DIVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR INDUSTRY-A MINISTER'S LAMENTATIONS

The turbulence and violence that forced the Tata Motors to make a hasty retreat from West Bengal and set up its Nano car project in Gujarat is still fresh in the memory of those familiar with the conflict that is becoming more and more frequent between the farmers and the industry. A new dimension has been added to this issue by the agriculture minister of the country who made an assertion recently that good farming land should not be acquired for industry since that would affect the food production in a serious way. His contention that majority of land holdings have no assured water supply, however, provides some justification that such lands being low in productivity can be used for industrial development. An agriculture minister of a country should strive to make the land more productive by providing irrigation and other inputs for increasing over all production instead of lamenting helplessly in public!

Addressing the media on the sidelines of a workshop on 'Bringing the Green Revolution to the Eastern Region,' Pawar pointed out that as much as 82% of the farmers own less than an acre and 60% of such land have no assured water supply. "Therefore, the land which gives a good crop and the land which has good water supply will have to be preserved. Therefore, we are not encouraging acquisition of such land," Pawar said, adding however, he is not against setting up of industries. Pointing out that land identified for agriculture is shrinking, he said a committee under his ministry had recommended four years ago that the states should not acquire land where "one or two crops is possible and irrigation is also possible."

While productive land is an asset for any farmer, what is posing a dilemma is the small size of land holdings where most farmers are able to just survive, the viability of the operation always uncertain. Why these farmers are resisting land acquisition, in spite of being a marginal segment of the population is an issue not exercising the minds of the policy makers. If adequate compensation and assured livelihood through employment assurance are forthcoming, there is no reason why these farmer-owners would not surrender their land. National agriculture policy of any counry must lay down norms for crop selection, extent of areas with high production potential, fallow land and its utilization, use of land for non-agricultural activity, etc in stead of dealing with these issues piece meal.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

BIOFUEL MORE IMPORTANT THAN FOOD?-WHAT AN AUDACITY?

The proponents of using food for biofuel are getting brasher day by day though logic and common sense rule out diversion of food crops for alcohol making and its further use as a biofuel. The fact that half the population in this world do not have sufficient foods to keep them away from chronic hunger and malnutrition does not seem to be bothering their conscience as exemplified by the adamant and brash stand taken by a key official of the EU in justifying the EU program for biofuels from food crops.

"Andris Piebalgs, the EU's commissioner for development aid, published a paper Apr. 21 committing him to ensuring that work aimed at reducing poverty is not undermined by the Union's activities in other policy areas such as trade, agriculture and fisheries. While the paper states that the Union's officials have an "obligation" to monitor the effects of biofuel production on the world's poor, Piebalgs would not accept he was wrong to support the use of food crops for power generation during his previous role as the EU's energy commissioner. "I can clearly state today that biofuel policy has done no damage in the developing world," Piebalgs told IPS. "The focus is right." Holding the energy portfolio in the European Commission from 2004 until last year, Piebalgs was one of the most zealous defenders of an EU strategy that at least 10 percent of all journeys undertaken on the bloc's roads by 2020 should be powered by biofuels".
If powerful countries like the US can talk of economic sanctions on other countries in the UN forum for one reason or the other, it is time developing countries insist on international sanctions on those using valuable food crops for animal feeding or for fuel production. Running an automobile for pleasure can never get precedence over keeping hunger away from a human being!

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD VS FUEL-LAND USE DILEMMA

The raging debate regarding the policies now being pursued by some countries in diverting food materials for biofuel production doe not seem to be abating with no consensus emerging amongst the stake holders interested in maintaining equity and justice in this planet. While rich and prosperous countries with access to more than abundant foods at their door steps are more concerned about sustainable fuel sources, those under- privileged nations are facing the daunting task of keeping the stomach of their population at least half full to prevent catastrophic and permanent damage to their health. Ethics, morality, humane considerations and universal fellowship demand sharing of the pleasure as well as the sufferings amongst people on this earth and flow of economic aid, delivered as well as promised, must ensure freedom from hunger for every denizen where ever they are. Now comes scientific logic based on impeccable research studies to confirm that growing crops for food is much more efficient than for fuel.

"Using productive farmland to grow crops for food instead of fuel is more energy efficient, Michigan State University scientists concluded, after analyzing 17 years' worth of data to help settle the food versus fuel debate."It's 36 percent more efficient to grow grain for food than for fuel," said Ilya Gelfand, an MSU postdoctoral researcher and lead author of the study. "The ideal is to grow corn for food, then leave half the leftover stalks and leaves on the field for soil conservation and produce cellulosic ethanol with the other half."

The conclusion of the above study is fair and equitable to all and every nation must subscribe to the new strategy enunciated by the scientists who had the courage and conviction to rebuff the stand by some of the developed countries in the fore front advocating use of food crops for fuel to maintain the high quality of life to which their population is used to during the last few decades. Millions of tons of agricultural wastes generated in the farming operation are potential source of alcohol which needs viable technologies to convert cellulosic substance into yeast fermentable sugars. In stead of wasting valuable food by diversion to fuel making, rich nations must provide the where withal to the poor countries to process the farm wastes into valuable fuel.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com