Fundamental Change In Farming? IAATD UN Report

---

"Its final report acknowledges that genetically engineered (GE) crops are highly controversial and will not play a substantial role in addressing the key problems of climate change, biodiversity loss, hunger and poverty."

At the risk of being an arm chair critic given that I have not read the report - we have today and have had for many many years, not some time in the future, known how to literarily double our food growth in half the foot print ; do it organically; produce clean free energy as a byproduct; do it sustainably; and clean up the environment to boot! All this and more using tried and true time proven parmaculture and biodynamic methods already in public domain - so who is stopping us?

Australia, the US, Canada and their cronies. That who. Could it be stealing markets from fossil fuels, cleaning environment and an abundance of nutrient rich foods that keep us healthy be a little to threatening for the predatory corporations? These rich snobs with their self serving experts shills have repeatedly abused due diligence and continue to injure us. Their excuse. No money, Yet lots of money for wars at a drop of a had! They have usurped all our tax dollars to deliberately create from, richness and abundance, unconscionable wars and scarcity and environmental damage for personal gain for their cronies.

Just the cost of one year war in Iraq could easily pay for all the infrastructure for permanently establish abundance for all. But will they? And will we demand accountability or continue to be abused?

See:

Shedding Light on Genetically Engineered Food

GE Labelling - Government Adamant To Pass Bills C-51 & C-52

The Machinations Of The New World Order - The Farmer

Chris Gupta
-----------------------

From: Gene Ethics
Date: 5 June 2008 12:41:24 PM
Subject: Please comment on this Online Opinion story: Taking stock of agriculture

Please post your comment on the following article here.

Taking stock of agriculture

By Jan van Aken - posted Thursday, 5 June 2008

From April 7-12, 2008, nothing less but the future of agriculture was up for debate. Governments and scientists from around the world gathered in Johannesburg to debate the final report of the United Nations' International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).

Adopted by more than 60 countries, the historic final report calls for a fundamental change in the way we do farming, to better address soaring food prices, hunger, social inequities and environmental disasters. The only three countries present who refused to endorse the report were Australia, the US and Canada.

IAASTD is an ambitious, four-year, US$10-million project that aims to do for hunger and poverty what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has done for the challenge of global warming. Its final report acknowledges that genetically engineered (GE) crops are highly controversial and will not play a substantial role in addressing the key problems of climate change, biodiversity loss, hunger and poverty.

Several hundred scientists worked for three years to take stock of the current state of farming, globally. All relevant UN institutions were involved in the project and the final report reflects the best scientific thinking on the subject. It is hard to imagine that any national or international institution will ignore its major findings in future decisions on agricultural research and development.

The US, Canada and Australia, have criticised the report as unbalanced and one-sided and the genetic engineering industry even walked out on the process. But their allegation of an unbalanced assessment is untenable. They themselves were involved in the selection of all the scientists and editors of the report - together with a multi-stakeholder bureau comprising industry, governments and international organisations. The Australian Government had full input into the report and could add any objections that it had to the text in footnotes.

For decades, the science and politics of agriculture has been dominated by an agriculture based on high chemical inputs, that treats soil, water, air and farmers as expendable resources. It is indeed a revolution that the global scientific community concludes, in the Summary for Decision Makers of the report, that "the ecological footprint of industrial agriculture is already too large to be ignored".

The strength of the IAASTD is the fact that all stakeholders were involved in the process and thus a balanced selection of scientists was guaranteed. The jury was fairly picked and came back with a clear vote for a fundamental change in the way we do farming.

The agriculture of the future is one that works with nature and the people - not against them. Millions of farms on all continents already prove that ecological and sustainable agriculture can provide sufficient food, increase food security, replenish natural resources and provide a better livelihood for farmers and local communities.

Today's chemical-intensive agriculture is more like mining than farming. While it may provide short-term gains in production, it is not sustainable in the long term and compromises the dwindling agricultural area upon which our future food supply depends. It also fails to meet the needs of local communities for livelihoods, food security and a healthy, diverse diet.

The IAASTD report calls for a systematic redirection of agricultural research, to better address hunger, severe social inequities and environmental problems. It will now become a key reference point for the future of agriculture and impact UN and World Bank projects around the world.

By not endorsing the IAASTD report Australia has shown itself to be out of step with the rest of the world. While other nations all over the world are rejecting GE crops and moving towards more sustainable agriculture techniques, Australia is moving in the opposite direction.

For the first time, Australia now faces the introduction of GE food crops into its fields and food chain, with the states of New South Wales and Victoria's recent approval of GE canola.

One of the reasons Australia refused to endorse the IAASTD report is that it highlights the need for more research into the risks associated with GE crops. The IAASTD report also recommends that governments should recognise consumer preference with respect to GE crops; recognise and protect farmers' seed rights; and ensure that no cross-contamination takes place.

To fully exploit the potential of sustainable agriculture, a sea-change in research priorities is needed. From now on, the majority of investment in agricultural research and knowledge dissemination - nationally as well as internationally - must be focused on sustainable farming systems. This means diverting funding away from GE crops and industrial farming towards more sustainable farming techniques.

This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please notify us by return email and permanently delete the document.

 

---

posted by Chris Gupta on Sunday June 8 2008

Print this article

TrackBack

URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2008/06/08/fundamental_change_in_farming_iaatd_un_report.htm

 

 

Related Articles

Drinking Water Fluoridation is Genotoxic & Teratogenic
This paper by Prof. Joe Cummins is a very important 5 minute delegation made to London Ontario Canada "Civic Works Committee" public participation meeting on January 25, 2012 on fluoride*. While a bit technical it is short and easy to grasp. A must read as it goes to the heart of the matter regarding the well established toxicity of fluoride which is well in all scientific circles even before water... [read more]
February 06, 2012 - Chris Gupta

Democracy At Work? - PPM On Fluoride
Here is a commentary on the recent (Jan, 25th, 2011) Public Participation Meeting (PPM) on Fluoride in the City of London, Ontario. The meeting started with a strong pro fluoride stance form the City engineer. His lack of knowledge on chemistry of the toxic wastes used to fluoridate water could embarrass even a high school student never mind his own profession. He blatantly violated his "duty to public welfare" as... [read more]
January 29, 2012 - Chris Gupta

"Evidence Be Damned...Patient Outcome Is Irrelevant" - From Helke
Further to The Future of Complementary/Integrative Medicine & Patient Choice, here is an important must read and act note from Helke Ferrie, a superb Medical Science Writer and Publisher. Now that the true colours of the well known shortcomings of allopathic medicine are being discovered en mass, the screws are being tightened by the pharmaceutical masters on their medical puppets. It seems that they are prepared to stop at nothing.... [read more]
September 16, 2011 - Chris Gupta

 

Readers' Comments Name: Email Address: URL: Comments: Remember info? Security code: Please enter the security code displayed on the above grid Due to our anti-spamming policy the comments you are posting will show up online within few hours from the posting time.

 

	A Person Is Only As Valuable As She Can Be Of Help To Others

Home | Site map | About | Contact

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes.
Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice prior to any specific use of any of the non drug device or food based medicinal products referenced herein.