80% or 30% food from “small farmers”?

Vandana Shiva’s docco was watched after which the host stood up saying that it is great small farms supply 80% of food. I objected: “Sorry, but that information has been recently revised, and it is now just 30%”. This news was not well received and I was made to feel I was being deliberately disruptive, so I wrote this:

RE – Vandana Shiva’s statement in her video on “Seeds”   Letter from Rob B to JJ. Aug., 2023

To be clear, I am an authoritative advocate of organic farming and am strongly opposed to agrichemicals. My credentials are growing up living/working on mixed farms, and an actual PhD in Tropical Agroecology (Blakemore 1994) but I started working academically on organic farms in 1979 when I started my BSc (Hons.) Ecology project on Lady Eve Balfour’s Haughley Experiment farm (incidentally this is around the time Vandana was awarded a PhD in 1979 on the “philosophy of physics“, which is about as far away from Nature and farming as is possible)! So I am better qualified and, arguably, I have more experience on organic farming then she does… But for any hope to make any progress we all must be honest and factual (unlike the commercial promoters of chemicals). In her autobiographical docco Vandana said “small farmers” produce 80% of our food. This is often parroted, and I used to say the same until I found out differently. Any real scientist needs to correct errors and avoid dogma. Here’s the current state-of-play.

In 2008 Dr Miguel Altieri, who promoted the use of “AGROECOLOGY”, published a study with smallholder and family farms occupying about 80% of land implying 80% of food. However, Ricciardi et al. (2018 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912417301293) revised this to about 30% of human food from small farms. They said – “The widely reported claim that smallholders produce 70–80% of the world’s food has been a linchpin of agricultural development policy despite limited empirical evidence. Recent empirical attempts to reinvestigate this number have lacked raw data on how much food smallholders produce, and have relied on model assumptions with unknown biases and with limited spatial and commodity coverage. We examine variations in crop production by farm size using a newly-compiled global sample of subnational level microdata and agricultural censuses covering more countries (n=55) and crop types (n=154) than assessed to date. We estimate that farms under 2ha globally produce 28–31% of total crop production and 30–34% of food supply on 24% of gross agricultural area. Farms under 2ha devote a greater proportion of their production to food, and account for greater crop diversity, while farms over 1000ha have the greatest proportion of post-harvest loss.” [My bolding added here and below].

My recent paper (Blakemore 2022/3 – https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202212.0258/v2) clearly states: “Cereal yields are not the only metric as other crops and smallholder production contribute, previously estimated as 70–80% recently revised to ~30% (Ricciadi et al. 2018, 2021). FAO (2013: 130 – fao.org/docrep/018/i3107e/i3107e.PDF) say: “Of the approximately 2.3 billion tonnes of cereals currently produced, roughly 1 billion tonnes is destined for food use, 750 million tonnes is employed as animal feed, and the remaining 500 million tonnes is processed for industrial use, used as seed or wasted.” So please have some respect for my scientific integrity. Anyone who makes a mistake is most welcome to apologize.

REFERENCES:

Altieri, M.A. (2008). Small Farms as a Planetary Ecological Asset: Five Key Reasons Why We Should Support the Revitalisation of Small farms in the Global South (Third World Network).

Blakemore, R.J. (2022/3). Biotic SOC Stock: What We Had & What We Lost. Veop, 6, 1–59. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7825446.

Ricciardi, V., et al. (2018). How much of the world’s food do smallholders produce?. Glob. Fd Sec. 17: 64–72. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912417301293.

Ricciardi, V., et al. (2021). Higher yields and more biodiversity on smaller farms. Nat Sustain. 4: 651–657 (2021). doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00699-2 . https://lfs-ubcfarm-clone-2018.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2021/05/Ricciardi_etal_2021.pdf.

TIMELINE:

In 2018, Vandana’s Navdanya (anag.) claimed: “At the ecological level, industrial agriculture based on chemicals and GMOs has contributed to 75% destruction of the soil, water, biodiversity and 50% of green house gases leading to Climate Change, while only contributing to 20% of the food we eat… Small farmers produce 80% of the food according to the FAO..” This is not quite true as FAO (2018) refered to only said this of “Family farmers” which is quite a different thing, as already noted above and in more detail below.

In 2021, despite Ricciardi et al. (2018), Navdanya still makes misleading statements, this time slightly modified: “industrial agriculture produces only 20 % of the food we eat, using 75% of the land. In reality small farmers are providing 80% of the food we eat.. At this rate, if the share of industrial agriculture and industrial food in our diet is increased from 20% to 30%, we will have a dead planet, one with no life and no food.” This definitely implies the falsehoods that small farms are organic and that organic outcompetes chemical farms. Untrue. In sad reality, the agrichemical industry is massive and controls most production.

An 2021 article has: “Dr. Vandana Shiva doesn’t leave any room for doubt. “Industrial agriculture is a terrible disaster,” she concludes in an exclusive interview with the Calcalist supplement. “According to the World Food Programme, around 80 percent of the world’s food needs comes from small farms. ” I searched for this WFP statistic, eventually finding a quote from 2019 (Ref.) that smallholders produce “80 per cent of the food consumed in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa together (IFAD 2011b)” that is just an unsubstantiated claim by Kanayo F. Nwanze, IFAD (2011), as noted below; and another: “More than 80 percent of the food WFP purchases is bought from developing countries” (Ref.) that is, rather obviously, not quite the same thing.

I suggest that anyone who supports Vandana’s claim perhaps you could email to ask for her persistent source for 80% food from small farmers. Indeed, I wrote to her in 2015 and three times in 2016 offering to meet and survey while I was working on earthworms and organic soils in India, as in this 2016 link – https://vermecology.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/a-tale-of-two-sitis.pdf. Also my follow-up 2021 email:- 

Robert Blakemore <rob.blakemore@gmail.com>	9 Feb 2021, 20:41
to Vandana vandana@vandanashiva.com, vandana.shiva@gmail.com

“Hello Dr Vandana Shiva,

Having admired your work for some time as a smart person of honesty & integrity (and influence), perhaps you may be interested in my research or know people who would be.

My background is rural and academic with BSc in Ecology & PhD in Soil Ecology/Agroecology. I come from the same background as Darwin and Howard – https://trevorchalkley.wixsite.com/albert-howard/albert-howard-in-india.

Starting from 1980 on Lady Eve Balfour’s Haughley farm (as a Centenary tribute to Darwin’s 1881 “Worms” book) for 40 years I have studied and reported on organic farming specializing on global earthworm eco-taxonomy. Now ~>250 publications describing ~500 new worms/records.

Mostly my work is unsupported and ignored but is perhaps on the right track as I now get violent opposition from agrichemical companies and academics who work for them. Their greatest threat is the humble earthworm that works tirelessly and for free to rebuild topsoil humus.

My view of contexted triage of our most pressing global issues, in increasing order of urgency & importance are:-

5. Covid.  4. Climate (as third critical in Rockstrom’s Planetary boundaries – Ref.). 3. Extinctions & poor health of air, water, soil (always ignored!), biota & people. 2. Irreplaceable loss of healthy topsoil at global rate of 2,000 tonnes per second due to:- 2a. Chemical poisoning, erosion, climate & encroachments. 2b. Lack of a single, dedicated Soil Ecology Institute anywhere. 1. Compromising & trivialization of Science & corrupted journals.

Embarrassingly simple solutions: less red meat, organic food, compost and saving the worm (and my studies have reported three extinct species so far). After 1988 when I met Dr Bill Mollison, I fully support Permaculture as a science-based, humane & practical design system for safe living that aims to “teach the teachers” so may spread rapidly. Maybe our best & only hope… I have no political, religious nor financial conflicts but also do not know of a single remaining Soil Ecologist with courage of conviction or influence to help spread and promote our vital soils. Few if any researchers I know would publicly sign your https://www.navdanya.org/site/living-soil/soil-pledge for 100% organic farming… I however do support this 100%!

My website is here – http://www.annelida.net/earthworm/ that includes checklists of all Indian species, and my blog is here – https://vermecology.wordpress.com/ .

Kind regards,

Rob Blakemore PhD (Soil Ecology, Tropical Agroecology and Earthworms).”

To date… Over two (or over seven actually) years later… No reply…

PS. The likes of IFOAM, Soil Association, or Rodale used to attempt great work but have tiny influence; most other “Healthy Soil” endeavours (e.g. 4p1000, UN’s Conservation Ag, Regenerative Ag) are already heavily captured by agrichemical interests. For example, a  Nov., 2020 report : – www.organicconsumers.org/news/investigation-how-pesticide-companies-marketing-themselves-climate-change-solution? found “some 92 percent of [Regenerative Ag] respondents planned to use glyphosate for weed control, and the majority said they would plant crops that had been [GMO] engineered to withstand its use.” In other words, “Regenerative Ag” or “Conservation Ag” mostly still use agri-chemicals, unlike honest Organic operations that avoid poisons and GMOs and aim to restore healthy, humic soils using compost and earthworms.  As proof you need look no further than Syngenta’s or Bayer’s glowing (and cynically sickening) embrace of “Regen” – https://www.syngentagroup.com/en/regenerative-agriculture; https://www.bayer.com/en/agriculture/regenerativeag:-

Also, rather shockingly, UK’s Soil Association formed to promote Organic has now been rather diluted under the Regen banner, e.g. – https://www.soilassociation.org/blogs/2022/october/24/can-organic-and-regenerative-co-exist/ by Sarah Compton (below).

Their un-necessary diversion and dilemma is summarized here = https://www.soilassociation.org/causes-campaigns/a-ten-year-transition-to-agroecology/regenerative-agriculture-position-statement/ where they conclude: “In summary – we welcome the enthusiasm and innovation that the regenerative movement brings and believe that genuine regenerative advocates and the organic movement are often one and the same. Where they’re not, there’s an opportunity to work together and inspire one another. We’re cautious about the risks of greenwashing when it comes to the term regenerative and recognise organic certification as the most comprehensive, verifiable, legally protected benchmark for regenerative agriculture and believe it should be recognised and supported as such.”

As well as chemically-captured “Regen” trying to usurp true “Organic”, smallholder/family farmers globally are not all as organic as is implied. My experienced research in Europe, Africa, Asia & India shows they often use agrichems/GMOs, and in USA the revered Amish/Mennonites seemingly do too (Ref., Ref.).

The problem seems to be that the mega-chemical industry has spent decades vilifying organic farming but has had to come to a dreadful realization that people no longer believe them as their chemicals destroy Nature and human health while yielding less and less healthy food. Rather than admit any of this, their new ploy is to “greenwash” with Regen shills. This is appealing mainly to farmers previously fully embracing agrichemicals, by novice, rich/hippy-homesteaders, or by those with vested $$ interests, at best agrichemical “lite” practitioners. For me, only 100% pure organic works… this from rational field research.

The tricky mind-game with Regen is they they imply that it is a new hopeful movement to restore soil, while also keeping all their chemical and GMO synthetics in play. It gives the impression that Organic farming (interchangeably used with the term “Regen”) is outcompeting or challenging “conventional” agrichemicals. In reality, organic farms are only ~2% of the global total. And about half of the world’s organic land is faked in Australia’s massive cattle-stations in the desert. Thus, in reality, small farms only supply about 30% – not 80% – of our food and 100% organic produce is yet a tiny fraction. Sad but true.

So, instead of winning with large proportions of farms or food, Organic is still battling as an underdog.

Rather than await an email response validating Vandana’s “80% of food from smallholders” statement in her 2022 video, I have researched her possible sources. As noted above, her website in 2021 makes a similar claim at a “planetary” scale: “small farmers are providing 80% of the food we eat” – https://navdanyainternational.org/pachamama-feeds-us/#_ftn12 . Three sources are given for this:

“[12] http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4036e.odf [13] https://www.etcgroup.org/whowillfeedus [14] https://grain.org/article/entries/4929-hungry-for-land-small-farmers-feed-the-world-with-less-than-a-quarter-of-all-farmland”

The first [12] has a typo for a 2014 FAO report – https://www.fao.org/3/i4036e/i4036e.pdf saying farms <2 ha account for 84% all farms in 111 countries, but nothing on their food %. It notes “More than 90 percent of farms are run by an individual or a family and rely primarily on family labour. According to these criteria, family farms are by far the most prevalent form of agriculture in the world. Estimates suggest that they occupy around 70 – 80 percent of farm land and produce more than 80 percent of the world’s food in value terms.” My bolding added as this refers to family farms not to “small farms” alone. No data sources are given aside from the FAO itself.

[13] is ETC’s 2017 “Who will feed us?” – https://www.etcgroup.org/whowillfeedus claiming: “Peasants are the main or sole food providers to more than 70% of the world’s people” but sources of this information are not transparent, seemingly self-referencing from ETC’s own studies, as were the FAO’s noted above.

[14] grain.org 2014 report states “The UN Environment Programme, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, FAO and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food all estimate that small farmers produce up to 80% of the food in the non-industrialised countries.37” Their sources include [1] Lowder et al. (2014), and [37] Kanayo F. Nwanze, IFAD (2011) who claimed: “Small farmers can feed the world” and that “These small farms produce about 80 per cent of the food consumed in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa” with no source for this datum and applicable only to Asia and the sub-Sahara so, if true, not a global statistic.

Conclusion: Vandana’s “small farms produce 80% food” claim is unsubstantiated; just wishful thinking.

Moreover…

In 2018, Ricciardi et al. (2018 fig. below) calculated “Farms under 2 ha produce 30–34% of food.” In March, 2021, Ricciardi et al. (2021) confirmed 84% of farms are <2ha in size and constitute just 12% of farmland, plus they are reported to have higher yields per area, but no update was given for their total global yields.

In June, 2021, Lowder et al. (2021) concluded: “Farms smaller than 2 hectares produce roughly 35% of the world’s food.” Please note they clearly differentiate Family from Small farms while noting “the notion of “family farming” referring to all types of family-based production models in agriculture, fisheries, forestry, livestock and aquaculture, and includes peasants, indigenous peoples, traditional communities, fisher folks, mountain farmers, forest users and pastoralists (FAO & IFAD, 2019).”

In August, 2021, OurWorldinData (2021) used mainly Ricciadi et al. (2018) & Lowder et al. (2021) data to report – https://ourworldindata.org/smallholder-food-production with only 32% food from small farms.

OWiD rebuts claims of small farms with 70-80% of the world’s food: “The first UN report to make this claim seems to cite a 2009 report by the environmental activist organization, ETC group. It made the claim that ‘peasants’ grow at least 70% of the world’s food. How they got to this figure is not clear.”

In 2022, ETC group retaliated, recognizing a schism, and defended its stance on 70% food from small farms in detail here – https://etcgroup.org/content/backgrounder-small-scale-farmers-and-peasants-still-feed-world. They debunked Ricciadi et al. (2018) and a second study by Lowder et al. (2021) while also noting that OurWorldinData is not entirely unbiased in their independent reporting. Indeed, its founder, Max Roser, said: “for the generous support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [its largest funding body] we’re extremely grateful”; OWiD support was also from the dodgy WHO (www.inet.ox.ac.uk/news/our-world-in-data-new-funding/ ; www.influencewatch.org/organization/our-world-in-data/ ; https://assets.ourworldindata.org/uploads/2023/09/2022-Annual-Report.pdf ; https://global-change-data-lab.org/). The ETC paper did begrudgingly concede that perhaps: “In its 2009 report ETC had tried to visibilise [sic] these additional sources by disaggregating [sic] the 70% figure to assert that small farmers produced 50% of food while noting that a further 20% of nutrition is sourced from these other aspects of the peasant food web (artisanal fisheries, hunting and gathering, urban production.” Does this imply their 70% peasant food claim is a bit weak and 50% of food may be a better estimate?

Conflicts? I know Ricciardi worked for World Bank – https://blogs.worldbank.org/team/vinny-ricciardi and that Vandana Shiva is fully on board with the UN and its partnership with WEF‘s for the awful SDGs:

Compare to my take on the SDGs – https://vermecology.files.wordpress.com/2021/03/image-27.png.

Friends of the Earth (FoE), while commendable, are still a bit ambiguous in their data and definitions:

These images above represent the wide range or agricultural production around the World. Before anyone accuses me of being biased or paid off in some way this is not true as I too quoted Alitieri’s 80% claim up until I found Ricciadi et al.’s (2018) 30% report. I do support small farms and organic farmers, and it is possible too that “peasant” farms may provide 30%, or yet up to 50% of food as a rational compromise. However, it is vitally important for organic advocates and academics to be 100% truthful and factual in correcting any misleading data, or any falsified qualifications! It is not just me saying this… Please check OurWorldinData and ETC and FAO‘s summaries of this whole 80%<–>30% food issue.

Perhaps I should leave the final word to Drs Miguel Altieri & Nichols (2012) who rationally concluded: “There is no doubt that humanity needs an alternative agricultural development paradigm, one that encourages more ecologically, biodiverse, resilient, sustainable and socially just forms of agriculture. The basis for such new systems are the myriad of ecologically based agricultural styles developed by at least 75% of the 1.5 billion smallholders, family farmers and indigenous people on 350 million small farms which account for no less than 50% of the global agricultural output for domestic consumption (ETC 2009).” Please note that this 50% output includes family farmers & indigines so is not just about “smallholders”. I finish with a factual platitude that Vandana Shiva may wish for “small farmers” solve the food issue, but they will need to grow more…

Version for smartphone – https://vermecology.wordpress.com/2023/11/21/80-or-30-food-from-small-farmers-smartphone-version/ .