Integrated Planning and Management of Land ResourcesFAOCSDUNEP
World Summit on Sustainable Development, South Africa 2002


Introduction | Purpose | E-Conference Organizers
Questions and Issues | Working Documents | Record of Contributions
Register Here

Welcome to the E-Conference

Looking Forward to Rio+10: Reporting Progress on Land and Agriculture

Record of Contributions

Message 50

Dear E-Colleagues, We are very grateful to each of you that took the opportunity to respond to the Questions raised for Week Two. This summary takes into account 19 responses from 16 participants. The responses are grouped below as responses to Questions 3 and 4. There are two other categories of response as well: Comments on the Draft Task Managers' Report and Additional Information. Although we have tried to capture the key concepts of the interventions, we are certain that we have not done justice to your good work. We therefore request that you please go to the E-Conference Web site under "Record of Contributions" if you wish to view the interventions in full. Please note that in order to reflect the breadth of discussion, the report is approximately 12 pages. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY, WEEK 2 COMMENTS I. QUESTION 3. From your perspective, what would you identify as the root causes of the current trends and challenges for agriculture and land? (For example, in relation to land degradation, food safety and sustainable livestock production, food security and access to land, etc). ROOT CAUSES * The Historical Perspective Lewis offers a historical perspective in addressing the "root cause" of the problems of soil degradation, erosion, and depletion, water contamination, loss and supply. He surmises that the root causes date back to the end of WW II when "the ideas of confrontation through the manipulation of peoples and governments surfaced and developed into the food programs initiated in response [to crisis] and then expanded into other areas of the world." Speaking of both governments and UN bodies, he states, "rather than undertaking programs that would have developed the capacity of these many people to improve their lives and to encourage them to participate in the growth and development of their countries and of the world economy, these international forces prevented and precluded the establishment of such important programs." The "Green Revolution" resulted along with lobbying for supply side entities as "people in the West began to see themselves as having an unrestricted ability to solve problems and cure social ills." Further, he says, "the real question of human dignity and participation remains, for the most part, ignored and unaddressed"; "the real participation of people must be achieved toward constructive solutions or we can rest assured that their lack of participation towards such goal will most definitely bring them into open and disastrous conflict with forces that are aligned to exclude them." * Implications of Global Climate Change Curtis addressed the issue of environmental considerations and the implications of global warming on agriculture noting that a redesign of farming methods will be necessary throughout the world. Global warming is leading to changes in seasonal variations and the possible loss of better farming lands to submersion. Deforestation has led to loss of topsoil, increased salinization in some water tables and contamination of water sources with distant impacts. The degradation of marginal areas due to overgrazing has contributed to the increase in desertification. * Economics and Distribution of Wealth Curtis states that "the problem is one of economics and the distribution of both resources and wealth (in financial terms). Currently the vast majority of the earth's resources are controlled and consumed by the order for the 'developing' (a misnomer if ever there was one) countries to have an increase in their standard of living (not to be confused with quality of life - the two are quite separate) then the resources *must* be returned to their control. Citizens of affluent countries will never willingly give up their 'luxuries' in order that citizens of other countries can satisfy their basic needs for survival. The governments of affluent countries will never willingly carry out any actions that will realistically infringe upon the standard of living of the voting population of their respective countries." Robinson commenting on Curtis writes, "I believe that Mr. Curtis is right in regarding the agricultural development problems as macro-economic (such as wealth "trapped" in the developed countries). As an aside, he also mentions the political situation that is at the heart of economic problem; governments in developed countries must maintain the living standards of their constituents (or lose [their place in] government). Electors would always remove governments that lower their standards of living because it is the task of governments to improve standards of living. I therefore propose that the SOURCE of many of the problems discussed so far is the use of elections to install government. Although this is obvious and (more or less) undeniable, there seems to be no credible alternative to democracy, and little likelihood that democracy will be modified in the near future. It is THE political ideal of capitalism and the post-modern era." * The Cycle of Population and Poverty Ayoki speaks to the environment and sustainability question, from a Ugandan perspective (A supporting document he offered is provided with Message 25 in the "Record of contributions"). "The Uganda experience is that poverty, population growth, natural resource depletion and environmental degradation are linked in a vicious cycle. Uganda, like many poor countries is struggling to overcome widespread poverty and destitution, including food shortages, unemployment, inadequate housing, stagnating or even falling standards of health and education, inadequate infrastructure, and escalating public indebtedness. The prevailing poverty and rapid population growth has resulted in land degradation and deforestation and subsequently in food insecurity. The demand for food, for instance, is expected to triple over the next 30 years, and previous experience indicates that poverty and food shortages have a negative impact on economic, social and political stability." Lewis points out that in the past, "there was no industrial revolution creating both wealth and havoc; no communications revolution providing access and connection with the wisdom of the world. In those ancient times there was a practical need to solve problems, to improve the life of the people, to promote social and environmental welfare." * Implications of HIV/AIDS Ayoki says, "AIDS/HIV has had significant adverse effects on parameters such as household demographic composition, labour and income. These in turn affect food production, education, cropping patterns, livestock production, labour allocation, access to productive assets, and consumption of goods and services." Policy makers "view it as a medical or health problem only, rather than a development problem". To this effect, an integrated approach to sensitise the public and hence reduce the incidence of HIV/AIDS and its consequences should be initiated in the rural areas as well. The Ugandan Government must however be commended for its effort in educating the public through the mass media. * Implications of Trade Issues Ayoki speaking from experience in Uganda states, "there are legitimate concerns regarding environmental implications of liberal investment prescribed in the GATT rules. GATT resulted in an agreement that globalizes the agriculture sector. Agricultural support policies have been taken away from unilateral policy making and brought under multilateral rule. Specifically: (i) Trade in agriculture commodities is currently more bound than trade in industrial products; (ii) Although agriculture commodities face a few tariff barriers, they face many non-tariff barriers; and (iii) Within the agreement on agriculture there are imbalances with respect to the operation of the commitments on domestic support measures as well as export subsidy regimes". Ayoki also notes that the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) "may escalate the imbalance against developing countries by restricting access to new technology. The TRIPS agreement put developing countries, already constrained by low levels of income, a limited degree of skill development and the dearth of indigenous technological innovation capacity at a disadvantage". Measures to strengthen technology transfer and diffusion through the encouragement of local innovation and technological development are needed and environmental measures should not be used by developed countries as new protectionist measures. * Buffer-stocks and the Hunger Lewis states that, "the acknowledgement that sufficient food is presently produced to prevent malnutrition and hunger begs the questions of whether this will be true in the future or not". He says that, "We have the technology, we have the means, what we do not have is the time to waste." Veeresh agreeing with Lewis' points relative to linking social change with agricultural solutions adds "the green revolution technologies have become 'islands of success' in a 'sea of deprivation'". Using the example of India, he notes, "there is a buffer-stock, while 300 million people go to bed without a meal". He states: "30% of farmers who have access to green revolution technologies contributed to the buffer stock of the Nation while 70% of Farming, coming under dryland agriculture has not been influenced by these costly, high input technologies. The high input, energy intensive, corporate style agriculture is not only non-remunerative to these farmers but will further erode the fragile ecosystem natural resources and aggravate rural poverty." Lundall-Magnuson agreeing with Veeresh on the deprivation that "food being in commercial storage from production by a small percentage of the population while rural people are hungry" creates, states "poverty will only be alleviated if and when we realize the seriousness of hunger in the developing world. We want to improve technology to increase production forgetting that the poor farmer cannot afford our technology. When people are hungry they only think about food and how to survive and nothing else." Ewing, speaking from experience in Australia and commenting on Lundall-Magnusan, writes that "the technology that is needed is technology that is appropriate to the region. This, incorporated into a sustainable design, will make a difference." Further he adds, "people need to be able to grow their own food. Or at least some of it. This is a first step." Albertse, speaking of South Africa, responds, "although we live in a country where we export diamonds, gold, wine, table grapes etc, there are still thousands of people that do not have enough to eat or suffer from malnutrition. Although we do have appropriate technology available and we train people to grow vegetables and fruit using a minimum amount of water or even recycled water, people cannot always even afford to buy this equipment. There is a constant urge to grow your own food. People that moved to the large cities are mostly without jobs and in order to survive, they try to grow vegetables." He reports that in several communities, "people were given land, but they still have no equipment, implements, tractors and capital to work their fields in order to produce crops. Although they now have land, they do not have the means to produce crops." * Political Will Curtis states, "all of the research has already been done, over the last 30 years pretty much all of the solutions have been devised and tested - what is holding back implementation of sustainable agriculture is the lack of political will, and the surplus of consumer ignorance and apathy. If we are not willing to pay sensible prices for good quality food, a price that allows a decent standard of living, and a decent quality of life, for those whose occupation is food production - then we will end up with unsustainable agriculture by default." II. QUESTION 4. Drawing upon your experience, what are your proposals for action and the way forward on SARD? In responding to this question, you may wish to address methods, tools, practices, and policies that will lend themselves to solutions. Feel free to address both local community levels of action and national or international levels. ACTIONS AND THE WAY FORWARD * Inclusiveness Lewis says, "We must establish a way in which we include people, all people, their ideas, their beliefs, their experience and history. This 'inclusion' requires, indeed it demands, that we honestly and whole-heartedly seek to enrich and develop all peoples and societies capacities to care and to recognize the need to work on the problems and issues for which we collectively must find solutions." Sukalac offers an example of a recent meeting that "demonstrates that international organizations, NGOs and other third parties can only play an enabling role. "The key is to empower local communities to take the best decisions for them locally and to ensure that the means exist for putting these home-grown strategies into practice." She informs us of a "World Bank meeting between African agricultural producer organizations and representatives of agricultural input companies in Paris at the behest of the African farmers" This was seen as a " great step in grappling with Africa's agricultural problems". "African farmers are becoming well organized politically and economically". "Their absolute priority is feeding the people of Africa. However, they did not overlook their role as producers in a global marketplace both as a way to earn money that can facilitate hunger reduction and as a tool for overall development." The agricultural producers "expressed a need for better access to agricultural inputs, [through] creative financing tools". The producers also require information on markets, products and services, and about strategies for integrating products into overall production to achieve the best possible results with minimal side effects. * SARD Begins At Home Curtis states that "GAIA implements sustainable development activities in developed countries as this is "where the vast majority of damage is being done". He says: "We have to show the citizens of the west that sustainability begins at home." Munoz agrees that sustainability begins at home. He goes on to say "just as environmental degradation can come from the action of social and economic forces, it can also come from the actions of both developing and developed countries, and from their own perspective, sustainability must start at home. However, this has sacrifices for both of them social/economic forces or developing/developed countries; and as we need to find ways to move away from the notion that 'the more is better', the issue becomes 'how much can we sacrifice our home for the benefit of all'? After all we are here to share ideas, not to impose ideas." * Information Technology Holst remarks that "modern information technology has a large potential for teaching farmers and traders with the latest news on pest management (early warnings, integrated solutions) and market prices." He tells us that even "where the Internet stops due to lack of infrastructure or economic means, information can be conveyed further through traditional channels (e.g. radio broadcasting) and institutions (district offices of NGOs and extension services). Internet-based information networks have the advantage that, once established they are not expensive to maintain; maintenance is more a question of organization, a steady hand, than of money." A DANIDA-funded project is in the making relative to this concept (see ). * Land with Infrastructure Albertse providing an example from South Africa notes, "giving land to people is not always the solution to poverty alleviation. This action must be supported by allocation of development capital, extension service and training." In some cases, "obtaining land was therefore only the means to obtain money which they did not previously had. Although this was experienced in three communities, we have several successes in certain communities. This can be ascribed to ownership of land, training, funds to develop and a market for their products. This success was at Eksteenskuil where the people produced grapes, a high-income crop. Younger farmers are interested in grape production where they can see a success story." * Mobilizing Cutting Edge Science Hussain refers us to an IFPRI ( and WRI report in which it states that "40% of agricultural land is seriously degraded, with the net result that crop productivity has been reduced by 13% overall, with the poor bearing a disproportionate burden, particularly in the poorest parts of Sub-Saharan Africa and Central America. Agriculture is using up more land every year - 12.5 m ha annually - a surface area the size of Greece or Nicaragua." He goes on to say that "land is not used only to produce food - agricultural lands also provide other goods and environmental services (e.g. habitat for threatened species)". Additionally, he recommends the work "Feeding the World: A Challenge for the 21st Century". He states, "our only hope is to mobilize cutting-edge science that is multidisciplinary, and bring it to bear on problems of tropical farming, which is mostly subsistence farming." Hussain refers to the Future Harvest Centers of the CGIAR that are currently working on the "how" of improving such farming. He provides two examples. "The "Rice-Wheat Consortium for the Indo-Gangetic Plains" is a little-known success story ( . Rice-wheat rotations cover approximately 12 million hectares in South Asia, home to hundreds of millions of rural and urban poor. Slowing cereal yields, lack of new farmland, intense year-round cropping, and widespread resource degradation, are some of the major factors impeding the 'sustainability' of rice-wheat cropping systems. In fact, the areas covered by the Consortium constitute the most intensively cropped land in the world. Five Future Harvest Centers (CiMMYT, CIP, ICRISAT, IRRI, and IWMI) are working with national programs in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan, to promote new tillage practices (direct drilling and surface seeding) which allow farmers to prepare soils and sow wheat in a single operation after the rice harvest. The benefits: 75% fuel saved, higher yields, reduced application of herbicides, and 10% less water used. The fuel savings also translate into reduction of 1.3 million tons in emissions of CO2. Next steps are to work with farmers on cutting down the burning of crop residues - an activity with the potential to reduce CO2 emissions by another 17 million tons. What is clear is that the work is anchored at 4 different levels: community, national, regional, and international. It is necessarily multidisciplinary (combining an understanding of trends, low-tillage methods, nutrient management, system ecology, integrated water management, socio-economic and policy [issues], information and knowledge-sharing, and building capacity in terms of human and institutional resources). Most importantly, the innovative research fulfils the criteria of "global public goods," i.e. those technologies that depend on collective actions and provide shared benefits." "Drought is one of the major abiotic stresses affecting agricultural productivity and livelihoods in the dry areas. ICARDA, based in Aleppo, Syria, is focusing its research on developing a two-pronged strategy: (1) working on the genetic side, using conventional and non-conventional tools, to address production problems of crops grown in the dry areas (barley, wheat, faba beans, lentils, etc.) and (2) improving the management of natural resources. The benefit: powerful synergies inherent in each approach are captured. The work takes a holistic approach-new science, GIS, ecosystems approach, and participatory research methods - to address the needs of more than 1 billion people who inhabit dry areas, and where population growth rates are the highest in the world (3.6% pear year)." Hussain adds "So do these couple of examples help to provide a precise-enough roadmap to get us from here to there? I do not think so." Altieri brings to our attention that "areas characterized by traditional and peasant agriculture remain poorly served by the conventional transfer-of-technology approach, due to its bias in favor of modern scientific knowledge and its' neglect of local participation and traditional knowledge." He states: "The challenge of the international agricultural community is to refocus its efforts on marginalized farmers and their agroecosystems and assume responsibility for the welfare of their agriculture." This "requires an active search for new kinds of agricultural research and resource management strategies. NGOs have long argued that a sustainable agricultural development strategy that is environmentally enhancing must be based on agroecological principles and on a more participatory approach for technology development and dissemination". And further, "agricultural research and development should operate on the basis of a "bottom-up" approach, using and building upon the resources already available: local people, their knowledge and their autochthonous natural resources." He goes on to add that Agroecology "is the science that provides ecological principles for the design and management of sustainable and resource-conserving agricultural systems - offering several advantages for the development of farmer-friendly technologies." * Changing Practices, Revisiting Traditions and Empowering Farmers Lewis says "an ancient and successful method of bio-intensive farming has recently been 'rediscovered'. These practices were developed during the 'agricultural revolution' which occurred as early as 10,000 years ago. These practices permitted and supported the development of ever larger, more complex, and more successful human societies in all parts of our world. Amongst these ancient lessons for horticulture and animal husbandry are the following principles and practices: 1) The use of compost (humus) for soil fertility and nutrients; 2) A whole, interrelated farming system; 3) Synergistic planting of crop combinations so plants which are grown together enhance each other; 4) Deep soil preparation, which develops good soil structure; [and] 5) Close plant spacing." "However, 'sustainable bio-intensive' farming alone (or sustainable farming practice) is not the answer. We should consider the development of truly sustainable agricultural practices to include a collage of: 1) Indigenous farming; 2) Natural Rainfall 'arid' farming; 3) No-till Fukuoka food raising, 4) Bio-intensive mini-farming, 5) Traditional Asian blue-green algal wet rice farming; 6) Agro-forestry. We must begin by educating ourselves, then sharing what we have learned by teaching people the importance of growing soil." Veeresh says "solutions to rural poverty and sustainable agriculture lie in mobilisation of local resources and manpower for higher productivity with non-external high cost inputs." He notes "a number of experiments in India's 120 agroclimatic zones have proved the potential of each village to become self-sufficient in their input requirements and reduce cost of production to increase their farm returns." He says [that] "we have to fall back to self sustaining technologies suitable to each agroclimatic zones and not with borrowed technologies and inputs. Some of the areas where these farmers require knowledge and assistance [is] in post harvest technologies, value abolition and proper marketing facilities to get reasonable price for their produce." Veeresh, finds many of Altieri's suggestions from Week 1 to be "very pragmatic and the need of the hour." He states: "Results of millions of dollars worth of World Bank agricultural projects in developing countries have not reached the real farmer. On the other hand, these projects have increased the burden of repayment." Veeresh offers a success story from "the cotton belt of Karnataka, where an FAO supported, integrated pest management project [has been] in operation in six villages. Fifty-two percent of the total pesticides used in India are on cotton and hundreds of farmers' suicides are from cotton growers who were unable to pay the loan borrowed on pesticides." He states that "their project has worked wonders on farmers' thinking, and in building confidence to beat the pests from their own stick. An intensive training of the trainers at a cost of half a million Rupees funded by FAO and these trainers training the farmers every week from seed to seed and through getting every bit of the work done by the farmers has left them as knowledgeable as the experts on cotton IPM. They could [explain the] integrated nutrient management system (INM), integrated pest management system (IPM) and all the beneficial and harmful insects, birds perching, yellow traps, pheromone traps, economic thresholds, etc, etc. with all reasons and answers for their why, where, how, when and what. It [has had] a tremendous impact and they have now formed their own club and [are] willing to spread knowledge to others. They are expecting a good harvest without resorting to a single synthetic insecticide spray where they were doing 15-20 rounds of the same earlier. Therefore, there is a need for an 'alternative agricultural development approach' and an 'alternative institutional framework' where FAO serves as 'catalyst'." Curtis writes we "should be encouraging afforestation - permacultured agro-forestry and perennial crops rather than annual ones. SARD at home begins with serious implementation of "programmes that promote organic farming, Permaculture, agro-forestry, free-range non-intensive animal husbandry, renewable energy, appropriate technology." Altieri notes that "through participatory approaches, the needs, aspirations and circumstances of smallholders" must be considered such that innovations are: 1) Input saving and cost reducing; 2) Risk reducing; 3) Expanding toward marginal-fragile lands; 4) Congruent with peasant farming systems; 5) Nutrition, health and environment improving." "Special research challenges and demand appropriate technologies that are: 1) based on indigenous knowledge or rationale; 2) Economically viable, accessible and based on local resources; 3) Environmentally sound, socially and culturally sensitive; 4) Risk averse, adapted to farmer circumstances; 5) Enhance total farm productivity and stability" "Many agroecologists have argued that the starting point in the development of new pro-poor agricultural development approaches are the very systems that traditional farmers have developed and/or inherited. The persistence of millions of hectares under traditional agriculture in the from of raised fields, terraces, polycultures, agroforestry systems, etc., document a successful indigenous agricultural strategy and comprises a tribute to the "creativity" of small farms throughout the developing world. These microcosms of traditional agriculture offer promising models for other areas as they promote biodiversity, thrive without agrochemicals, and sustain year-round yields." "Hundreds of agroecologically-based projects were promoted by NGOs throughout the developing world which incorporate elements of both traditional knowledge and modern agricultural science, featuring resource-conserving yet highly productive systems, such as polycultures, agroforestry, and the integration of crops and livestock, etc. Such alternative approaches can be described as low-input technologies and practices, but this designation refers to the external inputs required. The amount of labor, skills, and management that are required as inputs to make land and other factors of production most productive is quite substantial. So rather than focus on what is not being utilized, it is better to focus on what is most important to increase food output - labor, knowledge and management." Sukalac cautions us not to "oversimplify the debate on sustainable development in general and sustainable agriculture specifically." She agrees that the "blanket overuse of modern agricultural inputs is not a solution, but neither is clinging only to indigenous practices that may remain for lack of alternatives." She stresses that "the important thing is maintain a wide range of alternatives (both traditional and modern), to improve farmer access to them and to make sure the information is in place to allow farmers to make educated decisions about what is best for their specific circumstances." However, she recognizes that "this is not a very satisfying solution for the large number of people frustrated by ongoing hunger and poverty because this is a slow, long-term and incremental process". Ilyan, a self described optimist, feels that "it will be possible for some Life to survive on Earth despite the worst endeavours of the overpopulating humans. One thing needed by those who are not putting their heads in the sand is a solar panel that will pass the ordinary sunlight that grows plants, and converts the UV light that burns plants into electricity." SOME PARTING COMMENTS Hussain concluded his comments saying: "The problems are daunting in scale, and multifaceted (economic, political, social, and environmental). For example, there are also the intertwined issues of land reform, land tenure, property rights, land redistribution, etc, but what is abundantly clear is that public policy will be key to addressing the problems, and better science, better information, can be crucial inputs for effective action. The immediate task is to keep food, agricultural, and natural resource management issues alive and high enough on the development totem pole, so that donors and governments alike can take notice and give rural issues the priority they deserve. That will be the challenge for Rio+10!" Altieri refers us to "recent data gathered by Jules Pretty and his group at Essex [that] demonstrates that more than 9 million households have used agroecological approaches regenerating about 29 million hectares throughout the developing world. This has been done with one tenth of what goes to the CGIAR yearly (CG's budget is about 330 million)." He asks: "Isn't [it] time that donors bet on this new approach, more cost-effective, more directly touching the poor and with very little transactions costs?" Lewis states: "The efforts represented through the involvement of all persons and institutions in this electronic forum and the resulting recommendations and programs presents reason for hope to identify and implement solutions for the problems we address." III. COMMENTS ON PART 2 OF THE DRAFT TASK MANAGERS' REPORT Kishore states that "the report provides a well-balanced perspective and touches upon all major relevant issues" and offers the following comments: "1. The document reviews the past trends and makes strategy and policy enunciations based on these trends. It may be useful to make long-term projections regarding the various issues under this cluster of programmes and identify critical areas of intervention and then recommend paradigm shift in policies and strategies. It may be noted that on major global environmental issues such as climate change and biodiversity conservation, the major international initiatives were possible only after forging an international consensus on causes and consequences based on scientific investigation and modeling studies with several scenarios. Unfortunately, such a consensus has yet to be evolved on the issues at hand. One of the major thrust of the report should, therefore, on long-term assessment of the problems for which relevant studies and establishment of an international expert's panel could be considered (paragraphs 5 and 28 of Part I and paragraphs 16(i) and 23(i) and (iii) of Part II)." "2. In "Globalization affecting agriculture and land use" there is no explicit mention of corporatization of agriculture production and marketing systems which may have profound impact on farm employment, land use, impoverization and pauperization of farming communities and loss of traditional farming practices and cultures and local knowledge base. This concern may be reflected in paragraphs 9 and 10 of Part I and paragraphs 5 and 6 of Part II." "3. Bio-safety concerns do not find mention in the documents. It may be useful to include some issues relating to impacts of genetically modified seeds and organisms and intellectual property rights in this sector (paragraphs 15 of Part I and 28(ii) of Part II)." "4. Programmes under this cluster and particularly agriculture production are not ends in itself. These are essentially intended for providing food security. Safety nets for poor communities and priority for dry land agriculture and animal husbandry in marginal and impoverished lands should be corner stone for any strategy aimed at food security, poverty and environmental degradation (paragraphs 27. 2) of Part I and 23 (i) of Part II)." "5. As regards new and additional financial resources, the existing mechanisms have not been able to make any significant impact on flow of enhanced funding support to anti-desertification programmes and rehabilitation of degraded lands. In fact, over the last few years these areas have registered decreased external flows. In order to galvanize the issues, fresh approaches or proposals may be necessary. Generally speaking, most of the anti-desertification and land reclamation and rehabilitation projects are not bankable. In order to accelerate these programmes particularly for acutely internationally debt-ridden countries and least developed countries where these problems are most serious; there may be need for incremental funding support to the extent that these might be made bankable. A new window or restructuring of an existing window is needed for financing debt-ridden and least developed countries for financing such project for greater investment flows to these countries. This may be added in paragraph 20 of Part II (paragraph 26 of Part I and paragraphs 20 (i) and 23 (iii) of Part II)." "6. International NGOs have not provided as much financial and technical commitments to programmes under this cluster when compared to other environmental programmes such as climate change, ozone layer depletion, biodiversity conservation, marine and coastal resources etc.. Support of international NGOs was crucial to give these programmes a very high visibility and critical and enhanced funding commitment at the international level. Enhanced role of international NGOs and international support to local NGOs and CBOs could provide a major fillip and conducive environment to promoting enhanced anti-desertification and land rehabilitation programmes (paragraphs 17 and 18 of Part I and 21(ii)of Part II ). IV. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Parris brings an OECD report to the attention of the participants. He states "OECD has just published a new report entitled: "Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, Volume 3: Methods and Results". This is the first international study to provide a comprehensive picture of the state and trends of environmental conditions in agriculture across OECD Member countries from the mid-1980s to the present day. Its conclusions are largely based on a set of indicators that use a common methodology to allow cross-country comparison of agri-environmental performance. The Main Report, containing over 400 pages with nearly 60 tables and 100 figures (also available in French), is also available in summary form as an Executive Summary which can be downloaded free of charge from the OECD agri-environmental indicator website at: " ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- We hope that we have been able to reflect the richness of the contributions during Week 2 with all of the points covered above. The last week of discussions has already built upon the quality of the previous interventions of many participants. Best regards, The Moderators

News and Events
Background Documents
Compendium of Success Stories
Associated Links
FAO Activities and Consultation