Is agriculture making a comeback on the international development agenda?

Twenty-five years on from the last World Development Report on agriculture in 1982, the 2008 WDR, launched on 19th October, provides a long overdue focus on ‘Agriculture and Development’.

Agriculture is crucial to the sustained growth of Africa’s economies and improving the lives of millions of poor people – over 70% of the population in sub-Saharan Africa works in this sector. The question of how to raise productivity in a continent where population growth still outstrips food production is key.

The WDR is right in stating that agriculture is a private sector activity. But to talk about agriculture in Africa in any broad-brush way is dangerous, and the WDR’s recognition of this is welcome. Agriculture an extremely heterogeneous sector; from subsistence and smallholder farmers, to cooperatives and large-scale plantations. In this regard, broad-brush policies to stimulate the agricultural sector will also be dangerous. Policies need enough flexibility to enable the diverse business of agriculture to flourish at every level of the supply chain.

The challenges to agriculture presented by the changing geography in many African countries must not be underestimated. Urbanisation is happening at an unprecedented scale in many contexts, creating new urban market opportunities for agricultural products. Linking farmers to these markets through efficient value chains and enhanced competitiveness is crucial.

If agriculture is seriously back on the international development agenda, there is an important window of opportunity not to be missed. Many African governments have made agriculture a national priority, the African Union’s Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) is finalising its strategic framework, and the private sector is recognising the huge potential of investing in African agriculture (with Business Action for Africa, for example, recently setting out its position on the issue).

The problem with food aid: one charity tells it as it is

Our latest news round up profiles one on the most inconsistent development policies currently out there - the long-running practice by the US government of providing aid relief in the form of subsidized grain bought from its own farmers. As reported in the New York Times, CARE, one of the world's largest charities, has just announced its decision to phase out its involvement, arguing that:

American food aid is not only plagued with inefficiencies, but also may hurt some of the very poor people it aims to help...[by competing] with the crops of struggling local farmers.

In taking this stand, CARE is breaking not only from its own past, but also from the general practice among similar agencies.

As we argued in a recently-issued statement, the real solution is far more complex: better access for farmers to markets and capital, appropriate technologies, farm inputs, diversified crop and animal portfolios, secure land tenure, adequate irrigation, the infrastructure and capacity building they need to connect to local, regional and international markets and supply chains, and better information on the current and future levels of demand for their crops.

We have also argued for a fairer world trading system. This includes ending market-distorting subsidies by the US (and EU) on the products that matter most to African farmers. Supporting farmers in a way that fundamentally damages their long term prospects, and is rooted in a problematic trade arrangement, is flawed. By standing up to its peers, CARE has brought this practice out into the open. And for that it should be congratulated.