[ad_1]
The moulting of agriculture is on a positive trajectory making this survival activity an issue that is finally starting to be taken into account in international climate negotiations. But the danger grows of seeing cultivable soils primarily allocated to the capture of CO2, hindering a virtuous agricultural transition. Patrick Piro of the information website ccfd-terresolidaire.org met for us Anne-Laure Sablé, in charge of advocacy for food sovereignty and climate at CCFD-Terre Solidaire which is the first French development association struggling sustainably against hunger by attacking to its causes, from the most local to the most global
On what occasion does the CCFD-Terre Solidaire publish the report "Our lands are worth more than carbon"?
Under the pressure of the fight against climate change, important issues are currently crystallizing in agriculture around the world. This will be the case, in particular, next December, in Poland, at the next annual international conference of the UN on climate – the COP 24. This is an important step, because the countries must revise the commitments of reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the adoption of the Paris Climate Agreement – at COP 21 in 2015 – which will come into force in 2020. But these efforts are notoriously insufficient to stabilize global warming. less than 2 ° C, agreed objective.
This objective, mentioned simply as optional by the Paris Agreement, is nevertheless demanded by the nations most vulnerable to deregulation, especially small islands threatened by rising ocean level. In the current state of things, the researchers tell us, it is out of reach, with the only measures to reduce emissions: it will be necessary to use CO2 storage technologies, the main greenhouse gas . Agriculture is in the crosshairs. The growth of plants, through photosynthesis, absorbs CO2 and fixes it in fibers in the form of carbon, part of which passes into the soil to store itself there.
Without a global challenge of our agrifood systems, bet on agriculture to play the role of a "carbon sink" prefigures risky evolutions for food sovereignty, family farming, the rights of peasants and indigenous peoples … These implications are complex and little cleared. This is why we have released our report (see box) early enough to feed the reflections upstream of COP 24, and to alert policy makers, scientists, associative relays and the media to these issues. 19659004] "Our lands are worth more than carbon"
The interactions between agriculture and climate are complex, says the CCFD-Terre Solidaire report. Agriculture generates a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions, including deforestation (to expand crops) and livestock. Conversely, it is destabilized by climate change
This new dimension is now added: the potential for storing CO2, a greenhouse gas, in agricultural soils. It is on this last issue, emerging, that the CCFD-Terre Solidaire focuses its recommendations. Policies that aim to include the agricultural sector in the climate fight will have to be strongly framed by strong principles: governance, accountability, coherence, management of storage practices. And above all, it will be imperative to differentiate agricultural models according to their interest in food security and food sovereignty as well as to the climate, in order to initiate the peasant agroecological transition.
For years now CCFD-Terre Solidaire and its allies are fighting for climate negotiations to integrate agricultural issues. With what results?
The blockage had lasted for years. But at the end of 2017, at COP 23 in Berlin, the countries most vulnerable to deregulation and the countries most responsible for it found common ground: they decided to set up a working group on agriculture and agriculture. the climate that will be active until 2020. This is a framework of negotiations between States on five themes: livestock farming, fertilizers, sequestration of CO2 in the soil, adaptation of agriculture and socio-economic implications. -economic climate change on agriculture. This is an important initiative because its findings will directly influence climate policies, so we are vigilant about its content.
Is this good news?
Yes, since and its role in the fight against deregulation should finally be the subject of serious negotiations. In addition, the creation of this working group will contribute to a little order and transparency on this subject. Because, in the absence of an appropriate UN framework, we have seen the emergence of various parallel or even competing initiatives involving private and state actors: the Global Alliance for Climate-Smart Agriculture (Global Alliance for Climate-Smart Agriculture, Gacsa). ), the project "4 per 1000" or the initiative for the Adaptation of African Agriculture (Aaa).
Another positive point: the groups most impacted in agriculture by the deregulation – peasants, communities local, indigenous peoples, women, youth … – are invited to participate in these reflections, as well as organizations such as CCFD-Terre Solidaire. However, the fundamental questions are not solved.
Which scenario do you fear?
That the problem is taken again by the bad end. Namely, that we consider the drastic reduction of greenhouse gas emissions out of reach, and that the rise in the world population serves as an excuse for a productivist vision that has not solved the problem of malnutrition so far. And that, ultimately, the massive contribution of agricultural soils to the storage of CO2 is presented as unavoidable. This would mean an increased use of an agro-industry, the social and environmental damage of which is known.
In addition, the extreme focus on CO2 obscures the role of other very important gases, including agriculture. is the main emitter: methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Their contribution to the greenhouse effect could increase, while it would be more efficient and more secure for the climate fight to revise the industrial agrifood system to reduce these emissions; fewer industrial farms (reduction of CH4) and synthetic inputs, especially fertilizers (reduction of NO2). Finally, very importantly, it will help the most vulnerable countries to adapt their agriculture, already affected by the deregulation.
In the great debate on the revision of policies of climate control thus arises this question of substance: how far Are decision-makers ready to use land as an adjustment variable? The United States, Canada or Australia are already experimenting with CO2 storage techniques in soils. The European Union, Brazil and Argentina are not far off … And we can expect the rise of a new modality of land grabbing: large agribusiness companies will seek to compensate their industrial emissions by financing the storage of CO2 in agricultural soils, including in southern countries.
What does your report recommend in the face of these risks?
The transition to this agroecology, which we call our own wishes , guaranteeing food sovereignty, strengthening peasants' rights, preserving natural resources and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Source link
