| What does "Gotong Royong" mean? |
"Gotong Royong" is a concept familiar to many parts of Indonesia and Malaysia. Translated into English, it evokes the concepts of "reciprocity" and "mutual aid".
We use the term "Gotong Royong" to refer to the idea of doing things together and helping each other in the spirit of goodwill. |
|
|
|
| Dear Maricel, |
Welcome to ANGOC Gotong Royong, the e-newsletter of the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC).
We welcome your feedback on any of the articles that appear here. We also invite you to send updates on your programs and on the socio-political situation in your country, as well as developments in agrarian reform, sustainable agriculture, and participatory governance, among others.
|
New NGO network to focus agri research on small farmers
|
The NGO Association for Agriculture Research in Asia-Pacific (NAARAP) was formed recently, at the end of the regional workshop, "Asia-Pacific Regional Workshop on Agricultural Research for Development," held jointly by the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC), the Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions
(APAARI), and Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) on 16-18 April 2008 in Bangkok, Thailand. NAARAP aims to redirect agricultural research toward meeting the needs of small farmholders (SFHs) and other marginalized groups.
In particular, the workshop discussions focused on how and in which areas NGOs and national and international agricultural research systems (ARSs) could collaborate in promoting and sponsoring research on agro-technologies that are based on farmers' traditional knowledge and integrated farming systems.
The NAARAP members agreed that the new network would undertake initiatives at multiple levels, and that such actions would be linked to GFAR and APAARI processes. Specifically, the network members committed to: (1) participate actively in determining the direction, content and conduct of agricultural research for development (ARD) at the national, regional and international levels; (2) generate, document, and disseminate information, knowledge and skills relevant to ARD; (3) share knowledge, experiences, expertise, and replicate successful practices and lessons learned while engaging in ARD; and (4) document the entire partnership process in ARD and disseminate this to farmers and in their local language.
Regional NGO priorities in ARD
The workshop also identified NGO competencies in ARD and areas where they could make a contribution, as follows:
1. Linking SFHs, NGOs, CSOs and agricultural research systems (ARS), SFHs, and other clientele groups (e.g., women, rural youth, etc.) at the national regional and international levels
- Participation of NGOs in the planning, budgetting, and decision-making process of ARSs (at the national, regional, and international levels), to ensure that the needs of NGOs/CSOs and SFHs are addressed in ARSs' research plans and priorities;
- Conduct of farmer-participatory research on SFHs' technologies, that is scientifically rigorous and properly documented, to facilitate their adoption by ARSs;
- On-farm production of inputs to facilitate adoption and replication of successful technologies by SFHs; and
- Access by SFHs to information, appropriate technologies, expert data banks, and agricultural research institutions (ARIs).
2. Impact assessment and advocacy for policy reform
- Identification of constraints to adoption and advocacy for policy changes needed to eliminate the constraints; and
- Assessment of the outcomes and impact of technologies on SFHs, and the documentation and dissemination of such results to key stakeholders.
Agenda of the new network
The following agenda have been identified by NAARAP: (1) technology development; (2) sustainable natural resource management; (3) facilitating farmers' access to markets and other support services; and (4) partnership development.
Technology Development:
- Development of local farming systems to increase farmers' incomes, without neglecting socio-cultural aspects (farmers' context, role of women, acceptability by SFHs) and environmental considerations, and utilizing innovative participatory approaches;
- Sustainable Natural Resource Management:
- Conduct of an adaptation study on the impact of climate change, with a special focus on the vulnerability of agriculture and the SFHs. Specific topics would include measures/programs to mitigate SFHs' losses, transfer risks, and increase resiliency, as well as coping mechanisms, and programs on nutrition and health, and recovery and rehabilitation; and
- Sustainable natural resource management (land, water, forest, etc.) based on bio-diversity, gender equality; and genetic diversity;
Facilitating farmers' access to markets and other support services:
- Development of models for linking farmers to market, which ensure that SFHs get a fair price for their products;
- SFHs promoting producer companies (PCs), acting on behalf of farmers yet staffed by professionals, and which would take on all functions and assume all risks and responsibilities, other than actual on-farm activities;
- Development of an internal quality control system (and/or standards for organic/ sustainable/green products) that is compliant with national, regional, and globally standards;
- Establishment of mechanisms to reduce farmers' financial vulnerability, such as micro/farmers insurance, microfinance/credit, and savings for self-reliance; and
- Facilitating farmers' access to information (digital, print, radio, video) and documentation of local innovations;
Partnership Development:
- Lobbying with national and international ARIs for the adoption of a more inclusive national agricultural research systems (NARS) approach in which CSOs, NGOs, SFH organizations, and other institutions engaged in social reforms, participate as partners;
- Advocacy for a new research paradigm that is small farm holder-led; that recognizes the value of a holistic and sustainable approach to agriculture, and of the work of farmers in the area, particularly women.
- Development of technologies and interventions at the national, regional, and international levels, that empower farmers and enhance sustainable livelihoods among indigenous and rural communities;
- Joint advocacy of development policies that prioritize agriculture, food, nutrition, health and rural development; and for the provision of funding support for the work of various stakeholders, such as CSOs, NGOs, and organizations of SFHs; and
- Restructuring of ARD institutions and extension systems to faciliate the development of partnerships with local area people's organizations, NGOs, community based organizations, and SFHs.
Source: Proceedings of the "Asia-Pacific Regional Workshop on Agricultural Research for Development," held on 16-18 April 2008 at the Rama Gardens Hotel, in Bangkok, Thailand.
|
FAO meet snubs land access issues; focuses on techno solutions to food crisis
|
From 3-5 June 2008, 5,159 representatives of 181 countries, including 42 heads of state, met in Rome at the High Level Conference on World Food Security: the Challenges of Climate Change and Bioenergy. The International Land Coalition (ILC) participated in this event, along with Food and Agriculture Organisation (the host), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
A number of the HLC participants, particularly several world leaders, acknowledged the urgency of responding to the current food crisis, yet demonstrated, by their statements, a disappointing indifference to another looming crisis, which could have more far-reaching implications: the crisis of land insecurity.
Food insecurity, but little mention of land insecurity
In the shadow of the current food crisis, most deliberations in the conference were addressed at how to achieve greater food security for the 862 million people who are undernourished in the world today. However, in statements of concern and proposed solutions to food insecurity, very little was said about a deeper form of insecurity related to another crisis that is on the rise: insecurity in access to land for the 1.5 billion people belonging to smallholder households that farm 2 hectares of land, or less.
The deliberations at the HLC provided a window into the opinions and directions that world leaders, including the United Nations System, are likely to take, and into how high on the agenda access to land is likely to be in a global response to current global trends. Most governments appear in the longer-term to be looking to the promise of technological innovation as the key to food security for all. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil appeared to capture the sentiments of many of the world's leaders when he spoke of working toward a "golden revolution" in agricultural production for developing countries, combining the three ingredients of "land, sun and innovation."
However, the label "innovation" seemed to be most commonly used in the context of scientific research for increasing productivity, with little mention of facilitating community-based innovation for small-scale production, drawing on traditional and local knowledge.
We have seen the future of agriculture, and small farmers are nowhere in sight
Judging by the statements of most leaders at the HLC, future agricultural production will likely be dominated by large-scale commercial production. While most UN Agencies mentioned the role of smallholders, IFAD was virtually alone in emphasizing the importance of smallholder production. Nonetheless, IFAD made no explicit reference to the increasing insecurity of tenure faced by smallholders, and focused on proposing measures to increase productivity and improve farmers' access to the market rather than to land.
The International NGO/CSO Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC) held a parallel Forum called Terra Petra, on the same topic, at which a number of ILC members participated, including FAO and IFAD. This Forum presented alternative perspectives on three topics related to the current food crisis and to the HLC agenda:
On the food crisis: Participants argued that solutions to the current food crisis must be based on the "right to food sovereignty" framework.
On climate change: Terra Petra participants advocated the promotion of existing/indigenous practices as part of the strategy for mitigating climate change.
On agro-fuels, land and water: A large consensus emerged on the need to reaffirm, in the framework of the right to food sovereignty for all, the centrality of land and agrarian reforms (with a major emphasis on, but not limited to, access to land and water as this is essential to the realization of the right to food), and on the need to acknowledge that land should be valued, not simply as an economic asset, but as part of a community's culture and identity, and as an integral part of biodiversity and environmental preservation. Participants criticized governments' aggressive promotion of agro-fuels as a solution to the energy crisis, saying that this policy is partly to blame for the current food crisis. Some support was expressed however for local-level production of agrofuels for local consumption.
Agrofuels engulfing world agriculture
As one of the main drivers of the demand for new agricultural land, the extent of political support for agrofuel production is an important determining factor in the impact it is likely to have on land rights.
(Above, a plantation of jatropha--an agro-fuel crop--in Bamako, Mali; inset, details of the jatropha oil seed.) The legitimacy of agrofuel production in the face of a food crisis was hotly debated by delegates. Some countries strongly advocated the production of agrofuels, such as Brazil (for ethanol, not biodiesel) and the United States. Others were firmly against the use of agricultural land for agrofuel rather than food production, such as President Rajapakse of Sri Lanka, who said that "Sri Lanka is firm in the decision that no land that can be used for food will be used for bio-fuel whatever the commercial attraction may be."
Running out of land
According to one estimate, at least 515 million hectares of new land will be required by 2030 to meet the demands of new agricultural production (200 million hectares), agrofuel (290 million hectares), and industrial forestry (25 million hectares). The same study forecasts that despite these huge land requirements, there would still be 250-300 million hectares of underutilized agricultural land that is available and that could be put into production. Nonetheless, the competition for existing agricultural land is expected to increase steadily. This competition takes place on an uneven playing field - in many cases between large-scale investors and local land-users who often hold no statutory rights over the land they are using.
Trans-national investment in agricultural land - increasingly negotiated on a bilateral basis between governments - is on the rise. Recent press reports claim that Japan has acquired 12 million hectares of land in South-east Asia, China, and Latin America to produce food for export to Japan. The Libyan government has leased 200,000 hectares of cropland in Ukraine to meet its own food import needs. The Chinese government is considering assisting Chinese companies to buy farmland in Africa and South America, to help guarantee food security. Investment Banks are also eyeing the investment potential of farmland; for example, Morgan Stanley has reportedly recently purchased several thousand hectares of land in Ukraine.
As long as smallholders do not have secure rights to land, they remain vulnerable to dispossession in the face of new demands for land. However, with secure land rights, smallholders are more able to negotiate on favorable terms with external interests in regard to their land. Furthermore, the inability of many would-be smallholders to gain access to land emphasizes the need for the re-assertion of the agrarian reform agenda, which feel out of favor when neo-liberal policies were adopted by most governments.
ILC's role in bringing access to land back on the international development agenda
The debates and outcomes of the HLC on World Food Security make it evident that many governments, and even a number of international agencies, do not associate the world food crisis with the deeper crisis of loss of access to land.
What can the ILC do to prioritize access to land in the agenda for action toward ensuring food security? Firstly, ILC, as a coalition that encompasses both intergovernmental and civil society agencies, is one mechanism that can facilitate a greater exchange of information and collaborative action on land-related questions across national boundaries.
Secondly, ILC members could encourage greater reference to and use of international legal instruments (such as those referring to the right to food) and of global research-based documents, such as the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), which provide a strong evidence base for the advocacy efforts of members.
Thirdly, ILC should consider how to develop closer links with a number of organizations which are active in promoting the land rights of poor land users, but with whom ILC currently has limited links.
Fourthly, there remains patchy evidence on the impact on land tenure security of new commercial pressures on land. Some ILC members, such as IIED, have begun documenting and analyzing impacts in specific countries, but many gaps remain.
Research-based organisations within the network could participate in collecting more systematic information on such impacts as a tool for advocacy and to guide informed responses.
Sixthly, the ILC intends to use upcoming events as a venue for continued global debate on food security, climate change, and bioenergy. These include a conference on Bioenergy in Brazil in November 2008, on Climate Change in Poland and Denmark in December 2008, the World Social Forum in Brazil in January 2009, and CSD17 in May 2009. ILC members will need to consider which of these may be the most strategic in highlighting the land tenure security of the poor.
The foregoing is an excerpt of "Access to land and the food crisis: Feedback and reflections by the ILC Secretariat on the FAO High Level Conference on World Food Security." The full text of this document may be found at the ILC website: www.landcoalition.org.
|
|
