Designing sustainable agricultural systems for food security under global change: challenges and opportunities Roma Tre University May 28 th 2015 Master in Human Development and Food Security, 2014 – 2015 Food Security Module - Prof G.A. Simon

Report written by Hélène Botreau

Introduction Facilitator: Jacque Wery, professor, Montpellier SupAgro, UMR System, Montpellier (France), Chair of the European Society for Agronomy and the Farming Systems Design Initiative. Speakers: Christian Gary: Researcher, INRA, UMR System, Montpellier (France). Head of the UMR System. Hatem Belhouchette, Scientific administrator, CIHEAM-IAMM, UMR System, Montpellier (France). The UMR System is dedicated to study the design of farming systems in Mediterranean region and the tropics. It aims at showing that the biodiversity of these systems contributes to their resilience.

This presentation addresses food security from the point of view of agronomists. For agronomists, there are two big challenges:  

Combine several scales from the field to the farm, the landscape and the territory. Have several disciplines working together: agronomy and water sciences have to be combined with social sciences.

Jacques Wery – Addressing food security challenges at the interface with agricultural systems: concepts and methods illustrated with examples in France. 1. Agricultural Systems are worth to consider, to work on Food Systems The agri-food systems can be divided into several components, including production, which is more diverse and precise than just one single step in the food system. The cross-cutting part of the agricultural system with all the systems is the production. An agricultural system usually comprises several types of production and includes all types of activities of the farm, which is not the food production only. The crossing of the two can be complex, because most of the parts of the food system, like the trade, processing, distribution and the consumption parts are usually related to one of the crops. So, there are several agri-food system crossing a single farm agricultural system, which makes the situation complex to analyze. The food production, at the level of the farmers, faces a lot of challenges. In Europe, the farmers face normative frameworks, regulations, standards on the quality of production (with pesticides, nitrogen levels and soils composition). It is heavily constraining the system and pushing it towards constant change: to reduce nitrogen or increase it, to adapt to climate or to mitigate climate, to increase

diversity... It is very important to put men at the center of this system: the agricultural systems is composed of men’s activities and activities for men, and it is not always included in the overview of the system. This human dimension is not only a matter of employment, but also of quality of life, of security of the workers etc. What are Agricultural Systems? -

-

-

They are complex systems with interactions based on plant and/or animal production. This system does exist because there is a production activity, even if, in Europe for example, there is shift towards ecosystem services. They are increasingly multifunctional (provision of ecosystems services in trade-off with production). They are intrinsically controlled systems, which gives some constraints but also some leeways. Nowadays, really often, they combine three sub-systems: o Biophysical system (processed-based operating system) o Technical system (technically-based managed system) o Decisional system (human based decision system) Sustainability and innovation can only emerge from the combination of the three systems.

Indeed, there is a need to combine the environmental (biophysical systems), the economical (technical systems), and the social sustainability (decisional system) aspects of a system. The agricultural system can be analyzed at different levels. Very often the agronomists are working at the landscape and watershed levels to address the trade-off between food production and protection of water for pollution. However, more and more, the question is to work both at the level of the activity of the crop itself and at the foodshed level inside the food system. To analyze the agricultural system, the key aspect is the notion of activity, in which you can make a bridge between the 3 dimensions (environmental, economic and social). The example of a farm system in the South of France can illustrate this conceptualization. This farm is composed of five activities, represented in a system approach to study the major interactions and properties. They produce chicken meat, pig meat, crops for feed, they do direct selling to the market, and also have a social activity (disabled people visit and work in the farm), which brings economic sustainability (public funds are injected into the farm for this activity). The concept of activity in a farm: It is a technical sub-system or component using: - Farm resources (land, labor, money), - Inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, energy….) - Natural resources (land, water, biodiversity…) All these activities serve the agricultural system: - Earning money from direct selling (eg. Wheat grain) - Using resource to another activity (eg. Forage from cropping system provided to the animal sub-system)

-

Earning money from non-production services (on-farm tourism, environmental services, offfarm work….) Illustration of the concept of activity in a farm: A multifunctional farm system in California produces 4 types of services: producing safe foods for the local population, producing clean ground water, protecting wildlife, bringing social cohesion (they are a farming nursery: training young farmers to organic farming). Thus, they have four different activities, which divide the land in four different parts, with four different outputs: Some land is used for the cropping system with vegetable in rotation, to produce safe foods, part of the land has been totally excluded from production and is used to produce clean groundwater of nitrogen and pesticide, other areas of the farm have been devoted to protect wildlife and conservation, and other part is used for training, bringing social cohesion.

2. Case-studies at the interface of Agricultural Systems and Food Systems. 1st case-study: an agricultural area, in the south-east of France, in the Valensole plateau, with 2 types of crops: durum wheat and lavender. The main questions that arise are: why do farmers produce durum wheat in this region? And why do they grow durum wheat, and not only lavender? Farmers grow durum wheat because some companies, some cooperatives need durum wheat, and they buy the grain. They also get subsidies, coming from Europe. However, there has been a reduction of the subsidies of durum wheat and it is no longer as profitable as it used to be. The major driver is actually the need of a crop to build soils fertility, the durum wheat, for the crop which is the most profitable and driving the farm economically, here, the lavender. In this case the activities, the outputs are diverse: lavender essential oil, and honey from bees (renting to bee-keepers), landscape (tourism). The pay-off for the farmer from these 3 outputs may, in the future, only be the tourism activity, even though it will be a challenge to determine how, within a territory, to provide a pay-off from a service which is just landscape. This farm combines two activities, that are part of the cropping system, and works with crop rotation: 3 years durum wheat and then 7 years lavender. This rotation choice was made for two reasons: maintaining the quality of the soil thanks to the durum wheat, and labor management facilities (choosing crops that are more or less overlapping for less strain on the farmers). Mono-cropping is not sustainable in terms of agro ecology because it needs too much pesticides and nitrogen and puts the system at risks to collapse. However, the interaction can also be made at a larger scale on a regional level: for example, in the region of Montpellier, in the south of France, 60 family farms which produce durum wheat, operate crop rotation with one a big company that produce melons.

2nd Case-study: An organic rice field in France in the Camargue region. This field is producing 8T/ha of rice without any fertilizers or pesticides whereas conventional yields are about 5T/ha. Is it the proof that the world can be fed with organic farming? How is it possible? Does this mean we have to replace conventional rice with organic rice in the region? Why has the whole region not been converted to organic farming? It is more technical than conventional farming, they use organic fertilizers that are not so easy to use and expensive. In terms of irrigation and labor, it uses up about the same amount of resources as a conventional field. This level of yield is possible because of rotations. In conventional farming, they alternate three years of rice cultivation and then durum wheat for a year, and they use a lot of pesticides, whereas in organic farming they alternate 3 years of alfalfa which is a forage crop and then one year of rice. What are the impacts of going from the conventional level to the organic one at the farm level, at the regional level? And what could be the solutions to unlock the systems? Growing organic is possible at the farm level providing that you have animals, which is a limit at the regional level: there are not enough animals in the Camargue region to make use of this. There could be consequences at the regional level, like the collapsing of corporations, if there was only organic farming. Another strong opposition to an all-organic farming comes from the national wild park of Camargue: it would reduce too much the area covered with water, which you need for the flamingos living in that area and it would cause a disturbance for the birds. For the national food system in France, it would not a problem because France imports rice, but in small countries that do not import it could have a big impact. It all depends on the level of food security and food sovereignty of the country. Can we feed the world with organic farming then? It is a matter of putting together, in a coherent way different levels.

3rd Case-study: The food legumes paradox Legume crops really are marvelous crops: they don’t use nitrogen, they favor biodiversity, and they are good for your health and allow to use less meat. But they are marginal in our meals and in our cropping systems (about 1% in Europe). In traditional countries (eg. North Africa) where they used to grow the legumes, they now import food legumes, from Canada for example and they now have a tendency to cereal monoculture, like wheat. This is a very strong paradox. Where is the lock-in? It is not necessarily because there is no demand in Europe but there might not be market for the farmers. The demand doesn’t match the needs to have a rotation system with food legumes. However, in Europe, we import 70% of our proteins to feed animals, so there would be room to grow food legumes. The lock-in has two explanations: there are no subsidies to grow food legumes and cooperatives don’t want a bigger variety of crops (which means more infrastructures and

investments). Some innovation could unlock that system though: in fact, durum wheat needs a lot of nitrogen input to keep a high level of protein in the grain, but it is not sustainable for the soils and the environment in general. If we put legume crop in the cropping system it would reduce the amount of nitrogen by 1/4th so there would be more nitrogen available for the wheat with rotation. The solutions to the evolution of the agricultural system is not always on the production side. Sometimes the food system in itself is locking any progress in the agricultural system and the consumers are the one that can influence these lock-in created by the Food system. First lock-in is in their hand: farmers can try to suppress insects totally without the use of insecticides ad pesticides, but then, there would still be insects in some foods. The solution here is in the consumer’s hands and their acceptance. The second lock-in is in their pocket! To have the same profit with less pesticides, the price will rise. Is the consumer willing to pay a little more for the salad using less pesticide?

Screening of “The Cretan Paradox”, a documentary produced by the Mediterranean Agronomic Institute of Montpellier. About the documentary: The Cretan diet is the reference for nutritionists, yet Crete is at the top of the list for obesity and cardio-vascular diseases. In an uncertain global context, the Greek government is accused of being “disengaged”, its agricultural policy “archaic”. And yet some believe that Cretan agriculture has been lucky to have avoided the errors of intensification and thus know how to conserve the biodiversity holding the future. This film raises the debate over many paradoxes and confrontations between nutrition system and production system. To watch the documentary online (in French language): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZER5kjlXZrc Discussion on the documentary: This documentary starts from the consumption side and describes all the aspects of the diet and shows how it was affected by the production and also by the policies. The idea here is to illustrate the connection between production and consumption. In this region, explains Hatem Belhouchette, they consume what they produce, the diversity of the ecosystem makes it possible. In other areas it is not always possible mainly because the diversity is more linked to economic issues in general. In Sierra Leone, for example, all the conditions are met to have the biggest diversity but, to cultivate this diversity, investments are needed and there is not enough money. It is not sustainable because the agricultural production is not profitable and the trade-off is not easy to reach. The target is then to combine sovereignty and diversity. As inter-planting is suggested as one of the key solution in the documentary, in Europe it has disappeared for several reasons: - Herbicides entering the systems: it turns into simplification of the system, - Specialization: at the farm level but also at the company level.

The big challenge today is to reintroduce diversity, to unlock the system at economic and political level. For example, in Europe, there is a very strong regulation about pesticides residues on fruits and vegetables which pushes towards less diversity: the regulation states that no pesticides can be applied 20 days before harvesting, which is not possible when you have inter-planting. Youth desinvolvment is also a major problem in Europe but in developing countries as well. This is why the farming system has to be thought and designed for labor management. The agro ecological system for example includes animals which takes a lot of time and often means no holidays for the farmer. Often, when young people settle in a farm, they get rid of the animals and just keep the crops. Another challenge, faced by the farming system as shown in the documentary, is that people don’t grow their food today and even farmers don’t grow what they eat. Some things have to change at the agricultural level to address the problems at the food system level. The innovation may come from the food system in itself, but the agricultural systems have to be considered, at the right scale and sometimes simultaneously at the same scale. There is indeed a need for an integrated analysis of Agricultural systems and Food systems: -

Consider that innovations lie at the interface of agricultural systems and food systems Integrate the production in the 3 dimensions of Agricultural systems Avoid to escape the scales: the driver of the problem may be at a very high scale but the solution may be at a very low one: downscale drivers and upscale leeways. Interdisciplinary approach may not be sufficient and quantitative aspects are much needed as well as a multi-scale approach for systems thinking, to train decision-makers, for research, for the engineers that advice farmers and for the policies which assess the systems.

Hatem Belhouchette – Pathways to enhance rice production and consumption in Sierra-Leone: policy and methodological challenges to assess resource-production-consumption nexus decision. This case study aims to address different issues and questions: -

How to quantify the connection between resources, inputs and consumption and how the decisions are taken by households and farmers in West Africa and especially in Sierra Leone? The government in Sierra Leone and International Organizations propose a lot of innovation and try to promote a lot of scenarios to improve production and consumption but they never assess the impact of those policies. What could be the impacts of such policies?

Sierra Leone is a country with a very high food security risk index and an important paradox arise in the country:

Like most African countries, the agricultural sector represents a high share of the activities: about 60% of the GDP. There are very good biophysical conditions in Sierra Leone but the annual revenue per capita is about 1€ a day, and the production is still too small to match the national demand. The production activity in Sierra Leone is divided in two different ecosystems: the lowland ecosystems, where they cultivate rice and the upland areas where most of the production comes from, which has a big diversity of crops from legumes and oil palms trees, to rice. In both ecosystems there are very low yields. There is also a very low consumption in Sierra Leone compared to West Africa in general. The study of this agricultural system and of the potentialities to improve consumption and production relies on the characterization of the rice producers households in this country, and their classification depending on their share of upland and lowland and their share of palm oil production whether it is high or low. Three main scenarios can be identified to increase production: -

-

By cultivating more oil palm trees, which is a cash crop, the farmers will get more money. They intensify their rice production with more inputs, and can increase their production. So one of the recommendations would be to introduce more cash-crops to intensify the rice production. Subsidize rice seeds: by increasing the seeding rates you can increase the yields and, thus, increase the production and then the consumption. The yield in lowlands is higher than in uplands, they are more fertile, but farmers prefer to cultivate in uplands because it allows them to grow more diversity, and since labor is limited, it is more efficient for them to grow several crops in the same areas. One of the recommendation here would be to subsidize the cultivation of rice in lowlands.

Scenarios assessment: The question for the first scenario is about the trade-off between the cultivation of rice and oil palm, because both crops are cultivated in uplands areas and cultivating more oil palm means cultivating less rice. The trade-off has to be computed here. Regarding the subsidies of rice cultivation in lowland ecosystems in the second scenario: it will impede the production of legumes which are very important for consumption. And the legumes price are high so they are not easily accessible in the market. The impact of subsidizing the seeds is a higher need for labor to harvest which is not always affordable for farmers. To assess these scenarios, a conceptual model has to be built to understand the links between production and consumption. We have here a bio-economic model of the system, with 3 components: the resources, the household system and the outputs. A solid quantitative model should connect all the components. This model intends to maximize the farm income but also the consumption, taking into account the constraints the farmers may encounter: consumption constraints, risks of the market and climate uncertainty.

The results of all 3 scenarios shows that the target hasn’t been reached in any case. This means that the scenarios are not enough to increase the production to meet the target. Also, the reactions of farms to the subsidies are different and the solution cannot be universal even within a same regions. In conclusion, many challenges arise from this assessment: -

-

Most of the initiatives target only one objective and thus only offer one solution and address only one question, whereas the question is more complex than that. The database is very complex and it has to be designed to address the question in all its dimensions in an integrated way. To get all the information, as detailed as possible. It is not easy to get this kind data because farmers cannot always answer the questions. Also, having only aggregated information doesn’t address the question of diversity. This type of survey is usually done by economists and considers only annual time-steps, which is not detailed enough for agronomists.

To go further: Barrière, V., Lecompte, F., Nicot, P. C., Maisonneuve, B., Tchamitchian, M., & Lescourret, F. “Lettuce cropping with less pesticides”. A review.Agronomy for sustainable development, (2014). Delmotte, S., Tittonell, P., Mouret, J. C., Hammond, R., & Lopez-Ridaura, S., “On farm assessment of rice yield variability and productivity gaps between organic and conventional cropping systems under Mediterranean climate”. European Journal of Agronomy, (2011). Keating, B. A., Herrero, M., Carberry, P. S., Gardner, J., & Cole, M. B. “Food wedges: Framing the global food demand and supply challenge towards 2050”. Global Food Security, (2014). Louhichi, K., y Paloma, S. G., Belhouchette, H., Allen, T., Fabre, J., Fonseca, M. B., ... & Flichman, G. “Modelling Agri-Food Policy Impact at Farm-household Level in Developing Countries (FSSIM-Dev): Application to Sierra Leone (No. JRC80707)”. Institute for Prospective and Technological Studies, Joint Research Centre, (2013). Van Ittersum, M. K., Ewert, F., Heckelei, T., Wery, J., Olsson, J. A., Andersen, E., & Wolf, J. “Integrated assessment of agricultural systems – A component-based framework for the European Union (SEAMLESS)”. Agricultural systems, (2008). A song lecture by Pacala and Socolow (2004) Princeton University https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wcDHZ7Z-hQ&noredirect=1