Strong El Nino Affects Southern Africa: How Creating Landscape and Farmer Resiliency to Shocks is Going to Help us all Keep Moving

/by

Year after year we realize that the extreme weather patterns are making it hard for farmers to make ends meet from their landscapes.

In a report on Southern Africa the main areas of concern that are being hard hit are Zimbabwe, southern Malawi, Southern and central Mozambique and southern Madagascar.  These areas will be in deficit of food supplies and its anticipated to get to early 2025.

I am in western Zimbabwe, Hwange where I am engaged with communal farmers working on regenerative projects together. We are currently in an unprecedented dry spell in the midst of a growing season!  Reports show that a great population will be in lack of food this year in our country, quoting about 2.8 million people. The rains delayed, the temperatures were soaring, wildlife, people and livestock were all desperate for the smallest shower we could get from the skies. We have a very short growing season, that starts in mid November to mid-March, and this 2023/2024 we have only had precipitation for 9 days, and a long dry spell, of 15 days (and it looks like we are still counting).

Most of the farmers where we are working are in an already challenging environment, we are located in rainfall region 4&5 (barely enough rainfall per year anyways) and on mostly Kalahari sandy soil areas, that easily lose moisture if there are long dry spells and leach all the nutrients should there be excessive downpours of rain. It is unfortunate that we are living in the times where both events are a norm. As such, every small effort to create resiliency on the landscape, crop lands and the broader ecosystem becomes one of the greatest priorities of our time.

All regenerative efforts like Agroecology, organic farming, permaculture, and so on are so important to relieve stress in events like this. Regeneration in at the core meant to help farmers manage the complexity that is involved with living systems work. The odds are never predictable, and with the ever advancing climate crisis- the shocks are almost inevitable. Our  networks are doing the very best moves to pressure the powers that be to make policies and plans that will finally see us moving ahead with confronting climate emergency. While this effort is important, we also celebrate the brave efforts of being able to work at policy levels while building strong farmer movements to create capacity to small holder farmers across the region for such times.

In our region, I have witnessed in the last week, chances of total crop failure rising to nearly 90 percent. If it doesn’t rain in the next few days, for those on sandy soils, it’s game over. Those that did not apply ecological principles on their plots, have already counted their losses. The farmers that used livestock manure, mixed crop still have a spark of hope that some legumes and smaller traditional grains might wake up at the smell of a light shower. And so the wait continues.
Below are some crop field photos taken on 6th February 2024:

A devastated crop- in scorching heat, and a loss that will probably never bounce back should the rains delay further. Besides, it’s past fruiting season and the plants are stunted in growth.

 

A hopeful crop, albeit late for fruiting, the color and strength shows that some ecological principles and early planting can buy a bit of time and give a farmer the smallest chance to get a harvest.

Grazing lands are what will carry most of the households, that is if farmers continue to hold strong on the plans we created. Otherwise, in panic some farmers are letting their animals wander off to their prime dry season paddocks in a bid to speed up great condition. However, they do not realize that this action is at the expense of their animals condition in the face of a longer and  harder non growing (or dry) season. Livestock becomes an important back up plan for the community in times like this, because one animal can be sold to buy staple food from neighboring communities with better soils. Some legumes will survive and balance up local nutrition.
Below are some photos of the landscape comparisons. Pictures taken on 06 Feb, 2024.

A prime paddock that has been exposed to consistent grazing, not recovering, will be overgrazed and will not be able to carry any livestock when needed the most (in the 8 months of dry season).

 

A sufficiently grazed paddock, farmers have pulled out livestock for its recovery. Once it rains, a little bit of moisture will give them a chance to regrow forage.

 

A paddock that has had about 2 months without animals in it, growth could have been much taller but rainfall has been so limited. The farmers will still have something to fall back on for their livestock.

Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems: 10th Anniversary Collection

/by

Celebrating 10 years of Agroecology & Sustainable Food Systems

Ten years ago we opened Volume 37, Issue 1, with an editorial that announced the change of the name of the journal from the Journal of Sustainable Agriculture to Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems-ASFS (Gliessman 2013). For the past 10 years, our journal has been at the forefront of scholarly publishing in the “Agroecology Movement.” It has been our goal to help define what this movement is about, to advance scholarship at the cutting edge of transdisciplinary research, and to learn with and from peasants, Indigenous peoples, smallholders, and workers across the food system who are leading the way in transforming food systems worldwide toward justice and sustainability. At the time of the name change, the ecological foundations for agroecology had received much scientific attention, but the social and political components—where change is most needed—remained ill-defined and largely ignored by the Western scientific establishment. It became our journal’s goal to link research, practice, and social change.

To celebrate 10 years of ASFS, in this special collection, we have gathered some of our most-read and most-cited papers from the decade, as well as several “editors picks” we feel exemplify the agroecological focus the journal promotes. The collection will be available open access for the next six months, and we hope you will read and share the articles, reviews, and editorials with your colleagues, students, co-organizers, and more. We also invite you to consider contributing to ASFS in the future, as we look to continuously advance agroecology scholarship rooted in a commitment to transformative food systems change and in solidarity with diverse communities who advance agroecology every day in thinking and practice.

DOWNLOAD HERE

Reclamamos al Congreso Nacional el rechazo de la adhesión de Argentina a UPOV 91

/by

El 27 de diciembre pasado el Gobierno Nacional presentó su proyecto de “Ley Ómnibus” que entre sus 664 artículos, el número 241, establece la adhesión de Argentina “a la Convención Internacional sobre la Protección de Nuevas Variedades Vegetales (1991)”. Esto es la adhesión a UPOV 91, y es un viejo anhelo de las corporaciones semilleras trasnacionales como Bayer-Monsanto, Syngenta, Corteva o Basf, y nacionales como Bioceres o Don Mario.

Desde hace años este puñado de corporaciones a través de sus organizaciones, buscaron infructuosamente la modificación de la Ley de Semillas actual (nro. 20.247 de 1973) que reconoce derechos de propiedad intelectual (“de obtentor”) para las empresas, pero también garantiza derechos de los y las agricultoras sobre los frutos de sus cosechas con semillas certificadas. Estos intentos fueron sistemáticamente rechazados por un conjunto amplio de organizaciones de productores y de la sociedad civil.

La adhesión a UPOV 91 representa la profundización del cercamiento corporativo del primer eslabón de toda cadena agroalimentaria, mediante el reconocimiento de mayores derechos de propiedad intelectual sobre las semillas, amputando derechos de las y los productores ya que, entre otras cosas, cercena la posibilidad que tienen de hacer “uso propio”, extiende la “protección” también a la cosecha y habilita el patentamiento de las semillas.

La incorporación del país a una Convención Internacional como UPOV, supone que deberá modificarse la Ley de Semillas actual para adecuarla a sus disposiciones, como sucede con los países que firman acuerdos de libre comercio. Así, una discusión que lleva más de una década de debate parlamentario sin consensos, pretende zanjarse “por arriba”, sin debate específico, en el marco del tratamiento express de una “ley ómnibus”, y en sesiones extraordinarias.

Lo que está en juego en el artículo 241 es trascendental: quien controla las semillas, controla la cadena agroalimentaria, y por lo tanto la disponibilidad, calidad y precio de los alimentos de nuestra población.

Por todo esto las organizaciones firmantes le reclamamos al Congreso de la Nación el rechazo a la adhesión a UPOV 91 en amparo de la Soberanía Alimentaria de nuestro pueblo.

FIRMAR SOLICITUD AQUÍ

Joint Declaration in Defense of our Biodiversity, Seed and Food Freedom – Resisting GMO Imperialism

/by

Defending our Seed and Food Sovereignty 

Seeds are the first link in the food chain. They embody our heritage and enfold the future evolution of life. It is our inherent duty and responsibility to protect our seeds and pass them on to future generations. The cultivation of seeds and their free exchange among farmers have been the basis for maintaining biodiversity and our food security. Today, our seed sovereignty is threatened by intellectual property rights and new GMO technologies that have transformed seeds from a commons shared by farmers, to a commodity under the control and monopoly of agribusiness corporations. To have control over seeds is to have control over our lives, our food and our freedom.

Over the last few decades, GMO crops have been imposed in countries all over the world, advertised as a solution to food insecurity and the malnutrition crisis. However, hunger, disease and malnutrition have increased, while biodiversity has declined and toxins have spread. GMO imperialism has destroyed the lives and livelihoods of small farmers and biodiversity in centers of origin. These centers of origin of biodiversity are the cradles of the world’s food supply, and the protection against plague, climate challenges, natural disasters or other hindrances to food production.

In Mexico, which is the center of origin of maize, just as in other centers of biodiversity, there has been a long struggle by society and organized communities against this GMO imperialism threatening the subsistence and culture of native peoples. To date, Mexican society has achieved a ban on the planting of GM maize in Mexico through a class action lawsuit filed against the companies Bayer-Monsanto, Syngenta and Corteva Agriscience. This ban is still in force.

Recently, the Mexican government issued an executive order that proposes the gradual prohibition of the use of glyphosate and the use of GM maize in tortillas, a staple food. GMOs compromise access to healthy, sustainable, culturally appropriate foods free of genetically modified organisms. Faced with this decision, the U.S. government, based on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA), has requested a dispute settlement panel to reject the order.

Mexico is the protector of the biocultural diversity developed over millennia, and shared by peasants around the world. Mexico therefore urgently requires our support and solidarity in the face of this GMO imperialism.

All over the world, citizens are rising against the unscientific, undemocratic, anti-ecological imposition of GMOs by corporations and the US government. The first generation of GMOs has failed. But corporations continue to impose gene-edited organisms, or new GMOs, in centers of diversity. They continue to shift their narrative towards framing nature and biodiversity as commodities for commercialization and patent monopolies.

Agribusiness and biotech giants are attempting to bypass biosafety regulations by quietly making changes to GMO regulation around the world, in order to promote these new GMOs under new acronyms, such as NBTs (New Breeding Techniques), NGTs (New Genomic Techniques), or TEAs (Techniques of Assisted Evolution). These new GMOs have been silently dovetailing into different countries’ existing agricultural legislation, with the aim still being patent monopolies in the hands of the big chemical and biotechnology giants.

KEEP READING ON NAVDANYA

Don’t Be Duped: GMO Deregulation Compromises Food Transparency

/by

Next week, the European Union will vote to deregulate GMOs. Deregulating GMOs poses serious risks to consumer freedom of choice and the environment.

Key reasons we must maintain oversight and transparency around genetically engineered foods:

  • Consumer Right to Know: Polls consistently show that most consumers want foods containing GMOs labeled. Deregulation removes the right to make informed choices. Consumers deserve transparency about how their food is produced.
  • Contamination Risks: Deregulation will make traceability and segregation of GMO and non-GMO supply chains difficult, if not impossible. It will also increase the chances of unwanted GMO contamination, putting non-GMO, organic, and regenerative markets at risk.
  • Unintended Consequences: New GMO techniques can make unpredictable genetic changes (off-target effects). Without regulation, potential human, animal, and environmental health risks could go unstudied before widespread exposure.
  • Environmental Impacts: Genetic engineering can create unintentional effects, like fostering herbicide-resistant superweeds. Oversight helps identify ecological risks before they spiral out of control.
  • Reduction of Independent Science: Deregulation marginalizes the role of independent, third-party safety assessments in favor of industry studies. Balanced scientific input is essential to understand impacts.
  • Slippery Slope: Deregulation opens the door to faster and riskier GMO development with less review. This dangerously short-sighted approach undermines sensible precautions that protect our food system.

 

Preserving GMO oversight and labeling upholds the Precautionary principles of social responsibility. Join us in rejecting any attempts to deregulate or redefine GMOs and stand up for environmental health, freedom of choice, and transparency in our global food supply.

READ AND SIGN THE LETTER HERE

Comunicado – Organizaciones e instituciones exhortamos a diputadas y diputados a aprobar minuta de ley general de alimentación adecuada y sostenible

/by
COMUNICADO
  • La Minuta de la Ley General de Alimentación Adecuada y Sostenible responde a una larga lucha por el reconocimiento del derecho constitucional a la alimentación.
  • Solicitamos al pleno de la Cámara de Diputados, responder oportunamente ante la urgencia de contar con la ley reglamentaria del derecho a la alimentación en México.
  • Su aprobación representará un hito histórico para nuestro país y una importante referencia mundial en materia de derechos humanos.

Ciudad de México, 02 de febrero de 2024.

El pasado martes 30 de enero de 2024, organizaciones e instituciones que participamos en la construcción y articulación de consensos de la Ley General de Alimentación Adecuada y Sostenible, entregamos un Exhorto al pleno de la Cámara de Diputados, en donde pedimos la aprobación inmediata en este periodo ordinario de sesiones, de la Minuta de dicha Ley, en espera de ser enlistada para su discusión en el pleno.

De aprobarse, se cumpliría con uno de los anhelos de justicia social más importantes del pueblo de México, producto de una larga lucha de más de tres décadas por el reconocimiento del derecho constitucional a la alimentación.

El 13 de octubre de 2011 se promulgó una reforma constitucional en materia de derechos humanos que modificó el artículo 4to. de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos para reconocer el derecho a la alimentación. Así también el artículo 27, para garantizar este derecho a partir del desarrollo rural integral y sustentable.

A 12 años de esta trascendental reforma al artículo 4to, el Estado mexicano aún no cumple con su obligación de desarrollar la ley reglamentaria correspondiente, con la que se establezcan, entre otras cosas, programas, presupuestos, estrategias y responsabilidades para garantizar una alimentación sana, nutritiva, asequible y culturalmente adecuada para todas las personas.

La Minuta de la Ley General de Alimentación Adecuada y Sostenible responde a la grave problemática de salud alimentaria nacional, que tantas vidas cobra año tras año; nos acerca a la soberanía y autosuficiencia alimentaria y contribuye a alcanzar la sostenibilidad, al revertir el daño ambiental asociado con la producción agroindustrial de alimentos, que afecta la salud de las personas y de los ecosistemas, y que agrava el cambio climático.

Esta importante Minuta de Ley General de Alimentación Adecuada y Sostenible, promovida por la Sen. Ana Lilia Rivera Rivera, es producto de la construcción y articulación de grandes consensos encabezados por el FPH Capítulo México, de la mano del Grupo Intersectorial de Salud, Alimentación, Medioambiente y Competitividad (GISAMAC), con la coordinación institucional de la Secretaría de Salud y la Subsecretaría de Autosuficiencia Alimentaria, así como la participación de las Secretarías de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Economía, Bienestar y Educación, e instituciones académicas y técnicas como Conahcyt, Senasica, Segalmex, Inifap, INSP, Instituto Nacional de Nutrición, INPI, Conabio, Sistema Nacional DIF y Cibiogem, y la participación de todos los partidos políticos representados en Senado que lograron una votación histórica por unanimidad.

Asimismo, ha contado con la participación activa de Organismos de las Naciones Unidas como la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación (FAO) y el Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (UNICEF) México, y de organizaciones sociales como la Asociación Nacional de Empresas Comercializadoras de Productores del Campo (ANEC, A.C.), la Campaña Nacional Sin Maíz No Hay País, el Centro de Derechos Humanos “Fray Francisco de Vitoria O.P.” A.C., el Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo Rural Sustentable y la Soberanía Alimentaria, El Poder del Consumidor, el Centro de Orientación Alimentaria, FIAN México, Greenpeace México, el Observatorio Universitario de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición del Estado de Guanajuato (OUSANEG), el Proyecto de Agrobiodiversidad Mexicana, Salud Crítica y The Hunger Project México.

Por tanto, su aprobación por la H. Cámara de Diputados representará un hito histórico para nuestro país y una importante referencia mundial en materia de derechos humanos.

Conoce el Exhorto aquí 

Comunicado oficial aquí

Contactos de prensa
CNSMNHP: Víctor Manuel Chima | 5541919336
El Poder del Consumidor: Denise Rojas | 5512989928

IFOAM – Organics International Stands Firm on the Importance of Grower Group Certification Amidst Litigation Pratum v. USDA

/by

IFOAM – Organics International is extremely concerned about the litigation against the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) initiated by an organic farmer in the USA.

The lawsuit alleges that group certification of organic farmers is being used to cover up fraudulent practices and create an uneven playing field between organic American farmers who have an individual responsibility for certification and organic farmers organised in producer groups that are subject to Internal Control Systems (ICSs).

It questions whether USDA has the authority to delegate the responsibility of inspecting every farm every year and questions whether the new regulation provides for an adequate number of third-party inspections of producer group members to meet the intent of the organic legislation.

The litigation highlights widespread misunderstanding about the role and function of grower group certification, which we seek to clarify in the explainer below.

IFOAM – Organics International considers group certification a vital tool for ensuring millions of organic farmers around the world can access global markets whilst ensuring the robust integrity of the products produced. We understand that the USDA’s new regulation for producer groups differs from both the recent EU legislation and IFOAM Norms for grower groups in a few ways, but still support the regulatory recognition of producer groups in the USDA rule [1].

Grower groups play a key role in supporting organic farming and provide organic market access for millions of honest, hard-working smallholder farmers that care for the land and provide ecological benefits. As a result, they should be considered a strong force for good in rapidly scaling climate and nature-friendly farming that mitigates and addresses the biggest crises of our times.

We also recognise the crucial importance of robust governance of ICS. The oversight process for grower groups is different to the process for individual farmers. An appropriate level of rigour must be maintained in both approaches.

KEEP READING ON IFOAM ORGANICS INTERNATIONAL