Reclaiming the Soil & Water Commons for Health, Sovereignty, and Sustainability

Food
, ,
1

Policy Proposal: Reclaiming the Soil & Water Commons for Health, Sovereignty, and Sustainability

I. Introduction:

In an era where global food systems are increasingly dominated by a few entities, driven by profit rather than sustainability, this proposal seeks to reorient our approach towards agriculture, land use, and resource management. It aims to dismantle plutocratic control over our food and environment, advocating for a meritocratic system where decisions are based on competence, ethics, and community welfare.

II. The Case Against Plutocracy:

  • Monopolization of Resources: Wealth concentration, exemplified by figures like Bill Gates and Monsanto, leads to control over essential resources like seeds, water, and land. This control often prioritizes profit over ecological health or human well-being.

  • Environmental Degradation: Industrial agricultural practices degrade soil, contaminate water, and reduce biodiversity, directly opposing long-term sustainability.

  • Health Impacts: The pursuit of short-term economic gains has led to the proliferation of nutritionally poor, chemically intensive foods, as well as the advent of genetic manipulations, exacerbating health issues and chronic diseases.

III. Advocating for Meritocracy:

  • Merit-based Governance: Shift decision-making power in food and environmental policy in the FDA and USDA to those with proven expertise in sustainability, regenerative agriculture, organic food production, ecology, and community health.

  • Community Involvement: Ensure that local communities have a say in how their land and resources are managed, promoting decisions that reflect local needs and cultural values.

IV. Vandana Shiva’s Philosophy - A Path Forward:

  • Biodiversity and Soil Health: Advocate for agricultural practices that enhance soil fertility, support biodiversity, and reject monoculture. Shiva’s work with Navdanya illustrates the benefits of organic, biodiverse farming on both health and the environment.

  • Food Sovereignty: Promote the right of communities to produce and consume healthy, culturally appropriate food, free from corporate control.

  • Seed Freedom: Protect the right to save, share, and use native seeds, countering the privatization of genetic resources.

V. Policy Recommendations:

  • Legislation for Environmental Rights:

  • Address chemical and genetically modified organism trespass. Farmers growing heirloom varietals should not be sued by corporate conglomerates for patent infringement if the corporate owned GMO produce is trespassing or infecting natural foods. It should be the other way around. Corporations must contain their modified organisms separate from the food supply, or face lawsuits and fines.

  • Decentralization of Food Production:

    • Promote Victory Gardens: Encourage the conversion of lawns into biodiverse, productive gardens. Provide incentives for community garden initiatives, transforming urban and suburban landscapes into food-producing areas.

    • Urban Agriculture: Support urban farming initiatives to combat food deserts, making fresh, local produce accessible to all.

    • Regenerative Models: Implement practices from Regenerate America, which emphasizes regenerative agriculture to restore soil health, increase biodiversity, and sequester carbon. Examples include:

      • Rotational Grazing: Mimicking natural grazing patterns to improve soil structure and plant diversity.
      • Cover Cropping: Using crops to cover soil during off-seasons to prevent erosion and enrich soil nutrients.

  • Permaculture Movement: Integrate permaculture principles for sustainable land use:

    • Design for Resilience: Create systems that are self-sustaining and mimic natural ecosystems, reducing reliance on external inputs.

    • Zoning for Efficiency: Plan land use based on frequency of human interaction to minimize energy use in maintenance.

    • Diversity and Synergy: Encourage polyculture and companion planting to enhance ecosystem services like pest control and water management.

  • Regulation Against Monopolization:

    • Cap on Land Ownership: Implement policies to limit how much land one entity can own to prevent monopolies like those facilitated by large-scale investors.

    • Water Rights: Remove restrictions on rainwater harvesting and promote decentralized water management systems.

  • Cultural Shift:

    • Education and Awareness: Launch campaigns to educate the public on the benefits of sustainable agriculture, the value of biodiversity, and the rights to food and environmental health.

    • Support Local Farmers: Provide grants, training, and market access for small-scale, sustainable farmers to reduce dependence on industrial agriculture, incorporating lessons from regenerative and permaculture practices.

VI. Legal Guidelines Necessitating Policy Initiatives For Protecting Our Commons

  • Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 (1972) enforced by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 (1970) The President’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

  • ICCPR, Article 47: “…the inherent right of all peoples to enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources.”

  • ICERD Articles 2.1(d), 5(b), 5(e)(i), and 6 • “The rights to security of person and protection by the State against…bodily harm,…inflicted by…any individual group or institution.”

  • Food and Nutrition Act, 7 U.S.C. 2011 (2008), revised from Food Stamp Act (1964); enforced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) Administration

VII. Countering Gates’ Methodology:

  • Ethical Investment: Encourage divestment from practices that degrade the environment or monopolize food systems, promoting investments in regenerative agriculture and community-led initiatives.

  • Long-term Sustainability: Focus on policies and investments that repair and sustain ecosystems for future generations, rather than those offering short-term gains at the cost of long-term health.

VIII. Conclusion:

This policy seeks to restore the natural commons to the people, ensuring that water, soil, and food are managed in ways that enhance life, health, and cultural diversity. By embracing the wisdom of figures like Vandana Shiva and moving towards a meritocratic approach, alongside adopting regenerative and permaculture models, we can achieve a food system that supports all life on earth, not just profit margins.

References:

Appendices

Supplementary Resources for Sustainable Agriculture and Community Engagement

  • EcoFarm:

    • EcoFarm supports sustainable agriculture by hosting educational events like the EcoFarm Conference, which encourages organic farming and community support systems. Their focus is on fostering a network of farmers, educators, and professionals committed to ecological farming practices.

  • The Land Institute:

    • This organization is dedicated to developing perennial grains and diverse cropping systems that mimic natural ecosystems to enhance environmental sustainability. Their work is pivotal in exploring new agricultural models that could revolutionize food production while preserving soil and water resources.

  • Food Tank:

    • Food Tank works to combat hunger, obesity, and poverty by focusing on food system change. They offer resources, stories, and initiatives centered around sustainable agriculture, food justice, and the empowerment of small farmers globally.

  • Soil Capital:

    • Soil Capital operates to transition farmers towards regenerative agriculture, focusing on improving soil health, biodiversity, and carbon sequestration. They offer programs that reward farmers for adopting practices that enhance environmental outcomes, thereby supporting sustainable farming economics.

  • Soil Management to Reduce Carbon Emissions:

    • Westland Seed explains how we can capture carbon (carbon sequestration) through proper soil and land management.

These resources provide a framework for understanding and implementing sustainable practices that align with the goals of this policy proposal, enhancing the connections between policy, practice, and community well-being.

Relevant Observations & Contributions:

Feedback
Feedback is welcomed to improve this proposal. You can also add links to other observations and proposals that are relevant in the comments for integration, or add a direct observation outline in the comments for inclusion.

Out of Votes? Answer this Poll!

  • 100% Agree
  • Mostly agree, but with reservations
  • Half agree/disagree
  • Mostly disagree, but agree with some of this
  • 100% Disagree
0 voters
3 Likes
2

Can we eliminate all regulation and guidance that dictate these things first before writing more laws?

3

Hello @Wlipps

Please be more specific as to which regulations should be removed and why, and what should replace it and why, and I can incorporate that into the proposal.

1 Like
5

Great job! My only reservation is subsidy for organic. While it may be a benefit, and even NECESSARY in the short term. I don’t want the corrupting market effects, and imposed dependency that we can clearly see in the present situation, to persist in any way 20 years, 40 years from now post conversion era. Subsidy DEMANDS the creation of a middle management beaucracy, period. And farmers desperately need fewer parasitic middlemen between them and their already small profit margins. Subsidy may be useful in incentivising conversions in the short term. BUT THE NATURE of subsidies REALLY MUST BE EMPHASIZED AND ACKNOWLEDGED AS ULTIMATELY DEPENDANCE AND PARASITISM INDUCING IF NOT TEMPORARY AND ULTIMATELY SUNSETTED. Let’s face it, if it’s not limited in duration of policy, subsidy isn’t merely money, it’s welfare. And if there’s welfare, there must be a welfare office. And we’re either lying to ourselves, or not doing full accounting if we aren’t acknowledging that subsidies EFFECT and partially shape the bottom line price of each commodity and produce.

7

You raise an interesting point. Would it be best to integrate some sort of temporary time frame to it? I think the problem as it stands today, is that conventional has been subsidized to artificially drive unhealthy food costs lower, when in fact, the organic food should be cheaper, as there is less money spent on chemical inputs and patented gmo seeds. So, it should really be the other way around, supporting the latter, rather than the former. I’m open to suggestions as to how to word the policy proposal differently in light of this aspect.

8

Thanks. It takes more labor/time/fuel to farm organics, than conventional. Conventional is the cheap labor saving shortcut. But the cost is in health & quality.

This is tricky. I’m not necessarily against a long term subsidy FOR organic farmers, IF, chemical agriculture is going to remain. And let’s say go ahead and implement it now, jump start, reward, incentivise the organic program.

Here’s the issues that I’m not sure are being addressed.

The functional consequences of big ag subsidy program essentially , it locked in farmers to a learned helplessness of monsantos malicious welfare. It disincentivised those farmers to assume the risk to ever convert to organics. The volatility of markets, even though for the most part until recently organics paid slightly more per bushel, it’s because of the unadulterated consumer demand drives that market that determines those prices!

The public STILL does not know or understand what I just stated. And what I’m trying to ascertain is if YOU understand this, because the subsidy IS THE PADLOCK on that farming method. I need to know that you see and understand that. It’s what allows gmo food manufacturers to monopolize markets and sell at BELOW MARKET, at every level.

That said. I do not have a problem with that leverage and utility of subsidy being applied and available to organic markets. Most everyone will think and say it’s about time. Certainly not in the short term.

However, I don’t know what the goals of the administration are for agriculture! No one in the administration has outright said what I think should happen. And what I think should happen is chemical and gmo bans, law changes as to who is liable for gmo pollen drift and contamination and xhemical runoffs from property to property. Laws are cutrently upside down and bass ackwards from what they should be. And there should be a fast phasing out of big ag chemical agriculture, and restore farming to pre 1945 quality of commodities, whatever it takes to get there.

If gmo IS going to stay, then I’m all for subsidy for organics, and NOT for gmo in any form. If gmo is reduced to 50% of the market, I’m still for subsidy for organics.

But if in 4 years or less gmo is completely phased out, and all crops, food, products consumed are gmo free/organic…then do we need subsidy??

Because the subsidy itself HAS
market effects/consequences. We can possibly agree that perhaps ALL those effects are POSITIVE as it pertains to organics ONLY. But it’s effect has been extremely negative with regard to gmos.

As I’m thinking this through right now, I guess I’m having a hard time adjusting to the fact things are actually so corrupted, and consumers and farmers remain still ignorant and misinformed on these matters, that it may be in our national interest to issue permanent qualification requirements/standards to recieve annual subsidy to ensure safety, integrity, and longevity of organic markets and comodities/products. As an added measure of surety on top of bans, law changes, etc.

It seems we need bulwarks and walls everywhere now.

I’m disappointed that the vast majority of farmers and the rest of agriculture is SO DIVORCED FROM DOING THE RIGHT THING, or correcting itself that we need a bureaucracy and national controls to cure it. But the reality is, this added cost is really going to have to exist, and it’s just going to have to be the cost of doing business. As I consider the scope and scale of everything that is wrong, I can’t even imagine a time in the future when a subsidy incentive wouldn’t be necessary, and ALWAYS be a disaster to do away with it. It’s not even worth entertaining. It’s the only way, in conjunction with bans on chems and gmos, to ensure clean organics.

Sorry I’m so retarded and it’s taken me this much time to think it through.

1 Like