Author : ipc
Date : July 16, 2010
Food Security: How programmes can better support smallholder farmers?
We invite you to join our debate on food security and innovative programmes to support smallholder farmers. Share with us your ideas and comments around the following issues:
Challenges: What are the main challenges facing smallholder farmers in reaching new markets for their products?
Best practices: Which examples of innovative public policies are supporting smallholder farmers in developing countries?
Impacts: What impacts a governmental programme that guarantees alternative agricultural markets may have on smallholder farmers?
In order to provide you with a few inputs on these issues, we highligh a recent assessment carried out by the UNDP International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) on Brazil's Food Acquisition Programme.
The Food Acquisition Programme (PAA), part of the Zero Hunger Campaign that purchases food from small farmers and donates it to institutions working with people facing food insecurity, has helped to increase and improve farmers' production, but not enough to make them independent of the project.
The assessment was based on overall numbers of the program and specifically evaluated two methods involving the simultaneous purchase with donation. 72 interviews were also made in November and December last year with farmers, farmers' leaders, technicians and representatives of social movements, state governments, municipalities and institutions that have received donations. The case study focused on three municipalities of Sergipe state: Estância, Indiaroba and Lagarto, where over 50% of the population is poor and more than 80% of farmers are smallholder producers.
Entitled Alternatives for Family Farmers Market Initiatives in Food Security: Lessons from the Food Acquisition Programme of Brazil, the study estimates that the changes promoted by the project in the techniques of cultivation and farmers' organization are essential to encourage participation of producers in the market. The programme increases and diversifies production, improves food quality and intensifies the use of inputs.
The programme invested US$ 1 billion between 2003 and 2008 to purchase 2 million tons of food and distributed it to ¼ of the Brazilian population suffering from food insecurity. By guaranteeing the purchase of agricultural production by a pre-agreed price, the project provides income security to more than 100,000 benefited farmers.
In addition to producing more and being better equipped, farmers benefiting from the PAA also improved the quality of their products, because of the control established by the initiative. "With the resources available and a guaranteed market, farmers have explored new and reintroduced some cultures which had been abandoned, as different varieties of cassava," says the study. There was an increase in acreage and / or variety of products available. Participation in the programme also led to higher use of inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides and seeds, and became more frequent rental of tractors, investment in irrigation and purchase of equipment for beekeeping.
Market Access still a challenge
In the three municipalities surveyed in Sergipe, the market options available are normally street markets and intermediaries. "It can be extremely difficult for farmers to find and enter markets that would give them better opportunities," the authors note.
Although they are more competitive now, the small farmers in those towns are still struggling to reach other markets. "Regarding the access of producers to other sales channels, changes caused by PAA were very limited," says the study. The authors propose, therefore, additional support to farmers. "In the case examined, there is a clear need for technical assistance in the area of production planning," say the authors, suggesting that training may stimulate the growth of agro-ecological or organic items, with higher added value.
The assistance should also include food processing technology and rules for licensing. "The development of management capacity, including knowledge of financial and legal procedures would also be appropriate," the report recommends.
Series of studies
The publications on the Food Acquisition Programme are the first in a series that aims to compare different experiences in food security policies based on procurement of food. Upcoming research projects will focus on India and the World Food Programme (WFP, UN).
According to the researcher Darana Souza one important thing is "to show other countries what impacts a government programme to guarantee alternative agricultural markets may have on small farmers who, in turn, would have difficulty in entering the market without such incentives."
Reports
You can also read the publication on IPC-IG website at:
Market Alternatives for Smallholder Farmers in Food Security Initiatives: Lessons from the Brazilian Food Acquisition Programme
Authors: Danuta Chmielewska, Darana Souza
Series: Working Paper # 64. June 2010.
Download: www.ipc-undp.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper64.pdf
Supporting Food Production and Food Access through Local Public Procurement Schemes: Lessons from Brazil
Authors: Darana Souza, Danuta Chmielewska
Series: One Pager # 110. June 2010.
Download: www.ipc-undp.org/pub/IPCOnePager110.pdf
- Comments RSS feed
-
Send this post to a friendSend this post
Date : August 26, 2010 00:21
I read the article, and the first idea of agreeing on the prices is really the most important, it protects everyone now. And as Che Thuy Nhu said, it protects children from malnutrition, which is the most important thing.
But, in the same time, it makes me think to the Grapes of Wrath. High salaries and protection will create some huge movements in populations, coming from an other region or countries. It is the first danger, because making a region rich can create new poor people dreaming that prices will stay high.
The second danger is that if solvability of population increase, farmers will have to grow. And to grow, you have to make more debts. And debts in a markets where prices can decrease very fast is more than dangerous.
Last danger is that these famers are not necessarily likely to pay taxes and without tax, no general progression for the whole countries.
For me, the only solution is to learn them how to progress, and to escort them on a long term view. The only way to do it is to create our own farms and employ people in a constructive way.
Rural revolution was a very difficult time in Europa or in the USA, I don't think it will be enought to help them by donations or kind of.
Date : August 12, 2010 15:30
Dear All,
Good day!
I think smallholder farmers are focus of attention of most of the forum without proper perspective. I am sorry for taking this off tangentially but, often, it’s the perspective glitches that form the "slip" between the cup and the lip. In most cases, they don't have access to developed market. In my opinion, formation of self help groups and advocacy for microfinance is one way to empower them. Providing status of industry to agriculture may make some difference to the fate of smallholder farmers. As long as that is not reality, we should empower them with capacity building in areas of post harvest management and processing. Holistic agri-production in a participatory mode through watershed development will also bring positive changes in the livelihood of smallholder farmers. Crop insurance rather than subsidy may also help their ability to withstand climate change related production adversity.
Another issue that I have raised time and again in different forum including ID4D is proper governance; it is the key not only to food security but improving the fate of smallholder farmers. Many of the African agrarian problems may be ascribed to poor governance besides other factors. Proper synergy of different governmental schemes is also essential which again can only stems from good governance.
Thanks and regards,
Pradip Dey
Date : August 5, 2010 21:16
Way back in India, farmers are producing food grains which are then perishing under government's control; on the other hand, poor farmers are dying out of hunger. When the press goes to meet administrative officer of government, he comes forward and breaks media cameras. And you ask what are the main challenges?
Date : August 3, 2010 12:04
To :Darana Souza
International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG)
You ask pay attention to market access of small households in rural area .It mind they will collect agricultural products and sell it in the markets . YES it happen in the rural area .But they sell when price is low .Latter they are hungry . The rich persons in country side : they buy when the price is low , they sell when the price is high . This is I know .So why some became poorer , some became richer.
The bussiness man came to market in rural and buy products . Market is place for selling and buying .
Recently time , our government build markets by budget money .Many money spend .But markets became empty .People do not go to markets .All bussiness work happen in old markets or out of new markets .
This is big question for us : Why market formulated ?
If you read our newspapers, you can see the claims from deference provinces about empty markets in rural area . They sorry land and money in market Programme .
Some days ago , I read the new from Dr Quach Tuan Ngoc - Director of Information Technology ( MOET ) that Viettell company put ADSL to all schools ( 100% ) .I think this is good new for peasants to access to the markets , teachers can help them .But how it will be work ? We don't know ?
Information from rural area to which points in Global market or National market ? It is not clear .
Whrere to send the information for example : now the harvest of maize , peasants want to sell with this price ? With whom to contact ? which requirement for maize ?
In Vietnam all peasants use money in cash .They don't use bank accounts.
The women work for our family , she affraid BANK . We have to help her pur money in the bank and help her take interest rate .
Let disscusion is going on .
Thank you .
Date : July 30, 2010 20:43
Dear all,
Thank you for your participation and very interesting contributions. In general, market interactions are part of smallholder farmers’ livelihood strategies. However, due to several difficulties, these interactions are often disadvantageous for these producers. As suggested, macro and micro level contexts play relevant role in these difficulties. Comments point out to the fact that smallholder farmers have specific logics of production and interaction with markets, which are different from large commercial farmers in many ways. In terms of public policies, in order to support their market insertion, facilitation of commercial links is very important, but not enough. As was also raised, support to different moments of the production cycle is crucial, including access to land, inputs, technical assistance, proper storage, distribution etc. In the Brazilian case, a range of support actions specific to ‘family agriculture’ is in place. PAA, which offers market alternatives through public procurement, is one of them. I invite you to share more experiences that had positive impact on smallholders’ livelihoods, particularly those related to market access.
Darana Souza
International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG)
Date : July 27, 2010 11:12
Dear Mr( Mrs ) SALAN ZOGHAI and participants in the Forum
For long time , I put in the WTO FORUM the topic : subssidies in socialist system.( http://www.wto.org).Please came and see .
You can see Vietnam is rice -country .
But Vietnam have to give rice to poor in time next to harvest .Because people are hungry .
The way is from National Reserve Warehouse to provinces .
The distribution is not easy.
Some time corrouption .We lost persons because bad management .
I think reserve in the family is good idea to solve the problems .
We flexible reacte to the chance .
Date : July 26, 2010 07:34
There is no standard resipe to solve this issue. Practices should take into account all macro and micro economic limiting factors involved along with its anthropological dimension. In some countries, like Lebanon the main issue might be the land formalization in some others, like Sudan, the lack of appropriate financial investments. However, it would be a good start to decrease the public subsidy ot agricultural sector in Europe and in the US. Globalization has enormly increased the difficulty of the issue and there should be an international system for checks and balances to force the good practices on the national level as Dr. Paul Collier recommended.
Date : July 23, 2010 10:14
Dear participants in the FORUM
WELL CAME THIS DEBATE, I GIVE SYMMARY INFORMATION .
I informed this new to VIETNAM WOMEN UNION .They can expand the idea to all society with small credit for poor programme
39 Hang Chuoi, Hai Ba Trung, Ha Noi.
Tel : (04) 39720063/ 39718157/ 39720058
Fax: (84-4) 9713143.
Email: webhoilhpnvn@yahoo.com; tttt@hoilhpn.org.vn
Other address is good I think: Chemical, food faculties in Universities.
My summary
How the people in countryside Vietnam keep food in family from harvest to harvest
In time of harvest the food has cheapest price –To keep food at this time for all time to next harvest is most economy of money. The left food can be sell in the market when the price increasing ( special in time next to harvest ) .I see in the WB CHART that the price for food increasing 75% since 2000 up to now .This mind reserve of food is necessary .
My mother was economist in rural trade all life. She said : the reserve in family is best way help government .Because every family do it .When they need food , we do not pass many papers and command to take food from State warehouse .Depend on the products of every land the small trading happen as goods changing goods. Not to buy in rural area.
The Food reserve can be seeing in 2 sides
- For human
- For Animal
For human reserve can be: raw rice, Soya bean, peanut, potato .salt … Here are some examples for FORUM - ID4D.
All technical side can be find in the guide of Agricultural documents .I only list general way. Time: from harvest to new harvest.
1- How to keep the rice : rice with cover can be keep longer .Of ten they dry rice under SUN and put in the VASE made by land ( best CHUM ) .In the new time the VASE by plastic, by metal can be use .Some time they dry rice under SUN again
2- The same way they keep bean (green, black), soybean, and peanut.
3- Salt better use VASE made by special land or glass
4- Dry fish: fresh fish dry under SUN
5- Pig’s fat
6- Potato, cassava can be kept in the scale made by bamboo or under ground.
7- Cut Sweet potato or potato, cassava in to slices and dry them under SUN .Put dry products in to the VASES .It can be cook with rice or made powder for CAKES. Now in city people like this kind of products
8- Kudzu made in to the Powder to use or sell
9- Fish source, Shrimp source (Made by salt) are types of protein food for all year.
10- Pig’s fat: fry fat in to water and put in to the vase
11- Made source from tomato, chili, fruits when the price is low, and use when price is high
12 - Soybean source - rich protein (made by soy bean or maize)
13 – Vegetable with salt can be keep as food for cooking with fish, meat …
14 –Maize dry under SUN can be use for human, and pigs, horse, chickens.
Food for Animal:
Dry grass or rice plant, plants of potato … can be good food for animal during winter.
In Vietnam: SUN play important in DRY food, vegetable for Reserve.
Note: During planning economic system, my mother Mrs. Phan Nhu Loan graduated trade faculty of National Economic University ( 1967 ) .She worked in the rural market : cooperatives of BUY and SELL . She was teacher for trade and later vice Chairman of Vietnam General Department of cooperative Buy and Sell – This department was belong to Ministry of External trade Ministry. Her system supply necessary goods to rural area during war time and help peasants sell products .The system is changing after war more free .Their majority work is market analysis, training and technical support to rural market .
Now Vietnam have economy with difference property .You can choose best way for collaboration.
Thank you .
Date : July 20, 2010 05:37
To Admin and participants in the FORUM
Well came this debate .
This is our worry, this is our dream ?
I will find more examples for this topic later .
Food security for poor family is priority in POLICY .It give social security and avoid children from malnutrition, give new health generation.
My mother is economist ,she worked all life for trade problems in rural .She said that : Reserve from harvest to harvest in family is important activity . This regular demand and supply in rural market .This activity help poor family buy food with last price when harvest .Use it in time highest price .
How to do reserve in every family : it have to teach them : how to keep raw rice , how to keep potato, peanut ,soya -bean , fish by salt , dry vegetable , sugar - preserced fruits when they have harvest ?
Which types of VASES appropried ?
For poor family , when harvest finish, they pay debt , very few products left for market. The rich persons take products and sell .The poor do not think about selling in future .
Only reserve in family help them keep enough food to next harvest avoid hungry
Don't think about market for poor in our country .
Thank you
Date : July 16, 2010 21:59
It seems to me that the objectives of the Food Acquisition Programme are being successfully achieved. For example, the monies being provided are establishing income security for small holders; enabling the farmers to continue producing a range of products to feed their families, and sell to local markets, irrespective of vagaries of prices and demands.
For example, the buying and marketing of crops ensures food security for a wide range of citizens so that their access to specified food crops is secure. Furthermore, the income security allows the small holders to be adventurous in their crops and methods.
The achievement of these objectives is to be welcomed.
The programme should not then be judged by other, more difficult objectives. For example, it is foolish to consider small holders as if they were large scale farmers. Small holders in all lands operate to produce crops for their localities. If they were interested in farming on a larger scale then they would use the Food Acquisition Programme to buy up local land, thus risking the security of an increasing number of small holders and families.
I wish to suggest that the interests of productive smallholdings are not necessarily identical to those of large scale production farms. I would urge the Programme to decide whether it is committed to the security of the small holders or whether it is determined to promote farming for capitalist profit for the few.
[see: www.kelvynrichards.com - Social Ecology]
German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Chinese
