Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
CA policies. Since CA is a systems approach, policy impacts are numerous and
interrelated.
At an agriculture sector level, CA is compatible with robust policies for innova-
tion, technologies, diversity, resource conservation, enterprise risk management, and
community development. Policy research and analysis is needed to identify sector
policies and institutions that publically fund policies that are counter to CA adop-
tion, societal values, and government directions. For example, some governments
have historically had fuel subsidies for farmers to reduce costs (and lower income
risks). With increasing fuel costs, the burden on society is projected to increase. CA
realizes fossil fuel savings, so the argument for a subsidy diminishes. Crop insurance
programs are another example where historic policies favor conventional cultivation
systems over CA.
The private sector is another rapidly emerging champion of CA systems. Large
retailers have adopted sustainability policies and are starting to require simple cer-
tification or proof of production practices. Practices favored are often components
of CA systems, or conversely, full CA is the optimization of the desired production
characteristics. The early work in life cycle analysis focused upon carbon, GHGs, or
energy. More recently, work has moved toward more comprehensive or encompass-
ing approaches such as environmental footprints. Again, CA profiles more favorably
than conventional production systems. Financial institutions are other players in the
private sector that are increasingly looking at production practices of clients, includ-
ing agriculture, from an environmental risk perspective and innovation in market
opportunities. CA receives high marks. The private sector is unique in that it can
formulate and implement policies much more quickly than governments. The private
sector has leading players in CA policy that governments need to pay attention to.
Thus, it is necessary to ensure that all relevant institutions in both private and
public sectors and at all scales (international to local) have a clear awareness of the
basic agroecological and socioeconomic principles upon which sustainable land use
is based, and of the ways in which each institution's particular interests and responsi-
bilities may be able to support and embody the CA principles. This commonality of
underlying concern with the care of land, underpinning policy cohesion, will facili-
tate the needed interdisciplinary collaborations to be undertaken with farmers and
other land users, and the alignment and linkages of new progressive policies.
Agricultural development policy can and should therefore have a clear commit-
ment to sustainable soil management and production intensification. Best sustain-
able systems cannot be devised based on high-soil-disturbance agriculture. Where
agriculture development is maintained by tillage systems, it will generally not be
possible to maintain production intensification as well as to continue to deliver eco-
system services because of suppression of soil biotic capacities for self-repeating
soil structure regeneration. Hence, all agricultural development activities dealing
with crop production intensification should be assessed for their compatibility with
dynamic ecosystem functions and their desired services. Any environmental man-
agement schemes in agriculture, including certification protocols and payments for
environmental services that do not promote the emulation of CA principles and prac-
tices as a basis for sustainable soil management, are unlikely to be economically
and environmentally sustainable in the long run. This does not mean that non-CA
Search WWH ::
Custom Search