Conclusion

The organic movement, which was started by women's groups, NGOs, and farmers in the 70's and 80's, is increasingly receiving worldwide attention from the private sector, governments, and international organizations. This paper presents some of the fundamental conceptual issues in OA and the MDGs. A review of the existing literature reveals that OA has strong potential to meet multi-policy objectives that go beyond reducing income poverty to include the achievement of the various MDGs. However, the review also shows that the magnitude of the impacts would be stronger for some MDGs than others.

With regards to OA's contribution to improvements in income, food security (MDG 1), and environmental sustainability (MDG 7), the linkages are fairly well-defined and there is sufficient empirical and anecdotal data to support these. OA's contribution to improved profitability and therefore income, due to premium price and lower cost of production, is widely documented. OA's contribution to environmental sustainability is now a generally known fact and has been the main basis for subsidies program to support OA in European countries.

OA's contribution to global partnership in development (MDG 8) is increasingly being recognized in the international trade arena i.e. in WTO discussions. It is also generally accepted that improved employment opportunities in rural areas through OA could provide rural youths (target 16 of MDG 8) with jobs, reducing rural-urban migration and alleviating population pressures in urban slums (target 11 of MDG 7).

OA's contribution to health improvements (MDG 4 and 5) due to reduced exposure to pesticides is also widely recognized and very well documented. OA's contribution to maternal and child health due to improved quality of food, although widely perceived by consumers of OA products, is more difficult to prove. Such a study would require longitudinal data which are expensive to collect and generally not available. OA's impact on diseases is also largely anecdotal as establishing cause and effect and collecting supporting empirical data is difficult.

In the case of OA's contribution to education (MDG 2), the linkage is indirect through higher spending on education, given improved household income through OA. However, as OA is known to be more labor intensive, it may increase demand for children to work on farm and not be attending classes. The actual affect is context specific.

Finally, as for gender empowerment, (MDG 3), the linkages have been defined as largely indirect and inconclusive. OA could empower women by providing income opportunities but its impacts will depend on initial gender relations, as reflected in gender-based divisions of labor, decision-making, housework, and intra-household allocation of resources and assets. Nevertheless, since OA practice is generally associated with higher level of social awareness, the risk of women being exploited under OA is lower.

While OA has the potential to address multiple MDG targets, the magnitude of impacts on each MDGs will be context specific. The extents of impacts vary greatly due to several factors i.e. nature of the agro-ecosystem, type of crop, stage of development, initial poverty status, etc. Most importantly, the extents of impacts on MDG would depend on the share of agriculture income in total household income.

In general, OA development appears to be more successful in marginal areas where agro-chemicals have not been extensively used and where employment opportunity is limited. These marginal areas are also where the poorest of the poor reside and where the MDGs targets are at stake. This provides a case for donors and government to look more seriously into supporting OA as a development tool for the rural poor.

With increased attention to OA, governments of developing countries around the world are looking to develop various legal and financial programs to facilitate the development of this sector. However, they are all faced with the same problem of lack of rigorous studies to form a basis for policy design. Although there are increasing number of empirical research on OA and the MDGs, the review shows that even in areas where empirical research has been carried out, there has been little consistency in the research framework, indicators, and method for interpreting the findings.

Since mainstream research has overlooked organic agriculture, and since research methodology on the non-income aspects of MDGs is limited and data are difficult to obtain, rigorous studies on OA is still severely limited, particularly in the context of smallholders in Asia. Addressing this knowledge gap is crucial for the development of effective policies to support OA development for poverty reduction and for achieving the MDGs in developing countries.

Download this Discussion Paper [ PDF 296.7KB| 28 pages ].

Comment(s)

There are [1] comment(s) for this entry. Post a comment.

1. Anthony Zola
   (posted 06 October 2006 / 10:00:45 AM)
   
   Aspects of this paper are based upon a recent international workshop in Bangkok. The workshop was excellent and the proceedings already make an important contribution to the existing literature. This document reflects only one aspect of the discussion, albeit a very important aspect, that of meeting the MDGs and how organic agriculture can contribute to that process.