II. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO
2.3. Variables y operacionalización
186
6. From agronomic diversity to simplifying choices: Moving towards agrobiodiversity loss?
6.1 Introduction
In this chapter I gather the arguments and evidence that demonstrate that a widespread agronomic simplification is an existing threat to agrobiodiversity in the Altiplano Norte. I analyse the mechanisms that make agrobiodiversity loss a possible future scenario; discuss how this trend is included in the deagrarianisation framework examined previously; clarify how migration fits into the picture of progressive abandonment - on the farmers’ side - of conservation activities, or of agriculture altogether.
I begin by discussing the status of on-farm conservation, which scientists have recently started to monitor systematically in the Bolivian Highlands. Then I illustrate the direct consequences of rural-urban migration (particularly depopulation) on rural villages and farmers’ choices. Finally, I analyse the indirect changes caused by migration as part of a broader socio-economic transformation.
I engage with publications that explore the influence of different socio-economic, agronomic and environmental factors on producers’ decisions and on the agrobiodiversity conserved on farm. However, my analysis relies mainly on the primary data that I collected in Cachilaya, Coromata and Okola. To do so I used participant observation during different moments of the crop year; unstructured and semi-structured interviews with farmers and residentes; focus groups and survey data. My analysis also includes (especially in 6.4.6) the results of participant observation and unstructured interviews in La Paz and El Alto, particularly in urban markets.
Finally, it draws from the secondary material I retrieved in the municipalities’ offices (PDMs) and in international and Bolivian NGOs and research institutes (i.e. Rojas et al. 2014; Sthapit et al. 2014; Bioversity International 2012; Mamani Alvarez 2011; Padulosi et al. 2011; Torresin 2010; Avilés Irahola 2009; Rojas et al. 2004; Tapia et al. 2004).
6.2 Is genetic erosion occurring in the Altiplano Norte?
Genetic erosion is the “loss of genetic diversity between and within populations of the same species over time, or reduction of the genetic base of a species” (Jarvis et al. 2000, p.7). With reference to in situ/on-farm agrobiodiversity conservation, it is “the loss of crop genetic
187
resources such as the rare genes and gene complexes often found in locally adapted landraces”
(Van Dusen 2005, p.63). The literature reveals that worldwide there are different causes for the loss of landraces by smallholders. Biotic stress is one of them - deforestation, desertification, soil erosion, and climate change (Bioversity International 2012). Another one is what Zimmerer defines as “decommittal (reallocation, reduction, or elimination of inputs) of agrobiodiversity resources” (Zimmerer 2013, p.1). Agricultural modernisation is often considered as the main factor responsible for this (Davari et al. 2013; Velásquez-Milla et al.
2011; Pascual et al. 2011; Subedi et al. 2003), although some authors disagree with this stance (Brush 1992; Van Dusen 2005; Wood & Lenne 1997). Van Dusen, for example, argues that while the competition between traditional and improved varieties of the same crop can affect genetic resources conservation, labour market dynamics - including non-farm work and migration - generally influence the cropping decisions of farm households to a much greater extent (2005). In addition, cultural erosion can be another possible cause of genetic erosion, as the conservation of agrobiodiversity on farm is strongly linked with the maintenance of traditional knowledge (Velásquez-Milla et al. 2011; Sthapit et al. 2006; Mamani et al. 2010).
A number of regional studies from the Andes identify a clear acceleration of genetic erosion (Clawson 1990; Bioversity International 2012; Tapia et al. 2004; Velásquez-Milla et al. 2011;
Gruberg et al. 2013), caused by low market demand, low profitability, limited availability of arable land, growing preference for other species, abiotic and biotic problems, low availability of quality seed (Bioversity International 2012, p.9 of Apendix G). Nevertheless, some authors argue that this trend is not currently in place for papa (de Haan 2009; Hermann & Heller 1997), and claim that further research is necessary to confirm its existence and understand its underlying processes.
In the Altiplano Norte agrobiodiversity loss is reported in several studies as a serious risk, caused by climatic and environmental, as well as by social and economic factors. None of them, however, quantifies this loss, as collecting the data that allow scientists to do this is an extremely complex and lengthy process that requires a systematic effort (Mamani Alvarez 2011; Rojas et al. 2014; Torresin 2010; Rojas et al. 2004).
In the Lake Titicaca region PROINPA scientists have recently started to work to assess the amount and distribution of crop diversity in farming communities. This has been done according to the four-cell analysis (análisis de los cuatro campos), a participatory methodology for understanding the status of diversity and, if repeated over time, the rate of loss in a specific area. This technique aims at identifying 1) the richness and evenness of inter- or intra-specific diversity; 2) the common, rare and endangered species or varieties; 3) the reasons that
188
determine agrobiodiversity loss (Padulosi et al. 2011; Sthapit et al. 2014; PROINPA’s Annual Report for IFAD NUS III 2012).
Graph 6.1: The four-cell analysis
Own elaboration from Sthapit et al. 2014.
In Coromata and Cachilaya farmers were invited - in the framework of participatory workshops held on 31 May 2012 and 8 June 2012 respectively - to collectively decide where to locate seed varieties according to the four cells shown in graph 6.1. Each cell combines size of the area used for each variety (large or small) and number of households conserving it (many or few).
The seeds that are placed in the upper left cell will be the most common, while those that are placed in the lower right cell the most endangered. Furthermore, according to PROINPA’s Annual Report for IFAD NUS III from 2012, in Coromata and Cachilaya farmers were asked to fill in a fifth cell with the names of the variedades perdidas (lost varieties). The process was repeated twice - to assess the status of cultivated species the first time, and of potato varieties the second time. Table 6.1 shows the status of papa diversity that emerged from the five-cell (four plus one) analysis in Coromata. During the seminar “Managing on-farm agrobiodiversity”
189
in the offices of Care Bolivia PROINPA scientists declared their intention to carry out this type of evaluation more regularly in Altiplano Norte communities in order to trace the trend of agrobiodiversity conservation in this region (Fieldnotes 22-10-2012). At present, as explained in 3.3.2, reliable data on the trend of agrobiodiversity do not exist.
Table 6.1: Papa varieties classified according to the four-cell (plus one) analysis in Coromata
Translated from PROINPA’s Annual Report for IFAD NUS III 2012.
Cell Papa varieties
Large areas - Many households Huaycha, Wila Imilla
Large areas - Few households Janqu Pala, Wila Pala, Chiji Pala, Pala Morado
Small areas - Many households Chiyara Surimana, Chiyara Surimana Muruku, Chiyara Imilla, Janqu Chuquipitu, Ajawiri, Pitikilla
Rojo, Chiri Luki, Cuchi Callu, Piñu Blanco
Small areas - Few households
Queta, Manzana Imilla, Sacampaya Negro, Cuchi Jipilla, Morado Chuquipitu, Chiyara Taraco, Sapallu, Wila Taraco, Janqu Imilla, Janqu Kaisalla, Holandesa,
Sacampaya, Chuquipitu Nairan Morado, Chiji Yurima, Leke Cayu, Wila Surimana, Koyu, Tonko Puya Blanco, Kaka Surimana, Condor Piqui, Papa Garri Blanco, Papa Chinito, Wila Piñu, Papa Kealla,
Pepino, Camara, Kalla Pitikilla, Saitu Luki, Morado Kaisalla, Janqu Ajawiri, Choclito, Holandes Sapallu, Loka, Wislla Paqui, Janqu Polo, Wila Wislla, Chiyara Surimana Largo, Janqu Yurima, Luki Taraco, Sani Imilla, Wislla Wislla, Peruanito, Papa Garri Rojo, Chiyara Isla, Wila Koyu, Yurima, Janqu Sicha, Amajayu, Wila Nairan Peruano, Pureja Blanco, Huancu Callu, Chiji Pitikilla, Tonko Puya, Janqu
Pitikilla
Lost varieties Papa Milagro, Papa Criolla, Morado Kullo
190