Sustainable Agriculture: A Personal Overview

Sustainable Agriculture: A Personal Overview

So through from my first blog in October, to my most recent blog posted a couple of days ago, I feel that a number of topics have been covered with sources of various publication dates providing alternative information regarding sustainable agriculture.

For me, I quite instinctively have a cynical view when it comes to changing from industries that we know work well - as our current alternatives sometimes don’t reach the same level of yield as the industries that damage the environment do. Another reason as to why I’m fairly pessimistic with alternatives is that I believe they require an extremely large participation, on a global scale - if we were to reduce our current carbon emissions that is so that the temperature by the end of the century will not have risen greater than 2 degrees. But I feel that to achieve such a demanding target would require a global agreement - something that was tried recently with COP21! But whether or not countries will stick to their targets is obviously a concern and issue, as politics can be an influencing power when it comes to sustainable alternatives for industries.

Despite this, I feel that through the research I have encountered in this blog, humans have came up with and utilised ideas in a sustainable manner - even though it has taken many years to produce - and so it is now time to see whether we can really put these alternatives to good use to meet our targets. I’ll end my final blog with this short but intriguing video about an American company who promotes sustainable agriculture in a futuristic manner:

Thank you for taking the time to read my blog & I hope you've enjoyed but also have thought about the issues I have talked about!

Joe Sanders

How is a Costa Rican Banana Industry Coping?

How is a Costa Rican Banana Industry Coping?

EARTH University - Guácimo, Costa Rica - is a university largely funded by a U.S Agency for International Development and has led to the establishment of more environmentally friendly, lower pesticide banana industry in Costa Rica since it’s foundation in 1989. Food from Earth went to the banana industry in Guácimo, to look at what has been happening in the banana industry and whether it’s been for the good or not.

At first, the land purchased by the university had an awful reputation with regards to human health and the environment as a result of intensive use of pesticides [Frundt et al 2009]. One of these detrimental environmental side effects of this industry included the discarding of trash that included plastic bags for the bananas, which ultimately were washed into rivers and the sea during periods of heavy rainfall - causing problems for the surrounding biodiversity. Such conventional farms used plastic bags that have been sprayed with insecticides and eventually led to chlorpyrifos exposure, which eventually saw health impacts upon children [Lovasi, GS et al 2011].

So what could EARTH University do to combat such detrimental issues that affected both human health and the environment? Since the 1989, the university has been looking at methods that include reducing chemical pesticides, recycling of plastic bags to ultimately making banana production carbon neutral. So what happened?

Before the university came to assistance, workers would have to endure heavy labour that included pulley systems that they would drag up to 25 bunches at a time for more than a mile, under extreme heat and humidity, so EARTH installed more than 30 miles of track with a banana-tram. This has benefit the workers’ health immensely.

With regards to biodiversity, Medina of the programme claims that they do not “plant within 50 feet of the river” and so there is a buffer that protects the stream from the chemical runoff. Recycling of plastic bags began in 1991, as well as cords. Another issue faced was the copious waste of banana stalk left after harvest, so EARTH would take this and recycle it as banana paper. In an attempt to reduce chemical uses on the banana industry’s plantations, EARTH began spraying a mix of bacteria and yeast species, which saw the chemical use get cut by a quarter.

In 2005 EARTH began replacing treated plastic bags with chili pepper and garlic to repel insects, and the following year then saw the end of herbicide usage, and workers now manually remove weeds. I believe that EARTH’s input in this industry in Guácimo has undoubtedly changed lives and reduced the environmental effects of agriculture - the establishment nets around $1 million a year and pays its employees a living wage - something which I have found quite rare in a lot of agricultural industries in developing nations! Furthermore, the impact of EARTH has influenced other surrounding communities and therefore leads by example, and rightly so, as now other agricultural industries are beginning to create sustainable products in carbon neutral ways [Carbon Clear 2013].

What is the EU and the FAO doing to boost food and nutrition security with regards to sustainable agriculture?

What is the EU and the FAO doing to boost food and nutrition security with regards to sustainable agriculture?

The EU, an important politico-economic union of 28 member states, as well as the FAO, an agency aiming to defeat global food hunger, are aiming to boost food and nutrition security through sustainable agriculture, based on a partnership agreement that hopes to see such impacts in at least 35 countries. But what does this entail? An FAO report published in July 2015 focuses on the agreement.

First of all, budget-wise the EU is going to contribute approximately €50 million, with the FAO contributing €23.5 million to the programme. According to the FAO commissioner Mimica, this initiative “will be crucial to support partner countries and regional organizations in pulling together political, technical and financial means towards the common goal of reducing food and nutrition insecurity”. It consists of two five-year programmes:

• The Food and Nutrition Security Impact, Resilience, Sustainability and Transformation (FIRST) - this aims to enhance capacities of governments and regional administrations to improve food security, nutrition and sustainable agricultural policies.
• The second programme is the Information for Nutrition Food Security and Resilience for Decision Making (INFORMED), which should contribute to strengthening resilience to withstand food crises as a result of human-induced and natural disasters.

But on a more scientific, and regional level - what is the potential of extensification of European agriculture for a more sustainable food system, by focusing on nitrogen? This is a food security strategy employed by many countries worldwide, using increased nitrogen amounts as well as manure. 

What are the benefits of extensification? Extensification leads to higher biodiversity as well as reduced environmental pollution. However, extensification could lead to lower yields and a reduction in GDP, and could even lead to an increase of global demand for land. Van Grinsven [2015] predicts that a 2030 scenarios for the EU27 reducing consumption and production of animal products by 50% would reduce nitrogen pollution by 10%, which also benefits human health. He also acknowledges that this form of diet would allow the EU27 to become a food exporter, but at the same time reducing land demand outside Europe in 2030 by more than 100 million hectares (2%), which ultimately more than compensates increased land demand. Van Grinsven ultimately concludes that extensification of agriculture within Europe is sustainable when combined with adjusted diets and externalization of environmental costs to food prices.

This is just one of many strategies that agreements and programmes made by the EU and FAO have to consider, as the latest UN food security report suggests that even after several decades, about 800 million people currently still suffer from hunger. Another report by the FAO suggests that to eradicate world hunger by 2030 would require an additional $267 billion a year in investments. Therefore, eradicating such issues is a shared global priority between global nations, and this latest agreement only strengthens and expands global efforts. The two programmes, FIRST and INFORMED will ultimately need the coordinated action by all stakeholders involved to combat the issues and succeed in their aims.

Sustainable Farming Receiving Recognition!

Sustainable Farming Receiving Recognition!

I’ve talked a lot about the prospects and the problems facing sustainable agriculture in the 21st century, but how well are they being received around the world and is their recognition being awarded?

I came across an articled on Eco-Business, published on the 17th December 2015 - so a recent publication, which is reporting that four traditional farming systems in Bangladesh and Japan have been rewarded by the FAO as ‘Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems’. But what does this mean? Is this important in the sustainable agricultural revolution that seems to be taking over the world?

The sites were designated during a meeting of the Scientific Committee at FAO’s Rome headquarters, and now bring the total of GIAHS systems to 36 sites located in 15 countries. GIAHS offer real solutions to food security, the conservation of natural resources and sustainable rural development, and as part of an FAO Coorporate Programme, should be entitled to ‘adequate policy guidance as well as investment’, the FAO Deputy Director-General Helena Semedo claims.

But what are these recent four traditional farms that have been rewarded as a GIAHS?

Japan - Ayu of the Nagara River System - One of cleanest rivers in Japan. Ayu fish benefit from clean waters mainted by upstream management.

Japan - Minabe-Tanabe Ume System - Allows for high-quality production of Ume and various kinds of fruit. System ensures stable livelihoods and makes communites more resilient to disasters.

Japan - Takachihogo-Shiibayama Mountainous Agriculture and Forestry System - Balances timber production with diverse farming activities.

Bangladesh - Floating garden Agricultural Practices - unique hydroponics system in which plants can be grown on the water on floating organic bed of water hyacinth, algae and other plant residues.

But what about other developing nations? How is West African farming being supported? There is no doub that the population growth in sub-Saharan Africa has spurred an increase in demand for agricultural and food products [Pretty, Toulmin, and Williams 2011], but Herrero [2010] believes that a better integration between crop and livestock activities at a farm level is a possible solution towards sustainability of these systems. Such integration involves the transfers between crop and livestock systems, but despite such scientific knowledge of sustainable agricultural alternatives, crop-livestock integration (CLI) remains limited due to the low transfers between crop and livestock components within mixed farms [Herrero 2010]. Sempore et al [2016] argues that through a particapatory approach, farmers’ knowledge and awareness of CLI evolved. This method, which in some of my previous blogs has been mentioned, relies on education and training, and according to Sempore et al [2016] proved to allow farmers to design and assess scenarios which ultimately increase transferable animal and plant biomasses in mixed crop-livestock production.

Through helping farmers in developing nations on an interactive level, farmers can assess the most feasible options in the short term and allows them to calculate changes in practices following cropping season. Despite this, there is always the burden of financial backing to support such measures, and without it can lead to limited impacts from this sustainable improvement.

What are consumer preferences when it comes to local farming?

What are consumer preferences when it comes to local farming?

Within the past ten years, the demand for food has increased massively in the US, and with the demand to reduce carbon emissions, the growth of local farming has been quite substantial, growing 111% from 1994 to 2004 [Darby et al 2008]. Adams et al [2010], however, argues that there has been a consumer shift in preference from organic farming to local farming, which ultimately has implications for the environment and society.

An interesting point I believe to begin with is augmented by Darby, who raises the point - what do consumers define as local? The perception of locally grown foods is not quite well understood, and if the distance between production and the consumer is the predominant driving factor, then national firms have difficulty in regarding their produce as ‘local’, especially with many consumers being influenced by ‘anti-corporate’ images that locally produced foods show [Darby et al 2008].

Adams et al [2010] believes that consumers have turned to local food from organic food as a more holistic alternative, as he emphasises a point made by Iles [2005], where consumers are now actually more interested in knowing food miles instead of reading the organic labels, as a general consensus that organic farming has become somewhat industrialised, and this ‘turn’ apparently - according to Adams - began in the 1990s as a result of interesting results from surveys, with one including 9% of respondents saying that their concern for the environment was their primary reason for buying organic produce. This was exacerbated by results found by Wolf [1997], which suggested that consumers in California indicate that locally grown produce are an important part of their shopping at farmers’ markets, whereas organic produce was less desirable. But why? Wolfe’s study also found that consumers perceived local food as fresher, better quality and cheaper. This is reinforced by some statistics produced in an article published in the same year as Wolfe’s study, with Gallons et al [1997] finding that local food is very important (49%) or somewhat important (31.5%), whereas organic food was considered at 15% very important and 19.9% somewhat important.

All in all, what determines a consumer’s preference between the two depends on various drivers, such as concern about industrialisation of organic agriculture and how fresh particular produce are. But according to Adams et al [2010], whether or not a change from organic to local food preference will have an effect on broader aspects of the food system, but still it provokes some interesting thoughts about agriculture and how society bases itself on information - even if its an image on a product!

Newsflash: What Is The Potential Of Seaweed Farming Regarding Ocean Restoration And Climate change?

What Is The Potential Of Seaweed Farming Regarding Ocean Restoration And Climate change?

What if there was a way to grow restorative species that make oceans cleaner, healthier and more habitable, but also help in reducing carbon emissions? Well, Bren Smith, director of Thimble Island Oyster Co., believes that his ‘3D ocean farms’ provide this solution that utilises the entire water column.

According to Mr. Smith, “A 3D ocean farm is designed to restore rather than deplete our oceans. We use our new farming methods to meet the growing need for sustainable seafood, while restoring ecosystems, mitigating climate change and building a new blue-green economy”. But why is using seaweed an option? According to FastCoExist, seaweed farms help clean the water from the pollution of carbon dioxide and nitrogen. The kelp that these farms also grow absorb five times more carbon than land-based plants. Mr. Smith’s seaweed farming was considered so innovative that his project, GreenWave, was awarded $100,000 from the Fuller Challenge Prize, who augment how the infrastructure is simple but helps to provide vibrant ecosystems.

To me, there is no disbelief as to why Mr. Smith’s GreenWave project has received such an honourable award, as his project of 3D Ocean farms seems like one of the most innovative systems I have come across whilst studying sustainable farming, whilst the project also doesn’t remove people from work but instead creates employment, something developing nations could utilise? Whilst absorbing carbon at a fast rate, the farms also supposedly act as a storm surge protector, reducing the impact of storms on shoreline communities. Furthermore, the system also acts as an artificial reef, attracting 150 species that after a decade of what was once a barren patch of ocean, has now become a thriving ecosystem.  

Is Renewable Energy The Solution For Modern Agriculture?

Is Renewable Energy The Solution For Modern Agriculture?

It is well-known that agriculture is heavily dependent on the use of fossil fuels, but as we know that this is a finite resource, it is surely not only sensible but mandatory to consider whether renewable energy could pose a possible alternative to our use of fossil fuels within the agricultural industry and would this alternative make agriculture sustainable. Agriculture contributed to nearly 14% of world greenhouse gas emissions in 1994 and in 2009 the US agriculture was responsible for emitting 6.3% of US greenhouse gas emissions [Camargo 2013]. Alongside our depleting amount of fossil fuels, there will eventually be a forced reduction of our usage of fossil fuels - paving the way for seeking these alternatives.

Solomon et al [2007] proposes a more conservative approach of resources as well as more effective cultivation techniques, yet this would not make us independent from fossil fuels. Bardi et al [2013] responds to this and against the idea of a truly ‘organic’ farm as these farms would be incredibly labour-intensive - which would take the level of agriculture back centuries. But if farms were to remain fully dependent on fossil fuels without seeking/utilising sustainable alternatives, they can become, as mentioned, victim to the global fluctuation of fossil fuel prices, as Haggard and Noland [2009] use North Korea as a prime case study. North Korea’s agricultural system depends heavily on the usage of fossil fuels and as a consequence of price fluctuation of fossil fuels, North Korea has been subject to famines, leading to farmers reducing fertiliser input thus reducing agricultural yields.

When discussing the effectiveness of renewable energy solutions, a good measurement of comparison is the energy return for energy invested (EROI). Until recently, the EROI of fossil fuels was much greater than that of renewable technologies, but with progressing technology, an EROI efficiency level high enough to compete with fossil fuels is being achieved. These high EROIs are also creating lower monetary costs, but very slowly - due to the high costs of investment, but the gap is closing due to the greater efficiency of renewable technologies such as wind and photovoltaics [Bardi et al 2013].

With the world’s total energy consumption in 2012 being 513 EJ, agriculture contributed to 6% of the world’s fossil fuel consumption. According to Pfeiffer [2004], renewable energy provided 8.2 EJ of primary energy worldwide, and Bardi et al [2013] believes that expanding this to cover the 30 EJ used by agriculture would be possible by expanding the use of PV and wind. Bardi et al [2013] interestingly argues for this expansion, claiming that the land requirements would be minimal, but fails to identify the cost requirements of this expansion as well as the investment costs, which he previously noted as being high when discussing the EROI comparisons.

Whilst electricity currently plays a minor role in modern agriculture, if farming were to adapt agricultural processes to the direct use of electricity, the high EROI of modern renewables could be exploited. In particular, electricity could be utilised for the production of nitrogen-based fertilisers and power irrigation, therefore substituting the need for fossil fuels for both of these tasks. Furthermore, electricity could also power agricultural machinery, again reducing the greenhouse emissions that modern agriculture strongly contribute to.