Agroecology can guarantee access to water, seeds and pesticides
Isabelle Chevalley Member of Swiss Parliament for the GLP is, based on her African experiences, convinced that Agroecology is the right path for the future in which we have to invest. At the moment between 50 and 80 percent of the African population lives on agriculture, and for her three problems are evident: Farmers lack access to water, to seeds and to adequate pesticides. By applying Agroecology one is able to save water, one can use the seeds again and for pesticides, better regulations are needed. At the moment pesticides are available, they are, however, harmful for humans and the environment.
Create local food systems and diminish policy incoherence and power imbalances
Tina Goethe from Bread for all refers to three of the 10 FAO Elements for Agroecology. For example the "co-creation and sharing of knowledge": we need to make sure that Switzerland does not push for policies such as the establishment of new seed laws and intellectual property rights, that endanger access to seeds for farmers and preservation of indigenous knowledge. So we need to rethink of international policies, which are not in favour of the livelihood of local farmers. One change that must happen is that farmers regain control over land and seeds, what is at present denied due to policy incoherencies and power imbalances. One must also think about new ways of linking farmers with consumers and organize more local food systems which allow proximity between farmers and consumers. This would allow food chains are getting shorter and therefore energy saved for food transport.
Incentives to work in agriculture are missing
For
Regina Ammann from Syngenta agroecological systems are important for biodiversity and food quality. At the same time, Agroecology provides answers to challenges such as productivity, adaptability towards climate change, fertility on degraded soils etc. Overall, the question of who will feed future generations needs an answer as migration to cities is the biggest movement of people in this day and age. Simultaneously, labour is missing in rural areas because agriculture is not attractive anymore. Incentives are required in order to keep youth and farmers in rural agriculture. At the moment comprehensive investment schemes for farmers are missing. Better crops and the use of biotech might help to create incentives as well as investment from the private sector in rural agriculture. Syngenta would like to be a part of this discussion and already has set some goals on soil enhancement and biodiversity to gather evidence for dialog with stakeholders.
Before talking about Agroecology, the livelihood of small-scale farmers must be assured
Ulrike Minkner as a member from UNITERRE and a Swiss small-scale farmer points out that not terms such as Agroecology are of importance, but rather practices. Before one can talk about Agroecology, the livelihood of small-scale farmers must be assured, since it is them who will apply it. At the moment she faces unequal treatment because she is a small-scale farmer and access to financial credits from government is denied, whereby large-scale farms are heavily supported. It seems that Switzerland rather wants to be fit for the world market and promotes growth instead of environmental sustainability. Before focusing on the export of agricultural goods, Switzerland should focus on peasant rights first. When transforming food system it is important to listen to the farmers because they have the knowledge for improving them.
Statements from the panel and the plenary:
Chevalley confronts
Ammann by pointing out, that innovation does not necessarily mean GMO.
With GMO the Global North links itself with Global South and creates dependency of the latter to intellectual property, owned by the Global North. A lot of farmers are also losing money due to context inadequate seeds and adverse effects.
Ammann answers that this is why farmers need to be educated and that she is not aware of a sustainable business product that creates dependency. To ensure this, one must start
a dialogue with farmers to produce according to their needs and preferences. No dependency is created then. One shouldn't judge from the Swiss position on production methods others choose in their context. Furthermore if farmers choose GMO seeds, this is not Syngenta's doing but rather the one of existing policy frameworks, rules and regulations created by governments and organizations such as SDC.
Goethe adds, that Syngenta is investing 1.2 billion dollars in research and development every year and asks what would happen if this money would be invested in agroecology, or at least more sustainable technologies. In her opinion farmers are eager to learn more, which happens
through exchange but isn't fruitful if the power asymmetry between the different actors is too big. One key is to help farmers organize themselves better and give them a voice. When working together
one must clearly discuss power inequalities and define who is in which position. For
Minkner, big companies and the private sector do not really care for sustainability in trade, and it is
the role of governments to engage and regulate more.
Niggli wants to clarify that
farmers do not hold the ultimate knowledge and that
a dialogue between farmers and researchers is important to create better knowledge. Furthermore it is important to talk about farmers' and breeders' privilege and not about right and wrong.
But for Chevalley it is about right and wrong. When Syngenta is investing 2.1 billion in research for GMO it is wrong,
because research is not equal research. Farmers are not really informed by Syngenta and they don't really have a free choice. They
don't have a strong voice
or enough knowledge and information about the product they buy.
Tadesse mentions that there were problems with pesticides in Ethiopia and, related to that, with water in bore-holes. The Government of Ethiopia did not allow GMO seeds at that time. However, the technology and circumstances made policy makers change their opinion on GMO. The challenge in Africa is to promote cost efficient agriculture. Farmers rather care for productivity than ecology and this focus is not changing at the moment.
Zürcher elaborates that one
can also increase yields with agroecological group practices and that there is evidence available from several NGO's from different countries.
For
Caron, the big challenge is to create a perfect food system. There are different visions of the world and it is idealistic to think one would come to an agreement. But
different visions can help to start a better dialogue. Agroecological transition is and will not be the same in different contexts and local stakeholder should design their own solutions. One can
encourage stakeholder to choose between different existing approaches.
Arvelo refers to
Chevalley and explains that black or white thinking comes from parliament where clear positions must be taken. Within the UN there is a search for consensus and policy guidelines are shaped accordingly.
Chevalley replies, that it is indeed
a choice and consensus is not always the right way. The goals are common for every party but there are different ways to reach them. She would bet her money on Agroecology and not on GMOs.
Goethe supports her, because in her opinion, the existing challenges are clear and there is nearly enough time to tackle them. So
it is time now to make clear choices. There is
no way to go
somewhere in between. A clear pathway is needed. Also one must include and think
about economic and social innovation and not only about technology.
For
Amman it is still an unsolved question what "sustainable" and "responsible" agriculture really means. There is not enough focus on the role of technology and digitalization. One should rather
define "sustainable" agriculture and then existing technologies can be applied.
Minkner is pessimistic when she looks at Swiss farmers. Although they get a lot of subsidy payments from the government it is barely enough and many farmers are in debt. The agricultural sector has a much higher suicide rate than other sectors in Switzerland.
It is not just about money, but also a about a feeling of pride! One must strengthen local farmers' organization and
support direct sale as well as rethink existing free trade agreements