Linking Agricultural Biodiversity and Food Security: The Valuable Role of Sustainable Agriculture Author(s): Lori Ann Thrupp Source: International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 76, No. 2, Special Biodiversity Issue (Apr., 2000), pp. 265-281 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Royal Institute of International Affairs Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2626366 Accessed: 29/09/2010 16:47
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://links.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://links.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Royal Institute of International Affairs and Blackwell Publishing are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-).
http://links.jstor.org Linkingagricultural biodiversity and foodsecurity: the valuable role of agrobiodiversityforsustainable agriculture
LORI ANN THRUPP
There is a growingrealization worldwide thatbiodiversity is fundamentalto agriculturalproduction and food security,as well as a valuable ingredientof environmentalconservation. Yet predominantpatterns of agriculturalgrowth have eroded biodiversityin, for example, plant genetic resources,livestock, insectsand soil organisms.This erosion has caused economic loss,jeopardizing productivityand food security,and leading to broader social costs. Equally alarmingis the loss of biodiversityin 'natural'habitats from the expansion of agriculturalproduction to frontierareas. The conflictsbetween agricultureand biodiversityare by no means inevitable. With sustainablefarming practices and changes in agricultural policies and institutions,they can be overcome. Historicalevidence and current observation show that biodiversitymaintenance must be integratedwith agriculturalpractices-a strategythat can have multipleecological and socio- economic benefits,particularly to ensurefood security.Practices that conserve, sustainablyuse and enhance biodiversityare necessaryat all levels in farming systems,and are of criticalimportance for food production,livelihood security, healthand the maintenanceof ecosystems. This articlesummarizes the main conflictsand complementaritiesbetween biodiversityand agriculture,discusses the ecosystem services provided by agriculturalbiodiversity, and highlightsprinciples, policies and practicesthat enhance diversityin agroecosystems.
* Thisarticle is extractedfrom a longerresearch report by L. A. Thrupp,Cultivating diversity: agrobiodiversity andfoodsecurity (Washington DC: WorldResources Institute, i998). To order,please contact WRI at
InternationalAffairs 76, 2 (2000) 265-28I 265 LoriAnn Thrupp
Agrobiodiversity as a basis for production and survival Biodiversityand detailedknowledge about it have allowed farmingsystems to evolve since agriculturebegan some I2,000 years ago.' Although sometimes perceived as an enemy of biodiversity,agriculture is actuallybased on richly diversebiological resources. Likewise, agriculture comprises a varietyof managed ecosystems,or agroecosystems,that benefit from resources in naturalhabitats. Agriculturalbiodiversity (or agrobiodiversity)is a fundamental feature of farm- ing systemsaround the world. It encompassesmany types of biologicalresources tied to agriculture,including:
* geneticresources-the essentialliving materials of plantsand animals; * edible plantsand crops,including traditional varieties, cultivars, hybrids and othergenetic material developed by breeders; * livestock(small and large,lineal breeds or thoroughbreds)and freshwaterfish; * soil organismsvital to soil fertility,structure, quality and health; * naturallyoccurring insects, bacteria and fungithat control insect pests and diseasesof domesticatedplants and animals; * agroecosystemcomponents and types(polycultural/monocultural, small-/ large-scale,rain-fed/irrigated, etc.) indispensablefor nutrient cycling, stability and productivity;and * 'wild' resources(species and other elements)of naturalhabitats and land- scapes thatcan provide ecosystemfunctions and services(for example, pest controland stability)to agriculture.
Agrobiodiversitytherefore includes not only a wide varietyof species and genetic resources,but also the many ways in which farmerscan exploit bio- logical diversityto produce and manage crops,land, water,insects and biota.2 The concept also includes habitatsand species outside farmingsystems that benefitagriculture and enhance ecosystemfunctions.3 One example is a source of hostplants for natural enemies and predatorsof agriculturalpests. As recordedby Egyptian,Mesopotamian, Chinese and Andean civilizations, ancient agriculturalsettlements made use of a varietyof plants,livestock and agroecosystems.Over manycenturies, farmers have employednumerous prac- ticesto use, enhance and conservethis diversity in traditionalfarming systems. Many such practices continue today: the use of particularspecies for pest controland the integrationof treesand woody shrubsinto farmingsystems are two examples. Wild plant and animal species in surroundinghabitats also provide servicesand value to the farmingsystem. Such practicesare a basis of survivaland livelihoodfor millions of people.
I Genetic Resources Action International,'Biodiversity in agriculture:some policy issues', IFOAM Ecology andFanning, January I994, p. I4. 2 H. Brookfieldand C. Padoch, 'Appreciatingagrodiversity: a look at the dynamismand diversityof indigenous farmingpractices', Environment 36: 5, I994, pp. 7-44. 3 H. Brookfield,'Postscript: the population-environmentnexus', Global EnvironmentalChange 5: 4, I995, pp. 38I-93.
266 Linkingagricultural biodiversity andfood security
The majorityof staplecrops cultivated and consumedacross the world today originatedin a few areas,mostly in Asia, Africaand Latin America,often called 'centresof diversity'centres, and crop diversityis still most concentratedin these regions, where it served as a basis for the growth of important civilizations.4From ancienttimes to the presentday, plant collectinghas also enhanced agrobiodiversity.Throughout the colonial period,the searchfor and collectionof new plantsand foodswas a drivinginterest of European explorers and played an importantrole in colonial expansion. Traditionalfarming methods that maximize diversity include the small-scale polyculturalsystems, sometimes called 'home gardens',that are stillfound today in many regions, including Central America, South-East Asia, sub-Saharan Africaand even some partsof Europe. Numerous studiesshow that shifting cultivationsystems, especially in traditionalforms, are agroecologicallydiverse and containnumerous plant species. These can also be relativelysustainable in certainareas of theworld, especially where economic and demographicpressures forgrowth are low.5 Other methods that supporthigh biodiversityare traditionalagroforestry systems,such as the shaded coffeeplantations common throughoutCentral and South America,6which commonlycontain well over ioo annual and perennial plant species per field.7Farmers often integrate leguminous trees,fruit trees, treesfor fuelwood and typesthat provide fodder on theircoffee farms. The trees also providehabitat for birds and animalsthat benefit the farms.For example,a shaded coffeeplantation in Mexico supportsup to i8o speciesof birdsthat help controlinsect pests and disperseseeds.8 Ethnobotanicalstudies show that the Tzeltal Mayans of Mexico can recognize more than I,200 species of plants, while the P'urepechas recognize more than goo species and Yucatan Mayans some 5oo.9 Such knowledge is used to make productiondecisions in various circumstances,for example to selectspecies that are suitedfor diverse soil types, to expand optionsof cropsto cultivateand/or for conservation purposes. Anotherimportant dimension of traditionalagrobiodiversity is the use of so- called 'folkvarieties', also known as landraces.Defined as 'geographicallyor eco- logicallydistinctive populations [of plants and animals]which are conspicuously diversein theirgenetic composition','0 landraces are productsselected by local
4 P. Raeburn, The lastharvest: the genetic gamble that threatens to destroyAmerican agriculture (New York: Simon& Schuster,I995), p. 40. For extensivediscussion and review of diverseshifting cultivation systems, see S. Hecht, L. A. Thrupp and J. Browder, 'Diversityand dynamicsof shiftingcultivation: myths, realities, and human dimensions', draftpaper (WashingtonDC: World Resources Institute,I996); also H. Brookfieldand C. Padoch, 'Appreciatingagrodiversity: a look at the dynamismand diversityof indigenous farmingpractices', Environment36: 5, I994; and literaturefrom the SustainableAgriculture Program of the International Institutefor Environment and Development (IIED). 6 R. Greenburg,'Phenomena, comment and notes', Smithsotnian25: 8, I994, pp. 24-7. 7 M. Altieri,'Traditional farmingin Latin America', The Ecologist2I: 2, I99I, p. 93. 8 Greenburg,'Phenomena, comment and notes'. 9 Altieri,'Traditional farmingin Latin America'. IO A. H. D. Brown, 'Isozymes, plant population genetic structure,and genetic conservation',Theoretical AppliedGenetics 52, I978, pp. I45-57, cited in D. Cleveland et al., 'Do folk crop varietieshave a role in sustainableagriculture?', Bioscience 44: I I, I 994, pp. 740-5 I.
267 LoriAnn Thrupp farmersover time fortheir various production benefits." In some areas in the Andean region, for example, farmershave developed complex techniquesto select,store and propagatethe seeds of landraces. The numerouspractices used forenhancing biodiversity are tied to the rich culturaldiversity and local knowledgethat support the livelihoodof agricultural communities.In many societies,rural women are particularlyknowledgeable about plantand treespecies and about theiruses forhealth care, fuel and fodder, as well as food.'2 Many principlesfrom traditional systems, as well as intuitive knowledge,are appliedtoday in both large-and small-scaleproduction. In fact, 'traditionalmultiple cropping systems still provide as much as 20 per cent of the world food supply'.'3 These componentsof agrobiodiversitytherefore yield an arrayof benefits. They contributeto productivity,resilience in farmingsystems, income gener- ation,nutritional values, and food and livelihoodsecurity for numerous societies. Agriculturalbiodiversity also providesecosystem services on farms,such as pol- lination,fertility and nutrientenhancement, insect and disease management, and waterretention. Moreover, agrobiodiversityhas great value for science and technological discoveryin crop production.Starting in thelate nineteenthand earlytwentieth centuries, scientistswho recognized the value of diverse crop varieties discoveredplant breedingmethods that have boosted crop productivity.The innovativeuse of plant genetic resourceshas continued to be importantfor scientificadvances in plantand livestockbreeding and seed improvementsup to the presentday. Access to germplasmis vitalfor modem agriculture,and forthe developmentof medicinalproducts, fibres and foods. In the United States,for example,for two major crops-soybeans and maize-exotic germplasmadds a value of$3.2 billionto the nation's$i billionannual soybean production and $7 billion to its $I8 billion annual maize crop. 4 Agrobiodiversitytherefore contributesto industrialagribusiness as well as to traditionalsmall-scale farming and livelihoods.
" Cleveland et al., 'Do folk crop varietieshave a role?'. See also National Research Council, Alternative agriculture(Washington DC: National Academy Press, I989). 12 For documentationon women's local knowledge, see publicationsfrom the ECOGEN (Ecology and Gender) programme,Department of Geology, Clark University,Worcester, MA. See also J. Abramowitz and R. Nichols, 'Women and agrobiodiversity',Societyfor International DevelopmentJournal on Development,I993; and L. A. Thrupp, 'Women, wood, and work: in Kenya and beyond', Unasylva:FAO Journalof Forestry, December I984. I3 UNDP, Agroecology:creating the synergismsfor sustainable agriculture (New York: United Nations, I995), p. 7, citingC. A. Francis,ed., Multiplecropping systems (New York: Macmillan, I986). 14 H. Shand, Human nature:agricultural biodiversity andfarm basedfood security (Ottawa: Rural Advancement Foundation International,I997).
268 Linkingagricultural biodiversity andfood security
Agrobiodiversity losses Agrobiodiversitylosses andglobalfood insecurity
Developments in agricultureover the last 30 years have broughtsignificant increasesin global production,partly as a resultof expansionof cropland,partly throughchanges in technologiesover time. However, at the same time, the model and patternsof industrialagriculture and the 'Green Revolution' have exacted significantbiophysical and socio-economic costs and disadvantagesin manyparts of the world, in both North and South. One of the main concerns has been the seriousdegradation of naturalresources, including soils, water and biodiversity,in and around agriculturalland. These trendsnot only do social harm,but also can undermineproductivity. This in turncontributes to food insecurity,which affectssome 8oo millionto i billionpeople worldwide.At the same time, naturalresources (including diverse plant genetic resources) are distributedunequally within nations,in regions and across the world. These trendspose tremendouschallenges to effortsto meet growingdemand forfood while conservingresources-one of the most importantbeing the need to addressthe threatfrom the erosion of agrobiodiversity. The erosionof agrobiodiversityis manifestedin manydifferent ways and on many differentlevels, both within farmingsystems and offfarms, in natural habitatsand in communitiesaround the world. The variousthreats to biodiversity emanatefrom common root causes, linked to prevailingassumptions, conflic- tingpolicies and inappropriateproduction practices, as explainedbelow.
Geneticdiversity Although people consume approximately7,000 species of plants,only I50 species are commerciallyimportant, and about I03 species account forgo per cent of the world'sfood crops.Just three crops-rice, wheat, and maize- account forabout 6o per cent of the caloriesand 56 per cent of the protein people derive from plants. Reduction in diversityoften increases vulnerabilityto climaticand otherstresses, raises risks for individual farmers, and can underminethe stabilityof agriculture. In Bangladesh,for example, 'promotionof HYV [high-yieldvarieties] rice monoculturehas decreaseddiversity, including nearly 7,000 traditionalrice vanre- tiesand manyfish species. The productionof HYV riceper acrein I986 dropped by io per centfrom I972, in spiteof a 300 per centincrease in agrochemicaluse per acre."5 In the Philippines,HYVs have displacedmore than 300 traditional ricevarieties that had been the principalsource of food forgenerations. In India, by I968 theso-called 'miracle' HYV seed had replacedhalf of the nativevarieties; but these seeds were not high-yieldingunless cultivated on irrigatedland with highinputs of fertilizer,which poor farmerscannot afford.'6 As a consequence, in manyareas the expectedproduction increases were not realized.
'5 Mian Hussein, 'Regional focus news: Bangladesh', Ecologyand Farming:Global Monitor,International Federationof OrganicAgricultural Movements (IFOAM), JanuaryI994, p. 20. I6 V. Shiva, 'The Green Revolution in the Punjab', TDieEcologist 2I: 2, I99I, pp. 57-60.
269 LoriAnn Thrupp
Table I: Extent of genetic uniformityin selected crops
Crop Country Number of varieties
Rice SriLanka From2,000 in I959 to fewerthan ioo today; 75% descend froma common stock Rice Bangladesh 62% of varietiesdescend from a common stock Rice Indonesia 74% of varietiesdescend froma common stock Wheat United States 50% of crop in 9 varieties Potatoes United States 75% of crop in 4 varieties Soybeans United States 50% of crop in 6 varieties
Source:World ConservationMonitoring Centre, I992; Brian Groombridge,ed., Globaldiversity: status of the earth's living resources (London: Chapman& Hall, I992).
In Africa,the introduction of GreenRevolution technologies has also reduced diversity.In Senegal,for example, a traditionalcereal caloed fonio (Panicum laetum), which is highlynutritious as well as robustin lateriticsoils, has been threatened with extinctionbecause of its replacementby modem crop varieties.'7In the Sahel, too, reportsconfirm that traditionalsystems of polycultureare being replaced with monoculturesthat cause furtherfood instability.'8(For a sum- maryof the extentof geneticuniformity in certainkey crops,see table i.) Homogenizationalso occursin high-valueexport crops. Nearly all the coffee trees in South America, for example, are descended froma single tree in a botanicalgarden in the Netherlands.Coffea arabica was firstobtained from forests of south-westEthiopia thathave virtuallydisappeared. 9 Uniformvarieties are also common in exportcrops of bananas,cacao and cotton,replacing traditional diversevarieties.20 Such changes have increasedproductivity, but the risksof narrowingvarietal selection have become clear over time. In the North, similarlosses in crop diversityhave occurred (see table 2). Many fruitand vegetablevarieties listed by the US Departmentof Agriculture in I903 are now extinct.Of more than7,ooo apple varietiesgrown in the United Statesbetween I804 and I904, 86 per cent are no longercultivated, and 88 per cent of 2,683 pear varietiesare no longer available.2' Evidence fromEurope shows similartrends. Thousands of varietiesof flax and wheat vanished after HYVs were introduced.22Similarly, varieties of oats and ryeare also declining
'7 IFOAM, 'Biodiversity:crop resourcesat riskin Africa',Ecology and Farming:Global Monitor,January I994, p. 5. I8 R. D. Mann, 'Time runningout: the urgentneed fortree plantingin Africa', The Ecologist20: 2, I990, pp. 48-53. I9 Cary Fowler and Pat Mooney, Shattering:food,politics, and theloss ofgenetic diversity (Tucson: Universityof Arizona Press, I990), p. I04. 20 Ibid.,p. 63. 21 Ibid. 22 J. Harlan and Bennett, quoted in Pat Mooney, Seeds ofthe earth: a privateor public resource? (Ann Arbor: Canadian Council forInternational Cooperation, I979), p. I2.
270 Linkingagricultural biodiversity andfood security
Table 2: Reduction of diversity in fruitsand vegetables, 1903-1983a
Vegetable Taxonomic name No. in 1903 No. in I983 Loss (%)
Asparagus Asparagusofficinalis 46 I 97.8 Bean Phaseolusvulgaris 578 32 94.5 Beet Beta vulgaris 288 I7 94.I Carrot Daucuscarota 287 2I 92.7 Leek Alliumampeloprasum 39 5 87.2 Lettuce Lactutasativa 497 36 92.8 Onion Alliumcepa 357 2I 94.I Parsnip Pastinacasativa 75 5 93.3 Pea Pisamsativum 408 25 93.9 Radish Raphanussativus 463 27 94.2 Spinach Spinaciaoleracea I09 7 93.6 Squash Cucurbitaspp. 34I 40 88.3 Turnip Brassicarapa 237 24 89.9 a Varietiesin NSSL Collection. Source:Cary Fowler and Pat Mooney, The threatenedgene:food, politics and theloss ofgenetic diversity (Cambridge: Lutworth Press, 1990). in Europe.23In Spain and Portugal,various legumes that had been an important part of the local diet are being replaced by homogeneous crops, and in the Netherlands,four crops are grown on 8o per cent of Dutch farmlands.24 Livestockis also sufferinggenetic erosion. The FAO estimatesthat at least one traditionalbreed of livestockdies out somewherein the world everyweek. Many traditionalstrains have disappearedas farmersfocus on new breeds of cattle,pigs, sheep and chickens.25Of the 3,83 I breeds of cattle,water buffalo, goats,pigs, sheep, horses and donkeysbelieved to have existedat the beginning of the twentiethcentury, I6 per cent have become extinct,and a furtherI 5 per cent are rare.26Some '474 extant[livestock] breeds can be regardedas rare.A further6I7 have become extinctsince I892.'27 Over 8o breeds of cattle are found in Africa,and some are being replacedby exotic breeds.28These losses weaken breedingprogrammes that could improve hardinessof livestock,and also reduce the resourcesavailable for future adaptation.
23 Renne Vailve, 'The decline of diversityin European agriculture',The Ecologist23: 2, pp. 64-9. 24 Ibid. 25 D. Plucknett,and M. E. Horne, 'Conservation of genetic resources',Agriculture, Ecosystems, and the Environment42, I992, pp. 75-92, cited in N. Smith. 'The impact of land use systemson the use and conservationof biodiversity',draft paper (WashingtonDC: World Bank, I996), p. 23. 26 S. J. G. Hall and J. Ruane, 'Livestock breeds and theirconservation: a global overview', Conservation Biology7: 4, I993, pp. 8 I5-25, cited in Smith, 'The impact of land use systems',p. 43. 27 S. J.G. Hall, cited in Brian Groombridge,ed., Globalbiodiversity (London: Chapman & Hall, I992), p. 397. 28 J. E. 0. Rege, 'Internationallivestock centerpreserves Africa's declining wealth of animal biodiversity', DiversityIO: 3, I994, pp. 2I-5, cited in Smith, 'The impact of land use systems',P. 43.
27I LoriAnn Thrupp
Table 3: Past crop failures due to genetic uniformity
Date Location Crop Effects
I 846 Ireland Potato Famine i 8oos Sri Lanka Coffee Farmsdestroyed I940S United States Various Crop loss to insectsdoubled I 943 India Rice Famine I960S United States Wheat Rust epidemic I970 United States Maize $I billion loss I 970 Philippines, Indonesia Rice Tungo virusepidemic I974 Indonesia Rice 3 milliontons destroyed I984 Florida,US Citrusfruits i8 milliontrees destroyed
Source:World ConservationMonitoring Centre, I992; Brian Groombridge,ed., Globaldiversity: status of the earth's living resources (London: Chapman& Hall, I992).
Increasedvulnerability topests and diseases The homogenizationof speciesand of farmingsystems increases vulnerabilityto insect pests and diseases. Purely monoculturalsystems are highlysusceptible to attack,which can devastatea uniformcrop, especiallyon large plantations.History offers many examplesof serious economic loss and sufferingarising from reliance on monocultural systems(see table 3). Among the best known are the potato famineof Ireland duringthe nineteenthcentury, a wine-grape blight that wiped out valuable vines in both France in the nineteenthcentury and the United States in Californiain the I970s and I980s, a virulentdisease (Sigatoka) that damaged extensive banana plantationsin Central America in recent decades and a devastatingmould thatinfested hybrid maize in Zambia. In addition, there has been a serious decline in soil organismsand soil nutrients.Beneficial insects and fungi sufferunder agriculturethat involves heavypesticide inputs and uniformstock, again makingcrops more susceptible to pest problems.The consequentlosses can reduce productivity.In addition, many insects and fungi commonly seen as enemies of food production are actually valuable-for pollination, as contributionsto biomass, in natural nutrientproduction and cycling,and as naturalenemies to insectpests and crop diseases. Mycorrhizae,the fungi that live in symbiosiswith plant roots, are essentialfor nutrientand water uptake.29But agrochemicalsfrequently kill naturalenemies and beneficialinsects, as well as the 'target'pest. 'Pesticides [especiallywhen overused] destroya wide arrayof susceptiblespecies in the ecosystemwhile also changing the normal structureand function of the
29 D. Tillman, D. Wedline and J. Knops, 'Productivityand sustainabilityinfluenced by biodiversityin grasslandecosystems', Nature 379: 22, I996, pp. 7I8-20.
272 Linkingagricultural biodiversity andfood security
ecosystem.'30The disruptionin the agroecosystembalance caused by heavyuse of agrochemicalscan lead to perpetualresurgences of pests and outbreaksof new pests,as well as provokingresistance to pesticides.This disturbingcycle often leads farmersto applyincreasing amounts of pesticidesor to changeproducts- a strategythat is not only ineffective,but furtherdisrupts the ecosystemservices and elevatescosts. This 'pesticidetreadmill' has occurredin countlesslocations.3I Reliance on monoculturalspecies and the decline of naturalhabitat around farmsalso reducesor eliminatesbeneficial insects in the agriculturalecosystem.
Additionallosses-farming systems, habitats, nutrition, and culturaldiversity/knowledge Diverse farmingsystems have also been displaced,eroded and eliminated,in many areas,as monoculturalmodels have become predominant.For example, therehas been a decline in traditionalagroforestry, polycultural home gardens, indigenous shiftingcultivation systems and other mixed farmingpractices. These changes affect the broad agriculturallandscape, transformingthe countrysidefrom a richmosaic of cropsand plantsto a monotonousuniformity. Agriculturalexpansion has also reduced the overall biodiversityof natural habitats,including tropical forests, grasslands and wetland areas, throughthe processof land conversion.The loss of biodiversityin habitatssurrounding agri- culturalareas results in the disruptionof the ecosystemservices provided by that biodiversity,such as pollination,water retention,nutrient cycling and decom- position.These disturbancesin turncan resultin productivitydeclines both on and offfarms. Likely future trends of croplandexpansion will tend to aggravate theselosses and ecosystemdisruptions. Evidence fromsome areas also suggeststhat a decline in diversityof food varietiesalso adverselyaffects nutrition.32 In many cases where 'modern' food marketsand development technologieshave been introduced,people have stopped growing and consuminghighly nutritious and diverse native foods, such as pulses,legumes and/or high-protein traditional grains, and have replaced them with 'modern' monoculturecereals, such as uniformwheat and maize varieties,which are lessnutritious.33 In theprocess, local knowledgeand cultural traditionsrelated to use of diverseplant resourceshave been lost as uniform industrialagricultural technologies predominate.34 In sum, the loss of agrobiodiversityhas immediaterisks and costs-financial and social-for producers,communities and nations,and long-termeffects on agriculturalproductivity, as well as jeopardizingfood security.Evidence indicates thatsuch changescan decreasesustainability and productivityin farmingsystems.35
30 D. Pimentelet al., 'Conservingbiological diversity in agricultural/forestrysystems', Bioscience 42: 5, I992, p. 360. 3I S. Swezey, Breakingthe circle of poison (San Francisco, CA: Food First,I985). 32 IIED, Hidden harvestsproject overview: sustainable agriculture programme (London: IIED, I995). 33 Shiva, 'The Green Revolution in the Punjab'. 34 Miguel Altieri,Agroecology: the scientific basis of sustainable agriculture (Boulder: Westview, I987); UNDP, Benefitsof diversity (New York: UNDP, I992); and UNDP, Agroecology. 35 These examples are largelyfrom Miguel Altieri,'Traditional farmingin Latin America', and Altieri, Agroecology.
273 LoriAnn Thrupp
Win-win approaches to biodiversity and agriculture The need to overcome conflictsand build complementaritiesbetween agricul- tureand biodiversityposes a major challengeto humanity.Changes are needed at all levels,ranging from major policy reformsby governmentsand institutions to implementationof new practicesat thelocal levelby communitiesand farmers. Experienceon the ground-literally-providespromising examples and oppor- tunitiesfor conserving diversity in agriculture,but such effortsmust be strongly supportedand widelymultiplied.
Confrontingthe causes of agrobiodiversity loss In addressingthe reasonsfor agrobiodiversity loss it is helpfulfirst to understand the proximatecauses, which are oftentied to the use of unsustainabletech- nologies and degradingland-use practices, such as relianceon uniformvarieties and the heavy use of agrochemicals.Yet if we look beyond these we see that thereare more deeplyrooted factors underlying the erosionof agriculturalbio- diversitythat determine the farmers'use of particulartechnologies and practices (see table 4). These are oftenbased on disparitiesin resourcedistribution, the dominance of industrialagricultural policies and institutionsthat support and contributeto inappropriatefarming practices and technologies,and pressures frombusinesses that promote uniform monocultures and chemicals. Moreover,institutions and companiesfrom developed countrieshave gained controlof intellectual property rights (patents) of seedsand othergenetic resources. This predominantpattern of ownershipof intellectualproperty rights tends to give transnationalcompanies unfair advantages in exploitingthe diversebiological resourcesof the tropics,while at the same time it oftenconstrains indigenous people's and local farmers'access. Related causesof agrobiodiversityloss include the depreciationand devaluationof diversityand accumulatedlocal knowledge, and marketand consumer demands for standardizedproducts. Demographic pressuresmay also contributeto the losses,but addressingthese oftenrequires consideration of broader socioeconomic structures,ways of overcoming inequities,and the provisionof economic and educationalopportunities for the ruralpoor. These longer-termchallenges need concertedattention over time.
Diversitythrough sustainable agriculture principles and practices Effectiveapproaches to the conservationand enhancementof agrobiodiversity fitwithin a generalframework of sustainableagriculture, merging the goals of productivity,food security,social equity and ecological soundness.A shiftto sustainableagriculture requires changes in production methods,models and policies, as well as the fullparticipation of local people. Scientificadvance in geneticscan have a significantrole in thisapproach, but need to be re-oriented towardsusing and enhancingdiversity in farmingsystems.
274 Linkingagricultural biodiversity andfood security
Table 4: Addressing causes of biodiversity losses linked to agriculture
Problems Proximate causes Underlying causes (for all problems)
Erosion of genetic resources Dominance of uniform * Industrial/GreenRevolution (livestockand crops/plants HYVs and monocultures, paradigmthat stresses - threatensgood security biases in breeding uniformmonoculture - increasesrisks methods,weak * Inequitable distributionof - preventsfuture discoveries conservationefforts land and resources * Policies thatsupport uniform Erosion of insectdiversity Heavy use of pesticides,use HYVs and chemicals (e.g. - increasessusceptibility of monocultures/uniformn subsidies,credit policies, and - ruinspollination and species,degrading habitats marketstandards) biocontrol harbouringinsects. * Pressuresand influenceof seed/agrochemicalcom- Erosion of soil diversity Heavy use of agrochemicals, panies and extensionsystems - leads to fertilityloss degradingtillage practices, * Trade liberalizationand - reduces productivity use of monocultures marketexpansion policies thatneglect social and Loss of habitatdiversity Extensificationin marginal ecological factors includingwild crop lands,drift/contamination * Lack of awarenessof agro- relatives fromchemicals ecology in R&D and in education institutions Loss of indigenousmethods Spread of uniform'modern' * Disrespectfor local and knowledge of varietiesand technologies knowledge biodiversity * Democraphic pressures
The followingelements are of criticalimportance in anystrategy designed to achieve such change:
* applicationof agroecologicalprinciples that can conserve,use and enhance biodiversityon farms,maintain or increaseproductivity and enable sustain- able intensification; * participationand empowermentof farmersand indigenouspeoples, protec- tion of theirrights, and respectand use of theirknowledge on biodiversity and resources,to help conserveagrobiodiversity in researchand develop- mentprocesses; * building upon existing successfulmethods and local knowledge about biodiversityand genetic resources in farming,and adapting sustainable practices(e.g. integratedpest management,integrated crop management) to local situations; * conservationof plant and animal genetic resources-especially in situand community-basedefforts-to protect biodiversityfor currentlivelihood securityas well as futureneeds and ecosystemfunctions;
275 LoriAnn Thrupp
* creatinga supportivepolicy environment-includingeliminating incentives foruniform varieties and foragrochemicals such as tax discountsand sub- sidiesfor certain HYV seeds and forpesticides and extensionprogrammes thatpromote technologypackages, and implementingpolicies for secure tenureand local rightsto plant genetic resources-and prioritizingagro- biodiversityenhancement in researchand developmentprogrammes. Applyingthese basic principlescan generateconsiderable public and private benefits.At the farmlevel, more specificpractices for agrobiodiversity enhance- ment have been discoveredand adapted in many areas of the world. Building upon the knowledgeof ruralpeople has provento be effectivein manycontexts, both in making scientificadvances and in helping to ensure that agrobio- diversityinnovations are adopted and the benefitsappreciated. Ecologically oriented integratedpest management (IPM) methods, for example, illustratewell the use and benefitsof biodiversity.IPM approaches usuallyhighlight diversity as a key feature.Examples of best practicesthat are effectivefor insect and diseasemanagement include the following:36 * multiplecropping and/or crop rotations,used to preventbuild-up of pests; * intercroppingof plantsthat house predatorsof insectpests; * use of certainplants as naturalpesticides; * use of weeds to repelinsects; * use of biocontrolagents, including various parasites,animals and fishthat consume insectpests (e.g. ducks and fishin rice paddies in Asia); * eliminationor reductionof pesticideuse to avoid adverse agroecological effectson diversity; * mixed crop standsthat slow down the spread of diseasesby alteringthe micro-environment; * use of non-hostplants as 'decoy' crops,to attractfungus (or nematodes). Successful IPM programmesin Asia show that building up agrobio- diversity-particularlyusing beneficial insects-is a key ingredientof effective pestmanagement in riceproduction. These initiatives,coordinated by the FAO along with governmentand non-governmentalorganizations, have resultedin remarkablereductions of pesticideuse and increasedrice yields. For example,in Indonesia'snational IPM programme,thousands of farmershave adopted IPM methods,including measuresto enhance insect diversityand restorenatural pest-predatorinteractions. In addition, many farmers,extension staffand scientistshave been givenparticipatory hands-on training ('farmer-field schools') in agroecologicalprinciples. As a result,the volume of pesticideused on rice has fallenwhile yieldshave increased. This successfulIPM approach,building on naturaldiversity in rice paddies, has been extended and adapted throughoutSouth and South-East Asia. In
36 World Bank, 'Integratedpest management:strategy and options forpromoting effective implementation',draft document (WashingtonDC: World Bank, I996); see also L. A. Thrupp, ed., New partnershipsforsustainable agriculture (Washington DC: World Resources Institute,I996).
276 Linkingagricultural biodiversity andfood security
Bangladesh,for example, thousandsof farmersinvolved in IPM projectshave integratedfish into rice paddies,adopted agroecologicalmethods to restorethe naturalbalance between insectsand otherfauna, and plantedvegetables on the dykesaround the edges. This approach has increasedrice yieldsand provided new sources of nutrition,and has made hazardous chemical use unnecessary. For example, farmersin the pilot IPM programmeachieved an i i per cent increasein rice productionwhile eliminatingpesticides.37 Practices to support soil fertilityand nutrientcycling also make use of agrobiodiversity.Examples include:38
* use of compostfrom crop residues, tree litter, and otherplant/organic residues; * use of intercroppingand cover crops, particularlylegumes, which add nutrients,fix nitrogen, and 'pump' nutrientsto the soil surface; * use ofmulch and greenmanures through collection and spreadingof cropresi- dues,litter from surrounding areas and organicmaterials, on and/orunder crop; * integrationof earthworms(vermiculture) or otherbeneficial organisms and biota into the soil to enhancefertility, organic matter and nutrientrecycling; and * eliminationor reductionof agrochemicals-especiallytoxic nematicides- thatdestroy diverse soil biota, organicmaterial and valuable soil organisms.
These kindsof soil managementpractices have proved effectiveand profit- able in a varietyof farmingsystems.39 The benefitsinclude improvementof soil nutrientcycles and soil quality;added economic value; increasein sustainability of systems;and alleviationof pressureson habitats. Agroforestryoffers an excellentway to use agrobiodiversitythat has multiple benefits.40The integrationof treesinto farmingsystems has variouspurposes in manycontexts, such as providingfuel, fodder, shade, nutrients and timberfor con- struction,as well as aidingsoil conservationand waterretention. (In West Sumatra, agroforestrygardens occupy 5o-85 per cent of the total agriculturalland.41) Complex formsof agroforestryexhibit forest-like structures, as well as a remark- able degree of plant and animal diversity,combining conservation and natural resourceuse. (In Indonesia,for example, small-holder 'jungle rubber' gardens incor- poratenumerous tree species.) Agroforestry systems in traditionalforms also shelter hundredsof plantspecies, constituting valuable formsof in situconservation.42
37 Thrupp, ed., New partnershipsforsustainable agriculture. 38 These examples are mainlyfrom Altieri, 'Traditional farmingin Latin America'. See also Pimentel et al., 'Conserving biological diversityin agricultural/forestrysystems'; and Brookfieldand Padoch, I994. 39 K. E. Lee, 'The diversityof soil organisms',in D. K. Hawksworth, ed., The biodiversityofmicroorganisms and invertebrates:itsrole in sustainableagriculture (London: CAB International,I990). 40 UNDP, Benefitsof diversity: an incentivetoward sustainable agriculture (New York: UNDP, I992), pp. 98- I02. 41 UNDP, Benefitsof diversity, pp. I20-4. 42 G. Michon and H. de Foresta, 'Complex agroforestrysystems and the conservationof biological diversity',in Harmonywith nature: proceedings of international conference on tropicalbiodiversity (Kuala Lumpur: SEAMEO-BIOTROP, I990).
277 LoriAnn Thrupp
Many of the practicesnoted above serve multiplepurposes. For example, intercroppingcontributes to pest and soil managementas well as enhancing income. In South Americaan estimated70-90 per cent of beans and 6o per cent of maize are intercroppedwith other crops.43Farmers in many otherparts of the world have recognizedthat such diversityprovides valuable sourcesof soil nutrients,improved nutritionand reduced risk-all essentialelements of a soundlybased agriculturallivelihood. A common misperceptionis that agrobiodiversityenhancement is feasible only on small-scalefarms. In fact,there is ample evidence to refutethis notion. Experienceshows thatlarge production systems also benefitfrom incorporating theseprinciples and practices.Crop rotations,intercropping, cover crops,IPM techniques and green manures are the most common methods being used profitablyin largercommercial systems, in both North and South.44Illustrations of such sustainableapproaches to intensificationare found in tea and coffee plantationsin the tropics,and in vineyardsand orchardsin temperatezones. In most large-scalesettings, the change frommonocultural to diversesystems and practicesentails transition costs, and sometimestrade-offs or lower profitsfor the firsttwo or threeyears. However, afterthe initialtransition period, pro- ducers have found that agroecological changes are profitableas well as ecologically sound for commercial production and that they present new valuable opportunities.
Usingparticipatory approaches The incorporationof farmers'local knowledge, practicesand experimentationis advantageousin effortsto encourageagrobio- diversityand sustainableagriculture. Experience has shown that fullinvolve- ment of local farmingpractices in agriculturalR&D, throughthe participation and indeed leadershipof local people, has had beneficialoutcomes and should be adopted widely. A farmer-friendlyapproach is essentialto the successful implementationof change. An understandingof farmers'knowledge and incorporationof theirstrategies for agrobiodiversity enhancement increase the chances of success,for example helping to make proposed innovationsmore relevant by drawing upon their informalmethods of experimentingwith unfamiliarcultivars and practices.45At the same time, the involvementof farmersas partnersin R&D helps to ensure the adoption of agroecological methodsand can help to empowerlocal people. In Mexico, forexample, researchers worked with the local people to re-create chinampas-multicropped,species-diverse gardens developed from reclaimed lakes-which were native to the Tabasco region and part of Mexico's pre-
43 UNDP, Agroecology. 44 C. V. Finch and C. W. Sharp, Covercrops in Californiaorchards and vineyards(Washington DC: USDA Soil Conservation Service, I976), cited in UNDP, Agroecology. 45 B. Rajasekaran et al., 'A frameworkfor incorporating indigenous knowledge systemsinto agricultural extension', IndigenousKnowledge and DevelopmentMonitor I: 3, I993, pp. 2I-4.
278 Linkingagricultural biodiversity and food security
Hispanic tradition.46A similarproject conducted in Veracruzalso incorporated the traditionalAsiatic system of mixed farming,mixing chinampas with animal husbandryand aquaculture.These gardensalso made more productiveuse of local resources,and integratedplant and animal waste as fertilizers.Yields of such systemsequalled or surpassedthese of conventionalsystems.47 In Burkina Faso, a soil-conservationand integratedcropping project in Yatenga province was based largelyon an indigenous technologyof Dogon farmersin Mali: buildingrock bunds forpreventing water run-off. The project added innovatory elements-positioning bunds along contour lines-and revivedan indigenoustechnique called zai, which is addingcompost to holes in which seeds of millet,sorghum and peanut are planted. These crops are in a multicroppingsystem, and animalsare incorporatedfor theirmanure. In the fieldsusing these techniques, yields were consistentlyhigher than in fieldsusing conventionalpractices; the increasesranged from I2 per cent in I982 to 9I per centin I984. Yields in the zai methodreached I,000-I,200 kg/ha,compared to conventionalyields of 700 kg/ha.Water managementwas enhanced,and food security,a priorityfor local people, was also improved.The techniqueshave been widely adopted,covering 3,500 hectaresby the end of i988.48 In such efforts,the fullparticipation of women has significantbenefits. As managersof biodiversityin and around farmingsystems in many areas of the world,women can make importantcontributions and have a promisingrole in research,development and conservationof agrobiodiversity.In Rwanda, for example, in a plant-breedingproject of CIAT (InternationalCentre for Tropical Agriculture),scientists worked with women farmersfrom the early stages of a project on breeding new varietiesof beans to suit local people's needs.49Together they identifiedthe characteristicsneeded to improve the beans, ran experiments,managed and evaluated trials,and made decisions on the basisof the trialresults. The experimentsresulted in stunningoutcomes: the varietiesselected and testedby women farmersover four seasons 'performed betterthan the scientists'own local mixtures64-89 per cent of the time'. The women's selections also produced substantiallymore beans, with average productionincreases as high as 38 per cent.50 The developmentof participatoryapproaches requires deliberate measures, trainingand timeto changethe conventionalapproaches to agriculturalR&D.50
46 M. Altieriand L. Merrick, 'Agroecology and in situconservation of native crop diversityin the third world', in Biodiversity(Washington DC: National Academy Press, I988 ); and H. L. Morales, 'Chinampas and integratedfarms: learning from the ruraltraditional experience', in F. De Castri,G. Baker and M. Hadley, eds, Ecologyand Practice,vol. I: Ecosystemmanagement (Dublin: Tycooly, I984). 47 From UNDP, Benefitsof diversity. 48 CGIAR, Partnersin selection(Washington DC: Consultative Group on InternationalAgricultural Research, I994). 49 Ibid. 5? See e.g. R. Chambers, A. Pacey and L. A. Thrupp, Farmerfirst:farmerinnovation and agriculturalresearch (London: IT Publications, I987); I. Scoones andJ. Thompson, Beyondfarmerfirst(London: IT Publications, I995); J. Alcorn, 'Making use of traditionalfarmers' knowledge', in Commonfutures, proceedingsof an internationalforumon sustainable development (Toronto: Pollution Probe, I989).
279 LoriAnn Thrupp
Nevertheless,the benefitsare substantial:the application of such two-way approachesimproves the likelihoodof adoption and successof agrobiodiversity efforts.Basic principlesof participatoryrural appraisal in agroecologicalR&D include:5'
* joint problem-solvingamong farmersand scientists,and responsivenessto local needs; * mutuallistening/learning between farmersand scientists; * understandingof complexity; * flexibilityin selectingmethods and timing; * adoption of an interdisciplinaryand holisticperspective; * inclusiveand equitablerepresentation (in gender,class, ethnicity).
In sum, the use of these participatoryapproaches can help plannersand communitiesto identifyand develop 'best practices'in sustainableproduction, i.e. practicesthat are adapted to diverselocal conditionsand thatbring agri- cultureand biodiversityinto convergence,as well as creatingsocio-economic opportunities.
Mergingagrobiodiversity and habitat conservation Efforts to conserveand enhance agrobiodiversitymust also addressthe underlyingpolicies thataccelerate its loss. Broader policies and institutionalstructures focused on agrobiodiversitycon- servation drive practical, field-level changes. Many policy initiativesand institutionshave alreadybeen establishedto addressthese issues. For example, severalinternational institutions influence and regulatethe use of plantgenetic resources.Among the key playersare the ConsultativeGroup on International AgriculturalResearch, the InternationalPlant Genetic Resources Institute,the Food and AgricultureOrganization, the Commission on Plant Genetic Re- sources and the United Nations Food and AgricultureOrganization. Recent importantinternational conventions and agreements,particularly the Con- ventionon Biological Diversityand the latestround of the GeneralAgreement on Tariffsand Trade, are also influentialin settingguidelines that affect agrobiodiversityand use of geneticresources. Concerns about the control of plant genetic resourceshave led to many intellectualproperty regulations that govern the activitiesof public institutions and private companies and are intended to protect farmers'legal access to geneticresources. Gene banks conservea remarkablediversity of plantgenetic resources,and increasingnumbers of agriculturalresearch institutes have begun in situconservation projects as well. Along with theselarge formal institutions, manyNGOs and local organizationsare also increasinglyinvolved in promoting the conservationand equitabledistribution of benefitsfrom agrobiodiversity.
5' Adapted frominformation provided by Centre forInternational Development and Environment/ AfricanCentre forTechnological Studies. See Participatoryrural appraisal handbook (Washington DC: WRI, 1990).
280 Linkingagricultural biodiversity and food security
Policyand institutionalchanges Althoughmany institutions are alreadyactively involved,more coordinationand work is needed at all levelsto ensureeffective reformsand agrobiodiversityconservation policies that benefit the public, especiallythe poor. Policy changesthat attack the rootsof problemsand protect people's rightsare needed. Issues and areas that require furtherattention include:52
* ensuring public participationin the development of agriculturaland resourceuse policies; * eliminatingsubsidies and creditpolicies for uniformhigh-yield varieties, fertilizersand pesticides,so as to encourage the use of more diverseseed typesand farmingmethods; * providingpolicy support and incentivesfor effective agroecological methods thatmake sustainableintensification possible; * reformingtenure and propertysystems that affectthe use of biological resourcesto ensure that local people have rightsand access to necessary resources; * implementingregulations and incentivesto make seed and agrochemical industriesmore sociallyand environmentallyresponsible; * developing marketsand business opportunitiesfor diverse organic agri- culturalproducts; * developinglegal systemsand regulationsto ensurethe protectionof intel- lectual propertyrights of indigenous peoples and farmersin developing countriesin relationto geneticresources.
Building complementaritybetween agricultureand biodiversitywill also require changesin approachesto agriculturalresearch and development,land use and breeding.The typesof practicesand policies outlinedhere constitute potential solutions and promisingopportunities. Such changes are urgently needed to overcome threatsfrom the continuingerosion of geneticresources and biodiversity.Experience shows that enhancing and sustainablyusing agriculturalbiodiversity has benefitsfor both small- and large-scalefarmers, while at the same time servingthe broadersocial interestsof ecosystemhealth and food security.
52 Discussion of similarpolicy issues can be found, for example, in UNDP, Benefitsof diversity; Thrupp, ed., New partnershipsfor sustainable agriculture; and Grupo Interamericanode AgriculturaSostenible, 'Sernillas para el futuro'(San Jose, Costa Rica: Institutode Cooperaci6n Agricola).
28I