Climate change has also forced a shift in the direction
of research, partly in response to the El Niño phenomenon
and its effects on the spatial and temporal distribution of
water. This has affected weather patterns, with increasingly
frequent reports of extreme events related to maximum and
minimum water flows and changes in ocean currents (Obasi,
2000; IDEAM et al., 2001; MMA and IDEAM, 2002). Networking
has been an important factor in mitigating the impact
and designing policies at the regional and global level
through bilateral and multilateral cooperation.
One of the most recent trends in water use planning centers
around advanced research centers and water treatment
laboratories. Outstanding examples include the Network for
Water Management in Agriculture, Irrigation and Ferti-irrigation
(Red para la Gestión del Agua en Agricultura, Riego
and Fertirriego); the Ibero-American Water Quality Laboratories
Network (Red Iberoamericana de Laboratorios de
Calidad de Agua); and the project known as “Indicators and
Appropriate Technologies for the Sustainable Use of Water
in Ibero-America’s Drylands” (Indicadores and Tecnologías
Apropiadas de uso sostenible del agua en las tierras secas de
Iberoamérica) (Fernández, n.d.).
Activities include the desalinization of seawater to extract
potable water, the use of water as a source of energy
(either from hydrogen or kinetic energy from water and
tides), the study of ground waters and their decontamination,
geothermy, and research on the estuaries of large Latin
American rivers like the Amazon, the Río de la Plata, and
the Orinoco. Major efforts and progress have also been
made in the field of limnology. These new strategies increase
our knowledge base and—with the help of case studies,
best practices, partnerships between organizations, and
the exchange of experiences—constitute essential actions to
enhance the capabilities of national statistics institutes and
their management of water resources (UNESCO, 2006).
2.4.2 Biodiversity
LAC is an exceptionally rich territory in terms of agrobiodiversity
because it spans important cultural centers for
domestication and agriculture: Meso-America, Amazonia,
and the Andean region. Approximately 10,000 years ago,
the original settlers domesticated scores of native species,
originating agriculture in the New World and leading to the
rise of highly developed pre-Hispanic civilizations involving
extensive empires based on the success of autochthonous
agriculture, its genetic and agronomic diversification, and
its broad geographical diffusion.
The inter- and infra-specific diversity of these native
crops constitutes a rich heritage of genetic resources and an
enormous comparative advantage, since this agrobiodiversity
contains the elements (unique genes) that are essential
for plant genetic improvement and the long-term sustainability
of agriculture.
However, in spite of the enormous value of genetic resources
in the region, the institutional and political capability
of most countries is too weak to conserve such assets
properly and use them rationally. The conservation of genetic resources is achieved
through two different but complementary strategies: ex situ
(in germplasm banks) and in situ. In LAC, germplasm banks
are typically associated with public agricultural research in |
|
institutions
and agronomic improvement programs. Germplasm
collections conserved ex situ at these banks are well
documented and catalogued, with information regarding
their place of origin, agronomic characteristics, and other
information that can facilitate their direct use by farmers, in
improvement programs as a source for desirable characteristics,
or for their eventual repatriation to the communities
of origin should they have been lost for any reason and there
is a desire to bring them back.
Advantages of ex situ conservation include the assurance
provided by banks that the materials will survive, their
availability for research and improvement, and comparative
studies of different strains to test, for instance, for resistance
to a given pest or disease. Disadvantages of this strategy
include the cost of the facilities and technical staff needed to
regenerate, characterize, and document the conserved materials,
and the fact that samples are relatively small with
regard to the genetic diversity found in wild populations. In
addition, the process of evolution—of natural selection—
pretty much stops while the materials are stored in the bank,
where they are regenerated no more frequently than 5, 20,
or more years in between.
In situ conservation refers to preserving various species
or varieties in their natural field conditions in the places
where they developed their particular characteristics. In
the case of domesticated plants, in situ conservation is carried
out “on-farm”, in the fields of the farmers who have
traditionally grown these crops or varieties. For the in situ
conservation of wild plants (such as the wild relatives of
common crops), efforts are made to preserve the ecosystems
where the natural populations of such species are to be
found, whether in national parks, protected areas, or other
ecosystems that have not been intervened. The advantage of
in situ conservation is that evolutionary processes continue,
thanks to large populations of individuals with wide genetic
variability. The disadvantages of this strategy include the
difficulties of monitoring and protecting wild or cultivated
populations in remote areas, the relative lack of documentation
and characterization of the genetic materials, and the
logistical difficulties of accessing those materials easily to
apply them to research or genetic improvement.
Neither in situ nor ex situ conservation by themself are
enough to safeguard the survival and integrity of genetic
resources in the long terms. Each strategy has its strengths
and weaknesses, which makes it necessary to rely on both
mechanisms (in situ and ex situ) so that they can function
together in an integral strategy known as “complementary
conservation”. Thus, if for some reason farmers lose their
seed in the field they may reclaim it from the bank, while
if due to some accident a bank loses some of its materials
it will know where to go to once again collect them in the
field and restore them to their germplasm collection. It may
also make sense to encourage the exchange of seeds among
farmers in the same region, or even different regions and
countries. An AKST challenge would be to improve national
institutional and technical infrastructure for safeguarding
and making good use of the agrobiodiversity (genetic resources)
that make up the heritage of each country.
The Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) acknowledged
the sovereignty of each country over the genetic
resources to be found within its borders. But with soverfromCK
|