We heard NOTHING about this at 2020

As elections are one of the only times governments and oppositions take notice of public issues, do you think the potential of Natural Sequence Farming should become an issue.

Over the last years billions of dollars have gone into so called 'fixes' for our problems and now more billions are being poured down possibly another deep hole.

Do you think NSF should be given adequate funds to either prove or disprove it's theories?

Let us know your thoughts here.

Moderator: webmaster

duane
Posts: 1156
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

We heard NOTHING about this at 2020

Postby duane » Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:19 am

For decades now Peter Andrews has been trying to bring to this nation's attention the unique aspects of the Australian natural environment that could provide long term sustainable solutions to the worlds foodbowl.

How is it that the worlds oldest,driest continent produced the most biodiverse flora and fauna and manged it for millenia on its own at NO cot and yet in 200 years our chemical agriculture has almost killed all our rivers, floodplains and eroded and denuded our landscape beyond recognition.

The BIG question for Austalians in 2020 is "Will we have enough clean food and water to eat and drink?" By 2020 Australia could show the world how to live and farm sustainably. The answer and the innovative solution lies in the Australian landscape. As the GG showed in his ice core we have undergone many such eras of climate change, anthropogenic or otherwise, and came out well the other end. The article below backs up what Peter Andrews has been trying to tell all Australians for 30 years....WE CAN LEAD THE WORLD IN SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE with all the advantages that implies.

Why wasn't Peter given a chance to express this BIG PICTURE at 2020???
He needs to be on Kevin Rudds bus with the destination of INCLUSION. Where are you MR RUDD???


For future peace, step forward for the great agricultural challenge Achim Steiner
SMH April 21, 2008


For two centuries, Australians have coped with the challenge of producing food on a continent where 70 per cent of its surface is at best semi-arid.

The legendary Australian ingenuity has met this challenge through innovation, determination and world-class science. By harnessing the river systems and using fertilisers and chemicals, Australians have enjoyed bountiful supplies of meat, grains, vegetables and dairy products that in many developing countries with similar climates and conditions are often in short, life-threatening supply.

Australia's governments and citizens, however, know that this bounty has come at an increasing environmental cost. Even with innovative schemes such as LandCare, Australia's farmers, politicians and citizens face confronting challenges, not the least of which is climate change that may decrease rainfall in critical food-growing regions.

Australians are not alone.

The world's newspapers are heavy with grim headlines of food riots, food shortages and escalating food prices. Various causes have been cited, including food stockpiling, commodity speculation and the theory that production of energy crops for conversion to biofuels is linked to a decline in food production.

It is simplistic to use these as scapegoats. They are convenient distractions for what is so often in reality poor management at national and international levels. They do, however, point to the inescapable fact that food security is intimately linked to national and international security. This was a point recognised by the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, in putting world food security on the agenda at the 2020 Summit.

Eventually this current food shock will fade from the front pages like the oil shocks of the 1970s. Just like those shocks, however, this will be only a temporary respite unless we tackle the fundamental issues of food production and supply, ranging from a distorted trade regime to feeding a population that is set to mushroom from 7 billion to more than 9 billion by mid-century.

The business-as-usual temptation might be to clear more forests, drain more wetlands, and dam or divert more river systems, while pouring even greater quantities of fertiliser and pesticides on chemically saturated soils. This approach is likely to prove an environmental dead end, and a market failure of enormous and far-reaching consequences.

We are now pushing the limits of many of our economically important ecosystems that support pollinating insects, keep soils fertile and replenish the water supplies. That's the conclusion of scientists from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of 2005, the United Nations Environment Program's Global Environment Outlook-4 published last year, and the UN and World Bank International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology released last week.

Add to this the likely impacts of climate change, and the future is sobering.

We need to do business on planet Earth differently - an approach of creativity and intelligent management reflecting the realities and knowledge of the 21st century. Australia has an extraordinary opportunity. If the country can accelerate investment in its world-class scientific research base, including sustainable dry-land farming, it could not only contribute to solving current and future food crises, but also become a global agriculture leader prospering in a carbon-constrained world.

Innovation and a "greening" of the global economy are emerging on several fronts, including a multibillion-dollar boom in renewable energy development; the growing carbon markets and the trillions now under responsible investment policies.

Australia can and must be part of this transformation so urgently needed to achieve greater resource efficiency, cut greenhouse gas emissions and realise a post-2012 climate convention deal.

However, some country is also going to rise to the challenge of developing true 21st-century agriculture - agriculture that reflects the need to conserve and does not run down the natural life-support systems of the planet; which will feed 2 billion-plus extra mouths and is adapted to a globally warmed world.

In doing so that country will lead the way in sustainable and profitable farming that generates food security at home and new export markets in agricultural science and skills abroad. That country will also be a beacon of hope and help to the less well-off in the even more vulnerable arid economies of Africa, Asia and Latin America. Why not Australia?

Achim Steiner is UN Under-Secretary General and Executive Director, UN Environment Program.

Return to “Should Natural Sequence Farming become a part of the next election debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest