|
Comparative Study of
Real Costs and Benefits of Different
Co-investigators:
Project work was also carried out by a team of six additional Indian and Canadian research assistants. Duration of project: March 1999 to December 2000
Agricultural Sustainability The expressions 'sustainable development' or simply 'sustainability' have come into wide use around the globe since they were first popularized through the report of the World Commission on Development and the Environment which stated the following ...... make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to fulfil their own needs...' While these terms have frequently been misused to add legitimacy to activities that are clearly unsustainable, this should not deter us from seriously considering their proper meaning and evaluation. In fact, a large number of research studies and project activities have been directed toward the issue, and a broad consensus has developed that sustainability must be considered in the image of a tripod, with support through three sub-issues - economic, social and environmental. In other words, any truly sustainable region, project or activity must be one that over time can be simultaneously justified in economic, social and environmental terms. Obviously this brings into question the basis for assessing each component of the tripartite justification process - making value judgments inevitable. Much of the legitimate debate about sustainability is then focused on choices made about what and how to evaluate each of the sub-issues. One thing is clear however. Every individual situation is unique and calls for its own set of evaluative criteria. Measures developed to study sustainability of may apply only to a limited extent, if at all, to rural areas. Criteria used in India may have only limited application in Canada. It is for this reason that a detailed knowledge of a particular situation is required before proper evaluation can be done. Assessing sustainability (or aspects of sustainability) is carried out at various levels. A macro-sustainability study could involve observing and measuring factors at the level of individual countries, An initiative of this sort has come out of the Global Leaders for Tomorrow Environment Task force of the World Economic Forum at their Annual Meeting held in Davos, Switzerland (2000). Other studies examine sustainability of ecosystems (World Resources - 2000 - 2001, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C., 2000), or sustainability of agriculture on a broad scale (Environmental Sustainability of Canadian Agriculture, Agriculture and Agrifood Canada, 2000). At the other extreme are studies of sustainability done on a much smaller scale, such as of a city (Practices for Sustainable Communities, CMHC, Ottawa, Canada, 2000) or a small region. In the limit, sustainability of an individual person's activities can be evaluated. A well-known approach is the concept of the environmental footprint (Our Ecological Footprint, M. Wackernagel and W. Rees, New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, B.C., 1996) which attempts to measure the environmental impact of an individual's life in terms of the area of land required to support the activities in which that person participates. Each of these types of studies could be said to examine micro-sustainability.
Sustainabillity indicators In every case, whether at the macro- or micro-level, the question arises as to how sustainability should be measured? Or on an even more basic level, can you actually measure sustainability, or should it be merely described in a qualitative way? And so, the question of indicators comes up. Indicators are numerical values that can be used to point to the degree of sustainability of a particular situation. A well-known indicator of national economic activity is the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) which measures the total activity of a nation in purely monetary terms. It can be criticized for the way in which it assesses economica activity. For example, clean-up of a major environmental disaster contributes to the GDP - the more serious the disaster, the larger the apparent positive contribution to economic activity. Leaving aside its obvious limitations, even at best the GDP only relates to one of the legs of the sustainability tripod. There is considerable interest, then, on how to develop indicators that provide a more comprehensive measure of given situations. It is our belief that a weak link in many studies - especially the macro-studies - of sustainability is that they do not take into account the specific and often unique details of the local situation. This is especially true in a country like India where spatial variations of language, culture, and biogeophysical characteristics are so distinct. We therefore believe that micro-sustainability measures are essential important in their own right for describing features within a small region - and as a basis for building up a broader picture of national sustainability. It is with this in mind that we have been working to develop indicators that faithfully enable assessment of sustainability of village activities in and around the Tungabhadra Project (TBP) area in Northern Karnataka, India.
Sustainability of agriculture in the Tungabhadra Project area of Karnataka In India, changes in agricultural practices are occurring rapidly and a variety of food and fibre production systems co-exist in near proximity throughout the country. With its large population, India must assure that there is high productivity of all the essential crops, and to a great extent this has been achieved in the past 30 years. Yet, at the same time, food security can be guaranteed only if socially, economically and environmentally sustainable agricultural practices are followed. The present study examines, in a holistic manner, issues of sustainability of the agricultural systems used in and around the Tungabhadra Project (TBP) area of South India, The TBP is situated in a semi-arid region of Northern Karnataka State and is the first major irrigation project completed in independent India and serves a command area of some 475 000 ha. The study encompasses four distinct agroecosystems:
The head end of the left bank main canal command area of the TBP, an area supplied with abundant irrigation (Head end) The tail end of the command area, where irrigation is limited (Tail end) An area supplied with irrigation for the past 600 years through the ancient Vijayanagara canal system (Ancient) The rainfed area adjacent to the TBP (Rainfed) Within each of these agroecosystems, three villages were chosen for detailed study. In each village, discussions were held with ten farmers and their family members in order to gather information about farming practices, economic issues, domestic matters and a variety of environmental factors. A central feature of the study was to obtain detailed quantitative energy, nutrient and economic information about all the activities and inputs (chemical products, biological materials, human labour, animal labour and mechanical devices) used in the agricultural production processes. In all, more than eight hundred data sets for individual crops were obtained. Supporting information was acquired via government statistics, field and remote mapping, measurements of soil and water quality, studies of insect populations, a survey of pesticide use practices, a study of domestic activities, and discussions with older men. Using the information obtained, the study examines sustainability under the headings of productivity, stability, efficiency, durability, compatibility and equity. A set of thirty five quantitative indicators was developed that allows for estimation and comparison of these categories of sustainability and of the overall sustainability within each system. This approach has enabled the identification of agricultural practices that are problematic in terms of their long-term sustainability. More positively, in other areas, highly productive yet environmentally and socially sustainable practices were also observed.
Indicator data from the TBP area Within each indicator category, individual values were scaled over a range of 0 to 10, with more sustainable measurements being assigned higher values. A summary of the findings for the four agroecosystems is given here.
Productivity: Productivity is a measure of the average output of a given area in terms of yield as well as in profit to the farmer. We maintain that a sustainable system must be a productive one in order to provide the farmer and his/her hired coworkers with an acceptable individual and family livelihood. A high level of productivity is also a prerequisite for feeding the wider population. Our indicators considered yield in the given area with respect to all-India benchmark values. They also measured crop value per cropping season per hectare and total farm income. The agroecosystem values were as follows:- Head end 8.5 Tail end 3.5 Ancient 8.7 Rainfed 3.0 It is obvious and not surprising that productivity is enhanced in the areas well supplied with water. The high level of productivity is also a reflection of the knowledge and skill developed by the farmers in taking advantage of an irrigated agricultural situation.
Stability: Stability measures the ability to maintain good levels of productivity over extended periods of time. To measure this we used historic yield data for the past 20 years and determined its variability in crop yields, a stable system being one that shows minimal variability. We also measured soil properties in the various areas, as a means of determining if the nutrient status was sufficient to support continued cropping. A common problem in irrigated areas is the development of waterlogging and salinity in poorly drained regions, and so a salinity index was included in the stability calculation.
Head end 6.8 Tail end 6.4 Ancient 7.5 Rainfed 5.7 Some level of stability is achieved by having an assured water supply through the irrigation systems. To some extent, however, this was offset by apparent nutrient depletion and encroaching soil salinity in the head end of the command area.
Efficiency: Efficiency in agriculture is a measure of the productive use of resources that make up the inputs used to grow a crop. We determined energy input / output ratios, renewable energy use and added nutrient (nitrogen) use. The productive areas again showed good energy use efficiency but, at the same time, most of the energy inputs were nonrenewable forms. There was more efficient use of added nutrients and of renewable energy in the other settings.
Durability. This category is often referred to as resilience and indicates the system's ability to resist environmental stress. In the TBP area the principal stressors are (usually lack of) water and insect pests. A durable system has an intrinsic ability to thrive, even if the stress is present. Again, irrigation provides insurance against the possibility of lack of rainfall. However, in the tail end of the command area, the irrigation is itself somewhat uncertain. The situation with regard to insect pests is especially striking. In the head end, the average number of sprayings of paddy crops each year was found to be 18, while in the ancient area (with equivalent productivity) fewer than 2 sprayings were used. Intermediate values were measured in the other two agroecosystems. Information from the farmers in the Vijayanagara canal region indicated a widespread interest in more 'organic' methods of farming and a conscious decision to avoid overuse of non-renewable chemical inputs. Instead, they rely on methods of integrated pest management especially by using varied cropping and crop rotation. The fact that, in this area, productivity was nearly equivalent to that in the more intensively farmed head end shows that productivity need not be compromised by those who consider environmental sustainability to be an important issue.
Compatibility: In its broadest sense, compatibility is a measre of how well the agroecosytem fits in with its human, cultural and environmental surroundings. To measure it, we have considered health issues by evaluating the frequency of malaria and by determining potential human toxicity problems from the use of biocides. We have also considered ecological aspects using remote sensing technology. This allowed us to determine the fraction of natural (uncultivated) area in each region, and the diversity of crops over time and space. Once again, there was a striking difference evident between the intensely cropped head end and the Vijayanagara areas , in terms of the degree of biodiversity. This relates to the issues that relate to durability, as alluded to above. An unexpected finding was that the incidence of malaria was much lower in the irrigated areas than in the dryland. This may be due to there being high concentrations of residual pesticides in the drainage canals.
Equity: Equity is of course a major issue and we refer to here as meaning the general well being of individuals, their families and theCommunities as a whole. We have at tempted to measure equity by indicators that relate to income ratios, education, 'health and house quality. The results of these assessments are generally rather low, in large part as a result of the uniformly limited levels of education throughout the entire area. Once again, the ancient area stands out as having a better record than was observed in each of the other agroecosystems.
Some conclusions Taken together, our study leads to some useful conclusions. Overall system indices are as follows:
We think of these individual numbers as their name implies - as indicators of the sustainability of the agroecosystems in each area. As such, the actual values may be less important than what the values point to. For example, the uniformly higher numbers associated with the ancient area suggest that that the systems of agriculture developed there (over centuries) make use of important principles of sustainability. This is not just by chance, as we observed in discussions with a number of highly knowledgeable, articulate farmers. There is much to be learned from these people. The mediocre values in the head end show that, while productivity at present is very high, there are signs that the system is ultimately unsustainable in its dependence on high levels of non-renewable chemical inputs and its dependence on a single, presently-lucrative crop. The very poor indicator value for the rainfed region more than anything underlines the need for policies that support research into better methods for dryland farming. Finally, we must point out that the simple numbers obtained, while useful, cannot take the place of detailed qualitative studies in each of these areas. To some extent, we have supplemented the quantitative information by gathering other data through one-on-one discussions with a large number of persons living in each of the villages. The discussions give substance to the numerical values, For example, in discussions with women throughout the command area, we found widespread concern for ensuring sustainability, especially in terms of family life. Their domestic activities too play an important role in overall village life. Even in terms of energy consumption, cooking activities are one of the main consumers of energy, and this leads to its own set of questions about how a particular domestic practice relates to sustainability. Discussions with both women and men evoked concerns about health issues - connected with chemical use and with changing lifestyles that evolve from new methods of agriculture. Therefore while we promote the use of numerical indicators, we also emphasize that these should be used as a simple means by which it is possible to focus on issues - issues which are generally very complex and not described in simple categories. Policy This leads us to say something about policy implications.
We encourage the development and use of indicators that are appropriate to the Indian agricultural situation. The present study should be considered as an initial step in providing a set of proposed indicators. We formulated these indicators based on the concept that a sustainable rural environment is essential for India in the 21 st century. We used information that could be collected by a small team over an 18-month period, but refinement and modification of these is required. From our study, we have further work to do to add to the information presented here. We propose that other research be done in other areas of India, in order to develop appropriate indicators in the Indian context. We propose that information from indicators be one factor to be used in determining agricultural policy in the regions of India. For example, from our study, we can support the following proposals:
Major efforts should be made to reduce dependence on pesticides in situations of high-intensity agriculture. State governments should establish training and regulatory systems that will lead to the safe use of pesticides.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
©
Copyright and Fair Use |