Glass half empty? What climate change means for Canada's wine industry

by Laila Benkrima, The Conversation

Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

Wine has long been synonymous with good times, celebration and an appreciation of the finer things in life

Evolved over thousands of years and cultures, wine is something we all take for granted. But that is all about to change.

Recent publications on climate volatility have painted a bleak picture of the future for this beloved alcoholic beverage.

It is now clear that global warming is affecting most of the crops that are essential to feed the world. Climate change is impacting the production of both staple food crops like wheat, rice and corn and also commodity crops including coffee, cocoa and grapes.

Most of the world's vineyards, including its most venerable names, are facing incredible existential challenges that pose essential risks to their very survival if they don't adapt to the changing environmental conditions. Canadian wine is by no means exempt from these changes.

Signs of things to come

In January 2024, the Okanagan Valley in British Columbia experienced a devastating cold snap, with temperatures plummeting below -20°C. This unprecedented climatic event inflicted severe damage to all the grapevines in the region and could result in a 97% to 99% decrease in annual grape and wine production across the region—with projected revenue losses over the next few years in the $440 to $445 million range.

It is still too early in the season to assess the full extent of the damage and, while many vines will need replacement, there is still hope that with careful management some vines will bounce back within a few years.

The Okanagan cold snap is merely the latest climate change-induced climatic event to rock the Canadian and global wine industry in recent years.

Drought conditions, heat waves and smoke from forest fires have heavily impacted grape yields and resulted in variations in wine quality across regions. The cumulative effect of these climate-related events underscores the undeniable influence that climate change is already having on wine production and quality.

The viticulture industry must confront and adapt to these challenges to ensure its sustainability and resilience in the face of ongoing environmental changes.

The future of wineries

In order to adapt, the wine industry will need to embrace new production methods and technologies while promoting collaboration between researchers and growers.

Agriculture technologies—ranging from precision viticulture tools to high-resolution spatial information and AI—offer invaluable insights into vineyard management, grape quality optimization and environmental practices.

Providing more support to viticulturists can help incentivize sustainable farming practices and eco-labeling. At the same time, providing access to resources and education can significantly enhance the industry's resilience and sustainability over the long term.

Meanwhile, forward-thinking new policies could encourage research and development in areas like climate change adaptation, disease management and alternative grape varieties more suitable for changing environmental conditions. Policymakers should promote the adoption of renewable energy sources and more climate-resilient approaches to the vines and the soil.

Canadian governments should provide financial incentives and support the wine industry's transition to a more sustainable future. The recently announced $177 million, three-year extension to the federal government's Wine Sector Support Program is a good start.

Climate change not entirely to blame

Grapevines are often cultivated in areas that are incredibly vulnerable to changes in climate and while global warming is the greatest challenge the wine industry faces, it is not the only one.

The last 20 years have seen a significant drop in wine consumption as changing lifestyles, price hikes and health concerns push consumers—particularly young people—to cut back on alcohol. When people do indulge in wine, they are increasingly splurging on pricier bottles, choosing quality over quantity.

Data shows that Gen Z is sipping far less alcohol (around 20% less) than previous generations and more young people than ever are jumping on the no or low alcohol "NoLo" movement.

China, long a major wine market, has so far seen a 25% drop in wine sales in 2024 as rising prices and economic slowdown has left fewer glasses clinking than ever. Simply put, the wine world is experiencing a sobering moment.

Turning challenge into opportunity

Wine is one of life's great pleasures and an intrinsic part of human cultures—likely almost as old as civilization itself.

For those of us who drink wine, it is imperative that we try to be mindful of how we can all support our local viticulture industry in these challenging times.

As consumers, our role is pivotal in supporting resilience. Actions ranging from embracing local products, visiting vineyards, buying new wines crafted from climate-resilient varieties and staying informed about the challenges confronting the winery sector all can contribute to a brighter future for the industry.

We need to believe that the Canadian wine industry can not only adapt to change but can also thrive by producing great wines and developing the wine tourism that will educate consumers about the tradition and cultural heritage of Canadian wine making.

While global warming news can often seem all doom-and-gloom there remains a ray of hope. Using adaptation strategies and embracing agritech innovation, we can mitigate the impacts of climate change as much as possible. This adversity could catalyze a heightened focus on sustainability, adaptation and innovation within the viticulture sector. That, if nothing else, would be a positive outcome.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 Bordeaux for Kent, climate change to shift wine regions: Study

 

TikTok law threatening a ban if the app isn't sold raises First Amendment concerns

by Anupam Chander and Gautam Hans, The Conversation

Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

TikTok, the short-video company with Chinese roots, did the most American thing possible on May 7, 2024: It sued the U.S. government, in the person of Attorney General Merrick Garland, in federal court. The suit claims the federal law that took effect on April 24, 2024, banning TikTok unless it sells itself violates the U.S. Constitution.

The law names TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance Ltd., specifically. It also applies to other applications and websites reaching more than a million monthly users that allow people to share information and that have ownership of 20% or more from China, Russia, Iran or North Korea. If the president determines that such applications or websites "present a significant threat to the national security," then those apps and websites, too, must either be sold or banned from the U.S.

TikTok's suit says that the law violates the First Amendment by failing to provide evidence of the national security threat posed by the app and for failing to seek a less restrictive remedy. Despite legislators' claims to the contrary, the law forcing the divestiture of TikTok—the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act—implicates First Amendment interests. In our view, it does so in ways that ripple beyond this specific case.

As a company incorporated in the United States that provides an online publishing platform, TikTok has a right protected by the First Amendment to select what messages—in this case, user videos—it chooses to publish.

A ban appears to us, scholars who study law and technology, to be a massive prior restraint, which is generally barred by U.S. courts. Prior restraint is action by the government to prevent speech, typically some form of publication, before it occurs.

The First Amendment limits what the government can do to censor speech.

Speech in the crosshairs

The law's backers say that it is not a ban—all TikTok has to do is sell itself. These supporters describe the bill as a divestiture, a purely economic regulation that they say should insulate it from First Amendment challenge. After the sale, users could happily keep on using TikTok, not caring who owns the company. But the law seems to us an attempt to control speech by mandating a change in ownership.

Changing the speech content on the app is the express goal of some of the law's backers. The principal author of the bill, former U.S. Rep. Mike Gallagher, who stepped down from office in April to join a venture capital firm partly backed by Microsoft, explained to The New York Times that he was principally concerned about the potential for the Chinese Communist Party to spread propaganda on the app. The Times and The Wall Street Journal have reported that Congress passed this bill in part because of unsubstantiated accusations that TikTok was unfairly promoting one side in the Israel-Hamas war.

Imagine if the government told Jeff Bezos that he had to sell The Washington Post because it was worried that he might push a particular agenda using his control of the newspaper. Or to use a digital analogy, what if the government told Elon Musk that he had to sell X, formerly Twitter, because it didn't like his content moderation of legal speech? Those scenarios clearly have a connection to First Amendment protections.

Ownership matters

Transferring TikTok's ownership from one company to another matters greatly for the purposes of First Amendment analysis.

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan observed during oral arguments in a case unrelated to TikTok's ownership that ownership can make a difference in an app. She noted that the sale of Twitter to Elon Musk changed the character of the app. Kagan said, "Twitter users one day woke up and found themselves to be X users and the content rules had changed and their feeds changed, and all of a sudden they were getting a different online newspaper, so to speak, in a metaphorical sense every morning."

Indeed, The Washington Post found a rightward tilt after Twitter changed hands.

By forcing the sale of TikTok to an entity without ties to the Chinese Communist Party, Congress' intent with the law is to change the nature of the platform. That kind of government action implicates the core concerns that the First Amendment was designed to protect against: government interference in the speech of private parties.

U.S. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, co-sponsor of the House bill on TikTok, pointed to another instance where the U.S. government ordered a Chinese company to sell a U.S. app. In 2019, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States ordered the new Chinese owners of Grindr to sell the dating app, which the Chinese owners did the following year. In that case, the foreign owners could not assert First Amendment rights in the United States, given that they were outside the U.S., and thus no court considered this issue.

TikTok is claiming First Amendment protection against the law forcing its sale or ban.

National security claims

The government hasn't disclosed to the public the national security concerns cited in the TikTok law. While such concerns, if accurate, might warrant some kind of intervention, some Americans are likely to decline to take claims of national security urgency on good faith. To address skepticism of secret government power, particularly when it involves speech rights, the government arguably needs to present its claims.

U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Marsha Blackburn, both of whom supported the TikTok law and have seen the government's secret evidence, called for the declassification of that information. We believe that's a vital step for the public to properly consider the government's claim that a ban is warranted in this instance. In any case, the courts will ultimately weigh the secret evidence in determining whether the government's national security concerns justified this intrusion upon speech.

What seems likely to happen, absent judicial invalidation or legislative repeal of the law, is a world in which TikTok cannot effectively operate in the United States in a year's time, with mobile app stores unable to push out updates to the software and Oracle Corp. unable to continue hosting the app and its U.S. user data on its servers. TikTok could go dark on Jan. 19, 2025, in the United States.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

TikTok to fight US ban law in court

 

As governments crack down on fast fashion's harms, could Shein lose its shine?

by Elaine L Ritch, The Conversation

Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

Fast-fashion brand Shein expressed interest last year in listing on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). But, having met some opposition from US politicians, including Republican Florida senator Marco Rubio, it has now reportedly turned its attention to London.

While this would be a boost for the London Stock Exchange (LSE), which has lost several organizations to other international exchanges over the last five years, it raises the question of why Shein has not been successful with its application to the NYSE.

Shein has gained a significant global market share in online fast fashion since launching in China in 2008. It found success accelerating the already lucrative fast-fashion business model to become an ultra-fast fashion retailer.

That Shein is the second most popular fashion retailer for American generation Z is unsurprising, given the vast choice of up to 10,000 new garments uploaded daily at significantly lower prices than fast-fashion competitors like Zara and H&M.

Yet those strategies that have enabled Shein's international expansion are now likely hindering its application to the NYSE. The low cost of fast fashion in general has long been linked to potential labor exploitation, and the precariousness of outsourcing fashion production to the cheapest supplier within a global supply chain was evident during the pandemic. And as awareness of unethical and unsustainable practices in the wider industry grows, activists may yet have the power to disrupt Shein's growth.

Swiss NGO Public Eye has reported on alleged exploitation at factories said to be used by Shein, which itself recently issued a comprehensive response saying it has made "extensive progress" in improving conditions. In the US, Rubio introduced a law in 2021 blocking imports made by Chinese Uyghur slave labor and has since ordered an investigation into Shein and fellow Chinese low-price retailer Temu to see if their goods fall foul of the law.

Climate emergency

The US is going further in regulating the fashion industry. In New York, the Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act will, if passed, legislate that fashion and footwear brands with more than US$100 million (£79 million) in revenue must map 50% of their supply chain to ensure transparency. They will also have to develop plans to reduce their social and environmental impact.

Similarly, in 2019 the European Parliament declared a climate emergency, and the European Commission responded by developing the European Green Deal. This includes planned legislation forcing the fashion industry to address sustainability issues, meaning that by 2030 fashion and textiles will have to become more durable, repairable and recyclable. Businesses will also need to have strategies in place from the design process through to the end of life to maximize resources and avoid contributing to landfill.

French politicians are also "legislating to limit the excesses of ultra-fast fashion," with a surcharge from 2025 of €5 (£4.29) per item, rising to €10 by 2030. This is recognition that ultra-fast and fast fashion does not only exploit labor, but also the environment. In being seen as disposable, fast fashion has been shown to encourage constant consumption.

While listing Shein on the LSE could improve the company's respectability and profits, it could backfire for the brand in the long term. Shein could become more visible to a wider audience and with more understanding of sustainability and business practices that contribute to the climate emergency, activists could begin targeting shareholders and other organizations and people with connections to the company.

There is precedent for this—activists who targeted museums and galleries over their sponsorship from energy companies, as well as campus protests in the US and Europe calling for universities to divest from Israeli companies over its war in Gaza.

This trend of publicly criticizing brands for exploitative or unethical practice has been levied at fast fashion retailers on social media for years. In particular, influencers who promote "fashion hauls" have been criticized for encouraging unsustainable fashion consumption.

The fashion industry may appear to be unfairly scrutinized for failing to address sustainability. After all, it's hardly the only industry that damages the environment. But the scrutiny appears to be valid; the United Nations now believes that the fashion industry is the second largest polluter in the world.

What's more, as an industry it makes an overt display of its cheap prices and rapid turnover, with marketing tactics claiming "last chance to buy" or "low in stock," along with discounts that encourage frequent impulsive purchases. Our research has found that fast fashion marketing on social media is "in your face" and encourages mindless consumption of clothing that often languishes in wardrobes with the tags still on.

Fast-fashion retailers frequently make sustainability claims to alleviate consumer "eco-guilt," which are often ambiguous and can't be readily substantiated. But fast and ultra-fast fashion can never be sustainable due to the speed of turnover and items that are often binned after one wear.

So, although the marketing entices customers through social media, the messages consumers see as they scroll are increasingly competing with stories of activism and protests about fast fashion's harmful effects.

As moves to regulate the fast-fashion industry spread to more regions, the effects will almost certainly affect the profits of those in the sector. While a London listing for Shein might be a shot in the arm for the LSE, it could spell trouble for the retailer as it finds itself—and its practices—under increasing scrutiny.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Opinion: Ultra-fast fashion is a disturbing trend undermining efforts to make the whole industry more sustainable

 

Are some routes more prone to air turbulence? Will climate change make it worse? Your questions answered

by Doug Drury, The Conversation

A map of estimated clear-air turbulence around the world, current as of 3:00PM AEST

 (0500 UTC) on May 22 2024. Credit: Turbli

A little bit of turbulence is a common experience for air travelers. Severe incidents are rare—but when they occur they can be deadly.

The recent Singapore Airlines flight SQ321 from London to Singapore shows the danger. An encounter with extreme turbulence during normal flight left one person dead from a presumed heart attack and several others badly injured. The flight diverted to land in Bangkok so the severely injured passengers could receive hospital treatment.

Air turbulence can happen anywhere, but is far more common on some routes than on others.

Climate change is expected to boost the chances of air turbulence, and make it more intense. In fact, some research indicates turbulence has already worsened over the past few decades.

Where does turbulence happen?

Nearly every flight experiences turbulence in one form or another.

If an aircraft is taking off or landing behind another aircraft, the wind generated by the engine and wingtips of the lead aircraft can cause "wake turbulence" for the one behind.

Close to ground level, there may be turbulence due to strong winds associated with weather patterns moving through the area near an airport. At higher altitudes, there may be wake turbulence again (if flying close to another aircraft), or turbulence due to updraughts or downdraughts from a thunderstorm.

Credit: The Conversation

Another kind of turbulence that occurs at higher altitudes is harder to predict or avoid. So-called "clear-air turbulence" is invisible, as the name suggests. It is often caused by warmer air rising into cooler air, and is generally expected to get worse due to climate change.

At the most basic level turbulence is the result of two or more wind events colliding and creating eddies, or swirls of disrupted airflow.

It often occurs near mountain ranges, as wind flowing over the terrain accelerates upward.

Turbulence also often occurs at the edges of the jet streams. These are narrow bands of strong, high-altitude winds circling the globe. Aircraft often travel in the jet streams to get a speed boost—but when entering or leaving the jet stream, there may be some turbulence as it crosses the boundary with the slower winds outside.

What are the most turbulent routes?

It is possible to map turbulence patterns over the whole world. Airlines use these maps to plan in advance for alternate airports or other essential contingencies.

While turbulence changes with weather conditions, some regions and routes are more prone to it than others. As you can see from the list below, the majority of the most turbulent routes travel close to mountains.

In Australia, the highest average turbulence in 2023 occurred on the Brisbane to Sydney route, followed by Melbourne to Sydney and Brisbane to Melbourne.

A map showing changes in the chance of clear-air turbulence across the globe between 

1979 and 2020. Darker red indicates a higher chance of turbulence. 

Credit: Prosser et al. (2023), Geophysical Research Letters

Climate change may increase turbulence

How will climate change affect the future of aviation?

A study published last year found evidence of large increases in clear-air turbulence between 1979 and 2020. In some locations severe turbulence increased by as much as 55%.

In 2017, a different study used climate modeling to project that clear-air turbulence may be four times as common as it used to be by 2050, under some climate change scenarios.

What can be done about turbulence?

What can be done to mitigate turbulence? Technology to detect turbulence is still in the research and development phase, so pilots use the knowledge they have from weather radar to determine the best plan to avoid weather patterns with high levels of moisture directly ahead of their flight path.

Weather radar imagery shows the pilots where the most intense turbulence can be expected, and they work with air traffic control to avoid those areas. When turbulence is encountered unexpectedly, the pilots immediately turn on the "fasten seatbelt" sign and reduce engine thrust to slow down the plane. They will also be in touch with air traffic control to find better conditions either by climbing or descending to smoother air.

Ground-based meteorological centers can see weather patterns developing with the assistance of satellites. They provide this information to flight crews in real time, so the crew knows the weather to expect throughout their flight. This can also include areas of expected turbulence if storms develop along the intended flight route.

It seems we are heading into more turbulent times. Airlines will do all they can to reduce the impact on planes and passengers. But for the average traveler, the message is simple: when they tell you to fasten your seatbelt, you should listen.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Aviation turbulence strengthened as the world warmed, research shows

 

Chamber pots, shared toilets and DIY plumbing: China's toilet revolution exposes social inequalities

by Deljana Iossifova and Qi Liu, The Conversation

Credit: Deljana Iossifova

Urbanization in China tends to be depicted in terms of towering skyscrapers and multilane highways—the city reaching upwards and outwards. Not much thought is given to the vast, but less eye-catching, urban infrastructure that shapes and is shaped by the everyday lives of its citizens—such as toilets and sewers.

Until as late as the 2010s, chamber pots were still a common feature of urban life in China. Families shared wooden matong buckets or enamel tanyu, and emptied them at communal disposal sites. The waste thus collected was transported to suburban and rural areas for agricultural use.

In 2015, President Xi Jinping launched the nationwide toilet revolution. By 2020, city councils had added 68,000 more public toilets; by the end of 2022, 73% of rural residents reportedly had access to flush toilets.

But, as research has long shown, urban development and access to the modern sanitation it brings is unequal. When a poorer neighborhood is slated for redevelopment, indoor plumbing is often not considered a priority.

Residents in older, poorer urban areas continue to rely on chamber pots and neighborhood waste collection services. And not all newer areas are connected to the municipal sewage network either; some depend on septic tanks that have to be frequently emptied.

Attitudes, too, are shifting slowly. In newer and older neighborhoods alike, local residents often attribute poor sanitary conditions in public spaces to migrant populations. This leads to discrimination and sometimes even intimidation.

Our recent study looks at how sanitation in the east coast city of Shanghai is shaped by socioeconomic inequality. We have found that it isn't just about cleanliness—sanitation is also about power, culture and social norms.

Everyday sanitation practices

Between 2019 and 2022, our research team visited six diverse neighborhoods in the heart of Shanghai, conducting interviews with 54 residents of different genders, ages and places of origin. We wanted to understand how cultural and social norms are embedded within people's daily hygiene practices, and to what extent existing sanitation infrastructure meets their needs. We also wanted to see what inequalities both this infrastructure and people's routines create and recreate.

We found that sanitation practices are not just about biological rhythms, but the rhythms of everyday life. Residents who do not have flush toilets at home have to schedule visits to public bathrooms in between shopping, going for walks and exercise.

In other older neighborhoods, instead of public bathrooms, multiple households in a building or on the same lane might share a toilet. Residents have to plan their visits to avoid busy times, before and after work.

In some older neighborhoods and those slated for redevelopment, people continue to use chamber pots. They empty them at collection stations twice a day, in the morning before heading to work and in the evening before going to bed.

Rapid urbanization in China has brought unprecedented numbers of migrants into Shanghai and other cities from the countryside. The long-term residents of older neighborhoods we spoke to said repeatedly that these rural-to-urban migrants, who are often overworked and starved for time, do not always follow local customs when disposing of their waste.

Some might, for example, cover their chamber pots with plastic bags and dispose of the contents, bag and all, at the collection stations. This has often led to blockages and overflows, which represent a significant public health hazard. As one resident, migrant worker Lou*, put it: "Urbanites blame migrant workers for making public toilets dirty."

In turn, migrant workers are critical of the people in these older neighborhoods who still use chamber pots. In their home villages and towns, this old-fashioned system—which they consider backwards—has long been replaced by private or shared toilets.

Sanitation infrastructure in Shanghai, 1995–2019

Public or shared toilet blocks sometimes lack the facilities women need, including menstrual waste disposal. When Zhu, a 25-year-old migrant worker, was pregnant, she said she felt helpless because the public bathroom was equipped with urinals only, not toilets with seats. This led her husband to install a private flush toilet inside their rented home.

DIY toilet installation—tolerated by local authorities—is common practice. However, these toilets are often connected directly to storm water sewers, which can lead to unpleasant odors, sewage overflow and, potentially, drinking water contamination.

When connected to septic tanks, there are other challenges. Yu, a 70-year-old local resident, pointed to the economic disincentives at work. Instead of emptying them completely, she said sanitation workers seem to prefer to increase the frequency of their visits. Doing so is more profitable.

The shift to water-based, sewer-networked sanitation and chemical fertilizers in agriculture has decreased the value of human waste. Sanitation professionals are no longer interested in maximizing the amount of waste they collect.

Private flush toilets are typically more common in affluent neighborhoods. This has brought about new social norms and hygiene practices. Men and boys are expected to put the toilet seat down after urination for the convenience of women and girls. Parents use toilet seat covers to prevent the transmission of pathogens through children's direct contact with water or droplets from flushing.

Qiu, a 33-year-old man, said having his first child changed the way he thought about sanitation: "My wife's careful selection of hygiene products for our baby made us more conscious of personal hygiene."

As a result of these changing attitudes, hygiene products—wipes, tissues, seat covers—have become increasingly popular. This has obvious implications for the increased production and disposal of (solid) waste.

Even in neighborhoods where people have access to private toilets, however, chamber pots have not disappeared entirely. Yu told us that her elderly neighbors tend to still keep one by their bedside.

This is not only a matter of convenience but nostalgia and cultural heritage. Traditionally, the humble chamber pot—also known as zisun tong, or offspring pot—is an item of value for Han people, given as a wedding present by the bride's family. In a rapidly changing world, it continues to resonate with meanings beyond personal hygiene.

*All names in this article have been changed to protect the interviewees' anonymity.

Provided by The Conversation 

his article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

A global 'toilet revolution' is underway, but it's polluting water and ignoring the urban poor

 

International development can tackle the climate and migration crises together

by Nathan Einbinder, The Conversation

Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

Without immediate action to help the world's most vulnerable people adapt to climate change, millions face the prospect of their homes becoming unlivable, with no option but to leave.

Take the "dry corridor" of Central America, which stretches from Nicaragua in the south to the Mexican border in the north. Home to nearly 12 million people, the region is in the throes of yet another mega-drought. Recent heat waves here have lasted months, sparking winter wildfires and drying up freshwater and soils.

The consequences, which have yet to be fully realized, will almost certainly include major crop losses and food shortages that could spur violent conflict and mean more desperate families on the move.

Yet, by researching nature-friendly forms of farming rooted in the region's Indigenous cultures (often referred to collectively as agroecology), I've learned that extreme weather needn't end in tragedy. The right kind of actions can help people adapt to and even mitigate climate change, while giving them economic incentives to keep them from migrating.

A green economy in action

Since 2009, I've worked in the Maya-Achi territory in central Guatemala. Like elsewhere in the Dry Corridor, climate change has increased the frequency of heat waves at all times of year here and made wet seasons more erratic. As a result, small-scale agriculture, the principal livelihood, is extremely difficult.

Climate change has also exacerbated existing problems, such as inequality, the dependency of farmers on expensive and polluting chemical fertilizers and fallout from the civil war of the 1980s which tore communities apart. These factors have caused an exodus of young people from the region in search of opportunities elsewhere.

I've learned a lot from the Maya Achi, an ethnic group indigenous to Guatemala. I've discovered how ancestral knowledge about the local ecology can promote healthy soil management. I have seen how community organizations contribute to sustainable livelihoods, with programs that restore and in some cases reintroduce native foods and crop varieties, such as heritage maize and amaranth, which experts have found to be drought-tolerant and highly nutritious.

I've also witnessed the success of local groups in coordinating hundreds of Indigenous families to pursue agroecology, which includes regenerating degraded forests and watersheds. This has allowed farmers to grow more food as the prevalence of shade, moisture and healthy soil has improved, making small-scale farming more viable.

It's no secret that strong social networks help boost resilience in agricultural communities. In our recent article, education scholar Michael Bakal and I argued that Maya-Achi organizations, such as Qachuu Aloom, a local farmer and seed-saving association, are ideally placed to take on the climate and migration crises.

Not only do these organizations understand the needs and values of their communities, they also advance a model of economic development that enhances rather than destroys the environment—precisely the kind of green economy that is being called for internationally.

Each year, billions of dollars are spent globally on development projects which are supposed to improve conditions in areas like the Dry Corridor. Increasingly, funds are earmarked for building resilience to climate change, including farming projects that introduce new technologies, crops and practices.

As useful as some of these efforts have been, in the Maya-Achi territory, many programs initiated by foreign governments and charities have not left a positive legacy. Often this is due to a lack of consultation with local people and community leaders, the continued gifting of chemical fertilizers and non-native seeds which farmers become dependent on and the use of food aid, which is often unnecessary and culturally insensitive, disrupting as it does local food production and diets.

I have also heard criticisms from family farmers about the unrealistic expectations from simplistic (though expensive) projects that last, at most, two years. As one community leader put it: "They give us a shovel and expect everything to change overnight."

Not all international assistance and development programs have failed to improve local conditions. Yet, it's clear that to meet the urgency of the climate and migration crises, a change is needed. Some researchers insist that governments subsidize agroecological farming in areas hard hit by climate change, and that traditional and Indigenous techniques and crop varieties be at the heart of national campaigns to make communities more resilient.

Instead of importing ideas and projects to climate-vulnerable regions, we propose a new vision of development based on the values and well-being principles of local and Indigenous communities. This would mean development rooted in healthy food and farming landscapes, tight-knit communities of mutual support, and reverence for nature—principles originating from the philosophy of Buen Vivir, also called "Utziil Kasleem" in the Maya-Achí language.

As hundreds of millions of US dollars become available for development, with schemes aimed at tackling migration at its source, there is enormous potential to support local climate action: reforestation and agroecological farming, new markets for local products and ancestral practices blended with newer technologies, helping farmers adapt to changing conditions. An example might be improved composting methods and biological fertilizers derived from leaves and crop residues.

Development aid raised internationally could be much better spent by mitigating climate change and helping vulnerable communities stay together. Wealthy nations and organizations must listen to and learn from local people, supporting their existing projects and allowing them to reach their potential.

Provided by The Conversation 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How agroecology can be part of a 'just transition' for Canada's food system