uniformity diversity

96 Pages·2016·6.64 MB·English

6
1
0
2

E
N
U
J
FROM
UNIFORMITY

TO
DIVERSITY
A paradigm shift from industrial agriculture
to diversified agroecological systems
FROM UNIFORMITY
TO DIVERSITY
A paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to
diversified agroecological systems
Lead Coordinating author: Emile A. Frison
Citation: IPES-Food. 2016. From uniformity to diversity:
a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological
systems. International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food systems.
www.ipes-food.org
2 REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY
Key messages
Today’s food and farming systems have succeeded in supplying large volumes of foods
to global markets, but are generating negative outcomes on multiple fronts: wide-
spread degradation of land, water and ecosystems; high GHG emissions; biodiversity
losses; persistent hunger and micro-nutrient deficiencies alongside the rapid rise of
obesity and diet-related diseases; and livelihood stresses for farmers around the world.
Many of these problems are linked specifically to ‘industrial agriculture’: the input-in-
tensive crop monocultures and industrial-scale feedlots that now dominate farming
landscapes. The uniformity at the heart of these systems, and their reliance on chemi-
cal fertilizers, pesticides and preventive use of antibiotics, leads systematically to nega-
tive outcomes and vulnerabilities.
Industrial agriculture and the ‘industrial food systems’ that have developed around it
are locked in place by a series of vicious cycles. For example, the way food systems are
currently structured allows value to accrue to a limited number of actors, reinforcing
their economic and political power, and thus their ability to influence the governance
of food systems.
Tweaking practices can improve some of the specific outcomes of industrial agricul-
ture, but will not provide long-term solutions to the multiple problems it generates.
What is required is a fundamentally different model of agriculture based on diversify-
ing farms and farming landscapes, replacing chemical inputs, optimizing biodiversity
and stimulating interactions between different species, as part of holistic strategies to
build long-term fertility, healthy agro-ecosystems and secure livelihoods, i.e. ‘diversi-
fied agroecological systems’.
There is growing evidence that these systems keep carbon in the ground, support bio-
diversity, rebuild soil fertility and sustain yields over time, providing a basis for secure
farm livelihoods.
Data shows that these systems can compete with industrial agriculture in terms of total
outputs, performing particularly strongly under environmental stress, and delivering
production increases in the places where additional food is desperately needed. Diversi-
fied agroecological systems can also pave the way for diverse diets and improved health.
Change is already happening. Industrial food systems are being challenged on multiple
fronts, from new forms of cooperation and knowledge-creation to the development of
new market relationships that bypass conventional retail circuits.
Political incentives must be shifted in order for these alternatives to emerge beyond
the margins. A series of modest steps can collectively shift the centre of gravity in food
systems.
REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY 3
Table of contents
The challenge: shifting the centre of gravity in food systems ………………………………………………………………… 6
The need for systemic change …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
Two ends of a spectrum: industrial agriculture and diversified agroecological systems ………………10
SECTION 1 What are the outcomes of industrial agriculture and diversified
agroecological systems? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13
1.a. Outcomes of specialized industrial farming ……………………………………………………………………………………15
1.a.i. Productivity outcomes ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………15
1.a.ii. Environmental outcomes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17
1.a.iii. Socio-economic outcomes ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 22
1a.iv. Nutrition and health outcomes ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 27
1.b. Outcomes of diversified agroecological systems ……………………………………………………………………… 31
1.b.i. Productivity outcomes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 31
1.b.ii. Environmental outcomes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
1.b.iii. Socio-economic outcomes ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37
1.b.iv. Nutrition and health outcomes ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 39
1.c. Conclusions on the outcomes of specialized industrial agriculture
and diversified agroecological systems ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 41
SECTION 2 What is keeping industrial agriculture in place? ……………………………………………………………………45
Lock-in 1: Path dependency ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 46
Lock-in 2: Export orientation …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 47
Lock-in 3: The expectation of cheap food …………………………………………………………………………………………… 49
Lock-in 4: Compartmentalized thinking ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 51
Lock-in 5: Short-term thinking ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 53
Lock-in 6: ‘Feed the world’ narratives …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 54
Lock-in 7: Measures of success ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 56
Lock-in 8 : Concentration of Power ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 57
4 REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY
SECTION 3 How can the balance be shifted in favour of diversified
agroecological systems? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 60
3.a. Emerging opportunities for a transition to diversified agroecological systems ……………… 60
Opportunity 1: Policy incentives for diversification and agroecology ………………………………… 60
Opportunity 2: Building joined-up ‘food policies’ ……………………………………………………………………… 61
Opportunity 3: Integrated landscape thinking …………………………………………………………………………… 61
Opportunity 4: Agroecology on the global governance agenda …………………………………………… 62
Opportunity 5: Integrated food systems science and education ………………………………………… 63
Opportunity 6: Peer-to-peer action research ……………………………………………………………………………… 63
Opportunity 7: Sustainable and Healthy Sourcing …………………………………………………………………… 64
Opportunity 8: Short supply chains ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 64
3.b. Pathways of transition: recommendations for moving towards diversified
agroecological systems ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 65
Recommendation 1: Develop new indicators for sustainable
food systems ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 68
Recommendation 2: Shift public support towards diversified
agroecological production systems …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 69
Recommendation 3: Support short supply chains & alternative
retail infrastructures ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 70
Recommendation 4: Use public procurement to support local
agroecological produce ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 70
Recommendation 5: Strengthen movements that unify diverse
constituencies around agroecology …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 71
Recommendation 6: Mainstream agroecology and holistic food systems
approaches into education and research agendas ……………………………………………………………………… 72
Recommendation 7: Develop food planning processes and ‘joined-up
food policies’ at multiple levels …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 73
Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………76
Panel members ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………92
Aknowlegements ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………94
REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY 5
THE CHALLENGE: SHIFTING THE CENTRE plications for global production volumes of
OF GRAVITY IN FOOD SYSTEMS staple crops, and for ‘food security’ in the
narrow terms in which it is often understood1
The evidence in favour of a major transfor- (Cloke, 2013). After all, it is not simply a change
mation of our food systems is now over- in agricultural practices that is envisaged here,
whelming. Many influential studies have but fundamentally different farming land-
helped shape our understanding of the per- scapes and livelihoods, and radically reimag-
ilous situation our food systems are in, from ined food systems. This in itself is a key insight:
the degradation of ecosystems to the fragili- the discrepancy between the potential of diver-
ty of farmer livelihoods in many parts of the sified agroecological systems to deliver what
world; from the persistence of hunger and really matters, and our capacity to measure
under-nutrition to the rampant growth of and value those things. It is no coincidence that
obesity and diet-related diseases. one of the key recommendations arising from
this report is to develop new ways of measur-
However, few studies have yet to provide a ing success in food systems.
comprehensive view of how alternative food
systems, based around fundamentally dif- Making the case for changing course is crucial,
ferent agricultural models, perform against but so too is mapping out a pathway of tran-
the same criteria. Even fewer have mapped sition. Encouragingly, the foundations of this
out the pathways of transition towards the transition are already being laid by farmers,
sustainable food systems of the future. consumers, civil society groups and the many
others taking bold and innovative steps to trans-
This report explores the potential for a shift form food systems around the world. However,
to occur from current food systems, charac- the odds are still stacked against those seeking
terized by industrial modes of agriculture, to alternatives. As this report describes, industrial
systems based around diversified agroecolog- agriculture is locked in place by a series of pow-
ical farming. It asks what the impacts on food erful feedback loops extending well beyond the
systems would be if diversity, rather than world of farming. Industrial agriculture and in-
uniformity, were the key imperative. The dustrial food systems have shaped and been
ecological benefits of such a shift have been shaped by each other. Farmers cannot simply
widely documented. The key question, and be expected to rethink their production model,
the one asked in this report, is where the nor consumers to radically reorient their pur-
trade-offs lie. In other words, could food sys- chasing patterns, without a major shift in the
tems based around diversified agroecologi- incentives running through food systems. The
cal farming succeed where current systems specific steps will differ from setting to setting,
are failing, namely in reconciling concerns and from country to country. However, this
such as food security, environmental protec- report seeks to identify the common leverage
tion, nutritional adequacy and social equity. points for unleashing this transition.
As this report shows, there is much promise It is a transition that is applicable to all farming
in the emerging evidence. The comparison is contexts and scales, whether the starting point
complex, and the evidence is far from com- is highly specialized industrial agriculture, or
plete. Diversified systems produce diverse forms of subsistence farming in poor develop-
outputs, making it difficult to gage their im- ing countries. Specialized industrial agriculture
1. A full understanding of food security was established at the 1996 World Food Summit: “Food security exists when all people,
at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food
preferences for an active and healthy life” (FAO, 1996).
6 REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY
and diversified agroecological farming stand by a wholesale shift in mainstream practices,
at two ends of a wide spectrum. Agroecology led by those with the power to reform them.
is not a niche for small-scale artisanal farmers Some firms are already engaged on this path.
in given sectors, nor is it a label to be attained These steps are welcome, insofar as they find
on the basis of specific practices. It is a univer- ways to complement, and not to derail, a tran-
sal logic for redesigning agricultural systems sition that may ultimately redistribute power
in ways that maximize biodiversity and stimu- away from currently dominant actors.
late interactions between different plants and
species, as part of holistic strategies to build The key is to establish political priorities, name-
long-term fertility, healthy agro-ecosystems ly, to support the emergence of alternative sys-
and secure livelihoods. Put simply, it is the op- tems which are based around fundamentally
posite of monocultures and their reliance on different logics, and which, over time, generate
chemical inputs. It is therefore a broad land- different and more equitable power relations.
ing space that can be reached via a variety of Incremental change must not be allowed to
pathways and entry points, progressively or in divert political attention and political capital
more rapid shifts, as farmers free themselves away from the more fundamental shift that is
from the structures of industrial agriculture urgently needed, and can now be delivered,
and refocus their farming systems around a through a paradigm shift from industrial agri-
new set of principles. culture to diversified agroecological systems.
The majority of farmers currently find them-
selves somewhere in between the two poles. Structure of the report :
Many farmers are diversifying their outputs
» Section 1 What are the outcomes of
and activities, experimenting with natural pest
industrial agriculture and diversified
management, aiming for nutritious, high-quali-
agroecological systems?
ty production and seeking alternative retail cir-
» Section 2 What is keeping industrial
cuits, even as they continue to farm primarily
agriculture in place?
on the basis of specialized commodity crops.
» Section 3 How can the balance be
Rather than encouraging farmers to go a step
shifted in favour of diversified
further, the current incentives in food systems
agroecological systems?
keep farmers locked into the structures and
logics of industrial agriculture. The transition
envisaged in this report would shift these in-
centives, thereby empowering farmers to step
firmly off the treadmill of industrial agriculture.
Only then will the true benefits of diversified
agroecological systems be realized.
The type of change considered here would lead
to the emergence of what are essentially new
food systems with new infrastructures and
new sets of power relations, implying the coex-
istence of two more or less distinct systems for
some time to come. That does not mean that
we should remain indifferent to the reforms
emerging from those at the centre of industri-
al food systems. The emergence of alternative
food systems can and must be complemented
REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY 7
THE NEED FOR SYSTEMIC CHANGE ferent faces of malnutrition within the same
region or even the same household (Graziano
The food systems we inherit in the 21st century da Silva, 2014). Non-communicable diseases
represent some of the greatest achievements (NCDs) associated with imbalanced diets have
of human civilization. Paradoxically, they also increased so rapidly as to have overtaken in-
represent some of the greatest threats to our fectious diseases as the number one cause
continued health and prosperity. Contrasted of global mortality (WHO, 2012; Murray et al.,
with millennia of subsistence diets for most 2015). In addition, while food-borne illnesses
of the population, today’s food systems are a persist in all types of markets, new scares af-
radical success in abundance in many parts of fecting large numbers of people are emerg-
the world. Over the 19th and 20th centuries, ing in increasingly globalized food markets,
major breakthroughs in crop productivity, food threatening to unravel the historical progress
processing and distributive capacities drove on food safety.
huge increases in net calorie availability for
consumers, bringing more varied diets into The environmental outlook is equally trou-
reach for those able to access and afford them. bling. Today, food systems contribute between
Modern food systems also boast impressive 19% and 29% of global anthropogenic green-
achievements in food safety. At the beginning house gas (GHG) emissions (Vermeulen et al.,
of the 20th century, food poisoning and water 2012). Upstream of agriculture, major contri-
contamination were major causes of mortali- butions are made by the fossil fuel-intensive
ty, even in relatively wealthy regions like West- production of chemical fertilizer and pesticides
ern Europe (Satin, 2007). Improved hygiene, (Gilbert, 2012). Downstream, emissions arise
technologies and medicine have all but erad- from food processing and retail sectors that
icated these pathologies in the most affluent rely increasingly on abundant synthetic pack-
countries, with middle-income and low-income aging (Murphy-Bokern, 2010) and soaring ‘food
countries now making major advances. miles’ in order to deliver the highly processed
and unseasonal products to which consum-
However, the outcomes of these food systems ers have become accustomed (Schnell, 2013).
are poor on many counts, and in many coun- Meanwhile, 70% of all water withdrawn from
tries and regions of the world. Indeed, the very aquifers, streams and lakes is used for agricul-
foundations on which these systems were built ture - often at unsustainable rates (FAO, 2013).
are becoming increasingly fragile. The agricultural sector is responsible for ni-
trate, phosphorus, pesticide, soil sediment and
Despite decreases in the percentage of the pathogen pollution in soil and water (Parris,
global population going hungry over recent 2011). Furthermore, agricultural systems have
decades, 795 million people still suffered from contributed significantly to land degradation
hunger in 2015 (FAO et al., 2015). Expanding as well as to the destruction of natural habi-
the lens to take in those who are malnour- tats and losses of wild biodiversity around the
ished, the failures are far starker. In addition world (Scherr & McNeely, 2012).
to acute hunger, two billion are afflicted by
the ‘hidden hunger’ of micronutrient deficien- Food systems are also failing food producers
cies (Bioversity International, 2014), and over themselves. Many small farmers, especially
1.9 billion are obese or overweight  (WHO, women, struggle to emerge above subsistence
2015a)2. Indeed, one of the greatest paradox- level, often lacking access to credit, technical
es of our time is the coexistence of the dif- support and markets – or facing the uncer-
2. There are some overlaps between those suffering from hunger, micronutrient deficiencies and overweight and obesity.
8 REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY
tainties of volatile prices on global commod- The problems in food systems are deeply
ity markets (FAO, 2004). Globalization has interconnected and mutually reinforcing.
brought new challenges in terms of downward Some 35% of global cultivated crops depend
price pressures and costly regulatory burdens on pollination (WHO & Secretariat of the Con-
for farmers. As a result, the world faces the iro- vention on Biological Diversity, 2015). The
ny of small-scale farming communities making global decline in insect pollinators – driven
up about 50% of the hungry (WFP, 2015). Even in large part by the use of pesticides in ag-
in wealthier countries, farmers continue to riculture (van Lexmond et al., 2015) – now
face high risks and uncertainties, with farm- threatens the very basis of agriculture and its
ing incomes showing little prospect of rising future crop yields. Meanwhile, the livelihoods
durably (European Commission, 2014). This of many food producers are being pushed to
leaves many farmers reliant on government breaking point by climate change and envi-
subsidies. Meanwhile, labour conditions re- ronmental degradation. Nearly one billion
main problematic across food systems, from people who derive their livelihoods primar-
the precarious circumstances facing migrant ily from agriculture are presently living in
fruit-pickers to the routine exploitation and vulnerable environments, and these are the
under-remuneration of workers in abattoirs, populations that will bear the brunt of large-
food processing plants and retail outlets (ILO, scale environmental change in the near fu-
2008; ILO, 2015). While food and agriculture ture (Fischer et al., 2002). In other words,
generate increasing value for grain traders modern agriculture is failing to sustain
and global retail giants, decent livelihoods re- the people and resources on which it re-
main out of reach for many of those employed lies, and has come to represent an exis-
in food systems. tential threat to itself.
FIGURE 1 - THE KEY PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEMS
MICRONUTRIENT OBESITY AND
HUNGER
DEFICIENCIES OVERWEIGHT 19 - 29% 70%
795 2 1.9 of all water
of anthropogenic withdrawn from
greenhouse gas aquifers, steams
million people billion people billion people
emissions come and lakes is used
from food systems for agriculture
NCDS ARE THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE
OF GLOBAL MORTALITY
50%
> of the hungry
NCDs
Infectious are small scale farmers
(cancer, CVA, diseases
diabetes)
REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY 9
TWO ENDS OF A SPECTRUM: INDUSTRIAL • SECTION 1 What are the outcomes of indus-
AGRICULTURE AND DIVERSIFIED trial agriculture and diversified agroecologi-
AGROECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS cal systems?
• SECTION 2 What is keeping industrial agri-
The various parts of food systems are clearly culture in place?
interconnected, requiring a holistic analysis • SECTION 3 How can the balance be shifted in
of how these systems operate, and an aware- favour of diversified agroecological systems?
ness of the power relations running through
them (see IPES-Food, 2015). It is nonetheless Industrial agriculture and diversified agroeco-
essential to zoom in on agriculture as a key logical farming stand at two ends of a wide
entry point. In particular, it is crucial to identi- spectrum, and offer diametrically opposing vi-
fy the modes of farming that have generated sions of how to organize farming, particularly
the most negative outcomes, and to explore in its relationship to ecosystems. While most
the potential for a fundamental shift in agri- farmers are currently somewhere in between
culture to set food systems on a sustainable the two extremes, it is nonetheless import-
footing. ant to understand both models in their fullest
forms. These models are understood in terms
It is possible to identify industrial agricul- of broad organizing principles as well as the
ture as the dominant logic underpinning specific practices they entail; many farmers
agriculture in industrialized countries, and may therefore be operating according to a pre-
increasingly in transitional economies. It is dominantly industrial logic, even as they adapt
also the dominant trend in today’s agricultur- some of their practices.
al research and development efforts world-
wide. In practice, what is referred to as ‘con- The key characteristics of the two models are
ventional’ agriculture often corresponds to described below. It should be noted that this
the industrial model. The negative outcomes list is not exhaustive, and is limited to the key
proliferating in modern food systems are agricultural/agronomic logics and organizing
therefore closely associated with industrial principles of each system. What these farm-
agriculture; the extent of this association, ing systems imply in terms of the broader so-
and the potential for improving these out- cio-economic conditions around farming, and
comes under different agricultural systems, what they deliver in terms of outcomes, will be
is explored in Section 1. analysed in detail in Section 1.
Alternative visions and organizing principles The potential for incremental shifts within pre-
for agriculture have evolved alongside the in- dominantly industrial systems is not addressed
dustrial model. The terms diversification and in detail here. Steps to introduce individual
agroecology capture modes of agriculture measures such as conservation agriculture,
that respond to fundamentally different objec- crop rotation3 or integrated pest management
tives and logics, offering a genuine and holistic (IPM) are undoubtedly positive. However, if the
alternative to industrial agriculture. This report vast challenges in food systems are to be
is focused on exploring the potential for a par- met, these steps must be reconceived not
adigm shift whereby diversified agroecological as an end point, but as the starting point of
systems become the dominant model. The re- a process of change. This process must culmi-
port is therefore structured around three key nate in the adoption of holistic strategies for
questions: reintegrating agriculture with the ecosystems
3. Crop rotation is the sequential planting of one crop after another, and is often done to ensure soil health, replacement of
nutrients, and reduction of disease.
10 REPORT 02 FROM UNIFORMITY TO DIVERSITY