Seeds in farmers' hands: community seed banking in China

Topics in this article include: What is a community seedbank and why it matters / the Chinese way of community seedbanking / three examples of community seed banks in China / challenges, prospects and the way forwar

Community seed banks in China: achievements, challenges and prospects

The rich agrobiodiversity of China is under unprecedented threat, experiencing a dramatic loss of many valuable local varieties and wild relatives of main crops. The country's formal conservation system of ex situ genebanks faces serious challenges to address this loss. Community seed banks can play a key role to complement the conservation activities of these genebanks and provide other important collective goods, such as evolutionary services, but although they have been around for some 35 years in various parts of the world, in China they have a much shorter history. In recent years though the number has increased to almost 30 in 2020, in particular due to the efforts of the China Farmers' Seed Network. The community seed banks in the country are very diverse in terms of functions and services, forms of management and institutional linkages. Compared to the most common functions of community seed banks in other countries, China is bringing an important design innovation through two new functions: adding value to seed and produce through innovative marketing strategies, and building regional and national seed system linkages and fostering collaboration. The review of community seed banking not only provides rich empirical evidence, but also makes an important contribution to theory. Building on the achievements of community seed banking in the last decade, there is scope to scale this kind of very valuable agrobiodiversity conservation approach through more effective uptake and support by relevant national policies

Support indigenous food system biocultural diversity

The Comment by Carol Zavaleta-Cortijo and colleagues1 was timely in emphasising the challenges faced by Indigenous peoples due to the combined effects of climate change, COVID-19, and longstanding inequities. Although pressure on Indigenous livelihoods is nothing new, current effects are extreme, both in terms of deaths due to the virus and disruptions to lifeways, including Indigenous food systems. Both the importance and also the vulnerability of Indigenous food systems, and therefore the obligation to “ensure that current decisions and development trajectories do not further jeopardise the resilience of Indigenous food systems, which have integral roles in the response of Indigenous populations to current and future pandemics and climatic changes”,1 should be highlighted in all pertinent policy and development arenas, including the Convention on Biological Diversity's Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework and upcoming UN Food Systems Summit, among many others. Our experiences in the Andean, Himalayan, and other mountainous regions offer the insight that Indigenous food system biocultural diversity provides the foundations for resilience. This diversity encompasses not only the many crop and livestock species, and their varieties and breeds, but also the wild organisms supporting and interacting with Indigenous agriculture and food. Traditional knowledge systems around this diversity provide health and sustainability solutions that are unique to place, but whose benefits are urgently needed globally.2, 3 The ongoing loss of this biocultural diversity and associated knowledge is a global tragedy. We draw hope from two ongoing movements regarding Indigenous food system biocultural diversity. First, Indigenous communities have organised around nurturing this diversity by sharing experiences and visions on food, health, climate adaptation, conservation, and livelihood generation with others facing similar threats around the world, through networks such as the International Network of Mountain Indigenous Peoples. Second, Indigenous communities are finding ways to engage on their own terms with national and international organisations and institutions about shared interests, on the basis of respect for Indigenous food system diversity and knowledge systems.4 In the aftermath of COVID-19 and ongoing efforts to adapt to and mitigate climate change, we heartily agree with Zavaleta-Cortijo and colleagues that food systems are essential to health and resilience in Indigenous communities. Moreover, as these biocultural processes embody the longest ongoing human experiences with the provision of food under environmental stresses, shocks, and extremes, we suggest that the world has much to learn from Indigenous food systems. Now, more than ever, what is needed is respect for diversity and for the knowledge systems that have both nurtured it and survived because of it

Biocultural diversity for food system transformation under global environmental change

Biocultural diversity is central to the nutrition, resilience, and adaptive capacity of Indigenous and traditional peoples, who collectively maintain the longest ongoing human experiences with the provision of food under environmental change. In the form of crops and livestock and associated knowledge on their cultivation and use, food-related biocultural diversity likewise underpins global food security. As food system transformation is increasingly recognized as an urgent priority, we argue that food security, sustainability, resilience, and adaptive capacity can be furthered through greater emphasis on conservation, use, and celebration of food-related biocultural diversity. We provide examples from the Parque de la Papa, Peru, a “food biocultural diversity neighborhood” which through advocacy and partnerships based around its diversity, has both enhanced local communities and contributed to food security at a much larger scale. We outline collaborative actions which we believe are important to up- and out-scale food biocultural diversity neighborhood successes. Further research and knowledge sharing are critical to better document, understand, track, and communicate the value, functions, and state of biocultural diversity in food systems. Expanded training and capacity development opportunities are important to enable the interchange of experiences and visions on food, health, sustainability and resilience, climate adaptation, equity and justice, and livelihood generation with others facing similar challenges. Finally, strengthened networking across food biocultural diversity neighborhoods is essential to their persistence and growth as they increasingly engage with local, national, and international organizations, based on shared interests and on their own terms, across five continents

Sustainable maize production and consumption in China: practices and politics in transition

China provides a stark and globally significant illustration of how changing patterns of food production and consumption (especially related to increased intake of animal protein) are creating negative impacts on biodiversity, climate, nitrogen and phosphorous cycles and the use of freshwater. However, China's rapidly growing innovation capabilities and dynamic pattern of development also offer a unique opportunity for transitions towards more sustainable and resilient agri-food systems. Applying a ‘food practices in transition’ framework (Spaargaren et al., 2012), this paper discusses the technological, political and socio-cultural factors central to such systemic changes, with a focus on maize as a core case study. In particular it presents and discusses two contending (but not mutually-exclusive) pathways towards more sustainable maize production and consumption. One, which we call the ‘indigenous innovation’ pathway is framed by ‘systemic rationalities’ and characterised by a focus on R&D-intensive technologies for agricultural intensification, including the controversial use of transgenic phytase maize. The second, which we term the ‘alternative’ pathway, is framed by ‘lifeworld rationalities’ and focusses on improved management practices, shorter supply chains, agro-ecological and participatory research. The two pathways claim different environmental benefits and present different risks and political implications. This paper analyses the food practices in transition in each pathway, identifying links with shifting political conditions and pointing to the increasingly significant role of consumer agency in steering patterns of maize production and consumption in China

Global importance of large-diameter trees

Aim: To examine the contribution of large‐diameter trees to biomass, stand structure, and species richness across forest biomes. Location: Global. Time period: Early 21st century. Major taxa studied: Woody plants. Methods: We examined the contribution of large trees to forest density, richness and biomass using a global network of 48 large (from 2 to 60 ha) forest plots representing 5,601,473 stems across 9,298 species and 210 plant families. This contribution was assessed using three metrics: the largest 1% of trees ≥ 1 cm diameter at breast height (DBH), all trees ≥ 60 cm DBH, and those rank‐ordered largest trees that cumulatively comprise 50% of forest biomass. Results: Averaged across these 48 forest plots, the largest 1% of trees ≥ 1 cm DBH comprised 50% of aboveground live biomass, with hectare‐scale standard deviation of 26%. Trees ≥ 60 cm DBH comprised 41% of aboveground live tree biomass. The size of the largest trees correlated with total forest biomass (r2 = .62, p < .001). Large‐diameter trees in high biomass forests represented far fewer species relative to overall forest richness (r2 = .45, p < .001). Forests with more diverse large‐diameter tree communities were comprised of smaller trees (r2 = .33, p < .001). Lower large‐diameter richness was associated with large‐diameter trees being individuals of more common species (r2 = .17, p = .002). The concentration of biomass in the largest 1% of trees declined with increasing absolute latitude (r2 = .46, p < .001), as did forest density (r2 = .31, p < .001). Forest structural complexity increased with increasing absolute latitude (r2 = .26, p < .001). Main conclusions: Because large‐diameter trees constitute roughly half of the mature forest biomass worldwide, their dynamics and sensitivities to environmental change represent potentially large controls on global forest carbon cycling. We recommend managing forests for conservation of existing large‐diameter trees or those that can soon reach large diameters as a simple way to conserve and potentially enhance ecosystem services

Whose varieties are they? : clarifying questions of recognition, access, and benefit sharing related to the development of new varieties through participatory plant breeding; project final report

This report is part of the umbrella project, “Deepening the methodological basis of participatory plant breeding.” It provides detailed summaries of activities carried out in terms of Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB) benefit sharing; policy analysis and new policies to protect genetic resources; farmer’s rights in seed collecting, intellectual property and ownership; training and workshops; seed and seed security; regulatory frameworks; grain yield performance; rural economies; biodiversity; farmer participation and associations

Seeds that give revisited: Participatory plant breeding and rural revitilization

In 2003, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) of Canada published “Seed that give. Participatory plant breeding,” synthesizing the achievements and lessons learned of the first 10 (pioneering) years of participatory plant breeding (PPB), a concept first tabled at an international workshop in Wageningen, the Netherlands, in 1994. IDRC was one of the early and most fervent supporters of PPB. See: https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.648982/publication.html In “Seeds that give revisited,” the PPB champions highlighted in the 2003 book present and reflect on their work over the last 20 years, joined by a group of Chinese professionals who were inspired by the early PPB work, bringing the approach to new regions and crops. Contributors write about significant results obtained, but also about (new) challenges. The Conclusion brings the cases together

Fair Access and Benefit Sharing of Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge for Rural Livelihood Security: Exploring Appropriate Policies and Laws in Rapidly Changing China

Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) related regulations and policies have been further explored through close collaboration with policy actors i.e. individuals and institutions under Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Environment Protection (MOEP) and Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS). In Guangxi, more in-depth farmer (vs. formal) collaboration and linkage activities and mechanisms have been carried out, while at the SW China level the focus is on Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB) scaling up for mainstreaming and institutionalization. On the national and international level the focus is mainly on exchange and policy suggestions, with advocacy in some workshops and conferences