unctad small farms
TRANSCRIPT
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT REVIEW 2013
MAKE AGRICULTURE TRULY SUSTAINABLE NOW FOR FOOD SECURITYIN A CHANGING CLIMATE
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT REVIEW 2013
MAKE AGRICULTURE TRULY SUSTAINABLE NOW FOR FOOD SECURITYIN A CHANGING CLIMATE
U n i t e d n at i o n s C o n f e r e n C e o n t r a d e a n d d e v e l o p m e n t
TRA
DE A
ND
ENVIR
ON
MEN
T REV
IEW 2
01
3UN
CTAD
KEY MESSAGES• The 2008 food crisis was an important catalyst for realizing the need for a fundamental transformation and questioning
some of the assumptions that had driven food, agricultural and trade policy in recent decades. However, actual results achieved since 2008 suggest that a paradigm shift has started, but is largely incomplete. Priority remains heavily focused on increasing industrial agricultural production, mostly under the slogan “growing more food at less cost to the environment”. The perception that there is a supply-side productivity problem is however questionable. Hunger and malnutrition are mainly related to lack of purchasing power and/or inability of rural poor to be self-sufficient. Meeting the food security challenges is thus primarily about empowerment of the poor and their food sovereignty. Furthermore, the current demand trends for biofuels, concentrate animal feed, excessively meat-based diets and post-harvest food waste are regarded as given, rather than challenging their rational.
• The fundamental transformation of agriculture may well turn out to be one of the biggest challenges, including for international security, of the 21st century. Much slower agricultural productivity growth in the future, a quickly rising population in the most resource-constrained and climate-change-exposed regions (in particular in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia) and a burgeoning environmental crises of agriculture are the seeds for mounting pressures on food security and the related access to land and water. This is bound to increase the frequency and severity of riots, caused by food-price hikes, with concomitant political instability, and international tension, linked to resource conflicts and migratory movements of staving populations.
• The world needs a paradigm shift in agricultural development: from a “green revolution” to an “ecological intensification” approach. This implies a rapid and significant shift from conventional, monoculture-based and high-external-input-dependent industrial production towards mosaics of sustainable, regenerative production systems that also considerably improve the productivity of small-scale farmers. We need to see a move from a linear to a holistic approach in agricultural management, which recognizes that a farmer is not only a producer of agricultural goods, but also a manager of an agro-ecological system that provides quite a number of public goods and services (e.g. water, soil, landscape, energy, biodiversity, and recreation).
• The required transformation is much more profound than simply tweaking the existing industrial agricultural system. Rather, what is called for is a better understanding of the multi-functionality of agriculture, its pivotal importance for pro-poor rural development and the significant role it can play in dealing with resource scarcities and in mitigating and adapting to climate change. However, the sheer scale at which modified production methods would have to be adopted, the significant governance issues, the power asymmetries’ problems in food input and output markets as well as the current trade rules for agriculture pose considerable challenges.
• Elements and key achievements of the required transformation of agriculture, elaborated upon by the authors of this Review, include:- Increasing soil carbon content and better integration between crop and livestock production, and increased incorporation
(not segregation) of trees (agroforestry) and wild vegetation. - Reduction of direct and indirect (i.e. through the feed chain) greenhouse-gas emissions of livestock production.- Reduction of indirect (i.e. changes in land-use-induced) GHG emissions through sustainable peatland, forest and grassland
management.- Optimization of organic and inorganic fertilizer use, including through closed nutrient cycles in agriculture.- Reduction of waste throughout the food chains.- Changing dietary patterns towards climate-friendly food consumption.- Reform of the international trade regime for food and agricultural products.
• In pursuing a fundamental transformation of agriculture, one should take into account systemic considerations in particular (i) the need for a holistic understanding of the challenges involved due to inter-linkages between sometimes competing objectives; (ii) the merits and demerits of single climate-friendly practices versus those of systemic changes (such as agro-ecology, agro-forestry, organic agriculture); and (iii) the need for a two-track approach that drastically reduces the environmental impact of conventional agriculture, on the one hand, and broadens the scope for agro-ecological production methods, on the other.
UNITED NATIONS
EMBARGOThe contents of this Report must not be
quoted or summarized in the print, broadcast or electronic media before
18 September 2013, 17:00 hours GMT
KEY MESSAGESThe 2008 food crisis was an important catalyst for realizing the need for a fundamental transformation and questioning
some of the assumptions that had driven food, agricultural and trade policy in recent decades.
The fundamental transformation of agriculture may well turn out to be one of the biggest challenges, including for
international security, of the 21st century.
The world needs a paradigm shift in agricultural development: from a “green revolution” to an “ecological
intensification” approach.
The required transformation is much more profound than simply tweaking the existing industrial agricultural system.
Elements and key achievements of the required transformation of agriculture, elaborated upon by the authors of this
Review, include:
In pursuing a fundamental transformation of agriculture, one should take into account systemic considerations
adaptation
Ch
ina
Braz
il
EU-2
7
US
Ind
ia
Arg
enti
na
Ind
on
esia
Russ
ia
Nig
eria
Au
stri
a
Fran
ce
Co
lom
bia
Thai
lan
d
Ger
man
y
Ban
gla
des
h
Paki
stan
Mya
nm
ar
Mex
ico
Turk
ey
DRC
Can
ada
Vie
tnam
Eth
iop
ia
Ven
ezu
ela
UK
1,200 -
1,000 -
800 -
600 -
400 -
200 -
0 -
- 6
- 5
- 4
- 3
- 2
- 1
- 0
Tota
l (m
illio
n m
etri
c to
ns
CO
2-e)
Per c
apit
a (m
illio
n m
etri
c to
ns
CO
2-e/p
erso
n)
n.a.
>25
15 to 25
5 to 15
0 to 5
-5 to 0
-15 to -5
-25 to -15
<-25
80,000 -
70,000 -
60,000 -
50,000 -
40,000 -
30,000 -
20,000 -
10,000 -
0 -
Chickenproduction
Ton
s
Chickenimports
2002 2007
350,000 -
300,000 -
250,000 -
200,000 -
150,000 -
100,000 -
50,000 -
0 -
Riceproduction
Ton
s
Riceimports
1980 2004 2009
100 -
90 -
80 -
70 -
60 -
50 -
40 -
30 -
20 -
10 -
0 -
UE
Cu
sto
ms
tari
ffs
(per
cen
t)
UEMOA
Cer
eals
Milk
po
wd
er
Sug
ar p
rod
uct
s
Mea
t
/ Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE)
1960
-
1970
-
1980
-
1990
-
2000
-
2010
-
4.0 -
3.5 -
3.0 -
2.5 -
2.0 -
1.5 -
1.0 -
0.5 -
0.0 -
Sub-Saharan Africa
North Africa
North America
World
Asia
Hect
ares
per
capi
ta
1850
-18
60 -
1870
-18
80 -
1890
-19
00 -
1910
-19
20 -
1930
-19
40 -
1950
-19
60 -
1970
-19
80 -
1990
-20
00 -
2010
-
1,000 -
800 -
600 -
400 -
200 -
0 -
-200 -
Latin America
CO
2 em
mis
sio
ns
(Tg
Cy-1
)
S and SE Asia
Tropical Africa
Mo
nsa
nto
DeK
alb
(199
5)
Hyb
riTec
h(1
995)
Sem
ente
sAgr
ocer
es
Cus
tom
Far
mS
eed
DeK
albA
yala
Aya
la
Agr
iPro
Whe
at
Hyb
riTec
hEur
ope
Pau
Eur
alis
Sem
inis
Car
gill
Intl.
See
dDiv
isio
n
Firs
tLin
e
Jaco
bHar
tz(1
995)
Asg
row
Hol
dens
Ren
esse
nC
argi
ll
Cal
gene
Car
gillN
orth
Am
eric
a
Agr
acet
us
PB
IC
Uni
leve
r
Mon
soy
FT
Sem
ente
s
Del
taP
ineL
and
Syn
gent
aGlo
balC
otto
nDiv
isio
n
Em
erge
ntG
enet
ics
Par
as
Mah
endr
a
Dae
hnfe
ldt
AS
I
Cha
nnel
Bio
Cro
ws
Mid
wes
tSee
dGen
etic
s
Wils
onS
eeds
Gol
dCou
ntry
Her
itage
See
ds
NC
Plu
sHyb
rids
Spe
cial
tyH
ybrid
s
Fon
tane
lle
Ste
war
tSee
ds
Tre
layS
eeds
Sto
neS
eeds
Cor
nBel
t
Adv
anta
Can
ola
Hub
nerS
eed
Lew
isH
ybrid
s
RE
A
Mow
eaqu
aSee
ds
iCO
RN
JungB
oCa
Inte
rsta
teC
anol
a
Sen
sako
Agr
oest
e
CD
MM
andi
yu
Cia
gro
Car
nia
Die
ner
Sie
ben
Kru
ger
Tris
ler
Cam
pbel
lSee
d
Fie
lder
sCho
ice
Hea
rtla
ndH
ybrid
s
Haw
keye
Neb
rask
aIrr
igat
ed
Lim
agra
inC
anad
a
Pol
oni
ISG
Wes
tern
Peo
tec
Mah
yco
Ter
raza
wa
DeR
uite
r
Aly
Par
ticip
acoe
sMar
mot C
otto
nSta
tes
Sto
nevi
lle
Cor
nSta
tesH
ybrid
Cor
nSta
tesI
ntl
Eco
gen
CN
DK
Chi
naS
eed
EID
Par
ryR
allis
Bay
er
Gus
tafs
on
Nun
hem
s(1
995)
Par
agon
See
dEx
Ave
ntis
Agr
Evo
Sch
erin
g
Pro
agro
Sem
ente
sRib
eira
l
Sem
ente
sFar
tura
Mitl
aPes
quis
a
Gra
nja4
Irm
aos
Agr
Evo
Cot
ton
PG
S
Pla
nTec
Bio
tech
Gen
eXS
orgh
um
Cot
tonS
eedI
ntl
Sun
seed
s
KW
S
Hoe
chst
Nun
za(1
986)
Rho
neP
oule
nc
Leen
DeM
os
Rio
Col
orad
o
Cal
iforn
iaP
lant
ingC
otto
n
Rel
ianc
eGen
etic
s
Ass
ocF
arm
ersD
elin
ting
Nid
eraS
emill
as
Nid
era
Du
Po
nt
Pio
neer
Cur
ryS
eed
Sha
ndon
gDen
ghai
Pio
neer
Den
ghai
Dun
huan
g
Dun
huan
gPio
neer
Doi
sMar
cos
Hyb
rinov
a
Pro
tein
Tec
h. In
t./S
olae
Opt
imum
Qua
lityG
rain
s
Syn
gen
taSP
S
Gol
denH
arve
st
Gol
dsm
ith
Res
ourc
eSee
ds
Zer
aim
Ged
era
San
bei
Fis
cher
Adv
anta
NA
Cor
nSoy
bean
s
Gar
st
Inte
rsta
teP
ayco
Agr
iPro
PS
AG
enet
ics
Gut
wei
n
Dia
Eng
eiN
ovar
tis
Cib
aGei
gy
San
doz
Ast
raZ
enec
a
Ast
raZ
enec
aM
ogen
ExS
eed
Thu
rsto
n
Mai
sado
ur
Koi
peso
lAgr
osem
Agr
a
Erid
ania
Beg
hinS
ay/
Koi
pe
Stu
rdyG
row
Lan
d
O'L
akes
Agr
itrad
ing
Nor
thru
pKin
g
Lim
agra
in-V
ilmo
rin
Adv
anta
EU
Veg
etab
le
Wes
thov
e
Har
risM
oran
Cla
use
Bio
gem
ma
Rho
Bio
AgR
elia
nt
Wen
sman
Pro
duce
rsH
ybrid
s
Loch
owP
etku
s(1
967)
CP
BT
wyf
ord
Haz
eraC
arlS
perli
ng
Kyo
wa In
nose
eds
Bio
See
ds
Van
denB
ergGer
mai
nsC
otto
n
Hol
land
Cot
tons
eed
eldS
eedD
elin
ting
Hel
enaC
otto
n
Indu
sem
Agr
ocer
es
Bar
ham
Pet
osee
d(1
995)
Roy
alS
luis
(199
5)
Cho
ongA
ng
Hor
ticer
es
Bru
insm
a(1
994)
Gen
ecor
p(1
994)
Hun
gnon
g
Gre
enLe
afG
enet
ics
Ver
dia
Ave
stha
gen
Con
radF
afar
d
Long
Rea
ch
AW
B
BA
SF
Sva
lofW
eibu
ll
Sw
agha
t
Cee
Kay
Aus
tral
ianG
rain
Tec
h
Yua
nLon
gpin
g
Do
w
Dai
ryla
ndS
eed
Myc
ogen
Bio
Pla
ntR
esea
rch
Ren
zeH
ybrid
s
Agr
omen
MT
ISud
wes
tsaa
t
Bro
dbec
k
Duo
Mai
ze
Triu
mph
Em
pres
aBra
sile
ira
Hyt
est
AB
IAlfa
lfa
Spe
cial
tyG
rain
s
Coo
pera
tiveB
usin
essI
ntl
Agr
ilian
ce
Cen
exH
arve
st
Far
mla
ndIn
dust
ries
Cen
ex
Har
vest
Sta
tes
SO
YG
EN
ET
ICS
FF
RC
oop
Nic
kers
onV
erne
uil
Mor
gan
Uni
tedA
gris
eeds
Hib
ridos
Col
orad
o
Bio
gene
ticaD
eMilh
o
Din
amilh
oCar
ol
Phy
toge
n
JGB
osw
ell
Illin
oisF
ound
atio
n
Adv
ance
dAgr
iTra
its
See
d In
dust
ry S
truc
ture
19
96
- 2
00
8
Phi
l How
ard,
Ass
ista
nt P
rofe
ssor
, Mic
higa
n S
tate
Uni
vers
ityht
tp://
ww
w.m
su.e
du/~
how
ardp
Pha
rmac
eutic
al/C
hem
ical
Com
pani
es
Zim
mer
man
See
d C
ompa
nies
Oth
er C
ompa
nies
Par
tial O
wne
rshi
pS
ize
prop
ortio
nal t
o gl
obal
see
d m
arke
t sha
re
Ful
l Ow
ners
hip
Sun
seed
s
Cro
pDes
ign
(199
5)
Rou
ssel
-Ucl
af
Bun
ge
2000
-
2010
-
2020
-
2030
-
2040
-
2050
-
600 -
500 -
400 -
300 -
200 -
100 -
0 -
non-OECD
Bill
ion
m3
OECD
0
17.90
60.27
10.04
10.04
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Mix of preparation methods
Carbon footprint in the use phase
g CO2 e / cup of coffee
Automatic coffee machine
Filter drip
French press
1.5 -
1.0 -
0.5 -
0 -
-0.5 -
-1.0 -
-1.5 -
-2.0 -
-2.5 -
-3.0 -
Weighted average
Kg.
of C
O2-e
Average
Fertilizerproduction
Cropresidue
management
Fertilizerinduced
emissions
Pesticides
Carbonstock
change
Totalemissions
1960
-
1970
-
1980
-
1990
-
2000
-
2010
-
10 -
9 -
8 -
7 -
6 -
5 -
4 -
3 -
2 -
1 -
All fertilizers (1961=31.2 Mt)
Rat
io (1
961=
1)
Nitrogenous fertilizers (1961=11.6 Mt)
1961
-196
5 -
1966
-197
0 -
1971
-197
5 -
1976
-198
0 -
1981
-198
5 -
1986
-199
0 -
1991
-199
5 -
1996
-200
0 -
2001
-200
5 -
2006
-200
8 -
50 000-
40 000-
30 000-
20 000-
10 000-
0-
Soybeans (cake weight)
Mill
ion
s o
f to
ns
Cake of soy
120 -
100 -
80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
0 -
Cow to be replaced
Mo
nth
s
Substitute cow
Cow
External factors (e.g. entrepreneurs)
Desire for security and wealth
Overfishing
Ecosystem degradationand soil erosion
Breakdown of nutrientcycling and loss of
soil fertility/structure
Increased use ofagrichemicals
Increasedcosts
Pollution of waterways,
aquifers and wetland
Increasedhealth risks
Loss of incomefrom food crops and wildlife
Increasedvulnerability to HIV/AIDS
Other external factors(e.g. war and disasters)
Loss of biodiversity
Breakdown of ecosystem function
Loss of crop yields
Hunger andmalnutrition
Declining livelihoods,leading to poverty and social deprivation
Regulated by social organizations at thecommunity level
OvergrazingDeforestation
Unsustainable use of soils and water
Regulated bysocial organizations
at national andinternational level
0
2
4
6
8
10
Weeks 2 6 10 14
Actual yield Biological yield potential
Filling the gap - Step 1 Filling the gap - Step 2+3
Crop
yie
ld (t
ons/
ha)
Weeks
Steps 2+3
Yield Gap
Step 1
External factors (e.g. entrepreneurs)
Desire for security and wealth
Overfishing
Ecosystem degradationand soil erosion
Breakdown of nutrientcycling and loss of
soil fertility/structure
Increased use ofagrichemicals
Increasedcosts
Pollution of waterways,
aquifers and wetland
Increasedhealth risks
Loss of incomefrom food crops and wildlife
Increasedvulnerability to HIV/AIDS
Other external factors(e.g. war and disasters)
Breakdown of ecosystem function
Loss of crop yields
Hunger andmalnutrition
Declining livelihoods,leading to poverty and social deprivation
Regulated by social organizations at thecommunity level
OvergrazingDeforestation
Unsustainable use of soils and water
Regulated bysocial organizations
at national andinternational level
STEP 1
STEPs2 + 3
DIVERSIFY
GENERATE INCOME
Loss of crop yields
Focus of AF
Loss of bio diversity
Inco
me
US$
30.000
2 Years
5 Years
10 Years
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
-
US
$ 1
45
US
$ 2
8.3
50
US
$ 1
6.0
00
1995
- -
1997
- -
1999
- -
2001
- -
2003
- -
2005
- -
2009
-
3.0 -
2.5 -
2.0 -
1.5 -
1.0 -
0.5 -
- 100
- 80
- 60
- 40
- 20
- 0
Western Europe/ Canada rapeseed productivity
Western Europe/ United States rapeseed productivity
Western Europe/ United States maize productivity
Rat
io o
f yie
ld (H
g/H
a)
Perc
enta
ge
of G
M
United States maize
United States rapeseed
Canada rapeseed
1992
-
1997
-
2002
-
2007
-
3 200 -
3 000 -
2 800 -
2 600 -
2 400 -
2 200 -
2 000 -
Chile
Columbia
Venezuela
Peru
Bolivia
kcal
/per
son
/day
1992
-
1997
-
2002
-
2007
-
3 400 -
3 200 -
3 000 -
2 800 -
2 600 -
2 400 -
2 200 -
2 000 -
- 0.7
- 0.6
- 0.5
- 0.4
- 0.3
- 0.2
- 0.1
- 0.0
kcal
/per
son
/ d
ay
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f ara
ble
farm
lan
d u
nd
er G
M c
rop
s
Argentina (kcal)
Uruguay(proportion of GM)
Paraguay(proportion of GM)
Brazil(proportion of GM)
Argentina(proportion of GM)
Brazil (kcal)
Paraguay (kcal)
Uruguay (kcal)
Bene
fits
Agricultural potential
Negative
High
High Medium Low None
Main focus for multi-functional agricultural landscapes
Actual production benefits
Potential production benefits
Actual environmental benefits at the farm level
Potential environmental benefits at the farm levelPotential environmental benefits at the agricultural landscape
Low
1
2
34
5
1
2
3
4
5
1970
-
1975
-
1980
-
1985
-
1990
-
1995
-
2000
-
2005
-
2010
-
6 -
5 -
4 -
3 -
2 -
1 -
0 -
Fertilizer Price Index / Food Price Index(ratio 1970 = 1)
2000
-
2001
-
2002
-
2003
-
2004
-
2005
-
2006
-
2007
-
2008
-
2009
-
2010
-
225 -
200 -
175 -
150 -
125 -
100 -
75 -
50 -
25 -
0 -
UN
FA
O fo
od
ind
ex
US
do
llars
per
bar
rell
FAO food index
Price of oil
- 225
- 200
- 175
- 150
- 125
- 100
- 75
- 50
- 25
- 0
Jan
. 200
6 -
Mar
. 200
6 -
May
200
6 -
Jul.
2006
-
Sep
. 200
6 -
Nov
. 200
6 -
Jan
. 200
7 -
Mar
. 200
7 -
May
200
7 -
Jul.
2007
-
Sep
. 200
7 -
Nov
. 200
7 -
Jan
. 200
8 -
Mar
. 200
8 -
May
200
8 -
Jul.
2008
-
Sep
. 200
8 -
Nov
. 200
8 -
Jan
. 200
9 -
Mar
. 200
9 -
May
200
9 -
Jul.
2009
-
Sep
. 200
9 -
Nov
. 200
9 -
200 -
180 -
160 -
140 -
120 -
100 -
80 -
- 14,000
- 12,000
- 10,000
- 8,000
- 6,000
- 4,000
- 2,000
5,03
8 5,85
3
6, 3
99 7,05
3 7,75
8 12,3
89
3,39
2
3,10
1
OTC contracts ($ bn)
Primary commodity price index
Co
mm
od
ity
pri
ce in
dex
Sale
s va
lue
of O
TC c
on
trac
ts in
$ b
n
01.01.2008 01.01.2010
160 -
140 -
120 -
100 -
80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
2008 2009 2010 2011
160 -
140 -
120 -
100 -
80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
Dow Jones Industrial Average
Dow Jones UBS Commodity Index
Perc
enta
ge
750
700
650
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
2001970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Polynimial
World Consumption
Linear
Linear
World Production
Polynimial
• SEKEM engages with all of it’s stakeholders in a holistic and transparent way
• In 2010, the SEKEM Companies and Foundation employed 1 856 and 271 people respectively
• SEKEM actively endorses the UN Global Compact principles and promotes human rights together with the Cooperative of SEKEM Employees (CSE)
• SEKEM was awarded by UniFern to provide all its female employees with equal oppor-
tunities• SEKEM is at the forefront of national
and international initiatives for sustainable development
• The SEKEM Development Foundation (SDF) operates a broad range of educa-tional institutions, provides health services and supports the cultural and artistic development of SEKEM employees and members of the surrounding communities
• To spread knowledge about biodynamic agriculture, SEKEM established the Egyp-tian Biodynamic Association (EBDA)
• SEKEM established the Helipolis Academy for Sustainable Development to foster research and development
• The core business of the SEKEM group are land reclamation, organic farming, phyto-pharmaceutical and textile production
• The SEKEM companies include the largest producer of organic tea and the largest producer of organic herbs in the Middle East
• SEKEM companies are compliant with 14 international standars and certificates (Demeter, Fairtrade, ISO, etc.)
• The SEKEM group has implemented a comprehensive management system, integrating the four dimensions of sustain-able development and annually reports on progress and achievements
• SEKEM cultivates 1 628 feddan (ca 684 ha) of farmland and its suppliers from the EBDA cultivate more than 7 200 feddan (ca 3 000 ha)
• Roughly 30 percent of raw materials used in processing come from SEKEM firms
• SEKEM constantly monitors and improves the efficiency of water usage and energy consumption
• One of the major priorities of SEKEM is caring about the fertility of soil and the biodiversity of plants and the related ecosystem
• Animal husbandry at SEKEM includes cattle, chickens, bees and pigeons, all living accord-ing to Demeter standards
CulturalLife
SocialLife
EcologyEconomicLife
