We are all sitting in one boat
Shawki Barghouti talks about agricultural practices around the globe.
Shawki Barghouti, advisor for Agricultural Research & Portfolio Management at the World Bank, is an expert on agricultural practices around the globe. Earth & Sky’s Abby Frank spoke with him as we assembled our Special Report on the Human World.
Frank: How do you perceive the relationship between humans and the environment in the 21st century?
Barghouti: We are now more aware of what is happening as a result of human activities because population growth has forced us to become more aware. Whether we deal with water, or forestry, or agriculture, the impact on the environment is no longer an isolated event. It is part of the dynamics in which we live.
I don’t think we can isolate our type of activities from the way nature is going to react to these activities. And the coming generation is much more aware of these matters because they see the damage which has been inflicted on the Earth, whether you look at it in river basins, whether you look at it in forests.
And these serious impacts have come as the result of our own actions. So, our relationship is becoming much more clear, but I don’t think we have articulated much on how we handle this relationship. We know more about what impact we are inflicting on nature, on the environment, but I don’t think we really have found enough evidence to show that we are changing the way we handle it.
Frank: What will it take for humans to survive in the future?
Barghouti: I think we need to think of ourselves as travelling in a boat. A hole in one place is not just suddenly only affecting that person who is sitting in that section of the boat. We are all sitting in one boat and that is Earth. And one hole in it is going to sink it. So, whether the damage is in Amazonia, whether it is in the Middle East, we are all affected.
So it is collective action. And the collective action will influence the individual behavior. I don’t think you can only ask people individually to act if the total environment, collectively, is negligent.
The role of the organizations, the media, the governments become very important in shaping the individual action. Individuals do not really think of the long term effects. They have to survive. And you cannot blame them if they are poor. They are concerned about living from day to day. So, if they damage the environment, which is only going to show up 10 years from now, that is not immediately important for them.
So, collective action and cooperative action among international organizations, among nations themselves, will become important. And I don’t think it really is a matter of politics because the natural impact does not know political boundaries.
Frank: What might sustainable food production look like? How is it different from current agricultural models?
Barghouti: Well there are different schools of thought. There are those who are pushing for organic agriculture, and I think that is very attractive. But the problem is, can organic agriculture provide enough that we can feed the growing population? So, there is going to be a mix between what we consider as minimum input, minimum disturbance to nature. And that’s basically how our previous generations lived. They did not use much input in agriculture. They did not use millions of tons of fertilizers or pesticides. They lived under normal conditions, and they survived.
But I don’t think we can do the same with the growing population. We’ve gone way too far in relying on inputs in fertilizers, in machinery, in disturbing the soils, in changing the landscape of agriculture. And I think nature is not going to accept that from us. The soils are eroded. You see large tracts of land in Pakistan, in India, in the Middle East, losing their fertility because salt is crusting on the surface. We have to be more aware of the interaction between our agricultural activities and how nature is going to react, not necessarily from season to season, but over the long run.
Frank: If we limit our use of fertilizer and machines in agriculture will we still be able to feed the world?
Barghouti: Well this is the challenge. Many people say we won’t, but if I think if we look at the waste in agriculture we could. In many developing countries, we produce grains, and I think the amount which is lost between the harvest and taking it to the store is about 20% or 25% because of poor handling and poor management. There is waste happening in many different processes. Before we keep worrying about whether we will have enough to feed the world, I think we need to start talking more about how to save and how to manage the waste we are causing.
Definitely there will be challenges. The population continues to grow. But the resources in terms of agriculture, I think, will be managed in a way that is not over–doing it. I mean, if you look at the European and the American production, they produce way above what their population needs. In many parts of the world, still, there is more excess in production. India has a huge reserve, which means they have mastered the production system. They can produce whenever they need. They have good irrigation systems. They have a good understanding of what makes agriculture grow. So, I think the worry about feeding the world should be carefully addressed by proper management of what we can do and thoughtful planning of what we need to do for the future without destroying the present place while we are working.
Frank: Can we afford to have the rest of the world consume like Americans?
Barghouti: Thank goodness they can’t afford it. I mean the American consumption: if it is applied to other parts of the world, the world will be eating itself. And if you look at the austerity level of living in Africa or in south Asia, you wonder how nature has also allowed for this type of penance. Because people there do not consume as much, do not waste as much, mainly because they can’t afford it. I think the wealth of the society is also measured by how much the society wastes. And unfortunately Western society is not only wasting nature, it is wasting itself. I mean the obesity, the disease, the associated health problems with overconsumption and overwaste.
If you look at the damage, which is coming from our consumption, to the environment . . . it is coming back to haunt our health. The pollution, the number of cases now which are attributed to environmental pollution is tremendous. I don’t think you see that in places where consumption has not been high and waste has not been high because the environment has not been as damaged.
Frank: Are you optimistic about the future?
Barghouti: I think so because you see there is one thing which is really important. Thank goodness it is not affected by the politics of the environment. That is science. Science is teaching us more and more about how these dynamics are working. And many thoughtful organizations are trying to apply the scientific findings on the way we manage our relationship with nature.
Some governments will not act because of the influence of the interest groups who are only interested in their balance sheet rather than the long term effects on the environment. And I think more and more of these efforts are becoming exposed. At the end of the day, they are affecting the way we live and they are affecting not only the balance sheets of these years . . . they will affect the balance sheets of future years as well.
Frank: Thank you, Dr. Barghouti.
