Mr. Michael O'Brien:

I will make a few comments in response to questions that have been raised. Deputies Penrose and Corcoran Kennedy both referred to agroecology as something that works with nature. They sounded somewhat familiar with the concept. Such familiarity can sometimes generate the idea that agroecology involves going backwards. We would like to impress on the members of the committee the idea that agroecology, which may sound familiar, is a modern fusion of the best traditional approaches, the best traditional knowledge and the best practitioner knowledge with the best and most advanced ecological science. That is what agroecology represents.

Ms Moore has spoken about what Ireland can do to support the scaling up and scaling out of agroecology. In that regard, I draw attention to the recommendations we are making to the committee today. Some of the international processes which are afoot are being led by the UN food agencies, particularly the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO. The success of initiatives aimed at scaling up agroecology depends on the demonstration by member countries across the international community of support for such initiatives. I encourage the committee to ask the relevant Departments how Ireland is supporting the scaling up of agroecology initiatives and the process afoot at the Committee on World Food Security, which is examining agroecological approaches and seeking to make recommendations later this year on the best innovations for sustainable agriculture and food systems.

Deputy Cahill's question about why farm families continue to fall into a hunger trap has been addressed in part by my colleagues. Developments over several decades can be cited as another part of the reason. The structural adjustment policies of the 1980s and 1990s, which were led by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, had a particularly negative impact on African agriculture, about which we are talking this afternoon.

Its negative impact was to reorient the focus towards large-scale monocultural export-driven produce, rather than looking at the basis of the livelihoods of the 500 million plus small-scale farming producers. By small scale, we mean farmers with less than 2 ha. The majority of those would now have less than 1 ha. There has been relative neglect as evidenced by the direction taken since the 1990s in response to those structural adjustment policies. The fiscal commitments that many governments have given have privileged that monocultural export-driven production rather than considering domestic and local markets. That requires revisiting trade policies and investment policies and looking to trade policies that support access to local markets, competitiveness of small scale farmers in those local, national and regional markets without the same emphasis on international markets.

In answer to Deputy Corcoran Kennedy's question about the feminisation of agriculture, another related dimension which raises the importance of agroecology is that although there is very significant migration to urban environments, those urban environments are failing to create the employment opportunities for many of those who go there. The Food and Agricultural Organization is highlighting that there is not commensurate employment generation and because of that there is a need to consider what forms of agriculture in these societies can really sustain decent livelihoods. There is opportunity in agroecology, which is more labour intensive than capital intensive, to create quality jobs, on and off-farm, in the rural economy.

There was a question about differences or similarities between permaculture and agroecology and, as Mr. Aijuka said, there are significant similarities in respect of specific practices in permaculture, organic farming and agroecology. There are three distinguishing features of agroecology, the first of which is the co-creation of knowledge, that is, the emphasis on the best of indigenous farmer knowledge fused with the best of ecological scientific knowledge. The second is the linkages made with local markets, which puts the focus on local markets and circular economies, rather than long-distance value chains focused on meeting the needs of international markets. The third feature concerns meeting the food and nutritional needs of the households and the local communities.

Deputy Martin Kenny asked about the sustainable development goals and the relevance of agroecology to those. I draw the Deputy's attention to the Food and Agricultural Organization's scaling up agroecology initiative, transforming food and agricultural systems in support of the sustainable development goals. The Food and Agricultural Organization is joining Trócaire and PELUM tomorrow in a policy roundtable, to which committee members will have received invitations, that will deal with this specific topic. It shows that agroecology is relevant to virtually all of the sustainable development goals. It is also highly relevant to the report that was published last week on biodiversity. The global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services by the UN Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, whose status is equivalent to that of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, work on climate change and action, the 1.5o report, has underlined the urgency of the biodiversity loss and the threat that represents.

In terms of the SDGs, it tells us that progress towards achieving 80% of the goals, that is, 35 out of the 44 assessed targets of the goals relating to poverty, hunger, health, water, cities, climate, oceans and land, will not be met if we do not address the biodiversity challenge. Agroecology is all about diversity, moving away from monoculture and towards a system that builds nutritious, sustainable food systems.

I thank the Chairman.