Eco-JusticeTowards Sustainable Development and

Food Security in Asia

Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum IV

November 28 to December 02, 2016

Co-Sponsored by

Christian Conference of Asia (CCA)Church of Christ of Thailand (CCT)

Korea Life-Giving Agriculture Forum (KLGAF)

Chiang Mai, ThailandPage 1 of 119

Eco-JusticeTowards Sustainable Development and Food Security in Asia:

Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum IV

This is an open access publication. Individual authors retain ownership of the copyright for their papers in this publication. Appropriate attribution can be provided by acknowledging the publisher, citing the document properly, and the date of the publication in which the item appeared, which does not in any way suggest that we endorse you or your use of the work.

For any reuse or redistribution of this publication, you must also make clear the terms under which the work was reproduced. Open access to, and free use of, original work ensures the publication is freely and openly available. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.

DisclaimerAll ideas expressed in this publication belong to the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations with which they are affiliated. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring organizations. Content, style, editing, and proofreading were the responsibility of each author or group of authors. All errors and omissions are those of the contributors.

Edited by Dr. Rey Ty2016 Christian Conference of Asiac/o Payap University, P.O. Box 183, Muang, Chiang Mai, Thailand 50000Telephone: (66) 53-243-906, 243-907Fax: (66) 53-247-303Webpage: http://cca.org.hk/home/

IndexAsia Bible Reflection Christian Conference of Asia (CCA) Church of Christ in Thailand (CCT) Eco-Justice Field Visit and Immersion Food Security Food Sovereignty Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) Korean Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum (KCLGA) Life-Giving Agriculture Nature The Poor Right to Food Seed Bank Sustainable Agriculture Sustainable Development

Production CreditsPublished by the Christian Conference of Asia, Church of Christ of Thailand, and the Korean Christian Life Giving Agriculture ForumPrinted in Chiang Mai, Thailand

Page 2 of 119

Contents

About the Resource Persons....................................................................................................................5

Chunakara, Mathews George...............................................................................................................5

Ahn, Jae Hak.......................................................................................................................................5

Arakawa, Tomoko...............................................................................................................................5

Baladjay, Ardniel Amar.......................................................................................................................5

Bicksler, Abram J................................................................................................................................5

Chung Ho Jin.......................................................................................................................................5

George, Mariamma Sanu George (Nirmala)........................................................................................6

Gultom, Justin.....................................................................................................................................6

Guneratne, Nishantha..........................................................................................................................6

Han Kyeong Ho...................................................................................................................................6

Kim In Soo..........................................................................................................................................6

Maneekorn, Nuttapong........................................................................................................................6

Moon, Grace........................................................................................................................................6

Rajkumar, Christopher.........................................................................................................................6

Sihombing, Samuel..............................................................................................................................6

Ty, Rey................................................................................................................................................6

CCA Staff................................................................................................................................................7

CHAPTER 1: Introduction..........................................................................................................................8

Schedule................................................................................................................................................10

CHAPTER 2: Prayers and Bible Reflections............................................................................................11

Opening Prayer......................................................................................................................................11

Morning Devotion.................................................................................................................................17

Bible Reflection 1..................................................................................................................................20

Bible Reflection 2: To Help on the Road...............................................................................................21

CHAPTER 3: Overview............................................................................................................................24

Life-Giving Agriculture Principles........................................................................................................24

Experience, Practice, Approach, and Thoughts on GMOs and Sustainable Agriculture and the Poor...30

International Political Economy: Neoliberal Globalization vs. Eco-Justice...........................................43

Page 3 of 119

CHAPTER 4: Eco-Justice.........................................................................................................................50

Vision of ARI Farming as Eco-Just Farming.........................................................................................50

Eco-Justice............................................................................................................................................56

CHAPTER 5: Sustainable Development...................................................................................................58

Towards Sustainable Development........................................................................................................58

Arable Area Management with the King’s Philosophy and Local Intellect...........................................72

CHAPTER 6: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)..........................................................................78

Food Security (Safety) in Korea............................................................................................................78

Is Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) a Modern Miracle of Food Production or an Art of Life. .88

CHAPTER 7: Food Security and the Right to Food..................................................................................99

Food Security: Back to Basic, Relating Life to Soil..............................................................................99

The Right to Food or the Right to Get Healthy Food...........................................................................107

Final Statement.......................................................................................................................................114

List of Participants...................................................................................................................................117

Page 4 of 119

About the Resource Persons

Chunakara, Mathews George. Dr. Mathews George Chunakara is General Secretary of the Christian Conference of Asia. He served the World Council of Churches in Geneva, Switzerland as its Asia Secretary from 2000 to 2009 and Director of the Commission of the Churches International Affairs (CCIA-WCC) from 2009 to 2014.

Ahn, Jae Hak. Rev. Ahn (right) is the general secretary of the Korean Christian Life Giving Agriculture Forum KCLGAF. He is also a co-coordinator of the Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum IV.

Arakawa, Tomoko. She is the Director of the Asian Rural Institute (ARI) in Nasushiobara, Tochigi, Japan (left photo). She studied at the International Christian University. Tomoko has been engaged in the work of nurturing and training grassroots rural community leaders, both women and men, of the developing countries, at the Asian Rural Institute (ARI) in Tochigi prefecture for 21 years. With those grassroots rural community leaders, staff and volunteers form an international, multi-cultural and multi-religious community of learning

each year based on sustainable agriculture. (We achieve high level of food self-sufficiency by organic farming every year.) Tomoko graduated from International Christian University in Tokyo in 1990. After working as a teacher at high schools for several years, she took master degree under sociology at Michigan State University in 1995. Since then she has been working at Asian Rural Institute. Tomoko had been in charge of curriculum for 6 years until 2009 and worked as a general manager cum associate director of ARI until March, 2014. She became Director of ARI April, 2015. She has been coordinating Servant leadership class and Gender class. She enjoys sessions learning and hearing real issues related to those topics from the rural leaders of the world. Baladjay, Ardniel Amar. He was raised in a rural farming community and grew up with the church as his second home. In 2016 of April, he finished Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Science with major in Crop Production and Management and with cognate in Crop Protection. Currently, he is working as full-time college instructor in the Department of Agricultural Extension, College of Agriculture, University of Southern Mindanao, Kabacan, Cotabato.

Bicksler, Abram J. Dr. Abram J Bicksler is the Director of the ECHO Asia Impact Center in Chiang Mai, Thailand. For over 30 years, ECHO has been helping thousands of development workers and organizations around the world to gain better access to vital information and resources needed to improve food security and livelihoods for small farmers and gardeners. Since 2009, the ECHO Asia Impact Center has been equipping and training development workers and organizations in Asia to extend relevant information,

techniques, seeds, and ideas to improve the lives of the poor in Asia. Formerly a Post-Doctoral Fellow and Instructor for the International Sustainable Development Studies Institute (ISDSI) in Chiang Mai, Abram spent 4 years teaching American undergraduate students about sustainable development in the tropics in an experiential learning setting. Prior to moving to Thailand, Abram completed his M.S. and Ph.D. in environmental science at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, which focused on the ecology and use of cover crops in sustainable vegetable production.

Page 5 of 119

Chung Ho Jin. Dr. Rev. Chun (right) is the former president and the honorary president of International NGO LIFE WORLD.

George, Mariamma Sanu George (Nirmala). She is one of the Co-Heads at Inter Cooperation Social Development (ICSD) and is currently also working as Team Leader –Kerala for CPGD-CCIP ((DFID supported Climate Change Innovation Programme to provide technical support to the Government of Kerala). She has more than two decades of work experience in development sector spreading across the areas of governance, gender,

climate change adaptation and capacity building. She has been a Gender specialist and also was instrumental in developing modules on environment and local governments. She is also the working group member constituted by the Government of Kerala to develop tool kits for Sustainable Development Goals. She had undertaken assignments for The World Bank, ADB, SDC, UNDP, UNICEF, Lal Bahadur Shastry National Academy for Administration, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of Kerala, Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA) and Kerala State Biodiversity Board. Academically she has done her M.Phil in Applied Economics from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. She is pursuing her doctoral studies also along with her work.

Gultom, Justin. Rev. Gultom (right) is the director of the department of Diakonia, Community Development bureau in HKBP, Indonesia.

Guneratne, Nishantha. Rev. Guneratne (left) is the Director of Nawajeevanam Farm, pastor of the Methodist Church in Sri Lanka.

Han Kyeong Ho. Rev. Han Kyung Ho (right) is the President of the Korean Christian Life Giving Agriculture Forum.

Kim In Soo. Dr. Kim In Soo (left) is the president of Dandelion Community and Principal of Dandelion Alternative School.

Maneekorn, Nuttapong. Adjarn Nut (right) works with the Social Development and Service Unit (SDSU) of the Church of Christ in Thailand (CCT) in Chiang Mai. He is also a co-

coordinator of the Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum IV.

Moon, Grace. Rev. Grace Moon (left) is the Program Coordinator of (1) Mission in Unity and Contextual Theology and (2) Ecumenical Leadership Formation and Spirituality.

Rajkumar, Christopher. Christopher (right) is an ordained minister of the Church of South India. Presently he serves the National Council of Churches in India as its Executive Secretary for the Commission on Justice, Peace and Creation and the Unity Mission and Evangelism. He facilitates the Life Giving Agriculture Forum - India. He also serves as a Member of the Global Reference Group of the World Council of Churches - Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance and the Moderator of the 'Food For Life' Global Campaign Strategy Group of the WCC - EAA. christopher@nccindia.in

Sihombing, Samuel. Rev. Sihombing (right) is the chairperson of PODA coffee cooperative, PETEASA foundation and pastor of HKBP. He is a rural pastor: a “coffee pastor.”

Ty, Rey. Dr. Rey Ty (left) CCA’s Program Coordinator for Building Peace and Moving beyond Conflict as well as of Prophetic Diakonia and Advocacy. He received his first master’s degree from the University of California at Berkeley and his second master’s degree

Page 6 of 119

and doctorate from Northern Illinois University. He is also a co-coordinator of the Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum IV.

CCA Staff

General SecretaryDr. Mathews George Chunakara

Rev. Jung Eun Moon Grace Dr. Rey TyDr. Alphinus Rantalemba KambodjiRev. Dr. Chuleepran SrisoontornMs. Sunila AmmarMs. Zeresh JohnMr. Rama Rao GolluMs. Janjarat SaedanMs. Phawinee PinthongMs. Patchayotai BoontamaMs. Casey Lita Lupe Moana Fa’AuiMs. Han-Byeol Angela KimRev. Dedi Bakkit Tua PardosiMr. Jebasingh SamuvelMrs. Arpa Yai-ChidMr. Wittaya Makasuk

Page 7 of 119

CHAPTER 1: Introduction

Eco-Justice: Towards Sustainable Development and Food Security in Asia—Asian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum IV

November 28, 2016 (Monday) to December 2, 2016 (Friday)

Background

Life-Giving Agriculture (LGA) is a movement of the people and a way of life that relates to livelihoods. The land, forest and water are gifts of God to all on earth. LGA is a living philosophy based on theology of life. It is a life enhancing process grounded in faith and nurtured in a culture of sharing, caring and loving. LGA is diverse yet holistic, participatory, non-exploitative and builds equity (gender), respect, dignity and justice.

The present dominant development model of agriculture is corporate and market-driven. It is capital intensive, export-oriented, and mono-cultural with profit as its motive. It compels farmers to use GMO seeds, pesticides, and chemical fertilizers. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are plants, animals, micro-organism, or any other organisms, which are products of laboratory processes in which genes which are extracted from the DNA of one species are artificially forced into the genes of an unrelated plant or animal. The external genes could come from animals, bacteria, humans, insects, or viruses.

This leads to soil degradation, loss of indigenous seeds, bio-diversity and concentration of lands in the hands of few. It restricts diversity of agriculture based on the food patterns that are dictated by fast-food companies, increases occupational losses, displacement, drought and migration. Decades of these unsustainable agricultural practices have led to erosion of cultures, traditional knowledge and sustainable agricultural systems.

The Christian Conference of Asia (CCA) in cooperation with the Korean Christian Forum on Life Giving Agriculture, organized the 1st Asian Christian Forum on “Life Giving Agriculture” in August 2006 in Korea. This was followed by a second Conference in Sri Lanka in November 2010 on the theme “Empowering Local Economy of Life in the Context of Globalization” focused on the Asian context of a globally capitalized world, giving emphasis on life giving agricultural communities as examples of alternative communities in Asia.

Having clearly identified the need to have solidarity networks at regional levels, an Ecumenical Consultation on “Life Giving Agriculture” was jointly organized by Justice, International Affairs, Development and Service of CCA and the Korean Christian Forum on Life Giving Agriculture. The 3rd Consultation was conducted on 2-8 November 2013 at Dandelion

Page 8 of 119

Community Sancheong, Korea, identifying problems and constraints farmers were facing and exploring alternative approaches to life-giving agriculture in the Asian context.

The 3rd Consultation provided much input to the participants with various sustainable and ecological farming practices that have been observed to have mitigated climate change, assured food security and sovereignty among communities, and uplifted the conditions of small farmers. The United Nations Committee on Food Security defines food security as World Food Security, is the condition in which all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.

Working for eco-justice requires valuing both ecology and social justice, ensuring the well-being of human beings on our Earth that thrives, providing us with clean water for drinking, sufficient food for all, clean air that we breathe, and the land on which we stand. We cannot separate Nature from society.

Previous Meetings of Life-giving Agriculture Forum

1. The International Life Giving Agriculture Forum was held in Wonju, Korea jointly with WCC, in 8 – 14 April, 2005.

2. The Asian Life Giving Agriculture Forum was held in Hongsung, Korea jointly with CCA, in 25 – 30 August, 2006.

3. The 2nd Asian Life Giving Agriculture Forum was held in Sri Lanka jointly with CCA, in 22 – 26 November, 2010.

4. The 3rd Asian Life Giving Agriculture Forum was held in Snachong, Korea jointly with CCA, in 4 – 8 November, 2013.

Venue1. 28–30 November, 2016 at Chiang Mai – Thailand2. 1 – 2 December, 2016 at Field Visit and Immersion

Participants

50 Participants (Need to have gender balance in composition of participants!) 1. 15 from other Asian countries2. 15 from Korea3. 15 from Thailand4. 5 from CCA

Page 9 of 119

ScheduleDate Morning Afternoon Evening

Nov. 28, 2016(Mon.)

ArrivalInformal Fellow-ship

Nov. 29, 2016(Tue.)

Adjarn Nut (CCT, Facili-tator)

Breakfast 7:30-9 AM

9-10 AMS1: Inauguration-WorshipRev. Grace Moon (CCA)

-Welcome-Introduction-Life-Giving Agriculture PrinciplesDr. Rev. Chung Ho Jin (KCLGAF)

Coffee Break: 10-10:30 AM

10:30 AM – 12 noonS2: Theme

Presentation I.Overview: “Practices on and Views of GMOs, Sustainable Agriculture and the Poor”Dr. Abram Bicksler (ECHO) & Dr. Rey Ty (CCA)

Lunch Break: 12 Noon – 1:00 PM

1:00 – 3 PMS3: Thematic Presentation II: Eco-JusticeTomoko Arakawa (ARI Japan), Nishantha Guneratne (Sri Lanka)

Coffee Break: 3 – 3:30 PM

3:30 – 5 PMS4: Thematic Presentation III: Sustainable Development Mariamma Sanu George “Nirmala” (India), Rev. Justin Gultom (HKBP Indonesia), & (Rev. Nuttapong Maneekorn, CCT)

Break: 5-5:30 PM(No break)

Welcome Dinner

6:00 PMNov. 30, 2016(Wed.)

Angela Kim & Dedi Pardoso(CCA Faci-litators)

S5: 9-9:40 AMMorning Devotion& Bible ReflectionRev. Grace Moon

(CCA)

S6: Thematic Presentation IV. Genetically Modified Food (GMOs)Rev. Han Kyung Ho (KCLGAF), Christopher Rajkumar (NCC-India) & Response from Local Context CCA (Bangladesh)

S7: Thematic Presentation V: Food Security & Right to Food Dr. Ardniel Baladjay (SSC Philippines) & Rev. Samuel Sihombing (HKBP Indonesia) & Eang Chhun (Cambodia)

S8: Group Discussion: Facilitated by Rev. Nuttapong Maneekorn, CCT

DinnerS9:

Consultation about

establishment of Asian

LGA forumBy President of KCLGAF(Rev. Han Keung Ho)

Dec. 1, 2016(Thu.)

8 AM DepartureField Visit: Departure 8AM to Mae Hang Village, Lamphang Province, Organized by CCT

Bible Reflection, Rev. Niran Chanta (CCT)Facilitators: Rev. Nuttapong Maneekorn, Rev. Kim Young Soek (Bokaeo Development Center)

Dec. 2, 2016(Fri.)

Rev. Ahn (Faci-

S10.Morning Devotion& Bible ReflectionDr. Kim In Soo

(KCLGAF)

S11:-Plenary Sharing of Group Discussion-Plenary Discussion on Common ConcernsRev. Jae Hak Ahn (KCLGAF)

Departure(If you have to leave by 11 AM or so, kindly fill

out a Sign Up Sheet and inform CCT coordinators at once. See Adjarn Nut and

Adjarn Tewin

Page 10 of 119

litator) Closing Act

CHAPTER 2: Prayers and Bible Reflections

Opening Prayer

Prepared by Rev. Jung Eun “Grace” Moon

Our care of creation is an act of worship. And our worship is an act of caring for creation. The challenge is to be intentional in making the connections between our caring and our worship, and to find liturgical ways to express that relationship in a way that does not detract from the work of praising God. Worship can be a time to increase our awareness of the world around us, to increase our appreciation of the sacredness of creation, and to deepen our desire to treat it with dignity and respect.   (Jennifer Edinger)

Let us praise and worship Our Lord!God, Fill our worship with grace, that every thought, word, and deed may be acceptable to you, our Rock and our Redeemer. Amen.

Communal Reading of Psalm 96

Sing a new song to the LORD! Sing to the LORD, All the world! Sing to the LORD, and praise him! Proclaim every day the good news that he has saved us. Proclaim his glory to the nations, his mighty deeds to all peoples. The Lord is great and is to be highly praised; he is to be honored more than all the gods. The gods of all other nations are only idols, but the LORD created the heavens. Glory and majesty surround him; power and beauty fill his temple.Praise the LORD, all people on earth; praise his glory and might. Praise the LORD’s glorious name; bring an offering and come into his Temple. Bow down before the Holy One when he appears; tremble before him, all the earth!Say to all the nations, “The LORD is king! The earth is set firmly in place and cannot be moved;He will judge the people with justice.”Be glad, earth and sky!Roar, sea and every creature in you;Be glad, fields, and everything in you!The trees in the woods will shout for joy when the LORD comes to rule the earth. He will rule the peoples of the world with justice and fairness.

Page 11 of 119

“All of creation waits with eager longing for God to reveal his sons. For creation was condemned to lose its purpose, not of its own will, but because God willed it to be so. Yet there was the hope that creation itself would one day be set free from its slavery to decay and would share the glorious freedom of the children of God. For we know that up to the present time all of creation groans with pain, like the pain of childbirth. (Romans 8: 19 – 22)

O God, our creator,whose good earth is entrusted to our care and delight and tenderness, we pray:For all who are in captivity to debt, whose lives are cramped by fear from which there is no turning except through abundant harvest.May those who sow in tears reap with shouts of joy.

For all who depend on the earth for their daily food and fuel whose forests and rivers are destroyed for the profits of a few.May those who sow in tears reap with shouts of joy.

For all who labor in poverty, who are oppressed by unjust laws, who are banned for speaking the truth,who long for a harvest of justice.May those who sow in tears reap with shouts of joy.

Page 12 of 119

For the whole creation that is groaning in pain, whose vitality is threatened, whose existence in the world is ended because of human’s ignorant and sinful deeds.May those who sow in tears reap with shouts of joy.

For all who are in captivity to greed and waste and boredom, whose harvest joy is chocked with things they do not need.May those who sow in tears reap with shouts of joy.

Turn us again from our captivity, and restore our vision,that our mouth may be filled with laughter and our tongue with singing.May your Spirit inspire and move all churches and people in Asia to care for your creation in our daily lives. In Jesus Christ we pray:Amen. (Janet Morley, Bread for tomorrow, with adaptation)

It was Moses who prayed to God for bread, and there it was in the desert, Fine flakes like hoarfrost on the ground. ‘What is it?’ they asked. ‘That is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat,’ said Moses. Bread of Life, give us today our daily bread.

In all the wilderness journeys of the heart, In all barrenness of spiritAnd when we are utterly lost, Jesus offers food which lasts.Bread of Life, give us this food now and always.

What is this bread from heaven?It is Jesus himself, his presence, healing, challenge, grace, his hope for each one of us. Bread of Life, may we take and eat so that you live in us.

For some, affluence has brought a food surplus with much wasted;Then it is all the harder to trust in the gift of heavenly bread.Bread of Life, keep us hungry and thirsty for righteousness.

Page 13 of 119

For others, a loaf is the most blessed gift of all, to be received with thankfulness,

for it is the chance to live another day. Bread of Life, help us to share – that all may be satisfied.

Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the bread of life. Blessed be God for ever.

Page 14 of 119

Loving God, we have gathered here to meet you. We have come to listen to your wisdom, To strengthen our solidarity and fellowship. In you we become; in you we live.

Page 15 of 119

Loving God, you are here and everywhere,Around us and within us; you know our inmost thoughts.In you we hope; in you we live.In you we are still; in you we live.Loving God, we live in you; we praise you. Loving God, you live in us; we worship you. In Jesus’ name, we pray. Amen.

BlessingO creator God, Bless our land and rice field around us. Bless every molecule and particle of soil in it. Bless the water spring nearby. Bless every insect, worm and bird.Bless every leaf and shrub and tree.Bless our hands, our strengths, our skills.Bless our caring together and our unity,That we may bring back the waters to the river once again. Amen.

Page 16 of 119

Morning Devotion 30 November 2016

Our hearts are ready, O Lord, our hearts are ready!We will sing and make melody! We will awaken the dawn!We will give thanks to you, O Lord, among the peoples,We will sing praises to you among the nations.For your steadfast love is great above the heaven, and your faithfulness reaches to the cloud.

Loving God, we have gathered to meet you. We have come to listen to you, to seek you, to worship you. You are the beginning of all things, the life of all things; you knew us before we were born. In you we become; in you we live. Loving God, you are here and everywhere, around us and within us; you know our inmost thoughts. In you we hope; in you we live. You are the source of serenity, giving peace that is beyond our understanding. In you we are still; in you we live. Loving God, we live in you; we worship you. Loving God, you live in us; we worship you. Amen.

Praise the Lord!Praise, O servants of the Lord;Praise the name of the Lord.Blessed be the name of the Lord from this time and for evermore.From the rising of the sun to its setting the name of the Lord is to be praised.

The Lord is high above all nations, and God’s glory above the heavens.

Page 17 of 119

Who is like the Lord our God,who is seated on high, who looks far down on the heavens and the earth?

The Lord raises the poor from the dust, and lifts the needy from the ash heap.Praise the Lord!

Lord God, you have provided for us a creation filled with food and water,a universe rich with energy and resources, and charged us to have dominion over all you have created. But we confess that we have often spoiled your gifts,We have put abused the environment you have provided for us. Forgive us, Lord, and make us better stewards of your creation. We pray through Christ, our Lord. Amen.

O God, give us compassion, that we may nurse our beautiful but fragile creation. Give us knowledge, that we may protect it and be protected. Give us love, that we may love it and be loved. Give us a desire for reconciliation with all your creation. O Lord, hear our prayer.

O God, we belong to you, being made in your image. Help us to be followers of your true image, Jesus Christ, your Son, appreciating our differences, not as dividing facts, but as gifts of being and belonging in your divine multitude. O Lord, hear our prayer.

We praise your wisdom. We pray for the unity of the breathing world that we and all your creatures may live together in harmony and peace. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Page 18 of 119

Page 19 of 119

Bible Reflection 1

Affirmation (all)We believe in God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth. We believe that God’s love is powerful beyond measure. God not only preserves the world, God continually attends to it. God commands us to care for the earth in ways that reflect God’s loving care for us. We are responsible for ensuring that the earth’s gifts are used fairly and wisely, that no creature suffers from the abuse of what we are given, and that future generations may continue to enjoy the abundance and goodness of the earth in praise to God. Entrusting ourselves wholly to God’s care, we receive the grace to be patient in adversity, thankful in the midst of blessing,courageous when facing injustice, and confident that no evil may afflict usthat God will not turn to our good.

BlessingMay God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,who is the source of all goodness and growth, pour his blessing upon all things created, and upon you, his children, that you may use them to his glory and the welfare of all peoples. Amen.

Page 20 of 119

Bible Reflection 2: To Help on the Road

Dr. Rev. Kim In Soo

Bible Reading : ⅢJohn 2

“Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.”(KJV)

One of the frequently mentioned verse by ‘prosperity theology’ is ⅢJohn 2. Many Christians think that if we believe in Jesus, and are sincere church members, then we will become rich, healthy, and enjoy wellbeing life.

In the process of industrialization, particularly in developing countries, this prosperity theology receives special attention from Christians. The conviction of the followers of prosperity theology is confirmed when they took western Christiandom as their model.

This approach resulted in overwhelming social atmosphere in every way. As we all consequently perceived the outcome of the prosperity theology, mammonism and increasing structural poverty have taken roots in our society and mind.

Even though material prosperity and wellbeing exhaustion is common in our consumptive society, reliable and dependable human relationship have become endangered. Real friendship is rare. The future is swallowed up by present moneygrubbing pressure. The word sustainability is mentioned in every conference, meeting and daily conversation.

We are on the verge of seeking the alternatives in our thinking and attitude in reflecting with the deep biblical view.

Prosperity theology has undermined and secularized the Christian Church; its spirituality and modus vivendi.

Now, let us return to the original meaning of ‘prosper’ as shown in ⅢJohn 2, and reorient our way to the essence. According to Strong’s Concordance, the original Greek word ‘euodoo’, it denotes 3 similar translations and 1 different implication in STRONG’s Concordance. Euodoo, in its three translations are ‘to help on the road’, ‘succeed in reaching’, and ‘have a prosperous journey’. The first meaning of ’prosper’ should be ‘to help on the road’. Other two translations ‘succeed in reaching’ and ‘have a prosperous journey’ are closely related in successful journey in our life. These major 3 translations give inspiration that life is journey, life is pilgrimage. Only in its last translation does prosper mean to ‘Succeed in business’. However, prosperity pursuers emphasize the minor translation as their bulwark, accepting ‘succeed in business as their favorite, understanding ‘prosper’ in ⅢJohn 2. It is a clear misunderstanding.

The Bible reveals Christians as pilgrim Christian in ⅠPeter 1:1 - “to God’s elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia”, ⅠPeter 2:11 - “Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world”, and also in Heb 11:13 - “All these people were still living by

Page 21 of 119

faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth” We are strangers and aliens in this world, We are pilgrims.

In keeping with our identity as pilgrims, we should keep in mind the following three points,

Firstly, we are requested to transfer our lifestyle from possession to existence.

“Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming.”(ⅡPet 3:11)

“So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.”(LK 5:11)

Insatiable desires, of possession extend their boundless, devilish state as seen in the cursed city of Babylon (see Rev 18:10-13). The Babylonian as spirit of possession demanded the corruption and destruction of the earth

“And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest gave reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and should destroy them which destroy the earth.”(Rev 11:18)

“For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.”(Rev 19:2)

As caretaker of our earth and ourselves, we should preserve the vitality of all living creature and our mother earth.

Secondly, we are requested to transfer our attitude obtaining wealth to being poorer life. A village may be impoverished if a man attempts to be a rich. A continent may be impoverished if a nation attempt to be rich. We were called to help each other on the road to the kingdom of God. We should cooperate with each other for a successful journey. Possession cannot guarantee a successful journey for a lifelong pilgrim. Good partnerships, and a communal sharing life can only success in our pilgrims. One of the greatest joys of the journey are the relationship (good friendship) themselves.

“I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.”(LK 16:9)

Voluntary poverty is one way to create a thriving spiritual economy.

“As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all thing.”(ⅡCor 6:10)

“For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.”(ⅡCor 8:9)

Thirdly, we are requested to transfer our view from stability to instability. Enormous instability globally, regionally, and locally, is on the rise. Unceasing terror and war, refugee camps, tenacious epidemics. Uncontrollable natural disasters and man-made calamities, political unrest, economic recession, and more.

Page 22 of 119

We see these phenomena in daily news. Christians are ones who dare to confront the danger, sufferings, and instability. Christians are ones who interpret the meaning of affliction into real hope.

We shared three recommendations of life changing transition, in our pilgrimage; a greater concern for wellbeing and authentic existence than in possessions, a poorer life instead of material riches, and instability over stability. With these, our pilgrimage will be more enjoyable, communal procedure, in the name of brotherhood.

Jesus Christ himself is our archetype in understanding and applying this kind of pilgrimage. His life fully shows a pilgrimage bearing all kinds of burdens, sin and iniquities, while bringing humanity into the kingdom of God. He is our only reliable friend in sustaining this world and the world to come.

As the decreasing industrial period draws a darkening shadow on this world, we should increase our spiritual capacity and wisdom. As mammonism reveals its demonic and eschatological phenomena, we should strengthen our communal interactions and extend more intimate friendship to each other. As prosperity theology is losing its validity, we should construct, instead, friendship theology for the coming future. Now is the time to recover friendship and sharing our possessions as demonstrated in early Church. The last verse of Ⅲ John “The friends here send their greetings. Greet the friends there by name.” gives us very simple but deep instruction. Our lives should be found upon greeting and welcoming each other, not upon taking profit.

A pilgrim community encourages greeting each other in any place, at any time.

The best Journey is to be with friends.

Page 23 of 119

CHAPTER 3: Overview

Life-Giving Agriculture Principles

Dr. Rev. Chung Ho Jin

Page 24 of 119

Page 25 of 119

Page 26 of 119

Page 27 of 119

Page 28 of 119

Page 29 of 119

Experience, Practice, Approach, and Thoughts on GMOs and Sustainable Agriculture and the Poor

Abram J. Bicksler, Ph.D.ECHO Asia Impact Center, Chiang Mai, Thailand

The development, application, and ethics of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) will be explored in this panel discussion after a brief overview about the basics of the technology and its applications. This forum will also briefly discuss the creation of hybrid seed and the legal and Intellectual Property Rights (IP) issues surrounding it and compare/contrast hybrid seeds with open pollinated (OP) seeds in the context of smallholder farmer agricultural development. Additionally, the concept of sustainable agricultural development will be highlighted, with particular attention paid to smallholder Asian agriculture and its implications for informing sustainable development globally. The ECHO Asia Impact Center and its services will be highlighted as an example of a collaborative non-competitive strategy providing an example of a way to move forward into a sustainable future of equity, information sharing, food security, and improved livelihoods.

Page 30 of 119

Page 31 of 119

Page 32 of 119

Page 33 of 119

Page 34 of 119

Page 35 of 119

Page 36 of 119

Page 37 of 119

Page 38 of 119

Page 39 of 119

Page 40 of 119

Page 41 of 119

Page 42 of 119

International Political Economy: Neoliberal Globalization vs. Eco-Justice Dr. Rey Ty

Introduction

Problem StatementThe world is experiencing a food crisis, not because we lack food. In fact, we are in the midst of a food glut: about 1.2 billion pounds of cheese, the size of a small mountain, are sitting idly in cold storage. About 40% of food in the U.S. alone is thrown away (Light, 2015). Millions of people still live in a condition of food insecurity (Marshall, 2016). Over “1 billion people struggle to live on less than one dollar a day”; “11 children under five die every minute because of hunger,” over 800 thousand people suffer from acute or chronic hunger; “1 billion people are denied the right to clean water,” and “2.6 billion people lack access to adequate sanitation” (GBCS-UMC, 2016b). Your partly eaten food has a dirty secret. Food waste kills the Earth. One third of food is wasted globally, which releases a huge amount of greenhouse gases (Butler, 2013). So much food is produced; yet so much food is thrown away while simultaneously so millions go to bed hungry every night. The problem is not the lack of food. The problem is the control of food. The “food supply is now controlled by a handful of corporations that often put profit ahead of consumer health, the livelihood of the…farmer, the safety of workers and our own environment” (Kenner, 2010).

We live in two worlds on Earth: the utopia of the haves and the dystopia of the have-nots. Inequality has become the norm. The dominant paradigm is one of conquest and destruction which incentivizes greed and profit (Chomsky, 2011). There is a growing inequality in income and wealth between the rich and everyone else (Stiglitz, 2016). Market forces (Stiglitz, 2013) and capital accumulation (Piketty, 2015) are central to the rise of inequality, which negatively affects democracy and social justice (Stiglitz, 2013). Only 62 persons own the same wealth as 3.6 billion poorest people on Earth (Oxfam, 2016). On the one hand, members of the 1% are the economic, political, and cultural power-holders who promote competition, greed, capital accumulation, profit, war, and genocide (Chomsky, 2002). On the other hand, the 99% have to deal with poverty, hunger, thirst, genocide, wage slavery, destruction of Nature, racism, and human inequality. Variances in income and capital ownership are causes of inequality (Piketty, 2015). Economic inequality, which has increased over the past 30 years, is not accidental but a feature of capitalism (Piketty, 2014). To boot, the rich reinforces the myth that poor people are lazy.

QuestionsIn this paper, the following questions were raised for our critical reflection: (1) How does the unsustainable neoliberal economic world order affect food security? (2) What are some of the proposed alternative solutions that promote eco-justice?

Objectives This paper, which reviews the literature, aimed to delve into the major problems with which the global community is afflicted today based on the operation of the dominant economic structures and political and cultural systems. As a counter-narrative, some alternative solutions are proposed.

Research Method This paper uses a diachronic and dialectical method (Hegel, 1977) to portray the historically and socially determined view of the contradictions between the hegemonic neoliberal economic model and the various people’s alternatives in the global context, with a preferential option for the poor and the powerless.

Conceptual Framework1. Eco-justice: Caring simultaneously for Nature as well as the poor and the oppressed

Page 43 of 119

2. Sustainable development: Development that meets human needs and ensures that the future generation will enjoy Nature and its wealth (Brundtland Report, 1987)

3. Food security: The condition where all humans are assured to have the physical, social, and economic access to safe and nutritious food which meet our dietary needs and food choices for an active and healthy life (UNCWFS, 1996)

4. Right to food: Food not only as a basic need but a basic human right “underpinned by law” (Marshall, 2016). The government has the duty “to work to provide mechanisms to secure food where it is needed” and “the government could be held legally responsible if its efforts to guarantee food is available to all citizens fail” (Marshall, 2016)

5. Food sovereignty: A term that Via Campesina coined in 1999 (cited in Global Small-Scale Farmers’ Movement, 2005). Around 500 delegates from more than 80 countries at the Forum for Food Sovereignty in Mali in 2007 adopted the "Declaration of Nyéléni", which states that food sovereignty refers to “the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. It puts those who produce, distribute and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations. It defends the interests and inclusion of the next generation. It offers a strategy to resist and dismantle the current corporate trade and food regime, and directions for food, farming, pastoral and fisheries systems determined by local producers. Food sovereignty prioritises local and national economies and markets and empowers peasant and family farmer-driven agriculture, artisanal fishing, pastoralist-led grazing, and food production, distribution and consumption based on environmental, social and economic sustainability” (Declaration of Nyéléni, 2007)

6. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs): “organisms (i.e. plants, animals or microorganisms) in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. The technology is often called “modern biotechnology” or “gene technology”, sometimes also “recombinant DNA technology” or “genetic engineering”. It allows selected individual genes to be transferred from one organism into another, also between nonrelated species. Foods produced from or using GM organisms are often referred to as GM foods” (WHO, 2016).

Findings

Paradise Lost: Problems with the Unsustainability of the Neoliberal Globalization Structure

In almost all universities in all countries, the only theme taught in Economics is the mono-hegemonic neoclassical neoliberal economic model (Klein, 2007), but we are deceptively told that they offer alternative economic policy choices. The western-led industrial civilization which provided affluence in the 20th century was based upon the exhaustion and conversion of non-renewable fossil fuels into smoke and ash. The dominant neoliberal market fundamentalist economic structure, which promotes growth and consumption, which is focused on private property and money, is hostile to and debases both Nature and people in society (Klein, 2014). Giant corporations gain for themselves corporate welfare from government tax exemptions, smashing competition and making “free market” a hoax (The Economist, 2016 September 17). This old economy which relies on fossil fuels including petroleum, natural gas, and coal causes climate disruption (Brown, 2015) and exploit the labor of others. The current dominant system has provided so much scientific development and technological innovations. However, there is a contradiction, as technology leads to efficiency on the one hand and to unemployment and crisis on the other hand. The political economy of the economic growth in the Global North depends upon the exploitation of cheap labor and natural resources from somewhere else. About 80% of all resources are used by the 20% of the world’s population in the U.S. and Western Europe, many of whose products are made by the labor in the Global South.

Page 44 of 119

In a throwaway societal structure, Nature is destroyed in order to feed the production of continually obsolescent commodities for distribution, sale, use, and dumping. Thanks to the aid and power of advertising and marketing, the endless purchase and consumption of planned obsolescent products are forced down the throat of consumers who themselves are the producers of goods and services. But as we live on Earth, there is no such thing as infinite growth, as matter is finite. Exchanging labor value, we use labor as blue, pink, or white collar workers to earn money to buy commodities produced by the labor of others but owned by a few. Think of your over-packaged food, drinks, cellphone, gadgets, and other commodities at the malls and supermarkets. Nature, labor, as well as the lands of farmers and indigenous peoples are destroyed and exploited in order to mine and extract critical metals and mineral, every time we buy the latest model of a brand-name gadget. Clearly, there is a deep connection between the destruction of Nature and socio-economic injustice.

Corporate biopiracy of indigenous plants through patenting plant products threatens ancestral products (Mora, 2016; Shiva, 2011). Greedy corporatocrats promote the use of hazardous chemical pesticides and fertilizers as well as seek to control potable water as well as food through genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which leads to “gene-ocide” (The Economist, 2016 September 17, p. 12). Our food is contaminated from the soil to our plates. The “merchants of doubt” (Oreskes & Conway, 2011) have manufactured consent (Herman & Chomsky, 2002) on cigarette smoking, junk food, bottled water, and climate change denial. Our food supply is threatened by the control of a few powerful monopolies that control the production of GMO seeds and distribution of food commodities. Some biotechnology giants have been engaged in aggressive lobbying in an effort to expand their profits to the detriment of Nature and human rights (Telesur, 2016).

Everything, including water, is turned into private property. Today, bottled water use exceeds that of tap water (Ringholm, 2016). Shouldn’t access to water and food be free, as they are basic human rights, considering that they are fundamental to sustain life? Without potable water, we die. Without food for about 40 days, we die. The rich can buy bottled water, fresh produce, fancy food, and packaged food, wasting most of it. But the poor and the minoritized groups always suffer the most. Where is eco-justice? Consumers are made to believe that bottled water is special. In fact, unless otherwise stated, most bottled water is municipal tap water. Corporatocrats promote industrialized junk food and fast food (Pollan, 2009). The promoters of the neoliberal market economic model rely on economic disasters to promote and implement this model (Klein, 2003). The neoliberal global order prioritizes profit over people and Nature (Chomsky, 2011).

The youth work and get a loan to study and support their life. Many join the military and fight wars in which they do not believe. The middle class loses job security. Governments promise job creation. Corporations talk of trickle-down growth, which has in fact caused the alienation, pauperization, and misery of millions of people on a global scale. The dominant economic model, which benefits the rich, is flawed and unsustainable. Its neoclassical economic model provides abstract measurements of gross domestic product (GDP), inflation, consumer price index (CPI), and the stock market, all of which do not measure the well-being of actually existing people. In this worldview, really existing individuals, workers, farmworkers, communities, other groups, and Nature are made invisible in macro-economic charts and micro-economic graphs. We have been fooled and lied to for so long now.

Modern-day slavery and labor conditions continue to oppress millions of people who do not eke out an income that could support their basis needs. In addition, technological advances lead to mass unemployment: think of agricultural tractors, computers, self-driving cars, and robots in production line. Typists, clerks, and secretaries are a species going extinct. The few rich who own the means of production amass more wealth, while the labor force become unemployed in the rich countries and the export of labor to poorer countries lead to the impoverishment of cheap foreign labor. Climate refugees

Page 45 of 119

leave their arid lands in search of food and livelihood elsewhere where they are unwanted: think of Syria and North Africa in relation to Europe (Baker, 2015).

The dominant economic, political, and cultural structures imposed on the rest of the world are unsustainable, as they rely on the continuing exploitation of others. The contradictions in the dominant economic model are unsustainable and have reached the level of a general crisis. If we only produce marketers, advertisers, and service workers, but not farmers,who will produce our food (Eckart, 2016)?

Reconstructing Paradise: Solutions for Eco-Justice and Food Security

We need to question the control of Wall Street over human lives (Chomsky, 2012) and engage in an economic revolution that promotes a more caring, sharing, democratic, collaborative, and people-centered economy (Alperovitz, 2013). The elements of such an inclusive and participatory economy alternative to the neoliberal global economic model include women-and-widows participation, shared research, worker ownership and control, building the eco-system for economic democracy, the “buy local” movement, participatory governance, and growth taming. Instead of being victims of brand names and buying the latest models of gadgets which only lead to the intensification of mining, depletion of ores, and destruction of Nature as well as indigenous and farm lands, we should support the No Logo movement (Klein, 2012) and becoming prosumers (producers-consumers, Toffler, 1980).

From Corporate Coup d’État to Grassroots Democracy and Sustainable Development. Almost all things we use are the products of the labor of others but claimed by owners of capital. Corporatocrats mainly think of saleability and profit, not use. Decommodify: we must think beyond growth (Daly, 1997), which is a flawed and unsustainable model and must work for sustainable development (Sachs, 2015). As proposed solution to the global problems today confronting the majority of the world’s population, more than social welfare, many today are demanding the protection of Nature, green jobs, living wages and universal basic income, which will alleviate the suffering of the majority of the people and provide a decent basic standard of living to all (Chomsky, 2015). In a word: that is eco-justice. Instead of following the logic of competition, we can join liberatory collective and solidarity movements as well as work for social benefit instead of private greed, sharing and caring for others, other beings, and Nature (Leclerq, 2016).

We need to create counter-realities and counter-narratives (Chomsky, 2015) which balance human needs and our sense of success and material abundance based on the carrying capacity of the Earth. Question things-as-they-are. Enter into a dialogue. Critique. Expose and oppose oppressive structures of domination. Learn from each other. Make some noise. But talk is not enough. Organizing and attending fora and conference are not sufficient. We need to take action for social change that promotes eco-justice. Be where the action is. Be where the struggling people are. Organize. Empower the people. Be in solidarity. Build coalitions and alliances. Deconstruct language and structures and construct new ones. Engage in policy change. Engage in extra-legal direct actions and civil disobedience. Challenge, propose, work on, give life, and live alternative structures, new lifestyles, and new ways of being, doing, and thinking that promote cooperation, empathy justice, coexistence, reciprocity, mutuality, and good relationships as species on Earth. In the tension between efficiency and fairness, we need to side with justice (Piketty, 2015).

The economic and social inequality between the rich and the poor is extreme. Instead of focusing on growth, we need to emphasize justice. Per capita consumption especially in the Global North is unsustainable in relation to the extraction of ores from Nature. Hence, we need look beyond economic growth and to take part in the degrowth movement (Daly, 1997).

Page 46 of 119

We need to expose the flaws of and free ourselves from the dominant economic model as well as propose and create alternative models. Antithetical to the dominant exploitative model which promotes classism and discrimination, we can turn around technology and engineering systems—under alternative sustainable systems—through such means as digitalization, creative commons, peer-to-peer designs, open sources, and 3D printing as some ways by which we can share our knowledge and empower the people over corporations. Reclaim the streets and public spaces. Engage in media jamming and guerrilla communication. Be involved in atomized spaces of resistance such as the Occupy movement (Chomsky, XXX) as well as broad-based mass movements. We need to join the grassroots movement to protect Nature (Brodine, 2007) and work for the common good, redirecting society toward people, community, and Nature to construct a sustainable future (Daly, 1994).

From Corporate Welfare to People’s Welfare and Food Security. Given the current economic crisis, is labor for income the proper model forward? How can we attain a world without poverty, war, destruction of Nature, hunger, and thirst? We can work on the individual, community, country, inter-country, and global scale for social change. There are many ways by which we can free ourselves from corporatocratic food control. Starve the market beast. Learn from the indigenous peoples: (1) farm like a forest (biodiversity, intercropping, and agroforestry), (2) eat low on the food chain, (3) restore health to damaged land, and (4) cultivate reverence for the planet (Penniman, 2015). Put back our organic “garbage” back into the soil in order to nourish it and make it productive agriculturally.

We need more young people to farm. Occupy the farm! Go natural. Go organic. Support local food system. “Going vegetarian can cut your food carbon footprint in half” (Plumer, 2016). Eat lower on the food chain: “Gallons of water needed to produce one pound of wheat: 25. Gallons of water needed to produce one pound of beef: 2500” (GBCS-UMC, 2016b). Boycotting GMO products is not “revolutionary,” as it is allowed by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety according to which countries can “refuse entry to a GM crop” (The Economist, 2016 September 17, p. 14).

Individual efforts are necessary but not sufficient. Partner with farmers. Provide local solutions to local problems, while at the same time promoting a just world order. Join the collective efforts to ensure food security. In many parts of the world, people are already engaged in agropolis, both rural and urban food gardening, using public and private spaces that serves the common good. Engage in community agriculture and plant food crops to consume, share, or sell in urban, suburban, exurban, and rural areas. City dwellers plant food on their window sills, rooftops, and the fire exits. Urbanites, suburbanites, and exurbanites use raised box agriculture. Where space is available, many engage in backyard agriculture. Where space is limited, people engage in home-made aqua culture and vertical agriculture. “Guerrilla grafters” secretly graft fruit-bearing branches on city-owned ornamental trees lining the streets. Grow food, not lawns! Avoid fast food like a plague and support the local slow food movement. Share and barter goods and services to meet human needs and pull away from the market economy. We must work towards the localization of food production, distribution, sharing, sale, and consumption. Reject the hegemonic control of corporatocrats. Reject greed and promote caring for people and for Nature. Engage in fair trade, not free trade. Feed the world without destroying the Earth.

Conclusion

Restatement of the ProblemTechnological improvements should free up human labor from drudgery and alienation. However, far from fully enjoying the fruits of science and technology, we live in a world in which war, disease, famine, and daily exposure to toxic chemicals are a way of life, thanks to the neoliberal globalization economic model, as pushed forward by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Instead of solving the problem of scarcity of which it is capable, technological efficiency leads to mass unemployment and estrangement. Governments and corporations collide to

Page 47 of 119

promote more growth and more jobs, which are not forthcoming. The dominant way of life is unstable and unsustainable. Food was a direct cause of the French Revolution and the Arab Spring.

SummaryThis paper presents a critique of the dominant unsustainable economic model and recommends an alternative sustainable development model that provides food security. The two contending and incompatible models at work are the following: one is based on the market forces which favor production, local commerce, international trade, money, profit, and the exploitation of labor and Nature, while another is based on the betterment of Nature and society. At the core of the market economy is a financial system that increases capital without producing goods that benefit society or Nature. The dominant economic model damages Nature and society. At the core of the alternative economy is one that promotes the betterment of everyone without being detrimental to Nature.

ImplicationsWe need to act to ensure food security not only on an individual but also community, country, inter-country, and global levels. Lobby for regulation and proactive policies that ensure access to and distribution of food for all. We need to move away from the neoliberal economic growth model to one that promotes the well-being of the people and Nature. “Take action for justice… Learn about hunger and poverty in your area… Speak truth to power! Tell [your governments] to put those living on the economic margins at the center of our vision of a new just economy” (GBCS-UMC, 2016b).

References:Alperovitz, Gar. (2013). What then must we do? Straight talk about the next American Revolution. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing. Atlantic. (2016). The future of protein will not be animal meat. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR8TFrLYZvMBaker, A. (2015 Sept. 07). How climate change is behind the surge of migrants to Europe. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/4024210/climate-change-migrants/?

xid=fbshareBrodine, V. (2007). Red roots, green shoots. New York: International Publishers. Bruntland Report. (1987). World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Butler, K. (2013 September 10). Your half-eaten sandwish’s dirty secret. Mother Jones. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/09/food-

waste-carbon-emissionsChomsky, N., & Polk, L. (2013). Nuclear war and environmental catastrophe. New York” Seven Stories Press. Chomsky, N. (2015). Because we say so. City Lights Publishers. Chomsky, N. (2012). Occupy. Zuccotti Park Press. Chomsky, N. (2011). Profit over people: Neoliberalism and global order. Seven Stories Press. Chomsky, N. (2002). Understanding power. The New Press. Climate Reality Project. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/climate-change-explained-10-cartoons?utm_source=email-

newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GeneralConniff, R. (2016 July 03). Global trade: What’s a good progressive to do? In The Progressive. Retrieved from www.progressive.org/news/2016/07/188830/global-

trade-whats-good-progressive-doD’Angelo, C. (2016 May 12). Rising sea levels swallow 5 Pacific islands. In The Hufftington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/solomon-

islands-swallowed-climate-change_us_5730f200e4b0bc9cb047b77b?slideshow=trueDaly, H. (1997). Beyond growth: The economics of sustainable development. Beacon Press. Declaration of Nyéléni. (2007). Nyéléni 2007 - Forum for Food Sovereignty. Eckart, Kim. (2016 February 01). If there are no farmers, who will grow our food? In Yes! Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/good-

health/if-there-are-no-new-farmers-who-will-grow-our-food-20160201Environmental Protection Energy (2016) Global greenhouse gas emissions data. Retrieved on July 8, 2016 from

https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.htmlFahn, J. D. (2003). A land in fire: The environmental consequences of the Southeast Asian Boom. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm Books. Food, Inc. (2010). A Robert Kenner Film. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/pov/foodinc/Francis, Pope. (2015). Laudato Si (On Care for Our Common Home). Vatican.Gene-ocide. (2016 September 12). In The Economist, p. 12. Germanos, A. (2016). Un Assessment: Global destruction of Mother Earth on fast track. Retrieved from http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/05/20/un-

assessment-global-destruction-mother-earth-fast-track?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=socialnetworkGeneral Board of Church & Society of The United Methodist Church. (2016a). Clean Water.General Board of Church & Society of The United Methodist Church. (2016b). Hunger and Poverty. Retrieved from https://umc-gbcs.org/issues/hunger-and-poverty"Global Small-Scale Farmers' Movement Developing New Trade Regimes", Food First News & Views, Volume 28, Number 97 Spring/Summer 2005, p.2.Guardian. (2015). 60-second climate fix. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/theguardian/videos/10153458263351323/Hallman, D. G. (2002). Globalization and climate change. Geneva, Switzerland: World Council of Churches. Retrieved from

http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/justice-diakonia-and-responsibility-for-creation/climate-change-water/globalization-and-climate-change

Hegel, G. W. (1977). Phenomenology of spirit. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Herman E. S., & Chomsky, N. (2002). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon. Jamail, D. (2016 May 23). Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration has passed the point of no return. Retrieved from http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/36133-

atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-concentration-has-passed-the-point-of-no-returnJamail, D. (2016 May 02). As climate disruption advances, UN warns: “The future is happening now.” Retrieved from http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35860-as-

climate-disruption-advances-un-warns-the-future-is-happening-now

Page 48 of 119

Kenner, R. (2010). Food, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/pov/foodinc/video/food-inc-trailer/Klein, N. (2012). No Logo: Taking aim at the brand bullies. Toronto: Random House.Klein, N. (2014). This changes everything: Capitalism vs. the climate. Toronto: Random House.Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. Toronto: Knopf Canada.Kris, M. E., & Laccetti, N. (2016). Ministry with the poor in an era of climate change. New World Outlook Magazine (May-June). Also retrievable from The United

Methodist Church Global Mission at http://www.umcmission.org/find-resources/new-world-outlook-magazine/2016/may/june/0621eraofclimatechangeLeclercq, A. (2016 March 17). Des potagers urbains en libre-service? Vive les “Incroyables comestible”! In Positivr. Retrieved from http://positivr.fr/incroyables-

comestibles-potagers-urbains-legumes-gratuits/Light, J. (2015 September 02). U.S. restaurants are terrible at getting wasted food to the hungry. Can we change that? In Grist. Retrieved from http://grist.org/food/u-

s-restaurants-are-terrible-at-getting-wasted-food-to-the-hungry-can-we-change-that/Marshall, W. (2016 November 18). Scotland considers passing a law to ensure a “right to food.” In The Vice Channels. Retrieved from

https://munchies.vice.com/en/articles/scotland-considers-passing-a-law-to-ensure-a-right-to-food?utm_source=munchiesfbusMcKibben, B. (2016 March 5). The mercury doesn’t lie: We’ve hit a troubling climate change milestone. Boston Globe.

www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/03/04/why-degree-temperature-jump-more-important-than-trump-hands/lCyz5MHZkH8aD0HIDJrcYJ/story.html?event=event25

Merchant, C. (1992). Radical ecology. New York: Routledge, Cahapman & Hall.Mora, R. (2016 October 07). Corporate ‘biopiracy’ in Peru threatens indigenous knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Corporate-

Biopiracy-in-Peru-Threatens-Indigenous-Knowledge-20161005-0020.htmlMosbergen, D. (2016 May 16). Last month was the warmest ever recorded, continuing 7-month hot streak. The Hufftington Post. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hottest-april-2016-nasa_us_57394f3ae4b060aa781aa334National Council of Churches in the Philippines. (1995). A public faith, a social witness: Statements and resolutions of the National Council of Churches in the

Philippines. Quezon City: NCCP.Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Oxfam. (2016b June 27). Just five food commodities produce more greenhouse gases than any country except emissions giants China and the US. Retrieved from

https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2016-06-27/just-five-food-commodities-produce-more-greenhouse-gases-anyOxfam. (2016a January 18). 62 people own the same as half the world. Retrieved from https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2016-01-18/62-people-

own-same-half-world-reveals-oxfam-davos-reportPearce, F. (2016 July 4). What would a global warming increase of 1.5 degrees be like? Yale Environment 360. Retrieved from

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/what_would_a_global_warming_increase_15_degree_be_like/3007/Penniman, L. (2016 August 10). Four ways Mexico’s indigenous farmers are practicing the agriculture of the future. In Yes! Magazine. Retrieved from

http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/four-ways-mexico-indigenous-farmers-agriculture-of-the-future-20150810Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Piketty, T. (2015). The economics of inequality. Belknap Press. Plumer, B. (2016 June 13). Study: Going vegetarian can cut your food carbon footprint in half. In Vox. Retrieved from http://www.vox.com/2014/7/2/5865109/study-

going-vegetarian-could-cut-your-food-carbon-footprint-in-halfPollan, M. (2009). In defense of food: An eater’s manifesto. Penguin Books. Readfearn, G. (2016). Conservative funders of climate denials are quietly spending millions to generate more partisan journalism. Retrieved from

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/06/16/conservative-funders-climate-denial-are-quietly-spending-millions-create-more-partisan-journalismRingholm, E. (2016 September 19). The downside of bottled water. In The Progressive. Roberts, W. (2016). 30 ways cities can prepare for global warning. Retrieved from http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/07/08/30-ways-cities-can-prepare-for-global-

warming/Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. New York: Columbia University Press. Shiva, V. (2011). Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge. New Delhi: Natraj Publishers.Schwägerl, C. (2016). Vanishing act: Why insects are declining and why it matters. Retrieved from http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/07/08/vanishing-act-why-

insects-are-declining-and-why-it-matters/Stiglitz, J. E. (2013). The price of inequality: How today’s divided society endangers our future. W. W. Norton & Company.Stiglitz, J. E. (2016). The great divide: Unequal societies and what we can do about them. W. W. Norton & Company. The Economist. September 17-23, 2016 Issue. Telesur (2016 October 13). GMO giant Monsanto has too much power and influence: Report. Retrieved from http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/GMO-Giant-

Monsanto-Has-Too-Much-Power-and-Influence-Report-20161013-0017.htmlTodhunter, C. (2016). On World Environment Day: Profiting from Death, Devastation and Destruction is the Norm. Montreal, Canada: Center for Research on

Globalization. Retrieved from http://www.globalresearch.ca/on-world-environment-day-profiting-from-death-devastation-and-destruction-is-the-norm/5529090

Ty, R. (2011). Human rights, conflict transformation, and peacebuilding: The state, NGOs, social movements, and civil society—The struggle for power, social justice, and social change. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University.

United Nations’ Committee on World Food Security. (1996). World Food Summit. United Nations. (2015). Paris Agreement. Geneva and New York: United Nations. Retrievable from https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?

src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-d&chapter=27&lang=enWorld Health Organization (WHO). (2016). Food Safety. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/

en/Yale Environment 360. (2016 June 28). Atmospheric CO2 Level May Not Drop Below 400 ppm “Within Our Lifetimes.” Retrieved from

http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/06/28/atmospheric-co2-level-may-not-drop-below-400-ppm-within-our-lifetimes/

Page 49 of 119

CHAPTER 4: Eco-Justice

Vision of ARI Farming as Eco-Just Farming

Tomoko ArakawaAsian Rural Institute (Japan)

ARI Exists for Social JusticeOur founder, Rev. Dr. Toshihiro Takami said that “Asian Rural Institute (ARI) exists now and for the future for achieving Social Justice”. He further defined social justice as “a state where every person in this world, without single exception, can sit at a rich dining table having a joy of sharing.”

ARI and ReconciliationARI was established in 1973 having its root in the training course named “Southeast Asia Rural Leaders’ Training Course” under the UCCJ’s Theological School for Rural Mission in Tokyo. The original request came from CCA back in 1960. At the foundation, there was a hope of redemption of Japan’s sin committed against many Asian countries during WWII. ARI tries to seek reconciliation with other Asian countries by our concrete actions of training and nurturing rural leaders who can lead rural communities toward the right direction. We believe that this work should be done with servant leadership, practicing sustainable agriculture and community building where people can enjoy the joy of sharing. In 1973, in the creation of ARI, Rev. Dr. Takami said,

“We sincerely hope that people will participate in God’s work of building a just and peaceful world. In order to achieve this, we try to grasp and understand the situation in Asia with our all effort and abilities and we happily chose the way to devote our whole souls to the strictly concrete and absolutely necessary work, that is “to nurture rural leaders who serve rural people”. And we are grateful to be given such an opportunity.

The situation of Asia that occupies more than half of the world population will affect the future of all human beings. The majority of those more than 1 billion people are the villagers in the rural areas in the so called “developing countries”, and they are in very vulnerable and unjust situations being oppressed by increasing social gap. Our Lord Jesus Christ is a friend of the weak first of all and sacrificed his own life to such people. Remembering this, we as well live together with such people and make effort to be saved together with them. There is no bigger joy than this.

Majority of the people in Asia are still captured by the power of evils such as poverty, hunger, diseases, illiteracy, population explosion, customs, exploitations, etc. We, relying on God’s power, fight for the freedom of those people including us. We nurture the leaders who work for the salvation of the whole human race by choosing to live together with such people. We find an image of such a good leader in Jesus Christ, a good shepherd.

Our Motto : “That We May Live Together” This is our means and end. We try to find the way to live together with other people, with nature and with God. And we try to achieve it by living it every day in our Community Life.

Page 50 of 119

Organic Farming and ReconciliationARI was not doing organic agriculture from the beginning. When staff members thought of a more appropriate farming method which would go with our purpose and motto, they changed their farming way from conventional farming to organic farming. So our farming is one form of realization of our motto “That We May Live Together”. So it has to contribute to the achievement of our mission; Reconciliation with people, nature and God.

The first introduction of organic farming was done by one farm staff in 1976. In 1979 a step style compost area which used a slope area, dividing a slope into four sections, dumping compost materials from the top section, and shifting to the lower section when it becomes decomposed. It dramatically reduced the labor of human beings. Finally, we were able to practice farming without any chemical inputs from 1981 for vegetable production and from 1988 for rice production.

ARI Eco System VisionIn 1982, an idea of ARI Eco System was introduced, that is to push the achievement of our motto “That We May Live Together”. There were 9 principles.

① Making all the 6 ha of campus land a community that has a good balance with nature. ② Allocating forest, fields, livestock sheds, school buildings, sports ground and road in an

appropriate way. ➂ Utilizing natural energy at a maximum level. ④ Utilization of rain water and gray water by purifying, reserving them underground and in ponds. Trying not to pollute land with our gray water. ➄ Aiming at high food self sufficiency. ⑥ Practicing organic farming. ⑦ Planning the works so that every one on the campus has appropriate amount and kinds

of work.⑧ Making efforts to share this kind of life style with other people.⑨ Promoting worldwide networking with those who share the same vision.

FOODLIFEFoodlife is a special term used at ARI to express the reality that food and life cannot be separated; both are essential for each other. Nature is a gift from God given to us to sustain our lives through producing food. Human beings cannot survive without food, so we work to sustain life through a healthy relationship with nature. At ARI we are making an effort to create Foodlife in which the soil becomes richer as we produce food and human relationships become more beautiful.

ARI Foodlife involves activities such as producing, processing, cooking and eating food and sharing with others. Foodlife provides learning opportunities to deepen our understanding of organic farming, the importance of food, dignity of labor and the importance of food self-sufficiency for self-reliance of people. -ARI Training Handbook-

Appropriate Technology Promoting farming technology and methods that can sustain human life, nature and social environment in appropriate manners, the idea of Appropriate Technology became important.

Appropriate Technology is not about introducing new technology and transferring it from old ones. We believe that technology does not have any positive meaning unless it may be well utilized in a social and economic structure and context that were built for centuries by local people. Also Appropriate Technology should improve human activities no matter where it is introduced. Based on this belief, we set the direction of our organic farming method in relation

Page 51 of 119

with appropriate technology:

1. Developing simple and time saving techniques without depending on big machineries and high tech.

2. Developing chemical-free farming technology3. Developing methods to utilize local materials inside and outside campus4. Developing marketing methods that can reduce waste in production and foster mutual

understanding with consumers 5. Developing methods to make farming fun and interesting

At the base of all these policies and direction of ARI foodlife and appropriate technology, Christianity lies. In our record in 1970’s, it says. “World trend is centered at money-based value. It requires a tremendous courage to make a judgment based on another value different from this. Moreover, organic farming is a voice of minority and still immature in terms of economic point of view. However, we try to have a value of differentiating “an important thing” out of the voices of minority and hope to hold such a value.”

Attitude and behavior towards conventional farmersNot criticizing chemical farming imposing the “Justice of Organic Farming”, we should first humbly listen to these farmers, their voices and their problems with an attitude and mind of Servant Leadership.

Five Years from the Massive Accident of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power PlantLeak of radioactive substances by this terrible accident, farming in Japan and neighboring countries was threatened. Especially the farming that depends on circulation of organic materials in the eco-system was frightened greatly by the intervention of radioactive substances in the eco-system. Now after five-years of hard efforts of decontamination and repeated measurement of different kinds of food, soil and farm inputs, we at ARI can produce as we did five years before, except mushroom culturing, mountain vegetables and wild animals in the forests.

After all these experiences, some questions came to my mind; Is our enemy TEPCO (The Tokyo Electric and Power Co. , the owner of the Nuclear Power Plants) ? Do we really need to “fight “against radiation? I had to think deeply about these questions because I found myself/ourselves not just victims but assaulters as well. I and we (ARI) had not done anything toward national energy policy in Japan especially going against nuclear energy at all. We committed a sin of ignorance. We found ourselves as a target that we need to fight against in a form of asking this fundamental question to ourselves; How does God want us to conduct our training program of rural leaders in this time of nuclear age ?

What we need to do now are the following three things:

1） Self-realization as an assaulter who caused the nuclear power plant 2） Continuing the training of rural leaders of the world, putting more emphasis on the

efforts of showing problems of development and figuring out what true development should be. 3）Doing all these things in walking a path of Christ’s peace.

Activities for Eco justice should bring about peace, not hatred and conflicts among people. True peace will be created not by challenging to a fight, but trusting Christ and practicing love of Christ. It is same with Agriculture. Not trying to change others’ farming methods brandishing a sword of organic farming over someone’s head, but by trusting Christ and practicing Christ’s love in farming, true peaceful farming is created.

Example of peaceful collaboration toward sustainable agriculture in Sado Island in Japan

Page 52 of 119

Sado island, is located 40km off the shore of Niigata Prefecture, is characterized by a variety of landforms and altitudes. In 2011 Sado island was recognized for the first time in Japan as “GIAHS – Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems” for their efforts to make Sado's satoyama (Japan’s traditional agricultural landscapes) in harmony with Japanese crested ibis. Sado City has started “the ibis-friendly farming method” and a certification system for creation of the homeland of the Japanese crested ibis to rebuild the satoyama for local economy and biodiversity. This is one good example of peaceful collaboration of different kinds of people work together toward environmental and social sustainability of the locality.

Conclusion - Impact on the ARI Graduates and their communitiesWe researched 229 graduates in 11 countries (about 17 % of all graduates) in 2014 to 2015. The results showed that many of the ARI graduates successfully integrated the idea of true peace making with their farming activities, Church and NGO activities and into their family life. The ARI training program that comes along with servant leadership, sustainable agriculture and community building is resonant with eco justice and it helps people to realize true peace and to take action on the way to peaceful societies.

References:

Takami, T (1973, December). That we may live together: the vision and work of the Asian Rural Institute. Church Education, p.18-22Asian Rural Institute (1993, October). That we may live together: ARI’s 20 years’ walk. Asian Rural Institute (2016). Training Handbook GIAHS, Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems. Sado City Home page,https://www.city.sado.niigata.jp/topics/gihas/index/index.shtmlCutting, S and Abma, B (2016). Rural Leaders. Asian Rural Inst

Page 53 of 119

Page 54 of 119

Page 55 of 119

Eco-Justice

Rev. Nishantha Guneratne

Talking about Eco-Justice issues today indisputably is involved with speaking of fundamental issues. The issues we are facing are not just a problem or a difficult situation, but it points to a fundamental rift which exists in the current state and structure of our humanity. In other words, if we talk about ecology today we have to face some grave structural challenges of injustice within world society. However we believe that very issues are also an opportunity, a situation which also provides some space capable of accommodating new and creative alternative for alternative solutions.

The global ecological issues today have reached unprecedented levels, as every day more forests cease to exist and no day is passing in our context, where we do not hear or read of foreign multinational companies which indiscriminately exploit Sri Lankan soil and resources leaving indelible marks of destruction on the ecosystems of this region and the world. Instead of treating this subject of ECO Justice in a piece-meal way like handling climate justice or earth justice, we need to develop a holistic view of the total devastation done to the earth and the human civilization.

This paper tries to delve with the basic theoretical and philosophical issues involved with this total destruction of Nature. Nature consists of all planets in the space. In simple terms: the sun, moon, stars, the earth and the oceans with all forms of animate and inanimate life. The soil, the rocks, plants and animals are all parts of the earth.

The life develops with all the resources of Nature. This can be depicted very clearly in how a plant grows. It receives all the resources from the Atmosphere – like nitrogen and oxygen. The monsoonal rains provide a basic factor of life. i.e. water. This water seeps down to the earth. The microorganisms bring all nutrients and water to the roots of the plant. This is the humus soil. Its nutrients are absorbed by the sap in the hairy roots of the plant. This process taken up through the trunk of the plant to the leaves within the structure of the plant. The substance chlorophyll becomes activated by the solar energy and carbohydrate is produced. This is really the food production.

Scholars have emphasized that the components of this planetary system are not working independently from each other, rather each element of what we know as reality is closely interrelated to other elements. The ecological balance of the planet therefore is a balance within a very complex structure, integrating multiple and variable components in a perfect fit which has given origin to life on this planet. Only this complex system of interrelation and perfect

Page 56 of 119

equalization keeps this planet alive as whole. Any alteration of one of those elements directly affects everyone else and potentially endangers the survival of the whole system.

Actually, it is the Nature that produces food and not man. Humanity does only a supportive role. This whole process functioning within Nature is reflected naturally in the human mind. The mind really abstracts the whole process within Nature. The main characteristic of Nature as understood by the mind is its continuous flux. It is the continuous, unending motion. The Greek philosophers – Thales and later Heraclitus brought this changing situation to the fore. Aristotle has refined it by explaining further the inner dynamics of change motion we showed that it is only the form that changes and takes various appearances. But the matter remains the same throughout the whole process.

The thinking and the outlook of all early Greek philosophers because of their close proximity to the changes taking place in Nature has been more progressive and dialectical.

The oriental thinking fully absorbed this dialectical thinking which culminated in Buddhist Philosophy. Birth (Uthpatha) existence (Thithi), and death (Bhanga). The most radical Buddhist thinkers would like to adhere to Birth and Decay. These two aspects take place almost in union. In living always the dying process takes place.

In the creation story which is an old Mesopotamian Epic (Gilgamesh) in the 2nd Chapter of the Bible – man is depicted as one who nurtures the Earth. It is different from the 1 st Chapter, where man’s role is to “increase and multiply and “subdue” the Earth”.

We can draw conclusions from all these;

That the rights are not just restricted to man only as fundamental human rights.

But the rights are embedded in all life, animate and inanimate beings.

Therefore, ECO Justice deals with all rights.

We need to build a society and the earth-planet on the basis of ECO- Communitarian life or ECO-Socialism.

It is the regenerative capacity of the Earth and the whole creation that we have to maintain.

Therefore, we have to discard Industrial & Chemical Agriculture and we must adopt an Industrial Policy which is based on the regenerative capacity of Nature.

Page 57 of 119

CHAPTER 5: Sustainable Development

Towards Sustainable Development

Mariamma Sanu George (Nirmala), Kerala, India

We are in the early part of the 21st century, with a population estimated at 7.4 billion (as of August 2016) which is expected to reach 9.9 billion by 20501. The 31 percent of the world’s population follows Christianity, the world’s largest religion. We are on a planet with 71 percent of the earth’s surface area covered by water2. We are in a world where the disparities between the haves and have-nots are increasing day by day. We are in a world where 10.7 % of the world’s population lives on less than US$1.90 per day (2013 estimates) 3. A total of 1.6 billion people of the 101 countries are living in multidimensional poverty; of these 54% live in South Asia 4. We are in a world where the temperature is rising, rainfall becoming lesser or erratic, sea level rising, melting polar caps, extreme weather events and related catastrophe’s like floods, drought, cyclones, storms and other disasters. Post industrial revolution is an era of rapid population growth. We live in a world in which natural resources are tapped in an uncontrolled manner, there by leading to an uncertainty on the future of such prized natural resources. Are we responsible for this ecological crisis? What does the bible say of humanity's obligation to care for creation?

God created the heaven and earth, the sea and all the living beings5. God retains ownership of all His creation and is in absolute control. Psalm 24:1 says that “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it.” The earth was created for the benefit of mankind with the right to live, produce their own food and be self-reliant. In Genesis1:28 God blessed his creations by saying “be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it” and not to destroy it. “God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work and take care of it6”. Mankind was created in his own image to rule over the earth. So mankind is responsible to live in harmony with the environment and manage with justice the resources so that the future generations can benefit. Thereby, bringing in environmental sustainability and hence development.

1 http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2016/2016-world-population-data-sheet.aspx2 water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html 3 http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview4 http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Global-MPI-8-pager_10_15.pdf5Genesis 1; Psalm 146:6; Acts 14:15; Revelation 4:116Genesis 2:15

Page 58 of 119

Sustainability and sustainable development7 are terms widely used across the globe although it still lacks a uniform interpretation. The word sustainability has many meanings as maintain, support, endure and withstand. It commonly means ‘maintaining the world we live in’. It accounts for economic, social and environmental benefits. This refers to the three interlocking pillars. Therefore, if any one pillar is weak then the system as a whole is unsustainable. On the other hand, sustainable development is “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs8”.

But what does it mean by the needs of the present and the future? Take a minute and write down five most important needs that you have in your own life. Suppose if you thought of buying a car, how does it contribute to the three pillars? Economically and socially it will benefit your present need but what is the environmental consequence it will have? Multiply these needs for the family, society, country and the world. The earth has limited resources to meet the everyday needs of the rapidly increasing population.

SustainabilityThree interlocking pillars

SocialBenefits: Poverty

reduction; Improved equity

EconomicBenefits:

Transfer of skills & technology; Reduced cost

EnvironmentBenefits: Improved

energy & water efficiency; Reduced

GHGs

The basic principle of sustainable development is to act responsibly so that resources on the planet will be able to support many generations to come9. If this is so, our interventions in development has to consider not only the three pillars but also in a spiritual perspective which address the issues of ethics and moral values which are crucial for conserving nature, preventing over exploitation of natural resources so that they are available for the future generations and also mitigating adverse effects due to climate change. The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro proclaimed that “human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development”. Pope Francis has said “the urgent challenge to protect our common home includes a concern to bring the whole human family together to seek a sustainable and integral development”.

7Brundtland Commission in 1987, from the World Commission on Environment and Development’s, (the Brundtland Commission) report Our Common Future, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).

8United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development in 19879 http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm

Page 59 of 119

Different countries have different priorities in their development policies. Ideally many factors have to be considered to measure development like levels of poverty, health, education, employment, social cohesion, safety and security, internal and external conflicts, governance systems and many others. The fundamental question is whether mere economic growth measured in terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and similar indictors alone reflect development? Also what kind of development are we talking about? And whose development are we looking for? How do we decide whose needs should go first? How do we make that trade off?

The shift in the economic system from socialism to capitalism has had great effects on the lifestyle of the people in the world, changing the manner in which they relate with and use the environment’s resources given to us by the Creator. While the church across the globe has been working towards the development of mankind, upliftment of the poor and the downtrodden, what is our approach to development? How can we define development beyond materialistic development? In order to sustain the development achieved, is it not important to have such a development beyond materialistic development. Equity is the first step towards achieving such a development.

Is Equity Important for Achieving Sustainable Development?

Equity has to do with everyone having access to fair and equal treatment under the law, regardless of race, social class or gender.  The concept of equity can be applied to various spheres of life such as gender, environment, education etc. The ‘haves’ should not use more than their fair share of the earth’s limited resources.

The challenge of a growing population is the mere presence of so many people sharing limited resources which strains the environment. Many of the world’s population live in poor countries which are already strained by food insecurity; inadequate sanitation, water supply and housing; and an inability to meet the basic needs of the current population. A large proportion of these populations are supported through subsistence agriculture where everyone has the right to produce their own food and be self-reliant. When farm lands expand towards fragile lands in order to keep pace with the needs of a growing population in a region, it can lead to deforestation, erosion and desertification.

It is usually understood that “intergenerational” equity would be impossible to achieve in the absence of present-day social equity, if the economic activities of some people continue to jeopardize the well-being of other people living in other parts of the world. Imagine, for example, that emissions of greenhouse gases, generated mainly by highly industrialized countries, lead to global warming and flooding of certain low-lying islands—resulting in the displacement and impoverishment of entire island nations. Or when people in one region are poor and undernourished due to many prolonged factors while at the same time in another region the people are obese and lead a luxurious life.

Page 60 of 119

As mentioned earlier, sustainable development is not just about the present but about the future too. Natural resources available to us in this generation is a gift from our previous generations. “Sustainable” development could probably be otherwise called “equitable and balanced,” meaning that, in order for development to continue indefinitely, it should balance the interests of different groups of people. Major changes in policies will be needed to cope with the current high levels of consumption, and expected population growth. Development policies must widen people's options for earning a sustainable livelihood, particularly for resource-poor households and in areas under ecological stress.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are considered as the world's time-bound and quantified targets for addressing the issues of poverty, hunger, social and human development and many aspects of sustainable development including conservation of natural resources. How can Christians contribute to these development goals? Interestingly, many of the points we plan to discuss in this conference like sustainable agriculture, sustainable living, sustainable development and long-term actions for future generations, conservation of natural resources, prevention of environmental degradation and how can sustainable development help in sustaining food security find places in the list of development goals.

The Sustainable Development Goal to “End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture” (SDG2) recognizes the inter linkages among supporting sustainable agriculture, empowering small farmers, promoting gender equality, ending rural poverty, ensuring healthy lifestyles, tackling climate change, and other issues addressed within the set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals in the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

Food Security is the state of having reliable access to a sufficient quantity of affordable, nutritious food. Household food security exists when all members, at all times, have access to enough food for an active, healthy life.  Food insecurity, on the other hand, is a situation of "limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways"

Climate change, with its impacts on temperature, rainfall, humidity etc. affects us, and leads to adverse effects on agriculture. This in turn affects the people in multiple ways – directly by way of food insecurity and indirectly through it impacts on health, nutrition, employment and associated poverty. So hunger and poverty are not just about food alone and any action on tackling hunger and poverty needs to consider many factors which are all determinants of sustainable development.

Climate Change and Its Impacts

Since the beginning of Earth’s history, climate has varied and changed. But the intensity and impacts of these have increased and most of them are due to human interventions. Climate

Page 61 of 119

change refers to any significant change in the measures of climate lasting for an extended period of time. It includes major changes in temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns, among other effects, that occur over several decades or longer10.

Is it human intervention causing climate change or contributing to global warming? Climate changes prior to the Industrial Revolution can be explained by natural causes, such as changes in solar energy, volcanic eruptions, and natural changes in greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations. Recent climate changes, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone. According to the 4th Assessment report the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change11, there is greater than a 90 percent chance that human activity is causing the increase in Earth’s global average temperatures observed since the mid-20thcentury.

Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20th century. Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming12. The largest known contribution comes from the burning of fossil fuels, which releases carbon dioxide gas to the atmosphere. Deforestation also plays a significant role in climate change as it destroys the major sink (that which absorbs) for the carbon dioxide emission. The warming effect caused by the abundance of greenhouse gases13 is referred as global warming14. It is to be noted that climate change is not just about global warming but the latter is one of the impacts of climate change.

Major Consequences of Changing Climate

The major consequences of changing climate are;

Increased temperature and increased frequency and/ or duration of heat waves Increased heavy precipitation events Increased intensity and / or duration of drought Increased intense tropical cyclones Rise in sea level

These changes will have long lasting effects on agriculture, food security, health, nutrition, water availability and many other aspects of human development. It is also clear that the lives of the future generations are at stake.

Effects on Social Systems

10https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/ 11IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report12Goosee et al., 201013 The Greenhouse Effect is a natural process that warms the Earth, and, in fact, is quite necessary for our survival. Gases in the atmosphere, like water vapour (clouds), carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) act as a natural blanket by preventing the sun’s heat energy from radiating back into space. The natural greenhouse effect helps warm the Earth’s surface by as much as 33oC, and without it, our planet would be too cold for humans to survive.

14Goosee et al., 2010

Page 62 of 119

There are many direct and indirect social impacts of climate change. Some factors that cause climate change impact on social systems are given below:

a. Unequal Capacity for Adaptation: Globally, adaptive capacities of developing countries are much lower than that of developed countries. Even though developing countries did not significantly contribute to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, they will be at an even greater disadvantage when it comes to dealing with the effects of climate change. Developing countries already struggle to deal with high rates of poverty, income inequality, lack of infrastructure and less technological and financial resources, which will be exacerbated with climate change.

b. High vulnerability of women, children and elderly people: In rural areas it is often the responsibility of women and children to collect firewood and water; yet decreasing supplies is resulting in more work and less time for other tasks as they now often have to go further distances to find supplies. Children and the elderly are also more susceptible to the health concerns associated with climate change such as heat-related ailments from higher temperatures; malnourishment due to increased strain on food supplies/increased prices, and also disease that can be associated with increased flooding. In many countries women are already having difficulty in accessing climate resilient technology or crops, which are necessary for climate change adaptation. Furthermore, there are various psychological and physical impacts that have already been witnessed (in both men and women) due to increased pressure to provide for the family.

c. Communities will be forced to relocate: Many communities will be forced to move as they are exposed to rising sea levels, extreme drought that puts strain on resources, or even extreme rainfall that becomes the norm. Small island developing states (SIDS) are particularly vulnerable and are at the forefront of feeling the effects of climate change. At the beginning of 2014, Fiji’s first village to relocate moved 1 km further inland as a part of the country’s climate change program as seawater had already began to flood residents’ homes in the village of Vunidogoloa.

d. Poor people are highly vulnerable: Poverty and inequality get worse with climate change because disadvantaged groups do not have the resources to cope with effects such as extreme flooding or droughts that may displace them or change their way of life.

Thus addressing climate change becomes the crucial factor for ensuring sustainable development. As far as I understand, the church across the globe is yet to come out clearly on climate change, its potential impacts on the life on earth and how to address it. Pope Francis said “Religions can play an important role in protecting the environment and defending human rights in their countries, their communities and their schools”15.

Way Forward

15 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.pdf

Page 63 of 119

Today we are faced with many issues and problems related to managing the environment and natural resources and protecting the environment from degradation or damage by people. It is high time that this becomes part of our agenda for action. Fundamentally there are two ways of addressing them – mitigation and adaptation. As Christians, it is time that we define strategies for adaptation and mitigation so as to have overall development of the entire people of the earth without discrimination and inequality as well as about the wellbeing of the future generations for climate resilient sustainable development.

The beautiful rainbow is God’s sign and reminder of his covenant with Noah not to destroy life on earth again with a great flood. This covenant clearly includes plants and animals and every “living creature on earth16”. It shows God’s love and concern for all of his large and small works of creation and the concern for protecting and sustaining all living creatures. God expects his people to act as caretakers of nature who are ultimately responsible to God for their use and management of the environment. As caretakers, God expects us to manage the “environmental concerns” of our planet earth in the same way we manage our homes, our office and our church. As the Bible says“ true change starts from within a person’s heart, mind and spirit and works outward as reflected by attitudes and actions”.

References:

http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2016/2016-world-population-data-sheet.aspxwater.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overviewhttp://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htmhttp://www.climatechange-foodsecurity.org/science.htmlhttps://answersingenesis.org/search/?q=sustainable+development&start=10https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populationhttp://gifre.org/library/upload/volume/33-38-Environmental-vol-4-3-15-gjiss.pdfhttps://arcapologetics.org/culture/subdue-earth-bible-says-environment/www.circularecology.com/sustainability-and-sustainable-development.html http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.pdfhttp://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Global-MPI-8-pager_10_

16Gen. 9:9-16

Page 64 of 119

Sustainable Development, as an effort to save the nature, our world17

Rev. Rein Justin Gultom18

I. IntroductionI realized this particular topic was born when our institution (the Community Development Service of HKBP) in North Sumatera Indonesia dedicated the tenth of biogas, as renewable energy for the 500 students of theology high school and farmers in Indonesia.

This writing in that topic Sustainable Development comprises with, Introduction, a glimpse of Challenges of Globalizations that creates blessing and many bad impacts, what is the calling of the church in that challenge and what we have done to anticipate un-sustainable and what to do to achieve the goal of sustainable development.

a. Globalization, Development and Its ImpactsGlobalization19 is known as sophisticated era. In fact, all things have been ready for us. We understood, it is also a blessing for us and all the nations. The presence of globalization in the world, it creates no border between us anymore. All have been opened transparently. We thank God for that; it has made us easier to act and to serve.

In addition, whether we realize or not, globalization has also created many impacts (unsustainable) for the world and the nature, such as liberalization, privatization and deregulation, since the Green revolution20 to Globalization which is known as a free trade. Globalization players succeed to build some organizations such as World Trade Organization (WTO) and Multinational Corporations (MNCs). The new technology and the new high yielding varieties (HYVs), chemical pesticide and fertilizer were introduced to the whole world, especially to the farmers. They encouraged and influenced the developing countries and convinced them to implement this new technology and use chemical and pesticide to their field. Now what is going on? There are many bad impacts happen caused of the impact of globalization, I may say, the impact of unsustainable development as we can see below.

1. Social Economy and PovertyThe Economy can be drawn as a glass campaign21.: bigger at the top and smaller in down side. It means that the wealth of the world has dominated merely at the high class (capitalist) or richer people. 83% the world’s wealth has dominated and owned by 20% of world’s population, in addition just only 11% owned by 20% world’s population. More Ironic it is just only 60% the world’s population’s owned 6% wealth.

17This paper was presented at the meeting in Chiang Mai Thailand, 22 November 201618 The head of Community Development Service of HKBP 19 Gideon, Memahami Globalisasi Untuk Petani, Yayasan Duta awam solo, 2004, p1 20 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution, accessed on 30 Oct 2016 21.WCC: Aternative Gobaization Adressing People and Earth,, Jenewa 2006, 13

Page 65 of 119

According in Indonesia statistic data (BPS)22, on March 2015 amount 28, 59 million people (11, 22%) live in poverty. This condition show the increase of 0, 86 million people from September 2014 which is 27, 73 million people (10, 96%). The income of these people is only 2$ a day. It has made them not be able to fulfill their daily life for food, education cost, health and another cost. Many of them especially children become malnutrition, which eventually causes death. Mukhsilin mentioned that Indonesia has been known as an agrarian country, but ironically many farmers still lack of land, even though Indonesia has wide agricultural land which is 1,86 million km (21 million ha), unfortunately 80% of its farmer do not have land to cultivate in. There are only 4.2% farmer who own 0.5 ha agricultural field.

2. Unemployment and human quality Indonesia Statistic Data (BPS) 2015 shows the rates of the unemployment are still increase. It is around 7.560.000 peoples. If we cannot be solved out, we can imagine the rate of criminalization, thieve, road gang, teenagers adequacy, etc. On another hand, it is also happening the lowest of farmer’s quality index, we can imagine how can they cultivate their land as good as possible? It is around 44.27% of work force of Indonesia dominated by farmer who graduated from secondary school. Again if we say the rate of poverty still increase, or many peoples still left of behind and live under the poverty lines, it is caused, there is no access and capability as well23.

3. Nature collapse and culture and local wisdom almost lostBy implementing these policies to the agriculture field, I mean using chemical and pesticides to the farm without consideration, now our farmer felt suffering, I do not know in your place. But in reality, we found, that local resources include organic compost and pesticide that we can take from utilizing local resources, now is going to vanish. The Local wisdoms become lost. Our farmer’s culture and philosophy “Sinur na Pinahan Gabe na niula” (agricultural survive by survival livestock), which is healthier, profitable and sustainable, is vanished from our life.

On the other hand, we knew the function of the forest in our live. Tress release O2 is very important to our life. Forest provides income and organic compost resources. It is important to support the human life. Unfortunately, according in Indonesia Environmental Ministry24,, Indonesia (2009) has 109 million Hectare of forest, and it is the third biggest tropical rain forest in the world after Congo and Brazil. But ironically, many of irresponsible people decimating and burning that forest. 1970 was the biggest forest destruction that ever happened in Indonesia. In 1997-2000 forest missing is around 2, 8 million hectare, now only 28% of forest remaining. It is certainly caused by illegal logging, burning, mining, conversions and clearing away. Again these irresponsible actions, as an impact of unsustainable development, have created suffering to people life and other creations. Kill the living things in the forest itself. We still remember forest fire that happened in Sumatera newly, September 2015, has brought kinds of diseases such as URI (Upper Respiratory Tract infection), and many people dead because of that.

22.http://www.bps.go.id/brs/view/id/1158/, accessed on 21 July 201623.http://www.bps.go.id/brs/view/id/1158/, accessed on 21 July 201624. Baca Kerusakan Lingkungan: Peran dan Tanggung Jawab Gereja, Zaimah Adnan, UEM Asia Regional Office Medan, 2011

Page 66 of 119

4. Taking side to the capitalists and industrialist rather than poor people?In another hand, maybe it is not wrong if I say, still many government policies are taking side to the industries or the capitalist, high class rather than the community (not pro poor). Nowadays the Foreign debt of our government is still increasing; import policies which neglect the real sector are still continuous. The developing countries still focus on the big cities rather than villages. Ironically, allocation budget is bigger to the government worker rather than community. Of course that budget which still doesn't take side to the community will not lead the people to prosperity, and unsustainable.

Let me describe you one for examples. In this example, that was happen 1 year ago (2015), in my place, we can see how the government more takes side to the factory rather than to the local people. The establishment one of factory in Toba North Sumatera Indonesia has destroyed the nature, cleared away the forest, especially benzoic trees that provides resources to the people especially farmers, who settle in that places. When the local people refused it and defend their right, somehow the factory collaborate with government deployed soldiers and polices to cleanse the affecting area, in other word they used violence to go after residence and catch them all who opposed its policies and put them into jail. When the capitalist need more money, and advantage, when they found challenges to opposed them, they plays the end justify the means soon as possible. They have a heart to oppress and kill, ironically they do not care, even though other people are starving, hunger and suffering.

II. Calling to Save The World God, He is the only one who create the world and all living things. He creates the world with Good (Gen 1:31). He asked the human to lead the nature and all living things (Gen 1:27), but to be careful, not to be a king that is tortured cruelly, but live together with them, work the earth and take care of it. Shape the world to enhance life at the same time. It is the Christian duty as written on Bible in Genesis 1, 27, 31 and 2:15. This Christian duty is parallel to the model of sustainable development25: creating happiness and new life together, as what Isaiah 11:6 and 65:25 said: “the wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw, like the bullock, and the dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt, nor destroy in my entire holy mountain” will be reality in the entire world.

From this reflection, we can see that the human being is a part of the world (nature). It is certainly the life based on nature. Killing the nature is same as doing suicide to the human life. Threaten the world means threaten human life too. The world feeds the human being and living things, in turn the human being feeds the world. For those reasons, appreciating the live of all creation is strongly needed and necessary. Our life depends on the world, therefore we must hand in hand to save, maintain, sustain and take care, and making harmony to this world. Kim Yong Bock26 stated, that our world is “Oikos”, it means house. The world is our house. How we live in our own house? We live together in the same house, like in a ship (the symbol of Oikumene), which is moving on the stormy seas. Frankly we can say, we will be able to across this stormy seas, if no one to leak our boat (ship). If anyone leaks the ship or house, all of us will wash away by the stream. It is a parallel meaning, if the human being destroys the world, the

25 Peace With The Earth, UEM, Germany 2012, p.106 26 The mission of Jesus is love of All Living Beings for Fullness of life, in Pelay a n yan Memperlengkapi jemaat, PGI 2009, p.17

Page 67 of 119

ecology, so our life cannot be survived. On other side, if all of us save our home, ecology and world, so the goal, we can achieve together, happiness be in oursActually the purpose of the sustainable development is to create the happiness between all creations. To achieve this goal, all stake holders should be plays significant role, in appreciating the life one to another. According to Permen,27 remembering the significant of the Sustainable Development, in making it reality, we have to reconsider 3 reasons, such as moral, environmental and economic reasons. Moral reason means; having to think sustainability of natural resources for the current and future generation. For that, do not destroy or to vanish biodiversity instead of keeping and taking care it for the current and next generation, so that, the current and next generation are able to meet their access and able to fulfill their needs. The second is environmental reason, due to the significance of biodiversity for the human life, so that the Economy activities run without threat the life of all creation, but give them chance and space to live. The third is economy reason; prepare intergenerational welfare maximization for current and future generation.

III. Community Development HKBP , Promote Sustainable Development and its usefulIndeed, the churches in Indonesia under the year of 1975, it was still reluctant to respect to other. Churches are a little bit slow to respond such kinds of various problems in its surroundings. , in the year 1975, when the Church conference took place at Nommensen University Pematang Siantar Indonesia, Churches decides, that they should be engaged in development problems in the word and its surrounding. In 1989, our institution called the Community Development Services, it started to pay attention to the impacts of development and the human being needs.

What this organization has done concern to sustainable development to its surrounding? Even though it done a little bit programs to response such kinds of problems to its surrounding, but i believe these programs were useful to inspire and create sustainable development. And it useful to response the impacts of globalization that were happen in the world and in their surroundings. Some kinds of those programs that it has done to continuo sustainable development to save the nature and the human being, as we can see below

01. Biogas, Organic fertilizer, renewable energy, increase economy

As we said above, the development that we observe nowadays at our surrounding, it has created bad impacts to the nature and the peoples also. Global warming, it is happen everywhere, fossil energy almost comes to finish. Cultures and autonomous economy come to vanish, and our world almost collapses. The poverty rate increase as we mentioned above. Even the Small activities concern to sustainable development that we did, i thought it was also important to save our nature, world and all creation. For these reasons, our institution has tried to optimalize livestock dung (manual) as resources of organic compost, renewal energy, that we can use to fertile the soil, to cook, and to increase income or minimize its budget. 10 Biogas has been built in 4 districts especially in isolated area such as Simalungun, Barus, toba Samosir regency and Siantar municipality. Besides a place for lesson learn and promotion about sustainable development, now the people has able to feel the useful of this biogas. I thought these activities were a part of sustainable development.

02. Livestock donations, improving economic, increase nutrition

27 https://anshor83.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/pembangunan-berkelanjutan-kebijakan-implementasi-dan-tantangannya-di-indonesia, Accessed on 29 Nop 2016

Page 68 of 119

The unsustainable development as we said has created devastation, dryness to the nature, not only those but also bring bad impact such as poverty, malnutrition especially for the children. For tackling these problems, to provide organic compost and renewable energy resources and improving economic, providing nutrition, meat for the people, that’s why my institutions also take part in handling that impact of unsustainable development by provide livestock donations, such as piglet, goad, cows and fish.

03. Setting organic integrated farming, for promoting sustainable development

There are 3 organic integrated farming fields, it is about 2 ha, and we have set in 3 regions. Organic fields which using local seed, organic fertilizer and pesticide. From the farmers analyze the cost of organic integrated farming cheaper than conventional one, its production nicer than conventional one. When our farmers start for cultivating their field, they gathered to provide organic compost that utilizing from the local resources. By that way, they minimize to buy resources from outside. Once again, even though these programs are small one, but these activities can be a representative of sustainable development, to keep and sustain the nature. Those fields we realize as a place for promoting and lesson learn for the peoples. 4 times has already harvested in these places, and the farmer can be feltt the useful of these programs.

04. Building awareness, and harmony with nature For building awareness and making harmony with the nature, in order capable of carrying out and changing paradigm and its value for nature and all creations, that is why our biro did Field farmer Scholl and send the farmers to the successful organization in organic farming.

a. HKBP Field Farmer SchoolCapacity and awareness building of the people, especially to the farmers, unwillingly these should be improved, if not people will be left behind and, in turn they will be disappear on the surface of this world. Capabilityies they need to come out from their difficulties and suffering, our institution started on year 2008, established Field farmer school. This school is especially for those people who are interest to sustainable development one, located in Tigadolok regency collaborated with LCA at the time. Now that building moved to Pematang siantahur Jl Haji Ulakma Sinaga, Pematang siantar, and it has trained sustainable agriculture, which is healthier, profitable, and sustainable to the 1000 peoples. We believe by these ways the people have competencies and capacities to come out of its problem, and change their paradigms to achieve prosperity

b. Orientation and comparing study to KoreaBesides building field farmer school, we send the people especially farmers to go outside such for orientation and comparing study. 10 peoples sent PCK (Presbyterian Church of Korea collaborated with LGA (Life Giving Agriculture) Korea, to learn organic matters.

05. Organic production marketingBureau of Community Development pushed our church to build marketing productions for their congregations. Marketing which is provided by the church, will be a bridge to market villager product to the town. We establish also market in two places in the village and in the town. The meaning of this market, it is not only to get huge profit but also the way to promoting sustainable development through the Church.

06. Provide capital to extend small and medium enterprises Building the economy autonomy is an important effort to minimize poverty rate in our places. Building Credit Union, and encourage the peoples to be member of CU, to save money for creating capital to support their small and medium enterprises, it is very significant role. CU as a place to provide loan for them, now our cu still has 3000 members. For me this is also the way to create the autonomy economy

Page 69 of 119

and minimize poverty rate. From the evaluation that we have done, people are able to improve their economic, such as agriculture, husbandry, etc.

IV. How Our Togetherness for the Next to save Our World? What to doMaintaining, support, endure the world (nature) that we live in, so it can meet the needs of current and future generation. That is the Purpose of the sustainable development. The problem is, how and what we can do? So the Development creates the happiness for all creations? To achieve this goal unwillingly all stake holders should be plays significant role, in appreciating the life one to another.

Hanz Ulrich28. In his writing: The New St Gallen Management stated that the “Stake holder” are plays important role to archive Sustainable Development. The stake holder such as government, economist, entrepreneurial, grass root and marginalize people, theologian, economist, politician, etc., unwillingly they should get together to discus and hand in hand to create the goal of sustainable development to be success. In addition the stake holder in 3 contexts such as micro, mezzo, and macro context, their role cannot be neglected; the people in micro contexts should be strengthened. Build their awareness and spirituality, so they will be capable of carrying out their God,s calling to the nature. In addition the task of Reduce, reuse and recycle, should be create to be be their own culture, value and style of life.

On the other hand, in the Mezzo context: we have to strengthen their capacity, competencies also. The value and spirituality of its institution, such as church (worker), theologian, politician, etc., should be strength against the bad impact of development, so they will be capable of carrying out their god job, to criticize the government, economy policies that cannot take a side to the social development, to the nature and ecology. Convince them to plays prophet sound, hand in hand with government in empowering the people, even in economy community, organic and sustainable agriculture

In macro context According to Emil Salim, there are no serious discussion between businessmen, people and government, that is why the purpose of sustainable development cannot be achieved and implemented in this world29 For that reason, government should remember it’s task: to provide prosperity for their population. Government should protect the human right, the nation, people and its environment from kinds of threats. Government should re-think their policies again, whether it is pro poor or not, pro people, industries and the capitalist or not. To remind the entrepreneurs, business man/woman not to be selfish, greed and just think the advantage (benefit) but consider with the people and the nature. And urge the business man/woman take responsible in Corporate Social Responsibility and environmental, as a way to pay attention to the people and protection the environment,

V. Closing

28 Baca : Johannes Ruegg-Sturm, opcit, hl. 13-1729.https://anshor83.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/pembangunan-berkelanjutan-kebijakan-implementasi-dan-tantangannya-di-indonesia, Accessed on 29 Nov 2016

Page 70 of 119

The last but not least, we me say together we can do more. Together we can change everything. But before that let us come from our home, as an individual, ands institution, let us prepare our self, our member and our institution in awareness, capacities and competencies, let us build our community and go hand in hand with all of our stake holder, to implement our prophet voice, to appreciate our local wisdom, culture and create the justice, peace and integrity of creation in our world. By togetherness we can criticize the bad policies that destroy the nature and made the people suffering. Let us build our Asian Community to protect the world, to create prosperity and making harmony with the nature, our world. By then the goal of Sustainable development, to prepare needs for now and next generation and prosperity will be reality. Let make our dream be a reality.

Page 71 of 119

Arable Area Management with the King’s Philosophy and Local Intellect

The Social Development and Service Unite (SDSU), The Church of Christ in Thailand

Page 72 of 119

Page 73 of 119

Page 74 of 119

Page 75 of 119

Page 76 of 119

Page 77 of 119

CHAPTER 6: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

Food Security (Safety) in Korea

Rev. Kyeong Ho Han

Opening Word

All living things are eat food, digest and metabolize it, get the energy for activity and get out it from body as excrement (dung) and urine. Human also eat the food 2-3times in a day. We cannot live without food. Food is indispensable for survival. And the energy is needed also for our life. While the food is absolute for life, the energy is not indispensable, without it may be inconvenient

In the past the focus of food problem was related with productivity (quantity). With the progressing of farming technology (chemicals, machinery, etc.) agricultural productivity increase and the importance of food security (quality) became closed up. Of course this is not common for all countries. I tell you the tendency and stream of the attitude of human as the change of food situation. The problems of starvation and poverty are serious and must be solved. Simultaneously the problem of food security also must be dealt as an important social issue.

The safety of food is so important that nobody can deny it. We cannot keep the health of body without the safety of food. Nowadays all peoples are disclosed for food contamination. So we Christians must be concern about that problem. What is the reason of food contamination? Who are producing and making those food? Why they doing it? What is the social mechanism of it? What diseases and damages will be happen in the future? We are to know of it and effort to solve the problem. I think about this problem through Korean situation.

1. The Historical background and process of food contamination in Korea

1) Chemical farming and food contamination

The problem of food contamination is closely related with the policy of economic development by Korean government. The military government pushed strongly the policy of industrialization from 1962 year. Agricultural policy was influenced by that. The main focus was increasing the productivity of main food, the rice. At that time most of farmers were peasants, had small farming area, so starvation was the most serious problem to be solved. Especially there was little food at farmers' home during spring (March, April and May) before harvesting barely in June. There are four seasons in Korea. Farming is impossible during winter (December, January, and February). Many farmers had no rice and other foods in winter. They borrowed rice from landowner and repaid double in autumn.

Page 78 of 119

The government established factories producing chemical fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide. Farmers bought them to use. The chemical methods were spread rapidly over the country. The productivity of rice was gradually increased. At last the self-sufficiency ratio of rice became over 100%. It was a great historical event. Farmers got out of starvation.

In those times (1960s) green revolution were driven in most of Asian countries by their governments. The green revolution was planned and supported by America (esp. foundation of Rockefeller). IRRI (International Rice Research Institute) which was founded by Rockefeller made a important role at that time. Rockefeller was also a man of petrochemical industry. Then the chemicals for agriculture were produced by petrochemical factories. Asian countries bought the technology or chemicals directly from them.

The rapid process of industrialization made many farmers to leave the land and move to city. With farmers’ leaving the land the numbers of farmers were gradually decreased. Government filled the lack of farming labor with supplying the machines. So chemical and machinery farming became the main stream in agriculture. The rice field was arranged for mechanization all over the country. The curved line of field became straight.

But the problems of chemical farming were appeared gradually. The chemicals made increase the agricultural productivity to any level. But it was limited. The productivity of agriculture is different from industry. There is a law of diminishing returns in agriculture. It is a characteristic of it. The soil became acidic and decreased in production. At last the contamination and danger of agro-products by chemicals were closed up socially. Peoples became know that chemicals are harmful to farmers, consumers, soil and crops all. Especially the residue components of pesticides and chemical fertilizer were known very harmful to human health. Food security became important social issue. Under this situation Right Farming Movement was initiated by producers (Christian farmers) in 1976 and life-giving co-operatives movement by consumers was begun in 1985. This is the first response of people to food security in korea. Peoples knew the food contamination occurred by chemical farming.

2) Import of foreign agricultural products and food contamination

Korea was a self-sufficient country in most of foods. But with the diminishing of farmers, decrease of agricultural products and activation of international trade, foreign agricultural products were imported from the middle of 1980s. Year by year the amount of foreign products increased rapidly, especially after Uruguay Round negotiation in 1992. The price of the domestic was more expensive than that of foreign products. The farming condition of Korean farmers became worse than before. The basis of producing corn, wheat, soybean, and cotton collapsed. At last, the government imported beef and rice which were very important for farmers' life. All agro-products are imported now.

Are foreign products safe? The security problem of foreign products was initiated by NGO and mass communications reported and issued it. Ago-products are living things. It is not like industrial products. It became easily corrupt for longtime of transportation. So it was treated by special method, for example by radioactive, fumigation, smoking, pesticide, etc. America permits the post-harvest application in case of exporting products. Especially wheat was treated with chemical smoking. It was told bananas were dipped in chemical water for one day. Peoples became know that the food table is not safe. Especially women thought of that problem seriously.

Page 79 of 119

The movement of protecting the domestic agriculture was arisen and eating not the foreign foods for the health of people spontaneously. The movement of eating the domestic agro-product was begun. Many people thought that the domestic is safer than the foreign. They thought also body and soil are not two but one. Now many Korean peoples prefer to domestic agro-products. Many Korean restaurants inform of guests that they use only the domestic food materials.

With the increasing of foreign products the problem of food security became serious and the self-sufficiency ratio of food was decreased. Rice 86,1%, barley 17.3%, soybean 10.3%, corn 0.9%, wheat 0.7%, total 23.6%(2013 by government). As the sovereignty of food become low, the sovereignty of nation will become weak. The life of Korean peoples depends upon foreign foods. It is dangerous. If it were accidents of war, drought, flood, earthquake or climate change happened, how and where we get the foods?

3) Import of GM-crops and food contamination

With establishing the WTO regime, the trade area of agro-products was spread all over the world. The barrier of trade before WTO was disappeared. The power and influence of transnational corporation became great. They monopolize the seeds and produce chemicals set to seeds. Monsanto for example produced GM-soybean seed named 'Round Up Ready' (herbicide-resistant soybean) and produce herbicide 'round up' at the same time. Round Up Ready is not killed by Round Up, while other weeds are killed. Farmers must buy seed and herbicide together. Monsanto have strong wills to dominate the seed and agro-market on the global level.

From 1996 year GM-crops were produced commercially, traded globally and sold in market. The first nation of producing GM-crops is America followed by Brazil, Argentine, Canada, China, India. The GM-crops area became wide and wide, many kinds of GM-seeds were produced. The main crops are soybean, corn, cotton, canola etc.

< Area of GM crops in America>

crops total area (A) GMO area (B) Ratio (B/A)

corn 39 34.3 88%

soybean 30.8 28.6 93%

cotton 5.1 4.8 94%

sugar beet 0.5 0.485 97%

canola 0.66 0.61 93%

Unit: million ha

Page 80 of 119

Korea is the first importing nation of GM-foods, the second nation in GM-crops import in the world. Korea imported GM-crops 10,240,000 ton in 2015(2.36billion dollar), among them GM-foods occupy 2,145,000 ton (21%). Most of GM-crops (especially GM-corn) are fed for livestock. The main imported GM-products are soybean, corn, cotton, canola, sugar cane, potato, alfalfa etc.

3. GMO, What are the problems of it

The approvers of GMO assert that GMO is not harmful for people; it is the solution of starvation, decrease the amount of chemicals (pesticides, insecticides, herbicide etc.) and labor of farmers and cure many diseases through bio-pharming. It may be right in a part. But many peoples doubt of that assertion and are anxious about GMO. What are the problems of GMO?

1) Harmful for human health

The pro-GMO told the GMO is substantial equivalent with non-GMO in the shape, taste and nutrition. GM corporations say that the GM-food is safe according to their experiments. But we do not trust in their reports. They used small rats for experiments and the duration of experiments are very short (90 days). Until now the experiment has not been practiced to human body. It is impossible and takes long times in human experiment. If human eat GM-foods continuously in daily life, when will the abnormal expressions be showed? What will happen? GMO is not equivalent essentially non-GMO. Several examples below are the good cases that GMO is not safe.

<Example 1> by Dr. Arpad Pusztai in Scotland

This experiment was practiced in 1997 by Dr. Pusztai in Rowett Research institute and it is the first as an independent case. The aim of this experiment was in the inspection of safety of insect-resistant potato (GM-potato). He experiment with small rats for 110days. He divided the rats into three groups, non-GMO potato, general insecticide potato, GM-potato. He discovered that the rats fed by GM-potato were small in body, more light in weight, especially the size of liver and heart was small and had weak immune system. The small capacity of brain was shocking. After he informed of that results to peoples through TV, he was fired by government

<Example 2> by Dr. Seralini in France

This experiment was practiced in 2013 at the University of Caen in France. The duration of it was long for 2 years. He fed the rat with GM-corn (herbicide-resistant produced by Monsanto). The rats fed by GM-corn died early two or three times compared with rats fed by non-GM-corn. More tumors were discovered, serious problems happened in liver, kidney, pituitary gland, especially many diseases occurred because of endocrine disturbance.

<Example 3> by Dr. Yermakova in Russia

The rats of this experiment were fed by GM-soybean. The results are as follows. The rats brought forth their young rats. Then about half of the young rats (55.6%) were died in three weeks. Dr. Yermakova fed the rats by GM-soybean before 2 weeks of pregnancy. He gave it during suckling. 36% of young rats were low weight and half were died. 9% were died in general soybean group, 6.8% were died in group

Page 81 of 119

which gave not any soybean. He concluded that GM-soybean is harmful for both mother rats and young rats

<Example 4> by farmer Gottfried Glockner in Deutschland

The dairy farmer Glockner lived at Hessen in north region of Germany plants GM corn (named Bt-corn produced by Syngenta) in 1997. He sowed the seed at small area at first year, 5 ha in twice year, all field (10 ha) in third year. No problems happened for three years. He mixed non-GM with GM corn. Then he fed to cattle with only GM-corn to increase milk production. After that problems happened. Cattles evacuated white dungs and diarrhea. The blood got out during milking at the same time. 5 calves were died after three months. The result of research was that the Bt-corn contained poisonous matter. But the Syngenta answered that he did not discover any poison by his experiment and was not responsible for that accident.

Besides those examples many experiments and events related to GMO have been reported through masscom. The effect of GM-food in human body begins to appear after 20 years. The GM-food was commercialized in 1996. It is 2016 year now.

2) Disturbing the ecosystem

The gene of GM-crops may disturb the ecosystem through fertilization. The pollen of GM-crops may be scattered by wind to near place. Sometimes the GM-seeds are dropped to side the road and other place during transportation by truck or train. GM-corn had grown around the factory of feed in Korea.

Herbicide-resistant GMO make super-weeds appear and insecticide-resistant GMO make super-insect appear. The glyphosate of 'round up'(herbicide) is the most harmful component. Nobody know what results will be happened in the ecosystem by GM-crops. It will take long times till human aware of the result. It is terrible. Maybe all living things will be damaged and suffered by greatly changed environment in the future.

3) Banishing small farmers from their own land

GM-crops need great land for farming. Countries which cultivate many GM-crops i.e. America, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, China, India have great and wide field. As GM-crops be spread more and more area as possible, the small farmers are banished from their own land. The GM-corporations and rich farmers occupy the small farmers' land. What will be happen? Farming will be dominated by them. Finally foods also will be at their hand. It is terrible situation

The main aim of GM corporation is not to keep safety of crops but to get more money. They only concern about to earn the money and dominate the global food market. They look at the crops only as money or goods not as living things. The soil will be acidic to be dead, life-killing agriculture will damage to the human health and other living things.

4) GMO is not the solution of starvation

The population of human gradually increases now. The increasing of population is dependent upon the increasing of foods. Nowadays many people suffer from shortage of foods and starve to death. It is duty of all nations to solve the problem of starvation. There will be several methods to approach it. But GMO

Page 82 of 119

is not. For example Malawi in Africa accepted the support of GM- food. After eating the GM-food, disease of intestine greatly increased in Malawi. So, several African countries refused the support of GM-foods.

The cause of poverty and starvation is not originated from the lack of quantity of foods but from the bad politics (dictatorship, etc.) and wrong distribution system of foods. We must to solve that problem at first.

5) Destruction of order of God's creation

All species have instinct to reproduce themselves. It can be possible in same species. It is impossible between other species. There is a wall not to go over between species. It is a result from long process of evolution. It is also order of creation by God. But biotechnology had broken that order. Biotechnologist can move and take the gene into other species. botanic gene into animal gene, gene of bacteria into vegetable each other. Border or wall was broken between species. Human invades into God's area, take God's place, and seems to become creator. He manipulates the order of creation at his will. What do we think about it?

4. The political and economic background of GMO

The natural science had progressed greatly during 20 century. Especially the progress of physics and biology is remarkable. After the discovery of double helix of DNA by the biologist Watson and Crick, life phenomena were explained in the level of molecule.

The main country of GMO production is of course America. In America Enterpriser and politicians were concerned of the progress of biology. Rockefeller is the first man. Henry Kissinger the Secretary of State during Nixon government said "Occupy the oil, then can dominate the other country. Occupy the foods, then can dominate the world people." Oil and food are indispensible for human life.

GMO project has been developed with the aim of taking the political hegemony to govern continuously the world by America. The foundation of Rockefeller had strong power of influence not only in America but also in the world. It spread its power over several parts, education, medical service, foreign policy of government and biotechnology.

For 1960 -1970s Green Revolution was practiced in Asia. It was supported by the foundation of Rockefeller. It established IRRI (International Rice Research Institute, 1961) in Philippine to back up the green revolution. Main point of green revolution was increasing the food. It was accomplished by using chemicals which was produced by Rockefeller corporations.

After the UR (Uruguay Round of Multinational Trade Negotiation), WTO (World Trade Organization) regime started. The trade of agricultural products became free over the nations. The power of huge GM corporations became stronger. They monopolized the seeds with applying the IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). They dominate the global market of agricultural products and foods.

Nowadays 4 corporations occupy and dominate the GM-seeds, agro-chemical market in the world. The first is Monsanto. The head office is located at Saint Louis city in State of Missouri. It is a leading corporation of GM-seed and first corporation which produce the glyphosate (very harmful component of herbicide). It had produced Agent Orange (making the leaves of tree dry to death) during the war between

Page 83 of 119

America and Vietnam. The branch in Korea now is engaged in business. Second is Pioneer Hi-bred International. The head office of it is at the Johnstown city in the State of Iowa. The Dupont took over it in 1999 year and became complex corporation of seed and chemicals. Now it is engaged in business in 70 countries. Third is Dow Agro-Sciences at Indianapolis city in the State of Indiana. Dow Chemical is the mother company of it. It is engaged in business in 168 countries. It made the napalm bomb during Vietnam War. The fourth is Syngenta which the head office is at Basel city in Switzerland. But England has the hegemony of it. Syngenta-Korea is engaged in business in Korea. America (3) and England (1) dominate the market of seeds(including GM-seed) and chemicals over the world. The GM industry is international huge project of them.

At present time the transnational corporations (including above 4) have patent rights of seeds and rob of the right of self seed gathering of small farmers in other countries especially in the third world. If a country accepts the GM-seeds the system of farming used to be changed. For example America invaded Iraq in 2003 year. Through the war America grasped the oil industry and spread the GM-seeds in Iraq.

In the near future America and GM corporations will hold the food market of the world and reorganize the system of world agriculture at their will. It will bring about dangerous situation.

Korea follows this stream. Korea is the first nation which imports GM-foods. Moreover Korea turns the policy from GM importing nation to producing nation. The government (the organization of rural development) began to plant the GM-rice at the spring and harvest at October in this year. They practice the project in secret we have no information and afraid of that process.

5. the policy and treatment of Korean government for GM food

Most of peoples (86.4%, by question investigation) think that the labeling of GM-food must be executive and enforced. In spite of the law there are many holes for corporations to run away. For example, most of GMO is processed to oil and starch etc. In this process the components of GMO, protein and DNA are disappeared. In case of this no labeling is permitted. And if the ratio of GM material is out of fifth among raw materials no labeling is also permitted.

The guidelines by the Ministry of Food and Drugs Safety are as below.

(1) Labeling on duty

① Agro-products: GM-products (soybean, corn, cotton, canola, sugar beet) which are investigated for safety. sprouting vegetables.

② Processed foods: foods made of GMO which is in fifth order. Food additives which contain the components of GMO

(2) Labeling off duty

① Agro-products: Non-GM-products with certificates for transportation by government. If GMO is contained 3% below, it is free from labeling

Page 84 of 119

② Processed foods: foods made of non-GMO materials with certificates for transportation by government. Even If it uses GM-materials, the amount of it is not within fifth order and the components of GM (protein, DNA, etc.) never be discovered in final products.

In recent years the problem of food contamination is issued and closed up in Korean society. It makes many peoples perceive the danger of GM-food. The national assembly has revised the law of labeling GM food at last autumn. The revised law make GM-food be labeled at any case (used as main materials or side materials). And it made the ratio of non-intentional mixed low from 3% to 0.9%.

6. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

As the trade of GMO world-widely increases, there needs to be negotiation between countries, because harmful accidents may occur in other country. So agreement was made at Cartagena in Colombia in 2000 year. It is an international agreement which control the trans-boundary movement of GMO and protection from adverse effect by modern biotechnology. It was adopted with a subsidiary protocol of Convention of Biodiversity. The Conference of the Parties is held in every two years. Korea joined it in 2004 year and sent an act of ratification to executive office to become 143th Party. But the main exporting countries of GMO e.g. America, Canada, etc. did not join it.

In Korea the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy is mainly responsible for that affairs and it established Korea Biosafety Clearing House and enacted and proclaimed the law of controlling trans-boundary movement of GMO. In 2014 it was held at Pyengchang in Korea (MOP7). Participants in convention dealt with agenda investigating harmfulness before transportation, safe dealing on transportation, packaging and discrimination from others, socio-economic factors for determining the import

7. Anti-GMO movement in Korea

Seven GM-crops, soybean, corn, cotton, canola, sugar beet, potato, alfalfa and 92 kinds of the processed were imported to Korea in 2014. Korea imported 7,840,000 ton (1,910,000 ton for food, 5,930,000 ton for animal feed) in 2012. 8,880,000 ton in 2013, 8,970,000 ton in 2014 and 10,240,000 ton in 2015. The amount of import has increased gradually year by year. Corn is the main crop among them. 98% of corn is used for feeding animals. As the increasing of GM products in Korea, many Koreans became know the problems of GMO. They worried about that. The NGO initiated many question strongly.

1) The organizing the civil solidarity for Anti-GM food

This organization was made in 2000 year by civilians awakened. They pointed out the harmfulness of GMO, claim to stop import GMO and demand labeling system. They informed peoples of the danger of GMO. The point of their insistences as follows.

① GM food should not be on the food table because the harmfulness of it is not yet known to peoples.

② There will be possibility to disturbing the ecosystem

③ The organic farming will be impossible because of unpredictable reproduction of GM-crops

Page 85 of 119

④ The influencing power of transnational enterprises will be more enforced. They will control the agriculture system of the world at their will. They will make health of consumers bad and the life of farmers hard.

⑤ Life is the most important value. So It is anti-life action to subordinate the life to money (capital). We cannot accept it.

They demanded several things to Korean government.

① Extend the kinds and scope of GM-foods which belong to labeling system. Include all kinds of GM-foods which is possible to contain GM-components (protein, DNA etc).

② Establish the social examine system to trace the process from import(material) to final product(processed)

③ Establish the independent system of acting integrated (total) valuation about harmfulness to human health, influence to ecosystem, socio-economic and ethical influences.

④ Open the information of GMO to peoples transparently

⑤ Stop the GMO developing policy with much budget input.

But as the time passed the amount of import increased and the influence of transnational corporations became enforced. The food table is now occupied by GMOs. Peoples eat the animal products (meat, egg, milk, etc.) fed by GM-corn and eat oils(GM-canola, soybean, corn, etc.), bread, noodle (GM-wheat), tobu (GM-soybean) processed by GM-crops in every day. Besides it processed products are so various that anyone cannot distinguish them from non-GMO. Maybe the government and civil organizations may not control the spread of GMO. The GM seeds are not dealt strictly during transportation and in factories. It was reported that GM-crops grow on the side road or around the factory. GM flower pollen is spread by wind widely. The provisions of government for GMO are very important and urgent.

2) Korean Christians' Solidarity against GMO

The Korean Christian LGA Forum discussed about GMO problems at the steering meeting May in 2015 and came to an agreement to making Christian organization against GMO. We proposed it to other Christian NGOs including consumers' co-operatives. They agreed with our proposal. After several meeting we established with them the organization named Life-giving Solidarity of Korean Christians for Exo-GMO (Exodus from GMO) October in 2015. Above all the announcement and education for Christians are urgent. Most of churches do not know about GMO. Korean Christians are concern about spiritual thing not about the flesh. So we have to explain and persuade them with the base of Bible and theology. Making their consciousness turn from ignorance is the most important thing. We have plans to carry out them. Now the 'Korea Church Environment Movement Solidarity' has a central role for activity. Last 3th day in November we had a seminar for whole labeling system of GMO. In December we will have a steering meeting for the plan of next year.

Page 86 of 119

Closing word

GM-seeds, GM-crops and GM-foods bring about the several serious problems against human health, disturbing ecosystem, narrowing the diversity of species and banishing small farmers from their own land to destroy the agricultural system of country. Biotechnologists create new organism by genetic modifying technology. They break down the wall between species. At last they invade the area of creation order of God.

Why we eat the GM-foods. Do we want to eat them? Do Farmers want to produce them? No! We all do not want! Then who want? It is just the man who earns the money and wants to take political hegemony in the world by GMO. Some transnational corporations and political and economic leaders mainly in America have made today's situation intentionally for long times. Greed of them leads all living things to destruction. Beautiful globe God create become dead gradually.

What do we do? We are Christians. What does God want us to do? We must think deeply and seriously. GMO is like nuclear materials. They are modern fruits of Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. The fruits seem to be good for foods and pleasant to the eyes. It is very strong temptation for human. Adam and Eve ate the fruits and were expelled from Eden by God. It is the beginning of tragedy of human life. The GMO and Nuclear Materials are also strong temptation for us. But if we choose them for our convenience and economical profits, we may be driven out from the globe. We must be awaken and act for healthy, harmonious and peaceful life in the globe and for the globe.

Page 87 of 119

Is Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) a Modern Miracle of Food Production or an Art of Life

Christopher Rajkumar

Milieu:Agriculture is the foundation civilizations. The survival of human kind in large numbers is not possible without a productive agriculture. Agriculture is a way of life. The first and foremost occupation of human origin is agriculture. The quest for food by the early human race began with gathering and hunting and later ended in tilling and cultivating. Agriculture became an art and later became the part of human life. India is one of the world’s most fertile areas, with vast range of agricultural resources. The oldest agriculture so far demonstrated archeologically in India is that of Harappa Civilization, beginning in appropriately 2500 BCE.

The origins of agriculture in the world scenario are obscure. The excavated evidences around the globe exhibit that the farming system with diverse crops and livestock are well established. The agricultural practices differ from land to land and crops as well. Those are based on the type of soil, season, monsoon, climate, and availability of assured irrigation. Gradually the experiences of centuries in the field of agriculture have taught the generation the art of agriculture.

The yields from agriculture were modest, but stable until about four decades ago; during that time the crop yields purely depended on internal resources, recycling of organic matter, built in biological control mechanisms and rainfall patterns. Production was protected with traditional agricultural practices and systems with knowledge transferred and families have involved in agriculture except a few occasional help from outsiders. These yields were exchanged for survival and fulfilment. No specialized equipment or services were purchased from off-farm sources. Investment is from hand and income is from land. In this farming system, the link between agriculture and ecology was quite strong as a mother and child.

The signs of environmental degradation were seldom evident. The technology development in 'agriculture' has brought the mind set up of the present generation, as it is ‘inevitable’ or ‘there is no alternative’. Is it mandatory to be prone to market driven forces? Can the era of globalization improve the life of an individual in the farming community and a society as a whole?

Curtain Raiser:

Shifts and Developments - Agriculture to AgribusinessThe advent of ‘Green Revolution’, diversified agriculture outside the crop sector which played a role in commercialization which is understood as adoption of modern inputs such as seed, fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation, and mechanical devices. Among these inputs, the most valuable is ‘seeds’. Innovations in any of these interdisciplinary sectors of agriculture can contribute to the improvements of the productivity, cost effectiveness, and efficiency. The colonization ideology eyed of the market monsters falls on the various spheres of agriculture30. Agriculture

30PrabuddhaGanguly, “India”, in Intellectual Property Rights in Agricultural Biotechnology ed. F.H. Erbisch and K.M. Maredia (Hyderabad: University Press (India) Limited, 2010), 129.

Page 88 of 119

involves preparing the land, sowing, plant protection, plant production, seed processing, harvesting, post-harvest technologies, and storage. Right from the land preparation, there are enormous intriguing possibilities for the market force to creep in. An expectation in the increased production and income, motivated the farmers to convert farms into factories.

Economic Activity (Food Crops to Cash Crops)Trade in agricultural commodities has not been quiet vigorous in the past. Trade has always been out of reminder after satisfying the domestic demand and production. However, 'green revolution' trends in commercialization very clearly, the changes in the crops are in favour of commercial crops31. This attracts the farming community to keep them ready for participating in the trade sector.

Agriculture and Globalization in Global Scenario Agriculture forms axis of the global economy. No other sector on the globe is so tied up with the prosperity of any nation’s economy. Globalization is the integration of the nation’s economy with the world economy. The freedom to trade has mainly benefited the giant multinational traders to profitize the agriculture with adopting to modern technologies. On the contrary, Seeds of suicide are a study of the impact of trade liberalization on Indian agriculture and Indian farmers by the team led by Vandana Shiva32. It is an account of the social and ecological costs of globalization. The promise of huge profits linked with clever strategies evolved by the seeds and chemical industries include the lure of huge profits and easy credit for purchase of costly inputs.

Globalisation Leads to Corporatization'Globalization of agriculture' is in fact the corporatization of agriculture. The free international trade policy has led the United State government to lead the world in promoting globalized monopolies through the international trade agreements. The food corporation, which was controlling US agriculture, is now attempting to control world agriculture33. Globalization of agriculture is violating all the components of food relating human rights. Corporatization of agriculture is being pushed under trade liberalization as a successor of the Green Revolution that is leading to poverty and suicide of poor farmers34.

Science and TechnologyModern science and technology are regarded as a solution and as an antidote against the underdevelopment conditions prevailed in that time. The major important input and farming source are the seeds. Seeds are also grains but used for propagation and as a vital and divine source of life to create the next generation35. These modern science and technology both in its theoretical and practical aspects, have become instruments in the hands of unjust power

31Satyasai, K.J.S and K.U. Viswanathan (1996b). Diversification of Indian Agriculture and Food Security. Ind. Jn. of Agrl. Econ., Vol. 51(4): p 674-679; October-December.32DhulasiBrindha,Climate Change and Globalization of Indian Agriculture in Indian Agriculture Challenges of Globalization ed. by Vinayak Reddy and YadagiraCharyalu (New Delhi: New century publications,2010), 129.33D.Kumar,Agriculture Under Globalisation,(New Delhi:Dominant publishers and Distributors,2005),90.34Singh, S., Contract Farming for Agricultural Diversification in the Indian Punjab: A Study of Performance and Problems. Indian Journal ofAgricultural Economics 55(3): 2000, 283-294.35 R.L Agarwal, Seed Technology,(Bombay: Oxford IBH Publishing CO. PVT. LTD, 1990),3.

Page 89 of 119

structures who are the policy makers.36 The art of divine origin is manipulated, marketed, and plundered to an extreme extent, forgetting the unborn future generation.

New Entries:

Entry of Agri- Business CompaniesThe entry of multinational companies in seeds, fertilizers and pesticides sectors has hit the farmer’s head heavily. However, the reality of globalization is different from the corporate propaganda and far from the promises of trade liberalization and agriculture offered by World Bank and WTO37. Contract farming has emerged as a new venture by the entry of MNC’’s and domestic players into agribusiness. Agriculture, driven by multinational corporations is capital intensive and creates heavy debt for purchase of costly internal inputs such as seeds and agrichemicals. Corporatisation of agriculture is being pushed under liberalization as a successor of the Green Revolution, which is leading to new poverty for small farmers.

Emergence of BiotechnologyBiotechnology includes a wide range of diverse technologies. It is a powerful tool to carry out the purpose of agriculture. It is to use natural resources intelligently, for the production of more and better products. Biotechnology is also different because it allows scientists to incorporate genes from other species — something that cannot be done via conventional plant breeding. This makes biotechnology a very powerful and useful tool for plant breeders.It is simply a “high-tech” version of traditional plant breeding38. Current biotechnology is a combination of power and ignorance.

Monsanto- A Wolf in Sheep ClothingThe Monsanto is a US based multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. It is the world's leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate, marketed as "Roundup.” Monsanto is also the leading producer of genetically engineered (GE) seed; it provides the technology in 90% of the genetically engineered seeds used in the US market.It is headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri. Monsanto's development and marketing of genetically engineered seed and bovine growth hormone, as well as its aggressive litigation, political lobbying practices, seed commercialization practices and "strong-arming" of the seed industry have made the company controversial around the world and a primary target of the alter-globalization movement and environmental activists. Because of its business strategies and licensing agreements, Monsanto came under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department in 200939.

Monsanto acquired Delta & Pine Land Company, a company that had patented a seed technology named as Terminators. This technology, is commercial, in producing plants that have sterile seeds so they do not flower or grow fruit after the initial planting. This prevents the spread of those seeds into the wild, however it also requires customers to repurchase seed for every 36 Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva, Ecofeminism, (New Delhi: Kali for Women, 1993), 24.37DhulasiBrindhaVaradarajan, “Climate Change, Globalisation and Indian Agriculture”, in Indian Agriculture Challenges of Globalisation,ed. Vinayak Reddy A. YadagiraChayuluiM, (New Delhi: New Century Publications,2000),126.38 Colin Ratledge, “Biotechnology: The Socio-economic Revolution? A synoptic View of World Status of Biotechnology,” in Biotechnology: Economic and Social Aspects Issues of Developing Countries, ed. E.J. Da Silva,etal., (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992),2.39 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto,accessed on 19.8.2011, 11.51 am.

Page 90 of 119

planting in which they use Terminator seed varieties. The company is collecting seeds from every parts of the world with extreme climatic conditions in the assumption that seeds there will possess the desired genetic traits. Then they map the genome of these varieties to identify genes or gene sequences that increase a plant’s tolerance to a certain environmental stress. Traditional-farmers have long known and used flood-resistant, drought-resistant, cold-resistant and heat-resistant seeds to adapt to local climatic conditions,” says Shiva.40 “Patents on these traits to multinational companies deny the innovation embodied in indigenous knowledge41.” Monsanto has monopolized agricultural systems in all countries. Thus Monsanto is no less than a monster spreading its tentacles over the entire world.42

Monsanto Leads To Suicidal EconomyFor an example, the Vidharba region in Maharashtra, India (where NCCI National Secretariat is situated), faces a highest level of suicide of farmers in India. This is the region with highest acreage of Monsanto’s GMO Bt cotton. Monsanto’s GM seeds create suicide economy by transforming seed from renewable resource to nonrenewable input which must be bought every year at high prices. Seed saving gives farmers life. Seed monopolies rob farmers of life. Chhattisgarh the tribal belt is another example: This center of diversity of their varieties of rice, is now facing farmers suicide. This is where the tribals bred rice and wheat varieties with higher yields than green revolution. Today the rice/wheat farming here is under threat. Under globalization pressures, the farmers are sold hybrid seeds, the seeds need heavy inputs of fertilizers and pesticides, as well as intensive irrigation. And crop failure isfrequent. This pushes farmers into debt and suicide. The suicide economy of industrialized, globalised agriculture is suicidal at three levels - it is suicidal for farmers, it is suicidal for the poor who are derived food, and it is suicidal at the level of the human species as we destroy the natural capital of seed biodiversity, soil and water on which our biological survival depends.

Genetic ModificationAccording to the modern technology, the Genetically modified (GM) seeds are a significant step forward in the production of agricultural crops. GM seeds are seeds that have been modified to contain specific characteristics such as resistance to herbicides or resistance to pests. However, the method of modification used with GM seeds varies from the traditional method in an important respect. The genes have not been modified over generations of cross-fertilization, but rather inserted directly into the DNA of the seed43. The technology that terminates the viability/fertility of seeds after a given time is known as terminator technology and the gene involved is popularly known as terminator gene. Terminator technology is a disputable application of the genetic engineering.

Impacts of Genetic Modification in SeedsThe terminator technology is based on the use of suitable lethal gene, which makes the second-generation seeds infertile. This will force the farmers to buy fresh seeds from the seed company to grow next season crop, since they cannot use the harvested seeds for next season crop. Taking into consideration about the herbicide tolerance the gene to protect a crop from a certain 40Vandana Shiva, Genetic Modification and Frankenstein Foods (New Delhi:Navdanya,2000),14.41 www.huuingtonpost.com/vandana_shiva/from-seed-of-suicideb192419.html, accessed on 19.8.2011 2.45pm.42ShivaniChaudry,ed., Monsanto Peddlng “Life Sciences” or Death Sciences”? (New Delhi: Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology,1998),6.43 Online.wsj.com/article/SB 126862629333762259.html, accessed on 19.8.2011,9.23 am.

Page 91 of 119

herbicide, to encourage farmers to use that particular product, could ‘leak’ through natural crossing of the engineered plants with weedy species, into the weeds – resulting in super hardy weeds that could not be destroyed with weed killer. With regard to the genetically modified crops with insect resistance, it is conceivable that Bacillus thuringiensis genes engineered into a crop to induce resistance to insects could cross into weeds, this time producing insect-resistant super weeds44. When the virus resistance crops are taken into consideration, the risks of introducing genes for vital coat proteins into plants- to produce resistance to that virus – are that some other virus might collect that coat from plants- a process known as transcapsulation. That would give that virus the entry properties of that coat, so viruses might move into other crops than their usual hosts. Where crops are genetically modified to resist insect attack, there is an increased probability that insect populations may acquire resistance, leading to the use of more powerful toxins to control them. Reduced diversity of crop varieties and more weed-free fields may cause further severe decline in farmland birds. Genetically engineered crops could turn our agricultural land into a biological desert.The trends set forth by corporations are to create broad international markets for a single product, thus creating the conditions for genetic uniformity in rural landscapes45.

People’s Voices against GM SeedsThe awareness of the impacts of modern technologies on the environment is increasing one side. By the other side the proponents of the biotechnology celebrate the emergence of biotechnology as the latest magic bullet that will revolutionize agriculture with products based on nature’s own methods, making farming more environmentally friendly and more profitable for the farmer46. Although clearly certain forms of non-transformational biotechnology hold promise for an improved agriculture, gives its present orientation and control by multinational corporations, it holds more promise for environmental harm, for the further industrialization of agriculture and for the intrusion of private interests too far into public interest sector research.

In India, there are three groups representing farmers, civil society networks across Rajasthan, have asserted that Monsanto had actively sued farmers for saving seeds and reusing it at their farms, they also have added that it was “unclear that the benefit of farmers is Monsanto’s real interest”.47 The proposed seed bill, 2010 have made the Kerala Government to comment that the Bill has excluded farmers and informal seed handlers and users.48 It is suitable to title it as commercial seed Bill. The bill focused on the commercial production, sale and distribution of quality seed companies. Bihar Chief Minister, Nitish Kumar has expressed concern about the proposed law permitting unrestricted commercialization of seed varieties in the public domain and has said that it will jeopardize the lives of millions of peasants and put agriculture under the mercy of multinational agribusiness.49

44 Robert Wulgate, “Making Biotechnology Appropriate and Environmentally Sound,” in Biotechnology: Economic and Social Aspects Issues of Developing Countries, ed. E.J. Desilva, et al., (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992), 2.45Anumapama, et. al., “Impact of Plant Genetic Resources on Sustainable Regional Development in Biotechnology for Food, Environment and Agriculture” by, M.A.A Pinheiro de Carvalho,volumeI,Agrobios, (India)2008, Jodhpur, 279.46 Kiran Kumar, et. al., “Indian Agriculture: Crisis and Challenges under Globalisation”, Social Action 59/1(January-March,2010): 106.47 The Hindu/Delhi/3/3/2011 in India Green File, March 1-31, 2011 no.279, Centre for Science and Development (New Delhi).48JyotikaSood, “Dissent on Seeds Bills,” Down to Earth, 19/22 (April1-15, 2011): 15.49 The Hindu/Thiruvananthapuram/22/3/2011.

Page 92 of 119

People’s Movements against GM SeedsNavdanya, started as a program of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology (RFSTE) by Vandana Shiva, a social activist to promote biodiversity, seed saving and protecting farmer’s right. It is a social movement in India, which extends to 16 states in India, which works with local communities facilitating seed conservation and seed exchange of different varieties.50Navdanya has 54 community seed banks and trained over 50,000 farmers about seed sovereignty. It also gives priority to indigenous knowledge and provides awareness to the public. This transition from seeds of suicide to seeds of hope includes, a shift from GMO and non-renewable seeds to organic and open pollinated seed varieties which farmers can save and share, a shift from chemical farming to organic farming, a shift from unfair trade based on false prices to fair trade based on real and just prices.51 The farmers who have made this shift are earning 10 times more than the farmers growing Monsanto's Bt-cotton.52

GM Seeds: The Implications for the Public Witness of the Asian Churches.Call for Our ContributionThe development of GM plant technology raises two kinds of issues: the scientific and the ethical. This division between scientific and ethical is problematic. This is a right time for the Asian Churches to attempt to evaluate the scientific issue ethically. Ethical principles provide standards for the evaluation of policies or practices, for example, indicating that it would be wrong to carry out a certain genetic modification because to do so would threaten human health or harm the environment. Although it may be scientifically possible to undertake a certain experiment or introduce a new type of crop for commercial planting, it does not follow that it would be ethically right to do so53.

Globally Connected: Our Role as ConsumersScience has dealt so far with the conditions of life, but now science deals with the life itself. The GM technology that has come to represent a means of mitigating the problems of global food security in the 21st century is seen as a way to salvation. Economics means the laws concerning a house or habitat. The two different house models described by Sallie McFague in which economics is rooted: “First model seeks earth as a corporation or syndicate, as a collection of individual human beings drawn together to benefit its members by optimal use of resources. The second model seeks earth as an organism or a community that survives and prospers through the inter relationship and the interdependence of human and nonhuman.54

Principles of RelevanceThree main types of principle are relevant to the evaluation of policies or practices. The first principle is a principle of general welfare which enjoins governments (and other powerful institutions) to promote and protect the interests of citizens. The second is the maintenance of

50No GM Crops and Food, A Handbook for Activists (New Delhi:Navdanya, 2003).51www.navdanya.org, accessed on 31.8.2011 at 12.00 am.52http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Transnational_corps/TerminatorSeeds_Monsanto.html, accessed on 3.10.2011,12.30am.53 Rowe V.Cadelina, ’Ethical Responsibility of Scientists in the Conservation of Resources’,in Towards an Asian Sense of Science and Technology, ed.Lourdino A.Yuzon,(Singapore: CCA Bangalore,1998),24. 54 Sallie Mcfague,Life Abundant:Rethinking Theology and Economy for a Planet in Peril (Minneapolis:Fortress press,2000),72.

Page 93 of 119

people’s rights, for example their rights to freedom of choice as consumers. The third is the principle of justice, and it requires the burdens and benefits of policies and practices to be fairly shared among those who are affected by them. When we consider the introduction of a new technology, such as that related to genetically modified seeds, we can ask a series of questions in the light of these general principles55.

Christian Agricultural EthicsChristian ethics brings with it a faith stance that can serve as a foundation for a critical ethic. Contemporary theologies bend to see human beings as "stewards of creation" or as "created co-creators." Within the context of such theological ethics churches and individuals can develop an ethical assessment of modern biotechnology which is not ideological, but critical and intellectually consistent. Second, Christian ethics can deploy an array of critical skills in attempting to render a reasonable account of faith and its implications for assessing biotechnology. It can bring its hermeneutics of suspicion to the assessment of situations, programs, projects, foreseen and unforeseen consequences. It can bring its hermeneutics of appreciation to cultural minorities, tribal religions, and the culture of the poor. Ultimately, Christian ethics finds the profit driven market economy of a globalizing world an inadequate answer to questions of justice and equity.56 Christian ethics reminds believers that some values are so central to what it means to be a good human being that those values must be cherished and protected against the overwhelming economy and technological power of the few. The sources of doing Christian ethics are.

ScriptureBible has ethical insights and instructions formed in different contexts and cultures. Hence, Bible comes from different contexts, cultures and understanding, it has no answer to the questions of today’s context. Ethics today must attend the novel choices and challenges generated by new, immense human powers in the contemporary world.57 Creation is the theological word for all things together in their relationship with God. This is a unitary vision. Creation, for all its fecund diversity is one, human and nonhuman together, organic and in organic, natural, social, and cultural the whole ball of atoms. This unity of creation is important so that we can understand the “sense of neighbour.” This is a universal term. All are our neighbours.

In spite of seeking means to control and manipulate the creation, scientists should seek means to live in, and with the creation. As stewards we, not only have the privilege to use the bounties of nature, for the good of all, but also the responsibility to return it in good shape to its creator. The 21st century belongs to the science and technology. Science deals with the knowledge systems. Technology is the skill and application of scientific knowledge. Technological solutions may not solve given problems created by science. An issue brings about cultural and social changes. These changes affect our lifestyle and the very fabric of our belief system. Hence, there is a need to address these problem-based changes both from secular and biblical viewpoints. We should

55http://www.nuffielfoundation.org, accessed on 22.10.2011 at 11am.56 James B.Martin-Schramm and Robert L. Stivers,Christian Environmental Ethics a Case Method Approach, (New York:Orbis Book,2003),289.57 Per Anderson, “Agriculture, Food and Responsible Biotechnology”,in Lutheran Ethics at the Intersection’s of God’s One World,ed. Karen L.Bloomquist,(The Lutheran World Federatio:Geneva,2005),172.

Page 94 of 119

initiate discussions and search the scripture for guidelines, as well as to find answer to these important issues58.

TraditionThe word ‘tradition’ has many meanings. In Christian understanding, tradition is related with the church. In other words, “Tradition is the continuing attempt of the church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to enter more deeply into the meaning of God’s revelation attested in the Bible. Tradition, therefore, is the church’s attempt to express Christian faith in terms of assumptions and problems of that period. It involves the faith, liturgies, confessions and theological writings of the church59. Our moral laws have come to us through the religions that have enriched us as human beings. As Christians we need to examine carefully the tenets that are embedded in our faith traditions.

Christian concern about theology of creation and of the place of human beings in the divine scheme of things arose because of increased popular awareness of environmental issues and the destructive and creative potentials of biotechnology. Christian churches today have a growing awareness of their complicity in the environmental destruction that has brought about present ecological problems. Building on the Biblical creation narratives found in Genesis chapter one and two, Christian theologians point out how human beings were called by God to be stewards of God's good creation but that they fai1ed in that task and sinned, causing the earth to turn against them.

ExperienceExperiences of the community have a special place in doing Christian ethics. The everyday lived experience of the victims has profound implications for the way they perceive the issue and respond to it. The shift from saved seed to corporate monopoly of seed supply by the multinational company like Monsanto represents a shift from biodiversity to monoculture in agriculture. Monsanto’s GM seeds create a suicide economy by transforming seed from a renewable resource to a non-renewable input which must be bought every year at high prices. High costs and unreliable output make for a debt trap, and a suicide economy. Monocultures and uniformity increase the risk of crop failure, as diverse seeds adapted to diverse to eco-systems are replaced by the rushed introduction of uniform and often untested seeds into the market. The suicide economy of industrialized, globalised agriculture is suicidal at 3 levels - it is suicidal for farmers, it is suicidal for the poor who are derived food, and it is suicidal at the level of the human species as we destroy the natural capital of seed, biodiversity, soil and water on which our biological survival depends. The experiences of the poorest of the poor in the Third World Countries, will squeeze us to look the global moratorium on further use, which might be the most responsible at this time.

Power of Ownership: Right or wrong? - An Ethical ResponseEach living organisms has an intrinsic value, they are not merely collection of genes and chemicals or resources for human use. The essence of being is its integrity. But geneticist, try to see it as things or commodity, Patenting living organism is, claiming ownership. Biotech companies currently have power and asset ownership over certain living organisms, without 58JeyapaulAzariah, ‘Emerging Biblical Sights in Bioethics, Dharma Deepika,(January-June 2006), 5-23.JaypaulAzariah is not a biblical scholar to do it. He is a professor of biology.59 Owen C. Thomas, Introduction to Theology, (ISPCK: Delhi, 1989), 5.

Page 95 of 119

accepting responsibility for them or for their effect upon the environment.60 It requires an evaluation of the potential indirect long term effects of GM crops on the health, environment and society of others. These developments intend to surpass the limits of natural life. This may entail the vision of an entirely newly designed and recreated order. Technologies, indeed, are pushing the natural limits of life and the natural order in the interests of “improving” life itself.61

Virtues for Restraining Integrity of CreationIt is impossible to define the bounds of human, intervention in nature as long as their needs are insatiable. The artificialization and simplification of nature by producing transgenic crops always have a new ‘want’ in the garb of an urgent need. Alterations in the genes of species may not appear valuable or imperative with alterations in the definition of human needs and patterns of consumption62. We know very little about little about the biological connections and the consequences of human interventions. Practically, we do not have the powers to master all natural dynamics, and ethically, we ought not to exercise all of the limited powers that we do have63. What are the characteristics that are conducive to the goal of restraining the integrity of creation and that therefore, we ought to cultivate?

Sustainability, Relationality and HumilitySustainability is living within the bounds regenerative, absorptive and carrying capacity of the earth. A sustainable society is one that satisfies its needs without jeopardizing the prospects of future generations. Now the people of earth are living beyond natural means, and future generations will be major victims of our generation’s excessive consumption, toxification, destruction, and reproduction. Sustainable living also implies the preservation of biodiversity for the sake of the wellbeing of the future generations. The virtue is sustainability for a subsistence living, that is hard too.

Relationality is the acute sensitivity to the fact that everything is connected with and has consequences for everything else. It is the counsel of caution to be responsive to the environmental impacts of our activities. It also means being aware of the multiple dimensions of the ecological crisis and their linkages, and acting in ways that the solution to one social or environmental problem do not cause or aggravate another social and environmental problem. Relationality requires us to think holistically.

Humility is a self-realistic virtue, which recognizes the limitations on human knowledge, technological ingenuity, moral character, and biological status. It avoids over confidence in human powers to control nature, exaggerations of human authority and rights over nature, and under evaluation of other creatures and their rights. It is the guiding norm for all the other virtues64.

Church’s Response and Responsibility towards GM Technology

60 Madden, “Values, Economics and Agricultural Research”, Ethics and Agriculture, ed. C. Blatz (Moscow: University of Idaho Press, 1991), 298.61 Suzanne C. Toton, World Hunger, The Responsibility of Christian Education,(New York: Orbis Books,1982), 56.62 S. Blackburn, Being Good: A Short Introduction to Ethics.(New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2001), 162.63 Ibid, 288.64James A. Nash, Loving Nature Ecological Integrity and Christian Responsibility, (Washington: Abhigton Press,1991),62.

Page 96 of 119

The rapid advance of biotechnology raises fundamental theological issues for the churches. Even more, the potential consequences of this technology call the churches to offer within their societies a vision for the future, shaped by the message of the Gospel, which can provide guidance for the choices which must be made concerning how biotechnology is utilized. Therefore, the response of the churches must begin with expressing again our faith in God's intentions for the future of the life of the world. So we must ask how the capabilities of biotechnology relate to the establishment of justice, to the building of peace, and to upholding the integrity of creation.

God's justice in the world is denied if, biotechnology is utilized to increase the control of the rich nations and groups over the common biological resources of the creation. God's justice is broken if biotechnology becomes a tool for genetic discrimination against vast groups of people. And God's justice is violated if biotechnology imposes on seeds dangerous and exploitive gene transfer techniques. The peace of Christ in the world is violated by all those who use biotechnology to perfect military means for spreading diseases and death65. The integrity of creation is damaged if biotechnology is utilized by commercial pressures to manufacture new life forms that are valued only as economic commodities. The integrity of creation is attacked if biotechnology is used to reduce the rich diversity of human life and to threaten the uniqueness of each individual. The integrity of creation is undermined if new organisms are created and released into the environment irresponsibly.

ConclusionThe creation, production and consumption of genetically modified crops and foods raise moral questions for all people today across every society and culture. Transgenic agriculture is a modern western technology, forced to be adopted in non-western contexts. In this non-western context, agriculture tends to be integral to cultural life, not simply its material base. People gain identity, meaning and orientation through agricultural practice. The transgenic plant technology offers changes in agricultural meaning and practice. Environmental concerns have focused on the fear that GM herbicide-tolerant crops might encourage farmers to use broader spectrum herbicides with a negative impact on insect and bird life. Genes conferring herbicide tolerance might also migrate from crop plants to their wild relatives resulting in herbicide-tolerant weeds. There are also fears about damage to non-target species by insect-resistant crops and the inadvertent creation of new viruses. Irrespective of their safety, GM crops are only one further step in the ‘industrialisation’ of agriculture.

How much of a risk GM crops are to the environment is difficult to judge at this stage. They might damage it in some circumstances and enhance it in others. It could be that much of the dislike of GM crops stems from guilt by association: they are produced by agrochemical and seed companies and they are an element in ‘non-organic’ farming. They are also seen as ‘unnatural’. To conclude with the beautiful poem written especially for the GM technology in the garden speaks there is something in the garden.

The wind howls before the dawn Something’s in the garden

65 Walter Glannon, ’Genetic Engineering can be Ethical’ in ‘Genetic Engineering an Opposing View Point, ed. James D Torr, (Green Haven Press: California, 2001), 83.

Page 97 of 119

Look out, see what’s going onOh, the winds they blowIn a shroud of secrecySomething’s in the gardenA suicide technologyOh, it’s got to goThe corporate biotech machineSomething’s in the gardenUnveils the Terminator geneOh, the winds they blowInserting a genetic crimeSomething’s in the gardenSterile seed at harvest timeOh, it’s got to goThe winds they blow across the fields of every nationOur seed we been sowing for a hundred generationsTill it’s banned in every land we’ll fight the TerminatorOh, no it’s got to go!The desperate poor are locked in the sights…Of its almighty appetitesWearing a boy scout disguise… To hijack the global food supply (Jane Anita (Revd) Arcot Lutheran Church)

Page 98 of 119

CHAPTER 7: Food Security and the Right to Food

Food Security: Back to Basic, Relating Life to Soil

Dr. Ardniel Baladjay

Will the world continue to watch the hungry people of the world die silently?-FAO Director-General, Jacques Diouf

Outline:

I. Food Security Current ScenariosII. Different Perspectives of Food Security III. LGA: Holistic Approach to Food SecurityIV. And Now?

I. Food Security Current Scenarios

The world population is growing fast while food production is increasing too at the expense of nature and other resources. Though there are good accounts that at some point, historically, food sufficiency as one indicator of food security has been attained. Food security has become a global concern. In contrast, with rapid increase of population for the past two decades and emergence of several threats such as climate change, political instability, social injustices, economic recession, it has become difficult to attain and maintain food security.

Today’s reality represents a combination of challenges that includes poverty, especially in remote areas, and an unresolved threat to food security. To ensure food security for all in the years to come, we will need to produce more food using fewer environmental resources while reinvigorating rural economies (Widjaja, 2015).

The importance of small farm in reducing poverty and growing the food that is needed to meet the development goals as targeted of having food security in 2015 has been given importance. But what happened? Despite a strong global consensus that the main goal for development must be the elimination of poverty, and that lack of access to adequate food is the most appalling manifestation of poverty reduction strategies on food security issues, concern over hunger tends to be confined largely to highly visible emergency situations, but the bulk of the world’s undernourished people face food shortages day-in, day-out throughout their lives (FAO, 2001).

Page 99 of 119

Is there a way out for us to resolve such? How can we address the challenges of different development goals to address the pressing issues in a pluralistic world? How about the response of spirituality based movement?

One of the manifestations of food insecurity is hunger. Hunger is a powerful word that encompasses the complex patterns of undernutrition amongst the world’s poor. The hungry include:

About a billion people who are chronically undernourished (i.e. consuming less than 1,800 calories per day;

130 million children under five who are underweight for their age (more than two standard deviations below the median;

400 million women who are anaemic; and Over 200 million children who are vitamin A deficient.

Hungry and poverty are inextricably linked, one resulting in the other, so creating a trap from which escape is very difficult. It is the persistence of hunger and its consequences that have made hunger a key target of the development goals (Conway and Waage, 2010).

II. Different Perspectives of Food Security

Though there are lots of views, meaning or perspectives, it would be more fitting to come up with common understanding regarding food security.

“Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”. (World Food Summit, 1996)

Food security has long been regarded as a matter of balancing supply with demand. In the past, policies were limited to increasing agricultural production and/or slowing population growth. This perspective has fundamentally changed, as the definition above indicates.

According to CIRAD (2016), food security is based on four pillars:1. Access – refers to the ability to produce one’s own food or buy it, which implies having

the purchasing power to do so.2. Availability – still a problem in areas where food production does not meet population

needs, thus raising the question—does our planet have the capacity to feed the growing millions whose consumption habits are on the rise?

3. Food quality – from a nutritional, sanitary, sensory and socio-cultural point of view. Food security integrates the notion of food safety.

4. Stability – in terms of availability, accessibility and quality. This fourth pillar incorporates issues of price stability and securing incomes for vulnerable populations.

Page 100 of 119

In the Philippine context, “Food Security” refers to the policy objective, plan and strategy of meeting the food requirements of the present and future generations of Filipinos in substantial quantity, ensuring the availability and affordability of food to all, either through local production or importation, or both, based on the country’s existing and potential resource endowment and related production advantages, and consistent with the overall national development objectives and policies. However, sufficiency in rice and white corn should be pursued as challenged by the national government.

According to the Philippine Department of Agriculture in consultation with the farmers and fisher folks, the private sector, non-government organizations (NGOs), people’s organizations and the appropriate government agencies and offices, they formulated and implemented a medium- and long-term comprehensive Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Plan. This plan shall focus on five (5) major concerns: a) Food security; b) Poverty alleviation and social equity; c) Income enhancement and profitability, especially for farmers and fisher folk; d) Global competitiveness; and e) Sustainability.

The said plan aims to meet the following goals and indicators of development.a) Increased income and profit of small farmers and fisher folk;b) Availability of rice and other staple food at affordable prices;c) Reduction of rural poverty and income inequality;d) Reduction of the incidence of malnutrition;e) Reduction of rural unemployment and underemployment; andf) Improvement in land tenure of small farmers.

At the turn of the new administration in June 2016, the in-depth paradigm and challenge of the Department of Agriculture is to realize its strategic goal that is to make food available and affordable to all.

As one venue to attain food security and with the enabling law of the Philippines regarding holistic farming through organic agriculture, the Republic Act 100068 or otherwise known as Philippine Organic Agriculture Act of 2010 was approved and implemented for the past six years.

It was hoped then by the national government and has approved a measure that will provide incentives aimed at promoting organic farming in the country. This could soon result in farmers refraining from using chemicals and adopting ecologically sound, economically viable farming practices and socially acceptable technologies.

The law was signed primarily lays down the groundwork of a program that would promote organic farming and the sale of chemical-free agricultural produce in the country.

This law is also guided by various principles in organic agriculture as follows:

Page 101 of 119

1. Principle of Health

Organic Agriculture should sustain and enhance the health of soil, plant, animal, human and planet as one and indivisible.

Healthy soils produce healthy crops that foster the health of animals and people. The role of Organic Agriculture is to sustain and enhance the health of ecosystems and organism from the smallest in the soil to human beings.

Organic Agriculture intends to produce high quality, nutritious food that contributes to preventive health care and well being.

It avoids the use of fertilizer, pesticides, animal drugs and food additives that may have adverse health effects.

2. Principle of Ecology

Organic Agriculture should be based on living ecological system and cycles, work with them, emulate them and help sustain them.

Production is based on ecological processes and recycling. It protects and benefit environment such as: landscapes, habitat, biodiversity, air and water.

3. Principle of Fairness

Organic Agriculture should build on relationships that ensure fairness with regard to the common environment and life opportunities

Fairness is characterized by equity, respect, justice and stewardship of the shared world, both among people and to other living beings

4. Principle of Care

Organic Agriculture should be managed in a precautionary and responsible manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the environment.

Practitioner of organic agriculture can enhance efficiency and increase productivity, but this could not be at risk of jeopardizing health and well being.

Moreover, the law also highlighted that “It is hereby declared the policy of the State to promote, propagate, develop the practice of organic agriculture that will condition and enrich the fertility of the soil, increase farm productivity, reduce destruction of environment and prevent the depletion of natural resources and further protect the health of farmers, consumers and general public and save on imported farm inputs.”

Toward this end, a comprehensive program for the promotion of community-based organic fertilizer such as compost, pesticides and other farm inputs, together with educational

Page 102 of 119

and promotional campaign for the use and processing, as well as the adoption of organic agricultural system as a viable alternative shall be undertaken.

As to educational endeavor, the Department of Education (DepED) has a mandate to:

1. Incorporate the principles of organic agriculture in the basic education curriculum; and

2. Develop training program for teachers that would enhance competencies and skills on the practice of organic agriculture.

In the higher educational institutions under the supervision of Commission on Higher Education (CHED), both from public and private, organic agriculture is being offered in order to promote and challenge younger generations the vital role of such farming system. One clear manifestation is the offering of Bachelor of Science in Agriculture with major in Organic Agriculture.

Even in the Technical Education, Skills and Development Authority (TESDA), a national certificate is awarded to individuals who will pass the competency assessment and will further certify them as person who has the rights and privileges to teach and practice organic agriculture in the countryside.

In the church, the Rural Emphasis Month, is also given equal importance as opportunity to inculcate and share success stories with regards to the relevance of rural life in relation to sustaining life’s processes in general and food security in particular.

III. LGA: Holistic Approach to Food Security

Higher food output where it is needed is important but does not automatically mean increased food security. What is also important is who produces the food, who has access to the technology and knowledge to produce it and who has the purchasing power to acquire it (Pretty and Hine, 2000).

To address such, one viable response is to look at Life-Giving Agriculture as the best alternative so far in attaining food security. It has been described that Life-Giving Agriculture (LGA) is the stewardship of both the natural and human resources.

Food security can be enhanced, attained and sustained via Life-Giving Agriculture. It looks at the whole environment as integrated component of sustaining life, best at conserving soil productivity and quality, attempts to disregard external inputs, closer to a natural ecosystem, opportunity to grow alternative crops and animals.

As highlighted by Madeley (2002), below is an account of attaining food security.

Page 103 of 119

NO FOOD SECURITY WITHOUT SOIL SECURITY

The intensification of agriculture has led to land degradation, erosion, waterlogging and salinization. All these are visible. Less visible, says the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, are the imbalances and deficiencies in the soil’s physical, chemical and biological conditions which were caused by the use of high yield varieties in monocultures and machinery and the indiscriminate applications of agrochemicals. These can be held responsible at least in part for the yield plateaus and declines now observed in farmers’ fields where high-input agriculture had previously been successful.

In the areas of marginal agriculture and animal production where the Green Revolution has not penetrated, the quality of the soil largely influenced the availability of water and nutrients to the plant. The development and maintenance of soil conditions favourable to moisture storage, plant nutrition and health are even more critical because the soils are generally poor and fragile, prone to rapid degradation – a major cause of food insecurity in these areas.

Improving soil management requires a quite different approach to that of the use of the Green Revolution inputs. Soil conservation practices are often difficult to demonstrate and validate; they always need to be adapted to the local conditions of the farmer’s field, and changed with the season and the weather. They are often labour-intensive, and their impact is less visible as they result merely in maintaining or slowly improving yields, and therefore they tend to be neglected by the farmer for more immediate economic returns.

There is, however, a vast array of knowledge and experience which is now available to promote more efficient soil management and conservation:

Analysis of the extent and cost of land degradation – loss of soil fertility and erosion- at both country and global levels have been conducted.

Figures for both agricultural productivity loss and land-improving investments are few but becoming available in both developed and developing countries.

The world overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) provides since 1992 a database to evaluate conservation methodologies over a wide range of environmental and social circumstances.

Soil conservation strategies are also evolving and attempt to give priority to soil productivity and farmer’s income rather than considering prevention of soil erosion and soil loss as an end in itself. The soil management-cum-productivity approach enlists the participation of farmers in identifying and applying for the most appropriate practices for the husbandry of their land- as they do for their crops and animals. Soil conservation then becomes an integral part of agricultural development and land care and can be promoted in any type of farm system- from traditional to commercial. In order for soil management and conservation needs to be integrated into sustainable agricultural strategies for food security, they also must be addressed at the policy, legal and institutional levels.

Ultimately the conservation and management of soil resources are matters of national interest and food security which cannot be left to the farmers alone. Governments must play a positive role. Technical support and credit facilities should help the farmers in adopting improved soil management practices and carrying out land rehabilitation and improvement works. In addition, local communities and the society at large should accept

Page 104 of 119

to bear part of the costs of maintaining a secure soil resources base for the food supplies to present and future generations, in particular those of major investments works in agricultural land resources reclamation and protection.

Source: FAO Fact Sheet 2, October 2000.

IV. And now?

What matters most is agriculture. It is believed that the first and last vocation would be agriculture. As long as human beings will eat, as long as other living creatures will depend on green plants, agriculture is necessity.

Relating our life to soil is the basic concept of having close relationship to God’s creation. As the Bible emphasized, from dust to dust, you shall return. With this conscience in mind, who are we not to sustain life? What have we done to the least of our brethren to share abundant life that God has bestowed to each one?

Now is the time for us to revisit/review our individual, communal and societal vision, mission, goals, objectives and concrete actions.

On the personal note, since 2013 after the 3rd LGA Forum in South Korea to recent, as active member of advocating and practicing organic agriculture as a form of life-giving agriculture, I got involved with the following endeavours:

a. Research work on some soil amendments as one input in the production of cutflowers to provide baseline date for rural cutflower producers;

b. Implemented and forged partnership with secondary high school to address the National Greening Program with immediate concern on producing food in school. This partnership realized the establishment of vermicomposting, edible landscaping, and the revival of sloping agricultural land technology (SALT) model farm in the rural high school;

c. Trail blazed the greening program in one farmer organization with emphasis on organic diversified crop production with a vision of making their barangay (local community) Green by 2020;

d. Served as resource persons on the following activities conducted by Local Government Unit with private partnership:i. Organic Corn Production for Agricultural Technologists from Autonomous

Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)ii. Organic Vegetable Production for local farmers, 4-H club members and

Agricultural Technologist from Sultan Mastura of Maguindanao Province, ARMM, and

Page 105 of 119

iii. Integration of Corn-Cassava Farming System for local farmers from Muslim communities.

Indeed, agriculture matters. As concluded by Madeley (2002), agriculture matters because it produces food that feeds the people and provides most of the jobs and incomes on which the world’s most vulnerable people depend. Small-scale agriculture matters above all because it is the base of survival for the poor and a key part of overcoming poverty. It matters because the absence of a viable agricultural sector makes it less attractive for people to stay in the rural areas; it matters because it can stem the drift to towns and cities. Agriculture matters because a depressed agricultural sector can give rise to social instability, civic disorder, conflict and war. Agriculture matters because the continuation of poverty is in no one’s interests.

Moreover, an urgent, determined and concerted action must be taken. Life-giving agriculture is a kind of agriculture that will allow the possibility of meeting food security. There is a need for developing countries in Asia to prioritize food security over trade. It is our greatest conscience of betrayal the poorest people on earth without doing so.

References:

Black, R. et al. (2008) Maternal and child undernutrition: global and regional exposures and health consequences. The Lancet, 371, 243-260. in Conway and Waage. 2010. Science and Innovation for Development. UK Collaborative on Development Studies.

FAO. (2009). 1.02 billion people hungry. FAO Media Centre 19 June. Available at: www.fao.org/new/story/en/item/20568/icode. FAO website: http://www.fao.org Madeley, J. (2002) Food for all. IBON Books, Manila, Philippines. Philippine Laws: Republic Act 8435 and Republic Act 10068. can be accessed on-line. Pretty, J. and Hine, R. 2000. Feeding the world with sustainable agriculture: a summary of new evidence. University of Essex. Pretty, J. et al. (2005). Resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries. Environmental Science and

Technology, 40 (4), 1114-1119. UNEP/UNSECO. (2008). Organic agriculture and Food Security in Africa. UN, Geneva, in: Conway, G. And Waage, J. (2010).

Combating Hunger. UK Collaborative on Development Sciences, p 162. UNICEF. (2009). Tracking Progress on Childe and Maternal Nutrition. UNICEF, GenevaVictora, C. et al. (2008). Maternal and child undernutrition: consequences for adult healt and human capital. The Lancet, 371,

340-357. WHO. (2009). Worldwide prevalence on anaemia 1993-2005, Summary. Available at: www.who.int/vmnis/anaemia/prevalence/summary/anaemia_status_summary/en/index.html. Widjaja, Franky Oesman. (2015). 6 ways to improve food security in Asia. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Sinar Mas Agribusiness & Food, Indonesia. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/04/6-ways-to-improve-food-security-in-asia/

Page 106 of 119

The Right to Food or the Right to Get Healthy Food

Rev. Samuel Sihombing

The Story of a poor old grandma From East Java

An old woman was caught stealing cassava from a company cassava plantation. The Company reported it to the police and eventually goes to court.

In the courtroom, the judge Marzuki sat stunned listening to the prosecution. An Old grandma argued she was very poor, her son was seriously ill and her grandchildrenstarving. But the manager of the company was fixed on their demands in order to be an example for the surrounding community.

Judge sighed and seemed very concerned. Then he ruled out prosecution And he said,”I feel so sorry, I can’t make a legal exeption, the law remains the law, you must still had to be panished” The court is fining you 1.000.000 Rupiahs and if you couldn’t pay 1.000.000 rupiahs then you are sentenced to prison for 2,5 years as prosecution attorney”

The old grandma bowed sluggish, crying, her heart was disappointed, and then the judge took off judge hat and open his wallet, took money one 1.000.000 rupiahs and put it into hat then with his strong voice said, “

“I, on behold of the court also fined each person who present right now in this courtroom with 50.000 rupiahs because you live in this town and let an old woman and her family become hunger and he had to steal to feed her grandchildren.”

Once the decision was made and before the judge leaved the courtroom, money had been collected 3.500.000 rupiahs. With a feeling embarrassment manager of cassava company was also paid 50.000 rupiahs for having complain to the court.

Stealing is a crime and should be punished, but let the poor starve and even the poor family could not feed their children is also a crime. Crimes committed by those people who are around and also the state.

There is no denying that food is the most vital in our daily life. Before man was created God had provided human needs. God gave nature to be nurturing and caring in order to continuously be able to provide food for human being. Unfortunately, human being falls into greedy and creates injustice in the world.

Food becomes a basic need of human being and other creators, but as we know, there are still many countries cannot meet the needs of the society. It is to pity, there are so many people cannot get food in this advanced age.

Page 107 of 119

But more worrying that there are still many countries with their behaviour who throw food in to the vain. When I attended a training in one of developed countries I showed lot of leftover food waste from various schools. As we know, schools provided food to their students for their day at school. While in the poor countries, people struggled with all their power to sustain life and to get food. They often eat just once in a day, and even they do not get any food for a whole day.Among activists in my place, there is a joke that satirized this condition.The poor people will always said, “what can we eat today?”Middle class will said, “where we eat today?”While the greedy and rich people will say, “Who will we at today?”Lot of people are hungry not because there is no food, but there is injustice on all respects

A quote from the wise words of Mahatma Gandhi said: “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed”.

Right to Food is the right of all human being.

Right to food has been concern of all nation in this world. We can see it on the united nation declaration and some international convention declaration. I will try to get some of them here as below:

The UN Charter 55........ With a view to the creation of conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, the United Nations shall promote: a. higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development; b. solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; and international cultural and educational cooperation; and c. universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.”

Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 25:1 also said, “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.)

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ), article 11. Wrote, “1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent. 2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co-operation, the measures, including specific programmes, which are needed: To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of

Page 108 of 119

nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources;

World food conference declaration on 1874 said, “every man, woman and child has the inalienable right to be free from hunger and malnutrition in order to develop fully and maintain their physical and mental faculties...

World Declaration on Nutrition, 1992 wrote also, “"Hunger and malnutrition are unacceptable in a world that has both the knowledge and the resources to end this human catastrophe.... We recognize that globally there is enough food for all and... pledge to act in solidarity to ensure that freedom from hunger becomes a reality."

World Food Security Compact , on 1985 declared that “hungry cannot wait”

All the members of UN also start to make their own laws. I took sample like Indonesia. Indonesian’s government has made food law no.7 1996. In the legislation acknowladged that food is a basic need of human being and had to fulfill into human rights. In article 2 stated that the development of food should provide fair and equitable benefit. And as UN members, Indonesia is bound to all International declarations and conventions above

The description above shows that poverty, hunger and right to food is not a new things. This topic has been a long discussion among UN members. I also believe, churches, civil society and non-government organization has been actively involved in this issues. I remember, when natural disaster occurred in Indonesia, many churches, other religions and institution came to support and bring food to the victims.

For more information about the right to food we can read information from FAO of the United Nations 2006. “The right to food in practice. Implementation at the national level.” FAO talk much what we can do for the right to food at our each nation.

What is the important thing than this so much declaration and article? Actually, it can be implement if each government members of the UN had commitment. So depend on the political commitment of each nation and of course the situation of each nation.

Right to food or right to get healthy food?

As I already mention above, right to food have been discussing for long time, many decades. UN gives attention to this issue much. Therefore, I will not talk about it more. My concern is “can we move now from right to food to next step, “right to get healthy food?” You can say that, still millions people live in poverty, hunger and malnutrition as I mention also in the first paragraph.

Let’s start this discussion with clear mind. For me, in an emergency situation, every people must get food. That’s the most basic rights. Whether any kind of food. It is still clear in my memory, when helping tsunami victim at Banda Aceh Indonesia, many agencies provided food to victims. Victims had right to get food and we provided it. That is in emergency situation, disaster and people need to help.

Page 109 of 119

Now there is no emergency, no disaster, do you think that we are safe now? In my mind, we are still in dangerous situation more than in natural disaster situation. Think deeply, what we actually eat? Is our food is really healthy?

One of my big concerns is about our food recently. I will speak in our experience. Most of our food in Indonesia was affected by the chemical fertilizer and pesticide. The multinational company always fed our farm with chemicals. They have strong power to influence government and even many local and national institutions so that farmers switch their traditional agriculture which does not use artificial chemicals to conventional agriculture. From natural agriculture, organic and harmonic with nature to use much artificial chemicals, use GMO. Training was conducted just to motivate farmers to use their product, then farmers become depend on their product and changing local seed to the GMO. Every day they have new product and of course also there is always new disease. I suspect they create always new disease.... maybe.

Seeing this situation, I think, each government had to create a new policy to protect their society from unhealthy foods. But is it possible? I doubt, because most of the government just think about economic development. Think about money; think about income; think to be a developed country.

For me, right to healthy food is not only about stomach but also about justice, peace and integrity of creation. So that, churches also has responsibility to be hand in hand to against the company that destroys our nature, our environment and our life. Not only to fight with them but give also solution to the people in rural area especially farmers who produce our daily food.

Education for both sides

Everyone have right to get a healthy food, without pesticide, no artificial fertilizer. It is completely free from poison. Unfortunately, as we know, many countries had been occupied by the multinational company and “force” people to use pesticide. Farmers do not have chance to choose. The company primary reason I guess just economy and used the weakness of community lack of food and lack of access to food. Churches had to preach to against company who destroy nature through pesticide and GMO

There are two directions that should be done by the church, first to educate producer (it can be church’s members at the villages, and also educate consumers at the town (it can be also church’s members). As a pastor in our church, I feel that we focus to the producers (farmers in the rural villages) but we still lack to educate customers. Conducting education to the both sides will strengthen network between rural and city.

Dig deeply local wisdomAt the producer level (farmer) need to dig cultural values, customs and traditions especially the local wisdom. I am sure that every tribe in every nation has its own way to solve its social economic problems. What we can do is to dig a local wisdom and local knowledge of each tribe.

Page 110 of 119

In our Batak tribe, for instance there is a word said, “sinur na pinahan gabe na niula” breed cattle/livestock, agriculture will harvest lots. Livestock become the backbone of the healthy agriculture.

Based on this philosophy, since 2013 Korean Life-giving Agriculture soon after the Sumatra-Korea LGA in 2012, realized that to reduce of using chemical pesticide and fertilizer small holder farmers had to support with livestock. LGAF with PODA cooperative and HKBP looked for what kind of livestock that people used to take care in the rural area especially at Sumatra. We found that pigs are the important animal for Batak people. Because without pig, it will be difficult to conduct some cultural ceremony there. But as we know small holder farmers a very poor farmers will have problem to access livestock because they do not have capital to start this business. So KLGA start a project named “pig’s bank” there are 25 poor families have been supported. The impact of this project some farmers have succeeded to be a harmonic with nature system even two families have been success to develop their organic farm.

The idea to start this project also based on the cultural of the people there. KLGA just support 2 piglets to each family as an embryo of the mother pigs. Every mother’s pigs have baby, this family had to share 2 piglets per each pigs to another family. The family who got these piglets must be shared two times to another village’s members. Economically, the small holder family has been helped by this project. From the point of agriculture, they do not need to buy manure anymore from town. Farmers who did not take care livestock they will buy chicken manure or cattle manure from city.

In our culture, this kind of project, have been implemented among the village’s members. In formal time, to support a poof family we have “Sanghae” a kind of profit sharing between owner and the person who take care of the livestock. For instance, a person who wants to take care buffalo of one family, he/she already have a part of the body (leg) of the buffalo. If the buffalo have baby, she/he have again apart of the buffalo. Until she/will have all the buffalo.

Pig bank or profit sharing (sakkae) in my opinion really helped the small holder farmers. We did not need to support all the time, but to give him/her a chance to develop his/her livestock business. Pigs bank of course, have restore our wisdom “sinur na pinahan, gabe na niula/

I hope this project can be implemented at another place so that we do not need to speak loudly to ask people to implement organic farming but through action or like ARI said again, learning by doing, learning by action. This is our way to against transnational companies who promot much about new varieties and chemical. Using the local product, like Hansalim cooperative in Korea. I hope someday our cooperative will follow Hansalim to promote organic food all over indonesia at least at North Sumatra.

Another old local wisdom to protect people from hungriness is “lumbung desa” means “village rice barn”. In formal time, Village rice barn is a building in the village as rice repository from village’s members. “Lumbung” become food reserve facility or food security for all recidences. When disaster strikes, the community can take rice to the need of all residence. Everybody had right to food. Everybody had right to get food from “lumbung desa” because they already saved their own grain every time they harvest. No one hunger.

Page 111 of 119

So that is the reason also, in some villages “lumbung desa” meant more than just a physical building to store grain or any other of materials. In some cultural background, lumbung has a social significance that is quite tick, even sacred and can only be entered on customs agreement.

“lumbung desa” as a central food reserves especially in rural area, in increasingly hard to find. of Food management of local wisdom is indeed already eroded by changing demands of life. Community prefers practical things and instants. Currently access the rural economy is quite advanced so that the rural credit in the form of unnatural/money easily obtainable.

In its development, village rice barn has changed from natura/grain/rice/material into innatura/inmaterial. It means from rice storage system developed into saving and lending. This model is known as a Credit Union groups. Credit Union becomes a new system to help each other in the villages. It is more practise and community can use for their own porposed.

The government’s decision to take over the function of “lumbung desa” by establishing “Bulog (logistic government body) which act as a national “lumbung” or national warehouse of rice increasingly discouraged roll of barn/lumbung as one embodiment farmers independence. This is one of reason also why lumbung is not running well recently.

Our responsibility

Environment damaged and farmers turning to conventional farming which is highly dependent on artificial chemical is also our common responsibility. Our faith is not determined by how long and how hard we pray, not seem how big the church we build and how many church members you have but I guess in my understanding, what we can do for other people, nature and for others creation.

In my village, I still remember when a family wanted to build their house, all the community will do it together. Everybody will participate. Similarly, to cultivate land, or harvest they work together. We called it “marsiruppa” “marsiadapari” it means, doing worked alternately in their respective fields. To work together in cultivating and harvesting. They arrange their own system to whom they work first and then next day to another farm again. This is the local wisdom of the community how they solve their problem.

Time to hand in hand, time to support each other, time to share, we cannot leave alone in this world. Right to food and right to healthy food are our common struggle. Reduce poverty, feed the hungry and to provide healthy food will be realized when we done it together.

I remember one of my Korean Pastor friend said to me, “dream which is dreamt alone is just dreamt, dream which is dreamt together will come true.

“Let’s hand in hand so that we may live together” said ARI (Asian Rural Institute), Japan.

Page 112 of 119

Closing word

Someday.... if God comes to the earth and ask you, what did you do to the old woman who can’t feed her grandchild? I hope we won’t say, “I bring her to court because she stole my cassava. She violated your law... oh God, “thou shalt not steal”

Or God will ask, “What do you prefer for me today” Hope we won’t say, “there is a fast food in front of you God.”

Page 113 of 119

Field Immersion in a Karen Ethnic Minority Village in Mae Hang Village, Lamphang, Northern Thailand

From December 1 to 2, 2016, the participants of this consultation traveled to Baan Mae Hang Ngao Village in Lamphang, northern Thailand. The Social Development and Service Unit (SDSU) of the Church of Christ in Thailand (CCT) organized the field immersion. The main objective was to observe how sustainable and organic agriculture is practiced in an indigenous village in cooperation with the Social Development and Service Unit (SDSU) of the Church of Christ in Thailand (CCT). The program started with meeting our indigenous host families. After lunch, the group had an ocular visit to some farms that practice organic farming and sustainable agriculture. They group tilled the soil in a terrace where rain water will be stored and rice will be planted in the water ponds from time to time. Dinner which consisted of organic food was served by a bonfire in a mountaintop where three different indigenous groups (Karen, Yao, and Akka) presented their cultures through songs and dances. Participants from different Asian groups likewise presented songs in different languages. At the end, everyone joined hands in a big circle around the bonfire to sing and dance together.

Page 114 of 119

Final Statement

4th Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum28th November to 2nd December 2016

Chiang Mai, Thailand

We, the sixty participants of the 4th Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum, met from 28th November to 2nd December 2016, in Chiang Mai and Baan Mae, Hang Ngao in Lamphang Province in Thailand deliberated on the theme “Eco-Justice: Towards Sustainable Development and Food Security in Asia.” This Consultation was jointly organized by the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA), Church of Christ in Thailand (CCT) and the Korean Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum (KCLGAF). The participants represented various walks of lives, including clerics, activists, academics, technologists, agriculture engineers, and practitioners of the alternative agriculture from eight Asian countries - Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, send this epistle to the Churches in Asia to uphold the 'Life-Giving Agriculture' spiritually, theologically, prayerfully, and ministerially as a Christian faith response.

Grace and peace to you from our Lord Jesus Christ!

We are concerned about our societies by realizing that we live in a context where the ‘agri-culture' became ‘agri-business' in which the land is used as factory to produce commodities to sell in the shops or malls rather the food grains to share among the communities. Hence, the entry of transnational corporations entered in ‘agri-business' by supplying high-yielding, genetically-modified, and genetically terminated seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and hazardous chemical pesticides that erases the traditional farming and ‘agri-culture' and the natural support systems heavily. Also, the reality of globalization is different from the corporate propaganda for contract or corporate or mass farming with highly profitable mono-crops, where the traditional multi-crop farming is removed. This throws the small farmers out from farming and agri-culture and forces them to go for high-interest debts that cause the farmers' suicides since they are not able to pay back their loans and get profitable yields. So, the ‘agri-business' of today causes many to starve, giving birth to a world of mal-nourished children and mothers. We were warned even to know, what are we getting from soil to plate: are they food or chemicals since, today knowingly or unknowingly we eat unhealthy hazardous chemical filled food, on the other hand many starve due to food insecurity.

In this context, we were edified to know that Church as a Christian faith community found as a hope in the midst of turmoil since the biblical theology is upholding the 'Life-giving Agriculture and Food Security'. We were also inspired through the following theological insights:

God of the Bible has created humans to be the farmers to involve in and to promote life-giving agriculture, by 'tilling' the land, care for earth and naming the species and caring for them with supportive environments;

Page 115 of 119

'Bread', as a symbol of food, is a central theme of the Bible; 'Food' is always related to celebration and coming together for greater koinonia of the all

'earth communities' including the communities of humans with praise and thanks-giving for the blessing of sufficiency; and,

Biblical theology is justice based on cosmo-centrism where all creatures which are considered as equal to each other and the kingdom of God is interpreted as the 'kin-dom’ of God where the god-intended 'kith and kin' relationship with all creature be affirmed and upheld.

Our deliberations in this consultation have facilitated us to get engaged in theologically, socially, scientifically, ministerially, diaconally, and practically initiated conversations on sustainable development, prospects, and challenges in agriculture and agri-business, genetic engineering, bio-ethics, and agroecology. We were also inspired by the success stories of life-giving agriculture practices and farmers' associations and movements, capacity enhancement initiatives from the activist, academic and theological fraternities from the participants.

We are enraged that the churches in Asia and even in the whole world is yet to understand that, hazardous synthetic chemical fertilizers, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), plant growth regulator, and synthetic chemical pesticides ruin the fertility of the land, species, crops, and grains. Therefore, we urge the congregations and communities to be free from such synthetically produced and chemically loaded food grains and to say no to GMO products.

We realize the Churches in Asia to be prophetic in challenging the popular ‘life- killing agriculture’ and evangelize the region for the 'life-giving agriculture.'

Therefore we pledge to:

Adopt / adapt theology as a strategy, prayer as an advocacy tool and worship as a campaign for life-giving agriculture through our worship, preaching and public witness and promote the same among our networks;

Build people's movements to work on food security and eco-justice in solidarity and accompany them so as to express our faith commitments to care for the Earth;

Commit time and resources on the younger generations to assist them to be aware of the hazardous agriculture patterns and food habits;

Develop networks of like-minded individuals, communities, local congregations, and movements to be the ambassadors of the life-giving agriculture; and,

Encourage in-depth leaning on the life-killing, GM Products, biologically terminated-seeds and chemically loaded food products and systems at the local congregational / community and Asian regional level ethical and theological discussions and deliberations and to respond them as faith communities.

As an outcome of the 4th LGA Forum, we launch an Asian level ‘Boycott GMO Products' campaign and pledged to take it to our respective countries to campaign through our

Page 116 of 119

congregations and networks. This would be the Asian churches’ prophetical engagement to challenge the governments and pro-GMO producers and practitioners.

Therefore, we invite all the churches, diaconal departments, and civil society organizations in Asia to join the solidarity and missional pilgrimage together towards realizing the 'kin-dom' of God on earth to be hazardous synthetic chemical-free and GMO products-free and to affirm and to promote life-giving agriculture towards ‘Living Together in the Household of God'.

Yours in Christ,

The Participants4th Asian Christian Life-Giving Agriculture Forum,28th November to 2nd December 2016Chiang Mai, Thailand

Page 117 of 119

List of Participants1. Rev. Han Kyeong Ho2. Rev. Dr. Chung Ho Jin3. Mr. Kim Jun Kwon4. Rev. Song Myoung Ho5. Rev. Cha Heung Do6. Rev. Ahn Jae Hak7. Rev. Park Yong Cheol8. Ms. An Young Sook9. Rev. Youn Tea Soon10. Rev. Dr. Kim In Soo11. Ms. Kwon Keun Sook12. Ms. Kim Ju won13. Ms. Lee Soong Ri14. Ms. You Mi Ho15. Rev. Christie Catherine16. Rev. Kim Jung Teak17. Rev. Dr. Lee Kyu Dae18. Ms. Kim Mo Young19. Rev. Nam Myoung Hyun20. Rev. Edwin Tupoloh21. Rev. Saniel Angkot22. Mr. Jimmy Anak Betal23. Mr. Bilvey Hirrson24. Rev. Agong Sakai25. Rev. Samuel Sihombing26. Rev. Rein Justin Gultom27. Dr. Ardniel A. Baladjay28. Rev. Christopher Rajkumar29. Rev. Nishantha Gunaratne30. Ms. Tomoko Arakawa31. Ms. Mariamma Sanu George (Nirmala)32. Mr. Eang Chhun33. Dr. Abram Bicksler34. Rev. Grace Moon35. Dr. Rey Ty36. Ms. Angela Kim37. Ms. CaseyLita Fa'aui38. Rev. Dedi Pardosi39. Mr. Jebasingh Samuvel40. Ms. Keng Patchayotai

Page 118 of 119

41. Mr. Songwut Kopkun42. Mrs. Wantanee Suwannachang43. Mr. Taweesak Thanapang44. Miss. Krongkarn Sirapaiboonporn45. Mr. Yakob Wanapitakkul46. Mr. Somboon Phoonamsap47. Miss. Samorn Chummongkhon48. Mr. Permpoon Saenpanya49. Mrs. Khuanjit Khumsaen50. Mr. Rachata Mayur51. Mr. Phaitoon Saekhow52. Mr. Niran Chanta53. Mrs. Wanpen Thisa54. Mr. Prakasit TG koma55. Mr. Nuttapong Maneekorn56. Dr. Chuleepun Srisoontorn57. Mr. Tewin Somchit

Page 119 of 119