Chapter 1
Nature of the problem

Introduction

FAO 1991. Sustainable Agriculture and Development in Asia and the Pacific.
Regional document No. 2 FAO/Netherlands Conference on Agriculture and Environment,
S-Hertogenbosch , the Netherlands 15-19 April 1991.

Given escalating population growth, intensified cropping, widespread land degradation, shrinking agricultural land and increasing demands on limited water resources from the expanding urban and industrial sectors, sustainable agricultural resource management (SARM) is critical to food security within the Asia Pacific Region.¹ The challenge facing the region is one of how to increase output from the agricultural sector while sustaining and enhancing the productive potential of the available agricultural resources.

Although the share of agriculture in GDP has declined steadily from 30 percent in the mid-1980s to around 20 percent in recent years (FAO 1995a), agriculture remains the driving economic force and major employer in most Asia-Pacific countries. More than 65 percent of the region's inhabitants still live in rural areas and agriculture employs more than half of the economically active population (FAO 1995a). The percentage contribution of the agricultural sector to the economies of both the developing and developed countries of the region has declined in recent years but SARM requires continuing, and increased, investment of financial and manpower resources from both government and private sectors.

A range of studies indicates alarming statistics on the extent and severity of land degradation on a continental, regional or national basis. One of these is the Global Assessment of Human Induced Soil Degradation (GLASOD) project which estimated that globally some 1.9 billion ha of land had been affected by soil degradation during the last 45 years, and that the largest area, or 850 million ha, was in Asia and the Pacific (Oldeman et al 1990).² About of this was believed to have suffered moderate to extreme soil degradation. Figures on the extent of land degradation within the region are largely based on qualitative estimates rather than precise data. Although some of these estimates may be based on questionable foundations, reports emanating from all countries within the region point to the existence of:

• Severe degradation of identifiable (often substantial) areas e.g. gullying, total removal of topsoil by sheet erosion, complete salinisation; and
• Light to moderate degradation over extensive areas eg. soil fertility decline in croplands and loss of palatable species in rangelands.

One of the conclusions of a recent FAO (1994) report on land degradation in South Asia noted that "although more precise data should be obtained, the total evidence is sufficient to call for immediate action to prevent further land degradation and, where possible, to reverse the effects of past degradation." This statement is believed to hold true for East and Southeast Asia. Another report noted the evidence of environmental stress in all of the Pacific countries although the specific nature and urgency of the problem varies according to the circumstances in which they occur (ADB 1992).

Land and water for agriculture are finite resources

The total land area of the Asia Pacific region amounts to some 3,001.5 million ha or 22.9% of the world's land area.³ Estimates vary as to how much of this land is suitable for agriculture, with variations in the data depending on the methodology used, the reliability of the available data and the scale at which the assessment was made. It has been estimated that under 14% of the Asia Pacific region's total land area are constraint-free for agriculture (Dent 1990). Thus the possibilities for agricultural production in over 86% of the region are limited by adverse soil, climatic and topographic factors namely cold (2%), dryness (19.4%) steep slopes (26.7%), shallow soils (4.1%), wetness⁴ (6.3%), adverse soil textures⁵ (12.6%) and chemical problems⁶ (13.5%).

Whereas there may be scope for technically alleviating some of these limitations (e.g. irrigation in arid areas, soil drainage in waterlogged areas), in most of the countries in the region almost all the land capable of sustainable agricultural use is already being farmed. FAO (1995a) estimated that that the uncropped cultivable area in South Asia (0.051 has per person) will be halved in 20 years, while that of East Asia (excluding China) will drop by a third, or to 0.103 ha per person. These estimates show the limited potential for expansion of the cultivated area. A recent report on the Pacific (ADB/SPREP 1992) noted the small amount of available land per person in most of the Pacific Island developing countries, especially when considering the generally poor quality soil. Significant additional arable land was considered a reasonable prospect in only a few exceptional circumstances (notably Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu).

Water is a vital resource for agriculture. Like land, it is a finite resource that has to be shared amongst a growing population. It is estimated that in Asia per caput water availability, which fell by half in the 30 years ending 1980, might fall by another 35% by the year 2000 (UNEP estimate quoted in FAO 1995a). Given that much of Asia's crop production is dependent on irrigation, this decline in water availability has potentially severe implications for food security. This is exacerbated by the growing demand for water from the urban and industrial sectors which compete with demands for water from the agricultural sector.

Where water is in short supply, ultimately it will come down to a political or economic choice, namely which sectors of the economy will give the better returns per litre - agriculture (i.e. using water for irrigated rice/wheat/vegetable production), tourism (i.e. supplying water to hotels and golf courses), or the urban/industrial sector?

A significant proportion of the land in crop production within Asia is fragile. This includes arid and rainfed semi-arid areas, those with unreliable rainfall, and areas with steep slopes and/or poor soils. It is these areas where environmental degradation and rural poverty tend to be most severe.

Small atolls are a feature of most of the Pacific Island countries as well as the Maldives. With elevations only a few metres above sea level they start with little, if any, soil of good agricultural quality, sparse vegetation and a severely limited supply of fresh water. They are extremely vulnerable to cyclones which can wash away much of their shallow soils or cause saltwater intrusion into the fragile In those Pacific countries with high islands as well as atolls, the populations tend to move to the larger islands to take advantage of the greater diversity and better protection of resources. But the differences are matters of degree.

Even the islands with relatively abundant land resources experience pressure on arable land, evidenced by the invasion of new (often unsuitable or reserved) areas for gardening or housing, stress in coastal regions and expansion of urban settlements (ADB/SPREP 1992). The limited cultivable area for expansion within the Asia Pacific region and the continuing conversion of fertile agricultural land to non-agricultural uses mean that production increases have to come mainly from growth in yield. However yield increases will be difficult to accomplish given the quickening pace of land degradation and water scarcity. The most damaging factors are soil erosion, nutrient mining, salinisation of soils, and reduced water quantity and quality.

The potential for yield growth is limited by poor agricultural resource management practices that result in unsustainable farming systems. This is a particular problem where the vicious circle of poverty and environmental degradation has been established. Dwindling per caput resources lead to further intensification of resource use and encroachment onto fragile areas.

Population supporting capacities

The ability of land to produce food is limited. The limits of production are set by soil and climatic conditions and land use and management (FAO 1982). Accordingly there are critical levels of population that can be supported in perpetuity from any given land area. Any attempt to produce food for populations in excess of the restrictions set by soil and climatic conditions will, in the long term, result in failure. Degradation of land, hunger and eventual reduction in population are the outcome of such practices. In recognition of these facts a study was initiated in 1978 by FAO and the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), in collaboration with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). The study aimed at determining the physical limits of the land's capacity with regard to the level of population that could be supported. It was undertaken in five regions in the developing world.

The study for Southeast Asia considered the population supporting capacities for 14 of the countries in the Asia Pacific Region⁷ for the years 1975 and 2000 according to low, medium and high levels of input use.

In 1975 five of the 14 countries (Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Vietnam) would have been unable to support their existing populations solely by means of low input agriculture. It was concluded that in the year 2000 these same five countries, with the addition of the Philippines, would be unable to support their projected populations at the low input level, and Bangladesh would also fail to meet its population needs with the use of intermediate levels of inputs. Whereas at first sight the other countries would appear to be able to support their existing and projected populations, the study also revealed marked regional differences within individual countries with some heavily populated and/or marginal areas exceeding their 1975 and 2000 carrying capacities (see box 1)

Consequences of soil degradation

Soil degradation (in particular, loss of potential soil productivity due to erosion and soil nutrient decline) is the biggest threat to meeting the future agricultural needs of the Asia Pacific region. The consequences of allowing this to continue are severe. These will have repercussions not only on individual farm families, but also at the national and international levels (after Stocking 1984):

• Soil and vegetation: declining soil productivity means less vegetation cover to the soil, less return of organic matter and less biological and nutrient activity. All are detrimental to the soil hence promote a downward spiral of increasing degradation.
• Yields: as soil productivity declines the useful, or economic, yield from crops and pastures will decline.
• Returns to the farmer: declining soil productivity means that direct returns are reduced, costs of production are increased and sustainability of returns is less.
• Local environment: to counteract declining soil productivity people may have to accept pollution (from increased use of agro-chemicals), construct mechanical protection works or deforest more land for agriculture.
• Local society: similarly the effects of a decline in soil productivity may cause migration of young males⁸ to seek work in towns, or change patterns of labour, diet, disease or malnutrition.
• Farming systems: a farming system adjusted to lower levels of soil productivity will have different crops and outputs; of less value nationally but more secure to the individual. The importance of agriculture within the household economy will decline with non-farming occupations of necessity becoming more prevalent.

• National economies: loss in soil productivity in both commercial and subsistence sectors has national costs in, for example, food imports, lower exports, relief supplies, extra agricultural investment etc. Less tangible are the social welfare costs associated with increasing numbers of those who fall below the poverty line.
• International relationships: political differences and power relationships between developed and developing countries are maintained at least in part by the poor productivity of the agricultural sector in developing countries.
• Aid: declining soil productivity contributes to the poor state of agriculture in many developing countries, for many the end result is a growing dependence on food relief and other programme aid.

Avoiding the above consequences of soil degradation requires the adoption of SARM practices within those land areas suitable for agriculture.

Sustainable development

The word sustainability has recently taken on a high profile within development circles. However it is not something new as natural scientists have recognised the concept of sustainability for many years. Whereas soil conservation and rural land use planning specialists may not have specifically used the term, in practice bio-physical sustainability has long been the objective underlying their field programmes and activities (Douglas 1994).

There is no universally accepted definition of sustainable development. One paper lists almost 60 suggested definitions (Pezzey 1989), though the one most commonly referred to in development circles is that to be found at the beginning of chapter 2 of Our Common Future⁹ (WCED 1987), namely:

Many other development workers and agencies have proposed alternative definitions of sustainable development. What these definitions all have in common is a recognition that sustainable development is based on a few key principles, particularly the following (after IUCN 1990):

• Ecological sustainability - development is undertaken in a manner that is compatible with the maintenance and/or enhancement of essential ecological processes, biological diversity and the natural resource base.
• Social and cultural sustainability - development is undertaken in a manner that will increase people's control over their lives, is compatible with the culture and values of the people affected by it, and maintains and strengthens community identity.
• Economic sustainability - development is undertaken in a manner that is economically efficient (i.e. the benefits are commensurate with the costs) and which ensures the resources are used and managed in a way that will retain their potential to support future generations.

Sustainable agricultural development

The present emphasis within development circles on sustainable development suggests that many past development efforts may have achieved at best only short-lived gains. Such an assessment can be applied to many past agricultural development programmes. Although such development efforts may have increased production in the short term, in the process they have often depleted the "natural resource capital stock" (i.e. caused land degradation) on which future agricultural development options depend (Pearce et al 1990).

The agricultural sector has figured highly in the present debate on what constitutes sustainable development. FAO's active involvement in this debate led to the formulation of a definition of sustainable development that focused more specifically on agriculture and natural resources than that of the WCED. The FAO Council approved the following definition in 1988 (FAO 1990a):

The FAO/Netherlands Conference on Agriculture and the Environment (FAO 1991a) considered that the above definition should be translated into several essential criteria and objectives against which the sustainability of present agriculture and future trends could be assessed. These were regarded as comprising the following:

• Meeting the basic nutritional requirements of present and future generations, qualitatively and quantitatively while providing a number of other agricultural products.
• Providing durable employment, sufficient income, and decent living and working conditions for all those engaged in agricultural production.
• Maintaining and, where possible, enhancing the productive capacity of the natural resource base as a whole, and the regenerative capacity of renewable resources, without disrupting the functioning of basic ecological cycles and natural balances, destroying the socio-cultural attributes of rural communities, or causing contamination of the environment.
• Reducing the vulnerability of the agricultural sector to adverse natural and socio-economic factors and other risks, and strengthening self-reliance.

A purely scientific definition of sustainability based on biophysical characteristics is not acceptable. This is implicit in the "five pillar" definition of sustainable (agriculture and) land management proposed by an IBSRAM working group in 1991, namely (Howlett 1995):

Sustainable agricultural resource management

SARM in the context of small-scale farming systems involves rural land users and their families making decisions to manage their interrelated resources of soil, climate, plants, animals, implements, labour, knowledge and capital, in order to meet their household needs on a sustainable and productive basis. Good SARM requires that this be done, in accordance with the constraints and opportunities presented by the local natural and socio-economic environment, so as to produce outputs from the inputs and technology available, while sustaining and enhancing the future productivity of the land.¹⁰

Land degradation occurs when farm households, seeking to satisfy their immediate needs, attempt to produce outputs from one or more of their land use activities. The manner in which this is done is non-sustainable and which will lead to a decline in the productive potential of the land, unless improvements and necessary changes are made with regard to the inputs, technologies and management practices employed.

Small-scale, primarily subsistence, farmers face a range of socio-economic constraints, such as population pressure, insecure land tenure, lack of alternative sources of family welfare, limited access to credit and limited knowledge of alternative practices. Unless such constraints can be overcome farmers have little option but to pursue short term production goals that they are well aware cannot be sustained.

Good SARM therefore requires that improved land use and management practices should develop from the knowledge, problem awareness, analysis, ideas, insights, capacities, goals, aspirations and priorities of the farmers and their household members. Since lasting improvements cannot be imposed, decisions about changes to existing land use practices should involve the full participation of the landusers in identifying problems and opportunities, formulating and implementing appropriate courses of action and in monitoring and evaluating the results of doing so.

The following seven key points are also critical to any consideration of SARM (after Howlett 1996):

• What period should be considered when looking at a farming system - is the system to be sustainable for 5 years, 25 years, or for generations?
• How can the dynamics of sustainability be captured in a constantly changing social, cultural and economic setting? What was once sustainable may no longer be so and vice versa; external and internal influences on a system will affect its sustainability.
• Whose perspective should be considered? Different groups may have different assessments of the sustainability of different systems - the farmer and the research scientist may have different views on sustainability, as may different members of the same household reflecting the different interests and perspectives of different gender and age groups.
• Which pathway to sustainability should be followed? There may be several different technical and policy options available - there is unlikely to be only one true road to sustainability.
• How are different systems to be assessed as to their sustainability?
• How should progress to more sustainable systems be monitored, and who will do it?

All the questions will need to be addressed in SARM. Although precise quantification of sustainability of different farming systems is impossible, but it should at least be possible to make qualitative judgements as to which are more sustainable in both the short and long term.

Concern with sustainable livelihoods

Poverty is the underlying cause of much of the land degradation within the Asia Pacific region. Lack of alternative income-generating activities (off- and non-farm) means that most rural households in the region are dependent on small-scale farming and/or forestry activities for their livelihood. Given that the majority of the region's population have no real alternative but to obtain their livelihood from the land, SARM must ultimately be concerned with the development and promotion of sustainable livelihoods.

Individual rural households require sustainable livelihoods to ensure that they have access to the food they require. Although some farm households can satisfy their food security needs on a sustainable basis from their own farm production, food security at the household level does not mean that all rural households have to meet all of their requirements from their own on-farm production.

In reality rural households in the Asia Pacific typically pursue a variety of different livelihood strategies. Some go in for commercial crop and/or livestock production, to enable them to purchase their additional food requirements with the proceeds from sales of produce. Others will harvest and sell a variety of forest products (from both on and off farm sources.

For many households, particularly those with limited land resources, increasingly one or more members of the household will need to work part- or full-time off farm. Depending on the area and the type of work they may receive payment in the form of food or cash. Others will earn the means to secure food from proceeds of non-farm activities such as cottage industries, trading, fishing etc.

In some countries (especially in the Pacific) remittances from members of the family working in town or overseas make a vital contribution to the overall household economy. Such individual households can be described as food-secure provided that they:

• obtain enough cash from farm sales, off/non-farm activities, and/or remittances
• find food available locally when needed for purchase or barter; and
• the means of livelihood pursued do not contribute to degradation of the local agricultural and forestry resources.

Multi-disciplinary dimension to sustainable agricultural resource management

The foregoing discussion recognises that, in the context of agricultural development, sustainability is concerned with the adoption of land management practices that will enable the available natural resources to be used, now and in the future, to meet basic human needs. Such a concept of sustainability embraces a number of different disciplinary concerns (Douglas 1994). From the bio-physical perspective the concern is maintaining and enhancing the potential of the physical environment (the land) to sustain plant growth (crops, pastures and trees) while conserving bio-diversity within the natural resource base. There is an implicit time dimension that requires that immediate or short term productive returns from the land should not be obtained at the expense of potential future production in the medium to long-term. There is a social dimension that addresses the need to use the land to meet human needs in ways that are socially and culturally acceptable. The economic dimension requires that any economic and financial costs incurred by individual landusers and the wider society should be commensurate with the benefits and that there should be no diminution in the value of the natural resource capital stock as a result of using the land for agricultural purposes.

SARM and the Pacific and other small island countries

The fact that the issues and options related to sustainable agriculture and food security in Asia may be different from those of concern to the Pacific Island countries should be considered. It is therefore important when looking at the Asia Pacific region as a whole to recognise the often unique characteristics of the Pacific sub-region (box 2). The small size and relative isolation of the Pacific Islands reduces the number of strategies for SARM. There is a much greater risk if a strategy or plan fails due to their limited natural resource bases. Conversely the continuing existence of traditional societies and their attachment to the land provide opportunities to develop long term stewardship through the active participation of the rural population (Howlett 1996).

¹ The Asia Pacific Region, as covered by this report, consists of 27 developing and newly emerging countries (Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Cook Islands, Cambodia, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Iran, Laos, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Republic of Korea, West Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tonga, Vanuatu and Vietnam) and 3 developed countries (Australia, Japan and New Zealand).

² Note the Asia Pacific Region referred to in the GLASOD study covers a wider area than that defined by FAO/RAPA as the Asia Pacific Region. Thus the figure of 850 million would include degraded land within countries in West Asia and the Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union.

³ Different reports by different organisations give different figures for total land area for individual countries within the Asia Pacific Region. For the purpose of this report the source for all figures of total land area, either for the region or individual countries, is: FAO RAPA 1996. Selected Indicators of Food and Agriculture Development in Asia-Pacific Region, 1985-95. RAP Publication 1996/32 Bangkok.

⁴ This includes land classified as peat land.

⁵ Coarse textures and heavy cracking clays.

⁶ Infertile, saline/sodic and acid sulphate soils.

^{7 Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. In addition the study looked at the situation in Brunei and Singapore which although physically in Southeast Asia are excluded from this report as they do not belong to the group of countries that makes up the FAO Asia Pacific Region.}

⁸ Or females, in some countries e.g. the Philippines, the opportunities for off-farm employment may in fact be greater for young females (working as maids, domestic servants).

⁹ Often referred to as the Brundtland report, after Gro Harlem Brundtland, chairman of the UN World Commission on Environment and Development.

¹⁰ The term land is used here in a broad sense to encompass the natural environment to include such factors of agricultural production as climate, topography, soils, hydrology and vegetation.