Poverty alleviation and biological diversity

a view from the south

October 2003

Collaborating organisations Allpa, Ecuador Kawsay, Ecuador Centro Ecolgico, Brasil CETAP, Brasil CEPEMA, Brasil CIRHEP, India Sonam Dorje, Ladakh Frvnnerna, Sweden Swallows, Sweden Future Earth, Sweden

Introduction
Future Earth, through its global network of NGOs and farmers and indigenous peoples organisations has compiled a booklet based on the experiences of small scale farmers and indigenous people in India and Brazil. They tell of the effects of industrial agriculture (especially the Green Revolution and the introduction of genetically modified crops) on their lives and livelihoods. Their experiences highlight the problems they face due to the degradation of both their biological diversity as well as their cultural integrity and how these two phenomena are linked. Food security and food self-reliance are dependent upon them having access to and control over a diversity of ecologically appropriate seeds. As a response to these threats to both their culturel and biological diversity the farmers also explain how they are taking initiatives to regain control of their lives. Often this is done with the support of local NGOs. This booklet provides the readers with concrete examples of efforts to address the problems. The booklet will be used as study material for Future Earths Learning from the South tour, 2003. Three of the authors who wrote articles for the booklet will come to Sweden in November and visit schools and other organisations such as SLU, Ingenjrer fr Miljn, Miljfrbundet Jordens Vnner, Studiefrmjandet, Svalarna Lund. To make this booklet more useful as study material in different kinds of schools and for the preparation of volunteers and trainees going to work in the South a Swedish version will be produced. For more information contact Future Earth (Framtidsjorden).

Tangopono explains that organic farming is based on a model to minimise loss not maximise profit. Photo: Petra Zther

Table of Contents

Introduction by Birgitta Wrenfelt A view from the South on the World Bank Development Strategy by Jefferson Mecham The future of GMOs - What does experience tell us? by Maria Jos Guazzelli The effect of neo-liberal politics on the Kayambi people of Ecuador by Csar Pilataxi CETAP and biological diversity by Alvir Longhi and Marcelo Souza Santos Biodiversity is important - the Pedretti family explains why by Erik Axel Amn The meaning of ecological agriculture to small farmers... Calendar with photos and text by farmers and agriculture extentionists who attended a course in photography and writing skills organised by Centro Ecolgico 2000 Consumer cooperatives for ecological products - a success story from two states in Brazil by Ana Luiza Meirelles A coffee with the flavour of ecology and more income to small farmers based on an article on CEPEMA published in the newspaper O POVO, Fortaleza, Brazil by Ana Ceclia Mesquita Creating conditions for life - Ladakhi agri-culture at a crossroads by Sonam Dorje The Green Revolution and export agriculture - promises and problems for small farmers in the Kadavakurichi watershed by P M Mohan Minimise risks, dont maximise profits! - Udayalipatty farmers long term strategy for survival by Petra Zther

2 4 7 11 15 22 23 26 28 30 35 39

A view from the South on the World Bank Rural Development Strategy1
by Jefferson Mecham

The World Bank Rural Development Strategy: Reaching the Rural Poor is a great disappointment. Below are some of the reasons why.

The World Bank (WB) assumes that corporate globalisation,free trade and advanced technology will help the rural poor, disregarding the fact that to a large degree the rural crisis in the Third World has been caused by such policies (e.g. the Green Revolution and now Genetic Engineering) financed by the WB and other multilateral agencies. The rural development strategy is based on corporate privatisation of the rural sector under the premise that what the poor need are higher incomes and, to achieve this, investment in rural development by multinational corporations is essential. Experiences throughout the Third World demonstrate these assumptions as false, as similar policies have already been applied with disastrous consequences. The major problem of the rural sector is the losses of local peoples control over the food production process and thus their own food security and economic destiny. Only a few decades ago self-reliance in food production was the rule, not the exception, in African countries. Under the relief strategies of the FAO, WB and such, the best agricultural lands were converted to export crops. As a consequence, 140 million people (out of a total of 530 million) became dependent on imported food which, rather than resolving the problem of hunger, has compounded it. Overlooking the hard-won

struggle of peoples throughout the Third World to achieve basic rights and access to land, water, etc., the Bank proposes that these be considered as commodities subject to free market competition in the global arena. Industrial agriculture in the U.S., Japan and Europe operates under huge public subsidies (the U.S. just passed a Farm Bill to raise them by 80%). Meanwhile under the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Structural Adjustment programs (SAP) applied throughout the Third World, real per capita spending on basic services - including health and education - has been cut dramatically. Where is the level playing field to support all the rhetoric of free trade and competitivity? Does the World Bank really think the Third Worlds poor structurally-adjusted farmers will be able to compete with the industrial nations subsidised agribusinesses? Or are we only to compete for wages as dependent labour and consumers in the new world order? The Banks document propagates the myth that bad resource management by the poor is the chief cause of ecosystem degradation and loss of biodiversity. It fails to mention the role of big business whose extractive capacity and impact far exceeds that of the worlds poor. In Ecuador, as a typical example for the Third World, the chief causes of deforestation are related to the activities of the timber,

petroleum, palm oil, shrimp farm and similar export industries and the infrastructure which serves them. The influences are both direct and indirect by destroying and/or marginalizing local people from their land and subsistence resources and opening road access that facilitates the destructive colonisation of intact ecosystems. Blaming the poor for this confuses the symptoms with the causes of the disease. (See Causes and consequences of deforestation in Ecuador, Rainforest Information Centre, www.rainforestinfo.org.au) The Bank continues to promote the conversion of diverse small-hold family farms to large-scale corporatecontrolled monocultures, apparently under an outdated concept of economies of scale or bigger is better. Ample evidence from both Southern and Northern countries disproves this conventional wisdom. Small farms are multi-functionalmore productive, more efficient, and contribute more to economic development than large farms. Small farmers also make better stewards of natural resources, conserving biodiversity and safe-guarding the future sustainability of agricultural production. ( The Multiple Functions and Benefits of Small Farm Agriculture in the Context of Global Trade Negotiations, Institute for Food and Development Policy, Peter M. Rosset, Ph.D. 1999). The WB fails to value the essential non-market functions of small

This article is an extract summary of a longer paper with the same title written by the same author. A copy of the full paper is available from Future Earth Stockhom.

farms and/or proposes to separate and concession them out piecemeal to business. The Banks strategy threatens the continued existence of small farms, as well as indigenous peoples, rural communities and all this implies to biological and cultural diversity. The WB proposes that cultivated areas be expanded without taking into account how lands currently under cultivation are being utilised. The report does not question the fact that huge extensions of fertile agri-

cultural lands that could produce food are dedicated to the production of flowers, tobacco, etc. which pay neither true nor opportunity costs in environmental or human terms. Nor does it criticise the destructive consequences of the expansion of industrial agriculture. Theres no mention that millions of hectares of degraded lands could be productively rehabilitated instead of sacrificing natural ecosystems to the persistent and unsustainable expansion of the agricultural frontier.

The Bank proposes the improvement of agricultural productivity and competitivity by stimulating private initiatives for exportation. As farmers change land-use according to whatever is competitive in the logic of the world supermarket, domestic food production capacity is dismantled. Countries are obliged to use foreign exchange to import cheaper food, creating dependence even for essential goods and eroding national food security. Meanwhile most farmers will be displaced from the land

Water as commodity
Each year over 5 million people die directly from polluted water. At the same time, the generative capacities of watersheds are being degraded by deforestation, poor land use practices and urbanization, further complicated by climate change. The Banks agricultural strategy will place yet greater demands on earths freshwater supply, well beyond those of population growth alone. Increasing use of agrochemicals, irrigation (and dams) will reduce water availability and quality in many regions, especially in the Third World. Predictions that water will be the critical resource for the 21st century are well founded. (See: World Water Vision - projections for world water in 2025, International Water Management Institute, www.iwmi.org). To assure efficient use, the World Banks rural development strategy supports pricing of water for full cost recovery and establishment of water user associations or concessions to the private sector. Such policy was applied in the semi-arid Andean region of Cochabamba Bolivia. In 1999, the World Bank recommended privatization of Cochabambas municipal water supply company Servico Municipal del Aqua Potable y Alcantarillado (SEMAPA) through a concession to International Water Inc., a subsidiary of U.S.-based Bechtel Corporation. Later the same year the Drinking Water and Sanitation Law was passed, ending government subsidies and allowing privatization. In a city where monthly incomes average less than $100, water bills reached $20/month, roughly the cost of feeding a family of five for two weeks. In January 2000, a citizens alliance called La Coordinara de Defense del Agua y de la Vida (The Coalition in Defense of Water and Life) led a protest that shut down the city for a week. Over the next month, hundreds of thousands of citizens from all over Bolivia marched to Cochabamba, paralyzing all transportation. In February 2000, La Coordinara organized a peaceful demonstration to demand the repeal of the new Water Law, the annulment of ordinances allowing privatization, the termination of the water contract, and the participation of citizens in drafting a water resource law. The citizens demands struck at the core of corporate interests and were violently repressed. La Coordinoras fundamental critique was directed at the negation of water as a community property. Protesters used slogans like Water is Gods gift, not a commodity and Water is life. The government tried to silence dissent as activists were arrested, protestors were killed, and media was censored. Finally on 20 April 2000, the government was forced to revoke its despised water privatization law. Bechtel left Bolivia soon thereafter and the water company SEMAPA was handed over to the workers and the people, along with the debts. In summer 2000, La Coordinadora organized public hearings to establish democratic planning and management. Bechtel filed a US$200 million lawsuit against the Bolivian government for breach of contract and lost profits. In turn, the government took up a campaign of harassment against La Coordinadora. (Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, www.vshiva.net). The example of the Cochabamba Water War is instructive about the inapplicability of rigid free market/ privatization dogma to community resources such as water. Industry places the most demand on scarce water supplies (from both consumption and pollution); they also have the greatest ability to pay market prices and/or to privatize water as a profit-seeking venture. Thus under the logic of supply and demand, full cost recovery, and highest and best (most $profitable$) use, the price of water will be driven out of reach of the poor. This is exactly what happened in Cochabamba. As the poor make up the great majority of the population in both Bolivia and most of the world, and water is a vital necessity for all, we can expect more water wars if the Bank were to insist on such foolish policy.

as uncompetitive under the new rules of the global market. The lands of millions of farmers have already been usurped by the Green Revolution to install high-tech export crops intensively dependent on chemicals harmful to the environment and human health. Yet even overall increases in productivity do not equate to a better life for the majority of rural poor. In India, for example, which produces more than enough food to be self-sufficient, over 70 million children are malnourished as their landless (uncompetitive) families lack money to buy food. The WB asks nations to reform agricultural policies to provide yet greater access to transnational corporations producing external inputs (chemical fertilisers, pesticides, machinery, patented seeds including transgenics) and to promote the use of biotechnology (genetic engineering) to increase production for export. Throughout the 1990s Argentina has been the model of this strategy in the Third World. Over 20 million hectares of their best agricultural lands have now passed into the hands of 2000 agribusinesses that practice large-scale monoculture production with insignificant employment of people. Around 300,000 small and medium size farms have disappeared during this process and the minimum farm size for survival has reached 340 hectares (850 acres). Although Argentinas agricultural exports have reached record levels, over 50% of the nations food is now imported. Crop prices have fallen (just as the Banks strategy proposes) while the prices of agricultural inputs (mostly imported) continue to rise. More than 13 million hectares are under bank foreclosures as a result of defaulted loans to pay for input-dependent technologies. The combination of industrial agriculture and transgenic soybeans has created countryside vacant of farmers where rural culture is practically extinct. Hundreds of thousands have been displaced from their homelands to occupy the new slums ringing Argentinas major cities. In a country which was one of the worlds major breadbaskets, 15 million people (half the population) now live below the poverty line and 6 million

are indigent, dependent on international donations and food aid. Of the 20 million hectares in the country under agricultural use, 9 million are for growing Monsantos Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans. 84% of the soybeans grown in the year 2000 were transgenic. Although the agro-biotechnology propaganda sells itself as environmentally friendly for using less pesticides, the reality is otherwise. In Argentinas 1991-92 growing season (before RR), one million liters of glysofat (the herbicide active in Roundup) were used. In 1998-99 this grew to nearly 60 million liters, an average of 2 liters of glysofat per inhabitant (Grupo de Reflexin Rural, 2002). The World Bank calls for a new Green Revolution, now based on biotechnology with transgenic crops, claimed as the solution to feed the hungry and reduce rural poverty. However, in the biodiversity section of the Banks own text, the Green Revolution is cited as a cause of genetic erosion and loss of biodiversity. Well known environmental and health risks of transgenics are not mentioned, as were already living the first multi-billion dollar disasters of genetic contamination from transgenics (corn in Mexico, Starlink, etc. See article by Maria Jos Guazzelli for more information.). Corporate control of food crops with patents and Terminator Technologies to prevent farmers from saving and replanting their own seeds - such strategies are hardly compatible with solving world hunger. In the countries where there has been access to complete information, open debate and the opportunity for the public to choose (e.g. Europe, Japan and New Zealand), transgenics have been overwhelmingly refused despite commercial pressures to impose them. The oversupply of transgenic crops (e.g. soybeans, corn) rejected in their destined markets are now being dumped in the Third World without public knowledge or consent, even presented as officially sponsored food aid. The people of our poor democracies need to be provided with complete information and the same opportunity to decide for themselves if they want transgenics, or indeed, the

World Bank rural development strategy. It is essential that the rural poor themselves are taken into account for meaningful participation in a strategy for reaching the rural poor. Although its laudable of the Bank to cite the Millenium Declaration of the United Nations to reduce poverty and improve the quality of life for rural populations, its strategy leads us in the opposite direction. It imposes yet further debt upon we the citizens who are expected to pay for its policies without the benefit of real participation. If the World Bank were to invest in us and the opportunities we deserve, instead of subsidising unaccountable corporate interests at our expense, we rural peoples are quite capable of making our own strategy and one that would actually achieve the goals cited. Unfortunately the Bank continues operating on an obsolete paradigm which urgently needs to shift. Life on the planet can no longer support these investments in large-scale destructive industrialism which ignore basic principles of ecological function and human dignity. Viable alternatives currently exist and are readily available, awaiting support.

The author lives in Ecuador and works with indigenous and rural people on forest conservation, land restoration and sustainable livelihood strategies such as permaculture. Among the organizations he works with are: PAL - Permacultura Amrica Latina CIBT - Centro de Investigacin de los Bosques Tropicales KAWSAY - Fundacin de Culturas Indgenas ALLPA JANPIRA - Instituto de Regeneracin Ecolgica. For more information contact him at <allpa@accessinter.net>

The future of GMOs What does experience tell us?

by Maria Jos Guazzelli
History seems to be repeating itself. Similar to what happened during the Green Revolution regarding pesticides is happening now with genetically modified organisms (GMO). The transnational corporations (TNC) are trying to convince the public why their new technology is needed. According to them their products are good, harmless, will protect the environment and help the poor. As it was with pesticides so it is with GMOs. And for the third time in the near future we will hear quite the same arguments regarding nanotechnology - the technology at the atom scale1. When something is repeated often enough it is assumed to be true. But what does experience tell us?

Some of the myths about genetically modified organisms

GM crops are safe for consumers health The GMO industry supported by notso-independent scientists has spread the idea that GM products, specially soybeans and corn, have been consumed by millions of people for more than 5 years in the USA with no negative effects. The scientist Arpad Pusztai, in his section of a book called Food Safety, brings together all the scientific studies carried out into the safety of GM foods and subjects them to rigorous statistical and scientific scrutiny. ...he said: We found that there are only a few such studies and they show many problems. In particular, they illustrate that GM foods have never been publicly tested for their safety and wholesomeness. There is
1 2

increasing research to show they may actually be very unsafe.2 These are similar to the conclusion published in 2000 by researchers from the University of Rovira i Vergili, Tarragona, Spain. Scientists from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (that authorised the production of GM herbicide resistant soybean in the USA) say it is not possible to guarantee the safety of GM food. Because they have never been labelled in the USA there is no way to track them and check their effect. The Alliance for Biointegrity, an NGO based in Iowa, got legal access to FDA documents in 2002. It then became public that the FDA scientists considered that they did not have enough information on the public health effects of GM crops to approve them. The decision to allow their release was political, not technical. A few powerful TNC dominate the market of seeds, agrotoxics, pharma-

ceutics and biotechnology. They are BAYER (including Aventis Crops Science), SYGENTA (Novartis + Astra Zeneca), DOW CHEMICAL, BASF, DUPONT and MONSANTO. Monsanto alone controls more than 90% of GM varieties commercially planted today in the world, basically soybeans, corn, canola and cotton. These varieties are either Roundup resistant (RR), i.e. resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, which has glyphosate as the active ingredient, or have in-built insecticides such as Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), or have both traits. Regarding glyphosate, in June, the Danish environment minister announced unprecedented restrictions on glyphosate, the countrys and Europes most widely used herbicide due to the chemicals presence in groundwater, Denmark main source of drinking water3. Giving permission to release these varieties was based on the standards

www.etcgroup.org. Leake Jonathan, 2003 . 3 Hurburgh, Charles R. et al. 2001.

of risk assessment and risk analysis for environmental and health issues and the concept of substantially equivalent. This means that GM soya and the same variety of conventional soya (the isogenic variety) are equal when compared to each other, except for the tiny gene bit inserted. In short Monsanto declared to the FDA, (initially on a voluntary basis - they were not required to do so) that there was no need to make studies about the impact and qualities of the GM varieties. They claimed that the GM soya characteristics including protein level, oil content, etc. are the same as in conventional soybean. In short, the FDA has not itself tested its impact on humans. The same claim has been made for corn, canola and other GM crops. And they argue that as we have been eating soya, corn and canola for thousands of years with no problems, it is safe. But additional research shows that this concept of substantially equivalent needs to be revised. There are too many unknowns. For example there are 534 pairs of genes in the GM soybean that are not present in the conventional one. Are they beneficial or harmful? No one has the answer yet. Scanning the kernels of GM and isogenic conventional varieties in an infrared spectrometer to check proteins, carbohydrates, sugars, fats, moisture, etc. shows that they are not the same. Preliminary research results show that the composition of the Roundup Ready soya is different than its isogenic conventional variety and the differences can be detected and separated by the near infra-red rays4. Other research reports suggest that the soya flavonoid levels are also different. When added to the fact that they also show different tolerance to heat and cold stress, does it not indicate that more studies need to be done before GM food continues to be produced?

Almost all over the world, the precautionary principal for environment and health issues is the rule. This means that something must be proven safe before it is allowed. This is necessary because problems may come much later. This is the case with Agent Orange, also a product sold as safe by Monsanto. Today children in Vietnam are born with defects because their parents and grand parents were exposed to high doses of the chemical during the war in the 70s. And we also have to take into account the human factor. Mistakes have already happened (and more can be expected) that could be hazardous to human health. The Starlink corn is a case in point. As it is a Bt corn, it is classified as an insecticide, and approval for its release was given by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) - USA. It contains the molecule CRY 9C that could provoke an allergic reaction and therefore has zero tolerance in human food. The conditional license for the Bt corn was for animal feed only. The farmers that planted it did not get this information and at harvest the Starlink Bt corn was sold, mixed with other varieties and subsequently started to show up in human food products. Because of the zero tolerance level, all the food products containing this corn had to be pulled back. The direct cost for this mistake was at least 2 billion USD. Were they able to pull back 100% of the corn that had been harvested? Most probably not. In theory the license and the liability were very strict and there was awareness of the issue but still the mistake was made. Another case is the swine vaccine incident. This bio-pharming (instead of farming) means that pharmaceuticals are produced in plants such as corn or soya. The biotech industry says it is better than producing in a laboratory because, among other

things, it gives less wastes and better quality yields. As it is a drug, a pharmaceutical, it is supposed to be strictly controlled. A pharmaceutical company in Nebraska and Iowa, USA, grew vaccine for swine in corn under very strict licensing from the FDA and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Among other requirements they were to have buffer areas around the corn fields, check that all seeds that had been planted germinated, harvest all the corn, incinerate all the leftovers from the corn plants and plant a different crop the next season to make sure that no swine vaccine corn would get into the food system. And they missed it. They planted soya next season and due to a late rainfall volunteer corn seeds develop in the soya field. It was found out by chance because an inspector passing by the harvested soya field saw a corn plant. To make a long story short the soya was tracked down and 15 000 tons had to be incinerated. Here the risk is not only of economic and environmental damage but also of human health damage due to a regulatory practice that meets the needs of industry rather than of consumers. GM crops will end hunger in the world The Green Revolution also promised to end hunger. In fact, with the exception of China, the number of hungry people in the world has increased by more than 11% from 1970 to 1990. This increase in hunger is not related to low production. Today per capita food production is higher than ever before, around 1,5 to 2 kg per person per day. Hunger is not a technical problem. Rather it is political. It is due to poverty - lack of access to food or lack of access to land to grow food. It is a matter of unequal distribution of resources and not lack of production. To ensure equal distribution requires use of production tech-

4 5

Benbrook, 2001 Mississippi State University Extension Service Agronomy Notes, 2002. 6 Benbrook, 2001b 7 Impact of transgenic canola on growers, industry and environment, www.canolacouncil.org/manual/GMO/gmo~main.htm. 8 University of Iowa (Obrycki et al., 2001 Benbrook (2001b) 9 (Huang et al. 1999). 10 Elmore et al., 2001 and Benbrook, 2001a 11 Shoemaker, 2001.

nologies that the poor can also control. GM technology is a big step in the wrong direction giving more and more control to TNCs. There is no risk for the environment - GM crops need less biocides In their advertisements Monsanto states that soya RR requires only one spraying of herbicide. However research indicates that slightly more than the quantities used in conventional soya production is required and that this quantity increases each year soya is grown in the same field5. The increased need for herbicides is often due to the increasing weed tolerance to glyphosate. In the USA this is the case with weeds like Amarantus rudis, Abutilon theophrasti, and horseweed6. A survey of Canadian canola oil industries, involving 650 GM canola farmers indicated that they increased the use of herbicide by 20% during the period 1997-20007. By 2001, 26% of the total area planted with corn in the USA was Bt corn. Contrary to what Monsanto promised there had been no reduction in the use of pesticides8. The resistance of the caterpillar to the Bt corn increased rapidly9. Monsanto and the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) have therefore changed their recommendations for Bt corn management. Today they recommend that 20 to 50% of the cornfield be planted with conventional corn as a way to increase the time for the caterpillar to build resistance. GM varieties are more productive In 1998 Monsanto stated that Roundup Ready soya produced 5% more than the conventional soya. Research carried out by different Universities in the USA concluded that conventional soya produced more than the GM soya10. Today both Monsanto and the United States Department of

Agriculture (USDA) acknowledge that GM soya does not produce higher yields11. Researchers at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada, have similar results for GM canola (rapeseed)12. Bt corn seems to be an exception as GM varieties give slightly higher yields than conventional corn13.

No benefits to farmers but GMOs are still increasing why?

If yields are lower, the seeds more expensive and farmers do not own what they produce , why is the area cultivated with GM crops in the USA increasing? For the season 2002 the USA farmers indicated an intention to reduce their cropping area under transgenic soya because of consumer rejection, lower yields and higher costs. Why did the opposite happen? There are several reasons for this. One is lack of labelling. When asked, consumers have said that they do not want to consume GMO products. However they cannot exercise this choice, as the products in the USA are not labelled as GMO. Another is the situation of farmers: (a) It is getting very hard to access good quality conventional seed there is almost no research being done on them these days as the biotech companies control the seed production market. (b) For soybean, corn and canola there is no longer such a thing as guaranteed pure non GM seed any more. So the farmers have no option! (c) The natural contamination of conventional varieties by GM varieties due to cross-pollination puts the farmers under a huge risk of being sued by the biotech companies that accuse them of violating their GM patents. It does not matter how small quantities of GM are in a conventional field, the fines are very heavy. Farmers prefer to plant GM varieties than to risk facing the gene police or the attorneys of the TNC. In North America Monsanto is suing hundreds of farmers. Among them are the soya producer Rodney Nelson15, from North Dakota, USA and the canola producer Percy Schmeiser16, from Saskatchewan, Canada. They

Photo: Centro Ecologico

The reasons why soya yields are lower are not yet fully understood. In the process of making transgenic soya resistant to the herbicide glyphosate there is a side effect that makes the plant less tolerant to temperature stress, both cold and heat. Also the glyphosate disturbs the symbiotic fixation of nitrogen, especially under drought or low soil fertility conditions14. The costs of soybean seed in the USA have increased from USD 6 per bushel in the mid 90s to more than USD 30 in 2002. The agreement between Monsanto and the farmer says that it is illegal for farmers to keep any of the seed produced to replant next season or to exchange with a neighbour. Saving and exchanging seeds is an age-old tradition of vital importance. It has been practised by millions of farmers throughout the world as a way to increase diversity in agriculture and to ensure food security. With the arrival of GM seeds this practice is reduced to an economic issue under the control of TNC.

12 13

Fulton e Keyowski, 1999. Benbrook , 2002; www.iatp.org. 14 King, Purcell e Vories, 2001). 15 www.nelsonfarm.net 16 www.percyschmeiser.com

are experiencing what it means to fight against a giant that has strong connections with the Canadian and USA governments. Most of the others keep silent due to the agreements they have signed with the company. There is another very important aspect. The proponents of GMOs say that there is no reason to complain about the spread of the fields cultivated with transgenic crops. Farmers can always choose if they want to plant GMO, conventional or organic crops. This is no longer true. What is already happening in the USA and Canada is that thousands of farmers no longer have an option. Conventional and organic farmers can hardly raise canola or soybeans due to GMO contamination. And the problem goes further regarding canola because it is a plant of the Brassica family that has several wild and domesticated relatives like turnips, radishes, mustard, cauliflower, etc. So cross-pollination can also contaminate vegetable gardens in addition to grain fields. It is no longer meaningful to say it could happen or it may happen - it is happening! And who has the responsibility when contamination occurs? According to the agreement between the farmer and the company that is automatically signed as soon as the farmer opens the GMO seed package that he has purchased, the liability goes to the farmer. And only to the farmer. So when an organic farmer has lost his crop due to GM contamination what can he do? Sue his neighbour for causing the contamination and pay Monsanto the fee for using its technology!

References
BENBROOK, C. Troubled times amid commercial succes for Roundup Ready soybeans - Glyphosate efficacy is slipping and unstable transgene expression erodes plant defenses and yields. AgBioTech InfoNet technical paper no. 4, 3 May, 2001a. BENBROOK, C.. Do GM crops mean less pesticide use? Pesticide Outlook, 2001b. (www.rsc.org/is/journals/current/pest/pohome.htm). BENBROOK, C. When does it pay to plant Bt corn: farm level economic impacts of Bt corn 1996-2001. www.iatp.org BENBROOK, C.Premiun paid for Bt corn seeds improves corporate finances while eroding grower profits. Benbrook Consulting Services, Sandpoint, Idaho, 2002. DUFFY, M. Who benefits from biotechnology? Presentation at the American Seed Trade Association meeting, December 2001. ELMORE, R.W. et al. Glyphosate-resistant soybean cultivar yields compared with sister lines. Agronomy Journal, 93: 408-412, 2001. FULTON, M.; KEYOWSKI, L. The producer benefits of herbicide-resistant canola. AgBioForum, vol. 2, no.2, 1999. (www.agbioforum.missouri.edu). HUANG, F. et al. Inheritance of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis toxin in the European corn borer. Science 284: 965-967, 1999. HURBURGH, CHARLES R, ET AL,Detection of Roundup ReadyTM Soybeans by Near-Infrared Spectroscopy, Iowa State University Grain Quality Laboratory and Center for Crops Utilization Research, Iowa State University. Applied Spectroscopy, October 2001 KING, C.; PURCELL, L.; VORIES, E. Plant growth and nitrogenase activity of glyphosate - tolerant soybeans in response to foliar application. Agronomy Journal, vol. 93, p. 179-186, 2001. (http://biotech-info.net/king_abstract.pdf). LEAKE JONATHAN, Scientist who pressed GM panic button raises new food health fears, Sunday Times Online, London, May 04, 2003 ( http:// www.agbios.com/main). Mississippi State University Extension Service Agronomy Notes, March 2002. Owen/Iowa State University, 1997. OBRYCKI, J.L. et al. Beyond insecticidal toxicity to ecological complexity. BioScience, vol. 51, no. 5, May 2001. OWEN, M.D.K. (IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY). North American developments in herbicide tolerant crops. British crop protection conference. Brighton, England, 1997. (www.weeds.iastate.edu/weednews/Brighton.htm). SHOEMAKER, R. (Ed.) Economic issues in agricultural biotechnology. Agricultural Information Bulletin, no. 762, Economic Research Service of the USDA, 2001. SOIL ASSOCIATION. Seeds of doubt: North American farmers experiences of GM crops. Bristol: Soil Association, 2002. (www.soilassociation.org). To have more information visit www.greenpeace.org www.bothends.org www.psrast.org www.groundup.org www.isaaa.org www.genewatch.org www.icgeb.trieste.it/~bsafesrv/ www.grain.org

What can be done?

As consumers use your power to decide what to eat. Consume organic products. Demand your food store supply GMO free food. Demand labelling of GMO food. Support organisations that are fighting for more strict rules about GMO before they are released on a commercial basis. Spread information about the issue.

Maria Jos Guazzelli is one of the founding members of Centro Ecolgico, an organisation that has been working against the use of GMOs

in their country Brazil and supporting farmers to develop ecologically sustainable farming systems. For more information contact them at centro.litoral@terra.com.br

10

The effect of neo-liberal politics on the Kayambi people of Ecuador

by Csar Pilataxi

Introduction
Everyday work is not only important for agriculture. It is also fundamental for the culture and self-esteem of indigenous people. The ayllu community, family, forms the basis on which the Andean society has been built, within the boundaries set by the ecosystem. Rural communities develop relationships with one another and with the urban world in order to exchange the products that earth pacha provides. In this way they get a share of modern societys various advantages. Indigenous people continue with a stubborn struggle to win and defend their rights. The education which has been forced upon us is rooted in a one-sided economic perspective and is resulting in the collapse not only of indigenous cultures but also of nature. The economic system that neo-liberalism stands for is completely foreign to our indigenous culture. Neo-liberalism is nothing more than an economic, social, cultural and political strategy to plunder natural resources, mainly in the South and especially in the territories of indigenous people. There is remarkable irony in the fact that in so many cases, it is the people in those areas of the world which have the richest natural resources who suffer the most from poverty. Let us take a closer look at the perceptions and opinions that we indigenous people have of neo-liberalism

the system that is causing loss of culture and identity, that deepens inequalities, i.e. that has led to accumulation of wealth among the few and left others without necessary resources. The following is based on our own experiences

The background
Agriculture in this region is suffering greatly from the effects of neo-liberalism. Our countrys food policy is based on the import of foodstuffs that are heavily subsidised in the developed countries. This is resulting in serious problems and undermining our food security and our ability to be self-reliant in food. This is making the poverty in the rural areas worse and increasing the out migration to urban centres where people gather in an existence of hopelessness. Those who suffer most are indigenous people and women. Todays agriculture stems from the Green Revolution, biotechnology and the free market. Traditional agriculture has been more and more marginalised, and increasing numbers of people find themselves with no possibility for a development characterised by sustainability and identity. The Ecuadorian land reform, especially that which has been carried out in Cayambe, is seen by the middle class as being a success. But we ask ourselves: What kind and quality of

land do we have? What is the quality of life in our communities? The answers to these questions are clear. Communities of indigenous people have been pushed off into heavily exploited hilly areas that are seriously eroded. The best land is concentrated in the hands of a few landowners, especially large flower export companies. The cooperative that was set up by the state land reform some 40 years ago is today a true minifundia while at the same time the increased population of the indigenous agriculture communities has led to a need for increased access to land and water. This need is becoming increasingly acute as our lack of basic needs increases. Having the cooperative system forced upon us has resulted in us losing our cultural identity. We have internalised components and behaviour from the developed world and become dependent upon other forms of economic, social and technical organisation while our own indigenous societys technology, agricultural systems and organisational forms have decayed. They are no longer able to play their vital roles eg. providing us with an historical and cultural identity. The view of development that dominates in our society has had many negative effects, e.g.: - loss of crop species, decreased biological diversity and less crop rotation - increased technology depen-

11

Fertile areas on the high plateau north of Quito Ecuador. Insert: Lunch was served on this occasion when the Finnish volonteer teacher was leaving. Photo: Gudrun Rechholtz

dence, soil erosion, soil salinity and degradation, forest logging and shifting cultivation, - loss of knowledge on how to conserve natural resources and loss of ancient knowledge and wisdom - in short the loss of a richness of wisdom and biological diversity.

Biological diversity is more than just plant and animal life

Since the land reform law was implemented neo-liberal policies have been applied. This has increased poverty, worsened our living conditions and undermined our self-esteem. At the same time the power and wealth of transnational corporations, such as flower export companies, has increased and with it discrimination and exploitation of the people.

The concept of biological diversity starts with the recognition of human (cultural) diversity. International organisations and national governments must both admit that we are different and that every people, culture and person, has the right to think and act. But crimes are committed against these principles daily. In line with this, biological diversity is not limited to plant and animal life, nor to soil, water and the ecosystem. It also includes culture, production systems, economic relations and human relationships as well as societies forms of governance. Plant diversity gives us food, medicine, housing ...But what gives us human diversity? People with different conditions, religions and ideologies? Let us say that this is the basis for cultural diversity. As a consequence we should avoid having models forced upon us where only one way of living is dominant - a so-

called homogenising development model. Biological diversity is the basis for guaranteeing a supply of food, which we see as a non-negotiable basic right of the indigenous people. For us indigenous people the seed is the most important natural resource, along with soil, air and water. Ever since humans started practising agriculture we have protected and conserved genetic diversity, we have multiplied and refined the best species. But today, these species are threatened with extinction because our youth are no longer farming their land. Instead they have become cheap labour at flower plantations and their consumption is almost exclusively of industrial products. Indigenous people have throughout their history defended their land. They know that they have a constitutional right to participate in e.g. the administration of resources. In this

12

way they can guarantee a healthy care of the environment. The owning of knowledge about life brings with it a serious problem: the monopolisation through patents for a solely moneymaking purpose. Governments and transnational corporations genetic engineering can bring with it serious problems because they promote large homogeneous population groups that are sensitive to disease producing genes. We are not against knowledge development but we are against its monopolisation and wrong use. The wisdom and knowledge of our ancestors as well as their technology and different agriculture methods are threatened by the introduction of cutting-edge technology, by climate and temperature changes, as well as the unregulated use of agricultural poisons, which are called cures. Festivals, rituals and economic forms of organisation lose much of their meaning, as does growing ones own food.

Our struggle our challenge

The agricultural land reform did not solve the underlying problems concerning the indigenous peoples collective ownership of land. The interest of the state was to promote exports. The participation of communities was very limited. Only members of coopertives received land, while the majority of community members remained without. For this reason cooperatives were dissolved in the beginning of the 1990s in order to make place for the reestablishment of the communities own traditional ancient collective forms of selforganising. The dependency on alien (and inappropriate) technology and outside organisations that the agriculture reform brought with it has moulded the thinking of a whole generation. To break this pattern is difficult but not impossible. We indigenous people have, throughout history, stubbornly struggled in order to organise ourselves, defend our rights and dignity. The basis on which we build this struggle is a wide and humanistic worldview as well as a cultural identity that rests on the

Andean cosmovision and wisdom and collective forms of organisation. Our efforts are beginning to have an influence and bring about political and economic changes in the country. In the beginning of the 1990s various initiatives were promoted. Womens participation in the indigenous movement was strengthened and activities such as embroidery and production of dairy products were promoted. Forest guardians were educated to help conserve and regenerate the ecosystem. Youth groups were formed for sport and cultural activities. Agricultural production was improved from an agroecological perspective. These were, to be sure, only isolated initiatives but they paved the way for a policy that worked for sustainable development on a regional and national level. A study carried out among farmer leaders and farmers indicated the importance of land: 50% saw their land as essential and fundamental to their livelihoods, i.e. they wanted to be self-sufficient. 35% saw land as an essential complement to their work as paid labourer (construction worker, flower grower, artisan, domestic servant, etc.). 15% saw the land as a part of the household because their wives or children kept animals and produced crops but that it could be leased out or sold. These figures indicate that many do not have the perception that land is a cultural heritage that we have been given to take care of. But perhaps this is because the land no longer has irrigation possibilities, the soil is eroded and large investments are needed if it is to give anything at all and even then it will not satisfy the basic needs. At the end of the 1980s large flower plantations were established in Cayambe valley, which is a very fertile region. They brought about great changes in the economy. The plantations devoured labour on a large scale. These workers came from indigenous communities, mainly youth, and even included migrant labourers from other provinces. Today these flower plantations occupy a major part of the valley. Agriculture and animal production is limited to

meet the local demand. It is the indigenous people who produce for the internal market.

The situation today the need for a strategy to push policy into practice
The different nationalities who live in Ecuador have during the latest decades been successful in building up a large federation for indigenous people in Ecuador. This organisation, CONAIE, brings together 12 nationalities and 14 peoples with different languages and cultures. In addition there are other smaller indigenous organisations. Through the initiatives of the people and their organisations during the past decades, indigenous people have, despite their poverty, achieved a certain position within the countrys politics. They have forced the government to negotiate. Specific representatives have been assigned by the government to negotiate directly with indigenous leaders. Despite these efforts there have been few concrete results in terms of improved livelihoods. Large numbers of the indigenous population continue to live in extreme poverty. The land they were given during the land reform is very deficient. The soil has been depleted through inappropriate production methods and these areas lack the necessary infrastructure such as irrigation canals. With the land having lost its fertility the people are forced to migrate - temporarily or permanently - either to the cities or to the industrial plantations to work for meagre wages that do not cover their basic needs. In 1996 a political organisation, Pachacutik (Movement for a Multination State) was formed. This provides a forum where various social and political actors can meet. The indigenous movement is one of many members. Because this has become an alternative forum for social movements, indigenous people have been appointed to some of the leadership positions. Others have been voted in during general elections. We indigenous people in Ecuador

13

have been guaranteed in the constitution the right to self-define ourselves as a nation with ancient roots and our own history. Therefore there exists within the framework of customary rights, a whole chapter in the constitution that deals with indigenous people. In this the state awards us the right to be respected for our own identity and traditions, the right to land and territories, the right to inherit collectively held land and the right to renewable resources on our land. It also recognises our rights to practice diverse agriculture, have our own social organisation and leaders/ authorities, keep our collective intellectual, historical and cultural inheritance, have a bilingual education system, maintain our traditional medicine and sacred places, define our own development plans and projects, be represented in official formal institutions, and use our own symbols and emblems in public acts. The progress in the constitution concerning the recognition of our rights makes it possible for us indigenous people to plan how our territories shall be organised and how our collective rights shall be put into practice. We can also participate in decisions about how natural resources shall be used and administered. We can enrich production, the environment, the society and the culture with our cosmovision. This reestablishment of the indigenous society brings with it possibilities to enrich our culture. These rights give us power to overcome poverty and to return to our old ways that nurture biological diversity and cultural expression e.g. our festivals and dress. Despite all this, poverty is increasing with every day that passes. Many families have nothing to live on because their land provides nothing. This is a result of many things including climate change, agricultural poisons, monocultures and use of machines that have resulted in logged forests and soil erosion. Important also is the loss of old customs and ways of working and the wisdom, rituals and festivals which are closely linked with the agriculture cycles. Traditional production systems such as mingas, uniglla and chucchi are disappearing. Many people are flee-

ing from the rural areas and moving to cities, even to other countries. As the values that form the basis for societys organisational system disappear, and society collapses. If we dont find a strategy to stop this development it will affect our food security and self-reliance. This strategy must be in line with social and cultural equity as well as gender equity in the production, access and distribution of food. Culture, education and production should all be directed towards saving our identity, i.e. the rural populations customs, practices and methods. Unfortunately the authorities do not understand the link between identity and access to food. They accept that a multicultural model can be introduced, but when it should be put into practice the economic structures and unregulated trade work against it.

tural homogenising upon other societies and cultures. This model has led to inequalities in the distribution of resources and to the destruction of natural resources. Equality, the social welfare and democracy have not worked. The indigenous peoples movement in Ecuador is working to strengthen the people and defend their diversity, against patriarchal power structures, so they can participate in different decision making to promote sustainable development, gender equity and local development with identity.

The lessons learnt

This situation demands that we indigenous people emerge ourselves in a process to organise and strengthen our cultural identity. We must also fight to maintain the rights we have won - respect for and strengthening of the cultural diversity within the framework for building up an intercultural society and a pluralistic state. The main strategy in this process is to recover the old organisational forms that are a part of our cultural identity and to promote a sustainable use of natural resources which includes a sustainable and sound agriculture. Efforts to value agricultural diversity are great. So too the trends to introduce industrial agriculture are strong. The state does not support agricultural diversity. Other experiences show that many families and indigenous societies have started to develop alternatives in order to lift themselves out of poverty, with the support of local NGOs. These can be seen as pilot experiences that are in a process of being socialised. What is needed is to tie together these experiences, build alliances and develop strategies. Despite the failure of the functionalistic paradigm, modern society continues to force its economic and cul-

Csar Pilataxi is the leader of the Cayambe people who live in Ecuador. He is a trained agronomist and permaculturist, a Member of Parliament, chairman of Kawsay Foundation in Ecuador and coordinator of the Indigenous Intercultural University Kawsay, UNIK in the Andean region. Kawsay is a non-profit organisation working to strengthen the indigenous movement, especially education and cultural aspects. It works with rights, identity, art, science, technology, culture, biological diversity and intercultural relations and reciprocity among peoples. Kawsay is run by an interdisciplinary team. It supports indigenous peoples own organisations and at the same time creates a forum for debate and dialogue around themes concerning identity. Presently it has four areas of activities: human and indigenous rights; identity, community-based education and intercultural pedagogics; ecology and ecological production; and research, art and technology. For more information contact: Kawsay, Marquz de Varela 183 entre Av. Amrica y de Soto, Quito, Ecuador (kawsay@kawsayecuador.org; http://www.kawsayecuador.org/ kawsay/index.html) Or Kawsay vngrupp c/o Lina Svenzen <linasvenzen@hotmail.com>

14

CETAP and biological diversity

by Alvir Longhi and Marcelo Souza Santos

Introduction
The region in the north of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, where CETAP is carrying out most of its work with small scale farming households, is characterised by a high plateau as well as hilly land along the Uruguay river and in the foothills of the mountains. The original vegetation in the area is Atlantic rain forest with small open meadows in the flatter areas. The soils in the more hilly areas are fertile but they erode easily and are difficult to work. In the flatter areas there are large fields appropriate for mechanisation but here the soils are acid and less fertile. CETAPs goal is to strengthen ecological agriculture. To accomplish this we work together with and support groups of small scale farming households and landless peasants who have recently gained access to a plot of land. Most of these households live in the more hilly areas and they have maintained the traditional family farms with their diverse production systems.

Recent agriculture trends in the region

Farmers from Europe, especially Germans, Italians and Poles, migrated into the plateau area, and then into the hills in search of more land for the second and third generation settlers. By the beginning of the 1950s a strong local economy was developing. Timber was harvested and sold to the mills in Argentina. On the newly opened land a variety of crops - maize, beans, cas-

sava, and others were grown for home consumption. Between 1950 - 1970 production and processing evolved (eg. mills, animal fat processing, storage facilities) and a well organised local trading system evolved. The area was well known for its wheat, maize and pork. And the farming households with their diverse production and high level of self-sufficiency lived well. In the beginning of the 1970s a series of rapid changes occurred in the wake of the Green Revolution. Wheat production fell drastically. Largescale soybean production was introduced. Production and processing activities were integrated and largescale industrial complexes were established - first for pigs and then poultry. This replaced the diverse subsistence production of farmers, undermined the local trading systems and local economy and led to a gradual decline in biological diversity. By the 1990s the poor economic return led to a reduction of soybean production in the hills, although it continued on the large farms on the plains. Many small-scale farmers in the hills turned to maize production and pig rearing as an alternative. As this became concentrated in larger production units, many small farms went under. The economic crisis in the country grew and the agriculture sector was hit hard. The production of beans and wheat, especially on small farms declined drastically. Many cooperatives and small seed companies went bankrupt. The monopolistic strategy of the transnational corporations also contributed to this situation.

In response the small farmers searched for alternative production and income alternatives and the interest in milk and tobacco production grew. Citrus groves as well as eucalyptus, coniferous and matte production were also encouraged. On the big farms soybean production declined as maize production increased to supply the national market for pigs and poultry feed. This sector, although it was growing during this period, was concentrated to a few large-scale producers and more small farmers were eliminated.

The situation today a threat to biological diversity

Today the farming sector is characterised by monocultures of soybean and maize across the whole high plateau area, mainly on large farms. These large plantations, typical for modern agriculture, are characterised by capital intensive mechanisation and a fast increasing use of biocides. These producers are pushing hard for the introduction of genetic modified technology. In the border area between the hills and high plateau a similar large-scale highly mechanised agriculture is found. Here farmers are also involved in secondary activities such as milk production and to a lesser degree even ranching. In this way farmers put the hilly areas, that cannot be mechanised, into pastures. It is in these hills that most of the family farms that still keep a some-

15

Field visits provide an important opportunity for learning. Photo: Ethel Cavn

what diversified production and richness of species are found. But this diversity continues to decline. Its main threat is the commercial orientation that the big farm industries involved in specialised pig and poultry production advocate. The situation in the dairy branch is not yet so aggressive. However the rapidly increasing numbers of milk cows on the small farm units that have not yet led to a noticeable reduction in biological diversity is a concern. Today the farming sector is characterised by a reduction in farmers incomes and a shortage of capital. Farm machines and buildings are being scrapped and abandoned. Another serious indication of the impoverishment of the sector is the fact that many farming families are dependent on pensions and some even on food baskets that are distributed by government aid programmes.

CETAP and their work with biological diversity

From an environmental perspective, the loss of biodiversity is one of the most serious consequences of the green revolution. In agriculture this problem has emerged with the development of modern techniques for genetic improvement, where the most important is the hybrid process (crosspollination). According to Goodman, Sorj and Wilkinson, apud Ehlers (1986) seeds will be the most important carriers of technical improvements in plant biology and will become the focus for industrial use. (s.31) The proponents of the high yielding varieties (HYV) promised a continuous increase in productivity. Today however everyone agrees that their limits have been reached and no promising possibilities are in sight. However, one clear result achieved by the introduction of these miracle HYV and hybrid seeds is farmers

increased dependency on the seed industry Another is the almost total eradication of the seeds of many local varieties that are well adapted to the ecosystem in which they have been planted for thousands of years. Another catastrophic result of the chemical-industry model is the almost religious belief in monocultures. However, one of the most important characteristics in natural ecosystems is exactly the diversity of plants and animals. They are dependent on balance being maintained in the system that is sustainable. Obviously the main worry for the chemical-industry model has never been to maintain a balance. Rather their goal has been to develop artificial cropping systems that are adapted to chemical agriculture and mechanisation. The impact of this triangle - industrial seeds, agricultural chemicals and enormous, widespread uniform monocultures - has been disastrous for biological diversity that continues to

16

decline every day. This decline affects not only cultivated species but also even the indigenous varieties of the natural ecosystem. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) estimates the global loss of the diversity of crop species to 75 %during the twentieth century. Between 1950 and 1980 in southern Italy almost all the traditional varieties of wheat, lentils, onions, tomatoes and eggplant disappeared. In South Korea the loss was even greater; of 5 000 varieties of 57 different crop species 82 % was lost in only 8 years (from 1985 to 1993). (Febles, 2000) One observation that needs to be made is that the problem is not just the loss of seeds which, in itself, is very serious. Actually what one loses with the seeds is the knowledge about their use, care and adaptation to the original ecosystem. This knowledge that has been handed down from generation to generation of farmers is being lost, and with it the cultures of farmers and indigenous peoples are being dissolved. To maintain their self-sufficiency it is important for farmers to have access to and control over a diversity of seeds and animal species and varieties that are well adapted to their agroecological system. This diversity of alternatives must also correspond to the different areas of use in family agriculture- for their own consumption, for sale, for animal feed, etc. The northern part of Rio Grande do Sul is characterised by grain, pig and in more recent years, commercial milk production. Up until t 1970 there was a lot of forest which was rich in fruits, medicinal plants, timber, etc. But in line with the logic of irrational exploitation, the forest was clear-cut to open up new areas for grain production. As a result a culture for the rational use of the riches of the original vegetation in the region never developed. The growing concern of farmers about the rapidly dirtying and poisoning of watercourses has led them to see the value of the regions forest resources and their important function of protecting water sources and maintaining/regaining the original landscape. To rescue and conserve this diversity it is necessary for farmers to see

the possibilities of a forest-agriculture system that uses the forest resources and keeps the biological diversity intact. Seeing the possibilities to commercialise agroecological products can contribute to this. A study carried out with consumers at the ecological market in Passo Fundo helped. It made it clear for farmers that consumers were interested in buying a large selection of forest products - everything from nuts to medicinal herbs. Another important aspect of biological diversity is that it affects the food security of farming families. In traditional family agriculture, the logic was always to produce for the familys own consumption needs and sell the surplus. This started to change with the arrival of the green revolution and its logic to produce for the market. Food security ought to be taken up initially at the farm family level, from the perspective of their making progress in terms of self-sufficiency in food. This is a basic condition for strengthening family agriculture and for keeping farmers in rural areas. Studies that CETAP have carried out show that the most diverse production units are those that offer the best quality of life for the family because of the abundance and diversity of food they have access to. In addition the household economy increases by approximately 5000 - 7000 reais per year. (CETAP, 2002) Due to this strategy of self-sufficiency these families have been able to maintain a high degree of animal and plant diversity close to their homes. This is usually cared for by women and the elderly in the household. Valuing and saving this characteristic of family agriculture is therefore crucial to ensure food security. This includes both a quantitative and qualititative improvement in their subsistence production as well as nurturing a diversity of plants and animal species and varieties

The strength of the values of family agriculture in maintaining biological diversity

Since time immemorial farmers in different parts of the world have grown and saved their maize, bean, wheat and rye seeds. This is a reflection of their ancestors knowledge because families, by growing many different crops, achieved food security at the same time as they were able to maintain a large number of species and varieties of their local flora and fauna. Farmers had knowledge about both the nutritional and medicinal value of many different herbs, fruits, tubers, roots, and fibres that originated in each region. The logic of industrial agriculture and the efforts to introduce hybrid seeds resulted in many farming families, including the most traditional, losing their domestic seeds. With them they also lose a whole set of knowledge and cultural values. For this reason we usually say that the community that loses its seeds also loses its history. It is well known that biological diversity is disappearing at a rapid pace in the world. Luckily however, many farmers continue to save their seeds. These often also have an important symbolic meaning. For example in religious ceremonies they represent new life. The mystery of seeds is also apparent in the daily meeting between groups of farmers when they come together to talk about agriculture, techniques for animal and crop production, different ways to store seeds, etc. In industrial agriculture where the goal of selfsufficiency is replaced by the goal of production for the market, farmers are alienated from environmental issues. As a result one can say that the maintenance of biological diversity is directly related to the survival of the farmers culture. For it is almost impossible to imagine achieving success in this area unless family farmers are acknowledged as the most important guardians of biological diversity. Education has always played a determining role for getting farmers interested in ecology. Most important has been the informal education that

17

children receive from their parents and other family members in the home. This is clear in childrens games that are often closely related to nature. This is an important part of their learning about plants, seeds, fruits, animals, water, etc. Even today it is very common that children keep themselves busy on Sunday by climbing trees, fishing, gathering fruits in the forest, etc. All this contributes to their ecological awareness. For this reason it is not possible to be successful in maintaining biological diversity without a major investment in childrens ecological education. This is a responsibility of the family, social groups, local community and, of course, the school. Farmers get together and their meetings provide many opportunities for exchanging knowledge. Every person feels appreciated when they can tell their own history and the learning that has been passed on from one generation to the next. Because seeds carry a transcendental spiritual meaning of lifes continuity and at the same time they are the familys guarantors for food each day, seeds have always held a special place in families. And this is the reason why it is the family farmers who, up till now, have carried the main responsibility for maintaining biological diversity in agriculture in this part of Brazil It used to be very common that neighbours visited each other. Sadly this does not happen very often any longer. These visits provided opportunities to discuss life. Often products were exchanged - seeds, food or remedies for different illnesses. Plans were made for work parties during planting and harvest time. These spontaneous meetings provided a means for the local society to selforganise by providing a basis for socio-cultural and economic dynamics. Through this exchange of ideas, organising life in the local community and developing technology to meet their needs, people themselves gathered the necessary knowledge about care of their agroecological system. At the same time, the practice of giving away seeds to ones neighbours meant that they were continuously being valued and the biological diversity was repeatedly

being re-appreciated. One needs to emphasise the importance of relationships among people and their collaborative activities for maintenance of biological diversity. Concern for the environment is only possible when values of solidarity replace egoism. It is from these meetings, conversations, and practical tasks that many farmers rediscover the value of their seeds, customs and traditional knowledge. This is the base from which an alternative agriculture, that does not have profit as its only goal, can be created For many years CETAP based its work with biological diversity on seeds, especially maize seeds, as this area is characterised by grain production. If the area had been an important livestock producer then our focus would most certainly have been on the diversity of animal species; if it had large areas covered by forests then it would have been care of forest diversity. The practical and symbolic ties between farmers and their seeds made us certain that this was a powerful theme to stimulate the local communitys interest for complex issues of agroecology and the debate on biological diversity. Another methodological lesson weve learned is the importance of maintaining a balance between theory and practice, e.g. between carrying out a thorough study on some aspect of biological diversity and activities such as establishing communal plots for seed production, organising festivals and markets on the theme of biological diversity or planning, together with a farmer, the change over to agroecological farming on their fields. In other words it is necessary to work at an advanced and thorough theoretical level and at the same time ground it socially in the concrete experiences of the farmers. While seeds provide the methodological window to work with biological diversity among farmers, it is important to simultaneously put it into a wider strategy that has local sustainable development, based on agroecology, as a goal. To do this it is necessary that activities are coordinated and the technical, environmental, economic and social aspects are clearly articulated. For this rea-

son ecological production, social and political organisation and commercialisation based on principles of solidarity are all necessary aspects of the same project. For example commercialisation is strategic in supporting an increase in biological diversity on the farms because talking about agroecology also includes issues of the familys economic capacity to implement it. In this way commercialising can make it possible for the group to go over to agroecology and in turn save and keep biological diversity.

Activities that stimulate biological diversity

Local commercialisation After many years of collaborating with groups of farmers on activities to promote ecological production, we saw the importance of also working to develop an alternative marketplace. The agro-industrial complex and the control they exercise over the food sector, including marketing, makes the development of ecological agriculture more difficult. It is not enough for farmers to produce ecologically if they at the same time are in a position of dependency as far as commercialisation goes. There are many examples of farmers who have had ecological production for years without it spreading to their whole farm and the area where they live. These farmers are increasingly clear about the fact that the industrial agriculture production and processing complexes lead to their exclusion and to an unsustainable agriculture in all dimensions. But due to the standardisation and monopolisation strategies within the food sector they have fewer and fewer alternatives. One example is the concentration in supermarkets. Here, large chains dominate about 90% of the food distribution in cities. This leaves limited possibilities for farmers who have not been included here, to market their produce. And this is the majority. As long as the food sector continues to be dominated by these large agro-industrial complexes and supermarket chains that destroy the traditional family agricultures way of pro-

18

duction, so long will the negative impact continue. Biological diversity will continue to diminish, the quality of the environment will become worse, and local food processing processes, marketing channels and cultures disappear. It is very clear that this dependency creating agriculture model leads to this situation. This is the reason why the change must lead to increasing farmers self-reliance. The ecological market in Rio Grande do Sul has clearly been the beginning of a new phase for ecological agriculture with an increase in new groups of farmers and the spread of the ideas that are part of that project. The possibilities to sell their ecological products and in this way get an income certainly explain part of the reason why the market has been so successful. It is possible to say a lot about this but it seems superficial to only concentrate on the economic aspects. The cultural changes that this process initiates are so much deeper and its effects so much wider and sustainable on the long term. Since its beginning, the ecological market has clearly provided an important space for placing value on biological diversity. The direct contact with consumers that the market provides shows farmers the importance of diversity among the products they sell. It is through diversity that their stand becomes attractive and attracts customers. It is clear that consumers have started to put value on a whole lot of products that are difficult to get at the supermarket and that farmers earlier only grew for home consumption. The interest that consumers have shown for their so called colonial products is mainly a result of the fact that a large portion of city dwellers in Brazil maintain strong ties to the rural areas. This contributes to many traditions being kept alive. The ecological market has helped to revitalise some food customs. This is in contrast to the artificiality and consumer alienation that is fostered by the commercial market system of industrial agriculture. It is becoming increasingly clear

Farmers enjoy getting together and sharing ideas and experiences.Photo: Ethel Cavn

that the groups of ecological farmers who participate in the ecological market are stimulated to increase the biological diversity on their farms. Some groups that earlier produced one or two varieties of beans for the ordinary market today produce more than thirty varieties of beans. At the ecological markets it is possible to find an enormous diversity of vegetables, fruits, grains, animal products, handicrafts and other products that have been harvested in the forest. These products are not normally found in the ordinary shops. The interest from consumers, especially for the local fruits, was made clear in a study carried out by CETAP in June 2001 in which consumers at the ecological market in Passo Fundo participated.1 The results were a surprise. These fruits came in third among the most sold products or those that consumers would prefer to buy if they were available at the market. But even more surprising was that these fruits are those that farmers have always had on their own table but never believed it would be possible to sell. Despite the fact that farmers have such a potential to produce a large variety of different things, they have been misled into specialising their production to a few products only. All the opportunities that are created through participating in an ecological market contribute a great deal to the work with biological diversity. This is illustrated by those groups

who are now interested in working with the forest production system in order to offer consumers the local products they demand. Seed house Seeds are first and foremost a question of self-reliance and food security. For this reason, when you talk about biological diversity you see how strategically important it is for farmers to be autonomous and have control over their seeds and over biological diversity as a whole. This is why the progress of GM seeds is such a concern for the future as far as food security is concerned. It is necessary to resist the large agroindustrial corporations and their profit seeking projects. The biotechnology industry is a case in point. They have blatantly misused their power, including breaking the law, as they have forced through the use of genetically modified seeds in Brazil. Through years of work CETAP has helped groups of farmers to rescue a large variety of local species. In a study carried out with these farmers we documented about 50 different varieties of beans, 6 pumpkins, 5 groundnuts, 7 rice, 20 maize, 4 varieties related to pumpkins, 10 popcorn maize, 5 tomato varieties, 8 wheat, 6 salad and 10 varieties of peas, to mention only a few. Even though these seeds are kept at home by many farmers it is disturbing that they are grown on very

The ecological market in Passo Fundo has been going on since April 1997 and involves close to 100 farming families, organised in 12 different groups in the northern part of Rio Grande do Sul

19

small areas and only to conserve them, which of coarse is very commendable but perhaps not very sustainable. The reasons for this situation are many. To begin with there is a doubt that these varieties can be high yielders. This is sometimes the case although there are also many species that in addition to being well adapted to the local conditions are even very productive. Another reason for distrust is the anti propaganda that has been spread by the seed companies that claim that the products from these seeds are not of interest to the market. This is partly true, eg. the export market, though there are segments of the market interested in these varieties. However this strange belief has resulted in many farmers not using these varieties of seeds, not even for their own consumption. A third problem is the lack of quality on those fields that are planted with local seeds. That this is seen as a problem is more a result of the bad habit of trusting sales personnel linked to large companies than a real problem. It is a false problem. The work done in the region shows that it is possible to improve these varieties by developing the agronomic characteristics, so they completely meet with farmers expectations. Certainly problems do exist. The most noticeable is the difficulty to organise the rescue of seeds, develop and keep them and then store and distribute them. Another difficulty is that the laws forbid sale of seeds from producers that are not controlled by the Ministry of Agriculture, which benefits the large-scale producers. This is really a disservice of the government against the efforts to save biological diversity because it is the small farmers who really have saved the biodiversity throughout history. The pedagogical method behind The Seed House is an idea that CETAP developed two years ago. Obviously there is a building (a house) but it is not primarily for storage and sale of seeds. Rather the idea is to create a method that stimulates a better organisation of the work done by farmer s groups (rescue phase, development and preservation, storage and renewal.)

The Seed House is even expected to have the function of a bio-construction, a living place where farmers groups can have meetings, receive visitors, etc. Because seeds will always play a central part in their activities and provide the basis for the groups interest and experience, visitors will be able to share a lot of experience on this theme, and even take seeds home with them. In addition this Seed House will be a reference centre for the whole region and when someone wants to get a special kind of seed s/he will know where it will be possible to find it and get information about it. The Seed House has a room that is adapted for the storage of farmers groups seeds, but only in very small quantities because this process must not lead to farmers taking the easy route out. It is very important that they continue to store their seeds in an adequate way at home. Decentralisation is a guiding principle in all the activities that we carry out. Forest agriculture On the high plateau of Rio Grande do Sul the original vegetation consists of Brazilian pines with small patches of natural meadows. This type of vegetation, like the others in Brazil (Atlantic rain forest, Amazon, Pantanal, Cerrado and the coastal zones) have great diversity of plant and animal species. The use of these rain forests for food, fodder and other purposes is common in the northern part of Brazil. In the south, however, the forests have been used mainly as a source of timber. One of the species of special significance in northern Rio Grande do Sul is the Brazilian pine (Araucria angustiflia). Their fruits, the pine nuts, are still an important food today. Pine nuts are rich in carbohydrates and were eaten by the indigenous people of the region. Unfortunately much of the knowledge about the use of these nuts has been lost. One exception is the dish paoca. This dish was common on ranches and was eaten together with sun dried meat. The nuts were also eaten on their own, boiled with a little salt or roasted over the fire. Another important species in this ecosystem is Matte (Ilex

Paraguariensis). Matte is a typical undergrowth species. The leaves of this tree are dried and ground and used to make chimarro or mate. This tea, a legacy from the indigenous people, is one of the most traditional drinks in Rio Grande do Sul. Chimarro is drunk from a cup made from a porongo, a calabash from the climber of the curcubitaceas family (Lagenria vulgaris). There are many other products in the indigenous forest whose use continues, especially in the countryside. But over time much knowledge has been lost. This is mainly because many are not valued and lose out in the fight against other species with a larger commercial value that have been introduced with support from the public authorities. CETAP has in its work with farmer groups sought to support ecological agriculture and has come to understand that it is not enough to have agriculture without chemical fertiliser, biocides and industrial (hybrid and genetic manipulated) seeds. Nor does keeping the biological diversity only mean saving and storing local seeds for growing, especially grains. Work with biological diversity needs to go much beyond this. It is necessary to devote oneself to an agriculture that takes all life forms into consideration, in all its different forms of expression, in a special ecosystem. This is possible through agroecology. The interest in forest farming systems has emerged at a time of maturity for the agroecological proposal, which has been implemented in the region during the past two decades. Many experiences have been gathered during all these years that have brought us to a new and higher level in the care of agroecosystems in the search for a more sustainable agriculture. In the efforts to build a more balanced production CETAP has been discussing with farmers groups about the development of forest agriculture systems. Attempts have been made to include experiences that meet the needs of farmers - e.g. provide an income, use their labour better, reduce production costs, conserve natural resources and value the local species. To accomplish this we

20

have made use of local seeds with a potential in terms of their fruits, timber, medicinal plants, etc. The work has developed through a method that includes fieldwork, get-togethers, courses and meetings to discuss forest agriculture. This has awoken the feeling among farmers that it is possible to grow crops in a way that is completely different from the conventional monocultures. In addition these alternative production systems have high productivity and good possibilities to sell the local products. The fact that there are already a growing number of different forest agriculture products (eg. mate, pine nuts and a selection of local fruits) at the ecological markets in the region, is proof of this.

groups that lead to a diversification on their farms, initially in close proximity to the home. At the same time this is articulated by systematising and spreading experiences on the different farms. This has proved promising in many ways. For example, it has highlighted the importance of the participation of women and the elderly. Work with local seeds The indigenous seeds have long been an opening for discussions about ecological agriculture and biological diversity with farmers. This theme has been an important trigger and it is often around and through such discussions that groups start to organise themselves. One method that has been very effective has been to set up joint seed production fields. The work of soil preparation, sowing, weeding, and harvesting is done together by the participating families. These occasions provide an important opportunity to meet and discuss other questions linked to ecological agriculture, which makes it possible for farmers to exchange ideas and discuss other issues in addition to seeds. The work with seeds has to be wide and include the recovering of indigenous varieties, improvement, multiplication and finally distribution among the farmers. All this would not be complete if it isnt combined with an educational process of the farmers. In addition to courses different activities have been organised to increase motivation. It is in this spirit that festivals for biological diversity have represented a valuable opportunity to show the biological diversity that is on each farm, to exchange knowledge, deepen discussions, improve the mood for the project and also make possible the articulation around themes. Farmers role in the process Methodologically this is one of the most important elements and one of the reasons why CETAP doesnt construct central seed banks that are run by the organisation. Biological diversity is conserved better the more it is shared out on the different farms and this conservation improves as the education and organisational process develops.

Conclusions
In conclusion the following aspects of CETAPs work that have contributed to the reestablishment and conservation of biological diversity on family farms and in their local society can be highlighted: The biological diversity in the regional agriculture system First it is important to point out that in a crop production area like in northern Rio Grande do Sul, it is not possible to develop work with biological diversity within the same framework as is the case in the forest regions, where the focus is on conserving the forest. It is necessary to work within the existing production system in the region through, for example, stimulating the replacement of hybrid seeds with indigenous, encouraging the local breeding of local animal races and establishing forest agriculture that ensures production and income for farmers. All this to get closer to a system that is more like the forests own. Biological diversity and food security - Traditionally farming households prioritised production for their own consumption and only sold the surplus. Recreating this is strategic when thinking about food security from the perspective of the family. It even has a direct relation to farmers autonomy over seeds, plants and animals. CETAP has tried to develop activities together with farmers

Forest agriculture system This project passes in very well in the perspective for developing ecological agriculture on the farms. In addition to these systems being very well developed with complex ecological interactions that help to maintain the necessary balance, farmers have also discovered that they are also very productive and can therefore offer an alternative source of income for the farm. In closing one can say that CETAPs work with biological diversity is not carried out in isolation because CETAP itself is embedded in the logic for developing ecological agriculture. And ecological agriculture, as we understand it and try to put it into practice, includes technical aspects of production, environmental, economic and social cultural aspects. This could all stop with beautiful speeches at the policy level, but in CETAP we try and work in the opposite direction. i.e. from concrete activities and a social and institutional sustainability that is maintained through farmers selforganisation (even together with cities). The social and geographic spread of these experiences happens through the articulation among these farmers groups as well as the infection of the communities and cities that exist around them. This is the case for both the countryside and the cities. CETAP calls this process local sustainable development.

Centro de Tecnologias Alternativas Populares, CETAP, was established in 1986 by a number of social movements active in rural areas and a group of agronomists. The purpose is to strengthen small farmers by promoting the use of technologies that are economically, socially and ecologically appropriate. To reach this goal CETAP developed various experimentation, training and extension activities with and for organisations and groups of family farmers who work with ecological agriculture. For more information contact: CETAP, Rua Prestes Guimares, 366, CxP. 616, 99001-970 Passo Fundo - RS, Brasil. <cetap@via-rs.net> .

21

Biodiversity is important the Pedretti family explains why

by Erik Axel Amn
Luiz and Oneide Pedretti. Photo: Erik Axel Amn

One key aspects of agroecology is biodiversity. As an agricultural system, agroecology aims to be an integrated part of its surroundings i.e. nature. What does biodiversity mean to farm households? What are the gains for them? In the Southern most state of Brazil, Rio Grande do Sul, there is a region called So Domingos do Sul. This particular region is characterised by hilly areas covered with forests. Although the hills are often very steep and difficult to work, conventional agriculture totally dominates this area. The consequences are not difficult to spot. Because the monocultures seldom have enough vegetative cover to protect the thin, fragile layer of soil the result is soil erosion that is very difficult to revert. Furthermore these monocultures often attract insects and diseases like fungi, bacteria and viruses also spread easily. One of the families that lives in this area is Luiz Pedretti, his wife Oneide and their two sons Marcelo and Anderson. Their farm is 70 ha and they produce mainly beans, maize and soja. They have chosen to look for alternatives to the conventional way of conducting agriculture. In cooperation with CETAP1 and other farmers in the vicinity theyre experimenting with ways to improve their farm according to the principles of agroecology, in search for sustainability. One of the first steps they took, in addition to stop using agrotoxics and synthetic fertilisers, was to start growing food to sustain their own family. This cut the costs of living for the family and they can also rely on what they eat now more than before because they know it is free from poisons, etc.. What they dont manage to grow themselves they buy at the ecological market every Saturday in Passo Fundo.
1

Here they sell their own surplus as well. This direct contact with other consumers gives the family an even stronger incentive to diversify their production. Why? Because what the consumers demand is freedom of choice and therefore also a lot to choose from. So that is also what the Pedretti family tries to offer at the market. But biodiversity means so much more for the family. For one thing it reduces risks, as they dont rely on only one type of crop. They produce several. If one crop is ruined due to poor weather, pests or diseases one year there is most often another one that can be harvested, guaranteeing their food security. Half of the Pedretti family land is forested. Instead of cutting it down to turn it into farmland theyve chosen to experiment with forest agriculture. This is a method for both utilising and at the same time preserving and/or improving the biodiversity of the forest ecosystem. Farmers try to make use of the native species that are well adapted to the local soil and climate conditions, etc. And each species used in the system fills at least one and usually more useful purposes such as food for hu-

mans, fodder for domestic and wild animals, timber, firewood, fibre, fertiliser for the soil, and so on. The biodiversity of the system makes the use of energy very effective and while the productivity of one particular crop may not be high the production of the system as a whole is. The Pedretti family has already planted several desired species into their forest including orange and peach as well as indigenous fruit trees such as pitanga, ariticum and guava. This system of forest agriculture not only gives the farmer a good and diversified production but also protects the forest and prevents erosion problems. The new methods the Pedretti family is using to make their farm more sustainable are gaining in popularity, as it becomes increasingly evident that they pay off. Neighbours are starting to experiment with similar methods. As their interest in alternatives to conventional farming grow members of CETAP step into the process, giving advice on how to progress and facilitating exchanges with other farmers who are closer to achieving sustainability in all aspects. So if you happen to pass by the lush hills of So Domingos do Sul in a few years, things are bound to have changed in a new and exciting way.

Erik Axel Amn has recently begun his studies of agronomy at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU). Last year he spent six months in Brazil, as a Future Earth volunteer working and learning with CETAP, a member of Future Earths international network. For more information you can contact him at <erikamno@webaid.nu>

For more information about CETAP see the previous article by Alvir Longhi and Marcelo Souza Santos

22

The meaning of ecological agriculture to small farmers...

From a calender with photos and text by farmers and agriculture extentionists who attended a course in photography and writing skills organised by Centro Ecolgico in 2000

January To be an ecological farmer is to have developed. I consider myself a researcher. I work with homeopathic medicine for the animals and flower remedies for the plants and I am impressed by the results. We have demystified the concept that agriculture requires poison to produce. Agroecology also brings a stable income for the families. Gilmar Bell February Being an ecological farmer makes me proud and gives me self-esteem. I dont always have time to do all that I want to do, it is not always easy to find resources to hire a farmhand to work or to buy a tool. And I still do not yet have all the knowledge I need. But this way of working is really worth it. It is no longer necessary to take all the precautions that one must when working with pesticides. Nor do I have to spend time worrying about thoughts like what if I get sick when I cultivate or eat what I produce. Valdecir Camatti March I never want to leave agriculture, it has been my life, it is my education. I am committed to it because this is what I like and value most of all. Even though my parents cultivated in a conventional manner, as a student I already sympathised with organic management. Because I started to get information I was able to compare. When I got to know Centro Ecolgico where I

trained and worked, everything fit together. Today I understand the importance of preserving biodiversity, because without it, it would not be ecological agriculture. Adilson Roberto Bell Until I was twenty I worked with chemical agriculture on my fathers farm. When I married I shifted to ecological agriculture. To be an ecological farmer is very good. Now I am 22 and I will never go back. I am more satisfied. I am free. I dont need to worry about whether the chemicals I am using in my work will make me sick. I am proud to be an eco-farmer. Vanderlia Souza Camatti April Ecological agriculture improves the quality of life. Those who use agrotoxics are always afraid that their children will be close by when they are working. I am not afraid, my son can be near me when I work. He can play on the ground and eat what I produce in the garden. It is only healthy! Luzia Carlos Fernandes May On our farm we have never used poison in the vegetable garden, but yes we did use it on the maize, tomatoes and apple trees. It ended up with me poisoning myself and being taken to the hospital. It was really serious. Then we dropped it. We will never think about using poisons again. For the past two years I have grown crops organically. It is much healthier. We dont pollute the rivers, the air or nature.

Despite all this, I must say that we have problems marketing our products. The markets are there but we havent been successful in reaching them yet. When this happens I want to expand our activities, because then I will be able to work full time in agriculture. Airton Zanotto June I am very allergic to all agrochemical products. It is enough eating fruits like strawberries and peaches that have been sprayed, and I will have problems. For me, to choose ecological products is to choose health. Farmers and consumers have to change and become more aware. Agroecology is the future. Adriana Bell I know my vision is captivated but for me agroecology is beautiful. It has a strong alliance with Good. It respects the earth, nature as a whole (a unity) and the nature of the human being. From my point of view, agroecology is not only an alternative, it is the solution. Stella Raupp Schwank July For me to begin ecological agriculture required a tremendous effort to change paradigms. I had an education and came from an environment where the prevailing standard was valued. When I got to know agroecology I discovered that the most important thing is not to be like everyone else, it is to

23

be an individual, to be different. To find different solutions for different cases requires that the agro technician is deeply in tune with the farm where he will work. To create a space, a market, for ecological products and a habit of consuming them is not easy because it is necessary to be brave and relentless. But it is fundamental to bring the persons out of the square. Rudinei Marcos Giacomelli, extensionist August When I left the farm to study I did not quite realize why I did not like that my father used (agro-)chemicals. When I began to understand agroecolgy a little better, I realized that I have always had a strong personal relationship with nature. Today if I were forced to work from a non-ecological focus, I would prefer to leave my profession. My dream is that this work continues to spread and builds up pressure to defeat the negative pressures of the reality. Cristiano Motter - agriculture extensionist Four years ago my family changed to ecological agriculture. Before

when we worked conventionally we had less security, less money and we had to buy poisons for the profit we got. Today we live better. Mirian Aguiar Selau September Ecological agriculture is my life. Since I got involved in this work, twelve years ago, my paradigm has changed totally. I have another notion of what it is to be a farmer - to value the consumer, the markets, the whole process. It is a very big personal change. I cannot imagine myself being anything but an ecologist. Nlson Bell I admire those who work with ecological agriculture. It is a hard work compared with the agriculture that uses chemicals, it is much harder work but it is much healthier. I am happy because not long ago my father stopped using chemicals when cultivating tomatoes, on top of that he also joined agroecology. Edina de Souza Borges Evaldt October To be an organic farmer is to co-operate with the environment, with your

neighbour, with medicine, with life! To collaborate with everything is to be approved by life. I am an ecologist because I am religious and do not want to destroy the life God gave the earth. Jorge Luiz da Silva Machado November I like what I am doing, I am proud to be what I am. I live and let nature live. Organic agriculture is more labour intensive, but it is compensated. Even in terms of income, my family has today increased the income by 40-50%, perhaps more. Odimar Marcon December Today I do not see any other possibility then to be an ecological farmer. It is my work, my joy, my food. It is life! To work in a group is very good. At home we have healthy food to eat. What my children eat at home is what I sell for others to eat. Rosane Cardoso Martins

24

Landrace seeds
The source of our domestic plants, those which we cultivate today, lie in the efforts of experimenting farmers, of successive generations and different civilisations. They collected grains and seeds from the best ears and pods and increased their productivity. They chose seeds from the most developed plants, and succeeded to adapt them locally. They planted seeds from the least attacked fruits and plants and maintained their resistance to insects and fungus. Each landrace seed carries in its genetic map, a part of the human history, a collective inheritance that ought to be preserved as a grand treasure.

During the last forty years the traditional seeds have been substituted by industrial seeds. With the invasion of modern varieties, the society has lost many varieties and farming families have been forced to buy seeds, chemical fertilisers, pesticides and, finally, a whole production technology. Fortunately, today agriculture is returning to benefit from this common treasure, its landrace seeds. With sound ecological soil management, they produce well, show advantages of adaptation, rusticity and diversity of forms, tastes and colours. When farmers resume the habit of producing and selecting seeds, they are investing in human food security. When consumers assume the habit of demanding healthy food at the supermarket, this benefits the collective, the whole of nature including people.

Created risks

Little bird where do you build your nest? Among the eco-tomatoes of course....

25

Nourish and Change

... the revolution is personal, you change and the world changes for you. How do you change? Liberating the thoughts, untying the ties (let the moorings loose), rediscovering the words. Let your thoughts recline here, there, over there, without fright, without barriers, without false bottom drawers full of occult thoughts. Keep the thought nutritious as your food, clean as your intestines, straight like your spine, renewed like the air in your lungs. Letting go fluently what you think even if at the beginning it is just for yourself / for your own buttons. Snia Hirsch, in the book Let it Go

The risks that present themselves to humankind, created by civilisation, give back to humankind the adventure of retaking our destiny and controlling it. What we did before fearing the gods that we no longer fear, fearing the plague that we now control, overpowered by the unknown that now we know, now we will have to do facing the risks that we have ourselves created. We will have to confront that mad god, called humankind, a plaque we have created called scientific and technical power, and try to unveil an unknown called ourselves, our economic system, our relation to nature, the essence of our process of civilisation. Christvo Buarque

Consumer cooperatives for ecological products success story from two states in Brazil
by Ana Luiza Meirelles

This initiative to establish a consumer cooperative is a response to a specific problem: how the 10000 inhabitants of Trs Cachoeiras could have access to the high quality food that weekly passed by on the highway through their town on its way to the ecological market in the State capital. More than 10 years ago, small farmers, both men and women, from the Northern seashore of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (counties of Dom Pedro de Alcntara, Torres, Morrinhos do Sul, Mampituba and Trs Cachoeiras) had begun to make their dream come true. They started to create an agricultural production system in harmony with nature as well as a social organization that would lead to a more congenial and just society. This dream of high quality food was also shared by many people living in town, especially from the small town of Trs Cachoeiras. They were very aware of the problems posed by agrotoxics and of the advantages of ecological products. Different strategies were tried in order to connect several of the ecological farmers to urban consumers: a weekly street market, baskets delivered to homes, direct purchase from farmers. But the intrinsic limitations of each of these options as well as the limited variety and seasonality of products were serious constraints making it difficult to meet the demand of consumers. Several meetings bringing together different actors like the church, the NGO Centro Ecolgico, the small farmers association ACERT and consumers were held looking for the best alternatives. Many possibilities were considered and discussed. Eventu-

ally it was decided to begin a consumer cooperative for ecological products. Inspired by the pioneer Cooperativa Coolmia from the State capital of Rio Grande do Sul, they started to develop a cooperative that would meet the needs of the small community. Small working groups were formed. One drafted the rules for the cooperative. Another was responsible for drawing up an inventory of the minimum equipment, stock and suppliers needed to open the shop. A third group looked at the legal aspects and recruited more members to join the cooperative. A few months after the first big meeting the cooperative COOPET (Cooperativa dos Consumidores de Produtos Ecolgicos de Trs Cachoeiras) was inaugurated on May 18th, 1999. It had 80 family members. The shop was opened in the downtown area of the small town on June 5th, 1999 - on International Environmental Day. Today more than a 100 different items are sold in the shop. These products, both natural and processed, are produced by groups of ecological family farmers from different States in Brazil, mostly from Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina. This story continues now in another county some 20 km north named Torres - a summer resort that has about 50 000 permanent inhabitants. Some leaders, school teachers and urban environmentalists, who were worried about the effects of agrotoxics both on producers and consumers felt the need to have access to good quality food. They held a first meeting in June 1999, supported by Centro Ecolgico and the

pioneer COOPET. In a process similar to COOPETs a new cooperative, ECOTORRES, was founded on November 17th, 1999 with 85 family members. The shop, located in downtown Torres, was opened on January 20th, 2000 during the peak of the summer season. And to our joy, this story continues to unfold. Further to the north, in the State of Santa Catarina new initiatives are sprouting. People are working to set up cooperatives that provide access to environmentally sound quality products in partnership with small farmers organizations. In the county of Praia Grande (15 000 inhabitants) COOPERVIDA was founded during the year 2000 with 105 member families and in the county of Sombrio (40 000 inhabitants) COOPERNATIVA was founded in 2001 with 35 member families. And it does not end here. By the end of 2002 the Consumer Cooperative in the county of Cricima (200 000 inhabitants) was founded. It expects to open its shop before mid 2003. And consumers from the county of Ararangu (70 000 inhabitants) held their first meeting in March 2003 to discuss a consumer cooperative for ecological products.

An innovative idea is working and continues to evolve

COOPET was having a hard time making ends meet. Their income did not cover their costs. In October 2002 a new procedure was discussed and put into practice. Now the members of the cooperative pay a monthly fee and buy

26

the products at cost price. What does it means - cost price? If the Cooperative pays R$ 2.50 to the farmer s agroindustry for a jar of tomato sauce it will be sold to its members for the same price of R$ 2.50. A 50 kg potatoes bag that costs R$ 50.00 plus R$ 2.50 in transport costs will be sold to the members at R$ 1,05/kg the cost price. The monthly fee, initially R$ 20.00 per month, and later reduced to R$18.00, covers all the operating costs rent, personnel, taxes, water and electricity, maintenance, packaging, etc. When the idea was implemented COOPET had 72 members. Of these 16 families who did not want to pay the monthly fee left and 36 new families joined. Today COOPET has 92 members. Not only are they able to cover their costs, but they have also increased their sales by 200 %. The shop can be used by members of other sister cooperatives provided that the members are really committed to the cooperative ideals and process expressed in Trs Cachoeiras.

A wide variety of locally produced and processed ecological products are sold at the consumer cooperative shops. Photo:Centro Ecolgico

Facts about the structure and functioning of the small consumer cooperatives
In Brazil a minimum of 20 members is legally required to form a Cooperative. The members of these small consumers cooperatives have decided to have an Administrative and the Fiscal Board each with 6 members. These are renewed every 2 years. All members must be approved by the Administrative Board and pay an initial membership fee of R$ 80,00 (around SEK 280). This provides the cooperative with a start capital. The shops are open to the public. At COOPET price tags on all the goods show two prices: one that is equivalent to the cost price to be paid by the members and a second that is 150% of cost to be paid by the public. In the other cooperatives the price tags also show two figures: one that is 135% of costs for members and the other, 150% of the cost, for the public. These prices cover the costs of rent, personnel, taxes, water and electricity, maintenance, packing, a s o. Presently these small consumers cooperatives in the region sell about 120 000 tons of agricultural products per year. Their value is approximately SEK 1 000 000. 150 to 200 different items are sold. About 30 groups of small farmers (450 families) sell their products through these cooperatives shops. This additional market for their products increases the stability of their income. The guarantee that the products are ecological is provided through by the confidence and trust between consumers and producers. This is a fundamental aspect of what is called the Network for Commercialization and Certification of Ecological Products. The network keeps that small farmers organizations, NGOs and consumers organizations a in permanent contact with each other to check the process of agricultural production and the quality of the final product. In the three Southern States of Brazil (Paran, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul) it is the Rede Ecovida de Agroecologia (Ecovida Agroecology Network) that is responsible to guarantee the products. Its members include more than 120 small farmers organizations, 23 NGOs and 8 consumers cooperatives.

The author Ana Luiza Meirelles, is an Agronomist by profession, working for Centro Ecolgico since 1989. Her main focus in the organization has been advising ecological small farmers groups on small scale food processing (agroindustries) - from harvest to legal aspects, from jars to the lay out the labels, and ecological solidarity consumption from presenting the products in the market to consumers cooperatives. Some years ago she worked also with medicinal plants. Her contact address is <centro.litoral@terra.com.br>

27

A coffee with the flavour of ecology and more income to small farmers
based on an article on CEPEMA published in the newspaper O POVO, Fortaleza, Brazil by Ana Ceclia Mesquita

The ecological coffee Pico Alto is produced by members of COMCAF (Cooperativa Mista os Cafeicultores Ecolgicos do Macio de Baturit) in the municipalities of Guaramiranga, Pacoti, Mulungu, Aratuba and Baturit in the State of Cear, in Northeastern Brazil. These farmers, both young and old, believe in a system of production more generous towards nature. Instead of huge coffee monocultures they have fields where coffee plants are not the only actors. Planted under the shade of big trees like Inga sp. coffee trees are part of a consortium of bananas, papayas, guavas, Caribbean cherries and beans. In this agroforestry system the flora and fauna diversity in the remaining Atlantic Rain Forest areas in the State of Cear is maintained. The production of shaded coffee is not a new phenomenon. It was first introduced in the region over a hundred years ago. Not only does it guarantee the reduction of solar radiation but it also modifies the humidity in the air, the temperature and the characteristics of the soil. In this way it makes the micro-environment more suitable for coffee production. However in the 1970 the Brazilian government introduced into the region the technique of growing coffee without shade. This brought disaster to the ecosystem. With the destruction of the forest came reduction of water springs and increased soil erosion. It also brought economic and social disaster. Some farmers have joined the recent trend in Macico de Baturit

of replacing their coffee monocultures with other crops. This has lead to the exhaustion of the soil. Other farmers have left the rural areas for the major towns in search of a better life. However there were also some farmers who reverted to the more appropriate shaded coffee production and planted Inga sp., jack fruit, among other trees and in this way increased the biodiversity. Today an increasing number of farmers, mostly small family farmers, are changing over to ecological shaded coffee production. Their efforts are supported by CEPEMA, an NGO that has worked for many years in this area. They continue to learn more about how to protect nature through an agricultural management that excludes agrotoxics and chemical fertilisers. They also learn how to increase their income and food security by mixing coffee with other crops. CEPEMA has been successful in supporting these farmers and their efforts to practice a more sustainable agriculture. CEPEMA agents are out daily visiting farmers and bringing them new technical information. They have a dual aim of protecting the Altlantic rain forest and at the same time improving local livelihoods and reducing rural exodus to big towns. Today there are about a 100 hectares with shaded ecologically grown coffee. According to the Cooperatives president, also a coffee farmer, Francisco Fernandes Barros, the idea is to process and improve the quality of the coffee

to add more value in order to improve the local economy. The price of the ecological coffee is higher than conventional coffee because the harvest is lower per hectare due to the shade and mixed cultures. Presently the Cooperative is processing 3000 kg per month. They expect to increase the harvest from 5 to 10 bags per hectare and also produce other crops on the same area. The cooperative started three years ago. It has improved the member farmers economic situation by making the profit stay with the farmers and not with middlemen or big enterprises. They have also introduced new planting techniques to increase the yields. For example they have introduced varieties that are better adapted to this system and can be planted closer to each other. After planting it takes 4 years for the coffee to start producing. It is harvested once a year in April during the rainy season. The shade lengthens the maturation period which allows the sugars to be better processed in the fruits. This is what gives the more subtle special flavour. The soil and climatic conditions in this region are ideal for growing coffee. The higher trees that shade the coffee eventually increase the biomass with their leaves, bark and branches, improving the organic matter in the soil. Their decomposition stimulates the action of different micro-organisms transforming it into nutrients. Because of the diversity a lot of insects and birds

28

are also present - the ecosystem is in better balance. This coffee has already been exported to Sweden since 1996/97, as KRAV coffee but the idea now in to sell it to the internal market in Brazil as well.

Learning ecological agriculture at 72

Jos Pereira da Silva was the oldest but not the least dedicated student at the course in Ecological Agriculture in the Macio de Baturit. He went back to school to learn how to produce ecologically. Now I am an ecological small farmer, he says proudly. The house he purchased 8 years ago has a tropical home garden with a diversity of medicinal plants, beans, oranges, caj (Spondias sp.) and ciriguela trees. The only coffee plant grows together with passion fruit and peanuts. It was his childhood dream to have his own house and garden. But my greatest inheritance has been to be able to raise my 14 children he says. Although he has been working since he was a child he never managed to have enough money to buy a farm. For the last 40 years he has taken care of someone elses small farm where ecological shaded coffee is grown. During the last 63 years he has witnessed the changes in the production system as well as in the processing of coffee from hand labour in the pilo peeling coffee to the use of machines.

from her father I have worked in agriculture since I was 7 years old. Together with my brothers we have always helped my parents. The brothers left to live in the Capital of Cear. But I dont even think of leaving here. Mother of 6 and a grand mother, Elenilda has long been an active proponent of agroecology often working outside her own farm. She has been the president of the association of ecological small farmers of Macio do Baturit. This association organised the first street market of ecological products in Guaramiranga. Her interests and initiatives go beyond environmental aspects. I used to gather together the women in the area to see if they had knitting or handcraft skills because many of them stayed at home not knowing that they could increase their income.

Photo: Pernilla Siljehag

A living memory and an example of resistance

The soft smile is an invitation to share
the intimacy of the house and the memories of Gerardo Queiroz Farias. He is one of the oldest coffee growers in the Macio de Baturit - and an acknowledged expert. At 78 he still works up and down the hills to prune his coffee plants. I was born here and lived here my whole life. Several rooms of the old house show traces of that childhood: a wooden stove and utensils almost a 100 years old. The coffee was peeled in the pilo and later came the mill he tells. It has been an ecological farm for decades. The small farm that belonged to his father used to have 96 ha of shaded coffee, harvesting up to 700 bags per year during the 60s. Gerardo feels cheated by the low yield nowadays as well as the low price of the coffee. He has inherited 31 ha from the old farm but harvested only 40 bags last year. But he does not give up and he still cultivates other crops. It is not the money that allows us to live from agriculture. Important for him is his passion for coffee and his achievements. He has been the president of the Coffee Growers Association of Serra de Baturit and travelled to Sweden in 97 in conjunction with the export of ecological coffee. The memories - photos and press materials - are kept in a yellow paper file that he enjoys showing to every visitor.

COFFEE is an exotic plant in Brazil. Some say that its origin is in Africa. The word coffee has its origin in the Arabic word cahue meaning force. In Europe the first coffee houses were called wise mens schools where the scholars sipped coffee, chatted and exchanged ideas and information. The legend says that coffee was first discovered by a shepherd on the west coast of the Red Sea and given to the monks who, thinking that it was evil, had thrown it in the fire. The scent that spread in the air made them realise that it was divine and they learned how to prepare the beverage to stay awake during their nights of prayer. Coffee contains caffeine, lipids, amino acids, sugars and several minerals.

Protection of the environment and something more

One of the few woman farmers producing ecological coffee and a member of the cooperative in Guaramiranga is Maria Elenilda Amorin, 36 years old. She is one of the environmental extentionists trained by CEPEMA and every day she walks about 5 km to try to raise the consciousness of her neighbours about the environment and the needs of nature. She gives them information about ecological techniques in agriculture, techniques that dont require agrotoxics or chemical fertilisers. We can already see some changes. A lot of farmers dont cut the forest any more to grow crops. The love for the land she learned

Ana Ceclia Mesquita is a Brasilian journalist. She has a degree in social communication with a focus on journalism from the Federal University in Fortaleza in Cear state. As a journalist with the daily newspaper O Povo, one of the major (30 000 readers) newspapers in North East Brasil, she works together with colleagues to cover science and health issues. The Sunday edition takes up topics related to the environment, wellbeing, health scientific research. In the year 2000 she received the international award, First Interamerican Prize in Environmental Journalism, for her article Environment - a project for life that covered the city as a sustainable place for residents to live. She wrote this article about CEPEMA in March 2003.

29

Creating conditions for life Ladakh agri-culture at a crossroads

by Sonam Dorje

Ladakh basically is an inhospitable barren desert. It is dusty, dry and rocky with extremely scarce cultivable land and almost no vegetation even if water is abundantly available. Centuries ago settlers came and, for whatever reason, decided to settle down here, and face the challenge of nature. Today when one sits on a high point and tries to imagine what the region looked like originally it becomes clear what an indomitable challenge it must have seemed to decide to settle here for eternity. Especially as the settlers lifestyle was more or less entirely dependent on agriculture. However they did decide to create a place for themselves in this hopelessly gloomy looking landscape - and they were successful - not only to survive but also to thrive and prosper.

Every blade of grass

Many guidebooks today describe Ladakh as Moon Land. No doubt it was a true Moon Land with no sign of life in sight to the farthest end of the horizon. Elsewhere human beings entered into a bountiful nature. In Ladakh, however, they entered and transformed nature first, to create an ecosystem and then continued to live a lifestyle that not only complimented nature but also enriched it with every passing year. Over the generations, enough fertile land was created to support prosperous, culturally rich human settlements, which took pride in the fact that they belonged to this place. This pride stemmed from the

fact that their source of life, their agriculture, was well established. They had created very fertile soil in beautifully terraced fields. These were supplied with water from the clear glacial streams through an elegant network of irrigation canals. In this desolate desert they could be appropriately termed living canals. Very often miles in length, they were built over mountain precipices with no modern materials, only mud and stones held together by roots of bushes, trees and grass. The canals have become stronger and more beautiful with the passage of time. The plants that grow along their sides provide timber, fuel wood and fodder. Ladakh is the place where every blade of grass is so respected; every sign of life is so valued. Here in Ladakh the lifestyle used to be in total harmony with nature - a process of enhancing nature in support of life. This is contrary to other parts of the world and other myopic development models where the lifestyle of people leads to the catastrophic destruction of a rich and bountiful nature. This has progressed to the extent that the intricate economic systems laced with infinite human greed are intertwined in such a complicated manner that it is extremely difficult for humans to extricate themselves out of this pathetic condition. The human race has made tremendous progress in all spheres. And the aggregate outcome of this whole process of progress is threatening the survival, not only of the human race but also of the whole planet. The mistake is that we had been pandering to the indomitable, insatiable mon-

ster of greed in the human consciousness. Human comfort is enhanced at the expense of the survival of the planet. This is a very short sighted course that human civilisation has taken. Today, suddenly when juxtaposed with the rest of the world where human activity has pushed the planet to the brink of major catastrophes like global warming and the collapse of ecosystems, Ladakh acquires a certain special significance. Here there has been a process of creating conditions for life and not the contrary.

Peacocks and crows - an inappropriate development mode

Over the years the modern development model has been introduced into Ladakh as well. The responsible agencies, which had almost no local staff, hardly had any clue of the project at hand. They were all snobs, believing themselves to be the messiahs on their mission to deliver the mountain brutes. They were utterly incompetent for the task, and they thoroughly messed up the situation. They delivered nothing but chaos and confusion. It was out of good intentions perhaps, the rest of the world wanted the economic progress to reach every corner of the planet - and Ladakh was no exception. The first and the main agency to introduce this so-called development was the government. Staffed with people who had received a so-called

30

Photos: Inger Kllander

modern foreign education, they were the products of an education system that was introduced by the colonial masters in India. This system aimed to produce servants and clerks for them. It had no respect for the local and always taught things of a foreign land. The colonial masters left but the attitudes lingered on.

It came up with a development model without the least consideration for the local conditions or respect for the knowledge and ways of the people. These development models proved to be very effective in destroying the old and utterly ineffective in creating something new. No one seemed to have the vaguest clue

as to what they were supposed to create, as these models were 2nd or even 3rd hand pathetic imitations of development models that belonged to some other world with their own conditions. It was like trying to make a peacock out of a crow by sticking one or two peacock feathers into the crows tail .

31

Ladakhi agriculture
Ladakhi village communities used to be very happy people, though materially not rich by any standard they had just enough to eat. A village community was always a big family that relied completely on sharing and supporting each other, honestly and unfailingly. This perhaps was necessitated by the geographical conditions. Without a strong and sincere community, life wasnt possible here in this harsh desert. Agricultural land is more or less equally distributed among the families and since fertile agricultural land is extremely scarce in the region polyandry was practiced to keep the population under control and to keep the family property undivided. Polyandry is a dying institution today and as a result land is being divided among the brothers and sisters and the population is on the rise. In this mountainous desert with a sandy soil there are only small patches of land along some glacial streams that can be cultivated. Flat land between the mountains is very scarce and flat land between the mountains and along a stream is even scarcer. Therefore villages are situated far apart and the total population of some 200 thousand people is scattered over a vast area of 60,500 square kilometres. The altitude varies between 2700 and 4500 meters. A diversity of crops are grown: barley, wheat, peas, vegetables, potatoes, millet, buck wheat etc. Lower parts in the west are warmer and therefore more crops are grown including fruit trees. Changthang the region in the east is high and very cold. Growing crops there is not a possibility, therefore this region is home to the Changpa nomads who live with their yak and goats and move around seasonally. Apricot and apple are the two main fruits here. Until recent times fruit meant apricot and even now it is the symbol of fruit. Summer is the time to relish the fresh fruit and in winter, fruit requirements are met with the dried apricots. The sweet kernels are very nourishing and delicious very similar to almonds. The bitter ones are used to extract oil which is very good for the skin. The left over cake after taking out the oil is very nourishing for the animals. The shells of the kernels are used as fuel and they are known for their hot fire. Sheep, goat, cow, donkey, yak and dzomo (the cross between yak and cow) are the main animals. Amongst these, goats occupied a special place, as they were the most important animals traditionally. They probably played one of the most important roles in enabling the people to settle in this extremely cold, barren, desert climate, so much so that in many places they are called nor meaning wealth. They thrive in this cold desert, requiring hardly any feeding by the people and enjoying the cold winters. Apart from being the source of food and clothing in the form of meat, skin, hair and wool, in the night after grazing all day in the mountains, they produce the extremely valuable manure in the stables. Goat manure is the best to grow crops in the cold desert. .Times have changed and raising goats is now considered to be labour intensive. People are into growing trees, fruit and otherwise, these days as it is less labour intensive compared to growing any other crop. The goats are seen as a menace as they can very easily bark the young trees to death, destroy and enter all kinds of fencing, and in general give people a hard time as they are very energetic and intractable. With the able-bodied youth disappearing from the village it is very difficult to handle large herds of goats. Ironically their extremely useful survival skills that helped build Ladakh at one time have become a menace today in the changed circumstances. While most of the dung from the bigger animals like cow and dzomo is used as fuel for the kitchen stove and heating in the winter and the ash used with the manure, the dung of the sheep, goats and donkey are an extremely good source of manure. The floor of the stable is covered with a thin layer of soil and when that is drenched another layer of soil is put and that continues the whole year round. The layers down below rot and on the surface it is still clean enough for the animals. In the spring the stable is dug out and the well-decomposed manure is put into the fields. Likewise human manure from the compost toilets is used in the same manner. Toilets have always been a precious source of manure and children were trained to always relieve themselves in the toilet for the precious manure. This in turn keeps the surrounding clean and disease free.1 Towards the beginning of spring a date is fixed when the village gathers for a small celebration and some rituals that mark the beginning of the farming season. At this time the churpon, the traditional water management system, comes into effect. Depending on the size of the village three to four families take turns managing the water of the village and in turn provide households with water for irrigation. Once the ploughing is finished, on an appropriate date the lora system is imposed. After this date the owner of any animal found straying in the fields is fined. Again three or four families take turns to ensure these rules are enforced. Once the lora system comes into effect another system called ra-res begins. Families take turns taking the animals into the mountains for grazing for the day. Around half of the animals are taken to mountain pastures for the whole summer. They are accompanied by one member from each family who stays in the mountains collecting butter, cheese etc. for the family for the winter. The weeding time yoorma is when the crops are about two inches high. Most of the weeds are very good vegetables and are consumed fresh during summer. The surplus is dried for the winter. In larger villages groups of four to five families perform their agricultural activities jointly throughout the season. In smaller villages the whole village joins together. They sing their work to finish, as work has ever been an occasion for singing. Ploughing, harvesting, threshing and winnowing, etc. - all have their different songs to be sung while the work is being done. Seasons of work are the seasons of festivities also, with lots of excitement as every evening the group gathers at different homes for dinner with singing and lots of chang the local beer. (Today these communities are gone and people, especially the young find it very boring and hard to live in the villages. Before people loved their villages; today they wear a deserted look.) For bigger occasions like marriages and births, etc. the whole village gets together and celebrates it as a festival of the village. The family concerned is not required to do much as the community takes turns making the arrangements. Likewise the village community also takes care of funerals and the bereaved family literally doesnt do anything. Both the deceased and the family of the deceased are taken care of, even financially.

32

Results of the modernisation process

In the process of modernisation the first casualty along with local customs and traditions was the agriculture - the backbone and the soul of Ladakh. The main adverse impacts include: a) Youth and the children were alienated from the grown ups by the education system and the general attitude of the powerful outsiders. The parents, fearing that their children should become like them, dragged their children to these so called schools where they learnt nothing except bad attitudes against this land and its people. Parents kept their children away from the Ladakhi lifestyle especially the farming. b) Life in Ladakh was almost impossible without the extremely closely-knit village community that was centered around agriculture. From them emanated the joie de vivre of Ladakhi life. Despite all the hardship work always used to be an opportunity for singing. Change took away these communities. Agriculture was looked down upon. Other sources of living like government employment, small shops in town etc, were emphasised. The youth were attracted to the town leaving behind a truncated village community, taking away all the charm of the rural life. c) Disrespect for the local customs and traditions resulted in chaos in the society. Almost all Ladakhi villages are situated along glacial streams the lifelines. A tradition is to keep them clean, even the smallest child is taught not to spit in them, not to wash in them. Peeing in water used to be a sin and therefore for many Ladakhis it was an extremely difficult situation when they had to use the modern water toilets for the first time. None of these traditions had any meaning for the outsiders. Due to convenience, sacred streams were used as toilets and as the dumping

place for their garbage, bringing all kinds of sickness to the people. So now they have started laying pipes for drinking water. But these hardly ever bring water - most of the time they are dry. A school system was introduced to civilise the mountain people. This destroyed the confidence of the children and instilled a sense of shame for being a Ladakhi. Children were taught to stay away from agriculture that was considered to be the task of the illiterate and the inferiors. Children coming out of these centres of learning had very little or no self-esteem. The curriculum was so alien to their world that almost 100% failed to identify with it. They learnt almost nothing. A new Ladakhi generation grew up with an intense sense of shame for their ignorance and for being failures. So called economic centres or urban settlements, previously unknown to Ladakh, emerged on the scene. These lured away the young and able bodied in the name of education or better income or simply more fun in loitering around in the streets, as they felt more modern that way. This left behind the old and infirm in the villages to tend to the laborious work of farming. During less than a single generation agriculture, that used to be their pride, had become a disgrace and people tried to disassociate themselves from it. Inappropriate policies like highly subsidised, cheap rationed food, transported from the plains of India rendered agriculture in Ladakh almost meaningless, though it did help people to free themselves from the clutches of the money lenders. These policies destroyed the spirit of the farmers. Now there was hardly any demand for the traditional grains like barley and wheat. Instead people opted for cheap and fanciful rice. This not only had the counter productive effect of shaking the agriculture foundations upon which Ladakhi society is based. It also worsened the situa-

tion by drawing young and able to the towns. There, with this artificially priced cheap rationed rice, they could survive with very little money. Over a period of twenty to thirty years the farmers (still at least 80% of the population of Ladakh) that used to be the well off and confident families, now found themselves at the bottom of the social strata and dependent on subsidies and handouts from the government and NGOs. This further destroyed their spirit and undermined their initiatives to live a lively life. Today, when the season arrives, farming is performed more as a ritual then as a source of livelihood and way of life. To discontinue it would be a pity as it has been going on from the time of our forefathers. This is the attitude of most of the farmers because: a) It is very hard work without the singing community. Individual families find that there are never enough people to carry out farming joyfully. b) Nobody wants their produce. In many households their produce is lying in a corner for the rats and their children always ask for rice.

The crucial external intervention

This is a palpable dilemma of the farmers that is rampant here though things are changing. The situation is improving but very slowly. With this rapid decline in agriculture the basic social fabric disintegrated as it was based and revolved around agriculture. The gap between the old and the new generation widened drastically. The so called educated that came out from our schools with their hollow degrees literally knew nothing of value. They had no skills to support their lives. As if this wasnt enough, chemical fertilisers were introduced. When

As a result of modernization and urbanization the town is facing exactly the opposite situation. It is an urban area with a concentrated population and lacks a sewage system to get rid of the waste. Wastewater from the kitchen and washings is put into the streets and glacial streams, which until recently were the source of the cleanest drinking water. There are no public toilets and as the manure is not needed the houses built in town are without toilets. As a result the street corners are used as toilets and the outskirt of town is strewn with feces. There are still a very few traditional compost toilets in use but as no one maintains them (by putting soil in and regularly emptying them every six month etc.), they are rotting and stinking bombs. One of the main issues of the town today is how to handle this problem.

33

used in this extremely sandy desert soil, they destroy the fertility that has been built over generations. Their use is partly due to labour constraints. Today when only the elders are left in villages, making home manure for the fields is very strenuous. But their use is also due to spiritual impoverishment. They dont love their land anymore - the intimate relationship with the land is gone. When their farming activities have hardly any meaning it becomes very convenient for them to rely on these chemical fertilisers. This vicious cycle is hard to break without a meaningful external intervention. And finally this crucial external intervention did come. It came in the seventies in the form of tourism when Ladakh was opened to the outside world. Tourism does have its negative impacts but the most outstanding thing that it did to Ladakh was to ignite the renaissance of the moribund Ladakhi society. Finally the doors and windows were thrown open allowing a breath of fresh air that replaced the stifling dingy atmosphere inside. Westerners, those from whom our 3rd hand development models originally emanated, were at our doorstep. They were questioning their own models. They came to draw strength and inspiration from the traditional lifestyle of these desert mountain people. A life style that is in total harmony with the cycles of nature within which humans, land and animals enrich each other and in this way enrich the nature itself. This recognition relieved all the pressure from the Ladakhi psyche. It was an experience of a sudden outburst of freedom the lack of confidence, the low self-esteem, the inferiority complex - all were waning away. A new dawn was on the horizon. Today the attitudes of the people and of the government alike have changed but a lot still needs to be done to make these ideas a reality. A major challenge for the newly appointed local government, the Hill Council, is the development of a serious plan for agriculture. Clear government policies are the need of the hour - policies that support what we really want to do with agriculture in the coming years.

Still today at least 70% of the population is occupied with agriculture. However urbanisation continues to draw people away from the villages as all the facilities and amenities are concentrated in town. Lack of good schools is one of the main reasons why people move to town and therefore it is quite common to find people who live in town just to send their children to proper schools. If proper facilities were provided in the villages those who are not interested in moving to the town could remain in the rural areas. A malaise of this subcontinent is that the towns are overcrowded, chaotic and filthy with rampant unemployment while the villages are empty. This represents a strange ironic mismanagement that first creates human misery and then whines about it desperately.

Required government action

* Ladakh is Ladakh, trying to impose New York or New Delhi kind of development models would be absurd. The ancient lifestyle will have to evolve and move on in the changed circumstances rather than being replaced by disorder and misery in the name of development. On the part of the administration they have to have a clear vision of where we want ourselves to be in the coming years. * The need of the hour, before it is too late, is to define the role agriculture will play on the socio economic stage of Ladakh in the coming years. * Provide the basic amenities in the villages including good schools for those who do not wish to move to the town but feel compelled due to lack of basic facilities. * Give the customs and traditions of this place and the agriculture a prominent place in the school curriculum so that children are not alienated from this land and its culture. * One of Ladakhs predicaments is that it is stuck between two paradigms. One advocates that Ladakh should not change with time and should stay intact as a traditional society. The other, dont give a damn about traditions and are for total modernization, even if Ladakh looses its distinct charm of being a

civilisation that thrived in these mountains for centuries despite all geographical and climatic odds. Because of the extremely scarce resources Ladakh learned to put them to their optimum use, and today Ladakh provides a rare example of a happy and thriving society despite minimal resources in this age of mindless destruction and wastage of natural resources. * The challenge for the present administration is to chart out an in-between policy road map that derives the optimum out of the present situation. Today Ladakh isnt The traditional society any more and there is no question of going back either. The present situation of the villages is that they lost all the advantages of the traditional society and gained only the disadvantages of the socalled modern society. The administration needs to facilitate the village farmers to take advantage of the market and train them with the skills required in the market to survive. This does not mean advocating large-scale commercialisation with cash crops, etc, but rather simple ways for the villagers to earn a livelihood. In the present situation the town gets away with all the money of the region and the villages are mere spectators to their-overnight rags to riches drama. Suddenly when compared to the town their whole lifestyle that is dependent on agriculture ceases to be meaningful anymore. Income disparity that was previously not known to Ladakh is rising exponentially and that could lead to a conflict situation anytime. Now is the time for the villages to redefine their way of life in the changed circumstances. Only when agriculture in the villages start earning some income will life and its youth return to them. The author Sonam Dorje is from Ladakh. He has for many years worked for better education for village children and survival of the Ladakhi culture. Presently he runs a co-operative to counter the pressure on the environment during the tourist season, to provide local employment and market for the local products. He is also information coordinator for Future Earth in India. You can contact him at: <sdsoso@sancharnet.in>

34

The Green Revolution and export agriculture promises and problems for small farmers in the Kadavakurichi watershed
by P M Mohan

Introduction to the Kadavakurichi Reserve Forest

The Kadavakurichi Reserve Forest (KRF) is located 4 Kms southwest of Nilakottai town, headquarters of Nilakottai Taluk in Dindigul District, Tamilnadu, India. It covers an area of nearly 10 sq km. Excluding the area of alluvial soil, a thin strip along the Marudanadhi and Vaigai rivers, the soil is sandy with higher proportion of red clay further from the hills. The low total average rainfall as well as its uneven distribution is a limiting factor that must be taken into consideration. Poor water holding capacity and high run off/poor infiltration makes shortage of water a perennial problem. There are about 25 000 people living in some twenty villages in the Kadavakurichi watershed and 90% of them depend on small-scale agriculture for their survival. Almost all of them were once involved in family farming of traditional millets, pulses, vegetables and floriculture on a small scale. They were in fact earning a modest daily income from the sale of flowers in the local market and had a secure food supply from their farm. Their family agriculture provided employment opportunities to the

members of the farmers families and land less people in the villages. Their age-old traditional farming was sustainable in many ways, ensuring as it did food and fodder security as well as employment generation throughout the year and considerable yearly income. The seeds they used were suited to the climate and soil as they were collected from their own fields or exchanged with nearby farmers. Farming was a prestigious occupation about which the local population was very knowledgeable.

Negative trends in agriculture

Today the local ecosystem has changed and with it the situation for farmers and their farming system. The main reasons for the change include: An over use of the forest. Almost all the trees in the area have been cut down for use as timber and firewood. This has led to soil erosion and water run-off. An extensive over use of fossil groundwater for irrigating new crops such as rice, coconuts and flowers that are not suitable for semi-arid areas.

Overgrazing. As farming land became degraded and difficult to cultivate, farmers increased the numbers of sheep and goats which in turn led to over-grazing. This also led to more problems with erosion and water runoff. The way that these farmers have used water as a resource in agriculture has changed during the past decades. Before they used to keep their fields flat and build walls around them to stop the water runoff and reduce the soil erosion. They used buckets or a system using bullocks to bring the water from the open wells up to the surface. This demanded a lot of time and hard work so the water was used sparingly. The farming system traditionally also included many different varieties of crops and fruit trees in a more integrated farming system. The trees in and around the farms were an important component to store water and to stop erosion. With the Green Revolution came new varieties of crops that were not suitable to semi-arid areas because of their high water demand. Irrigation was mechanized and motor driven pumps were installed. These made it easy to overuse the water resource. Today the situation has become critical. The low rainfall during the

35

last three years has led to acute water deficiency. The ground water table has fallen from 10 - 15 feet twenty years ago to 700 - 800 feet today. Farmers find themselves in a situation of severe poverty and, because of their degraded eco-system, extremely vulnerable. So the promises of the Green Revolution and the more recent emphasis on export agriculture have not been fulfilled - at least for the majority of farmers who are small scale. Rather the introduction of high yielding crops such as rice has led to many problems. These high yielding varieties of seeds require costly chemical fertilisers and pesticides. This sort of high external input based cropping has degraded the soil water system, depleted organic carbon stocks and fertility of soils and has led to secondary salinisation. It has also resulted in accelerated soil loss. The imbalanced fertiliser application exclusion of organic sources combined with overuse of nitrogen - has resulted in nutrient deficiencies and imbalances in the soil. Such agriculture is also very capital intensive. High yielding varieties of food grains and other crops demand the use of sophisticated machinery as well as the other expensive inputs mentioned above. This is not suitable for the great majority of farmers who, with their small landholdings, are labour rich and capital poor. This unfavourable situation has forced many farmers to quit agriculture. Many remain unemployed and get caught in an everlasting poverty trap. The result of this unsustainable use of natural resources in the Kadavakurichi watershed has resulted in a low income from natural resources, a decreased productivity on farmland, increased water runoff, soil erosion and seasonal migration from the areas. Depletion of the natural vegetation, inappropriate agriculture practices, expensive ground water development, insufficient extension services on sustainable land management have all contributed to degradation of the land. This in turn has contributed to a decrease in the area under farming over last two decades. Lack of appropriate knowl-

edge and opportunities related to effective land use and agro-based activities have further aggravated the situation.

dia with their small and highly fragmented land holdings. Nor does the international marketing structure, with its demand for product homogeneity and large quantities, meet their needs. Industrial export oriented agriculture does not address issues of food security, nutrition adequacy, rural income generation, employment and poverty. Farmers are unable to control the sophisticated technology that is in the hands of international corporations and financial institutions. Due to the high level of mechanisation it provides few jobs thus leading to rural out migration. The price fixed for farmers products are in the hands of the ultimate seller with the interruption of many intermediaries and the concern of the producer /farmer is hardly taken into account. Because most of the profits from crop sales go to the many middlemen the farmers remain poor. They cannot afford to buy grains and other food to eat because of the high cost. Eventually they give up and leave their farm - resulting in decreasing human resources in the farm sectors. The export agriculture global market is limited to a few goods only. This results in farmers going in for a monoculture, thus threatening biodiversity. Some of the farmers use chemical fertilisers initially, but find they cant continue after some time. Reduced soil fertility leads to reduced yields per hectare. This results in farmers having such meagre incomes that they finally are pushed out of their traditional and prestigious occupation. The export agriculture demands a comprehensive package of technologies with intensive irrigation because of their high yielding nature. Many farmers are unable to meet the growing demand for water due to the acute water scarcity and so are unable to produce for the international market. The exploitation of the ground water by the affluent farmers who rig deep bore wells quickens the depletion of water level enormously. The shal-

Export Agriculture - Where has it led to? ? ? ?

Looking superficially, one might think that export agriculture is a logical and positive opportunity of globalisation that can help solve the problems facing small farmers by providing them access to the rich markets of the industrialised countries. But if we look closely we see that it is not. This is partly because of the unevenness of the field on which the game of globalisation is being played. Take for example the case of international competition. The prices of farm products on international markets are declining while in the Indian markets they are increasing. The price decline in the international market is a result of one main reason. Despite the use of expensive technology (biotechnology, chemical fertilisers, expensive mechanisation, pesticides etc.), prices are kept low through enormous government subsidies especially in Europe, Japan and North America. Those who benefit from these subsidies in these countries are the large agriculture units. Many farming families have been bought out by large industrial agriculture complexes. This exodus from rural areas in industrial countries is partly due to the fact that agriculture no longer provides a livelihood for rural people who are forced to move to urban areas in search of jobs. Conditions placed on the Indian government by IMF and the World Bank through their structural adjustment programmes (SAPS), for example, exclude the possibilities of government subsidies to agriculture. But it is not only a case of creating a level playing field. It also has to do with what game is being played. There are several reasons why export agriculture is not appropriate for small-scale farmers in India: Industrial export oriented agriculture requires use of technologies that are not appropriate for farmers in In-

36

When the ground water level falls, trees die.

Extensive soil erosion and water run off are two results of inappropriate agriculture technology.

Volunteers help CIRHEP construct stone walls to improve water infiltration and lessen erosion.

High yielding varieties of rice is one of the crops that requires a lot of water. Traditional grains such as sorghum and millet are better adapted to the area.

Photos: Tobias Karlsson and Karin nneby

37

lower wells of the less affluent farmers go dry. The result is often that they are forced to quit farming which has been their main and often only source of livelihood. Global treaties, trade-related policies, international institutions, market forces, and structural adjustment programmes are prompting and forcing local governments to frame new policies and implement programmers that are often incompatible with their own specific conditions. Most of the recent agriculture policies are in tune with globalisation and the needs of the large-scale urban-based farmers. They do not live in the village but fly in on occasion to oversee farm production. Export agriculture favours them as they have a better network for marketing their agriculture products. These city dwelling farmers are attracted by the income that can be derived from international sales. They tend to take up the agriculture by purchasing lands from the poor farmers. When farmers loose their land they are forced to leave in search for other employment. But even these urban-based farmers very often find themselves unable to continue. The result is that these absentee landowners who have no stake in the village leave their lands lying fallow and this furthers local economic collapse. This is what is happening for example in Nilakottai Block. Export agriculture results in the growing dependence of farmers on the Government infrastructure to obtain seeds, loans and other agricultural inputs. The Government and corporations attain fabulous profits out of the regular sale of seeds and chemicals, but the poor farmers, who take all the risks, often incur irreversible loses.

The newly introduced and extensive cultivation of flowers requires intensive irrigation. Farmers have dug deep bore wells that have led to the depletion of ground water. Today less water is available and at a depth of more than 700 ft in the area. Digging and using these wells is very costly. As a result many farmers had to borrow money (at exorbitant interest rates. Those who could not afford these loans have been forced to leave their farms and migrate to different parts of the state in search of employment. The landless agricultural laborers who previously earned their livelihoods from traditional farming activities have been thrown out of their routine jobs and many have become residents in urban slums where they lead pathetic and uncertain lives. Initially the profits from this export-oriented floriculture seemed very good and many farmers got involved. However, in the longer run, this was clearly not the case. In addition to increasing production costs heavy use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides have led to several serious health and other environmental problems.

of poverty by developing integrated soil water and nutrient management options to raise system productivity, increase the adaptive capacity of ecosystems, and enable rural households to face risk and change. Support farmers marketing skills and capacity.

The possible solution

For survival of the small farmer in particular and elevating the level of investment in agriculture in general, farming will have to be made more remunerative. This is possible only by adding value to the produce of currently cultivated crops, by introducing new appropriate crops and by implementing cost saving methods of production and marketing of the farm produce. Eco-friendly disease/pest management practices and low input production technologies need to be developed so that enhanced yield is possible in a profitable manner. This alone will help the small and marginal farmers with an environmentally, economically, socially sustainable farming. Make crops in the semi-arid areas more productive, nutritious, affordable and accessible to the poor. Help farmers grow their way out

Mr. PM Mohan, rural economist, lives in Veelinayakenpatti in the Kadavakurichi watershed. Mohans father was a farmer in the area and Mohan has donated this land to CIRHEP to be used for a model and experimental farm. Mohan has worked in close cooperation with the villagers in this semi-arid area on environmental issues for more than 15 years. The Center for Improved Rural Health and Environmental Protection (CIRHEP), a registered voluntary organisation, is working for the improvement of the health of the rural people and for the protection of the environment by watershed development and organic farming coupled with uplifting the rural community by providing education, empowering women and promoting income generation schemes for the poorest of the poor. Their email address is: <cirhep@sify.com>

Flowers for export

The production of dried flowers for export is a case in point. Dry flowers are produced as a monoculture for the export market. This has led to increased risk and uncertainty including loss of food and fodder security, reduced employment opportunities throughout the year and an insecure income from year to year.

38

Minimise risks, dont maximise profits! Udayalipatty farmers long term strategy for survival
by Petra Zther

I try to encourage others , says Tangapono. Her face reveals that it is not always an easy job. She is an organic farmer on the plains of central Tamil Nadu in the south of India. It is just before the groundnut harvest and she chews and talks as she walks me from her field to the bus stand in her village Udayalipatty. She gives me serious gazes and tells me that she is convinced that a change is taking place. She says both her family and her village are on her side now. I understand she means that she is not alone in the fight to revitalise the land in the village. Unfortunately I am also very aware that she is not alone in her situation of poverty and debt. That situation is shared by millions of marginalised farmers in India. Tangapono is however one of the villagers that during my two-years stay in India helps me to put my picture of people and environment in India together. It will naturally never be complete. I and my association Swallows in Sweden will continue to learn every hour we spend with local residents. We need this understanding at home in order to stop ignoring the consequences of globalisation. I leave India and Tamil Nadu in peak-summer and during a severe drought.

Photo: Petra Zther

What is water scarcity?

Every summer water scarcity is an urgent problem in India. It starts with withering crops and shortage of drinking water. It continues with severe conflicts between local residents and industrialists and even between states

with precious rivers crossing their borders. It seams to me that water problems will not end easily. But it is not only a question of scarcity. Misuse and inequality in distribution systems are important factors that must also be considered. The Centre for Science and Environment(CSE) is Indias largest environmental watch-dog. They argue that the misuse of water started with centralisation a hundred years ago. When the responsibility for water was transferred from the local communities to the national government, groundwater was seen as the most important source. Rainwater and floodwater were utilised less and less and traditional systems for sustainable usage of water were left to be forgotten. But not for ever. During the nineties, Anil Agarwal, the previous head of CSE was crucial in the development of alternatives to short-sighted and wasteful usage of water. He and his team reviewed valuable community initiatives in

Gujarat and Rajastan thus bringing recognition to their elaborate and effective traditional rainwater-harvesting technologies.

Tamil Nadu and policy

Tamil Nadu is famous for its traditional water management. An association in Chennai Pasumay Thayagam, Green Motherland, has taken great interest in these traditional water management systems that include both the technical and social structures for storage and viable distribution. The data gathered by CSE and Pasumay Thayagam tells us about two thousand year old traditions where the village tanks and water catchment areas were central in everyday society. Seminars are repeatedly arranged at national and state levels and even though officials and decision-makers do participate at times, the community perspective on management and distribution

39

is still not reflected in the governments policy or implementation in India. Associations working for small-scale alternatives have to fight the policy of economic growth and short-term solutions which depend on private profit as the development generator. Compared to other states, Tamil Nadu is experiencing an almost explosive privatisation. This is politically articulated as the states independent policy but is a part of a national policy of an increasingly export-friendly policy encouraged by the World Bank and the IMF. India as a whole has since 1991 gone through structural adjustments that have resulted in rapid commercialisation of the agriculture sector among others. Even though water is still a public good, external private agents with an interest in natural resources are gaining ground. Multinational companies and exporting industries naturally have capacities to drill much deeper than small scale farmers. Cash and export crops such as sugarcane and cut-flowers demand more water than traditional food-crops. For the former, irrigation is a must. In March, 2003 a Coca Cola factory in Sivanagar in western Tamil Nadu received a permit to take water from the Vaigai river, a river on which hundreds of villagers depend. Additionally, Kinley (Coco-Cola) and Aquafina (Pepsi) are almost the only available bottled water in Tamil Nadu. No matter how dry the rural areas become, the bottles are always available for those who can pay.

What villagers say

In the villages, drought is no news. It is expected, or at least feared, since awareness about water availability is connected to local knowledge about trees, soil and crops. Natural resources provide, in one way or the other, a livelihood to 60% of the population in India. Environmental and social issues are inseparable. When lack of water is expected and alternative ways to store

water are available, drought does not lead to famine. People do not have to loose dignity, migrate or commit suicide. Most of the ecological farmers I meet do not blame the drought on industries or climatechange. They regret their own mistakes, and their misuse of the soil. The modernisation of the agriculture sector, sometimes called the Green Revolution, started during the sixties and many farmers have lived long enough to remember what the land used to be like before chemical farming was introduced. The farmer Tangapono tells me that the eighties was worst. That was when the soil fertility started giving in and the loans should have been repaid. Additionally, she says, subsidies on pesticides started to decrease even though insects had developed resistance and demanded more inputs. She curses the faith she had in external advice and external inputs: It was certainly stupid to start with fertilisers and pesticides. But it was cheaper then. They told us the yield would increase. We thought we could afford it. But we were wrong and we can never repay the loans fully. Tangapono is a widow with five grown-up children. When her husband past away many years ago she took charge of the two-acre familyfarm. Today this land gives the family organically produced crops. Her work with ecological agriculture started fifteen years back when the organisation Kudumbam, (it means family in Tamil) took initiatives to support her and others in the village U d a y a l i p a t t y. Tangapono is well off in the sense of food-security but she can only sell a little so she finds it hard to save money for her two unmarried daughters dowry. She can purchase little from outside. Her answer to water scarcity is not easy and needs to be understood in

the context of organic farming. She argues that her method of farming is very much focused on minimising the effects of the drought. Integrated farming, trees and drought resistant crops are mixed with hard and patient work. As she teaches me the necessity of the bad and good insects and their respective host plants, I begin to understand the very basic importance of diversity and ecological balance. Even though integrated farming is very much focused on enabling the farm to fight pests without pesticides, I understand that the methods walk hand in hand and that most farmers in Udayalipatty are just taking the consequences of their knowledge of their eco-systems and natural resources. The majority of the farms in Udayalipatty are rain-fed and have no possibilities to irrigate their crops. Financially, organic farming is based on a model to minimise loss, not maximise profit. Tangapono says she has made a choice to stop taking hazardous loans and instead to trust in herself. The economic aspect is one of several that farmers take into consideration. Universities and institutes in Tamil Nadu are critical towards fully organic farms. Dr Sekhar, a professor in agriculture at Coimbatore University, tells me the food production has to be maximised in a country like India and that the yield from organic farming is just not enough. When asked about the benefits of having low external inputs, a farmer will of course mention the economic aspects. But still, other arguments and aspects seem to be of major concern for the marginalised farmers in Udayalipatty. If ecological balance is the force of the field, dignity and independence are the major driving forces of the farmer. Tangapono explains it to me several times every visit. She says her self-esteem has grown along with the crops in her field. Her increased status as a woman and village member is central in her story and her knowledge and strength is already a

40

part of the base for the future local development. The latest news in seeds is the Bt-cotton (Bacillus thuringiensis), a genetically modified seed with resistance against the problematic pest called bollworm. Despite extensive criticism towards the American company Monsantos field trials, Bt-cotton was legalised in India 2002 and is today available on the market. Tangapono and her neighbours meet and discuss news like this. They are today a critical group able to articulate their concerns. Their scepticism towards Btcotton and other genetically modified seeds is obvious. Tangapono has had to be strong in faith for a long time. She tells me she was often considered to be an odd farmer in the village. Eventually she became a source of inspiration for other villagers, especially the women. Udayalipatty has collectively mobilised for farmers rights and along with Kudumbam they have established traditional seed banks. During 2003 the water problems are severe also in this village, but their harvest of a ragi is a saviour. This traditional variety of finger millet is drought-resistant, unlike many of the modern rice varieties that are common in the area.

innovations and experiments are carried out by staff who come from nearby villages. In Trichy, a medium-sized city in the heart of Tamil Nadu an hours drive from Udayalipatty is a central office for a state-wide network started by Kudumbam. It is called LEISA, which stands for Low External Input and Sustainable Agriculture. It includes 2000 organic farmers and has since the nineties facilitated the development of ideas and sharing of experiences in organic farming for marginalized farmers in the state. The network also documents cases and co-operates with other networks in India, Bangladesh and Malaysia. According to Ozwald Quintal, convenor of LEISA Network, it is a challenge to work with long-term improvements during a time of drought. And naturally, it is hard to plant trees and develop water catchment areas in the village, important investments for the future, when there is a lack of drinking water today. But , says Ozwald, there are no shortcuts to sustainable development.

Kudumbam and LEISA

In the eighties, Tangapono and a few other women in Udayalipatty were initially inspired by a man named Namalvar. Today, he travels the state encouraging farmers to find their own alternative ways to nurture soil fertility, water assets and biodiversity. He talks about how they are all connected and why they need to avoid chemicals and seeds alien to them and their land. Namalvar started this kind of work with Kudumbam. This association works with long-term improvements for farmers, landless labourers and unemployed. This work is closely linked to a model farm where

Conclusion
In the spirit of Tangapono, Kudumbam and LEISA, farmers in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Madya Pradesh and the Himalayas illustrate diversity, locally specific alternatives and ways to live with and from natural resources. They explain that the drought is not the issue but rather the result of an unsustainable view of a community asset. Instead of drought and water scarcity they emphasise the need to minimise the risks. Their analysis is inspiring. Even though it is external changes that have complicated these farmers lives, they identify solutions from within themselves that are constructive, inno-

vative and build on their self reliance. Organisations and activists in India are very aware of the critical discussion on globalisation but want to do more than protest. Small-scale farmers in India are finding holistic perspectives and sustainable solutions. They do not live with the ideal of maximising profit and the experience of villagers in Udayalipatty show us that food-security and dignity for a group of people in India is not a result of a policy of liberalisation. Quite the opposite. The green revolution did not benefit these farmers and they are not ready to believe that increased commercialisation of agriculture or biotechnology will do it in the future. In my own country Sweden, people have limited knowledge about smallscale ambitions in India. Still, local communities in the north have similar concerns for a sustainable development. Associations and activists in Sweden see options to work for a better world through questioning the western lifestyle, consumption and misuse of natural resources. The challenge for these groups is to join forces with the south and influence decision makers in both the south and the north. The major risk is that the same decision makers ignore peoples voices because they are diverse and multiple and not in line with the paradigm of liberalisation and free-trade. In 2004 India will host the World Social Forum. Under the banner of Another world is possible vital movements in India are welcoming activists and groups from all over the world. Local arguments are increasingly becoming global. To minimise risks instead of maximising profit is no short-cut to development. It is a necessary alternative. Petra Zther worked as a contact secretary for Swallows India-Bangladesh Section during 2001 to 2003 . She was based in Tamil Nadu, South India. Swallows has supported the NGO Kudumbam in their work with ecological farming. www.svalorna.org
Photo: Petra Zther

41

Future Earth
was formed in 1988 by Friends of the Earth and The Future in our Hands. Both of these organisations had, for more than 10 years, worked with information, lobbying and other activities to illustrate the negative effects of the World Banks , International Monetary Funds and World Trade Organisations (then GATT) strategies. After having been told that their policies were the only way FoE and FioH decided to show that another development was possible. Future Earth network was formed and today includes more than fifty organisations in South America, Asia and Sweden. They work for ecologically sound rural development, environmental improvement in poor urban areas and nature education for children and adults. Future Earths goals are: - To support local projects that work towards a society that meets human beings basic needs and defends and strengthens nature; - To make use of and share members knowledge and experiences by organising seminars, courses and exchanges. - To strengthen the collaboration in the South and between the North and the South. In Sweden member organisations are called friend groups. Each friend group works directly with their partner organisation in the South. The networks office is in Stockholm. Its role is to coordinate activities and spread experiences from the South in Sweden and internationally. For more information contact: Framtidsjorden,Tegelviksgatan 40, 11641 Stockholm, Tel: 08 6150080; Email: info@framtidsjorden.se; www.framtidsjorden.se

Cover photo: Karin nneby

Photo above: Centro Ecolgico

Lay-out: Charlotte Eriksson

Acknowledgements
This booklet is the result of a combined effort by many people. The authors have all freely shared their ideas and experiences in their untiring efforts to make this world a better place in which to live. Many people have helped with the translation from Portugese and Spanish to Swedish and English on a voluntary basis. Special thanks go to Maria Jos Guazelli, Lina Svenzen, Pelle Boberg, Birgitta Wrenfelt and Mattias Lindwall. The editorial team has included Daphne Thuvesson, Birgitta Wrenfelt, Maria Jos Guazzelli, Mattias Lindwall and Tobias Karlsson. Additional funding to print this booklet has been made available from the Swedish International Biodiversity Programme (SwedBio) a joint initiative of Sida and the Centre for Biological Diversity (CBM) at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU).

42