Good Agricultural Practices Approach (GAP)

A Working Concept

By Anne-Sophie Poisot, FAO/AGD

FAO Workshop on Good Agricultural Practices, 27-29 October 2004, Rome

1. Big challenges for agriculture ?• Improve food security, livelihoods• Satisfy increasing demands for safe and

nutritious food and other products• Conserve the natural resource base

Commitments• WSSD and SARD - economic, social and

environmental sustainability• World Food Summit Plan of Action, MDGs

The million dollar question is…

How to make agricultural systems

in developing countries

more sustainable, in a globalizing world where food supply chains

are ever more competitive ?

Developments in Ag. Sector

• ‘Demand’ by consumers, retailers, processors– Food safety, quality, nutrition– Environmental impact of agriculture

• ‘Supply’ by farmers who adopt practices– Improve livelihoods

• ‘Support’ by governments and institutions– Sustainable agriculture policies– Research, extension, education, credit,

infrastructure

GAP: What is new under the sun ?

• For decades: extension and research guidelines on “good practices”

• More recent trend: GAP in food markets - growing number of “GAP” codes & standards - privatization of standards

• Renewed attention as entry point for food safety & quality in food chain

Simple assumption…

Good production practices at farm level can make a

huge difference!

Can codes support sustainable ag.?• Private certification and standards (e.g.: EUREP, retail…)

– Competitive advantage - not all farmers can meet– Focus more on impact on product than on sustainability

• Public legislation and policies (e.g. : extension, research)– Society-driven – broader sustainability priorities– Local, small farmer-adapted– But lack financial resources

• Fair trade, organic– A mix of both– Provide capacity building. Environmental and social aspects– But market share may be limited in longer term

“Any problem”?• Too many standards and codes, confusing• Opportunities, but hard for small farmers to

meet private & export standards (cost, investments, paperwork) and certification fees

• Farmers don’t always get a price premium• Different scopes of GAP• Are food safety/quality and food

security/sustainability GAPs compatible or contradictory?

Farmers incentives to adopt?

• Economic: price premium, market access; access to inputs; stabilize yield, increase productivity, reduce losses, increase farm asset value...

• Regulatory/Legal: ascertain property rights to scare resources; reduce liability...

• Human/social capital: expand skill sets, reduce community tensions...

… which means

… that farmers have many incentives to apply GAPs whether or not that gives them access to segregated markets or price premiums

2. And FAO…? Development of a GAP Approach in FAO

a. Identification of Preliminary Principles of GAP and electronic discussions in context of SARD

b. Request for guidance at COAG 2003

c. GAP Expert Consultation, Nov 2003, Rome

a. “Global Principles of GAP”

• Form 11 components of ag. practices

• Identify hazards to be avoided

• Identify outcomes to be promoted

= Provide a basis for the development

of codes of practice for individual

production systems

The 11 components• Soil

• Water

• Crop and fodder production

• Crop protection

• Animal feed and livestock production

• Animal health

• Animal welfare

• Harvest and on-farm processing and storage

• Energy and waste management

• Human welfare, health and safety

• Wildlife and landscape

b. FAO dos and don’ts on GAP: (COAG 2003)

• COAG: ”GOOD, GO AHEAD” but…DON’Ts• No new intergovernmental standard or certification, no

barriers to trade : voluntary practices• No undue demands on resource-poor producers • Consistent with existing regulations (Codex, IPPC, OIE)DOs• Share lessons through multi-stakeholder processes and

capacity building• Consider different commodities, agro-ecosystems, and

scale & resources of farmers

c. Expert Consultation: definition of a GAP approach

• addressing economic, environmental and social sustainability inclusive of food safety and quality

• focused on primary production (whilst considering the supply chain and institutional context)

• taking account voluntary and regulatory aspects• within a given incentive and agro-ecology context

• = Focus on a GAP Approach and not the creation of a FAO international “Super-GAP”

Meanwhile, in the field…• Many projects related to GAP are implemented

by different units: Eastern Africa (AGAP), Latin America, Thailand, China (ESNS and RLC), Burkina Faso (AGD/AGS/AGPC), Asia region (AGE, AGSF), Brazil and West Africa (AGPC) etc, etc, etc

• With different entry points: food safety and quality, sustainable production systems, meat and milk production, certification and value-chains, participatory extension etc, etc, etc

3. Lessons learnt - Strategy• Be strategic: some crops have more impacts

and potential than others• Focus on improvement: better, not best

agricultural practices; encourage innovation, not compliance

• Focus on the most serious impacts: soil erosion, effluents, habitat conversion. 8-10 activities cause most environmental impacts

• Be open: not enough effort made to collect/adapt lessons from around the world

Lessons learnt - Stakeholders• Work with producers, consumers, markets

and governments, and use carrots and sticks

• Need to work with drivers of change

• Farmers and communities create most GAPs

• 400 buyers are key, more than millions of consumers: need to engage industry

Lessons learnt - Incentives• Target farmer incentives and disencentives

when designing GAP programmes

• GAPs increase product quality and reduces risk; GAP can work without market incentives

• Most GAP pay for themselves, though not all

• Different agro-ecologies, institutional and market contexts = different GAP priorities

4. Possible Joint Action Areas - Global -

• Provide information on GAP schemes: who, what, how, incentives, cost, benefits…– GAP comparative database http://

www.fao.org/prods/gap/database/index.html

– GAP website http://www.fao.org/prods/GAP/gapindex_en.htm

• Define global principles of GAP– 11 components – need more work ?

Possible Joint Action Areas- Local -

• Support local translation of principles into appropriate practices and indicators

FAO may bring:1- Knowledge range (on policies, practices,

impacts)2- Facilitate multistakeholder negotiations on

GAPs for a commodity/farming system 3- Capacity building: trainer of trainers & farmers

Where could a GAP approach be most useful ?

• “From the top”: when private company wants to improve its GAP standards in a meaningful way

• “From the bottom”: help farmer groups integrate markets (technical advice on practices and managerial advice on commercialization)

• “Support level”: help interested govnt understand implications, define policies and build capacity

Conclusion : key words !• GAP : Old wine in new bottles ? Or…working

better together? It’s about INTEGRATION

• Win-win situations for consumers, markets and farmers. It’s about NEGOTIATION

• Ultimately, a matter of policy choice for govts, minimizing trade-offs. It’s about SELECTION

• Practical, flexible approaches in GAP worskhop… It’s about IMPLEMENTATION

…have a fruitful workshop !