Connect with us

Green Planet

Oceans Have Saved Us Now We Have To Save Our Oceans

Published

on

Authors: Prakash Sharma and Partha Pratim Mitra*

The rampant consumption of Earth for its resources has caused massive alterations to its responsive ecosystem. Humans desires have separated themselves from the mutual well-being of the other living and non-living entities of the planet. Human needs following various generations of industrial revolution has only resulted in accumulation of piles and piles of waste and pollution. The inefficient development model has invaded the ecological habitats of “others”.

Every year June 08 is celebrated as World Ocean Day. During the 1992 Earth’s submit, Canada proposed the concept of a World Ocean Day. Since then, there have been remarkable measures adopted to this project of Ocean protection. The focus of this year’s Ocean Day celebration centers around the spirit of “together we can”. humanity finds itself confronting with many issues including COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and poisoned plastic. The rise of contagious diseases like COVID-19, SARS, MERS, Zika virus, Ebola etc. are all result of self-consuming model. Perhaps, it reveals the manner in which development has only resulted in manipulating animals and plants, with no integrity or care for their health. In fact, the response during pandemic is no different. For plastic industry, pandemic is seen as an advantage to push suspensions or rollbacks of hard-won environmental measures of reducing plastic pollution. The argument is to follow caution and ensure that the pandemic does not results in epidemic. It in these lines the present writeup outlines various legal instruments entered amongst nation-states; and thereby argues for re-evaluating existing human practices to ensure crucial changes to the health and sustenance of marine ecosystem.

Early Initiative: Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas, 1958

The Convention of Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas, 1958 is an agreement that was designed to solve through international cooperation the problems involved in the conservation of high seas, considering that because of the development of modern technology some of these resources are in danger of being overexploited. The Convention took place at Geneva on April 29, 1958 under the auspices of United Nations forproblems involved in the conservation of the living resources of the high seas due to development of modern techniques for the exploitation of the living resources of the sea and man’s ability to meet the need of the world’s expanding population for food which has exposed some of these resources to the danger of being over-exploited. The original convention consisting 22 Articles mainly restricting fishing activities of member countries within their territorial seas. It entered into force on 20 March 1966 and at present there are 38 signatories to the convention.

Conventions for Prevention of Marine Pollution during 1970s

The legal framework was also structured to control the marine pollution and conserve the wildlife in marine ecosystem during the period of 1970s. The marine pollution awareness generated after the industrial development in the western countries and mainly after the disasters of Torrey Canyon, a Liberian oil vessel, caused huge damage in marine life of British coasts in 1967, and Santa Barbara near California suffered a huge ecological loss after a blow out of an oil well in 1969. People realized the necessity of strict provision to control oil pollution to protect the marine life and Oslo Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircrafts, 1974(Oslo Convention)was introduced to cope with marine pollution in international level. It modified previous Convention for Prevention of the Pollution of the Sea by Oil, 1954and subsequent international efforts were often triggered by major oil spills such as the accidents involving the Torrey Canyon in 1967, the Amoco Cadiz in 1978, the Exxon Valdez in 1989 and the Prestige in 2002.

The Helsinki Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, was originally signed in 1974,for the protection of the Baltic Sea from all sources of pollution from land, air and sea and also to take measures on conserving habitats and biological diversity and for the sustainable use of marine resources. The original Convention was signed by Denmark, Finland, the German Democratic Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, Poland, Sweden and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and subsequently was updated in 1992 by Estonia, the European Union, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden.

Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution, 1976and came into force in 1978, was the legal framework implemented through the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP), which aims to protect the Mediterranean Sea basin. Three additional legal instruments i.e. Protocol on pollution from land-based sources, 1980, Protocol concerning Specifically Protected Areas, 1982 and Offshore Protocol, 1994 were adopted by this convention. The contracting parties to the Barcelona Convention included measures to prevent the deterioration of the Mediterranean coast in 1995 and now it is known as Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean came into force on July 9, 2004.

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, Bonn, 1979 (CMS) assumes relevance in the context of marine migratory species and its Tenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties, adopted about “marine debris” on 2011 Bergen, Norway. Here, marine debris negatively impacts substantial numbers of migratory marine wildlife, including many species of birds, turtles, sharks and marine mammals that are threatened with extinction;

Major pollution accidents in the recent past have created another exception to the exclusiveness of flag State jurisdiction on the high seas, in favour of States whose coastline is threatened with serious pollution damage from a foreign shipping casualty. This right gained rapid recognition after the British action against the American tanker, the Torrey Canyon in 1967 which led to the adoption of the International Convention on Intervention on the High Seas, 1969 in case of Oil Pollution Damage, and ultimately found entry into theLaw of the Sea Convention, 1982 (UNCLOS).

The ship borne wastes generated during normal operation are regulated bytheOslo Convention. But this Convention is not globally applicable and is limited essentially to the North-East Atlantic area. The banned dumping wastes cannot be regulated by the Basel Convention for Transboundary movement of Hazardous Wastes, 1989. In this regard, the London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matters, 1972 (London Convention), is an important international instrument for protection of marine resources and marine biodiversity against the disposal of wastes into the seas.

In 1983, Pacific Island nations proposed an immediate ban on the dumping of nuclear waste into the sea. They made their proposal before the authority established under the London Convention for regulating the sea pollution caused by dumping. The London Convention is a global Convention and is wider than the Oslo Convention. After the 1996 London Protocol, the dumping of all wastes are prohibited and it completely prohibits incineration at sea and the dumping of industrial wastes.

UN Convention on the Law of Sea, 1982

The UNCLOS is the foundation for the modern law relating to international fisheries.It conferred on the nationals of all states the right to engage in fishing on the high seas but this right is subject to their treaty obligations and the rights and duties as well as the interests of the coastal states. All states have the duty to take or to cooperate with other states in taking measures for their respective nationals as may be necessary for the conservation of the living resources of the high seas.

The UNCLOS specifically addresses some categories like highly migratory species, namely tuna, marlin, sailfish, swordfish, dolphin, shark and cetacea listed in Annex I. Then marine mammal’s category includes 12 species including great whales which were previously hunted near extinction, as well as small cetaceans, dolphins, porpoises, seals, dugongs and marine otters. Next categories, Anadromous species which are spawned in freshwater rivers but spend the major part of their lives at sea passing through territorial sea, Exclusive Economic Zone and High Seas and Catadromous species are spawned at sea and send major part of their lives in rivers and lakes.

In particular, the UNCLOS attributes jurisdiction over conservation and use of marine living resources within the various marine zones, and also sets forth certain basic conservation principles applicable therein, within the territorial sea, states have traditionally enjoyed exclusive rights to fisheries as part of the exercise of sovereignty there. In Section 2 of Part IX (Articles 116 to 120) deals with the provisions relating to ‘Management and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas’ and Part XII (Articles 192 to 237) totally deal with ‘Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment’ including Enforcement, Safeguard and International rules to prevent and control marine environment pollution.

Initiatives during 1990’s and onwards

In a ministerial meeting in September 1992, representatives of Oslo Convention and Paris Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-based Sources, 1974 adopted a new Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, 1992 also known as OSPAR Convention.

Likewise, the Washington Declaration on Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities held on November 1995 for affirming the need and will to protect and preserve the marine environment for present and future generations and also reaffirming the relevant provisions of Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992. This process included among others a week-long meeting of government designated experts, focusing on the Montreal Guidelines for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Sources of Pollution, 1985.

Recently, International Maritime Organization amended the Annexure V of International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) dealing with “Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships” which will prohibit the discharge of all garbage from ships into the sea from January 1, 2013.In March 2019, The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) adopted Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities, Nairobi for retaining the high quality of the coastal and marine environment for ecosystem functions and services in support of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals to conserve and sustainably use oceans, seas, and marine resources. It has the plan to implement Bali Declaration, 2018 and Manila Declaration, 2012 for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities which identified nutrient, wastewater and marine litter as priority source categories of marine pollution.

Indian Position on Prevention of Marine Pollution

There is no specific regional convention for South Asian Seas among India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives. The UNCLOS is the only primary legal instrument for guidance. But India ratified various marine safety conventions and has amended the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 several times to develop and maintain Indian shipping law in the line of international mercantile marine law and Part XB deals with ‘Civil liability for oil pollution damage’.The Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976 under section 15(2)(e) has vested the power to the Central Government to make rules preservation and protection of the marine environment and prevention and control of marine pollution for the purposes of this Act.The Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2018 has also provision for prevention of coastal pollution.

Marine Pollution: Concerns for our Oceans

The United Nation estimates that 13 million tons of plastic are dumped in the sea each year and that half of the plastic produced globally is for single-use items. According to a WWF Report, “if just 1% of the masks were disposed of incorrectly and dispersed in nature, this would result in as many as 10 million mask per month polluting the environment.” The Report further stipulates that “considering that the weight of each mask is about 4 grams, this would result in the dispersion of more than 40 thousand kilograms of plastic in nature.”

Does it mean the biodegradable plastic would act as the better solution? Many suggests that more than plastic solutions, there is a greater need for all waste to be disposed of properly. It is argued that the exposure of biodegradable plastic to different environments showed that “some items disappeared quickly, while you could still shop in some of these bags after four years in the sea. By the time they get to the sea, it’s too late.”

Concluding remarks

Ocean for time immemorial is the source of human prosperity and development through navigation, research, fishing and many others. Protection of oceanic resources and marine ecosystems are very necessary for human’s own survival. As the world is engulfed with unmindful response to COVID-19 pandemic, one could fairly assume that there will be ‘still talks’ and ‘no response’. Earths capacity to support human desires are limited and the talks of nature’s response are somewhat misdirected. For instance, for all the development in science and awareness formed against use of plastic, the COVID-19 pandemic experience only puts us back to square one. It yet again proved that we depend on plastic. Can world afford to move backwards? Present times have conveyed us that there is a greater need for collective efforts in order to bring sustainable alternatives. Yes, ‘together we can’, but, if we are serious and want to take thoughtful actions ‘it is now’!

*The author has written three books on environmental laws.

Continue Reading
Comments

Green Planet

Tiger Conservation in South and Southeast Asia and The Indian Experience

Published

on

Every year 29th July is being celebrated as Tiger Day since 2010 when thirteen tiger range countries, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Russia, Thailand and Vietnam adopted the Global Tiger Recovery Program  in St. Petersburg, Russia in November 2010 to double the number of wild tigers from about 3,200 to more than 7,000 by 2022. Earlier in the same year Governments from across Asia’s tiger range countries took initiatives to save wild tigers from extinction and total protection of critical tiger habitats on January in 1st Asian Ministerial Conference on Tiger Conservation at Hua Hin, Thailand.

Degradation in Tiger Population in Southeast Asia

Maximum tigers were roaming on those areas of Asia where human beings are now densely populated. Presently over one-third of tiger conservation sites in the world are still under the risk and the majority of those areas are located in Southeast Asia. Bhutan is the home to the highest altitude tigers in the world and Indonesian island of Sumatra is one of the last places on earth where tigers, elephants and orangutans coexist in the wild. Sunderban mangrove area of India and Bangladesh is the habitat of largest number of wild Royal Bengal tigers. One hundred years ago, there were 100,000 wild tigers in the nature but in 2010 as few as only 3,200 wild tigers remained. The sole cause of declination in tiger population is human activity and nearly 97% has been extinct due to rampant poaching and habitat loss. The borders of India-Nepal, Indonesia-China and Russia-China are very well known hot spots for trans-boundary smuggling of tiger body parts.

Indian Tiger Protection Laws and National Tiger Conservation Authority

The main legislative action was undertaken by then Indian government through the insertion of the Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act, 2006 which was also known as ‘Tiger Amendment’. This Amendment of 2006 introduced some important statutory and administrative steps including National Tiger Conservation Authority (Section 38L), Tiger and Other Endangered Species Crime Control Bureau (Section 38Y), Tiger Conservation Plan (Section 38V) and Tiger Conservation Foundation (Section 38 X). This Amendment was made on the recommendation of Tiger Task Force (TTF) consisting of biologists, social scientists, activists and forest officers across the country constituted by then Prime Minister in July 2005 on the backdrop of vanishing of tigers by rampant killing and poaching. Since its inception in 2006, National Tiger Conservation Authority has worked tremendously and till now declared nearly 50 protected areas as Tiger Reserves having critical tiger habitats with the consultation of State Governments. Though few Tiger Reserves were established earlier after launching of Project Tiger during 1973 but those reserves have got the statutory status (Section 38V) after this Amendment. Central Government notified many bye laws for better functioning of National Tiger Conservation Authority and those are The National Tiger Conservation Authority (Qualifications and Experience of Experts or Professional Members) Rules, 2006; The National Tiger Conservation Authority (Salaries, Allowances and other Conditions of Appointment) Rules, 2006; The Tiger Conservation Authority Fund (Regulation) Guidelines, 2007; The National Tiger Conservation Authority (Tiger Conservation Foundation) Guidelines, 2007; The National Tiger Conservation Authority (Annual Reports and Annual Statement of Accounts) Rules, 2007; The National Tiger Conservation Authority (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Officers and Other Employees) Rules, 2007 and The National Tiger Conservation Authority (Normative Standard for Tourism activities and Project Tiger) Guidelines, 2012. The Act has played nicely the federal features of Indian government as ‘wild animals’ are subject of State as well as Union.

Indian legal framework for wild animal protection

There is an elaborated interpretation of Indian Constitution after 42nd Amendment in 1976 through which protection of wild animals came under the Directive Principles of State Policies (Article 48A) and Fundamental Duties (Article 51A(g)) of citizen. This Amendment also brought the subject protection of wild animals within the legislative approach of States as well as Centre. In 1992, the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments widened the legislative power on forestry and ecological aspects to local governments of panchayats and municipalities.  The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 instituted office of Director of Wildlife Preservation [Section 3(a)], Asst. Director of wildlife preservation [Section 3(b)] and Wildlife Advisory Board [Section 6] at central level and Chief Wildlife Wardens [Section 4 (a)] and Wildlife Wardens [Section 4 (b)] at State level. After the Amendment of 1991, Central Zoo Authority [Section 38A] came into force to regulate all zoos in the country and National Board for Wildlife [Section 5A] at State level. The Amendment of 2003 introduced National Board for Wildlife [Section 5A] and a Standing Committee of the National Board [Section 5B] and for state level Honorary Wildlife Wardens [Section 4 (bb)], State Board Wildlife [Section 6], Advisory Committee [Section 33 B], Conservation Reserve Management Committee [Section 36 B] and Community Reserve Management Committee [Section 36 D]. There are several other administrative authorities constituted for protection of tigers and wild animals directly or indirectly. In 1962 the Animal Welfare Board of India was established under Ministry of Environment and Forests as per provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and National Biodiversity Authority was established through the provision of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 to regulate, transfer and use of diversified biological resources at the national level. The National Afforestation and Eco-Development Board, was set up in 1992 for promoting afforestation, tree plantation, ecological restoration and eco-development activities.

Collective Initiatives by Member Countries

Countries like India, Nepal and Russia have shown that tiger recovery is possible but other governments in Southeast Asia are facing the challenges in poaching and man-tiger conflicts. In November 2009, representatives from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Secretariat, the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the World Customs Organization (WCO) and the World Bank (IBRD) decided in Vienna to form the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) to jointly move forward in a coordinated manner with mandates in law enforcement and criminal justice to prevent and combat illegal trade in wild animals and plants. Finally the Consortium was launched by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in November 2010 during the International Tiger Forum held in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation. ICCWC is the first initiative where these five international agencies cooperate together towards crimes against animals, birds and fish, as well as timber and non-timber forest products to achieve a common goal of delivering multi-agency support to affected countries. In 2014, Nepal became the first country to achieve a full year of zero poaching for three of the world’s most iconic species –tiger, rhino and elephant. Last year Indian Prime Minister on the event of global tiger day declared that India is the safest habitat for tigers in the world and having largest numbers of wild tigers in the nature. India along with other participant countries decided to double their tiger population within 2020 at the St. Petersburg Tiger Summit, Russia in 2010 and as per recent press release of National Tiger Conservation Authority, since 2006, the 33% rise in tiger numbers is the highest ever recorded between cycles which stood at 21% between 2006 to 2010 and 30% between 2010 and 2014.

Continue Reading

Green Planet

Has CCS Really Got Us Covered?

Mehre Taban

Published

on

It is widely said and preached that one is responsible for one’s actions, but little do we pay attention to our actions towards our atmosphere. To cut it short, the ever-increasing temperature, scorching heat from the Sun and unbearable summers are all due to us-the humans. It may come to us as a shock, but it is the truth. Hotter days are the consequence of global warming. Global warming is the unusual rapid increase in the average temperature of earth. The Earth is getting hotter and hotter day by day due to human activities. Human inventions which involve burning fossil fuels(coal, oil, and natural gas) for industrial and domestic purposes is one of the major causes of global warming as combustion of these release methane, nitrogen oxides, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, etc.  but most importantly carbon dioxide (CO2).

Even though carbon dioxide is a natural greenhouse gas which helps sunlight reach the Earth but it also prevents some of the heat from radiating back into space but this is a natural process to keep the Earth’s temperature within limit otherwise we would have frozen to death. But the main concern here is that we are adding extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by combustion of fossil fuels which is causing great problems to deal with. Scientists are burning the midnight oil to address this pressing issue and save our planet. They have come up with ways to prevent carbon emissions by using carbon-free devices and if not prevent then at least with ways to get rid of this extra carbon dioxide that we have added and continue to add in the environment.

One of the ways that lets 90% of the carbon dioxide to get rid of is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). This technique collects the carbon dioxide from the emission sources, transports it to a storage location -underground and/or underwater and “dumps” it there. The method of Carbon Capturing has been in use for many years or to be precise for decades to get speedy recovery of oil and gas in industries, but it is only now that scientists have thought it to use for environmental reasons.

Carbon Capturing is done using three ways. All of them prevent up to 90% of the carbon dioxide from making the atmosphere toxic. One of the ways is ‘post-combustion capturing’ which lets us capture carbon dioxide after the fossil fuels are burnt. In the technique, a ‘filter’ can be added to the power-plant and the job is done. It allows us to modify the old plants with low expense. The second method is ‘pre-combustion capturing’ in which the carbon is collected before the fuel is burned. Unfortunately, this method is costly because new plants must be employed. The last and third method is ‘oxy-combustion capturing’ which separates carbon dioxide form steam after the fuel has been burnt in oxygen.

After the carbon capturing process comes the transportation step. Carbon dioxide can be transported in three states-solid, liquid, and gaseous. Solid CO2also known as dry ice, is very hazardous and sometimes fatal so it is very dangerous to transport, it would require huge manpower and it is also not very much friendly monetarily. So, transporting carbon dioxide in solid state is not feasible.  It is also possible to transport carbon dioxide in liquid state through ships and tankers butliquid carbon dioxideneeds low pressure and a constant low temperature, so cargo tankers or ships must be both pressurized and refrigerated. For that special mechanisms ought to be installed which is again not very pocket friendly but still in use as it does not go very hard on budget. The last option is to transport it in gaseous form. This is the best possible option and widely in use because in gaseous form, carbon dioxide is transported through pipelines which can be installed anywhere- underground or underwater (on sea-beds). A compressor compresses the gas all the way through the pipeline and moves it forward. Occasionally, a pipeline will have compressors after a measured distance to keep the gas moving and avoid any interruption. The CO2 must be free of any impurities and moisture or else, it can corrode the pipes. But pipelines built from stainless steel are said to have a low risk of corrosion.

As much as this method of transportation sounds easy and feasible, it is not. The reason being that this is a new method and there is not much data regarding this. There have not yet been many accidents due to mishandling or pipe leakage but the ones that occurred have gone without much harm. If there is leakage of carbon dioxide at a place, a condition called asphyxiation is common. It is shortness of breath due to lack of oxygen and excess of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a colorless and odorless gas. To avoid accidents due to leakage one thing that can be done is to add color and odor to the gas before transporting.

The last step in this method is storing the carbon dioxide. There are three possibilities to store carbon dioxide- in deep geological formations, underwater and in the form of mineral carbonates.

Considering storing carbon dioxide as mineral carbonates which is done by reacting CO2 with naturally occurring magnesium and calcium to form their respective carbonates which are very stable so there is no possibility of re-formation of carbon dioxide but this is a very slow process under normal conditions. It requires high temperature and pressure along with some catalyst. Once it is done then we are good to go.

The second option of storing it under water also seems quite promising but the environmental effects are believed to be very terrible. The excess carbon dioxide in the water reacts with water to form carbonic acid which leads to acidification of oceans. Also, the extra carbon dioxide in the water acts as asphyxiant and breathing becomes difficult for marine organisms. The last option is to store it underground. Carbon dioxide is stored in deep geological formations known as geological sequestration. In this technique, carbon dioxide is converted to ‘supercritical carbon dioxide’ which is a runny liquid. It is then injected into sedimentary rocks and the runny liquid then seeps into them underground. Various physical and geochemical mechanisms prevent carbon dioxide from escaping.

Although ‘Carbon Capture and Storage’ technique seems like a miracle solution, but it is important to keep in mind that it is not a permanent solution. It is just a way to get rid off already present carbon dioxide and we surely should not emit more and more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere thinking that CCS has got it all covered. It should be given keen intention that we should still come up with ways and devices with little or no carbon emission. Fossil fuels should not be used anymore. Rather than wasting time and money on coming up with ways to get rid of carbon dioxide being emitted, our goal should be to get invested in replacing fossil fuels with alternatives which has less adverse effects to the environment.

Continue Reading

Green Planet

Organic Farming and Climate Change

Alek Karci Kurniawan

Published

on

In early 2019, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, published an interesting study related to the effects of organic agriculture on the Earth’s climate. Stefan Wirsenius, Professor of environmental sciences who wrote the study concluded that organic food production has a worse impact on the climate as compared to conventional farming methods. Summary of the thesis published in Ekologisk news mat ärsämreförklimatet by chalmers. seon 8th January, 2019.

The approach is based on the argument that organic food requires a larger area of ​​land, so it contributes more to deforestation. The data source was statistics on total production in Sweden — yields per hectare for organic versus conventional agriculture for 2013-2015.

Findings in Sweden showed that yields from organic foodper hectare were much lower – mainly because there was no fertilizer used. Thus, a much larger area of ​​land was needed to produce organic food with the same amount of that produced by conventional method.

Until now, it is still a problem formulation for environmental experts and observers regarding what systems are suitable for developing sustainable global agriculture. It is due to the number of human populations continues to grow as a geometric progression, while the growth of food resources for consumption moves slowly following the arithmetical count.

Is it true that the organic farming system is no more sustainable than conventional farming system? Certainly it is not enough to conclude from one sample in an area. Even the different methods used in a system that want to be applied in the same area can show different results.

Simply put, the essence of organic farming emphasizes locality or the use of surrounding resources to grow plants – not dependent on industrial chemicals that help agricultural production. Then the problem is that there are certainly different and highly diverse local resources in each region.

There are areas with local resources that are sufficient to replace chemical fertilizers and pesticides. However, there are also areas with very little local resources. It is not that simple, every local resource available must further be tested for its compatibility with local land. Whether or not organic farming is successful depends on it.

Several things needed are water resistance testing, comparison of soil texture, observation of the development of land ecosystems, and how toself-produce vegetable extracts from local resources for pest repellant.

December 2018 ago, in an activity covering the organic rice harvest in Sumpur Kudus Sub-District, Sijunjung Regency, West Sumatra, Indonesia, I found facts that were contrary to the Wirsenius Thesis that we discussed earlier. Through organic farming system, farmers in Sumpur Kudus could produce 7.7 tons of rice per hectare. Previously, through fertilization and spraying methods, farmers in Sumpur Kudus produced 4 tons of rice per hectare. Their production costs were reduced and organic rice could be sold at a higher value than the price of common rice.

These results were obtained after conducting a compatibility test between the local resources and local land. A group of organic rice farmers in Sumpur Kudus found that unburnt straw was the most powerful material in maintaining water sustainability for their rice fields. Meanwhile, the highest nutrient content was found in a mixture of rice mud with cow dung. To repel pests, they replaced pesticides with papaya leaf extract.

Rice is only one example of various types of plants that can be applied to organic farming system. But the point is whether local resources are sufficient and suitable to support the agriculture. We can get different yields in one hectare of land if we use different local materials to support agriculture.

Another experience was found by Verena Seufert and Navin Ramankutty, both of whom are geography professors from the University of British Columbia. They conducted a study on the application of organic agriculture in North America, Europe and India. In an article entitled “Organic Farming Matters, Just Not In The Way You Think”, the researchers found that organic farming was up to 35% more profitable than conventional farming. In a number of regions, organic agriculture provides more rural employment opportunities because organic management is more labor intensive than conventional practice. In terms of health, the biggest advantage is that organic system can reduce exposure to toxic agrochemicals.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending