Open market has destroyed the sovereign economy of economically poor nations! Millions of farmers are uprooted from agriculture. Billions of people lost their lives and livelihoods for a  few like you. So, don’t decide for us.

The leaders of WEF, this is the first time of the history has given focus on youth employment. The World is sitting on a social and economic time bomb like youth unemployment, the WEF leaders have argued by giving a statement as “Youth will be less employable. They won’t have the skills that business needs. They are more likely to have long-term health problems. And it can cause social unrest”.  The statement has said well the roots cause of the understanding of the global leaders about youth unemployment. As per their understanding, unemployed youth can cause of social unrest. They got this experience from recent unrest which occurred in middle east, England and USA particularly. It could be! They have identified the  problems, but they have hidden the causes for the problems to save their development principles. Without uprooting the causes of problems, the WEF leaders is trying to make a immediate solution in name of employment generation which will not the real solution of the problem! The real problem is income gap between the riches and poor and it is happened due to the neoliberal economic policy. We should examine it and determine our future in a new way!

 The WEF leaders will not finding solution in the new way, so we need to think alternative. For the alternative, we need to let them know now, don’t decide for us! We need a real solution and people will make their own choice. Don’t put the finger on it!

South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), a contagious block of countries, started journey with seven countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka when it was established in 1985, but extended to include Afghanistan as eight members in 2006.  The region contains cultural similarities including similar food habit exists in the region, e.g. rice is the common food grain around the South Asia.

With the cultural similarities, the region has economic dissimilarities which impacts on the lives and livelihood to its people in different countries within South Asia. Major dissimilarities in GDP in per capita, e.g. GDP per Capita  in Nepal $427, Bangladesh $551, Afghanistan $900, India $1,271, Pakistan $1,023, Bhutan $1,832, Maldives $4,388 and Sri Lanka $5,300.

Table: Demographic and economic dissimilarities among South Asian Countries[1]

With an objective to extend cultural cooperation within the South Asian Countries, later SAARC has realized the importance of economic links with cultural development; aiming to build a self-reliant South Asia, therefore, the member countries are discussing now to extend the economic cooperation among the states. Being a self-reliant region, South Asia has a major challenge to ensure food security within the region to feed its people.

Context of Food Security in South Asia

Economic development is normally accompanied by improvements in a country’s food supply and the gradual elimination of dietary deficiencies, thus improving the overall nutritional status of the country’s population. Furthermore, it also brings about qualitative changes in the production, processing, distribution and marketing of food which will enhance the local consumption before trade. Food Sovereignty as well as food self-sufficiency is a major issue within the South Asia which goes beyond the concept of food security. FAO also states, food strategies must not merely be directed at ensuring food security for all, but must also achieve the consumption of adequate quantities of safe and good quality foods that together make up a healthy diet[2]. The policy leaders of SAARC state should keep this context for formulating food security policy for this region.

Food Production within South Asian Countries[3]

In South Asia, only Pakistan and India seem to have done better than the other countries in terms of their performance in per capita food production .So far, Pakistan and India have effectively managed a food crisis even under unprecedented drought conditions in 2000-2001 (In Pakistan) the population growth has consistently decreased from 3.1 per cent in 1971-75 to 2.6 per cent in 1986-90 and 2.4 per cent in 1996-2000. The food production is growing at a stable rate from around an average of 3.4 per cent in 1976-85 to well above 4 per cent in the last 15 years. Domestic food availability is, however, increasing at a decreasing rate due to increasing processed food exports. This holds true for India as well.

In Bangladesh, population growth outpaced the growth in food production during the last three decades. The cereal yield (kg/h) growth rate that increased from 1.1 per cent in 1971-75 to 2.4 per cent in 1981-85 has decreased to 1.7 per cent in 1996-00. The per capita food production growth rate has been negative over the period 1971-96. Similarly, per capita food availability did not improve much until 1996-2000. The devastating floods of 1998 exposed Bangladesh’s vulnerability to natural catastrophes. It is only recently that the country has managed to increase its food production by 4.1 per cent (1996-2000) and per capita food availability by 1.8 per cent in 1996-2000.

The situation in Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka is not much different. In Bhutan, population increased from 1.4 per cent in 1971-75 to 2.0 per cent in 1976-85, and further to 2.9 per cent in 1996-2000. For the last 15 years, growth in food production has been lower than the population growth. Food production has decreased from 3.8 per cent in 1981-85 to 0.6 per cent (1986-90); rising briefly to 2.2 per cent (1991-95) and falling again to 1.1 per cent (1996-2000). Bhutan has consistently witnessed a declining trend in cereal yield per hectare and per capita food production.

In Nepal, population is growing at an average rate of 2.5 per cent while food production is fluctuating from a high growth rate of 5 per cent in 1981-85 to 2.2 per cent in 1991-95 and 2.5 per cent in 1996-2000. The per capita food availability, which had been growing strongly at 2.1 per cent in 1981-85 and 3.2 per cent in 1986-90, has shown a negative growth rate in recent decade.

In Sri Lanka, although population growth is not as high as in other countries of the region, yet food production is fluctuating erratically. The population is increasing at a decreasing pace; growing at 1.6 per cent in 1971-75 it has slowed down to 1.3 per cent in 1996-2000. This led to a declining trend in per capita food production and food supply.

Recommendations

Forty percent of the world’s hungry lived in South Asia, even before the food price crisis of 2008. Hunger silently stalks the entire region, from the steep mountain slopes of Nepal to the dry, arid plains of southern Afghanistan. Although large-scale famines have largely been kept at bay, millions of poor people in Bangladesh, unable to afford two square meals a day and left literally clutching at straws[4].  On the other hand of hunger, we found a declining trend in per capita food production and supply in most of the South Asian Countries except India and Pakistan. In this context, SAARC should extend its cooperation in food production within the South Asian Countries.

Establishment of SAARC SEED BANK

In the context of poverty and hunger around the region, South Asian policy leaders should extend cooperation to support its small and medium farms as well as farmers for providing the agricultural inputs, particularly the quality seeds for boosting its local food production towards being self-reliant in food production. At the Thimpu SAARC Summit, Prime Minister of Bangladesh proposed to establish a regional seed bank which incorporated in the Thimpu Declaration. Policy leaders of SAARC states should make a pro-active decision to establish SAARC SEED BANK in the forthcoming summit to be held in Maldives.

Operationalise of SAARC FOOD BANK

During the food crisis in 2008, as a food importer countries like Bangladesh have a critical experience in food import which increasing the hunger within the countries. Bangladesh could not get food to import from international market as well as from India due to restriction of state in food export to tackle to local food demands which made a worsen situation of food crisis in Bangladesh. The SAARC policy leaders has already taken decision to establishment of SAARC FOOD BANK. Now this is the time to make it operationalise. The people of South Asian region expects a pro-active decision from the SAARC policy leaders to operationalise the SAARC FOOD BANK from Male SAARC Summit.

Climate change has the potential to undermine development of countries like Bangladesh and vulnerabilities could be increased. Please read the story of Hosne Ara, women of Kollatoli village situated at very adjacent of Cox’sbazar sea beach. She lost her own home 3 times due to seashore erosion. Losing everything, she has built a small room at other land and go to sleep in each night keeping a fear to submerge her last destination. As like Hosne Ara, millions of people of coastal districts of Bangladesh fear to lose home, land and properties hearing the forecast of submerging of coastal districts under sea due to global warming from the climate scientists. A shadow climate tribunal held at Dhaka before COP 16 where audiences wept hearing the story of testimonies and the juries blamed the riches for climate change and demanded compensation.

Global Negotiation

Compensation like financing in climate change is a critical issue discussed at the global negotiation. Describing the forthcoming climate impacts to the Bangladesh, Prime Minister of Bangladesh in her address at the Copenhagen Climate Summit (COP 15) in December 2009 stressed a common commitment to meet the emergency needs of millions of household whose lives are endangered by increasing natural disasters, erosion of riverbanks and salinisation of rivers and Copenhagen Accord of Commitment were developed.  In the next, the Cancun Agreement enshrined the Copenhagen Accord commitment to a new Green Climate Fund with an interim Fast Start Funding (FSF) package which reaffirmed the commitment from developed countries mobilize $100 billion of climate finance a year by 2020 to address the adaptation needs of developing countries.

Financing of a sustainable climate deal is still a vision, not a reality, although pieces of the future package are now in place. The emerging structure is being framed from the global level. The global policy leaders are generating knowledge about context of country level for its future development which will be scrutinized under Monitoring, Reporting and Verification requirements. We should keep it mind carefully to overcome the policy and diplomacy of climate entrepreneurs particularly of rich countries.

Policy and Diplomacy to control Climate Finance

Bangladesh Climate Change Resilience Fund (BCCRF), a multi-donor fund for supporting the implementation of Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (BCCSAP) formed, but fund as per commitment yet to receive. Before receiving any funds, development partners pressured Bangladesh to make World Bank (WB) as manager of the BCCRF, but hearing the protests hearing the protests from mass people, the government denied to this role of World Bank in BCCRF as fund manager.

Delaying the fund disbursement to BCCR, Bangladesh government initiated Bangladesh Climate Change Trust Fund (BCCTF) with own resources and approved 44 government projects and 53 NGO projects at a combined cost of $75 million. Already questions raised by the media about selection process of NGO’s for project implementation. So, the government holds the NGOs projects while Government projects has already gone in implementation.

Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) also found the corruption risks in management of Climate Fund and urged to ensure transparency in utilization. They have already declared to monitor the climate fund accordingly to ensure transparency.

We, as a citizen of Bangladesh has appreciated the initiative of TIB, but fears to fall in the corruption trap. Already Alice Harrison, the Communication and Advocacy Coordinator for Transparency International’s Climate GovernanceIntegrity Programme raised question, Climate Finance in Bangladesh: Where has all the money gone? by giving a brief, “Despite the influx of millions of dollars of climate finance into Bangladeshi coffers, villagers here say they’ve seen no evidence of it. Corruption has long aggravated levels of social injustice in Bangladesh, depriving children of access to education, increasing poverty and hunger, and closing the door to basic healthcare provision, particularly for the poor. Climate money may be relatively new to Bangladesh, but it will be flowing through familiar channels. Wary that funds risk being hijacked by corrupt interests, TI Bangladesh has begun shining a light on them, to ascertain where money’s coming from, how it’s managed, what it’s spent on and why.”

An autonomous board for climate fund management

As a citizen, we fear, the government is going to fall in the corruption trap which will help the World Bank (WB) to re-establish control over climate fund. So, we have urged the government to accumulate all climate funds under a single autonomous board with democratic ownship to avoid any trap and keep WB out of climate change which the LDC nations premised.

The influential policy leaders like the rich countries and IFIs is trying to control national climate funds to serve the interests of climate entrepreneurs. The Least Development Countries (LDCs) should take a common position to protest this vested interest of climate entrepreneurs to serve the lives and livelihoods of millions of climate victims living under the climate threats.

How can an ailing global job market be cured and what can be done to promote more jobs and decent work around the world? Are there viable alternative strategies for job creation and development that provide less risk to global market fluctuations and financial volatility?

It is a right solution? Small and Medium Enterprises for job creation, is not new; already World Bank  has prescribed this solution to Bangladesh as well as to the least developed countries (LDCs). Already the government  has  been  going to implement  the prescription. How many job has been created under this initiatives and how much exploitation of labour has been occurred, the researchers should examine it.

In Bangladesh, every year millions of graduate enters in the job market. The government should extend technical and financial cooperation to these educated youths. Investing to the youth, the state should take an initiative to build every youths as entrepreneurs; job would be created automatically in this process.

Agriculture is the prime sector of employment till now in Bangladesh. Agri-business is an important sector for employment. We need to employ our youths in this sector. Agricultural cooperative could be formed for getting government cooperation.  The government will invest to this cooperative or to the collective efforts which will be taken by youth enterprises as solidarity.

In the neo-liberal economic era , there is hardly a concrete answer against the branding, but we should examine its impacts on agriculture, where about 43 percent population of Bangladesh directly involve in agricultural sector who are marginalized and poor  and depends their lives and livelihoods on this sector.

A growing trends of branding agricultural commodities including rice is becoming more visible in the market and more and more corporate like ACI, BD Foods, Square, Aarong, Minabazar etc is trying to take controls of rice market as well as agricultural markets.

Many of us, mostly the agricultural researcher pushes commercialization of agriculture and the agricultural practitioners like aware farmers are now about convinced on it. But what will be the impacts on the millions of farmers which we need to examine before suggesting a whole-sale policy reform like commercialization. In the general sense, if we found, commercialization is inevitable, then we need to make a competition policy first which will  make a guarantee of saving lives and livelihoods of poor and marginalized farmers under commercialized agricultural system.

The drafted agricultural policy and the sixth five year plan and also election commitment of present government have acknowledged that agriculture is the largest employment sector till now in Bangladesh and the policy document has principally agreed to ensure the security of poor and marginalized farmers including small and medium farms. We need to ensure it in practice now.

In the context, we should prepare ourselves before allowing rice brands in the market. But reality is Rice Brand is at your doorstep now! So, please think a while before response! If you response without ensuring safeguard of small and medium farms like competition policy, it will increase unemployment and misuses of labour and eventually, millions of people will be added in the poverty trap which will create more destruction against development.Vision 2021 will be a nightmare!

Filed under: Food ]]> http://prodip.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/rice-brand-is-at-your-doorstep-whats-your-response/feed/ 4 prodip www.bonikbarta.com http://prodip.wordpress.com/2011/08/18/national-agricultural-policy-2011-dilemma-with-context-and-text/ http://prodip.wordpress.com/2011/08/18/national-agricultural-policy-2011-dilemma-with-context-and-text/#comments Wed, 17 Aug 2011 22:26:57 +0000 administer http://prodip.wordpress.com/?p=2383 ]]> Recently the Ministry of Agriculture of Bangladesh has published a draft policy on agriculture, “National Agricultural Policy 2011″ for discussion which has created dilemma with context and text of the policy. At the very beginning under the context, the draft policy has recognized the importance of agriculture to reduce poverty and to increase employment. It has also recognized the importance of small farms in agricultural development.

But the text of the policy has undermined the above context described as principles. As principle, the draft policy has intended to introduce the commercial and competitive agricultural system in the near future. But the urgency of competitive commercialization of agriculture is not described at the context or  the draft has hidden the context. 

The agricultural campaigners is making blame to the agricultural ministry particularly the bureaucrats and consultants who were engaged in drafting the policy, for lending the policy framework from Asian Development Bank (ADB). Blames have also been made  to make a cut, copy and paste from agricultural policy which were formulated in 1999 and agricultural policy of India.

However, it is drafted and we have got it at the table for discussion. Now we are coming to the point with dilemma with context and text of the policy.  Already we have said that the ministry of agriculture has shown an intend to introduce the competitive commercial agricultural policy. But the policy have not described the principle of competition. So, competition  has made  a hidden agenda which will create a bigger threat to the small farms. It has denied the context of importance of small farms in agricultural development, which will also create more poverty and poor people. A very small number of jobs could be introduced in commercialized agriculture, but we couldn’t say, it will increase employment. Dilemma is here which need to be analyzed carefully before entering in the competitive commercialized agriculture.

The policy documents e.g. Perspective Plan 2021 (Vision 2021), Country Investment Plan, 6th fifth year plan including the election manifesto of the present government shows eagerness to reduce poverty 65 million to 45 million by 2013 and 22 million by 2021.  We have also seen the eagerness to reduce unemployment 28 million to 24 million by 2013 and 15 million by 2021.

Have the policy direction been reflected in the agricultural policy? apparently not! The draft policy is not prepared within the policy framework which is indicated above paragraph. A very simple example is, the draft policy has satisfied the policy framework of PRSP-2 (Clause-1.4) which has already declared abandon by government and a draft of 6th fifth year plan formulated under the policy framework of vision 2021. It has shows negligence to read the policy framework for economic development of present government which should be addressed. 

The policy has formulated to address the crops sector particularly, because the government has policy for forestry, animal husbandry and fisheries. But the policy has only address cereals and forgotten to address the non-cereals sector like jute, sugarcane, cotton etc.  If the government intend to formulate the crops policy, then it needs to be address the non-cereal crops also.

We are in the traditional agricultural system with limited uses of technology and farmers engaged in the farms have limited skills and knowledge on contemporary competitive agriculture system which should be addressed in policy to increase the skills and knowledge of the farmers. But there is not policy direction in the draft policy.

The educated youths irrespective of poor and rich agricultural families migrated to the urban for seeking employment who have some practical knowledge on the agriculture. A small initiative from government could make these youths a skillful and knowledgable modern agriculturalists who could sustain in the competitive commercialized agriculture. It could reduce poverty and increase employment in the rural areas. But we have not found any policy framework in the draft agricultural policy to develop effective human resources for commercialized agriculture which should be addressed given most importance in policy agenda.   

After independance of Bangladesh, the first agricultural policy gave a great importance in coperative agricultural systems. But the consequent government after Bangabandhu Shikh Mujibur Rahman did not pay attention to cooperative policy. This is the time to examine it again while we need to enter in the competitive market in agriculture which has been address in the draft policy. Only cooperative system could save the small farms in the competitive comercilized agricultural system.

In the budget documents for fiscal year 2010-11 and 2011-12, we found that the government has introduced farmers club and producers markets in the agricultural regions for ensuring fair prices for the agricultural product to the farmers. But the draft policy did not pay attention to this policy which should be addressed as policy agenda.

While the world is standing against the genetically modified organisms in foods, then Bangladesh has just stood in opposite in the issue. Genetically modified organisms injects in the foods in Bangladesh and the draft policy has also stood for GMO. We should examine it!

While high court of India has given stay order in BT brinjal, invented by Mahico, an Indian Company; for the same time, in Bangladesh, we are promoting it! Gene of a gram positive bacteria named bacillus thuringiensis injects at the brinjal which have created a toxic protein within the brinjal. The toxic protein and trasmission of genes could be a great threat to the human being! But we have shown don’t care motive! The government should go vigorus research on GMO before permiting the company to produce the GMO foods which should crearly declared in the agricultural policy.

The process of formulation of the policy has already been questioned by agricultural campaigners, organisations and institutions. The results for not communicating the policy to the stakeholders have shown to above. So, the government should hear the cry of the stakeholders before drafting the final policy.
 

The Facebook generation is showing  a growing resolve to change our world and a capacity to make things happen. They are bringing their energy and courage to some of the most difficult issues we face.

- Ban Ki Moon, Secretary General of United Nations.

“Failing to invest in our youth is a false economy; Conversely, investing in young people will pay great dividents for all”, Ban Ki Moon stated and asked, “International community must work to expand the horizons of opportunity for young women and men and answer their legitimate demand for dignity and decent work, nothing that global economic crisis and austerity measures in many countries are contraining these opportunities”.

Yesterday, 25 July 2011 during inaguration of high level General Assembly of youth, Mr. Ban spoke to tackling the challenges facing youth and exploring their potentials to bring about change in their societies and in the world at large. The meeting is expected to conclude today, 26 July 2011 with the adoption of an outcome document that calls for strategies to give young people everywhere a real chance to find decent work and urge countries to take effective measures to protect young people from terrorism, among other elements.

The youths of Bangladesh, we have not any information about these meeting and its outcome. The government have not any initiatives to invest in their youth people. Youth are not an agenda for development of the nations while the world is focusing on youth development.

“Youth are the key players in the societies can mobilise the change”, frequently we use this speech in dialogue in discussion table, but hardly we realise it in the practice ground. Youth men and women are ignored in the decision making and implementation process. The government need to focus in the youth and promte the culture of dialogue with young people if we really want the proper development of the nation. 

Please read more:

• Right to Food: Dialogue with Youth Activists
• Demanding safe migration worldwide of Climate Victims, the Youth Activists observed a Stand Up Programme during Colombo Proces Meeting held in Dhaka.
• Dialogue on Youth and Employment: Youth Activists participated in an extended programme of World Social Forum, Dakar, Senegal
• Workshop on Youth Activism

27 June 2011, just the following day of the press conference, the retailers have sold the Soyabean Oil in Tk.125 each litre which was Tk.110 in previous day. It means, the traders have increased Tk.15 for per litre Soyabean Oil. Is it satisfactory?

The prices of essentials have already cross the limit of purchasing capacity of people and they have cut the food items and spending on education and health budget for their child.   

54 per cent of overall respondents and a majority of people in most countries surveyed said they are not eating the same food as they did two years ago – the period before the current food price crisis began. Globally 39 per cent of those who said their diet had changed blamed the rising price of food and 33 per cent cited health reasons. – Rising food prices changing what we eat.

A youth team comprising university students formed by Online Knowledge Centre  for market monitoring of daily household essentials and as per their report, the coarse rice has been sold Tk.30-45 per kg, suger in Tk.65-68 per kg and edible oil in Tk.110-125 per kg. The prices of essentials are not satisfactory compared with the income of poor and lower middle class families at all.

The standing committee report will inspire the unfair profit makers and it will create more burden in lives of thousands poor and marginalised people living in the poverty line.

In this context, a   published and suggested to the standing committee and the commerce ministry also should come up with immediate policy decision to strengthen TCB to take control over market and set up market based consumer forum under the supervision of commerce ministry.

The commitments produced in such high level meetings, hardly realized in the practice ground, which the prime minister pointed out in her speeches. According to Accra Agenda for Action, LDCs have ownership and right to use of country systems and the development partners are not allowed to attach any aid provisions as conditionality. But the Accra Agenda for Action is not implemented in real world!

Bangladesh also experienced that the giants like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are too concerned with influencing the decisions and strategies of LDCs, which should be changed for equal global development. In this regards, reform in global governance to free the LDCs from the dominion of international institutions and even from some of the emerging developed countries required, the head of state participated in this high level meeting should be addressed it in UN LDC-IV conference as prime agenda.  

There is need for human development, which is sustainable, attention to the priority issues of poverty reduction, MDG achievement and attention to environmental sustainability for the medium and longer run, the Bangladesh Prime Minister argued at the conference. But she forgot her own speeches which she made in the inauguration programme of Colombo Process held in Dhaka during 20-22 April 2011, `Since Bangladesh is likely to have huge human displacement due to climate change, we want establishment of an international regime under the UN to tackle the situation’.

Reminding the speeches of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, we demanded to address the following issues in the UN LDC – IV conference:

• Establishment of special protocol under UN system for safe migration of displaced people due to climate change: The COP-16 declared that measures to enhance understanding, coordination and cooperation with regard to climate change induced displacement, migration and planned relocation, where appropriate at national, regional and international levels. So, the Prime Minister should address the issues in the UN LDC-IV conference.
• Establishment a consensus among LDCs for migration of Low and Semi-Skilled Workers Worldwide as Natural Persons.

The Bangladeshi Ambassador Anowarul K. Chowdhury, former UN Under-Secretary-General expressed his own experience abbreviated as “4D” – deny, dilute, delay and divide, which is the current attitude strategic steps of the development partners showed by the rich countries. The last 30 years of UN LDC conference proved it. Assessing this experience, if the delegates of LDCs should made a time bound and specific action plan for next decade from Istanbul UN LDC conference, it could bring a positive change of LDCs. Putting people before profit, we can make a sustainable globe for living together in the planet, time has come to realize it.

Modern energy technology can help combat poverty, I read this article today and tried to visualise Bangladesh in the context of the article. Yes, really it is a  great idea!

The country is facing enough energy inefficiency partricularly in electricity. But we hardly realise the importance of Solar Energy. We can overcome the electricity problem through promoting Solar Home System (SHS). Government should re-think about the national energy policy to serve the nation.