected. Enjoy them.”
There’s a longer report at NPR.
So there’s this thing in the world of mainstream journalism called the embargo. Journalists receive a press release, but they’re not allowed to publish the news until after the embargo time. This deal gives the journalist time to research and prepare the story, and supposedly levels the playing field for all. Occasionally someone breaks the embargo, and sometimes they even get a slap on the wrist. And the source of the news then usually decides to lift the embargo, resulting in an unseemly scramble of journalists. Or not.
Which has what, exactly, to do with agricultural biodiversity, I hear you ask.
This. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has a big special feature all about “The Modern View of Domestication,” embargoed until Monday afternoon next week. And one of the papers is a fascinating look at the domestication of chilli peppers, bringing all sorts of different evidence to bear and shifting the birthplace of domesticated chillis somewhat to the south. I can tell you this because the naughty Sacramento Bee broke the embargo. Which I knew because I subscribe to Embargo Watch.
What can I tell you? Nothing; it’s under embargo.
It’s a bit of a cheat, but bear with me for a minute and have a look at a couple of quotes from recent articles in the mainstream media. The first one is from the NY Times. Don’t look at the original piece until you’ve read both quotes:
Drought-resistant X is now providing a better livelihood for some 20 million people. The organization aims to double that reach by the end of next year. The drought-tolerant varieties do as well as or better than traditional X when the rains are good, and when they are bad they will save a farmer from ruin.
And here’s something which came out in The Guardian the day before the previous piece:
The … drought-tolerant varieties developed by Y require a high amount of input of chemical fertiliser and pesticides that are not affordable by the majority of poor farmers. Methods like … organic farming are attractive because they are available and affordable and give a better net income.
Just your normal, fundamental disagreement about what works, and what doesn’t, in agricultural development? Well, maybe. But X in the first quote is CIMMYT’s maize in Africa, and Y in the second quote is IRRI’s rice in the Philippines, so there could be other things at work too. Maize is not rice. Africa is not Asia. And, just maybe, CIMMYT’s media relations are not IRRI’s.
That last possibility only really came to mind because of another recent piece, this one from USAID’s Frontlines newletter:
In partnership with international research institutes and with support from USAID, the Bangladesh Rice Research Institute developed flood- and saline-tolerant varieties of rice that produce higher yields. Rice plants grown using these improved seeds can survive between 12 and 14 days when completely submerged underwater, compared with traditional rice varieties that can only endure three or four days of submersion. For the most vulnerable country in the world to cyclones and sixth-most prone to flooding, these appear to be the perfect seeds to plant.
Now, when I read that, I assumed that one of those “international research institutes” must be IRRI, but that is not specified anywhere in the article. Discrete enquiries with people who should know revealed that IRRI’s Stress-Tolerant Rice for Africa and South Asia (STRASA) team was indeed closely involved in this work. STRASA has contributed directly to the release of 7 salt-tolerant varieties in Bangladesh and 4 submergence tolerant varieties (BR11-Sub1, Swarna-Sub1, Ciherang-Sub1 and IR64-Sub1), with additional breeding lines combining both traits in the pipeline.
Why would USAID not mention that? Why is IRRI’s message not getting across?