system, another type of paradigm, as an alternative to the current dominant one, in addition to considering other structural (for example, land tenure), cultural and intercultural factors.

          In terms of exclusively scientific knowledge, Latin America and the Caribbean is the region that invests the least in research and development in relation to the rest of the world. In the agricultural sector, the region invests only 0.3% of gross domestic product, whereas the rest of the world invests 0.5%. The countries that invest most in research and development in the region (Argentina, Mexico, Costa Rica, Brazil and Chile) do so at levels very far below the developing countries that are prototypes in terms of returns on research and development, such as China, India, Korea, South Africa, Singapore and Israel, among others.

Knowledge, culture and agricultural development. In LAC, the “other ecologies” (Toledo and Castillo, 1999) and their respective systems of agricultural knowledge are as diverse as the rich and diverse cultures of the region (Deruyttere, 1997; Altieri, 1999). For example, the indigenous population is made up of more than 400 ethnic groups (Deruyttere, 1997), or 800 cultural groups (Toledo, 2007).

          In general, agricultural knowledge in the region is associated with the three types of agricultural production systems described in this document: the conventional/productivist system, the agroecological system and the traditional/ indigenous system (including peasant agriculture). Historically, indigenous forms of agriculture (hunting, fishing, gathering, domestication and cultivation of plants and animals) not only precede the other two, but are the result of an intimate and sophisticated interaction and co-evolution with nature in general and in particular with a significant number of plants and animals (Fowler and Mooney, 1990; Valladolid 1998, 2001; Altieri, 1999; Barkin, 2005; Narby, 2007). These interactions gave way to what today are known as centers of origin of native crops (Diversity, 1991). Traditional/indigenous knowledge is very valuable for the people of the region for three reasons: First, it contributes to the cultural affirmation of the indigenous people and is useful for learning about nature and its resources, including sources of food, medicines, forage, building materials

and tools, among other things (Toledo, 2005). For example, the Tzeltal of Mexico can recognize more than 1,200 plant species, whereas the P’urepecha recognize more than 900 species and the Maya of the Yucatan approximately 500 species (Toledo et al., 1985). Second, this knowledge results from the experience accumulated and shared by many men and women over thousands of years. And third, knowledge is also wisdom, as it is closely linked to the identity, values, beliefs, traditions and ideals of individuals and communities. Nonetheless, it is also important to recognize that traditional knowledge and local knowledge have weaknesses. For example, often this knowledge and wisdom is not found in books and may be lost if not transmitted from generation to generation. Traditional knowledge is also limited to a locality or region and is not easily transferable to other regions with different conditions. Finally, many natural phenomena cannot be perceived through feelings without the help of technologies, for example, microorganisms, biochemical processes and the DNA molecule (Toledo, 2005). Moreover, from the standpoint of indigenous experience, traditional/ indigenous knowledge and wisdom are not necessarily limited by what one can see, hear, touch or feel. For example, anthropologist Jeremy Narby (2007) notes that a good part of the extraordinary knowledge of Amazonian plant life comes through supra-conscious/extrasensory states during ceremonies and rituals, such as those performed by the shamans of the Amazonian indigenous peoples. In his view, a process of affirmation, cultural regeneration and intercultural exchange could help recover the potential of combining the physical and the metaphysical (Narby and Huxley, 2004; Narby, 2007).

          Colonial and neocolonial agriculture in the region is based on (1) the exploitation of the plants, animals, peoples and indigenous knowledge and wisdom native to the region, (2) the usurpation and violent or non-violent expropriation of lands and territories that belonged to the hundreds of indigenous peoples and (3) the exclusion of the local peasant- indigenous and agroecological knowledge and AKST systems (Crosby, 1991, 2004; Lumbreras, 1991). One might suggest that parallel to the growth of modern homogenizing agriculture, peasant-indigenous and local forms of agriculture
have tended to diminish. This is summarized, for the