|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Format for print or mobile
Africa: Underdeveloping African Agriculture
AfricaFocus Bulletin
June 12, 2013 (130612)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
"These interventions from AGRA [Alliance for a Green
Revolution in Africa] and the G8 are, first and foremost,
about opening markets and creating space for
multinational corporations such as Yara, Monsanto and
Cargill, to secure profits. ... As world leaders speak in
philanthropic terms about 'ending hunger', behind the
scenes Africa's seed and trade laws are being
'harmonised' to the whim of agri-business giants. The
efforts of Africa's farmers over millennia stand to be
privatised and expropriated, while traditional and vital
practices such as seed saving and sharing stand to be
criminalised." -- Francis Ngang, Secretary General of
Inades-Formation (http://www.inadesfo.net/)
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains a recent statement by
African civil society groups, challenging the claim by
the G8 New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition that
their programs benefit African farmers and food security.
In fact, as this statement and multiple other reports
document, the insistence on private-sector-led
development, without adequate checks and policy direction
by government and farmers themselves, is contributing to
the dispossession of African farmers for the primary
benefit of large private-sector firms from around the
world. A sampling of links to relevant reports is
included at the end of this Bulletin.
Another AfricaFocus Bulletin released today and available
on the web at http://www.africafocus.org/docs13/moz1306.php, but not
sent out by e-mail, contains an open letter from
Mozambican, Brazilian, and Japanese civil society groups
addressed to the leaders of Mozambique, Brazil, and
Japan, challenging the multinational Pro-Savana Programme
in the Nacala corridor of northern Mozambique. The
Programme is being introduced without adequate
consultation and environmental checks, they argue, and in
its present form will do irreparable damage to the small
farmers of the affected area.
Official background on the New Alliance programs,
including texts of cooperation agreements signed with
African countries, is available at http://www.feedthefuture.gov / direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/q95c5rc
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on agriculture issues,
visit http://www.africafocus.org/agexp.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++
Statement by Civil Society in Africa
Modernising African Agriculture: Who Benefits?
June 3, 2013
Press release on the statement: http://tinyurl.com/mcnx6je
Direct URL for full statement, including names of
signatory organizations, also available in French and
Portuguese: http://tinyurl.com/pk8b5wr
Contact for comments:
Meriem Louanchi: +213 21 6985 / meriem.louanchi@gmail.com
Million Belay: +251 11 550 71 72 / melca@ethionet.et
Francis Ngang: +225 22 40 02 16 / francis.ngang@inadesfo.net
Moses Shaha: +254 67 31686 / moses_388ke@yahoo.com
Elizabeth Mpofu: +263 772 44316 / ezimmpofu@gmail.com
African agriculture is in need of support and investment.
Many initiatives are flowing from the North, including
the G8's "New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in
Africa" and the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa
(AGRA). These initiatives are framed in terms of the
African Union's Comprehensive African Agricultural
Development Programme (CAADP). This gives them a cover of
legitimacy.
But what is driving these investments, and who is set to
benefit from them?
The current wave of investment emerges on the back of the
gathering global crisis with financial, economic, food,
energy and ecological dimensions. Africa is seen as
underperforming and in control of valuable resources that
capital seeks for profitable purposes. The World Bank and
others tell us Africa has an abundance of available
fertile land, and that Africa's production structure is
inefficient, based as it is on many small farms producing
mainly for themselves and their neighbourhoods.
Africa is seen as a possible new frontier to make
profits, with an eye on land, food and biofuels in
particular. The recent investment wave must be understood
in the context of consolidation of a global food regime
dominated by large corporations in input supply (seed and
agrochemicals) especially, but also increasingly in
processing, storage, trading and distribution.
G8 and AGRA: a new wave of colonialism
Opening markets and creating space for multinationals to
secure profits lie at the heart of the G8 and AGRA
interventions. Both initiatives are built on the basis of
public-private partnerships (PPPs) with the large
multinational seed, fertiliser and agrochemical companies
setting the agenda, and states and institutions (like the
G8, World Bank and others) and philanthropic institutions
(like AGRA and others) establishing the institutional and
infrastructural mechanisms to realise this agenda.
Multinational corporations like Yara, Monsanto, Syngenta,
Cargill and many others want secure markets for their
products in Africa. In the first place, security means
protection of their private ownership of knowledge in the
form of intellectual property (IP) protection. Across
Africa, so-called 'harmonisation' of laws and policies
are underway to align African laws and systems with the
interests of these multinationals.
Harmonisation of trade laws means opening borders across
the continent to free trade. But this is a skewed free
trade, one that favours the 'formal sector' of goods and
services that have gone through approval and registration
processes. Farmers and other producers of goods and
services who cannot afford to enter the official approval
system are marginalised and trading of their products is
rendered illegal.
Private ownership of knowledge and material resources
(for example, seed and genetic materials) means the flow
of royalties out of Africa into the hands of
multinational corporations. In some countries where laws
protecting the interests of corporations are well
established –ndash; for example in South Africa –ndash;
multinationals have entirely occupied domestic seed and
agrochemical sectors with profits flowing out of the
country. The same is happening for agricultural services,
trade, manufacturing and even selling of food.
The private companies are not acting on their own. They
are using investment-friendly government policies and
plans to advance their agenda.
CAADP and regional investment policies: facilitating
'orderly' processes of colonialism
There are many well-meaning organisations and individuals
who view CAADP as an African-based investment plan. But
Africa is not isolated from the world. CAADP emerged at
the height of neoliberalism globally in the early 2000s.
African governments were mired in the consequences of
decades of structural adjustment that saw the net outflow
of financial and other resources from Africa to the rest
of the world. The New Economic Partnership for Africa's
Development (NEPAD) was an initiative by selected African
governments to integrate Africa into global flows of
capital. The expectation was that profit-generating
investment, and creating the conditions for protection of
this investment, were Africa's chance to catch up with
the rest.
African governments, desperate for some financial relief,
are willing to make whatever changes are necessary to
bring capital into their countries. The multinationals
are setting the terms: harmonisation, free trade and
protection of private IP or no investment. It is
therefore of little use calling for CAADP to be placed at
the centre of investment plans. CAADP itself is a
compromised instrument, calling for the very policies and
programmes favoured by the multinationals.
Food security and corporate-driven investment in Africa
Harmonisation, free trade and the creation of
institutions and infrastructure to facilitate
multinational penetration into Africa are presented as
the answer to food insecurity on the continent.
Multinational corporations, African states, states
outside Africa, philanthropic institutions, multilateral
institutions such as the World Bank and even some nongovernment
organisations are all part of this agenda.
Surely so many organisations and people cannot be wrong?
The logic is that of the Green Revolution: introduce
yield-and sales-enhancing technologies and systems,
provide credit for producers to access these
technologies, and anticipate increasing returns from
sales to cover the increasing cost of inputs. Expand
access to markets globally and regionally to absorb
increased production.
This model can benefit some, as Green Revolutions in Asia
and to a lesser extent in Latin America have shown.
However, it also has negative social and ecological side
effects. Green Revolution technologies benefit relatively
few farmers, often at the expense of the majority. These
technologies produce concentration of land ownership,
increasing economies of scale (production has to be at a
large scale to get into and stay in markets), and a
declining number of food producing households in a
context of limited other livelihood options.
Ecological concerns about Green Revolution technologies
are rising to the top of the global agenda, especially
loss of biodiversity when commercial hybrids and GM seed
dominate (especially maize as a staple crop in Africa,
and the introduction of soya as the basis of biofuels and
commercial intercropping approaches), soil degradation
and water pollution caused by excessive use of
manufactured chemicals in synthetic fertilisers, and
water shortages caused by wasteful water use in
irrigation.
The Green Revolution produces uneven benefits, favouring
farmers with financial resources of their own, with
access to more land, and with some formal education. The
majority of resource poor farmers are excluded from
public support for agriculture, with infrastructure and
institutional frameworks designed for the minority to
benefit.
Currently African food security rests fundamentally on
small-scale and localised production. The majority of the
African population continue to rely on agriculture as an
important, if not the main, source of income and
livelihoods. In most sub-Saharan African countries,
agriculture is the primary economic activity for between
50% and 90% of the population. Even though there is
growing urbanisation, the majority will continue to rely
on agriculture for their livelihoods for decades to come.
The rural population continues to grow in absolute terms
even while the urban population grows as a proportion of
the total population.
We know that all of these people will not benefit from
these new investments. Seen as more inefficient than
those producers who are in a position to adopt the new
technologies, many will be forced out of agriculture to
become passive consumers. Instead of building the broad
base of producers, G8 and AGRA investments, supported by
African government policies and resources, will narrow
the base of producers.
The practical results of the recent surge in investment
in African agriculture expose the empty rhetoric of
African food security. Blatant land grabs are well known
across the continent. Mega projects such as the
ProSavanna project in northern Mozambique are displacing
farmers from their lands and imposing large-scale
production structures for export. Favourable investment
terms (for example tax free zones and laws on
repatriation of profits) undermine even the questionable
benefits increased foreign exchange brings. Meanwhile
actual farmers are separated from the land and the only
realistic option for a livelihood. African governments
and their investment 'partners' enable and implement
these projects.
Alternatives
First and foremost, differentiated strategies are
required, so that local and informal markets, proven lowinput
and ecologically sustainable agricultural
techniques including intercropping, on-farm compost
production, mixed farming systems (livestock, crops and
trees), on-farm biofuel production and use, and
intermediate processing and storage technologies are
recognised and vigorously supported. The emphasis here is
on individual and household food security first, with
trade arising from surpluses beyond this. The
International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge,
Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) provides
detailed and scientifically sound proposals in this
regard.
Open access technologies are an essential principle,
especially seed, where all recent technological advances
are based on 10,000 years of collective experimentation
and sharing. No-one and no corporations should be allowed
to privatise the results of ongoing research. Companies
can sell their new varieties, but once sold, they reenter
the common pool that anyone should be able to use
and improve on at will.
Green Revolution technological development leads to an
ever-increasing gap between conception and execution,
that is between the knowledge that goes into producing a
new seed variety and those who use the seed. An
alternative, based on open source technologies, is a far
closer working relationship between decentralised
technicians and producers to define the research and
development agenda (what traits are farmers looking for
in specific locations, what crops are priorities for
further development etc). Plant breeders are still able
to make profits by selling new varieties to those who
want to buy fresh seed, especially commercial farmers.
But if farmers choose to reuse and adapt seed once they
have bought it, that must be their right.
We therefore call on the G8, AGRA, CAADP and other
similar institutions to:
- Acknowledge variation amongst farmers and commit to
providing appropriate, dedicated support to all food
producers rather than only a thin commercial layer;
- Abandon efforts to assert private ownership of
germplasm, agricultural techniques and knowledge and to
accept that these all emerge from a common pool
- Invest in and facilitate open source technological
development together with farmers;
- Invest in ecological agriculture following the IAASTD
proposals;
- Development finance to be based on grants and public
programmes not for profit.
- Ensure smallholder women and men farmers are at the
centre of any strategy for increasing investment in this
sector. There should be recognition of the ongoing broad
consultation of the Committee on World Food Security
(CFS) on Responsible Agricultural Investments (RAI). This
process was the result of a decision of the CFS in 2011
following their rejection of the World Bank blueprint for
Principles on Responsible Agricultural Investment in
2010. Statement signed by:
Other recent related reports and statements include
(1) Civil Society Statement on COMESA Seed Trade Laws
http://tinyurl.com/n8xdnuv
(2) Oakland Institute report on fraud in Herakles Farms'
venture in Cameroon
http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/herakles-exposed
(3) Friends of the Earth Liberia report on landgrabbing
by palm oil companies in Liberia
http://www.foei.org/simedarby
(4) Oxfam blog - "Does the World Bank speak with forked
tongue on Land Grabs?
http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=14291
(5) Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, "Land
Grabs and Fragile Food Systems"
http://www.iatp.org / direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/mze55n9
(6) Oxfam blog on the New Alliance: "an initiative in
need of repair"
http://tinyurl.com/kytowca
(7) UK civil society statement on the G8's New Alliance
for Food Security and Nutrition
http://waronwant.org / direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/pdx7a72
(8) George Monbiot - "Corporate Carve-Up"
http://www.monbiot.com/2013/06/10/corporate-carve-up/
A guide to even more critiques of the G8 New
Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition is available
on http://www.actionaidusa.org / direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/nwgjv43
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic
publication providing reposted commentary and analysis on
African issues, with a particular focus on U.S. and
international policies. AfricaFocus Bulletin is edited by
William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please write to this address to
subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin, or to suggest
material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original
source mentioned. For a full archive and other resources,
see http://www.africafocus.org
|
