![]()
Part I
Introduction to Neglected and Underutilized Species (NUS)
![]()
1
NUS
What they are and why we need them more than ever
Stefano Padulosi, Gennifer Meldrum, E.D. Israel Oliver King and Danny Hunter
DOI: 10.4324/9781003044802-2
Introduction
Agricultural biodiversity represents a strategic resource in ensuring food and nutrition security for humankind (Thrupp, 2000; Frison et al., 2006; Bioversity International, 2017). It keeps us healthy, as diets with poor biodiversity often lack crucial vitamins and micronutrients and are associated with diet-related non-communicable diseases (diabetes, heart attacks, overweight, obesity and cancer), which are a leading cause of death at the global level (Branca et al., 2019). Diversity on our plate is of paramount importance to everybody, and making sure this diversity is safeguarded and promoted should receive the utmost attention of decision makers, both at the national and the international level.
The period of intense agricultural growth from the early 1960s to mid-1980s, known as the Green Revolution,1 was characterized by an unprecedented expansion in the production of staple crops through the development of high-yielding varieties (HYV). The Green Revolution contributed to a reduction of poverty. An increase of approximately 15% in per capita GDP as a result of a 10% use increase of the HYV in the period 1960â2000 was observed, with an associated reduction of food insecurity for billions of people, and an estimated 18â27 million hectares of natural ecosystems safeguarded from being converted to agricultural land (Hazell, 2003; FAO, 2011; Pingali, 2012; Stevenson et al., 2013; Gollin et al., 2018). Among the key players of the Green Revolution were the international agricultural research centers of the CGIAR Consortium, responsible for the development of HYVs of major staplesâmostly cerealsâwhose production more than doubled in developing nations between the years 1961 and 1985 (Tribe, 1994; Conway, 1998). Unfortunately, this success came with a heavy cost to the environment (e.g., in the loss of wild and cultivated biodiversity, water scarcity, increased crop vulnerability to pests and diseases and loss of soil fertility), and caused a deterioration in human nutrition (e.g., with essential amino acid deficiencies and a general lack of balanced essential fatty acids, vitamins and minerals from cereal-dominated diets), as well as increased health hazards from the widespread use of pesticides. This period also brought about socio-political instabilities (e.g., ruralâurban migration of farmers unable to afford introduced technologies, as well as social conflicts and marginalization) (Jennings, 1988; Fowler and Mooney, 1990; Pingali, 2012).
The greater availability of calories resulting from the Green Revolutionâs efforts has not represented an escape from hunger for millions of people, as HYV have been scarcely adopted in Africa, for instance, and the narrow crop diversity has led to food systems simplification, reducing options for healthy diets (Mooney and Fowler, 1990; Vanhaute, 2011; Willett et al., 2019). Nearly one in three people globally are still afflicted by malnutritionâa situation predicted to worsen in coming years based on current trends (FAO et al., 2018; UNSCN, 2018).
The diversity reductionist approach followed by the Green Revolution has influenced the way agricultural development strategies and programs have been developed in every country for decades. This approach continues to have an influence today at different levels; however, it is increasingly questioned and less accepted, with urgent calls for a global transformation of the food system growing (Schutter and Vanloueren, 2011).
As we tackle the ambitious Sustainable Development Goal 2 (SDG2) of achieving âzero hungerâ by 2030, we are faced with the disturbing paradox that is hindering our efforts: of the 5,000 food crops estimated to exist worldwide, global food systems are dominated by just three (rice, wheat and maize), which provide half the worldâs plant-derived calories (FAO, 2015; Willis, 2017). An incredible wealth of nutritious crops, and other wild edible food plants, is largely overlooked in our battle to produce food and tackle malnutrition, and this is happening now when the need for diversification of production and food systems has never been greater. Crop uniformity and standardization of agricultural fields are causing food systems to be enormously vulnerable to climate change, reducing farmersâ capacity to absorb shocks and leaving consumers with fewer choices for nutritious and healthy diets (Padulosi et al., 2019). Those thousands of nutritious plant species left behind by the Green Revolution, which we call âneglected and underutilized speciesâ (NUS), represent a unique treasure for humanity that must be recovered from their state of neglect and must be mobilized to fuel a truly evergreen agricultural revolution (Swaminathan, 1996, 2020).
NUS: beyond a definition
Neglected and underutilized species have become a popular topic lately, both in public debates and scientific papers. Different terminologies (orphan, forgotten, lost, alternative, minor, novel, local, traditional, etc.) are interchangeably used to refer to these species, creating confusion among researchers and development practitioners. It is one of the aims of this book to dispel this confusion. NUS is a terminology subject to different interpretations, reflecting peopleâs own cultural background and sensitivity, and we hope to put everybody on the same level of understanding through the following observations.
In simple words, NUS are plant species thatâalthough appreciated at local levelâare forgotten, abandoned or rarely explored by researchers and other agriculture and food systems R&D actors, for various reasons (e.g., low economic competitiveness; lack of improved seed, adequate cultivation practices, or processing technologies and reduced consumer appeal). They include wild, semi or fully domesticated plants from different food plant groups (including cereals, vegetables, legumes, roots and tubers, fruits, nuts, spices, etc.), diverse growth forms (herbs, shrubs, vines, trees, etc.) and life cycles (annual, biennial, perennial) (Padulosi et al., 2018). Although this book focuses solely on food plants, we should point out that NUS as a concept may well refer to other species too (plants or animals), as exemplified by the growing interest in the use of insects as a source of sustainable and cheap proteins for food and feed (van Huis et al., 2013; Dickie et al., 2019).
The reduced use of NUS over time has led to the loss of both their genetic diversity and a wealth of traditional practices and associated knowledge that was developed by generations of traditional farmers for managing sustainable harvests (if occurring wild), cultivation, processing and preparation. Also contributing to this marginalization is the widespread perception, registered particularly among younger consumers, that NUS are the legacy of backwardness and hardship of traditional rural societies, the food of the poor, and should therefore be abandoned (Durst and Nomindelger, 2014; Padulosi et al., 2019).
The term âneglected and underutilized speciesâ was first conceived by IPGRI (the predecessor of Bioversity) in the late 1990s (Eyzaguirre et al., 1999). The reason why this term was chosen relates to its usefulness in conveying two key messages upfront: firstly, the status of neglect by research and development efforts of these traditional resources; and secondly, the status of underuse in relation to the multiple benefits they can bring to improving nutrition and health, livelihoods, the environment and biodiversity conservation, if better harnessed by society. Furthermore, the use of the word âspeciesâ instead of âcropsâ, was also preferred in reminding people that NUS do encompass both naturally occurring species that are harvested in the wild and domesticated species. Lastly, the word âneglectedâ is useful for evoking in our narratives those millions of âneglectedâ people (vulnerable groups, marginalized members of society), who rely on NUS for their livelihood and for whom the improvement of these resources, to which they are culturally connected, represents an opportunity of economic growth, empowerment and reaffirmation of identity.
The term âorphan cropsâ, present also in the title of this book, is often used interchangeably with NUS, though the latter is broader in scope as it includes both wild and cultivated species that may not immediately convey the messages with the same intensity described in Box 1.1. For more reflections on the semantics of the term NUS, the reader can refer to Padulosi et al. (2004, 2008).
Box 1.1 Short description of NUS and other similar terms commonly found in literature
| Term | Description | Source |
| Neglected crops | âNeglected crops are those grown primarily in their centres of origin by traditional farmers, where they are still important for the subsistence of local communities. Some species may be widely distributed around the world but tend to occupy special niches in the local ecology and in local production and consumption systems. While these crops continue to be maintained by sociocultural preferences and the ways they are used, they remain inadequately documented and neglected by formal research and conservationâ. | IPGRI, 2002 |
| NUS | âAcronym standing for Neglected and Underutilized Species and applied to useful plant species which are marginalized, if not entirely ignored, by researchers, breeders and policy makers; they belong to a large, biodiverse group of thousands of domesticated, semi-domesticated or wild species; they may be locally adapted minor crops as well as non-timber forest species. The âNUSâ term is a fluid one, as when a crop is simultaneously a well-established major crop in one country an... |
