The central plateau of Burkina Faso is marked by poor soils, low crop yields, and very little rain. In many places, the land is so parched that it has crusted over into what local farmers call zippelle: hard, dry cake. To grow anything here takes a special kind of ingenuity. In the 1980s, with the help of the FAO, farmers revived an ancient strategy known as the Zaï pit. During the dry season (between November and May), farmers dig thousands of small pits—5,000 to 10,000 of them per hectare (12,000 to 25,000 per acre), each about 30 centimeters (12 inches) wide and 15 centimeters (6 inches) deep. Once the pits are dug, each one is filled with roughly half a kilogram (about a pound) of organic matter. After the first rainfall, the organic layer is covered with a thin layer of soil, and seeds are placed in the middle of the pit. The top of the pit is then ridged, so that when the rain does fall, it accumulates in the pit and hydrates the seed.

Zaï pits are not the only technology being employed in this landlocked, desert country. Researchers and farmers have also worked together to adapt cutting-edge microdose fertilization technology to suit local needs. By applying small and precise quantities of fertilizers close to each seed at planting, they only apply what the plants can actually use: Wheat crops grown in Burkina Faso now require one-tenth of the fertilizer used on their U.S.-grown counterparts; corn crops require one-twentieth.

311

This significantly reduces fertilizer waste and brings the cost of fertilization down to an affordable level.

In addition to using Zaï pits and microfertilization, farmers here have planted trees to retain soil and stave off desertification, and they are conserving livestock manure and applying it to fields. And cooperative groups have been established throughout the region to manage village cereal banks and community wells. The result has been an increase in grain production that matches some of the first Green Revolution successes in Asia and belies the despair of the 2008 food riots. “So much has been written about the disappointments in African agriculture that it is easy to overlook the successes,” said Steve Wiggins of the Overseas Development Institute in London. “In some parts of the continent and for particular crops and activities, there have been veritable booms in farming.”

Indeed, a growing litany of similar successes have been reported from across the continent. The details of each differ, but the central point is often the same: Across the vast African continent, at least some individual communities are meeting their food needs with simple, sometimes centuries-old technologies.

312

To those opposed to GMOs, these low-tech successes underscore a key argument—namely, that there are other solutions that are more cost-effective and that can address not only the need to produce food but also the need to reduce farming’s impact on the natural environment and to rehabilitate damaged areas. Instead of giving industrial agriculture another tool to use—GM seeds that will need lots of fertilizer and cost lots of money—proponents of a more sustainable approach to farming say we should teach farmers to plant nitrogen-fixing trees and crops that would furnish the soil with nutrients and help improve crop yields. (See Chapter 8 for more on nutrient cycling.) Farmers should be encouraged to plant many different crops instead of just one so that the soil is replenished naturally. And communities should create seed banks and seed-sharing programs that enable farmers to both use and preserve the wild relatives of our crops (known as the wild type) and the traditional plant varieties—those that over generations have become adapted to each individual area. (See Chapter 17 for more on sustainable agriculture and seed banks.)

Critics also contend that government policies should be examined as well. For example, rather than subsidize cash crops for export, policies could provide support for farms that grow some crops for local consumption. And instead of offering tax incentives to agribusiness giants like Monsanto, investments in infrastructure could be made: Creating and repairing roads would dramatically enhance farmers’ ability to get supplies to the farm and to get fresh produce to market—while it’s still fresh.

Low-tech solutions have a key advantage over higher-tech ones: They are more accessible to women. Women make up a large percentage of the agricultural workforce—43% worldwide—and possess considerable knowledge about successful farming techniques in their home regions. But in developing countries especially, they are much less likely than men to have government support or the financial means to purchase the inputs required for industrial agriculture. Because of this gender bias, programs that focus on high-tech solutions tend to bypass women and local farmers like the ones that Paarlberg surveyed in his travels. INFOGRAPHIC 16.6

313

Ultimately, of course, the countries of Africa will need much more than Zaï pits or GMOs to attain food security: They will need financial support, infrastructure, equipment, and training. And even with those essentials in place, the solutions still won’t be straightforward. Different regions—and different farmers within the same region—face different agricultural challenges. In some cases, GMOs may represent the best option. In others, HYVs may work better, and in others still, native varieties may be the right choice. Whatever methods are pursued, they must also protect the natural environment so as not to jeopardize future productivity. And they must be made available to all people, not just an empowered few. That means issues of environmental sustainability and social justice must be considered alongside issues of productivity per hectare.

One thing nobody disputes is this: Helping countries like Uganda and Burkina Faso achieve food self-sufficiency will be the key to lifting them out of poverty. “Most extremely poor people in the developing world get their food and income from farming small plots of land,” Gates explained. “Many others live in big cities and need access to inexpensive food to be healthy and productive. So helping small farmers grow more food sustainably is the best way to fight hunger and poverty over the long term.”

Select References:

Azadi, H., & P. Ho. (2010). Genetically modified and organic crops in developing countries: A review of options for food security. Biotechnology Advances, 28(1): 160–168.

Indian Council of Agricultural Research. (2011). CICR Vision 2030. Nagpur, India: Central Institute for Cotton Research.

Paarlberg, R. (2008). Starved for Science: How Biotechnology Is Being Kept Out of Africa. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Paarlberg, R. (2010). GMO foods and crops: Africa’s choice. New Biotechnology, 27(5): 609–613.

Patel, R. C. (2012). Food sovereignty: Power, gender, and the right to food. PLoS Med, 96: e1001223.

Qaim, M., & S. Kouser. (2013). Genetically modified crops and food security. PLoS ONE, 8(6): e64879.

314