June 29, 2007
Ka Vic Fabe, Treasurer, Asian Farmers’ Association (AFA)
Good morning , ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for your invitation to be one of the discussants in this session. To be honest, I am not very familiar with the European Commission’s agricultural research programs. But I am glad to know that the European Commission has a pro-active, purposeful and systematic research program. How I wish that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (or ASEAN), the regional inter governmental body in which my country Philippines, belong to, has this kind of research program. A statement in the ERA-ARD brochure also caught my attention: “promote collaboration in European agricultural research for the world’s poor”.
As a farmer, I need agricultural research and extension. I have 500 citrus trees, now 10 years old. I noticed that the leaves of these trees are becoming yellowish in color, a sign of disease. I also have 4,000 eggplant trees. I would like very much to grow these organically. But lately, worms have been creeping inside the eggplants. I would like to know what plants to intercrop so the worms will go away.
PAKISAMA agricultural research needs
I am also a member of a national farmers’ organization called PAKISAMA, or National Confederation of Peasant’s Organizations, having served in the past as its President, then Chairperson, now ex -officio National Council member. PAKISAMA was part of the initial group who conducted a participatory research , way back in 1986, on the effects of the “Green Revolution” on our incomes, as well as on the health of our soil, on the animals in the farm, particularly the fishes, and of course, on our bodies. It was a very powerful research for us, farmers, as it made us realize that the Green Revolution, while it indeed increased our incomes, increased our production costs, killed the mud- and catfishes in our rice farms, contaminated our water supply , increased our risks to health, and made our soil unhealthy. Because of this research, PAKISAMA set as one of its goals the promotion of sustainable agriculture. We also became part of MASIPAG, a network of farmers and scientists, who researched on traditional rice seeds, experimented on going back to organic rice farming, and later established a seed bank . From the experiments and sharing of experiences among organic rice farmers, we learned that there should be gradual phasing out of chemical fertilizers, it we want to be economically viable.
Together with other support groups in the Philippines, PAKISAMA is embarking on the production and marketing of staple crops which are organically grown- rice, corn, fresh vegetables, and muscovado ( from sugarcane) among others. However, we have a number of research concerns both at local and national levels, and many of these have policy implications.
a. Baseline/market information for important commodities, e.g., rice, coconut, fish products, vegetables, including produce for niche market such as organic mango, papaya, water melon, banana, pineapple, etc. Until today, we do not have very precise information in these areas. For PAKISAMA, , it is quite important to locate our members in their respective pre-occupations and types of farming systems. Even MASIPAG has no definite information about the real numbers and hectarages involved in its own organic rice promotion.
b. what is the real profitability of the the organic food industry (with focus on rice, muscovado, corn fresh produce and fish )considering high investments on food traceability and food safety
c. What should be the standards for organic and sustainable fisheries, seaweeds, all culture fisheries and captured fisheries?
d. Is there a possibility of creating trading papers for important commodities, which can serve as impetus for productivity improvement and market access especially by small farmers?
e. What is the initial impact of the commercial release of Bt corn and other Bt crops in the country?
f. What is the socio-economic and environmental impact of raising, for instance, 28-day old chicken?
AFA agricultural research needs
PAKISAMA is a member of the Asian Farmers’ Association or AFA, a regional alliance of nine national farmers’ federations and organizations in eight countries in Southeast and North Asia. The formation of AFA itself was a product of five Farmers’ Exchange Visits conducted by our NGO partner, AsiaDHRRA, from 1999-2001. During these exchange visits, we researched and studied various models and experiences on farmers’ organizing and empowerment as well as production and marketing technologies. We shared how tariff reductions had affected our livelihoods. Through these sharing sessions, we came to realize that we had common interests and common concerns, and that regional and international policies and trade agreements had seriously impacted our lives, many in negative ways. Thus, we established AFA.
Just two weeks ago, AFA held a regional consultation where each member presented two major difficulties being faced by their farmers. The difficulties mentioned were in (1) getting access and control of production resources , basically land and capital ( Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia), (2) low product competitiveness (Vietnam, Philippines, Cambodia ), (3) international and bilateral trade agreements ( Korea, Indonesia), but (4) domestic overproduction coupled with cheaper imports (Taiwan) and (5) low marketing skills (Vietnam, Thailand).
From these difficulties, we can somehow pinpoint AFA’s agricultural research needs:
a. the need for updated agricultural statistics – how many farming families, fishing families, tenurial arrangements of these farmers, socio-economic conditions.
b. what is the real impact of WTO AoA agreements and key existing bilateral agreements, to small men and women farmers, fishers and indigenous peoples?
c. the whole gamut of market information and research, for each crop
d. suitable and sustainable production technologies for each crop. For example, in Cambodia, what should be the proper rice variety or rice planting system in areas where there is little water? Or what kind of water systems should be made available to farmers in these areas?
Maybe you will say – we have researched all of these already. If so, then the problem is the weak link of governments’ agricultural research to agricultural work. Extension work has failed farmers in terms of access, availability and quality. Agricultural extension workers are not there when you need them, primarily because they are few and have many areas to cover and other tasks to do. Sometimes, their technologies are not aligned with our needs, and many times, they also do not know the answer to our questions. Perhaps this is because the extension workers are not accountable to us farmers, and only when we are strengthened, only when we can claim accountability, can they be more responsive to us. To be fair, we would like to say that in AFA we have admired the close link between state agricultural universities to the various farmers’ association in Taiwan. The production of rice and waxapples of the members of the Taiwan Waxapple Development Association was raised to very competitive levels because of the close cooperation between research and extension work from the National Pintung University of Science and Technology and the farmers themselves.
Concerns in Agricultural Research at Global levels
At the global level, we are concerned with five things.
First, we are concerned with the increasing role of private companies, especially, transnational corporations, on agricultural research and development, spending $3B a year on it. Private funds in agricultural R&D remains largely concentrated in industrialized countries, particularly in the area of seeds, agro-chemicals and biotechnology, but invest little in developing countries. The public sector conducts 94 percent of agricultural R&D in developing countries. Efforts should be made to develop innovative public-private partnerships to raise funds for the research agenda of the public research institutions, and to make closer links between research and extension. Efforts should be made to support farmer-led and civil society initiated R&D efforts such as participatory plant breeding and community-based genetic resource conservation efforts.
As you will probably note, much of our concerns are in the area of food security and organic food production and marketing. Second , we are now concerned with growing interest on research on bio technology and GMOs, and the growing pressure on governments of developing countries to devote the meager R&D funds to bio technology. It may good to compare the investments required in biotechnology with investments required in agricultural infrastructures and support programs. There can be a study on the cases of public investments in the development of genetically engineered crops and their experiences in terms of costs and benefits. One good experience to look at is the experience of the Rockefeller Foundation (a philanthropic institution, not exactly public) in investing on the research and development of genetically engineered rice. Publications show that the Rockefeller Foundation has already invested some $100 million for its Rice Biotechnology program over a period of 10 years, still without any single genetically engineered rice variety released in the market. There is no indication how much more should any philanthropic agency or government have to invest in order to deliver the promises of biotechnology in uplifting the condition of the rural poor. A thorough analysis should show how much that level of investment would have benefited the rural poor if that were invested in agricultural infrastructures and support programs instead of biotechnology.
Third, we are concerned with the devotion to research and development of high-value crops using intensive agriculture. This research must be balanced with socio-economic sustainability concerns. Southeast Asia has a long experience in bearing the negative consequences of plantation agriculture that supplies the international commodity market. There must always be accompanying research on the impacts of intensive agriculture to local communities and to local and national food security.
Fourth, the market for organic products, especially in Europe and East Asia, is considered as the fastest growing segment of the agricultural market, even by the FAO. Agricultural research and development may be focused on helping farmers access both the domestic and international markets for organic products. We believe that organic agriculture is a very viable option and a sure pathway to poverty alleviation and sustainable rural development.
Lastly, we are concerned with Europe’s and USA’s rising needs for bio fuels as it impacts on food security. If we use lands currently planted to food crops, this may lead to food insecurity. If we use forests, this may mean destruction of bio-diversity. We think that there is still a lack of scientific researches to back up observations on positive and negative effects of bio fuel energy, especially to the environment. We have doubts whether the planting of crops for bio-fuels will benefit the farmers; as there have been experiences that farmers in plantations for bio fuel crops are receiving little income from this activity. During a dialogue with ASEAN Secretary General Ong Keng Yong, we have encouraged ASEAN governments to develop at national and regional levels an energy policy that promotes the increasing use of reusable sources of energy including solar energy and bio fuels. The development of renewable sources, especially bio fuel energy, should consider the balance between meeting the needs on energy and food security of the people, especially that of small men and women farmers, fishers and indigenous peoples. There is a glaring inequality in energy distribution, where rich countries consume and waste more energy while the multitude of the poor do not have access to energy. Governments need to conduct careful assessment of their energy needs, local renewable energy sources and technological capacity, and to formulate a sustainable energy plan that would primarily be aimed at providing equal access to energy for all, and empower people to manage their own energy production and consumption. Governments should encourage and assist community based farmers groups to manage the production, marketing and trading of bio fuels.
Asian Farmers and ERA-ARD
I know that farming here in Europe is very different from farming in Asia. But we look forward to collaboration in European agricultural research with the agricultural research of developing countries. We look forward to participatory applied researches for organic food production. Some of the AFA members have good working experiences and solidarity with European farmers’ groups, such as in Netherlands and France, through our partner Agriterra. We look forward to such kind of meaningful exchanges and solidarity among European scientists, especially farmer scientists. Together, we can help fight poverty in the world through sustainable food production.
Thank you for your attention. Pleasant day to everyone!
(Mr. Vicente Fabe, or Ka Vic as he is fondly called, is a farmer from Sta Elene town, in Camarines Norte province, about 300 kilometers south of Manila. He is working on a 6-hectare farmland, 2 hectares of which he owns, and 4 hectares of which is still owned by his mother. He plants organic rice for home consumption, and earns income from 500 citrus trees, 4,000 eggplants and 400 coconut trees. From his farm, he was able to send his five children to school – one of whom has finished college already. Ka Vic is also a respected farmer leader in the Philippines. He has been President then Chairperson of PAKISAMA, one of the progressive national farmers’ organizations in the Philippines. He has been appointed as farmer’s representative to several key government agricultural agencies, such as Director of Philippine Coconut Authority (1994-1998), Director of United Coconut Planters’ Bank (2003-2005) Member of the Farmers’ Council of the National Anti-Poverty Commisssion (2001 till present). At present he is ex-officio member of the National Council of PAKISAMA. He is also Treasurer of the Asian Farmers’ Association or AFA.)
Comments are closed