@農자료창고

The Rabobank obsession with focusing on improvement of existing industrial methods - without quite grasping the scale of the problems facing industrial agriculture - is, however, a serious deficiency. Two years ago, a landmark report by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food demonstrated that agroecology based on sustainable, small-scale, organic methods could potentially double food production in entire regions facing persistent hunger, over five to 10 years.

 THIS summer the tiny town of Furnace Creek, Calif., may once again grace the nation’s front pages. Situated in Death Valley, it last made news in 1913, when it set the record for the world’s hottest recorded temperature, at 134 degrees. With the heat wave currently blanketing the Western states, and given that the mercury there has already reached 130 degrees, the news media is awash in speculation that Furnace Creek could soon break its own mark.

Such speculation, though, misses the real concern posed by the heat wave, which covers an area larger than New England. The problem isn’t spiking temperatures, but a new reality in which long stretches of triple-digit days are common — threatening not only the lives of the millions of people who live there, but also a cornerstone of the American food supply.

People living outside the region seldom recognize its immense contribution to American agriculture: roughly 40 percent of the net farm income for the country normally comes from the 17 Western states; cattle and sheep production make up a significant part of that, as do salad greens, dry beans, onions, melons, hops, barley, wheat and citrus fruits. The current heat wave will undeniably diminish both the quality and quantity of these foods.

The most vulnerable crops are those that were already in flower and fruit when temperatures surged, from apricots and barley to wheat and zucchini. Idaho farmers have documented how their potato yields have been knocked back because their heat-stressed plants are not developing their normal number of tubers. Across much of the region, temperatures on the surface of food and forage crops hit 105 degrees, at least 10 degrees higher than the threshold for most temperate-zone crops.

What’s more, when food and forage crops, as well as livestock, have had to endure temperatures 10 to 20 degrees higher than the long-term averages, they require far more water than usual. The Western drought, which has persisted for the last few years, has already diminished both surface water and groundwater supplies and increased energy costs, because of all the water that has to be pumped in from elsewhere.

If these costs are passed on to consumers, we can again expect food prices, especially for beef and lamb, to rise, just as they did in 2012, the hottest year in American history. So extensive was last year’s drought that more than 1,500 counties — about half of all the counties in the country — were declared national drought disaster areas, and 90 percent of those were hit by heat waves as well.

The answer so far has been to help affected farmers with payouts from crop insurance plans. But while we can all sympathize with affected farmers, such assistance is merely a temporary response to a long-term problem.

Fortunately, there are dozens of time-tested strategies that our best farmers and ranchers have begun to use. The problem is that several agribusiness advocacy organizations have done their best to block any federal effort to promote them, including leaving them out of the current farm bill, or of climate change legislation at all.

One strategy would be to promote the use of locally produced compost to increase the moisture-holding capacity of fields, orchards and vineyards. In addition to locking carbon in the soil, composting buffers crop roots from heat and drought while increasing forage and food-crop yields. By simply increasing organic matter in their fields from 1 percent to 5 percent, farmers can increase water storage in the root zones from 33 pounds per cubic meter to 195 pounds.

And we have a great source of compostable waste: cities. Since much of the green waste in this country is now simply generating methane emissions from landfills, cities should be mandated to transition to green-waste sorting and composting, which could then be distributed to nearby farms.

Second, we need to reduce the bureaucratic hurdles to using small- and medium-scale rainwater harvesting and gray water (that is, waste water excluding toilet water) on private lands, rather than funneling all runoff to huge, costly and vulnerable reservoirs behind downstream dams. Both urban and rural food production can be greatly enhanced through proven techniques of harvesting rain and biologically filtering gray water for irrigation. However, many state and local laws restrict what farmers can do with such water.

Moreover, the farm bill should include funds from the Strikeforce Initiative of the Department of Agriculture to help farmers transition to forms of perennial agriculture — initially focusing on edible tree crops and perennial grass pastures — rather than providing more subsidies to biofuel production from annual crops. Perennial crops not only keep 7.5 to 9.4 times more carbon in the soil than annual crops, but their production also reduces the amount of fossil fuels needed to till the soil every year.

We also need to address the looming seed crisis. Because of recent episodes of drought, fire and floods, we are facing the largest shortfall in the availability of native grass, forage legume, tree and shrub seeds in American history. Yet current budget-cutting proposals threaten to significantly reduce the number of federal plant material centers, which promote conservation best practices.

If our rangelands, forests and farms are to recover from the devastating heat, drought and wildfires of the last three years, they need to be seeded with appropriate native forage and ground-cover species to heal from the wounds of climatic catastrophes. To that end, the farm bill should direct more money to the underfinanced seed collection and distribution programs.

Finally, the National Plant Germplasm System, the Department of Agriculture’s national reserve of crop seeds, should be charged with evaluating hundreds of thousands of seed collections for drought and heat tolerance, as well as other climatic adaptations — and given the financing to do so. Thousands of heirloom vegetables and heritage grains already in federal and state collections could be rapidly screened and then used by farmers for a fraction of what it costs a biotech firm to develop, patent and market a single “climate-friendly” crop.

Investing in climate-change adaptation will be far more cost-effective than doling out $11.6 billion in crop insurance payments, as the government did last year, for farmers hit with diminished yields or all-out crop failures.

Unfortunately, some agribusiness organizations fear that if they admit that acceleratingclimate change is already affecting farmers, it will shackle them with more regulations. But those organizations are hardly serving their member farmers and ranchers if they keep them at risk of further suffering from heat extremes and extended drought.

And no one can reasonably argue that the current system offers farmers any long-term protection. Last year some farmers made more from insurance payments than from selling their products, meaning we are dangerously close to subsidizing farmers for not adapting to changing climate conditions.

It’s now up to our political and business leaders to get their heads out of the hot sand and do something tangible to implement climate change policy and practices before farmers, ranchers and consumers are further affected. Climate adaptation is the game every food producer and eater must now play. A little investment coming too late will not help us adapt in time to this new reality.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/our-coming-food-crisis.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

케냐에서 날아온 동부.  사진: Wendy Stone/Corbis

스페인산 토마토, 이탈리아산 올리브유, 칠레산 자두, 알래스카산 연어, 케냐산 동부... 당신의 장바구니에는 이런 재료가 얼마나 자주 담기는가? 영국에서 사람들 대부분의 쇼핑카트에는 수입산 식품이 상당 부분 포함되어 있다. 그런데 이러한 먹을거리가 집에서 재배되고 생산될 수 있을까? 어떤 나라가 식량을 자급할 수 있을까? 새로운 지도 시리즈가 어느 나라가 모든 인구를 먹여살릴 수 있고, 어떤 나라가 토지나 물이 부족하여 한계가 있는지 보여준다.

독일의 기후영향 연구를 위한 포츠담 연구소(Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research)의 Marianela Fader 씨와 동료들은 세계 각국의 재배능력과 식량 요구량을 비교하여 현재와 앞으로 2050년 어떻게 될지 그 결과를 예상했다. 그 방법에서는 다양한 작물 유형의 수확량을 예측하기 위하여 각국의 기후 자료, 토양의 유형, 토지 이용 패턴을 받아들였다. 각국의 인구와 식량 및 물 소비에 관한 현행 자료를 사용하여, 각국에서 생산할 수 있는 식량의 비율이 어느 정도인지 결정할 수 있었다. 

많은 국가들이 당장은 식량을 수입할 수 있었지만, 분석에 따르면 앞으로 지금과 같은 식단과 식량자급을 유지할 수 있는 나라는 놀랍게도 소수뿐이라는 사실을 보여주었다. "오늘날, 66개국이 물이나 토지의 제약 때문에 자급할 수 없는 상황이다"라고 Fader 씨는 말한다. 세계 인구의 16%는 다른 나라에서 수입하는 먹을거리에 의존하고 있다는 것과 같다. 

수입에 가장 의존하고 있는 국가는 북아프리카, 중동, 중앙아메리카에서 나타난다. 이 지역에서는 절반 이상의 인구가 수입산 먹을거리에 의존하고 있다. 이 이외의 지역에 있는 대부분의 국가는 그들이 선택하면 식량을 자급할 수 있었다. 

그러나 시계를 2050년으로 돌리면, 인구압이 매우 다른 그림을 그린다. 세계 지도의 광대한 면적이, 예를 들어 농업생산성의 향상과 농경지의 확대 등 인구를 먹여살리기 위한 식량 생산의 극대화를 알리는 붉은색과 주황색으로 칠해진다. 이 그림은 세계 인구의 절반 이상이 2050년에는 수입산 먹을거리에 의존할 수 있다는 것을 시사한다. 

"모든 저소득 국가들이 2050년 농경지 확장의 최대치만이 아니라 잠재적 생산성의 최대치도 이룩한다는 것을 추정한다. 이는 엄청난 사회적, 기술적 과제로서 매우 낙관적인 추정일 수 있다. 식량자급 격차는 니제르와 소말리아의 경우만으로도 2000만 명 이상으로, 여전히 5500~1억2300만 명에 해당될 것이다"라고 Fader 씨는 설명한다. 이는 Environmental Research Letters에 실려 있다. 이 연구에는 포함되지 않은 기후변화의 영향을 추가하면, 문제는 더 심각해질 수 있다. 

영국과 네덜란드, 일본을 포함한 선진국의 다수는 이미 인구의 식량 요구량을 충족시킬 수 없다. 수입에 대한 의존은 인구가 증가할수록 악화될 것으로 보인다. 그러나 개발도상국과는 달리, 이러한 나라들은 문제를 해결하기 위해 먹을거리를 구매할 수 있는 능력이 있다. 

식량안보는 앞으로 수십 년 동안 큰 문제가 될 것이다. 이 연구는 농업생산성을 향상하는 것이 식량안보를 유지하기 위해 중요한 역할을 할 수 있다는 것을 나타낸다. 한편, 이 연구에서는 다루지 않았지만 제철음식과 채식을 먹는 등과 같은 식단의 변화 역시 상당한 영향을 미칠 수 있다.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/07/half-population-food-imports-2050

Sprinklers water crops in Bakersfield, California, during a heatwave. Photograph: David McNew/Getty Images

As the global population heads towards a projected 9.1 billion by 2050, the availability and cost of food are likely to pose major challenges for countries around the world.

World food prices and the cost of grain increased by 7 percent and 12 percent respectively over the year to the end of 2012. This has happened without any major food crisis or panic policies on the part of major food grain producers.

According to an estimate by the United Nation's Rome-based Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), global food production must rise by 70 percent to meet the requirements of 2050 and feed the world's growing number of hungry mouths.

Echoing the sentiment, the US National Intelligence Council's (NIC) Global Trends 2030 report also estimates an increase of at least 35 percent in food demand over the next two decades.

An uncontrollable spike in food prices can lead to increased poverty, deteriorating global health and even tension between nations.

In 2008, a dramatic surge in food prices caused social unrest in various parts of the globe including Egypt, the Ivory Coast, Senegal, Yemen and Mexico, prompting UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to warn that a food crisis could become a serious threat to international security.

Speaking to IBTimes UK, Camilla Toulmin, director of the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) agreed that food and water shortages could cause nations to fall out.

"Shifts in power between different countries can generate instability - look at the Nile, where Egypt has for long been the dominant power. This has now been challenged by Ethiopia, as they now have the means to build a dam in the Upper Blue Nile."

The implications of a food crisis are closely linked to another issue that has the potential to threaten global food security - the falling amount of land that is suitable for food production.

As developing countries strive to push their economies forward, land becomes a scarce commodity. Building more factories and cities may result in stronger GDP numbers, but the urbanisation, rising disposable income and population growth such development produces all contribute to rising demand for food.

"Up to 30 million hectares of farmland is lost annually due to environmental degradation, conversion to industrial use or urbanisation," notes Olivier De Schutter, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food in a report.

China is one of the best examples of this. The country's population is set to level out slightly by the middle of the century, but its accelerating economic expansion is increasingly destabilising the food balance.

China's Land Shortage

It may seem curious to suggest that the world's fourth largest country has a land scarcity problem, but not when you consider the demographics. This is a country with 20 percent of the world's population but only 9 percent of its farmland and 6 percent of its water resources.

In terms of cereals such as rice and wheat, China has so far managed to satisfy its needs with domestic output and limited imports. But the changing economic situation has resulted in a shift in people's lifestyle.

Improved salaries have raised disposable income, which in turn has pushed up demand for protein-rich foods such as meat and soybeans. A jump in meat production will directly cause an increase in demand for grain to feed the animals.

"China is largely self-sufficient in food production. Not including soybeans, China's self-sufficiency rate for corn, rice, and wheat is about 98 percent or more," Kevin Chen, Senior Research Fellow at The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in Beijing told IBTimes UK.

"However, with its environmental stress (particularly on water and land degradation) and increasing urbanisation with new demographic reality in rural areas, to remain self-sufficient at 98 percent will be challenging for China."

As the International Monetary Fund (IMF) notes, "Strong food demand from emerging economies, reflecting stronger per capita income growth, accounts for much of the increase in consumption. Although demand growth has been high for some time now, the recent sustained period of high global growth contributed to depleting global inventories, particularly of grains."

Though rising demand is yet to reach alarming levels, China may soon confront a different problem: a reduction in arable land due to industrialisation and urbanisation.

According to a report by the Vancouver Sun, every year China loses about a million hectares of agricultural land to urbanisation - the country's emerging cities have eaten away about nine million hectares of land between 1996 and 2006.

Coupled with this, marginal land that can be used for farming is being threatened by pollution from China's booming industrial sector, although China is not very open on this matter. The results of soil contamination tests conducted by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and the Ministry of Land and Resources in 2010 remain undisclosed.

The issue of ecological protection was given strong emphasis in the country's recently concluded 18th Party Congress. Officials promised to improve environmental assessments, and increase responsibility and awareness among people about the effects of pollution.

On top of these problems, China also has to face the prospect of a looming water shortage. According to the United Nations, China is one of 13 nations that are experiencing extreme water shortages. Persistent droughts have affected the country's key arable regions such as Shandong province, which produces most of its grains.

The Chinese government knows that food scarcity could be a major problem. In fact, avoiding a hunger crisis will be a top priority for the administration since memories of the terrible famine that killed nearly 50 million people during Mao Zedong's ill-fated Great Leap Forward remain strong in the country's collective consciousness.

To improve farming productivity, authorities have introduced many strong reforms over the last 30 years. These include combining small family-owned land holdings with large scale agricultural areas as well as the mechanisation of production to improve quality. By 2020 China's agricultural production is expected to be 26 percent higher than it is today.

But all this may not be enough, as China's urbanisation rate is expected to rise by 1 percent annually. The government is encouraging people to move to the cities to improve their living standards and boost the economy, even if inflation fears persist.

Boards displaying prices hang above a worker as she collects dates for a customer, at a food market in central Beijing

Imports and Overseas Farmland Takeovers

China has long restricted its food imports to limited quantities of high-quality rice, wheat and corn, placing the emphasis on self-sufficiency. Official policy still mandates that 95 percent of these three staple crops should be produced locally.

At the same time, the country is already the second largest importer of rice in the world, among the top 10 and 20 buyers of corn and wheat, and the biggest importer of soybeans. Chinese rice imports have increased about fourfold this year, and in November it signed a memorandum of understanding with Thailand to import more. Analysts expect the figures to jump further as the economy grows.

China is also the biggest importer of American agricultural products, and a major buyer of Australian meat and wine.

However, the government is well aware that reliance on imports is not sustainable. Trade is often dependant on a number of factors such as the nature of bilateral relations with the importing nation and the geo-political situation in the exporting country. For this reason, China's state-owned and private agricultural companies are actively buying and investing in arable land across the globe.

China has recently become one of the main buyers of agricultural land worldwide, from the Americas to the Asia-Pacific. In Africa, the Communist nation is reported to have set up more than ten research stations to increase production of staple crops.

It is thought to have spent billions of dollars acquiring millions of hectares of arable land in North and South America, Central Asia, Africa, Australia and New Zealand.

Despite wide criticism of China's acquisition of land, Beijing has so far been able to continue with its plans.

A Food Crisis Looming

China's scramble to secure food for its people clearly indicates that its leaders realise the gravity of the threat. But while the Chinese government may be able to maintain a good supply, the shifting nature of Chinese food consumption and rising demand could lead to a global rise in food prices.

It is also possible that exporters will shift production from traditional crops to those in demand in China, thus indirectly pushing up the prices of other crops. For example, rising demand for soya could prompt farmers to cultivate more of it, potentially leading to price hikes for other crops.

But a crisis could be averted if China were to adopt better approaches to agriculture and self-sustainability. According to NIC, innovation in crop genetics and technological advances promise sustainable systems of farming. Robotics could aid in conserving water and fertiliser, resulting in improved efficiency. Improved irrigation systems could further help save resources.

The real issue, then, is not about the ability to reach self-sufficiency, but about the willingness to do so. If the Chinese government decides that it is more beneficial to import than to produce, it might buy more, rather than less.

China does not need to be independent in this matter, says Harold Corke, a professor at the University of Hong Kong's School of Biological Sciences.

"Because China is economically prosperous, and exporters have capacity for further expansion of grain and soy production (such as Brazil, Argentina, and the US), I think that China has no need or rationale for self-sufficiency in all food categories," Corke told IBTimes UK.

Wherever its food comes from, China needs to maintain stability to avoid a global food crisis.

한국인의 밥상 주권(主權)이 흔들리고 있다. 우리 식탁에서 국산 농·수·축산물 비중이 점점 낮아지는 반면 그 자리를 외국산(産)이 점령한 데 따른 결과다.

올해는 곡창지대의 국가들이 기후변화에 의한 피해로 농작물 생산량이 감소할 것이란 예보가 돌고 있다. 그런데 이러한 위급한 때, 최대의 소비국의 하나인 중국이 해충으로 인하여 수확량이 감소할 것이란 예보까지 나왔다. 이런 세계는 급속히 식량위기의 소용돌이로 말려들어가는 것인가.

올해 중국의 옥수수 등 농작물 수확량이 급감할 수 있다는 우려가 나오고 있다. 최근 지속된 폭우로 해충 피해가 늘고 있기 때문이다.

케냐는 아프리카의 뿔에서 일어난 위기로 심각한 고통을 받았다– 375만 명이 식량 불안으로 도움을 필요로 한다. 

이 지역의 수십 년에 걸친 정치적 불안정과 빈발하는 자연재해는 케냐인들을 점점 가난과 기아에 취약하게 만들었다. 이러한 충격 –2008년 선거 폭력을 포함하여– 은 30만 국내 난민을 발생시켰다.

이에 더하여 케냐는 주로 이웃한 소말리아에서 폭력과 기근을 피해 도망온 세계 최대의 난민을 수용하는 나라 -58만 5천 명의 난민과 망명자- 가은데 하나였다.

식량안보와 생계에 직면하고 있는 과제

소규모 농민과 목축민은 가구와 그 이상으로 식량 가용성을 높이고 보호하기 위한 복구 노력의 중심에 서야만 한다. 케냐의 식량 가운데 약 75%를 주로 빗물에 의존하는 작물을 경작하고 있는 소농이 생산한다. 그들은 생산 투입재나 농기계, 자본에 거의 또는 전혀 이용할 수 없다. 

목축민, 반농반목민과 케냐의 한계농업 지역은 3~4 계절을 연속하여 비가 내리지 않아 위기 상태에 처해 있다. 작물 생산은 식량 수요를 충족시키기에 부족해졌다.

생산된 적은 식량은 제대로 저장되지 못한다. 수확 후 곡물 손실은 해충 피해와 균류(아플라톡신)에 의한 오염으로 50%에 달한다. 이러한 것들이 이 나라의 식량 불안과 시장 악화에 기여하는 주요 요인이다. 가뭄은 결정적으로 목축 지역에 물 부족과 동물의 질병 발생을 일으키고, 일부 지역에서는 홍수의 원인이 된다. 목축민들은 가축을 잃고 많은 가족들이 빈곤해지고 있다.

여성과 아이들은 상당한 영향을 받았다 –5세 이하 38만5천 명의 아이와 9만 명의 임산부 및 수유하는 여성이 급성 영양부족에 힘겨워하는 것으로 추정된다. 지난 5년에 걸쳐 농산물 가격은 거의 3배로 뛰었는데, 특히 곡물, 콩류, 설탕이 그렇다. 옥수수는 1kg당 15~40실링으로 올랐고, 케냐의 극빈층(4분위의 가장 아래)은 이러한 주식에 소득의 28%까지 소비하고 있다.

FAO의 대응

2012년 케냐에서 펼칠 FAO의 가뭄 대책은 주로 가뭄과 식량안보 위기가 지속되고 있는 건조지역과 반건조지역에 사는 목축 지역사회를 돕고 앞으로 가뭄에 더 나은 대비를 하는 데 초점을 맞출 것이다.

기부금은 가축을 건강하고 생산적으로 돌보기 위한 예방접종과 치료를 통해 효과적으로 질병을 감시하고 통제하는 데 필요하다. 우유 생산을 향상시키기 위한 훈련을 펼칠 것이다. 사료와 물은 방목지를 재건하고 관개 사료생산을 확대하는 노력과 함께 그들의 가축에 가장 취약한 목축민에게 분배될 것이다. 더 나아가 물구덩이 수준을 위성으로 관찰하여 목축민들에게 가뭄 위험을 조기에 알릴 것이다. 

농민에게는 절실히 필요한 관개를 이용할 뿐만 아니라 농기구와 가뭄 저항성 종자를 지급할 것이다. 토양과 물의 보존, 집수법과 보존농업에 대한 훈련은 더 나은 자연자원 관리에 도움이 될 것이다. 취약한 가족들, 고아가정과 학교는 수확 후 손실을 막기 이한 저장고를 받는 한편, 농민현장학교는 수확 후 취급법에 대한 좋은 방법을 퍼뜨릴 것이다. 

FAO가 이끄는 농업과 가축 위원회는 향상된 정보, 조기 경보와 분석을 통해 기후변화의 영향에 더 나은 대비와 예방과 대응을 하도록 지역사회를 돕고자 한다. 이는 선택된 지역사회에 대한 가뭄관리계획의 개발을 포함한다.
FAO는 특히 여성 가장 가정에 효과적인 조치를 제공하기 위하여 여기서 배운 좋은 방법과 교훈을 발표할 것이다. 

• Download the FAO assistance proposals for Kenya in 2012