As an organization with a long member history on the continent of Africa, we take issue with some of Dr. Sachs' proposals. The idea that Africa needs a Green Revolution - genetically modified seeds and chemical fertilizers - to feed its people is an American view of agriculture that undermines the traditional and successful farming methods of the people of Africa. There are many ways to increase the health of soils that do not involve synthetic solutions. We believe in the necessity of respecting the sacredness and fertility of African soil.
If the U.S. truly wishes to boost the food output of the African continent, it should eliminate its own harmful farm subsidies, it should establish fair trade laws in a more holistic fashion, and it should work to end conflicts on the continent that are undermining the ability of communities to farm. Our next President can set these as goals for his term(s) in office.
This does not mean that all elements of the Green Revolution are inherently harmful - better irrigation, tools, and some methods of farming may indeed be helpful. But the U.S. should tread lightly considering the dismal state of its own soils and the struggles of its own smallholder farmers.
What are your thoughts on this issue? Do you think Africa needs a Green Revolution? How should it look?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree with this reluctance to stand behind the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa and the Millennium Challenge Corporation on its notion of a 'green revolution' for Africa. I do celebrate the new attention being given -in the wake of the recent food price crisis - to the importance of investing in rural agriculture and all its infrastructure. Yet the lens through which this attention is focus shapes the impact, sustainability, and viability of those "investments." My concerns are with yours on the need for holistic, community-based approach, and in particular that the sort opportunism seen in reaction to the rise in food prices may indicate that investment in African agriculture may continue to be not necessarily in the best interest of communities and individuals, but of seed and fertilizer corporations.
Post a Comment