SIERRA LEONE maq 4ª.indd - agrilife - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 Description of the Context in Sierra Leone 26 Figure 3. Economic Growth in Sierra Leone (percentage change of GDP) Source: The World Bank: World Development Indicators 2009. 766 US$ PPP 5 in 2008, Sierra Leone remains not only one of the (economically) smallest and poorest, but it would seem that Sierra Leone is not particularly efficient in converting its economic resources into social well-being (UNDP, 2009). Lastly, its Human Poverty Index (HPI-1) of 47.7% reaches position 128th out of 135 countries (UNDP, 2009). According to the 2004 Integrated Household Survey (SLIHS, 2007) 70% of the population was living in poverty and 26% in extreme poverty. Given these figures and the general conditions of the country, UNDP (2007, xii) argues that Sierra Leone will not be able to reach the Millennium Development Goals. Regarding other key macroeconomic variables6 it is worth highlighting that while economic growth has been impressive, particularly in the early years of the 2000´s, Sierra Leone has struggled to control inflation. 5 The 2008 estimated GDP per capita varies according to the multiple sources: 350 US$ (PRSP II, 2009), 725 US$ (IMF, 2009). 6 National data for key economic indicators should be carefully considered since there are still shortcomings in the collection and estimation of balance of payments and national accounts data. Although the authorities are cooperating fully in providing and disseminating data, efforts should be maintained to improve the timeliness and quality of economic and financial data (IMF, 2009). Both, increased food and oil prices accelerated inflation in 2007 and throughout 2008. The 12 month inflation rate for June 2008 increased to 16.8 percent from 13.8 percent in December 2007 and 8.3 percent in December 2006. More specifically, according to data from Statistics Sierra Leone, Freetown consumer prices for imported rice showed an accelerating rate of inflation: the cost of imported rice in December 2007 was 21 percent higher than in the preceding December while the June 2008 price was 49 percent higher than the preceding June. The Government tried to limit some of these price increases in 2008 by reducing import tariffs on rice, flour, and petroleum products (World Bank, 2009). However, the external current account deficit (including official transfers) increased to 8.4% of GDP in 2008 (World Bank, 2009) from 3.5% of GDP in 2006 following a slight deterioration in the terms of trade (IMF, 2009). At the end of September 2008, official reserves declined to 212 million US$ (or 4.6 months of import coverage) (IMF, 2009) 7 . The main challenges to economic growth are poor infrastructure, including lack of access 7 Estimated at 209 million US$ or 5.1 months by the World Bank (2009).
to energy supplies 8 , a low-skilled and poorly trained labour force and inefficient regulatory environments for business and the private sector. According to the World Bank’s index for ease of doing business, Sierra Leone was ranked 156th out of 181 countries in 2009. Exchange rates and Price transmission Increasing agricultural exports and reducing food imports both depend critically on the exchange rate, as well as the efficiency of price transmission to farmers. During the period from mid-1970s to the end of the 1980s restrictive import licensing system, rationed foreign exchange, administered setting of the exchange rate characterised Sierra Leone’s trade and payments regime. Consequently, wide disparity prevailed between the official and market exchange rate, which was a reflection of the shortage of foreign exchange and overvaluation of the domestic currency (Jalloh, 2006). In 1989 the Government of Sierra Leone began to implement a Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), which sought to establish fiscal and monetary discipline, liberalize and open the economy and create an enabling environment in which the private sector could thrive. The immediate result was that the domestic currency depreciated sharply in 1990, and continued to depreciate each year, between 1990 and 2000. The SAP ushered in the liberalisation of markets and removal of subsidies and price controls. This coincided with a relatively large budget deficit due to emergency defense spending and the payment of arrears on foreign and domestic debt that resulted in a short term burst in domestic prices, sending inflation rates soaring to 102 and 117% in 1990 and 1991, respectively. Prices rose sharply in 1997 following the AFRC coup, and again in 1999 after the rebel incursion of Freetown. However, since then, relatively stable exchange rate, sound 8 Less than 10% of Sierra Leone’s population has access to electricity; lack of supply and extremely high electricity prices hamper private investment (CSP, 2007). fiscal management, combined with low effective demand have resulted in low inflation rate of – 2.8 % in 2000, 3.4 % in 2001 and –3.1% in 2002 (Jalloh, 2006). Yet, as commented above, under critical external shocks as the recent food and oil price crisis (2008), Sierra Leone suffered an inflationary spiral. 2.6 Labour Active population was estimated at 50% of the total population in 2004 (UNDP, 2007). More than two-thirds of the active population works in farming, forestry and fishing (Table 3). Agriculture is thus the largest provider of employment in Sierra Leone supplying jobs to an estimated 2.5 million. For most people, there are few options beyond farming, fishing or mining. Paid employees are a minority; most of them are employed in the informal9 sector, where women and youth are disfavoured. Women’s average earnings are about half those of men. 7% of the economically active population is under 15 years old (SLIHS, 2007). 2.7 Major Sectors The economic recovery from the very low post-war level is explained to a large extent by a return to normality. Since the end of the war, growth has been concentrated in the informal, agricultural, fishing and services sectors that represent the major part of the economy (World 9 The informal sector is broadly characterised as consisting of units engaged in the production of goods or services with the primary objective of generating employment and incomes to the persons concerned. These units typically operate at a low level of organisation, with little or no division between labour and capital as factors of production and on a small scale. Labour relations - where they exist - are based mostly on casual employment, kinship or personal and social relations rather than contractual arrangements with formal guarantees (International Labour Organization, 1993). Rural poverty reduction and food security: The case of smallholders in Sierra Leone 27
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: Diseases such as malaria and tuberc
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 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 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 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 164 and 165:
7 Conclusions 162 In the Eastern di
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?