Rebecca Burgess: A pioneer in local and regenerative fiber systems

/by

Rebecca Burgess is a pioneer in local and regenerative fiber systems. I (Lizzy Kahn, Social Media Manager of Kiss The Ground) was thrilled to connect with her and learn more about why she went on this path, why textiles? Lizzy knew the fashion industry is one of the most wasteful in the world. I also knew that most of the clothes in my nearby shopping mall were made oversees in probably not-so-great conditions. My big question was why and how was Rebecca going to transform our way of thinking about and making clothes?

***

RB: I had been traveling and in Southeast Asia in 2005. The factories I visited at that time were producing for western consumption. I saw color of dye in the nearby water ways, women and children working in harsh conditions all serving western markets. I knew this wasn’t right and I knew from that experience it had to change.

I got that the more we consume, the more you stress the people and all the ecosystems that are impacted by the supply chain. If we bring our production home and take responsibility for its impacts, we begin to get up close and personal with the costs of garment creation. I’ve experienced how proximity breeds a new ethic of appreciation, through an enhanced understanding and sensitivity for agriculture and manufacturing. Bringing production into our own auspices also takes the pressure off places in the world that do not have significant labor and environmental protections to ensure fair wages, clean water and air.We have infiltrated these lands and their communities with western ways. We’ve disrupted their culture, land, and tradition.

LK: How do we begin to change this system?

RB: We are encouraging a shift in perspective that there is beauty in reducing consumption and moving towards purchasing regeneratively farmed, naturally dyed, locally labored & constructed goods. This outreach work is part of our organization’s educational mission.  Also known as the“The Zen Wardrobe” we admonish efforts for people to focus on what they really need. The idea is to just bring total mindfulness around clothing.

There is not much within the current global system of production that can truly sustain over the long haul given the water and climate implications of the current means of production. Some aspects are there but more accurately we need to focus on all of our systems becoming ”regenerative”. We want to create and support regenerative systems that bring life back and leave the environment better off than it was when we started.

LK: How is Fibershed working to improve this?

RB: We’ve been promoting a couple of things, particularly partnering with for-profits and non-profits that are working on developing the policy and infrastructure changes and shifts needed to bring a regional and regenerative ‘Soil-to-Soil’ clothing system into being. We need to support strategic changes in agricultural practices as well as the manufacturing systems that add value to the material. We encourage relationship building between farmers, ranchers and endusers, as these relationships tend to develop into new local production based businesses.

LK: Lastly, a recent documentary called “The True Cost” came out this past summer and focused on the fast fashion’s impact on the environment and social well being – what do you think about fast fashion?

RB: I don’t know why anyone would wear it. It is a health risk exposing yourself to a store full of a toxic dyes and fabrics that have been treated with endocrine disruptors and neurotoxins. Think about it, if you don’t want to eat it [chemicals], you don’t want to wear it.

Wearers must demand a new paradigm.

VISIT FIBERSHED’S WEBSITE
ORIGINAL ARTICLE ON KISS THE GROUND

A Great Day: Saving the World from Catastrophic Climate Change

/by

[ English | Español ]

Author: Courtney White

“Dec 1, 2015, will be one of the most important days in human history. It will be seen as the tipping point when the world was saved from catastrophic climate change.” – André Leu, President of the IFOAM (Organics International)

One of the most significant events at the recent UN climate summit in Paris went largely unnoticed.

We know the headlines: In an effort to slow dangerous climate change, representatives from 197 nations concluded a two-week marathon of negotiations by signing a breakthrough agreement that commits governments to targeted reductions in greenhouse gas emissions starting in 2020.

This was justifiably big news. After 20 years of failed attempts to craft an international consensus on climate action, most spectacularly in Copenhagen in 2009, the world simply had to get its act together. It did so, to well-earned applause, on December 12, 2015.

So what happened on December 1?

That’s the day the French government launched the 4 per 1000 Initiative: Soils for Food Security and Climate, a plan to fight climate change with soil carbon. The initiative’s goal is this: to increase global soil carbon stocks by 0.4 percent per year by drawing down atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) via the increased photosynthesis of regenerative farming and land use.

On the surface, that may not sound like a lot of carbon, (it amounts to 10 billion tons of carbon per year sequestered in global soils), but French scientists say it’s enough to halt human-induced annual increases in CO2 globally.

That sounds like a front page headline to me!

How will the initiative succeed? The key is regenerative agriculture. France, for example, intends to hit its 4/1000 target by employing agro-ecological practices on 50 percent of its farms by 2020.

Agro-ecological practices restore damaged land and build biologically healthy soil through the use of cover crops, perennial plants, no-till farming, and livestock grazing patterns that mimic nature. If managed properly, these nature-based practices not only increase carbon stocks in soil, they also can dramatically reduce the amount of greenhouse gases produced by the use of fossil fuel in industrial agriculture, one of the biggest polluters on the planet.

Agro-ecological practices also increase resilience to climate change. In an op-ed published days after the French announcement in Paris, Michael Pollan and Deborah Barker wrote:

Regenerative farming would also increase the fertility of the land, making it more productive and better able to absorb and hold water, a critical function especially in times of climate-related floods and droughts. Carbon-rich fields require less synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and generate more productive crops, cutting farmer expenses.

Those are bold, but as we’ll see later, realistic claims. But here’s the best news: Regenerative agriculture is a shovel-ready solution to climate change.

Agro-ecological practices are practical, profitable and have been ground-tested by farmers and ranchers around the world for decades. In fact, shovel-readiness is a big reason why more than 100 nations, international NGOs and farmers’ organizations signed onto the 4/1000 Initiative–and why many more have signed on since then.

After years of neglect, soil carbon is now viewed as key to how the world manages climate change. “[It] has become a global initiative,” said French Agriculture Minister Stéphane Le Foll. “We need to mobilize even more stakeholders in a transition to achieve both food security and climate mitigation thanks to agriculture.”

“The time for talking is finished,” said IFOAM’s André Leu. “Now is the time for doing. The technology is available to everyone. It is up to us to mobilize in time. Let’s start working to get this done and give our world a better future.”

Paying for regeneration

A critical step will be creating a viable carbon economy where regenerative farmers and ranchers can be paid to build soil carbon. This has been a difficult challenge so far, but thanks to the Paris Agreement, 197 nations now have a huge incentive to draw down their emissions to meet official targets. And regenerative agriculture can help get them there.

From the carbon emitter’s perspective, offsetting carbon dioxide emissions with verifiable increases in soil carbon, validated now by the French government’s 4/1000 Initiative, will likely stimulate other nations to create market-based mechanisms which, in turn, will encourage farmers and ranchers to adopt regenerative practices, round and round. From society’s perspective, all this is great news!

Creating carbon markets isn’t a new idea. Over the past twenty years, a variety of efforts have been made to energize a voluntary carbon credit trading system, including programs in Europe, Australia, New England, California, and Vancouver, British Columbia, each with varying degrees of success. In New Mexico, where I live, the state legislature considered a bill in 2015 that would have created a policy framework for enacting a carbon credit system–a first for the state.

New Mexico attempted to established a carbon credit as a contract right and to create a five-member board to review and audit the credits as potential offsets for carbon emitters. The board specifically identified the removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and its accumulation within plants, soils and geologic formations as a legitimate means by which a credit can be created–also a first (specifically, one carbon credit equaled one metric ton of CO2 or its equivalent).

Unfortunately, the bill didn’t become law, and it’s not the only model for paying for regeneration. But the bill represents an important step toward stimulating market-based responses to climate change.

Serious concerns about the shortcomings of carbon offset markets (sometimes called cap-and-trade) have been raised. This is especially true for organic, regenerative and family-scale agriculture, which could easily be pushed aside by large industrial producers. Here’s a useful primer on how climate-friendly agriculture can be treated fairly in a carbon economy.

The bottom line is this: We need state and federal policies that make the polluters pay, create publicly-controlled pools of money, and pay regenerative farmers and ranchers for building carbon stocks in their soils.

Science is on our side

Markets and their regulators will require sound science and hard numbers–credible and verifiable–to work effectively. This is a challenge, however, because understanding soil carbon involves chemistry, biology, ecology, hydrology, and agronomy—which means the science can get complex quickly, for researchers and laypeople alike. Fortunately, there has been a veritable explosion of soil carbon science recently, creating a clearer portrait of carbon’s potentials.

One researcher whose work has shed exciting light on regenerative agriculture is Dr. David Johnson, a molecular biologist at New Mexico State University. Johnson believes that “getting the biology right” is critical to creating significant increases in soil carbon stocks.

It’s essentially a two-step process, according to Johnson: (1) get life back into soils that have been stripped of their biological fertility by industrial agriculture; and (2) employ practices that bring about a shift in the soil from bacteria-dominated to fungi-dominated communities. The latter is important because fungi are the “carbon brokers” between plant roots and soil microbes. This process also improves soil structure which improves its ability to resist erosion–equally crucial to long-term carbon storage.

Of course, all of this soil rebuilding can be undone by the plow, which exposes microbes to the killing effect of heat and light. That’s why not turning the soil over is a key component of regenerative agriculture.

Johnson’s research also shows that “getting the biology right” reduces the amount of carbon that is “burped” back into the atmosphere (as CO2) by microbes as a waste product. This is important because the viability of long-term carbon storage in soils–and thus the size of monetary payments to farmers and ranchers from markets–depend on there being more carbon flowing into the soil system than flowing back out.

It’s not just about money. Additional carbon improves plant productivity, improves water infiltration and soil water-holding capacity, reduces the use of synthetic amendments, and promotes a healthy environment for pollinators and other beneficial insects.

A win-win for the land and ourselves!

Johnson notes that nature is three to four times more productive than any agricultural system yet devised by humans. And nature achieves that productivity without pesticides, synthetic amendments, irrigation or monocropping.

“Shouldn’t we be asking what we’re doing wrong?” Johnson said in an interview. “Plus, nature had the capacity to increase soil carbon in the past. Our task is to find out how it was done and mimic it in our current practices.”

Improved soil fertility, better food, more efficient use of water, reduced pollution, fewer energy requirements, better animal health, increased biodiversity, and keeping global warming in check–all possible for as little as 4 per 1000 a year!

For more information see:

Carbon Sequestration Potential on Agricultural Land by Daniel Kane, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

Soil Carbon Restoration: Can Biology Do the Job? by Jack Kittredge, Northeast Organic Farming Association

***

Courtney White, co-founder and former executive director of the Quivira Coalition, is the author of multiple essays and books, including “Grass, Soil, Hope: A Journey Through Carbon Country” and “The Age of Consequences.”  

French Ministry of Agriculture Official, Leading U.S. Soil Scientists Outline Plan to Stall Global Warming through Soil Carbon Sequestration

/by

Regeneration International, IFOAM Organics International and other NGOs Host Experts and Media for Critical Climate-Agriculture Discussion

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 9, 2016

CONTACT: Katherine Paul, katherine@regenerationinternational.org, 207-653-3090; Alexis Baden-Mayer, alexis@organicconsumers.org, 202-744-0853; Ercilia Sahores, ercilia@regenerationinternational.org

WASHINGTON DC—Today Catherine Geslain-Lanéelle, Director General for the Economic and Environmental Performance of Enterprises of the French Ministry of Agriculture spoke to climate and agriculture reporters and climate and food activists about “4 per 1000: Soils for Food Security and Climate,” an initiative to mitigate, and eventually reverse, climate change. The Initiative, launched in December at the COP21 Climate Summit in Paris, calls for countries to increase soil carbon worldwide by 0.4% per year. So far, 26 countries and more than 50 organizations have formally signed on to the initiative.

Also speaking at today’s event, held at the National Press Club, was André Leu, president of IFOAM Organics International, and leading soil scientists: David C. Johnson, Ph.D., New Mexico State University; Kris Nichols, Ph.D., Rodale Institute; Tim LaSalle, Ph.D., Cal Poly San Luis Obispo; and Richard Teague, Ph.D., Texas A & M. (Full bios here)

Leu told the audience: “The French Government 4 per 1000 Initiative is a fantastic win, win, win for the planet. By changing agriculture to one that regenerates soil organic carbon we not only reverse climate change we can improve farm yields, increase water holding capacity and drought resilience, reduce the use of toxic agrochemicals, improve farm profitability and produce higher quality food.”

LaSalle said: “If we stopped all GHG emissions today, the planet would still warm for the next 40 years.  We absolutely must stop the emissions.  But what is now also imperative is that we reduce this legacy of CO2 in our atmosphere and oceans.  We have mechanism to do this through photosynthesis and our soils.  And with the right incentives in place, our farmers and ranchers the world over can perform this heroic feat. But this is key: We must create the proper incentives for our civilization’s survival.”

Teague said: “Data from leading conservation ranchers in North America indicates that with appropriate grazing management the goal of the COP21 Climate Summit in Paris to increase soil carbon on grazed agricultural land by 0.4% per year can be exceeded by a factor of 2 or 3. With appropriate grazing management, ruminant livestock consuming only grazed rangeland and forages can increase C sequestered in the soil to more than offset their GHG emissions. This would result in a GHG-negative footprint, while at the same time supporting and improving other essential ecosystem services for local populations. Affected ecosystem services include water infiltration, nutrient cycling, soil formation, reduction of soil erosion, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and wildlife habitat.”

Nichols said: “Research shows that soils are carbon-deficient, which is not only causing problems with soil erosion, but also negatively impacting air and water quality, water management, increasing flooding and drought, and negatively impacting nutrient cycling in soil and nutritive quality of food. Organic farming practices will regenerate soils by putting carbon back into the earth.”

Johnson said: “Microbes have fashioned the destiny of our planet for over 4 billion years, and they currently facilitate the day-to-day cycling of all earth’s elemental components flowing between terrestrial, oceanic and atmospheric environments. In efforts to sustain our civilizations over the past 200-plus years, we have employed agricultural practices that exhaust soil carbon resources, a practice that in the past has invariably led to the downfall of many civilizations. Restoring the population, structure and function of microbes in soils of our agroecosystems will begin the process of building soil health, and in turn promote development of mutualisms between plants and microbes towards improving soil fertility and soil carbon reserves while concurrently reducing atmospheric CO2.”

Joining Regeneration International in organizing today’s event were Biodiversity for a Livable Climate, GrassPower, IFOAM Organics International, Rodale Institute and Soil4Climate.

Additional materials:

Speaker bios
Fact Sheet
Program

Regeneration International,  a project of the Organic Consumers Association, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to building a global network of farmers, scientists, businesses, activists, educators, journalists, governments and consumers who will promote and put into practice regenerative agriculture and land-use practices that: provide abundant, nutritious food; revive local economies; rebuild soil fertility and biodiversity; and restore climate stability by returning carbon to the soil, through the natural process of photosynthesis. 

Reconnecting with—and regenerating—our grasslands

/by

Author: Deanna Pogorelc

This farmer and rancher says an important global movement is underway.

After working for several years as a farmer and rancher at a family farm in the Sacramento Valley, Chris Kerston is now helping promote large-scale restoration of grasslands through holistic management as the director of events and public outreach for the Savory Institute.

While there’s still a lot of work to be done on restoring the land, there’s a big, global movement happening on every continent: Kerston notes that more than 60 million acres of land across the globe being are managed holistically.

He’ll be joining Organic India CEO Kyle Garner, IFOAM Organics International President Andre Leu and Organic Connections Editor Anna Soref on a soil health panel at Natural Products Expo West to talk about just that. Here, he provides some background and context to frame the conversation.

What are some of the major barriers that are keeping more producers from looking at livestock in a more holistic way?

Chris Kerston: This is a difficult question to answer because everyone wants a tangible thing that is what’s in the way to opening this up to the whole world, and the sad part of the answer is that what’s in the way is the human mind. It’s what people believe is possible and what matches with their culture and with how they think things are supposed to be. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t market and policy barriers, but the biggest barrier in terms of widespread global adoption toward regenerative farming is in the way that we think. It’s ‘is this possible?’ and, if somebody believes it’s not possible, they’ll find every way to make it not possible.

KEEP READING ON NEW HOPE 360

Meet John D. Liu, the Indiana Jones of Landscape Restoration

/by

[ English | Español ]

He’s known to some as the “Indiana Jones” of landscape degradation and restoration.

John D. Liu, ecosystem restoration researcher, educator and filmmaker, has dedicated his life to sharing real-world examples of once-degraded landscapes newly restored to their original fertile and biodiverse beauty. Liu is director of the Environmental Education Media Project (EEMP), ecosystem ambassador for the Commonland Foundation and a visiting research fellow at the Netherlands Institute of Ecology of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.

We recently sat down with Liu, the newest member of the Regeneration International (RI) Steering Committee. In this interview, Liu walks us through large-scale ecosystem restoration projects in China and Rwanda. We learn that when humans work with nature, degraded landscapes can be restored in a matter of years, and economies can be regenerated, putting food security and climate change mitigation within our reach.

In order to survive as a species, Liu explains, humanity must shift from commodifying nature to ‘naturalizing’ our economy.

Interview with John D. Liu, February 4, 2016

RI: What is the significance of the Paris Agreement, reached at the COP21 Climate Summit in December (2015), for the pioneers, such as yourself, of the landscape restoration movement?

Liu: There is now recognition of soil carbon, which was not the case in the past. The best and perhaps only way for humanity to massively affect carbon disequilibrium in the atmosphere is to restore natural ecological function of soils through the restoration of biomass, biodiversity and accumulated organic matter.

One of the things that I have been learning about, and that has most impressed me, is the difference between natural systems, which have huge organic layers, and human systems, which are massively degraded and actually have lost their organic material.

In Paris, we’ve started to turn the corner. Instead of just talking about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, we’re now seeing [climate change] spoken about as a holistic problem. When you see it holistically, you find out that CO2 and GHG emissions are a symptom of systematic dysfunction on a planetary scale… Human impact on the climate is not simply emissions; it is degradation.

There is a way forward. That is why I am so excited about the early work I did in the Loess Plateau and in Ethiopia, Rwanda and other countries. When you increase organic matter, you increase biomass and you protect biodiversity. You get a completely different result than if you just totally destroy those systems. So I don’t think that the political agreements go far enough, but they are starting to reflect reality, which is better than before.

RI: In Paris, RI encountered skepticism about the potential power of regenerative agriculture and landscape restoration to restore climate stability and feed the world. Can you tell us about your experience with the Loess Plateau restoration project in China and how it impacted your perspective on the potential of restoration?

Liu: There was a moment in the mid-1800s when Thomas Malthus reported that the rate of agricultural increase was happening arithmetically while human population growth was logarithmic. He posited huge famine and this pushed the development of industrial agriculture. But what I’ve seen is that this is based on huge assumptions and those assumptions are basically false. If you think that you can get higher productivity by reducing hydrological function, or the natural fertility in the land or the biodiversity of a biome then you are just sadly mistaken. You can get higher yields of monocultures for a short time but you ultimately destroy the basic fundamental viability of the entire system. So you are creating deserts. This is what happened in the Loess Plateau and this is what happened in every cradle of civilization.

It isn’t inevitable that human beings degrade these systems; we simply have to understand them. It is our understanding, our consciousness of these systems that determines what they look like. What I’ve noticed is that degraded landscapes are coming from human ignorance and greed. If you change that scenario to one of consciousness and generosity, you get a completely different outcome. And that is where we have to go, where we need to go. We are required to understand this. We have to act now as a species on a planetary scale. This has to become common knowledge for every human being on the planet. This has been our mission for the past 20-some years.

RI: Apart from the ecosystem benefits, the Loess Plateau project also helped lift 2.5 million people in four of the poorest provinces in China out of poverty. Is that correct?

Liu: Well, there are different ways to look at it because the Loess Plateau project influenced more than just the project areas. It changed national policy. Some of the negative behaviors, such as slope farming, tree cutting or free ranging of goats and sheep—behaviors that were devastating to biodiversity, biomass and organic material—were banned nationwide because of the work done on the Loess Plateau.

Landscape restoration does not only change ecological function, it changes the socio-economic function and when you get down to it, it changes the intention of human society. So if the intention of human society is to extract, to manufacture, to buy and sell things, then we are still going to have a lot of problems. But when we generate an understanding that the natural ecological functions that create air, water, food and energy are vastly more valuable than anything that has ever been produced or bought and sold, or anything that ever will be produced and bought and sold – this is the point where we turn the corner to a consciousness which is much more sustainable.

RI: It’s almost as if a global paradigm shift is needed to start accounting for nature in the economy. ‘Naturalizing’ the economy as you would say.

Liu: We have to be very careful not to commoditize nature. We need to naturalize the economy. What this means to me is that natural ecological functions are more valuable than ‘stuff.’ When we understand that, then the economy is based on ecological function. And that is exactly what we need in order to mitigate and adapt to climate change, to ensure food security, and to give every individual on the planet equal human rights. Suddenly we are in another paradigm. It’s similar to the shift from flat earth to round earth paradigm.

We need to realize that there is no ‘us and them.’ There is just us. There is one earth and one humanity. We have to act as a species on a planetary scale because we will all be affected by climate change. We have to come together to decide: What do we know? What do we understand? What do we believe as a species?

RI: Tell us about your work in Rwanda.

Liu: Rwanda is an interesting case study because of the 1994 genocide. This sort of a situation is ground zero. It is a reset. Every family, every person was affected. In 2006, I was invited to Rwanda by the British government and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). What I saw in my travels were bare hillsides, erosion and sediment loads in river systems. I presented my findings to the president, prime minister, parliament, cabinet, ministries of environment and agriculture, universities and press. We put films on TV. I explained each of these natural systems and what you have to do to correct it. And at the same moment in time, everyone in Rwanda was talking about ecological function.

Several weeks later, the government wrote me a letter saying thank you for coming to Rwanda to share your experiences. Then they wrote me a second letter, in which  they said we believe you and we’re rewriting our land use policy laws to reflect that economic development in Rwanda must be based on ecological function.

The measures Rwanda has taken have led to regeneration. They had food security when there was famine in East Africa. They have had increasing use of renewable energies and lessening of dependence on fossil fuels. If human beings can go to hell yet they can somehow come back and work to build a fair, equitable and sustainable society, that is a good thing. We need to watch carefully how Rwanda develops, as a lesson for the world.

RI: Can you tell us about the widespread detrimental impacts that industrial agriculture is having, particularly with regards to loss of biodiversity? Why is biodiversity essential to sustain life as we know it?

Liu: Evolutionary trends favor more biodiversity, more organic matter. The industrial or degenerative agriculture model favors less biodiversity, less biomass, less organic matter. This disrupts photosynthesis, hydrological regulation and moisture, temperature and it artificially elevates evaporation rates. Industrial agriculture sterilizes soil with UV radiation. It is just wrongheaded.

Humans went down the wrong path. But once we begin to understand these evolutionary trends, we understand that we have to get back in alignment with them. That is where regenerative agriculture and landscape restoration come in. We’ve seen the results at large scale and we’ve seen them on a smaller scale. This is the way forward for sequestration of carbon, this is the way forward for fertile healthy soils, this is the way forward for food security this is the way forward for meaningful work for everyone. We understand this. This is the basis of wealth and sustainability for humanity.

RI: If there were one behavior or habit of humans that you could magically change, what would it be?

Liu: It is clear right now that economics is driving today’s problems. There are a lot of assumptions in economics that are simply false. Economics now says that extraction, manufacturing, buying and selling can create wealth. This is bullshit. We are creating poverty by doing this. We are creating degradation of the landscapes. So few people in a tiny minority are accumulating vast material possessions in this system, while billions of people are living in abject poverty at the edges of large degraded ecosystems. Others can no longer even stay in their homes, and millions of people are migrating to escape from the horrible conditions. Well this cannot work. This must change.

What I have noticed is that ecological function is vastly more valuable that extraction, production, consumption, and buying and selling things. What we really need to understand is: “What is money?” If I were going to leave one thing for the people to think about it is this: What is money? What is it? It is basically a storehouse of value, a means of exchange, and a trust mechanism. That means it is an abstract concept; it can be anything that we want it to be. If we say that money comes from ecological function instead from extraction, manufacturing buying and selling, then we have a system in which all human efforts go toward restoring, protecting and preserving ecological function. That is what we need to mitigate and adapt to climate change, to ensure food security, to ensure that human civilizations survive. Our monetary system must reflect reality. We could have growth, not from stuff, but growth from more functionality. If we do that and we value that higher than things, we will survive.

***

Alexandra Groome is Campaign & Events Coordinator for Regeneration International, a project of the Organic Consumers Association.

The Rise of Regenerative Agriculture

/by

Imagine a world in which industrial crop production supports healthier air, water and soil; a time when rural communities thrive thanks to their local farms; a world where foods are rife with nutrients and the future of agriculture is a thing of beauty and promise …

This is the vision that grows within regenerative agriculture—a practice of farming, based on ecological principles, that builds soil health and recaptures carbon emissions from the atmosphere.

Regenerative agriculture is building on the principles and practices of organic to help communities and soil thrive. “There is an international movement afoot today that says it’s time to take things a step further,” says industry veteran Tom Newmark, founder and chair of Carbon Underground—a nonprofit dedicated to restoring soil health and helping to address climate issues. Regenerative Agriculture is that step, according to Newmark and a growing number of vocal advocates.

Many modern farming systems, which often include the use of heavy machinery, excessive tilling and harmful chemicals, disrupt the organic matter in the soil. Once the carbon molecules in the soil get exposed to the air, they combine with oxygen to create carbon dioxide, turning a natural carbon exchange system from healthy and fertile soil into a toxic atmospheric gas. These unnatural processes have sickened the living systems within the soil, and in many cases have cut off vitality completely—ruining the health and sustainability in all too many agricultural ecosystems.

The healthy side of dirt

In her recent book, The Soil Will Save Us (Rodale Press, Inc., 2014), author Kristin Ohlson writes about the relationship that plants have with microorganisms in the soil, and the impact that disturbing the soil through unnatural, modern methods is having on our food, our climate, our local communities and our future as a whole.

In a teaspoon of healthy soil, Ohlson says, there are billions and billions of microorganisms, all interacting with plants in a “complex and crucial” ecosystem. “Because it’s not visible to the naked eye, humans have only sort of become aware in the last couple of decades what’s going on down there,” she explains.

Organic carbon in soil is a reservoir for plant nutrients—those that are essential to the health of humans that consume them, as well as the ecosystem they are meant to thrive within. These nutrients include calcium, nitrogen, phosphorous, magnesium and micro-nutrients, which are released in the decomposition though microbial processes.

Carbon in the soil ensures these processes become a vital part of nutrient storage, soil structure, microbial activity, water retention, soil temperature and biodiversity—all elements that contribute to nutrient-rich soil and foods from that soil and the living ecosystem they sustain.

Known by scientists as agro-ecological farming, the principles of regenerative agriculture create healthy farms through practices such as crop rotation, cover cropping, composting and reduced tillage.

Healthy farms can be just as productive, if not more productive, than industrial farms, but are much better for the environment, the economy and the people who plant, harvest and eat the food.

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT FROM ORGANIC INDIA & NEW HOPE 360

Honduran Indigenous Leader Berta Cáceres Assassinated, Won Goldman Environmental Prize

/by

Honduran indigenous and environmental organizer Berta Cáceres has been assassinated in her home. She was one of the leading organizers for indigenous land rights in Honduras.

In 1993 she co-founded the National Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH). For years the group faced a series of threats and repression.

According to Global Witness, Honduras has become the deadliest country in the world for environmentalists. Between 2010 and 2014, 101 environmental campaigners were killed in the country.

In 2015 Berta Cáceres won the Goldman Environmental Prize, the world’s leading environmental award. In awarding the prize, the Goldman Prize committee said, “In a country with growing socioeconomic inequality and human rights violations, Berta Cáceres rallied the indigenous Lenca people of Honduras and waged a grassroots campaign that successfully pressured the world’s largest dam builder to pull out of the Agua Zarca Dam.”

KEEP READING ON DEMOCRACY NOW!

¿Es el suelo sano una solución al calentamiento global?

/by

[ English | Español ]

De qué se trata: Evento con representates del Ministerio de Agricultura en Francia para discutir la captura de carbono en el suelo.
Cuándo: Miércoles 9 de marzo, 8 a.m. – 11 a.m.
Dónde: The Holeman Lounge en el National Press Club – 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20045

En diciembre, en la Cumbre Climática COP21 de París, el Ministro francés de Agricultura lanzó la iniciativa 4 por 1000, una iniciativa destinada a mitigar y eventualmente revertir el cambio climático aumentando el carbono en el suelo alrededor del mundo en un 0,4% al año. Hasta ahora, 26 países y más de 50 organizaciones han suscrito formalmente la iniciativa.

¿Es el suelo sano una solución al cambio climático? ¿Es la iniciatitiva 4 por 1000 realista?

El 9 de marzo tendrá lugar una discusión que puede cambiar el modo en que vemos al suelo.

Regeneration International tiene el agrado de invitarlos a unirse a una conversación para cambiar el curso del calentamiento global el día 9 de marzo a las 8 am en el National Press Club.

Los ponentes incluirán a:

  • Catherine Geslain-Lanéelle, Directora General para los Resultados Económicos y Medioambientales de las Empresas, Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Bosques de Francia.
  • David C. Johnson, Ph.D., New Mexico State University.
  • Tim LaSalle, Ph.D., Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
  • Andre Leu, IFOAM – Organics International.
  • Kris Nichols, Ph.D., Rodale Institute.
  • Richard Teague, Ph.D., Texas A & M.

MEDIA

* Programa (PDF)
* Biografías de los Ponentes (PDF)
* Información para medios (PDF)

 

LEE MÁS ARTÍCULOS EN ESPAÑOL

El poder de… El maíz

/by

[ English | Español ]

  • La nixtamalización de la masa de maíz aumenta su contenido de calcio y la biodisponibilidad de vitamina B3 y de proteínas.
  • La combinación maíz-leguminosa, como el frijol, incrementa la calidad de las proteínas.
  • El maíz azul contiene antocianinas, potentes antioxidantes que protegen nuestras células.

¿Qué es el maíz?

El maíz (zea mays) es una planta que pertenece a la familia de las gramíneas, al igual que el trigo, el arroz, la cebada, el centeno y la avena. Sin embargo, a diferencia de éstos, no se conocen con precisión las variedades silvestres del maíz, aunque se menciona que se originó mediante el proceso de domesticación a partir de los teocintles, unas gramíneas similares al maíz que crecen de manera natural en México y en parte de Centroamérica.

El maíz es inherente a las culturas mesoamericanas. El Popol Vuh narra como “Quetzalcóatl bajó al Mictlán, lugar de los muertos, y allí tomó unos huesos de hombre y de mujer y fue a ver a la diosa Coatlicue, quien molió maíz junto con los huesos, y con esa pasta se creó a la humanidad”.

En los países industrializados, el maíz se utiliza principalmente como forraje, materia prima para la producción de alimentos procesados y, recientemente, para la producción de etanol. Por el contrario, en algunos países de América Latina y, cada vez más en países africanos, un gran porcentaje del maíz que se produce o importa se destina al consumo humano.

Actualmente, en México el cultivo de maíz se lleva a cabo en una amplia variedad de climas, altitudes, humedad, suelos y tecnología. El maíz constituye el principal cultivo, concentrando alrededor de una tercera parte de la superficie sembrada. Todas las entidades del país producen maíz, aunque Sinaloa, Jalisco, Michoacán, Estado de México, Chiapas, Guerrero y Veracruz concentran el 64.5% de la producción.

LÉER MÀS
LEE MÁS ARTÍCULOS EN ESPAÑOL

The Power of… Corn

/by

[ English | Español ]

Translation by: Eleanor D. Stevens

  • The nixtamalization of corn dough increases its calcium content and the bioavailability of Vitamin B3 and certain proteins.
  • Combining corn with legumes such as beans increases the quality of their proteins.
  •  Blue corn contains anthocyanins, powerful antioxidants that protect our cells.

What is corn?

Corn (zea mays) is a member of the Gramineae family, along with wheat, rice, barley, rye, and oats. However, unlike these other grains, corn is not known to have any direct relatives among wild plants. It is thought that it was developed by domesticating teosintle, another Graminea similar to corn that grows naturally in Mexico and parts of Central America.

Corn is central to all Mesoamerican cultures. The Popul Vuh tell how “Quetzalcóatl went down to Mictlán, the land of the dead, and there he gathered bones from a man and a woman and took them to the goddess Coatlicue. She ground the bones with corn, and from this paste humans were made.”

In industrialized countries, corn is used primarily as feed for animals, raw material for processed foods and, recently, for the production of ethanol. On the other hand, in several Latin American countries and, increasingly, in African countries as well, a high percentage of the corn grown or imported is destined for human consumption.

Currently, corn is cultivated in Mexico in a wide range of climates, altitudes, humidity levels, and soils, using many different technologies. Corn is Mexico’s principal crop, occupying around one third of cultivated land. Every state in the country produces corn, although 64.5% of production is concentrated in Sinaloa, Jalisco, Michoacán, Mexico State, Chiapas, Guerrero, and Veracruz.

What nutrients does corn provide?

Corn, as a cereal, consists primarily of starches. When its hull is not removed, it is also an important source of fiber in our diet.

Its nutritional properties vary depending on its degree of maturity. For this reason, we will first discuss the nutrients in fresh corn and then those in corn dough.

Fresh corn

Fresh corn is considered a vegetable because of its higher water content in comparison to the dry kernel, which is ground into corn dough.

Fresh corn is rich in potassium and folic acid, and yellow corn in particular contains vitamin A.

Corn dough

Corn dough is typically prepared from dried corn kernels soaked in lime water and then ground. This process, known as nixtamalización, or nixtamalization (from the Náhuatl nixtli, ashes, and tamalli, dough) is indispensable for making tortillas and other dough-based products.

Nixtamalization softens the dough and simultaneously improves its nutritional value, adding calcium and facilitating digestion of essential amino acids which make up the corn’s protein. Tortillas are, therefore, a good source of calcium, in addition to the calcium we get from dairy products and some vegetables.

Blue corn has a particular advantage in nutritional terms because it contains anthocyanins, flavonoid compounds with antioxidant properties which protect our cells from oxidation and DNA mutations.

Many people associate tortillas with weight gain. However, it’s important to remember that tortillas only contribute to weight gain if they are consumed in excess.

A typical tortilla from a tortillería (neighborhood tortilla shop) weighs around 30 grams and provides some 65 kilocalories. If we eat two tortillas during a meal, along with a main dish and a side of vegetables, we will probably maintain energetic equilibrium. However, if we consume up to ten tortillas, equivalent to 650 kilocalories, we will probably exceed our daily calorie requirement, since this is a third of the recommended daily calorie intake for a young adult male.

Unlike flour tortillas, corn tortillas contain very little fat, unless they are fried.

How much does corn cost?

According to the Sistema Nacional de Información e Integración de Mercados (National Market Information and Integration System), one kilo of tortillas from a tortillería costs between 10 and 18 pesos, depending on the state in which it is purchased.

As a general rule, corn dough costs slightly less than tortillas.

What’s the best way to eat corn?

In Mexico there exist at least 600 ways to prepare corn for consumption, including: tortillas, tamales, corundas, sopes, huaraches, memelas, peneques, picadas, salbutes, panuchos, molotes, quesadillas, tostadas, tacos, tlacoyos, and other snacks.

Traditional pozole, whether green, red, or white is prepared from cacahuazintle corn kernels. Corn dough can also be made into small balls, which are added to soups, beans, and a variety of sauces such as mole de olla and Oaxacan yellow mole. Corn kernels are boiled and then ground to make drinks such as pozol, tejate, and atole. To prepare pinole, the kernels are first baked and then ground. And, when fermented, they are used to make alcoholic drinks like tesgüino.

Currently, many of the dishes made from corn dough are fried. However, Mesoamerican societies never used this culinary technique. We recommend frying as little as possible in order to enjoy the benefits of corn without adding high quantities of fat.

Because of the nutritional advantages it provides, we recommend eating blue corn rather than white or yellow corn whenever possible.

Why shouldn’t we grow genetically modified corn?

Clearly, in Mexico corn is precious.

The campaign “Sin Maíz no hay Paíz” (No Corn, no Country) summarizes briefly why we should not allow the cultivation of genetically modified corn in Mexico:

“Distributed throughout its national territory, Mexico has 59 corn species and thousands of sub-species which will be contaminated if genetically modified corn is sown in Mexico. Corn is Mexico’s inheritance, our sustenance, and the basis of our diet and our economy, and it is recognized as the heart of indigenous and campesino cultures. It is a fundamental staple of agriculture in the face of climate change and socioeconomic instability. It is our right and our obligation to keep corn a common good, free of genetic modifications.”

For her part, Cristina Barros, a specialist in Mexican cuisine, reminds us: “There are only two varieties [of genetically modified corn], one resistant to a plague that is almost nonexistent in Mexico, and the other resistant to herbicides, when in our milpas many of the “weeds” are quelites, squash, beans, chile, and other plants that are staples of our diet.”

Did you know?

Corn is present in the form of tortillas in the great majority of Mexican homes. On average, a family will consume 20 kg of white or yellow corn tortillas each month. It is present in homes of all social classes, although at the lowest socioeconomic level this food may constitute half of all calories consumed and a third of all protein.

_____________________________________

FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT CORN:

Sin Maiz No Hay Pais
Biodiversidad
Greenpeace Mexico

VIEW THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE ON EL PODER DEL CONSUMIDOR