Transcript Enhancing Capacity for Integrated Assessment and Planning for Sustainable Development in Colombia: Agricultural Trade Liberalization and its relationship with Biodiversity and Poverty Alleviation UNEP.

Enhancing Capacity for Integrated Assessment and
Planning for Sustainable Development in Colombia:
Agricultural Trade Liberalization and its relationship
with Biodiversity and Poverty Alleviation
UNEP Initiative on Capacity Building for
Integrated Assessment and Planning for
Sustainable Development
Mid-term Review Meeting
Geneva, February 16-17, 2005
Brief Description of the Project
Objective
To analyze the effects of the liberalization of
agricultural trade on biodiversity, the
sustainability of small scale farmers, and
possible structural changes in agriculture and
cattle production.
Brief Description of the Project
Expected outcome
• Analysis of the decision planning process related with
agricultural trade liberalization.
• Analysis of the process of incorporating biodiversity and
poverty criteria on the decision making process.
• Identification of trends in, opportunities created by, and threats
from the liberalization process.
• Identification of alternatives for implementation of priorities
• Achievement of agreements with the decision makers.
• Identification of policy mechanisms.
National Steering Committee
Government institutions leading the project
The project is led by
The Ministry of Environment, Housing and
Territorial Development, and the National Planning
Department.
Ministry Of Agriculture and Rural Development
Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism
Ministry of Interior and Justice
With the collaboration of
Colombian Agricultural Institute
Interamerican Institute for Agricultural Cooperation
Semillas Group
Description of the Project Process
Feed back system for
continuous
improvement
Methodology for Integrated Assessment
Selection of
priority sectors
Interinstitutional
Coordination
Identification of
links
between sector,
environment,
biodiversity and social
aspects
Monitoring and
control
Indicators
Official
Implementation
Stakeholders
Analysis
Participatory
identification and
construction of the
proposals
Priorities and Consensus
Alternatives Analysis
(trends, threads, opportunities)
Identification of key
instances for decisions
Identification of links
between sector, environment, biodiversity and social aspects
Priorization
TRADE
NEGOCIACIONES
NEGOTIATIONS
COMERCIALES
 Structural changes in agricultural
production
Effects over small scale farmers
MEA
AMUMAS
 Food Security and AgroBiodiversity.
Main Links
Productive
Structures
BD
Food
Security
small
scale
farmers
Selection of priority sectors
Key Economic, Social and Environmental Issues
Integrated Assessment
Trade
Biodiversity
Poverty
Ecosystems
Agricultural
Land use
Income/
Employment
Productive systems
Genetic Resources
Agricultural Biodiversity
Agriculture is the most closely related sector to Biodiversity
Food
Security
Stakeholder Analysis
Description and Rationale of the Planning Process
The Free Trade Agreement – US
And the Agricultural Internal Agenda
This planning process was selected because:
• The FTA is a concrete liberalization policy instrument.
• Colombia is currently involved in FTA negotiations with
the US which will influence various aspects of long term
national development policies.
• It presents a unique opportunity to influence a process of
this magnitude on the domestic level
Description and Rationale of the Planning Process
Decision Planning Process for the Internal Agenda
FTA
NEGOTIATING
TEAM
DIRECTIVE
COUNCIL
TECHNICAL
SECRETARY
NPD
PUBLIC
FORUMS
REGIONAL
SECTORAL
THEMATIC
Main gaps and weaknesses
• Substance
The overall purpose is clear, but the planning process
of the FTA and the Internal Agenda is not sufficiently
open, as it hardly involves local communities.
The FTA and Internal Agenda has separated
chapters related to Economic, Environmental and
Social issues but does not consider this issues in an
integrated manner.
Main gaps and weaknesses of the process
• It is not clear
– the participation of marginalized, weak, minority groups, in
particular local communities.
– the flow of information on the planning process related with such
groups.
– the role of these groups inside the trade policy objective
– which are going to be their expectative and opportunities after the
FTA.
• Despite the important dissemination instruments, the information
related with the FTA and IA does not reach rural communities.
• Despite the effort, the process is not supported in a substantial budget
that allows a wider participation. As well, the timeline has been very
tight.
• Government Partners
National Planning Department
Directorate of Rural Sustainable Development (primary beneficiary)
Ministry of Agriculture (NSC)
Ministry of Commerce (NSC)
CRITERIA OF PRIORITY CROPS IDENTIFICATION
Semillas Group
IDEA
National
Local variaties of crops grown by
Development
Clasification of
farmer and indigenous
Plan
(2003production
systems
communities
2006) Targeted related to its impact
R. Andina 1
R. Caribe
New Crops (Ha).
over BD
(--, 100, 41)
7,58
D
(20, 8, 22)
32
145.000
9,32
D
62.000
13,62
F
Products
Potatoe
Corn
African Palm
Jaime Forero Alvarez
Farmer
production
X
Traditional
Commercial
production
Technified
X
1. In ( ) is indicated the varieties and species found on ( Z.Cafetera, Santander, Laguna La Cocha)
TRADE INSTRUMENTS OF COLOMBIAN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
Market Acces
Products
Potatoe
Corn
African Palm
Forest
AEC*
X
X
X
X
Internal Policies
Salvaguardias - Contingentes
SAFP**
OMC
arancelarios
X
X
X
X
X
X
Vistos
buenos
Acuerdos de
absorción
X
X
X
X
Precios
minimos de
garantía
Precios de
intervención
Cuotas de
fomento
Apoyo a la
comercialización
Interna
X
X
X
X
*Arancel Externo Común
** Sistema Andino de Franja de Precios
OTHER CRITERIA
Information Availability
Conflict of Land Use indicator (livestock)
Assessment of a Georeference Information System Instrument
Stakeholder Involvement
Ministries (environment, interior, commerce, agriculture):
Guide the project
Provide Information
Identify priorities
Participate in national workshops
National Planning Department
Guide the project
Provides Information
Identifies priorities
Helps with methodologies
Participates in national workshops
Other agricultural authorities (ICA, Corpoica)
Guide the project
Provide Information
Identify priorities
Participate in national workshops
Regional Authorities (Agricultural Agencies – Umatas - regional)
Logistical support
Convoke local community meetings
Provide Information
Participate in workshops
Private sector (Fedepalma – Fedipapa)
Academic institutions (Javeriana University – Cega):
Provide Information
Help with methodologies
Participate in workshops
Provide Information
Study partners
Local communities: (Individual Farmers & Farm Associations)
Participate in workshops
International Institutions (IICA)
Logistical support
Provides Information
Helps in methodologies
Participates in workshops
NGOs:
Convoke farmer & farm association meetings
Participate in workshops
Stakeholder Involvement
Methods for stakeholder consultations and
involvement
 Workshops & Meetings
 Consultations & Interviews
 WEB page
http://www.humboldt.org.co/chmcolombia/servicios/jsp/comercio_agr
icola/
Description of the Project Process
Activities undertaken
•
•
•
Background document: main relationships and
priorities
Official Project Launch – held in Aug 2004
First National Workshop –held in Sep 2004:

•
Presentation of the methodology - The UNEP team
participated
Two regional Workshops

Local communities (farmers), regional agricultural
authorities and related NGOs.
Tools and methods
•
•
•
The Integrated Assessment was focused on the small scale farms .
The main focus is to find the economical, ecological and social relationships
Deficiencies
- Lack of information on agrobiodiversity, production systems, food security
- Financial resources
- No information available for small scale farmer
Qualitative Tools
Workshops with marginalized and weak represented groups to wide their participation on the
planning process.
Quick Agro – Ecological Assessments
Validation of linkages by perception (Mental Maps)
Semi – Structured Local Market Surveys
Literature Reviews
Quantitative Tools
In order to analyze the linkage of the effect of the agricultural trade policy on the land use conflict.
–
–
Production Function Approach
Geographic Information System Tools (Desired)
Qualitative Tools
Conceptual framework for food security and its relationship with Trade
Global Food
Availability
TRADE
National Net
Imports of Food
National Food
Production
National Food
Availability
Government
Revenues
Household
Incomes
Household
Food Access
Food
Security
Growth,
Employment,
Income
distribution
Care
Health
global
national
household
& individuals
Other Basic
Needs
Nutrition
Security
individuals
Source: IFPRI, TMD Discussion Paper No.59, 2000
Food Insecurity causes on rural families
Low food availability and consumption on the family
Low production
for self-consumption
Low crop
yields
Low Soil
Productivity
Low purchasing power
to buy food
Scarce land
endowment
Inappropriate
technologies
Inadequate
soils
for crops
Inadequate
use of soils
Lack of
Permanent
employment
Lack of
knowledge
Lack of
inputs
Low
Incomes
Seasonal
Activities
High food
prices
Low
Salaries
Low
Sales
revenues
Geographic
Isolation
Low labor
capacities
Lack of
Surplus for
sale
High work
demand
No market
for their
products
Source: FAO. 2001. Guía para la gestión municipal de programas de seguridad alimentaria
Quick Agro – Ecological Assessments
Literature Reviews
How does public policy affect the
ESE issues?
1990 - 2000
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
-500000
1980
USD thousands
Trade Balance Cattle and Agricultural And Agro-Industrial
Production 1980-2003
Total
Agric
and Cattle And
TOTAL
AGROPECUARIO
Y Agro-Industrial
AGROINDUSTRIAL.
Total Agric and Cattle And Agro-Industrial. Excluding coffee
TOTAL AGROPECUARIO Y AGROINDUSTRIAL. SIN CAFE
Fuentes: periodo 1980-1997: DNP - UDA y Oficina de Información y Estadística del Ministerio de
Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural. Periodo 1998-2003: Ministerio de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural,
Dirección de Politica Sectorial - Grupo Sistemas de Información
Calculos: IAvH - LVE
Interest Real
120
600000
100
500000
80
400000
60
300000
40
200000
20
100000
Arancel
Tariff
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
0
1996
0
Ton
2003
2002
2001
2000
TIEA
IR
FUENTE: DNP- Dirección de Desarrollo Agrario con base en Evaluaciones
Agropecuarias URPA´s, UMATA´s. MADR - Dirección de Política Sectorial - Grupo
Sistemas de Información. FEDEPALMA. Banco de la República, Superintendencia
Bancaria.
Calculos: IAvH - LVE
Colombia. Tariff and Palm Oil Production 1996 - 2003
%
Rendimiento
(Ton/ha)
Yield (Ton/Ha)
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1991
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1990
Ton / Ha
Colombia:African Palm yield Vs IR 1990 - 2003
Producción
Production
FUENTE: DNP- Dirección de Desarrollo Agrario con base en Evaluaciones Agropecuarias
URPA´s, UMATA´s. MADR - Dirección de Política Sectorial - Grupo Sistemas de Información.
FEDEPALMA. MADR, Anuarios
Producción en Términos de Aceite. No incluye material verde M/V
Distribution of small scale farmer production
C o l o m b i a : D i s tr i b u c ió n d e l a s u p e r fi c i e c u l ti v a d a p o r l o s
Porcentaje
c am p e sin o s. 2 0 02
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
D a to s to m a d o s d e F o re r o y o tro s 2 00 2
F ue nte : B a s e de d a to s M in a gr ic u ltu ra y D e s a rro llo R u ra l
E lab o r ó : IA v H - LV E
Amazonía
Orinoquía
pac ífic o
A ndina
Suroccidental
Andina
CentroOccidente
Andina
Oriental
Caribe
0
Participation of small scale farmer’s production
Surface and Agriculture Output Value
Predominancia
1990-1992 % 1999-2001 %
cultivos
Campesinos
58,2
67,1
Superficie cosechada
Capitalistas
41,8
32,9
(hectáreas)
Total nacional
100
100
Campesinos
54,9
58,1
Valor producción
Capitalistas
45,1
41,9
(millones de $ 1994)
Total nacional
100
100
Variable
Tomado
de Forero y otros
2002
Fuente. Minagricultura
y Desarrollo
Rural - urpas, Umatas, Augura, Federacafé,
Asocaña, Fedepalma, Ascolflores
Share of Farmer Economie´s Products on
the Food Purchasing 1995
Alimentos
Arroz
Tubérculos y plátanos
Hortalizas y legumbres
Frutas
Carnes
Lácteos
Panela
TOTAL
Tomado de Forero y otros 2002
Participación (%)
0,7
8,1
8,7
5,8
6,2
4,2
1,5
35,3
Small scale farmers and indigenous communities agrobiodiversity
ESPECIES Y VARIEDADES CULTIVADAS POR COMUNIDADES CAMPESINAS E INDIGENAS DE ESPECIAL INTERÉS PARA LA
ALIMENTACIÓN
Productos con estadísticas
MADR (1991-2001)
Tratado FAO
Grupo Semillas
Lista de cultivos
alimentarios (Anexo I)
Variedades locales de cultivos manejadas por
organizaciones y comunidades campesinas e
indigenas
R. Andina
1
R. Caribe
Arroz: Secano Manual / Total
X
Papa
X
(--, 100, 41)
Cebada
X
(--, 5, --)
Fríjol
X
(34, 12, 46)
12
Maíz
X
(20, 8, 22)
32
Trigo
X
(--, 8, --)
Caña de Azúcar
22
(21, --, --)
Ñame
X
Plátano
X
10
(22, --, --)
Yuca
Café
2
16
(8, --, --)
1
Especies y variedades cultivadas por organizaciones locales de la Zona Cafetera, la Provincia García Rovira de Santander y el ecosistema de la Laguna de la Cocha en
Nariño. En paréntesis se indíca las especies y variedades encontradas en las zonas mencionadas: (Z. Cafetera, Santander, Nariño), se relacionan sólo aquellas que coinciden
con los cultivos que tienen estadísticas oficiales. Adaptado de: Grupo Semillas (2004) "Cultivando la Diversidad en Colombia", Proyecto Cultivando la Diversidad, Bogotá, 2004,
p. 33
2
Variedades de los cultivos tradicionales manejados por las comunidades indígenas y campesinas de la región Caribe, se relacionan sólo aquellas que coinciden con los cultivos
que tienen estadísticas oficiales. Adaptado de: Grupo Semillas (2004) "Cultivando la Diversidad en Colombia", Proyecto Cultivando la Diversidad, Bogotá, 2004, p. 48
COLOMBIA: rural poverty and food security
•
•
•
•
•
Rural population: 1938 = 70%; 1990 = 30%; 2001 = 25.5%
Agricultural sector: 13.4% GDP (Producto Interno Bruto)
One of the countries with worst income distribution in Latin America
Increasing unemployment
In 2000, statistics show a return to poverty levels from 1988
Desempleo Urbano / Rural 1980-2002 (% )
9,7
2002
16,4
10,4
2000
16,6
10,9
1999
7,6
1998
1997
6,5
1996
6,4
1,4
1980
11,6
Nacional
Rural
Urbana
8,7
10,3
5
Urbano (%)
59.2
74.9
48.2
2000
51.5
75.8
41.8
59.8
82.0
51.0
19.4
37.7
11.6
17.9
37.5
10.1
23.4
43.4
15.8
0.55
0.52
0.50
0.54
0.50
0.56
0.56
0.50
0.54
51.7
70.7
43.6
INDICADOR DE INDIGENCIA(%)
7,7
0
Nacional
Rural
Urbana
1993 1998
15,0
4,6
1988
19,7
11,8
5,0
1995
1988
15,7
9,1
2001
INDICADOR DE POBREZA (%)
10
Rural (%)
15
20
27.2
43.3
15.9
INDICADOR GINI (%)
Nacional
Cabecera
Rural
Fuente: Dirección Desarrollo Social, DNP, con base en ENH, DANE
Fuente: DANE
COLOMBIA: rural poverty and food insecurity
•
The contribution of imported food to the total daily per capita provision was almost
duplicated between 1991 and 2001, from 10,1% to 19.6%
–
•
Imported food participation: cereals 50.5%; oils and fats 42%; vegetables (leguminosas)
60.5%
Although the nutritional status of children less than 5 years has been improved,
persists the problem of chronic undernourishment intensified in rural areas
EVOLUCION DE LA DESNUTRICIÓN EN NIÑOS(AS) MENORES DE CINCO AÑOS
1986
1995
2000
NIVELES DE DESNUTRICIÓN
CRÓNICA
Talla Para la Edad
TOTAL
URBANA
RURAL
16.6
15.0
12.5
19.1
13.5
10.8
19.4
GLOBAL
Peso Para la Edad
TOTAL
URBANA
RURAL
10.1
8.4
6.6
11.4
6.7
5.7
8.9
AGUDA
Peso Para la Talla
TOTAL
URBANA
RURAL
2.9
1.4
1.0
2.1
0.8
0.7
1.0
Fuente: MINISTERIO DE SALUD y PROFAMILIA. Encuesta Nacional de Demografía y Salud, Colombia .
Conflict of Land Use
Usos
Potencial
Forest
Pasture
Agric.
Others
70
69
13
16
2
1932
1998
2000
53
43.7
2.4
48
35
4
13
54
36
4.4
5
60
50
Potential
32
98
2000
40
30
20
10
0
Forest
Agriculture
Pasture
Other
Fuente: IGAC 1998.
Transformation of habitats and ecosystems
Scenarios
Positive Scenario
Negative Scenario
Preliminary Results
Planning Process
• Rural and marginalized communities feel distant towards the decision planning process
• Considerable negative expectations regarding results of FTA negotiations due to
asymmetric information flows
• Change of perceptions when information is provided
Social
• Small scale farmers near extinction - Under-estimation of importance of Farm
Economies - Decrease in the quality of food supply
Economic
• Substantial decrease on rural income and employment
Environmental and BD
• Lost of traditional practices
• Higher pressure for incremental production. –
– More usage of agro – chemistry inputs
– Expansion of agriculture frontier (Increase of pressure over natural ecosystems)
– Productive systems less friendly with Biodiversity
• Loss of agriculture biodiversity
Preliminary Recommendations
To successfully influence in the four main
strategies of the Internal Agriculture Agenda
Land & Water

Land Planning Tools con BD criteria
 Value of Local communities function

Instruments for assessment of the importance of the environmental services provided by Farm
Economies – (e.g. In-Situ Conservation of Agrobiodiversity)
Technological Innovation & Sanitary Admissibility


Conversion to Friendlier Production Systems
An agenda for Ecological Agriculture investigation
Transaction Costs



Stable Legal frame
 Farmers rights
Capacity Building
Incentives for
 in-situ conservation
 Conversion to Friendlier Production Systems
Planned Activities and Next Steps
Pillars
Economic
Social
Income - Employment Food Security
Scenario
Positve
Negative
Environmental / Biodiversity
Agricultural Biodiversity - Land Use Conflic
Planned Activities and Next Steps
• At least two more Regional Workshops
• Possibility of a Sub-sectorial workshop
• Evaluating the viability of implementation of a
Geo-referencing Information System tool
• Economic Studies
• Build up of policy recommendations for the
Internal Agenda