70%
of the land is at desertification.
So it is already losing the productive capacity.
A forest is much more productive than any kind of agricultural systems because,
for example,
they absorb 99%
of the sunlight.
We also need to implement the payment for the ecosystem services.
This is a crucial mechanism.
Everybody wants to have clean water,
clean air.
Welcome back to The Deep Seed and today we have episode 3 of the mini-series about Val di Bella.
Today I'm interviewing Rafael Bueno.
He is a professor and researcher in ecology and together we dive into some of the biggest topics and questions in agriculture right now.
We talk about the massive problem of desertification in Sicily but also in many other parts of the world and how that's related to farming and how...
By using regenerative agriculture methods and principles,
we can actually reverse that.
We also talk about farming subsidies and the urgent need to stop financing desertification and instead start financing regeneration.
This episode was made in partnership with Soil Capital.
I'm your host Raphael and this is the Deep Seed Podcast.
So my name is Rafael Bueno,
I'm a Brazilian ecologist and I'm a researcher in the University of Palermo and I work particularly with my main interests are on the role of ecological interactions,
conservation of biodiversity and agroecology and then
I apply this the scientific knowledge in the field working together with farmers or with the stakeholders like for public management of
protected the areas and so on.
My role in Valdibela,
I met Massimiliano a long time ago and we began talking about the relationship of biodiversity and agriculture and then I participated in
Seminario Futuro,
an event that they made to sow in the wheat,
the old varieties of wheat,
and then later we have a moment of discussion.
And then he invited me to make a presentation about this relationship of biodiversity in agriculture.
And then from there we began collaborating together within Valdibella and also applying this scientific point of view of the agricultural systems.
What inspired you in the first place to become an ecologist and to work in agriculture?
Well,
I was born in São Paulo.
São Paulo which is now
20 million people,
but my parents got a small piece of land in the interior and so I grew up there in the field,
so we cultivated and had some animals and so from there I became inspired and also we promoted the restoration because it was at the beginning a degraded land and then we began this work to produce,
you know,
agricultural...
part of the land but also to restore the degraded areas,
particularly the water system.
And then from there
I began thinking that this should be my way,
my pathway,
and then I got my bachelor in ecology and then this was of course my confirmation that this was what I would like to do and to join this nature conservation.
with agriculture.
So how to bring them together to make a good production.
We need agriculture but mostly agriculture is also the problem.
So to get the solution from the problem and then mixing together with natural conservation.
Okay yeah.
When you watch TV and you see the news and you see the political debates about agriculture
It seems like there's an opposition between nature and agriculture.
What do you think about that?
Yes,
unfortunately there is this opposition because in general,
not only in agriculture,
but our society is generally opposed to nature.
We cannot see,
we have difficulties to see how we need nature and how to get this sustainable development which is clearly...
feasible but there are many difficulties to from the political side but also the society you know the common people they don't don't see often they see a piece of land of a forest but they cannot see that we need this
piece of natural environment to have our water to have the all the ecosystem functionings and services that we need.
So yeah,
it's quite difficult.
It's difficult to try to make them understand that both things need to go together,
otherwise it will be...
it is already difficult,
our survival in the planet.
So in my work I try to make the scientific part,
but also the dissemination,
to try to at least show data.
that we need to change the way we are managing our system towards a more sustainable way of living.
Could you maybe describe a particular scenario or example where improving nature,
improving biodiversity is actually for the farmer's benefit?
Yeah,
actually let's just think about the soil for example.
After the
Green Revolution,
where nature became the enemy,
more or less,
we have lots of degraded soils here in Sicily,
but not only in Sicily.
And in this case,
it's this degradation,
this desertification process,
which is the loss of the productive capacity of a former area that was productive before.
In this way we
See these soils and they are just clay sand and the mineral part,
we have lost the biological part of the soil and this I think is a good indicator on how to we need to improve the biodiversity beginning with the soils that we need for agriculture but also if we take into account the the whole and
ecological networks that are behind the agricultural systems and the natural system.
For the biological control,
for example,
of pests,
but also the antagonisms of the natural fungi that has in the soil against the damage,
the fungi that creates a lot of problems in agriculture.
So this gradual loss of biodiversity in agricultural systems at the same time created the loss of ecosystem services.
that we need to farm.
And this is always,
we find the conventional systems always fighting and need to use even more herbicides,
fungicides,
because of course they are fighting against the natural way of conducting the system.
And this is a lost battle.
If we focus specifically on the water issue,
we're in Sicily here,
We have a changing climate,
getting hotter,
drier,
with shorter,
more intense rain events.
Could you describe how improving biodiversity helps being more resilient in the face of climate change?
Yeah,
we need to consider that this scenario that we see in Sicily was not like that,
because Sicily,
I also select this place because Sicily was covered by forests before,
no?
Almost all Sicily.
This was the natural vegetation and it was full of rivers,
full of water sources,
because trees or the vegetation in general are the protection of the water,
no?
They are the...
we need them to have the water.
the water cycle,
the water sources,
the rivers.
So increasing biodiversity,
for example,
creating agroforestry systems and letting the water sources or the borders of the rivers with a more tree-like vegetation,
this already could improve a lot the conservation of the water,
and of course increase the organic matter in the soil.
Because 1%
of organic matter is capable of storing more than hundreds of thousands of liters of water in the soil.
So adopt practices that improve the biodiversity in the sense of the biological life of the soil.
So the nutrient cycling,
the organic matter creation and decomposition would already benefit a lot in their water system.
So the water cycle,
the conservation of the soil and increase the presence of trees.
Okay,
but a lot of farmers will see reforesting,
for example,
like counterproductive because they're taking productive land out of production to reforest.
Even though it has this ecological benefit that their production will benefit from because they have more water in the soil and things like that.
So how do you solve that issue?
How do you convince farmers that it's a good idea to plant trees?
Do we need them to find this combination of food producing trees like agroforestry?
or yeah
Yeah,
well,
actually there are several examples of highly productive systems that use trees together,
no?
Agroforestry systems.
And if you talk about productivity,
a forest is much more productive than any kind of agricultural systems because,
for example,
they absorb 99%
of the sunlight.
Instead,
most of the fields that we saw here,
the sun goes directly to the soil.
And it's important to remember that the only natural system where the soil is not protected by vegetation are the deserts.
All the other systems,
the soil is covered,
both from the grassland,
but particularly from forest trees.
So this is the natural message that over hundreds of millions of evolution say the soil must be protected.
On the other side,
the farmers can say,
no,
but to have trees,
I lost my productivity.
But on the other side,
we have,
for example,
in Sicily,
but in many parts of the world,
70%
of the land is at desertification.
So it is already losing the productive capacity.
Also if we go to walk in the fields after a strong rain.
which are the increasing phenomenon in this climate change,
you know,
this very concentrated rain,
we see a lot of erosion.
And if you have erosion,
you don't have any more agricultural productivity.
So it's a wrong way of seeing trees as enemies because we are already losing a lot of productivity with this conventional system,
you know,
moving the soil,
plowing and burning organic matter,
erosion.
And we can see that walking on the field.
So I think it's a wrong way of seeing the system to say that to have trees or keep some pieces of lands with more natural vegetation,
it's counterproductive.
I guess most people who are knowledgeable about agroecology would agree with you,
but the majority of farmers,
they probably need to see concrete examples of of that happening and prove that those farmers who try that
are improving their system,
improving the health of the system but also the economics.
Have you been able to help farmers here at Val di Bella implement agroforestry,
for example,
and demonstrate that it was positive for them?
Yeah,
we are working with Val di Bella.
Here,
in this farm particularly,
is a very nice example because we are implementing this downhill agroforestry system with olive trees and legumes,
for example.
We are working here to
keep the soil as much as covered as possible.
And we have a project of implementing a wide species of trees together,
create a food forest on the upper side of the hill in a way that the water comes in this upper part and then it gets infiltrated in the terrain due to the presence of trees and then to feed the water table of the whole farm.
So in this we are...
applying different farms of Valdibella,
it's not easy to change the mentality,
because particularly it's difficult for some farmers to accept that their lands are being degraded,
or if they change their way of doing it could be possible.
We need to show them some models,
how it works.
And in Valdibella we are applying a large-scale
biodiversity increase,
um,
increasement,
no,
biodiversity enhancement in the farms to create these models to show farmers that it's completely possible,
we have several examples of already ongoing models to improve the presence of trees that could be also productive trees,
of course,
but especially to conserve the soil and avoid erosion and increase organic matter.
So together we are applying,
we have the school of agroecology,
where we bring the farmers there and show them these many examples of how it works and especially try to show them the real costs of the conventional farming of the coast of desertification,
that we are all paying for this land degradation but it's a hidden cost.
Often it's not on the main frame,
We just think about that.
Tons of products that I can pick up from my land,
but we don't think about all the degradation that we are causing in a general level.
Also the subsidies and so on.
There is a very complex economical part.
Of course,
yeah.
Just a quick word about the official partner of the Deep Seed podcast,
Sol Capital.
Sol Capital is a company that accelerates the transition to regenerative agriculture by financially rewarding farmers who improve things like soil health,
and biodiversity.
They're a really,
really cool company.
I love what they're doing and I'm super proud to be partnering with them for the podcast.
Do you see some kind of tipping point where a lot of farmers are getting to a stage where they cannot ignore anymore the desertification and the degradation of their own land and the loss of productivity and they cannot ignore what some of the neighbors are doing and they come to your trainings and you see more and more of these farmers now having this moment of,
okay,
this makes sense.
I need to change,
I need to go in that direction and I want to join this project.
Yeah,
well,
climate change and desertification,
if you ask for any farmer,
they will say no,
effectively something is different.
It's not like that anymore.
It's well recognized,
but not only for farmers.
Sicily has the
Sicilian strategy against desertification.
So it's an institutional recognition that we have a really big problem here.
It's not if you go to make the highway Palermo-Catania,
you see hundreds of thousands of hectares degraded.
Let's try to calculate effectively how much those pieces of land produce in agriculture.
You see that's very low.
And then here we have also a problem with the common agricultural policies that they don't help too much in this way.
They should give the subsidies,
but...
Together we compromise to take care of the land,
avoid erosion.
If you see erosion,
it's the failure of agriculture,
because you cannot produce anymore.
And we have lots of farmers that their productivity is going down,
even if they are pushing hard with fertilizers and trying to keep artificially their production.
The data says clear,
if you want to go to the science,
for example,
the studies
The academic community has no doubt about the degradation that we are going downhill in the productivity of agriculture due to climate change,
due to desertification,
loss of biodiversity and so on.
Yeah.
What's one recent scientific finding that you found super interesting or that gave you hope?
Well,
there are now many studies that comparing,
for example,
organic farming or minimum tillage or regenerative agriculture and trying to,
from the economical point of view,
comparing but again it's very important to do a very good
calculation with the whole system,
also of the hiding costs,
how much does erosion cost for us.
If you have a land that contributes to climate change,
then we have a global issue.
So there are many scientific studies putting together biodiversity,
the more sustainable way of managing a farm,
and in the economical point of view,
showing that it's much more valuable,
the products and the ecosystem services.
produced by these farms than in a conventional system where you have all of these high-deng costs of degradation that are not put on the calculations.
Just look at the amount of products that I harvest,
but also talk about the quality of the products or the health of the systems.
There are some reports showing that the rivers and the water reservoirs in Sicily,
but all over the world,
are full of pesticides,
for example.
and then we will drink that water.
How much does it will cost us in terms of healthy from the people also who lives in the city?
So we really need to make a very good mathematical calculation,
including all of this coast,
and there are several studies that are doing that and showing with no doubt that this is the only way we should go,
the agroecological way.
So what you're saying I guess is that we're now getting to the point where there's so much hard data proving that it's better economically.
It's a smarter choice to take care of the environment,
the ecology,
the biodiversity and we should see more banks giving you know loans to farmers who want to farm agroecologically.
We should see more subsidies going towards these farmers and we should see the market kind of shift towards that kind of...
way of doing agriculture because now we're getting the proofs that this is the smarter the smarter economic choice right yeah we should but we know that the financial system and the subsidy system does not work as
it should work in some cases at least thinking about conservation of the soil and biodiversity conservation oh they have other logics by lobbies and so on.
It's a very complicated...
We saw in the past few months that there was a riot of the tractors,
and they removed some strategic pieces,
for example,
against the use of pesticides,
and left aside 4%
of their land for biodiversity,
but they didn't talk about the prices.
So they are still paying very low prices for the farmers,
but trying to compensate this in other ways.
So the farmer is still there.
the weakest point in all of this financial system and instead they need to have the right salary,
the remuneration of their work in a way that they can also afford to organize better their systems,
giving also the recognition to the ecosystem services.
We also need to implement the payment for the ecosystem services.
This is a crucial mechanism.
Everybody wants to have clean water,
clean air,
or if there's hot to go under a tree,
but then we are not willing to pay to help farmers to sustain all of these more complex systems.
But this is also a very important point with the final consumers.
If they change and say,
no,
I will only buy products that follow
a more sustainable way of producing because I want to have a good water also to drink,
then it should be a better system.
And of course the loans and the bank system,
they should,
there are some very small activities,
but compared to how much money is given to the conventional way of doing farming,
respect to the agroecological and the regenerative,
of course,
is very...
Very low amount of farm,
even the cap subsidies,
80%
goes to 20%
of farmers.
So there is an issue in how this system is organized.
Yeah.
The new
CAP budget will be negotiated over the next year,
right?
It's going to be really important in deciding the next cycle of CAP subsidies.
What would be the one policy change that you would like to see above all?
Well,
I think regarding the CAP,
they should incorporate the health of the soil,
for example.
Okay,
I will give you the subsidies,
no problem,
I'm not discussing that.
But you at least must not have to have erosion in your farm,
for example.
I think this should be a relatively small change,
but we will at least guarantee that we are not going financing desertification.
Because this is the point.
And there is no doubt about that.
There's an interesting map of the...
a United States
Agricultural Department that shows that the title is clear,
risk of human-induced desertification,
and shows that 40%
of the planet is going towards desertification.
So we need to choose,
we go back to the forest or we go to desertification.
We need to find a way in the middle,
and now the financial system must help you to try to find this way and it's possible.
We have many examples of
Virtual systems that can produce.
We need agriculture,
but without degrading the whole system.
Fantastic.
That's really interesting.
Thank you.