User:Bellamelodia/sandbox

Summarizing and Synthesizing

Ecopedagogy

I have mainly been working on the Agroecology in Latin America article and am collaborating with Arielle Levin on the Ecopedagogy article. We still have to specify how we will divide up the work and what we will focus on, but in general we will:

- Turn the parenthetical citations into correct Wikipedia number citations

- SImplify and clarify the language of the current article to make it more accessible to non-academia

- Add information on the praxis of ecopedagogy

- Add information on the criticisms of ecopedagogy

Agroecology in Latin America

Pasted from current article, with my suggestions in italics and things I want to remove in strikethrough.

Agroecology in Latin America

Coffee shadow trees Costa Rica

Agroecology is an applied science that involves the adaptation of ecological concepts to the structure, performance, and management of sustainable agroecosystems.. In Latin America, agroecologyical practices vary between regions due to the ideological differences between agroecology and industrial agriculture and agroecology. Agroecology in Latin American countries can be used as a tool for conservationists in providing both ecological and economic benefits to the communities that practice it, It is also method that allows for while also maintaining high biodiversity and refuges for flora and fauna in these countries.

Goals

Overlooking a large shade cacao plantation where the Ixcacao Mayan Belizean Chocolate company grows and produces chocolate using Mayan techniques.

(I want to add a short section on the specific goals of agroecology in Latin America)

Background

History

The term agroecology in reference to the combination of agronomy and ecology in literature in 1928 by B.M. Bensin,. Until the 1960s, it mainly focused on the scientific aspects of combining agronomy and ecology and remained relatively unknown. However, due to the increasing awareness of the harmful effects of pesticides and the burgeoning environmental movement in the1970s, agroecology began to integrate a much wider range of issues on top of ecological ones, such as the social, political, economic implications of agroecosystems. In this context, the scientific aspect of agroecology began to take into account and dialogue with traditional local farming practices in any given region.

In Latin America specifically, agroecology emerged strongly during the period of structural adjustment policies in the 1970s. In this time, many Latin American countries took up loans from the International Monetary Fund with strict conditions of trade liberalization that allowed large transnational corporations to grab huge swaths of land and out-compete local markets.

(I will keep writing and try to include the existing information below but with citations)

Agroecosystems serve as refuges for many flora and fauna of endemic and migratory species as well as provides a sustainable economic benefit to the communities that utilize its methodology. The relationship between agronomists and traditional practitioners, often subsistence farmers, has been termed an "exchange of wisdoms." This recognizes that some solutions and innovations to offer, while local knowledge systems developed over thousands of years have just as much to offer. This becomes evident still when the importance and uniqueness of local ecologies are understood as underpinning agricultural systems.

combined from above:

History

The term agroecology in reference to the combination of agronomy and ecology was coined in 1928 by B.M. Bensin,. Until the 1960s, it mainly focused on the scientific aspects of agronomy and ecology and remained relatively unknown. However, due to the increasing awareness of the harmful effects of pesticides and the burgeoning environmental movement in the1970s, agroecology gained momentum and began to integrate a much wider range of issues on top of ecological ones, such as the social, political, economic implications of agroecosystems. In this context, the scientific aspect of agroecology began to engage in dialogue with traditional local farming practices and experimentation in any given region. The relationship between agronomists and traditional practitioners, often subsistence farmers, has been termed an "exchange of wisdoms." This recognzies that science is an important way of knowing and mode of discovery, while local knowledge systems developed over thousands of years have just as much to offer.

In Latin America specifically, agroecology emerged strongly during the period of structural adjustment policies in the 1970s. In this time, many Latin American countries took up loans from the International Monetary Fund with strict conditions of trade liberalization that allowed large transnational corporations to grab huge swaths of land and out-compete local markets. While many small farmers have been marginalized, many others have joined together to form cooperatives, social movements, and global organizations. Through the ongoing work of these social movements, agroecology has grown to mean more than just the combination of agronomy and ecology, it has come to be called ''a science, a movement, a practice." By now, many of the leading researchers, practitioners, and advocates of agroecology are from or working in Latin America.

The role of social movements

(I will add information about the socilal movements, specifically La Via Campesina, the Landlass Peasant Movement, and others)

The role of research

(I will write about the role of scientific research hand in hand with social movement action)

Benefits

Traditional farming systems of Latin America were forged from a need to subsist on limited means. These techniques were developed from centuries of cultural and biological evolution by combining experiences and methods of other peasant farmers using locally available resources. Due to its origins Latin American, agroecology represents a low impact form of agriculture. Modern agriculture had become a process of "artificialization of nature" producing a monoculture of a very few crop species. Agroecology contrasts modern ecology in its use of polyculture, lack of synthetic fertilizers, minimal machinery and incorporation of successional stages. Agroecology attempts to benefit both people and the environment by maximizing crop yield, but also preserving the natural environment. It is often practiced by forming agroecosystems which are communities of plants and animals interacting with their physical and chemical environment that have been planted and harvested by people.

Economic benefits

Specific examples of economically successful agroecological systems include stabilizing hillside farming in Honduras. World Neighbors, an NGO, partnered with Honduran farmers to implement a program that helped practice soil conservation using techniques such as drainage and contour ditches, grass barriers, rock walls, and organic fertilization (e.g., use of chicken manure and intercropping with legumes). These changes allowed for an increase in grain yield of three to four times more than in previous years as well as supplied 1,200 families with grain. Another example, from the Andean region in Peru where a partnership of NGOs and locals lead to the implementation of a Pre-Columbian indigenous technique called Waru Warus. This technique involved raising the fields and surrounding them with dug out ditches filled with water, which regulates the soil temperature allowing for an extended growing season. In the district of Huatta, this method of using waru-warus have increased annual potato yields by 4-10 metric tons per hectare.

A final example from the Andean region where some peasant communities in Cajamarca and NGOs planted more than 550,000 trees and reconstructed terraces as well as drainage and infiltration canals.This change allowed for about half the population in the area - 1,247 families - to have land under conservation measures. For these people, potato yields have increased from 5 to 8 tons per hectare and oca (wood sorrel) yields have jumped from 3 to 8 tons per hectare.

Intercropping coffee and tomatoes

Ecological benefits

The benefits of Agroecology are not only economic,but also vitally important ecologically. There is evidence to indicate that the agroecosystems with overstory shade trees like coffee or cacao plantations can rival the biodiversity of natural forests. The diversity is so high in these systems because the overstory is structurally and floristically complex which allows for many different niches to be available resulting in refuges. It is possible that shade coffee plantations are already serving as refuges, as seen in Puerto Rico where tremendous deforestation has occurred and yet the avian extinction rate is relatively low. Another system that is ecologically important is neotropical kitchen gardens. Kitchen gardens or home gardens are common in tropical and subtropical areas and they provide food and income for the family. Some kitchen gardens like the Mopan Mayan of southern Belize contain dozens of tree and plant species of different stories mimicking a natural forest. These patches, much like shade plantations, serve as refuges for flora and fauna such as in Belize where they are used by migratory birds.

Social and cultural benefits

(I will add detailed and cited invormation about the social justice and cultural sensitivity aspects of agroecology)

Examples by method (I reorganized the article to have examples by method and examples by country)

Shade coffee

Shade-grown coffee is an ecologically and economically important agroecosystem in which coffee plants are grown in the understory of a tree canopy. The shade of the canopy over the coffee shrubs encourages natural ecological processes and species diversity. These shade coffee plantations are in many Latin American countries including Brazil, Mexico, Belize and Guatemala. Shade coffee growers maintain complex coffee agroforests in which they produce coffee and manage the area's biota.

Shade coffee differs from the industrial open sun coffee plantations that increase faster coffee growth and reduce costs but result in decreased biota resources, refuge, nutrient cycling and increased broken terrain and soil erosion. Studies have been done in Latin America to prove the biological importance of shade coffee. In 1996, a scientific journal discussed the evolving industrial coffee plantation effects on Northern Latin American countries. Areas of high deforestation where traditional shade coffee methods are used have been found to be a crucial refuge for many biota. Another study in Veracruz, Mexico on shade coffee ecological relationships found that areas of lower cloud forest that are now coffee plantations are also a microclimate for native orchids and pollinators.

Coffee shadow trees Costa Rica

Cabrucas

A cabruca is an agroforestry system found in the Latin American countries of Belize, Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Costa Rica and Brazil. These cabrucas, largely run by smallholder farmers, are the production locations for cacao trees that grow underneath the canopy of mixed native trees. This forest canopy like the shade coffee has been found to provide a diverse ecosystem. An example of the biological importance of cabrucas can be found in Brazil’s main cacao production region Southern Bahia, Brazil. A 2008 study of biodiversity conservation in cacao regions found that the cabrucas in Southern Bahia are used by a significant amount of native flora and fauna. Due to parts of the region experiencing high deforestation and fragmentation, these cabrucas are providing habitat, fragment connection, and edge effect reduction. Another study in Costa Rica on the role of these cacao plantations in maintaining avian diversity found that the plantations do not substitute for a forest but do provide a home for a large number of avian generalist species.

References

• see bottom of sandbox

Beginning Bibliography

Agroecology in Latin America

Chappell MJ, Wittman H, Bacon CM et al. Food sovereignty: an alternative paradigm for poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation in Latin America [version 1; referees: 2 approved] F1000Research 2013, 2:235

Through agroecology, agrarian reform, and social movements, the framework of food sovereignty would greatly decrease poverty , increase biodiversity preservation,  and decrease carbon emissions, all of which is critical for the balance of nature and human survival in the long term. I will add information from this to the section of ecological benefits and create a section addressing social benefits.

FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization, "Final Recommendations for the Regional Seminar on Agroecology in Latin America." 2016.

The FAO outlines the demands on government made by everyone involved in this conference: to include agroecology permanently on their agendas, include the perspectives of and empower indigenous/local groups and women, make food sovereignty a high priority, and strengthen the connection between farmers and consumers. I will use this to outline current efforts to scale up agroecology in Latin America, as an example of one of the few larger-scale top-down attempts to encourage it.

Rosset, P. M., and M. E. Martínez-Torres. 2012. Rural social movements and agroecology: context, theory, and process. Ecology and Society 17(3): 17.

Agroecology emerged in the scene of growing neoliberal globalization, transnational corporations dominating the agricultural sector. The principles of agroecology are not just ecological, but also cultural and social: it’s the “transformation of rural realities through collective action” for the goal of food sovereignty Thus it is not just science and principles, but also practice. And the best way for these practices to spread are through farmer to farmer interactions and re-peasantization, i.e. taking land back and increasing autonomy. I will add this to a new section covering social movements fighting for agroecology.

Peter Rosset (2013) Re-thinking agrarian reform, land and territory in La Via Campesina, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 40:4, 721-775

Rosset gives a history of La Via Campesina (LVC) and explains how it has changed over the course of its existence from focusing on demanding territory to also expanding to agroecology; formulating the concrete idea of food sovereignty; increasing communication and consensus with other users of land; expanding its organizations, especially those that deal with legal support for occupations and research to have reliable data; and confronting negative stereotypes of occupations. I will include this in the part addressing social movements that have involved themselves fully in agroecology, as well as specifically mentioning that La Via Campesina coined the term food sovereignty.

Additional literature cited:

Altieri, Miguel. "Applying agroecology to enhance the productivity of peasant farming systems in Latin America."Environment, Development and Sustainability1 (1999): 197–217. Print.

Gliessman, Stephen. R Agroecology: Ecological Processes in Sustainable Agriculture. Ann Arbor: Sleeping Bear Press, 1998.

Pimbert, M. "Agroecology as an alternative vision to conventional development and climate-smart agriculture." Society for International Development, 58(2-3), (2015): 286-298. Print.

SOCLA, Sociedad Científica Latinoamericana de Agroecología“The role of Agroecology on the future of agriculture and the food system.” Latin American Scientific Society of Agroecology, (2017).

Wezel A. et al. "Agroecology as a science, a movement and a practice. A review."Agronomy for Sustainable Development.Vol. 29, Iss. 4, (2009): 503–515.

Ecopedagogy

Kahn, Richard. Ecopedagogy: An Introduction. Counterpoints, Vol. 359, Critical Pedagogy, Ecoliteracy, and Planetary Crisis: the Ecopedagogy Movement. (2010), pp. 1-33.

As the scientists became more aware of the drastic environmental changes caused by human activity, and the environmental movement brought these issues to public discursive space, environmental education has been deemed necessary by most. However, the nature of this education has varied greatly, from "environmental education," to "education for sustainable development," which does not critically address the underlying political economy. Thus ecopedagogy emerged, as a more integral form of achieving "ecological literacy" and praxis. I will include information from this well-formulated review of ecopedagogy to add to the introduction as well as give specific examples of praxis and where the movement is headed.

Kahn, Richard. Technological Transformation as Ecopedagogy: Reconstructing Technoliteracy. Counterpoints, Vol. 359, Critical Pedagogy, Ecoliteracy, and Planetary Crisis: the Ecopedagogy Movement.(2010), pp. 61-80

There are both ways to use technology to increase ecoliteracy and threats of its being a destructive force, overly technocratic. I will summarize these details in a section about debates within the movement of ecopedagogy about how to move forward.

Kahn, Richard. Green Theory & Praxis: The Journal of Ecopedagogy. Vol. 4, No. 1 (2008)

This article focuses on ecopedagogy as being a source of liberation that simultaneously sustains life; it is the goal of ecopedagogy to spur individual and collective epiphanies to create a sensitivity to and active engagement in global protection of life in its many forms. I will introduce this in the section called Objectives and Aims, which we will hopefully reorganize in the process.

Evaluating Articles

Evaluation of Agroecology in Latin America

- This article has been classified as a stub, so there is a lot to add to it

- There is a section in a more broad Agroecology article discussing Latin America, but it is very limited. Since agroecology is most prominent in Latin America, I think it's appropriate to have a separate page for it rather than adding to the subcategory in the main Agroecology article.

- The article is missing key social and cultural aspects and benefits of agroecology (just mentions economic and ecological benefits).

- I hope to add previously missing information about these social and cultural benefits, such as the participatory approach to pedagogy, the engagement with political economy, and the larger goal of agroecology to be a bypass from farmers (producers) to consumers

- The background needs much more detail of the emergence of agroecology in Latin America, both the factors that spurred its creation and adoption, and the ways in which it spread

- In general, I think the article needs to be reorganized on a larger scale to have intro, background,economic, ecological, social, cultural, and political implications, and then examples of particular categories (either by country, by movement, etc). Some parts begin generally and proceed to specific examples that sometimes go into detail in a way that is out of place. Thus I think it would make more sense to talk about general principles and tendencies of agroecology and then focus on examples.

- There are a good selection of scholarly articles cited, to which I will be able to add many more for more detail. However alongside this, I would like to add some examples of social movements whose websites contain very useful documents, which I would like to add to include underrepresented voice of farmers. This will be supported by scholarly articles outlining the work of these social movements.

- The talk page is relatively short and neutral, with the last comment made in 2014, so I don't anticipate much difficulty communicating with anyone who is also in the process of refining the article.

- There are some basic style and grammar corrections that I would like to make.

Evaluation of Ecopedagogy,

- This article gives a good preliminary overview of ecopedagogy

- However, it is written in very long, complex sentences that may not be accessible to everyone reading Wikipedia (this was mentioned on the talk page)

- It also needs to include a more balanced discussion of the pros and cons of ecopedagogy in practice.

- Alongside this, specific examples of ecopedagogy in action would be useful, comparing its successes and difficulties in different contexts of the world

-It will be useful to expand the headers to other topics, such as current actors/voices/debate about ecopedagogy, and the role of different global events in the efficacy or need for ecopedagogy

- In collaboration with my fellow Wikipedians, I hope to be able to simplify the language to make it more easily readable. I wonder whether it matters if the article receives a rating of class and importance, because as of now there is no categorization. And if it is deemed important, how that is achieved.

- I think it might be appropriate to change the Bibliography title to References, and the References to Notes as we now know is the tendency on Wikipedia.

Selecting possible articles

Area:

Agroecology in Latin America

I will be adding much more information on the social benefits of agroecology, as well as some of the counterarguments for it, and specific examples of its praxis, and the role that bottom-up and top-down methods play in scaling up agroecology.

Sector:

Ecopedagogy

I will be clarifying the definition and background of ecopedagogy, collaborating with Arielle to add new sections discussing the pro and con views of ecopedagogy, as well as a section dedicated to its practice, and one addressing conversations happening in the current discourse in terms of how to move forward.

Green neoliberalism (From Development and the Environment class, not GPP)

History

One kind of green liberalism is called green neoliberalism, which became significant and increasingly prominent in world institutions beginning in the 1980s. In this decade, the two main institutions of global development, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, began to face increasing global outrage as a result of their structural adjustment plans, which were loans with severe conditions on debt-ridden countries. The conditions focused on austerity measures, i.e. reducing government control of the market and provision of social services, and liberalizing trade, thus enabling corporations from the global North to enter into developing countries and out-compete local markets. This caused social unrest to increase on many fronts: farmers were losing their livelihoods to large corporations importing artificially cheap, subsidized stable crops from the global North; industrialized agriculture and agronomy became the status quo in both research institutions and practice, bringing about with it many environmental and social costs ; companies could move their presence to other countries where labor was cheaper much more easily, thus people lost their jobs while others accepted very low-paid wage labor. People, social movements, and NGOs, began to openly criticize and blame the World Bank, IMF, and World Trade Organization for being the root cause of the sudden food crises, job loss, and environmental degradation. This was picked up by media in the global North as well, adding to the shift of the view of the global South as "happy recipients of Bank aid" to very real and vivid images of bread riots, protests, mass marches and fasts. The pressure was heightened by the increasingly prominent environmental movement that brought attention to the way that business as usual economics did not account for environmental costs, the largest of which, which is in turn connected to many other problems, is human-caused climate change.

In response to criticism of the trajectory of development, the World Bank first responded with denial, but when this did not prove effective, it completely turned around and decided to make a significant change in its organization. Led by actors within the Bank who were intent on reforming it in response to global criticism, the environment grew to become one of its primary focuses. Whereas in 1985, the World Bank only had five staff working on environmental issues, with a budget of less than $15 million by 1995, it had more than three hundred environment-related staff, with almost one billion dollars to work with. An entirely new Environment Department was created, which had to approve large-scale projects for their definition of environmental sustainability before they were implemented.

Characteristics and Context

Thus began a new era of green neoliberalism, where the World Bank and its fellow institutions did not let go of their neoliberal ideology, i.e. that free-market economics, low regulation, free trade, etc. are the best economic model, but at the same time adopted mainstream rhetoric of sustainability and environmental consciousness. This kind of green liberalism is mainly economic; it is supported by a range of people both socially liberal and socially conservative. It is related to, if not synonymous, with eco-capitalism.

In the larger context of the history of development, this transition follows a trajectory that began with modernization theory and a project to modernize developing country, followed by the globalization project, where free-market and free-trade was meant to help countries develop, which was then succeeded by the sustainability project. The green neoliberal view of sustainability is one of weak sustainability, which contrasts with many ecologists view of strong sustainability.