Highlighted Content:
Additional Content:
► International News
► African News
Partnership Board Member David Beckmann, Bread for the World, and Jo Luck, Heifer International, Named 2010 World Food Prize Winners
16 June 2010
David Beckmann and Jo Luck are receiving the 2010 World Food Prize for their landmark achievements in building Bread for the World and Heifer International into two of the world's foremost grassroots organizations leading the charge to end hunger and poverty for millions of people around the globe.
In honoring David Beckmann and Jo Luck, the World Food Prize recognizes the critical efforts of NGOs in mobilizing and empowering everyday citizens to end hunger in communities around the world.
Sweet genes arm banana crops
Kampala, Uganda - 14 June 2010
Scientists in Uganda have developed GM bananas that show promising resistance to the deadly banana Xanthomonas wilt (BXW) disease.
Bananas are Uganda's leading non-cereal crop with some 70 per cent of the population depending on it as staple food. More than US$200 million has been lost to BXW infestation since 2001. The disease has also been reported in Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Rwanda and Tanzania.
Now, the banana plants modified with two genes derived from sweet peppers (Capsicum annuum) show resistance to the disease caused by the bacterium Xanthomonas campestris pv. musacearum.
Principal investigator Leena Tripathi, a Ugandan-based biotechnologist from the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria, said inserting the genes — plant ferredoxin-like amphipathic protein (
PFLP) and hypersensitive response-assisting protein (HRAP) — separately in four local banana varieties is giving encouraging results (see GM bananas to fight wilt in Africa).
"In over five years of research, we've been able to insert genes into the East African highland banana varieties used for cooking (mpologoma and nakitembe), desserts (sukari ndizi) and brewing (kayinja). From these we've managed to develop resistant lines, which have proved effective in laboratory and screenhouse tests after deliberate exposure to BXW," Tripathi, who works on the project together with the Nairobi-based African Agricultural Technology Foundation and the National Agricultural Research Organization told SciDev.Net.
But, she added, they still need to confirm this effectiveness in a field trial.
Patrick Rubaihayo, a crop scientist at the Uganda-based Makerere University lauded the progress but warned of possible overdose with the molecule that these genes code for.
"My worry is that when a consumer eats large quantities of the modified varieties ... it is likely to be harmful," he said, adding that safety should be established before recommending these bananas for human consumption.
But Feng Teng-Yung, a plant pathologist at the Academia Sinica, a Taiwan-based research institute that provided the genes, said that they were safe. "Ferredoxin is a naturally-occurring protein in all living organisms," he said. "When we modify any plant with ferredoxin, we're only boosting amounts for greater protection against serious infections as bacterial pathogens."
Even if BXW-resistant bananas prove successful in field trials, the absence of a GM law in Uganda will hamper farmers' access to the technology (see Uganda 'needs biotech law' to save banana sector). The 2008 National Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill is yet to be presented to the cabinet for approval before it goes to parliament for enactment according to Michael Olupot-Tukei, assistant commissioner for planning and research in the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
Ethiopia: The village that will not need food aid
Abreha we Atsebeha - 9 June 2010
"We will be self-sufficient," said Gebremichael Giday, chairman of Abreha we Atsebeha, a village high in the arid uplands of northern Ethiopia, about 45km from Mekele, capital of the Tigray region. He is confident that in another 10 years they will not need food aid.
The village, named after a rock-hewn medieval church perched on one of the mountains that surround it, lost 60 people in the famine of 1984. Then a food-for-work programme was set up to help rehabilitate the eroded land.
"All you had to do was build terraces to prevent rainwater from rushing down the hill-slopes - the soil then acts as a sponge and absorbs the water," said Giday. This is a form of watershed management; Ethiopia loses 1.5 billion tons of topsoil to erosion every year, a major contributor to food insecurity, according to World Food Programme (WFP).
It took 10 years for the water table to rise, allowing villagers to dig shallow wells for irrigation. Now, orchards and community gardens lush with maize and vegetables surround the village. "We are blessed," Giday commented.
Kahsai Gebremariam, an Ethiopian government official and coordinator of Managing Environmental Resources to Enable Transitions to More Sustainable Livelihoods, a programme developed by WFP and implemented by the government - also known by the acronym, MERET, meaning "land" in Amharic, the local language - said the village was blessed to have such a chairman.
MERET provided Giday with the opportunity to learn about cross-breeding techniques and obtain new seeds for quick-growing varieties of maize. Since then he has cross-bred mangoes with apples - a delicacy that fetches good money in the markets of the national capital, Addis Ababa - and has introduced many new vegetables to the villagers.
"Before they would only eat cereals - now they know they can live on vegetables and fruits and also make money," said MERET coordinator Gebremariam. Farmers from neighbouring villages visit regularly to compare methods and swap tips in the farmer-to-farmer exchanges that are part of the programme.
Almost all the villagers earn a living from their produce, but some still need aid during the lean seasons. "It has been getting tougher with the rains," Giday acknowledged. "What will we save when the rains become more scarce?"
Melake Brhanat Tesfay Gebremariam, 72, a farmer who lost a one-year-old son and a daughter aged six in the 1984 famine, looked at the harsh landscape beyond the gardens. "Now things are different," he said in Tigrinya, the local language in the highlands. "It would have been different for my children, but I think the best thing to do now is remember them with fondness." He harvests three times a year. "I have enough food for my family."
At least five million people in Ethiopia need food aid every year, but the idea of food aid is not popular in government circles and there is concern about increasing dependency on aid.
Tewolde Egziabher, who heads Ethiopia's Environmental Protection Authority and is effectively Minister of the Environment, said he liked the objectives of MERET but would have been happier if the food aid provided for watershed management (the food-for-work programme) were given as a loan.
WFP spokeswoman Judith Schuler pointed out that when they start a MERET project in a food insecure and degraded area, "People have basically nothing, and many of them tell me that they would have left the area without MERET - they spend their day looking for food," and beneficiaries "only receive food assistance during the initial stage of the project" - 3kg of maize per day for three months.
The problem
At the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen in December 2009, MERET was flagged by the Ethiopian government and WFP as an answer to the problems facing arid countries struggling with the impact of climate change across the world.
But the programme that became MERET has managed to turn around the lives of at least 600,000 people in its 20 years seems to be floundering. The problem is funding. "The yearly requirement for MERET is about US$21.3 million (33,000mt of food) to provide food-for-work incentives to up to 610,000 people. In order to avoid a major pipeline break in 2010, we urgently need $12.6 million," said Schuler.
MERET coordinator Gebremariam said the number of beneficiaries had dropped. "I understand funding is a problem - we would like this programme to spread throughout the country."
Is the programme sustainable? "There isn't enough food aid around at the moment - most donors have opted to give cash and prefer giving funds to PSNP [Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP), another food-for-work programme with a watershed management component]," an aid worker said.
Marc Cohen, a senior researcher at Oxfam America, who reviewed the programme two years ago for WFP, commented: "The real test of ... [MERET's] sustainability is not only whether the government will be able to run it without WFP support, but whether MERET communities can institutionalize the project's emphasis on community planning and management of development activities."
Schuler said donations by Spain, and Princess Haya Bint Al Hussein of the United Arab Emirates, have helped them start income-generating activities like as bee-keeping and horticulture, and noted that "In the long term, we definitely plan to hand it [MERET] over to the government."
MERET has proved useful in many ways. "Already, MERET has influenced the much larger PSNP programme in this regard - PSNP watershed management projects, which account for the bulk of PSNP activities, employ the community planning and management methodology that was first developed by MERET," Cohen pointed out.
"Committees made up of beneficiary community members choose, plan, manage, and evaluate the precise type of project that MERET or PSNP resources will support. In addition, MERET served as the pilot project for stationing a team of agricultural extension agents at the community level. The Ministry is now rapidly expanding the extension service nationally, on the model first pioneered by MERET."
Giday has inspired his wife, Asqual Halefom, to become a successful fruit farmer in her own right. Together they have acquired assets worth at least a million birr ($74,000), a considerable sum. "We want other farmers to become successful too - we want all of us to grow, and no one should ever depend on food aid." The government would agree.
Improved farming rather than more food aid?
Johannesburg, South Africa - 9 June 2010
President Barack Obama wants the United States, the world's largest provider of food aid, to focus on agricultural development in the countries it helps support, rather than having them remain recipients.
"Quite simply, this change in mindset is that food security is part of national security," said a factsheet issued by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA); this new approach had already begun to unfold in strife-torn, food-deficit Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"This welcome and substantial shift of resources into long-term food security programming marks an important break from past policy," said Chris Barrett, an expert on food aid who teaches development economics at Cornell University. This "very important strategic shift" towards supporting agriculture "merits widespread applause".
The move comes hot on the heels of the 2008 food price crisis, which prompted the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to call for better governance of food security.
The number of hungry climbed to more than a billion in June 2009 while the economic crisis kept reducing the affordability of food, prompting FAO to urge the G8, a group of eight of the world's richest countries meeting in L'Aquila, Italy, to devote 17 percent of their official development assistance (ODA) to agriculture in needy countries.
A similar allocation of funds had led to the successful Green Revolution of the 1970s, which prevented looming famine in Asia and Latin America, FAO reminded the gathering.
Grow your own
USDA has appointed agricultural experts to 13 provincial reconstruction teams in Afghanistan since the beginning of 2009, and hopes to more than triple this number if Obama's request for funds is approved by the US Congress.
Political unrest, recurring natural disasters and high food prices in Afghanistan have left 31 percent of the population without enough food, according to the World Food Programme (WFP). Similar events and conditions have also affected food security in Pakistan, where more than 80 percent of the population earn less than $2 a day.
Under a new strategy, led by Obama and US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, the USDA will help Pakistan and Afghanistan conduct research to improve the production of fruit, nuts, livestock and other agricultural products, and reduce post-harvest loss.
The department will also help develop corridors along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, which will not only facilitate cross-border trade but increase the potential for Afghan and Pakistani agricultural products to be exported to other countries.
At the recent G20 Summit in the United Kingdom, Obama announced that he would ask the US Congress to double financial support for agricultural development in poor countries to $1 billion in 2010.
"A portion of the additional resources [in Obama's proposed support package] is designed to support multilateral efforts to provide rapid assistance for farmers and the rural poor," said the USDA factsheet.
Since January 2008, the G8 has committed over $10 billion to short-, medium- and long-term support of food aid, nutrition interventions, social protection activities and boosting agricultural output. The G8 have affirmed their commitment to support agriculture in developing countries and said $13 billion of the pledged funds had been disbursed.
However, Gawain Kripke, spokesman for the UK-based development agency, Oxfam, said: "We already know that around nine of the $13 billion they disbursed since January 2008 to tackle the food crisis was nothing more than recycled cash. This is unacceptable when more than 1 billion people are going hungry. This G8 must not be 'business as usual', and take urgent action."
End of food aid?
The move towards development does not necessarily portend the end of food aid. Blake Selzer, Senior Policy Advisor at the US-based NGO, CARE, one of the world's largest aid agencies, said the shift was more about taking "A comprehensive approach to food security, which does still include emergency food aid but places increased emphasis on global agricultural development, creating more of a balance of long-term needs with short-term emergency ones."
He pointed out that funding for international agricultural development had decreased dramatically over the past few decades, and that any successful comprehensive food security initiative would also need to address safety nets, social protection and nutrition programmes.
WFP, which dispenses the largest amount of food aid, said there could not be an "either and or" approach. WFP Executive Director Josette Sheeran noted in a statement: "It's a false logic for the world to say that we will either invest in tomorrow's agriculture or today's urgent food needs. There is no question that we must do both."
Food aid has dropped 35 percent since 1995, and global food aid supplies in 2008 were 18 percent lower than in 2005, a 34-year low. "We cannot afford to lose a generation to malnutrition, starvation and despair," said Sheeran. "Addressing immediate hunger needs is a critical long-term investment in healthy, stable societies."
Food aid can also help agriculture
Andrew Natsios, who led the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for five years, told IRIN that emergency food aid programmes - which make up 75 percent of the food aid budget - could be integrated into agricultural programmes.
"The question has been: 'Where we should buy the food aid? In the US or in the developing world, where the purchase by WFP and donor governments can help create demand, increase production, and strengthen markets?' We should be buying food aid from African farmers for Africans displaced by war and conflict, who are in need of temporary assistance."
In the series of measures announced to beef up agriculture in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the US administration announced plans for $27.5 million in international assistance under the Food for Progress Program, which raises the money by selling vegetable oil bought in the US markets in the beneficiary countries.
Why is feeding the hungry so controversial?
New York - 14 June 2010
The US Senate is expected to pass the Global Food Security Act, new legislation that would significantly expand the government's commitment to combating hunger worldwide with a broad range of measures and more money, and a special coordinator, or "food czar", to oversee implementation of these provisions across agencies.
A proposed new fund would allocate several billion dollars over five years to research and development, to enhance "food security, agriculture productivity, rural development, poverty and malnutrition alleviation, and environmental sustainability".
The proposed fund would be "in addition, and complementary, to food aid provided through the US Department of Agriculture", most of which is not permitted to be purchased in the areas where a food crisis is occurring.
The legislation would also establish a US Emergency Rapid Response to Food Crises Fund that would authorize a $500 million appropriation for "local and regional purchase and distribution of food" and "provision of emergency non-food assistance, including vouchers or cash transfer, safety net programmes, or other appropriate non-food assistance".
"The US, indeed all global donors, have been starving agricultural research funding for more than a decade," said Christopher Barrett, a food aid expert who teaches at Cornell University.
"A huge body of evidence demonstrates extremely high rates of return on agricultural investment ... in the form of poverty and hunger reduction globally and ... economic growth, including for US and other high-income country farmers who benefit ... from research aimed at stimulating agricultural development in poor countries," Barrett commented.
"It's a smarter way to approach hunger and development assistance," the ONE Campaign, a grassroots advocacy organization, said in a statement. "With targeted investments in solutions like proven farming techniques, seeds, improved soils and efficient use of water resources, we can not only end chronic hunger and food shortages, we can help poor farmers and their families earn their way out of poverty."
However, some organizations have objected to a sentence in the bill sponsored by Senators Richard Lugar and Robert Casey, which mandates funding for "research on biotechnical advances appropriate to local ecological conditions, including genetically modified [GM] technology".
A letter signed by more than a hundred advocacy groups, scientists and development experts claimed that "The current language mandates one highly controversial type of technology - transgenics - dominated by two or three companies (most notably Monsanto), to get both taxpayer cash and ... favoured treatment under a bill ostensibly designed to help the poor and hungry," and asked that this section be stricken from the bill.
If Congress "singles out one technology and attaches it to a pool of foreign aid money, the pressure on developing countries to ignore local priorities and other scientifically valid options – and to open their markets to that one technology – will be substantial", the letter noted.
Annie Shattuck, of Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy, commented in an email to IRIN: "The bill puts needed resources to long-term agricultural development, but the essential question is: who will ultimately benefit from the development?
She noted that "Both [the] State [Department] and USAID acknowledge that poverty, not scarcity, causes hunger, yet both focus on productivity and new green revolution technologies, to the exclusion of broader social factors like fairer trading arrangements, increasing the market power of small farmers, access to credit, stabilizing markets, rebuilding public extension, etc."
GM controversy
Lugar responded: "The bottom line is that a provision of the Lugar-Casey bill directs US assistance in developing local technological solutions to advance agricultural productivity in countries suffering from chronic hunger - it does not require that these solutions be GM, but it does not preclude it where appropriate."
He characterized as "gross misrepresentations" suggestions that "the bill would mandate that US assistance be used to promote genetically modified agricultural technologies, and that US food aid would be conditioned on recipient countries approving the use of GM products."
Robert Paarlberg, author of Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being Kept out of Africa, told IRIN: "This is a deeper matter than GM crop research, since most of the organizations that oppose the Lugar-Casey bill on these grounds also oppose its emphasis on spreading more traditional science-based 'green revolution' farming technologies."
He pointed out that "There is not yet an example of any society lifting its farming populations out of hunger and poverty without introducing green revolution methods, such as the use of improved seeds and nitrogen fertilizers," and that using only organic and agro-ecological approaches had not yet worked anywhere.
"It simply makes sense to keep all our arrows available in the quiver in the battle to reduce hunger and poverty," said Christopher Barrett. "It would make no more sense to exclude research based on genetic modification than to focus on it exclusively."
After passage in the senate, the bill will move on to the House of Representatives; once the lower house grants its approval, President Barack Obama's signature will make it law.
Climate Change, Agriculture and Trade: A Full Policy Agenda
Source: IPC Policy Alert
“Climate change as well as policies and measures chosen to address climate change will have serious implications for agriculture and trade,” states IPC Chairperson Carlo Trojan, “and these must be carefully considered as policymakers and other stakeholders grapple with the policy agenda.” The three latest papers to be released under the ICTSD-IPC Platform on Climate Change, Agriculture and Trade, address a number of serious policy challenges.
Climate change challenges for agriculture make technology transfer issues even more pressing
“Climate change is yet another wake up call for the global community to address longstanding constraints to more effective technology innovation, transfer and adoption required for global food security,” explains IPC Chief Executive Charlotte Hebebrand. New crop traits and varieties will play an important role in facilitating adaptation, as will water management and production practices, post-harvest technologies, and improved services in information, forecasting and insurance. The Platform paper “Agricultural Technologies for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in Developing Countries: Policy Options for Innovation and Technology Diffusion” by Travis Lybbert and Dan Sumner emphasizes the need for sound policies and institutions to address impediments to the development, diffusion and use of relevant technologies that can surface at several levels – from the inception and innovation stages to the transfer of technologies and access to agricultural innovations by vulnerable smallholders in developing countries.
Despite lingering controversies, agricultural biotechnology is identified as an especially promising set of tools for climate change adaptation and mitigation: increased yields reduce pressure on forests and no till allows greater carbon sequestration in agricultural soils, and traits such as drought tolerance promise to play a particularly important role. The process of transferring agricultural innovations across agro-ecological and climatic zones is often subject to agronomic constraints, and substantial investment and effort are required to develop varieties for local production. Agricultural biotechnology has relaxed these agronomic constraints but creates some new intellectual property constraints and requires that countries have sound biosafety and stewardship frameworks in place. Where IP seems to pose a problem, recent institutional and legal innovations provide a point of departure for effective remedies.
Carbon standards and developing country producers
“Issues surrounding the measurement of carbon embedded in internationally traded food and agricultural goods are rapidly emerging on the policy agenda, and have important implications for developing country producers,” warns ICTSD Chief Executive Ricardo Meléndez-Ortiz. Whereas earlier experiments have now been largely discredited, particularly those which singled out air-freighting of fresh fruits and flowers as a “carbon hotspot”, newer initiatives involve more sophisticated life cycle analyses to determine a product’s carbon footprint. There is no consensus on how to conduct such an analysis and it is difficult to define the boundaries of where a life cycle analysis should begin and end. Despite this complexity, labels must nonetheless be simple and easy to understand if they are to be viable. Verification and monitoring add an additional layer of complexity and costs – especially for smaller producers.
The Platform Paper “Carbon Concerns: How Standards And Labelling Initiatives Must Not Limit Agricultural Trade From Developing Countries” by James Macgregor posits that carbon-labeling schemes could provide developing countries with new market opportunities and niches based on carbon efficiency, but they also run the risk of restricting market access. The paper emphasizes the need for technical assistance and support to developing country players, particularly smallholders, to help them participate in such schemes and also argues that transparency is needed to allay fears that the schemes are not just another developed country form of “green protectionism.”
National and international repercussions
While agriculture receives considerably less attention than China’s energy and manufacturing sectors, the Platform Paper “Climate Change and China’s Agricultural Sector: An Overview of Impacts,Adaptation and Mitigation” by Jinxia Wang, Jikun Huang and Scott Rozelle clarifies that it is not an insignificant source of emissions. Agriculture accounts for more than 15 percent of China’s total greenhouse gas emissions, nearly 90 percent of nitrous oxide emissions, and 60 percent of methane emissions. Excessive fertilizer use is not only fueling a major portion of the nitrous oxide emissions but also contributes to water pollution. “Yet there are important climate change mitigation opportunities in agriculture,” adds author and IPC member Jikun Huang, Director of the Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy, “for example through carbon sequestration and the adoption of production methods that reduce emissions.”
The paper also indicates that the potential impact of climate change on agricultural production and prices in
China could have significant implications for not only the domestic market, but also for international markets, due to the sheer size of
China’s domestic demand for agricultural products.
These three papers, along with other ICTSD-IPC Platform papers, and presentations made at Platform seminars held can be accessed
here.
About the IPC:
The International Food & Agricultural Trade Policy Council (IPC) promotes a more open and equitable global food system by pursuing pragmatic trade and development policies in food and agriculture to meet the world's growing needs. IPC convenes influential policymakers, agribusiness executives, farm leaders, and academics from developed and developing countries to clarify clomplex issues, build consensus, and advocate policies to decision-makers. More information on the organization and its membership can be found on our website:
www.agritrade.org.
For more information, please contact Katharine Shaw, Program and Communications Manager, at 202-328-5117 or
shaw[at]agritrade[dot]org.
Q+A - What happens if EU relaxes GM rules?
4 June 2010
The EU executive European Commission has drawn up plans for a radical overhaul of the 27-nation bloc's rules on genetically modified (GM) crop cultivation, according to sources, which if approved could see huge growth in plantings in Europe. Below are questions and answers the plans raises.
WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED?
* The plan set to be adopted in mid-July has two elements: "fast-track" technical guidelines immediately enabling member states to grow or ban GM crops as they choose, and a legislative change designed to confirm the new approach in EU law.
* The Commission hopes that by giving countries opposed to GM cultivation the option to ban it, they will end their opposition to approving new varieties for growing in the EU and unblock the paralysis in Europe's approval system.
* Approvals would still be granted at EU level following a scientific safety assessment, but member states would be free to ban cultivation at any time without the need for scientific justification, and the Commission will not intervene.
WHAT IMPACT WILL THE PLANS HAVE?
* If approved the proposals are likely to see rapid growth of GM cultivation in parts of Europe, particularly in countries seen as favourable to the technology such as Spain, the Netherlands, Sweden and the Czech Republic.
* They would also legally confirm cultivation bans in anti-GM countries such as Italy, Austria and Hungary, and raise the prospect of new national bans in the future should governments change their position on GM crops.
* Multinational biotech companies such as U.S. seed and chemical giant Monsanto (MON.N) and Swiss agro-chemicals firm Syngenta (SYNN.VX) could see lucrative new markets opening up in Europe, but countries' ability to ban cultivation at any time creates legal uncertainty and could hamper their business plans.
* Industry experts said new GM crops most likely to be planted in Europe in the coming years include a maize variety resistant to the corn root worm, and a fungal-resistant potato currently being trialled.
* New GM oilseed rape varieties could be available within a decade, and GM wheat with resistance to septoria disease could be developed within 10 to 20 years, they added.
WILL THE PLANS BE APPROVED?
* The "fast-track" guidelines would only need to be rubber-stamped by EU governments to take effect, which could happen within weeks of publication in mid-July, though countries such as France are thought to be strongly opposed to the plans.
* The legislative change is even more uncertain, as it must be approved by a qualified majority of EU governments and members of the European Parliament under the bloc's weighted voting system.
* The Commission believes it can restrict the scope of the legal review to its proposal alone, but EU lawmakers could try and open up the EU's entire GM policy for review, which could take several years and make the final outcome very uncertain.
HOW HAVE THE PLANS BEEN RECEIVED?
* The biotech industry has criticised the proposals for introducing unscientific concepts and legal uncertainty into the EU's approval system, and warn that different rules in different countries will disrupt the EU's internal market and lead to legal disputes.
* Environmentalists are also unhappy, because they fear an end to the EU's largely GM-free stance, which has seen commercial planting limited to less than 100,000 hectares to date, compared with 134 million hectares worldwide.
* The EU's trading partners are known to be watching developments closely, and could challenge the new rules in the World Trade Organisation if they percieve them as anti-science or a barrier to trade. (Compiled by Charlie Dunmore, Editing by Keiron Henderson)
Online review of European Agricultural Development Assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa
15 June 2010
OUR PROJECT
Professor Sir Gordon Conway at the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, with the support of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is leading a small team to explore the potential for new or improved European support for agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa. Part of this work is what we call strategic mapping: finding out what the major European donors are doing, and are planning to do, in relation to agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa. We do this through visits, personal contacts and phone calls. We worked with Rothamsted International to produce this desk based review of the EU, European governments, foundations and private sector commitments and actions in this area. We have also worked with Professor Colin Thirtle, Imperial College London, and Professor Jenifer Piesse, Kings College London, to track donor financial commitments and disbursements on agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa. We are also seeking the views of prominent African policy makers on European funding and what they would like to see happen in the future.
OUR VISION
Our vision is to create an online tool for donors, researchers, private sector actors, NGO workers and students to better understanding European donor support for agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa. We hope that this will enable people both to understand what Europeans are doing, but also to allow anyone from across the world to connect with European governments, institutions and organisations who are supporting similar or complementary goals and priorities.
THE GLOBAL CONTEXT
1.02 billion people, or 1 in 6 of the world's population, is hungry today, more than the populations of USA, Canada and the European Union. (FAO, 2009) The global food price crisis of 2007 served as a catalyst to refocus attention on the challenges of ensuring access to food security and agricultural development for people in developing countries. This short term crisis brought to prominence the deeper agricultural crisis caused by a number of longer terms trends: rising populations; rising per capita incomes; growing demand for livestock products; growing demand for biofuels; increasing water and land scarcity; the impact of climate change; the slowing of productivity increases; trade inequalities; lack of access to markets for smallholder farmers; and the lack of public funding for agricultural research.
WHY SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA?
In sub-Saharan Africa, over 200 million people are undernourished. Africa is home to 15 of the 16 countries where the prevalence of hunger has exceeded 35 percent. Only Ghana is on track to meet and exceed the Millennium Development Goal 1, target 1C to halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger (FAO, 2009). Average cereal yields in Africa sit currently at 1.3 tonnes per hectare, which is the equivalent to average yields obtained in the Roman Empire (World Bank, 2007). Nevertheless at national level the picture is varied, and there has been significant improvement in some parts of the continent. Countries such as Nigeria, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Sudan and Malawi are making progress towards meeting the MDG target, and look likely to reach it if progress is sustained. But in some countries including DR Congo, Madagascar, Tanzania and Zambia have seen an increase in undernourishment since the 1990s (Wiggins & Keats, 2009).
82% of the rural sub-Saharan African population lives in agriculture-based countries: countries where agriculture if a major source of growth, accounting for 32% of GDP growth on average. (World Bank, 2008). These agricultural-based countries often have hugely different structural features, in terms of size, agricultural potential, transport links, reliance on natural resources and state capacity (World Bank, 2008). It is clear that this wide-ranging diversity of structural challenges and rates of progress across the continent means there can be no universal blueprint for these countries' agricultural development.
Please see the following links for more information.
Secretary Clinton's Remarks at Diplomacy Briefing Series Conference on Sub-Saharan Africa
Source: US State Department
Washington, DC - 14 June 2010
SECRETARY CLINTON: Good afternoon, everyone. Well, thank you all very much and welcome again. I know you’ve been welcomed over and over again, but it’s a delight to have you here in the State Department for this briefing on Sub-Saharan Africa and the issues that affect the countries in that region and our relationship with them.
We are very pleased to have such a broad cross-section. I understand we even have some people who may be watching us, as I see on this screen here, from universities. And I delighted that we have you with us. I want to recognize the two members of Congress who I know are here. There may be others, but I’ve only seen two – Congressman Donald Payne from New Jersey, who is a longtime, very – (applause) – there he is – very strong, consistent supporter of Africa and Africa’s needs, and Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee from Texas – there she is. (Applause.) And if I’m not mistaken, Sheila, one of the schools participating is Texas Southern University, which you have a relationship with, and I see them applauding on the screen up there. (Applause.)
I am very pleased to be the – I guess either the clean-up act or the dessert, whichever way you want to think about it, for this good, long discussion that you’ve all participated in. I know you’ve heard from Assistant Secretary Carson and other senior diplomats and leaders from the State Department and USAID, but I just wanted to hit a few of the high points of the Obama Administration’s connection to Africa during the last 16 months.
President Obama visited Africa very early in his tenure to underscore the region’s importance to the United States and gave a historic speech in Ghana that very clearly sounded a call to action and set forth our basic principle that we want a relationship not based on patronage, but on partnership. I was privileged to visit Africa on a very long 11-day trip last August and was able to carry that message and others throughout the continent.
And just this past week, Vice President Biden was in Kenya and South Africa. The World Cup – (laughter) – was at least part of the draw, but he was able to reinforce a lot of our messages that we wish to work as partners, not only with African governments, but most importantly, with the people of Africa. Because we believe that the future of Africa is in the hands of Africans. And we have to join hands to work together to develop that partnership to expand democracy that delivers for people, good governance that actually can be accountable to the people, promoting sustainable economic growth that provides benefits to all people, improving access to healthcare, education, basic services, and working to eliminate the conflicts that destroy lives and destabilize the region.
Now, achieving these goals requires close cooperation across governments, business communities, the not-for-profit sector, civil society groups. And we have established high-level dialogues with our counterparts. We have a bilateral dialogue with South Africa, we have one with Nigeria, we’re working hard with many of the countries, from Angola to Tanzania to Liberia, and we are increasing our relationship with the African Union.
There is a lot of progress that’s being made that is not often in the headlines in democracy and human rights. And over the next two years, 27 nations in sub-Saharan Africa will hold elections. But at the same time, we have to recognize the challenges that still exist for even stable democracies that are trying to fully embed their progress, and on the other end of the spectrum, the many countries, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Sudan, that are still facing severe conflicts. We will continue to speak out on behalf of democratic governance and human rights and on behalf of economic opportunity.
I attended the Africa Growth and Opportunities Act conference last year in Nairobi to underscore our commitment to helping to grow the economies. And central to that is revitalizing agriculture and enhancing its value-added returns for African farmers. We also are committed to investing in women. Women are the principal farmers on the continent of Africa, producing food not only for themselves and their families, but reinvesting the profits in benefits for their children and future generations.
We recognize that corruption remains a major obstacle to not only economic growth, but many of our goals. The literal looting of state coffers deprives millions of Africans of basic services and makes it easier for drug traffickers, terrorists, and other criminals to expand their presence. And fighting corruption is not only the right thing to do and helps improve people’s lives, it gives them more of a stake in their own society. And it is a high priority.
We’ve also made a major commitment to improving health in Africa. In addition to continuing the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria, TB, and polio, the Obama Administration has pledged $63 billion over five years for all of our health programs. And we are paying particular attention to Africa and especially to the health of women and children.
We continue to work on mitigating conflicts. The UN and the African Union have been leaders in peacekeeping and mediation efforts. We are strong supporters of that. We pay particular attention to gender-based violence and the recruitment and use of child soldiers. Part of what fuels the fighting and the corruption are the rich mineral resources that Africa contains. So we are working to try to promote responsible use of natural resources through the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.
But I must say that we need to do a better job of spreading the word about the progress in Africa. So if you’re part of the African diaspora community, we want you to stay in touch with us to get information about what we’re doing and what the impacts are, and we also need your advice. If you’re a student, we want to look for ways to involve you in the work that is improving the lives of the African people, whether it’s in public health, agriculture or entrepreneurship. If you’re in an NGO, we want you to let us know what you’re doing so we can better partner with you and support you.
But there’s a lot of exciting work that is going on, and we are extremely committed to that work. But we recognize that it is not the work of a year, nor even the work of a single four-year or eight-year administration. It needs to be the work of America, and therefore, it needs to be firmly rooted in how we define our interests and our values. And to that end, we believe strongly that Africa can have and should have a very positive future for its people, and we want to be the partners who help to realize those dreams that stretch across the continent and give people a feeling that life can be better, and to help show the way by being a good supporter of what is already happening in Africa.
So with that, let me turn it over, I guess, to P.J.
MR. CROWLEY: We can start by taking questions from our students from (inaudible) Florida A&M. Can you hear us?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I think they’re gone.
MR. CROWLEY: How about Texas Southern?
QUESTION: Thank you. Regarding to the problems of structural adjustment programs in Africa, many believe that that’s something that should come without conditions. (Inaudible) noting the problems and negative impacts of structural adjustment programs, SAP, in Africa--
SECRETARY CLINTON: What?
PARTICIPANT: Structural.
QUESTION: Yes, yes, yes – (inaudible). We believe that (inaudible) those – that should be forgiven. And what is really the U.S. policy towards forgiving the debts without conditions that will improve the quality of life, economic development, and even security issues in Africa?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. We’ve certainly got a little bit of trouble understanding the question because of the hook-up. Technology is wonderful, but sometimes it takes a little bit of interpretation.
So thank you very much for your question about structural adjustment programs. Let me start by saying that the United States does not support unconditional debt relief. But we do participate in the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative along with other donors. And under this program, an indebted country, of which there are many, which faces an unsustainable debt burden, who agrees to a system of measures and reforms, including clearing outstanding arrears to international financial institutions, as well as preparing a poverty reduction program and establishing a track record of reform and sound policies does qualify for the kind of debt relief that we think is called for. Because without the changes that are needed in policies and without a commitment to reform, the impact of debt relief for poor countries can really be lost. And instead, we want to continue to work with countries to obtain forgiveness of debt under the so-called HIPC framework, the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative. And we do not want to see Africa incur new, unsustainable debt.
I think that if you look at what African leaders are saying about debt – and there is an African Union spokesperson; it’s Prime Minister Meles of Ethiopia, and representing the 53 members of the African Union – the focus coming now from the African Union is on responsible use of loans and grants, based on economic development reforms and progress, according to the Millennium Development Goals, in order to avoid incurring more debt that cannot be repaid.
So we’re trying to walk the line here. Just providing debt relief with no changes, with no commitment to a different path forward with changes in the economic policies that will create more growth. There’s no reason why African countries with all of these resources cannot be so much richer, growing so much more, but they need better government policies and leadership in order to do so.
So we basically have used debt forgiveness as a means of trying to bring about those changes. And we’ve seen some positive effects in that. Liberia is paying down its debt, despite the poverty of the country and the inheritance of years and years of war. It’s paid its debt down from five billion to a little over a billion in the space of about six or seven years. And that’s what we want to see because then it puts both government policies on the right footing and economic growth on a more sustainable foundation.
MR. CROWLEY: Why don’t we go to the University of Central Florida next.
QUESTION: Good afternoon, Secretary Clinton. My name is Amal Khan. Our question for you is: The World Cup will be the sports highlight for all of Africa and most of the rest of the world during the next few weeks. What could the United States to do to ensure a similar long-term focus on the region?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. The World Cup is a great opportunity because much of the world will be paying attention to Africa because of the World Cup in a way that they perhaps have not in the past. In fact, I’ve worked on issues pertaining to Africa for nearly 20 years, and there are so many misconceptions about Africa. I will never forget having a meeting as First Lady with a large group of press in preparation for my first extended trip to Africa, and one of the press representatives asked me if I would be going to the capital of Africa. (Laughter.) And I said, “Well, yeah, probably.” (Laughter.)
So I think anything which raises the visibility of Africa, which gets people to think about and learn more about Africa, is probably a good door opener. But there is so much more that needs to be done. I mean, this conference today is one example of how we here in the State Department are trying to keep the attention on Africa, trying to maintain the focus that our policies represent. We are doing a lot more than that, of course, every single day.
We are working on some issue very intensely that has to do with Africa, whether it is the efforts to implement the Feed the Future Food Security Program that we are going to be involving a number of African countries in, or the Global Health Initiative that I referenced, expanding PEPFAR funding to countries working for the first time in a good partnership with South Africa. It is – there’s a lot going on that we are very proud of and very committed to. And anything which gets people to pay more attention to Africa, sort of in real time, which the World Cup is doing, I think is beneficial.
MR. CROWLEY: We’ve just got to double-check; Florida A&M, could you hear us?
QUESTION: Yes. We’re here. Good afternoon, Secretary Clinton. This is Calvin Hayes. It’s a pleasure to speak with you again after already – can you hear us? It’s a pleasure to speak with you again after already meeting you this past summer at the U.S. Embassy in South Africa, where I completed a State Department internship and also had the privilege of serving as a site officer for your bilateral meeting.
Madam Secretary, the strength of our U.S. diplomacy greatly depends on our good relationships with other countries as well as our ability to appropriate the necessary resources to meet the needs of the people around the world. Given the challenges of political battles associated with leadership in Zimbabwe, how is the Obama Administration showing that the foreign aid given to this area actually meets the people and their local communities?
Is there a comprehensive strategy to measure the efficiency of our appropriated resources, the accountability of our disbursements, and the sustainability of our efforts both in Zimbabwe and countries in sub-Saharan Africa? If so, can you shed some light on the strategy and ways students and faculty at (inaudible) can become engaged in assisting communities in need like Zimbabwe and other sub-Saharan African countries?
SECRETARY CLINTON: (Inaudible) is a very difficult challenge to us and to our policy. It is a country that has been woefully governed and misruled for a number of years now. Congressman Donald Payne, who had to leave for a vote, is probably, in the Congress – is he still here – there he is – is probably, in the Congress, the most knowledgeable, strongest advocate for African interests. And when he tried to go to Zimbabwe a few months ago – right, Donald? The Government of Zimbabwe would not let him in because they don’t want somebody who has his expertise and experience actually seeing for himself all of the difficulties that are now apparent in Zimbabwe.
And it’s very sad. It’s a tragedy. And we are working hard with South Africa, with the African Union, with other countries to try to assist the people of Zimbabwe. We’re doing primarily humanitarian assistance. There is a great need for food like corn or corn meal or cooking oil, just the basics that have been destroyed in a country that used to be able to not only feed itself but export food. And we’re trying to help with healthcare, particularly with communicable diseases like HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis as well as with malaria and maternal and child healthcare.
At the same time, the President just renewed sanctions against 220 individuals and entities associated with the Mugabe regime. So these are what we call targeted sanctions that go to whether they can travel, what kind of investments or bank accounts they can have that we can reach. So on the one hand, we’re trying to help the people of Zimbabwe get through a very difficult time. On the other hand, we’re trying to keep the pressure on the leadership.
We rely heavily on civil society to deliver programs that can get the aid in fairly and apolitically so that our aid is not, basically, hijacked by the government and people connected to the government. I’ve had two meetings with Prime Minister Tsvangirai in the last year to try to send a message that we support reform in Zimbabwe, that we support elections that will actually be followed because there’s no doubt in most of our minds that Mugabe’s party did not win that first round of elections a year-plus ago.
We are also looking to link democratic and economic performance by encouraging that the government be held accountable and working with those who are attempting to do so. But it’s a very sobering situation. And it’s a very sad one, indeed, because the ruling party, the ruling clique within that party, continues to benefit from aid, benefit from the diamond trade, benefit from corruption, to a very significant degree while the people are suffering. Policies like the Mugabe government pursued, which destroyed housing areas, leaving people homeless with nothing in their place, just make no sense. But nevertheless, that’s what the people of Zimbabwe have had to cope with.
So we are trying to walk a line between supporting the people, keeping the pressure on the Mugabe leadership, working with South Africa to try to get that message across. But I’m not going to stand here and tell you we have some perfect formula, because it’s extremely difficult to try to do what we’re doing and really make a difference for the people of Zimbabwe. But we’re going to persist in doing so and working with people like Congressman Payne to try to give the people there a better future.
Okay?
MR. CROWLEY: One or two questions from the audience. Over there. Second row.
QUESTION: Thank you very much, Madam Secretary. My name is Fred Oladeinde and I represent the AGOA civil society network. Since we met in Nairobi, some of us in civil society have noticed that AGOA, in terms of export from Africa to the United States, has declined, particularly if we take oil export out of the total basket of export into the United States.
We believe that CAADP, which is the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program, may present yet another opportunity for us to be able to reevaluate AGOA and be able to help African countries that are ready to reform to expand their export into the United States.
Can you share with us what is the Obama Administration in terms of reforming AGOA and trying to see how we can expand export through CAADP and the new $6.3 billion initiative to ensure that we optimize the opportunity that AGOA presents?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, thank you for that. And as you might remember, in my speech in Nairobi, I outlined a number of steps to reform AGOA. But we recognize, too, that there is a very good opportunity with CAADP and we are working to use the CAADP-developed principles in our Feed the Future Program so that we take what has been agreed to by African countries themselves as the base for our work in agriculture.
I will repeat what I said in Nairobi. There may be – and there definitely are things that the United States could do that would be better for exports from Africa to the United States other than oil exports, which is a huge distorting aspect of our trade relation. But most of the work that needs to be done needs to be done in Africa. If you look at trade between African countries, it is abysmally minimalistic. African countries don’t trade with themselves. They have barriers and tariffs and customs problems that stand in the way of developing their own economies. I laid that out in my speech in Nairobi. I challenged African governments to change their own laws to increase more trade. If Africa traded – if sub-Saharan Africa traded among themselves the way Asian countries trade among themselves, the GDP growth would be significant in a relatively short period of time.
But this is a corruption problem. This is a capacity problem. This is driven by rivalries across borders. And so, unfortunately, the market to the United States is difficult because in order to get products from many African countries, you have to go through other countries. And that’s not easy. I will never forget one of the speakers in Nairobi saying that he came from Lagos, Nigeria and it took him longer to get from Lagos to Nairobi than it would have taken him to get from Lagos to London.
So the United States will do our part, but African countries have to start doing their part and making the changes that will grow the economies in the sub-Saharan region. There is so much wealth, so many resources, so many opportunities. (Applause.) And we said last year in Nairobi we stand ready to provide technical assistance, we stand ready to help, but we can’t help if nobody is asking for help or if nobody is accepting help.
And so again I renew the offer: We will work with anybody; we know how to open markets. The United States is an expert at opening markets. We have the most open market in the world and we want Africa to export more to the United States. But it is difficult, and a lot of the countries haven’t gone to really assist their businesses in knowing how to export to Africa. So there is so much that could be done, but it is hard to do if you don’t get laws and policies and customs and everything else changed. So I will renew our offer: We stand ready to assist. But I don’t want to be making the same speech at the AGOA conference this year. We’ve made that speech and we are ready to help and we need to have somebody on the other end saying – okay, I would love for some African government to come and say, go through our laws, tell us everything that needs to be changed that you believe would increase our GDP by 5 percent in the next 10 years, and we can tell you how to do it.
But it means doing things that are going to run afoul of special interests and government bureaucrats and businesses that already have a lock on a market and they’d rather have the biggest piece of a small pie than a smaller piece of a big pie. And so if you’re going to have that mentality, it is really hard to utilize the incredible tool that AGOA is. But we will be there to help if people come forward, if some of the NGOs can work with us to try to wrench open those markets.
But it’s not something that just happens by hoping it’s so or because the United States tries to make it so. It is a structural problem within the way countries in the region relate to each other. And that has got to be addressed. I mean, for goodness sakes, this is the 21st century. We’ve got to get over what happened 50, 100, 200 years ago, and let’s make money for everybody. That’s the best way to try to create some new energy and some new growth in Africa. (Applause.)
Okay, one more and then I’ve got to run.
QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Clinton, for being here today. My name is Beth Tuckey. I’m with Africa Action. And you mentioned in your presentation that you would speak out on behalf of democratic governance in Africa, and I know that the U.S. has been a strong supporter of Rwanda for many, many years. And I’m just wondering what you’re doing to address the recent oppression of political candidates in Rwanda and if you’re doing anything to address attorney Peter Erlinder, who is currently under arrest in Rwanda.
SECRETARY CLINTON: I know that we have addressed those concerns. We’ve made them known to the Rwandan Government. We really don’t want to see Rwanda undermine its own remarkable progress by beginning to move away from a lot of the very positive actions that undergirded its development so effectively. We still are very, very supportive of Rwanda. The kind of development that has taken place in Rwanda is really a model in many respects for the rest of the continent. But we are concerned by some of the recent actions and we would like to see steps taken to reverse those actions.
On the one hand, I understand the anxiety of the Rwandan leadership over what they view as genocide denial or genocide rejectionism. There are many countries that have been in a similar historic position, so I do understand that and I know that they are hypersensitive to that, but – because, obviously, they don’t want to see anything ignite any kind of ethnic conflict again. So I’m very sympathetic to that.
But I think that there are ways of dealing with that legitimate concern other than politically acting against opposition figures or lawyers and others. So on the one hand, I understand the motivation and the concern. On the other hand, I want to see different actions taken so that we don’t see a collision between what has been a remarkably successful period of growth and reconciliation and healing with the imperatives of continuing to build strong democratic institutions.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
Just Give Money to the Poor: The development revolution from the South by Joseph Hanlon, Armando Barrientos and David Hulme
Source: AfricaFocus Bulletin
11 June 2010
Editor's Note
Discussing poverty with a Washington Post reporter last month, 5th graders at a Southeast Washington school (the poverty rate for Washington, DC is 32 percent) came up with an obvious solution. "Why not just give them money?" (Washington Post, May 11). Experts and policy-makers have found it easy to dismiss this common-sense suggestion, in favor of magical belief in trickle-down economics or of elaborate poverty-reduction plans. But a new book brings together weighty evidence that in fact the children are likely to be right.
In "Just Give Money to the Poor: The Development Revolution from the South," Joseph Hanlon, Armando Barrientos and David Hulme look at the experience of recent cash transfer programs, in countries ranging from Mexico and Brazil to South Africa, Namibia, India, and Mongolia. The verdict: cash transfers work if they are both fair and assured. If poor people have even small amounts of regular ensured income, they are in general well-equipped to decide how to use it most productively. And the results not only alleviate immediate hardship, but also contribute to longer-term economic development and poverty reduction....
For additional brief commentaries by the authors, see the interview
with Joseph Hanlon
here and the blog entry by Armando Barrientos
here.
To browse AfricaFocus Bulletins on issues of aid, poverty, and public investment,
click here.
Report: How would a trade deal on cotton affect importing and exporting countries? by Mario Jales
May 2010
This paper assesses the likely implications for exporting and importing countries from a trade deal in cotton. The study estimates the price, production and trade effects of reforming cotton subsidies and tariffs under alternative scenarios, with a primary focus on the WTO Doha Round. For a variety of scenarios, the model simulates the prices and quantities that would have obtained in a base year had the policy reforms implied by the given scenario been retroactively applied to that year. Simulations cover ten base years (1998-2007) that not only provide a wide variance in prices and subsidy levels but also reflect recent trends in supply and demand.
The full report can be found
here.
USAID and USDA announce Norman Borlaug Commemorative Research Initiative
Washington, D.C. - 16 June 2010
Today at the announcement of the 2010 World Food Prize winners, Secretary Hillary Clinton, Secretary Tom Vilsack and USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah outlined the Feed the Future research strategy, which includes a new partnership between the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The event honored the work of two individuals whose passion for ensuring that no one goes hungry has inspired action around the world: Jo Luck, President of Heifer International and David Beckmann, President of Bread for the World.
"This year's honorees have addressed hunger in innovative ways, engaging millions of people at home and abroad. Their contributions are critical. But much work remains," Secretary Clinton said. "In a few decades, the world's population will grow to 9 billion people. If we are to feed the future without leveling the forests, draining the aquifers, and depleting the soil of all its nutrients, we need science. Today we are announcing the Norman Borlaug Commemorative Research Initiative, to leverage the work of our nation's scientists to benefit farmers in developing countries worldwide."
As part of Feed the Future, research investments will focus on priorities that advance the productivity frontier, transform production systems and enhance nutrition and food safety. Research in these areas will help solve problems and provide smallholder farmers with the opportunity to harness the latest scientific discoveries. More than ever before, research investments will be tied to national and regional development programs that work to disseminate scientific innovations to agricultural producers by providing critical investments in extension, the seed and fertilizer industries, markets, and trade. Feed the Future will leverage the expertise and resources of USAID and USDA to establish the Norman Borlaug Commemorative Research Initiative.
The Borlaug Initiative will span the USDA's research agencies, increasing its relevance and impact on problems and opportunities faced by both US farmers and smallholder farm families in Africa, Asia and Latin America. This expanded relationship will add to USDA and USAID's partnerships with U.S. universities, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, the private sector, and research organizations in developing countries.
"We are excited to be a part of Feed the Future, see the progress it has made, and partner with USAID to build on existing research grants and other USDA research activities to enhance agricultural development and food security worldwide," said Secretary Vilsack. "This is a fitting way to honor the memory of Dr. Borlaug, whose work demonstrated the incredible capacity of innovation and scientific research to combat hunger across the globe."
Administrator Shah commented that "I just returned from a regional meeting in Senegal where we heard from many governments about their national agriculture investment plans. Countries asked us for continued investments in new agriculture tools and technologies through increased investments in research. We are responding to their requests by redoubling our efforts to fight poverty and hunger through research and innovation and significantly expanding our research partnership with USDA. Through these investments we can discover and deliver breakthrough technologies that will benefit millions of farmers and their families worldwide. USAID will be laser focused on results and our ability to help farmers increase their incomes, reduce their risk, and improve their yields."
Feed the Future is the U.S. Government's global hunger and food security initiative.
For more information about
Feed the Future, please visit:
www.feedthefuture.gov.
What will we eat when climate change strikes?
Johannesburg, South Africa - 9 June 2010
Diversify food sources; go local, suggests renowned agriculturalist and development expert Hans Herren in the latest news publication by the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition (UNSCN).
The UNSCN has explored ways of assessing the impact of climate change on food and nutrition security in its influential news publication, printed twice a year. Herren is guest editor of the first edition to focus on the impact of climate change on food and nutrition security.
Many projections have illustrated how the unfolding impact of climate change will hit food production. In 2009, the US-based think-tank International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) pointed out that climate change could push up the numbers of undernourished children.
Later in 2009, the UNSCN urged aid and development agencies and other organizations to develop a knowledge base that could inform future programming on climate change and nutrition, and to set up a comprehensive surveillance system that could identify interventions for protecting nutrition from climate-related hazards.
Read this edition of the UNSCN news publication at: Climate change: food and nutrition security implications
Africa Needs Investment in Infrastructure to Maintain Economic Growth
Lagos, Nigeria - 9 June 2010
Chief Operating Officer of African Development Bank (AfDB), Nkosana Moyo, has said that Africa needs investments of at least $93 billion in power plants and roads during the next decade to sustain economic growth of the continent.
Moyo, in an interview at the Conference of Montreal, said: "We need a lot of money, and the bank can only supply a part of that. If any economic activity is going to take place, clearly our infrastructure deficit must be closed."
Africa, the world's poorest continent, is home to one-sixth of the global population. It holds about 10 per cent of the earth's oil reserves, 40 per cent of its gold and 60 per cent of cobalt reserves.
Shareholders of the African Development Bank last month approved the tripling of the lender's capital base to almost $100 billion to help fund projects, such as railways and ports. The bank, based in Tunisia's capital, Tunis, more than doubled lending to $12.6 billion last year.
Lending to companies in 2010 will probably be little changed as the bank waits for shareholders to start injecting capital, Moyo said.
"We are holding our pipeline a bit flat," he said. "It's a timing issue. The capital increase will only kick in sometime next year, so we are bridging the period between now and when the capital comes in by suppressing a little bit."
Founded in 1963, the bank has 53 member countries from Africa and 24 from outside the continent, including the U.S., the European Union and Japan. Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation, has the biggest shareholding in the bank, with 8.9 per cent.
The bank, one of five major multilateral development lenders in the world, invests more than half of its funds on infrastructure projects, mainly in energy and transportation. The World Bank estimates that electricity capacity in Africa amounts to only 68 gigawatts for 48 countries, about the same capacity as Spain.
No other continent has more power outages than Africa, Moyo said. This, combined with deficient roads, boosts the cost of doing business in the region, he said.
"Power is a big issue. Everything else in terms of economic development needs that foundation," he added.
After approving power investments in South Africa and Botswana last year, the bank is considering whether to back wind-power projects in Kenya and Cape Verde, Moyo said. The lender is also continuing to evaluate a plan to build the Inga three hydropower plants on the Congo river - a project that has been beset by delays.
"Inga is one of the projects we are looking at," Moyo said. The Democratic Republic of Congo "is doing a study to see if it makes more sense to keep the project small, or go for a bigger version right away. We are still in the very early stages."
Telecom investments such as the construction of wireless towers also fit the bank's focus on infrastructure, Moyo said. Africa will probably have 560 million mobile-phone subscribers by the end of next year, double the 2007 total, he said, citing bank estimates.
"There is a lot of pent-up demand for telecommunications in Africa," Moyo said. "The penetration rate is still very low, and consumers are prepared to pay for the service. This should translate into good opportunities for investors."
Surging costs hit food security in poorer nations
6 June 2010
Families from Pakistan to Argentina to Congo are being battered by surging food prices that are dragging more people into poverty, fueling political tensions and forcing some to give up eating meat, fruit and even tomatoes.
Scraping to afford the next meal is still a grim daily reality in the developing world even though the global food crisis that dominated headlines in 2008 quickly faded in the U.S. and other rich countries.
With food costing up to 70 percent of family income in the poorest countries, rising prices are squeezing household budgets and threatening to worsen malnutrition, while inflation stays moderate in the United States and Europe.
Compounding the problem in many countries: prices hardly fell from their peaks in 2008, when global food prices jumped in part due to a smaller U.S. wheat harvest and demand for crops to use in biofuels.
Majeedan Begum, a Pakistani mother of five, said a bag of flour for bread, the staple of her family's diet, costs three times what it did two years ago in her hometown of Multan. She can no longer afford meat or fruit.
"My domestic budget has been ruined," said Begum, 35.
The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's food price index — which includes grains, meat, dairy and other items in 90 countries — was up 22 percent in March from a year earlier though still below 2008 levels. In some Asian markets, rice and wheat prices are 20 to 70 percent above 2008 levels, it says.
Many governments blame dry weather and high fuel costs but critics in countries such as India, Argentina and Egypt say misguided policies are making shortages worse and collusion by suppliers might be pushing up prices.
No single factor explains the inflation gap between developing and developed countries but poorer economies are more vulnerable to an array of problems that can push up prices, and many are cropping up this year.
Farmers with less land and irrigation are hit harder by drought and floods. Civil war and other conflicts can disrupt supplies. Prices in import-dependent economies spike up when the local currency weakens, as Pakistan's rupee has this year.
Costs also have been pushed up by a rebound in global commodity prices, especially for soy destined for Asian consumption. That has prompted a shift in Argentina and elsewhere to produce more for export, which has led to local shortages of beef and other food. The global financial crisis hurt food production in some countries by making it harder for farmers to get credit for seed and supplies.
In Mauritania in West Africa, rice prices doubled over the first three months of the year, according to the World Food Program. Over the same period, the price of corn rose 59 percent in Zimbabwe and 57 percent in neighboring Mozambique.
In Kinshasa in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mami Monga pays $25 for a box of fish that cost $10 a year ago. The price of a 25-kilogram bag of rice has doubled to $30.
"Today I am obliged to buy half the food I used to buy mid-last year," said Mami, a mother of five.
Kinshasa shopkeeper Abedi Patelli said prices rise when the exchange rate of Congo's currency falls. "But when our currency improves against the U.S. dollar, prices don't fall," he said. "They remain steady."
WFP spokesman Greg Barrow said poorer countries can suffer a "ratchet effect" that locks in price rises due to high transportation costs and limited competition.
"Prices dropped fairly dramatically toward the end of 2008 on international markets but we found prices remained relatively high in many local markets in developing countries," said Barrow.
After the cost of food rises, "it tends to take a long time to go down," he said.
The FAO said the double blow of the global recession and high food prices has pushed 100 million people into poverty.
Opposition parties have organized protests in Pakistan. In Egypt, a 50 percent jump in meat prices in recent weeks has helped to fuel demonstrations outside parliament over wages and other economic issues.
"I am afraid that I will wake up one day and not able to get enough bread for my 12-member family," said Aboulella Moussa, a doorman at a Cairo apartment building.
People interviewed in a number of countries said they are coping not just by cutting out expensive items but by eating less — a trend that has stirred concern about malnutrition.
In the 2008 inflation spike, WFP found families in some countries skipped meals or switched to eating corn husks or other low-quality produce. "Over the long term, this would lead to the effects of chronic malnutrition," Barrow said.
"It's expensive, so we eat less," said Seema Valmiki, 35, who is raising three children in New Delhi with her husband on his 6,000-rupee ($135) monthly income as a driver.
Valmiki can no longer afford meat, fruit or fish and has put off buying her children new school uniforms, toys and a bicycle.
"If we buy them fruit, we can't buy them food" like rice, dal and vegetables, she said.
In China, food costs rose 5.9 percent in April over a year ago — a modest rate for a country that suffered 20 percent-plus inflation in 2008. But it was enough to prompt the communist government to try to reassure the public with pledges that prices will ease as the spring harvest comes in. It also threatened to punish price gouging in a new effort to cool inflation.
Even in moderately prosperous nations such as Venezuela, shoppers say they can no longer afford meat and scour markets for bargains.
In Argentina, soy production has taken over more than 32 million acres (13 million hectares) of grassland once used to raise cattle and replaced less profitable wheat and corn as well, driving up prices in supermarkets.
Argentina's government has responded with higher taxes, export limits, controls on supermarket prices of meat, wheat and corn, subsidies to food producers and pay hikes of 30 percent for union workers. The moves have temporarily eased the pain but beef producers have thinned their herds in response to government intervention and the price of meat has doubled in the last year.
"Before, we would eat meat three times a week. Now it's once, with luck," said Marta Esposito, a 45-year-old mother of two in Buenos Aires. "Tomatoes, don't even talk about it. We eat whatever is the cheapest."
Venezuela's 30.4 percent inflation is among the world's highest. The oil-rich country is a major food importer and its bolivar has tumbled against the dollar, forcing up prices in local markets. In April, food prices rose 11 percent over the previous month.
The Venezuelan government has imposed price controls and arrested some shopkeepers for violating them. But the controls have led to shortages of beef, sugar, corn meal and butter, forcing the government to allow some prices to rise by 20 percent this year.
Elsewhere, rising prices highlight a more basic problem: making sure farm productivity keeps pace with burgeoning populations.
India's food prices were up 17 percent in April over a year earlier but the government hopes normal rainfall this growing season will increase supplies. The rise has been driven in part by growing demand from the rural poor, who can afford to spend more on food thanks to government debt-relief and job-creation programs.
Longer term, experts say India, with more than 1 billion people, has to speed up growth in farm production if it is to keep up with demand.
"Our capacity to feed every Indian is systematically declining with time," said Harsh Mander, who was appointed by India's Supreme Court to monitor hunger. "World markets can't bail us out."
2009 CAADP Annual Report
This report highlights the main activities of the Agriculture Unit/CAADP during the course of 2009 and explains how CAADP worked with governments and stakeholders in 2009 to build an African consensus on agricultural policy and practice. You also in this document information on CAADP implementation, the AU-NEPAD responses to the high food prices and/or delivery with regard to the strategic functions of the Agriculture Unit in 2009.
Championing Agricultural Successes for Africa: Synthesis Report of a Parliamentary Dialogue
African parliaments play an increasingly important role in government
Budgetary processes. This report provides a summary of the proceeding at the 2006 ‘the Conference Championing Agricultural Successes for Africa's Future in Support of CAADP: Findings of a Parliamentary Conference on NEPAD’, 15-18 May, Somerset West, Cape Town, South Africa.
West Africa: Why Food, Energy, Financial Crisis Persist in West Africa-Minister
Abuja, Nigeria - 1 June 2010
The Federal Government on Monday linked the unabated food, energy and financial crises in the ECOWAS sub-region to half-hazard implementation of agreements reached by member states.
Dr Aliyu Idi Hong, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, stated this at the 64th Session of the Council of Ministers of ECOWAS in Abuja.
Hong said the half-hazard implementation of the 1979 ECOWAS Protocol on Free Movement of Persons, Goods and Services and the Right of Residence and Establishment by member states was retrogressive. "Despite efforts and structures put in place to fast track the integration process within the sub-region, the lack of political will by member states to implement this agreement has further undeveloped us.
"Citizens of the region have continued to face harassment, intimidation, torture and extortion in the hands of the security agencies manning our borders.
"These unfortunate trends have no doubt constitute serious barriers to trade and development within the sub-region," Hong said. He said that he hoped the construction of the five joint border posts, including that of Nigeria-Benin border post, under the auspices of ECOWAS and the EU would reverse the trend.
Hong stressed that it was expected that when border posts are completed, all the impediments to trade would have been removed.
The Minister of State also noted that the establishment of a Customs Union in the sub-region remained one of ECOWAS top priorities.
He added that the establishment of a Customs Union would make the free trade area function effectively.
According to him, it will act as a lubricant to the establishment of the Common External Tariff (CET) and eliminate all impediments to the free movement of persons, goods and services.
Hong, however, lauded ECOWAS Agricultural Policy (ECOWAP) and the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). He expressed satisfaction on the sincere steps taken by the organisation to assist states undergoing challenges of enthroning constitutional democracy. He said that it was gratifying to see efforts by the organisation and Nigeria to resolve the political logjam in Guinea Bissau, Guinea had paid off with agreements for elections this year.
Hong said that President Goodluck Jonathan in conjunction with ECOWAS had engaged the relevant stakeholders to ensure workable election time table in Cote d'Ivoire and Niger.
"It is hoped that through this process, we will be able to consolidate the gains of democratic governance and development in our sub-region," he said.
Mr James Gbeho, President of the ECOWAS Commission expressed happiness that the global financial crisis that worked against economies of member states was now under control.
"Our success in the face of the ongoing global economic recession will be measured by how effective we adapt and respond to the measures put in place by global financial institutions," Gbeho said.
The highlight of the meeting is the consideration of the reports of the Financial Controller and Audit Committee of the council.
The reports are for the good governance of community institutions and their administrative and financial management. (NAN)
Kenya: Coffee Farmers Win Package to Boost Production, Marketing
Nairobi, Kenya - 11 June 2010
A plan to boost quality control in coffee production promises to strengthen the competitiveness of the crop and increase farmers' earnings.
The European Union and Kenya-based DCDM are jointly funding a certification project aimed at increasing output and boost earnings by 25 per cent.
The project seeks to transform the way coffee is produced and marketed in its member countries to reach leading buyers.
Farmers in coffee producing countries in eastern Africa will be handed a lifeline through the five-year initiative being implemented under the Common Fund Commodities (CFC) by the Eastern Africa Fine Coffees Association (EAFCA).
Diminishing acreage
About Sh370 million has been channelled to the verification and certification project.
"This boom, however, may not be realised in countries like Kenya as more and more coffee acreage is lost to real estate and other developments in coffee growing areas," the association said in a statement.
The diminishing coffee acreage in the country poses a threat to Kenya's foreign currency reserves as well as its positioning as a producer of the world's best crop.
"As it stands, indicators on a qualitatively and quantitatively improved coffee production and value addition process are imperative for all coffee producers if they are to enjoy the impending gravy train," said Samuel Kamau, the acting executive director of the association.
Figures from the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) show that the quantity of coffee exports decreased by December 2009 to 2,935 metric tonnes from a high of 7,252.1 metric tonnes earlier in May of the same year.
Sandeep Khapré of DCDM says leading markets have set standards for access, including tracking the production process, value addition, packaging and storage.
The project seeks to enlighten farmers on the standards and how best to capitalise on the global market's expectations.
Despite Kenyan coffee's global popularity among roasters, the country does not yet have a formal certification or standardisation regime.
Standards workshop
Last year the Kenya Bureau of Standards (Kebs), drafted a comprehensive guide on certification standards to realign the local industry to the global markets where consumer are keener on traceability, food safety, environmental responsibility, fair pricing and farmers welfare. The regulations await the approval of stakeholders.
Beginning Saturday, the EAFCA will hold a four-day workshop on verification and certification of specialty coffee in Nairobi.
The workshop focuses on harmonisation of standards such as accreditation of trainers, reduction of certification costs, shared roles in market linkages, integrating producers upstream with the buyers, producer incentives and value chain sustainability.
Namibia: Organic Farming Body Sets Out Goals
Windhoek, Namibia - 14 June 2010
The Namibia Organic Association (NOA) was launched at the just ended 2010 Tourism Expo last week.
"We want to provide leadership in organic farming and encourage farmers to incorporate organic practices in their farming methods," the chairperson of the association, Manjo Smith, said.
The vision of NOA is to contribute to a healthy environment, to attain increased incomes and improve livelihoods through the adoption of organic agriculture in Namibia.
Organic farming is the form of agriculture that relies on crop rotation, green manure, compost, biological pest control, organically approved pesticide application and mechanical cultivation to maintain soil productivity and control pests, excluding or strictly limiting the use of synthetic fertilisers and synthetic pesticides or plant growth regulators.
NOA's mission is to provide leadership in the coordination and promotion of organic agricultural development, networking and marketing.
To accomplish its mission, NOA will promote Namibian organic products, locally and internationally, by specifically connecting small-scale and communal farmers with markets; build capacity in organic training, education, extension, research; promote organic production systems and wild harvesting, increase awareness and attract support for organic agriculture in Namibia and be a contact point for organic matters.
Smith said the association is a membership-based organisation for both producers and consumers.
"Consumers are also members as they can influence other people or even Government," Smith said.
The Namibia Country Pilot Partnership for Integrated Sustainable Land Management (CPP SLM SAM) financially supports NOA with funds provided by the Global Environment Facility and administered by the United Nations Development Programme.
The CPP SLM SAM is hosted by the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, which is also the lead implementing agency of the partnership.
Since 1990, the market for organic products has grown at a rapid pace, to reach N$46 billion in 2007.
The demand has driven a similar increase in organically managed farmland.
Approximately 32.2 million hectares worldwide are now being farmed organically, representing approximately 0.8 percent of total world farmland.
In addition, as of 2007, organic wild products are harvested on approximately 30 million hectares.
Niger: Cash to fill the food gap?
Dakar, Senegal - 15 June 2010
Logistical and funding constraints could cause shortages in the food aid pipeline from July onward, hampering distributions to some of Niger's 7.8 million food-insecure people, say NGOs and the World Food Programme (WFP). More cash distributions could be the answer.
"There are gaps – we don't have all the food we would like to have, and of the resources we have received, we are struggling to ensure food will be available for distribution during the critical lean season," Gianluca Ferrera, head of WFP in Niger, told IRIN. WFP has received 40,000mt of the 113,000mt needed for 2010, and expects to receive about 20,000mt in July and in August.
The government has emergency food stocks and cash to distribute over coming months. It is currently undertaking a countrywide survey of the latest food security needs, due out in July.
Aid agencies are addressing severe acute malnutrition fairly well, said Patrick Barbier, head of Médecins Sans Frontières in Niger, but many cases of moderate malnutrition, which require food supplements like grains, oil and pulses, are not being met.
Upstream and downstream
WFP's Ferrera told IRIN there were "upstream" and "downstream" challenges to the food pipeline. "Upstream problems are: ensuring we have enough money to buy the food that we need, and that we have it in time." WFP is US$22 million short of the $124 million it will cost to buy 113,000mt of food.
Downstream problems include difficulties in transporting the food to rural areas; the arrival of the rains, which could make roads impassable; and ongoing delays in obtaining cargo clearance for shipped food. Most of WFP's fortified corn-soya blend (CSB) comes from the United States and Europe, and arrives at the ports of Lomé in Togo and Cotonou in Benin.
WFP has launched its largest ever regional procurement drive, looking to fill 30,000mt of the food gap with maize, millet and beans from Benin, Ghana, Togo, Mali, and Burkina Faso; so far half of this quantity has been bought.
Ferrera said the agency would expand regional purchases if it could obtain the extra $22 million. Nigeria is not seen as an option for sourcing food because WFP had experienced difficulties in obtaining export permits and clearance when it tried to buy grains there in 2005.
Despite local imports, gaps are likely. "WFP food may not be sufficient for the number of people in need – additional solutions must be considered," Severine Courtiol, head of programmes in Niger at Save the Children, an international NGO, told IRIN.
Cash or seeds?
"Cash [distributions], where possible," would have to make up the shortfall in food, Courtiol said. They were quicker than food, and cut out having to pay heavy customs, as well as delivery and transport problems. But, "We also need to find the cash."
Many markets in towns and cities are functioning well and have sufficient grain, much of it from Nigeria, Benin and Burkina Faso, an update by the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWSNET) noted in May 2010.
The update on the Maradi, Tahoua and Zinder regions of southern Niger was based on FEWSNET's own assessments and those by Concern Worldwide, an NGO that combats poverty and hunger.
"If we had cash I think it could be an option, especially in urban areas ... we can expect urban markets to keep working relatively well," said Courtiol. Ferrera said market conditions in rural areas varied but, in general, grain prices were rising and imports dwindling, as was usual in the lean season.
Save the Children has upped its cash distributions in the Aguie and Tessaoua districts of the Maradi region in southern Niger, with help from the European Commission and US government.
Concern Worldwide offers vulnerable families a choice between seeds to plant, plus a small cash stipend, or $37 (20,000 CFA) per month in cash, distributed via mobile phones from January to September. In Tahoua province, southwestern Niger, fertilizers, food, and therapeutic food for severely malnourished children are also provided.
In discussions with community members, more people said they would choose cash rather than seeds.
Communities with the greatest crop failure – some had 90 percent or above – or that lived further away from a market, tended to opt for seeds, while those with market access, lower crop losses, or limited access to land, tended to choose cash.
Tom Arnold, head of NGO Concern Worldwide, said aid agency coverage was relatively good and NGOs were coping, but food security could deteriorate in coming weeks. "There is potentially a very high risk that problems will get a lot worse," he warned. "It takes time to mobilize and distribute food."
Nigeria: NAIP - 333 Projects Ready for Take-Off
Abuja, Nigeria - 14 June 2010
The Federal Government has said that the National Agricultural Investment Plan (NAIP) and the 333 agricultural projects in the country have been considered for take-off.
However, the government has also promised adequate funding of research institutes across the country. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development ,Prof Sheikh Ahmed Abdullah, disclosed this at the National Agricultural Investment Plan (NAIP) Stakeholders Forum in Abuja.
The minister noted that the draft document on NAIP for the implementation of comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) in Nigeria called for collective sanctification. "We must ensure this document reflects the desires and aspirations of all Nigerians including the rural farmers," he said.
According to him: "On behalf of Mr President Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, i wish to reiterate the commitment of the government of Nigeria, politically, economically and socially for the sustenance of the CAADP process in Nigeria, especially as it concerns regular budgetary allocation and timely disbursement of funds to the sector.
In another development, Abdullah paid a familiarisation visit to Ahmed Bello University (ABU), Zaria. In his remarks the vice chancellor, Prof Abdullahi Mustapha urged the government to double its contribution to research and development as it was the only antidote to a true agricultural revolution as recorded in developed economies.
Nigeria: Organic Food - 'Nation Should Not Be Left Behind'
Lagos, Nigeria - 13 June 2010
Agriculture is the basis for millions of livelihoods in Nigeria and improvement of the agricultural sector is a prerequisite for development of many states in the country, some experts would want to agree.
A market oriented development of sustainable agriculture combined with local or regional processing of products targeted at high value markets may increase income, employment and capacity building of women and young people in rural societies.
The demand for organic products in high value food markets in Europe and North America has increased by 10 to 25 per cent yearly and it is the fastest growing food market segment, with an increasing import from developing countries.
Modern organic agriculture builds on principles for improving soil fertility through incorporation of legumes and compost, strengthening ecological support-functions and using natural regulation and crop diversity to prevent pest and diseases. Using such agro-ecological practices helps farmers to intensify and increase production without necessarily depending on chemical pesticides and fertilisers, which again reduces their risk to become indebted or poisoned by pesticides. Moreover, organic principles allow farmers to better adapt to the challenges from climate change, water constraints and loss of soil.
Organic agriculture can contribute to increase productivity and reduce poverty and vulnerability among African farmers. Given the right focus on training and capacity building in primary production and in food processing. Organic production creates employment, transfers knowledge and improves access to high value markets.
This were part of the consensus reached recently in Makurdi, Benue State, at a one-day training programme on organic products and certification put together by the Management of the Nigerian Export Promotion Council in collaboration with ECOCERT, an International Certification Agency Makurdi, Owerri and Sango-Otta.
While most countries of the world, including West African countries have gone far in this relatively new field in agriculture, Nigeria, it was discovered has yet to make any progress in the field. According to Mr. James Thompson of ECOCERT West African, Organic farming simply means to intensify and increase production without necessarily depending on chemical, pesticides and fertilisers, which again reduces their risk to become indebted or poisoned by pesticides.
Although Nigeria is lagging behind, he said concerted effort is being made to address the issue. In the forefront of the move to position Nigerian in the field that is yielding increased revenue for other countries is the Nigerian Export Promotion Council.
According to the Executive Director of the Council Mr. David Adulugba, the programme was put together in continuous fulfillment of the Council's mandate at capacity building of exporters and other stakeholders in the non-oil export sector of the Nigerian economy.
He said the development of the sector is in tandem with the Federal Government's 7-point agenda. "The Management of the Nigerian Export Promotion Council in collaboration with ECOCERT, an international certification agency packaged this training programme in three locations in the country: Makurdi, Owerri and Sango-Otta.
He said the market for organic products has been on the increase in the world, growing at a rate of 20 per cent per annum since 1990 (20 years ago) to reach $46 billion in 2007 and is expected to hit $70.2 billon in 2010. "The Council has identified this market to have a significant share of the billions of dollars in the sector.
"Organic farming began in Central Europe and in India. Today, many countries are known for growing organic crops. All over the world, organic food accounts for approximately one to two per cent of gross food sales. So many premiums are attracted to organic products that in Austria, organic farmers have been given incentives; experts expect 10 per cent of all foods grown locally to be organic.
"In Germany, almost all baby food is completely organic and in some places, up to a third of all bread is baked using organic ingredients. Italy has gone even further to assure that the children eat organic food. Its government has legislated that, as of 2005, all food prepared in school lunch programs must be organic food. In the United Kingdom it was reported that more than 600,000 hectares of land was allotted and managed under organic production standards.
Sales of organic foods increased from approximately 100 million to over 1.2 billion pounds sterling in only ten years. The big change, perhaps, the biggest change has occurred in Cuba, where, in 1990, the government banned many chemicals used in conventional farming and converted the land in the entire country to organic farmland. This means that it would be rare to even find a piece of conventionally grown produce within the country. Clearly, the world is going organic and several countries are really far ahead of us in promoting organic, eating and providing incentives to organic farmers.
"In our neighbouring countries like Mali, Burkina Fasso, non-governmental organisation (NGOs) is actively driving the development of this sector. We call on our own NGOs to equally assist in the development of the sector. The growing trend for organic products is definitely headed in the right direction and Nigeria cannot afford to continually be an onlooker given the socio-economic benefits of organic products"
According to the Director, Product Development Department of the council, Mrs. Omowunmi Osibo, the major driving force including the objectives of the programme were to create awareness in organic agriculture/products and certification, educate and sensitise Nigerians on the economic, environmental and health benefits of organically produced products/agricultural produce and to promote greater interest in producing organic products.
She said that it is aimed also at enlightening producers on the new emerging markets, attracting higher premium for such products, encourage capacity building for key stakeholders at different levels in the value chain, trade promotion and quality control organisations and to promote increased exports of Nigeria's agricultural and other products under this label and at higher premium.
The West Africa Sales Manager, ECOCERT, Mr. James Thompson, who was the programs resource person, disclosed that the body is an institution providing inspection and certification services for organic, fair trade and for standards related to sustainable development. ECOCERT, he further said, has been existence since 1991 and is a team of multi-disciplinary professionals from agriculture, environment and from other life sciences.
"As a process of working each team member undergoes various field experiences related to ecology and sustainable development. These field experiences forms a knowledge base which is inherent in the ECOCERT team," he emphasised.
ECOCERT is now a global network with its existence in 80 countries. Hence the live field experiences gained is trans-boundary, holistic and global. Issues related to ecology and sustainable development are also no more only local but also global in nature. This coherence is making this knowledge base more apt to make considerable contribution to set directions for solutions.
This global network is also in contact with civil societies in 120 countries and thus making this network a latent force for global actions in favour of ecology and sustainable development. This knowledge base arising out of this global field experiences can form a plausible reaction to solution of problems encountered related to ecology and sustainable development. This pursuit of solutions will be from the field experience to laboratories."
ECOCERT has various partners and stake holders in its process of delivering their inspection and certification services related to ecology and social standards. These partners and stakeholders include environmental and socially responsible businesses, policy makers, regulatory authorities, scientists and consumers. These vast array of stakeholders and partners stand to benefit from this inherent knowledge base emanating from this network of global live field experiences.
The councils Director/Area Controller North, Mallam Sabo Bello, enjoined farmers and stakeholders to maximise the benefits of the programme also "impacting same to fellow Nigerians not opportuned to be at the meeting. It is my hope that in no distant time Nigeria would have recorded numerous products certified as organic, finding their way to the high value organic market."
During the training workshop, several sectors dealing with agricultural production were present including Earth Care Nigerian Limited, one of the country's first organic product manufacturers. According to the Sales Marketing Manager Toma Ubandoma, the company has developed a method that duplicates the rejuvenation of the soil without loss of planting time. He also stated that Earthcare Compost Plus is pure, natural and biodegradable humus for soil fertility, which is also the building block for organic agriculture.
Earlier, at the opening ceremony, Governor Gabriel Suswam of Benue State said government is taking the issue of organic farming seriously even as he said the state government has procured tractors for farmers at subsidised rate. In addition, he said the state has secured a N1 billion loan from the 200 billion Naira set aside for farmers in the country to be distributed to farmers.
Nigeria: USAID Partners 10 States to Boost Agriculture
Abuja, Nigeria - 10 June 2010
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is to partner 10 states in Nigeria to ensure increased agricultural productivity and guarantee food security for the citizenry.
USAID Mission Director, Ray Kirkland, who stated this on Thursday at the National Agriculture Investment Plan Stakeholders' Workshop in Abuja, added that in the next five years USAID would closely work with the selected states to boost the production of rice, cassava, cowpeas, sorghum and aqua culture.
Kirkland said since 2005, USAID has been implementing a large demand-driven private sector-oriented activity known as " Maximise Agriculture Revenue and Key Enterprises in Targeted Sites (MARKETS) in Nigeria".
It is aimed at working with agro-processors, credit organisations, suppliers of agricultural inputs and farmers' and producers' organisations to increase productivity, output and incomes of small farmers.
As part of the achievement of the initiative, he noted, rice yields on supported sites increased from less than two tonnes per hectare to over five tonnes per hectare during the 2008 and 2009 cropping seasons as incomes of benefitting smallholder farmers increased by 100 per cent.
He expressed optimism that with MARKETS, Nigeria would once again become West Africa's bread basket and net exporter of agricultural-based products.
Kirkland said the United States government has designated Nigeria as a strategic partner in President Barrack Obama's World-wide Hunger and Food Security Initiative, adding that it would afford U.S. the opportunity to continue providing assistance to Nigeria in the development of its agricultural sector.
In his keynote address, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Sheikh Abdullah, said the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) is an African-wide initiative by the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) to boost agricultural development and overall growth in Africa.
Sierra Leone: EU Boosts Food Security in Country
Freetown, Sierra Leone - 8 June 2010
The European Union (EU) through its implementing partners in Sierra Leone has engaged residents of Kamboya and Bagba chiefdoms in the Bo district to promote agriculture, water and sanitation, good governance and trading activities, among others.
A team from the EU headquarters in Freetown recently embarked on an on-the-spot check to the provinces to get firsthand information about the impact of these projects on the lives of the people, as the scheme was basically designed to address the social and economic needs of grassroots communities.
Giving an overview of the project, EU project officer Ritchie Johns said the welfare of people at grassroots communities was seriously considered while implementing the project, and that increase in agricultural productivity for food self-sufficiency and grassroots empowerment were significant to the project.
He encouraged farmers to embark on inland valley farming activities, stating that Nerica - a higher yield, shorter growth duration, resistance to local stress and higher protein rice - was given to farmers to be multiplied.
Johns noted that farmers now have enough seeds and seedlings for their farming activities, adding that water and sanitation programmes were included in the project for proper hygiene and environmental sanitation.
"EU is spending 800,000 Euro in this project; it is very important that community people actually benefit from it because it was developed to ease some of the problems faced at grass root levels," he said.
Dirk Harsdorf is the project manager for Welthungerhilfe (German agro action), one of the implementing partners of the governance and agricultural projects in that part of the country. He said various committees were being set up to encourage full community participation and that a lot of success stories were being recorded, especially on agriculture and governance issues.
Harsdorf further noted that people from other areas were now purchasing seeds and seedlings from farmers who benefited from these projects.
It could be recalled that shortly after the decade civil conflict in the country, one of the major challenges faced by local communities, especially women, were sustainable livelihoods and infrastructural development. Majority of them could not have survived all of these confronts without the timely intervention of the EU and its implementing partners, as some beneficiaries explained in an interview.
The project started in 2008 but has contributed greatly in changing the living conditions of the people. It has increased agricultural productivity for food self-sufficiency and trade links with both rural and urban communities.
Soft loans were given to local farmers to strengthen their economic status and most of them commended the donors for providing such an enviable assistance.
In Blama, women's groups have received over two million Leones to startup small scale businesses and according to them, "it has yielded a lot of profits for the community".
Before the loans were given, beneficiaries were trained in business management, profit and loss and other business techniques for them to properly manager the resources.
These women can now pay school fees, buy clothes and feed their children without support from their husbands. The scheme has created unity and love among women's groups as they plan together and share things in common.
One of the beneficiaries, Victoria Samai, said they can now properly take care of themselves and their children out of the profits generated from the micro credit scheme.
She said they organized themselves into groups with 20 of them given reasonable amount to be invested and that she was happy that the scheme has been a success for the communities.
"Before we were given the loans, they provided us with training facilities on business management, adult literacy, savings and income generating activities; it is significant because it has increased trade links tremendously between Bo and our village.
"We no longer quarrel with our husbands if they fail to give us food for a particular day because we have some money at hand. We recognize the fact that it is out of sympathy that we are getting this support, therefore we are working hard to sustain our business activities," Samai said.
Adama Thomas, a member of the group, explained that they have been buying palm oil and other local products and that whenever there is an increase in prize, they sell and make profit.
She thanked the EU for constructing seven toilets, a dry floor, and water well and other facilities for the people.
In Kondorwadu, Kissi Tongi chiefdom in the Kailahun district, the community association and skills training institute (CASTI) is working with Oxfam with support from the EU to implement community action for water facility development and poverty reduction in the area.
The community has been fetching water from a nearby stream which, according to residents, was not hygienic.
Community sensitizations on hygiene promotion were all part of the project.
A total number of two hundred and twenty six people in that village now boost of nine locally made toilets, water well and other implements to upkeep their environment.
Uganda: Nation is Looking to Process Its Famous Fruits and Vegetables
Cape Town, South Africa - 26 May 2010
Uganda's fruits exports have increased steadily over the years, but because the fruit is exported fresh, the country is missing out on the full potential of its produce. There is huge potential for the production of quality value-added fresh fruits and vegetables.
Uganda is one of the world's top banana-growing countries, producing an estimated 10 million tonnes of the fruit each year. It is not just the sweet apple banana that is a hit in international markets: pineapples, mangos, passion fruits and vegetables like hot peppers are also in high demand due to their good quality.
Uganda's vibrant organic farming industry is poised to make the country a major source of organic fruits and vegetables, according to recent data from the National Organic Agricultural Movement of Uganda (NOGAMU).
Fruits exports have increased steadily over the years - in 2007, the value of exports hit more than $1m. But, as the fruit is exported fresh, Uganda is missing out on the full potential of its produce. There is huge potential for the production of quality, semi-processed or value-added fresh fruits and vegetables.
Investment opportunity
British company Anglo-Uganda Development Company (AUDC) plans to set up the Lugazi Foods Company to process fresh fruits and vegetables. The company is seeking an investor to partner in the venture which has the potential to be very lucrative.
Cost of investment: GBP2 million
Return on investment: based on 40% shareholding
Project description
The proposed Lugazi Foods Company aims to increase the competitiveness of Uganda's fresh fruits and vegetables exports by investing in the production of value-added fresh fruits, including pre-cut, portioned and pre-packed in consumer retail packs. The business will initially target the four most popular fruits - pineapples, apple bananas, passion fruits and also hot peppers.
Production will be stimulated easily for scaling up once sufficient demand and capacity is established. The business will also seek to exploit the high demand for organic and fair traded fruit and vegetable products.
Project justification
Access to Resources: Growing of the abundant fresh fruits and vegetables is largely dominated by small-scale farm producers in central, eastern and western Uganda. There are over 200 000 internationally certified (IDOAM and FiBL 2009) farmers involved in organic farming, producing mostly pineapples, passion fruits and apple bananas. Access to organic raw fruits further increases the competitiveness of Uganda's value added fresh fruits and vegetables.
Access to Markets: Uganda is already exporting raw fruits and vegetables to the European Union. Demand for processed fresh fruits and vegetables is increasing, presenting new export market opportunities. Uganda's hot peppers are preferred, especially in the UK, Netherlands and France due to their high quality. In addition, based on the growing global market for organic products now estimated to be above £40 billion, Uganda is bound to be a market leader as a source of organic semi-processed fruits and vegetables.
Availability of affordable labour: Uganda has a competent and well educated labour force that will provide a base for recruiting appropriate staff for the project.
Favourable Location: Excellent climatic conditions drive the production of a variety of fruits and vegetables for the export and regional markets. The country's geographical suitability for organic production also presents enormous advantages for growing of organic produce. Uganda is well connected for international markets due to the accessibility of the major international airport, which has sufficient cargo flights.
Potential Markets
The European Union presents huge potential export market for minimally processed fruits and vegetables. The main target market will be the major supermarkets, food distributors and the hospitality industry. The growing number of supermarkets in the region, particularly in Uganda, Rwanda, Southern Sudan, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo, present additional market opportunities. The implementation of the East African Community's Common Market Protocol which will allow free movement of goods, people, services and capital in member states will also present huge opportunities for the company in terms of access to a larger market, as well as facilitate future regional expansion plans.
Project site
The Uganda Investment Authority has secured land that is available for leasing to investors interested in setting up processing plants. A portion of the land has been developed into industrial parks, with the basic infrastructure such as power, water, sewerage and road networks established. AUDC is also exploring the possibility of setting up the processing facility in a special economic zone. Investors operating in the zones benefit from a host of incentives and tax exemptions.