Towards a Community-Based Food Security System

Ensuring every person has enough food on the table is an issue of making the right political decisions within the framework of national development that integrates rural development, people participation and sustainable management of natural resources.

Putting Food First, is a book based on a study about food policy in Indonesia. Published by InsistPress and Third World Network, this book puts forward a set of short and long-term policy recommendation aimed at attaining food security within a broader national policy on sustainable development.

A glimpse of the last chapter of the book is provided here.

 

IV. TOWARDS COMMUNITY BASED FOOD SECURITY SYSTEM

Food security is a political choice at the national and global levels, but it is a matter of survival at the local and family levels. This is especially true in a country with rich biological resources, as well as diverse food, knowledge and cultural systems such as Indonesia. In this case food security problem is not a matter of inadequate resources or knowledge systems, or even technology; it is an issue of making the right political decisions within the framework of national development that integrates rural development, people participation and sustainable management of natural resources.

Paradigm Shift

There is a need for a paradigm shift in managing food security at the national and local level. The shift is important to break away from inappropriate policies and practices in the past and to recover from the damages that have been done to the national and local food security system. It is also important that the paradigm shift is put within the framework of transformation in the development paradigm.

Essentially a paradigm shift would involve:

1. Shifting from monoculture industrialised based system to diverse local systems. A monoculture system has been proven to be vulnerable to pests, diseases and fluctuating market prices when there is overproduction. The monoculture food habits also need to be transformed into diverse food culture that has its roots in the diverse culture and agricultural systems in Indonesia.

2. Transforming production based agriculture to farmer and local resources based agriculture. Increased production is an important factor for food supply increase, but has failed to translate into food security. Using local resources and prioritizing farmers’ welfare would translate into increased local production and increased income that would be more sustainable in terms of food security.

3. Moving from agrochemical based farming to environmentally sound farming practices. This is an attempt to protect the natural resource base of agriculture and food production system as well as to provide healthier food for the population.

4. Changing centralised government based planning into local community based planning. Communities need to be responsible for food security and the government needs to provide policy, technical and funding support. Rural and urban communities need to plan their own food security strategies that would then be integrated into the regional and national food security policies and programs.

5. Transforming fragmented development system (rural vs. urban; industrialisation vs. agriculture development) into integrated development system. Development programmes have created dichotomy between rural and urban development or industrialisation and agriculture development. The process has often led to urbanization and increased rural poverty. An integrated development system, on one hand, prioritizes rural development by providing health care, education and employment in rural areas as well as developing agriculture based rural industries; and on the other hand encourages urban food production system and distribution that would help the poor.

Policy Recommendations

Food security is a political choice to be supported by effective implementation of policies, sustainable natural resource base, appropriate technological know how coupled with traditional knowledge and systems. Thus this paper looks more at policy recommendations but in a holistic manner that includes policies at the technical level. Many of these policies have been put forward before by experts and practitioners, debated upon, agreed on, but seldom implemented as an integrated unit, although some parts might have been converted into programs.

National development policy and institutional framework

Food security policies need to be integrated into the entire national development policy, not just through agricultural and/trade policies. To that end, there is a need to get the policies, institutions and incentives right.  For instance, the credit policy in the current banking system does not favor small scale food producers and local resource based agriculture. Thus there is no incentive to increase productivity. The banking and other alternative financial system must be supported by government policy to serve small scale food producers and farmers. This can be done through micro-credit schemes and crop insurance schemes.

Similarly, the government at the central, regional and local level needs to support existing policies and institutions that are useful for local food security strategy. The Desa Mandiri Pangan (Food Secure Village) programme, for instance, needs to be implemented through local institutions rather than in a top down manner. There is also a need to balance priorities between urban based industrialisation programme and rural based agricultural programmes. Industrialisation needs to strengthen food security system not threaten it. And this can be done through a holistic framework of national development programmes. The balance should be reflected in the budget, in development of economic incentives and in policy and technological support, particularly for research and development.

In addition, there must be policies to protect agricultural lands and agro-ecological areas from conversion. One way is by ensuring that the public is involved in decision making process about Spatial Planning and land use policies.

Integrated Agricultural policy that includes food security and rural development policies

Food security in Indonesia is predominantly rooted in agricultural production although increasing income from non-agricultural, non-rural based sectors is also important. Agricultural policy must be integrated into rural development programs aimed at first fulfilling local food security.

Rural development needs to be aimed at providing education system at least until high school, adequate health care services, and energy services. In addition, there is a need to develop rural incomes through provision of road infrastructure and information services. Villages must have access to internet, electricity, market information and appropriate technologies for rural based, environmentally sustainable industrialisation. The goals must be self sufficient villages, instead of only rice self-sufficiency. This will hopefully reduce urbanization, create opportunities in villages and increase food productivity.

Agricultural policy should not be uniform for islands across the archipelago. It must be based on local comparative advantages, local resources and local systems. National targets that are set without proper assessments should not be forced on villages and provinces, especially if such targets can only be achieved through technologies that potentially harm local systems and natural resources. For instance, Papua should not be forced to grow rice unless the lands are appropriate and the local people want to eat rice and have the knowledge to grow rice.

This brings us to the next point that policies should be formulated through a participatory manner, in which farmers across regions are consulted as equal partners, as people who have knowledge and skills as much as the policy makers. Decentralisation must bring a change in how policies are made, otherwise centralisation in policy making would persist.

Finally, the policy package must take into account the economic, social and cultural rights of farmers. The government often provides tax break incentives, subsidies or political support to investors and companies, including seed companies. But aside from fertilizer subsidy (which is often mis-targetted anyway), farmers are not given any incentives for the service they do i.e. feeding the nation. Incentives can be in the form of free health care and education for children of farmers, and tax reductions over lands that are being productively cultivated.

Policy on research, knowledge and technological capacity

There is a need for a coherent policy on research, knowledge and technological capacity development for systems aimed at food security. Such a policy must be put in place based on several aspects. First the government and the scientific community need to recognize that farmers are innovators and applied scientists at the micro level. They have the appropriate knowledge about their work and local socio-ecological conditions. The lack of recognition and acceptance of indigenous knowledge have regrettably led to many scientists ignoring traditional farmers’ rationales and imposing conditions and technologies that have disrupted the integrity and sustainability of local and indigenous agriculture systems.

Secondly, any agricultural innovation and food security strategy must guarantee equity for the farmers and the poor. That would mean that policies need to ensure that farmers can access knowledge and technology that would help them advance economically. Farmers should not be treated only as users of new technologies.

Third, diversity and interlinkages of agroecology and socio-culture must be recognised and taken into account. Research and knowledge and technological development must not further delink the agri-‘culture’ from a socio-cultural and ecological process. Research and technological policy need to take into account traditional knowledge and know how, as well as the social relationships and cultural patterns that govern technical know-how. Important issues in this aspect are the technology on seed breeding, cultivation systems, post-harvest processing and food processing.

Trade Policy

Trade policy must effectively take into account the issue of food security, livelihood security and rural development as is the national position at the WTO within the framework of the Group of 33. To that effect food imports and tariff must be managed in such a way so as to create a balance between the interests of the farmers and the interests of urban consumers. So far an attempt to do so has been conducted with rice; it needs to be expanded to other food commodities, as necessary.

Reforms of existing policies

In order to ensure that the above policies are effectively implmented, there is a need to reform existing policies, particularly the Law No. 12/1992 on Plant Cultivation System and the Law No. 29/2000 on Plant Variety Protection. These laws should be reformed in order to ensure the national sovereignty over seeds, farmers rights’ over seeds and other resources. Other policies to be reformed include subsidies for seed and fertilizer companies, the credit system in order to make it more accessible to farmers, crop insurance system, and general protection of small farmers from import surges, and unfair trading system at the local level as well as at the national and international level.

Of importance is reforming the current Bulog system in order that it can function as a marketing channel for farmers’ crops at fair prices, as stock for food reserve and as a price stabilisation mechanism to ensure availability of food at affordable prices. Finally, there is a need to evaluate all agricultural and food related policies that were formulated due to pressures from IMF, the World Bank and possibly through bilateral channels to gauge whether they are supportive of food security measures or not; should they actually hamper food security, these policies must be reformed accordingly.

All these policies need to be reformed within the framework of the larger policy and regulatory framework of national development programs.

Short-term Immediate measures:

The above policy reforms will not be easy to undertake, as it involves paradigm shift at all levels, including policy makers at the parliament. This will need long-term programmes on awareness raising, policy formulation process, and capacity building. In the meantime, some immediate measures can be undertaken, at the national level, with encouragement to be followed at the local level. These measures are:

1. Introduce cooperative farming to solve the problem of small land sizes and reduce production costs, thus making agricultural enterprise more profitable. This effort should be combined with joint marketing measures to ensure fair prices for farmers. The national government can introduce the concept, provide capacity building and perhaps financial incentive, while the implementation can be at the local level.

2. Provide options for organic farming or other environmentally sustainable practices in areas that have not used chemicals intensively and provide incentive for farmers who have used chemicals to shift to sustainable agriculture. Provinces such as Maluku, Papua, East Nusa Tenggara and remote areas in Kalimantan and Sulawesi should be protected from the unfair and unethical marketing of agrochemicals. A gradual shift to sustainable agriculture must be encouraged in Java, Bali, and Sumatera through economic and social incentives. Overall, the government must take the lead in shifting towards healthier and environmentally sound practices. Nongovernmental organizations must take the lead in raising consumer awareness for healthier products and facilitate marketing of those products.

3. The government need to immediately provide funding and guidance for research and development of locally adapted seeds, particularly those with drought tolerance. This can be undertaken more cost efficiently if conducted together with farmers and local researchers. Over dependence on seeds from companies and from foreign sources need to be reduced substantially.

4. The government needs to seriously and effectively implement some sound policies that are already in place, such as control of agricultural land conversion. This needs to be strengthened with regulations that will impose a moratorium on agricultural land conversion in sensitive and fertile areas such as Java, Bali and Sumatera, as well as in traditional, productive agro-ecological lands.

5. The current National and Local Food Security Agencies, together with the Desa Mandiri Pangan need to be evaluated for effectiveness and then adjusted accordingly.

6. The national and local governments need to take the leadership in reducing dependence on rice and introduce diverse food systems by not just launching campaigns but actually undertaking the transformation. When governments organize events, the food served can be made from non-rice elements. Local governments can help increase farmers’ income by creating a market for local foods through government sponsored events. The government must move from rhetorics to real implementation.

7. Given the vulnerability to disasters, Bulog must immediately strengthen its warehouse and food distribution system in areas that have been identified as vulnerable to disasters and food insecurity situations. For instance, Bulog must have food distribution centre and preparedness in Kupang, the capital of NTT, the province that experiences periodical food shortage. Bulog must also begin to introduce non rice food reserves, mainly cassava and other root crops, sago and corn.

Many of the above recommendations can be implemented and may receive wide support. The main issue is the political will of decision makers to create the right policy and incentives.