(PDF) Cuba’s Agricultural Revolution: A resilient social-ecological system perspective
Cuba’s Agricultural Revolution: A resilient social-ecological system perspective
Article (PDF Available) · December 2014 with 319 Reads
Export this citation
Richwell Tryson Musoma
Ministry of Agriculture, Government of Zimbabwe
Discover the world's research
15+ million members
118+ million publications
700k+ research projectsJoin for free
Figures - uploaded by Richwell Tryson Musoma
Author content
Three phases in Transformation (Stockholm
…
Content uploaded by Richwell Tryson Musoma
Author content
Download full-text PDF
1
Cuba’s Agricultural Revolution: A resilient social-ecological system perspective*
*Richwell Tryson Musoma, SLU, Sweden, email: rlmu0001@stud.slu.se
1. Introduction
The Cuban agrarian development serves as a model for what humanity can attain. However, it
is also a lesson for us not to wait for crises (like the Cuban food crisis in early 1990s) to adapt
quickly to changing socio-ecological and economic challenges like food shortages. External
drivers and shocks to the social-ecological system have for long been known for causing
negative impacts to social, economic and environmental systems without considering them as
potential to bring change and lead to the attainment of a stable and resilient environment.
This paper analyses Cuba’s environmental degradation caused by conventional agriculture
prior to the “Special Period” and how this contributed to “alternative” agriculture thereafter
using resilience thinking. The paper uses the concept of resilience that relates to the ability for
renewal, reorganization and development, which has received less focus in ecology, but
important for sustainability (Ganderson and Holling, 2002; Berket et al., 2003, cited in Folke,
2006). To achieve this, the paper starts with the context analysis. This section presents the brief
history of Cuba and the environmental degradation that was caused by the agriculture sector
prior to the “Special Period,” the institutional settings, legal frameworks and the management
system of land and soil resources in agriculture. The second part introduces the concept of
resilience in a social-ecological perspective and how it is used in natural resources
management. The emphasis here is put on the understanding of resilience and how it can help
understand the case. The third part provides a discussion of the resilience process in Cuba’s
agricultural revolution. Theory and policy implications are raised as the concluding remarks.
2
2. Context Analysis
2.1 Cuba’s agricultural history
Land and soil have remained a strategic resource for Cuba since the time it was a Spanish
colony between 1492 and 1898 (Zepeda, 2003). During this colonial era, both the local Taino
people and forests were eliminated to pave way for extensive dairy cattle and sugarcane
monocrop fields belonging to a few rich owners and worked by slaves. It got under the rule of
the United States (US) military between 1898 and 1902 (Alverez, 2004). Over the next few
decades US businesses and private owners acquired some of the best land and sugarcane
production increased to the detriment of food security and the environment. Due to the land
ownership and wealth being in the hands of the few, a large part of the natives remained poor
and with low incomes to sustain their livelihoods.
According to Zepeda (2003), the US military rule was overthrown and socialist government
took over. The seizure of US property invited US policy of isolation to the island which by
default turned to the Soviet Bloc. Automatically, Cuba adopted the Soviet agricultural model
– large monoculture state farms, highly mechanized, heavily reliant on chemical fertilizers and
pesticides (Zepeda, 2003). This modern model due to its high capital requirements got subsidies
from the Soviet Union through exchange of oil, chemicals and machinery for Cuban sugar
(Ibid.). Zepeda (2003), states that subsidies suddenly disappeared after the fall of the Berlin
Wall in 1989. This came as a shock to the country which also at the same time saw the US
trade sanctions being tightened. The unexpected events led to an economic crisis termed the
“Special Period.” Abruptly, oil imports dropped by 50%, availability of fertilizers and
chemicals fell by 70% and food imports dropped by 50% (Zepeda, 2003).
2.2 Agricultural legal frameworks, institutions and the ecological impacts
It is impressing to note that Cuba had a complete legal framework for environmental protection
and prevention of ecological degradation since 1959. Agriculture in particular had several
notable laws and regulations that include Law 239 of 1959 that is called the Leyde Repobacion
Forestal (Law of reforestation) (Pichs, 1992, cited in Alverez, 2004). The objective of this law
is to conduct a national reforestation program. Another law of interest to the sector is Law 81
of 1997 which is the Law on the environment passed by the National Committee for Protection
3
of Environment and Rational Use of Resources (COMARNA) (Diaz-Briquets and Pérez-
López, 2000, pp. 65-67; cited in Alverez, 2004). However, the institutions for natural resources
management are weak as cited by Diaz-Briquets and Pérez-López (2000, pp. 65-67; cited in
Alverez, 2004, p. 3);
Environmental protection institutions are weak, and their ability to enforce laws and
regulations is severely limited by their lack of authority to interfere in matters under
the control of economic-sector ministries.
Various records show ecological degradation caused by heavy mechanized and often
monoculture agriculture in Cuba (Alverez, 2004). Among the most critical were one million
hectares of salinized soils, the expanded recurrence of moderate to extreme soil erosion, soil
compaction with its resultant soil barrenness, loss of biodiversity and deforestation of vast
lands (Funes-Monzote, n.d). Besides the land resources, water resources were also affected as
the agricultural sector made supply of irrigation water a top priority. “An ambitious dam
construction program and an increase in the extraction rate of underground water have resulted
in the contamination of a considerable volume of water in aquifers and increased salinization
from salt water intrusion near coastal areas,” (Díaz-Briquets and Pérez-López, 2000; cited in
Alverez, 2004).
The above account of natural resources occurred prior to the Special Period. However, during
the period some negative effects can also be observed. Of importance is the reduction of several
areas of the national budget provision for environmental research. According to Alverez
(2004), this includes the risk to the protection and upkeep of its scientific accumulations and
to the diminishing of training. Soil erosion this time was mainly due to deforestation due to
high demand of firewood for energy.
3. Understanding Resilience
3.1 Resilience concept and the social-ecological system perspective
Resilience was initially presented by Holling (1973) as an idea to help comprehend ecological
systems limitation with option attractors to hold on in the first state subject to perturbations
(Folke et al, 2010). It can be defined as “the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and
reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure
4
and feedbacks, and therefore identity, that is, the capacity to change in order to maintain the
same identity,” (Holling, 1986). In ecology therefore it becomes the capacity of an ecosystem
to cope with disturbances such as pollution and fire without changing into a qualitatively new
state. Socially, it is the ability of human communities to recover or withstand shock, for
example environmental, social, economic change or political disturbances. Due to the dynamic
nature, the interactions and interdependency of ecosystems and humans, resilience therefore
need to analyse the social and ecological system as a whole.
Most work on resilience in ecology has been dedicated on the ability to absorb shocks and still
maintain function. However, recently a resilience approach to sustainability has concentrated
on how to build the ability to manage surprising change, the capacity to renew, reorganise and
develop. According to Stockholm Resilience Centre (n.d), the concept also moves past viewing
people as outside drivers of ecosystem changes and rather takes a look at how humans relate
to the biosphere and this is called a social-ecological system (SES). SES is an incorporated
arrangement of ecosystem and humans with equal feedback and reliance. The idea underscores
the people-in-nature point of view. In a resilient social-ecological system, shocks have the
potential to create opportunities for development or innovation. In a vulnerable system, even a
little disturbance may cause drastic social results (Adger, 2006).
Resilience thinking change policies from those that wish to cope with, adapt to and shape
change to those that enhance sustaining desirable ways for development in changing social,
economic and environmental situations. Holling (1973; cited in Folke, 2006) illustrates the
existence of multiple stable basins in natural systems. He presented resilience as capacity to
persist within such basin in face of transformation. Therefore, according to Holling (1973, p.
17; cited in Folke, 2006);
Resilience determines the persistence of relationships within a system and is a measure
of the ability of these systems to absorb changes of state variables, driving variables,
and parameters, and still persist.
To understand resilience thinking and its application, it is important to shortly discuss the two
key concepts that are adaptability and transformability. Walker et al., (2004:5; cited in Folke
et al., 2010) defines adaptability as “the capacity of actors in a system to influence resilience.
It captures the ability of an SES to learn, combine experience and knowledge, alter its feedback
to changing external drivers and internal processes, and further development within the current
stability domain or basin of attraction. By contrast, transformability is “capacity to create a
5
fundamentally new system within ecological, economic, or social structure make the existing
system untenable,” (Ibid).
According to a report for The Swedish Environmental Advisory Council (n.d), in sustainable
natural resources management, resilience of social-ecological systems can be used to
understand three things that are;
How much shock human and natural system can absorb and still remain within a
desirable state and or develop
The degree to which it is capable of reorganizing
The degree to which the system can build capacity for learning and adaptation
3.2 Cuba agricultural revolution and resilience
In contrast to the biosphere approach of ecologists who define resilience in terms of the
capacity of the environment to adapt or stay the same after shock, the case of Cuba is
identified to be unique. The concept of resilience that helps to understand the case of Cuba
is “transformability.” This concept was briefly presented in the previous subsection.
According to Walker et al., (2004, p. 5; cited in Folke et al., 2010);
“Transformation or transformability in social-ecological systems is defined as the
capacity to create untried beginnings from which evolve a fundamentally new way of
living when existing ecological, economic, and social conditions make the current
system untenable.”
Through the government, agencies, networks, institutions, and innovations, Cuba managed to
initiate and transform towards sustainability. Cuba was practicing an environmentally
degrading agricultural model (conventional agriculture) before the Special Period and turned
to an alternative agricultural model due to a sudden economic and political crisis. This post-oil
resilience carried with it productive implications bringing reorganization and rebuilding of the
ecosystem at the same time improving the household food security.
In light of this crisis the Cuban government moved a national push to change the agrarian sector
from industrialized farming to low-input and self-reliant agriculture. Because of the reduced
availability of chemical inputs, oil and machinery, the government moved to replace them with
locally available substitutes. When yields and farming production fell due to scarcity of inputs,
6
the first problem was of machinery and chemicals. Through some legislation, the government
encouraged the increase of the national ox head to provide traction substituting tractors. A
series of methods to produce organic substitutes, for example, compost manure substituted
synthetic fertilizers. This alternative method due to its inapplicability to big state owned farms,
prompted the government to Basic Units of Cooperative Production (UBPCs), a form of
worker-owned enterprise or cooperative small farms which became applicable (Funes-
Monzote, n.d). The effort from Campesino a Campesino (farmer-to-farmer) movement as well
as training, extension and research by Asociacion Cubana de Tecnicos Agricolas y Forestales
(ACTAF) also promoted agroecology (Altieri and Toledo, 2011).
Through its interest in having food locally produced and not moved long distances to the market
(locavorism), 383,000 urban farms with more than 50,000 hectares produce in excess of 1.5
million tonnes of vegetables enough to supply 40-60% of the city of Havana (Altieri and
Toledo, 2011). This has helped the country to transform and reorganize attaining self-reliance
in food at the same time practicing an ecological sustainable agricultural practice.
4. Discussion
4.1 Transformation to sustainable agriculture
Sustainable agriculture is defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development
(WCED, 1987), as “that which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet their own needs.” Though according to COMARNA (1991, p.20;
cited in Alverez, 2004) reforestation efforts were initiated in the late 1970s, real frantic efforts
started in the late 1990s (during the Special Period). Since then 110, 000 hectares have been
replanted each year in Cuba. Díaz-Briquets and Pérez-López (2000; cited in Alverez, 2004),
also highlights the decrease of population growth to below 1% having direct implications for
sustainable agriculture due to its translation to less environmental degradation.
However, interesting to note is that the end of the Soviet subsidies brought low-input
sustainable agriculture and national-scale organic farming (Carney and Haynes, 1993, p. 1).
During the same time, issues of sustainability were supported by Cuban scholars, technicians
and extension services who helped form farmers. The “alternative” agriculture model included
organic fertilizers, bio-pest control, and use of animal traction power, crop diversification,
7
more local labour input, soil conservation and reclamation of degraded lands. The management
of natural resources and the advancement towards sustainable agriculture was also due to use
of local knowledge and alternative technologies (Carney and Haynes, 1993). Socially, the
Special Period also contributed to reversing the rural-to-urban migration in a bid to increase
people in farming. Cuba unintentionally rejected Green Revolution principles, adopting social
and ecological tailored agricultural process.
Transformational change in Cuba’s agricultural model shows a change in a stable social-
ecological system that brought up a new state of agriculture model that drastically reduced
impacts on the environment. It resulted in changes of the perceptions about industrialized
agriculture, social networks, and patterns of interactions among actors, including political and
power relations and other related institutions. Because the transformation was not deliberate,
but an adaptation action due to the effects of the Special Period, it becomes a “forced
transformation.” According to Olsson et al. (2004; cited in Folke et al. 2010), case studies of
SES suggest that transformation takes three stages. The first is getting prepared or preparing
for the SES for change. Secondly, the movement by making use of the crisis as a window
opportunity for transformation. Lastly, the building resilience of the new SES. Stockholm
Resilience Centre (n.d) identifies three phases in the transformation and this fits in the Cuban
case (fig. 1).
Fig 1: Three phases in Transformation (Stockholm Resilience Centre (n.d))
8
4.1.1 Preparation phase
In response to the food shortage crisis, Cuba had two choices that is to starve or self-reliance
without the use of chemicals or machines in agriculture. The efforts of small-scale farmers, for
example, in Havana initiated urban gardens. This was independent of the government actions.
Crops were grown in vacant lands, rooftops and balconies. Those with space began to rear
small livestock bringing in sustainable organic farming in urban Cuba. The government,
complemented this effort some few years later through creating Urban Agriculture Department
(UAD) to aid developing state-funded infrastructure for urban agriculture (Funes-Monzote,
n.d). UAD then worked with agriculture research sector and some learning institutions to
develop information and resources to push up the new trajectory of development – sustainable
agriculture.
4.1.2 Navigation phase
The Cuban government through the UAD and some farmer-to-farmer organizations
(Campesino a Campesino) helped scale up the innovations for organic agriculture. UAD
adopted city laws to permit public or private vacant land to be used as farms, established
initiatives, for example seed houses and necessary inputs to assist local farmers. A network of
extension agents was also established to disseminate information and appropriate technologies
that were independent of synthetic chemicals and machinery. They also trained the locals on
bio-fertilizers, composting and crop rotations among other initiatives.
4.1.3 Resilience building
In this phase that resulted in a renewal, reorganization and development, the Cuban government
provided incentives, for example the issuance of rent-free land (Alverez, 2004). This was to
encourage the use of land for food self-reliance. Social networks were mobilized especially
through the Campesino a Campesino to support the new sound social-ecological system.
9
5. Concluding remarks
5.1 Theoretical conclusions
As opposed to the natural scientists who define resilience in terms of the capacity of a post-
crisis environment to return to its original stability state, the paper identified combined social-
ecological system resilience after an economic crisis that carried with it reorganization to a
desired environmental state. In the context of Cuba, the Special Period led to a renewed,
reorganized and developed SES.
The concept of resilience helps to understand the success of the agriculture revolution in Cuba
and its links to social and ecological issues. It gives insight on community-based resilience that
grasp both ecological management principles and household food security. For example
agriculture’s return to Havana city shows a new urban ecology, meant to provide food while
reorganizing to natural process. Within the concept, it can also be seen that environmental
stewardship is the basis for social and economic development. The sustainable use of soil and
land that followed the Special Period led to food sufficiency and promoted locavorism thus
reducing carbon footprint associated with the industrialized agriculture. It is also important to
note that the resilience concept enhances chances of sustainable development in changing SES.
The sudden drastic changes that brought up the Special Period were inevitable and helps to
view components or actions required to reorganize.
According to Stockholm Resilience Centre (n.d), transformational change is vital to move out
of “bad state” (social-ecological traps) and moving away from likely critical levels. Cuba
moved from unsound industrialized agriculture that it was trapped in since its colonization to
a sustainable agriculture model. This removed the likely threshold, for example land
degradation, soil compaction, pollution by chemicals and overuse of water for irrigation. In the
Cuban case there is a clear link between crisis and opportunity for organization. The sudden
withdrawal of subsidies from the Soviet Union to support industrialized agriculture gave Cuba
an opportunity to transform to sustainable agriculture.
Resilience concept also helps to appreciate the importance of networking and adaptive co-
management to find solutions to environmental problems. The farmers cooperated among
themselves and with other institutions to engage in organic farming during the Special Period.
The Cuban government through the Ministry of Agriculture, agriculture research, extension
10
agencies and the Campesino a Campesino generated innovations and incentives for
sustainability which helped in the transformation to a resilient system.
However, the concept is limited in exploring how diversity can play a role in resilience and
transformation. It should be noted that during the Special Period, exports from mining (nickel),
fisheries and health products contributed to the wellbeing of Cuba. Evidence from rural
development concepts like the Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) emphasizes on how diversity can
lead to social resilience and sustainable environments. Investing in diversity can help people’s
livelihoods to become resilient to changes. Resilience also gives less insight into how much
shock the SES is able to absorb and remain in the same state. It is therefore important to analyse
the degree which the system is capable of reorganizing and develop. The degree to reorganize
and develop is influenced by many factors, for example the society, economy, power-relations
and institutions within a system.
5.2 Policy recommendations
Resilience in SES is not only important to sustainable natural resources management, but also
to sustainable development. Policies should enhance resilience in the face of unpredictable
situations either, be it environment phenomenon like Hurricanes or socioeconomic like market
failures. Policies should drive change in a sustainable manner and know the channels and actors
that they are made for so that they encourage effective adaptation. Above all, policy for
resilience in SES should embrace and strengthen diversity and linkages between people and
nature, through;
Addressing polies tailored to scale and situation
Differentiating policies that slow down or accelerate sustainable development
Provision of support, economic and social incentives for sustainable natural resources
management, and
Strengthening institutions and linkages for SES resilience.
11
6. References
Adger, W.N. 2006. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16 (3) (2006), pp. 268–281
Altieri, M.A., Toledo, V.M., 2011. The agroecological revolution in Latin America: rescuing
nature, ensuring food sovereignty and empowering peasants. Journal of Peasant Studies 38,
587–612. doi:10.1080/03066150.2011.582947
Alvarez, José. 2004. Cuban Agriculture before 1959: The Political and Economic Situations.
FE479 . Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.
Alvarez, José. 2004. Environmental Deterioration and Conservation in Cuban Agriculture. FE489.
Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.
Carney, Judith A., and Richard Haynes. 1993. from the Editors. Agriculture and Human Values 10
(3, summer): 1-2.
Folke, C., 2006. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems
analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, 253–267. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002
Folke, C., S. R. Carpenter, B. Walker, M. Scheffer, T. Chapin, and J. Rockström. 2010. Resilience
thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society 15(4):
20. [Online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/
Funes-Monzote, F. N.d. Towards sustainable agriculture in Cuba.
Holling, C.S. 1986. Resilience of ecosystems: local surprise and global change. Pages 292-317 in
W.C. Clark and R.E. Munn, editors. Sustainable development and the biosphere. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Stockholm Resilience Centre. N.d. Applying resilience thinking seven principles for building
resilience in social-ecological systems
The Swedish Environmental Advisory Council. N.d. Resilience and Sustainable Development.
World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. p. 27.
Zepeda, L., 2003. Cuban Agriculture: A Green and Red Revolution. Choices: The Magazine of
Food, Farm, and Resources Issues
(PDF) Cuba’s Agricultural Revolution: A resilient social-ecological system perspective. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272790002_Cuba's_Agricultural_Revolution_A_resilient_social-ecological_system_perspective [accessed Dec 18 2018].
