| |
|
Background
The decentralised management of agricultural biodiversity by
farmers and their communities is increasingly seen as a prerequisite
for sustaining food systems, livelihoods and environments. (
The term “farmers” is used here to include people
who grow crops and harvest tree products as well as those who
work with livestock such as pastoralists and fisher people.)
For example, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity
call for the “Mobilization of farming communities, including
indigenous and local communities, for the development, maintenance
and use of their knowledge and practices in the conservation
and sustainable use of biological diversity in the agricultural
sector” and encourage countries “to set up and maintain
local level forums for farmers, researchers, extension workers
and other stakeholders to evolve genuine partnerships.”
(COP CBD Decision III/11, 1996). Moreover, the “ecosystem
approach” endorsed by the Parties to the Convention on
Biological Diversity stresses that management should be decentralised
to the lowest appropriate level and that the objectives of management
are “a matter of societal choice”. Both cultural
and biological diversity are viewed as central to the ecosystem
approach, which emphasises greater responsibility, ownership,
accountability, participation and use of local knowledge (COP
CBD V/6, May 2000).
Although
the international community does emphasise the need to involve
farming and local communities more centrally in the management
of agricultural biodiversity, there are huge gaps in knowledge
and institutional constraints that limit national capacities
to scale up these approaches. In order to help fill these
gaps, this research seeks to analyse how and under what conditions
can decentralised governance, farmer participation and capacity
building promote the adaptive management of agricultural biodiversity
in the context of localised food systems and livelihoods.
This collaborative
action research is informed by the following concepts and
shifts in understanding:
Multiple
functions of agricultural biodiversity.
Dynamic and complex local livelihoods usually rely on plant
and animal diversity, both wild and in different stages of
domestication. Different elements of agricultural biodiversity
are used by different people at different times and in different
places, and so contribute to livelihood strategies in a complex
fashion. Whilst contributing to environmental sustainability,
agricultural biodiversity and people’s manipulation
of it also helps sustain many production functions both in
low external input and high input-output agriculture (e.g.
soil organic matter decomposition, nutrient cycling, pollination,
pest control, soil and water conservation). Agricultural biodiversity
can also provide the basis for biotechnologies (old and new),
natural product development, ecotourism and other activities
important for income generation in local, national and global
economies. In these different ways, agricultural biodiversity
provides multifunctional goods and services for agriculture
and land use (FAO/Netherlands, 1999).
|
| |
| A
livelihoods focus. Although
rural and urban households do engage in multiple occupations
few attempts have been made to link this behaviour in a systematic
way to agricultural biodiversity and its multiple functions.
Reflecting sectoral interests and disciplinary specialisations,
the conventional point of entry for scientific research, management
and policy has been to focus on selected components of agricultural
biodiversity (e.g. plant genetic resources). However, this
approach often leads to a mismatch between standard development
interventions and diverse local realities, needs and priorities.
Reversing this approach, requires putting people with their
assets, activities, and complex livelihoods at the centre
of analysis. The functions of agricultural biodiversity thus
need to be situated and mapped out within a total livelihood
context, linking different components of agricultural biodiversity
with the multiple activities and diversified income portfolios
of local food and livelihood systems.
|
|
| A
food systems focus.
Agricultural biodiversity is embedded in variety of food systems.
Food systems include not just the production aspects of food
but also processing, distribution, access, use, food recycling
and waste. Food chains,- from the point where food and fibres
originate to where they are consumed and disposed of-, are important
components of the food system. Historically, food systems have
tended to be localised,- starting at the household level and
expanding to neighbourhood, municipal and regional levels. Diverse
localised food systems are still the norm for many rural communities
around the world today. With globalisation, localised food systems
tend to become integrated into a more linear world system based
on the principles of comparative advantage, standardisation,
geographical division of labour and control by a few large corporations
and trade agreements. The manner in which interlinked networks
of production, on- and off-farm technologies, markets, consumption
and regulatory frameworks are bound together in any local, national
or global food system are critical to the sustainability of
agricultural biodiversity and livelihoods. |
| 
|
| Adaptive
ecosystem management. Local resource management
groups or platforms are often better placed to monitor environmental
change and deal with the unpredictable interactions between
people and ecosystems as they evolve together. Variation within
and among agroecosystems is enormous. Daily, seasonal and
longer term changes are apparent at the broad landscape level
right down to small plots of cultivated land. Uncertainty,
spatial variability and complex non-equilibrium ecological
dynamics emphasise the need for flexible responses, mobility
and local level adaptive resource management in which local
users of agricultural biodiversity are central actors in analysis,
planning, negotiations and action. Such adaptive management
emphasises the importance of feedbacks from the environment
in shaping policies and management interventions, followed
by systematic experimentation to shape subsequent policies
and practice. The adaptive management process is thus iterative,
and feedback and learning based. It often relies on indigenous
knowledge as well as local social, economic and ecological
indicators to track and respond to ecological and economic
changes. In this dynamic context, farmer groups and other
producer organisations can be instrumental in furthering the
interests of rural people in optimising sustainable, diversified,
production and marketing systems.
A rights based approach. The legitimacy
of rural peoples’ claims to tenure and rights to agricultural
biodiversity and its products and associated knowledge are made
more apparent as landscapes are re-interpreted as the product
of social and ecological histories. If landscapes, species and
genetically distinct populations have been moulded or modified
by human presence and actions, local communities may claim special
rights of access, control, property and decision over them.
Property right institutions are key for the decentralised management
of agricultural biodiversity, including the sharing of benefits
derived from its use. Entitlements and rights over resources
and knowledge are at the heart of negotiations between the multiple
actors involved in local fora (platforms) set up to evolve joint
agreements for the adaptive management of agricultural biodiversity
and its associated livelihood and food system contexts.
Objectives
The overall objectives of the action research are to:
-
Identify forms of decentralised governance, co-management
agreements, markets and property right institutions that
can sustain agricultural biodiversity and livelihoods in
the context of localised food systems and rural economies
-
Identify ways of strengthening the capacities of farmers
and other actors, including producer organisations and local
fora, for the adaptive management of agricultural biodiversity
so as to increase their benefits, and promote awareness
and responsible action by producer organisations, agro-enterprises
and policy makers
-
Identify and develop indicators (social, ecological, economic…)
to analyse the
dynamic links between livelihoods and agricultural biodiversity,
with a special emphasis on the indicators used in local
adaptive management and local definitions of well being,
equity and culture
-
Develop and apply Participatory Assessment Methodologies
for comprehensive valuations of agricultural biodiversity
and the various systems (livelihoods, food systems, rural
development…) in which local biodiversity is embedded
-
Identify and recommend effective policies and processes
based on the research findings that may be used to build
capacities and institutionalise the adaptive management
of agricultural biodiversity in the context of localised
food systems and rural economies.
|
| |
|
| |
|
