|
|
| (7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | | + | {{Publication |
| − | = Trend towards uniformity = | + | |Pub Title=Underutilized Species |
| − | | + | |Pub Subtitle=Rich Potential is being Wasted |
| − | Until the beginning of the 20th century, a wide range of locally-adapted crop varieties and livestock breeds were available to farmers. This diversity contributed to the security of the food supply and helped to safeguard people's livelihoods. Nowadays, the bulk of the world's food is derived from just a few species. For example, the three major cereals – wheat, rice and maize – supply more than half of the global protein and calorie intake. Relatively few modern varieties are planted on every continent, accounting for almost three-quarters of the land under cultivation, where they have supplanted the diversity that once existed. Farm animals have been affected by a similar trend. The success of Holstein-Friesian cattle seemingly knows no bounds. This highly productive breed is now dominant, making up 60% of European and 90% of North American dairy cattle. Many developing countries are becoming increasingly reliant on industrial dairy production, and are supporting cross-breeding programmes using Holstein- Friesian and other exotic high-performance breeds. But it will take more than a handful of species to feed the world population and secure its income in the long term. It is important to retain a ''broad genetic base ''of our major crops and farm animals, so as to allow for breeding activities to adapt plants and animals to changing environmental conditions, market requirements or new pests and diseases. At the same time, increasing the ''number of species ''in agricultural systems helps to raise their all-important buffer capacity.The 1996 Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources makes specific reference to promoting development and commercialization of under utilized crops and species. The same goals were adopted by the World Food Summit (Rome, 1996), because underutilized species make an essential contribution to food security and poverty reduction. If a proportion of the major food crops in production were replaced or supplemented with underutilized plants and breeds, this would not only increase the number of species in production but would also result in a healthier and more diverse nutritional base.
| + | |Pub Author=Christinck, A. |
| − | | + | |Pub Editor=GIZ |
| − | <br/>
| + | |Pub Year=2005 |
| − | | + | |Pub Keywords=agrobiodiversity |
| − | [[File:Quinoa1.jpg|right|150px|alt=Quinoa1.jpg]]
| + | |Pub Language=English |
| − | | + | |Pub Permission=I have read the Terms and Conditions and hereby accept them. |
| − | [[File:Nguni cattle1.jpg|right|150px|alt=Nguni cattle1.jpg]]
| + | |Pub Category=Agrobiodiversity |
| − | | + | }} |
| − | {| style="width: 500px;" border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5"
| + | {{Publication File Upload |
| − | |- | + | |Pub File=Giz-Underutilized species.pdf |
| − | | | + | }} |
| − | = What are "Underutilized" species ? =
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | The term underutilized species – referring to animals, crop plants, wild or semi-wild plants – applies to those species which appear to have considerable potential for use yet whose potential is barely exploited, if not totally neglected, in agricultural production. For example, there are numerous plants which are particularly well adapted to specific sites and agricultural production systems. This category includes crops like yams, [[Quinoa|the 'Inca wheat' quinoa]], and many species of tropical fruits and vegetables. The reasons for the underutilization of such species vary: it may be that their useful traits are not well known; perhaps there is little processing or marketing capacity, or a lack of interest on the part of agricultural research. 'Taro', the tuberous root of ''Colocasia esculenta ''is an example of a species overlooked by science. Although it is one of the staple foods in Africa, Asia and Latin America, there has been less research on taro than on asparagus.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Instead of 'underutilized' species, the related terms 'minor', 'local', 'neglected', or 'orphan' species are also used in literature. These terms all focus on certain aspects which restrict a wider use, for example the fact that they have been 'neglected' by scientific institutions, or that they are of 'minor' economic importance. Other authors have suggested the terms 'alternative' or 'promising' species to highlight their potential.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | |}
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == What underutilized species can offer == | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Greater food security ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Local crops and animal breeds can increase food security, particularly if they are adapted to specific marginal agricultural conditions. Diversification is a means of risk reduction.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Healthy nutrition ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Many underutilized crops have important nutritional qualities, such as a high fat content, high quality proteins (essential amino acids), a high level of minerals (such as iron), vitamins, or other valuable nutrients which have not yet been described satisfactorily. They are therefore a significant complement to the 'major' cereals and serve to prevent or combat the ''hidden hunger ''– a diet deficient in vitamins, minerals and trace elements – which is prevalent in developing countries.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Income generation ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Underutilized species are capable of supplying both foodstuffs and industrial raw materials, which will offer new opportunities for income generation if their market potential is successfully recognized and developed.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Poverty reduction ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Many underutilized plant species and breeds require few, if any, external inputs for production. This is an incalculable advantage, especially for poor sections of the population. For example, local cattle breeds can thrive without fodder supplements and preventative veterinary treatments. While they may be less productive, their performance remains consistent when conditions are less than ideal. Local crops produce lower but stable yields even on marginal land and without additional inputs of mineral fertilizers and pesticides. If the land in question does not belong to the farmers, it may still be possi- ble to use wild or semicultivated species (such as medicinal herbs, dyes, etc.).
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Sustainable use of natural resources ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Locally adapted crops and animal breeds offer potential for the sustainable use of more challenging sites, such as semi-arid or mountain regions. A wellknown example is that local cattle breeds are often less destructive to the vegetation cover on slope land than (heavier) high performance breeds. Local crop species and varieties fit easily into traditional sustainable farming systems geared towards maintaining or restoring soil fertility, like mixed cropping and agroforestry.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Indigenous knowledge and cultural identity ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Many smallholders possess very specific knowledge of cultivation and processing techniques for underutilized species and their diverse uses. It is not unusual for certain plant or animal species to be of great spiritual importance for the people and their cultural identity.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == What are the limitations on use? ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Lack of market infrastructure ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Many underutilized crops and animal products are used almost exclusively for the farmers' own subsistence, even where the potential exists to market them more extensively. This is due to the lack of infrastructure for marketing products of suitable quality and in appropriate quantities to potential customers.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Lack of technologies ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Traditionally, underutilized plant and animal products have been processed manually on farms, often using labourintensive and time-consuming methods. To expand the scale of production, efficient technologies must be developed for manufacturing, storage and processing, to ensure that quality standards can be met.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Lack of knowledge and erosion of cultural diversity === | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Often, neither scientists nor consumers are aware of the nutritional value, medicinal properties or other special characteristics of these products. Indeed, fundamentally negative attitudes may prevail towards local traditions. In extreme cases, indigenous culinary traditions and local specialities may be dismissed as 'old-fashioned' or 'paupers' food'.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | === Lack of political support ===
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | The food security programmes in many developing countries are based on agricultural policies which favour the 'green revolution crops' and focus exclusively on maize, wheat or rice, and export crops. In animal production, the emphasis has long been on promoting the use of high-performance breeds, even though they only produce high yields in ideal production conditions. Incentives, subsidies and loan programmes for this type of agricultural production distort the market, to the detriment of traditional crop varieties and animal breeds. Complicated authorization procedures can also be an obstacle to accessing new international markets. One example is the Novel Food Regulation of the European Union, which requires extensive safety-testing of novel foodstuffs on public health grounds before they can be introduced to the European market. In addition to the reasons mentioned, there are certainly other causes of underutilization which are not so easily remedied, at least not in the short term; for example, low yields, unpalatable flavours or poor keeping qualities.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == New strategies to promote use ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Before strategies can be developed to promote use of a species, careful analysis is needed of its potential and the fac- tors constraining its use. Essentially, two different approaches are possible:
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''The ''commodity chain approach'''''aims to develop the ''market potential ''of a particular species or product by strengthening weak points in the value chain.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | '''The ''livelihood ''approach''' is an effort to exploit the full ''livelihood potential''. It seeks to find better uses for the species in relation to the producers' life situation, e.g. for their nutrition, for their health, to strengthen their cultural identity, and to conserve natural resources.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Both approaches can combine various strategic steps to pro- mote their product: optimizing production and storage meth- ods, improving quality standards, processing and marketing, strengthening organizational structures, lobbying, awareness- raising and public relations work. Essentially, promoting the use of underutilized species is most successful when it does not concentrate on one product in isolation but forms part of a regional development concept. Of course, the technologies and social structures deployed with- in the project must be sustainable. In the case of export prod- ucts, it often makes sense to team up with Fair Trade and or- ganic initiatives. In the long term, the promotion of underutilized species must be mainstreamed into regional and national development strategies, and research and advisory work must take up the cause of species with high potential. The main point is not to carry out isolated projects, but to make a lasting impact by reversing the loss of agricultural diversity.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | <br/>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | = References and further information =
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | [http://agriwaterpedia.info/wiki/Sourcebook_on_Sustainable_Agrobiodiversity_Management Sourcebook on Sustainable Agrobiodiversity Management]
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | GTZ (2002): Protection by Utilization - Economic Potential of Neglected Breeds and Crops in Rural Development. GTZ, Eschborn, Germany.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | E. Thies (2000): Promising and Underutilized Species, Crops and Breeds. GTZ, Eschborn, Germany.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | S. Gündel, I. Höschle-Zeledon, B. Krause & K. Probst (eds.) (2004): Under-utilized Plant Species and Poverty Alleviation. International Workshop , 6.-8. May 2003, Leipzig/Germany. InWEnt, Zschortau, Germany.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ILEIA (2004): Valuing crop diversity. LEISA Magazine 20 (1). (see [http://www.leisa.info http://www.leisa.info])
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | [http://www.gtz.de/agrobiodiv http://www.gtz.de/agrobiodiv][http://www.underutilized-species.org/ http://www.underutilized-species.org][http://www.ipgri.cgiar.org/Institute/fact_nus.htm http://www.ipgri.cgiar.org/Institute/fact_nus.htm]
| + | |
