Sustainability isn’t a conference, it’s whether the farm still feeds the family

My uncle had a long talk with me yesterday , being a Sunday and a time with family, but he was complaining about the government, the country and what policies are doing for and against agriculture in Ghana. But he made mention of sustainability in a way I wasn't really thinking about.

The land your grandfather farmed on for over forty years is an example of sustainable agriculture.

The crops of cassava, peanuts, maize, and everything else have been destroyed from drought, while the maize that was going to be grown from your uncle's savings was unsuccessful and was replaced with small plants growing only to the knee height of your uncle. The maize was planted after he bought both fertilizer and quality seed from the local agricultural officer. So how could your uncle have lost his harvest if he bought the things the agricultural officer recommended?

Today when sustainable agriculture is talked about, it usually entails conferences in nicely decorated hotels where all the top scientists get together and give speeches about environmental stewardship, these meetings are where people really have discussions about sustainable agriculture in an office, however, the evidence of what has really happened and is happening is seen when the crop that is being grown will not generate enough money for his children to attend school.

The reason your grandfather's farm was sustainable was he was able to do what his farm required and was also able to do what was needed so that the farm could continue to provide for its owner. Your grandfather did not attempt to extract crops from his farm indefinitely, rather he replaced what was lost from his farm's depletion of the nutrients from the ground and the addition of organic matter back to the soil.

To this day, agriculture has not changed so no matter how expensive the inputs are, they are still not permanent solutions to a problem.

_{Posted using SteemX}