COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT HOLDS DIALOGUE ON "KNOWLEDGE FOR A SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEM'

Press Release
ENV/DEV/540

COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT HOLDS DIALOGUE ON ‘KNOWLEDGE FOR A SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEM'

Food was not just a commodity, it was the most direct link to the natural world; it was the basis of spiritual connection and practice in cultures throughout the world, a representative of non-governmental organizations told the Commission on Sustainable Development this morning, as it held the third of its four multi-stakeholder dialogues on sustainable agriculture.

The dialogue session brought together representatives of government, industry, trade unions, agricultural workers and non-governmental organizations to express their views on "Knowledge for a sustainable food system: identifying and providing for education, training, knowledge-sharing and information needs". The Commission monitors the implementation of Agenda 21, the plan of action adopted at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), held in Rio de Janeiro.

Governments, the representative added, in collaboration with all stakeholders, should develop education and information policies to disseminate knowledge of sustainable food systems and their relationship to food security, and raise awareness on the part of consumers and other stakeholders.

The knowledge of food production that had developed over thousands of years was truly scientific knowledge, she said. The central role of farmers in research and development must be recognized by supporting training programmes of farmers’ own organizations, and increasing research programmes that collaborated with farmers from beginning to end. Moreover, those measures must take into account the particular barriers faced by women in popularizing and disseminating their knowledge. In addition, sustainable food systems could not be created unless consumer choices as well as agricultural production were changed.

An industry representative said that closer cooperation and coordination among farmers, scientists, workers, government, consumers and industry would be key to ensuring that food continued to be produced and distributed in a safe, economic and sustainable way and responded to consumer concerns and demands. Research and product innovations would have little impact without education, information and extension activities to help farmers identify and implement the best solutions for local conditions.

Knowledge of the agricultural system was a vital asset, one whose potential must be safeguarded for future generations, stated a representative of agricultural workers. Farming communities had the right to freely use and

Sustainable Development Commission - 1a - Press Release ENV/DEV/540 5th Meeting (AM) 25 April 2000

protect their diverse resources. Training methods offering new information and technology should respect the local knowledge of farmers. Farmers were the clients of agricultural research and, therefore, research must be farmer-driven and not simply imposed by industries. Also, the current system of intellectual property rights did not protect indigenous and traditional knowledge.

Responding to the views expressed, the representative of Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said that there was a need for a holistic approach to sustainability, covering such issues as the environment, technology and access to information. The importance of technology generation and dissemination could not be overemphasized. In many developing countries, once agricultural research was targeted and technology was developed, disseminated and linked to sources of input supply, the productive potential of farmers was enhanced. If farmers did not have access to inputs, it was difficult for them to put the knowledge gained into practice and increase their productivity.

Presenting the northern response, the German representative said that food security was not just about distribution, but about access. It was not just a question of quantity, but quality. There was a whole range of knowledge that had to be passed on to the consumer. Intellectual property rights were indispensable for private sector involvement, but it did involve the risk of excluding farmers from research results.

Among the other issues discussed this morning were the integration of traditional and scientific knowledge, patent rights, the creation of networks and partnerships for education and information dissemination, strengthening public sector research, as well as increasing funding for scientific research.

The Commission will meet again at 3 p.m. today to hold its fourth multi- stakeholder dialogue session, with the theme “Globalization, trade liberalization and investment patterns: economic incentives and framework conditions to promote sustainable agriculture”.

Sustainable Development Commission - 3 - Press Release ENV/DEV/540 5th Meeting (AM) 25 April 2000

Commission Work Programme

The Commission on Sustainable Development met this morning for the third of four sessions devoted to multi-stakeholder dialogues on sustainable agriculture. This morning’s theme is "Knowledge for a sustainable food system: identifying and providing for education, training, knowledge-sharing and information needs". (For summaries of the reports before the Commission during the dialogue sessions see Press Releases ENV/DEV/537 and 538 of 24 April.)

Statements

An industry representative, ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ, President of the International Cooperative Alliance, began the discussion, saying that knowledge and information were integral to agriculture. Because of that, the realization of closer cooperation and coordination among farmers, scientists, workers, government, consumers and industry would be key to ensuring that food continued to be produced and distributed in a safe, economic and sustainable way and that it responded to consumer concerns and demand.

Research and product innovations would have little impact without education, information and extension activities to help farmers identify and implement the best solutions for local conditions so as to be able to guarantee their products, he said. One of the key roles of the associations representing the agri-food business sector was to bridge the gap between commercial communication, which was often product-specific, and the need for a more comprehensive and global information provision. Each sector produced a wide variety of materials for educators, students and extension workers. Most sectors published guidelines on the safe storage, transport and use of the products that helped ensure sustainable food supplies.

Agri-food sector companies and cooperative organizations also made a valuable contribution to agricultural education providing training and practical experience on many aspects of farm input supply, food manufacture, processing and marketing, he added. Many of the companies represented by the network aimed to promote a variety of practices and technologies that contributed to sustainable agriculture. Information collected at the international level could be transmitted through the network, translated and adapted for local conditions.

Industry could do its part, he said, but it was also important to continue to support the activities undertaken by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other international organizations in their extension and outreach programmes, to optimize the contribution of all sectors to achieving sustainable agricultural development. He also mentioned examples of initiatives undertaken in partnership with other stakeholders.

On behalf of agricultural workers, AJAY VASHEE said that knowledge of the agricultural system was a vital asset, one whose potential must be safeguarded for future generations. Farming communities had the right to freely use and protect their diverse resources, including seeds that had been used for generations. Training methods offering new information and technology should respect local knowledge of farmers by enriching it and not degrading it. What was required was more targeted funding for linkages. He hoped that more research handbooks could be published in local languages. Governments had the responsibility to continue basic research. Too often the best scientific knowledge was guarded in the hands of a few rich multinational corporations.

Farmers, he continued, were the clients of agricultural research. Therefore, they must be involved in the entire process of research and research must be farmer-driven and not just imposed on them. Also, extension services must be reviewed to better serve the needs of farmers. National governments and funding agencies should increase funding for agricultural research. With better usage of modern information technology, such as the Internet, institutional linkages could be beneficial to all parties concerned. The present system of protection of intellectual property rights did not protect the knowledge of indigenous peoples, which must be protected.

MARIA JOSE GUAZZELLI, of the Centro Ecologico Brazil, said the vast majority of people producing and providing food in the world were small farmers and farmworkers who had not traditionally had a place at the table in determining essential issues of agricultural sustainability and food security. Small-scale, locally based sustainable food systems could be extremely productive, in that they created jobs and livelihoods, enhanced nutrition and food security and protected the natural resources upon which all life depended. Food was not just a commodity, it was the most direct link to the natural world; it was the basis of spiritual connection and practice in cultures throughout the world. Governments, in collaboration with all stakeholders, should develop education and information policies to disseminate knowledge of sustainable food systems and their relationship to food security, and raise awareness on the part of consumers and other non-farmer stakeholders.

Knowledge was too often presented as a top-down presentation of information, he said. The knowledge of farmers must be recognized as truly scientific. The knowledge of food production that had developed over thousands of years was truly scientific knowledge. The central role of farmers in research and development must be recognized by supporting training programmes of farmers’ own organizations, and increasing research programmes that collaborated with farmers from beginning to end. Moreover, those measures must take into account the particular barriers faced by women in popularizing and disseminating their knowledge.

Non-governmental organizations strongly agreed with the trade unions that they would never be able to create a sustainable food system unless they changed consumer choices as well as agricultural production, he continued. To prepare for the tenth session of the Commission, the Commission and major groups should co-sponsor national, regional and international conferences of stakeholders to examine ways the current food system works against sustainable agriculture and what policies needed to be changed.

PETER HURST, of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations, said that the waged agricultural workforce should be a skilled workforce. A skilled workforce would have the knowledge to run machinery, for example, and would develop the knowledge necessary to face new challenges. A skilled agricultural workforce would benefit from systematic training. At present, the experience that agricultural workers possessed remained untapped. Waged agricultural workers around the world remained invisible in Agenda 21. The Commission had not been able to work with the unions to determine their potential. Employees maintained practices that led to the social marginalization of waged agricultural workers.

Workers were too often excluded from decision-making processes, he said. That was a short-sighted approach. The key to enhancing the role of waged agricultural workers would be the development of a wide variety of educational programmes. Such an expansion could be done in cooperation with other stakeholders. Four areas of training were suggested, including a comprehensive training programme that would include: the sharing of knowledge; training and acceptance of the core standards of agricultural workers; worker information; and training material. Also, worker and agriculture safety training should be intensified to prevent unnecessary accidents and deaths. The challenge was how to better use workers’ knowledge and experience in a way that it would contribute to sustainable agricultural development.

I. EDACHE, from the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, responded to the presentations made. The dialogue was very appropriate in the process of getting stakeholder support for agricultural training, research and capacity-building. The sustainability of agricultural programmes continued to pose problems. Hence, there was a need for a holistic approach to sustainability, covering issues such as the environment, technology and access to information. To enhance sustainable agriculture, stakeholders must be carried along in the process. That was why such dialogues were important.

The importance of technology generation and dissemination could not be overemphasized, he said. The experience in many developing countries was that once agricultural research was targeted and technology was developed, disseminated and linked to sources of input supply, the productive potential of farmers was enhanced. The research, extension and farmer-input linkage was of utmost importance. If farmers did not have access to inputs, it was difficult for them to put the knowledge gained into practice and increase their productivity.

Helping farmers to organize themselves and using such associations for the dissemination of information and the provision of services were important, he continued. Governments had a vital role to play in those matters. Research in developing countries was largely a public responsibility and lacked adequate funding. Non-governmental organizations and private companies could provide services that tended to be commercially oriented and link farmers to the market. Without assured markets, the farmer could only produce for a limited time.

USCHI EID, Parliamentary Secretary of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of Germany, gave the views of the developed countries on the presentations made. She said that food security must be addressed in a multi-sectoral approach. It was not just about distribution, but about access. It was also not just a question of quantity, but quality, and so education was very important. There was a whole range of knowledge that had to be passed on to the consumer.

On the role of farmers, she said that it was necessary to involve them in research activities. Research must be farmer-driven and not imposed by research centres, as was stated by a farmer. It was not just a question of adapting research results to farmers’ needs. Both researchers and farmers could learn from each other. Intellectual property rights were indispensable for private sector involvement, but it did involve the risk of excluding farmers from research results. Consideration must also be given to the right of agricultural workers to decent wages and safe working conditions. In the long run, it would be necessary to ensure that certain social and ecological standards were met. She supported labelling programmes to educate consumers on the background of products.

The Chairman, JUAN MAYR MALDONADO (Colombia), summarizing the discussion, said that there were important differences in the interpretation of knowledge. In that regard, it had been said that sustainable agriculture was the product of knowledge accumulated over hundreds of years. Likewise, the need for generating, organizing and disseminating knowledge had also been expressed. Scientists, industry, communities and farmers all generated knowledge. Farmers were both clients and users and they must participate in the entire process of knowledge. The activities mentioned had included training and education for farmers and consumers. In many sectors the importance of the various United Nations bodies had been stressed. The need for training trainers and disseminators had also been mentioned.

As to financing, it was clear that there was a lack of financing for the training and disseminating processes, he said. The importance of providing education to consumers to generate the processes of change in demand, mechanisms of participation for farmers and workers and the question of the intellectual property and traditional knowledge rights had been highlighted and showed differences in interpretation.

A representative of indigenous peoples said that a great deal had been said about the conservation of natural resources. For indigenous peoples, that conservation was a part of their heritage. It was crucial to understand the importance of working the land, in terms of the relationship between man and nature. Unfortunately, in northern and southern countries alike, there was a disappearance of cultural values.

Another representative of indigenous peoples said that the scientific and knowledge of indigenous peoples must be acknowledged as a contribution to agriculture and sustainable development. For example, the indigenous people of the Andean region had improved seeds over the years. Certain groups had tried to patent those seeds. Some claimed that indigenous peoples lacked knowledge, but that was being revealed as an invalid prejudice, in view of the strength of the studies being conducted. Another proposal was to provide financial resources to strengthen knowledge through institutions led by indigenous peoples themselves. The indigenous peoples appealed for the protection of their intellectual, collective rights.

The CHAIRMAN asked whether the present system of intellectual property rights promoted the use of indigenous and local knowledge or limited that knowledge.

A farmer said that in looking at the record of the existing intellectual property rights regime, it seemed more like an intellectual piracy rights regime. It did not promote or limit traditional knowledge, but stole traditional knowledge and patented it. That, to him, constituted intellectual piracy rights.

A representative of non-governmental organizations said that it not only limited indigenous knowledge, but also destroyed it. Also, it violated basic human rights and dignity. It not only destroyed indigenous knowledge, but impeded the progress of knowledge and research in the West. She believed it should be rejected.

An industry representative said that intellectual property rights were particularly important for small, start-up businesses. Industry acknowledged that the rights of indigenous peoples should be considered. The question was whether the system of patent rights respected those rights.

A trade union representative said that the present system of intellectual property rights tended to ignore the fact that much of the knowledge and technology came from the workers. It became the property of the employer, after which the employee was compelled to respect the employer’s right to that property. The knowledge and technical resources of workers were only marginally tapped. Participatory approaches were needed to fully tap the potential of workers.

A representative of another non-governmental organization said that another issue was that of the knowledge of local farmers being lost due to the structure of agricultural systems that were driving farmers off their land. New York lost almost 1,000 farmers a year. With that loss was the loss of a vast amount of local knowledge.

The CHAIRMAN then asked what could be the way to protect such knowledge, in order to use it in a positive way.

An industry representative said that genes could not be patented, but their products could. Patent meant the right to use, not to own.

How could indigenous knowledge be protected? asked the CHAIRMAN.

An industry representative said that it was a complex subject and currently there were a number of working groups discussing the matter, including one under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Just as a system for intellectual property protection had been developed, a similar system should be developed for the protection of indigenous rights. Industry stood ready to participate in that process.

A trade union representative said that trade unions and workers brought knowledge to the table and that role must not be neglected by stakeholders and the Commission. They had been long involved in sharing knowledge with other workers, as well as with employers. They had used participatory training methods, as well as worker-to-worker training. Training and education were ways to empower workers and to make workplaces more democratic. She wanted the Commission to recognize the knowledge that workers could contribute to a sustainable food system.

A representative of farmers said that it would be difficult to reach complete consensus. There should be more balance between public and private sector research.

A representative of the Russian Federation said that the present system of education must take traditional knowledge into account. More research was needed and broader representation of indigenous peoples was also needed. It was necessary to reflect in educational materials the importance of programmes and plans to raise awareness of all sectors in sustainable agriculture. There was a need for shared information.

A representative of Bolivia said that the protection of traditional knowledge was extremely important. There was a battle between indigenous landowners and the invading multinational companies, which offered genetically treated products. It was a battle between the indigenous peoples who owned their land, and big companies who came along with tempting offers. Indigenous peoples in Bolivia were facing the onslaught of new companies and technologies. Bolivia was trying to make indigenous peoples aware that, while genetic products might offer positive results, it was still an issue for debate. Companies had tremendous power with their tempting offers.

A representative of a non-governmental organization said that the kind of knowledge under discussion was important. Agenda 21 declared that women were the custodians of knowledge. For example, women in Zimbabwe had tried to convince the Government to use traditional seeds that would not cause drought. Some seeds did not agree with African seeds and soil. In that regard, the initiatives on knowledge should be properly documented.

A representative of industry said that it was farmers who could best judge what kind of information they needed and how to use it. As much information should get to farmers as possible. The critical issue was to improve the flow of information to farmers. Farmers did not have enough information to make good choices. The flow of all kinds of information should be maximized.

A representative of farmers said that farmers in developing countries needed information, knowledge and training. On the issue of intellectual property rights, she said that it should go hand in hand with traditional knowledge. There was a need to protect and promote traditional knowledge. In Uganda, she could tell when it would rain and when there would be famine. Even before early warning systems were put in place, her great-grandfather knew when there would be a drought.

A trade union representative said that the majority of countries in Central and Eastern Europe suffered from food shortages, as well as unemployment rates of 30 per cent and higher. Not only should governments ensure access to food, but also access to information on food and nutrition, which could make the difference between life and death. Also, workers needed information to make environmentally sound choices. As to who should pay for that education, she said that it should come first from special funds of the multinational corporations and, second, from governments, which made it possible for the corporations to gain so much control.

The CHAIRMAN asked how traditional and scientific knowledge could be better integrated.

A representative of farmers said that the property rights regime should not be viewed only as a threat to indigenous knowledge, but also to better use of scientific knowledge. In the evolution of patent and intellectual property rights, societal interests had lost weight and certain narrow interests had gained. The patent laws were increasingly owned by major corporations and used to gain a market advantage.

A farmer said that he did not see a contradiction in the integration of traditional and scientific knowledge. Knowledge, information and dissemination constituted power. However, indigenous peoples were marginalized in that context. There was no contradiction once information was shared with the people for whom it was intended. The problem arose when it was strictly oriented for market purposes. He said that industrialized countries had depleted their forest reserve and came and disguised their assistance to control people in developing countries. In countries such as Belize, governments were moving away from strengthening the public sector, which had led to many problems.

Another farmer said that he was happy to hear the initiatives mentioned on sustainable agricultural development. One of the main obstacles to such agriculture in African countries was the servicing of the foreign debt. It was necessary to reduce the impact of that debt, which should be either cancelled or reduced. Then most African countries would be in a position to comply with sustainable agricultural projects and to improve their agricultural productivity. It was also necessary to train African women, who were responsible for 80 per cent of agriculture in Africa.

A representative of France said that thanks to local communities and indigenous groups, a discussion of intellectual property rights had been launched in recent years. Property rights dealt primarily with companies, with foodstuffs being treated no differently from industrial products. Indigenous peoples had stated that the definitions of intellectual property rights had gone too far. The international community must acknowledge and remunerate traditional knowledge and must look at the collective aspects of that knowledge. If definitions were not established clearly the result could be a contradiction within the system itself. “Bio-piracy” was taking place and certain codes of conduct should be established to address that issue.

A representative of industry said that important Internet sites provided incredible amounts of information for farmers with computers. However, the Internet could deepen the already existing social gap between developing and developed countries. It was fundamental not to forget that the Internet was an instrument of transmission of knowledge for those with the right technology. Cooperatives and agricultural unions must provide Internet-types of information that could not otherwise be obtained individually.

A representative of indigenous peoples said that indigenous peoples had been generous in sharing information, since they believed that their knowledge should benefit all mankind. Intellectual property rights, however, were a threat to the protection of indigenous knowledge. Indigenous peoples urged the international community to protect their knowledge by looking into indigenous ways of protecting knowledge.

A representative of farmers said that scientists were trying to tinker with traditional knowledge systems. Traditional knowledge systems should be protected.

A delegate from Australia said that sustainable land management was a way of looking after traditional knowledge and the health of people. Sustainable land management was about utilizing land through tourism, foods and medicines. Sustainable land management was about building relationships between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. It was the responsibility of the custodians of the land to ensure that a healthy environment could be provided for future generations.

A representative of trade unions said that trade unions had learned the importance of education. Trade unions had been at the forefront of non-formal education. The participation of all stakeholders was necessary to achieve sustainable development. Capacity-building created a safe working environment.

A representative of the farmers said that traditional knowledge was a fundamental basis of scientific research. Farmers and producers were at the heart of the process. There should be a new partnership with non-governmental organizations and other components, along with a popularization of knowledge. A proposal for a mechanism for a farmer-to-farmer process was needed. A global knowledge system was also needed.

An industry representative said that there were different agents that played an important role in the process of improving traditional and scientific knowledge. In many Latin American countries, the ministries of agriculture had smaller and smaller budgets every year. At the same time, agricultural research did not have behind it the appropriate funds or attention it required. Non-governmental organizations and other agents responsible for change should be playing an important role in filling the gaps. He recommended that ministries of agriculture be strengthened to increase the flow of information between farmers and others concerned.

A non-governmental organization representative said that everyone had recognized the importance of transmitting knowledge to the population. It was necessary to compromise on all issues and to attract scientific research. All efforts should be utilized, including universities and information services, to consider the viability of programmes from economic, social and environmental standpoints.

A representative of Nigeria said that the collection of germ plasms in developing countries, used for research and then patented in industrialized countries, could not be done without the assistance of traditional knowledge. Some form of payment or compensation to the local people or governments for the conservation of their genetic resources was necessary, if such products were to be patented.

The CHAIRMAN said that the guarantees offered so far to protect the system of traditional knowledge were not sufficient. That generated, in one way or another, a lack of confidence. He asked what mechanisms could be used to establish networks of knowledge or information that pulled together the various sectors.

A representative of indigenous peoples said that multi-stakeholder dialogues should be continued in future Commission meetings. At the national level, indigenous peoples were often marginalized. Adequate participatory mechanisms must be promoted, including a clearing house for information. Because indigenous land was not legally recognized, indigenous peoples were being threatened by industry. The recognition of the collectivity of traditional knowledge was also important.

A representative of non-governmental organizations said that it was important that traditional knowledge be given the status of a natural resource. The blending of knowledge should be mainstreamed, so as to enrich the agendas of research universities. There was a need to systematize the knowledge that already existed. It was also important that already existing partnerships be used in creating new networks and partnerships. Biodiversity was the key to sustainable agriculture and rural development.

A representative of industry said that family farms represented the majority of farms in Australia. Short courses were available for Australian family farmers. Where time and access to training were limitations, facilitators were made available to train family farmers. Local environmental issues were part of the school curricula.

A representative of a scientific centre said that an important aspect of their work was the promotion of information sharing. The public sector research for agriculture was grossly under-financed and must be strengthened. Food policy research capabilities should also be strengthened.

A representative of the farmers said that one issue not mentioned so far was the promotion of investment on the part of governments and industries for projects aimed at rural women to ensure sufficient food and sustainable agriculture. Rural women, in particular, should be made aware and provided with the necessary information. Their lack of knowledge was reflected in the small participation of women in the agricultural and industrial sectors. It was necessary to correct the existing gaps and allow women to move into decision- making positions. Equality must be promoted in training and discrimination in education must be condemned.

A trade union representative emphasized the importance of utilizing participatory approaches in sharing knowledge. Such approaches had worked in the Philippines in relation to collective bargaining agreements and had led to a framework in the workplace for labour and management cooperation for sustainable development. Such pioneering efforts had helped to start the “greening” of workplaces in that country.

The representative from France said that the way harmony was achieved in music was a valuable example for the work of sustainable agriculture. Also, a public statute on knowledge would be advantageous. Further, the example indigenous peoples provided in gathering information was also valuable.

A representative of Nigeria said that the recommendation must be broadened to cover agricultural technology. The main avenue for dissemination of agricultural technology was quite weak and must be strengthened.

A representative from industry said that the situation in the field was quite different than the scenario presented in the Commission. There were 15 projects relating to education in Latin America. In the field, work between non-governmental organizations, universities and farmers was actually quite harmonious.

A representative of indigenous peoples said that the opening up of the Commission to the issues of indigenous peoples was encouraging. Processes to protect knowledge were collective and not individual. The full and effective participation of indigenous peoples must be guaranteed.

A representative of non-governmental organizations said there was enough food to feed everyone in the world. The problem was not always a lack of resources, but the shifting of resources. Often there was a diversion of resources, rather than a lack of resources. Nutrition per acre was more important than production per acre. Also, there had not been enough discussion on consumer information.

A representative of the farmers said that training was the transference of knowledge and should be done by equal partners, not in a top-down approach. It should be built up on traditional knowledge. Knowledge moved at different levels. More public sector funding was necessary, as was increased resources for communication.

A representative of trade unions said that the use of pesticides had increased in the world. That increase affected agricultural workers. Assistance and training to minimize the negative effects of pesticides were needed. Workers' rights should include the right of workers to know, to refuse dangerous work and the right to participate in decision-making.

* *** *