Oxfam International Blogs - GMO http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/tags/gmo en Day 9: Who Will Feed Us All? http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/blogs/12-12-20-day-9-who-will-feed-us-all <div class="field field-name-body"><p><em><strong>If we are to survive climate change, we must adopt policies that let peasants diversify the plant and animal varieties on our menus. Only they have the know-how and patience to find out what plants and livestock will thrive where. A fundamental change in the regulatory machinery is needed.</strong></em></p> <p><em>By Pat Mooney, Co-founder and executive director of the <strong><a href="http://www.etcgroup.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">ETC Group</a></strong></em></p> <p>There has been a Pavlovian conviction that agricultural technology can meet our future food needs - and a pathological denial that industrial agriculture has contributed to today’s food crisis. Now, with climate change, the Global South’s food insecurity has morphed into a shared global challenge. Even soil-rich nations may not have the weather, water and other resources to feed themselves in 2050. </p> <p>Policy-makers are conventionally offered two options: the high-tech industrial food chain largely viewed as hyper-productive and efficient; or, the touchy-feely agro-ecological food web – the choice between the eco-foodie/fair traders’ 100 kilometer diet or agribusiness’s belt-busting 100 kilogram diet. The “smart menu,” of course, looks for the illusive middle ground – the best science while trading fairly and feeding sustainably.</p> <h3><em>“Is the food web just foodie romanticism?”</em></h3> <p>I am arguing that we are in a common and continuing food crisis; that the development ‘community’ is at the wrong starting point; that we don’t know very much; and, that we have to espouse the policies and practices of the peasant organizations that, today, provide humanity with at least 70 per cent of the food we eat. </p> <p>Is the food web just foodie romanticism? We tried to gather the facts that would prove the contribution of peasant provisioners (to describe both rural and urban food providers who are mostly outside the industrial food chain). But data on farm size and estimates on the number of rural peasants, for example, was at least a decade old and far from convincing. And, of course, farm calculations exclude hunting, gathering, fishing, and urban peasant production. </p> <p>In the end, we concluded that at least 70 of the food the world actually consumes every year is provisioned by rural and urban peasants. We could also conclude that only peasants have access to the technologies and resources we will all need in order to eat in 2050. </p> <p>Our 70 per cent estimate is inadvertently corroborated by the fertilizer industry  who worry that somewhere between 40 per cent and 60 per cent of the world’s food is grown without their synthetic chemicals. This is peasant production – farmers who either don’t want or can’t afford industry fertilizers. But, of course, many smallholders do use fertilizer so perhaps another 10 per cent or more of the world’s actual consumed foods are produced by peasants who do use chemicals. </p> <h3><em>“The suggestion that at least 70 per cent of consumed foods comes from rural and urban peasants seems modest.”</em></h3> <p>Beyond this, a significant share of the world’s food supply – conservatively, 15 per cent - comes from hunting and gathering – including artisanal inland and coastal fishers. Add to this the estimates that somewhere between 15 and 20 per cent of our food is produced in urban gardens and the suggestion that at least 70 per cent of consumed foods comes from rural and urban peasants seems modest.</p> <p>Looking at the question from the other end - the industrial food chain – strengthens the case. While the quantities are enormous, according to <strong><a href="http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">recent FAO studies</a></strong>, at least a third of food produced is wasted either during production, transportation, processing or by rotting in the fridge. Then, calculate how much of our fishmeal and grain is fed to livestock or automobiles. </p> <p>We lose food before it can rot. What’s more, in OECD states (and increasingly in the global South) <strong><a href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/5244304_Global_burden_of_obesity_in_2005_and_projections_to_2030" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">about a quarter of consumed calories are “waisted”</a></strong> - consumed unnecessarily, contributing to obesity.</p> <p>The unavoidable conclusion is that the industrial food chain is hugely ineffective. It only partly feeds people in the industrialized countries and has little left over for the rest of the world. The industrial food chain only gives us 30 per cent of our necessary consumption. </p> <h3><em>“The unavoidable conclusion is that the industrial food chain is hugely ineffective.”</em></h3> <p><em>The table below summarizes and updates our 2009 report, “Who Will Feed Us?” available at <strong><a href="http://www.etcgroup.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">www.etcgroup.org</a></strong>. Reference sources are available in this report and an upcoming sequel.</em></p> <p><a href="http://blogs.oxfam.org/sites/blogs.oxfam.org/files/etc-schedule.png" target="_blank"></a></p> <p><strong>The first policy principle</strong> in any crisis is not to mess with what works. The second principle is to be led by those most affected – the peasants. They are the folks who are growing the food and have access to the diversity we will need to survive the challenges ahead. That is why the recently-reformed UN/FAO Committee on World Food Security (CFS) is becoming so important. Not only do we have all the governments and multilateral agencies around the table, civil society organizations and peasant movements are also there. The only thing peasants can’t do is vote. </p> <h3><em>“Africa’s enslaved peasants smuggled almost 50 crops when they were shipped to the Americas.”</em></h3> <p>Peasants bring unique resources to the table and need support to deploy them. Within the first century of the colonial era – without trains or telegraphs – much less blogs or Twitter - peasants adapted Mayan maize to almost every growing region of Africa, while Asian peasants accomplished the same success with sweet potatoes. Meanwhile, Africa’s enslaved peasants smuggled almost 50 crops when they were shipped to the Americas. </p> <p>The Columbian exchange of 500 years ago was preceded by an Arabic transfer and, before that, the Silk Road and the mud trail kept moving crops and livestock between and among Eurasia and Africa. More recently, in 1849, the US began shipping free packets of experimental seed to settlers to kickstart crop production west of the Mississippi. By 1897, more than 20 million packets of exotic experimental seed were being sent to settlers every year. The highly successful seed experiment only ended in the late 1920s when seed companies realized that public sector distribution was interfering with private sector profits.</p> <p>To address climate change, we need this kind of seed exchange once again. Over the past six decades, peasants have donated at least two million locally-bred plant varieties for storage in the world’s major <strong><a href="http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1500e/i1500e03.pdf" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">gene banks</a></strong>. Peasants are also the breeders and protectors of almost 8,000 rare livestock breeds of 40 species. Gene banks, as a policy priority, must multiply the peasant varieties and make them freely available to peasant organizations upon request. </p> <h3><em>“Over the past six decades, peasants have donated at least two million locally-bred plant varieties for storage in the world’s major gene banks. “</em></h3> <p><strong>If we are to survive climate change</strong>, we must adopt policies that let peasants diversify the plant and animal species and varieties/breeds that make up our menus. Plants and livestock are going to have to move around so that they can be used under the conditions in which they can thrive. There are, of course, phytosanitary considerations; support will be needed from FAO and perhaps from the Biodiversity Convention. </p> <p>The only people with the know-how and patience to experiment with crops and livestock are peasants. Peasants will require a fundamental change in the regulatory machinery – including intellectual property regimes - so they can exchange and develop seeds/breeds among themselves around the world. </p> <p>The rest of us urgently need to come together across all of the food web to see how we can collaborate. As cell phone technologies spread across every continent, our collective capacity to exchange information makes it possible for all of us to keep up with the innovative energies of peasants.</p> <p>Download: <strong><a href="http://blogs.oxfam.org/sites/blogs.oxfam.org/files/who-will-feed-us-all-mooney-dec2012.pdf" target="_blank">Who Will Feed Us All?</a></strong></p></div><div class="field field-name-title"><h2>Day 9: Who Will Feed Us All?</h2></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="translation_fr first"><a href="http://l.blogs.oxfam/fr/blogs/12-12-20-jour-9-qui-nous-nourrira" title="Jour 9: Qui nous nourrira tous ?" class="translation-link" xml:lang="fr">Français</a></li> <li class="translation_es last"><a href="http://l.blogs.oxfam/es/blogs/12-12-20-dia-9-quien-nos-alimentara" title="Día 9: ¿Quién nos alimentará? " class="translation-link" xml:lang="es">Español</a></li> </ul> Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:00:01 +0000 Pat Mooney 10172 at http://l.blogs.oxfam http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/blogs/12-12-20-day-9-who-will-feed-us-all#comments Day 8: Frame new ideas within indigenous knowledge http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/blogs/12-12-19-day-8-frame-new-ideas-within-indigenous-knowledge <div class="field field-name-body"><p><em><strong>Experts’ ideas about how resource-poor farmers could improve productivity ought to be guided by indigenous knowledge. Low-cost, micro-innovations that make use of local resources have great potential but are often overlooked by mainstream developers of agricultural technology.</strong></em></p> <p><em>By Dr. Florence Wambugu, CEO, <strong><a href="http://africaharvest.org/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Africa Harvest Biotech Foundation International</a></strong> (AHBFI)</em></p> <p>Although many people know me because of my frontline work in advocating for Africa’s right to Genetically Modified (GM) technology, many don’t know my early involvement in this technology was largely driven by the desire to increase agricultural productivity for resource-poor farmers. I remain true to my calling, but wiser to know that the GM technology is only one in the large arsenal of tools available to scientists and farmers. </p> <p>There is, of course, a place for conventional technologies, but what I really wish to explore in this article is how “expert ideas” targeted to resource poor farmers need to be framed within the indigenous knowledge of technology recipients.   </p> <p>When HIV/AIDS robs a woman of her husband, does the widowed mother, now alone to take care of her seven children, have anything to contribute to her plight? Does the fact that she owns only one acre of land in Kenya’s arid and semi arid lands  make her a mere recipient of development interventions? Could her experiences with the myriad of challenges provide a solution to her problems?? </p> <h3><em>“The mainstream drivers of agricultural R&amp;D often fail to incorporate home-grown ideas and innovations into their interventions.”</em></h3> <p>Sadly, the mainstream drivers of agricultural R&amp;D often fail to incorporate home-grown ideas and innovations into their interventions. Forced by years of limited success, development players are now searching for how best to tap farmers’ indigenous knowledge and innovations. </p> <p>A case in point is a project funded by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and implemented by Africa Harvest. The Food Security and Ecosystem Management for Sustainable Livelihoods in Arid and Semi Arid Lands of Kenya (FOSEMS) Project, demonstrates how to unlock value by tapping indigenous ideas and innovations. </p> <p>The project takes an integrated approach to food security, ecosystem management and sustainable livelihoods using five components: traditional food crops, horticultural crops, soil fertility management, water (conservation, harvesting and management) and short-cycle livestock. </p> <p>The project location represents the poorest of the poor in the harsh arid and semi-arid environment of Makueni District and Central Kitui of the Eastern Province of Kenya. The communities depend on agriculture or agro-pastoralism for their livelihoods; they include subsistence farmers, traditional crop processors, livestock farmers, HIV/AIDS affected households, unemployed rural people and farm produce dealers.   </p> <h3><em>“While not applying advanced systems of agricultural production, they managed to increase their incomes by making small improvements with few resources.”</em></h3> <p>At project inception, we were very conscious that among target resource-poor farmers, there existed indigenous knowledge and innovation. We were therefore on the lookout for farmers doing novel things to mitigate the challenges they faced.  </p> <p>Our staff (a multi-disciplinary team of scientists, sociologists, economists and field workers) joined hands with local communities and other stakeholders and pursued an approach we call farmer-first-and-last (FFL) and it has proven more effective than the often used alternative, the technology transfer (TT) model.  </p> <p>We started with a systematic process of understanding the conditions of farmers, and in consultation with famer leaders developed home-grown adaptable solutions to resolve the challenges people faced. . </p> <h3><em>“Farmers are innovators who generate agricultural practices which are very well adapted to the prevailing conditions.”</em></h3> <p>These included unfavourable soil conditions, erratic rainfall patterns, low literacy levels, unstable market prices of inputs and final produce, and limited access to insurance and credit markets. While, some do own the land on which they farm, they lack productive assets acceptable as collateral. Research generally agrees that these farmers will be disproportionately affected by climatic changes and that trade reforms are not sufficient to reduce poverty among them.  </p> <p>These farmers are experimenters and innovators who generate their own agricultural practices which are very well adapted to the prevailing agro-ecological and socio-economic conditions. While not applying advanced systems of agricultural production, they managed to increase their incomes by making small improvements with few resources, expanding their resource base by building upon local knowledge. </p> <p>Some of the farmer “innovations” included growing of dry land cereals and legumes and also keeping short-cycle livestock to address food deficiency in local diets and income generation from marketing the surplus in the nearby shopping centres. </p> <p>Farmers proposed the upgrading of their indigenous goats and chickens to improve their breeds for milk and egg production. Their explanation was that goats and chickens were more resilient to drought and climatic changes; their meat and eggs are a source of protein to improve human diet; goat droppings boost the fertility of gardens; and their sale provides much needed income for school fees, medical costs and farm inputs. </p> <h3><em>“It’s impossible to achieve success alone.”</em></h3> <p>Farmers received an improved variety of chicks which resulted in increased egg production. One of the indigenous innovations was the farmers decision to assign one of the mother hens to tend to the chicks of several mother hens; this released others hens used in brooding to resume egg production at the earliest opportunity. </p> <p>During the baseline survey, women farmers identified water for domestic use as the highest priority and suggested sand dams could retain water throughout the year. Three  sand dams across Muini River in Mulala, Kamunyii in Wote both in Makueni County and Yethi River in Kitui were constructed and completed. </p> <p>The community shares and manages this resource to ensure equity and sustainability.  Innovative funding mechanisms would probably attract the private sector to play a greater role in the search for greater engineering innovation in building dams and providing domestic water.  </p> <p>A key lesson was that farmers must be involved in the search for solutions to their problems. Our farmers’ idea of planting sorghum, which is a naturally drought-resistant grain crop allowed them to use a traditional innovation taking advantage of the minimal precipitation that occurs during the short rain season, thereby affording them a second harvest. </p> <p>It’s impossible to achieve success alone. With help from the Ministry of Agriculture’s Home Economics Department, farmers became more innovative in making new recipes of tasty meals from sorghum grains. Younger farmers fed their surplus sorghum grain to the improved chickens and then sold eggs instead. The sorghum residue was also used as manure to fertilise the soil and as a fodder bank for consumption by livestock during the dry season.</p> <h3><em>“Tapping into the creativity and perseverance of poor farmers should be an integral aspect of project design, not an after-thought.”</em></h3> <p>You cannot underestimate the importance of building local capacity—nor the time it takes. A major contribution of Africa Harvest in the project was training, capacity building, skills transfer, especially in good agronomic practices, and information dissemination to farmers along the whole value chain. </p> <p>The disadvantaged in society could be key drivers of development. Africa Harvest tapped into persons living with HIV/AIDS, youth, widows, orphans and men and women undergoing alcohol abuse rehabilitation. Appreciating and working with the disadvantaged helped to demonstrate in the fastest way that our interventions worked. This attracted other community members. The project also provides conclusive evidence that local knowledge can be built upon to successively stimulate and upscale processes of innovation, with one new idea spawning the next. </p> <p>The integrated-approach to development can positively impact many aspects of community life. Tapping into the creativity and perseverance of African’s resource-poor farmers should be an integral aspect of project design, not an after-thought.</p> <p>Development partners could also emulate the example of IFAD by allowing some flexibility in project implementation while achieving project targets, encouraging farmers’ innovations and allowing project promoters to focus on solving the problems facing the farmers, while still focusing on food security, income generation and sustainability.</p> <h3><em>“Most innovators lack confidence and the means to make their ideas more widely known.”   </em></h3> <p>For R&amp;D organizations, the key lessons are that farmers and scientists are partners in development. For the FOSEM project, the two groups worked together to come up with a legume for nutrition and soil fertility: high-yielding dual-purpose cowpea from certified seeds whose tender leaves serve as a vegetable for human consumption, while the mature leaves form an important ingredient in chicken feed and the seeds provide a rich source of protein. Cowpea fixes atmospheric nitrogen and enhances soil fertility. Its residue is also used to feed goats and provide manure for the soil. </p> <p>Overall, such micro-innovations bring improvements that tend to be low-cost, and because they primarily make use of local resources. These innovations are often overlooked by mainstream developers of agricultural technology.  These innovations have good potential for dissemination and sustainability. Sadly, most of the innovators lack confidence and the means to make their ideas more widely known.     </p> <p>Download: <strong><a href="http://blogs.oxfam.org/sites/blogs.oxfam.org/files/new-ideas-indigenous-knowledge-wambugu-dec2012.pdf" target="_blank">Frame new ideas within indigenous knowledge</a></strong></p></div><div class="field field-name-title"><h2>Day 8: Frame new ideas within indigenous knowledge</h2></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="translation_fr first"><a href="http://l.blogs.oxfam/fr/blogs/12-12-19-jour-8-integrer-de-nouvelles-idees-la-connaissance-traditionnelles" title="Jour 8: Formuler des nouvelles idées avec les connaissances autochtones" class="translation-link" xml:lang="fr">Français</a></li> <li class="translation_es last"><a href="http://l.blogs.oxfam/es/blogs/12-12-19-dia-8-encuadrar-nuevas-ideas-en-el-marco-del-conocimiento-indigena" title="Día 8: Encuadrar nuevas ideas en el marco del conocimiento indígena" class="translation-link" xml:lang="es">Español</a></li> </ul> Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:01:00 +0000 Dr. Florence Wambugu 10162 at http://l.blogs.oxfam http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/blogs/12-12-19-day-8-frame-new-ideas-within-indigenous-knowledge#comments Day 3: Seeds in Women’s Hands http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/blogs/seeds-in-womens-hands <div class="field field-name-body"><p><em><strong>Seeds are the first link in the food chain. Yet women seed breeders are invisible in the industrial model of food production and in intellectual property regimes. The roots of food and gender justice lie in keeping seeds in women’s hands and recognizing women’s knowledge of biodiversity.</strong></em></p> <p>by <a href="http://blogs.oxfam.org/en/user/profile/dr-vandana-shiva"><strong>Vandana Shiva</strong></a>, philosopher, feminist and environmental activist</p> <p><strong>Health and nutrition begin with food, and food begins with seeds</strong>. The seeds of food justice lie in creating food systems where seed is in women’s hands, and women’s knowledge of biodiversity is the foundation of food and nutritional security.</p> <p>Women have been seed breeders for centuries and have bred much more diversity and traits than all the industrial breeding systems that are formally recognized. Science and culture merge in women’s seed breeding.</p> <p>Nowhere is this more evident than in India. I have seen how tribal women of Chattisgarh take 21 seeds for a seed germination test, and do not use the seed if more than 3 seeds fail to germinate. In Karnataka, the ceremony of germinating nine seeds for nine days at Ugadi, the New Year in the indigenous calendar, is also a seed germination test (called navdanya). Seed saving, seed selection and seed breeding are sophisticated skills which generations of women have evolved.</p> <p>Seed is the first link in the food chain. Yet women as seed breeders are invisible in the intellectual property regimes linked to seed. Seed, which used to be saved and bred by women, is now the ‘intellectual property’ of the chemical corporations, which are now also the seed corporations controlling 73 % of the world’s seed supply. When these corporations patent seed, they collect royalties. Royalties on seed mean higher seed costs. Seed in women’s hands is renewable and ‘open-source’, to be freely shared and saved. Patented seed becomes non-renewable. Saving and exchanging seed becomes an intellectual property crime. When women sow seed, they pray ’may this seed be exhaustless’. Corporations work on the philosophy ’may this seed be terminated so our profits are exhaustless’.</p> <h3><em>"Seed is the first link in the food chain. Yet women as seed breeders are invisible in the intellectual property regimes linked to seed."</em></h3> <p>High costs of seed means debt. In India 250,000 farmers have committed suicide due to debt, mainly in the cotton belt, since seed monopolies were established through the introduction of Bt cotton. Each farmer who commits suicide leaves behind a widow.</p> <p>Across the world, women have bred more than 7,000 species of crops for taste, nutrition, pest resilience, drought resilience, flood resilience, and salt resistance. In India alone, women have bred 200,000 rice varieties. <a href="http://www.navdanya.org/" rel="nofollow"><strong>Navdanya</strong></a>, a network of seed keepers and organic producers that is spread across 16 states in India, values this biodiversity and has so far successfully conserved more than 5,000 crop varieties. This is knowledge.</p> <p>Corporations claiming patents on seed through genetic engineering have offered only four crops: corn, soya, canola and cotton. These crops have only two traits (herbicide resistance and Bt toxin) which, instead of controlling pests and weeds, are creating <a href="http://www.navdanya.org/attachments/Latest_Publications5.pdf" rel="nofollow"><strong>superpests and superweeds</strong></a>. Our seeds and breeding would be more secure in women’s hands!</p> <p>Not only are women seed breeders who have kept seed as a commons; when measured in terms of health per acre and nutrition per acre, women-run small biodiverse farms that are based on indigenous knowledge and seeds produce more food. Navdanya’s study <a href="http://www.navdanya.org/attachments/Health%20Per%20Acre.pdf" rel="nofollow"><strong>Health Per Acre</strong></a> shows that small ecological farms can produce twice the nutrition that chemical monoculture farms produce.</p> <p>Intellectual property rights to seed are justified in the name of producing more food. However instead of biodiverse outputs from a farming system, only the yield of one commodity that leaves the farm is measured. False categories of ‘yields ‘and ‘productivity’ create the illusion of inevitability, surpluses, and success. But more commodities of a few crops on the global markets do not reach those who need food, especially women and children.</p> <h3><em>"Our seeds and breeding would be more secure in women’s hands!"</em></h3> <p>All this is done in the name of feeding people and reducing hunger. Yet 1 billion people are hungry, and another 2 billion suffer from food-related diseases. Hunger is not being reduced, because the hunger for profits shapes the food system, from seed to table.</p> <p>The industrial model of food production and the globalized model of distribution are failing on the measure of food justice, because that was never its objective. Its objective is profits, and this is achieved through a dual strategy: selling ever more chemicals and non-renewable, patented seed to farmers, even if this means debt and suicide, and buying cheap commodities from them as raw material producers.</p> <p>We need a paradigm shift because the old paradigm is failing us. We need to move from monocultures to diversity, from centralized globalized systems to decentralized localized systems, from chemical and capital intensification, to ecological and biodiversity intensification.</p> <h3><em>"The industrial model of food production and the globalized model of distribution are failing on the measure of food justice, because that was never its objective."</em></h3> <p>When I did my study on the green revolution in Punjab in 1984, female foeticide was just beginning. Today more than 35 million girl children have not been allowed to be born in India. When women’s creative and productive roles in agriculture and food systems are destroyed, women become a dispensable sex. In addition to many other benefits, putting women’s seed and biodiversity expertise at the heart of food justice also has the potential to address gender violence and injustice.</p> <p>To sow the seeds of food and gender justice, the following steps must be taken:</p> <ul><li>Women’s seed breeding skills need to be recognized in agriculture.</li> <li>Farming systems need to be based on women’s knowledge of diversity for increasing output of nutrition, increasing resilience to climate change, and reducing inputs of land, water and capital.</li> <li>Community seed banks should be created and women’s participatory seed breeding should become the backbone of food security.</li> <li>Laws of intellectual property need to change. The <a href="http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/trips_e.htm" rel="nofollow"><strong>World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights</strong></a> (TRIPS) has an article which imposes patents and intellectual property rights on seed and life forms. This clause was to have been reviewed in 1999. Most countries had called for a stop to patents on life, which includes seed. This mandatory review should be completed, and seed removed from patentability, since seeds are not an invention, and hence not a patentable subject matter.</li> <li>Seed laws that are an attempt to make indigenous, open-pollinated seeds illegal must be revoked. Instead we need to shape laws that recognize seed rights as women’s rights, and keep seed as a commons.</li> </ul><p>Download: <a href="http://blogs.oxfam.org/sites/blogs.oxfam.org/files/Vandana-Shiva-Oxfam-online-discussion.pdf"><strong>Seeds in Women's Hands</strong></a></p></div><div class="field field-name-title"><h2>Day 3: Seeds in Women’s Hands </h2></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="translation_fr first"><a href="http://l.blogs.oxfam/fr/blogs/les-semences-aux-mains-des-femmes" title="Jour 3: Les semences aux mains des femmes" class="translation-link" xml:lang="fr">Français</a></li> <li class="translation_es last"><a href="http://l.blogs.oxfam/es/blogs/las-semillas-en-manos-de-las-mujeres" title="Día 3: Las semillas en manos de las mujeres" class="translation-link" xml:lang="es">Español</a></li> </ul> Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:00:01 +0000 Dr. Vandana Shiva 10051 at http://l.blogs.oxfam http://l.blogs.oxfam/en/blogs/seeds-in-womens-hands#comments