Toward a Sustainable Recovery After Hurricane Mitch
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Lessons from the Field Reasons for Resiliency: Toward a Sustainable Recovery after Hurricane Mitch This report presents the methods and findings of an action research effort to measure and compare the impact of Hurricane Mitch on conventionally and agroecologically farmed lands in Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala. The project included farmers, promoters and local organizations as full partners in the research process, from beginning to end, and was de- signed to stimulate reflection and action based upon the lessons learned. Published by World Neighbors 2000 Printed in Honduras Also available in Spanish World Neighbors - Central America Office Apartado 3385 Tegulcigalpa HONDURAS tel: 504-230-2006 fax: 504-230-2004 email: [email protected] World Neighbors - International Headquarters 4127 NW 122nd Street Oklahoma City, OK 73120-8869 USA tel: (405) 752-9700 fax: (405) 752-9393 email: [email protected] www.wn.org Major support for this project was provided by the Ford Foundation, The Summit Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation and the Inter-American Foundation Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 5 Hurricane Mitch Action Research Key Results INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 7 The Impact of Mitch Root Causes An Uneven Pattern Sustainable Agriculture Conventional Agriculture Farmer to Farmer ACTION RESEARCH ....................................................................................................................... 13 Overview Plot Selection Research Teams Field Work Data Synthesis Feedback Sessions TECHNICAL RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 17 Overview Topsoil Soil Profiles Moisture Content Vegetation Cover Biophysical Damage Surface Erosion Gullies and Landslides SOCIAL IMPACT ............................................................................................................................ 23 Overview Participation Farmer Awareness A Learning Process Institutional Effects Local Government CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................ 29 Summary of Findings Recommendations REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 31 LIST OF PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS ...................................................1 .......................................................... 32 Acknowledgments This project would not have and Luís Caballero, of the aged the project and ensured been possible without the in- Panamerican School of Agricul- financial backing from World volvement of many people who ture at Zamorano, Honduras. Neighbors. gave their time and enthusiasm for a process they strongly More than 40 local institutions A documentary video entitled believed in. Foremost among involved in sustainable agricul- Changing Course complements those who should be thanked ture and rural development took this report. It was filmed and are the nearly 2,000 farmers and part in this project, providing produced by Nicole Betancourt promoters in Honduras, Nicara- technical staff, creating local with Bray Poor and other associ- gua and Guatemala who took research teams and identifying ates of Nota Bene Productions. responsibility for collecting vital farmers in the communities Without their donations of time data and testimony about the where they work to take part in and equipment, the video would impact of Hurricane Mitch at a the study. A full list of participat- not have been possible. time when they were still recov- ing institutions is included in the ering from the storm them- Appendix, and all are gratefully Finally, the generous and timely selves. acknowledged. support of several private foun- dations gave this project the Members of the regional re- World Neighbors staff supported necessary resources to move search team and national teams the project throughout. Raúl forward. Grants from the Ford in each country were instrumen- Zelaya, then Country Director for Foundation, The Rockefeller tal in carrying out this project. Honduras, and Oscar Foundation, The Summit Foun- Eric Holt-Giménez conceived of Castañeda, Country Director for dation and the Inter-American the project, designed the meth- Guatemala, provided strong Foundation provided essential odology and served as regional leadership in their respective backing for the research pro- coordinator. Gonzalo Rodríguez countries. Essential administra- cess. Additional grants for local served as associate regional tive support was provided by research teams in Nicaragua coordinator, and Ana Sonia Nelly Cañadas in Honduras, were made by Oxfam (Great Recinos served as regional Karla Calderón and Carla Britain), ADESO (Nicaragua), methodologist and compiled the Aguilar in Guatemala and Doris SWISSAID (Switzerland), qualitative results. Jorge Gómez in Nicaragua. COOPIBO (Belgium) and Catho- Cabrera and Grupo Kukulkan in lic Relief Services (USA). Guatemala supported regional From World Neighbors head- Intercooperacion (Swiss Aid) advocacy and outreach. quarters in Oklahoma, José and ANAFAE (the Honduran Quiñónez managed logistics, National Network for the Promo- Pascal Chaput was national Pawan Gulati kept accounts, and tion of Ecological Agriculture) coordinator in Nicaragua and Lala Ramirez provided adminis- provided funding for the re- contributed to the survey design. trative support. Jim Durbin search in Honduras. Maritza Zuleta served as na- assisted with grant proposals, tional coordinator for Honduras, and Jethro Pettit supported the and Manuel Camposeco served regional team and edited the as national coordinator for final report. Catheryn Koss Guatemala. All three provided designed and produced the invaluable skills and leadership. English report, and Raúl Zelaya Data was analyzed by Nicolas and Nelly Cañadas translated Arroliga of Geodigital, in Nicara- and produced the Spanish gua, and by Angel Rodríguez version. Ron Burkard encour- 3 Executive Summary Hurricane Mitch The project was designed to plots of farmland that were include farmers, promoters selected for their similarities In October of 1998 Central and local organizations as full in nearly every respect. They America was devastated by partners in the research shared the same topography, Hurricane Mitch, the worst process from beginning to angle of slope, location on the natural disaster to strike the end, and to stimulate reflec- watershed, intensity of the region in 200 years. A tropi- tion and action based upon storm, type of crops, etc. The cal depression with heavy the lessons learned. In only variation was that one rainfall caused widespread addition, the project aimed to was agroecologically farmed flooding and landslides, inform decision makers and and the other conventionally destroying homes, bridges, donors, and to influence farmed. roads, crops and animals, recovery priorities and poli- impacting 6.4 million people. cies. A total of 1,804 plots were surveyed (902 agroecological After the storm, much of the World Neighbors agreed to and 902 conventional) in 360 damage appeared to be sponsor and facilitate the communities spanning 24 related to poor land use and research, and helped obtain departments of the three deforestation. The damage to support from the Ford, countries. Of these, 1,738 agricultural land was espe- Rockefeller, Summit and were found to have valid data cially uneven: farms using Inter-American Foundations. and were included in the soil and water conservation Additional support for re- analysis. Data was pro- methods and other search teams in Nicaragua cessed for each of the three agroecological practices was provided by Oxfam countries and the results seemed to have survived (Great Britain), ADESO were confirmed and validated better than those using con- (Nicaragua), SWISSAID in workshops with partici- ventional farming methods. (Switzerland), COOPIBO pants at the local, regional (Belgium) and Catholic Relief and national levels. Action Research Services (USA). Intercooperacion (Swiss Aid) Participating farmers were Many similar observations and ANAFAE (the Honduran also interviewed about their were shared among farmers National Network for the farming practices, economic and promoters involved in Promotion of Ecological and labor investments, crop Farmer to Farmer, a Agriculture) provided funding types and yields, crop losses grassroots movement promot- for the research in Honduras. and observations of the ing sustainable agriculture in Forty local and international hurricane’s impact. Farmers Central America. In January organizations joined the were not objects of the study, 1999, a research team em- project, forming 96 local but rather involved subjects barked on a participatory research teams to carry out and took an active role in the action research project to field work in Honduras, Nica- data collection and analysis, compare the impact of Hurri- ragua and Guatemala. using and developing their cane Mitch on agroecological own knowledge and technical and conventional farms. The study examined paired abilities. 5 Executive