Water Efficient Seeds?

Hello!

I thought I'd share another aspect largely promoted under climate-smart agriculture: the use of hybrid seeds, such as water-efficient maize:

Major agribusiness companies such as Syngenta and Monsanto 
have been promoting their genetically modified seeds 
to combat food insecurity

Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) is a project undertaken by Monsanto, using a patented maize (corn) hybrid approved for commercial release in Kenya, Mozambique, Uganda, Tanzania, South Africa. The hybrid aims at resisting drought and insects, thus allowing African small-holders to be resilient against weather shocks. The project is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Howard G. Buffett Foundation and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It is coordinated by the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), who qualify climate change as a major challenge to smallholders in Sub-Saharan Africa, who ''have little resources to effectively manage''. But what resources do farmers need to become self-sufficient and resilient?

For whom is it a ''smart'' solution?

''Improving Lives in Africa'' - The Monsanto video campaign for WEMA

Projects such as WEMA and its successors- Drought-Tolerant Maize for Africa (DTMA) and Stress-Tolerant Maize for Africa (STMA), give rise to social movements and debates on food sovereignty, land grabbing. The African Centre for Biodiversity (ACBio) campaigns against the proliferation of GM breeds and hybrids in Africa, claiming that they are neither the solution in the fight against hunger nor climate change.

Cartoon by ACBio against the import of Monsanto's GM maize in South Africa
(the continent's largest producer of maize) during a period of drought in 2015.

Watch the FAO's video campaign for CSA

The FAO's youtube video campaign for CSA highlights the importance of building the resilience of ''the men and women who produce our food'' -- Yes, perhaps smallholders are most vulnerable to climate-change and holistic, innovative farming techniques are required. However, the video does not mention industrial agriculture (the main cause of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions) and focuses solely on small-holder farmers. 

Is the rest of the world-- major agribusinesses using intergovernmental organizations as vehicles-- imposing on African small-holders a Green Revolution in order to meet future increasing commodity supplies? Is rapid agricultural productivity growth the solution to unlock smallholders out of subsistence and drive ''the natural progress of opulence into industry and services''? (Lipton, 2012). 

Denouncers of climate-smart agriculture (see BioWatch, ACBio, Green Social Thought) claim that with the pretext of helping smallholders to combat climate change, ''under the guise of philanthropy'', TNCs such as Syngenta and Monsanto seek to establish a private sector-driven seed industry in Africa; ''hybrid seeds are capturing African markets at a rapid pace and represent an average of 57% of maize seed grown on the continent'' (Abate et al., 2017). 

''Using the language and even some of the methods of ecological agriculture, 
climate-smart agriculture provides a veneer of sustainability for interventions 
that continue to promote industrial agribusiness products and technologies” - BioWatch South Africa

To what extent are hybrids effective in alleviating climate impacts and water shortages?

Let’s take look at the introduction of maize hybrids in Malawi, a landlocked country in southeastern Africa. Malawi suffers from dry spells which can occasionally impact the rainfall season. The smallest water deficits can lead to significant crop yield losses, especially when they take place during the flowering stage of the main staple, maize (which is grown over 70% of arable land). Irrigation is limited to larger farming operations, with 97% of agriculture depending on rainfall. The agricultural sector supports three-quarters of the population and is comprised predominantly of export-oriented large-scale estates while smallholders concentrate on food crops on plots generally smaller than a hectare (Harrison, 2016). Due to poor government management, lack of rainfall, rising fertilizer prices, food insecurity was rampant for many years and the 2004-2005 season was the worst in a decade, with losses of 24% in maize production.

The national agricultural input subsidy program (AISP) was established in 2005 to promote food security, providing subsidies to enable family farmers’ access to fertilizers and hybrid maize seeds, a promise of resilience against water shortages. The AISP increased total maize production and was praised as a proactive policy allowing to achieve food security. However, the effectiveness of the program has come under scrutiny over the last years. The majority of the population in Malawi is still poor and rural, with an estimated 42% of rural households experiencing food insecurity (Graeub et al., 2016). The increasing wealth gap is raising concerns about inclusive agricultural policies and the questionable fact that the AISP ‘’preferentially benefits better-off farming households, who received more coupons, applied more fertilizer and had more significant changes in food security than poor households’’ (Graeub et al., 2016). Researchers claim that ''the Malawian production miracle appears, in part, to be a myth'' with discrepancies between the maize output estimates distributed by the FAO, the Malawi Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security and the National Statistical Office of Malawi, as well as fluctuating maize prices, which indicate supplies falling short of estimates (Messina et al., 2017). 

In terms of the agroecological sustainability of the programme, an OECD study raises concerns over the impact of inorganic fertilizers on water courses, fauna and soil health. 

To conclude on ''climate-smart'' initiatives, I think that the need to increase food production in African countries is connected to the need of tackling rural poverty. Long-term resilience and sustainability should not be compromised by short-term gains with reliance on external inputs potentially damaging to soil health, water streams, agrobiodiversity, and farmer's sovereignty. If agricultural development is considered essential for human development, I concur with Graeub et al that future research (and policies) must include a deeper understanding and assessment of family farmers’ contribution to food security.