Commission on Sustainable Development

Sixteenth Session

6^th & 7^th Meetings (AM & PM)

Commission on Sustainable Development panels discuss effects of drought, competing

definitions of sustainability on farming practices in different communities

In a full day of wide-ranging panel discussions devoted to desertification, drought, land and the interrelated issues of agriculture and rural development, the Commission on Sustainable Development debated the myriad economic, social and environmental impacts of drought and how competing definitions of sustainability affected farming practices in different communities.

Separated into four panel discussions, Government delegates, development experts and civil society representatives considered how rural poor people’s lack of capacity to cope with drought could be overcome, especially in light of current global-warming scenarios.  They also spotlighted how land-use management, as well as agriculture and rural development should be approached within the context of sustainable development.  The implications of desertification for worldwide eco-safety, poverty eradication, socio-economic stability and sustainable development were also discussed.

Many speakers throughout the day noted the severe adverse implications of drought for sustainable development in affected developing countries and regions, owing to falling agricultural production, famine, water scarcity and loss of human life, all of which triggered acute food shortages and general food insecurity.  Several speakers highlighted projections that water availability and quality would decrease in many arid and semi-arid regions, leading to increased risks of droughts and floods.

Other speakers expressed serious concern about environmental losses caused by drought, including damage to plant and animal species, wildlife habitats, and air and water quality; forest and range fires; degradation of landscape quality; and soil erosion.  Concerns were also raised that Africa’s huge dependence on agriculture rendered that continent especially vulnerable to the impact of drought.

Describing climate change as “the defining phenomenon of our time”, one expert said that, while it was perhaps no surprise that drylands would expand as the planet warmed, it would be increasingly difficult for people in drought-affected communities to escape dry conditions.  The situation would be much worse for people in the developing world.  As little could be done without a plan for drought, a logical, proactive, multi-step action plan was needed.  It would focus not just on catching rainwater, but also on creating dedicated early warning mechanisms, diversifying livelihoods and identifying ways to communicate with vulnerable communities.

Another speaker painted a disturbing picture of drought’s impact on the land and livelihoods of the world’s indigenous peoples.  As drought and creeping desertification shrank ground and surface water supplies, melted glaciers, killed forests, dried up croplands, and drove off traditional wildlife, indigenous livelihoods were increasingly threatened.  Drought also jeopardized indigenous culture and language, as it forced indigenous communities to move from lands and territories that they had inhabited for thousands of years.

In the same vein, a representative of indigenous people called particular attention to the growing phenomenon of “environmental refugees” as natural disasters and dramatically fluctuating weather patterns destroyed entire ways of life and set huge populations on the move.  Poor and rural women were particularly vulnerable in such circumstances.

Another speaker stressed that, unlike earthquakes or other natural disasters, drought accumulated slowly and lasted a long time.  As it gradually worsened, its impact on local populations would gradually increase.  It was, therefore, necessary to develop early warning systems to identity drought and differentiate between its four different types:  meteorological drought; agricultural drought; hydrological drought; and socio-economic drought.

During an interactive discussion that followed a panel on rural development and agriculture, a speaker representing non-governmental organizations suggested that there was an unspoken, perhaps unacknowledged, difference between what some speakers meant when calling for agricultural development and what others meant.  That division -- between holistic and extractives conceptions of farming -- permeated and possibly confused the discussion while going to the heart of sustainability.

Regenerative agriculture respected the soil, water and land in a way that could be described as sustainable while industrial agriculture was more akin to extractive industries, he said, urging Governments, civil society groups engaged in the agricultural sector and private corporations to work with social movements seeking truly sustainable agricultural practices at all levels.

Expressing a similar concern about the definition of “sustainable” agriculture and development, a speaker representing women’s groups stressed that the existence of local initiatives, farms and businesses was a value-added part of rural development strategies.

The Commission on Sustainable Development will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 8 May, to continue its parallel thematic discussions on land and drought and desertification.

Panel Discussion on Agriculture and Rural Development

Commission Vice-Chairperson Sasa Ojdanic (Serbia) led the panel on the interrelated topics of agriculture and rural development, which featured panellists Sergio Miranda da Cruz, Director, Agribusiness Development Branch, United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO); Puneetha S. Palakurthi, Assistant Professor, School of Community Economic Development, Southern New Hampshire University, Manchester; Colien Hefferan, Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service, United States Department of Agriculture; and Arne Cartridge, Senior Vice-President, Yara International ASA.

Leading off the interactive discussion, Mr. MIRANDA DA CRUZ stressed the strong correlation between the human development index and the activities of a country’s agribusiness sector.  Not only were agro-industries, which formed a vital chain between the field and the market, a key driver of employment in developing countries, they also represented real linkages between agriculture and general rural development strategies.  As such, they should be considered a key part of the way towards effective rural development.  Only a few developing countries dominated the South-South trade in food and a more robust agro-industry sector would allow agricultural commodities and products to reach a wider pool of domestic and international consumers.

Focusing on the important development role of rural finance, Ms. PALAKURTHI stressed that, while the foremost driver of rural development was high overall economic growth, other key drivers included effective land reform, rural infrastructure, effective institutions, financial services, an economic agriculture sector and rural non-farm enterprises.  Microfinance had proved that high-volume, low-value loans could be given to the poor.  Its past success showed that access mattered more than the interest rate and that, when a product was designed in a way that allowed the poor to repay, it would work.  But such financing had so far not been particularly successful in spurring agricultural development.  There was still a need to develop financial products that worked for farmers.  To do so, it was necessary to overcome existing operational, capacity, policy and regulatory constraints.  To be successful, those financial products would also have to enhance rural livelihoods through market-oriented mechanisms that increased the profitability and resiliency of current enterprises.

Ms. HEFFERAN said that, at its base, sustainability meant not harming the environment.  At its best, it entailed a workable system that not only avoided environmental degradation but offered economic growth.  Strategies for achieving sustainable development and agricultural development were intertwined if not totally interlinked.  For farmers to achieve sustainability, access to knowledge and the tools for its application was imperative, as was an environment conducive to sustainability.  Such an environment was created by good local governance, tariff reductions and open trade.

A key element in facilitating sustainable agricultural practices was farmer leadership training, she continued.  Starting with youth, it also included lifelong learning programmes and approaches.  In the United States, training techniques were based on the principle of “learning by doing”.  In fact, only when farmers participated in such training was the “ground truth” of how to apply technology revealed.  Beyond its borders, the United States was also working with local communities to train and educate farmers in a number of developing countries.  Ultimately, because sustainability was based on the ability to earn a living, farmers must have access to markets.

Mr. CARTRIDGE, head of the world’s largest plant nutrients and fertilizer company, then turned to the current food crisis and the looming challenge of feeding the growing global population, saying Yara International’s experiences in Africa revealed many keys to ensuring future sustainability.  The drive towards a green revolution in Africa had not grown out of a desire for profits in the near term.  Rather, corporations had to become active participants in creative ideas that respected long-term horizons.  Holistic approaches were necessary, as was the understanding that each company was interdependent on the whole.

Today, credit for agriculture still did not function in a way that helped small farmers, he continued.  Thus, an alignment of Governments, banks and microcredit donors and insurers was also necessary.  Yara International was now looking to establish a grain partnership in Ghana because its existing capacity had no ability to grow to scale.  The partnership would have to be created in such a way as to leverage working local capacities.  Too often, local institutions and civil society programmes had been insufficient; all parties seeking to promote rural and agricultural development needed to come closer together to re-evaluate the whole system.  Success on big-ticket items like the Millennium Development Goals required a reinvention of the way in which public-private partnerships worked in the agriculture sector.

In the ensuing interactive discussion, speakers from Government delegations, intergovernmental organizations, United Nations bodies, non-governmental organizations and major groups addressed a wide range of issues, including financing for agriculture, the need for sustainable bioenergy, food security and environmental protection.  A number of speakers emphasized how constraints on access to business development opportunities and institutions limited the rural sector’s ability to grow, while others stressed the need to develop partnerships between local municipalities and agri-business.  Still others called for significant capital injections into agriculture.

Many speakers highlighted policies adopted in their countries that had succeeded in harnessing microfinance institutions, improving rural infrastructure and roads, strengthening legal frameworks for farmers’ associations and promoting sustainability and environmental protection.

A number of speakers drew a link between biofuel production and the food price hikes that were squeezing poor communities around the world.  While a few of them subsequently called for a complete cessation of biofuel production, others disagreed, reaffirming their commitment to producing biofuel in a sustainable manner.  Speakers on both sides of the debate highlighted thorny questions that the production of biofuel increasingly raised about sustainability and climate change.

A few of them said biofuel production was an “ethical” question that demanded the Commission’s sustained attention.  In a similar vein, and in light of the possible risks and benefits of biotechnology, some speakers called for a science-based evaluation system to approach the biosafety of each product or process.

Thematic Panel Discussion on Drought

DANIEL CARMON ( Israel), Commission Vice-Chairperson, set the stage for the other morning panel discussion, saying droughts were becoming more severe and, in the hardest hit areas, lasted sometimes for years, with serious implications for household food security.

He urged the participants to consider how to overcome the lack of capacity among the rural poor to cope with drought, especially in light of the current global-warming scenarios.  There was need to share experiences and best practices regarding alternative employment and income opportunities in drylands or areas frequently hit by drought and where people relied mostly on rain-fed agriculture for their livelihood.

The panellists were:  Anada Tiega, Secretary-General, Ramsar Convention on Wetlands Secretariat; Scott Christiansen, Executive Assistant to the Director-General of the International Centre for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas (ICARDA); Enos Esikuri, Technical Specialist in Land Management, Environment Department, World Bank; and Estanbacio Castro Diaz, Consultant at the International Indian Treaty Council.

KATHLEEN ABDALLA, Officer-in-Charge, Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, introducing the Secretary-General’s report, Review of implementation of Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation:  drought (document E/CN.17/2008/6), said the phenomenon had severe adverse implications for sustainable development in drought-affected developing countries and regions, leading to food shortages and food insecurity owing to falling agricultural production, famine, water scarcity and loss of human life.  Africa’s huge dependence on agriculture rendered the continent especially vulnerable.  According to the report, the 2002-2003 drought in the sub-Saharan region had resulted in a food deficit of 3.3 million tons, with an estimated 14.4 million people in need of assistance.  Water availability and quality were projected to decrease in many arid and semi-arid regions, with the attendant increased risk of drought and flooding.

Changing rainfall patterns were likely further to intensify the siltation of rivers and the deterioration of watersheds, she said.  For example, lakes and reservoirs in the African Sahel were increasingly threatened with the loss of part of their water storage capacity, possibly leading to a complete drying up.  In Southern Africa, wetlands and wildlife of international importance were increasingly under threat from drought.

She said climate change was likely to exacerbate the frequency of drought, with even greater and more sustained negative impacts.  Current climate scenarios predicted that the driest regions of the world would become even drier, signalling a risk of persisting drought in many arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas.  Moving to a proactive, risk-based approach to drought management had proven effective in preventing or reducing the physical or economic losses associated with the phenomenon.  A proactive approach was particularly significant to regions such as the Sahel, West Asia and the Mediterranean, where population growth and urbanization now exposed many more people to the impacts of drought.

Opening the discussion, Dr. TIEGA focused on the role of wetlands and their relation to drought-affected areas.  Water from lagoons, river basins, marshes and bogs were crucial to drought preparedness and early warning about drought conditions.  Wetlands must be managed properly in order to play their role in adaptation to and mitigation of drought.  International cooperation, through transboundary action, was required to make use of wetlands.  Measures in lowland drainage basins to mitigate surface and groundwater droughts should be part of an integrated water management strategy.

Mr. CHRISTIANSEN, describing climate change as the defining phenomenon of the present time, said that, as the planet warmed, drylands would expand.  That was important because croplands, forests and plains were already so overworked and degraded that there was no way to “move somewhere else” to escape dry conditions.  Of course the situation would be much worse for people in the developing world who really had nowhere to go and no other options if their lands were destroyed by drought.  “Without a plan for drought, there is little that could be done.”

He laid out his recommendations for a logical, proactive, multi-step action plan that called for, among other things, appointing a global dedicated drought task force with regional/local focal points; identifying populations at risk and how to reach them; writing up a comprehensive preparedness plan; integrating science and policy; building public awareness; and promoting education.  A drought-preparedness plan was not just about catching rainwater; rather, it was also about dedicated early warning mechanisms, diversifying livelihoods, and identifying ways to communicate with vulnerable communities.

Mr. ESIKURI highlighted the World Bank’s efforts to address drought and other weather anomalies, saying that, unlike earthquakes or other natural disasters, drought accumulated slowly and lasted a long time.  The four acknowledged that conditions or stages surrounding drought as it gradually worsened and its impact on local populations gradually increased were:  meteorological drought, brought about when there was a prolonged period with less than average precipitation; agricultural drought, which affected crop production or the ecology of the range; hydrological drought, brought about when water reserves available in sources such as aquifers, lakes and reservoirs fell below the statistical average; and socio-economic drought, which concerned the impact on and availability of economic goods such as water, forage, food grains, fish, and hydroelectric power that, over time, may have been affected by the other stages of drought.

Painting a disturbing picture of drought’s impact on the land and livelihoods of the world’s indigenous people, Mr. CASTRO DIAZ said many tribal peoples and traditional communities depended on agriculture or lived in heavily forested areas or near coastlines.  As drought and creeping desertification shrank ground and surface water supplies, melted glaciers, killed forests, dried up croplands and drove off traditional wildlife, the sustainability of indigenous livelihoods was threatened.

Drought also threatened indigenous culture and language by forcing nomadic pastoralists and others to move from the lands and territories they had inhabited for thousands of years, he said.  Indeed, surviving drought involved the survival of the fabric of social security systems that depended on the survival of livestock, the ability to grow crops, marketing of the produce and sharing already threatened natural resources.  Drought management planning would benefit from an understanding of how indigenous societies responded to eco-climatic shifts and variations and how they coped with natural disasters.

In the interactive debate that followed, delegations joined civil society representatives to discus the insidious nature of drought and its myriad economic, social and environmental impacts on both developed and developing nations, though they noted that the characteristics of those impacts differed considerably between the two settings.  Improved understanding of the inevitability and characteristics of drought and its differences from other natural hazards would better equip scientists, policymakers, and other stakeholders to establish urgently needed policies and plans intended to reduce future vulnerability, many agreed.

Speakers from civil society and the developing world, including drought-hit regions, stressed that the diverse impacts of drought ripped through their communities and economies, causing loss of income, farm foreclosures, shortages of food staples and the death of livestock, among other hardships.  Some speakers from Africa and the Middle East cited higher instances of disease outbreaks in times of droughts, as well as increased malnutrition, and heightened tensions over and competition for natural resources, including food and water.

One representative of indigenous peoples called particular attention to the growing phenomenon of “environmental refugees” as global warming, natural disasters and dramatically fluctuating weather patterns destroyed entire ways of life and set huge populations on the move.  Poor and rural women had special needs in such circumstances.  Many speakers voiced serious concern about drought-caused damage to plant and animal species, wildlife habitats, and air and water quality; forest and range fires; degradation of landscape quality; and soil erosion.

The participants agreed that much could be done to reduce vulnerability to drought through the development of preparedness plans emphasizing risk management and the adoption of appropriate mitigation actions and programmes.  Some speakers called for innovative plans and programmes such as the monitoring of drought and land use, and rainwater harvesting.  They also called for “safety nets” and an increased emphasis on prediction and early warning capabilities in order to reduce the economic and environmental damage associated with drought.

Panel Discussion on Land

In one of two parallel panel discussions this afternoon, the Commission considered how land-use policies should be approached within the context of sustainable development.

Commission Vice-Chairperson Tri Tharyat (Indonesia) chaired the discussion, which featured the following panellists:  Amuko Omara, Global Health and Safety Officer, International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco Workers and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUFAWA); Jolyn Sanjak, Senior Director, Millennium Challenge Corporation; Erick Fernandes, Agriculture and Rural Development Department (ARD), World Bank; Clarissa Augustinus, Chief, Land, Tenure and Property Administration Section, UN-Habitat; and Michael Taylor, International Land Coalition.

ASLAM CHAUDHRY, Chief of the Water, Natural Resources and SIDS (Small Island Developing States) Branch of the Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, introduced the Secretary-General’s Review of implementation on land (document E/CN.17/2008/5), which notes that land- and water-use practices and climatic conditions affect the condition of land resources.  Because degraded land has negative effects on agricultural productivity and rural development, long-term investments, across sectors and stakeholders, are required to reverse that degradation.

He said that, according to the report, integrated land management approaches promoting holistic management of all related resources had shown promising results.  Secure access to land and other natural resources was an essential part of local empowerment of marginalized individuals and groups and could be instrumental in poverty reduction.  Access to land was often seen as a prerequisite to gaining access to other productive resources.  Moreover, certain uses of land, such as those leading to deforestation, could drive climate change, while others, like carbon sequestration, could mitigate it.  But despite considerable progress in the development of information systems and tools for land-use planning, their adaptation had been slow.

The report identified a number of challenges that should be addressed during the present session so as to promote sustainable and efficient land management, he said.  They included:  providing secure land rights; restricting certain types of environmentally demanding settlements; strengthening the capacities of communities; adapting land-use planning technologies; and successfully accommodating the interests of new developments while securing the rights of indigenous peoples.

Opening the interactive discussion, Mr. OMARA focused on the impact of land-use policies on humans, particularly agricultural workers.  While their livelihood was obviously linked to land, conditions in the sector meant that workers were typically employed on a seasonal, contract or casual basis.  In addition, children would often be co-opted into farm work because the wages were so low.  Climate change introduced further challenges into that scenario by triggering labour migration.  As workers moved in search of work, they faced a number of inherent insecurities, and might even be jumping from one “frying pan” into another.  In particular, health and safety risks like those created by pesticides were high.  Most countries lacked health service systems capable of addressing the needs of casual or migrant workers.

Ms. SANJAK, stressing that land-use policy and land-tenure rights went hand in hand, said the effectiveness of land-use strategies required that they address land-tenure issues, as understood to be the bundle of rights of individuals and groups to enjoy land and the trees, plants and waters on it.  Typically there were norms and practices -- both statutory and customary -- that spelled out how land could be used and, when successful, effectively avoided conflicts.  As a result, land-tenure rights and land-use policies had economic, environmental, social and cultural dimensions.

Land-use policies born of local initiatives tended to be more cost-effective, she continued.  Yet the issue of jurisdictional boundaries could get in the way of land-use planning, as proven by the example of Honduras.  In addition to being a governance issue, land-use policies were also highly variable, making it important to study the effectiveness of specific approaches in order to identify how different variables affected different policies.

Mr. FERNANDES said climate change represented a great challenge to the future uses of land.  In the coming years and decades, many countries would face increasing numbers of “extreme” events, such as Cyclone Nargis, which had flooded the Irrawaddy Delta in Myanmar this week, leaching its soils of the minerals and nutrients necessary for future farming activities there.  Such natural disasters would have serious human and development costs, and actions taken today would have far-reaching impacts on livelihoods at the local, regional and global levels.

He said it was now possible to map different scenarios detailing what would happen under different land-use policies, but the science was complex and policymakers needed support systems that would deliver reliable and robust information.  In addition, “pro-poor” instruments were needed to integrate land and water management and strengthen capacity.  It should be recognized that the participation of women and children offered means by which to gather more useful information directly from the ground, as well as disseminate information to the local level and future generations.

Seeking to establish linkages between rural and urban land-use issues, Ms. AUGUSTINUS pointed out that the two areas were connected through production systems.  In addition, environmental destruction resulting from climate change would force more people into urban settings in the future.  Such “climate refugees” would have an impact on planning, property values, financing and governance systems in cities.  That meant in turn that land-use planning and management must be participatory on a widespread basis.  Data and information systems that mapped a country’s full land-use picture must be developed and shared among countries.  Among other things, land-use management models should establish a balance between a “built versus a master plan”.  A range of land rights should also be elaborated from informal land rights, such as customary rights, on one end through formal rights, such as leases and group-tenure mechanisms, on the other.

Mr. TAYLOR, while noting the immediate impact of the current food crisis on the poor, called attention to its “deeper” impact -- the ability of those facing escalating food prices to maintain access to land and natural resources.  Land was one of the most important assets that poor rural people had, but because it was a finite commodity, those who used the land on a small scale basis were in direct competition with large-scale commercial interests.  It was necessary, therefore, to address land-tenure security from a “pro-poor” perspective because, without adequate land-tenure security, millions of poor land users were likely to face dispossession and discrimination.  Women were doubly vulnerable as they comprised the majority of the world’s poor and a significant minority in terms of owning land.

Stressing that inequity in land holdings incurred risks to economic development, he said an urgent response was required in order to protect the rights of poor land-users to own, control, manage and access land and natural resources individually and collectively.  Appropriate approaches should be developed with respect to recognition of land rights.  Because past efforts to do so had not recognized the complexity of the task, they had failed.  Meeting current challenges required a concerted, collaborative and coordinated response by stakeholders in Governments, the United Nations system and civil society.

Among the key themes raised during the discussion were the pressures that climate change would exert on land-use policies and the ensuing need to see land degradation as a serious issue on the international, rather than just local, level, and to develop comprehensive, cooperative strategies accordingly.  Many speakers highlighted the need to fashion holistic land-use management policies that would address local circumstances, as well as the threats posed by climate change, including soil erosion, sea-level rise and desertification.

Other speakers emphasized the need to address land-use issues impacting rural and urban communities in tandem.  Some called for the development and expansion of participatory approaches that would ensure that land-governance systems continued to support economic growth while protecting important ecosystems.  A number of speakers underlined the rights of indigenous peoples to their lands and the impossibility of separating land from those living on it.

Thematic Panel Discussion on Desertification

Chairing the other afternoon discussion, Commission Vice-Chairperson DANIEL CARMON ( Israel) said the body’s consideration of desertification was extremely important as the topic was being taken up in the broader context of sustainable development.  To that end, delegations could discuss, among other things, what must be done to secure long-term public and private investment to combat desertification, and how to accelerate the dissemination of information and communication.

Ms. ABDALLA, Officer-in-Charge of the Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, introduced the Secretary-General’s report, Review of implementation of Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation:  desertification (document E/CN.17/2008/7), saying that desertification -- the extreme case of land degradation -- was a global issue with serious implications for worldwide eco-safety, poverty eradication, socio-economic stability and sustainable development.

She said that, measured by indicators of human well-being and development, including gross national product per capita, access to clean drinking water and adequate sanitation, and infant mortality, dryland people -- about 90 per cent of whom lived in developing countries -- lagged far behind the rest of the world.  According to the report, poor people living in dryland areas had to contend with multiple challenges:  income loss; food insecurity; weakening health; insecure land-tenure systems and access rights to natural resources; and lack of access to markets.  Poor livelihood opportunities often forced them to migrate to areas not affected by desertification in the search for a better life.  The increased frequency and severity of droughts resulting from projected climate change was likely further to exacerbate desertification.  In that regard, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) offered a platform for adaptation, mitigation and resilience.

The panellists were:  Uriel Safriel, UNCCD focal point for Israel; Jeff Herrick, Research Scientist, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service; Sanjay Kumar, Deputy Inspector General, Ministry of Natural Resources, India; Nancy Kgengwenyane, Deputy Chief of Party, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Integrated River Basin Management Project.

Setting the stage with a technical overview, Mr. SAFRIEL said land degradation and desertification were inextricably linked, but desertification was mainly confined to drylands, expressed in a reduction of biological productivity.  That definition had been adopted by UNCCD, but it should include “persistent” reduction of biological productivity, especially when assessing the global scale of desertification.

He stressed that climate change was slowly but surely increasing the spatial extent of drylands, and exacerbating conditions in current dryland and arid areas, thus leading to further loss of productivity and biodiversity.  Addressing that required the urgent and full implementation of the three “ Rio” Conventions:  UNCCD; the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); and the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.

Mr. HERRIK recommended measures to mitigate the impact of desertification in arid and humid regions, stressing that two of the main challenges to addressing desertification were funnelling adequate resources to tackling the phenomenon, and following up to identify strategies that worked and those that did not.  The infrequency of such assessments often led to repeating the same mistakes over and over again.  Base assessments should integrate soil conditions with local knowledge of land areas.  Monitoring plant cover and spacing (for wind erosion and soil erosion) could also assist with the development of early warning strategies.

Mr. KUMAR, noting that one fourth of India’s land mass was under pressure from desertification, said there was a strong correlation between poverty and desertification.  While it was unclear whether poverty caused or was caused by desertification, India’s experience revealed that food insecurity was indeed higher in areas where the land was drying up.  The country’s response focused on addressing immediate needs, increased resilience and improved levels of drought preparedness.

Ms. KGENGWENYANE provided the African perspective, saying there was no question that agricultural practices exacerbated by over-cultivation and over-grazing continued to contribute to desertification across the continent.  Moreover, given the gaps in responses intended effectively to manage the phenomenon, there was a need for comprehensive efforts to finding viable solutions that could filter down to community and “farm-gate” levels.

Describing agriculture as a major tool for Africa’s development, she said it would be crucial to identify a holistic approach to agricultural practices and development, including raising public awareness about the links between agricultural practices and desertification.  To that end, robust institutional structures and frameworks were needed to address different factors connected to agricultural practices and desertification.  Investment in research and development of appropriate and accessible technology should also be scaled up.  Finally, major efforts should be made to promote the creation of an enabling environment for innovative communal-level practices to flourish.

When the floor was opened for comments and statements, audience members agreed that desertification was taking place much faster worldwide than it had done historically, and it usually arose from the demands of increased populations, crop growth or animal grazing.  So, while over-grazing, over-cultivation and deforestation remained the primary reasons for desertification, global warming was definitely a key driver in the new millennium.

Several speakers from remote areas in the developing world stressed that poor grazing management and destruction of vegetation in arid regions, often for fuelwood, led to desertification by reducing or eliminating the plants that helped to bind the soil.  As protective plant cover disappeared, floods became more frequent and severe.  Desertification thus became a self-reinforcing process and once it began, conditions were set for continual deterioration.

Some speakers suggested that new farming practices, such as encouraging forests in dryland areas, were simple measures that could remove more carbon from the atmosphere while preventing the spread of deserts.  Others called on donors to help dryland dwellers by providing alternative livelihoods that did not exert pressure on scarce natural resources.  Rather than traditional cropping based on irrigation or cattle farming, where it was appropriate, some local communities in arid areas could be helped with resources to explore alternative ventures.  Throughout the discussion, participants stressed the importance of fully implementing UNCCD, with speakers from the developing world repeatedly stressing the need to explore innovative methods and incentives for mobilizing and channelling resources.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record