NGO "ANOTHER WAY" (STICHTING BAKENS VERZET), NETHERLANDS, SUSTAINABLE INTEGRATED SELF-FINANCING DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT TECHNOLOGIES

“The U.S. has 36 million acres of lawn. We raise horses for recreational use on another 35 million acres. On those acres alone, using common-sense organic and regenerative farming practices, we could feed the world.” (Organic Consumers Association, organicconsumers.org, Finland (MN), Newsletter 07 August, 2014.

Agricultural production and food security and food sovereignty.

SIX PILLARS OF FOOD SOVEREIGNTY.

Focuses on Food for People, putting the right to food at the centre of food, agriculture, livestock and fisheries policies; and rejects the proposition that food is just another commodity or component for international agri-business.

Values Food Providers and respects their rights; and rejects those policies, actions and programmes that undervalue them, threaten their livelihoods and eliminate them.

Localises Food Systems, bringing food providers and consumers closer together; and rejects governance structures, agreements and practices that depend on and promote unsustainable and inequitable international trade and give power to remote and unaccountable corporations.

Puts Control Locally over territory, land, grazing, water, seeds, livestock and fish populations; and rejects the privatisation of natural resources through laws, commercial contracts and intellectual property rights regimes.

Builds Knowledge and Skills that conserve, develop and manage localised food production and harvesting systems; and rejects technologies that undermine, threaten or contaminate these, e.g. genetic engineering.

Works with Nature in diverse, agroecological production and harvesting methods that maximise ecosystem functions and improve resilience and adaptation, especially in the face of climate change; and rejects energy-intensive industrialised methods which damage the environment and contribute to global warming.

Mulvany, P., Food sovereignty comes of age, Food Ethics, Vol. 2, Issue 3, Autumn 2007, Food Ethics Council, Brighton, 2007.

“Earth democracy : Seed Sovereignty (Beej Swaraj), Food Sovereignty (Anna Swaraj), Water Sovereignty (Jal Swaraj) and Land Sovereignty (Bhu Swaraj). ” (Navdanya Movement website, 20 September, 2011.)

“Society is undermining the ecological foundation of its own food system.” (Avoiding Future Famines : Strengthening the Ecological Foundation of Food Security through Sustainable Food Systems, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, June, 2012, executive summary p. vii). ISBN 978-92-807-3261-0.)

“As a rough estimate 100 calories of externally provided energy (mainly fossil fuels) are needed to produce 10 calories of food.” (idem, p. 8).

“The total quantity of food produced globally on an annual basis is currently about four billion metric tonnes,[14] of which it is estimated that 30–50%, or 1.2–2 billion metric tonnes, is lost or wasted every year before consumption.” (Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Global Food : Waste Not, Want Not, London, January 2013, p. 7). “…initiatives [need] to be taken to reduce the substantial quantity of food wasted annually around the world. The potential to provide 60–100% more food by simply eliminating losses, while simultaneously freeing up land, energy and water resources for other uses, is an opportunity that should not be ignored.” (Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Global Food : Waste Not, Want Not, London, January 2013, p. 5)

“Ensuring the right to food requires the possibility either to feed oneself directly from productive land or other natural resources, or to purchase food. This implies ensuring that food is available, accessible and adequate. Availability relates to there being sufficient food on the market to meet the needs. Accessibility requires both physical and economic access: physical accessibility means that food should be accessible to all people, including the physically vulnerable such as children, older persons or persons with disabilities; economic accessibility means that food must be affordable without compromising other basic needs such as education fees, medical care or housing. Adequacy requires that food satisfy dietary needs (factoring a person’s age, living conditions, health, occupation, sex, etc), be safe for human consumption, free of adverse substances and culturally acceptable. Participation of food-insecure groups in the design and implementation of the policies that most affect them is also a key dimension of the right to food.” (De Schutter O., The right to food, Report A/HRC/16/49 submitted for agenda item 3 “Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development”, of the 16th session of the Human Rights Council, United Nations General Assembly, New York, 20th December, 2010. )

“Often only very basic interventions will prevent losses, which generally occur close to where the crops are grown and are the result of lack of expertise, incentive or the ability to adopt preventative measures ….. For cereal grains, pulses and oil seeds, losses commonly occur due to grain scattering or as a result of bio-deterioration caused by various pest activity. Cumulative losses of cereals grains in sub-Saharan Africa typically range from 14 to 17%, with a potential value of around US$ 4 billion per annum. For roots and tubers such as cassava, yams, sweet potatoes, etc, post-harvest losses are of the same order of magnitude. For example, Africa-wide cassava losses in 2002 were estimated to be about 18% or 101 million tonnes. Here, poor handling, marketing and transport are a particular problem.

There are few accurate loss figures available for fruit and vegetables. Unlike grains, there are no generally accepted methods for assessing losses of fresh produce. Individual case studies give losses ranging from 0% to 100%.

“Losses of the very perishable animal and fishery products can be very high, although surprisingly few reliable studies are available. Aggregated figures for Africa suggest that for fish, financial losses would be at least US$ 70 million for each percentage point of loss.” ( Growing out of poverty : A UK Parliamentary Inquiry into supporting and dveloping African agriculture, All Party Parliamentary Group on Agriculture and Food for Development, London, December 2011, p. 29.)

The leading reference on modern agriculture is Agriculture at a Crossroads, The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), Ed. McIntyre B. et al, Island Press, Washington, 2009. ISBN 978-1-59726-539-3. Each of the 8 chapters of this ambitious document (606 pages) is accompanied by an extensive and qualified list of references.

While times have since changed for the worse and some new factors have taken on greater importance, basic food security issues were extensively discussed in chapter 5 of the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development : Our Common Future [the Brundtland Report], United Nations, New York 1987.

“- peasant agriculture, family farming, artisanal fishing and indigenous food procurement systems that are based on ecological methods and short marketing circuits are the ways forward toward sustainable, healthy and livelihood-enhancing food systems; ” (It’s time to outlaw landgrabbing, not to make it “responsible”, GRAIN, Barcelona (Spain) and Los Baños (Philippines), 17 April, 2011.)

This work incorporates the principles set out in Towards Food Sovereignty : A Future without Hunger, Pimbert M., IIED, London, 2008 (Courtesy IIED London.).

The Model sets up practical structures enabling the principles to be applied.

See also how “ women often end up being the shock absorbers of food security” in Quisumbing A. and others, Helping Women Respond to the Global Food Price Crisis, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Policy Brief 7, Washington, October 2008.

For the effects of “globalisation” on Food Security see Wise T.A., The True Cost of Cheap Food, Resurgence Magazine, Issue 259, March/April 2010, Resurgence Trust, Bideford, 2010. The author concludes:

“Societies need to determine their own human values, not let the market do it for them. There are some essential things, such as our land and the life-sustaining foods it can produce, that should not be cheapened.”

For an analysis of the effects of land-grabbing by foreign organisations see: Odeny E. and others (editors), Landgrabbing in Kenya and Mozambique, Food First Information and Action Network (FIAN), Heidelberg, April 2010.

For a general update on the world situation in relation to food sovereignty see Ho. M, Biofuels and World Hunger, Institute of Science in Society (ISIS), London, November 2010.

For the effects of the use of (genetically modified) corn for ethanol on the costs of food imported into developing countries see T.A.Wise, The Cost to Developing Countries of U.S. Corn Ethanol Expansion, Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts University, Working Paper 12-02, Medford, October 2012.

For a review of losses and wastage in the food chain, see Lundkvist J. and others, Saving Water : From Field to Fork - Curbing Losses and Wastage in the Food Chain, Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), SIWI Brief, Stockholm, 2008. The review tends to be industry-biased, with a positive evaluation of the Green Revolution and a call for industrial initiative (Davos). It indicates a 50% loss of food from field to fork (Fig. 7, p.22) cited from Smil (2000) Feed the World : A Challenge for the Twenty-First Century, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 2000. It indicates a water requirement of 0.5m3 per 100 Kcal of plant-based food, and 4m3 of water per 100 Kcal of animal based food (this last representing 5-10 tonnes of water per kg of food). Fig. 3 on p. 12 indicates water requirements for food consumption of up to 6.5m3 per person per day in industrialised countries and between 1 and 2 m3 in developing countries.

International speculation in food-based derivatives was described in Knaup, J. et al in Der Spiegel Online International on 09 January, 2011. The article has four parts:

How Global Investors Make Money out of Hunger (Part 1).

Every Bubble Needs a Story (Part 2).

Number of Speculators will Continue to Grow (Part 3).

“It’s the Government’s Responsibility to Feed the People.”(Part 4).

For more detail on food commodities speculation see de Schutter, O. : Food Commodities Speculation and Food Price Crises : Regulation to reduce the risk of price volatility, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Briefing Note 02, New York, September, 2010. (The note includes a detailed list of references on the subject.)

First considerations.

“The neoliberal model assumes that a low- or middle-income nation’s best option is that of fitting into the economic position allotted to it by richer countries and financial institutions. If the American Midwest can grow massive amounts of corn, the rationale goes, then it should grow corn for the world, while Colombian farmers export coffee, Brazilian farmers bananas, and so on. Along with industrial-scale farming goes monocropping and massive inputs of fuel, fertilizers, and pesticides. Much more than large farmers, the primary beneficiaries are the corporate middle people who consolidate, arrange, package, and ship the food around the world.

“The proponents of this model are the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO), governments of industrialized countries, large landholders, and corporations. They insist that global South countries lower agricultural tariffs on food coming into their countries so as to open their markets to foreign trade. They also pressure countries to eliminate agricultural subsidies, even though many high-income countries like the U.S. maintain large subsidies of their own. These measures undermine local production and the livelihoods of the world’s small-scale farmers who cannot compete on an uneven playing field with corporate giants.

“A food system that depends on importing and exporting goods around the globe leaves everyone more vulnerable to the whims of global market forces. When oil prices rise, for example, communities and countries who can’t afford the resulting price spikes in food, or who no longer have their own strong agricultural systems in place, are left hungry. ( Field, T., Bell, B., Food Sovereignty : Think Globally, Eat Locally, Other Worlds Are Possible, New Orleans, 17 February, 2013.)

“Agriculture and rural development is not just about food security. It is a pathway to wealth creation and economic growth. It is the basis for social cohesion. It is the provider of employment. It is the foundation for political stability and the precursor for global peace and security”. (Nwanze K.F., Speech at the 93rd Session of the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States) Council of Ministers, ACP House, Brussels, 27 May, 2011, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Rome, 2011.

“Apparently striking data shows that average yields for cereals on small farms in Africa are less than two tonnes per hectare, compared with a world average which is twice as high. But smallholder farms often have low yields precisely because they use the factors of production more sparingly. Small farms in Africa use tiny amounts of fertilizer – about one-eighteenth of those in India, for example. They use labour rather than capital, and less than five per cent of the cultivated area is irrigated. Furthermore, small farmers can only dream of the lavish subsidies showered upon many large-scale farms. Accounting for these other factors in the productivity calculation massively narrows the gap. Put another way: if small farmers had the inputs, irrigation, and subsidies enjoyed by large farms, things would look very different. This is why surveys often find that, when the focus is shifted from yields to total productivity, small farms are found to be more efficient.” (Bailey, R., Growing a Better Future – Food Justice in a Resource-Constrained World, Oxfam International, London, July 2011, p. 548.)

Contrary to what industrial farmers and big business claim, the larger and more mechanized farms are, the less efficient they are and the higher their ecological footprint. On this subject read Vandana Shiva’s article Small is really beautiful in the Asian Age, 01 January 2014. The projects cover many agriculture-related aspects, such as the management of communal lands, the sustainable recycling of wastes, local production for local consumption and the production of bio-mass for high efficiency cookers. They do not expressly provide for pastoralist activities. However, sustainable pastoralism as it described for instance in I. Köhler-Rollefson’s policy paper Capitalising on pastoralism to feed people and achieve livestock sector sustainability (League for Pastoral Peoples and Endogenous Livestock Development, Ober-Ramstadt, March 2013 ) is not incompatible with the principles of integrated development.

The projects promote local production for local consumption. It is based on the concept that the first duty of the inhabitants is to ensure through their own efforts a good quality of life for all in the project area. The anthropological dimensions of the projects, with their first level at 200-250 persons, their second level at 1500 persons, and their third level at 50.000 persons, permit diversification of and specialisation in local production. Through the plant nurseries and the seed banks set up, the choice of products will be gradually widened, starting with traditional local products and continuing with the acclimatisation of more ’’exotic’ ones.

The introduction of local exchange systems will release farmers from seasonal economic pressures. They can accumulate local money debits for seed and costs during the crop growing period, according to the natural rhythm of their activities. The interest-free micro-credit system enables them where necessary access to funds for the purchase of seeds for which formal money must be found. In this case they must be able to sell a part of their production for formal money outside the project area to repay their micro-credits.

The projects privileges local private and cooperative production for family and local consumption and use of the financial structures created for this purpose. They therefore tend to act against large-scale monoculture activities. The projects are formally apolitical. They will not directly or indirectly support either industrial activities or the importation of fertilisers into the project area, an important cause of financial leakage. They will privilege the creation of alternatives to them, including the 100% useful local recycling of waste products. Full freedom for industrial activities and the importation of fertilisers remains under the traditional formal money system which continues to operate in parallel with the local money system set up by the project.

Cook organically, not the planet.

According to R. Cummins, in World Food Day : Cook Organic, Not the Planet (commondreams.org, Portland (Maine), 16 October, 2013) “If we’re going to cool the earth, we must:

• Phase out factory farms, junk food and industrial-scale, genetically engineered agriculture, and replace them with non-chemical organic farming, and non-factory-farm carbon ranching, where free-range animals are rotationally grazed on deep-rooted, carbon-sequestering perennial grasses. Not caged or intensively confined and fed genetically engineered grains.

• Prepare more organic whole foods at home, and reject fast-food outlets.

• Replace our lawns with urban gardens.

• Reduce excess consumption and recycle our wastes—all our wastes, rural and urban, including food, crop, and yard wastes - to make compost and eliminate the hazardous use of sewage sludge and nitrous oxide-polluting chemical fertilizers.

• Halt the deforestation and slash-and-burn agriculture, especially in tropical and sub-tropical areas, and rapidly scale up the production of biochar, a special type of charcoal that sequesters carbon and increases soil fertility and moisture retention.

• Educate ourselves and mobilize a grassroots army to transform marketplace practices and public policy.

• Create a globally coordinated Works Project Administration to train and employ a massive “Johnny Appleseed” green corps of students and the unemployed to plant a trillion trees on public and private land, restore desertified areas, and create the green infrastructure of a post-carbon economy.

• Start incorporating the science of biochar into our agriculture and climate-stabilizing practices.”

Management of communal lands.

The local exchange systems set up in an early phase of project execution enables the creation of classes and groups of owners of real and personal goods. For instance, benefits from the use of communal lands by nomad pastoralists or the revenues from the sale of wood from communal land can, subject to the decision of the responsible organs, be divided amongst the members of the groups in question. The costs of the management of communal lands and things can also be distributed amongst the members of the group of owners. In principle, collectively owned property remains inalienable. The same applies to mineral rights subject to application of national laws. For example, gypsum or anhydrite deposits found in the project zone are the property of the inhabitants in the tank commission area or the well commission area where the deposits are found. The deposits are managed by the groups themselves. The project structures therefore make it possible to formalise the management of traditional possessions without directly changing any of the rights attached to them.

Waste recycling structures.

The recycling of organic material (urine and faeces) involves both traditional agricultural activity and activities at household level. In larger villages, it automatically becomes a sort of urban agriculture. The main purpose of it is to recycle the 7.5 litres of urine per produced by an average family of five members each day with at least 75 litres of the filtered grey water they use. This is sufficient for household, vertical or roof-top gardens capable of producing a good part, if not all, of the food requirements of the families. Collection of urine and grey water under the local money systems set up is also an option available to members. Material collected is used in market gardens situated near the villages. The collection is organised at the level of the (usually about 200) tank commissions in each project area. Faeces are composted on site. Once composted (see the project for complete details) they can be moved without risk for use as soil conditioners in household, vertical or roof-top gardens or taken to local market gardens near the villages.

The system for the collection of recycling of waste waters, urine, excreta, other organic solids, non-organic solids will be set up during Moraisian organisation workshops held for the purpose.

The operations will take place under the local money LETS systems. A separate interest-free credit fund is provided in the budget for purchase of equipment which is not available locally and/or which has to be paid for in formal currency. In principle, the equipment used should not require the consumption of imported energy (electricity, diesel, petrol etc) which causes an on-going financial leakage from the project area. Transport distances should be kept as short as possible.

The following drawings and graphs form an integral part of each project proposal :

Drawing of waste disposal structures.

Drawing of composting toilet tank made from gypsum composites.

For detailed technical information on the treatment of grey water see :

(Information to be inserted.)

The main principles behind the proposed system are:

(a) Recycling should always be done at the lowest possible level, starting with the individual user.

(b) Recycling at a second level should also be done as late as possible during the composting cycle to reduce the volume of material handled and to increase safety in its handling.

(d) Capital investment for recycling equipment, transport and storage will be a priority for Micro-credit loans.

(e) "Dirty" work will be better paid than "clean" work in the LETS systems, because the rate of pay will reflect the willingness of workers to do the work. Those doing “unpleasant” work will have an above-average income within the LETS systems so that there should be no difficulty finding people to do the work.

(f) Waste should, as far as possible, be recycled within the project area so communities are self-sufficient and there is no leakage of formal money from the system. In particular, materials like metals, paper, plastics can often be treated at local level for use in local industries creating jobs and local value added during both treatment and production. The principle also promotes the export of re-cycled products for formal currency which will be used to repay the interest free micro-credits loans.

(g) Lucrative job possibilities are created within the system.

(h) Export and sale of selected non-organic solid waste through the recycling centres for formal currency so micro-credits for re-cycling operation can be repaid.

(i) Selected non-organic solid waste products will treated locally and recycled as raw material for local artisan industries.

(j) Interest free micro-loans for compost collection equipment may need to be for a longer term than other micro-credits as most of the compost will be recycled within the local currency system. Some of the compost collection charges may have to be in formal currency or the equipment may need to be used part-time outside the LETS systems to help earn formal currency to repay the micro-credit loans.

(k) Recycling of special industrial and medical wastes to be addressed separately.

(l) The use of throw-away waste products without value added, such as product packaging, is discouraged.

(m) Repairable goods will be repaired at project level under the local money LETS system set up. Spare parts not locally available will be charged in formal money at their original imported formal money price.

Use of composted faeces.

Faeces are composted without the addition of any fresh material for as long as possible, but not less than for 12 months, during which it is aerobically transformed into a high quality safe soil conditioner. It can then be recycled at home in vertical or roof gardens if there are any. If there are cultural problems relating to recycling of the compost at household level, it can be moved under the local money system for local use in agriculture without health risk and without risk of contamination of water resources. It is a matter of moving small amounts of material (about one wheelbarrow full per person per year) over short distances for local use.

Recycling of urine and food security.

“Man is the most extravagant accelerator of waste the world has ever endured. His withering blight has fallen upon every living thing within his reach, himself not excepted; and his besom of destruction in the uncontrolled hands of a generation has swept into the sea soil fertility which only centuries of life could accumulate, and yet this fertility is the substratum of all that is living.” (F.M. King, The Utilization of Waste, Chapter 9 of Farmers of Forty Centuries, Or Permanent Agriculture in China, Korea, and Japan, published Mrs C.B. King, 1911.) (Courtesy Earthly Pursuits website, accessed 19 January, 2012).

The urine tanks will have to be emptied regularly unless evaporation systems are used. Wet systems are preferred because they create more value added in terms of increased garden production. Urine, with a little lime sawdust or equivalent added regularly, can in principle be used systematically for watering plants as long as it is diluted with 10 parts of water or grey water to one part of urine, substantially increasing the productivity of the garden.

The small quantities of water in containers used by urinal users for urinal cleaning and for personal hygiene will be added to the urine tanks.

Toilets and san-plats are designed to separate urine from faeces. Where desired, urinals will be available for use by men and boys. Small amounts of water entering the urine tanks as a result of personal washing practices and (where applicable) urinal washing do not harm the system. Small amounts of ash (from the high efficiency cookers used) can be regularly added to the urine tanks.

In some cases urine, in particular that of pregnant women and of women breast-feeding their children may have a high formal money value for the pharmaceuticals industry. Unfortunately in the case of this project the exploitation of this potential does not appear to exist.

The recycling of urine is usually coupled with that of household grey water. It is not necessary to add “fresh” water to the urine. Household grey water, put through a simple filter to remove eventual fats content, can be mixed with urine at household level. Households without garden but with a flat roof can install vertical gardens made from gypsum composites and use them to increase their own food production potential.

Users unable to re-cycle the urine from their tanks and who do not use evaporation systems will have to arrange for the urine tanks to be emptied periodically under the local LETS systems for re-cycling within the project area.

Urine is in principle sterile, but can contain pathogens where users are ill. While risk of contamination is thought to be low, users may wish to provide for a double tank system offering temporary storage of urine for up to six months when planning their systems. In that case larger storage tanks with a volume of up to 0.75m3 would need to be used.

The amount of water and fertiliser mixture available to households this way is at least 82.5 litres per day. Each person produces about 1.5 litres of urine per day. In a family of five, this is 7.5 litres. The urine is mixed with 10 parts, or 75 litres, of filtered grey water. In practice, all the family grey water can simply be filtered into the urine tank. Since the amount of clean drinking water available is about 25 litres per person per day, this is 125 litres per day per family.

In principle, the 1.5 litres urine produced by each person each day is enough to fertilise 400m2 of land, or 2000m2 for each family of five. This is sufficient to supply most of the family’s food requirements. In practice the urine/grey water mixtures produced will receive more intensive application because of space limitations in on and around users’ homes. In any case, correct recycling of urine and grey water can supply food necessary for basic survival of the family.

For technical information refer to :

List of references to be added.

Other household organic solids.

Household organic wastes not being urine or faeces are usually made up of kitchen and food leftovers. These can cause disagreeable smells if they are thrown indiscriminately into the environment, where they can form a threat to the health of the residents and increase risk of infection from animals and insects.

The wastes are, furthermore, valuable. There are several ways of recycling them usefully. This is a problem in every country in the world. The best way of solving the problem is by keeping animals such as chickens, goats, and, where there are no religious problems, pigs. This way waste products can be recycled into eggs, milk, and meat. For example, once chicken consumes, on an average, kitchen wastes of five people. Since communities served by each of the 297 tank commissions have about 200-250 people, kitchen and food leftovers can be collected once or twice every day by one person in the locality.

This person can keep the animals necessary for the recycling of the wastes, creating a productive activity and at the same time eliminating a serious problem. The income forms an extra source of local money revenue for the person involved who is also free to sell the eggs, milk, or meat for formal money is he or she so wishes.

Household organic solids can also be recycled at household level by aerobic composting in appropriate bins locally made under the local exchange system.

Leftovers are mixed with soil. Once they have composted, they can be added to household gardens or collected by operators working under the local exchange system. Naturally, the leftovers themselves can also be collected by local operators for composting and recycling at tank commission level. Collection would take place under the local money system by farmers who can recycle the compost on their lands. They may even wish to sell the compost back to households.

Kitchen wastes and food leftovers should not be added to the faeces composting tanks as they can already be contaminated by flies and other insects capable of reproducing inside the faeces tanks. Once in there, the only way they can come out is through the toilet seat cover once it is lifted.

Intelligent use of kitchen waste products can directly create important added value to the local economy, even in times of water scarcity. Small animals and poultry need very little water, and can survive of filtered grey water. They can supply food up to the point where, in periods of extended extreme drought, there is no water, not even recycled grey water, left to keep them alive. As a last resort, the animals themselves can form a food resource for the inhabitants in times of prolonged crisis.

System for the collection and storage of compost material.

Individual members at the level of each tank commission will decide which services they feel they can be use. The services provided in one tank commission area may therefore be different from those at another one. The services provided are in any case labour-intensive and will create numerous jobs which will be well paid under the local exchange system.

Collection, storage and recycling systems will be set up during a capacitation workshop which will be held as soon as the local money and micro-credit systems are in place and in operation. The local operators will get priority under the micro-finance structures so they can set up their activities. Item 60703 of the budget provides a small fund to stimulate rapid execution of this part of the project structures.

Food and water security in times of drought and crisis.

In the case of serious drought for extensive periods of from 2 to 3 years no community in the world whether in the North or in the South, whether industrialised or under development would be able to survive without help from outside. In past periods of human history people may sometimes have been free to migrate to areas which had remained green and fertile. Demographic pressures in the modern world are such that this is very rarely an option in our times.

Project areas under the Model undoubtedly enjoy a greater resistance to droughts and other crises than most other communities. However, they cannot offer total guarantees against disaster.

Extensive, systematic, construction of infiltration ditches and similar can be carried out under the local money systems set up in an early phase of each integrated development project. Refer to Duveskog, D (ed), Soil and Water Conservation with a Focus on Water Harvesting and Soil Moisture Retention, Chapter 3 : Overview of water harvesting and soil retention approaches p.5-19, Farm Level Applied Research Methods for East and Southern Africa (FARMESA), Harare, 2003 for basic details on this simple technology.

For example, recommended solar pumps work at total heads up to 150 meters. This allows interested parties working where there is a risk of long-term drought or other serious climatic crises to deepen boreholes to reach a lower (and presumably safer) aquifer. It is also possible to increase the power installed with each pump from 300Wp to 400Wp, to help compensate the higher heads involved. Increase in installed power can also be introduced gradually, according to specific risks or requirements. Should a choice be made to allow extra margins from the beginning, provision should be made under item 70101 (Borehole construction) for an extra sum of Euro 250.000, and under item 70204 (solar PV panels) for an extra sum of Euro 125.000. Since reserves are inadequate to cover these increases, the total project budget should be increased to Euro 5.350.000- Euro 5.500.000.

Under conditions of extended drought for 2-3 years, reserves of harvested rain-water will have run out. There will be no surface water available, and perhaps no water left in rivers. The only water available to the inhabitants will be the 25 litres per person per day from their deep well sources. The system of recycling of urine and grey waters will enable people to recycle this water to produce a minimum food supply in their roof-top or vertical gardens to survive.

The recommended solar pumps also have the feature that they can be installed at any depth below the level of the water in the borehole. It is therefore possible to take strong fluctuations in the water level in the borehole into account to cover situations of severe water draw-down during the day in conditions of slow borehole replenishment. However, where night-time replenishment becomes insufficient to compensate for extra drawings during the day, the quantity of water pumped must be reduced either by turning the PV arrays out of the sun or by reducing the number of pumps in operation. As users start receiving less than 25 litres per person per day their general situation will become more and more critical.

Plant nurseries will be set up under the local money system created by the project. Tens of thousands of fruit and vegetable oil trees will be planted in the project area. The trees will take several years to sink deep roots and create relative immunity from drought conditions. Once they have done this they will form a second source of food in hard times.

Plant nurseries and food safety.

Nurseries, especially for the cultivation of native trees, including fruit trees, will be formed as commercial activities under the local money system set up, with financing of necessary imported items under the interest-free micro-credit structures. In principle, there is no formal money requirement for these activities. Should formal money be needed, the activities would qualify for interest-free micro-credits. For these reasons, there is no specific item in the project balance sheet for the nurseries.

Fruit- and vegetable oil trees will be planted along paths between villages and in public places and placed under the management of needy families. Tens of thousands of trees can be planted in the project area. Once the trees have had time to sink their roots and no longer depend on surface water for survival, they will represent a second important source of food in times of extended drought.

Cooperative seed banks.

“Seeds are the first link in the food chain and the repository of life’s future evolution. As such, it is our inherent duty and responsibility to protect them and to pass them on to future generations. The growing of seed and the free exchange of seed among farmers has been the basis to maintaining biodiversity and our food security.” (Shiva, V. et al, Seed Freedom : A global Citizens’ Report, Navdanya et al, New Delhi, October 2012.)

The project will set one or more seed banks up under the local money system. The seed bank(s) will serve :

1. For the reintroduction and conservation of local and regional plant sorts threatened with extinction.

2. The preparation and conservation of seeds for local farmers.

3. The conservation and reintroduction of traditionally used medicinal plants.

Local farmers can buy seed from the seed banks without needing any formal money. They can also extend their debit limits under the local money system in accordance with their seasonal business cycle.

Useful local food technologies.

Simple and sustainable “rice intensification” techniques greatly improve rice crops yields using a fraction of the seed conventionally required without the use of any chemical fertiliser. The concepts are also applicable to other common crops. For information see: How to help rice plants grow better and produce more : Teach yourself and others, Association Tefy Saina, Antananarivo, Madagascar with Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, about 2000, and Rabenandrasana, J., Revolution in rice intensification in Madagascar, LEISA Magazine, Vol. 15, no.3-4, December 1999, accessed at the Agicultures Network website, Wageningen, 21 March, 2013. The Agricultures Network (agriculturesnetwork.org) dedicated the March 2013 edition (Vol. 29, no. 1) of Farming Matters Magazine to this important subject. See also : J. Vidal, India’s Rice Revolution, The Observer, London, Saturday, 16 February, 2013, which includes a short video (photo) presentation.

Some crops offer can offer year-round healthy food supplements in difficult environments. They are ideally suited for labour-intensive production for local consumption within the framework of the local money systems set up in each project area. They may also be exploited on a small scale for exportation from a project area.

A good general reference for especially useful food crops Africa is : Stone, A. et al, Africa’s indigenous crops, Worldwatch Institute, Washington, January 2011.

The cultivation of the Moringa Oleifera (horseradish) tree is included in the Worldwatch list. Carefully read Growing and processing Moringa Leaves by de Saint Sauveur A. and others, published by the Moringa Association of Ghana and Moringanews, Paris and Accra, January 2010.

For another example, read Snail Farming in West Africa by J.R.Cobbinah and others, Agrodok 47, Agromisa Foundation, Wageningen, 20008.

The development of perennial grains over the medium to longer term appears to offer a fascinating opportunity for the farming of marginal lands in integrated development areas in developing countries. This could be undertaken in cooperation with organisations such as The Land Institute, Salina, (Kansas). Fully documented information on this technology is available at Glover J.D. and others, Increased Food and Ecosystem Security via Perennial Grains together with Supporting drawing, Science Magazine, Vol. 328, no. 5896, pp. 1638-1639, Washington, 25 June 2010.

Locally built zeer pots for food conservation.

Zeer pots are simple traditional conservation systems thought to have originated in North Africa which enable food products to be cooled for a short term in most environments. Delicate foods such as milk and meat can usually be conserved for up to 2 days and other foods for up to 20 days depending on the nature of the food in question. Within the framework of integrated development projects they can be locally made using 100% locally available materials in any project area using the local money system set up there. This means that no formal money resources are needed.

For a general introduction to simple equipment for food conservation see E. Rusten, Understanding Evaporative Cooling, Volunteers in Technical Assistance (VITA), Technical Paper 35, Arlington, 1985. The paper is published by Peter Weir.See his Subject index CD3WD.

For step by step description on how to make zeer pots see Clay Refrigerator on pp. 15-19 of Clay-based technologies, Practical Action, Khartoum, Sudan, August 2007.

For a detailed parametric analysis of zeer pots see Appropedia : Zeer pot refrigeration (design).

More on food storage.

“Smoke, mechanical means of cleaning stores, and chemical insecticides can be used to reduce the risk of infestation [especially by moulds with maize and groundnuts]. There are even notable disparities in the performance of different types of local structure, with better results coming from bamboo structures or when bags are used in combination with a secondary container such as a steel drum surrounded by mud or bricks…..Instead of being dried on the ground, which can be a source of humidity, groundnuts were dried in the sun on locally produced natural-fiber mats. Farmers learned how to judge the completeness of sun drying: shake the kernels to listen for the free movement of the dried nuts. Rather than using plastic or other synthetic bags for storage, which promotes humidity, natural-fiber jute bags were used and were stored on wooden pallets rather than on earthen floors, and insecticide was sprinkled under the pallets to kill pests…...

“[For dairy produce milk] establish rural milk collection centers. Smallholder cattle producers who had never engaged in milk trade can now deliver their surplus milk to the collection centers, which are equipped with cooling facilities that allow the milk to be sold on the market to processors and ultimately to create a self-sustaining business that increases farmers’ income and the availability of locally produced milk.” (Tristram Stuart, Face-to-face interview on Food Waste in Africa, Afronline, Vita Comunicazione Società Cooperativa Sociale, Milan, 10 October, 2012.)

Zaï pits for agriculture in marginal areas.

This simple technology was recently developed in Burkina Faso. It offers a way to grow crops where it would otherwise be impossible or improve production in marginal areas.

The technology has just two “disadvantages” :

1) The labour requirements for digging zaï pits depend on soil types but is in any case high (about 300 man-hours/ha). Their maintenance is also labour-intensive. Pits dug in soils with a high clay fraction or a lot of gravel require less maintenance than pits dug in sandier soils.

2.) Mechanization is impossible. Pits are dug by hand and maintained by hand.

These two “disadvantages” are just what make them particularly suitable for integrated development projects.

Barren common (community-owned) land can be worked by unemployed and/or handicapped people under the local money systems set up in each project area.

Since zai pits harvest moisture, the plants in them can survive during longer dry spells than would normally be the case. They can be prepared during the dry season. This means they are ready for planting as soon as the first rains come. This can help extend the normal growing season. Fields with zai pits do not need to be ploughed.

The technique would also be used for afforestation and reforestation projects.

For details on zaï pits see Kaboré D, and Reij C., The Emergence and Spreading of an Improved Traditional Soil and Water Conservation Practice in Burkina Faso, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Environment and Production Technology Division, Discussion Paper 114, Washington, February 2004, and Essama S., Burkina Faso : the Zaï Technique and Enhanced Agricultural Productivity, Indigenous Knowledge (IK) Notes, No. 80, World Bank Africa, Washington, May 2005.

1. Research.

Make a one-page analysis of the food situation in your project area. Do the people there suffer occasional or endemic hunger? Who suffer? Why? Can you supply statistics?

Farmers will be able to buy seed from the local seed bank without needing any formal money. They will also be able to obtain extensions to their credit limits under the local money systems to be able to cover their requirements linked with the seasonal nature of their activities.

2. Opinion.

In principle, basic materials for growing nearly all the food needed are available at family level .In some factors linked to poverty of section 1 analysis of the causes of poverty in the first block poverty and quality of life the example of a can of peas was given as an example of the industrialisation of the food sector. On one page explain the links between the two subjects.

3. Opinion.

The food industry harvests, processes, and distributes large quantities of food. Industrial operators are often not the producers of the food. That means that the food exists before its entry into the industrial chain.

Make a once page commentary on this observation.

4. Opinion.

“The food crisis is a crisis of the organisation of local production”.

Make a one-page analysis of this statement.

5. Opinion.

Make a one page analysis beginning with the words «The success of the food industry is due to ...... »

Section 4: Food crisis.

In-depth analysis

◄ Fifth block : How fourth block structures solve specific problems.

◄ Main index for the Diploma in Integrated Development (Dip.Int. Dev.)

◄ List of key words.

◄ List of references.