SIERRA LEONE maq 4ª.indd - agrilife - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

7 Conclusions 162 In the Eastern districts, Deutsche Welthungerhilfe engaged in similar tasks directed to cocoa and coffee producers but with a higher emphasis on the development of marketing structures, output quality controls, rehabilitation of plantations and promoting access to credit to cooperatives. Contrary to many post war agricultural measures that have been conceived in a top-down framework, with limited/no involvement of farmers and their representatives, most of these activities were conceived and conducted using a participatory approach. Under this approach, awareness, ownership and trust on aid policies are more likely to emerge, thus positively affecting the achievement of overall project objectives. The qualitative data available in the survey allows for assessing the relevance, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the aid programmes to which smallholders had access. In addition, the survey provided information on the perceived General Improvement in the Community Area. In terms of relevance (or perceived adequacy) of the support received to the farmer-householder’s needs, smallholders considered it was very low in general (and only Action Aid received slightly higher positive feedback). The evaluation of effectiveness entailed measuring how far the specific objectives of the projects implemented have been met from the point of view of farm household beneficiaries. However, when evaluating the level of improvement in production and income resulting from their interaction with the implementing agencies, most respondents reported some improvement, and especially a great improvement was perceived by 20% of the smallholders in the Northern region. Regarding the measures with the highest impact on food security and livelihood at the household level there were discrepancies between smallholders from the Northern and Eastern regions. In the Eastern region, the improvement of market access was deemed the most important to achieve food security. In the Northern region higher impact to improving food security is associated to staple food prices, cultivated area and food production. Unlike the Eastern districts, access to markets is in the Northern districts deemed to have less of an impact; which makes sense given that in the Northern region there is limited presence of cash crops. Sustainability can only be evaluated several years after implementation of the projects. Consequently, smallholders were asked about expected future sustainability of project components. Around 80% of respondents in the Eastern region and 50% of respondents in the Northern region perceived that the initiatives that were provided to them will serve to their long term benefit. Concerning the answers to General Improvement in the Community Area with respect to different development areas, the respondents perceived some enhancement in food security and the opportunities to sell farm produce (which were specifically targeted by STABEX). However, areas such as education, health care, provision of agricultural services and opportunities to buy fertilizers appear to have worsened from the point of view of targeted smallholders. Overall, one issue worthwhile exploring is related to aid programmes undertaken at village level since smallholders appear to work in a collaborative manner and many resources are shared. In this manner it would be necessary to identify the type of common assets and strategies which could benefit the majority of smallholders within their communities; for example: feeder roads, market information, cooperatives (e.g. Agro-Business Centres) to gain access to key inputs, including credit. Accordingly, aid should come in a format which not only supports yield increase but also guarantees food security in a more comprehensive manner and connects farm households to market opportunities. For this it is necessary to take into account the socioeconomic and cultural context of farm households while considering potential constraints specific to crop orientation. In the Eastern districts both cash tree crops and food crops play an important role in achieving food security objectives; while in the North, where the cultivation of cocoa and coffee is not advisable due to agro-ecological constraints (lower rainfall gradient inducing lower and highly variable yields), farm households
need to undertake complimentary activities which could include cash crops such as sugar cane, oil palm and/or citrus. Equally they should attempt to improve on their off-farm value added activities, which are in line with the Government development strategy for the rural areas of Sierra Leone. In this respect, it is central to underline that on one hand the cultivation of the most frequently exported cash tree crops which are coffee and cocoa cannot be spread to all regions, while on the other hand, staple cropping plays an important role in reducing food consumption uncertainties and increase food security. 7.4 Insights for Technical Assistance Insights or future technical assistance programmes in Sierra Leone are discussed in this sub-section. Ideas expressed in this sub-section may be relevant also for EU food aid policy in West Africa in general, or other areas under tropical agriculture. Three main aspects are considered and are discussed in detail: (i) reduction of crop production losses & enhancement to access to improved technology, services and inputs; (ii) support to off-farm income activities and (iii) explore alternatives to the current agrarian system and fostering of market integration. Reduction of pre- and post-harvest losses & enhancement of smallholders’ access to improved technology, services and inputs Given the high percentages of output loss in both food and tree cropping, one approach would be to continue with supporting yield enhancing measures under the current shift cultivation system. Although, it should be acknowledged that the sustainability of such an agrarian system is questionable both in Sierra Leone and other tropical agricultural areas worldwide. Moreover, smallholders could be involved in more specific measures aiming at yield increase, pest control, labour saving technologies, and increase investment into research and extension service especially for rice and coffee/cocoa production. Provision and access to harvesting machinery, storage capacity, processing equipments would also help to reduce post-harvest losses. Support to off-farm income activities Sustainability of smallholders in Sierra Leone depends on other income sources. Family members who work outside and send remittances constitute a critical source for farm household subsistence. Likewise, integration to other business sectors in the rural areas could also be considered (i.e. fishing, mining and/or sustainable forest management 49 , which could also serve as an alternative to deter the ongoing deregulated forest exploitation observed during the project team’s validation visit in 2009). It would be relevant to analyse available diversification strategies both in terms of intercropping mechanism and inter-village trade or low scale manufacturing (i.e. crafting). Explore alternatives to the current agrarian system and fostering of market integration Although income calculations under the Peasant Farming approach indicate that a significant part of the surveyed farms are viable in the specific context of the village or chiefdom, sustainability in the long run is questionable under the current agrarian system in Sierra Leone. Therefore it is crucial to explore alternatives to the current system and the integration of smallholders to different markets. However, it should be stated that large capital-intensive estates is not the only route which may be taken in paths of agrarian change; an alternative is the transition from (semi)subsistence peasant farming to more commercial oriented family farming in a context of fully developed input and output markets (Friedmann, 1980 in Ellis 1993, p 54). However, a most important consideration is that of effective agronomic alternatives to the current slash and burn system as well as the way in which farmers 49 For more on the economics of tropical deforestation refer to Barbier and Burgess (2001) and/or Cattaneo (2001) Rural poverty reduction and food security: The case of smallholders in Sierra Leone 163
Page 3 and 4:
Rural poverty reduction and food se
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents Acknowledgments 2
Page 7 and 8:
7 Conclusions 157 7.1 Surveyed Smal
Page 9 and 10:
Table 31. Different output values a
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 34. Local participation in t
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 96. Change in income as a re
Page 15 and 16:
Executive Summary Agriculture is es
Page 17:
attention needs to be paid to the i
Page 20 and 21:
1 Introduction 18 Box 1: Food Secur
Page 23 and 24:
2 Description of the Context in Sie
Page 25 and 26:
Figure 2. Structure of the populati
Page 27 and 28:
Diseases such as malaria and tuberc
Page 29 and 30:
to energy supplies 8 , a low-skille
Page 31:
Figure 4. Composition of exports fr
Page 34 and 35:
3 The Agricultural Sector 32 agrari
Page 36 and 37:
3 The Agricultural Sector 34 Figure
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
3 The Agricultural Sector 38 3.1.2
Page 42 and 43:
3 The Agricultural Sector 40 scale
Page 44 and 45:
3 The Agricultural Sector 42 absorb
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
3 The Agricultural Sector 46 availa
Page 50 and 51:
3 The Agricultural Sector 48 and in
Page 52 and 53:
3 The Agricultural Sector 50 origin
Page 54 and 55:
3 The Agricultural Sector 52 The us
Page 56 and 57:
3 The Agricultural Sector 54 crops
Page 58 and 59:
3 The Agricultural Sector 56 • Se
Page 60 and 61:
3 The Agricultural Sector 58 severe
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
3 The Agricultural Sector 62 Table
Page 66 and 67:
3 The Agricultural Sector 64 Table
Page 68 and 69:
3 The Agricultural Sector 66 post-h
Page 70 and 71:
4 EU Support Programmes for Rice an
Page 72 and 73:
4 EU Support Programmes for Rice an
Page 75 and 76:
5 Survey Methodology In this sectio
Page 77 and 78:
sampling techniques were employed t
Page 79 and 80:
up an agrarian system. The househol
Page 81 and 82:
Farm Net Income per working unit: D
Page 83 and 84:
price, which is higher than the mar
Page 85 and 86:
stock or exchanges at the village l
Page 87 and 88:
= 0.72) for non-food requirements.
Page 89 and 90:
6 Survey Results This section addre
Page 91 and 92:
6.1.2 Main activities and income so
Page 93 and 94:
Figure 24. Average acreage under cu
Page 95 and 96:
Table 24. Resources of smallholders
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 30. Total acre per household
Page 99 and 100:
harvesting period (Sesay et al., 20
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 34. Local participation in t
Page 103 and 104:
improved management strategies at p
Page 105 and 106:
Figure 41. Crop mix categories in t
Page 107 and 108:
when analysing the smallholder viab
Page 109 and 110:
Table 27. Economic results of the s
Page 111 and 112:
Table 29. Economic results of the s
Page 113 and 114: Figure 47. Farm Net Income for an a
Page 115 and 116: hired labour costs for self-subsist
Page 117 and 118: Figure 52. Output value of rice per
Page 119 and 120: Figure 57. Distribution of tree cro
Page 121 and 122: Figure 60. Farm viability of smallh
Page 123 and 124: Figure 63. Farm viability per farm
Page 125 and 126: Table 32. Percentage of farms per r
Page 127 and 128: Figure 69. Poverty level per farm t
Page 129 and 130: Figure 72. Cocoa and coffee output
Page 131 and 132: Figure 76. Total labour productivit
Page 133 and 134: Figure 80. Labour productivity per
Page 135 and 136: Figure 83. Labour productivity per
Page 137 and 138: 6.4 Evaluation of the influence of
Page 139 and 140: Table 33. Evaluation Matrix for Sup
Page 141 and 142: Figure 87. Adequacy of support prov
Page 143 and 144: Figure 91. Adequacy of support prov
Page 145 and 146: Figure 95. Change in income as a re
Page 147 and 148: Figure 97. Impact of support on dif
Page 149 and 150: Figure 100. Expected sustainability
Page 151 and 152: Figure 103. Average farm net income
Page 153 and 154: Figure 107. Cultivated area of non-
Page 155 and 156: Figure 111. Revelance of income sou
Page 157: Figure 115. Number of tractors hire
Page 160 and 161: 7 Conclusions 158 Table 34. Basic C
Page 162 and 163: 7 Conclusions 160 Under the Peasant
Page 166 and 167: 7 Conclusions 164 may actually bene
Page 168 and 169: 7 Conclusions 166 determining the d
Page 170 and 171: 8 References 168 Crowley, E.L. (199
Page 172 and 173: 8 References 170 GoSL and EC Govern
Page 174 and 175: 8 References 172 Moreau P., F. Mabo
Page 176 and 177: 8 References 174 van Wesenbeeck C.F
Page 178 and 179: 9 Appendices 176 HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAP
Page 180 and 181: 9 Appendices 178 COMMUNITY LEADERSH
Page 182 and 183: 9 Appendices 180 Planting materials
Page 184 and 185: 9 Appendices 182 Could you explain
Page 186 and 187: 9 Appendices 184 Externality Please
Page 188 and 189: 9 Appendices 186 Infrastructure/com
Page 190 and 191: 9 Appendices 188 LABOUR INPUT- FOOD
Page 192 and 193: 9 Appendices 190 OTHER INPUTS QUANT
Page 194 and 195: 9 Appendices 192 YIELD LOSSES Now w
Page 196 and 197: 9 Appendices 194 Figure: % of farms
Page 198 and 199: 9 Appendices 196 Figure: Average fa
Page 200 and 201: 9 Appendices 198 Labour productivit
Page 202 and 203: 9 Appendices 200 Labour productivit
Page 204 and 205: 9 Appendices 202
show all

SIERRA LEONE maq 4ª.indd - agrilife - Europa

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?