Wayne Ganpat and Howard Batson | Gulf conflict reveals need for Low External Input Agriculture model for Caribbean food security

There is every likelihood that if the current conflict in the Middle East persists, food prices will rise again! Higher costs associated with moving food for humans to the Western region is to be expected.

However, to be added would be increased costs for importation of feed for livestock and restricted supplies of some key farming inputs. Fertilisers and pesticides, mainly, are going to have significant impact on regional food production.

The present global disruptive event presently unfolding in the Gulf has the potential to further erode recent gains towards making the Caribbean region less food insecure. The costs and availability of food are major concerns that need to be addressed.

Today it’s the Gulf War. What will be next year’s disruptive event?

Recall some previous significant events: the temporary disruption as a result of the 911 World Trade Center bombing; severely restricted access by countries to grain at the start of the Ukraine-Russia conflict; and the near total shutdown of all maritime trade as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Added to these disruptive events are the overarching impacts of climate change which threatens all regional food production initiatives. Impacts are evident every year in the form of unusual flooding events, longer periods of droughts, episodes of intense heat and increased incidences of pests and diseases that reduce farm production and productivity by workers.

CARICOM is fully aware of these events and it has activated plans to reduce the huge regional food import bill, estimated at US$6 billion annually.

Several initiatives and plans have been put forward and actions are taking place; some more advanced than others. Production targets have been set for priority commodities to be produced in selected countries. Guyana is leading the charge with extensive production of rice, sugar, corn, soya, and black eye peas; while other countries are still in trial phases. While these initiatives take time, time is not on our side to make the region less reliant on imported food.

Most countries in the region, it has been shown, import greater than 75 per cent of their food. The increased fuel prices will undoubtedly send the food import bill much higher.

Economist Professor Roger Hosein has shown the strong direct relationship between increased oil prices and the food price index. Limited land, slow adoption of land-intensive technologies and low investment in agriculture all result in a heavy reliance on food imports, mainly from the USA.

IMPACT ON THE MOST VULNERABLE

The increased cost of fuel and transport by sea will result in increased landed cost of food and feed across the region. Retail prices increase immediately; notwithstanding governments’ assurances of 3-6 months food cover in-country. Food bought at lower costs suddenly attracts higher import costs.

Countries with lower food store capacity are more vulnerable. We only have to remember this from the onset of COVID-19. Vulnerable families are first and most impacted. Casual observations from the last significant event were that, even though there is food in warehouses presumably bought at lower prices, prices rise immediately in the market place.

Governments will have to dig into their coffers to deepen and widen the social security net for the most vulnerable to help them meet basic food needs by implementing social protection measures, such as food subsidies and targeted cash transfers; other national initiatives will have to take a back burner. Regularly, it seems, the region seems to be confronted with such similar events that stymie national development.

Our food sovereignty is compromised and economies are under threat. Caribbean peoples, especially the most vulnerable, will be the first to feel the brunt of this, and countries that depend on tourism are doubly impacted.

In Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, satisfaction of hunger sits at the foundation, demonstrating its importance above and beyond all other needs. So when people’s food supply is impacted, sitting governments need to be concerned. The deliberate, some say slow, movements of CARICOM and the strategies advanced to bring about meaningful change in the region to fix the food security problem has to be reimagined.

Higher agricultural input prices, especially fertilisers and pesticides, will see the cost of food production rise significantly in the region. Such rises in global food prices, agricultural inputs and transportation usually have immediate impacts on domestic inflation across regional countries.

THE FERTILISER EFFECT

We must also act faster and use the technologies to make our food system less reliant on external inputs. Increased fertiliser costs will directly impact the cost of food to consumers, both imported and local sourced, as farmers have to pay higher prices. Corn and soya price rises on international markets will translate into increased cost of livestock feed.

Some farmers unable to access high-cost inputs will exit the sector, as happened during the COVID-19 pandemic, making the situation even more tenuous. The regional food production system is known to be heavily dependent on imported fertilisers and to some extent pesticides.

Although the Caribbean lies geographically distant from the Persian Gulf, we will be impacted, as will all countries that depend on these imported inputs. When energy prices increase or supply disruptions occur, fertiliser prices often rise significantly. Fertiliser production depends heavily on natural gas.

It is estimated that almost one-third of all fertiliser passes through the Straits of Hormuz. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) indicated that up to 30 per cent of internationally traded fertilisers is shipped through this vital artery. This present disruption to the fertiliser supply chain will contribute to rising food prices in the region.

The recent suspension of urea production in Trinidad by NUTRIEN will only exacerbate the issue. Effectively, all fertilisers to be used in the region will have to be imported. Depending on the source, the increase in price will vary.

Reuters reported that fertiliser prices in the USA have risen by as much as 32 per cent since the conflict began. Small farmers across the Caribbean region will either reduce fertiliser use, crop less acreage or do less crops per year. Domestic and regional food supply will be challenged.

What will become of our large-scale production initiatives, in Guyana and being contemplated for other countries, that depend on large volumes of fertilisers and pesticides? Are we now going to be forced to import more food to feed our population? Caribbean economies are going to be stretched.

THE LEISA MODEL

While we have no control over global events that impact our food, we can take steps to lessen the impacts. The heavy dependence on external inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides, the higher-costs production inputs, have to be addressed. We need an alternative model of production; one that is less reliant on high use of external inputs.

In the late 1990s, the concept of LEISA (Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture) technologies was advanced; notably so as a response to the struggles farmers faced to meet the increased costs associated with high external input systems of production associated with the Green Revolution technologies.

The core principles of LEISA are centered around reducing the reliance on external inputs such as synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, promoting biodiversity, and improving soil health. These technologies have proved successful in other developing countries around the world that struggle to import inputs.

It sounds novel, but our fore parents practised a similar method successfully in earlier times. The advantage is that now there is a broad range of proven innovations available that can support this model of production.

We need to pay much more attention to our soils. The adoption of appropriate soil care practices, the use of bio fertilisers produced regionally, the education of farmers on fertiliser use and placement, the use of organic amendments, and crop rotation present immediate opportunities.

The huge amount of biomass, such as grass and shrub cuttings, that we literally dump can be vital sources of nutrients for use and presents an opportunity for young entrepreneurs to convert.

Soil experts often lament the degradation of regional soils because of overuse of cheap fertilisers over long periods. We only have to recall the tons of fertilisers used in the Banana and Sugar production as main export crops. These have degraded our soils.

Moreover, regional field extension staff are appalled at the extent of overuse of inorganic fertilisers by farmers, noting that only a small quantity of the amount applied by farmers is really needed. Experts suggest that farmers use double or even triple the required quantities, but crops can only utilise a fraction of what is generally applied. The rest is either lost through volatilisation or washed into the ground water, making its way slowly into the domestic supply.

Recommendations based on a soil test and farmer education will be very important. We can roll back significantly, not eliminate, the quantity of fertilisers imported for use in our farming system.

INVEST IN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT

We can manage pests with alternative methods. The Faculty of Food and Agriculture at The University of the West Indies (FFA/UWI) has developed a biopesticide that matches the efficacy of the best imported. However, to compete in the marketplace where longstanding importers hold leverage, investment will be needed to scale up locally produced biopesticides to reduce the cost of this input. This is an opportunity for investors.

Widespread implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies can help reduce the use of all pesticides; including those highly hazardous to humans and the environment.

We can hasten efforts to diversify our sources of staples and rejuvenate education efforts to have these as partial alternatives to the wheat offering. Current efforts at making them into flours is laudable, but the quantity needed to make any dent in the import bill of wheat flour is staggering.

It may be that we need to put more emphasis on using them in their natural forms and at other meal times, besides lunch time. This is quite acceptable in several regional countries, but it needs to be much more widely accepted in others. This will undoubtedly require national-level intervention.

Increased use of local forages can reduce our reliance on the amount of feedstock imported. Idle lands can be used for the production of Leucaena, Gliricidia and Mulberry. These are excellent sources of protein and amenable to pelletisation for ease of transport and storage. Investment in forage farms present further opportunities for entrepreneurs, well supported by the government, to grow these crops intensively, package and sell to small livestock farmers. Maybe idle land around the region, such a CARONI lands in Trinidad, can be made available.

A stronger focus on a Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) approach will enhance food production through sustainable practices, directly supporting the goal of reducing reliance on imported food. Implementing CSA practices has been shown to increase crop yields, with some reports from the Caribbean demonstrating up to a 30 per cent increase.

Practices related to soil health, for example, composting, mulching, and using bio-fertilisers align perfectly with the push to reduce dependence on imported inputs. The increased use of climate-resilient seeds that are drought-tolerant, pest-resistant, and early-maturing is crucial for maximising output in an unpredictable climate.

CONCLUSION

These are some immediate examples of alternative approaches and methods that can be used to make the region less dependent on the high levels of external inputs that are currently imported. Actions are appropriate and implementable at both the individual farm level and at national level by governments. These long-trusted methods support highly sustainable systems that benefit both human populations and the global environment.

Furthermore, these low-input practices promote biodiversity, improve soil health, and reduce the chemical footprint of modern farming, leading to cleaner water sources and safer food for consumers.

By reducing dependencies on foreign fertilisers, pesticides, and seeds, nations can exercise more control over their food sovereignty and economic well-being as they mitigate the impact of volatile global market prices. A return to home food production, well-practiced during the COVID-19 pandemic, which relied less on shop-bought fertilisers and other inputs, has to be reconsidered.

In an era of increasing geopolitical instability and unpredictable climate events, the risk of sudden disruptions to international trade routes remains high. Proactively reworking our agricultural systems to have more factors of production under our control ensures that our food supply can withstand unforeseen world events that threaten the accessibility and affordability of our food!

- Professor Wayne Ganpat is former Dean of the Faculty of Food and Agriculture, University of the West Indies (UWI); and Howard Batson is an International Agricultural Consultant. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com