commodity markets, however, show that most NAE farmers have not only become separated from consumers, but food supply chains are dominated by processors and retailers (Fearne, 1994; Lyson and Raymer, 2000; PCFFF, 2002; Vorley, 2003). Vertical integration of successive stages in agricultural and food supply chains under the control of single corporate organizations or clusters of corporations can reduce the competitive power of farmers (Lamont, 1992; OFT, 2006; UNCTAD, 2006) who have become disadvan-taged, inadequately rewarded "price takers" facing limited market opportunities for their produce. The gap between farm and retail prices is growing and is wider in countries where transnational corporations (TNC) have concentrated market power. The farm retail price gap is costing commodity-exporting countries more than US$100 billion each year and anticompetitive behavior by agrifood TNCs is said to be a key cause (Morisset, 1997).
There is thus an urgent need to develop policy instruments to remove incentives for farm concentration and agribusiness concentration (Action Aid International, 2006; SOMO 2006; UK Food Group, 2005). These include:
• Improve competition policies within agrifood markets, for instance, by monitoring corporate concentration, mergers and strategic business alliances and their anticompetitive effects across national borders;
• Apply stringent anti-trust measures that dissuade global price-fixing cartels;
• develop strict monitoring and external verification systems to assess and increase the credibility and transparency of corporate social responsibility;
• Develop international organizations to monitor the concentration and behavior of TNCs involved in agricultural trading and food retailing at a global level. These organizations could be given the task of collecting information, researching policy advice and developing standards of corporate behavior.
Another area of equal importance is that of improving the "connectivity" between food producers and consumers and increasing the competitive power of farmers. Some of the measures that could facilitate this are to:
• Improve the market orientation and responsiveness among producers through training and technical assistance in marketing and related business management skills;
• Improve market intelligence and transparency throughout the supply chain;
• Extend existing and develop new supply chains within NAE and externally that distribute profits more equitably among actors through negotiated multistakeholder arrangements;
• Support actions to add value on or near the farm, through on-farm processing and/or product differentiation, including for example organic and fair trade products and products distinguished by geographical origin or appellations;
• Develop collective business and marketing capability among farmers, through for example farmer groups, cooperatives and trade association in order to improve their bargaining position;
• Increase investments in market development and in |
|
marketing infrastructure for local and regional marketing such as storage, processing, refrigeration and transport.
6.2.6 Promoting environmental sustainability through ecological management
From an environmental perspective, the sustainability concept calls for an ecological and evolutionary approach. The understanding of specific ecosystems and the ecological principles by which they function are key elements for the design and management of agricultural systems—simultaneously ensuring both productivity and natural resource preservation (Altieri, 1995; Vandermeer, 1995; Gliessman, 1997).
The design of such agroecosystems is based on ecological principles (Reijntjes et al., 1992) that may be applied using a range of techniques and strategies (Altieri, 2005): "(1) enhancing recycling of biomass, optimizing nutrient availability and balancing nutrient flow, (2) securing favorable soil conditions for plant growth, particularly by managing organic matter and enhancing soil biotic activity, (3) minimizing losses due to flows of solar radiation, air and water by way of microclimate management, water harvesting and soil management through increased soil cover, (4) increasing species and genetic diversification of the agroecosystem in time and space and (5) enhancing beneficial biological interactions and synergisms among agrobiodiversity components thus resulting in the promotion of key ecological processes and services."
AKST needs to fully take into account this ecological perspective on agriculture and its dynamic evolution over time and space. In this context, biodiversity—viewed as the multitude of interactions among all living organisms in the soil and water as well as on the ground and in the air—plays a central role in the preservation and the enhancement of the multiple functions of the agroecosystem (Griffon and Weber, 1996; Altieri and Nicholls, 1999; Thies and Tscharntke, 1999) and particularly with respect to productivity (Hector etal., 1999).
6.2.6.1 Potential contribution of AKST for long term soil preservation
In the last few decades there has been an intensification of human activities on soil (industry, agriculture, urbanization, cemeteries, recreation, etc.). This has largely been achieved without considering soil diversity and its suitability to accommodate these different activities. Consequently there has been a pronounced degradation of soil with negative consequences for a range of soil functions, including the regulation of hydrological and atmospheric gas processes and the provision of habitats for flora and fauna.
In view of an ecological management of agroecosystems, there are some areas where AKST can be developed and help remedy the current situation of soils as mentioned below:
Understand soils better: including past, present and current dynamics.
• Soil is a continuous milieu wherein there are vertical as well as lateral organizations and dynamics. We are in a better position today to understand the vertical organization but more research is essential to understand the lateral organization and dynamics of pedological cov- |