|
 Essay - nov/dec 2008
The last frontiers
James C. Delouche
Professor Emeritus Mississippi State University
The food deficient, resource poor and impoverished countries in Africa constitute the last major frontiers for development and commercialization of agriculture. Well financed and motivated foundations, international and unilateral institutions, charitable agencies and others involved in development assistance are marshalling resources and laying plans to identify, address and overcome the multiple impediments and constraints that have limited or prevented progress in these countries. The accomplishment of these tasks will be very difficult and require a generation long or longer commitment of time and resources. The situations that have limited the participation of many of the African countries in the agricultural revolution that moved through Asia, the Americas and even Europe during the past 50 years of so persist and some have become seemingly intractable: marginal agricultural land, unfavorable climates, inadequate markets, poorly developed infrastructure, an apparent lack of incentives at the individual, community and national levels, and, very importantly, continuing social and civil unrest and strife. All of the lessons learned and information gained during the last half century of development assistance will have to be fully exploited to correct or improve these situations, reduce impediments and provide an appropriate range of incentives for personal, community and national development.
Green Revolution Observations
In 1964 I made my first trip to India as a consultant to the Ford Foundation. India and the other countries in the South Asian subcontinent, e.g., Pakistan, East Pakistan (later Bangladesh), Nepal, were in the midst of a grave food crisis. Ships with food grains from the United States, Australia, Canada and other food surplus countries crowded the harbors of Bombay, Calcutta and other ports. There were severe restrictions on the movement of food within and between the states and provinces to prevent the affluent areas from obtaining a disproportionate share of food supplies. But, even then, even in the midst of a food crisis and the specter of the regional famine predicted by an assortment of "experts", there was optimism, especially among the expatriate agricultural specialists, the corps of well trained and motivated Indian professionals, the land owners and even some of the share holders. The first of the high yielding rice and "Mexican" wheat varieties were under test and appeared to be very superior to the varieties in use. Hybrid maize was being introduced in areas with good soils and adequate water while hybrid sorghum and millet varieties were being developed for the areas not so well endowed with good soils and water. When I returned to South Asia in 1968 and especially in 1972 and later, I was astonished by improvements that were being greatly accelerated with the adaptation, use and spread of the so-called green revolution varieties of rice and wheat during the late 1960s and early 1970s and the continued development of hybrid varieties of maize, sorghum, millet and even cotton. While the "new" seeds and varieties were arguably the catalysts of this progress, their effectiveness was closely tied to the old, well established, stable and largely animal powered agriculture of the region and a full spectrum of associated improvements and inputs: fertilizers, pesticides, electric power and tube wells for irrigation, improved roads, better markets and more equitable commodity prices. And, it should be noted that the big advances in agricultural production in Asia and countries in South America occurred while the relatively efficient seed supply industries of today were still in the beginning, even rudimentary, stages, and before the enactment and implementation of the galaxy of laws and regulations that presently affect seed production and supply systems: seed and certification laws, plant variety protection, plant patents, biodiversity.
African Perspectives
Apart from the ancient and well watered agriculture of North Africa there are or have been notable developments in crop agriculture in several countries. South Africa has a well developed, modern agriculture, while Zimbabwe had a very productive, modern crop agriculture before it was essentially destroyed by the present regime. Hybrid maize became a important commercial crop in the Kenyan highlands decades ago. Hybrid sorghum has been successfully introduced into Ethiopia Peanuts, cotton, bean, and coffee are commercially produced in several countries. The failures, however, greatly outnumber the successes and, very importantly, have been in the production of basic food crops, the crops that the people depend on for subsistence and local trade, e.g., millet, sorghum, cowpeas, other grain legumes, peanuts, rice, maize, cassava, yams. Much of African agriculture is quite different than that in Asia and South America. First, while it is ancient it is not so well established or stable. Rather it has been and still is a shifting type of agriculture that does not permit the sort of improvements in the land and irrigation that are so obvious in areas in India, Indonesia, the Philippines and other countries. Second, crop agriculture is largely human powered. Animal power is scarcely used, while mechanical power is available only in commercial agriculture areas. The soils are very diverse and of relatively low fertility. Irrigation is not usually available for the small farmers and share holders. There are also important cultural differences between Asia and Africa. In Africa food crops are primarily produced by women while the men tend to take care of any commercial, "money", crops.
Very unfortunately, economic, social and political improvements in Africa have been and continue to be adversely affected by civil unrest, disturbances and war, political corruption, and drought. The troubles and near famine in Zimbabwe are an example of political corruption, while civil strife has devastated countries such as Sierra Leone, Liberia, Rwanda, Burundi, and Sudan, and the drought has caused hardships in more than a score of countries. It is devastatingly frustrating to have a decade or more of reasonably good progress more than undone by civil strife or a prolonged drought.
Lessons Leaned
There are several important lessons that should have been learned from green revolution experiences but appear not to have been learned as fully as needed. The first lesson is the inappropriateness of a highly commercialized and regulated seed supply system for improving a diverse and largely subsistence agriculture, the common type of agriculture in the impoverished countries in Africa. The second lesson is the importance of getting farmers to adopt and plant improved crop varieties and to spread them to other farmers in the village and nearby villages. The green revolution varieties spread rapidly and efficiently from farmer-to-farmer following the introduction of relatively small quantities of seeds. The production of a 10% supply of the seeds needed was not achieved until years after the new varieties had spread throughout the areas of adaptation. The third lesson is not to overburden or stifle the commercial and traditional seed supply systems with regulations and controls that are not needed and cannot be implemented. The fourth and perhaps most important lesson is that improvements in crop production require improvements in input supplies, production credit, markets, and infrastructure as well as in the seeds.
A few days ago I read Seeds of Confusion: The Impact of Policies on Seed Systems, Niels L ouwaars's Ph. D dissertation, University of Wageningen, The Netherlands, and agree in general with his argument that the "development of a seeds provision system (in the less developed countries) is neither realistic nor desirable for most crops." As an alternative he recommends a framework for seed system development that I have long advocated, a framework that recognizes and provides for the interactions of the two historically distinct, operationally different but functionally similar seed supply arrangements, the farmer's traditional system and the so-call formal or commercial seed system. Louwaars gives most attention to the policies and regulations that form the structure for modern seed industries and their disconnect between the functions they are designed for and everyday, resource poor, subsistence level agriculture. He contends that the conflicts between well intended seed related policies and regulations and the realities of the agricultural situation in many of the less developed countries leads to, "disorientation, uncertainty, and commotion -in short 'confusion'."-- hence, the title of his dissertation. I would add that too much or inappropriate policy and regulations result in a waste of scarce resources, and unrealistic expectations regarding benefits and progress.
One of the officials involved in the present initiatives for a green revolution in Africa was recently quoted as follows:
"We also believe that countries must have a robust regulatory and data system so that they can make their own decisions about whether or not to incorporate different types of technologies and make their own risk-benefit trade-offs about what is most appropriate for their populations."
This belief is very idealistic but wholly unrealistic. How many of the countries for which the initiatives are directed have the regulatory and data systems sufficiently robust for rigorous risk-benefit analysis.? If they don't have the capacity now, how long will it take to develop it? In the mealtime most of the countries urgently need appropriate assistance to increase food production and security now and in the immediate future as well as in the years and decades to follow.
|
|
............
|
