![]() |
![]() |
||||
| Organic Sci. Cluster | About Us | Top 10 | Français | ||
| British Columbia | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Manitoba | ||
| Ontario | Québec | Atlantic | Donate | ||
| Research
Extension
Courses
Consumers
-------------------------- |
Hungry for an AlternativeBy Sally Hall for the London Independent A growing number of experts believe that Africa should return to natural sustainable methods of agriculture, writes Sally Hall. Organic farming is a slow-to-grow, low-yield industry favoured by middle-class
parents who have the time and money to meander the overpriced aisles of
supermarkets, deliberating over wild rocket or white asparagus. Right?
Wrong, says Tewolde Berhan. He thinks organic farming could be the solution
to Ethiopia's famines. He maintains that genetically- modified organisms (GMOs) remove control from local farmers. He speaks for a growing number who believe that Africa should return to natural, sustainable methods of agriculture better suited to its people and environment. Can one man hope to stand against governments and the huge multinationals? Berhan appears to be a frail - if nattily dressed - sexagenarian. But our conversation reveals his determination, intelligence and encyclopedic memory, combining to create an indomitable force. Asked why bad harvests seem to have a greater impact on Ethiopia than its neighbours, he has a simple yet stark response. "It's largely because of the lack of infrastructure," he says. "The road system in Ethiopia has doubled in the past 10 years, but is still very poor. "Ethiopia is still an agrarian society, and there isn't one such country that hasn't had famines. The reasons are clear: some years you have plenty and others not enough. "If you don't have the technological and financial capacity and
the infrastructure to store in good years, you can't make provision for
the bad. People here depend entirely on the crops they produce in their
fields, so when one season fails, the result is famine." Negotiator In 1995, he was made Director- General of the Environmental Protection
Authority of Ethiopia, in effect becoming the country's chief scientist
in agriculture. A strong critic of GMOs, he is a powerful voice in lobbying
on food safety. His most notable triumph came in negotiations on biosafety
in Cartagena, Colombia, in 1999. So why is organic farming the answer? Given low yields, poor soil and
drought, you would think that industrial farming would help Ethiopia to
maximise production. "Organic farming disturbs nature as little as possible and reduces
those risks. Intensive farming has led to the exacerbation of pests and
diseases." "Farmers need solutions suitable for local predicaments. This means choosing from a range of options - organic, conventional and GM. If yields can be increased, that surplus can be sold." Berhan is undeterred. He has persuaded the Ethiopian government to let him demonstrate his ideas in the Axum area of Ethiopia. Old field-management techniques have been resurrected, while methods new to the area, like compost-making, have been successful. Those who think organic farming means low yields will be surprised by
Berhan's evidence. "When well managed, and as fertility builds over
years, organic agriculture isn't inferior in yield. Now, farmers don't
want chemical fertilisers. They ask: 'Why should we pay for something
we can get free?'" "But if you go beyond the intention and begin to dictate terms, it becomes more sinister. In times of shortage, making food aid available is helpful - for that year. If you keep making it available, you discourage production." He believes there are times when food aid can be more about control by Western governments than assistance. Dependent "The feeling is strong that this is deliberate. I attended a meeting where farmers from the US were present. I told them a story I'd read about how rice production in Liberia was depressed because of cheap imports from the US. The American farmers said this was a deliberate policy by the US State Department to make countries dependent on them for food. "I began to investigate and discovered that, while the EU has abandoned its policy of providing food aid, initially sending money so that food can be bought locally, the US still insists it will only give food in kind. This makes me feel those farmers were right." Berhan insists on the necessity of further trials for GM crops, and believes extreme caution should be used in their growth and trade. His application for a visa to attend talks in Canada on GM labelling was turned down earlier this year, suggesting that his influence is feared. "We were finalising the labelling of grain commodities," he says. "A compromise had been reached in 2000 for labelling to say: 'This product may contain GMOs,' but we wanted to toughen it up, to say: 'This product contains these GMOs,' and to list them." He also contests that GMOs give higher yield. "This is mainly hype.
So far, there's not one GM crop that produces higher yields per acre than
conventional crops. They offer an economical advantage to farmers as they
can apply herbicide in large doses and not have to worry about weeds,
that's all." "Canada has failed to ratify the biosafety protocol. In view of the fact that the Canadian government has done everything to undermine the efforts of the international community to adopt a strict, effective biosafety protocol, the delays in issuing the visa are evidence of Canada's bad faith." Is Berhan bitter? Far from it. "I think the visa refusal was based on a mistaken calculation. If anything, it gave the labelling issue higher visibility. We told the Canadian government: Either you accept multilateral discussions, or the Office for the Commission of Biological Diversity (based in Montreal), must move to another country." The threat worked. Berhan's message is compelling - and he is in demand worldwide. In the
past month alone, he has travelled to Austria, the UK, Tunisia and Norway.
This article first appeared in the London
Independent. |
||||
© 2011, Organic Agriculture Centre of Canada (OACC)