The Real Green Revolution Organic and Agroecological Farming

1. The Real Green
Revolution
Organic and agroecological
farming in the South
Nicholas Parrott &
Terry Marsden
Department of City
and Regional Planning,
Cardiff University

2. Greenpeace Environmental Trust
Canonbury Villas, London N1 2PN, United Kingdom
www.greenpeace.org.uk/trust
February 2002
Published by Greenpeace Environmental Trust
Canonbury Villas, London N1 2PN, United Kingdom
Registered Charity No. 284934
© Greenpeace Environmental Trust 2002
A catalogue record of this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 1 903907 02 0
Design by Paul Hamilton at One Another
Printed in the United Kingdom by Russell Press
Printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper
Front cover image © Pasha Saale
Back cover image © 2001-Greenpeace/Lopez

3. Table of contents
Foreword 4
Food security for all the world’s people
Dr Doug Parr, Greenpeace Chief Scientist
Acknowledgements 8
1 Methodology and approach
1.1 Context 10
1.2 Aims and objectives 10
1.3 Scope and definitions 11
1.4 Research methods 16
2 The world grows organic.
2.1 Estimating the extent of global organic production 18
2.2 External stimuli for the development of organic agriculture 21
2.3 Towards a typology of incentives and constraints to‘grow organic’ 23
3 Regional perspectives
3.1 Africa 36
3.2 Asia 45
3.3 Latin America 51
4 Key themes
4.1 Productivity and sustainability 61
4.2 Organic agriculture and diversity 66
4.3 Natural methods of enhancing soil fertility 73
4.4 Natural regimes of pest and disease control 80
4.5 Markets and premia 90
4.6 Certification 93
4.7 Institutional and political issues 98
4.8 Social and cultural issues 101
5 Conclusions and recommendations
5.1 Creating a coherent ‘alternative’ agricultural movement. 107
5.2 Promoting OAA: defining objectives 108
5.3 Global research and advocacy 108
5.4 Building local capacity. 109
Bibliography 112
Glossary of abbreviations and acronyms 128
Appendix 1 – Electronic resources for OAA 130
Appendix 2a – Research institutes and consultancies 137
Appendix 2b – NGOs and producer groups 138
Endnotes 144
The Real Green Revolution 1

4. List of case studies
Case Study 1 The Chagga Home Gardens (Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania) 14
Case Study 2 Organic cotton production in India, Peru and Mali 24
Case Study 3 Cuba: towards a national organic regime? 27
Case Study 4 World Food Day Farmers’ and Fishermens' Movement (Indonesia) 30
Case Study 5 Ambootia Tea Estate (Darjeeling, India) 35
Case Study 6 Zaï: a traditional method for restoring degraded land 39
Case Study 7 Organic and ethical banana production 58
Case Study 8 New developments in rice production 63
Case Study 9 Ecological land restoration in Tigray 77
Case Study 10 Sekem (Egypt) 93
2

5. List of tables and figures
Table 1 Key aims, principles and management practices of organic farming 12
Table 2.1 Certified organic land by country (hectares) 19
Table 2.2 Certified organic land by country (% of agricultural land) 19
Table 2.3 IFOAM members by country 20
Table 2.4 Incentives and constraints to organic farming 23
Table 2.4 The sustainable agriculture and rural development prize 26
Table 3.1 Organic farming statistics for Africa 37
Table 3.2 African organic agricultural products on international markets 37
Figure 3.1 Illustration of Zaï or planting pit 39
Figure 3.2 The push-pull method for controlling maize stemborer 42
Table 3.3 Organic farming statistics for Asia 45
Table 3.4 Organic farming statistics for Latin America 52
Table 4.1 Examples of yield increases attributable to adoption of OAA 62
Table 4.2 Risk reduction strategies of traditional farmers 66
Table 4.3 Annual soil loss (tons/ha) at Ibadan, Nigeria 67
Table 4.4 Effects of A. Albida on millet yield in Senegal 69
Figure 4.1 Influence of trees on maize cropping in Tlaxacal (Mexico) 72
Table 4.5 Nutrient management strategies 75
Table 4.6 Plants with pest controlling properties 78
Table 4.6 Premia generated by organic producers 81
Table 4.7 A flow chart for identifying synergies in OAA research 99
Table 4.8 Textures of folk knowledge 102
The Real Green Revolution 3

6. Foreword still largely overlooked by policy-makers, this
Food security for all the world’s people movement presents a hopeful alternative to a
world that would be dominated by corporate
Dr Doug Parr, Greenpeace Chief Scientist
agrochemical giants and monocultural
The crisis in Argentina in late 2001 agriculture. And, as this report shows, organic
illustrated again a frustrating and unjust farming is not simply a passing fad for
reality: there is no direct relationship consumers in the rich world. Put into practice
between the amount of food a country in the South, it can increase food security,
produces and the number of hungry people reduce poverty and protect environmental
who live there. In 2001, Argentina harvested resources for the future – unlike its
enough wheat to meet the needs of both conventional alternative.
China and India. Yet Argentina’s people were
Organic increasing
hungry. Argentina's status as the world's
second largest producer of GM crops – This report identifies some of the positive
largely for export – could do nothing to trends currently emerging, for example:
solve its very real hunger problems at home.
For fifty years conventional agriculture has • Latest estimates of land managed according
been getting less and less sustainable. to ecological principles vary from 15.8 to 30
Chemical pesticides, fertilizers and hybrid million hectares (equivalent to about 3% of
seeds have destroyed wildlife and crop agricultural land in the South).
diversity, poisoned people and ruined the This figure would almost certainly be much
soil. Now that the organic movement is higher if de facto organic agriculture
taking off in the industrialised world, practiced by traditional subsistence farmers
governments, international agencies and were to be included.
global agribusiness corporations must stop
promoting this destructive system in the • Two thirds of new members of the
South. Instead, there must be coherent and International Federation of Organic
long-term support – in practice as well as in Agricultural Movements (IFOAM)
principle – to enable the nascent ecological come from the South.
farming movement in poorer countries to
continue to grow into the future. • International agencies – principally the UN’s
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)
The world is on the brink of a second ‘Green and the Centre for Trade and Development
Revolution’, which – unlike the first – has the (UNCTAD) – have woken up to the
potential to truly live up to its name. This is not potential of organic farming in raising
a revolution in biotechnology; still less has it farmers’ incomes, creating jobs and
anything to do with genetic engineering. enhancing food security.
Instead, it is a global move towards ecological
agriculture, which promises to both feed a • Cuba has been moving towards a
growing world population and to do so nationwide organic system, and 65% of its
sustainably – without compromising the needs rice and nearly 50% of fresh vegetables are
of future generations to feed themselves. now produced organically. Argentina now
has the largest area of land under organic
Working in tandem with nature and cultivation of any country in the world after
encouraging biodiversity and local self-reliance, Australia.
this new trend towards organic and
agroecological farming is vibrant through
Africa, Latin America and Asia. Although
4

7. Greater diversity
peasant farmers, who are intuitively aware
Maintaining agricultural biodiversity is vital to of the dangers of monocropping.
ensuring the long-term food security of all the
Working with ecology
world’s people. This report also shows that
agroecological farms exhibit a much greater This report shows how organic and
array of biodiversity than conventional agroecological approaches to agriculture
chemical-dependent farms, with more trees, are helping to conserve and improve farmers’
a wider diversity of crops and many different most precious resource – the topsoil. In contrast
natural predators which control pests and help to the problems of hardening, nutrient loss and
prevent disease. In many parts of the South, the erosion experienced by conventional farmers,
diversity of crop species on organic and organic managers across the South are using
agroecological holdings typically numbers in trees, shrubs and leguminous plants to stabilise
the hundreds, in stark contrast to the and feed the soil, dung and compost to provide
monoculture encouraged by conventional nutrients, and terracing or check dams to
systems. For example: prevent erosion and conserve groundwater.
There is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategy, and the
• Indigenous farmers in Peru cultivate best approach varies with local expertise and
more than three thousand different types ecological conditions.
of potato.
Increasing yields
• More than five thousand varieties of sweet The widespread assumption that converting to
potato are cultivated in Papua New Guinea. organic means a decline in yields has been
proven to be false, a conclusion supported
• In West Java, researchers have identified by overwhelming evidence contained in this
more than 230 species of plant within a dual report. Case studies from many different
cropping system, which includes countries – involving radically different
‘agroforestry’ home gardens and outfields. practices, local conditions and crops – show
In Mexico, the Huastec Indians manage dramatic increases in yields as well as benefits
a number of plots in which up to 300 to soil quality, a reduction in pests and diseases
species are cultivated. Areas around the and a general improvement in taste and
house may contain between 80-125 useful nutritional content of agricultural produce.
species, many with medicinal properties. For example:
This diversity is maintained through traditional
seed-swap networks, which are now being • In Brazil the use of green manures and cover
extended and encouraged by the organic and crops has increased yields of maize by
agroecological movement. Whilst global between 20% and 250%.
industrial agriculture has led to a situation
where the world’s population gets 90% of its • In Tigray, Ethiopia, yields of crops from
food calories from a mere 15 species of crops, composted plots were between three and
organic and agroecological farmers are five times higher than those treated only
providing a vital service in maintaining genetic with chemicals.
diversity for the future –
a service increasingly threatened by genetically- • Yield increases of 175% have been reported
modified pollution and corporate biopiracy. from farms in Nepal adopting
The maintenance of a wide range of crops agroecological management practices.
provides food security throughout the year, an
overwhelmingly important consideration for • In Peru the restoration of traditional Incan
The Real Green Revolution 5

8. terracing has led to increases in the order of • The overwhelming majority of Southern
150% for a range of upland crops. organic produce is still sold as unprocessed
primary commodities, leaving poorer
The importance is not just that yields are farmers still exposed to the vagaries of
increased – important as that undoubtedly is – world markets, and meaning that the
but that the increases are much more under the benefits of processing and value-adding
control of the farmers and communities that remain in the North.
produce them, in contrast to a high input
agricultural model where the benefits go to the • Much Southern-based organic production is
equipment and chemical manufacturers and for export to the industrialised world,
seed merchants. raising the issues of ‘food miles’ and how
best to protect local food security and self-
Economic drivers
reliance. However, local and national
Across the South, engagement with the organic markets are developing in many
lucrative and rapidly growing organic foods poorer countries, notably Brazil, Egypt and
market in the industrialised world is still the Argentina.
main driving force behind the development of
the certified organic sector. Organic certification • Expertise in certification is still
can generate big premia for primary producers, overwhelmingly concentrated in the
especially from export markets. Although some industrialised world, and achieving
governments are now recognising the export certification is a major barrier to many
potential of organic produce, its development farmers in poor countries who lack literacy
so far has been driven almost exclusively by the and other skills and facilities necessary.
NGO sector – often despite official hostility.
What is needed
Remaining challenges
This report makes some clear and practical
This report goes on to show that some key recommendations for how organic and
challenges remain, however. These include the agroecological agriculture should be supported
following issues: and promoted. Some of these are highlighted
below.
• Hostility from conventionally minded
Southern governments and established • Governments in the South should rethink
corporate and bureaucratic interests are still the promotion of artificial pesticides and
holding back the potential of organic and fertilisers on poorer farmers through
agroecological agriculture. extension workers, subsidies and media
campaigns, and at the very least remove
• Many Southern-based NGOs promoting some of the barriers to NGO activity that
organic and agroecological approaches face currently hinder the growth of the organics
crippling funding shortages, and are sector. At best, Southern governments should
prevented from continuing their work often begin to re-orient their priorities –
for want of very small amounts of money in educational, institutional and legal –
comparison to that spent in the promotion towards promoting ecological and
of conventional agriculture. sustainable agriculture.
• Mechanisms for transferring indigenous • Where de facto organic farming is practised,
knowledge from one locale to another need it is vital to help farmers develop self-
further development and resourcing. confidence in their traditional knowledge so
that they do not immediately switch to
chemicals once they can afford them, as a
6

9. result of having been told for years that how the movement develops over the
industrial farming is ‘more modern’. coming years, and developing synergies
between social and environmental objectives.
• Security of land tenure is essential for
farmers to have sufficient incentive to • In addition, an agreement within the organic
develop long-term organic management movement itself is needed on the inclusion of
strategies, and in areas where inequality wider social and environmental criteria such
of ownership is especially pronounced land as ‘food miles’ and workers’ rights.
reform will be necessary for ecological
Looking to the future
farming to become widespread.
The dominant international worldview amongst
• Much greater support must be devoted to policy-makers and opinion-formers still holds
those grassroots NGOs and projects that are that food security for a growing world
the driving force behind the development of population can only be achieved by promoting
organic agriculture in the South. This ever more intensive chemical-dependent
requires a further mobilisation within agriculture. The evidence from this report is
Northern-based agencies to develop their that this viewpoint is dangerously flawed.
own projects and work with Southern-based Firstly, the relationship between food security
partners, and – crucially – greater financial and food production is complex – famines
support from the relevant funding bodies. occur because people lack the money to buy
food, not solely because their own crops have
• Various successful projects are beginning to failed. Secondly, chemical-dependent agriculture
transfer the economic benefits of food is fundamentally unsustainable. It exchanges
processing to organic farmers in the South. long-term ecological health (involving issues
These include the making of fruit into like biodiversity and topsoil quality) for short-
conserves in the Andes to the extraction of term productivity gains, and new developments
sunflower oil from hand-powered mills in in the genetic manipulation
Kenya. More resources and investment in of plants and animals are set to worsen this
these frequently low-tech solutions could disastrous trajectory. Thirdly, food security
have significant paybacks for ecological is endangered by encouragement for farmers
farmers across to opt for high yielding mono-crops requiring
the Third World. substantial inputs. If the crops fail farmers are
in danger of losing their land to cover bad
• Better links need to be fostered between debts – further contributing to rural-urban drift
different disciplines and approaches within in the South.
the ‘alternative’ agricultural movement –
bringing together (for example) foresters, Ultimately, we believe the key aim at a practical
researchers, livestock producers and level must be to knit together the different
horticulturalists in regional, national and aspects and drivers of the organic and
international networks. agroecological approach into a coherent
international movement which is capable of
• The development of certification capacity in providing an alternative to the conventional
the South – by governments working in system. As ecological agriculture becomes more
tandem with established NGOs – needs successful economically, and an increasing
to be boosted to prevent the need for costly number of farmers throughout the South decide
external inspections. – independently or with assistance from NGOs
– to jump off the chemicals treadmill, the
• Joined-up thinking between the organic and chances of this real Green Revolution
fair trade movements could be crucial in succeeding become greater every day.
The Real Green Revolution 7

10. Acknowledgements Development, Togo), Mª Fernanda de A. C.
Fonseca (Brazil).
We extend our grateful thanks to the
following individuals who have helped with N M Abdul Gaffar (Stassen Natural Foods,
this project, primarily through responding to Sri Lanka), Yvan Gautronneau (INRA, Lyon,
our survey, but in other instances through France), Maheswar Ghimire (Ecological
helping us make contact with key individuals, Services Centre, Nepal), Boghos Ghougassian
providing access to libraries and databases, (Middle East Centre for the Transfer of
and acting as translators. Alternative Technology, Lebanon), Nicolien
van der Grijp: (Vrije Universiteit,
Jacqueline Haessig Alleje (Rizal Dairy Farms, Amsterdam), Papa Gueye, (Fédération des
Philippines), Mustafa Akyuz (ETKO, Agropasteurs de Diender, Senegal), Carolyn
Turkey), Kossi Ahonyo (Centre de Promotion Foster (University of Wales, Aberystwyth).
des Initiatives de Base et de l’Environnement,
Togo), Marta Astier (Interdisciplinary Group Rob Hardy (Soil Association), Dr. Zahid
for Appropriate Rural Technology, Mexico). Hossain (Proshika, Bangladesh), Liz Hoskins
(Gaia Foundation).
Reena Bansal (Ambootia Tea Estates, India),
David Barkin (Universidad Autonoma Rosie Jackson (Soil Association), Pauline
Metropolitana, Mexico), Birgitt Boor (Bioherb, Jones (Kitty Seed Project, Gambia), Mariam
Germany), Angelina M. Briones (MASIPEG, Jorjadze (Elkana, Georgia).
Philippines), Edith Lammerts van Bueren
(Louis Bolk Institut, Netherlands), Helen J.G. Kanyi (Green Farming Group, Kenya),
Broutschert (Cardiff University), Kath Burton J.J. Kanjanga (Lipangwe Organic Manure
(Soil Association), Everard Byer (Trinidad and Demonstration Farm, Malawi) Nichole
Tobago Organic Agriculture Movement). Kenton, (IIED), Mustafa Koc (Ryerson
K. Cadoret (Henry Doubleday Research University, Canada) Avaz Koocheki (College
Association), of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University, Iran) Jon
Koshey (Spices Board of India)
Tadeu Caldas, (Ecotropic, UK), Daniel
Mones Cazon (FAEA, Argentina), Oscar Mao Lamin (Zhejiang Camel Transworld
Mendieta Chavez (Assoc. de Organisationes Organic Food Company Limited, CHINA),
de Product Ecologicos de Bolivia), Fernando Nic Lampkin (University of Wales,
Cruz (Cosecha del Sol, Mexico). Aberystwyth). Marcos Lena (Brazil) Huafen
Li (Agroecology Research Institute, China
Alexander Daniel (Institute for Integrated Agricultural University), Judy Longbottom
Rural Development, India), Sue Edwards (IIED), Emile Lutz (Planeta Verde, Brazil).
(Institute for Sustainable Development,
Tigray, Ethiopia), Marck van Esch (Bo Friedel Mallinckrodt (SARD Prize), Justo
Weevil, Holland), Bo van Elzakker (Agroeco, Mantilla (Ecological and Medicinal Plant
Netherlands), Lal Emmanuel (Nagenhiru Institute, Peru), P. Mariaselvam (People’s
Foundation, Sri Lanka). Agricultural Farm, Tamil Nadu, India), Laura
Martinez (Cardiff University), Prof. Peter
Caporali Fabio (Universitia degli studia della Midmore (University of Wales, Aberystwyth),
Tuscia, Viterbo, Italy), Ali Faisal (Hyderabad, Luiz Carlos Mior (Cardiff University),
India), Luciano Florit (Universidade Regional B. Mohan (Indian Bio Organic Tea
de Blumenau, Brazil), Komla Foly Association).
(Groupement des Jeunes pour l’Entraide et le
8

11. Elizabeth Nabanja-Makumbi (Mirembe Self (Greenpeace), Anna J. Wieczorek (Vrije
Help Organisation of Uganda), Mamseedy Universiteit, Amsterdam), Jean Marc von der
Njai (Gambia Agricultural Extension Service), Weid (Assessorias e Servicios a Projectos em
Gunnel Axelsson Nycander (Swedish Agricultura Alternitiva, Brazil), John
International Development Agency). Wilkinson (Brazil).
Sunny Okwudire (Regfos Green Virginia Zeneteno (Organic Chile Certifier),
Commission, Nigeria). Anke Zimpel (University of Wales,
Aberystwyth).
Suzanne Padel (University of Wales,
Aberystwyth), Fernando Pia (CIESA, Particular thanks are due to Bernward Geier
Argentina); Carlo Ponzio (Sultan Organic and Camilla Toulmin (of IFOAM and IIED
Farm, Egypt), Kranti Prakash (Ragavendra respectively) who generously accepted
Niwas, India). invitations to referee this report. We are
indebted to them for their insights and advice
Vanaja Ramprasad (The Green Foundation, on improving the content and presentation of
Bangalore, India), Sarath Ranaweera this report. Any outstanding errors remain
(Biofoods, Sri Lanka) C. Sundara Rao the responsibility of the authors.
(Enfield Agrobase, India), Paul Richards
(Wageningen Agricultural University, The The authors welcome feedback and
Netherlands), Esther Roycroft (Henry comments on this report which can be
Doubleday Research Association) Guido addressed to parrottn@cardiff.ac.uk
Ruivenkamp (Wageningen Agricultural
University, The Netherlands).
Abdoulaye Sarr (Recours a la Terre, Senegal),
Guillermo Scarlato (CIEDUR, Uruguay),
Carsten Schuettel (Rapunzel, Germany),
Albert Schwarz (Shiré Highland Organic
Growers Organisation, Malawi), Nadia
Scialabba (FAO), Jata Shankar (Mana Seva,
India), Vandana Shiva, Research Foundation
for Science, Technology and Ecology, India)
C. Shastry, (Phalada Agro Research
Foundations, India), Richard Soita (Hope
Community Development Programme,
Kenya), Erika Sosa (GreenAqua, Ecuador),
Roland Sturm (Hess Natur-Textilien).
Laura Thornton (DfiD).
Narayana Upadhyaya (Skal, India), Fr.
Gregorius Utomo, (The World Food Day
Farmers' And Fishermen's Movement Of
Indonesia).
Ong Kung Wai (HUMUS Consultancy and
Marketing, Malaysia), Fred Wajje (World
Vision, Uganda), Stokely Webster
The Real Green Revolution 9

12. 1 – Methodology and approach (Sen, 1986). In this sense arguments as to
whether different forms of agriculture, such
1.1 – Context
as GM, intensive or organic systems can ‘feed
At the dawn of the twenty-first century two the world’ are somewhat simplistic (Geier,
competing agricultural models are 1998). Other significant intermediary factors
positioning themselves in an attempt to win influence access to, and distribution of, food
loyalty, support and commitment from on the global and regional scales, and within
farmers, policy makers and consumers individual communities (Woodward, 1998).
(Marsden, 2001). One, a biotechnology-led This said, different models of food
extension of the Green Revolution, holds the production do play a role in shaping these
promise of feeding the world through entitlements: through making use of different
improved yields, greater resistance to diseases mixes of labour and capital (and increasingly
and greater efficiency through the nowadays, intellectual property); of locally
manipulation of the genetic structure of produced and imported inputs and; different
plants (Pretty, 1998). Critics argue that the market orientations.
risks involved in releasing GMOs into the
environment are unknown and unpredictable Such differences are also reflected in the
(ESRC Global Environmental Change research structures that help inform and
Programme, 1999). Moreover, particularly develop these different models. Conventional
in the South, the adaptation of GMO agricultural research tends to be
technology implies a huge and unacceptable laboratory/experimental farm based, often
transfer of intellectual property rights (and aiming at producing universally applicable,
thus power) from farmers to seed companies context-breaking solutions (e.g. hybrid
and laboratories (Shiva, 2001). seeds). Organic research, by contrast, tends
to be more diffuse, ‘farm based’,
The other model, which we explore here, of participatory and draws upon local
organic and agroecological farming is based knowledge and tradition. Significantly, it is
upon developing and maximising the use of also focused upon ‘public goods’, resources
locally available natural resources to and techniques that are not readily
maintain and build soil fertility and to deter patentable but which are, generally, freely
pests and diseases. It is a decentralised, available. This may significantly contribute
bottom-up approach to improving to explaining why organic research attracts
agricultural capacity that relies upon, only a fraction of investment from private
promotes and celebrates diversity. Critics of sources compared to conventional and
this approach claim that reliance on natural biotechnological approaches.
and often traditional, production systems
1.2 – Aims and objectives
will prove inadequate in the task of feeding
the world either now or in fifty years time – This report was commissioned to provide an
when world population levels are predicted overview of the ‘state of the art’ of organic
to have doubled (Pinstrup-Andersen, 2000). and agroecological farming systems in the
‘South’ (see below for an explanation of this
The ghost of Malthus appears to still haunt terminology). The primary focus of the
debates about food security, despite report is on identifying systems, technologies
widespread recognition that it is not food and methods which are proving effective in
production per se which determines whether increasing yields, eliminating (or significantly
the world is fed or not (Grolink, 2000), but reducing) the need for chemical inputs and
the political and economic structures which (as a ‘second tier’ objective), in increasing
provide, or deny, access to ‘food entitlements’ farmer incomes.
10

13. The aims of the report are:
engaged with OAA are twofold: those of
• to identify specific (and recently disseminating existing knowledge through
developed) projects/systems and, through training, participatory research and
this, identify possibilities for developing experimentation, and differentiating OAA
and supporting initiatives that have produce through effective yet economic
hitherto been neglected or underdeveloped certification processes.
at both research and project level;
Recent years have witnessed a surge of
• (in line with the above) to seek to identify interest in and rapid development of OAA
gaps in current knowledge and support; in many parts of the South. The convergence
of several sets of interests (commercial,
• to provide indicators of likely future developmental, and environmental) around
developments (both in research agendas the OAA agenda is in itself encouraging.
and project development). After years of being marginalised OAA is
becoming increasingly accepted by the
In meeting the first aim we provide a broad ‘mainstream’. The most significant
overview of the state of development of manifestation of this is the recognition by
Organic and Agroecological approaches the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation
(OAA) across the South, focusing on (FAO) of the role that OAA can play in
countries where a critical mass has begun to promoting ‘sustainable agriculture’. Given
develop and where innovative new this growth of interest we anticipate a
approaches are being put in place. We significant expansion in both levels of
identify a number of case studies where OAA production and the ‘knowledge base’
is presently proving successful in meeting a surrounding OAA in the very near future.
range of diverse objectives: improving yields, This notwithstanding, there remain
food security, farmers’ incomes and health significant practical and attitudinal barriers
status, and reversing established patterns to its further expansion.
of land degradation. We identify in our
1.3 – Scope and definitions
recommendations potential avenues for
assisting with the development of OAA: For the purpose of this study we have
building links with existing research and stepped aside from debates over what
extension networks, engaging with constitutes a ‘developing’ or ‘Third World’
established grassroots NGOs, and country and opted for a broad geographical
strengthening effective advocacy of the need definition of the ‘South’: one which covers
for, and benefits of, OAA amongst policy all of Africa, Asia (with the exception of
makers, farmers and consumers. Japan), Latin America and the Caribbean.
This approach gives us the scope to examine
Identifying gaps in knowledge has proven a a wide range of organic and agroecological
more challenging task. The nature of OAA, practices existing in different climatic,
rooted in specific ecological, agronomic and topographic and socio-economic situations.
cultural contexts, militates against identifying The systems and methods that we have
single key research issues that can provide examined vary significantly from, at one
universal solutions. For this reason we have extreme, those that primarily meet household
not singled out specific research issues food requirements where surpluses are
relating to say, soil fertility or pest bartered or sold, to market (often export)
management. Our overriding impression focused production systems. These different
from the literature reviews and responses to orientations imply quite different rationales
our survey is that the main priorities of those amongst producers and lead us into a
The Real Green Revolution 11

14. discussion of the similarities and differences weeds and other pests.’
between organic farming and agroecology. (USDA, 1980 cited in Scialabba and
Aubert1998)
Legal definitions of organic produce are
codified in a number of formal standards that Table 1 (below) expands on this definition by
define the regimes that producers (or exploring some of the key aims, principles
processors) need to work within in order to and management strategies employed in
claim organic status. Globally there are more organic agriculture.
than 100 different organic certification
Table 1: Key aims, principles and
systems in place (Van Elzakker, cited in
management practices of organic farming
Scialabba and Aubert, 1998). Of greatest
Aims and principles
importance are the international standards:
To develop, as far as possible, closed flows of
the EU Organic Directive Regulation (CEC, nutrients and organic matter within the farm and
1991), the IFOAM (International Federation therefore promote the ecological resilience of the
of Organic Agricultural Movements) Basic farm unit.
Standards (IFOAM, 1999) and the guidelines
produced by the FAO/WHO Codex Maintenance and improvement of soil fertility
Alimentarius Commission (1999).1 By nature • Mixed livestock and arable farming
these are prescriptive, defining the applications • Use of farm compost, mulches and green manure
(e.g. pesticides and fertilisers) and processes • Recycling and composting of vegetative matter
(e.g. irradiation and genetic modification) (including ‘off-farm’ materials)
which are and are not permitted in food • Use of crop rotation, fallows and strip cropping
described as ‘organic’. These standards are • Use of nitrogen-fixing plants
concerned primarily with consumer protection
• Mixed cropping to maintain soil cover and
and intended to provide unambiguous maximise nutrient availability
guarantees to consumers who are in general
• Use of deep-rooting plants to recycle nutrients
prepared to pay premium prices for organic
• Agroforestry
produce. Detailed analysis of these standards,
and of the differences between them, serves • Use of contour bunds, terracing and other
mechanical methods to prevent soil loss
little purpose here. Of more interest are the
characteristics, principles and working
Pest and disease control
practices involved in organic production,2
which we explore below. • Crop rotations and intercropping (both of different
species and geni)
One widely used definition of organic • Companion planting
production is that provided by the United • Use of resistant varieties
States Department of Agriculture (USDA): • Use of alleopathic / antagonistic plants
• Use of physical barriers
‘A production system which avoids or largely (e.g. tree breaks or insect traps)
excludes the use of synthetic compounded • Use of natural pesticides
fertilisers, pesticides, growth regulators and
• Use of biological controls, such as predators
livestock feed additives. To the maximum
• Control of carriers
extent feasible, organic farming systems rely
upon crop rotations, animal manures, • Hand picking
legumes, green manures, off-farm organic
Adopted from Harris et al.., (1998)
wastes and aspects of biological pest control and Scialabba, (1999)
to maintain soil productivity and tilth, to
supply plant nutrients and to control insects,
12

15. Notably both the definition and the key aims, ‘organically produced’, and de facto organic
principles and management practices provided production. Certified organic production
above make no reference to social justice or forms the basis of what is now a
economic viability, both of which are key phenomenally rapidly growing market.
features in determining the acceptability of This may however represent just the tip of
OAA to consumers and producers alike. the iceberg in terms of land that is managed
The importance of these issues is addressed according to organic precepts but is not
later in the paper – for the moment we (like certified as such. Such de facto organic
the authors above) confine ourselves to farming appears to be particularly prevalent
discussing the agronomic aspects of OAA. in resource-poor and/or agriculturally
marginal regions where local populations
The characteristics and management principles have a limited engagement with the cash
discussed above are not solely restricted to economy. In such situations, farmers have
organic farming. ‘Conventional’ farmers may little alternative but to rely upon locally
well employ some of these techniques. For available natural resources to maintain soil
example, livestock and/or green manures are fertility and to combat pests and diseases.
used in many ‘conventional’ farming systems In some instances sophisticated systems of
as a means of building or maintaining soil crop rotation, soil management and pest and
fertility. However, they are increasingly being disease control have evolved solely on the
replaced by artificial inputs, as the logic of basis of traditional knowledge. The first case
specialisation in a globalised market place study in this report, of the Chagga Home
favours the development of monocultural Gardens in Tanzania (see over) provides an
farming systems at the expense of mixed ones. example of an intensive, sustainable, multi-
functional organic system. Such systems are
Innovations in organic farming methods associated with remote areas, often involving
(often driven by the need to meet standards) culturally homogenous populations.
have a relevance that potentially extends Although primarily subsistence-oriented,
beyond the organic sector (FAO, 1998 p.9). these systems often also produce a range of
In Israel, for example, greenhouse cash crops.
management techniques pioneered by organic
farmers have now become widely adopted by As in many instances there is no official
conventional farmers (Raviv, 2000).3 recognition of the organic status of this land,
Similarly, principles of community ecology there are very few reliable estimates of the
developed to control pests in European extent to which de facto organic farming is
orchards have also benefited ‘conventional’ practised in the South. Estimates of the extent
growers (Brown 1999a and b). While of de facto organic farming vary widely. Our
conventional producers may adopt some impression is that the amount of land in the
organic techniques, organic farming remains South farmed on this basis exceeds, probably
differentiated from conventional approaches by a significant factor, land that is formally
by virtue of its exclusive reliance on natural certified as being organic.4 Kotschi (2000),
methods of building soil fertility and claims that ‘80% of registered organic land
combating pest and diseases. in the Third World has not undergone any
change in management practice’, suggesting
Agricultural systems that rely exclusively on that there is a large pool of organically
natural methods of building soil fertility and managed land which is not recognised as such,
combating pests and diseases fall into two that could readily be certified if market
categories: certified organic production, conditions permitted.
which has been inspected and is verified as
The Real Green Revolution 13

16. De facto organic farming is an approach that for staples (e.g. millet, beans and sorghum)
is embraced and celebrated by agroecology. and fodder. It is their home gardens that are of
This approach shares much common ground primary interest as they embody many key
with the ‘standards-driven’ organic model. elements of organic and agroecological
Both promote a ‘closed system’ approach, management strategy. The features of the
use multiple and diverse cropping and rely Chagga Home Gardens include:
on biological sources for building soil fertility
and controlling pests and diseases. • Capture of snowmelt water for irrigation
Agroecology, however, is more specifically through an elaborate system of
rooted in the experience of the South channelling
(particularly Latin America), and places
greater emphasis in ‘acknowledging the • A diversity of cropping for cash and
socio-cultural and ecological co-evolution consumption purposes, including bananas
and inseparability of social and natural (15 varieties), coffee, yams, beans,
systems’ (Norgard, 1987). Thus, agroecology medicinal plants, bees and livestock (see
contains a more explicit social component below)
than the organic approach, whose focus is
more upon verifiable technical standards. • Maintaining cattle, pigs and poultry that
Further, agroecological research is more provide both protein and manure.
strongly orientated towards the social (Mammals are stall-fed with fodder from
sciences, embodying a ‘human ecology’ the trees and grasses from the plain and
approach (Glaeser, 1995). Agroecological the manure recycled, providing an
research is more culturally specific and more ongoing source of fertility)
explicitly adopts a ‘farmer first’ philosophy.
Agroecological systems do not however • A design to maximise diversity – elaborate
provide internationally recognised standards patterns of vertical zoning exist –
and therefore do not provide the same providing niches within the gardens for
opportunities for attracting market premia as different species and a range of sunny /
certified organic systems. While some tension cooler conditions
exists between the ‘standards driven’
approach of organic production, and the • The use of a wide range of woody species
more culturally relativist approach of (Fernandes identifies and lists the
agroecology, practitioners and advocates of functions of thirty nine), many of which
the two approaches share a broadly common are multifunctional, providing fruit,
philosophy and agenda, and in many fodder, fuel and medicines as well as
instances work closely together. nutrients and crop protection
Case study 1: the Chagga Home Gardens • Cropping patterns designed to maximise
(Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania). continuity of yield
The Chagga Home Gardens provide an • Bees, used to provide honey and for
excellent model of integrated and sustainable pollination.
land management systems that use a minimum
of external inputs. The Chagga people farm The area is one of the most densely
the southern and eastern slopes of Kilimanjaro populated in rural Africa with about 500
(900-1900m above sea level). Most also have people per square kilometre. Average plot
lowland plots on the drier plains, within 20km sizes are small, just over 1 hectare, and
of their home gardens. These are mostly used support households with, on average, 9
14

17. family members. The system has been sustainable agriculture is an extremely weak
maintained in a stable form for more than form of agroecology, which ‘fails to address
100 years. Although individual crops may either the rapid degradation of the natural
sometimes fail, multiple failures are resource base, or resolve the debt trap and
unknown. Growing a range of cash crops profit squeeze in which many farmers find
(bananas, coffee and, in extremis, timber) themselves trapped’.
also provides some protection against market
price fluctuations. While there are some Sustainable agriculture may be likened to
concerns that the system is approaching its a broad church, which attracts a diverse
productivity limits within the present congregation with a range of different ‘core
management regime, strategies for further beliefs’. They include those whose primary
enhancing management techniques may yet concerns are with ecology and ‘farmer first’
be developed. Some believe that the approaches, but also ‘high –tech advocates
principles of this management system could who propagate a second green revolution
be successfully transferred to similar upland with gene technology and a new generation
areas in other parts of Africa: particularly of agrochemicals’ (Kotschi, 2000 p.653).
Rwanda, Ethiopia and Kenya, although local The attempt to include all these interests
cultural and ecological differences would under a single defining banner leads to
need to be taken into account. sustainable agriculture ‘lacking a clear
profile’ (ibid.) and lacking clear indicators
(Sources: Fernandes (undated), Harrison (1987),
or definitions of how it differs from
Küchli (1996))
‘unsustainable agriculture’.
A third approach, incorporating elements of
both the organic and agroecological models, These disagreements aside, organic,
is that of ‘sustainable agriculture’. This has agroecological and sustainable approaches
been a focus of activity and research within to agriculture share common methodological
the ‘development’ field for at least a decade. and theoretical ground in their use of
It is focused around three core principles: participative approaches to agricultural
those of ‘ecological soundness, social (and rural) research and development.
responsibility and economical viability’ This participative approach to research and
(Thrupp, 1996). Many projects and development has, in the last two decades,
programmes under the rubric of sustainable grown into a significant discipline in its
agriculture explicitly aim to eliminate or own right, generating a substantial body
reduce the use of artificial inputs, use local of literature. (For examples of work in this
resources to build soil fertility and increase area see: Haverkort et al.. 1991; Alders et
diversity within farming systems (for al.. 1993, Conway 1985; van Veldehuizen,
examples of such projects see Thrupp 1996; 1997; Gündel 1998; Pretty et al.., 1999 and
Whiteside 1998; Pretty and Hine 2000b). Bainbridge et al.. 2000). With a focus on the
However, both the organic and importance of traditional knowledge and on
agroecological movements experience some innovation, experimentation and diffusion of
unease about the looseness of definitions agricultural techniques, this body of literature
embraced by sustainable agriculture. As with contains much of relevance to understanding
many other applications of the term how OAA can be better promoted, and we
‘sustainability’, tensions can often arise over draw upon it where it specifically relates to
operational definitions of ‘ecological organic / agroecological systems.
soundness’, ‘social responsibility’ and
economic viability (Butler-Flora 1998). In this report we focus both on ‘whole farm’
Rosset and Altieri (1997, p.283) argue that systems, and on individual techniques. Whilst
The Real Green Revolution 15

18. the first group represents exclusively organic of ‘grey literature’ in providing current and
or agroecological approaches, the latter informed commentary on developments in
group may form component parts of organic, the field. Many key texts were only identified
agroecological or sustainable farming as a result of the survey that we conducted.
systems, be transferable across all three Many were e-mailed to us as ‘works in
agricultural approaches and, in many cases, progress’ or internal reports prepared as
also be applicable to conventional and more funding bids or project evaluations and not
intensive systems. originally intended for publication. We
acknowledge the invaluable contribution of
1.4 – Research methods
the many individuals and agencies who took
The information presented in this report has the trouble to assist our project in this way.
been generated by a desk-based literature Thus, in drawing together this literature
review, supplemented by a semi-structured review we have tapped into, and sought to
survey of organic organisations, NGOs and synthesise, a highly fragmented but rapidly
academics and a selected number of face-to- growing knowledge base.
face and telephone interviews. Details are
provided below of the work undertaken in Survey
each of these three areas. In addition to the literature search a survey
was undertaken of organic organisations,
Literature reviews development and environmental agencies
The literature relating to organic and with an involvement in OAA, and informed
agroecological farming is spread across academics. The initial sample frame for the
a number of sources. At the outset three core survey was compiled from the IFOAM
sources of literature were identified: the membership directory (IFOAM, 2000), from
organic movement’s own publications which we selected all IFOAM members in
(particularly those from IFOAM), those of the South, together with those in the
development and environment agencies, industrialised world claiming to have active
and broader academic literature. In addition involvement in the South. Relevant
a number of electronic information resources development and environmental
were visited, including remote access organisations and academics with a known
catalogues, the Web of Science and the Index interest in the field were identified and added
of Theses.5 Keyword searches were to the list. Requests for information were
undertaken on ‘organic farming’ and also sent out on the networks of the
‘agroecology’. Between them these sources International Sociological Association RC40
provided threads into a varied and eclectic group and the food network of the
range of fields of literature. International Human Development Project.
Throughout the project, a ‘snowball’ effect
The role and potential of OAA in the South was generated as feedback from these initial
is attracting interest from a range of contacts continued to generate further
disciplinary backgrounds including: suggestions of individuals and organisations
agricultural, plant and soil science, rural and to contact and which continued to elicit
third world development, rural sociology, responses throughout, and beyond, the
geography and marketing. Moreover, the contracted period of research.
literature is spread across a range of types of
sources: academic journals, trade Given the time constraints of this project,
publications, conference proceedings and and the broad range of interests of the
agency reports. As the study progressed we organisations and individuals whom we
became increasingly aware of the importance wished to contact, the survey itself was
16

19. carried out on an informal, semi-structured • Voluntary Services Overseas, London
basis. In preference to a questionnaire
format, which may well have limited the • International Institute for Environment
types and range of responses elicited, a letter and Development (Camilla Toulmin, Judy
was written (and translated into French, Longbottom and Nichole Kenton)
Spanish and Portuguese) outlining the project
and requesting details of projects, good • The Gaia Foundation, London (Liz
practice, policy and research issues. More Hoskins and Sue Edwards, Institute for
than 400 copies were sent out throughout Sustainable Development, Tigray)
December 2000 and January 2001 (the vast
majority by email) and more than 150 • International Human Development
responses received by the end of February. Centre, Amsterdam
Interviews and visits • University of Cordoba (Prof. Eduardo
In addition to the literature review and Guzman)
survey, a limited number of visits were made
to institutions identified as having specialist • The Soil Association, Bristol (Rob Hardy)
knowledge or expertise relevant to this study.
These are listed below. In most cases these In addition to these, a visit was made to
visits had the dual purpose of using library Biofach (the World Organic Trade Fair) held
resources and meeting with informed at Nürnberg, Germany in February 2001.
individuals working at those institutes – This proved particularly fruitful, enabling
in all cases these interviews were of an contact to be made with many producers
informal nature. from the South and with representatives from
several leading international organic
• The Welsh Organics Centre, Aberystwyth organisations.6 These meetings and
(Nic Lampkin, Suzanne Padel, Peter conversations significantly helped shape the
Midmore and Anke Zimpel) final structure and emphasis of the report.
The Real Green Revolution 17

20. 2. The world grows organic of the extent of organic production on a
global basis. Drawing upon the ITC report
2.1 – Estimating the extent of global organic
(1999) and other data sources, they identify
production
around 15.8 million hectares of land around
Only in recent years has published data the world that are managed organically.
regarding the extent of organic agriculture Argentina is clearly the largest certified
in the South become available. The organic producer in the South with 3 million
International Trade Centre (ITC) recently ha. (1.77% of its total agricultural land)
published a directory on products and under organic production. This accounts for
market development in the organic sector almost 19 % of total global organically
(1999) with the aim of fostering trade managed land. Other Latin American
opportunities, especially for developing countries account for around 1.3% of the
countries. This provides a country-by- global total of organically managed land.
country analysis of organic production and Africa and Asia account for only fractions
demand, together with details of available of a percent (0.14% and 0.33% respectively)
produce and the principal trading and (Willer and Yussefi, 2001, p.28).9
development organisations. It also provides
some details (though sketchy in places), Whilst these figures provide a useful
about the profiles of ‘non-certified’ activity. overview, there are evident omissions in the
data. For example, there is no data for many
More recently the German organic countries known to be exporting organic
organisation, Stiftung Ökologie & Landbau produce to the industrialised world. Walaga
(SÖL) published a statistical digest of global (2000) identifies a number of African
organic production (Willer and Yussefi, countries which are known to be exporting
2000, 2001). These figures provide the basis organic produce but which do not appear in
for a more comparative analysis of the extent these tables. These countries include: Algeria,
of organic production in different parts of Benin, Burkina Faso, Comoro Islands, Ivory
the world (see tables 2.1. and 2.2, below for Coast, Madagascar, Morocco, Mozambique,
summaries). A further useful data source is Senegal and South Africa (see table 3.2). Such
the annual IFOAM members Directory discrepancies occur due to a number of
(IFOAM, 2000), which lists members by factors. In part there is the problem of a time
country, thereby permitting proxy estimates lag in data collection. Even in the EU, which
of activity rates. 7 has a strong data gathering capacity, it is
difficult to collate information that is less
The FAO has also prepared a number of than two years out of date (Foster, pers.
studies of organic systems on a global scale comm.). The rapid expansion of certified
(FAO, 1998, 1999, 2000a; Scialabba 1999, organic production in the South and the
2000; Scialabba and Aubert, 1998).8 They more limited capacity for data collection
have recently commissioned a number of mean that the figures provided in Tables 2.1
specialist reports and are in the process of and 2.2 are almost certainly underestimates.
constructing a database of organic literature Other factors may play a key role: the cost
(FAO, 2001). Thus the literature providing and other constraining factors of certification
global perspectives on OAA, while not (discussed in section 4. 6), means that such
extensive, is rapidly growing and is likely data is only likely to be collected for land
to be more substantial in forthcoming years. where much, or all, of the crop is destined for
export markets. The only likely exceptions to
The SÖL reports (Willer and Yussefi, 2000 this are those few countries that have
& 2001) provide valuable early estimates established their own (IFOAM accredited)
18

21. Table 2.1 – Certified organic land by country (hectares)
Latin America Africa Asia
>1 Million ha. Argentina (3M)
100,000 – 1 M ha. Brazil
25-100,000 ha. Mexico
5-25,000 ha. Paraguay, Peru, Tunisia, Uganda Turkey, China, Japan
Costa Rica, Bolivia,
Guatemala
10
1-5,000 ha. El Salvador, Chile, Tanzania, Egypt, Papua New Guinea ,
Nicaragua, Uruguay Zimbabwe Israel, India, Taiwan
<1,000 ha. Suriname, Colombia Cameroon, Mauritius, Republic of Korea,
Malawi Sri Lanka, Honk Kong,
Lebanon, Philippines
Known existence of Ecuador, Honduras Burkina Faso, Ghana, Pakistan
organic production but Zambia
figures not available
Adapted from Willer and Yussefi, (2000 & 2001)
Table 2.2 – Certified organic land by country (% of agricultural land)
Organic land as % of
domestic agricultural total Latin America Africa Asia
> 1% Argentina (1.77%)
0.5 – 0.99% Papua New Guinea
0.15-0.5% Costa Rica, El Salvador, Mauritius Japan
Surinam, Guatemala
0.025-0.14% Paraguay, Mexico, Tunisia, Egypt, Uganda Turkey, Republic of
Brazil, Peru Korea, Lebanon
<0.025% Bolivia, Nicaragua, Tanzania, Cameroon, Sri Lanka, China, India
Chile, Uruguay, Zimbabwe, Malawi
Colombia
Adapted from Willer and Yussefi, (2000 & 2001)
certifying bodies, where certification costs are (see Table 2.3, over). These provide a useful
likely to be more in line with the premia that proxy method for estimating levels of OAA,
producers can expect to obtain on local which cover both certified and informal,
markets.11 Organic production systems which ‘de facto’ approaches. Although in some
work on a ‘trust’ basis, agroecological and cases IFOAM membership figures for
traditional ‘de facto’ organic systems will not individual countries correspond with the
be included in these figures. Between them amount of certified organic land, there are
these are likely to significantly outweigh many instances where they do not. For
formally certified holdings.12 example, IFOAM has members in many
countries that are not identified as having
An alternative approach to gauging levels of any certified organically managed land.
OAA is through analysis of IFOAM Some of these countries (notably Kenya,
(International Federation of Organic Senegal, Venezuela, the Philippines and South
Agricultural Movements) membership figures Africa) have a relatively high number of
The Real Green Revolution 19

22. Table 2.3 – IFOAM Members by Country
No. of IFOAM members Latin America Africa Asia
39 India
18 Argentina
16 Kenya China
10 Senegal
9 Venezuela Philippines
8 Chile, Mexico
7 Brazil Burkina Faso, Egypt Turkey
5 Bolivia South Africa Sri Lanka
4 Ecuador, Peru Malaysia, Pakistan
3 Costa Rica, Guatemala, Benin, Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal,
Nicaragua, Paraguay Congo, Ghana, Malawi, Thailand
Togo, Uganda,
Zimbabwe
2 Columbia, Uruguay Bangladesh, Israel,
Vietnam
1 Cuba, Trinidad and Algeria, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Korea,
Tobago Ivory Coast, Lebanon, Palestine,
Madagascar, Mali, Taiwan
Nigeria, Somalia,
Tanzania
Adapted from IFOAM (2000)
IFOAM members, yet there is no data organic farming is practised, although the
available for organically managed land balance of views suggests that the amount
within these countries. Many of the of de facto organically managed land almost
organisations affiliated to IFOAM are quite certainly outstrips ‘certified’ organic land,
evidently community and/or peasant farming probably by a considerable amount. Informal
organisations who would be unlikely to have use of OAA appears to be concentrated in
to have much engagement with export specific countries and particularly in certain
markets. Thus the IFOAM Directory types of area (discussed in section 2.3
arguably provides a more realistic assessment below). It is often a ‘hidden’ form of
of levels of the existence of non-export agriculture, rarely the subject of interest from
oriented OAA within individual countries. government extension agencies and only
Differences between data contained in tables sometimes the focus of development and aid
2.1 and 2, and table 2.3 offer clues as to projects. It is likely to be oriented primarily
countries where de facto organic agriculture towards local and regional markets, which
may be practised on a significant scale.13 further obscures information gathering as to
the extent to which it is practised. In view
Such deductive reasoning is useful since there of these factors, the development of any
are few other ways of identifying the extent definitive global estimates of the extent of de
and existence of de facto organic farming. facto and uncertified OAA is an unlikely
Our literature review and survey both prospect in the foreseeable future.
strongly suggest that OAA is practised more
extensively than official certification figures One recent report partially fills this gap by
suggest. Opinions vary significantly (see providing estimates of the amount of land
chapter 3) as to the extent to which de facto managed according to precepts of
20

23. ‘sustainable agriculture’. Pretty and Hine growing demand for organic produce in the
(2001a) undertook a major survey that industrialised world is opening up new
identified 208 sustainable agriculture projects market opportunities for producers in the
and initiatives, involving almost 9 million South (FAO, 1999; ITC, 1999). In response,
farmers, managing almost 30 million a new breed of ‘ecological entrepreneur’ is
hectares of land on a ‘sustainable basis’. emerging, seeking out producers able to
The authors estimate that this is equivalent provide consistent supplies of organic
to c. 3% of arable and permanent cropland produce to specified quality standards.
in Asia, Africa and Asia. Some reservations, This process involves identifying or, in many
however, should be expressed over the instances, setting up producer groups who
comprehensiveness and interpretation of are willing and able to meet this demand.
these figures. The great majority (70%) In so doing these entrepreneurs often become
of land that they identified as sustainably involved in areas traditionally associated with
managed is under new ‘zero-till’ and crop agricultural extension or developmental
cover management regimes which are not work, providing training, research and
necessarily either organic or agroecological. sometimes credit facilities.
Moreover, as the authors point out, in most
instances the ‘conversion’ to such methods Many of the entrepreneurs involved in
has occurred in the 1990s. Thus the promoting the growth of ‘certified’ organic
emphasis of this data is very much on produce across the South are based in the
‘projects and initiatives’, with the inevitable industrialised world. Swiss, German, British
implication that sustainable, agroecological and Dutch companies and individuals are
and organic systems that have been particularly active in seeking sources of
developed by farmers, independently of organic produce. Some Southern-based
development agencies, extension services or entrepreneurs and community groups are
NGOs are likely to remain unrecorded. also recognising this potential. However,
state support for promoting organic
In conclusion, large and probably production remains limited to a few
unanswerable questions remain over the countries (notably a few countries in South
extent to which OAA is practised in the America, Turkey, Tunisia, Egypt and China).
South, particularly on an informal basis.
In the remainder of this section we turn Few Southern countries have put in place
our attention to identifying the main factors measures to safeguard and support their
which are driving the growth of OAA, organic farming systems (i.e. legislation and
examining the role of external stimuli and extension services). Fewer still have
the incentives for, and constraints upon, developed the capacity to undertake
farmers in the South adopting OAA. certification activities, and most work of this
nature is undertaken by Northern-based
2.2 – External stimuli for the development
consultancies (see section 4.6 for a more
of organic agriculture
detailed analysis of the issues that this gives
In recent years there has been a rapid growth rise to).15 Increasingly, trade promotion
in the interest shown by the South in the organisations, such as the International
potential of OAA. Two thirds of the recent Trade Centre (Geneva) and the Centre for
growth in IFOAM membership is due to new the Development of Industry (Brussels) are
recruits from the South (La Prairie,14 cited in becoming involved in promoting and
Scialabba & Aubert, 1998). Several vectors of developing organic linkages between the
this growth can be identified, market forces ‘First’ and the ‘Third’ worlds.
being among the most important. Rapidly
The Real Green Revolution 21

24. National and international development agriculture programme , recognising that:16
agencies are a second force that is
encouraging the adoption of organic ‘it plays an important role in developing
production in the South. Here the primary innovative production technologies,
concerns are with enhancing food security, providing new market opportunities for
increasing farmers’ incomes and halting (or farmers and processors, and generally
reversing) environmental degradation. Such focusing attention on environmental and
projects often, but by no means always, social concerns. COAG (the FAO’s
focus on maximizing use of local resources Committee on Agriculture) will consider the
and knowledge in order to achieve these need for an FAO-wide, cross-sectoral
aims. Some projects promoted under this programme on organic agriculture that
agenda will be wholly organic, but the would provide information and discussion
majority of such projects are neither forums on production and trade, supply
explicitly, nor wholly, organic, although they advice and technical assistance, develop
may incorporate significant elements of standards and use pilot projects to improve
organic practice within them. organic farming techniques.’
(Eric Kueneman,17 1999)
The role of organic farming as a ‘development
strategy’ has been gaining increasing credibility Since adopting organic agriculture within its
in recent years. In 1996 a UNCTAD report remit, the FAO has developed a medium
highlighted the role that organic agriculture term plan intended to raise the profile and
can play in trade, environmental improvement support the development of organic farming
and social development in the third world. systems through developing dissemination
Although the report expressed some misgivings and networking vehicles, commissioning
about economic viability and technical studies, and providing effective decision
feasibility, it concluded that: support tools (FAO, 2001).18 However, the
FAO’s support for organic farming maintains
‘Organic production has an undeniable edge an element of caution. For example, in
over conventional farming in terms of its several publications they argue for partial
beneficial impact on the environment and conversion to offset potential loss of yields.
human health. Moreover, it can also
contribute to higher incomes, better food Other government-financed development
security and creation of employment.’ agencies are also taking a keen interest in
(UNCTAD, 1996) organic systems as a tool for development.
In the UK, DfID recently commissioned the
The report also commented upon the Henry Doubleday Research Association
‘flawed’ basis upon which comparisons (HDRA) to undertake reports into farmer
are made between conventional and organic demand and potential for development of
agriculture, stating that: organic farming in sub-Saharan Africa
(Harris et al.. 1998) and on management
‘if an internalisation of environmental and of manure in the Kenyan Highlands (Lekasi
social costs and benefits were to take place, et al.., 1998). A forthcoming DfID handbook
organic farming would appear economically for advisors will contain information on
justifiable’ (ibid.). evaluating organic projects. A further
publication on the role of ‘socially
Since then the role of organic agriculture has responsible’ business as a development tool
been recognised by FAO, who in 1999 will include a chapter on organic production
included it within their sustainable (Agroeco, 2001, van Elzakker, pers. comm.)
22

25. The German, Swiss, Swedish, Belgian and and Cotton project, which specifically
Dutch government development agencies addresses the potential of organic cotton
are all sponsoring research and/or projects, farming practices – reflecting concern about
which have led (or are intended to lead) the impacts of cotton on water cycles (WWF,
to the establishment of commercially viable 1999; Bärlocher, 2000).
export-oriented organic development
programmes.19 In some respects therefore, we are witnessing
a blurring between what might be regarded
A third driving force behind the growth of as developmental/environmental and
OAA is the ‘nature conservation’ agenda. commercial approaches to promoting OAA.
Though less significant than the previous Many of the development and environment
two, it is still worthy of mention. Our agencies are adopting a market-oriented
literature survey highlighted a number of approach in an attempt to secure better
examples where nature conservation market prices for organic produce. At the
organisations are working closely with local same time many ecological entrepreneurs are
farmers who live in or close to areas of taking on some responsibilities of extension
significant nature conservation interest (see workers, and are providing training, advice
for example, Stein 1996; Flores-Escudero; and sometimes credit facilities to their
Panuncio; Pryor; Vreeland, all 2000). Here producer groups.
the aim is to maintain the integrity of
2.3 – Towards a understanding of incentives
landscapes, habitats and biodiversity, and at
and constraints to ‘grow organic’
the same time ensure that local communities
are able to maintain or improve their All these external influences must be
livelihoods. The recent Vignola Declaration considered in the light of how OAA coincides
and Action Plan (in Stolton et al., 2000a; or conflicts with farmers’ perceptions of the
2000b) marked the beginning of what may risks and benefits involved in different farming
prove to be a powerful coalition of interests strategies. In a summary of the potential of
between the international organic and nature organic farming in Africa, Walaga (2000)
conservation movements (Stolton & Dudley, identifies a range of incentives and constraints
2000). On a commodity (rather than site- on farmers’ adopting organic practices.
specific basis) the World Wide Fund for We use this typology as a basis for discussion
Nature (WWF) has established a Fresh Water of the topic in a more global context.
Table 2.4 – Incentives and constraints to organic farming
20
Incentives Constraints
Disillusion with ‘Green Revolution’ technologies and Growing rural populations place traditional forms of
an awareness of the dangers of intensive agriculture, agriculture under strain and encourage moves
including resource degradation. towards intensification.
The (increasing) cost of Green Revolution The high cost of certification (especially in regard to
technologies makes them inaccessible to the large local wages / incomes) undertaken by outside
21
majority of farmers. organisations.
Organic farming draws upon (and valorises) Low literacy levels in rural areas make record-
indigenous knowledge. keeping a problem.
The influence of the environmental and development Lack of trade liberalisation in some countries
movements has led to organic systems being prevents development of export markets.
introduced to combat erosion and desertification.
Growing awareness that international organic
markets offer premia and the opportunity for farmers
to increase incomes.
From Walaga (2000)
The Real Green Revolution 23

26. 2.3.1 – Incentives for adopting OAA
respiratory illness amongst the workforce,
Disillusion with ‘Green Revolution’ improvement in the quality of drinking water
technologies and the improved stability of steep hillsides
This is most likely to affect farmers with as three key benefits flowing from their
direct experience of participation in conversion to biodynamic practices. Second
conventional chemical-dependent farming generation environmental problems such as
systems that have given rise to what these have often coincided with declines in
Paarlberg (1994) terms ‘second generation (or stagnation of) yields obtained from
rural environmental problems’. These intensive farming practices and/or declining
include: world market prices. Individually, or in
combination, these forces are influencing
• diminishing returns from repeated many farmers engaged in commodity-
pesticide and fertiliser applications orientated production to jump off the
treadmill of conventional agricultural
• deterioration of soil and water quality production and convert to more sustainable
methods.
• health-related problems
Case study 2 – Organic cotton production in
• declining groundwater levels India, Peru and Mali
• loss of biodiversity Cotton is one of the most demanding of
crops in terms of pesticide and insecticide
• increased risk of crop disease. applications. The effect of these on
watercourses, human health and ecosystem
Part of the problem lies in the toxic nature diversity has increasingly become a cause of
of many forms of pesticides and fertilisers, concern (Myers and Stolton, 1999). In many
but is compounded by inadequate methods of areas cotton pests are becoming increasingly
technology transfer. For example, one report resistant to spraying, and despite increased
from Algeria suggests that only a small frequency of pesticide applications, farmers
minority of hill farmers read and follow face declining yields. One response is a shift
instructions that accompany purchased to organic cultivation, as shown in these
agrochemicals (Moali-Grine, 2000). three case studies.
The problems outlined above have proved The Maikaal Bio-Cotton Project, Madhya
particularly acute in relation to cotton, which Pradesh, India
accounts for 2.4% of global arable land but In 1992 an alliance between local farmers,
24% of the insecticide market (Bärlocher, their local spinning mill, sales agents and an
2000). Despite the intensity of agrochemical organic consultancy set about creating an
use in conventional cotton projects, organic organic cotton project. Farmers were
approaches to cotton growing have been experiencing severe pest problems, despite
developed in many parts of the world, repeated pesticide applications: whitefly had
creating environmental and economic developed pesticide resistance and many
benefits (see case study 2, over). Another of farmers were abandoning cotton production
our case studies, of a tea estate in India, also altogether, due to declining returns and
highlights the health and environmental toxicity problems. Government researchers
benefits of switching to organic production. and extensionists were sceptical of the
Managers at the Ambootia Tea Estate (see initiative and suggested changing crops
case study 5) identify reductions in rather than method of production. There
24

27. were no other certified organic projects in Sugar cane yields are 30% higher. Sugar
India at the time, and a feeling that the mills also pay a premia for the organic
project was attempting the impossible. cane as it has a higher sugar content.
Other products, particularly wheat, attract
In the first year an experimental plot was local market premia because of its
established at the mill’s own small farm, superior taste.
to act as a reference point for farmers.
The following year two hundred farmers • Soils have become softer and more crumbly
joined the trial, applying a range of solutions and do not crack as much in the dry season.
that had been developed through a series of Farmers attribute this to composting, which
meetings between consultants and farmers. leaves residual fertility in the ground for
Seven years later more than one thousand next year’s crop. Composting also reduces
farmers, cultivating more than 15,000 acres, the need for weeding, as it reduces
have joined the scheme. Organic cotton is availability of weed seeds.
the main crop, accounting for around half
of this. It is grown in rotation with a wide • Irrigation requirements have been reduced
range of food crops. due to the increased moisture-retaining
capacity of the soil.
An extensive infrastructure has been created
to support the project. There is a team of • Pest incidence has been reduced to a
bio-agricultural extension officers located in minimum. Pest control management is
eight extension centres, which serve between now one of the least important discussion
eight and fifteen villages each. Regular topics at meetings. Natural predators are
monitoring is undertaken and practical and now very common on organic land and
theoretical training is offered to farmers. A farmers have learned how to monitor and
range of biodynamic and organic techniques encourage their development. Some have
have been developed. These include the use developed these techniques so successfully
of trap and host crops (the latter to provide that they no longer need to purchase
habitats for predators), compost making and biodynamic preparations. By contrast,
use of biodynamic preparations. The latter conventional farmers are facing increasing
are prepared locally (generating more jobs), pest incidence.
and credit for farmers and distribution is
arranged. Farmers have a guaranteed market • Most of the farmers have been using
and receive a 25% premia. biodynamic preparations on their land
for seven years and are happy with the
Participant evaluation seven years after the results.
project was initiated showed a remarkably
diverse set of achievements: • Labour requirements are substantially
reduced and production costs for organic
• Average cotton yields on participating cotton are 30-40% of those for
farms are on average 20% higher than conventional production.
on neighbouring conventional farms.
These tend to increase with length of • Given the reduced costs, equivalent / higher
participation in the programme. yields and market premia, farmers’ margins
are now significantly higher than before.
• Yields of other rotational crops (wheat,
soya and chilli) are equal to or up to 20% • Wider, knock-on effects have been
higher than those on conventional land. observed. Farmers not involved in the
The Real Green Revolution 25