http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/ What's on the minds of young leaders from around the globe? en-us http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/459515
CIELAP’s workshop will help stakeholders better understand the benefits of this international forum and will give them the opportunity to input into Canada’s participation at CSD. CSD is the only global plenary session that applies a sustainable development lens to pressing international issues. The international forum provides Canadian sustainable development thinkers and decision-makers with the opportunity to interact; share successes and best practices; learn from other cast studies; bring divergent opinions together to help bridge differences; and advance policies and standards that set the stage for Canadian policy-making at national, regional, and local levels.
To get involved with the workshop or to ask any questions you may e-mail Carolyn Webb at carolyn@cielap.org
]]> Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:02:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/459515 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/454423
The following is a summary of the workshop:

The UN Commission on Sustainable Development Needs Youth

Involvement of today's youth in decision-making processes is essential to the successful implementation of sustainable development policies and programmes. The UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) seeks to advance the role of youth and actively involve them in the protection of the environment and the promotion of economic and social development. Agenda 21 states that “it is imperative that youth from all parts of the world participate actively in all relevant levels of decision-making processes because it affects their lives today and has implications for their futures. In addition to their intellectual contribution and their ability to mobilize support, they bring unique perspectives that need to be taken into account.”

CSD meetings consistently provide innovative spaces for the participation of youth and other major groups, with the overall purpose of informing the Commission’s decision-making processes. Youth infuse the CSD with new ideas and information, and present challenges that enrich the inter-governmental debate. They participate in interactive dialogues, develop coordinated statements through the CSD Youth Caucus, and lobby for particular initiatives that they feel should be supported. They also contribute significantly to sustainable development initiatives surrounding the CSD process.

This workshop will be comprised of a presentation on how youth can engage in CSD, followed by questions and discussion among participants. It is designed to highlight the role of youth in CSD and to mobilize action for increased youth participation in upcoming CSD meetings.



]]> Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:44:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/454423 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/454417
Description:
The purpose of this group is to provide a forum for discussion among all individuals interested in Canada's role at the Commission on Sustainable Development. In particular, this listserve will enable Canadians active in the CSD process to connect, share resources, and identify opportunities for the Canadian Government to move forward at the CSD.

During the CSD, members can use the listserve to connect in person at the UN and to seek input from Canadians back home on pressing issues as they emerge.

Send a message: csdcanada@groups.takingitglobal.org
Subscribe: csdcanada-subscribe@groups.takingitglobal.org
Unsubscribe: csdcanada-unsubscribe@groups.takingitglobal.org]]> Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:40:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/454417 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/371335
There are a lot of issues to follow and be engaged with. News about the collapse of the salmon fish stocks is a clear reminder of how urgently we must sustain the earth - its systems, resources. If the CSD isn't the policy forum of choice for Canadian youth I think that is okay just as long as we are all engaged, and active, and concerned, and asking questions.





]]> Wed, 14 May 2008 17:36:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/371335 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370881
In particular, a shout out to youth are made:

Para 240. "An energetic youth force is emerging that intends to hold Governments responsible for their commitments. Youth are increasingly integrated into Government delegations in some regions, and their presence as current and future producers and leaders has inspired progress in the creation of new outreach education programs in sustainable agriculture and rural development. Integrating sustainability themes into all levels of education is an important measure that would ensure that future generations are conscious of sustainable development."]]> Tue, 13 May 2008 18:07:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370881 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370825
How many youngsters live in your country? How do you include them in decision making processes? What do you know about their ambitions, visions and opinions?

According to the UN, youth are people between the age of 15 and 24 years old. And these days, you see a lot of them walking through the halls of the UN basement. Most of them work for NGO´s, but this is not the case for all of them.

The World Programme of Action for Youth has invited Governments to strengthen the involvement of young people through the inclusion of youth representatives in their national delegations to the UN Commission on Sustainable Development.

Nowadays, four countries include an official Youth Delegate into their delegations and involve them in the decision making process about sustainability. These are Belgian with 3 delegates, Canada has got 1 delegate, Germany 2, the Netherlands 1 and Sweden 1.

These delegates do not have a symbolic value, they are actually participating in the work of the delegations. They participate in meetings, in informal negotiations with the major groups and with other delegations. They can provide substantive support. Overall they fulfill a dual role. On the one hand they interact with youth in their home countries, gather their opinions and present it as input to their National Delegation, the Youth Caucus and the CSD. On the other hand, they take the decisions being made at the UN back to the youngsters in their home country.

Youth participation is vital to the success of sustainable development. Youth are the largest group of stakeholders. Youth up to the age of 24 comprise 65% of the Earth's population. There are 1,2 billion people between the age of 15 and 24 worldwide. This makes youngsters the largest group of stakeholders on short-term sustainable development policies.

But they are also the ones that in the future decades have to implement decisions that are being made today. That makes them the group of stakeholders on long-term sustainable development policy outcomes as well.

The realisation of sustainable development depends also on coherence, communication and compliance. People need to understand why we should work together for a sustainable future. Young people in particular have a responsibility to make changes as it literally affects and determines their own future. And as the next generation, they have the ability to change paradigms, and be the action owner for the future. What happens today, what is decided today and what is being educated today, has an effect on the opinion, opportunities and choices of future generations.

Einstein said: the world will not evolve past its current state of crisis by using the same kind of thinking that created the situation. With the borders of the earth carrying capacity in sight, we need innovative, fresh solutions. Youngsters can make an excellent contribution.

Maayke Damen and Don Gerritsen]]> Tue, 13 May 2008 15:33:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370825 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370659
We were invited to reflect about the intervention we delivered on partnerships, and we discussed as a class some of the unique things about the youth caucus that I hadn't even considered. Some of the questions that Thomas raised include: how do we learn how to speak for a sector? Who are we speaking for when we say we represent children and youth? The fact is we aren't elected to represent the voice of these people so we have to deliver our statements with caution. Attending these UN negotiations require an investment of time and money that not everyone can afford to make and so it is important to be aware of the privilege there is in participating in these forums. Until there is better funding to ensure that more marginalized voices are heard at the UN, Thomas Forster suggested youth make better use of technology to further democratize the major groups at the CSD. Each major group has the potential to actively outreach to their communities back home and seek input from those that aren't at the UN, it's up to us how much we reach out.

Some other things that Thomas mentioned is that each group has its own internal organizing culture. The business major group tends to make more executive decisions with a stronger hierarchy. The youth group can have a lot less structure, which can sometimes to be frustrating, but we also have a lot more collaboration and engagement across the board.

Finally, I have been hearing a lot about the inadequacies of the review year and the need for action. I empathize with these frustrations since the magnitude of the problems being addressed are so enormous, and so pressing. But Thomas (who is my new hero also) raised a good point about how a review year is the only opportunity for countries and groups to get together and truly reflect on best practices and identify policy opportunities for next year, instead of just going into the negotiations with locked positions and minimal opportunity for a negotiated agreement.

A few more thoughts, in no particular order:

This week there will be thematic points of entry culminating in a final stakeholder delivery. It is important for youth to ensure that the major issues that are important to us to get onto the final text.

Partnerships are not insignificant. The reason why we focus so much on partnerships is because encourages more accountable governance. Partnershps interconnect governmental levels, sectors, and groups to work for a common purpose. This is unique. Up until my experience at the New School I didn't understand the hype around "partnerships". I thought it was just another buzz word like sustainability.

I have many more notes from the class but I am really grateful to have been able to join Thomas' class. I was up at Yale this weekend for a conference on environmental governance and democracy, and one of the closing speakers mentioned how the world needs more humility in academic circles in order to solve the environmental challenges we face. The self-centered approach of the ivory towers needs to be turned outward so that efforts are collaborative, and humble. The New School was everything this Yale professor seemed to mention. The students were engaged and curious.
It was an odd contrast going from Yale to the New School in one day's time. I was really inspired by the students I saw in the school, and I hope that we can foster more vibrant pedagogy in Canada during this critical political opportunity.]]> Tue, 13 May 2008 07:13:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370659 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370103
http://www.sdin-ngo.net/]]> Mon, 12 May 2008 09:59:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/370103 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/369455
"The earth has enough for everyone's need, but not for everyone's greed."
- Gandhi]]> Sat, 10 May 2008 22:17:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/369455 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/369449
Kudos to those countries that have taken the effort to include youth and other major groups as part of their delegation. This current outreach hopefully signals the start of more participatory environmental governance, whereby governments will start to bring a youth representative to other critical negotiations such as with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change - why stop at the CSD? ]]> Sat, 10 May 2008 22:01:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/369449 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/369431
Friday 10 May 2008 at 4:30-6 pm Session

Youth Statement

Thank you Mr. Chair. The Children and Youth Caucus understands partnerships as the mutual cooperation and responsibility of multiple entities working towards a common goal. That goal, as we all know, is sustainable development in the thematic areas. As the distinguished delegate from Indigenous Peoples noted, these thematic areas are interconnected. We as people are also all inerconnected. Children and youth have a tremendous amount of knowledge and experiences to contribute to organizations, governments, and the international process. We also hold vital and fresh perspectives to incorporate into the decisions and application of policies.

But the children and youth are concerned that the valuable contributions we can make to organizations, governments, and the international process, is underutilized. As the partnerships statistics on the CSD website reveal, there is an extremely small amount of partnerships with Youth and Children relative to partnerships from other major groups. When we are excluded from policy development and project implementation because of an assumed lack of expertise in management details, we are also excluded from the opportunity to provide a holistic perspective on issues.

In particular, we would like to highlight the advantages that youth have to offer in partnerships. As we are not yet restricted to a particular sectoral interest, young people have greater opportunity to understand problems and come up with solutions from a holistic lens. We are able to move across many institutional platforms at the local, provincial and international level simultaneously. Youth can enhance parternships because of our ability to comprehend and understand multiple perspectives and contribute to partnerships. Unlike some other contributors, youth come into the decision making and implementation process with no agenda other than a safe, just, and sustainable future.

The SARD Initiative provides us with a good example of a missed opportunity to establish a partnership between civil society and government. In its creation, the youth were represented by the CSD youth delegate, Calvin James, from Trinidad and Tobago. Following development of the SARD Initiative, he called for a global youth summit for sustainable food and agriculture. This summit has not yet been realized and illustrates how youth lacked the necessary support and resources in developing such initiatives. This lesson can teach us how youth can be brought to the table throughout all aspects of partnerships. In addition, partnerships can foster leadership development through investment in young people.

As part of a review year, delegates and observers are asked to listen to the stories and the lessons learned by others with an open mind and an open heart. As such, the youth caucus would like to acknowledge an internal weakness of our own that we have identified during this review session. Through the partnership case studies and stories of best practice, we have come to realize that the youth and children can better improve in the partnerships we develop with other governments and organizations. We must also be more active in soliciting and lobbying for the partnerships we desire. Sustainable Development requires joint collaboration of all countries and major groups. Although we are enthusiastic to further develop more partnerships, we also call upon you for help establishing more opportunities for us to be engaged. We invite governments and organizations to consider the critical role of youth partners and engage us in both the development of policy and the implementation of projects. Young people have fresh ideas and innovative solutions to the challenges we are discussing now. And as the constituency of the future, we are an integral element to any truly sustainable initiative. And, to remind you again, young people are not useless, we are simply used ... less.]]> Sat, 10 May 2008 21:49:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/369431 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367675
I am going to pose two general questions that some of the youth have been asking, and I invite any comments or feedback to these questions [or thoughts in general].

1 - What are your thoughts on the CSD process? Do you think the CSD is a suitable forum for dealing with issues of sustainable development? If not, what kind of an approach is needed to enhance implementation on the areas that countries identify as problematic?

2 - One of the themes this year is land and agriculture. What role do you think the CSD should take to enhance adaptation to climate change and to promote an agricultural sector that is prepared for climate change?

[** While I try to sort out why people can't post on this blog, please e-mail any thoughts to: joanna.dafoe@utoronto.ca and I will pass along any comments! Thanks**]]]> Wed, 07 May 2008 16:27:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367675 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367521

AGRICULTURE and the ENVIRONMENT - ANALYSIS and ACTION
By Helen Forsey

Introduction:

Farming is in crisis in Canada. So is the environment. Since agriculture and the environment are intimately intertwined, both crises must be addressed together.

We are all involved in agriculture, through the food we eat, the water we drink, the air we breathe, and the choices we make. And we are all part of the environment, whether we live on farms or in cities, in rural communities or in the industrial heartland.

The twin crises of agriculture and the environment threaten not only our own present-day economy and well-being, but the very survival of our society - the future that our children and grandchildren will inherit. It is our responsibility to look squarely at the problems, understand the causes and potential solutions, and act - now, while the opportunity lasts.

That is the urgency behind this paper.

Canadian Agriculture Today – Environmental Implications

Canadian agriculture today is characterized by ever-larger farms, ever fewer people farming, and record-low net farm incomes. Governments and agribusiness corporations vigorously promote a factory-style agriculture of monocultures and megabarns largely geared to export. This industrial approach demands costly specialized machinery and equipment, intensive application of synthetic chemical inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, pharmaceuticals), and increasing use of genetically modified (GM) crops and livestock. Local markets and industries vanish as farm products are trucked away to centralized processing and distant customers. This model is reinforced off-farm through corporate control of agricultural education and research, and bureaucratized "one-size-fits-all" regulations geared to global commerce.

Separately and together, these trends dramatically affect the natural environment, human and animal health, and the security of our food supply.

At the same time we see expanding public concern about climate change and pollution; recognition of the "peak oil" phenomenon and limits to growth; increased emphasis on responsible stewardship of land and water; a resurgence of interest in organic and low-input agriculture; and a growing realization that in the field of food production, "small is beautiful" and "acting locally" makes sense.

These alternative trends, too, have enormous implications for the environment and for the future of farming in Canada.

This paper complements the RCEN Green Paper on Agriculture and Environment (www.cen-rce.org/eng/caucuses/agriculture/index.html). It outlines key agro-environmental issues, and sets out some directions for positive action. Subject areas have been chosen to reflect major environmental themes and give order to the presentation. But as in ecology itself, the divisions are arbitrary, as all the subjects overlap and influence each other. Policy and action recommendations are integrated throughout the paper, rather than separated out shopping-list style, because the complex inter-connectedness of both the problems and the potential solutions requires an understanding of the overall picture and a correspondingly holistic approach.



Soil – "They’re not making any more of it"

Agriculture starts in the soil - that complex, living mix of minerals, organic matter, microorganisms, water and air that supports and nourishes plant life. Those plants in turn feed humans and other animals, and eventually return to nourish the soil itself again.

Fertile soil is a precious resource, non-renewable in the short term and very vulnerable to urban sprawl, erosion, depletion and contamination of various kinds. How we care for it is key to our present and future food security, and affects all other aspects of the agro-environmental balance.

Only a small percentage of Canada’s huge land mass is classed as agricultural land, ranging from rough pasture to rich fertile cropland. Most of the best agricultural land is along our southern border, where the growing season is longest and the human population is concentrated. This puts huge pressure on the land and those who farm it. Uniquely productive and accessible farming areas like the Niagara Peninsula, Quebec’s Montérégie and BC’s lower mainland are being rapidly paved over and built up, while in every province farmland gives way to suburbs, highways, airports, golf courses and industrial parks to meet urban priorities.

Soil is at risk from natural as well as human forces. It takes decades to build up fertile topsoil rich with organic matter, but almost no time for water or wind erosion to take it away. When inappropriate tillage, irrigation, row cropping or herbicide use leave it exposed to the elements, it disappears even faster. In many areas, soil problems are compounded by acid rain from near or distant industries, or by leaching and salinity resulting from irrigation.

Many other mainstream agricultural practices also leave the soil badly damaged. The massive machinery required to cultivate large acreages often causes soil compaction and erosion. Intensive cultivation of high-demand crops like corn depletes the soil of nutrients and the organic matter that maintains soil life and structure. And soil ecosystems simply cannot function under an onslaught of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides and fungicides.

Synthetic fertilizers cannot maintain the complex, living nature of the soil, even when used in crop rotations with nitrogen-fixing legumes. Nor can soil be properly maintained or rebuilt with manure from intensive livestock operations, or sewage sludge (coyly labelled “biosolids”) from septic tanks or municipal waste. In fact, using these substances risks further contaminating both soil and water with chemicals, heavy metals and even pathogens.

Many farmers are increasingly aware that agricultural practices must change if soil is to continue to produce food, and to play its part in a healthy environment. Organic farmers are leading the way in rebuilding soil structure and organic matter, stopping soil contamination and demonstrating the benefits of smaller-scale, mixed farming based on intimate knowledge of their land. Many others are reducing their use of chemicals, and drawing on old wisdom and new information about contour tillage, crop rotations, rotational grazing, woodlots, shelter belts, cover crops, mulching, and inter-cropping. These farmers should have the public’s full support.

Concerned citizens are working at municipal and regional levels to preserve farmland through rational land use planning, and pressing for provincial and national soil protection policies and enforcement. Many are actively opposing development on specific agricultural lands, keeping in mind the legitimate concerns of farmers for whom sale to a developer may offer the only way out of debt or into retirement. Such activism is complemented by local food initiatives like Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs), food coops and community gardens, and by media and educational work to increase people’s understanding of and commitment to the living earth that grows our food.



Water – Agriculture’s Lifeblood

In agriculture, water is as essential as soil. It is vital for both plant and animal life, and is the main component in raw agricultural products. How the quantity and quality of water affect agriculture, and how agriculture affects this crucial element of the Earth’s environment, are thus questions of vital interest to farmers and environmentalists alike.

Only about 9% of Canadian water withdrawals are used for agriculture, compared to 63% for thermal power generation (nuclear, gas and coal). Our showers, baths and flush toilets use almost as much water as our agriculture does. Both uses are largely consumptive; agriculture returns less than 30% of its water to sources that can be used again. Also, the mega-processing plants required by biofuels and other products of industrial agriculture are big water-guzzlers.

Too little water is a classic problem for farmers. So is too much, and both are likely to get worse as climate change progresses. Drought affects most areas at some time, but it is a constant threat in dryland parts of the West, and irrigation is often seen as the answer. In fact, irrigation is Canada’s biggest agricultural user of water. However, it can lead to problems of soil salinity, and to aquifer depletion if water is withdrawn faster than the source can recharge.

Heavy rains or snow melt can also be serious problems, causing erosion and flooding and saturating soils. When cropland is poorly drained, the plants are weak, yields are lower, machinery use is hampered, and chemical or biological contaminants may leach into the water table. Wet weather or flooding turn Intensive Livestock Operations (ILOs) into dangerous major sources of such contaminants, from both manure and deadstock.

Significant amounts of water are also used in dairy and livestock farming, notably for the liquid manure systems used by many ILOs. But again, the main concern is water quality. Even small farms must be vigilant in dealing with manure, washwater, and pasturing near water bodies. The more so in ILOs, where thousands of animals are crowded together in conditions of extreme stress, and fed hormones for growth and antibiotics to discourage rampant disease. Manure from these massive operations becomes a toxic soup of chemicals, sediments, and antibiotic-resistant pathogens that can quickly pollute surface and groundwater, endangering both human health and the whole environment, including the oceans and marine life.

Even before all the bad news about boil-water advisories and global warming, most farmers were doing what they could to conserve and protect water. Practices like buffer zones, proper drainage, reducing chemical inputs, fencing off waterways and composting manure can improve water quality, reduce erosion, and restore wildlife habitat. But such measures can be costly, and with farm incomes at record lows, many farmers simply cannot afford to do more.

On the consumer end of the food chain, we must become water-conscious as well. Lettuce from California and tomatoes from Mexico represent literally tons of imported water, brought to us at huge environmental cost in energy and pollution. To produce them, natural dryland areas have been converted to export agriculture through irrigation from sources like the Colorado River and the Oglalla Aquifer that are rapidly drying up. Buying these products makes us accomplices in water theft, climate change, and undermining local producers and processors.

Water is a public trust, not a commodity, and wise public policy should reflect this. Such policy would include sensible and effective regulations geared to farm size and type, fees payable to the public purse for water withdrawals over a certain amount, and adequate funding for small and medium-sized farms to improve water-related practices.



Hot Air - Energy, Atmosphere and Climate

Farming involves humans in a complex interplay of factors that convert soil, water, air and energy into the agricultural products that we eat and use. Through the magic of photosynthesis, the sun’s energy enables plants to literally create biomass, consuming carbon dioxide from the air and returning oxygen. Agriculture uses human and animal energy - and in recent history, fossil fuels - to reliably provide people with that biomass as food and fibre.

As “Third World” farmers and our own grandparents could tell us, it is quite possible to farm without fossil fuels. What is not possible without them is industrial agriculture. Everything from tractors and combines to fertilizers and pesticides, from grain trucks to megabarn ventilation systems to centralized processing plants, run on or are literally made from fossil fuels. Industrial agriculture is using up these non-renewable energy sources at a rapid rate, and churning out air pollution and greenhouse gases in the process. We are busily sawing off the branch we are sitting on.

ILOs are among the worst offenders in terms of air pollution, greenhouse gases and energy consumption. These factory-style operations consume massive quantities of feed which must be produced and transported; storing and spreading their manure emits ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and methane; and trucking their thousands of animals to be slaughtered adds to the problems.

Treating food as a mere commodity for global trade leads inevitably to enormous energy waste and added pollution. Focussing on large-scale production for export, replacing Canadian products with cheap imports, and corporate concentration of processing and distribution means that food now travels a ridiculous 2,500 to 4,000 “food miles” from farm to North American plate. If we go on this way, the advance of climate change and diminishing fossil fuel supplies will render this obscenity - and many others - obsolete.

The dream of avoiding this scenario by using agriculture to produce “renewable energy” is a popular but perilous illusion. The energy needed to grow the crops and process them into ethanol or biodiesel essentially cancels out the energy they produce. Meanwhile, precious land and resources are diverted from growing food. Even if all agricultural land in North America were switched to “energy” crops, that would still only meet a small portion of current fuel demand.

In the 1990s, when Cubans suddenly found themselves without oil or trade options, they shifted from a largely industrialized export-oriented monocrop agriculture to a decentralized, diversified, people-based system. Instead of importing agricultural inputs and 60% of their food, they now feed their urban and rural populations with organic food sustainably produced nearby.

Efforts towards low-energy, non-polluting alternatives for Canadian agriculture start with the knowledge, adaptability and resilience of small and medium-sized family farms and the support of surrounding communities. Initiatives like Community-Shared Agriculture, farmers’ markets, and “Local Flavour Plus” campaigns are gaining participants and gradually eating into the corporate “World Is Our Garden” approach. Local environmentally-friendly food processing - from abattoirs to dairies, from canneries to solar drying systems - can help make this shift sustainable. Where long distance transportation is necessary, railways are more than twice as energy-efficient as trucking; they should be restored and run at reasonable cost to producers.

Farm woodlots, natural wetlands, and organic soil-building methods help to increase carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat and water conservation. “Human-scale” mixed farms that combine crops and pastured animals can help slow climate change, and are better equipped to respond to its effects. Policy and consumer decisions should move us forward in this direction.



Seeds and Genes - The Stuff of Life

Farmers have always worked with nature to select and develop crops and animals that serve human needs and thrive in particular local conditions. From an almost limitless natural gene pool, humans have cultivated thousands of breeds and varieties to meet widely differing requirements and provide back-up possibilities. As a result, farmers theoretically enjoy a broad range of genetic options, an agricultural gene pool still related to its wild sources and reflecting the immense biodiversity that enables life in the natural world to flourish and cope with change.

In practice, however, biodiversity has been seriously undermined, both on farms and in the wild. Historically, clearing of forests and tilling of prairie destroyed rich and diverse natural habitats. Still, the agro-ecosystems that replaced them were generally fairly diverse themselves, with a variety of crops and animals playing multiple complementary roles. To a large extent that kind of farming, like organic farming today, emulated and worked with nature. In contrast, industrial agriculture tries to pick nature apart and re-engineer it towards uniformity, predictability and the supposed profit of monocultures and megabarns.

Genetic engineering is the culmination of this approach. The manufacturers of fertilizers, pesticides and pharmaceuticals have created the biotechnology or “life sciences” business to convert plant and animal DNA - the very stuff of life - into just another for-profit commodity. With scientific and legal collusion, these companies have acquired patent rights to genetic material, posing a serious threat to the world’s gene pool, on which all farming - and life itself - depend.

Patents on genetic material allow company scientists to manipulate DNA in risky commercial experiments to achieve corporate goals. Herbicide-resistant canola brings in profits both from seed and increased herbicide sales. Bt (insecticidal) corn grabs market share by promising to solve the corn-borer problem. Many farmers, struggling to break even in the cut-throat world of industrial agriculture, decide to try the genetically modified (GM) seed and submit to the restrictive “Technology Use Agreements” (TUAs) that the companies impose. Some are even being tempted to try growing GM pharmaceuticals and other ”novel” industrial products.

The environmental effects of these ventures - even apart from the chemical pollution and human health risks - can be devastating. Genetic contamination from pollen drift has already made organic canola a thing of the past on the Prairies, and is being blamed for the emergence of “superweeds” which, like “Roundup-Ready” crops, are happy with herbicides. Since the whole point of pesticides is to attack the elements of biodiversity known as weeds and insect “pests”, designing GM crops to produce or resist these chemicals wreaks havoc with ecosystems. Yet companies and government insist that GM products are “substantially equivalent” to their non-GM counterparts, and therefore need no testing - a claim contradicted by the scientific evidence.

Moreover, as corporate owners of genes focus on their biggest money-makers, potential genetic competitors - farmer-saved or heritage seeds or breeds - face eventual elimination, deliberate or not. Once those are gone, they’ll be gone forever, and with them the biological insurance and adaptability - to climate change, for example - that a diverse gene pool provides.

Meanwhile, Canadian farmers and other citizens are carrying on the tradition of organized resistance that got Bovine Growth Hormone banned here and kept GM wheat (so far) from being commercialized. World-wide, many markets are rejecting GM foods, while public pressure (again, so far) keeps the ban in place on “Terminator” technologies (so-called “Genetic Use Restriction Technologies” or “GURTs”). And at the grass roots, more and more people are saving seeds, raising rare breeds, and working to restore the health of fields and woods, rivers and oceans, and life’s marvellous and essential diversity.



The Way Forward - Directions for Policy and Action

Concerned farmers and other environmentalists know that farming can be done in ways that benefit the environment while producing food and fibre for human needs. But this can only be done if conditions change so that people can actually make a living by farming this way.

The industrial model of agriculture leads directly to the opposite results. As this paper points out, today’s large-scale, capital-intensive, chemical- and biotech-based, factory-style agriculture is harming the soil, water, air, and biodiversity that make up the environment, and undermining the family farms that hold the key to food sovereignty. With climate change escalating and fossil fuels in decline, we must make a rapid shift to a very different approach.

For Canadian agriculture to become ecologically sustainable, we need infrastructure and institutions that support farmers both as food producers and as stewards of land, water air and biodiversity. We need publicly funded, farmer-directed, non-corporate research that honours the Precautionary Principle, and independent agricultural extension and educational systems that promote and assist environmentally friendly farming. We need legal protection for people saving and exchanging seeds, financial and technical support for farmers in transition to organic, and regulations geared to farm type and size so that farmers don’t drown in paperwork. We need local processing, storage and distribution, railway branch lines and elevators. We need orderly marketing and supply management systems to give farmers a fair deal and secure our domestic food base, and accessible farm safety net programs to counter bad markets or bad weather.

Farmers should not be forced to choose between good stewardship and economic survival. Yet this choice is being forced upon farm families every day. The more farmers are squeezed by high costs and low prices, the less they are able to resist the promised benefits of using more chemicals, adopting GM crops, or expanding their operations by draining wetlands or buying out their neighbours. Environmental priorities cannot be met until the economics of farming are changed to give small and medium-sized farms a chance.

And, yes - in farming, size matters. When a farm is too big for the farmer to know the peculiarities of each field or to monitor the health of every animal, it can’t be farmed sustainably. Ecologically sensitive practices get traded off for the “economies of scale” of massive machinery, chemicals and biotech, antibiotics and liquid manure lagoons. Moreover, when something goes wrong on a big operation, the scale of the environmental damage is correspondingly large.

Governments at every level must reverse their industrial approach to agriculture, withdraw support for globalized agribusiness and focus on reforming and re-localizing our food system. Networks, communities and grass-roots groups like farm or woodlot cooperatives and citizens’ organizations can propel this shift. We don’t all have to be experts. We just have to know and care enough to make the changes that need to be made.

Environmental NGOs and progressive farm groups are doing excellent research, analysis and policy work on these issues of agriculture and environment - work on which this paper is based. There is a wealth of supporting detail in materials produced by these groups, combining peer-reviewed scientific studies and solid farm-level experience. Examples include the National Farmers Union’s briefs on environmental issues, Greenpeace’s comprehensive 2005 paper on Genetically Engineered Crops and Ecologically and Socially Sustainable Agriculture, Alternatives Journal ‘s Volume 32, #3, “Thought for Food”, our own Green Paper on Agriculture and the Environment (www.cen-rce.org/eng/caucuses/agriculture/index.html), and the websites of Quebec’s Union Paysanne, Beyond Factory Farming Coalition, and HogWatch Manitoba, to name just a few. Their recommendations and those throughout this paper deserve the urgent attention of policy-makers and the public.
]]> Wed, 07 May 2008 12:34:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367521 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367515
Question: What can governments do to support the role of youth in sustainable agriculture?

Governments can do many things to support youth in sustainable agriculture. An intergenerational community of agriculture requires no less than the transformation of our thoughts and behaviors so as to allow local economies and social structures to uplift and extend the benefits for children and youth in agriculture.

We understand that countries have unique economic and agricultural realities but we also understand the underlying responsibility from all countries to act in their fullest capacity.

* We believe governments should play a critical role in educating consumers to make more ethical decisions about their consumption, in particular, to encourage the purchase of local and organic foods. When farmer education is a priority, and when financial resources are provided for farmer programs, then farmers will appreciate the critical role they play in society as providers of a fundamental necessity.
* We also want to see governments follow the example of incentive programs for youth engagement on agriculture, such as Canada’s Junior Farmers of Ontario program which cultivates a new generation of local and ecologically based agricultural enterprises.
* To support the role of youth in sustainable agriculture, especially in developing countries, there must be increased access to sustainable technologies in rural areas. As young people, we need to know that agriculture is going to be profitable and self-sustainable.
* Methodologies of sustainable agriculture should be included in the educational curriculum, hence youth engagement will begin at a young age to allow for more competency and efficiency in sustainable agriculture. It is critical that governments play an active role in supporting youth in sustainable agriculture.

The children and youth encourage governments to engage young people in agricultural activities through education, grants for research and development, and the provision of innovative sustainable technologies.]]> Wed, 07 May 2008 11:57:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367515 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367487
Many thanks to those who have provided case studies from back home to help inspire the CSD process. Thanks also to colleagues at the Toronto Region Conservation Authority who have put together the the following links on youth opportunities in sustainable agriculture:

1 - http://www.onesky.ca/one_sky/internships
2 - http://www.planetfriendly.net/gwd.php?id=6411
3 - http://www.everdale.org
4- www.uoguelph.ca/sedrd
The School of Environmental Design and Rural Development brings together major academic fields concerned with creating strong communities. The four highly respected units that have come together to form SEDRD share many common goals but approach them in different and complimentary ways. This model reflects the imperatives in building authentic communities where planners, leaders, communicators, designers, the citizens and politicians all play important interdependent roles in community strength.
5 -www.ruralleadership.ca
The Centre for Rural Leadership, incorporated in 2002, is an organization designed to offer agricultural and rural leadership programming. The concept of The Centre arose from the Agricultural Leadership Trust’s desire to build a long-term, stable foundation for the Advanced Agricultural Leadership Program (AALP), one of the longest-running, most successful agricultural leadership development programs in the world.
6 - www.aalp.on.ca
Established in 1984, the Advanced Agricultural Leadership Program (AALP) is an executive development program for men and women who want to broaden their horizons and expand their networks to help shape the future of the agriculture and food sectors in Ontario. AALP is administered by the The Centre for Rural Leadership
5 - www.4-hontario.ca
The Ontario 4-H Program is about opportunities, personal development, making friends, and having fun. 4-H helps young people (10-21 years of age) learn self-confidence and new skills. Members also learn communication and leadership skills, problem solving, and goal setting.
6 - www.jfao.on.ca
Junior Farmers of Ontario develop personal leadership skills and contribute to our communities
compete locally provincially in cultural events
promote agriculture and an awareness of rural life
7 - www.farmstart.ca
The FarmStart mission is to facilitate, support and encourage a new generation of farmers to develop economically viable, locally based, and ecological agricultural enterprises.
By combining the facilitation of unique programs and resources, building partnerships and networks, supporting community capacity and linking farmers with existing programs and resources administered by other organizations.]]> Wed, 07 May 2008 11:21:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/367487 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667 http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/366385
CSD-16 (May 5th - 16th, at the UN-HQ in New York) is a review year of the third implementation cycle and will focus on the following thematic issues: Agriculture, Rural development, Land, Drought, Desertification, and Africa. The CSD is mandated to consider areas for implementation of Agenda 21. Both unique and cumbersome to the CSD process is the opportunity to prioritize the inter-linkages of thematic issues and consult with major groups (as oppose to other procedures such as G8 discussions wherein civil society is excluded). Unlike many UN committees that are mandated to carry out a specific and siloed objective, the CSD has the ability to recognize the ways in which contemporary environmental issues are interconnected.

As a review year (and with climate change and energy off the agenda), this year is anticipated to be less contentious than in previous years. The morning of the first day members adopt the agenda and touch upon some of the critical thematic issues. Notably, this morning, the issue of the food crisis has been raised as one which exacerbates the thematic issues of the CSD. The first few days consists of opening sessions, general statements, thematic discussions and regional discussions which considers "deliberations on identifying barriers and constraints, lessons learned and best practices in relation to the thematic cluster of issues."

Other observations of note: although climate change is not a thematic issue this year, it is becoming one of the cross-cutting themes that people are talking about the most as it relates to all of the agenda issues and it is difficult to discuss any one of these issues without raising a discussion on climate change. The American delegate this morning reminded delegations that the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is available to monitor adaptation and implementation issues and that the CSD should restrict itself by dealing with what is within its capacity. This raises concerns the question: to what extend should we comply with process when the greater content under discussion has yet to be solved, and in a multidisciplinary manner. It often surprises me how little the CSD and the UNFCCC overlap and cooperate. The extent to which these forums are excluded from one another seems to be more of a reflection of UN structural shortcomings as it does a logical division of dialogue and forums.

]]> Mon, 05 May 2008 11:33:00 EDT http://JDafoe.tigblog.org/post/366385 43.6666667 -79.4166667 43.6666667 -79.4166667