Sarah Pilgrim

The top 100 questions of importance to the future of global agriculture

Despite a significant growth in food production over the past half-century, one of the most important challenges facing society today is how to feed an expected population of some nine billion by the middle of the 20th century. To meet the expected demand for food without significant increases in prices, it has been estimated that we need to produce 70–100 per cent more food, in light of the growing impacts of climate change, concerns over energy security, regional dietary shifts and the Millennium Development target of halving world poverty and hunger by 2015. The goal for the agricultural sector is no longer simply to maximize productivity, but to optimize across a far more complex landscape of production, rural development, environmental, social justice and food consumption outcomes. However, there remain significant challenges to developing national and international policies that support the wide emergence of more sustainable forms of land use and efficient agricultural production. The lack of information flow between scientists, practitioners and policy makers is known to exacerbate the difficulties, despite increased emphasis upon evidence-based policy. In this paper, we seek to improve dialogue and understanding between agricultural research and policy by identifying the 100 most important questions for global agriculture. These have been compiled using a horizon-scanning approach with leading experts and representatives of major agricultural organizations worldwide. The aim is to use sound scientific evidence to inform decision making and guide policy makers in the future direction of agricultural research priorities and policy support. If addressed, we anticipate that these questions will have a significant impact on global agricultural practices worldwide, while improving the synergy between agricultural policy, practice and research. This research forms part of the UK Governments Foresight Global Food and Farming Futures project.

The Intersections of Biological Diversity and Cultural Diversity: Towards Integration

There is an emerging recognition that the diversity of life comprises both biological and cultural diversity. In the past, however, it has been common to make divisions between nature and culture, arising partly out of a desire to control nature. The range of interconnections between biological and cultural diversity are reflected in the growing variety of environmental sub-disciplines that have emerged. In this article, we present ideas from a number of these sub-disciplines. We investigate four bridges linking both types of diversity (beliefs and worldviews, livelihoods and practices, knowledge bases and languages, and norms and institutions), seek to determine the common drivers of loss that exist, and suggest a novel and integrative path forwards. We recommend that future policy responses should target both biological and cultural diversity in a combined approach to conservation. The degree to which biological diversity is linked to cultural diversity is only beginning to be understood. But it is precisely as our knowledge is advancing that these complex systems are under threat. While conserving nature alongside human cultures presents unique challenges, we suggest that any hope for saving biological diversity is predicated on a concomitant effort to appreciate and protect cultural diversity.

A CROSS‐REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FACTORS AFFECTING ECOLITERACY: IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE

The value of accumulated ecological knowledge, termed ecoliteracy, is vital to both human and ecosystem health. Maintenance of this knowledge is essential for continued support of local conservation efforts and the capacity of communities to self- or co-manage their local resources sustainably. Most previous studies have been qualitative and small scale, documenting ecoliteracy in geographically isolated locations. In this study, we take a different approach, focusing on (1) the primary factors affecting individual levels of ecoliteracy, (2) whether these factors shift with economic development, and (3) if different knowledge protection strategies are required for the future. We compared non-resource-dependent communities in the United Kingdom with resource-dependent communities in India and Indonesia (n=1250 interviews). We found that UK residents with the highest levels of ecoliteracy visited the countryside frequently, lived and grew up in rural areas, and acquired their knowledge from informal word-of-mouth sources, such as parents and friends, rather than television and schooling. The ecoliteracy of resource-dependent community members, however, varied with wealth status and gender. The least wealthy families depended most on local resources for their livelihoods and had the highest levels of ecoliteracy. Gender roles affected both the level and content of an individuals ecoliteracy. The importance of reciprocal oral transfer of this knowledge in addition to direct experience to the maintenance of ecoliteracy was apparent at all sites. Lessons learned may contribute to new local resource management strategies for combined ecoliteracy conservation. Without novel policies, local community management capacity is likely to be depleted in the future.

Battles over Biofuels in Europe: NGOs and the Politics of Markets

In this paper, we argue that a consortium of NGOs has played a significant role in shaping the market for, and restricting the use of, biofuels as an alternative to conventional fuels for road transport in Europe. This paper considers why a number of NGOs (Greenpeace, Oxfam, WWF, RSPB, Friends of the Earth) have chosen to enter the biofuels debate, and how they have variously developed policy, agreed a political campaign, and exercised political influence, in a key area of the worlds response to major global climate change: how to reduce the carbon footprint of transport. We found that in many cases the development of NGO policy has been driven more by narrow political opportunities for influence than by broader and more coherent policy responses to global climate change or economic development, or indeed rigorous assessment of the scientific evidence. The research provides evidence of how NGO policies and lobbying significantly affected biofuel policy changes, review processes, target reductions, and sustainability regulation in the UK and in Europe. We consider that politically instituted markets, such as the one for biofuels, are examples of the emergence of new forms of governance of capitalist political economies facing a novel and pressing combination of drivers (climate change, energy security, resource constraints, and sustainable land-use). Politically instituted markets open up possibilities for political intervention from non-governmental or party-political actors, in ways that other markets do not. If political shaping of markets by NGOs becomes more widespread, issues of democratic legitimacy and public scrutiny will become ever more pressing. The paper is based on in-depth interviews with senior scientific directors and policy-makers in five NGOs, and of senior officials in UK government departments and the European Commission (DG Environment and DG Transport and Energy). It forms part of a wider ESRC research project in Brazil, the USA and Europe on the Transition to Sustainable Bioeconomies.

Traditional knowledge and biocultural diversity: learning from tribal communities for sustainable development in northeast India

This paper presents a synthesis of grassroots activities designed to promote the learning and conservation of traditional knowledge and related biocultural resources among Adi, Monpa and Khasi tribes of northeast India. The results indicate that the participation of knowledge holders in various village level activities can enhance the promotion of traditional practices, learning of knowledge and conservation of related resources. Knowledge holders of varying age groups and social systems have many notable traditional practices that provide promising solutions to current challenges. The promotion of traditional knowledge-based products can also facilitate the conservation of resources and the subsistence survival of people. Strong multi-level networks between all stakeholders are needed to ensure the sustainability of traditional knowledge and conservation of biocultural resources of communities of northeast India.

Rudderless in a Sea of Yellow: The European Political Economy Impasse for Renewable Transport Energy

Faced with the twin challenges of anthropogenic climate change and ‘peak oil’, the need for an urgent and radical transformation of transport energy has been widely recognised. Adopting a neo-Polanyian economic sociology approach, this article asks what conditions European governance capacity to respond to these challenges, at either national or regional levels, using biofuels as a case study. It asks if the complexity of its political institutions, and the heterogeneity of interests and economic organisations, present ‘the biggest obstacle of all’ (Cohen 2007) to reduce fossil fuel dependency. By examining the European Commission level and comparing five countries, evidence is produced for a political failure in terms of continued fossil fuel dependency. Incumbent interests in the agricultural sector and a distinctively European legacy of a transport fleet dependent on fossil diesel, have led to a marriage of convenience between rapeseed farmers and vehicle manufacturers. As a consequence, rather than escaping from the path dependency on fossil fuels (Unruh 2000), Europe has gone down a cul-de-sac of rapeseed biodiesel inherently limited in scope, and with the low levels of greenhouse gas emissions savings. Ironically this outcome is in part an unintended consequence of opposition to biofuels from environmentalist groups and politics.

Commentary: Are biofuel policies opening up the channels to world trade?

Biofuels have elicited extensive debate about their role in climate change, particularly in the EU where climate mitigation has been used as the primary rationale for targets and incentives. But there has also been widespread criticism of the impact of biofuels on world food prices, specifically of first-generation biofuels developed from refined agricultural products. According to the World Bank, the price of food increased by 83% between 2005 and 2008. This sharp increase had its greatest impact on non-industrial countries where poor households spend up to 75% of their income on food (Ivanic & Martin, 2008). Despite biofuels only accounting for 2% of the world’s grain consumption (EREC, 2008), and a high proportion of food price rises being centred on non-fuel crops such as rice, anti-biofuels campaigners have drawn heavily on this argument (Oxfam International, 2008). The rise in world food prices due to biofuels has been variably estimated at between 10 and 65% (Mitchell, 2008; Oxfam International, 2008). Merrill Lynch, however, claims that oil and gasoline prices would have been 15% higher in the absence of biofuels, and consequently food price rises would be even higher (Barta, 2008). It seems that biofuels have emerged at a time when several overlapping factors have accelerated food price rises, including rising oil prices, severe climatic events (such as the Australian drought), malfunctioning world grain markets through restrictive exports, and commodity speculation (Robles et al., 2009; Wiggins, 2009). Biofuels, though, seem to have been targeted by some as the primary culprit. In light of these estimates, Europe and the USA have come under substantial criticism for setting biofuels targets. Critics, including some of the largest international NGOs, suggest that instead of allocating large portions of domestic yields to biofuels production, Europe and the USA should be focused on feeding the poor rather than feeding cars (e.g. Oxfam International, 2008). However, the USA and Europe have long been accused of ‘agricultural dumping’. Furthermore, agricultural subsidies have ensured that industrialized country exports dominate global food markets. Farmers in poor rural areas cannot compete in markets flooded by heavily subsidized European and North American imports. This limits domestic market capacity and development opportunities. Some have suggested this as a reason for long-term stagnant commodity markets across the world (Roberts, 2008). Biofuels, however, may well begin to realign this balance. Increased demand for food and fuel crops in industrialized regions has now redirected surplus crop yields from international markets to selling within home-grown regions. The EU, for example, has introduced import tariffs to ensure the farming sector is not out-competed by more competitive – some would argue more sustainable – feedstock sources (such as Brazilian ethanol). This home-grown mindset has stretched to set-aside targets being dropped in Europe in 2008, and being replaced by Energy Crop Aid (providing fiscal incentives for energy feedstocks grown on non-agricultural land). This will reduce ‘agricultural dumping’ by industrialized countries. However, some say this is forcing world poverty and hunger to even lower depths. Are these the same critics who have suggested that foreign aid and subsidies from industrialized countries are *Corresponding author. Email: sepilg@essex.ac.uk doi:10.3763/ijas.2009.c5006