21 December - Prioritising in Agriculture

The views expressed on this blog are the author's alone and do not reflect the views or opinions of his employer, Concern Worldwide.

A recent editorial in the Post ... as usual, my comments in red among the text.

Chinese Ambassador to Zambia Yang Youming is urging Zambia to prioritise agriculture as it is essential to the development of any nation.

“In terms of development of agriculture and this is the basis of economic takeoff in China because when we talk about the economic miracle in China, we always talk about industrialisation in China and China being the main manufacturing base for commodities to be exported to the entire world. But we must remember the first thing we emphasise is that we should have a solid agricultural base because you have to provide food and clothing to our people. And food and clothing all come from agriculture, so agriculture has always been and will remain a priority area,” says Ambassador Yang.

For Zambia, we have no sensible alternative to prioritising agriculture. The great majority of our people are dependent on agriculture for survival. Eight five [85%] per cent of our country’s workforce is in agriculture. And only six per cent of our labour force is deployed in the industry. The remaining nine per cent is in services.

The argument CFU makes is that most of these people in agriculture are not "farmers" per se, e.g. the production of food, fuel and/or fibre is not the primary goal of their farming endeavors. There is some truth to that, but the letter of the article is fundamentally correct ... they are growing crops for survival, e.g. food. Disqualifying someone as a farmer is all well and good, but it remains the essential means of survival for the overwhelming majority of rural Zambians.

But despite 85 per cent of our people being deployed in agriculture, the sector’s contribution to our GDP is only 19.80 per cent. The contribution to our GDP by industry and services is far above that of agriculture - 33.80 per cent for industry and 46.5 per cent for services. How can a sector in which 85 per cent of our workforce is deployed account for less than 20 per cent of our GDP? Despite 85 per cent of our workforce being deployed in agriculture, only 4.52 per cent of our arable land is under use. And only 0.05 per cent of that land has permanent crops. And with so much water, only 1,559 square kilometres is irrigated land.

There is some funny math at work here ... would be interesting how you count maize (the faraway leader in crops planted by that 85%) after taking away government subsidies on the production and consumption of the same. Most of what IAPRI says is that the majority of those 85% don't produce a surplus for sale. So ... huge labor force contributing almost nothing to the GDP.

It is clear that we have not prioritised agriculture. The contribution of agriculture to our GDP is too low and more so given its great potential. With 85 per cent of our workforce deployed in agriculture, it means that agriculture is the major source of livelihood for the great majority of Zambians who today, over 60 per cent of them live in abject poverty.

This means that if we have to move our people out of poverty, great effort will need to be exerted to increase agricultural production and consequently increase incomes of the majority poor who are totally dependent on agriculture for survival. This will call for consistent and sustainable high productivity growth in agriculture.

Okay, a bit of funny logic at work here; bunch of people do agriculture, ergo, improving agriculture production will "increase incomes of the majority poor who are totally dependent on agriculture for survival". Most people we work with are a lot like kids on Midwestern farm in the U.S.A. ... once they get the chance, they boost off the farm looking for easier work that pays cash (you would, too if you spent your formulative years swinging a hoe). Even people in rural areas are not likely to engage in sale of farm produce; they may engage in some other livelihood activity. This is where people get the message goobered up ... if you were to, say, get everybody to be a better cabbage farmer, what the hell would they do with all those cabbages? Same really with maize; people, typically the great mass of poor, are really excited when their production equals their consumption levels, or if their production allows them to reach their yearround consumption levels (vis-a-vi sale of their produce). 

To improve agriculture, a lot of things have to change. Our agricultural policies have to change. We can’t continue with the policies that have failed our people and have left them poor over many decades.

Here we go. Policies. As if words on paper can make the soil fertile. 

There will be need for diversification in agriculture. It doesn’t make sense to continue thinking and acting as if maize production is all that agriculture is about. Crop diversification is urgently needed. There is need to promote other crops that can be easily or cheaply grown by our people. And not every part of our country is good for every crop. 

We also need to find markets for all those diverse crops and figure out how to dismantle the great spinning economic, gastronomic, cultural and political engine that maize production and consumption has become. 

There is need to strengthen co-operative structures if we are to improve agriculture, especially for the poor. Efficiently run co-operatives can help a lot in terms of marketing, skills building, research, ICT services, finance, infrastructure and irrigation investment.

Now off to find that cooperative that efficiently uses all those services. "Cooperative" is what I call an automatic word. When you say "cooperative", farmers hear "subsidized inputs". They need to not think of the word "cooperative". Maybe "covenant" or "tontine", though the latter might bring in some interesting repercussions. 

There is also need to focus on crops that will help ensure household and national food security and also provide some surplus for exports. Such crops may include Irish and sweet potatoes, mixed beans, cowpeas, groundnuts, cashew nuts, fruits, in addition to cassava, millet and sorghum.

The contribution of our agriculture to exports is very low. It is just about five per cent. This needs to be increased if we are to see a reversal of economic fortunes.

Of course, crops like sugar, wheat, barley, soya beans, cotton, tea, coffee, tobacco, sunflower and so on and so forth also need policy priority if we are to develop a strong agri-business and light manufacturing.

Sigh. Of all of those, soyabeans, cotton, tobacco and sunflower are within the realm of reason (barely) for a small-scale farmer to grow (the others require irrigation and quite specific management regimes. However, these would be the best-off farmers, those with land and labour to spare. This past week when meeting with farmers, I recognized that the great mass of rural Zambians, who often operate on a quarter-tank with regards to caloric energy, plant maize and cassava because they are a) easy to get and b) provide the most calories. You don't go planting cotton or tobacco when your body's screaming for fuel.

Livestock production also needs to be increased if we are to meet the rising domestic demand and create a surplus for export and increase the incomes of our people. Livestock production calls for improved testing and treatment of all diseases of economic importance for cattle, pigs, goats, sheep and poultry in order to stabilise and increase stocking levels.

Funny enough, it appears that the number of cows in the country could meet demand; it's just that selling cows for money is still at cross-purposes with the fundamentals of cattle possession in the social context; status, non-liquid wealth, the medium of exchange to seal marriage arrangements, etc. Chickens are the way to go; less touchy with the whole gender thing, and villagers are so attached to Lil' Cluck-cluck.

Of late, the Minister of Finance Alexander Chikwanda has shown some increasing interest in fish farming. And the President has also shown some interest in this sector. But more needs to be done to improve fish farming. What is coming out of our fish farms is too little to meet the increasing demand for fish that has been complicated by the depletion of fish stocks in our rivers and lakes.

We agree with Ambassador Yang’s observations on the need to prioritise agriculture. It is a sector in which the great majority of our people are deployed. The poverty that we are experiencing today is a result of poor agriculture. (my opinion poor agriculture practices) If agriculture improves, the poverty levels will equally drop (will they really?). We have low agricultural productivity because the sector is not receiving adequate attention. We are spending over US$300 million per annum subsidising maize. But what are we getting out of that investment as a country? There is no strong political will needed for crop diversification. Too much political opportunism is tied to agricultural policies. Political (and cultural and gastronomic) sensitivities have ridiculously been created around maize production and subsidies. It’s time we stopped cheating our people and took a courageous way out of these sterile agricultural policies that are leading us nowhere other than to the deepening of poverty.

True ... but it's the practices, the capacity of extension to improve practices, and the mentality of how to improve production that are at fault. The Ministry of Agriculture is packed with ghost workers, agriculture officers not at their posts, or agriculture officers who fail to develop, recognize, and / or refine local innovations, etc. It is a system built on the assumption that knowledge comes from on high and should be followed w/out question. I think our constant struggles with CA come from the fact that everyone wants to harmonize the methods (e.g., basins and ripping), rather than understanding the goals likely have multiple opportunities for realization.

Whatever we do, whatever we earn from mining and other sectors, without meaningful developments in agriculture, we are going nowhere and we  will not be able to move our people out of poverty. 

Let's move them out of hunger first.