Fundamental Change In Farming? IAATD UN Report

[Guest guest]

" Its final report acknowledges that

_http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/ 2008/03/19/ shedding_ light_on_

genetically_ engineered_ food.htm_ (http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/

2008/03/19/ shedding_ light_on_ genetically_ engineered_ food.htm)

>genetically engineered (GE) crops are highly controversial and will not play a

substantial role in addressing the key problems of climate change, biodiversity

loss,

hunger and poverty. "

 

At the risk of being an arm chair critic given that I have not read the

report - we have today and have had for many many years, not some time in the

future, known how to literarily double our food growth in half the foot print ;

do it organically; produce clean free energy as

a byproduct; do it sustainably; and clean up the environment to boot!

All this and more using tried and true time proven

<_http://www.permacul ture.com/ book_menu/ 136_

(http://www.permaculture.com/book_menu/136) > parmaculture and

<_http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/ 2008/04/02/ codex_strikes_

again_biodynamic _products_ under_attack. htm_

(http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2008/04/02/codex_strikes_again_biodynamic\

_products_under_attack.htm)

>biodynamic methods already in public domain - so who is stopping us?

 

Australia, the US, Canada and their cronies. That who. Could it be stealing

markets from fossil fuels, cleaning environment and an abundance of nutrient

rich foods that keep us healthy be a little to threatening for the <

_http://www.thecorpo ration.com_ (http://www.thecorporation.com/) > predatory

corporations? These rich snobs with their self serving experts shills have

repeatedly abused due diligence and continue to injure us. Their excuse. No

money, Yet lots of money for wars at a drop of a had! They have usurped all our

tax dollars to deliberately create from, richness and abundance,

unconscionable wars and scarcity and environmental damage for personal gain for

their

cronies.

 

Just the cost of one year war in Iraq could easily pay for all the

infrastructure for permanently establish abundance for all. But will they? And

will we

demand accountability or continue to be abused?

 

See:

 

<_http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/ 2008/03/19/ shedding_ light_on_

genetically_ engineered_ food.htm_

(http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2008/03/19/shedding_light_on_genetically_\

engineered_food.htm) >

Shedding Light on Genetically Engineered Food

 

<_http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/ 2008/05/25/ ge_labelling_

government_ adamant_to_ pass_bills_ c51_c52.htm_

(http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2008/05/25/ge_labelling_government_adaman\

t_to_pass_bills_c51_c52.htm) >

GE Labelling - Government Adamant To Pass Bills C-51 & C-52

 

<_http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/ 2006/10/11/ the_machinations

_of_the_new_ world_order_ the_farmer. htm_

(http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2006/10/11/the_machinations_of_the_new_wo\

rld_order_the_farmer.htm) >

The Machinations Of The New World Order - The Farmer

 

Chris Gupta

_http://tinyurl. com/6cpv5l_ (http://tinyurl.com/6cpv5l)

------------ --------- --

 

Gene Ethics

5 June 2008 12:41:24 PM

Please comment on this Online Opinion story: Taking stock of

agriculture

 

Please post your comment on the following article

<_http://www.onlineop inion.com. au/view.asp? article=7419_

(http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7419) >here.

 

<_http://www.onlineop inion.com. au/view.asp? article=7419_

(http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7419) >Taking stock of

agriculture

 

By Jan van Aken - posted Thursday, 5 June 2008

 

From April 7-12, 2008, nothing less but the future of agriculture was up for

debate. Governments and scientists from around the world gathered in

Johannesburg to debate the final report of the United Nations' International

Assessment of Agricultural Science and

Technology for Development (IAASTD).

 

Adopted by more than 60 countries, the historic final report calls for a

fundamental change in the way we do farming, to better address soaring food

prices, hunger, social inequities and environmental disasters. The only three

countries present who refused to endorse

the report were Australia, the US and Canada.

 

IAASTD is an ambitious, four-year, US$10-million project that aims to do for

hunger and poverty what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has

done for the challenge of global warming. Its final report acknowledges that

genetically engineered (GE) crops are highly controversial and will not play a

substantial role in addressing the key problems of climate change,

biodiversity loss, hunger and poverty.

 

Several hundred scientists worked for three years to take stock of the

current state of farming, globally. All relevant UN institutions were involved

in

the project and the final report reflects the best scientific thinking on the

subject. It is hard to imagine that any national or international

institution will ignore its major findings in future decisions on agricultural

research

and development.

 

The US, Canada and Australia, have criticised the report as unbalanced and

one-sided and the genetic engineering industry even walked out on the process.

But their allegation of an unbalanced assessment is untenable. They

themselves were involved in the selection of all the scientists and editors of

the

report - together with a multi-stakeholder bureau comprising industry,

governments and international organisations. The Australian Government had full

input

into the report and could add any objections that it had to the text

in footnotes.

 

For decades, the science and politics of agriculture has been dominated by

an agriculture based on high chemical inputs, that treats soil, water, air and

farmers as expendable resources. It is indeed a revolution that the global

scientific community concludes, in the Summary for Decision Makers of the

report, that " the ecological footprint of industrial agriculture is already too

large to be ignored " .

 

The strength of the IAASTD is the fact that all stakeholders were involved

in the process and thus a balanced selection of scientists was guaranteed. The

jury was fairly picked and came back with a clear vote for a fundamental

change in the way we do farming.

 

The agriculture of the future is one that works with nature and the people -

not against them. Millions of farms on all continents already prove that

ecological and sustainable agriculture can provide sufficient food, increase

food security, replenish natural resources and provide a better livelihood for

farmers and local communities.

 

Today's chemical-intensive agriculture is more like mining than farming.

While it may provide short-term gains in production, it is not sustainable in

the long term and compromises the dwindling agricultural area upon which our

future food supply depends. It also fails to meet the needs of local

communities for livelihoods, food security and a healthy, diverse diet.

 

The IAASTD report calls for a systematic redirection of agricultural

research, to better address hunger, severe social inequities and environmental

problems. It will now become a key reference point for the future of

agriculture

and impact UN and World Bank projects

around the world.

 

By not endorsing the IAASTD report Australia has shown itself to be out of

step with the rest of the world. While other nations all over the world are

rejecting GE crops and moving towards more sustainable agriculture techniques,

Australia is moving in the opposite direction.

 

For the first time, Australia now faces the introduction of GE food crops

into its fields and food chain, with the states of New South Wales and

Victoria's recent approval of GE canola.

 

One of the reasons Australia refused to endorse the IAASTD report is that it

highlights the need for more research into the risks associated with GE

crops. The IAASTD report also recommends that governments should recognise

consumer preference with respect to GE

crops; recognise and protect farmers' seed rights; and ensure that no

cross-contamination takes place.

 

To fully exploit the potential of sustainable agriculture, a sea-change in

research priorities is needed. From now on, the majority of investment in

agricultural research and knowledge

dissemination - nationally as well as internationally - must be focused on

sustainable farming systems. This means diverting funding away from GE crops

and industrial farming towards more sustainable farming techniques.

 

This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and legally

privileged. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must

not disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this

email in error, please notify us by return email and permanently delete the

document.

 

To :

_chrisgupta (AT) alumni (DOT) uwaterloo. ca_

(chrisgupta) %3Fsubject=subscrib

e>_chrisgupta (AT) alumni (DOT) uwaterloo. ca_

(chrisgupta) ?subject=

To :

<_chrisgupta (AT) alumni (DOT) uwaterloo. ca_

(chrisgupta) %3Fsubject=subscrib

e>_chrisgupta (AT) alumni (DOT) uwaterloo. ca_

(chrisgupta) ?subject=

List information is at: _http://tinyurl. com/2xohw_

(http://tinyurl.com/2xohw)

ARCHIVES: _http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/ archives. htm_

(http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/archives.htm)

Share The Wealth: _http://www.newmedia explorer. org/chris/_

(http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/)

Communication Agents: _http://www.communic ationagents. com/_

(http://www.communicationagents.com/)

Council Member: Friends of Freedom International & the Canadian

Coalition for Health Freedom - _http://friendsoffre edom.org/ intl/_

(http://friendsoffreedom.org/intl/)