The richest natural resource

Why is agricultural biodiversity important?

Agricultural biodiversity is a key natural resource in the provision of food, fuel, fibre, pharmaceuticals and much more. Agricultural biodiversity also regulates environmental variability, supports important ecological functions, such as soil formation and water cycling, and is an essential component of cultural identity and diversity.
All crop and livestock improvement, both through breeding and biotechnology and also through the age-old processes of selection by local farmers, is based on agricultural biodiversity.

What are the biggest threats to biodiversity? And why is it important that we do something to conserve biodiversity now?

It is very difficult to give a single ranking for ‘threats to agricultural biodiversity’ because so much depends on the specific circumstances. In some places habitat destruction and conversion threatens crops and the wild relatives of existing crops. Drainage, for example, or irrigation, can displace the biodiversity that used to thrive in those places. In other places, the spread of new varieties, often the product of advanced breeding programmes, displaces traditional and more reliable landrace varieties that farmers have depended on. By the time the farmers discover that the old varieties may have been more reliable and resilient, they’re gone, unless they’ve been conserved somewhere else. Development and growing urbanization can also be major threats to biodiversity.

Why is it important to conserve the biodiversity of crops in ACP countries?

Some crop species are simply unknown elsewhere. Fonio (Digitaria exilis) is peculiar to the drier parts of the Sahel. In the Caribbean, there are hot peppers (Capsicum species) that are adapted to the conditions there, and often you find more different varieties in a single home garden in many ACP countries than in a whole country elsewhere in the world. These regions are particularly rich in agricultural biodiversity.

Should small-scale farmers in ACP countries be concerned about biodiversity?

In the simplest case, a farmer may grow two varieties of sorghum; one in the bottom lands where it gets adequate water, one at the top of the valley where it gets less water. Maybe sometimes it rains too much, and the lower one is washed away. The upper one thrives. Or there may be a drought, and the upper one fails. Replace those with a single variety that is supposed to be grown in both places, and the crop is at risk from both floods and droughts. Having several varieties, and several crops, is a form of insurance policy.

Can those farmers help to conserve biodiversity? Is the preservation of biodiversity purely for scientists and international institutions, like Bioversity International?

Farmers, especially small-scale farmers, are crucial to conserving biodiversity. We already know that small farmers conserve more biodiversity than was previously believed. What they need is a good reason to do so, one that can counter the promises made by big seed companies and government ‘experts’.
The efforts of farmers in conserving biodiversity need to be supported and complemented by national agriculture research programmes and gene banks, and also by organizations such as Bioversity International.

There is often conflict in many countries between conservation and agriculture? Is it possible, through promoting biodiversity, that the two could exist side-by-side?

Conservationists have tended to see farmers as the enemy, with a ‘fence everyone out’ attitude. But the fact is that farmers, pastoralists, forest dwellers and others manage a sizable portion of the Earth’s surface, and it would be much more constructive to work together so that farmers can conserve biodiversity. In this way, farmers will help to conserve other life forms and ecosystems too. I’ve heard it said that intensive agriculture with fertilizers and other high tech solutions would leave more ‘wilderness’ for conservation. But what will the effect of intensive agriculture be on the wilderness and on the environment in general?

Within agriculture, there is often great debate between organic farmers and those promoting monoculture techniques? Is there one single farming method that is better for preserving biodiversity?

No. And the dichotomy that is set up between ‘organic’ and ‘intensive’ is a false one. We need elements of both to ensure sustainable food security, with not only adequate calories and protein, but also the micronutrients that are absolutely essential for a healthy life. Small, diverse farmers conserve agricultural biodiversity directly in the way they manage their crops and livestock. Intensive monocultures need agricultural biodiversity too, to breed the new varieties. They don’t preserve it themselves, but they create the demand that encourages others to do so.

Could genetically modified crop varieties solve the problems of productivity and climate change we might face in the future?

I do not believe that genetically modified organisms have the capacity to solve the problems of productivity and climate change of the future on their own. Our genetic resources provide the basis for how we adapt to the effects of climate change and other global challenges. Therefore, we need to ensure that these resources are being used appropriately today, and also conserved for tomorrow. Where will the raw materials for modifying varieties come from if not from conserved agricultural biodiversity? If just a little bit of the money and commitment that currently goes into genetic modification went into research into the better use of agricultural biodiversity, I believe that we would be well on the way now to truly sustainable food security.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Dr Kwesi Atta–Krah is deputy director general of Bioversity International (www.bioversityinternational.org)