It is easy to get bogged down by the fragile and unsustainable nature of our modern food systems. Large chemical and seed companies are seen dominating the decision-making ability of farmers, the globalizing economy demands predictable output at diminishing prices, and large-scale agricultural strategies such as monocultures destroy our soils and land while contributing to the epidemic of global climate change. In the search for a stable food supply, some people argue that industrial agricultural practices are needed in order to “feed the world.” However, such a narrow stance fails to recognize the need for radical change likewise missing the potential for alternative solutions. In reconceptualizing the goals of agriculture from a global perspective, I have decided to focus on some of the work being done internationally by the UN.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations is working with 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) to end hunger and promote sustainable agricultural practices. Rather than taking these goals as a panacea for the world’s complex agricultural and economic problems, I would like to use them as a discussion topic for our class.
Here is a link to the site (http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/goals/goal-1/ro/) where they are listed as follows:
1. No Poverty 2. Zero Hunger 3. Good Health and Well Being 4. Quality Education 5. Gender Equality 6. Clean Water and Sanitation 7. Affordable and Clean Energy 8. Decent Work and Economic Growth 9. Industry Innovation and Infrastructure 10. Reduced Inequalities 11. Sustainable Cities and Communities 12. Responsible Consumption and Production 13. Climate Action 14. Life Below Water 15. Life on Land 16. Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions 17. Partnerships for the Goals
In achieving these goals, the UN aims to put food and agriculture development at the center of their agenda. Here is a quick video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=65&v=PbrYpZ_bXuo. (Bonus: for economists, notice the stark difference between this strategy and the policy prescriptions of the Lewis two-sector model!)
The following article also provides a few actions that have been taken to implement sustainable food and agriculture practices according to the SDG’s (http://www.fao.org/fao-stories/article/en/c/1184363/).
In browsing through the website, there are a number of stories displaying the work that is being done. I would like to ask everyone to read through at least one of these stories, paying attention to the methods used: are they policy decisions, education initiatives, market driven, or the result of implementing technology? What are the outcomes achieved? And what are your thoughts/ feelings?
So in sum, here are the response questions.
1.) What is your initial reaction to the sustainable development goals put forth by the FAO? Do you think these goals are achievable, sufficient, or is there anything you feel is missing?
2.) How do the goals and principles set forth by the FAO challenge or confirm your own views about sustainability and agriculture? Are you left with any questions, anxieties, or hopes?
3.) What did you find in the article you read? What were the methods and outcomes? How do you feel about the work being done in this context?
Thank you for covering such a dynamic topic and being able to use your economic background to tie in the “panacea for the world’s complex agricultural and economic problems” as you stated. As a discussion topic, I imagine fruitful conversations will follow. The various academic backgrounds people bring to the table will make all the difference in this. I am also curious about the class that you and Bella are taking regarding the economic crisis and how one might put this in perspective in comparison to the way that some people argue that there is a need to “feed the world”.
ReplyDelete1.)
Surprisingly, this is not the first time I have seen these FOA goals. I saw a very similar iteration of these released by the United Nations that was created circa 2013. I am also interested in the ways that gender equity plays out and if it focuses on women’s reproductive health, or if that would entail a entirely new categorization.
2.)
In the recent years they did end up adding gender equity which I am glad. I was curious as to why they did not implement the it sooner, as women's health is key to meeting sustainable development goals.
Ultimately, I am a little anxious about why “ Partnerships for the Goal” is number 17 on the list. As far as the Paris Climate Agreement goes, we know that even if there is a degree of “partnership” or an alliance between 200 plus countries, it does not take much for one, or two countries to not agree. And when a country does not agree… *cough cough* THE UNITED STATES, then the other goals for sustainability and agriculture become irrelevant because the only way things will be accounted for is if all countries (specifically the ones who release the majority of greenhouse gasses) do not partner with other countries than the whole list becomes irrelevant.
3.)
I definitely appreciated the implementation and the flushing out of examples that the Food and Agriculture Organization provided to give some context. The method of protecting pollinators to safeguard natural resources is essential to our food production.
1.) Like most goals from a large organization, these goals seem rather vague about the way that they could actually be implemented at a local level.
ReplyDelete2.)I think one of my biggest concerns is that many of the goals seem like they could easily be implemented in a very "western" way that disregards the local knowledge/pre-existing ways of doing things in many areas. For example, in the documentary about the Peruvian potato farmers, the way they do things could be viewed as less efficient/less "advanced" and thus not fit under some of the goals. Yet, it is the slow work of preserving various biodiversity that will help to contribute long-term to many of the goals. It can be easy to steamroll into an area with big goals and disregard the individuality of each place and its actual needs and then the best way to truly promote the goals (which may not always be easy in many cultures, because some of the goals may not be culturally normal for that area/people).
3.) I thought that the implementation of more sustainable practices seemed to be occurring at more than just the small scale (which is the scale we've seen most practices occurring). Both the idea of the coffee plants in the forest-like setting and the implementation of pollinator plants seem like fairly simple ways to help promote biodiversity in farming.
1) As aspirational goals, I can't argue with them. As far as achievable and sufficient, I don't know. It's a bit hard to envision a world in which all of these goals are achieved. And---if we can't envision it, how can we create it? So perhaps I just need to work on my visioning skills! Also--I think it's a mistake to discard goals because we aren't sure we can achieve them perfectly. I think that having aspirational goals that we may never fully achieve but we can put our hearts and minds into can be a great driving force in life, as long as we remain committed to the work while somewhat unattached to the outcome since we may have very little control over whether these goals are ultimately achieved.
ReplyDelete2)In relationship to sustainability, food, and agriculture, I like how the 5 actions set out by the FAO include elements of earth care, people care, and fair share (permaculture ethics!). If I had a critique of them, it would be that they are framed in language that has been used to separate people from the earth and the ecosystems they live in, privileging words like "productivity" and "natural resources." If we continue to think of plants and animals as products or resources, will we ever truly be able to see how inter-related and inter-dependent we all are? Farmer & Poet Wendell Berry wrote, "We know enough of our own history by now to be aware that people exploit what they have merely concluded to be of value, but they defend what they love." If plants, animals, insects, even soil and water are all objects (or resources) that we value instead of beings that we love, I think we'll have a harder time caring for them in a good way. And we all will (and do) suffer for that.
3) I went to the "in Action" page (http://www.fao.org/in-action/en/) and found the story on the System of Rice Intensification being implemented in the United Republic of Tanzania. Coincidentally, a K alum from a couple of years ago had told me about this system--her mom is friends with a Cornell professor who has worked with this method of cultivating rice. I did a little poking around online and found the Cornell page about this rice growing system: http://sri.ciifad.cornell.edu/aboutsri/FAQs1.html.
I think this is pretty cool, actually. Essentially, SRI (System of Rice Intensification--which is an awful, ugly name!)is a method of growing rice in which you soak your seeds ahead of planting them to make sure you are planting only good seeds, planting the plants further apart than is usually done, and improving your soil with organic matter. This system does not require the intensive flooding of usual paddy rice cultivation and the plants, because they have more room and fertility, grow more seeds. So even though you are planting fewer plants, you can harvest more rice from those plants. This cultivation method can be used with any type of rice seed and does not require special tools or fertilizer or pesticide inputs, so the only real barrier to implementing it is knowledge. The FAO initiative in Tanzania is a partnership with Venezuela that provides education to farmers in growing rice this way. I think this is a great example of how people sharing knowledge across the world can help us adapt to climate change. As the climates we live and farm in change, we can learn new farming techniques from people who have developed agricultural practices in ecosystems that have the type of weather that we are just now beginning to experience.
1) My initial reaction to these goals is that they are big goals and will probably look different in implementation throughout the world depending on different contexts. I think it is important for people to also talk about their own goals within their communities. I'm sure it will have similarities to the goals set out by the FAO but can also provide insight into more specific plans for individual communities.
ReplyDelete2) I am wondering about where these goals are envisioned to be taking place. Are they specifically for developing countries, or are they intended to be implemented in countries considered developed as well? Also, how does the FAO define development, and is it similar or different than how people define it in the places where the strategic plans are being implemented?
3) I read the article "Acting Early to Ensure Food for Farmers in Southern Madagascar". In it, they described the aid they provided in the form of diverse vegetable seeds and irrigation/food storage knowledge for farmers during several seasons of drought. I like the idea of spreading knowledge because that is how humans have shared ideas and discoveries for centuries, and I hope the seeds given to the farmers were ones that the farmers can save so that they do not end up dependent on the seeds from Western corporations like the Indian farmers in the seed documentary we watched earlier this quarter. While aid has its benefits for people in need, I know it has also historically been used to further Western interests, and I really hope that that is not going on.
1.) What immediately came to mind with the goals is how interconnected most of them are. I struggle with having them in a list form like this because they are all so entwined and are not applicable in the same ways in different places.
ReplyDelete2.) I like the idea of these goals! But like Amy, I want to push back on the system of land ownership that the FAO operates within. They seem to portray the lack of land ownership as something that is not chosen. I don't know much about these cases in particular, but that definitely seems to operate within the assumption that land is a material that must be controlled in order to produce capital.
3.) I read the article about "Reviving ancestral traditions to beat malnutrition." Essentially, it discussed how 36 years of civil war had created a gap in ancestral knowledge in the Ixil Triangle (in the Quiché region in Guatemala). The FAO created a cookbook that used recipes that would normally have been handed down from mother to daughter in order to try to promote this knowledge again, as well as healthy eating and growing native crops. While this is a pretty cool idea (and seems to have been successful) I wonder about the methodology and how they were collected. The article still positions the FAO as the distributor of that knowledge, as 'giving it back' to the native population, so to say.
1.) What is your initial reaction to the sustainable development goals put forth by the FAO? Do you think these goals are achievable, sufficient, or is there anything you feel is missing?
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction is that these goals are very logical. If you asked any group of sustainably driven people to write a 'wish list' I am sure the list would have many similarities to the FOA goals. I agree with many people who have already commented that the goals , while inspirational, seem lofty and unreasonably broad. Maybe that's cynical of me... but yes excellent goals. (PS missing reproductive freedom goal)
2.) How do the goals and principles set forth by the FAO challenge or confirm your own views about sustainability and agriculture? Are you left with any questions, anxieties, or hopes?
I believe that education and women's rights are inextricably linked to the betterment of society. I appreciate the FOA's ample inclusion of both (although again having an added goal of reproductive freedom would be good).
3.) What did you find in the article you read? What were the methods and outcomes? How do you feel about the work being done in this context?
I read 'Giving women in Guatemala a Voice in Food Security and Nutrition'. I really enjoyed this article because it has similar themes to a project I will be implementing this summer. Essentially the government enacted a policy that makes agricultural discrimination illegal for indigenous and rural women. I appreciated that the FOA helped turn this policy into action by establishing a Technical Working Group on Rural Development.
This is my first time encountering these goals and I am very excited to see them, but am also struck instantly by wanting to know the answer to the question of "when?" But I will chill. I agree that some of them seem so sweeping and interconnected that it's hard to separate them, especially the "Reducing Inequalities" one.
ReplyDelete2.I think these goals use some important language about "for all." We aren't just talking about implementing sustainable energy solutions, we are talking about making that energy accessible to all. It is exciting to feel as though many kinds of people will be involved and positively impacted by these initiatives.
3. I also read "Reviving ancestral traditions to beat malnutrition," about helping reintroduce traditional recipes following years of civil war in Guatemala. I think it is a great way to reintroduce cultural traditions to perhaps now a younger generation and make those connections across generations. It is also being done in an effort to combat malnutrition, so I am just curious how these cookbooks were put together in terms of whether the recipes were in any way altered based on the malnutrition of the population, ie to restore the population's overall vitality through additions or subtractions from these traditional meals. That could get dicey I guess, but I support the efforts being made to think about a sustainable food system that celebrates indigenous food ways.
1. In one of my courses abroad, we went into detail about these sustainability goals so I very familiar with them. I think they are a good thing to have laid out by a global organization, the key is implementing them into practice in a timely and considerate manner. I think they are attainable and purposely presented in broad terms so the large scope of problems facing us globally can be incorporated.
ReplyDelete2. These goals make me feel hopeful for the future, that to some degree governing organizations are addressing the problems people are experiencing across several facets of life. To reiterate some of the concerns of my peers, I think western solutions to these problems could very easily be implemented in the search for a blanket solution. However, as we know what works for one community does not necessarily work for its neighbor. Thus, in the implementation of these solutions, each community must be invested and consulted about projects and initiatives that best fit their needs within these goals. This methodology is logistically more difficult, but will result in long-term solutions that are more efficient.
3. I read an article entitled “Fuel-efficient stoves are keeping women safer in Nigeria” under the “In Action” tab. The FAO trained 100 local artisans to produce over 5,000 fuel efficient stove in northeast Nigeria. Of the women interviewed for the article, there appeared to be a positive response from those we received the stove. Using a traditional firewood and stone method for cooking presented several health and safety issues, specifically for women who were the ones cooking and gathering wood. These fuel efficient stoves cut done on the smoke being inhaled by women cooking and their children who were often close by. Further, when searching for wood, women were at increased risk of being raped, killed, or robbed which is diminished by not searching for firewood.
In the context of the goals, I feel as though this project addressed several goals as they are inherently intertwined. I picked this article specifically because they were addressing women and their safely within the realm of food and providing food, an issue I feel is underrepresented or not addressed at all in the larger scope of food problems globally. Secondly, instead of giving stoves and then leaving, local people were trained to produce these stoves, making it a long-term solution as they can continue making stoves even after the employees of FAO leave.
1. I guess I really appreciate agriculture being seen as the main mechanism for sustainable development as it is the big connection between us and our planet- therefore I can also appreciate how expansive and broad the FAO’s list is. What I can’t help but think, though, is that it’s pretty idealistic and I’m not sure how the FAO can tackle all those issues at once, so I’m not sure how achievable they are. For example, “end poverty in all its forms everywhere,” almost seems like a headline one would read on a similar themed article on Buzzfeed, because it seems like the solution to most issues in the world. Still, I would rather have all these goals included rather than completely disregarded as indirect potential solutions.
ReplyDelete2. Something that bothered me was certain language that seemed to promote finding ways to produce more food to sustain our ever-growing population while still acknowledging the fact that a third of our food is wasted- it seems like there’s more sustainable ways to deal with this issue of displacement than solely finding ways to “reduce negative impact on soil, water and nutrient loss, greenhouse gas emissions and degradation of ecosystems.” Something I appreciated was encouraging healthy lifestyles for all organisms- including humans, the animals we consume, and the agricultural beings we grow. It’s crucial that this is recognized as a critical need for all of us to harvest not only better quality of life, but better interpersonal relationships (leading to greater steps towards peaceful and equal communities!) within our giant food cycle/chain that creates all life forms. It ties in very well with the last goal which is to revitalize global partnerships and all work together.
3. My favorite method was the inclusive growth approach being implemented in Honduras- recognizing that a million acres of land do indeed belong to the same indegenous peoples that depend heavily on their coexistence with the land. It seems as though these policy decisions were outcomes of both government and FAO investment plans to both take care of their poor while maintaining certain parts of their tradition/culture alive. Indirectly, I’m sure it is also helping maintain our biodiversity and more sustainable ways of treating the soil. I wish I could put a big highlighter on the part that mentions the importance of interlinked goals like this and regularly MONITORED PROGRESS- I think so much of the time plans are put into action by organizations and then not checked on for maintenance.
1.) What is your initial reaction to the sustainable development goals put forth by the FAO? Do you think these goals are achievable, sufficient, or is there anything you feel is missing?
ReplyDeleteOn a whole, I agree with the sustainable development goals set forth by the FAO. They are important goals that I cannot really argue with. My issue is not with what they are so much as how they will be accomplished. How will they ensure that communities are able to self-determine and guide their own development? What are our conceptions for development and what are they based in? Is it more of the same neoliberal bs? How we go about achieving these goals will be the most important thing.
2.) How do the goals and principles set forth by the FAO challenge or confirm your own views about sustainability and agriculture? Are you left with any questions, anxieties, or hopes?
Again, I wonder about our conceptions of development and worry that they might be based in neoliberal or colonial ideology. These ideologies have had a huge impact on how we understand land ownership, the goals of education, and economic growth.
3.) What did you find in the article you read? What were the methods and outcomes? How do you feel about the work being done in this context?
I read the article titled “Morogoro’s Best Farmer.” It details the condition of the rice economy in the United Republic of Tanzania. The article claims that Tanzania is meeting 98% of its own rice demand but overall rice productivity is low. Right there, I question what this means. What level of productivity is necessary? Furthermore, the reasons for which the rice economy is not doing well enough are listed such as inadequate use of improved technologies and low levels of involvement of the private sector in the rice value chain. The pushing of new technology and the demand for private sector involvement makes me worried for the direction that the rice industry will head in Tanzania.
I found our little spectrum between 'systemic change' and 'reform from within' quite interesting. I think it's important to hold up your cultural and societal systems to scrutiny, and not be stuck in one way of doing things, as one end of our spectrum was saying. But I also think that the guy who cries 'revolution' always seems like the good guy... until the revolution is over, you return to real life, and things get messy again. So inside, it is important to understand the diversity of approaches people take. But outside, in real life, you have to actually do something - and you can't accommodate everyone all at the same time.
ReplyDelete1) My initial reaction is to question the broadness of these categories. Who are they talking about and what are the spcefic contexs for each of these when they talk about those people? I think one that was missing adn was a really big deal for me is that there is no section about housing being a right. This was interesting as much of the SDG's are rooted in capitalism and still imagine a world where money dominates, which leaves behind homeless folks and other demographics.
ReplyDelete2)Reading the goals worries me about American exceptionalism and the modeling of liberatory practices around examples in the western world that have been emancipatory for some but even more restricting for others. There is nothing about ongoing conversation with populaces or other types of overlap with those being "helped" and that concerns me as it seems to idicate a heirarchy of knowledge from the get go.
3)I read Harnessing the talent of rural youth in Guatemala
and while I think they are doing some work that could be heralded as being extremely cool and helpful, I worry abotut the way that they are teachng business models to indigenous ad rural youth becuase f their talent with food. Even the title seems to suggest an objectification of sorts and I worry that in trying to create solutions and innovate, we take advantage of certain ways of nowing and exploit that in the purpose of money making. Otherwise, it seems like a lofty endeavr to train all these young people how to be a business and run one.