2009_ActionAid_-_Ret.. - RIAED

  • No tags were found...

2009_ActionAid_-_Ret.. - RIAED

RETHINKING THE RUSH TO AGROFUELS:Lessons from Ghana, Senegal and Mozambiqueon the Unintended Consequences of AgrofuelsProduction for Food SecurityActionAid InternationalReport June 2009

CONTENTSSummary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3ActionAid’s Case Study Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Ghana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Mozambique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Senegal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Conclusion and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10COVER PHOTO: Bintu Haruna gathers shea nuts outsidethe village of Changolnaa kuna in northern Ghana.All photos by ActionAid.

SUMMARyAre agrofuels the bright new hope for homegrownrenewable energy? Or are they a dangerous threat tofood security and the environment? ActionAid hascarried out consultations with farmers and consumersin Ghana, Senegal and Mozambique to betterunderstand their perspectives on this controversialnew form of agricultural production. While theresearch revealed some mixed views on the potentialeconomic benefits of agrofuel cultivation, there waswidespread concern about the dangers an excessivefocus on fuel production could pose for food securityand rural livelihoods. Over the past year, previouslyambitious plans for agrofuels expansion have sloweda bit due to declining global demand. This slowingof the agrofuels juggernaut offers an importantopportunity for a full public debate of the social,environmental, and economic implications ofagrofuels policies for developing countries. The studyconcludes with specific recommendations for theObama Administration and the U.S. Congress.INTROdUCTIONOver the past few years, agrofuels have gone ona wild rollercoaster ride. U.S. and Europeangovernments jumpstarted the ascent by dramaticallyincreasing targets for agrofuel consumption as ashare of their total fuel consumption. Markets reactedwith dizzying optimism and new investments in fuelcrops skyrocketed around the world.Visions of an ethanol boom drove corn prices fromless than $2 a bushel in 2006 to well over $7 a bushelby July 2008, enabling U.S. farmers to meet and evenexceed production costs for the first time in decades.Governments in many developing countries, seekingpotential export opportunities and solutions tocrushing energy prices, began considering plans toexpand agrofuel production. Landowners andinvestors in countries as diverse as Ghana andGuatemala began to scale up production of sugar,palm oil, jatropha 1 and other feedstocks inanticipation of meeting the apparently insatiabledemand for renewable energy in the United Statesand Europe.And then the descent began. Rising food costsaround the world were blamed, at least in part, onagrofuels expansion. In the United States, soaringcorn prices led to shifts in production and priceincreases for other food crops, as well as beef andchicken. Farmlands in many developing countries thathad been devoted to food production were divertedto fuel crops. Prolonged droughts in some countriesand neglect of public support for agriculture in manyothers exacerbated the crisis. According to the U.N.Food and Agriculture Organization, the number ofpeople facing hunger increased from 923 million in2007 to 968 million by the end of 2008. 2 Consumersin country after country took to the streets in protest.Scientists and environmentalists also began tochallenge the idea that agrofuels would actuallyreduce greenhouse gas emissions. Some scientistsassert that if all input costs are included, along withthe environmental consequences of land beingdiverted from forests or other forms of carbonsequestration of plant materials in the land, thenagrofuels would actually contribute more greenhouse1Jatropha is a native plant in many countries, often used in hedge rows.While it grows naturally on poor soils, its cultivation as an oilseed crop foragrofuels is very new.2“Number of hungry people rises to 963 million: High food prices to blame –economic crisis could compound woes,” FAO, Dec. 9, 2008.3

gas emissions than they resolve. 3 Environmentalistsalso reported alarming cases of agrofuels cropsencroaching on rainforests and other sensitiveecosystems. 4Then finally came the steep plunge, as the financialcrisis hit U.S. agrofuels refineries hard. As oil pricesfell from $137 a barrel in July to $36 by December2008, agrofuels became a less competitivealternative. 5 Corn prices also dropped, and thecombination of price instability, lower demand, anddecreasing credit created new problems for theindustry. Soon refineries across the country began toreport plummeting stock prices and even bankruptcy. 6In developing countries too, what had once seemedto be a headlong rush into agrofuels productionslowed considerably. Many new plans to increaseproduction were put on hold.As wild expectations gave way to sober reality,governments should have begun to rethink agrofuelspolicies. And yet thus far, U.S. and Europeanagrofuels targets that have propelled the rollercoasterride remain unaltered. There have been no changes inthe 2007 Energy Bill, which calls for increasing U.S.production from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billiongallons by 2022 (of which 21 billion gallons must befrom “advanced” agrofuels made from crops otherthan corn). Despite a heated debate in the EUParliament at the end of 2008, Europe maintains itsplan to replace 10 percent of its transport fuelconsumption with renewable fuels by 2020. As aresult, what seems now to be a rational retreat fromunrealistic market expectations may well turn out tobe merely a lull in the rush to expand agrofuelsproduction around the world.Policy makers in the United States, European Union(EU) and developing countries should also take acareful look at the balance between food and fuelproduction. They should consider new methodologiesbeing developed to measure the indirect consequencesof agrofuels production on land use in developingcountries. This would support an informed publicdebate in the United States and overseas on the bestways to balance new energy sources and farmers’incomes, while avoiding the excesses of the pastyear’s market volatility.ACTIONAId’S CASE STUdy RESEARCHDuring 2008, ActionAid carried out a series ofconsultations with farmers and consumers in Ghana,Senegal, and Mozambique to better understand theirperspectives on this new form of production.Researchers looked at the structure of agriculturalproduction and land use in each country, as well as atgovernment plans to increase agrofuels production.They interviewed farmers in communities across eachcountry to gain a deeper understanding of theirexpectations, concerns and proposals for food andfuel crop production.In each country, similar themes emerged. Manycommunity members challenged the idea that theland being used for agrofuels production was actually“marginal.” In Ghana, for example, shea nut treesgrow on supposedly idle lands. But women havetraditionally harvested the nuts from those trees tosell for cosmetic and soap production. Shea nutshave therefore been an important source ofsupplementary income for poor rural women. In somecases, the shea trees have been plowed under tomake way for jatropha production for biodiesel.In Mozambique, initial reports that agrofuelsproduction would engulf the country now appearoverblown. As of June 2008, the government wasconsidering 21 new projects for investment insugarcane for ethanol and jatropha for biodiesel. ByFebruary 2009, only two of those projects had beenapproved. Farmers were cautiously optimistic aboutpromises to increase their incomes from jatrophaproduction, but also concerned that fuel crops wouldbe grown at the expense of food production.Similarly, in Senegal, land in apparently unusedmarshlands has been designated for agrofuelsproduction. Local community members are unsureabout whether this new production could help todiversify their sources of income, but they do knowthat the wetlands and fertile soils being considered3“Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases ThroughEmissions from Land-Use Change,” Timothy Searchinger, et al,, ScienceMagazine, February 29, 2008.4See, for example, Fueling Destruction in Latin America, the Real Price of theDrive for Agrofuels, Friends of the Earth International, September 2008.5US Energy Information Administration,http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/wtotworldw.htm6“VeraSun Files for Protection,” Justin Baer, Financial Times, November 2, 2008.4

for agrofuels projects are also vital to local food andfish production.In each of these cases, the consultation processsparked important national debates on the expansionof agrofuels production. Government officials, alongwith community members and nongovernmentalorganizations (NGOs), entered into new dialogues onappropriate land use, the need for public support forfood production and the uncertainties of this verynew form of production.The following sections provide more detailed findingsfrom ActionAid’s research in Ghana, Mozambiqueand Senegal.GHANAThere are parallels between agrofuels development inGhana and the United States. In both countries, initialdiscussions centered on small-scale experiments togenerate local energy supplies. As the ambitions toscale up production accelerated, so did the concernsabout the environmental and social costs.Discussions on a national agrofuels program began in2003 in response to rising oil costs. In October 2006,the Ministry of Lands, Forestry and Mines hosted anUNCTAD-Economic Community of West AfricanStates Bank for Investment and Development regionalworkshop on financing mechanisms and jatropha production,involving participants from 16 West Africancountries. By the end of that year, the Ministry of Foodand Agriculture, and the Ministry of Local Government,Rural Development and Environment, working withAnuanom Industrial Projects Limited, formed aJatropha Plantation Development Committee topromote development of the crop. The governmentalso considered plans to incorporate agrofuels into theGhanaian transportation system.Even at this early stage, there were questions aboutthe potential impacts of expanded agrofuelsproduction on land use. A National Lands Commissionstudy committee found that while agrofuels heldpromise, there were serious concerns about the risksof devoting large tracts of land to jatropha or otherfeedstocks. The Committee concluded that thatapproach would negatively affect the nation’s foodcrop production. 7Nevertheless, the government, working with privateagencies, advanced with cautious plans to exploresmall-scale production of jatropha. As of November2006, more than 400 farmers with an average farmsize of 1.5 acres had registered for various projects inthe Central region. 8 In the Brong Ahafo region, some500 farmers with an average farm size of 3.0 acreshad registered and established jatropha farms. 9Farmers involved in the project near the Atebubu andKwame Danso communities reported that they hadinvested considerable labor into that production, andthat jatropha had not been planted on marginal landsbut rather on the lands most suitable for food crops.By 2007, disappointed by low prices and the lack ofmarkets, many abandoned jatropha production. 10Some farmers involved in this effort reported that evenonce jatropha is removed, the land cannot be used forfood production for a long while.Despite these disappointing results, publicdiscussions on the expansion of agrofuels productionaccelerated in early 2008 with the new globalimperative to increase production for local use and tomeet increasing international demand. Investorsbegan to approach the government about much largertracts of land to produce jatropha, sugarcane,sorghum and cassava. Over 50,000 acres in the BrongAhafo and Central regions are being considered foragrofuels production. In the Northern region, over10,000 hectares involving six settlements nearKpachaa are being developed into a jatrophaplantation. In the same region, large tracts of land arebeing developed for sugarcane production for ethanol.While about 20 percent of agricultural lands areowned by the government or vested under control ofthe President, more than 80 percent are held bycommunity chiefs or other customary leaders.Individual members of the community also have the7Final Report on the Proposed Countrywide Cultivation of the Jatropha Plant,submitted by the Research and Development Committee of the National LandsCommission, 2006, National Lands Commission, Accra, Ghana.8Typical smallholder farms range from one to five acres of land. Smallholdersproduce more than 90% of agricultural production in Ghana.9Interview with MOFA Field Staff in Techiman and Atebubu, August 2008.10Findings from registered survey of villages around Atebubue and Kwame Dansoareas, August 2008.5

ight to occupy any unused lands. The principle of thecustomary law governing land use is that the head ofthe community holds the land as a trustee for ancestors,for the use of current community members, andin consideration of future generations. The chief of thecommunity or head of the family, along with councilorsor elders representing the whole community, mustconsent to any changes in land use. Any land grantsto persons who are not members of the communitymust also be approved by the National LandsCommission or, in the case of public use of lands, therelevant national agency.There are several cases in which a lack of appropriateconsultation with community members has led to conflictover land use. In the Kusawgu area of the CentralGonja District, for example, many villagers first learnedof a new agrofuels plantation project when bulldozersarrived to clear their lands in late 2007. The GhanaianEnvironmental Protection Agency later ordered a haltto those activities because the necessary permitswere not in place. Subsequently, there were a series ofmeetings with community members and chiefs toexplain the project, but many people were alreadyupset about the destruction of shea nut trees on theland. The lease arrangements offered by the companydid not include compensation for the destruction ofthe trees. 11Negotiations with the company are continuing, but thevillage chief has expressed reservations about thelong-term nature of the proposed lease agreement,saying:“The terms upon which you can stay here in thefuture will depend on how sweet or bitter yourrelationship has been with my people. I cannegotiate and agree on terms with you today andperhaps for the next twenty years, but I cannot doso after that. Let the future people decidewhat they want at their time with you.”Residents have raised similar concerns about thelack of effective consultation on the potentialconsequences of new agrofuels plantation projectsin Kpaachaa and Makango. Fisherfolk in Makangoare worried about the impacts of proposed sugarcaneexpansion on local wetlands, which serve as thebreeding grounds for fish during flood periods andsupport thriving fishing communities along the VoltaLake. Local people interviewed by ActionAid wereunsure about the potential impacts of the proposedsugar plantation and an ethanol plant to be locatedalong the river.ActionAid, the Food Security Policy AdvocacyNetwork (FoodSPAN, a network of 30 Ghanaianfarm, environment and community organizations)and many other Ghanaian organizations have raisedthese concerns in local and national forums. While theinitial flurry of interest resulted in several draft policydocuments, there is no comprehensive or legallybinding policy framework to guide agrofuelsproduction in Ghana.In a series of public events held to disseminate theresults of community level consultations, ActionAidand FoodSPAN have called for an informed publicdebate on the impacts of agrofuels production onhuman rights, especially the rights to food, water anda clean environment. They insist that these issues, aswell as the impacts on local livelihoods, should beexplored in a collaborative effort involving businesses,scientists, government and civil society to developappropriate and enforceable local standards for any11For more details on this case, see “Biofuel land grabbing in Northern Ghana”by Bakari Nyari, available athttp://www.wrm.org.uy/subjects/agrofuels/Biofuel_Northern_Ghana.pdf6

such production. National regulations should includeprovisions requiring companies investing in agrofuelsproduction to make full disclosure of their plans forthe use of lands and other natural resources so thatlocal communities can make informed decisions onthe best ways to balance the use of their lands forfood, fuel and livelihoods.MOzAMbIqUEThe agricultural sector in Mozambique presents bothchallenges and possibilities. Nearly 75 percent of thepopulation works in agriculture, but productivity islow. The share of agriculture in GDP has fallen from31 percent in 1996 to just 25 percent today.Malnutrition levels are among the highest in theworld, with 41 percent of children under 5 years oldsuffering from chronic hunger. In addition,unpredictable cycles of droughts and floodingresulting from climate change present ever increasingdifficulties for farmers around the country.At the same time, the country has enormouspossibilities. Mozambique has extensive agriculturallands with the potential to significantly increaseagricultural production. The government also plays anessential role in determining appropriate land use andresources devoted to agriculture. Land is held in trustby the state, and the 1997 Land Law requirescommunity participation in any decisions on land use.Women, who constitute 80 percent of the labor forcein agriculture, are guaranteed equal access to land.As in Ghana, initial talks on the expansion ofagrofuels began in 2004 with cautious discussions ofthe possibility of increasing production of feedstocksby smallholder farmers. Those plans accelerated afterBrazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s visit in2005, which focused in large part on bilateralcooperation on agrofuels. Those programs werepatterned after Brazilian biodiesel initiatives in whichcompanies would then purchase feedstocks fromthose farmers in order to increase rural incomes. Thecentral stated objectives were to reduce domesticdependence on fuel imports for transportation, toincrease production of gel fuels based on ethanolfor cooking to ease pressures on national forests,and to increase local job creation on farms and inprocessing plants.Over the next few years, proposals to increase privateinvestment in the sector increased dramatically. As ofJune 2008, a total of 21 new agrofuel productionprojects had been presented to the government forapproval, including several new investment projectsfrom Italy, Brazil and South Africa. While someprojects call for extensive production of sugarcaneand other crops, others promote smaller-scaleinitiatives in a variety of settings.ActionAid and ROSA (the Mozambican Network ofNGOs in Support of Agriculture and Food Security)surveyed farmers and their families in Sussundenga,Massinger, and Panda who had been approached toparticipate in new jatropha initiatives. In most cases,farmers had received seeds and technical assistanceand had been encouraged to plant small amounts ofthe fuel crop near or alongside their food crops.These farmers, while still awaiting the results of thecrop cycle, were enthusiastic about the prospects forincome generation and job creation.At the same time, 30 percent of those surveyedexpressed concerns that the agrofuels crops weredisplacing food production. More than 90 percentreported that they did not plant jatropha on marginallands, but rather on the most fertile land available in7

order to maximize potential yields. In the Manicacommunity, farmers reported that they had convertedsome community forests currently used for firewoodand other income generation to jatropha production.These activities could lead to significant problems inthe future if those plans are expanded to the pointthat they compete with food production or jeopardizelocal ecosystems.In fact, two of the three provinces identified by thegovernment as having the most land available foragrofuels expansion also have some of the highestrates of food insecurity in the country. While thefarmers surveyed by ActionAid were generallypositive about agrofuels, this enthusiasm was mostlybased on projections of good prices for the newcrops. New production decisions should be based oncomplete consultations that include a variety ofperspectives, as well as the concrete results of existingprojects on farmers’ livelihoods and food security.The global slowdown in markets provides somebreathing room to expand the public debate on therisks and opportunities involved in the expansion ofagrofuels production and the measures needed toensure that it does not compromise food security.ROSA and ActionAid are engaging in a series ofpublic events and discussions with the governmenton the development of a national agrofuels strategy.They insist that any such plans include the followingelements:■ Attention to the consequences of agrofuelsproduction on land concentration, water use, andthe use of chemical fertilizers.■ Measures to increase effective community levelparticipation—especially that of women—indecisions on land use.■ The establishment of a permanent platform fordebate on agrofuels that includes the activeparticipation of affected communities, NGOs, theprivate sector and government.■ The development of a comprehensive frameworkon food security that could include productionof energy crops, but only as a complement tofood production and as one element of acomprehensive package of to ensure sustainablelivelihoods.SENEGALAs in other countries, the expansion of agrofuelsproduction in Senegal has highlighted both therisks of excessive agrofuels production and thetremendous need to strengthen food security andrural livelihoods through a consultative process thatfully engages local farmers. Plans to expandagrofuels production that appeared to be racingforward last year have slowed somewhat, providinga new opportunity to reconcile these competingdemands.The agricultural sector in Senegal is confronting aseries of inter-connected dilemmas. Expectations andneeds are high, as some 70 percent of the populationis employed in agriculture. Productivity and publicinvestment in agriculture, on the other hand, are low,and the country is compelled to import some 60percent of its food products. The introduction ofagrofuels production into that equation raises newissues that need to be resolved if food security andrural livelihoods are to advance.The appropriate balance of land use among food,fuel, and other cash crops is central to that dilemma.Land ownership in Senegal falls into three categories:privately owned land, primarily in urban areas;publicly owned lands, especially those designated forpublic utilities, which are managed by the government;and rural lands that are under the publicdomain but are managed by rural councils and localauthorities. Within that context, nearly all agriculturalproduction is carried out by smallholder farmers.According to the 1998 National Agricultural Census,99 percent of farms were less than 20 hectares insize, and 82 percent were less than five hectares.The introduction of new plans to increase agrofuelsproduction has created new challenges for decisionmakingon land use. Encouraged by the prospectof developing local energy supplies and new exportopportunities, the government began the JatrophaNational Production Program in 2007. Among thegoals of that program was a target to increase theland used for jatropha production for biodiesel by321,000 hectares by 2012.8

Numerous local agricultural, forestry and ruraldevelopment services consulted by ActionAidreported considerable pressure from the centralgovernment to allocate land for agrofuels production,in some cases with very little knowledge of the realimpacts on communities. Some local authorities hadbeen advised that investors had requested approvalfor land allocations amounting to as much as100,000 hectares.In the Tambacounda region, for example, landallocations are taking place within the GOANAProgram, an initiative launched by President Wade inApril 2008. While the program is intended to ensurenational food security, nearly 70 percent of the landsinvolved in Tambacounda are designated for jatrophaproduction. Some 23,500 hectares have beenallocated for jatropha, compared to 7,200 hectaresfor other agricultural production. 12Farm organizations are divided on the issue of energycrop production expansion, but there is a strongconsensus that achieving food security must be theprimary goal of any program for the agriculturalsector. The leaders of milk producers’ organizationswere concerned that the agrofuels initiative coulddisplace small-scale farmers from their lands in favorof agribusinesses. They also questioned why landwas being designated for energy crops when foodsecurity is such a pressing national issue. On theother hand, the National Structure for Rural People’sConsultation and Cooperation (CNCR) expressedoptimism that small-scale jatropha farms couldbenefit local farmers if plans were developed tointegrate that production into overall agriculturalproduction. That would require technical assistance,as well as investments in small-scale processingfacilities to ensure that much of the value added fromsuch production remains in local communities.Unfortunately, the rush to expand agrofuelsproduction to meet international demand may beovertaking this prudent approach. Adbou Tall, amember of the federation of producers of Anambé,stated:“I clearly refused all of the initial propositions thatI received for starting to grow jatropha because I donot want us to become farm workers at the mercyof a few companies. I prefer to continue to increasemy production of rice and corn. Imagine whatwould happen if the world demand falls and theprice of agrofuels collapses, after we have concentratedall our efforts on it. Our situation would beeven worse than now and there would be famine.We can’t eat jatropha, but we can eat rice.”ActionAid has carried out 22 participatoryworkshops, town meetings, and public presentationson agrofuels production across the country.Ousseynou Konate, who supervises bananaproducers in Tambacounda region, is working withActionAid to stimulate greater public debate on theissue. He summarized the concerns emerging fromthose meetings:“It is clear that, given the size of the land surfacesrequired by the private developers coming fromEurope and elsewhere, the objective is massproduction for export … I was very surprised bythis rush, by the surface areas required and the lackof information given to small producers. It is crucialto develop a way of informing the communitiesrapidly, because the choices we make now willhave a huge impact on our generation and thegenerations to come.” 1312Statistics from Regional Directorates for Rural Development, August 2008.13Interviews conducted by Alexandre Pollack, ActionAid EU, quoted in“Agrofuels: how green is the green gold rush in Senegal?” Cafebabel.com,Feb. 2, 2009.9

CONCLUSION ANd RECOMMENdATIONSDecreases in oil and other commodity prices over thelast few months, coupled with restrictions in credit,have contributed to a slowdown in what onceseemed to be an inexorable rush to increase ethanoland biodiesel production around the world. Thispause could provide the opportunity to consider newpolicies at the national and international levels torefocus public attention—and public spending—onthe measures needed to achieve food security andstrengthen rural livelihoods.United States agrofuels policies that were developedto foster energy security and increase farmers’incomes have had unintended consequences for foodprices and food security around the world. Whilecoordinated action is also needed in Europe tomoderate the global demand for energy crops, theUnited States should consider its own role in the wildexpectations created by the renewable fuels targets.So far, the United States has been able to meet thevast majority of the Renewable Fuels Targets withdomestic production. Even that level of productionhas spurred considerable debate on the environmentalimpacts and consequences for food prices in thiscountry. Those targets are set to increase over thenext few years, rising from 11 billion gallons this year,to 13 billion gallons in 2010 and 14 billion in 2011.By 2022, they are expected to nearly triple to 36billion gallons. A rising portion of those targets mustbe met by advanced agrofuels production. But thetechnological and economic challenges involved indeveloping advanced agrofuels sources likeswitchgrass, algae and other potential feedstockscould raise their own problems for appropriate landuse and environmental sustainability. In any case, thecontinued rise in demand sends signals to investorsaround the world that this production will onlyincrease, no matter what the consequences.Now is the time to revise those targets, and refocusattention on lowering excessive U.S. demand forenergy and finding solutions that contribute to globalfood security. The Obama Administration andCongress should:■ Revise Renewable Fuels Standards targets sothat they can be met with sustainable localproduction that generates jobs and incomes inrural areas. Current U.S. production levels aresufficient to meet the 2009 target of 11 billiongallons a year.■ Restrict subsidies for agrofuels or otherrenewable fuels to only those that actually reducegreenhouse gas emissions. Eligibility should bebased on a full life-cycle analysis that includesindirect land use changes in the United Statesand developing countries.■ Increase foreign assistance for sustainable foodproduction to achieve food security. Fundingshould strengthen small-scale farmers’ right toland and their ability to produce food crops tofeed their nations. Support for food productionto reduce hunger and increase rural incomes,whether at the international or local level, musttake precedence over the unsustainableproduction of fuel crops for profit.10

ACKNOwLEdGEMENTSThis reports was written by Karen Hansen-Kuhn(ActionAid USA) based on contributions from AnnaAntwi (ActionAid Ghana), Carmen Munhequete andFilipe Pequenino (ActionAid Mozambique) and FatouMbaye (ActionAid Senegal).Additional thanks to Anne Jellema and PeterO’Driscoll for their thoughtful comments, to SarahAnderson for her careful editing, and to LyndaJorgensen for the layout.Support for the production of this report was providedby the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Theanalysis and conclusions in this report should besolely attributed to ActionAid International and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the Foundation.

ActionAid InternationalPostnet Suite 248Private Bag X31Saxonwold 2132JohannesburgSouth AfricaTel: +27 11 731 4500Fax: +27 11 880 8082www.actionaid.orgActionAid fights to end poverty and the injusticesthat cause it by helping poor and excluded peoplesecure and exercise their rights.

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines