By Javier Rodriguez Ros writing from Madrid, Spain

​

By Gabriele Sutera writing from Copenhagen, Denmark

The preparation of the 4th Congress of South-North Mediterranean Dialogue (4-6 October) took more than 15 months, and to some extent, is the result of a process started in 1995 with the Declaration of Barcelona. The discussion was built on statements related to the development of rural regions based on four regional studies held in four different locations of the Mediterranean basin (Volos, Greece; Alexandria, Egypt; Montpellier, France; Rabat, Morocco). The congress was held in two locations: the magnificent and exclusive Palace Grand Hotel in Varese and the over-crowded EXPO in Milan. The two different locations set the ground for a congress marked by similarly contrasting opinions and visions.

What was the congress about and who was there?
The congress titled, “Rural Communities, No Longer Left Behind – Rural and Regional Development in the South and North Mediterranean and the New Neighborhood Policy” was organised by Fondation du Dialogue Sud-Nord Mediterranée and GFAR, in partnership with Bibliotheca Alexandrina and CIHEAM. The aim was to give voice, in an inclusive dialogue, to all stakeholders operating in the rural sector and contributing to the development of rural communities, at the national, regional and local levels within the Mediterranean area. A well balanced mix of stakeholders took part in the congress, including: representatives of intergovernmental organisations and NGOs, youth and women’s organisations, university lecturers and researchers, government representatives, and economists. The GFAR secretariat played a crucial role in supporting the participation of an active group of young professionals. The biggest Italian organisation representing farmers, Confagricoltura (CIA), was also present. Unfortunately, small organisations and the non-formal sector were not represented. For instance, during discussions the need of regulating the informal sector was pointed out. The presence of a representative from this category would have brought insights regarding the problematic faced by the informal sector and the reasons which drive actors to operate outside of policy frameworks. I saw this as a missed opportunity – an inclusive dialogue should first of all be a bottom up process, giving space to the smallest amidst the bigger actors.

How the discussion developed?
Madame Fatima Bensoltane, founder and president of Méditerravenir and Dr Mark Holderness, executive secretary of GFAR opened the conference. The first day was a preparatory step, an occasion to meet again, which developed into an intense day of formal meetings with Italian and euro-Mediterranean authorities. On the second day, after a quick round of presentation during a plenary session, the participants were sub-divided in four round tables: i) agriculture, natural resources and food security ii) investment, infrastructure and governance iii) opportunities for women and last but not least iv) opportunities for youth. The round tables provided  an easier way to get to know each other and to proceed into a constructive dialogue which gave all the participants a voice within the discussion. Challenges and opportunities within each of the four tables were identified in the morning and translated into concrete actions during the afternoon session.

Which were the final outputs?
Each of the four tables synthesized their ideas and reported on their collaborative work at a plenary session. All the actors expressed the need to move forward toward systems which are more sustainable, inclusive and resilient, echoing a warning which has already been sounded by scientists – our lifestyles and values are causing the over-exploitation of our natural resources. Despite being designated different topics, the challenges and opportunities identified by all four tables converged toward similar statements, highlighting the multifunctionality of the agricultural sector, emphasizing that – it influences the management of natural resources, represents a source of revenue, and is a great depository of local knowledge and practices. On the other hand, the output showed the diversity of processes happening on the two shores of the Mediterranean basin; from one side, a tendency of young people to naturally move back to rural areas, and on the other side, a desire of abandoning rural areas, moving toward lifestyles which are consequential to the well established (and developing) consumption society. Ana Huertas, representative ­ YPARD Spain, strongly expressed what young generations are looking for: a more sustainable society attentive to quality rather than quantity. However, the report of the youth session was almost forgotten when the moderation committee brought the attention back to the participants.

How to move forward?
I found the event a valuable occasion for integration and dialogue, however, the quick parade of meetings and discussions seemed to be too brief to settle a common ground for action. During the congress, terms such as “investment”, “growth”, “bilateral agreements” were often used to define actions for finding a way forward. However, these terms embody a paradigm which over the past decades seems to have failed to work. I believe that it is now the time to settle a new language. If we want to move forward, toward a new and revised paradigm of development, we need a vocabulary which embody the new ideas of young generations – one that is understood by the wide net of stakeholders who may still be constrained by the philosophy that underscores business as usual. Only with a new vocabulary will it be possible to move into action, finding synergies between those who have a new vision, decision makers and civil society. Furthermore, in order to avoid leaving behind communities, policy makers should accent communities’ potentials rather than their weaknesses and emphasize making differences and diversity an added value rather than an obstacle to collaboration. Trusting in dialogue and mutual understanding can provide a basis for moving forward. Marginalised groups, such as youth, women and small, remote communities need more space in such discussions to enable them to walk together toward new paradigms without leaving anybody behind.

By Jaime Peréz-Molina writing from Copenhagen, Denmark

Here in Denmark, housing and living spaces are a bit different than in other places. Concepts like "sommerhus" (summer house) or "kollektiv" (comune) have a very specific meanings that are not exactly what one  might  expect  from  the  name.  One of these  concepts/phenomena  are  the "koloniehaver", or colony gardens: modest plots, originally provided with small sheds (nowadays also with small houses), to which city Danes would retreat from time to time to relax and maybe even grow some flowers and vegetables. Today, some people even live permanently in those plots. What started as a temporary  escape from the urban  environment is becoming yet  another way of living. 

It is in one of these small plots with a cabin that  a permaculture initiative is being implemented. One of my PDC (permaculture design course) classmates designed her tiny piece of land according to permaculture principles, and this  spring  is  the  moment  chosen  to  bring  the  theory  into  practice.  Thus my  plan  for  last Saturday  was  to  aid  in  contributing  ideas,  adjusting  the  design  and  helping  with  some  of  the physical work.

Generally, when planning for this type of effort it is advisable to start thinking about the factors that are most difficult to change and work on them first. This means that, since the local climate usually cannot be directly influenced, in a small scale permaculture garden it is the buildings, the accesses and the geographical features (like hills and depressions, inclination, orientation, etc.) which are the first factors to address. Any action taken on these features must be oriented to energy saving, water management and nutrient accumulation.

The easiest of these tasks is the reshaping of the accesses to accommodate the flow of people and animals (in this case, a cat named Perle) and to allow space for the raised beds. Usually, these flows will run along the least resistant parts of the landscape, which in this small plot is greatly affected by the location of doors in the building and the property limits. Both water harvesting and efficient drainage are becoming more and more important, as predictions for the climate change in Nordic countries suggest an increase in the intensity of rains coupled with a decrease in their frequency. In the present case, a water collection system was easily implemented by connecting a big barrel to the cabin’s gutters. Stored rainwater will be used to appease the thirst of the plants in drier seasons. On the eastern side of the plot, however, water tends to accumulate and form  puddles  too  close  to  the  main  building,  clogging  the  soil,  endangering  the  wooden structure and potentially drowning any crop that might grow there. Therefore, actions such as soil levelling, channelling and the construction of a small pond might be viable solutions to redirect and productively employ that excess water. A raised bed system all over the plot will also ensure the right amount of moisture for the crops.

Secondary to the water management and accesses are the microclimates generated by the existing geology and geography, the present vegetation and the buildings. A wind tunnel seems to form in the corridor that runs along the main building and the hedge, with one proposed solution being to plant broadleaved, edible tree (such as lime tree, Tilia sp.) that will slow down the flow of air, thus protecting the crops that will one day inhabit the raised beds.

Regarding raised beds and microclimates, these beds themselves will contribute to the protection of the trees around them, while at the same time their inclination and orientation will provide proper sunlight. It's a huge bed; a fantastic way to ensure nutrition and moisture for the coming crops. In order to avoid nitrogen losses, it is  convenient to  protect it with some mulch  and/or some  cover crop, such as clover, strawberries, skovsyre or any other low, expansive plant ­ but not too invasive, or problems with the crops will arise!

Finally, considering the annual cycles, both autumn and spring are the right seasons to plant trees and bushes. High soil moisture and mild temperatures will allow them to get established in the soil before the most intense period of photosynthesis comes. And so, during the weekend we planted a dwarf  lemon  tree (protected  by  the shed),  berry  bushes (relatively  close  to  the  hedge,  again for protection) and some strawberries as a soil cover.

Saturday night caught us working. It was the perfect time to get in the house and prepare a plant nursery. Improvised pots can be prepared by rolling newspaper. Adding soil, water and some seeds will kickstart the growing season. When the temperatures rise and the seedlings are big enough, it will be time to bring them out to the (hopefully finished) raised beds.

I headed back home, happy for the intense workday and looking forward to the next session.

By Jaime Pérez-Molina writing from Copenhagen, Denmark 

In order to  generate  a  positive  and  lasting  impact  on  carbon sequestration,  the  development  and preservation of forests is of fundamental importance . It is therefore obvious that turning a barren, naked soil into a lush food forest is a highly desirable project. But what can we do if we already have an established forest on our land?

Wild forests offer many resources, ranging  from  timber  to  medicinal  herbs.  With appropriate management, additional value  can  also  be  created in  already forested land. Guess what grows in shady, somewhat humid environments? 
 
Yup, mushrooms. Fungi are naturally found in symbiosis with the forest. This means that mushrooms and trees cooperate to find resources and protect each other. Trees give shade and sugar to the mushrooms, and these in turn extend the reach of the trees in the soil, coating and protecting the surface of the roots and producing compounds that improve the resistance of the trees against pathogens. In addition, the mycelium (the fungal tissue that lies within the soil) helps in connecting all the roots of the forest together, creating a sort of "natural internet" – resources and information can travel  very  quickly  from  one  side  of  the  forest  to  another,  thus  allowing  the individuals to get ready to face the changes in the land. Other mushrooms are responsible for the degradation of fallen trees, returning nutrients back to the soil.

We can use  the  naturally  favorable  environment  of  the  forest  to  grow  our  own  mushrooms, especially those that feed on dead wood. The tree trunks in the forest will degrade anyway, so why not catalyze  that  process  and  get  something  in  return?  That is  one  of  the  projects  that  we  are performing in Byhaven2200 in Copenhagen, Denmark.

By A. Eyrich writing from Canada

The devil is in the details. This is true for many contexts and circumstances.  The other day I was having a conversation about the decline of insects and the topic of neonicotinoids arose. It didn’t take long for me to realize that apart from knowing that neonicotinoids are “bad” and are closely linked to the decline of important pollinator populations, my knowledge about them was very limited; I did not know exactly what they were or how they worked. I decided to read up on them and I thought I’d share some of what I learned with you in case you are ever in the same situation!

What are neonicotinoids?
Neonicotinoids (or neonics) are a group of chemicals that are closely related to nicotine (and actually, bees have shown a preference for nectar containing neonicotinoids). They are neuro-active chemicals that humans use to kill insects, notably those that are pests in relation to us and our activities. They are a fairly new class of insecticide, with Shell starting to research them in the 1980s and Bayer in the 1990s.  However, within the past two decades they have become the most widely used insecticides globally.

How do they work?
Neonicotinoids are neuro-active substances that work by interfering with the insect’s central nervous system. They kill or paralyze the insect by binding with the insect’s receptors for the nicotinic acetylcholine enzyme. Because insects, and especially bees, have more of these types of neuro-pathways than mammals and birds, the neonicotiniods disproportionally affect insects. Neonicotinoids are systemtic meaning they are incorporated into the plants through the soil or the leaves and then the plants spread them to the flowers and fruits. When the insects consume the plant, they ingest the chemical.

Neonicotinoids remain active for many weeks and thus one neonic application or treatment can last a long time. The reduced impact of neonics on mammals and birds and the effectiveness of neonic treated seeds and the lower rates of application than other environmentally disruptive pesticides contribute to their popularity (source).

What are they used for?
Neonicotinoids come in many forms (liquids, powder, granules, dust, dissolvable tablets etc.) and are used to control and minimize insects detrimental insects, or pests, in agriculture, greenhouses, gardens, lawns, ornamentals, etc. and to pre-treat seeds for a range of agricultural crops. Though there are billions of insects on the planet, a small handful are considered “pests” in relation to humans and human activities, and this is particularly true in agriculture. In our agricultural systems we grow a handful of species, usually in high densities and usually in monoculture systems that have little to no plant diversity and correspondingly low insect diversity. If a certain insect has a taste for the one crop we are growing (for example a caterpillar that only eats cabbage) then we have created a paradise for them! But we do not want them there because they will destroy our hard work and our yield. So in agriculture we often have to find ways to maintain a balance in the insect populations (between good and bad) to ensure that we do not loose our crop to the insects that have a preference for what we are growing. There are a number of ways to achieve this balance. One option is to apply chemical products to kill insects, and neonicotinoids fall into this.

So what is the big deal and why are they so bad?
The big deal is that neonicotinoids are wreaking havoc on many insect populations. They are not selective, and so, as they kill the “bad” insects, they also kill the numerous beneficial ones. Insects, even if you are squeamish, are extremely important to us and to the world. If we loose insects we loose the pollination services that aid in plant reproduction and provide a huge proportion of our food, and support uncountable food-webs in nature. The link between neonicotinoids and colony collapse disorder (CCD) in honeybee populations is one example that has been researched in recent years and has gained significant press. Research into the effects of neonicotinoids has lead to actions to halt their use. These include a temporary suspension on the use of certain neonicotinoids by the European Commission and a law passed in Ontario, Canada in 2015 to begin curbbing their use. However, some farmers are unhappy with bans on certain neonicotinoids and companies manufacturing neonicotinoids dispute their effects on bee populations. In July 2015 the UK government suspended the two-year ban on neonic use to fight the flea beetle in oilseed rape (the two year ban ends in December).

What can you do?

• Educate yourself. This blog presents a drop in the ocean of the information out there and thankfully this body of knowledge keeps growing. But, as with anything you research, make sure you are aware of where the information is coming from, who paid for the research, who undertook it, how the study was done, data interpreted, and who is disseminating it… etc. But you know all that.  
• Teach others
• Buy organic when possible (but be aware of how and what the certification means) and local!
• Encourage governments to take action to ban these products
• Don’t use them yourselves! When purchasing products look at the label and ensure that the active ingredient is not one of these neonicotinoids:  acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, nitenpyram, nithiazine, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam

References:
http://bees.pan-uk.org/neonicotinoids
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pollinators/chemicals.php
http://www.stir.ac.uk/news/2012/00/bumblebee-research/
http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/imidagen.pdf
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/mar/29/crop-pesticides-honeybee-decline
Francisco Sánchez-Bay.15 November 2014. The trouble with neonicotinoids  Science.
Erik Stokstad. 10 May 2013. How Big a Role Should Neonicotinoids Play in Food Security? Science
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557293/pdf/pone.0054819.pdf 
http://goo.gl/tNLZSI

By Mariola Acosta-Frances writing from Kampala, Uganda 
(A version of this blog is also published on the CCAFS site)

The office of the community development officer (CDO) in Nwoya district (North-West Uganda) starts getting really busy around December, when the main harvest season kicks off. During harvest period, dozens of angry men and women concentrate every week in the district office seeking advice on how to get a fair and peaceful solution to their domestic conflicts arising over who is the rightful owner of the harvest and can decide on its final use.

The positions are clear. On the one side, as heads of the households and owners of the land, men consider that any products produced on their property is rightfully theirs and thus it should be up to them to decide what to do with it and the profit it generates. On the opposite side, women feel that since they contribute most (if not all) of the agricultural labour, their husbands have no right to come and take all the harvest to spend it, they argue, on non-priority-items. The conflict is served.

Many other couples, however, do not go to the district government office and decide to settle the conflict at home, which unfortunately ends, in too many occasions, in cases of gender-based violence. Farmers feel that these gendered conflicts over harvest, are only likely to increase in years with extended drought or that are marked with other climatic shocks that would result in reduced yields. Indeed, over the last few years, the perception in Nwoya district is that gender-based violence has increased generally, with clear spikes during the main harvest season. A quick look at the district offices confirms the seriousness of the matter. Almost all offices have hung up posters specifically designed to assess possible pathways to solve and prosecute gender-based violence issues.

Even as the Land Policy (2013) of Uganda grants women and men equal rights to own (and co-own) land, the reality in Nwoya, as in many other districts in the country, is very different. In Nwoya most of the land is effectively held under customary arrangements, by which most Acholi women do not have the right to own land and are only given access to it through their male counterparts and other male family members. This fact not only translates into conflict over harvests but might have other direct consequences as well, including women being less willing to make long and medium-term investments - such as climate-smart technologies – in a land that they do not own.

This situation raises the question: ‘What impact do gender considerations at the national level really have if at the grassroots level traditional norms and beliefs are still predominant?’ A recent study of the CGIAR research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security is currently seeking to answer this and related questions by analyzing the framing of gender issues in climate change related policies in Uganda and to explore its impacts on climate change adaptation at grassroots.

You can find this blog and more on the CCAFS website. 

By A Eyrich writing from Canada

It’s summer, well, at least in the northern hemisphere where I am. And over the past few weeks I have been reading about pollinators and learning what I can do to encourage pollinator populations - a how to “plant for pollinators” if you will. I find it fascinating and I think other people might too, so in this blog I’d like to share some of the elements and resources I have found with you. Some things may seem like common sense after reading them – and in certain ways they are – but when I first approached the subject they were not immediately evident. Regardless, I hope that after reading this you, too, can begin to plant for pollinators whether on your porch, balcony, yard, or farm.

So, firstly, to ensure we are all on the same page, what is a pollinator? Pollinators are any “agent”, such as bees, wasps, butterflies, beetles, moths, birds, etc., that fertilize the female ovule of a flower by moving pollen from the male anthers to the female stigma of a flower. (See the diagram to see what pollination looks like for a tomato plant)

The fertilization services that pollinators, usually keystone species, provide are essential for ecosystems and agriculture. Estimates place the 2005 global value of pollinators in agriculture at €153 billion, or almost 10% of the total agriculture food production.  In the US, the services provided by pollinators are valued at 24 billion dollars. Honeybees account for $15 billion and native wild pollinators are estimated at $9 billion. 

Despite the importance of pollinators and the enormous value of their services, their populations are declining globally in both rural and urban areas. This decline has been attributed to loss of habitat, use of chemicals, monoculture cropping, and diseases. The loss of pollinators has implications for ecosystems, as many are keystone species, but also for agriculture production. One well-known example of dealing with declining and total loss of pollinator populations comes from the rapid conversion of vast swaths of land that was converted monoculture apple orchards in China (Read more: 1 2 3). In order to keep pollinators alive farmers would have needed to maintain and integrate a variety of pollinizer trees, however farmers choose not to do this and instead use that space for more apple trees. As a consequence, the farmers have had to resort to hand pollination in order to maintain apple yields. Though this practice has resulted short-term economic gains for apple farmers, the long-term sustainability remains to be seen. 

There is growing global recognition about the need to protect pollinators and this extends to encouraging everyday citizens – like you and me – to “plant for pollinators” or engage in “bee friendly farming”. And if I can do it, you can do this too no matter where you live. If you have any space, be it a balcony, porch, backyard, or large garden or farm, you can be part of the solution by planting for pollinators.

How can I plant for pollinators?

Well, although this will depend where you are in the world and on the seasons and vegetation you have in your location there are some principles you should consider and a plethora of resources freely available online. Here I will try to summarize some aspects you should consider to get to started and at the end there is a list of references to get you on your way.

Constant supply of flowers

Firstly, you should try to include a diversity of plants so that you have at least one plant that is in flower throughout the period when pollinators will be present. In the northern hemisphere this would be the spring, summer and early fall. This ensures that pollinators have a constant supply of nectar – their food. The lack of a continuous supply of flowering plants is one of the problems (in addition to chemicals inputs) with monocultures. This is also why having diversity in green walls, fences and windbreaks is also beneficial. Also, it is one reason honeybee hives are moved during the planting season to follow the flowering crops. 

Pollinator types and lifespans

Another element to consider is what pollinators you have present and what pollinators you want, this will also help inform your choice of plants. Furthermore, it is important to consider the pollinators’ lifespan and during what period they undergo each life stage. For instance, if you want a butterfly, such questions would include when is it in the caterpillar stage and what its needs during each life stage?   

Plant types to consider

Pollinators are generally attracted to flower colour and odour. You can choose native or non-native species; however wild pollinators are more suited to native plants. Wild plant relatives are also generally more “nutritious” and their nectar is easier to access than their domesticated counterparts. 

More resources 

If the above spiked your interest, you can referrer to the resources below for more tips to make your spaces pollinator friendly. If you're skeptical about trying this in your space, why don't you test it out at a friend, neighbour or family member's place first! Or, you could just consider sharing this information with them. As you and others start to adopt pollinator friendly practices these “islands” of refuge will break the “food deserts” many pollinators encounter and will grow and create what you can think of as larger “countries” and corridors that facilitate pollinator activities and encourage them. 

Tips to help you plan your space:
Pollination Canada 
Creating a bee-friendly garden (with tips for species to plant in an Canadian context)
Designing a Bee Garden 
Plant a bee-friendly garden (7 practical tips) 
Farming for pollinators
Gardening for bumblebees 

Blog references:

Tools for conservation and use of pollination services
Insect pollinators contribute $29 to US farm income
Fact Sheet: The Economic Challenge Posed by Declining Pollinator Populations
Pollinators Science Summary
Economic value of insect pollination worldwide estimated at 153 billions euroes 

By Gabriele Sutera writing from Kathmandu, Nepal
This blog is also available in Italian

April 26, 2015.The last strong tremor occurred around midday and right after we took the motorbike to go to the village. Along the road we come across several villages. The houses are all closed and shops’ shutters drawn down, they are like ghost villages. Far from the buildings people are sitting on the road and are only meagerly protected from the elements by improvised tents. People are too afraid to go back inside the houses. Since yesterday people have been living on the road or the fields next to their homes. The power of the earthquake’s first tremor is still very fresh in people’s minds. 

Veering off the Priviti highway, the main road that connects Kathmandu and Pokhara, we enter Ghorka‘s district. The further we travel, the more the damage from the earthquake becomes evident. Ten kilometers before Ghorka city we take left onto a gravel road. About half an hour later Tikaram, my colleague and friend, tells me to pull over and stop. We are in front of a stable of which only half a roof remains from its previous structure.  We park the motorbike and start walking; we are now in Mirkot’s VDC (Village Development Committee). We cross the little creek that runs alongside the village and then we follow the path uphill. Suddenly, Tikaram points to a little forest which borders the path and tells me “Eh Arjun, you see this forest? Ten years ago there was no forest”. Puzzled, I wonder why and he explains that a lot of people have left the village since they prefer to live in the city, in India or the in the Terai (Nepal’s lowland plains). The path continues uphill and the forest gives way to a landscape of hillside terraces, recently planted with rice and corn. At some point the path led us in front of two houses belonging to the village of Lapshishour. The inhabitants of the two houses are sitting in front them and are staring blankly at their houses; it is very hot at that time. Both houses are evidently damaged, but still standing. The metal roofs are intact but the thick stone walls, bonded with cement and soil and plastered with red colored soil are cracked. 

I ask if it would be possible to go inside the buildings to have a look. A tiny wooden staircase brings me up to a small balcony on the first floor. The floor is full of stones, dust and plaster flakes. A big hole, one meter high and almost two meters wide, allows the light to enter the rooms which, until then, had been used as bedrooms and storage rooms. From outside the buildings almost looked good, from inside, however, they are devastated. The inner walls have collapsed; the beds are covered in debris under which only the corners of the bed frame can be seen.  Six quintals of rice and three quintals of maize are entirely covered by dust and big stones. The conditions are similar in the adjacent building, just that in this building not even the door of the bedroom and storage room can be opened. The next harvest, and consequently period of income and food availability, is going to be in almost three months. We have to return to the valley before it gets dark. While we are walking with Tikaram we discuss the fate of the little village and its 100 residents. He thinks the earthquake marks the end of this community. At the village down in the valley the people invite us to drink tea and they tell us how violent the first tremor was.

I was at the farm when the first earthquake struck the day before, and it caused the water from the water storage tank next to which we were working tip and spill. It was supposed to be a happy day; we were harvesting cow horns with inside the BD500 preparation, a treasure for those who practice bio-dynamic farming. About one hour after the first tremor there was a second very strong earthquake. Our neighbor Gimre, who came to help us that day, literally jumped as far as possible from the water tank and held onto my arm squeezing it strongly through the shaking. We still did not realize how bad the situation was in the rest of the country. Right after lunch we heard the first news. I contacted a friend who was traveling toward Kathmandu and he described a destroyed city in chaos. Tremors continued throughout the night. The next morning, same as every other normal working day, the farm workers came punctually at 5.45, since the work day begins at 6 o’clock. At 10 o’clock after the daily breakfast meal of daal baat tarkari (lentils, rice and vegetables) the workers left to take care of their houses, belongings and families since they expected more earthquakes. Tikaram, the farm’s manager, was able to get in touch with his mother who lives in a village not far from the earthquake’s epicenter, about 20 km. Her house was partly destroyed. I proposed Tikaram to take the motorbike to pay a visit to his mother’s village, it was almost midday. 

In Nepal and in the area affected by the earthquake there are many villages such as Lapshishour. Right now all the attention is turned toward Kathmandu and highly populated residential areas. Rural areas and their inhabitants have not been not considered much by media as remote are very difficult to reach. Time for reconstruction is likely to be long and the rainy season is forthcoming. What will become of the smallholder farmers and the inhabitants of remote areas who rely almost fully on their own harvests and energies to survive?

By Jaime Pérez Molina writing from Copenhagen, Denmark

By Mariola Acosta Francés writing from Sri Lanka

The tasting room of a tea factory in Central Province, Sri Lanka was adorned with pictures of happy women flashing big toothy smiles, harvesting tea as colorful butterflies  floated idyllically in the fields. Looking at the pictures and reading the panels, visitors cannot help but feel that the plantation is both protective of the environment and socially conscious.

However, one doesn't need to live in Sri Lanka for a long time to learn that, in reality, most tea estates are far from being either environmentally friendly or socially fair. In fact, it is the contrary: most tea fields in Sri Lanka are vast swaths of heavily sprayed, monocropped land and the tea pickers, the majority of whom are women, are amongst the poorest communities in the country and face great financial struggles to feed and sustain their families. To anyone who has spent some time in Sri Lanka, these panels at the tea factory feel very misleading. When asked about this apparent contradiction, this specific factory justified their claims of environmental sustainability by their recent installation of some rubber trees in the otherwise monocropped tea fields. Their understanding of what constitutes “environmentally sustainable” clearly did not match mine. However, given that most of the visitors ended up buying considerable amounts of tea after the factory visit, it appears that their greenwashing strategy was successfully doing its job. This example from Sri Lanka is only one of the many cases that one can find, both in developed and developing countries, of greenwashing, where companies spend more time and money marketing their sustainable initiatives than they do in actually implementing meaningful changes. 

Since the 1980s, and partly as an antidote to greenwashing, an increasing number of certifications schemes have emerged with the aim to regulate products labeled as organic, socially conscious, sustainably produced, etc. These certifications ensure consumers that their products meet certain quality standards and thereby prevent fraudulent or misleading marketing. For example, take the cartoon on my cup coffee this morning which assured me, through a now famous frog, that it was Rainforest Alliance certified. This means that a third party certifying body has ensured that the coffee in my cup was produced following certain standards.

However, how much do we, as consumers, truly know about these certification standards? What are the fundamental differences between, for instance, a Fair Trade certified coffee versus a Rainforest Alliance certified coffee? Certainly there are many more differences and nuances between certification schemes than one would initially expect. With an increasing number of certification schemes, and with standards constantly being modified, it is sometimes difficult as a consumer to choose the product and brand with the certification label that best matches one’s values and needs. Indeed, the amount of information that those labels hide can be truly overwhelming for consumers.

For instance, think about an organic product and how it was produced. You no doubt have a vision of what would constitute organic production. However, does the version of organic production in your mind match the version of organic production that is represented on the label? The answer: maybe not.  Certification requirements for “organic” production systems can indeed differ significantly depending on the product you are producing and the country or region where you want to sell your products. Additionally, third-party certification is complex and expensive, and in many occasions beyond the reach of smallholder farmers interested in producing organically.

What if there was a more flexible type of organic certification that on the one hand allowed consumers to have a close look at the certification process and get to know first-hand the producers and on the other hand gave smallholder farmers access to the organic certification process so that they could get better prices for their products at the local market? A new system of alternative organic certifications seems to have found an answer.

Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) were initially conceived in 2004 as a surrogate for third party organic certification but have only recently emerged as a viable alternative in many countries around the globe (a comprehensive list of all PGS systems can be found at the IFOAM site). PGS is based on a set of standards and certification processes that are constructed in a participatory manner by different stakeholders of a specific community or region, such as organic producers, agronomists and consumers.  This different approach not only keeps certification costs to a minimum but also provides stakeholders with commonly agreed upon understanding of what constitutes “organic” production. 

Clearly, only locally produced products can be certified through a PGS system and most consumers must still rely on third party certification schemes for imported products. However, PGS offers a medium term solution where consumers can take an active role in the certification system and can learn first-hand about the local organic standards by visiting the smallholder producers and, in doing so, promote local smallholder organic cultivation. In practical terms, this means being able to personally judge whether a tea plantation is cultivating in a sustainable way or understanding exactly how the organic carrots I buy every week at the market are produced. PSG means promoting and giving credibility to local organic production and creating trust and a direct relationship with our local organic farmers. 

In 2013, GAEA members attended the first edition of the  Global Landscapes Forum, a side event of the COP19 Climate Change Conference in Warsaw. The aim of the conference was "to create a platform for positioning landscapes in the new international agreements on climate and sustainable development."

As the COP20 in Lima draws nearer, and preparations for the next Global Landscapes Forum are under way, read about the GAEA story on the conference website ... http://www.landscapes.org/warsaw-lima-glf-helped-grow-new-youth-initiative/.


Learn more about the conference:

source: http://www.landscapes.org/

By Javier Rodrìguez Ros writing from Riobamba, Ecuador

I was curious about why today, March 22nd was the date selected by the United Nations to celebrate World Water Day, and I have to admit that I couldn’t find the reason. Perhaps it is related to the beginning of spring and the thaw that turns ice into water, or perhaps it was just the result of an arbitrary selection determined by the busy schedule of International Days. Anyhow, let’s use the occasion to reflect upon the importance of water as a cultural, aesthetic, biophysical and public good, let’s think about water in the global context and its relation with human livelihoods. Even more importantly, let’s individually step back and look at the essential: what water means for each of us, what its impact is in our lives and how would we like it to be regarded and managed.

For the first time in history, more than half of world’s population lives in urban areas, registered in 2010. It is foreseen that this trend will continue, reaching 60% by 2030 and 70% in 2050. What consequences will this shift have concerning freshwater supply? In the context of such increasing global urbanization, it seems apparent that residential, commercial, municipal and industrial needs will play major roles in water management strategies. In this sense, efforts seem to be focused on the demand-side, for instance developing new freshwater-conserving technologies and urban planning approaches that minimize water consumption. Moreover, there is a generalized call for more effective data collection and monitoring of water supply and demand, an essential step if we are to improve freshwater management. This has been regarded by the private sector as an opportunity to participate in urban water supply and sanitation, arguing that their entry improves the efficiency and service quality of utilities. These claims have led to considerable controversy. 

The present situation and the projections for total population growth and continued urbanization imply a steady increase in global water requirements – some estimations point out that by 2030, total water demand will be 40% above the current accessible, reliable supply –. It is worth thinking about the consequences of these trajectories. One particular point of contention that requires serious, democratic reflection is that of water privatization. Contractual relationships between government and water companies have been developed in many occasions with the aim of reducing fiscal burdens, fostering asset sales and concessions. This strategy has been criticized for considering water as a resource dependent on the regulations of the market, which has led to rate increases in numerous communities where water has been privatized (i.e. in the USA, UK). Conceiving water as a simple marketable commodity can tempt water enterprises to maximize prices, with no obligation to provide water to those who cannot afford it in addition to compromising water quality standards. On the other hand, many have pointed out that this problem may only arise in developed countries, whereas in developing countries privatizing water services actually improved water quality and the scope of its distribution (Gabon, Ivory Coast, Ghana) where governments due to a number of economic and political reasons failed to provide adequate water supply. 

However, the main problem of water privatization that water users around the world have to face lies on the fact that water companies are accountable to shareholders and not to consumers, which in the long run can drive major conflicts: to reduce public control can be to reduce public rights. Poor communities could see their access to water jeopardized, which doesn’t align with the undeniable fact that water is a basic human right and need and is formally recognized in a UN resolution . Not less disturbing is the way in which many water privatization processes have been characterized by an evident lack of transparency and occultation of information, thus avoiding public social debate. Some privatization agreements carried cases of corruption, which doesn’t mean that privatization inherently leads to corruption. In contrast, in order to avoid these aforementioned problems, such processes require social debate, a high accountability and transparency, that considering its impact in all users. As it is said in my hometown: “if it is not transparent it is not water”. In this sense, it is imperative policy makers prioritize water security, meaning real reliable access to all users, for which it is essential to consider water as an undeniable essential right and public good. Taking this into accountand considering that water management issues vary considerably in each urban center, each context needs its own appropriate model. And principally, it requires the maximum consensus amongst public governmental institutions, private companies and fundamentally users, aiming to achieve a balanced vision of water for its social, environmental and cultural value.

But how do users perceive water? Do we have a clear opinion about how we want water to be managed and supplied? Recent surveys show that 77% of Americans don’t know where their water comes from. This is applicable to many European countries, pointing out the increasing alienation of urban populations from natural resources, preventing them from realizing its importance in their lives. But let’s take a look to the agricultural sector. 

Irrigated agriculture has contributed since ancient times to build the identity of numerous cultures in Mesopotamia, the Nile, the Niger, the Zana or the Indus Valley, all of them conscious of their dependence on the precious resource. Similarly, indigenous communities around the world established their cultures on the dynamic, humanist and spiritual notions of their natural resources, water invariably being the omnipresent resource that sustains life. These visions, far from being inconsistent or vague as some may state, provide an alternative point of view that can help us manage water in a more sustainable way from a social and environmental perspective. Moreover, present-day smallholder farmers who irrigate their crops are also completely aware of the importance of the environmental, socio-cultural and economic value of water. They depict an integrated vision of the different dimensions of irrigated agriculture with an accurate perception of how the water supply affects their short and long-term interests, in contrast to most urban users. 

Despite of all these factors, indigenous and poor rural communities and those who suffer directly from water crises are not represented in the World Water Council as well as in other water-relevant institutions, even though these institutions theoretically tend to envisage a common strategy over water resources and services for all actors of the “hydric community”. In this sense, it is especially astonishing how women have been disregarded in decision-making of water issues, taking into account the undeniable principal role of women in the provision of water for domestic use and more generally, in safeguarding water, especially amongst the poor in developing countries. Concerning irrigated agriculture, indigenous communities and family farmers have been historically forgotten in the development processes and access to productive resources and services, not just water, but also land, for being less productive according to old parameters of the green revolution. It can be affirmed that smallholders have been systematically excluded from the processes of planning, design and even evaluation of irrigation systems. In consequence, technical experts have very often failed to meet the social and environmental needs of irrigation systems, as well as to identify the causes of low performances, being therefore unable to implement adequate solutions. Recently researches are demonstrating that understanding and including smallholders’ and indigenous’ perceptions of water can contribute to building a more integrative vision of irrigated agriculture that is beneficial for all stakeholders. 

In this context, agro-ecological practices performed by many family farmers are showing a high degree of productivity and sustainability in agriculture, through a coherent culture of water use and conservation. It can be therefore stated that agro-ecological principles aim for the efficient use of water, through diverse practices like mulching, the use of green manures, terracing or organic farming practices that have the final goal of conserving hydrologic basins. Such practices are oriented to improve water circulation and nutrient distribution in the soil to reduce leaching to groundwater bodies, increase water retention or improve crops’ tolerance to droughts. These strategies are irrefutable evidences of how agro-ecological practices are sensible to water issues, reason why there has been a claim for a shift in water management by a recent UN Environment Programme report, from “water for food” to “water for multifunctional agro-ecosystems” (Boelee et al., 2011). However, this trend in which agro-ecologic principles appear to be increasingly frequent in international water and food security policy narratives sounds contradictory to the global reality of industrial agriculture. The increasing urbanization discussed at the beginning of the article doesn’t favor the implementation of the agro-ecological principles, given the major role of family agriculture in agro-ecologic systems. On the contrary, generalized rural exodus is facilitating massive land grabbing and vice versa, which ends up in the expansion of industrial agriculture. It seems therefore pertinent to analyze the impact of rural development policies in the present and future context of water management at a global scale. 

So what is water? A profitable commodity? A right? A cultural value? An environmental resource? As I see it, it is symbol of life, human patrimony, a common resource, and its present and future’s sustainability needs our involvement. Last week, the European Commission reacted positively for the first time to a European Citizens’ Initiative, Right2Water, which claimed for the right of European citizens to water and sanitation, asking as well for the exclusion of water supply and management of water resources from internal market rules and liberalization. Even though this shows the awareness of an active part of the European population and seems to be a success of participative democracy, the truth is that most of the population is becoming progressively less aware of our dependence on water and its value, which in turn makes us less prone to get personally involved in protecting our right to access it. On the other hand, many private enterprises are aware of the increasing competition for this resource, and are willing to make a profit out of it, managing water purely as an economic good. Thus, the EU promised to improve information for citizens through more transparent data management. Moreover, they declared their intention of removing water from the scope of the concessions directive. These encouraging strategies and the importance of the issue oblige us to keep more aware and involved than ever, given the large number of questions that remain unanswered: not considering concessions anymore, are other forms of privatization such as lease contracts or mixed ownership susceptible of being introduced? What is the current state of the privatizations announced for southern-European countries? Are there any plans to involve citizens durably in the decision processes of water management?

Beyond the consideration of water as a public good for its vital importance, water users need to be aware of the strategies that concern water supply, for which public debate needs to be stimulated and accessible to the population. There is a need to involve populations to harness creative and collaborative solutions in order to achieve sustainable water management. However, in both urban and rural agricultural scenarios it is necessary to understand what determines users’ perception of water and include them in decision-making processes concerning water management, actions that have not been undertaken so far in the sector.

to know more:

Boelee E et al. (2011) Ecosystems for water and food security, an ecosystem services approach to water and food security. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 179p.