Christian Aid agrees with Paul Collier that the focus must be on people
living in poverty when considering Prince Charles's views on the future
of agriculture (Charles's fantasy farming won't feed Africa's poor,
August 22). A hard-nosed analysis of what will work, rather than any
romantic or ideological approach, is exactly what is needed. Collier
rightly notes it is conventional but unrealistic to say that Africa
needs a chemical-led "green revolution". And we strongly support his
view that increasing the productivity of farmland is crucial, while
expanding the area used is not a long-term option given population and
climate trajectories. Where we differ is over his promotion of a GM-led
revolution.
The evidence is that the highest productivity per acre comes from
smaller farms, even in the absence of sustainable access to markets and
finance. GM technology, requiring greater finance, is likely to militate
in favour of less productive large farms. This would inevitably neglect
the larger part of the African population and is far from guaranteed to
deliver the needed productivity gains.
Our report, Fighting Food Shortages, sets out how structures can be
improved to enhance the stability of prices and of access to markets and
finance for smaller farms. These measures, together with the ability of
governments to protect their markets from heavily subsidised imports,
would not only allow the possibility of greater productivity gains in
food production. It would also do more to allow families to lift
themselves out of poverty, and away from subsistence farming. At least
until there is serious evidence for GM benefits in the fight against
poverty, we should pursue what works now.
Alex Cobham
Policy manager, Christian Aid
|