Between 1990 and 2002, four-percent of the world’s total forests were lost, primarily to agriculture. Forests and wild lands with rich
biodiversity and high carbon sequestration value—especially in equatorial zones—are often under pressure for agricultural use
because they are many times impoverished areas where populations farm to survive.
Historically, when soils have been depleted in such areas, farmers have moved on, slashing and burning new fields. Often the
depleted fields are used by poorer farmers or grazed, further depleting the land.
So how do we, humans, limit the amount of land we need for agricultural use and its ill effects?
In 2000, Sara Scherr, Director of the Ecoagricultural Partners, helped
coin the term "ecoagriculture" to describe a series of agricultural
practices which work strategically both in terms of conservation and
rural development. In Farming with Nature, Scherr and Jeffrey McNeely
show that rural communities carefully managing their resources can
make an ecologically sound living and achieve three goals:
• Enhance rural livelihoods. This includes small-scale ecotourism efforts,
such as providing trail access across land to significant tourist sites.
• Conserve or enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services. This can
be accomplished by terracing sloped fields to conserve water, soil
and down-slope water quality; creating hedgerow fences to provide
habitat corridors; and maintaining “patches” of native growth within
the cultivated areas.
• Develop more sustainable and productive agricultural systems.
The hybridization of perennial cereal/grain crops augmented with
poly-cropping systems is perhaps the single most important piece of
work being done in this area. Unlike annual crops, perennials are not
replanted each year and thus greatly reduce the amount of carbon
released into the air via tillage and fertilization. Perennial forms can
also reduce water use and soil fertility loss.
Recent studies show that yields from ecoagriculture are broadly comparable
to conventional yields in developed countries and significantly
higher in developing countries where existing systems are low-input.
Successful projects are typically in indigenous-based communities with
strong leadership and unification from having fought for self-governance.
Communities with already degraded lands also tend to be very willing to
adopt ecoagricultural practices, as well as communities with historically
revered indigenous landscape features and significant biodiversity to
be protected. In these cases governing agencies are eager to provide
support, regulation and incentives. Communities quickly see the economic
opportunities in association with the protection of biodiversity
and use it as a sales tool. They tend to quickly grasp the value of getting
the necessary certifications to market their products, and farmers tend
to be willing to try relatively simple adjustments.
Also key is that ecoagriculture recognizes agricultural producers and
communities as stewards of ecosystems and biodiversity, enabling
them to play these roles effectively. Meeting the target goals of ecoagriculture
usually requires collaboration and coordination between
diverse stakeholders who are collectively responsible for managing key
components of a landscape. This means that the conservationist and
the farmer must work together and understand each other’s needs and
concerns to the point that they actually share them.
Successes aside, though farmers tend to be very proud stewards of
their land, at times they are often unaware of and less concerned
about their role in affecting the larger landscape outside their farms.
And ecologists and preservationists have been historically anti-agriculture
and see it as purely degrading.
But change comes particularly slowly for agro-industry leaders and,
therefore, policy makers in more developed countries. Scherr indicates
that we’re in the middle of a paradigm shift and that those with the
greatest financial stake in the old system will be the last to change.
“It takes at least a generation—it will be 2025 before this stuff is
standard. It’s difficult to clearly define the problem, which is about
10% involved with the input and 90% to do with the management
practices. That’s one of the hard things for product-oriented people to
understand. As a result, not enough research is being done.” She goes
on to say that current agricultural research and aid-funding policy is
still largely based on a badly outdated model segregating the functions
of biodiversity and agriculture. This highly simplified agricultural
maximization model erroneously assumes that soil fertility equals the
amount of fertilizers applied. As wrong as this model is, agri-corporations
have made big money from it, and money-making opportunities are
far from fully realized in the new model.
When asked what gives her the most hope for a paradigm shift and
widespread adoption of ecoagriculture as the primary agricultural
system, Scherr very confidently says: “People and farmers are willing to
make good choices if they’re provided with the opportunity to choose.”