agriculture at a crossroads_executive summary of the synthesis report (english)

8/6/2019 Agriculture at a Crossroads_Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report (English)

1/36

Agriculture

Crossroads

Agriculture

Crossroads

at aat a

Executive Summaryof the Synthesis Report

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge,

Science and Technology for Development


2/36

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science

and Technology for Development

Executive Summary of

the Synthesis Report

IAASTD


3/36


4/36

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Scienceand Technology for Development

Executive Summary ofthe Synthesis ReportThis summary was approved in detail by the Governments attending the IAASTD

Intergovernmental Plenary in Johannesburg, South Africa (7-11 April 2008).

IAASTD


5/36

Copyright 2009 IAASTD. All rights reserved. Permission to

reproduce and disseminate portions of the work for no cost will be

granted free of charge by Island Press upon request: Island Press, 1718

Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20009.

Island Press is a trademark of The Center for Resource Economics.

Printed on recycled, acid-free paper

Interior and cover designs by Linda McKnight, McKnight Design, LLC.

Manufactured in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1


6/36

Contents

Foreword

Preface

Statement by Governments

Executive Summary

Annex A Reservations on Executive Summary

Annex B Authors and Review Editors of Global and Sub-Global Reports

Annex C Secretariat and Cosponsor Focal Points

Annex D Steering Committee for Consultative Process and Advisory Bureau for Assessment

vii

viii

x

1

12

13

2021


7/36


8/36

vii

retariat. We would specifcally like to thank the cosponsor-ing organizations o the Global Environment Facility (GEF)and the World Bank or their fnancial contributions as wellas the FAO, UNEP, and the United Nations Educational,Scientifc and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) or theircontinued support o this process through allocation o staresources.

We acknowledge with gratitude the governments and

organizations that contributed to the Multidonor TrustFund (Australia, Canada, the European Commission,France, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United King-dom) and the United States Trust Fund. We also thank thegovernments who provided support to Bureau members,authors and reviewers in other ways. In addition, Finlandprovided direct support to the Secretariat. The IAASTD wasespecially successul in engaging a large number o expertsrom developing countries and countries with economies intransition in its work; the Trust Funds enabled fnancial as-sistance or their travel to the IAASTD meetings.

We would also like to make special mention o the Re-gional Organizations who hosted the regional coordinatorsand sta and provided assistance in management and timeto ensure success o this enterprise: the Arican Center orTechnology Studies (ACTS) in Kenya, the Inter-AmericanInstitute or Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) in CostaRica, the International Center or Agricultural Research inthe Dry Areas (ICARDA) in Syria and the WorldFish Centerin Malaysia.

The fnal Intergovernmental Plenary in Johannesburg,South Arica was opened on 7 April 2008 by Achim Steiner,Executive Director o UNEP. This Plenary saw the accep-tance o the Reports and the approval o the Summaries orDecision Makers and the Executive Summary o the Synthe-sis Report by an overwhelming majority o governments.

Signed:

Co-chairsHans H. Herren

Judi Wakhungu

DirectorRobert T. Watson

The objective o the International Assessment o Agricul-tural Knowledge, Science and Technology or Development(IAASTD) was to assess the impacts o past, present anduture agricultural knowledge, science and technology onthe: reductionofhungerandpoverty, improvement of rural livelihoods and human health,

and

equitable, socially, environmentallyand economicallysustainable development.

The IAASTD was initiated in 2002 by the World Bank andthe Food and Agriculture Organization o the United Na-tions (FAO) as a global consultative process to determinewhether an international assessment o agricultural knowl-edge, science and technology was needed. Mr. Klaus Teper,Executive Director o the United Nations Environment Pro-gramme (UNEP) opened the frst Intergovernmental Plenary(30 August-3 September 2004) in Nairobi, Kenya, duringwhich participants initiated a detailed scoping, preparation,drating and peer review process.

The outputs rom this assessment are a Global and fveSub-Global reports; a Global and fve Sub-Global Sum-maries or Decision Makers; and a cross-cutting SynthesisReport with an Executive Summary. The Summaries or De-cision Makers and the Synthesis Report specifcally provideoptions or action to governments, international agencies,academia, research organizations and other decision makersaround the world.

The reports draw on the work o hundreds o expertsrom all regions o the world who have participated in thepreparation and peer review process. As has been customaryin many such global assessments, success depended frst andoremost on the dedication, enthusiasm and cooperation othese experts in many dierent but related disciplines. It isthe synergy o these interrelated disciplines that permittedIAASTDtocreateaunique,interdisciplinaryregionalandglobal process.

We take this opportunity to express our deep gratitudeto the authors and reviewers o all o the reportstheirdedication and tireless eorts made the process a success.We thank the Steering Committee or distilling the outputso the consultative process into recommendations to thePlenary, the IAASTD Bureau or their advisory role duringthe assessment and the work o those in the extended Sec-

Foreword


9/36

Goals (MDGs): the reduction o hunger and poverty; theimprovement o rural livelihoods and human health; and a-cilitatingequitable, socially, environmentallyandeconomi-callysustainabledevelopment.Realizingthesegoalsrequiresacknowledging the multiunctionality o agriculture: the chal-lenge is to simultaneously meet development and sustainabil-ity goals while increasing agricultural production.

Meeting these goals has to be placed in the context o a

rapidlychangingworldofurbanization,growinginequities,human migration, globalization, changing dietary preer-ences, climate change, environmental degradation, a trendtoward biouels and an increasing population. These condi-tions are aecting local and global ood security and put-ting pressure on productive capacity and ecosystems. Hencethere are unprecedented challenges ahead in providing oodwithin a global trading system where there are other com-peting uses or agricultural and other natural resources.AKST alone cannot solve these problems, which are causedby complex political and social dynamics, but it can makea major contribution to meeting development and sustain-ability goals. Never beore has it been more important orthe world to generate and use AKST.

Given the ocus on hunger, poverty and livelihoods,the IAASTD pays special attention to the current situation,issues and potential opportunities to redirect the currentAKST system to improve the situation or poor rural peo-ple, especially small-scale armers, rural laborers and otherswith limited resources. It addresses issues critical to ormu-lating policy and provides inormation or decision makersconronting conficting views on contentious issues such astheenvironmental consequencesofproductivityincreases,environmental and human health impacts o transgeniccrops,theconsequencesofbioenergydevelopmentontheenvironment and on the long-term availability and price oood, and the implications o climate change on agriculturalproduction. The Bureau agreed that the scope o the assess-ment needed to go beyond the narrow connes o scienceand technology (S&T) and should encompass other typeso relevant knowledge (e.g., knowledge held by agriculturalproducers, consumers and end users) and that it should alsoassess the role o institutions, organizations, governance,markets and trade.

The IAASTD is a multidisciplinary and multistakeholderenterpriserequiringtheuseandintegrationofinformation,tools and models rom dierent knowledge paradigms in-cluding local and traditional knowledge. The IAASTD doesnot advocate specic policies or practices; it assesses the ma-jor issues acing AKST and points towards a range o AKST

In August 2002, the World Bank and the Food and Agri-culture Organization (FAO) o the United Nations initiateda global consultative process to determine whether an in-ternational assessment o agricultural knowledge, scienceand technology (AKST) was needed. This was stimulatedby discussions at the World Bank with the private sectorand nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) on the state oscientic understanding o biotechnology and more speci-

cally transgenics. During 2003, eleven consultations wereheld, overseen by an international multistakeholder steer-ing committee and involving over 800 participants rom allrelevant stakeholder groups, e.g., governments, the privatesector and civil society. Based on these consultations thesteering committee recommended to an IntergovernmentalPlenary meeting in Nairobi in September 2004 that an in-ternational assessment o the role o AKST in reducing hun-ger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods and acilitatingenvironmentally, socially and economically sustainabledevelopment was needed.The concept o an InternationalAssessment o Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Tech-nology or Development (IAASTD) was endorsed as a multi-thematic, multi-spatial, multi-temporal intergovernmentalprocess with a multistakeholder Bureau cosponsored by theFAO, the Global Environment Facility (GEF), United Na-tions Development Programme (UNDP), United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Educa-tional, Scientic and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), theWorld Bank and World Health Organization (WHO).

TheIAASTDsgovernancestructureisauniquehybrido the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)and the nongovernmental Millennium Ecosystem Assess-ment (MA). The stakeholder composition o the Bureau wasagreed at the Intergovernmental Plenary meeting in Nairobi;it is geographically balanced and multistakeholder with 30government and 30 civil society representatives (NGOs,producer and consumer groups, private sector entities andinternational organizations) in order to ensure ownership othe process and ndings by a range o stakeholders.

About 400 o the worlds experts were selected by theBureau, ollowing nominations by stakeholder groups, toprepare the IAASTD Report (comprised o a Global andve Sub-Global assessments). These experts worked in theirown capacity and did not represent any particular stake-holder group. Additional individuals, organizations andgovernments were involved in the peer review process.

The IAASTD development and sustainability goals wereendorsed at the rst Intergovernmental Plenary and are con-sistent with a subset o the UN Millennium Development

viii

PrefacePreface


10/36

and open to comments by anyone. The authors revised thedrats based on numerous peer review comments, with theassistance o review editors who were responsible or ensur-ing the comments were appropriately taken into account.One o the most dicult issues authors had to address wascriticisms that the report was too negative. In a scienticreview based on empirical evidence, this is always a dicult

comment to handle, as criteria are needed in order to saywhether something is negative or positive. Another dicultywas responding to the conficting views expressed by review-ers. The dierence in views was not surprising given therange o stakeholder interests and perspectives. Thus one othe key ndings o the IAASTD is that there are diverse andconficting interpretations o past and current events, whichneed to be acknowledged and respected.

The Global and Sub-Global Summaries or DecisionMakers and the Executive Summary o the Synthesis Reportwere approved at an Intergovernmental Plenary in April2008. The Synthesis Report integrates the key ndings romthe Global and Sub-Global assessments, and ocuses on eightBureau-approved topics: bioenergy; biotechnology; climate

change; human health; natural resource management; tradi-tional knowledge and community based innovation; tradeand markets; and women in agriculture.

The IAASTD builds on and adds value to a number orecent assessments and reports that have provided valuableinormation relevant to the agricultural sector, but have notspecically ocused on the uture role o AKST, the institu-tional dimensions and the multiunctionality o agriculture.These include: FAO State o Food Insecurity in the World(yearly); InterAcademy Council Report: Realizing the Prom-ise and Potential o Arican Agriculture (2004); UN Mil-lennium Project Task Force on Hunger (2005); MillenniumEcosystem Assessment (2005); CGIAR Science CouncilStrategy and Priority Setting Exercise (2006); Comprehen-

sive Assessment o Water Management in Agriculture: Guid-ing Policy Investments in Water, Food, Livelihoods andEnvironment (2007); Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange Reports (2001 and 2007); UNEP Fourth GlobalEnvironmental Outlook (2007); World Bank World Devel-opment Report: Agriculture or Development (2008); IFPRIGlobal Hunger Indices (yearly); and World Bank InternalReport o Investments in SSA (2007).

Financial support was provided to the IAASTD bythe cosponsoring agencies, the governments o Australia,Canada, Finland, France, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, USand UK, and the European Commission. In addition, manyorganizations have provided in-kind support. The authorsand review editors have given reely o their time, largely

without compensation.The Global and Sub-Global Summaries or Decision

Makers and the Synthesis Report are written or a range ostakeholders, i.e., government policy makers, private sector,NGOs, producer and consumer groups, international orga-nizations and the scientic community. There are no recom-mendations, only options or action. The options or actionare not prioritized because dierent options are actionableby dierent stakeholders, each o whom have a dierentset o priorities and responsibilities and operate in dierentsocioeconomic and political circumstances.

options or action that meet development and sustainabilitygoals. It is policy relevant, but not policy prescriptive. Itintegrates scientic inormation on a range o topics thatare critically interlinked, but oten addressed independently,i.e., agriculture, poverty, hunger, human health, natural re-sources, environment, development and innovation. It willenable decision makers to bring a richer base o knowledge

to bear on policy and management decisions on issues previ-ously viewed in isolation. Knowledge gained rom historicalanalysis (typically the past 50 years) and an analysis o someuture development alternatives to 2050 orm the basis or as-sessing options or action on science and technology, capacitydevelopment, institutions and policies, and investments.

The IAASTD is conducted according to an open, trans-parent, representative and legitimate process; is evidencebased; presents options rather than recommendations; as-sesses dierent local, regional and global perspectives; pres-ents dierent views, acknowledging that there can be morethan one interpretation o the same evidence based on dier-ent worldviews; and identies the key scientic uncertaintiesand areas on which research could be ocused to advance

development and sustainability goals.The IAASTD is composed o a Global assessment and ve

Sub-Global assessments: Central and West Asia and NorthArica CWANA; East and South Asia and the Pacic ESAP;Latin America and the Caribbean LAC; North America andEurope NAE; Sub-Saharan Arica SSA. It (1) assesses thegeneration, access, dissemination and use o public and privatesector AKST in relation to the goals, using local, traditionaland ormal knowledge; (2) analyzes existing and emergingtechnologies, practices, policies and institutions and theirimpact on the goals; (3) provides inormation or decisionmakers in dierent civil society, private and public organi-zations on options or improving policies, practices, institu-tional and organizational arrangements to enable AKST to

meet the goals; (4) brings together a range o stakeholders(consumers, governments, international agencies and re-search organizations, NGOs, private sector, producers, thescientic community) involved in the agricultural sector andrural development to share their experiences, views, under-standing and vision or the uture; and (5) identies optionsor uture public and private investments in AKST. In addi-tion, the IAASTD will enhance local and regional capacityto design, implement and utilize similar assessments.

In this assessment agriculture is used to include produc-tion o ood, eed, uel, ber and other products and to in-clude all sectors rom production o inputs (e.g., seeds andertilizer) to consumption o products. However, as in allassessments, some topics were covered less extensively thanothers (e.g., livestock, orestry, sheries and the agriculturalsector o small island countries, and agricultural engineer-ing), largely due to the expertise o the selected authors.Originally the Bureau approved a chapter on plausible u-tures (a visioning exercise), but later there was agreementto delete this chapter in avor o a more simple set o modelprojections. Similarly the Bureau approved a chapter on ca-pacity development, but this chapter was dropped and keymessages integrated into other chapters.

The IAASTD drat Report was subjected to two roundso peer review by governments, organizations and individu-als. These drats were placed on an open access Web site

ix

IAASTD Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report | ix


11/36

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Benin,Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Cameroon, Peoples Republic ofChina, Costa Rica, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo,Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Finland,France, Gambia, Ghana, Honduras, India, Iran, Ireland,Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic,Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Maldives, Republicof Moldova, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Pakistan,

Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Palau,Romania, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Swazi-land, Sweden, Switzerland, United Republic of Tanzania,Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United King-dom of Great Britain, Uruguay, Viet Nam, Zambia (58countries).

While approving the above statement the ollowing govern-ments did not ully approve the Executive Summary o theSynthesis Report and their reservations are entered in An-nex A.

Australia, Canada, United States of America (3 countries).

All countries present at the fnal intergovernmental plenarysession held in Johannesburg, South Arica in April 2008welcometheworkoftheIAASTDandtheuniquenessofthis independent multistakeholder and multidisciplinaryprocess, and the scale o the challenge o covering a broadrange o complex issues. The Governments present recog-nize that the Global and Sub-Global Reports are the conclu-sions o studies by a wide range o scientifc authors, experts

and development specialists and while presenting an overallconsensus on the importance o agricultural knowledge, sci-ence and technology or development they also provide adiversity o views on some issues.

All countries see these Reports as a valuable and im-portant contribution to our understanding on agriculturalknowledge, science and technology or development recog-nizing the need to urther deepen our understanding o thechallenges ahead. This Assessment is a constructive initia-tive and important contribution that all governments needto take orward to ensure that agricultural knowledge, sci-ence and technology ulfls its potential to meet the develop-ment and sustainability goals o the reduction o hunger andpoverty, the improvement o rural livelihoods and humanhealth,andfacilitatingequitable,socially,environmentallyand economically sustainable development.

In accordance with the above statement, the ollowinggovernments approve the Executive Summary o the Syn-thesis Report.

Statement by Governments

x


12/36

1

Writing team: Tsedeke Abate (Ethiopia), Jean Albergel (France),

Inge Armbrecht (Colombia), Patrick Avato (Germany/Italy),

Satinder Bajaj (India), Nienke Beintema (the Netherlands),

Rym Ben Zid (Tunisia), Rodney Brown (USA), Lorna M. Butler

(Canada), Fabrice Dreyfus (France), Kristie L. Ebi (USA),

Shelley Feldman (USA), Alia Gana (Tunisia), Tirso Gonzales

(Peru), Ameenah Gurib-Fakim (Mauritius), Jack Heinemann

(New Zealand), Thora Herrmann (Germany), Angelika Hilbeck

(Switzerland), Hans Hurni (Switzerland), Sophia Huyer (Canada),Janice Jiggins (UK), Joan Kagwanja (Kenya), Moses Kairo

(Kenya), Rose R. Kingamkono (Tanzania), Gordana Kranjac-

Berisavljevic (Ghana), Kawther Latiri (Tunisia), Roger Leakey

(Australia), Marianne Lefort (France),Karen Lock (UK), Thora

Herrmann (Germany), Yalem Mekonnen (Ethiopia), Douglas

Murray (USA), Dev Nathan (India), Lindela Ndlovu (Zimbabwe),

Balgis Osman-Elasha (Sudan), Ivette Perfecto (Puerto Rico),

Cristina Plencovich (Argentina), Rajeswari Raina (India),

Elizabeth Robinson (UK), Niels Roling (Netherlands), Mark

Rosegrant (USA), Erika Rosenthal (USA), Wahida Patwa Shah

(Kenya), John M.R. Stone (Canada), Abid Suleri (Pakistan), Hong

Yang (Australia)

Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD)


13/36


14/36

3

Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report of theInternational Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science

and Technology for Development (IAASTD)

place by the state were the primary drivers o the adoptiono new technologies. The general model has been to con-tinuously innovate, reduce arm gate prices and externalizecosts. This model drove the phenomenal achievements oAKST in industrial countries ater World War II and thespread o the Green Revolution beginning in the 1960s. But,given the new challenges we conront today, there is increas-ing recognition within ormal S&T organizations that the

current AKST model requires revision. Business as usual isno longer an option. This leads to rethinking the role oAKST in achieving development and sustainability goals;one that seeks more intensive engagement across diverseworldviews and possibly contradictory approaches in waysthat can inorm and suggest strategies or actions enablingthe multiple unctions o agriculture.

In order to address the diverse needs and interests thatshape human lie, we need a shared approach to sustain-ability with local and cross-national collaboration. We can-not escape our predicament by simply continuing to rely onthe aggregation o individual choices to achieve sustainableand equitable collective outcomes. Incentives are needed toinuence the choices individuals make. Issues such as pov-erty and climate change also require collective agreementson concerted action and governance across scales that go be-yond an appeal to individual beneft. At the global, regional,national and local levels, decision makers must be acutelyconscious o the act that there are diverse challenges, mul-tiple theoretical rameworks and development models and awide range o options to meet development and sustainabil-ity goals. Our perception o the challenges and the choiceswe make at this juncture in history will determine how weprotect our planet and secure our uture.

Development and sustainability goals should be placedin the context o (1) current social and economic inequitiesand political uncertainties about war and conicts; (2) uncer-tainties about the ability to sustainably produce and accesssufcient ood; (3) uncertainties about the uture o worldood prices; (4) changes in the economics o ossil-based en-ergy use; (5) the emergence o new competitors or naturalresources; (6) increasing chronic diseases that are partially aconsequence o poor nutrition and poor ood quality as wellas ood saety; and (7) changing environmental conditionsand the growing awareness o human responsibility or themaintenance o global ecosystem services (provisioning,regulating, cultural and supporting).

Today there is a world o asymmetric development, un-sustainable natural resource use, and continued rural andurban poverty. Generally the adverse consequences o global

This Synthesis Report captures the complexity and diver-sity o agriculture and agricultural knowledge, science andtechnology (AKST) across world regions. It is built upon theGlobal and fve Sub-Global reports that provide evidenceor the integrated analysis o the main concerns necessary toachieve development and sustainability goals. It is organizedin two parts that address the primary animating question:how can AKST be used to reduce hunger and poverty, im-

prove rural livelihoods, and acilitate equitable environmen-tally, socially, and economically sustainable development? Inthe frst part we identiy the current conditions, challengesand options or action that shape AKST, while in the secondpart we ocus on eight cross-cutting themes. The eight cross-cutting themes include: bioenergy, biotechnology, climatechange, human health, natural resource management, tradeand markets, traditional and local knowledge and commu-nity-based innovation, and women in agriculture.

The International Assessment o Agricultural Knowl-edge, Science and Technology or Development (IAASTD)responds to the widespread realization that despite signif-cant scientifc and technological achievements in our abilityto increase agricultural productivity, we have been less at-tentive to some o the unintended social and environmentalconsequences o our achievements. We are now in a goodposition to reect on these consequences and to outline vari-ous policy options to meet the challenges ahead, perhapsbest characterized as the need or ood and livelihood se-curity under increasingly constrained environmental condi-tions rom within and outside the realm o agriculture andglobalized economic systems.

This widespread realization is linked directly to thegoals o the IAASTD: how AKST can be used to reducehunger and poverty, to improve rural livelihoods and to a-cilitate equitable environmentally, socially and economicallysustainable development. Under the rubric o IAASTD, werecognize the importance o AKST to the multiunctionalityo agriculture and the intersection with other local to globalconcerns, including loss o biodiversity and ecosystem ser-vices, climate change and water availability.

The IAASTD is unique in the history o agriculturalscience assessments in that it assesses both ormal scienceand technology (S&T) and local and traditional knowledge,addresses not only production and productivity, but alsothe multiunctionality o agriculture and recognizes thatmultiple perspectives exist on the role and nature o AKST.For many years, agricultural science ocused on deliveringcomponent technologies to increase arm-level productivitywhere the market and institutional arrangements put in


15/36

4 | Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report

Options for Action

Successully meeting development and sustainability goalsand responding to new priorities and changing circumstanceswould require a undamental shit in AKST, including sci-ence, technology, policies, institutions, capacity developmentand investment. Such a shit would recognize and give in-

creased importance to the multiunctionality o agriculture,accounting or the complexity o agricultural systems withindiverse social and ecological contexts. It would require newinstitutional and organizational arrangements to promotean integrated approach to the development and deploymento AKST. It would also recognize arming communities,arm households, and armers as producers and managerso ecosystems. This shit may call or changing the incentivesystems or all actors along the value chain to internalize asmany externalities as possible. In terms o development andsustainability goals, these policies and institutional changesshould be directed primarily at those who have been served

changes have the most signifcant eects on the poorest andmost vulnerable, who historically have had limited entitle-ments and opportunities or growth.

The pace o ormal technology generation and adoptionhas been highly uneven. Actors within North America andEurope (NAE) and emerging economies who have capturedsignifcant economies o scale through ormal AKST will con-

tinue to dominate agricultural exports and extended valuechains. There is an urgent need to diversiy and strengthenAKST, recognizing dierences in agroecologies and socialand cultural conditions. The need to retool AKST, to reducepoverty and provide improved livelihoods options or therural poor, especially landless and peasant communities, ur-ban, inormal and migrant workers, is a major challenge.

There is an overarching concern in all regions regardingpoverty alleviation and the livelihoods options available topoor people who are aced with intra- and inter-regionalinequalities. There is recognition that the mounting crisisin ood security is o a dierent complexity and potentiallydierent magnitude than the one o the 1960s. The abilityand willingness o dierent actors, including those in the

state, civil society and private secter, to address undamen-tal questions o relationships among production, social andenvironmental systems is aected by contentious politicaland economic stances.

The acknowledgment o current challenges and the ac-ceptance o options available or action require a long-termcommitment rom decision makers that is responsive to thespecifc needs o a wide range o stakeholders. A recogni-tion that knowledge systems and human ingenuity in sci-ence, technology, practice and policy is needed to meet thechallenges, opportunities and uncertainties ahead. This rec-ognition will require a shit to nonhierarchical developmentmodels.

The main challenge o AKST is to increase the produc-

tivity o agriculture in a sustainable manner. AKST mustaddress the needs o small-scale arms in diverse ecosystemsand create realistic opportunities or their developmentwhere the potential or improved area productivity is lowand where climate change may have its most adverse conse-quences. The main challenges or AKST posed by multiunc-tional agricultural systems include: Howtoimprovesocialwelfareandpersonallivelihoods

in the rural sector and enhance multiplier eects o ag-riculture?

Howtoempowermarginalizedstakeholderstosustainthe diversity o agriculture and ood systems, includingtheir cultural dimensions?

Howtoprovidesafewater,maintainbiodiversity,sus-tain the natural resource base and minimize the adverseimpacts o agricultural activities on people and the en-vironment?

Howtomaintainandenhanceenvironmentalandcul-tural services while increasing sustainable productivityand diversity o ood, fber and biouel production?

Howtomanageeffectivelythecollaborativegenerationo knowledge among increasingly heterogeneous con-tributors and the ow o inormation among diversepublic and private AKST organizational arrangements?

Howtolink theoutputsfrommarginalized,rain fed

lands into local, national and global markets?

Multifunctionality

The term multifunctionality has sometimes been interpreted

as having implications or trade and protectionism. This is not

the defnition used here. In IAASTD, multiunctionality is used

solely to express the inescapable interconnectedness o ag-

ricultures dierent roles and unctions. The concept o multi-unctionality recognizes agriculture as a multi-output activity

producing not only commodities (ood, eed, fbers, agrouels,

medicinal products and ornamentals), but also non-commod-

ity outputs such as environmental services, landscape ameni-

ties and cultural heritages.

The working defnition proposed by OECD, which is used

by the IAASTD, associates multiunctionality with the particu-

lar characteristics o the agricultural production process and

its outputs; (1) multiple commodity and non-commodity out-

puts are jointly produced by agriculture; and (2) some o the

non-commodity outputs may exhibit the characteristics o ex-

ternalities or public goods, such that markets or these goods

unction poorly or are nonexistent.The use o the term has been controversial and contested

in global trade negotiations, and it has centered on whether

trade-distorting agricultural subsidies are needed or agri-

culture to perorm its many unctions. Proponents argue that

current patterns o agricultural subsidies, international trade

and related policy rameworks do not stimulate transitions

toward equitable agricultural and ood trade relation or sus-

tainable ood and arming systems and have given rise to per-

verse impacts on natural resources and agroecologies as well

as on human health and nutrition. Opponents argue that at-

tempts to remedy these outcomes by means o trade-related

instruments will weaken the efciency o agricultural trade and

lead to urther undesirable market distortion; their preerred

approach is to address the externalized costs and negative

impacts on poverty, the environment, human health and nutri-

tion by other means.


16/36

Food security

Food security strategies require a combination o AKSTapproaches, including the development o ood stock man-

agement, eective market intelligence and early warning,monitoring, and distribution systems. Production measurescreate the conditions or ood security, but they need tobe looked at in conjunction with peoples access to ood(through own production, exchange and public entitlements)and their ability to absorb nutrients consumed (through ad-equate access to water and sanitation, adequate nutritionand nutritional inormation) in order to ully achieve oodsecurity.

AKST can increase sustainable agricultural productionby expanding use o local and ormal AKST to develop anddeploy suitable cultivars adaptable to site-specifc condi-tions; improving access to resources; improving soil, waterand nutrient management and conservation; pre- and post-

harvest pest management; and increasing small-scale armdiversifcation. Policy options or addressing ood securityinclude developing high-value and underutilized crops inrain ed areas; increasing the ull range o agricultural ex-ports and imports, including organic and air trade prod-ucts; reducing transaction costs or small-scale producers;strengthening local markets; ood saety nets; promotingagro-insurance; and improving ood saety and quality. Priceshocks and extreme weather events call or a global systemo monitoring and intervention or the timely prediction omajor ood shortages and price-induced hunger.

AKST investments can increase the sustainable produc-tivity o major subsistence oods including orphan and un-derutilized crops, which are oten grown or consumed by

poor people. Investments could also be targeted or institu-tional change and policies that can improve access o poorpeople to ood, land, water, seeds, germplasm and improvedtechnologies.

Environmental sustainability

AKST systems are needed that enhance sustainability whilemaintaining productivity in ways that protect the naturalresource base and ecological provisioning o agriculturalsystems. Options include improving nutrient, energy, wa-ter and land use efciency; improving the understanding osoil-plant-water dynamics; increasing arm diversifcation;

least by previous AKST approaches, i.e., resource-poor arm-ers, women and ethnic minorities.1 Such development woulddepend also on the extent to which small-scale armers canfnd gainul o-arm employment and help uel general eco-nomic growth. Large and middle-size armers continue tobe important and high pay-o targets o AKST, especially inthe area o sustainable land use and ood systems.

It will be important to assess the potential environmen-tal, health and social impacts o any technology, and toimplement the appropriate regulatory rameworks. AKSTcan contribute to radically improving ood security and en-hancing the social and economic perormance o agricul-tural systems as a basis or sustainable rural and communitylivelihoods and wider economic development. It can help torehabilitate degraded land, reduce environmental and healthrisks associated with ood production and consumption andsustainably increase production.

Success would require increased public and privateinvestment in AKST, the development o supporting poli-cies and institutions, revalorization o traditional and localknowledge, and an interdisciplinary, holistic and systems-

based approach to knowledge production and sharing.Success also depends on the extent to which internationaldevelopments and events drive the priority given to develop-ment and sustainability goals and the extent to which requi-site unding and qualifed sta are available.

Poverty and livelihoodsImportant options or enhancing rural livelihoods includeincreasing access by small-scale armers to land and eco-nomic resources and to remunerative local urban and exportmarkets; and increasing local value added and value cap-tured by small-scale armers and rural laborers. A power-ul tool or meeting development and sustainability goalsresides in empowering armers to innovatively manage soils,

water, biological resources, pests, disease vectors, genetic di-versity, and conserve natural resources in a culturally appro-priate manner. Combining armers and external knowledgewould require new partnerships among armers, scientistsand other stakeholders.

Policy options or improving livelihoods include accessto microcredit and other fnancial services; legal rameworksthat ensure access and tenure to resources and land; re-course to air conict resolution; and progressive evolutionand proactive engagement in intellectual property rights(IPR) regimes and related instruments.2 Developments areneeded that build trust and that value armer knowledge,agricultural and natural biodiversity; armer-managed me-dicinal plants, local seed systems and common pool resourcemanagement regimes. Each o these options, when imple-mented locally, depends on regional and nationally based-mechanisms to ensure accountability. The suite o optionsto increase domestic arm gate prices or small-scale armersincludes fscal and competition policies; improved access toAKST; novel business approaches; and enhanced politicalpower.

1 Botswana.2 USA.

Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report | 5

Food security [is] a situation that exists when all people, at

all times, have physical,social and economic access to su-

fcient, sae and nutritious ood that meets their dietary needs

and ood preerences or an active and healthy lie. (FAO, The

State o Food Insecurity, 2001)

Food sovereigntyis defned as the right o peoples and sover-

eign states to democratically determine their own agricultural

and ood policies.3

3 UK.


17/36


Increasing food safety can be acilitated by eective,coordinated, and proactive national and internationalood saety systems to ensure animal, plant, and humanhealth, such as investments in adequate inrastructure,public health and veterinary capacity, legislative rame-works or identifcation and control o biological andchemical hazards, and armer-scientist partnerships or

the identifcation, monitoring and evaluation o risks. Theburdenofinfectiousdisease can be decreased by

strengthening coordination between and the capacity oagricultural, veterinary, and public health systems; inte-grating multi-sectoral policies and programs across theood chain to reduce the spread o inectious diseases;and developing and deploying new AKST to identiy,monitor, control, and treat diseases.

Theburdenofchronicdisease can be decreased by poli-cies that explicitly recognize the importance o improv-ing human health and nutrition, including regulation oood product ormulation through legislation, interna-tional agreements and regulations or ood labeling andhealth claims, and creation o incentives or the produc-

tion and consumption o health-promoting oods. Occupationalandpublichealthcan be improved by de-

velopment and enorcement o health and saety regula-tions (including child labor laws and pesticide regula-tions), enorcement o cross-border issues such as illegaluse o toxic agrochemicals, and conducting health riskassessments that make explicit the tradeos betweenmaximizing livelihood benefts, the environment, andimproving health.

Equity

For AKST to contribute to greater equity, investments are re-quired or the development o context-specifc technologies,

and expanded access o armers and other rural people to oc-cupational, non-ormal and ormal education. An environ-ment in which ormal science and technology and local andtraditional knowledge are seen as part o an integral AKSTsystem can increase equitable access to technologies or abroad range o producers and natural resource managers.Incentives in science, universities and research organizationsare needed to oster dierent kinds o AKST partnerships.Key options include equitable access to and use o naturalresources (particularly land and water), systems o incen-tives and rewards or multiunctionality, including ecosys-tem services, and responding to the vulnerability o armingand arm worker communities. Reorm o the governanceo AKST and related organizations is also important orthe crucial role they can play in improving community-levelscientifc literacy, decentralization o technological oppor-tunities, and the integration o armer concerns in researchpriority setting and the design o armer services. Improvingequity requires synergy among various development actors,including armers, rural laborers, banks, civil society organi-zations, commercial companies, and public agencies. Stake-holder involvement is also crucial in decisions about IPR,inrastructure, taris, and the internalization o social andenvironmental costs. New modes o governance to developinnovative local networks and decentralized government,ocusing on small-scale producers and the urban poor (ur-

supporting agroecological systems, and enhancing biodiver-sity conservation and use at both feld and landscape scales;promoting the sustainable management o livestock, orestand fsheries; improving understanding o the agroecologi-cal unctioning o mosaics o crop production areas andnatural habitats; countering the eects o agriculture on cli-mate change and mitigating the negative impacts o climate

change on agriculture.Policy options include ending subsidies that encourage

unsustainable practices and using market and other mecha-nisms to regulate and generate rewards or agro/environ-mental services, or better natural resource managementand enhanced environmental quality. Examples includeincentives to promote integrated pest management (IPM)and environmentally resilient germplasm management,payments to armers and local communities or ecosystemservices, acilitating and providing incentives or alternativemarkets such as green products, certifcation or sustainableorest and fsheries practices and organic agriculture and thestrengthening o local markets. Long-term land and wateruse rights/tenure, risk reduction measures (saety nets, credit,

insurance, etc.) and proftability o recommended technolo-gies are prerequisites or adoption o sustainable practices.Common pool resource regimes and modes o governancethat emphasize participatory and democratic approachesare needed.

Investment opportunities in AKST that could improvesustainability and reduce negative environmental eectsinclude resource conservation technologies, improved tech-niques or organic and low-input systems; a wide range obreeding techniques or temperature and pest tolerance; re-search on the relationship o agricultural ecosystem servicesand human well-being; economic and non-economic valua-tions o ecosystem services; increasing water use efciencyand reducing water pollution; biocontrols o current and

emerging pests and pathogens; biological substitutes oragrochemicals; and reducing the dependency o the agricul-tural sector on ossil uels.

Human health and nutrition

Inter-linkages between health, nutrition, agriculture, andAKST aect the ability o individuals, communities, and na-tions to reach sustainability goals. These inter-linkages existwithin the context o multiple stressors that aect popula-tion health. A broad and integrated approach is needed toidentiy appropriate use o AKST to increase ood securityand saety, decrease the incidence and prevalence o a rangeo inectious (including emerging and reemerging diseasessuchasmalaria,avianinfuenza,HIV/AIDSandothers)and

chronic diseases, and decrease occupational exposures, in-juries and deaths. Robust agricultural, public health, andveterinary detection, surveillance, monitoring, and responsesystems can help identiy the true burden o ill health andcost-eective, health-promoting strategies and measures.Additional investments are needed to maintain and improvecurrent systems and regulations. Increasingfoodsecurity can be acilitated by promot-

ing policies and programs to diversiy diets and improvemicronutrient intake; and developing and deploying ex-isting and new technologies or the production, process-ing, preservation, and distribution o ood.


18/36


health, natural resource management, trade and markets,traditional and local knowledge and community-based in-novation and women in agriculture.

Bioenergy

Rising costs o ossil uels, energy security concerns, in-creased awareness o climate change and potentially positive

eects or economic development have led to considerablepublic attention to bioenergy. Bioenergy includes traditionalbioenergy, biomass to produce electricity, light and heat andfrst and next generation liquid biouels. The economics andthe positive and negative social and environmental exter-nalities dier widely, depending on source o biomass, typeo conversion technology and local circumstances.

Primarily due to a lack o aordable alternatives, mil-lions o people in developing countries depend on traditionalbioenergy (e.g., wood uels) or their cooking and heatingneeds, especially in sub-Saharan Arica and South Asia.This reliance on traditional bioenergy can pose consider-able environmental, health, economic and social challenges.New eorts are needed to improve traditional bioenergy

and accelerate the transition to more sustainable orms oenergy.

First generation biouels consist predominantly o bio-ethanol and biodiesel produced rom agricultural crops(e.g., maize, sugar cane). Production has been growing astin recent years, primarily due to biouel support policiessince they are cost competitive only under particularly a-vorable circumstances. The diversion o agricultural cropsto uel can raise ood prices and reduce our ability to allevi-ate hunger throughout the world. The negative social eectsrisk being exacerbated in cases where small-scale armersare marginalized or displaced rom their land. From an en-vironmental perspective, there is considerable variation, un-certainty and debate over the net energy balance and level o

GHGemissions.Inthelongterm,effectsonfoodpricesmaybe reduced, but environmental eects caused by land andwater requirements o large-scale increases o frst genera-tion biouels production are likely to persist and will needto be addressed.

Next generation biouels such as cellulosic ethanol andbiomass-to-liquids technologies allow conversion into bio-uels o more abundant and cheaper eedstocks than frstgeneration. This could potentially reduce agricultural landrequirements per unit o energy produced and improve lie-cycle GHG emissions, potentially mitigating the environ-mental pressures fromrst generationbiofuels. However,next generation biouels technologies are not yet commer-cially proven and environmental and social eects are stilluncertain. For example, the use o eedstock and arm resi-dues can compete with the need to maintain organic matterin sustainable agroecosystems.

Bioelectricity and bioheat are important orms o renew-able energy that are usually more efcient and produce lessGHGemissionsthanliquidbiofuelsandfossilfuels.Digest-ers, gasifers and direct combustion devices can be success-ully employed in certain settings, e.g., o-grid areas. Thereis potential or expanding these applications but AKST isneeded to reduce costs and improve operational reliability.For all orms o bioenergy, decision makers should careullyweigh ull social, environmental and economic costs against

ban agriculture; direct links between urban consumers andrural producers) will help create and strengthen synergisticand complementary capacities.

Preerential investments in equitable development (e.g.,literacy, education and training) that contribute to reduc-ing ethnic, gender, and other inequities would advance de-velopment goals. Measurements o returns to investments

require indices that give more inormation than GDP, andthat are sensitive to environmental and equity gains. The useo inequality indices or screening AKST investments andmonitoring outcomes strengthens accountability. The Gini-coefcient could, or example, become a public criterionor policy assessment, in addition to the more conventionalmeasures o growth, ination and environment.

Investments

Achieving development and sustainability goals would en-tail increased unds and more diverse unding mechanismsor agricultural research and development and associatedknowledge systems, such as: Public investments in global, regional, national and

local public goods; ood security and saety, climatechange and sustainability. More efcient use o increas-ingly scarce land, water and biological resources re-quires investment in research and development o legaland management capabilities.

Public investments in agricultural knowledge systems topromote interactive knowledge networks (armers, sci-entists, industry and actors in other knowledge areas);improved access to inormation and communicationtechnologies (ICT); ecological, evolutionary, ood, nu-trition, social and complex systems sciences; eectiveinterdisciplinarity; capacity in core agricultural scienc-es; and improving lie-long learning opportunities alongthe ood system.

Public-private partnerships or improved commerciali-zation o applied knowledge and technologies and jointunding o AKST, where market risks are high andwhere options or widespread utilization o knowledgeexist.

Adequate incentives and rewards to encourage privateand civil society investments in AKST contributing todevelopment and sustainability goals.

In many developing countries, it may be necessary tocomplement these investments with increased and moretargeted investments in rural inrastructure, educationand health.

In the ace o new global challenges, there is an urgent needto strengthen, restructure and possibly establish new in-tergovernmental, independent science and evidence-basednetworks to address such issues as climate orecasting oragricultural production; human health risks rom emerg-ing diseases; reorganization o livelihoods in response tochanges in agricultural systems (population movements);ood security; and global orestry resources.

Themes

The Synthesis Report looked at eight AKST-related themeso critical interest to meeting development and sustainabil-ity goals: bioenergy, biotechnology, climate change, human


19/36


potentially undermining local practices that enhance oodsecurity and economic sustainability. In this regard, there isparticular concern about present IPR instruments eventuallyinhibiting seed-saving, exchange, sale and access to propri-etary materials necessary or the independent research com-munity to conduct analyses and long term experimentationon impacts. Farmers ace new liabilities: GM armers may

become liable or adventitious presence i it causes loss omarket certifcation and income to neighboring organicarmers, and conventional armers may become liable to GMseed producers i transgenes are detected in their crops.

A problem-oriented approach to biotechnology researchand development (R&D) would ocus investment on localpriorities identifed through participatory and transparentprocesses, and avor multiunctional solutions to localproblems. These processes require new kinds o support orthe public to critically engage in assessments o the techni-cal, social, political, cultural, gender, legal, environmentaland economic impacts o modern biotechnology. Biotech-nologies should be used to maintain local expertise andgermplasm so that the capacity or urther research resides

within the local community. Such R&D would put muchneeded emphasis onto participatory breeding projects andagroecology.

Climate change

Climate change, which is taking place at a time o increasingdemand or ood, eed, fber and uel, has the potential toirreversibly damage the natural resource base on which ag-riculture depends. The relationship between climate changeand agriculture is a two-way street; agriculture contributesto climate change in several major ways and climate changein general adversely aects agriculture.

In mid- to high-latitude regions moderate local increasesin temperature can have small benefcial impacts on crop

yields; in low-latitude regions, such moderate temperatureincreases are likely to have negative yield eects. Some nega-tive impacts are already visible in many parts o the world;additional warming will have increasingly negative im-pacts in all regions. Water scarcity and the timing o wateravailability will increasingly constrain production. Climatechange will require a new look at water storage to cope withthe impacts o more and extreme precipitation, higher intra-and inter-seasonal variations, and increased rates o evapo-transpiration in all types o ecosystems. Extreme climateevents (oods and droughts) are increasing and expected toampliy in requency and severity and there are likely to besignifcant consequences in all regions or ood and orestryproduction and ood insecurity. There is a serious potentialor uture conicts over habitable land and natural resourcessuch as reshwater. Climate change is aecting the distribu-tion o plants, invasive species, pests and disease vectors andthe geographic range and incidence o many human, animaland plant diseases is likely to increase.

A comprehensive approach with an equitable regulatoryramework, dierentiated responsibilities and intermediatetargetsarerequiredtoreduceGHGemissions.Theearlierand stronger the cuts in emissions, the quicker concentra-tions will approach stabilization. Emission reduction mea-sures clearly are essential because they can have an impact

realistically achievable benefts and other sustainable energyoptions.

Biotechnology34

The IAASTD defnition o biotechnology is based on thatin the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Carta-gena Protocol on Biosaety. It is a broad term embracing the

manipulation o living organisms and spans the large rangeo activities rom conventional techniques or ermentationand plant and animal breeding to recent innovations in tissueculture, irradiation, genomics and marker-assisted breeding(MAB) or marker assisted selection (MAS) to augment natu-ral breeding. Some o the latest biotechnologies (modernbiotechnology) include the use oin vitro modifed DNAor RNA and the usion o cells rom dierent taxonomicamilies, techniques that overcome natural physiological re-productive or recombination barriers. Currently the mostcontentious issue is the use o recombinant DNA techniquesto produce transgenes that are inserted into genomes. Evennewer techniques o modern biotechnology manipulate her-itable material without changing DNA.

Biotechnology has always been on the cutting edgeo change. Change is rapid, the domains involved are nu-merous, and there is a signifcant lack o transparent com-munication among actors. Hence assessment of modernbiotechnology is lagging behind development; inormationcan be anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty on ben-efts and harms is unavoidable. There is a wide range o per-spectives on the environmental, human health and economicrisks and benefts o modern biotechnology; many o theserisks are as yet unknown.

Conventional biotechnologies, such as breeding tech-niques, tissue culture, cultivation practices and ermenta-tion are readily accepted and used. Between 1950 and 1980,prior to the development o genetically modifed organisms

(GMOs), modern varieties o wheat increased yields up to33% even in the absence o ertilizer. Modern biotechnolo-gies used in containment have been widely adopted; e.g., theindustrial enzyme market reached US$1.5 billion in 2000.The application o modern biotechnology outside contain-ment, such as the use o genetically modifed (GM) crops ismuch more contentious. For example, data based on someyears and some GM crops indicate highly variable 10-33%yield gains in some places and yield declines in others.Higher level drivers of biotechnology R&D, such as

IPR rameworks, determine what products become avail-able. While this attracts investment in agriculture, it canalso concentrate ownership o agricultural resources. Anemphasis on modern biotechnology without ensuring ad-equate support or other agricultural research can altereducation and training programs and reduce the numbero proessionals in other core agricultural sciences. Thissituation can be sel-reinorcing since todays students de-fne tomorrows educational and training opportunities.

The use o patents or transgenes introduces additionalissues. In developing countries especially, instruments suchas patents may drive up costs, restrict experimentationby the individual armer or public researcher while also

4 China and USA.


20/36


and growing consumer awareness increase the need oreective, coordinated, and proactive national ood saetysystems.HealthconcernsthatcouldbeaddressedbyAKSTinclude the presence o pesticide residues, heavy metals, hor-mones, antibiotics and various additives in the ood systemas well as those related to large-scale livestock arming.

Strengthened ood saety measures are important and

necessary in both domestic and export markets and can im-pose signifcant costs. Some countries may need help in meet-ing ood control costs such as monitoring and inspection,and costs associated with market rejection o contaminatedcommodities. Taking a broad and integrated agroecosystemand human health approach can acilitate identifcation oanimal, plant, and human health risks, and appropriateAKST responses.

Worldwide, agriculture accounts or at least 170,000occupational deaths each year: hal o all atal accidents.Machinery and equipment, such as tractors and harvesters,account or the highest rates o injury and death, particu-larly among rural laborers. Other important health hazardsinclude agrochemical poisoning, transmissible animal dis-

eases, toxic or allergenic agents, and noise, vibration andergonomic hazards. Improving occupational health requiresa greater emphasis on health protection through develop-ment and enorcement o health and saety regulations. Poli-cies should explicitly address tradeos between livelihoodbenefts and environmental, occupational and public healthrisks.

The incidence and geographic range o many emergingand reemerging inectious diseases are inuenced by the in-tensifcation o crop and livestock systems. Serious socioeco-nomic impacts can arise when diseases spread widely withinhuman or animal populations, or when they spill over romanimal reservoirs to human hosts. Most o the actors thatcontribute to disease emergence will continue, i not inten-

siy. Integrating policies and programs across the ood chaincan help reduce the spread o inectious diseases; robustdetection, surveillance, monitoring, and response programsare critical.

Natural resource management45

Natural resources, especially those o soil, water, plant andanimal diversity, vegetation cover, renewable energy sources,climate, and ecosystem services are undamental or thestructure and unction o agricultural systems and or socialand environmental sustainability, in support o lie on earth.Historicallythepathofglobalagriculturaldevelopmenthasbeen narrowly ocused on increased productivity rather thanon a more holistic integration o natural resource manage-ment (NRM) with ood and nutritional security. A holistic,or systems-oriented approach, is preerable because it canaddress the difcult issues associated with the complexityo ood and other production systems in dierent ecologies,locations and cultures.

AKST to resolve NRM exploitation issues, such asthe mitigation o soil ertility through synthetic inputs andnatural processes, is oten available and well understood.

5 Capture fsheries and orestry have not been as well covered as

other aspects o NRM.

duetoinertiaintheclimatesystem.However,sincefurtherchanges in the climate are inevitable adaptation is also im-perative. Actions directed at addressing climate change andpromoting sustainable development share some importantgoals such as equitable access to resources and appropriatetechnologies.

Some win-win mitigation opportunities have already

been identifed. These include land use approaches such aslower rates o agricultural expansion into natural habitats;aorestation, reorestation, increased eorts to avoid deor-estation, agroorestry, agroecological systems, and restora-tion o underutilized or degraded lands and rangelands andland use options such as carbon sequestration in agriculturalsoils, reduction and more efcient use o nitrogenous inputs;eective manure management and use o eed that increaseslivestock digestive efciency. Policy options related to regu-lations and investment opportunities include fnancial incen-tives to maintain and increase orest area through reduceddeorestation and degradation and improved managementand the development and utilization o renewable energysources. The post-2012 regime has to be more inclusive o

all agricultural activities such as reduced emission rom de-orestation and soil degradation to take ull advantage o theopportunities oered by agriculture and orestry sectors.

Human health

Despite the evident and complex links between health, nu-trition, agriculture, and AKST, improving human health isnot generally an explicit goal o agricultural policy. Agricul-ture and AKST can aect a range o health issues includingundernutrition, chronic diseases, inectious diseases, oodsaety, and environmental and occupational health. Ill heathin the arming community can in turn reduce agriculturalproductivity and the ability to develop and deploy appropri-ate AKST. Ill health can result rom undernutrition, as well

as over-nutrition. Despite increased global ood productionover recent decades, undernutrition is still a major globalpublic health problem, causing over 15% o the global dis-ease burden. Protein energy and micronutrient malnutritionremain challenges, with high variability between and withincountries. Food security can be improved through policiesand programs to increase dietary diversity and through de-velopment and deployment o existing and new technologiesor production, processing, preservation, and distributiono ood.

AKST policies and practices have increased productionand new mechanisms or ood processing. Reduced dietaryquality and diversity and inexpensive oods with low nu-trient density have been associated with increasing rates oworldwide obesity and chronic disease. Poor diet through-out the lie course is a major risk actor or chronic dis-eases, which are the leading cause o global deaths. There isa need to ocus on consumers and the importance o dietaryquality as main drivers o production, and not merely onquantity or price. Strategies include fscal policies (taxation,trade regimes) or health-promoting oods and regulationo ood product ormulation, labeling and commercial in-ormation.

Globalization o the ood supply, accompanied by con-centration o ood distribution and processing companies,


21/36


among, and within, countries that in many cases have notbeen avorable or small-scale armers and rural livelihoods.These distributional impacts call or dierentiation in policyrameworks and institutional arrangements i these coun-tries are to beneft rom agricultural trade. There is growingconcern that opening national agricultural markets to in-ternational competition beore basic institutions and inra-

structure are in place can undermine the agricultural sector,with long-term negative eects or poverty, ood securityand the environment.56

Trade policy reorm to provide a airer global tradingsystem can make a positive contribution to sustainabilityand development goals. Special and dierential treatmentaccorded through trade negotiations can enhance the abilityo developing countries to pursue ood security and devel-opment goals while minimizing trade-related dislocations.Preserving national policy exibility allows developingcountries to balance the needs o poor consumers (urbanand rural landless) and rural small-scale armers. Increasingthe value captured by small-scale armers in global, regionaland local markets chains is undamental to meeting devel-

opment and sustainability goals. Supportive trade policiescan also make new AKST available to the small-scale armsector and agroenterprises.

Developing countries would beneft rom the removalo barriers or products in which they have a comparativeadvantage; reduction o escalating taris or processed com-modities in industrialized and developing countries; deeperpreerential access to markets or least developed countries;increased public investment in rural inrastructure and thegeneration o public goods AKST; and improved access tocredit, AKST resources and markets or poor producers.Compensating revenues lost as a result o tari reductionsis essential to advancing development agendas.67

Agriculture generates large environmental externalities,

many o which derive rom ailure o markets to value envi-ronmental and social harm and provide incentives or sus-tainability. AKST has great potential to reverse this trend.Market and trade policies to acilitate the contribution oAKST to reducing the environmental ootprint o agricul-ture include removing resource usedistorting subsidies;taxing externalities; better defnitions o property rights;and developing rewards and markets or agroenvironmen-tal services, including the extension o carbon fnancing, toprovide incentives or sustainable agriculture.

The quality and transparency o governance in theagricultural sector, including increased participation ostakeholders in AKST decision making is undamental.Strengthening developing country trade analysis and ne-gotiation capacity, and providing better tools or assessingtradeos in proposed trade agreements are important to im-proving governance.

Traditional and local knowledge and community-

based innovation

Once AKST is directed simultaneously towardproduction,proftability, ecosystem services and ood systems that aresite-specifc and evolving, then ormal, traditional and lo-

6 USA.7 Canada and USA.

Nevertheless, the resolution o natural resource challengeswill demand new and creative approaches by stakeholderswith diverse backgrounds, skills and priorities. Capabilitiesor working together at multiple scales and across dierentsocial and physical environments are not well developed.For example, there have been ew opportunities or two-waylearning between armers and researchers or policy makers.

Consequently armers and civil society members have sel-dom been involved in shaping NRM policy. Community-based partnerships with the private sector, now in their earlystages o development, represent a new and promising wayorward.

The ollowing high priority NRM options or action areproposed: Use existing AKST to identiy and address some o the

underlying causes o declining productivity embeddedin natural resource mismanagement, and develop newAKST based on multidisciplinary approaches or a bet-ter understanding o the complexity in NRM. Part othis process will involve the cost-eective monitoring otrends in the utilization o natural resource capital.

Strengthen human resources in the support o naturalcapital through increased investment (research, trainingand education, partnerships, policy) in promoting theawareness o the societal costs o degradation and valueo ecosystems services.

Promote research centers o AKST-NRM excellenceto acilitate less exploitative NRM and better strategiesor resource resilience, protection and renewal throughinnovative two-way learning processes in research anddevelopment, monitoring and policy ormulation.

Create an enabling environment or building NRM ca-pacity and increasing understanding o NRM amongstakeholders and their organizations in order to shapeNRM policy in partnership with public and private sec-

tors. Develop networks o AKST practitioners (armer or-

ganizations, NGOs, government, private sector) to a-cilitate long-term natural resource management to en-hance benefts rom natural resources or the collectivegood.

Connect globalization and localization pathways thatlink locally generated NRM knowledge and innova-tions to public and private AKST.

When AKST is developed and used creatively with activeparticipation among various stakeholders across multiplescales, the misuse o natural capital can be reversed and thejudicious use and renewal o water bodies, soils, biodiver-sity, ecosystems services, ossil uels and atmospheric qualityensured or uture generations.

Trade and markets

Targeting market and trade policies to enhance the abilityo agricultural and AKST systems to drive development,strengthen ood security, maximize environmental sustain-ability, and help make the small-scale arm sector proftableto spearhead poverty reduction is an immediate challengearound the world.

Agricultural trade can oer opportunities or the poor,but current arrangements have major distributional impacts


22/36


ment is increasing in many developing countries, particularlywith the development o export-oriented irrigated arming,which is associated with a growing demand or emale labor,including migrant workers.

Whereas these dynamics have in some ways broughtbenefts, in general, the largest proportion o rural womenworldwide continues to ace deteriorating health and work

conditions, limited access to education and control over nat-ural resources, insecure employment and low income. Thissituation is due to a variety o actors, includingthe growingcompetition on agricultural markets which increases the de-mand or exible and cheap labor, growing pressure on andconicts over natural resources, the diminishing support bygovernments or small-scale arms and the reallocation oeconomic resources in avor o large agroenterprises. Otheractors include increasing exposure to risks related to natu-ral disasters and environmental changes, worsening accessto water, increasing occupational and health risks.

Despite progress made in national and internationalpolicies since the frst world conerence on women in 1975,urgent action is still necessary to implement gender and

social equity in AKST policies and practices i we are tobetter address gender issues as integral to development pro-cesses. Such action includes strengthening the capacity opublic institutions and NGOs to improve the knowledgeo womens changing orms o involvement in arm andother rural activities in AKST. It also requires giving pri-ority to womens access to education, inormation, scienceand technology, and extension services to enable improvingwomens access, ownership and control o economic andnatural resources. To ensure such access, ownership andcontrol legal measures, appropriate credit schemes, supportor womens income generating activities and the reinorce-ment o womens organizations and networks are needed.This, in turn, depends on strengthening womens ability to

beneft rom market-based opportunities by institutions andpolicies giving explicit priority to women armer groups invalue chains.

A number o other changes will strengthen womenscontributions to agricultural production and sustainability.These include support or public services and investment inrural areas in order to improve womens living and work-ing conditions; giving priority to technological developmentpolicies targeting rural and arm womens needs and rec-ognizing their knowledge, skills and experience in the pro-duction o ood and the conservation o biodiversity; andassessing the negative eects and risks o arming practicesand technology, including pesticides on womens health,and taking measures to reduce use and exposure. Finally,i we are to better recognize women as integral to sustain-able development, it is critical to ensure gender balance inAKST decision-making at all levels and provide mechanismsto hold AKST organizations accountable or progress in theabove areas.

cal knowledge need to be integrated. Traditional and localknowledge constitutes an extensive realm o accumulatedpractical knowledge and knowledge-generating capacity thatis needed i sustainability and development goals are to bereached. The traditional knowledge, identities and practiceso indigenous and local communities are recognized underthe UN Convention on Biological Diversity as embodying

ways o lie relevant or conservation and sustainable use obiodiversity; and by others as generated by the purposeulinteraction o material and non-material worlds embeddedin place-based cultures and identities. Local knowledge re-ers to capacities and activities that exist among rural peoplein all parts o the world.

Traditional and local knowledge is dynamic; it maysometimes ail but also has had well-documented, exten-sive, positive impacts. Participatory collaboration in knowl-edge generation, technology development and innovationhas been shown to add value to science-based technologydevelopment, or instance in Farmer-Researcher groups inthe Andes, in Participatory Plant Breeding, the domestica-tion o wild and semi-wild tree species and in soil and water

management.Options or action with proven contribution to achiev-

ing sustainability and development goals include collabora-tion in the conservation, development and use o local andtraditional biological materials; incentives or and develop-ment o capacity among scientists and ormal research or-ganizations to work with local and indigenous people andtheir organizations; a higher profle in scientifc educationor indigenous and local knowledge as well as or proes-sional and community-based archiving and assessment osuch knowledge and practices. The role o modern ICT inachieving eective collaboration is critical to evolving cul-turally appropriate integration and merits larger investmentsand support. Eective collaboration and integration would

be supported by international intellectual property andother regimes that allow more scope or dealing eectivelywith situations involving traditional knowledge, geneticresources and community-based innovations. Examples omisappropriation o indigenous and local peoples knowl-edge and community-based innovations indicate a need orsharing o inormation about existing national sui generisand regulatory rameworks.

Women in agriculture

Gender, that is socially constructed relations between menand women, is an organizing element o existing armingsystems worldwide and a determining actor o ongoing ag-ricultural restructuring. Current trends in agricultural mar-ket liberalization and in the reorganization o arm work, aswell as the rise o environmental and sustainability concernsare redefning the links between gender and development.The proportion o women in agricultural production andpostharvest activities ranges rom 20 to 70%; their involve-


23/36

12

Annex A

Reservations on Executive Summary

As we have specifc and substantive concerns in each othe reports, the United States is unable to provide unquali-fed endorsement o the reports, and we have noted them.

The United States believes the Assessment has potentialor stimulating urther deliberation and research. Further,we acknowledge the reports are a useul contribution orconsideration by governments o the role o AKST in rais-ing sustainable economic growth and alleviating hunger and

poverty.

Reservations on Individual Passages1. Botswana notes that this is specially a problem in sub-

Saharan Arica.2. The USA would preer that this sentence be written as

ollows progressive evolution o IPR regimes in coun-tries where national policies are not ully developed andprogressive engagement in IPR management.

3. The UK notes that there is no international defnition oood sovereignty.

4. China and USA do not believe that this entire section isbalanced and comprehensive.

5. The USA would preer that this sentence be reectedin this paragraph: Opening national agricultural mar-kets to international competition can oer economicbenefts, but can lead to long-term negative eects onpoverty alleviation, ood security and the environmentwithout basic national institutions and inrastructurebeing in place.

6. Canada and USA would preer the ollowing sentence:Provision o assistance to help low income countriesaected by liberalization to adjust and beneft romliberalized trade is essential to advancing developmentagendas.

Australia: Australia recognizes the IAASTD initiative andreports as a timely and important multistakeholder and mul-tidisciplinary exercise designed to assess and enhance therole o AKST in meeting the global development challenges.The wide range o observations and views presented how-ever, are such that Australia cannot agree with all assertionsand options in the report. The report is thereore noted asa useul contribution which will be used or considering the

uture priorities and scope o AKST in securing economicgrowth and the alleviation o hunger and poverty.

Canada: The Canadian Government recognizes the sig-nifcant work undertaken by IAASTD authors, Secretariatand stakeholders and notes the Executive Summary o theSynthesis Report as a valuable and important contributionto policy debate which needs to continue in national andinternational processes. While acknowledging considerableimprovement has been achieved through a process o com-promise, there remain a number o assertions and observa-tions that require more substantial, balanced and objectiveanalysis.However,theCanadianGovernmentadvocatesitbe drawn to the attention o governments or considerationin addressing the importance o AKST and its large poten-tial to contribute to economic growth and the reduction ohunger and poverty.

United States of America: The United States joins con-sensus with other governments in the critical importance oAKST to meet the goals o the IAASTD. We commend thetireless eorts o the authors, editors, Co-Chairs and theSecretariat. We welcome the IAASTD or bringing togetherthe widest array o stakeholders or the frst time in an ini-tiative o this magnitude. We respect the wide diversity oviews and healthy debate that took place.


24/36

13

Annex B

Authors and Review Editors of Global and Sub-Global Reports

ManueldelaFuenteNationalCentreofCompetenceinResearch North-South

EdsonGandarillasPROINPAFoundation

Botswana

BaoneCynthiaKwerepeBotswanaCollegeofAgriculture

Brazil

FlavioDiasvilaEmbrapaAntnioGomesdeCastroEmbrapaAndrGonalvesCentroEcolgicoDalvaMaraDaMotaEmbrapaOdoPrimavesiEmbrapaPecuariaSudeste(SoutheastEmbrapa

Cattle)

SergioSallesFilhoStateUniversityofCampinas(Unicamp)SusanaValleLimaEmbrapa

Canada

JacquelineAlderUniversityofBritishColumbiaGuyDebailleulLavalUniversityHarrietFriedmanUniversityofTorontoTirsoGonzalesUniversityofBritishColumbia,Okanagan

ThoraMartinaHerrmannUniversitdeMontralSophiaHuyerUNCommissiononScienceandTechnologyfor

Development.

JoAnnJaffeUniversityofReginaShawn McGuire

MorvenA.McLeanAgricultureandBiotechnologyStrategiesInc. (AGBIOS)

M.MonirulQaderMirzaEnvironmentCanadaandUniversityof Toronto, Scarborough

RicardoRamirezUniversityofGuelphJohnM.R.StoneCarletonUniversity

Chile

MarioAhumadaInternationalCommitteeforRegionalPlanning for Food Security

China

JikunHuangChineseAcademyofSciencesFuQuinChineseAcademyofAgriculturalSciences(CAAS)MaShimingChineseAcademyofAgriculturalSciences(CAAS)LiXiandeChineseAcademyofAgriculturalSciences(CAAS)ZhuXiaomanChinaNationalInstituteforEducational

Research

Argentina

WalterIsmaelAbediniLaPlataNationalUniversityHugoCetrngoloUniversidaddeBuenosAiresCeciliaGelabertUniversidaddeBuenosAiresHctorD.GinzoMinisteriodeRelacionesExteriores,Comercio

Internacional y Culto

MariaCristinaPlencovichUniversidaddeBuenosAiresMarceloRegunagaUniversidaddeBuenosAires

SandraElizabethSharryUniversidadNacionaldeLaPlataJavierSouzaCasadinhoCETAAR-RAPALMiguelTaboadaUniversidaddeBuenosAiresErnestoViglizzoINTACentroRegionalLaPampa

Armenia

AshotHovhannisianMinistryofAgriculture

Australia

HelalAhammadDepartmentofAgriculture,FisheriesandForestry

DavidJ.ConnorUniversityofMelbourneTonyJansenTerraCircleInc.RogerR.B.LeakeyJamesCookUniversity

AndrewLoweAdelaideStateHerbariumandBiosurveyAnnaMatysekConceptEconomicsAndrewMearsMajorityWorldTechnologyGirijaShresthaMonashAsiaInstitute,MonashUniversity

Austria

MariaWurzingerUniversityofNaturalResources&AppliedLife Sciences

Bangladesh

WaisKabirBangladeshAgriculturalResearchCouncil(BARC)KarimMahmudulBangladeshShrimpandFishFoundation

Barbados

CarlB.GreenidgeCFTCandCaribbeanRegionalNegotiatingMachinery

Benin

PeterNeuenschwanderInternationalInstituteofTropicalAgriculture

SimpliceDavoVodouhePesticideActionNetwork

Bolivia

JorgeBlajosPROINPAFoundationRuthPamelaCartagenaCIPCAPando


25/36

14 | Annex B

JyrkiNiemiMTTAgrifoodResearch

RiikkaRajalahtiMinistryofForeignAffairs

ReimundRoetterMTTAgrifoodResearch

TimoSipilinenMTTAgrifoodResearch

MarkkuYli-Halla UniversityofHelsinki

France

JeanAlbergelInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique(INRA)

LocAntoineIFREMER

MartineAntonaCIRAD

GillesAumontInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique

(INRA)

DidierBazileCIRAD

PascalBergeretMinistryofAgriculture

YvesBirotInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique

(INRA)

Pierre-MarieBoscCIRAD

NicolasBricasCIRAD

JacquesBrossierInstitutNationaldelaRecherche.

Agronomique (INRA)

PerrineBurnodCIRADGrardButtoudInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique

(INRA)

PatrickCaronCIRAD

BernardChevassusFrenchMinistryofAgricultureandFisheries

EmilieCoudelCIRAD

BatriceDarcy-Vrillon Institut National de la Recherche

Agronomique (INRA)

Jean-FranoisDhteInstitutNationaldelaRecherche

Agronomique (INRA)

CelineDutilly-DianeCIRAD

FabriceDreyfusUniversityInstituteforTropicalAgrofood

Industries and Rural Development

MichelDulcireCIRAD

PatrickDuguCIRADNicolasFaysseCIRAD

StefanoFarolCIRAD

GuyFaureCIRAD

AliaGanaNationalCenterforScienticResearchCNRS/

LADYSS

ThierryGoliCIRAD

GhislainGosseInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique

(INRA)

Jean-MarcGuehlInstitutNationaldelaRecherche

Agronomique (INRA)

DominiqueHervInstituteforDevelopmentResearch(IRD)

HenriHocdCIRAD

BernardHubertInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique

(INRA)JacquesImbernonCIRAD

HuguesdeJouvenelFuturibles

TrishKammiliInstitutNationaldelaRechercheAgronomique

VroniqueLamblinFuturibles

MariedeLattre-GasquetCIRAD

PatrickLavelleInstituteforDevelopmentResearch(IRD)

MarianneLefortInstitutNationaldelaRecherche

Agronomique and AgroParisTech

JacquesLoyatFrenchMinistryofAgricultureandFisheries

Jean-PierreMllerCIRAD

SylvainPerretCIRAD

Colombia

IngeArmbrechtUniversitydelValle

HernandoBernalUniversityoftheColumbianAmazon

JuanCrdenasUniversityoftheAndes

MariaVeronicaGottretCIAT

ElsaNiviaRAPALMIRA

EdelmiraPrezPonticiaUniversityJaverianaofBogot

Costa Rica

MarianPerezGutierrezNationalCentreofCompetencein

Research North-South

MarioSamperInter-AmericanInstituteforCooperationon

Agriculture (IICA)

Cte dIvoire

GuladioCissNationalCentreofCompetenceinResearch

North-South, Centre Suisse de Recherche Scientifque

Cyprus

GeorgesEliadesAgriculturalResearchInstitute(ARI)

CostasGregoriouAgriculturalResearchInstitute(ARI)

ChristophMetochisAgriculturalResearchInstitute(ARI)

Czech Republic

MiloslavaNavrtilovStatePhytosanitaryAdministration

Democratic Republic of Congo

DieudonneAthanaseMusibonoUniversityofKinshasa

Denmark

HenrikEgelyngDanishInstituteforInternationalStudies(DIIS)

ThomasHenrichsUniversityofAarhus

Dominican Republic

RunoPrez-BrennanALIMENTECS.A.

Egypt

SoniaAliZagaridUniversity

MostafaA.BedierAgriculturalEconomicResearchInstitute

agriculture at a crossroads_executive summary of the synthesis report (english)

Documents