Africa needs a brown (not green) food revolution: CS Monitor commentary -

[pinto]

Author makes a good case for her premise - "Africa is mostly grassland, not farmland" ~ pinto

Africa needs a brown (not green) food revolution

Africa's long-term food security will come from nurturing the soil, not manipulating expensive seeds

By Shannon Horst / July 6, 2010
Albuquerque, N.M.

Once again, as the West attempts to help Africa, it's on the brink of causing more damage.

The Gates and other foundations, leading agro-industrial firms, and some African policymakers are championing a "Green Revolution II" to ensure food security. But despite the fanfare and good intentions, this misguided approach will probably do more harm than good.

The approach they are advocating, (modeled after the post-World War II Green Revolution that used technology to boost farm yields) is grounded in manipulating seeds and increasing synthetic fertilizers to improve production. It is the very approach that has been pushed on Africa over the past 50 years.

But Africa is no more food secure than it was at the start of the 20th century. That won't change just because aid groups put more money, more science, or more business savvy behind the same old approach.

There are at least three reasons why.

<more at>

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/0706/Africa-needs-a-brown-not-green-food-revolution

Shannon Horst, CEO of The Savory Institute, has worked in agriculture in Africa, the US, and other regions for 20 years. She was the Africa desk editor at the Monitor from 1984 to 1985.

[SunnySong]

1. Actually sending food aid to Africa contributes to unsubstainable population growth

and destroys local economies...


We need to stop food aid now and help Africa rebound from western "help"

[pinto]

3. The article's a great assessment of sustainability and how we might be more effective in our support

:hi:

[izquierdista]

10. Sustainability?

They have more than enough food resources in Africa, IF they use their local plants:
Grains: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309049903
Vegetables: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11763
Fruits: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11879

If they could invest in themselves like the US has done with USDA Agricultural Extension, they could be food sufficient and secure in a few short years. We would get FAR more return exporting our USDA programs than our DoD programs.

[enki23]

4. sure. we'll stop right now. cold turkey. it'll all work out.

.

[pinto]

7. That's obviously not feasible nor does the author advocate abandoning current ag programs.

She's advocating a long range, big picture approach to food sustainability in grass land environments. :hi:

[Warpy]

6. Not quite

Raising the status of women, something colonialism pretty much destroyed, is the key to lowering the birthrate.

This is done through education, of course, but is done more easily in helping them establish their own businesses.

Women who are told they have no value outside of producing as many sons as they can will try to produce those sons. Women who have their sights raised even slightly will start to realize they have more value than that.

Population control starts with women. Pursuing a policy of starving the surplus population instead of attacking the root problem is right out of Scrooge's pre reform playbook.

[pinto]

8. Population choices / family size choices are obviously a part of the picture.

And they dovetail with sustainability.

[Warpy]

2. They need to import experts in marginal land farming

I'm talking about Chinese peasants, and locally, Pueblo tribal people. The latter have long been geniuses at desert farming, although they are left with less land than it takes them to be food sufficient these days.

Real world help like this will actually help them instead of the university generated help that's long on theory and short on practicality.

That isn't to say all university educated agronomists are useless, that's far from the truth, they just don't have the every day experience with eking subsistence out of bad soil and poor rainfall with no disposable income for chemicals and seed that won't provide the seed crop for the following year.

It's more that experienced marginal farmers will be of more use to them in becoming food sufficient while building the land in the short term, which is when they really need the help.

This article is spot on as far as it goes. It just needs to go a little farther.

[truedelphi]

5. The same can be said for the United States.

Monsanto's Genetically Frankenstein seeds destroy the balance needed by the soil to keep plants healthy.

This is why the expected "increase" in crops that are GM has not come to pass.

Then the unbalanced soil allows for Superweeds to thrive. So that American farmers end up using toxic chemicals they haven't had to use for decades.

All so that Monsanto can get a monopoly on the world's food supply.

[midnight]

9. Mr. Savoy's methods are very impressive. I'm just trying

to grow tomatoes, and dealing with early blight...