August 20, 2013 –
Farewell Tanzania at the Julius Nyere International Airport
I don’t think I can bring myself to begin reading about
Indian culture, history, and agriculture until I properly digest my time in
Tanzania. The problem is that who knows
if and when said digestion is going to be complete. When I try to reflect on all that I’ve seen
and learned here, I become overwhelmed – my body, mind, and senses seem to shut
down. And airports seem to be the worst
place to self-reflect. They’re loud,
dirty, chaotic, and have many distractions, especially if you’re like me:
waiting to check in because I showed up four hours before my departure. I think that India is a time for new
beginnings. A fresh Watson start if such
a thing is possible. A new continent and
a new culture – it seems fitting. I hope
this can be a time of healing and continued self-discovery. I want to take better care of myself – eat
when I’m hungry and most importantly, know when is enough/sufficient. In Tanzania, I had a habit of gorging because
meals were space so far apart. I want to
eat better, be more active, and have more mental clarity. Perhaps India will help me achieve these
goals. My friend Katie who studied
abroad here a few years ago told me that the vegetarian food in India is some
of the best I’ll ever have. I want to go
on hikes and do yoga. I want to
farm. I was able to get my hands dirty a
little bit in Tanzania – harvesting potatoes in the Usambara Mountains and
helping the boys at the Watoto Foundation weed –but much of my research here
involved going to NGOs and research institutions for which I sat at a desk
asking questions. I want to be an active
participant, not a passive observer. I
think both roles have advantages and disadvantages, but I long to experience
the former, though I also recognize the importance of being comfortable with
just “being” instead of always “doing.” As
I’ve said in many previous entries, it’s tough to balance my time. I want to read relevant literature, listen to
pertinent podcasts, meet farmers, talk to agricultural researchers, and explore
NGO efforts. Just today, I listened to
an hour long podcast about permaculture/natural farming, which examined notions
of efficiency, yield, sustainability etc.
I wanted to side with the man who was asking the questions because his
were the same as mine: can we feed the world’s growing population with
permaculture design principles and multi-layered food forests? Can the yield compete with conventional or
large-scale organic? He seemed to think
so. For instance, he posed the scenario
– imagine you take a 2,000 acre piece of land being farmed by one conventional
farmer and then replace him with 500 individual farms, each cultivating two
acres using permaculture. He argued that
the latter would most definitely be more productive and high yielding. His rationale was that small-scale diverse
systems, strategically deisgned for layers etc. can be incredibly high
yielding. The woman did not seem to
think so. She’s had experience farming
conventionally, as well as large-scale organic (2000 acres with a 5000 member
CSA) and most recently veganic permaculture (without animals or animal
inputs). She argued that farmers that
use off-farm inputs (whether organic manure from another farm or synthetic
fertilizer and pesticides) will always be more productive/high
yielding/efficient because there is simply more land area going towards production,
rather than a farm that uses part of its land to raise animals for manure or
for cover crops or perennial woody plants for shade, all of which doesn’t’
result in food products/yield. The
problem may be that permaculture or diversified farming is viewed as chaotic
(e.g. scattering seeds freely and randomly to mimic nature) and definitely more
difficult to maintain on a large scale, compared to monocropping, ordering into
rows etc. The podcast also raised the
questions of economic versus biological efficiency, the latter I still don’t
really understand. She also disagreed
with him that population can continue to grow and that permaculture can support
it. She claimed that in contrast, if we
want truly sustainable systems that are self-regulating, we simply need a
smaller population. I agree with her on this one and think that his opinion on
the possibility of limitless growth is naïve and ill-informed. She is also no longer interested in
competitiveness, yield, etc. and wants to create equitable and environmentally
responsible food systems. I agree with
her that may be we are barking up the wrong tree, asking the wrong questions –
that it shouldn’t be a matter of yield at all but rather a question of holistic
healing. That we cannot possibly fix the
broken food system using the same flawed metrics and language, that looking to
market-based and capitalist driven solutions may not be the answer since these
systems bred the current catastrophes.
Perhaps we need a new language/vocabulary and total worldview
shift. One article I read suggested the
seemingly radical and farfetched idea of taking food out of the world market,
effectively decommodifying it. Something
else the woman in the podcast said that resonated strongly with me with avoid
being the armchair type that preaches sustainable food systems but hasn’t even
gotten dirt under their fingernails. I
fear being that person. I want to get my
hands dirty and understand farmer struggles and how they might be using
technology to overcome them. It seems,
however, that some of the most important practices for long term sustainability
(environmental and economic) is to conserve the soil and ensure that its water
content and nutrients don’t disappear.
This is where low/no till conservation agriculture comes in, however,
without the heavy spraying of round-up.
Cover crops and mulching can help to some degree but at what scale can
they be used? Scale always seems to be
an issue.
While in Tanzania, I feel like I was able to see the
spectrum, though not as equally as I would have liked – with many more visits
to small farms (1-2 acres that can’t afford a hand pump) and a few community
garden projects, but not nearly as many commercial and large-scale operations
as I would have liked. But perhaps that
is reflective of farming here – many, many more small farmers using hand tools
and maybe animal power or other appropriate technologies if they’re lucky. However, large-scale operations do exist. I saw this with Hortanzania, Quality Food
Products, and Mick Dennis. However, they
are much much capital intensive, requiring loans or other financing schemes at
the outset. On the high end of the
technological gamut, I saw pivot sprinklers at Hortanzania (straight from the
American Midwest/Plains), the BioAGtive Emissions System (“the most cutting
edge in the industry”) and QFP’s usage of high tech no till seeders and
glyphosate. These are definitely not the
norm though and it is interesting to compare the models of a foreign-owned
company coming in and farming large tracts of land (With the help of machines
and local labor) versus a foreigner coming in and integrating their technology
and business models with local farmers.
In the latter, it seems like the advanced technologies are received with
mixed responses: that in some cases, farmers are too obstinate to change the
crops they grow, let alone embrace a foreign and advanced technology. On the other hand, some farmers may be so
impoverished and desperate that they will jump on any opportunity to help
themselves.
All in all, I was able to visit 25
individuals/organizations/groups/NGOs/companies/research institutions while in
Tanzania: 9 NGOs, 3 farmer groups/community gardening projects; 3 cooperatives
(with some overlap with the farmer groups), 4 research institutions, 4
large-scale/commercial/plantation-style operations; 1 individual doing post
harvest processing and consulting; and the agricultural trade show (Nane
Nane). Each person I spoke with
naturally had different opinions and approaches to farming. There were some unexpected pieces of
information learned along the way, including a strategic planning training
given by TAN-EDAPS, an introduction to the benefits of low-till conservation
agriculture, and learning about one of the most cutting edge technologies in
the industry. I felt like I came away
from Tanzania better understanding the plight of small impoverished farmers,
though I didn’t experience them first hand.
I could ask and listen attentively to their problems and perceived
solutions, but could not live them. I
felt like I learned more about the power of cooperatives in farming: that they
can help individual farms by pooling resources and using collective bargaining
power to achieve many of their goals (e.g. access to credit, sharing a tractor,
or building an irrigation scheme together).
I found myself startled by the apparent lack of education in the farming
population. Obviously, I’ve always known
that slash and burn agriculture exists, but seeing the burning and charred
fields firsthand made it much more real.
And then I Question the Slow Food emphasis on traditional wisdom: where
is it? If these farmers are following in
the paths of their parents and grandparents, there must have been some
knowledge transmitted but I’m not sure where it’s gone. Some farmers, agricultural extension
officers, and government officials acted like life didn’t exist before chemical
inputs, as if this is how it’s always been.
This seems absurd, but if we’re talking about low life expectancy, then maybe
they really can’t recall another way.
Moreover, it definitely seems like farmers here are receiving
conflicting information: e.g. that chemical inputs are an absolute necessity or
that tilling is paramount or that high quality seeds are the be all, end all
(which I’ve heard that its more about good timing and maintaining healthy soil
that actual seed). I come away with the
understanding that we still need to take great measures to reduce food waste. I hadn’t really considered post-harvest
processing technologies when I first conceived of my project, but it’s actually
come up so often in Tanzania that it seems foolish that it didn’t make it on my
radar initially. I understand more how
much the availability of funding affects the capacity of NGOs and how the
equality of their work and capabilities vary significantly (e.g. comparing
AVRDC with WODSTA). Being taken around
in a company car and flying with a research scientist across the country to
follow up on a project versus being asked to help bring volunteers to Tanzania
or help them identify donors. The stark
contrast was a bit startling. I was also
surprised by how little support agriculture seems to receive when it makes up
such an enormous portion of the GDP and
employment. Despite Kilimo Kwanza (the
national agriculture policy of “farming first”), it seems like the government
is all talk (i.e. outdated research stations and poor farmers with unfair
subsidy systems). I also wonder and ask
who should be “teaching” or “helping” who (e.g. Australian permaculture
training, Dutch-owned Tanga Fresh dairy cooperative, QFP and Mick Dennis versus
Tanzanian-led Sustainable Agriculture Tanzania and TAN-EDAPS). It seems like in some cases, foreigners can
come in and train Africans, who then train each other but the issue of long
term financial stability of donor dependent NGOs is crucial. The Watoto Foundation is a unique example
because through Kiboko Lodge, it aims to become economically self-sufficient. And through value added products, groups can
generate additional income for themselves.
IT seemed like the most damaging and least positively contributing
operation was a foreign owned one like Hortanzia that doesn’t disseminate
knowledge or technology to farmers but rather uses local labor to mass produce
crops for export. But of course, I am
biased. Is food self-sufficiency and
localization the answer? Are these
models sustainable? And are cutting edge
technologies appropriate? They aren’t
locally produced, are usually expensive, require technical knowhow, and may be
large-scale. The idea of appropriate technology versus modern is hugely
important. The issue of climate change
further exacerbates the problem and may render traditional farming techniques
obsolete and new technologies the only way forward (though I’m not
convinced). My gut tells me it’s
probably a marrying of the two. Gender
also complicates my research – how many and women are participating in farming
activities (usually women are subsistence and men are commercial).
In sum, I don’t know if I had any burning questions answered
while I was in Tanzania, but rather, my brain has become further saturated and
muddled with uncertainty. If anything, I
think I saw (or tried to see) a good variety of worldviews and each person I
meet challenges me to think more. I saw both the dire reality and also what is
possible given a location and resources.
I also hope to skim the surface less and delve more deeply in the
future. Tanzania felt like a whirlwind,
though a good introduction to farming issues as a whole (seeds, water,
synthetic inputs versus organic, subsistence versus commercial etc.) and how I
want to explore more in depth. Bring it
on India – I’m ready for you!
No comments:
Post a Comment