CREATING VALUE CHAIN FOR FARMERS

Y V PHANI RAJ/ HYDERABAD : Perigreen Safe Foods is a start-up supported by Perigreen Group of Companies. Founded in 2013, the company focuses on affordable healthy food products as opposed to the organic foods, and these food products are priced on par with the regular items.
Nikhil Kuruganti, CEO, Perigreen Safe Foods, says, “All the food that we are dealing in has extra-health benefit than its conventional counterparts.

Perigreen tying up with farmers to improve farm practices, procure produce

Brown Sugar has Iron, Calcium, Phosphorus and Magnesium while white sugar has none of these, just White Calories. Rock salt has low levels of Sodium and has more Potassium. Sodium and Potassium imbalance can cause several health problems. This helps in maintaining blood pressure levels and also checks the body weight. Regular chilli powder is infested with pesticides. But our chilli-powder is chemical-free.” We are working hand-in-hand with farmers and are demonstrating the best farming practices in lands near Shadnagar and Ibrahimpatnam. We are working with farmers in Guntur for low-chemical chilli farming and buying the chilli produce and getting turmeric from Raichur in the same mode.

This way we are working with 2,800 farmers and encouraging them to reduce the usage of chemicals. We are providing the technical assistance to the farmers in dry and arid areas and are buying the produce that has lower chemical exposure at better prices than the market. By focusing on natural fertilisers, we are encouraging the farmers to save cattle.” “We help the farmers get better loans/ finance, provide technical assistance with the help of a team of scientists who talk to the farmers in villages, aggregating larger farmer groups to create a larger impact after educating them what seeds to use and seed treatment.”

The company also approaches local vendors and involve in labeling of chemicals used in fertilisers based on the danger they can pose to crops. Perigreen also is sourcing cereals, pulses and millets. Since the logistics is a challenge, the company is exploring what level it can take the farmers’ ties in the space of vegetables and fruits.
‘Rural Reach’ has been initiated by Perigreen Safe Foods to reach to the rural producers of India. “We are providing farm advice, inputs and sometimes monetary support along with a buy-back facility at better price. The only requirement for this is that the farmer has to adapt better farming methods.”

Good food is high-priced; limiting its consumption. The farmer is continuing with chemical farming practices in an anticipation of high yields. With harmful farming practices, both health of human beings and environment are getting adversely affected. Organic food with its high cost certification is not able to reach the farmer. The spiral of environmental damage and hunger is plunging the human civilisation into an even deep crisis. The company operates two mobile stores and supplies farm produce in about 13 locations in Hyderabad. It plans to go to more villages and touch base with more farmers and also get more buyers of its branded products-such as multigrain flour, turmeric powder, chilli powder, brown sugar, natural honey.

He said, “We are working to develop rural hubs that will be an answer to the safer food problem. We are organising village-level meetings to explain the importance of better farming methods to the farmers. To attract a greater mass, we are offering them a better price than the market. We take 2-3 week on-field classes and then organise them into groups that will monitor the chemical usage, water usage and other factors.”

“We also help these communities by providing help - advisory, input and buy-back at a higher price than market. We also provide periodic field visits of the qualified professions to these hubs to check for any symptoms of disease, deficiency or any other trouble that will affect the output and timely solutions are provided,” Kuruganti added.
The company may go for fund raising next year.

SOURCE: http://metroindia.com/Details.aspx?id=44428

Debal Deb - keeper of seeds

Since 1997 Dr Debal Deb has been conserving 700 varieties of native rice that seed companies are trying to drive out

Every year since 1997, Dr Debal Deb has sown the 700 varieties of folk rice seeds in his collection, in order that they may not be erased from India's heritage. He has collected these strains from humble farming folk in eastern India, whom the Green Revolution has mercifully passed by. Not able to afford the external inputs required for the misnamed high yielding variety [HYV: how tellingly, scarily akin to HIV this acronym is!], these marginal farmers had stuck to heirloom seeds handed down by their ancestors. These seeds are notable for their hardiness, aroma and nutritional value. Each differs subtly but distinctively from the other, and all of them, in a fair assessment of yield that factors in environmental, monetary and labour costs, can unmask seed companies' claims of 'high-yield' for their products.

But HYV seeds continue to make steady inroads. Hundreds of heirloom varieties die every year; when a seed is left unsown for two years it dies. Farmers have been led astray, seduced by dishonest marketing that is abetted by a collusive state. Thus an once self-reliant farmer becomes an annual customer at the seed supplier's shop in the bazaar, next to the shops of the agro-chemical merchant, the pump repairer and the pawn broker.

Dr Deb's is an unequal but well-engaged battle with what he has christened 'developmentality', a virus from abroad that has produced a collective mindlessness in India's elite and led to the crisis in rural India. Why would Dr Debal Deb dirty his hands in the soil of remote India in a place that you would find hard even to locate in a map? Why is he not a member of the delegate club of doctorates who hop around the seminar circuit? Why, indeed. The answer to that question-why is worth knowing if only to be reassured that sturdy home-bred Indian character survives, however precariously, even as Debal's beloved collection of rice seeds do.

Amarendra Krishna Deb:

Amerandra Krishna Deb, Debal's father, and his 6 siblings had been orphaned when young and were raised by their uncle. Money was scarce; he routinely carried huge bags of rice on his back across the Howrah Bridge in Kolkatta because of a price advantage. He came to value frugality and disdained accumulation of money. This made him pass up several opportunities to rise in his career at the bank. But he happily remained a Cashier, spending his freedom and time on his love for Sanskrit and Bengali literature; two loves that Debal has inherited along with a big library.

Debal remembers being taken to a rich man's home by his father. He was a customer of the bank and showed off his affluent home. On their way back, Amarendra solemnly enunciated to his boy the purpose of the visit: the lifestyle he had witnessed was precisely the one he must abjure if he wanted peace and happiness. "I took you there to remember forever what you must never aspire for"- the voice was firm and the diktat, final. Father was a private person but his mother Jaya, was always accessible. "Her lesson to me -still quietly taught- is patience." says Debal.

He liked physics and English and Bengali literature in college but it was away from the classroom that he discovered his passion. "I took to wandering in the Botanical Gardens. That gave rise to many questions. But there were no libraries that I could go to seeking answers. So I kept aimlessly visiting the Indian Museum," he says.

Subir Poddar:

The Museum had galleries dedicated to anthropology, music, archaeology, geology and science. He became absorbed in evolutionary biology and zeroed in on the four fundamental questions worth directing his attention to: origins of life, sex, sociality and consciousness. Was he drifting into too many realms, becoming a dilettante?

Acquaintance with Subir Poddar reassured him of the importance of eclecticism. Poddar published a Bengali magazine called Anrinya whose contents ranged from culture to science to philosophy. Debal was published in it and that led to knowing the formidable editor, who had been a professor of physics. "Poddar taught me how to 'create a writing'. He emphasised the importance of 'interdisciplinarity', as he called it." The Museum's role in Debal's life fell into place.

Like any self-respecting Bengali youngblood he too was immersed in student politics but passion for learning never flagged. Knowledge of Sanskrit, Marxist polemics, an affinity for science, writings of many but Stephen Jay Gould in particular, came together to mould him. He effortlessly passed the National Eligibility Test and enrolled for doctoral studies. Even as he was working on his thesis on aquatic ecology, he had published 2 papers in the Journal of Indian National Science Academy.

Madhav Gadgil:

Debal was surprised one morning in 1989 to receive a letter from none less than Madhav Gadgil, the grand master of formal ecology and founder of the Center for Ecological Sciences at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. Gadgil had read his paper in the Journal, and being impressed, asked him to come over and spend time in actual research. He was yet to receive his doctorate and so was bowled over by being noticed by Gadgil.

"I had the priceless opportunity to work under Gadgil, N V Joshi and Raghavendra Gadagkar" says Debal. "In just three weeks there I learned how exciting science can be, how to 'do good science', how to use mathematics and programming in setting up objective experiments, the importance of rigour and so on."

He became an ecologist armed with the tools of the science. He spent two years in Kumta, near Udupi studying the two distinct ways artisanal fishermen cast fishing nets. As he delved deeper the answer to why traditional people do certain things in certain ways, seemed rooted in anthropology, sustainable economics, culture and traditional knowledge.

Soon he was to study the ways of people of the forests who have always lived off usufructs, never touching the timber. He co-authored a well argued and evidenced seminal paper which proved that the value of Non Timber Forest Produce [NTFP] exceeded that from felling and selling timber. It exposed the non-ecological policies of the Forest Department. A few years later, the lessons learned from these 'ecosystem people' were to set him hard on his path to current mission.

Mita:

Debal has never worked for a corporate or at a 'steady' job. Research grants, a stint in an unpeopled island of the Andamans, developing computer programmes for researchers had sustained him. Four fellowships in the USA have helped him too; he has done post-doctoral and faculty work at the University of California at Berkeley, Irvine and Santa Cruz and at another time availed a Fulbright Scholarship. He has happily cruised along on modest incomes. He has used the money to drive his interests: the fight against genetically modified seeds, farmers workshops and Baul music, which he considers a part of the ecological lore.

But there were hard times. And times when he had to fight evil: his brother had been framed by police for flagging the plight of Santal tribal people held as bonded labourers. He trudged across Bengal in search for a way to have him released. Nearly defeated, he began to collapse. That was when Mita arrived in his life. He had known her for many years but had not realised that the love she was capable of could drive him anywhere he chose to go. They live in an open marriage. She is his the one he is tethered to.

He began to work for the World Wildlife Fund [WWF] in1992. As he travelled in eastern India for WWF, he began to observe many odd, varied and unknown varieties of rice cultivated by marginal farmers. He was amazed at the varieties in cultivation. When he applied to the management for funds to map these varieties he was allotted a mere Rs.36,000. The big money was for the big cats. He has wryly dubbed the big cats, 'charismatic mega fauna'. They are no doubt lovely and need to be cared for, but they suck away a disproportionate amount of eco donations in return for feel-good conservation.

Dying stars:

Debal put in his own money and free time to survey native rice seeds still in use- he calls them 'land races'. Marginal farmers had cherished these as life supporting heirlooms. They were proudly giving him seeds of their favourites. Soon he had 132 varieties on his hands. Some were of short and stubby rice plants and some taller than man; some stood in parched land and some in floods; some had more than one grain in the husk; each varied as to colour, aroma, size or term to harvest; almost all were hardy enough to resist pests. There was one for every local condition. Every one of them could be preserved year after year eliminating seed cost. And they were all high yielding varieties if you did honest sums factoring in cost to the environment and of inputs, including labour and water.

He thought he would be adored if he passed on these treasures to farmers in less remote places, nearer cities.Though bore-wells, pumps and seed companies had grabbed the whole space, would farmers not reevaluate *real* net profit and switch? But no! The Green Revolution's indoctrination seemed complete: thou shall sow this, flood thus and spray that. He started approaching a few willing farmers to use and preserve seeds chosen for their micro-climate. He was in fact seeking foster homes for his wards.

A classic double whammy emerged: native seeds being disfavoured by farmers preferring commercial ones, and at the same time, seed companies in search of them for gene mining. These companies were on the prowl, grabbing these landraces to patent their uniquenesses as their own creation. Even the common neem had been kidnapped, which took a huge campaign to free; what of these less known, scattered dying stars. Debal felt the need to preserve and classify them in the National Biodiversity Register.

An article he wrote in Down to Earth magazine, attracted the attention of Vandana Shiva of Navadanya. She sent a sum of Rs 20,000 and urged him to begin in-situ conservation of the landraces he had collected and to preempt biopiracy by making their characteristics public. It was time for a seeds orphanage; foster homes wouldn't do.

Vrihi and Basudha

Thus began Vrihi ['rice' in Sanskrit']. It was a project to conserve over 400 landraces in his possession by then. In 1997 on 1.5 acres in Bankura, Bengal he began planting out each of the landraces in 2mx2m plots, a practice [see box] he has continued till today. By 2002 he had a place which he called Basudha where his Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies began to operate. His work had gone beyond a seed conservation.

In-situ conservation
Debal Deb plants out every landrace in his collection in 2mx2m plots. Their term to maturity can vary from 70 to 180 days. Their growth is continuously observed and recorded. Each plot is tagged and also mapped on paper.
The yield is between 0.7 and 2.5 kg Although only about 60gms are required for replanting, about 200gms are transferred into the seed bank. Seed storage is in clearly tagged recycled paper packets placed together in terracotta pots, stacked three high.
In order to prevent misidentification, seed stock is clipped from panicles while the crop is still standing. Seeds are classified with scientific rigour as to size and various characteristics.
What remains after safe-keeping for next year's planting, is taken over for a seed exchange programme he runs with farmers. There is a seed suitable for every climate, soil and water source. At the moment about 200 farmers have begun to conserve about 130 varieties from Debal's collection on a production scale.

Basudha began to actively canvas for the adoption of native seeds and biodiversity through farmers workshops, seed exchange, visitor stays and demonstration plots. People came from around the world to learn, help, do research and observe rural life.

Debal was chasing a fast disappearing integrated life in India, in which traditions, cuisine, dialect, music, festivals, the calendar of seasons and behavioural prescriptions played a part in creating self reliant communities. What threatened it now? In a word, 'developmentality'- a word he has coined, a word that at once conveys the serious malaise of modern man.[see box below]

First make 'development' an unquestionable given. Then make all that is justified in its name, a priority. If you cannot convince people, coerce them. Promise a life with less work, easier money and freedom to 'enjoy'. In marxist run Bengal every village was politicised with apparatchiks strutting about everywhere. To be a cadre was itself a career. All that that was asked of them was to deliver consent and compliance to the central leadership. "What unites capitalism and communism,' Debal wryly observes "is industrialisation."

"Beyond Developmentality" 

This book by Dr Debal Deb, a scientist, makes him accessible to the lay person interested in understanding issues concerning environment and ecology at varying levels of rigour. The book is a romp across time and domains. Arriving at its conclusion from sources in history, biology, economics, anthropology and politics, Deb concludes endless growth is not only not possible but that it is not required for happiness; all attempts to attain it will lead to disaster."To understand how zero rate of interest leads to infinite value of an environmental good, let's consider a resource like a river which can be expected to yield a constant rent [in terms of, say, annual fish catch.] over an indefinite amount of time in future. The price p of this permanent stock -as a source of permanent income- is equal to the pecuniary benefit or rent [r]-however small- discounted by a normal rate of interest [d]:
         p=r/d
As the normal rate of interest decreases, stock price increases. At d=0, the price of any resource stock of permanent income becomes infinite."

'Developmentality' is the mentality that afflicts politicians, planners and the elite. And there are workable alternatives 'beyond developmentality' that can lead to inclusive prosperity. The first requirement is to disbelieve the need for high rates of growth, indeed even low rates of growth: we need to believe in zero-growth.

In Deb's view we need to go back to Traditional Ecological Knowledge [TEK] to learn about zero-growth economy. Keepers of this knowledge are the 'eco-system people'; people like the fishers of Kumta, seed saving farmers of Chhattisgarh and those living off usufructs of the forests. He calls all 'resource stock of permanent income', 'the commons'. Air, water, soil and forests are all commons. These are things that money cannot buy and should not buy because its price is infinite. To learn sustainability we must sit at the feet of eco-system people.

It is easy to see how developmentality and industrialisation are inherently antagonistic to the environment. Privatisation of water, pollution of the air are moves to deny these as accessible commons. The glib concept of payment for these being revenue to the state which in turn will deliver prosperity to its subjects is a concept unimaginable to eco-system peoples' communities. Carbon credit is a notion akin to a tariff for murder. Even champions of 'charismatic mega fauna' -viz. tigers- insist on the exclusion of eco-system peoples from forests.

The book is a primer and a sourcebook with numerous cited authorities and references. If it were in hypertext one could follow the links and complete one's education in ecology. For all its readability, it doesn't dumb you down: if it is mathematical rigour you want, you have it offered un-intrusively. Deb comes through as a reader-friendly polymath.

As Derek Wall, Principal Speaker for the Green Party of England says, "Debal Deb is one of the most important voice for ecological sanity on our planet.He shows in this vitally important book that it is possible to create real wealth while sustaining our environment by drawing upon the knowledge of indigenous people and grassroots movements"

By 2010 the drought situation in Bankura district had become acute. Added to that, an India driven by developmentality seemed unstoppable too. The government was playing games with public opinion and protests against genetically modified seeds. Seed companies were waiting in the wings with smug reassurance. While farmers were indeed asking for seeds in Debal's collection for trying out, it must be said he had not been overwhelmed by demand. He decided to move to a more remote area which had a greater assurance of water.

So what is the good news in this story? It is in the doggedness with which Debal continues his mission in the state of Odisha at the foothills of Niyamgiri hills. His associate Dulal has joined him and Debal feels it is enough help. He lives in a mud shack with no electricity. The last 15km of road to his station is primitive. His phone and laptop are charged in the nearby tribal hamlet. There are miles of silence all around. There is a running stream to irrigate his small research field. Debal has already made the first harvest of his 720 landraces currently with him at the new site. Like some ancient keeper of fire, Debal keeps the seed lines alive. He is hopeful -he is certain- their time will come.

There is reason to believe as he does. His station sits in the Niyamgiri valley. Hills all around gaze down upon him in encouragement. They had been to the brink and had fought back developmentality that had almost won the day; so the hills know Nature will in the end prevail. It is good to listen to their success story as we leave Dr Debal Deb in their fold.

Vedanta is the serene name appropriated by a corporate mining company. With the blessings of the State they sought to mine for bauxite in the Niyamgiri hills which are notable for diversity of flora and fauna. Alas for Vedanta, these hills are home to eco-system people known as the Dongaria Kondhs. Small and gentle though they may seem, they are fierce in their commitment to the hills. As most of India slept or barely noticed it is these little people who fought back and drove out Vedanta. They spurned the material allurements Vedanta dangled in front of them. It is their value system, rare as his seeds, that Debal Deb banks on. It is a value system worthy of elite India's emulation.

April, 2012 

Contact debaldeb01 [at] yahoo.com 
More on the in-situ conservation work by Dr Deb
How active the Bengal centre was until two years ago!
This brief but good interview with Dr Deb covers a range of issues

SOURCE: http://www.goodnewsindia.com/index.php/post12/story/debal/

Food as Medicine: How One Hospital Is Using Organic Produce to Help Heal Patients

Coach Mark Smallwood | August 22, 2014 8:41 am | Comments

In 431 B.C. Hippocrates said, “Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food”

More than 2500 years later, we are inundated with advertisements boasting the latest, greatest cure-all super drug. From a young age, we learn that it doesn’t matter how or what we eat, there is a quick fix around the corner for whatever ails us—whether we’re obese, have high blood pressure or bad cholesterol—just to name a few of the issues plaguing our society.

A sign directs visitors and patients to the St. Luke’s Rodale Institute Organic Farm, adjacent to the hospital. Photo credit: Bill Noll

It now seems almost revolutionary to think that we can change our health by changing the food we eat.

But, one hospital in Pennsylvania thought just that.

In 2014, Rodale Institute, in partnership with St. Luke’s University Health Network, launched a true farm to hospital food program.

The Anderson Campus at St. Luke’s has more than 300 acres of farmland, much of which had historically been farmed conventionally with crops like corn and soy. The hospital administration recognized the impact that providing fresh, local organic produce could have on patient health and approached Rodale Institute to transition the land to organic and farm vegetables to be used in patient meals as well as in the cafeteria.

The five acre farm at the St. Luke’s Anderson campus in Bethlehem, PA. Photo credit: Bill Noll

Lynn Trizna, or Farmer Lynn, as she’s known around St. Luke’s, provides food to all six hospitals within the network. This year, she is growing five acres of vegetables with plans to expand to ten acres in 2015. She estimates about 44,000 lbs of produce from her farm will be served in the hospital, just this season. She is paid a salary through Rodale Institute and has employed three staff members, all aspiring farmers.

Farmer Lynn Trizna. Photo credit: Bill Noll

With a three-year plan in place, Rodale Institute and St. Luke’s see the potential for expansion. We envision growing the program to include fifteen to twenty farmers—supporting new farmers who don’t have access to land; greenhouses that allow for year round production of produce; and a small batch cannery, ensuring that we can enjoy the harvest, even in the coldest months of winter.

We have created this model with the belief that it can, and should, be replicated at every hospital throughout the U.S.

So, the next time you’re feeling a bit under the weather, stop—think of us and Hippocrates’ words of wisdom. Maybe you’ll then look to the garden for a cure, instead of the medicine cabinet.

SOURCE : http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/22/food-medicine-hospital-organic-farm/

Why we should be in no rush for GM seeds: there is simply too much at stake

By K Yatish Rajawat

CORPORATE Aug 16, 2014

Genetically modified (GM) food has its detractors and supporters. Unfortunately, the debate between them does not progress beyond the basics. The contours of the debate are seemingly managed by the very powerful lobby of GM seed companies. Their clout is so strong that even reportedly tried changing the BJP manifesto on agriculture, something which got nixed only at the last moment. This overzealous and overreaching lobbying by GM companies has created such a major rift that a technology is now identified with a company - Monsanto - and linked with all that is bad in the commercial world.

The government is, of course, seized with an immediate problem of allowing trials of GM crops. These trials are the first step to giving clearance for selling GM seeds in India. The trial is done in various agro climatic zones to judge the biosafety impact of GM seeds on other crops. A former Minister of Environment and Forests, Jayanthi Natrajan, claimed the trials would also judge whether GM food was for human consumption, that is simply not possible. India is not fully equipped to judge the impact of GM seeds which is why a Supreme Court-appointed committee in 2012 had recommended a 10-year moratorium on GM seeds. The Supreme Court has not taken a decision on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed on this issue.

Representational Image. Reuters

Focusing or allowing trials of GM crops is the wrong way to approach the issue of GM crops. The biggest problem with GM crops is that they create a monopoly around a food product and that monopoly rests with a corporation. The analogy of this monopoly is similar to drugs where one company which patents the cure gets to sell it. Only, in this case, it is a crop; it is not an invention that can be granted a patent. A GM crop is created by combining desirable genes with specific properties; these genes exist in different varieties of crops or are borrowed from other living beings. Seeds are developed with these properties and they promise higher yields, among other things.

India has already taken a tough stance on frivolous patents by drug companies. It had rejected a patent for a cancer drug as that would make it too expensive for poor patients. In the case of GM crops, the issue is of food, farmers and its impact on prices in the long run. It is not the science or technology debate that scientists are so fond that the lobbyists use to obfuscate the real issues.

The issues that need to be considered if India is going to allow GM crops into the country are the policy or regulatory structures that will govern it:

1. Do the seeds, besides promising higher yields, also reduce the cost of cultivation for the farmer? If they do not increase the cost of cultivation then the farmer does not benefit, and prices do not come down. It’s like a drug which promises a cure, but at prices that are unaffordable. Here the question is should one grant a patent or prefer the creation of generic equivalents?
2. Learning from the BT cotton experience with GM crop, it seems the seeds initially reduced the infestation of bollworms. But later on they added to the costs of cultivation as they needed more insecticides – which are also sold by the same seed company. Seed companies selling insecticides and fertilisers and having a monopoly on both are a major issue for such crops. The monopoly gets strengthened over a period of time as the seeds of domestic strains die out when farmers stop cultivating them. Field trials should take into account the total cost of cultivation. The approval of GM seeds should not be a once-in-a-lifetime decision. Its impact is more important after it gets into the fields. Therefore it needs to be reviewed after every cultivation season and it needs to have a sunset clause. It has been observed by several researchers that after the initial spurt of high yields, the yield falls. If specific herbicides and insecticides are not used, the quantity needed and costs increase rapidly. This is what has happened with BT where the cost of insecticides multiplied several-fold for the farmer.
3. GM crops also affect domestic strains and that is what the trials are supposed to find in terms of the biosafety impact. Preventing the infestation of domestic strains is impossible despite regulations that say that not more than a certain percentage of crops in a region can be GM. Neither the GM companies nor the government can regulate it or control it. And we have seen in BT Cotton that more than 97 percent of the crop planted is now GM. This means almost complete decimation of all domestic strains of cotton in the regions that they are planted. This is the biggest fear of the local farmers and even RSS or its affiliated kisan organisations. They feel that India’s traditional gene base will die with the spread of GM crops. This is a genuine fear. The funding from the licensing of GM crops needs to be used for creating a gene bank for Indian native varieties. The BJP, in its manifesto, has hinted at making this possible. Individuals have also in the past made efforts to create gene banks. Now this should be a priority .
4. The impact of GM crops also needs to be studied and understood from its ability to create super weeds and superbugs that harm other crops and affects their yields. Cross-pollination that takes place with GM crops needs to be studied closely. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) has, over the years, developed its own strains of GM seed but has not been able to successfully market them as the MNCs do not want to sell it. Selling ICAR’s GM seeds should be like promoting generics in the drug industry.
5. The role of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) has to evolve from a body that just approves GM seeds to one that manages the GM ecosystem. Fertilisers and pesticides used for GM crops are increasingly a much more expensive input than the seed. There is no control or regulatory oversight on these pesticides and fertilisers. GM seed companies are the ones which recommend and make them too. These needs to be brought under the regulations. Prices have to be monitored and availability and production of them have to be liberalised so that the farmer does not suffer because of higher input costs.
6. Now that GM seeds are moving into the realm of food, a better way of informing consumers about them needs to be adopted. Like in Europe, The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) needs to insist that processed food made using GM seeds is clearly specified as such on the packaging.
7. The impact of GM seeds on soil and water also needs to be studied carefully. In cases of crop failure due to poor monsoon, farmers who generally pay in advance for GM seeds should get compensation in the form of cash or seeds. Seed companies can take reinsurance for such kinds of compensation but it will go a long way in protecting farmers.
8. India needs to develop its own norms for GM seeds that take into account not only the biosafety component but the economic impact. There is nothing in the current regulation that protects the farmer from rising costs or changing economics as he starts using GM seeds. Companies also do not look at the long-term impact of how their consumer (farmer) is doing in the long run. This is the biggest area of concern as a very large proportion of the population in the country is dependent on agriculture.   When several hundred millions become dependent on GM seeds we need to be sure about every economic aspect of it. The government should not move with haste on this issue, especially under pressure from US or Indian lobbyists.

Source: http://firstbiz.firstpost.com/corporate/rush-gm-seeds-simply-much-stake-93734.html

NEWS: Let Your Children Grow Up to Be Farmers

Jenna Woginrich                                                                          
Posted: 13/08/2014 20:49 IST Updated: 13/10/2014 15:29 IST

"Don't Let Your Children Grow Up to Be Farmers." That was the title of an op-ed piece in the New York Times circling around my Facebook feed this week. You may have read it yourself, but if not here's the gist: There is no money in farming with integrity as a small business model. It's a nearly-impossible way to make a living. Those organic veggies at your local farmers' market, the CSA share you may or may not have invested in, the truck hauls to busy city centers to deliver box club splits... It's a dog-eat-dog shit show, a constant competition between "hobby" farms (some are recreation of the wealthy for land tax breaks in the same farmer's market as commercial growers) and nonprofit farms who have boards of directors to hand out new tractors instead of resorting to begging a bank for a loan. It was a good article and as a good point was made. Farming as your sole source of income is no way to get rich and getting harder all the time, even among this recent food movement. And that was why the title was what it was, to grab your attention and point out how hard the much-applauded small farm business is. "Don't let your children grow up to be farmers" was a warning and an earnest one.

The article ends with issues farmers need to fight for, like loan forgiveness for college grads (I personally would love this one) who pursue agriculture and better wages for every part of the food-growing system. Like I said, it was a powerful article and well written, and I agree with him on all points but one:

Let your children grow up to be farmers.

Let them know what it is like to be free from fluorescent lights and laser pointer meetings. Let them challenge themselves to be forever resourceful and endlessly clever. Let them whistle and sing loud as they like without getting called into an office for "disturbing the workforce." Let them commute down a winding path with birdsong instead of a freeway's constant growl. Let them be bold. Let them be romantic. Let them grow up not having to ask another adult for permission to go to the dentist at 2 p.m. on a Thursday. Let them get dirty. Let them kill animals. Let them cry at the beauty of fallow earth they just signed the deed for. Let them bring animals into this world, and realize they don't care about placenta on their shirt because they no longer care about shirts. Let them wake up during a snowstorm and fight drifts at the barn door instead of traffic. Let them learn what real work is. Let them find happiness in the understanding that success and wealth are not the same thing. Let them skip the fancy wedding. Let them forget four years of unused college. Let them go. Let them go home.

Farming never has been, and never will be, an easy life but for many it is an easy choice. For me it was the only choice. Perhaps that is what it takes? Being a farmer means wanting to do it more than anything else. It means giving up things other people take for granted as givens, like travel and the latest fashion, new cars and 401k plans. It means making choices your peers won't understand, your family will disapprove of, and other farmers will scoff at. It means making a decision and owning it, really owning it the way few people get to own anything in their lives anymore. Let your children grow up to know this responsibility. Let them literally put food on the table, lift up their bootstraps and learn how much effort a life worth living entails.

I have been living on this farm full-time for nearly two years, and it has never been without worry. But that heavy blanket of anxiety is full of many, tiny, holes that let in brilliant beams of light, as many as there are stars! And those pieces of light I have reached have changed me so much. They are mountaintop rides on a draft horse, meals I knew as chicks and seeds, and finding a spiritual home in the everyday work and rhythms of my life. The version of me who was too scared to farm would certainly be more solvent, but she wouldn't be happy. She wouldn't know how to hunt deer, ride a horse, plant a garden or butcher a chicken. It is only in the last few decades of abnormal history that these skills were considered recreational or outdated. And perhaps that New York Times writer will find himself in a much better place financially when local food goes from being a novelty of the so-inclined to the staples his community depends on when gas prices, natural disasters, political climates or any other disruption in the cattle cars of modern civilization start to hiccup.

And that may be the best reason to let you children grow up to become farmers: they can feed themselves. They can achieve the most basic of human needs in a society clueless about how to take care of themselves without a car and a supermarket. Becoming a farmer isn't in financial fashion right now; that is sadly true, but it will be again. As long as people need to eat there will be a business in doing so, and it's up to each farmer to find his or her niche, celebrate it, unapologetically accept good money for it, and keep doing it far past the point of reason. Any son or daughter of mine that dared to be so bold would not be discouraged from facing the world with such fierceness for simplicity. Antlers on fire can set a lot more holes in a dark blanket.

Let your children grow up to become farmers. There is a surplus of mediocrity in this nation and a deficit of bravery. Let your children grow up to be farmers. Let them be brave.


SOURCE : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenna-woginrich/let-your-children-be-farmers_b_5674640.html?ir=India&adsSiteOverride=in

Searching for Sustainabile Clothing in India

Posted by Andrew Flachs in Explorers Journal on August 13, 2014

Andrew Flachs researches the trials of Indian farmers and their rush toward modern farming practices, such as GMO crops and new pesticides. The choices these farmers make aren’t always easy, even if they seem obvious—an entire host of factors may pressure them one way or the other. One big dividing line is whether to “go organic” or stick to “industrial farming.”

“Okay schoolboy, what did you learn?”

The author, conducting a farmer interview in an organic village as farmers gather to offer their opinions and drink tea. (Photo by Shivaprasad Citimar Sonnar. Shiva was a 2014 research assistant, aspiring travel blogger, and avid National Geographic enthusiast)

After three seasons of introducing myself as a student learning about genetically modified and organic agriculture in India, the question seems only fair. But despite more than 1,000 farmer surveys, focus groups, plant collection, and more than a few cups of kallu, the local palm wine, I struggle for the soundbite answer people are hoping for. I’ve talked with farmers growing genetically modified Bt cotton that makes its own insecticide, farmers involved with organic projects that prohibit Bt seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers, and even a few farmers growing desicotton indigenous to India. But answering which is “best”? Farming is intensely social, and like our lives it’s messy. “Well”, I say, clearing my throat, “it depends.”

A farmer hand sprays herbicides for the first time on his cotton field. Usually, small Indian farms are weeded by female labor teams, but the rising cost of labor has recently encouraged some farmers to use herbicides. Genetically-modified, herbicide-resistant cotton may be commercially released as early as next year in India. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

In the years before Bt cotton was commercially introduced to Indian farmers, India was suffering from a plague of bollworms that ate away cotton fruits destined to give birth to white fibers. Pesticide consumption was especially high in the Telangana region where I work.

Wearing bandanas to keep from breathing in cotton dust, Maharashtra gin workers attach plastic bands to hold cotton bales in place. Workers earn 300 rupees per day doing such work, about $6. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

Dr. Gyanendra Shukla, managing director of Monsanto India, explains: “It was, A: a very expensive proposition and B: it was very torturous. Imagine, in this kind of heat, you have to haul 200 liters of water to the field to spray insecticide every third or fourth day. As it is hot, you can’t put a lot of protective clothing—that was another problem with these insecticides.” Bt cotton, equipped with a gene poisonous to the bollworms, offered one possible solution to this problem.

A scientist organizes cell cultures in a biotechnology lab at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT). Genetically modified plants are first given their new gene at the cellular level and then grown from leaves or shoots of the plant. This is possible because plant cells are “totipotent”, meaning that in the proper conditions the entire plant can be grown from any given part. ICRISAT biotechnologists are working primarily on drought-resistant peanuts and insect-resistant pigeon pea. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

But as the number of Bt cotton brands diverged from a handful to more than 1,000, farmers have increasingly turned away from their own experiences and followed the advice of shops and neighbors. Bigger, wealthier farmers can hedge their bets by planting both seeds that they know perform well and new seeds that they hope will perform well. Their yields increase, and on a practical level it makes sense that wealthier farmers would perform better than their less-equipped neighbors.

Pesticide sprays, greatly reduced but not eliminated by Bt cotton, help to control aphids and other pests that suck water out of cotton plants. Over the course of three growing seasons in about a dozen villages, I have seen one farmer wearing protective face gear. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

However, smaller farmers don’t have the resources available to test a handful of seeds and if the crop fails, they are left without any tested seeds to turn to. With an unknown seed, the whole season is a gamble. “I’m not sure what seed I took this year,” one farmer tells me. “The picture on the seed packet had a big flower so I’m hoping it will grow well, but only God knows”.

Local gods, like this shrine in Maharashtra, receive offerings of flower garlands and local cigarettes with the hopes of good fortune. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

Organic farmers are spared the uncertainty of new Bt seeds because they are legally prohibited from planting them—ironic, as early developers of the Bt modification were themselves Rachel Carson enthusiasts trying to reduce pesticide sprays. But organic agriculture, especially in the developing world, relies on regulation and marketing. The people who buy organic clothing and who oversee organic programs tend to turn away from Bt not because of the gene itself so much as the kind of world it represents: more machines, more products, more corporate influence in our lives.

Clay tile roofs, bamboo fences, and sloping mountains are common in Indian forest villages. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

Organic yields are lower for the farmers where I work. Period. But there’s more to farming than cotton yields. By making their own pesticides and fertilizers, farmers save money, and in an acre of “cotton land” farmers also plant dozens of other plants for food, for alternative incomes, or to attract predator insects.

Gone are the days when the ox fall down? Certified organic farmers plow their field with bullocks. These farmers work rocky, uneven soil ill-suited to tractors, but the cattle manure and urine provide important fertilizing and pesticide agents (respectively). Farming under organic conditions and on poor land gives lower yields but can be done with a much lower investment. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

Organic programs tend to reach out to poorer farmers or farmers in crisis. Such people are more open to change, and in some cases never used that many genetically modified crops and pesticides to begin with. For the most part, everyone benefits—farmers get to make more money doing the same work, organic groups get sympathetic recruits, and consumers can buy clothing with a story behind it. But in a rural world where good growing is equated with being a good person, the poor yields in combination with social pressure from friends, neighbors, and family members can lead frustrated farmers to abandon the program. Once back in the normal market, they’re even worse off than the small Bt farmers. When asked the majority answer that they don’t know the name of the seed they planted this year. “Whatever the broker was willing to give on credit, that’s the one I took,” explains one farmer.

Boys heat goat-skin drums by a fire to bring them to the proper tuning for a new moon festival. Pesticide applications take place alongside ritual prayers, and both are seen as important to a good farm. “Our grandfathers worshiped these gods,” says one farmer, “and we can’t forget that tradition.” (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

For me, in the end the technology is secondary to these social and cultural factors. Different kinds of farming work differently for different kinds of farmers, because of their resources and the institutions helping them. Faced with an unpredictable environment, farmers have to balance what they know works with what they hope and fear about new technology. But nothing, be it genetic modification or organic outreach, lasts forever. Only with money, yield, credit, social standing in the community, managed risk, knowledge about the environment and improvisation in the field can farming be resilient, just, and, dare I say, sustainable.

A peacock poses for the camera. Taken as an egg from the forest, it has been raised by one farmer to think of itself as a large, colorful chicken. (Photo by Andrew Flachs)

SOURCE: http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/08/13/searching-for-sustainabile-clothing-in-india/

CHINA IS REJECTING GMO CORN AND THAT ISN'T GOOD FOR AMERICAN FARMERS

SOURCE:  Care2 Causes
AUTHOR:  Anna Brones
DATE:    12.08.2014

CHINA IS REJECTING GMO CORN AND THAT ISN'T GOOD FOR AMERICAN FARMERS

The industrial agribusiness has embraced GMOs in the United States, but it’s having a serious effect on farmers. Most recently, China began rejecting a variety of genetically modified U.S. corn, and the rejection is reportedly costing American farmers upwards of $3 billion, according to the National Feed and Grain Association.

The genetically engineered corn in question is one invented by the seed company Syngenta. The new gene has yet to be approved in China — in fact, it has been waiting for approval for four years. Since November, China has rejected more than 1.45 million metric tons. The corn was diverted to other buyers, but as the NFGA stated, it “almost assuredly would have negotiated a discount,” which means fewer dollars for American farmers.

A rejection of U.S. grain in China has serious consequences here on home turf, as the country is one of the top importers of U.S. corn, and its demand is projected to grow. But not if GMOs are involved.

GMOs have become an increasing concern in China. This spring, the Chinese Army banned all GMO grains and oil from its military supply stations. As the Wall Street Journal reports, “because of public concern over health risks and high-level discomfort with China becoming overly reliant on GMO strains developed by foreign companies, China has stopped short of allowing commercial distribution of GMO grains.”

China isn’t the only one. Russia has now announced that it won’t import GMO products, and the United States is having a hard time reaching a trade deal with the European Union because of GMOs.

Who should the farmers blame? The governments that don’t want the grain or the companies making them? They’re unsure.

According to NPR:

A few days ago, the U.S. Grains Council wrote a letter to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, urging his “immediate, direct, and personal intervention” with Chinese officials “to halt this current regulatory sabotage of the DDGS trade with China.”

The NGFA and the North American Export Grain Association, on the other hand, have called on Syngenta to stop selling the offending corn varieties until those varieties can be sold in major export markets.

“They’re being a bad actor here,” says Max Fisher of NGFA, referring to Syngenta. “They’re making $40 million” selling the new corn varieties, “but it’s costing U.S. farmers $1 billion.”

While companies will certainly find other channels for their grain, there’s no denying that the economic blow to farmers may fuel the conversation on GMOs moving forward.

SOURCE:  http://www.genet-info.org/information-services.html
http://www.care2.com/causes/china-is-rejecting-gmo-corn-and-that-isnt-good-for-american-farmers.html