Rome, Italy
November 30, 2007
Source:
Global Crop Diversity Trust
Admit it. Together with a cup of
coffee, the daily headlines – murders, wars, scandals and the
like – pump us up. We are addicted to the drama of it all.
We're not alone. Animal communication, as Prof. Ray Jackendoff
of the Center for Cognitive Sciences at Tufts University
observes, focuses on the immediate and pressing as well: food,
danger, threat, reconciliation.
Chimpanzees, born in captivity, react with terror upon first
seeing a snake. No teaching, no learning required. Like other
animals, we as a species are hard-wired to respond to imminent
threat. Literally hard-wired, according to psychologist Stephen
Pinker of Harvard University. We are programmed to react and
react quickly to a punch being thrown in our direction, as well
as to something that jumps out of the dark and startles us. We
have reflexes, physical, mental and social.
We are not hard-wired, it seems, to respond so quickly or
appropriately to threats that are around the corner, regardless
of their size, certainty or deadliness. Armies can be mobilized
over night to counter threats, real or perceived. Climate
change, on the other hand, engenders debate and careful
consideration as if the biggest danger it poses lies in quick
and decisive action. Mobilization takes time.
Politicians dealing with crop diversity are similarly inclined
to deal with immediate and flashy issues while underestimating
the importance of even larger chronic problems. Focused on
financial and legal matters, delegates to a recent meeting of
the Governing Body of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic
Resources scarcely uttered the phrase "climate change". Lost in
earnest discussions of "benefit sharing" was the fact that some
50% of crop diversity collections held in developing countries
are in urgent need of rescue and regeneration after years of
slow deterioration. The problem was first noted in 1996.
A crop diversity crisis?
Most unique samples could rot and die without an emergency or
crisis being proclaimed. We don't immediately feel pain by not
conserving crop diversity.
Agricultural crises will occur (that's a certainty), but we will
probably never have a "crop diversity crisis", because of the
lag time between cause and effect. Today's oversights in caring
for this resource provoke tomorrow's emergencies, but at most we
are hard-wired only to deal with the latter.
What would constitute a crisis or an emergency for crop
diversity? Obvious answer: A big, valuable, unique collection
could be wiped out.
But wait; isn't this exactly what is happening? Consider the 50%
regeneration figure cited above, based on data supplied by the
countries themselves. We are losing diversity. The loss is just
not happening quickly enough to be defined, like a punch being
thrown at our face, as an imminent threat. That's the good news,
I suppose. It's also the bad news.
Hard choices are only made when no other options remain.
For the moment, too many of us are still exploring the option of
"business as usual". In international arenas, this manifests
itself as old "us versus them" politics as countries jockey for
position. They curse and cajole rather than collaborate.
We will have reached a different plane in the decades-old debate
over plant genetic resources when our bio-politicians recognize
the threat around the corner and start to enunciate and support
strategies for dealing with it - when they realize that
positioning agricultural systems to provide food security in a
climate changed world is the supreme benefit to be generated
from crop diversity.
In the plant genetic resources world, neither donor nor
recipient is hard-wired to respond to unarticulated threats with
unarticulated remedies. But in the absence of such a shared
vision, political and financial support is inadequate. Should we
be surprised?
Clear and present danger
This does not mean that threats and dangers are not out there,
or that plans don't exist for dealing with them. By 2050, the
world's population will increase by 37% to 9.2 billion,
resulting in a commensurate need for more food. Rising incomes
are likely to generate even greater demand. Currently yields of
crops that the poor depend upon, such as roots and tubers
(cassava, yam, sweet potato, taro) are on track to provide just
a 29% increase by 2050, meaning that an already bleak situation
will get worse. More frightening, that 29% does not factor in a
changing climate and the multitude of additional challenges that
will pose to agriculture.
Producing more food will be especially challenging in developing
countries, given the additional and negative impact climate
change will have. Either we can cut the forests and bring more
land into agricultural production - but at what cost? Or, we can
try to increase crop yields on existing land. This cannot and
will not be done without use of crop diversity.
So here's the threat: 800 million malnourished today, and a very
uncertain ability to feed those people, plus many more tomorrow,
in an environmentally sustainable manner.
What do we need to do with our collections of crop diversity to
prepare for this?
- Identify and secure
existing diversity in facilities capable of conserving and
distributing it, quickly;
- Safety duplicate it in
another genebank plus the Svalbard Global Seed Vault;
- Screen it for traits plant
breeders and farmers need now and are about to need, and
develop information systems to help users identify and
deploy these resources;
- Guarantee funds to
maintain a global system in which unique diversity is
secured, and encourage countries to provide additional and
adequate support to meet their specific national needs
regarding conservation and use.
In short, make absolutely sure
crop diversity is as safe, as financially secure, and as readily
available for use as it can be. Accomplish this and humanity
will benefit immeasurably. In the long run, this is the
contribution the Trust hopes to make to implementation of the
International Treaty, and to humanity.
Pinker and others think humans are hardwired not just to focus
on present dangers but to cooperate. Who knows? If he is right,
we should soon see some evidence in the field of crop diversity.
Climate change and population growth are poised to throw a
combination of punches that would impress even Mohammed Ali. But
to escape those punches, we have to move now.
|
|
