CASSAVA NEWS. Follow up Thanh Nien Daily - Ho Chi Minh City,Vietnam. Vietnamese agricultural exports are beginning to be affected after China erected new technical rubber company, who wished to be unnamed, said the volume of latex exported to China over the border has fallen since China started tightening control. The Information Center for Agriculture and Rural Development said latex exports to China could fall by 2 percent this year because of this. Vietnamese cassava exported to China too faces more stringent safety conditions.
From July 1 fresh fruits like watermelon, longan, lychee, banana and dragon fruit can only be exported to China if they are harvested and packed by registered orchards and packaging factories.
China is the biggest market for Vietnam’s agricultural exports, last year importing produce worth US$1.9 billion, mainly latex, cashew, cassava, coffee, fruits and vegetables.
Exporters feared the toughening of standards would hurt them since they are still dependent on the neighboring market. Prices of many products would drop and stockpiles would grow if China reduced imports, they said.
Nguyen Duc Thanh, acting president of the Vietnam Cashew Association, said China buys around 22 percent of the cashew Vietnam exports, but warned exporters not to depend too much on this market since its policies are constantly changing.
Instead, cashew exporters need to increase their shipments to other markets like the Middle East, the EU and Russia, he suggested.
Vo Mai, a vegetable exporter, said it is important for exporters to scout for new markets, but at the same time farmers should learn more about market demand before they start planting.
For instance, they need to know that their Chinese counterparts can grow watermelon easily now, leading to lower demand for imports, she said, pointing out that thousands of tons of the fruit rotted at the border last March.
Trade between Vietnam and China topped $20 billion last year and the figure is expected to grow to $25 billion in 2010, Vietnam News Agency reported, citing the Ministry of Industry and Trade.
Source: SGTT
May 4, 2009
Uganda: Scientific Intervention is the Future of Agriculture
Joshua Kato
AllAfrica.com - Washington,USA
Kampala — BIOTECHNOLOGY is a system where bioscience is used on research to identify better yielding crops that resist certain diseases and separate other diseases that attack crops.
"The use of biotechnology eases the process of solving problems that would have taken years to solve," says Dr. Andrew Kiggundu, the head of the biotechnology centre at Kawanda. Experts in bioscience are located at key research centres in Uganda, including Kawanda and Namulonge.
Being a new system in Uganda, however, it is still dogged by beliefs that, experts say, are misconceived.
"All the misconceptions about biotechnology are not true. I have been in this field for many years. I have eaten foods that have been generated this way, but I do not have trees growing over my head," Dr. Arinaitwe, who is in charge of adding vital nutrients to matooke, says.
Dr. Arinaitwe says bananas are the most consumed food in Uganda, although they lack vital elements like Vitamin A and iron. In using biotechnology, bananas can be fortified with these major growth elements.
Dr. Titus Alicai maintains that, had it not been for biotechnology, the fight against a range of viruses ravaging crops across the country would have been much slower.
In the last 30 years, viruses have attacked coffee, cassava, bananas and other crops. Between 1993 and 1999, cassava was almost wiped out of the country by the cassava mosaic virus.
"But this process (biotechnology) helps scientists split and identify the exact viruses that are disturbing crops," he says.
The process may involve picking plant cells from one crop species and mixing it with cells from another crop species to create a better product.
Under the banana fortification project, cells from crops rich in vitamins and iron are mixed with banana cells to create a banana that is rich in vitamins and iron.
The public must be sensitised about the advantages of agricultural biotechnology for the programmes to succeed.
AllAfrica.com - Washington,USA
Kampala — BIOTECHNOLOGY is a system where bioscience is used on research to identify better yielding crops that resist certain diseases and separate other diseases that attack crops.
"The use of biotechnology eases the process of solving problems that would have taken years to solve," says Dr. Andrew Kiggundu, the head of the biotechnology centre at Kawanda. Experts in bioscience are located at key research centres in Uganda, including Kawanda and Namulonge.
Being a new system in Uganda, however, it is still dogged by beliefs that, experts say, are misconceived.
"All the misconceptions about biotechnology are not true. I have been in this field for many years. I have eaten foods that have been generated this way, but I do not have trees growing over my head," Dr. Arinaitwe, who is in charge of adding vital nutrients to matooke, says.
Dr. Arinaitwe says bananas are the most consumed food in Uganda, although they lack vital elements like Vitamin A and iron. In using biotechnology, bananas can be fortified with these major growth elements.
Dr. Titus Alicai maintains that, had it not been for biotechnology, the fight against a range of viruses ravaging crops across the country would have been much slower.
In the last 30 years, viruses have attacked coffee, cassava, bananas and other crops. Between 1993 and 1999, cassava was almost wiped out of the country by the cassava mosaic virus.
"But this process (biotechnology) helps scientists split and identify the exact viruses that are disturbing crops," he says.
The process may involve picking plant cells from one crop species and mixing it with cells from another crop species to create a better product.
Under the banana fortification project, cells from crops rich in vitamins and iron are mixed with banana cells to create a banana that is rich in vitamins and iron.
The public must be sensitised about the advantages of agricultural biotechnology for the programmes to succeed.
A brighter outlook
Thanh Nien Daily - Ho Chi Minh City,Vietnam
Overall, exports of rice, gemstones, cassava and certain other primary goods increased in the last four months. Vietnam posted a trade surplus for the first four months of the year, swinging from a deficit in the same period a year earlier.The country recorded a surplus of $801 million through April, compared with a shortfall of more than $11 billion in the same period a year earlier.
Going by the economic figures for the last four months, released last week by the General Statistics Office, we might say Vietnam’s economy has bottomed and will begin to strengthen in the second quarter of 2009.
Agriculture, forestry and fisheries continued to grow, countering unemployment, inflation and fears of deflation, and assisting the export industry.
Although the industrial output growth rate was far less than the same period last year, optimistic signs can be seen.
Manufacturing growth in April reached 5.4 percent while the rate in the first quarter was only 2.6 percent.
Vietnam attracted some US$6.4 billion in foreign direct investment in the first four months of this year.
Additional investments in existing projects totaled $3.9 billion, or $1.4 billion more than newly registered investments in the period.
This fact shows investors have continued to see good results and great potential in Vietnam. Such trust is the most important thing in this time of recession.
Exports in April were down from March but some key items went up, notably electronics, footwear and garments.
Overall, exports of rice, gemstones, cassava and certain other primary goods increased in the last four months.
Vietnam posted a trade surplus for the first four months of the year, swinging from a deficit in the same period a year earlier.
The country recorded a surplus of $801 million through April, compared with a shortfall of more than $11 billion in the same period a year earlier.
Exports declined a bare 0.1 percent to $18.64 billion, while imports plunged 41 percent to $17.84 billion.
Gold re-export contributed the bulk of the surplus. Re-exporting gold was a necessary move to draw out private gold hoards, improve the trade balance, boost foreign currency reserves, and maintain the dong’s value.
The consumer price index fell for the first time in last year’s fourth quarter but rose slightly in the last four months, allaying fears of both inflation and deflation.
By Ngoc Minh
Overall, exports of rice, gemstones, cassava and certain other primary goods increased in the last four months. Vietnam posted a trade surplus for the first four months of the year, swinging from a deficit in the same period a year earlier.The country recorded a surplus of $801 million through April, compared with a shortfall of more than $11 billion in the same period a year earlier.
Going by the economic figures for the last four months, released last week by the General Statistics Office, we might say Vietnam’s economy has bottomed and will begin to strengthen in the second quarter of 2009.
Agriculture, forestry and fisheries continued to grow, countering unemployment, inflation and fears of deflation, and assisting the export industry.
Although the industrial output growth rate was far less than the same period last year, optimistic signs can be seen.
Manufacturing growth in April reached 5.4 percent while the rate in the first quarter was only 2.6 percent.
Vietnam attracted some US$6.4 billion in foreign direct investment in the first four months of this year.
Additional investments in existing projects totaled $3.9 billion, or $1.4 billion more than newly registered investments in the period.
This fact shows investors have continued to see good results and great potential in Vietnam. Such trust is the most important thing in this time of recession.
Exports in April were down from March but some key items went up, notably electronics, footwear and garments.
Overall, exports of rice, gemstones, cassava and certain other primary goods increased in the last four months.
Vietnam posted a trade surplus for the first four months of the year, swinging from a deficit in the same period a year earlier.
The country recorded a surplus of $801 million through April, compared with a shortfall of more than $11 billion in the same period a year earlier.
Exports declined a bare 0.1 percent to $18.64 billion, while imports plunged 41 percent to $17.84 billion.
Gold re-export contributed the bulk of the surplus. Re-exporting gold was a necessary move to draw out private gold hoards, improve the trade balance, boost foreign currency reserves, and maintain the dong’s value.
The consumer price index fell for the first time in last year’s fourth quarter but rose slightly in the last four months, allaying fears of both inflation and deflation.
By Ngoc Minh
Apr 26, 2009
Vietnam earns US$18.63 billion from exports in four months
VietNamNet Bridge - Hanoi,Vietnam
23:33' 25/04/2009 (GMT+7)
VietNamNet Bridge - Vietnam has earned US$18.63 billion from exports in the first four months of the year, down 0.1% against the same period last year, according to the General Statistics Office.
In April alone, the country’s export turnover has been reported at US$4.5 billion, down 15.28% compared to the previous month.
Those goods that have enjoyed export growth include cassava and cassava products, up 155.8%; rice, up 43.9%; tea, up 14.8%; pepper, up 1.9%; garments and textiles, up 1.8%.
Particularly, exports of precious metals and gemstones saw sudden high increase, up 40 times compared to the same period last year, earning US$2.54 billion.
Exports of other goods all declined, most notably rubber (down 45.5%), crude oil (down 44.7%) and electric wires and cable (down 43.3%).
In April, Vietnam’s import turnover was reported at US$5.2 billion, up 3% against the previous month. In January-April period, the country imported US$17.83 billion worth of goods, down 41% against the same period last year.
In the first four months of this year, Vietnam saw a trade surplus of US$800 million. However, export turnover (excluding precious metals and gemstones) is tending to decrease.
VietNamNet/ND
23:33' 25/04/2009 (GMT+7)
VietNamNet Bridge - Vietnam has earned US$18.63 billion from exports in the first four months of the year, down 0.1% against the same period last year, according to the General Statistics Office.
In April alone, the country’s export turnover has been reported at US$4.5 billion, down 15.28% compared to the previous month.
Those goods that have enjoyed export growth include cassava and cassava products, up 155.8%; rice, up 43.9%; tea, up 14.8%; pepper, up 1.9%; garments and textiles, up 1.8%.
Particularly, exports of precious metals and gemstones saw sudden high increase, up 40 times compared to the same period last year, earning US$2.54 billion.
Exports of other goods all declined, most notably rubber (down 45.5%), crude oil (down 44.7%) and electric wires and cable (down 43.3%).
In April, Vietnam’s import turnover was reported at US$5.2 billion, up 3% against the previous month. In January-April period, the country imported US$17.83 billion worth of goods, down 41% against the same period last year.
In the first four months of this year, Vietnam saw a trade surplus of US$800 million. However, export turnover (excluding precious metals and gemstones) is tending to decrease.
VietNamNet/ND
Country profile: Thailand
Facts and statistics on Thailand including history, population, politics, geography, economy, religion and climate
The Guardian, Saturday 25 April 2009 Article history
Map of Thailand. Source: Graphic
Potted history of the country: The basis of modern Thailand began in 1351 with the unified kingdom of Siam. It became the only south-east Asian nation not to be occupied by a European power. A 1932 bloodless revolution created a constitutional monarchy, and Siam became Thailand in 1939. Eighteen military coups since reflect political instability. The last in 2006 deposed the then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
At a glance
Location: South-east Asia
Neighbours: Burma, Laos, Cambodia
Size: 198,117 square miles
Population: 63,038,247 (20th)
Density: 318.2 people per square mile
Capital city: Bangkok (population 6,320,174)
Head of state: King Bhumibol Adulyadej (King Rama IX)
Head of government: Prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva
Currency: Baht
Time zone: Thailand standard time (+7 hours)
International dialling code: +66
Website: thaigov.go.th
Data correct on Saturday 25 April 2009
Political pressure points: Society is highly divided between the Thaksin-supporting rural poor and a wealthy Bangkok elite. Thaksin's successors won power when the army stepped aside. But constitutional courts sacked two premiers before the army-backed prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva engineered a ruling coalition headed by his minority Democrat party. Thaksin supporters remain furious.
Population mix: Thai including Lao 75%, Chinese 14%, other minorities including: Malay, Cambodian, hill peoples (Meo, Lahu, Yao, Lisu, Lawa, Lolo and Karen) 1%
Religious makeup: Buddhist 94%, Muslim 5%
Main languages: Thai (official) Chinese, Malay and indigenous languages
Living national icons: Seni Saowaphong (author), Chart Korbjitti (author), Apichatpong Weerasethakul (film director) Somjit Jongjohor (boxer)
Landscape and climate: Tropical Thailand is flanked by the Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Thailand. There are four distinct regions: the central plain; the north-east plateau, which rises 300 metres above the central plain; the mountainous north; and the rainforested southern peninsula. Its major river systems drain either into the Mekong or the Chao Phraya near Bangkok.
Highest point: Doi Inthanon 2,565 metres
Area covered by water: 861 square miles
Healthcare and disease: The number of Thais living with HIV/Aids is around 550,000. The incidence lowers life expectancy to 73 years, and increases infant mortality. Malaria, dengue fever and Japanese encephalitis are prevalent, particularly in jungle areas bordering Burma and Laos.
Average life expectancy (m/f): 69/75
Average number of children per mother: 1.8
Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births: 110
Infant deaths per 1,000 births: 8
8HIV/Aids rate: 1.4%
Doctors per 1,000 head of population: 0.4
Adult literacy rate: 94.1% (m 95.9%/f 92.6%)
Economic outlook: Exports - accounting for 60% of GDP - have slumped dramatically. The electronics, electrical goods and automotive sectors have all suffered sharp drops. Last year's 4.5% GDP growth is projected to reverse to 1% this year.
Main industries: Services including tourism, manufacturing including computers, vehicles and parts, electronics, textiles, rubber.
Key crops/livestock: Rice, sugar cane, cassava (tapioca), oil palm fruit, maize, natural rubber, fruit, cattle, buffaloes, pigs, poultry.
Key exports: Machinery, manufactured goods, rice
GDP: £105,374m (33rd)
GDP per head: £1,661
Unemployment rate: 1.2%
Proportion of global carbon emissions: 0.84%
Most popular tourist attractions: Bangkok, Phuket, Ko Samui, Ko Phi Phi. Chiang Mai for Thai cooking classes and hill trekking
Local recommendation: Tarutao is one of the most unspoiled national parks in Thailand.
National dish: Pad thai (stir-fried noodles with egg, vegetables, spices, chicken, shrimp, tofu)
Foreign tourist visitors per year: 13,821,802
Media freedom index (ranked out of 173): 124
Did you know ... Most Thais refer to the capital as Krung Thep, the shortened name of a title that actually consists of 32 words.
National anthem:
The Thai people are peace-loving
But they are no cowards at war
They shall allow no one to rob them of their independence
Nor shall they suffer tyranny
· Information correct on date of first publication, Saturday 25 April 2009.
The Guardian, Saturday 25 April 2009 Article history
Map of Thailand. Source: Graphic
Potted history of the country: The basis of modern Thailand began in 1351 with the unified kingdom of Siam. It became the only south-east Asian nation not to be occupied by a European power. A 1932 bloodless revolution created a constitutional monarchy, and Siam became Thailand in 1939. Eighteen military coups since reflect political instability. The last in 2006 deposed the then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
At a glance
Location: South-east Asia
Neighbours: Burma, Laos, Cambodia
Size: 198,117 square miles
Population: 63,038,247 (20th)
Density: 318.2 people per square mile
Capital city: Bangkok (population 6,320,174)
Head of state: King Bhumibol Adulyadej (King Rama IX)
Head of government: Prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva
Currency: Baht
Time zone: Thailand standard time (+7 hours)
International dialling code: +66
Website: thaigov.go.th
Data correct on Saturday 25 April 2009
Political pressure points: Society is highly divided between the Thaksin-supporting rural poor and a wealthy Bangkok elite. Thaksin's successors won power when the army stepped aside. But constitutional courts sacked two premiers before the army-backed prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva engineered a ruling coalition headed by his minority Democrat party. Thaksin supporters remain furious.
Population mix: Thai including Lao 75%, Chinese 14%, other minorities including: Malay, Cambodian, hill peoples (Meo, Lahu, Yao, Lisu, Lawa, Lolo and Karen) 1%
Religious makeup: Buddhist 94%, Muslim 5%
Main languages: Thai (official) Chinese, Malay and indigenous languages
Living national icons: Seni Saowaphong (author), Chart Korbjitti (author), Apichatpong Weerasethakul (film director) Somjit Jongjohor (boxer)
Landscape and climate: Tropical Thailand is flanked by the Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Thailand. There are four distinct regions: the central plain; the north-east plateau, which rises 300 metres above the central plain; the mountainous north; and the rainforested southern peninsula. Its major river systems drain either into the Mekong or the Chao Phraya near Bangkok.
Highest point: Doi Inthanon 2,565 metres
Area covered by water: 861 square miles
Healthcare and disease: The number of Thais living with HIV/Aids is around 550,000. The incidence lowers life expectancy to 73 years, and increases infant mortality. Malaria, dengue fever and Japanese encephalitis are prevalent, particularly in jungle areas bordering Burma and Laos.
Average life expectancy (m/f): 69/75
Average number of children per mother: 1.8
Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births: 110
Infant deaths per 1,000 births: 8
8HIV/Aids rate: 1.4%
Doctors per 1,000 head of population: 0.4
Adult literacy rate: 94.1% (m 95.9%/f 92.6%)
Economic outlook: Exports - accounting for 60% of GDP - have slumped dramatically. The electronics, electrical goods and automotive sectors have all suffered sharp drops. Last year's 4.5% GDP growth is projected to reverse to 1% this year.
Main industries: Services including tourism, manufacturing including computers, vehicles and parts, electronics, textiles, rubber.
Key crops/livestock: Rice, sugar cane, cassava (tapioca), oil palm fruit, maize, natural rubber, fruit, cattle, buffaloes, pigs, poultry.
Key exports: Machinery, manufactured goods, rice
GDP: £105,374m (33rd)
GDP per head: £1,661
Unemployment rate: 1.2%
Proportion of global carbon emissions: 0.84%
Most popular tourist attractions: Bangkok, Phuket, Ko Samui, Ko Phi Phi. Chiang Mai for Thai cooking classes and hill trekking
Local recommendation: Tarutao is one of the most unspoiled national parks in Thailand.
National dish: Pad thai (stir-fried noodles with egg, vegetables, spices, chicken, shrimp, tofu)
Foreign tourist visitors per year: 13,821,802
Media freedom index (ranked out of 173): 124
Did you know ... Most Thais refer to the capital as Krung Thep, the shortened name of a title that actually consists of 32 words.
National anthem:
The Thai people are peace-loving
But they are no cowards at war
They shall allow no one to rob them of their independence
Nor shall they suffer tyranny
· Information correct on date of first publication, Saturday 25 April 2009.
Scientific Alliance newsletter 24th April 2009
Cambridge Network - Cambridge,UK
Making the most of agricultural technology
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, set up to use the couple's personal wealth for the benefit of the world's poor, takes a hard-headed, business-oriented approach to screening projects put forward for funding. Unlike the majority of development charities, the Gates Foundation is not afraid to include cutting edge technologies to address pressing problems. This is not to say that there is not a place for small-scale improvements to current farming practices. Better cultivation techniques and improved irrigation have a role to play, but so does a search for more radical solutions to malnourishment and the lack of food security.
This approach starts from the principle that healthy, well-fed people are able to move on from subsistence farming and lift themselves out of poverty. Regular crop surpluses and the scope to grow cash crops not only makes the lives of whole families better, but enable children to go to school, which greatly improves their prospects as adults.
With this as an overall objective, nothing is then ruled out. There is no philosophical reliance on indigenous knowledge and keeping small farmers on the land for generations to come. If a more radical solution has the potential to improve people's lives, then there is no reason not to explore it. The net result would not necessarily be good for everyone in the short term. There would be losers as well as winners as the pattern of farming changed and young people moved to the cities.
But these are the sort of social upheavals which European countries have gone through in the past. From the comfort of our lives in today's advanced societies, how many of us would really argue that populations would be better off working the land for the basic necessities of life? Then we have to consider why the development sector effectively wants to condemn the world's current population of poor farmers to a similar future.
This attitude is encapsulated in the report of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, published in 2008. Set up as an authoritative, multi-stakeholder study, it became dominated by the received wisdom of NGOs and development agencies, and effectively dismissed the tools available to developed country farmers as inappropriate to the needs of the developing world. No wonder that the representatives of the private sector agricultural supply industry withdrew from participation before the report was published.
But published it was, and the dismissal of agricultural biotechnology as a development tool is now regularly trotted out as the authoritative consensus view of 400 scientists and development experts. Not only is it difficult to see how this can be a balanced view if the owners of the technology have effectively been excluded, but it is also a pity that no-one seems to have asked poor farmers in Africa, Asia or Latin America whether they would like to see the best available technologies used to improve crops which will help them produce bigger and more valuable harvests.
Fortunately, the Gates Foundation is not so blinkered. It has, for example, very publicly funded a project whose aim is to breed a "super cassava" using genetic modification technology (Biocassava plus). Cassava is the fall-back staple food of many in sub-Saharan Africa, but has a low nutritional value and requires considerable preparation to make it safe to eat, as it contains significant levels of cyanide. The goal is to increase the protein, vitamin and mineral content, reduce or eliminate cyanide and increase disease resistance. Field trials of a variety with high levels of beta-carotene have been approved in Nigeria.
But genetic modification is only one of the tools used, where it is appropriate. More recently, the Foundation has made grants of $48 million to two bodies – the World Cocoa Foundation and the German development organisation GTZ – to improve the incomes of cocoa and cashew farmers in Africa. These are integrated, multi-faceted programmes which aim to improve farmer knowledge, crop yields and quality and access to market.
Will such initiatives work? Doubtless some will be more successful than others, but full marks are due to the Gates Foundation and their partners for making genuine efforts to improve the lot of the poor through its agriculture initiative and for being open-minded to the possibilities offered by modern technology.
A worthy winner, for the wrong reasons
The FT has recently announced the winner of its Climate Change Challenge, which "sought to find and publicise the most innovative and scalable solution to the effects of climate change." A solar-powered cardboard cooker called the Kyoto Box has won the $75,000 prize.
This is a simple, cheap and ingenious device which can be used to boil water by harnessing heat from the sun. This Sun's rays enter an inner box through an acrylic panel, and heat is trapped via a combination of insulation, black paint and foil, sufficient to boil 10 litres of water in two hours when placed on top of the panel. And all for a likely cost of $5. The judging panel included the Financial Times, Sir Richard Branson and Dr Rajendra Pachauri.
John Bohmer, the cooker's inventor, thinks that its use will reduce a family's carbon dioxide emissions by about two tonnes a year, by eliminating the use of firewood. The other suggested benefit is disease reduction because water can be boiled before drinking. Strangely, the report fails to mention the most significant benefit of all: a likely big improvement in health because of reduced use of indoor wood stoves. The smoke from these fires is a major cause of respiratory disease, particularly among women and children.
If the Kyoto Box could be used for the majority of cooking, respiratory disease would be reduced and the daily search for firewood could be eliminated. These are two big gains, and make the prize winner a worthy one. But to see it as making a significant contribution to reduction of carbon emissions is misleading. While the rural poor might use less firewood, their countries' governments will be investing in centralised power generation, the additional emissions from which will dwarf any savings.
An effective electricity grid – supplemented by local generation sources in many cases – is a prerequisite for a decent life for city dwellers and the development of viable industries. Whatever is done to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions associated with rural living, this will become increasingly irrelevant as the economy develops. Productive agriculture is only the first stage of development, and we should not be aiming to stop the process when subsistence farmers have enough to eat every year. Poor farmers already have a tiny carbon footprint compared to rich Europeans. But they also have much poorer health, and if the Kyoto Box can improve this, then it certainly deserves a prize.
The Scientific Alliance
St John's Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: +44 1223 421242
Please pass this newsletter on to your own networks and encourage other people to subscribe. Simply send us an email request, and your name will be added to the list.
See also:
Organisation: Scientific Alliance
Making the most of agricultural technology
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, set up to use the couple's personal wealth for the benefit of the world's poor, takes a hard-headed, business-oriented approach to screening projects put forward for funding. Unlike the majority of development charities, the Gates Foundation is not afraid to include cutting edge technologies to address pressing problems. This is not to say that there is not a place for small-scale improvements to current farming practices. Better cultivation techniques and improved irrigation have a role to play, but so does a search for more radical solutions to malnourishment and the lack of food security.
This approach starts from the principle that healthy, well-fed people are able to move on from subsistence farming and lift themselves out of poverty. Regular crop surpluses and the scope to grow cash crops not only makes the lives of whole families better, but enable children to go to school, which greatly improves their prospects as adults.
With this as an overall objective, nothing is then ruled out. There is no philosophical reliance on indigenous knowledge and keeping small farmers on the land for generations to come. If a more radical solution has the potential to improve people's lives, then there is no reason not to explore it. The net result would not necessarily be good for everyone in the short term. There would be losers as well as winners as the pattern of farming changed and young people moved to the cities.
But these are the sort of social upheavals which European countries have gone through in the past. From the comfort of our lives in today's advanced societies, how many of us would really argue that populations would be better off working the land for the basic necessities of life? Then we have to consider why the development sector effectively wants to condemn the world's current population of poor farmers to a similar future.
This attitude is encapsulated in the report of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, published in 2008. Set up as an authoritative, multi-stakeholder study, it became dominated by the received wisdom of NGOs and development agencies, and effectively dismissed the tools available to developed country farmers as inappropriate to the needs of the developing world. No wonder that the representatives of the private sector agricultural supply industry withdrew from participation before the report was published.
But published it was, and the dismissal of agricultural biotechnology as a development tool is now regularly trotted out as the authoritative consensus view of 400 scientists and development experts. Not only is it difficult to see how this can be a balanced view if the owners of the technology have effectively been excluded, but it is also a pity that no-one seems to have asked poor farmers in Africa, Asia or Latin America whether they would like to see the best available technologies used to improve crops which will help them produce bigger and more valuable harvests.
Fortunately, the Gates Foundation is not so blinkered. It has, for example, very publicly funded a project whose aim is to breed a "super cassava" using genetic modification technology (Biocassava plus). Cassava is the fall-back staple food of many in sub-Saharan Africa, but has a low nutritional value and requires considerable preparation to make it safe to eat, as it contains significant levels of cyanide. The goal is to increase the protein, vitamin and mineral content, reduce or eliminate cyanide and increase disease resistance. Field trials of a variety with high levels of beta-carotene have been approved in Nigeria.
But genetic modification is only one of the tools used, where it is appropriate. More recently, the Foundation has made grants of $48 million to two bodies – the World Cocoa Foundation and the German development organisation GTZ – to improve the incomes of cocoa and cashew farmers in Africa. These are integrated, multi-faceted programmes which aim to improve farmer knowledge, crop yields and quality and access to market.
Will such initiatives work? Doubtless some will be more successful than others, but full marks are due to the Gates Foundation and their partners for making genuine efforts to improve the lot of the poor through its agriculture initiative and for being open-minded to the possibilities offered by modern technology.
A worthy winner, for the wrong reasons
The FT has recently announced the winner of its Climate Change Challenge, which "sought to find and publicise the most innovative and scalable solution to the effects of climate change." A solar-powered cardboard cooker called the Kyoto Box has won the $75,000 prize.
This is a simple, cheap and ingenious device which can be used to boil water by harnessing heat from the sun. This Sun's rays enter an inner box through an acrylic panel, and heat is trapped via a combination of insulation, black paint and foil, sufficient to boil 10 litres of water in two hours when placed on top of the panel. And all for a likely cost of $5. The judging panel included the Financial Times, Sir Richard Branson and Dr Rajendra Pachauri.
John Bohmer, the cooker's inventor, thinks that its use will reduce a family's carbon dioxide emissions by about two tonnes a year, by eliminating the use of firewood. The other suggested benefit is disease reduction because water can be boiled before drinking. Strangely, the report fails to mention the most significant benefit of all: a likely big improvement in health because of reduced use of indoor wood stoves. The smoke from these fires is a major cause of respiratory disease, particularly among women and children.
If the Kyoto Box could be used for the majority of cooking, respiratory disease would be reduced and the daily search for firewood could be eliminated. These are two big gains, and make the prize winner a worthy one. But to see it as making a significant contribution to reduction of carbon emissions is misleading. While the rural poor might use less firewood, their countries' governments will be investing in centralised power generation, the additional emissions from which will dwarf any savings.
An effective electricity grid – supplemented by local generation sources in many cases – is a prerequisite for a decent life for city dwellers and the development of viable industries. Whatever is done to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions associated with rural living, this will become increasingly irrelevant as the economy develops. Productive agriculture is only the first stage of development, and we should not be aiming to stop the process when subsistence farmers have enough to eat every year. Poor farmers already have a tiny carbon footprint compared to rich Europeans. But they also have much poorer health, and if the Kyoto Box can improve this, then it certainly deserves a prize.
The Scientific Alliance
St John's Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: +44 1223 421242
Please pass this newsletter on to your own networks and encourage other people to subscribe. Simply send us an email request, and your name will be added to the list.
See also:
Organisation: Scientific Alliance
Apr 15, 2009
News: Nigeria planning to export $200 million in yams and cassava ...
FoodBizDaily.com (press release) - Westport,CT,USA
Lagos April 13 2009 (FoodBizDaily) - Nigeria has gone a long way in producing new and improved varieties of root and tuber crops, and the country’s success story in this field may, in all probability, be soon extended to it being elevated to the position of being the number one producer of yams, cocoyams, and cassava in the world through its export of these crops.
At present, the production volume of yams is 32 metric tonnes in a year. Preparations are on in full swing, already, to get on with the exportation of the tuber crop to the European Union (EU). This is expected to fetch foreign exchange earnings to the tune of $200 million.
Dr Kenneth Nwosu, by the Executive Director of the National Root Crop Research Institute (NRCRI) Umudike, made the announcement to this effect on the eve of the opening ceremony of the 2009 annual research review and planning workshop of the institute.
The NRCRI would collaborate with the Nasarawa State government and a United Kingdom-based company to make possible and execute the export of yam tubers to the European Union countries, he informed.
“This programme may turn out to be the saving grace in insulating Nigeria from the global economic melt down as close to $200 million trade could be created,” Nwosu stated.
Evaluating the highlights of the accomplishments of the institute, the NRCRI boss said that the institute has “substantially contributed to the national food security and food sufficiency through its agricultural research and extension activities on root and tuber crops.” He stated that the institute has been exceptional in its achievements, as it is highly commendable to note that Nigeria still retains its position as the world’s number one producer of yam, cocoyam, and cassava with an overall annual output of 32, 5 and 45 million metric tons, respectively.
“Technologies developed at the institute have contributed immensely in placing Nigeria at this global level,” Nwosu pointed out; he also added that “with the recent government positive intervention in funding agricultural research, production of these crops are expected to double by the year 2020.”
Mrs. Fidelia Akuabata Njeze, the Minister of State for Agriculture, said in her address that the ministry was “highly pleased” at the country’s position as the number one producer in the world of yam, cassava, and cocoyam, “which is largely due to the aggressive research and extension efforts of this institute.”
It was the deputy director in the ministry, Dr Parry Nyandati, who read out Njeze’s address. In the address, he conveyed his particular interest in the advancement achieved by NRCRI in developing yam and cassava varieties which give high yields and which are resistant to diseases.
Njeze said, “It is a known fact that many of our farmers do not get adequate reward for their efforts because of low yielding disease prone traditional varieties which they are using. Your effort to replace the traditional varieties with high yielding disease resistant ones is therefore commendable.”
FoodBizDaily.com - Staff writer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)