Intensifying Agriculture for Small Holder Farmers
By Maria Nagawa, Research Associate EPRC
On 25th June, 2015,
the Economic Policy Research Centre conducted the fourth annual forum on
agriculture and food security, focusing on intensifying smallholder crop
production in Uganda. Agriculture is a strategic sector of development: it
employs 66% of the workforce, contributes to 37% of GDP, and contributes the
highest proportion to export earnings at 40%. Despite all this, the sector
notoriously suffers poor performance at 2% growth per annum, significantly
lower than the services and industry sectors.
The agricultural sector is
largely dominated by smallholder farmers at 80%, whose average farm size is
less than 2 hectares. These farmers produce at such low levels that there is
barely a surplus for sale on the domestic market let alone for export, keeping
them in a cycle of poverty. Moreover, due to population growth and declining
soil fertility, farmers are opening up new lands; mostly by encroaching on wetlands
and forests. As a result, Uganda has the highest rate of deforestation and soil
depletion in the East African Community (EAC). Given our population growth rate
of 3.1%, this is unsustainable. It is projected that in 40 years, Uganda’s
population will surpass 100 million people. Without intensifying food
production, the country will be faced with either food insecurity or an
increased import bill as it struggles to match food availability to the
population size.
The problem is that there is
hardly any kind of intensification in Uganda. It would be possible to double
yields of small holder farmers through intensification rather than land
expansion. The pillars of intensification are: use of improved seed and
fertilisers, irrigation, and mechanization. However, 30% of farmers use
improved seeds and of these 85% have been recycled, only 0.9% of farmers use
irrigation and mechanization, and 1.1% use only one type fertilizer – the
lowest proportion in the EAC. Even among those that use fertilizer, nearly all
use fake or adulterated versions. Other problems facing the agricultural sector
are resource constraints, limited collaboration among stakeholders, negative
mindsets towards the sector, poor knowledge economy, and lack of organization
among farmers. Risk such as weather, volatile prices, disease, and policy
shocks is also an especially important problem for farmers. There is fear that
intensification could be an added risk.
One of the
major causes is a paucity of effective policies on intensification. All
policies must be based on research and consultation and go through the process
of problem identification, policy design, analysis, formulation, consultation,
and implementation. However, the policy formulation process in Uganda is
teeming with setbacks which include limited capacity for formulation, adoption
and especially implementation, confusion of mandates at intra and
inter-ministerial level, delays in policy adoption, poor Monitoring and Evaluation
data, limited use of evaluation results for policy formulation, and challenges
in aligning and linking policies with the agricultural sector plans.
Government efforts to meet policy
challenges have been dogged by poor sequencing and implementation. For example,
strategies are put in place to enforce policies but the agriculture Development
Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP) of 2010 was enforced 3 years before the
formulation of a National Agricultural Policy (NAP) which also failed to fit
into the framework of the first National Development Plan (NDPI) of 2010. In
addition, the National Agriculture Advisory Services (NAADS), created in 2001
to provide demand driven extension services to farmers through input
distribution and technical support, was working parallel to and in competition
with the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) as a
semi-autonomous government agency. Needless to say, it did not even fully
deliver on its mandate. After 12 years of operation, only 26% of farmers
countrywide had been reached by their services. The main problem cited is that
since the agency was semi-autonomous; out of the MAAIF sphere of influence, it
suffered capture from varying political interests.
Currently, the government
has redirected distribution of agricultural inputs to the army through
Operation Wealth Creation and created (but not implemented) a Single Spine
Extension System to streamline extension service provision. Whether these new
developments are logical rather than political is still under question. There
is no link between the single spine system and farmers or researchers for
example, which existed under NAADS.
Several solutions have been
suggested or are underway to turn the situation around:
I)
Financial deepening is needed in the
agricultural sector. Research from Policy Action for Sustainable
Intensification of Cropping Systems (PASIC) shows that farmers who have greater
access to wealth and / or savings tend to engage more in intensification and
even diversification to spread risk.
II)
Policy implementers such as parliamentarians and
ministers need to engage more in the agriculture policy process to ensure some
of the policies that have been lying dormant for years such as the seed and
fertilizer policies are implemented.
III)
Greater collaboration is needed between the
different stakeholders such as the farmers, research institutes, politicians
and government officials to ensure that policies go through the proper
formulation process.
IV)
Zonal Investment Plans have been formulated by
PASIC to boost value chains in particular agro-ecological areas especially for
rice and irish potatoes.
V)
Uganda should take lessons from countries that
have managed to boost their agricultural sectors such as Ghana, Rwanda, India,
and Nigeria.
Hi
ReplyDeleteBrian Hoshowski and his colleagues surveyed researchers about their perceptions of social media: “Researchers described social media as being incompatible with research