Friday, Apr 25th

You are here Blog Ian Scoones A new alliance for food security, or a two-track Africa?
Share: 

Future Agricultures blog

Opinion and comment from Future Agricultures researchers on agricultural politics, science and society in Africa.

A new alliance for food security, or a two-track Africa?

By Ian Scoones on
Ian Scoones
Ian Scoones has not set their biography yet
User is currently offline
May 21 in Hot topic 2 Comments

obama

The latest international initiative to combat food insecurity, hunger and malnutrition was launched by G8 leaders with the usual fanfare in Chicago last week. President Obama, Hillary Clinton, three African heads of state and a long list of business leaders were there, along with Andrew Mitchell, the UK’s own Secretary of State. Leaders pledged to banish food insecurity for 50 million people through mobilising the private sector through a ‘New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition’. But will the initiative really deal with the underlying political economic conditions that keep people poor? Or will it create a two-track Africa instead, dividing those able to benefit from private investment and neoliberal policy from those who lose out? The sort of technical-economic fix offered by the G8 clearly fails to address the wider political and institutional questions and the needs and priorities of many of the region’s people, an issue long emphasised by the work of the Future Agricultures Consortium.

Although overshadowed by the financial and political crisis in Europe in the international press, it is important that agriculture and food security is once again at the top of the international agenda. Galvanising the private sector for development of the smallholder sector must be a good thing. And new money, given the drastic failure of the international community to live up to the G8 L’Aquila accord, must be welcome news. But as ever with such events, there are more questions that arise. In the various statements it is not clear what is being pledged and by whom. A trust fund of $1bn is promised, along with a further $3bn investment by a lead group of multinational companies. Given that $22bn was promised by G8 leaders in 2009 in L’Aquila and only about 20% emerged (and even some of that was simply recycled), it is not surprising that there are cynical voices.

What then is being proposed? Again this is not all clear. The White House press release listed a whole array of worthy activities, many already well established. But it is the Grow Africa initiative of the World Economic Forum, and linked to CAADP and NEPAD, that is attracting new attention. This is framed by the report, Putting the New Vision for Agriculture into Action, prepared by the consulting firm McKinsey and released in last year. This is an intriguing document. It is again backed by some of the biggest corporate players in global agri-food systems and given legitimacy by a well-respected array of researchers from top institutions across the world, including IFPRI, IDS and others. It is full of arguments for supporting smallholder agriculture, but it is centred on an old-fashioned ‘productivity gap’ argument, linked to a dualistic model for agriculture involving both small and large farms, combined with a substantial expansion of farmed area. This is to come about through private investment in entrepreneurial activity, with a heavy reliance on large-scale farming. And this, presumably, is where the big business interests come into play.

Africa has been hailed as the new focus for global economic growth. Certainly there are some eye-catching statistics. According to the African Progress Panel report, Ethiopia grew faster than China in the five years before 2009, and Ghana was the fastest-growing economy in the world in 2011. ‘Destination Africa’ is increasingly appealing as a site for investment; and agriculture, as the core of the economy of most African countries, is often central to this agenda. Combined with the rush for scarce resources to fuel growth or provide food and energy elsewhere, it is a potent mix. Both African governments and big business are lining up to make the most of this.

The launch of this latest G8 initiative had the top brass from Monsanto, Dupont and Syngenta present, some of the largest agri-technology companies in the world. Such companies, as well as others involved in communications, brewing and marketing, are eyeing up Africa as a lucrative new market.  And some African countries are presenting themselves very effectively as business-friendly destinations. For example, the heads of Ethiopia, Tanzania and Ghana were all in Chicago for the G8 launch event and are being wined and dined by the global and political business elite.

In many respects this must be a positive development. Africa for too long has been off the radar screens of most major foreign investors. The lessons from elsewhere are that sustained poverty reduction only emerges when wider economic growth really takes hold and this needs a vibrant private sector with sustained investment flows. But there are downsides of a free-for-all neoliberal model promoted by the McKinsey/WEF vision. Growth does not always deliver poverty reduction and growing inequalities result in unrest and discord, as Kofi Annan emphasised at the launch of the Progress Panel report. Furthermore, not all private sector activity is beneficial, as some investments can push countries down a pathway which does not result in inclusive, sustained growth. Benefits are exported, profits are captured and jobless growth may result.

So in this celebration of the private sector’s role in development, let’s step back a bit and reconsider this revival of the much tainted ‘Washington Consensus’. Issues of access, distribution, inequality and justice must be part of the picture, and this is not always delivered by a rush to growth driven by global multinational corporations. An analysis of institutions and politics must be central. FAC research has highlighted for example the damage caused by many inappropriate land investments, dubbed ‘land grabs’ by many. This is not to say that large-scale farming is inappropriate in all cases, but the experience of large-scale land deals to date has not been positive. Other research shows how private sector activity is essential in seed development and supply, but the domination of the seed system by a few players is not healthy and may undermine agricultural sustainability. And in the process of the commercialisation of agriculture, it is often small-scale private sector players along the value chain who make the difference – a far cry from the big players assembled by the G8. And in all cases, state support, careful regulation and investment transparency and accountability are essential.

As argued by civil society groups in the lead up to the G8 announcement, a more rooted debate is required on the future of African agriculture, involving all the stakeholders not just a select political and business elite. A two-track Africa – where a well-placed minority win due to elite connections and the rest lose – will not bring long-term sustainable development to African agriculture.

Photo: 20120518-06, by The Chicago Council on Global Affairs on Flickr

Tags: Untagged
Hits: 4795
0 votes

Comments

Joanes Atela Wednesday, 23 May 2012 Reply

Well articulated Ian, most of these initiatives are rather public relation shows that blanket the real underlying problems in Africa. For example my own country Kenya under the auspices of such global initiatives has had in the 20th century, ambitious strategies for agricultural development including acceding to the CAADP compact in 2010. While these strategies mention small scale agriculture on paper, in action, the strategies simply work to find export market for the Naivasha based horticultural farms, the wider tea zones or the coffee cooperatives. Smallholders are only used as a policy tool in the documents but in action are left to varnish in their long time political oppression and economic marginalization with no extension services or input support. For how do you explain the fact that these strategies shout the loudest about agriculture being the backbone of Kenya's economy when the country has been faced with food shortages in each of the last five years? How do you explain the fact that Kenya, despite being endowed with rich natural resources including permanent rivers, rich soils and well developed agricultural institutions still spend over USD 222 million in the last five years to import food not forgetting the commercial interests in such imports? It is even not amusing that the same leaders, who launch the strategies, often have to return and declare hunger a national disaster in appeal for international help. I think it is time to question the mainstream assumptions and FAC is definitely setting the ball rolling.

http://powered-cloud.com/ Wednesday, 02 April 2014 Reply

It is very curious that the although it is overshadowed by the financial and political crisis in Europe in the international press, it is important that agriculture and food security is once again at the top of the international agenda.

Leave your comment

Guest Friday, 25 April 2014