The CoCoFe zero draft should be greatly improved before being an international Code of conduct.
1- First many scientific result presented as scientific proofs in this code are unconvincing assertions. For example sources of heavy metals pollutions are not really demonstrated. The work must keep on considering the isotopic ratios of cadmium, lead etc.because sources are several (industry, fossil combustibles, the parent rock and the original soil itself, the geological context, airborn nanoparticles).Only such studies should be deciding factors and by the way the different sources of pollution could be quantify.
2- roles of fertilizers and pesticides have not to be treated or even presented on the same rank. The negative impact developped by pesticides use is real. It is a danger for health of human population and animals.
3- How to ensure the feeding of the world population and to diminishe poverty? To day more than 50 % of people can survive thanks to the use of fertilizers. And considering the risk of use of organic fertilizers is higher than that of mineral fertilizers because developpement of bacteria strongly increase the risk for health. 10 to 20 millions of croppable lands are degraded each year because of bad agricultural practices which lead to a strong erosion of soil and then a loss of nutrients. It turns out that fertilizers use only can ensure the renewal of nutrients in the soil. Most of farmers and stakeholders have not the slightest hint that mineral fertilizers could restore the soil fertility when nutrients have gone along with clay minerals through soil erosion.
And to restore or to enhance soil fertility can keep food production and to be actually a breakthrough for feeding poor populations. FAO does not forget that hunger continues to lag behind. To provide enough food for humans must be the main target.
Daniel Nahon
professor at Aix-Marseille University (AMU)
president of directoire de la recherche of AMU
Member of Institut Universitaire de France ( chair of soil science)
Daniel Nahon