Nourishing the Planet in Basil Magazine

Crossposted from Border Jumpers, Danielle Nierenberg and Bernard Pollack.

Check out this great new regular feature for Basil Magazine from the Worldwatch Institute’s Nourishing the Planet project:

Hello readers of Basil Magazine!

I am very excited to be a new contributor to Basil as I travel through sub-saharan Africa, sharing share with you some of the people, places, projects–and foods!– I see along the way.

I’m currently a senior researcher at the Worldwatch Institute and co-Project Director of State of World 2011: Nourishing the Planet. I am blogging everyday from Africa at www.nourishingtheplanet.com. I have an M.S. in Agriculture, Food and Environment from the School of Nutrition Science and  Policy from Tufts University and I worked for 2 and a half years as a Peace Corps Volunteer in the Dominican Republic.

I started this trip in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, a place most Americans associate with war and hunger because of the famines of the mid 1980s and 1990s. Even today, more than 6 million people in Ethiopia are at risk for starvation so I think I had mentally prepared myself for seeing very desperate people. Instead, though, I found farmers and NGO workers full of hope for agriculture in their country. I think that’s been my greatest surprise about the continent in general – how vibrant, entrepreneurial, friendly, positive, and alive people are here. Six months and thirteen countries later, I’m now in Accra, Ghana, feeling more hopeful than ever that things are really changing.

I’ve making a point during this trip to focus on stories of hope and success in agriculture. Most of what Americans hear about Africa is famine, conflict and HIV/AIDS, and we wanted to highlight the things that are going well on the continent. There’s a lot of hope out here – a lot of individuals and organizations doing terrific work – but that doesn’t necessarily translate into them receiving resources or funding. We hope to create a roadmap for funders and the donor community and shine a big spotlight on the projects and innovations that seem to be working, so that they can be scaled up or replicated in other places.

So, why should Basil magazine readers and foodies in the United States and Europe care about these projects and issues around sustainable agriculture in Africa?

I firmly believe that the foodie community in the United States and Europe are a powerful force in pushing for organically grown and local foods in hospitals and schools, more farmers markets, and better welfare of livestock and I think that some of that energy can be harnessed to promote more diversity and resilience in the food system. Right now, the world depends on just a few crops-maize, wheat, and rice-which are vulnerable not only to price fluctuations, but the impacts of climate change. Many indigenous crops-including millet, sorghum, sweet potato, and many others-however, are not only more nutritious than monoculture crops, but also more resilient to adverse weather events and disease.

By supporting-and funding-NGOs and research institutions, such as Slow Food International, Heifer International, and the World Vegetable Center, wealthy foodies can help ensure that farmers in sub-Saharan Africa help maintain agricultural biodiversity.

I hope you join me for this journey across Africa. Through Basil, I’ll bring you to nearly every country on the continent, sharing with you things I’ve learned, and introducing you to people I meet. I hope that some of my articles inspire you to contact me, ask questions, share your experiences, and guide me towards projects and people you think I should see.

So, stay tuned. I’ll start in Ethiopia, the country where this journey began…

Nourishing the Planet’s research trip to sub Saharan Africa kicks off in Ethiopia and Danielle Nierenberg describes her first impressions of the capital city, Addis.

Thank you for reading! If you enjoy our diary every day we invite you to get involved:

1. Comment on our daily posts — we check for comments everyday and want to have a regular ongoing discussion with you.

2. Receive regular updates–Join the weekly BorderJumpers newsletter by clicking here.

3. Help keep our research going–If you know of any great projects or contacts in West Africa please connect us connect us by emailing, commenting or sending us a message on facebook.

The un-sexy Public Safety bill that isn’t getting much play from the VT Senate or the media

(Good catch.  I had totally missed this. – promoted by JulieWaters)

It isn’t sexy, doesn’t carry a catchy slogan, and hasn’t received any media coverage, but there is currently a bill – H.132 – sitting in the State Senate that would make all Vermont homes safer.  H.132 was passed overwhelmingly by the House and referred to the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs (which includes Sen. Doug Racine, Democratic candidate for Governor).

Unknown to many, you currently do NOT need to be a licensed electrician to conduct electrical installations in residences with no more than two dwelling units (unless you’re in the City of Burlington, which has had a licensing requirement for some time).  H.132 would require anyone wiring a one or two-family home to be a licensed electrician (in Do It Yourself fashion, owners of an owner-occupied dwelling would be exempted if they opt to do their own electrical). Vermont is the only New England state where anyone – license or not – can wire a home.  

Enabling the neighborhood handyperson, doctor, lawyer, babysitter, carpenter or plumber – or whatever – to “stand in” as an electrician is unsafe.  Scores of Vermonters have hired handymen purporting to be electricians, later finding out the person they paid hundreds of dollars to perform electrical work was in fact not licensed to ply the trade.  It is common practice for the carpenter building a home to also do the electrical wiring because Vermont law does not prohibit her from doing so.  Approach a licensed electrician, and nine out of 10 of them will tell horror stories about having to go into homes to repair the shoddy wiring done by these so-called handymen.  

You’d think H.132 would be an easy sell in the Senate.  The bill clearly fixes a glaring public safety issue.  It also rewards those who have done what it takes to obtain and maintain licensure in our state.  What’s more, a majority of citizens support requiring anyone doing electrical installations in one and two-family homes be licensed electricians (source: 2009 Vermonter Poll).

Sadly, H.132 is stalled in the Senate after earning near-unanimous support in the House.  With only one month left in the legislative session, the bill still hasn’t received a Committee hearing.  Our Senators certainly have a lot on their respective plates, but it is dumbfounding why such an important PUBLIC SAFETY bill is not getting much play in the Upper Chamber, especially when electrical fires are an all-too-common occurrence.  Electricity is dangerous stuff, let alone when messed with by those who don’t know what they’re doing.

How does the GMD community feel about this?  Have you been the victim of an unlicensed, wannabe electrician?

Link to the bill as passed by the House:

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/doc…  

 

Republican Office Supplies Go Green (Mountain State)

One of the most common clichés these days is that “some stories just write themselves.” I assume everyone is aware that the RNC has been having a little trouble with “integrity” (heh) in its financial dealings, with some “interesting” expenses (some of which you can’t even write about without feeling the need to wash your hands). Among the cleaner “interesting” expenses are their “office supplies,” more commonly known as “booze.”

We all know the Democratic Party had the wildly successful 50-state strategy for voter turnout in 2008, but little did we know the RNC also has a 50 state strategy: booze and bimbos!  Sure, the Republican President was unwilling to set foot in our little state, but not the Republican National Committee, which bought $982 of “office supplies” from Boyden Valley Winery in Cambridge Vermont (about 1 minute in on the video):

One wonders if these were the “office supplies” for Auditor Salmon’s “office party” and DUI meltdown

“Code of Entegrity” (some blog items write themselves)

I’m sorry, I really am, but there is no possible way I could see the phrase “Code of Entegrity” written as a serious line without going a little off the rails.

So… this “Code of Entegrity” is something that came up in this piece from the Rutland Herald, talking about how an “in house” investigation cleared all Entergy employees of wrongdoing with respect to Entergy’s misleading of public officials regarding the existence (sorry — “Exestencegy”) of underground pipes.

Specifically, Entergy’s internal report states that “no one made any intentionally false statements in state regulatory proceeding” but that “certain Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee personnel did not clarify certain understandings and assumptions, which resulted in misunderstandings, when viewed in a context different from the one understood.”

Let’s highlight that phrase:

…certain Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee personnel did not clarify certain understandings and assumptions, which resulted in misunderstandings, when viewed in a context different from the one understood.

So I’m thinking a game is in order.  What do you guys think might be the tenants of the “Code of Entegrity.”

I’m thinking:

  1. don’t get caught;

  2. drop your friends when things get hot;

  3. run when you can.

Yes, they really did say that …


Entergy Nuclear has told the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that its review of statements made to federal regulators for the past five years revealed no problems.

. . .

“The investigation also concluded that no one made any intentionally false statements in state regulatory proceeding,” the report stated.

. . .

“Accordingly, no corrective actions or compensatory measures are required,” McCann told the NRC.

(In-house review clears Entergy, Times Argues, 04/03/10)

Of course “corrective actions” aren’t included in the fact that “several top-level Entergy Nuclear officials were punished” (ibid) anymore than claiming buried pipes that don’t have direct contact with the dirt should be included in the list of buried pipes.

But hey … Louisiana Entergy tells us it’s so.

Oh, by the way …

Tests on the silt and debris in an underground pipe tunnel at Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor confirmed that the source of the cesium-137 is failed fuel rods at the reactor, and not fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster or above-ground weapons testing, both Entergy and the Department of Health said Friday.

. . .

Irwin said the cesium probably was in the bottom of the pipe tunnel, and was washed out into the environment via the same leak that led to the tritium contamination at Yankee.

(Yankee tests point to failed fuel rods, Times Argus, 04/03/10)

Lest we forget

Entergy Nuclear has found traces of cesium-137, a radioisotope, about 15 feet underground in the excavation trench where it is searching for the leak that has contaminated groundwater at the Vermont Yankee reactor for the past two months.

Entergy Nuclear said the cesium was found in trace amounts, and at background levels, a result of radiation from nuclear bomb tests and the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986, and was not the result of the tritium leak.

Entergy wouldn’t disclose the cesium measurements.

(New radioisotope found at Yankee, Times Argus, 02/26/10)

But then again … Louisiana Entergy says it is so.

Sometimes, when you speak up, people listen


Office of the Speaker of the House

Representative Shap Smith

ADVISORY

April 2, 2010

CONTACT:

Tom Cheney, Office of the Speaker

(802) 828-2245

tcheney@leg.state.vt.us

David M. Coriell, Office of the Governor

(802) 828-3333

david.coriell@state.vt.us

Alex MacLean, Office of the Senate President Pro-Tem

(802) 828-3806

amaclean@leg.state.vt.us

Legislature and Executive Branches to Hold Public Hearing on Challenges for Change

Tuesday, April 6, from 5:00-7:00 pm,  the Legislature and Executive branches will hold a joint public hearing in the House Chamber on the Administration’s Challenges for Change Proposals.  The hearing is an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the proposals and offer its perspectives on how to improve outcomes in state government.

Participants will have 2 minutes to testify.  A sign up sheet will be available 10 minutes prior to the hearing.  Written comments may be submitted at the hearing emailed to challenges@leg.state.vt.us.

What: Challenges for Change Public Hearing

Where: House Chamber, Vermont State House

When: Tuesday, April 6, 5:00-7:00pm

###

Thomas Cheney

Aide to the Speaker of the House

115 State Street

Montpelier, Vermont 05633-5201

Office: (802) 828-2245

Fax: (802) 828-2220

I can’t make this, but if you can, please post indicating your intent and why you’re going.

Dubie Emission Standards or “The General turned to me and said, ‘Brian…’ “

Jobs tour completed, candidate Brian Dubie recently opted out of a televised union-sponsored debate in Barre that might have proved a useful venue to discuss his insights on the state job situation. His absence and low key campaign style gives added significance to all the appearances he does make and utterances he does utter.  

Years ago, Vermont joined thirteen other states in court to tighten standards for new car fuel emissions. Now those standards have been adapted by the Obama administration. Certainly there were generous cheers and credit was shared liberally at the ceremony in Montpelier.

At the event, gubernatorial hopeful Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie readily weighed in, happily recalling a special evening on a rooftop in Baghdad and also curiously declaring that “Green really is green,” while brandishing a dollar bill.  

Dubie reflected on a conversation he had with a U.S. military general on a Baghdad roof in Iraq last year. That general, looking over an evening skyline in the war-torn country, pressed for the need to move off of foreign oil coming from "dangerous parts of the world."  He said clean energy and reducing car emissions are essential to the country's environmental and economic health and safety.  "Green really is green," Dubie said, holding up a dollar bill he took from his pocket.

Times Argus  

Last year in Iraq?

Unless this is a regular occurrence in the life of Brian, he seems confused about when he shared a memorable evening on a rooftop in Baghdad with a U.S. military general.  

From an article Dubie wrote for Aerospace States Association

October, 2007 On a mid-September evening in 2006, I stood on a rooftop overlooking the city of Baghdad with a U.S. Air Force Commanding General. I was deployed to Iraq as an Air Force reservist and member of an Air Force field assessment team.

The city was beautiful at night, but it was not peaceful. The General turned to me and said, “Brian, America has to find ways to use less oil — especially oil that comes from dangerous parts of the world.”

Meet the Nourishing the Planet Advisory Board: David Spielman

Crossposted from the Worldwatch Institute’s Nourishing the Planet.

“Meet the Nourishing the Planet Advisory Group” is a regular series where we profile advisors of the Nourishing the Planet project. This week, we’re featuring David Spielman, who is a Research Fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

Name: David Spielman

Affiliation: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

Location: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Bio: David Spielman is a Research Fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and is based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. His research agenda covers a range of topics including agricultural science, technology, and innovation policy; seed systems and agricultural input markets; and community-driven rural development. Prior to this, David worked in agriculture and rural development for the World Bank (Washington, D.C.), the Aga Khan Development Network (Pakistan), and several other organizations. His regional emphasis is on East Africa and South Asia. Spielman received a Ph.D. in Economics from American University in 2003, an M.Sc. in Development Studies from the London School of Economics in 1993, and a B.A. in International Relations from Tufts University in 1992.

Recent Publications:

• David J. Spielman et al., “Policies to promote cereal intensification in Ethiopia: A review of evidence and experience,” Food Policy, vol. 35 (2010), in press;

• Anwar Naseem; David J. Spielman, and Steven Were Omamo, “Private-sector investment in R&D: A review of policy options to promote its growth in developing-country agriculture,” Agribusiness, vol. 26, no. 1 (2010), pp. 143-73;  

• David J. Spielman, Javier Ekboir, and Kristin Davis, “The art and science of innovation systems inquiry: Applications to Sub-Saharan African agriculture,” Technology in Society, vol. 31, no. 4 (2009), pp. 399-405;

• David J. Spielman and Rajul Pandya-Lorch, Millions Fed: Proven Successes in Agricultural Development (Washington, DC: IFPRI, 2009).

On Nourishing the Planet: “Nourishing the planet” means investing in growth, development, and the improvement of human livelihoods in new and more sustainable ways than what we have done in the past. This means encouraging greater innovation in how we produce food, manage our natural resources, steward our environment, and assist those least able to benefit from innovation.

What is the relationship between agriculture, the environment, and global hunger and poverty? Agriculture is a fundamental source of both sustenance and income for many of the world’s poor, whether directly or indirectly. Their long-term ability to earn a living from agriculture depends acutely on how we manage the environment that provides agriculture with its essential inputs-soil, nutrients, water, light, and so many other elements. With the world waking up to climate change, there is more recognition that agriculture and the environment are inextricably linked, and thus that our lives and livelihoods are similarly linked.

What is the role you see small-scale farmers playing in the eradication of global poverty and hunger? There are skeptics who argue that small-scale farming is not a viable livelihood option in developing countries, and that the consolidation of land holdings and the expansion of capital-intensive farming will eventually push small farmers out. Yet there is ample empirical evidence indicating that small farmers-particularly small farmers who are able to innovate, commercialize, and compete in the marketplace-have some real advantages over more corporate-style agriculture. But realistically, creating a new generation of competitive and dynamic farmers will take more investment in rural education and health services, market institutions and infrastructure, and science in the interest of the smallholder. The new generations of small farmers should not be bound to the drudgery and uncertainty of agricultural life; rather, they should be sharp, savvy farmers endowed with the skills and education needed to compete successfully.

When you met with Nourishing the Planet co-director Danielle Nierenberg in the fall of last year, you said that “farmers are now faced with decisions that it would take a Ph.D to solve,” but that there are enormous opportunities for creative innovations that can help lift farmers’ incomes, protect the environment, and increase food security. Can you provide examples of what you mean? Policymakers, administrators, and development practitioners seem to expect that farmers will readily respond to their concerns about sluggish agricultural productivity growth, rising food prices, poor household nutrition, climate change, and a host of other complex challenges. But the solutions on offer-a new cultivation practice here, a new market niche there-are not always an obvious opportunity for every farmer. The ability of a farmer to seize an opportunity-to cultivate her crops in a new way, or to sell her farm surplus in a new market-depends acutely on her sense of household security now and in the future, her perceptions of risk, and her level of education and degree of experience.

My favorite “innovation” example is conservation agriculture which, loosely defined, is a set of cultivation practices designed to improve soil fertility and water retention that depend on the adoption of closely related farming techniques-residue retention, minimum tillage, land leveling, strategic crop rotation, improved or specialized varieties, etc. The idea is to conserve the natural resource base of agricultural production while also improving yields or lowering costs for the farmer. There are a range of crop-specific technologies designed to make these approaches work (direct seeded rice, zero tillage wheat, etc.), but they are pretty complicated. I have seen it practiced in Zambia, India, and several other countries, and I take my hat off to these farmers. It doesn’t look that easy.

I’m not much of a farmer myself, but if you gave me a half hectare of land and asked me to try some of these techniques out, I would fail miserably. And even if I got the techniques right-preparing the land correctly, planting seed, managing the irrigation, and harvesting at the right time-who knows what would happen when I tried to sell my output in the market. Being a good farmer, a good agronomist, and a good businessperson all at the same time is challenging. That’s why I focus on the need for greater investment in agricultural science, rural education, and rural infrastructure, so that tomorrow’s farmers are better equipped with the skills and education needed to experiment, adapt, and ultimately, compete.

What sorts of innovations, policies, etc. would you like to see implemented to reduce global poverty and hunger? Reducing global poverty and hunger hinge on several key policies and investments. First, continued and accelerated investment in science and technology is critical. This means not only “high” science like genomics and crop genetic improvement, but also the more “day to day” science of soil fertility and water management, as well as the managerial and organizational aspects of how we actually do science.

Second, greater investment in the hardware and software of innovation are also needed. This means physical infrastructure like roads and power; market infrastructure like price information systems and laws to effectively settle commercial disputes; rural education and health services; and many other areas that are often lacking in the lives of small farmers and rural entrepreneurs.

Third, investment in communities is essential because collective action can often contribute dramatically to social and economic change. There is much to be gained from encouraging communities to identify their own development priorities, marshal their own resources to effect change, and act as independent but constructive partners to both state and non-state actors.

Can you describe the Millions Fed project and your involvement? “Millions Fed: Proven Successes in Agricultural Development” is a project that examines “what works” in agricultural development-what types of programs, policies, and investments have had a proven impact on hunger and food security. The project looks at 20 proven successes in Africa, Asia, and Latin America during the last 50 years that have played an important role in reducing the proportion of people suffering from malnutrition from about one-third to one-sixth of the world’s population. The project, commissioned by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, was undertaken by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) in 2008-09.

Our flagship output from this project is a book by the same title. The book-along with the website, video, booklets, technical papers, and seminar presentations-has helped inform the debate on the future of the global food and agriculture system by focusing attention on large-scale successes that have had a demonstrated impact on hunger and food security, and on the importance of accumulating real evidence on where, why, and how interventions succeeded.

Can you discuss the relationship-if you think there is one-between food consumers in the United States and global hunger? Increasingly, consumers in both industrialized and developing countries are driving the choices that farmers in developing countries make. About 30 years ago, this was not necessarily the case, as policymakers with food self-sufficiency targets, local administrators with subsidized inputs, or scientists with new plant varieties held sway. Of course, this shift to a more consumer-driven global system offers many opportunities. Think about the small farmer in Tanzania who is able to make good money producing organic green beans for export to Europe, or the small farmer in India who is enjoying high returns on his mango and grape exports to the Middle East.

But I often wonder whether there is a need for us to cautiously interpret the gains associated with the expansion of this global system. The natural skeptic in me would ask whether we are simply replacing cacao, tea, rubber, and other colonial cash crops with pesticide-free strawberries, shade-grown coffee, or organic broccoli for wealthy consumers in industrialized countries. The economist in me would ask whether poverty reduction and global hunger can be effectively reduced by these products (and interventions to promote these products), or whether there are better uses of our scarce resources.

In some countries such as Ethiopia, research shows that greater poverty reduction can be achieved by investing in the improvement of food staple and livestock productivity. Although this doesn’t preclude investment in high-value export crops, it should be a warning message to policymakers and development practitioners who are overly enamored with the idea that quaint fruits, organic vegetables, or pretty flowers will end poverty.

Why should food consumers in the United States care about the state of agriculture in other countries? During my undergraduate studies, I had an international relations professor who published extensively on the theory of deterrence and mutually assured destruction-key principals during the Cold War. But recognizing that the Berlin Wall was falling at the same time as he was lecturing, he talked a bit about interdependence-the idea that the security of all countries would depend not on rival military might, but on the depth of their economic and social relationships. I think we are moving closer and closer to a tightly interdependent world. This means that food consumers in the United States need to care more about the state of the world because their choices at the supermarket, in the kitchen, and in the voting booth affect the livelihoods of millions beyond their borders.

Thank you for reading! If you enjoy our diary every day we invite you to get involved:

1. Comment on our daily posts — we check for comments everyday and want to have a regular ongoing discussion with you.

2. Receive regular updates–Join the weekly BorderJumpers newsletter by clicking here.

3. Help keep our research going–If you know of any great projects or contacts in West Africa please connect us connect us by emailing, commenting or sending us a message on facebook.

Trading canards …

The Douglas administration is pushing for school consolidation in Vermont. Literally for years I’ve been asking for the numbers that would support this type of centralized command and control over our for now localized school system … and for years I’ve not been given or found them.

What I can commonly find is such as this

With those kinds of results for small schools and districts, it should come as no surprise that states whose students perform very well on the rigorous National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests tend to have decentralized governance structures. For example, only nine states (Connecticut, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Dakota, Ohio, Vermont, Nebraska) scored above the national average in both  8th grade mathematics and 8th grade science on the most recent test. All of these states have highly decentralized governance structures with many small local schools, many locally elected school boards, and many local superintendents.

(Alternative Ways to Achieve Cost Effective Schools, The Rural School and Community Trust, June 1, 2003)

Okay, 2003 is so … yesterday … but the leadership in Vermont’s education system hasn’t changed: see this site from the federal Dept or Ed for more.

So here’s what Douglas and buddies are willing to trade: they get more control while we get less results at no less and probably greater expense.

I’m going to ask again: where are the numbers?