Agricultural Development & Land Research in the CPEGAgricultural Development & Land Research in the CPEG

Presentation to: Parliament’s Joint Budget CommitteePresentation to: Parliament’s Joint Budget Committee

16 October 2008

Centre for Poverty, Employment and GrowthCentre for Poverty, Employment and Growth

• CPEG’s policy research work is coordinated to answer:

• How can SA achieve the objectives of halving unemployment and poverty by 2014 on a sustainable basis?

• What would people be doing? What are the trade-offs and choices?

• This is done through:

• ‘Think tank’ processes – especially the “Employment Scenarios” and supporting sector based workshops

• Policy research

• Demonstration projects

• ‘Research infrastructure’ – including reviews of data quality, surveys, and modelling.

• Employment Policy Network

CPEG – scope of research workCPEG – scope of research work

• Employment studies

• Macro-economic policy

• Infrastructure and economic bias – most recently with work on commercial transport and electricity

• Industry policy

• Food and agriculture

• Labour markets, migration and social protection

• Public employment

• EPWP, with a special emphasis on the social sector

CPEG – Examples of research capacityCPEG – Examples of research capacity

• Dr Miriam Altman is the Executive Director. She is an economist, with wide ranging experience in employment, labour markets and industrial policy

• Catherine Cross is a migration specialist and economic anthropologist

• Dr. Innocent Matshe is a professor of economics, with a speciality in agricultural economics

• Tim Hart is an agricultural development specialist and social anthropologist

• Dr Peter Jacobs is an agricultural development specialist and economist

• Mompati Bhaipeti is an agricultural economist and research intern

• Stewart Ngandu is an economist with a specialty in economy-wide modelling

• Cooperation with other parts of HSRC – GIS, Surveys, gender, etc

Agricultural Employment ScenariosDepartment of Science and Technology

Agricultural Employment ScenariosDepartment of Science and Technology

• Policy oriented research problem and questions• What role can agriculture play in meeting the targeted

50% reduction in poverty and unemployment by 2014 and getting the economy to grow at a rate of 6% per year?

• Despite low cost per job for unskilled labour, agricultural employment in commercial farming sector is still falling

• Estimate a number of the plausible and practically realizable rural employment scenarios using 2014 and 2020 as time horizons

• What are the costs and benefits of policy options to boost job creation in agriculture?

Research approach and methodology

Research approach and methodology

• This research started from baseline information farm employment and livelihoods in the former homelands and large-scale commercial farming in the rest of South Africa.

• Within these extreme agrarian structures, the study defined ten possible ways in which this agrarian structure could evolve up to 2014 and 2020.

• To keep track of overall impacts and extract realistic employment scenarios, the study defined the following collective scenarios: • “Continuation of current trends’;• ‘Large-scale land reform + re-peasantisation of

former homelands’; • ‘De-racialisation via land reform + commercial

development in former homelands’.

Main findings Main findings • “Continuation of current trends’:

• 100 000 to 200 000 fewer farm jobs; • 75 000 to 100 000 livelihoods created or boosted via land

reform; • 1 million additional food security plots

• ‘Large-scale land reform + re-peasantisation of former homelands’:• 170 000 to 300 000 fewer farm jobs; • 1 to 1.5 million livelihoods created or boosted; • 1.25 to 1.5 million additional food security plots;• Significantly changed racial ownership pattern

• De-racialisation via land reform + commercial development in former homelands’: • No change in farm jobs, but some relocation; • 85 000 livelihoods created or boosted, but almost exclusively

black commercial farmers; • 0 to 0.5 million fewer food security plots; • Significantly changed racial ownership pattern

Recommendations Recommendations

• “Continuation of current trends’: • No major change in policies, or improved ability to implement

policies we have• Policy questions: Could lend itself to popular frustration and

political opportunism?• ‘Large-scale land reform + re-peasantisation of former

homelands’:• Large investment in redistributive land reform; Large investment

in supporting land reform beneficiaries and agriculturalists in former homelands

• Policy questions: Impact on farm jobs → careful targeting of under-utilised commercial land

• ‘De-racialisation via land reform + commercial development in former homelands’:• Large investment in redistributive land reform; Large investment

in supporting black commercial farmers• Policy questions: Political acceptability ambiguous

15 Year Review of Rural DevelopmentThe Office of the Presidency

15 Year Review of Rural DevelopmentThe Office of the Presidency

• Policy oriented research problem and questions• Synthesis evaluation of various government

interventions to raise the level of well-being of citizens since 1994

• Pro-poor rural policies with specific emphasis on agricultural and land reforms + “social wage” policies

• Research approach and method • comprehensive review of published and

unpublished reports, peer reviewed and “grey” literature.

• meaningful descriptive analysis of accessible official statistics: Labour Force Surveys, the General Household Survey and M&E reports of government departments

Main findings Main findings

• Smallholder farming: 3-4 million households engage in small-scale farming, albeit mainly to supplement their food requirements

• Land Reform Programmes: approaching 5mha in total target of 25 mha; reasons for slow pace range from willing seller willing buyer model to limited budgets and poor institutional coordination;

• The CASP: agricultural development support after land transfer; roll-out since 2004 uneven and almost exclusively concentrated on selective on-farm infrastructure (often consuming more than 70% of “CASP budget”)

• The ISRDP: sound principles but without a ring-fenced budget; instead depends on the allocations from the individual line departments

• Social wage transfers: transfers in the form of grants, health and education services are significantly higher in rural areas; on average, the bottom 40% of the rural population benefited slightly more than the rest of the rural population

Recommendations Recommendations

• Practicable rural policies can help to ensure the supply of food to urban areas while also slowing-down unplanned demographic pressures on non-rural localities

• Further investigations are needed into how land markets can facilitate or constrain elements of the land reform process

• Criteria to judge the success or failure of land reform projects must be more nuanced: projects considered a commercial failure might be success stories in terms of sustaining livelihoods and food security

• Other factors that affect the success of the projects require attention: institutional arrangements among beneficiaries and the capacity of land reform departments

• The need exists to up-scale CASP to broadly enhance post-transfer agricultural development

• Social wages in the form of services can substantially reduce structural poverty and therefore need to be accelerated

• More needs to be done to understand and measure the rural livelihoods impacts of coordinated and participatory governance (ISRDP)

Baseline Information on Technology-Oriented Initiatives in Rural Areas to Promote Economic Development

International Partnerships Unit, Department of Science and Technology

Baseline Information on Technology-Oriented Initiatives in Rural Areas to Promote Economic Development

International Partnerships Unit, Department of Science and Technology

• Main Problem:• Slightly less than 50% of poor reside in rural areas but

most of these are poor.

• It is generally recognised that the fight against rural poverty must be multi-pronged.

• The Department of Science and Technology (DST) is perpetually seeking to define and refine its contribution to this collective effort.

• Among other things DST is seeking to ensure that technology is harnessed towards the objective of rural development.

• DST required an overview of technologically-oriented poverty reduction initiatives in rural South Africa.

Research:Research:

• The study involved a literature review and a preliminary national audit of technologically-oriented poverty reduction initiatives.

• Technologies being developed and/or implemented – but only tip of the iceberg.

• Focused on the following sectors:• Agriculture• Small-scale mining• Manufacturing• Information and Communication Technologies• Energy, and• Environment

• Agriculture is the sector presented here.

Main findings: Main findings:

• 209 different types of agricultural technology were identified • Research has largely focused on technologies that are appropriate

to the better resourced commercial farming sector and consequently inappropriate for poor agrarian rural households.

• Insufficient and underskilled extension services in some provinces make diffusion of relevant technology to poor rural areas a serious problem.

• Constraints to technology development and transfer• Accessibility of information - problematic• Institutional knowledge management – poor and not shared• Monitoring and evaluation - limited • Indigenous knowledge - scant• Markets and business models - inappropriate • Massive agricultural programmes – too many, ineffective and no

cross-sectoral linkages

Recommendations:Recommendations:

• The diffusion of relevant technology to poor rural areas requires concerted effort by policy makers and state organs to ensure that it reaches the poor.

• South Africa is developing and transferring more appropriate technology in the agricultural sector than it was two decades ago, but much needs to be done to make this effective.

• Other economic sectors are lacking behind the agricultural sector. Their stimulation will ensure better service delivery in the rural areas.

African Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Agricultural Production

National Indigenous Knowledge Systems Office, Department of Science and Technology

African Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Agricultural Production

National Indigenous Knowledge Systems Office, Department of Science and Technology

• Main Problem:

• Can indigenous knowledge (local knowledge) contribute to food security and thereby reduce the poverty of rural agrarian households?

• If so how best may this be achieved?

• This question is aligned to three specific government interventions, namely poverty reduction (various Departments including DoA), addressing food insecurity (various departments including DoA) and the integration of ‘scientific’ and ‘indigenous’ knowledge systems (DST: NIKSO).

Research:Research:

• Carried out in a rural village situated in the former Gazankulu Homeland of the eastern Limpopo Province.

• High levels of poverty in the Limpopo Province, located in a former homeland and situated in a semi-arid to arid zone.

• Fieldwork was conducted for a period of 16 months.

• Participatory Rural Appraisal techniques, participant observation, qualitative interviews, focus group workshops and a random sample survey of 13.5% of the households in the village.

• Research focused on the agrarian activities in home garden plots, fields and two communal vegetable garden projects supported by the Limpopo Provincial Department of Agriculture and Environment (LPDAE).

Main findings: 1 Main findings: 1 • The majority of households are poor.

• Social grants (pensions and child grants) are the most common source of income reaching 83% of households in 2005.

• 83% of residents lived on less than US$ 2/day and 49% live on less than US$ 1/day.

• 90% of households produced agricultural crops during the summer rainfall season.

• 80% of households said that these were vital for their food security.

• But less than 5% able to produce exotics.

• Most produce traditional crops, various plants for marogo, and a few hardier exotic vegetables, also mainly for marogo .

• Dried marogo was consumed by 95% of households during the winter period - no rainfall for about six months.

Main Findings: 2Main Findings: 2• Traditional crops, including marogo, were grown at the two communal

vegetable garden projects due to their hardiness.

• The theft of the borehole pumps and the subsequent inability to grow exotic crops - projects not functioning well.

• Membership means only reaching 4% of the households and extension services did not reach out to other households.

• When functioning projects demand use of conventional technologies and crops.

• All households practise traditional agricultural at home. Unable to afford the technologies typically promoted and associated with the projects.

• People’s socio-economic and agro-ecological circumstances not considered prior to engagement. Support of more than 10 years has been inappropriate.

• Most households rely on local knowledge of agricultural. • indigenous knowledge systems breaking down or ineffective in the light

of rapid social, economic and agro-ecological change.

Recommendations:Recommendations:

• Interventions need to build on what people already know and do.• Alternative and low external input technologies required - fit in well with

the current local agricultural practices and the socio-economic circumstances.

• Urgent are water harvesting and management, and soil conservation, technologies. This would improve crop quality and quantity.

• Technologies need to be adapted to local requirements in a participatory fashion in order to reach most households.

• Active cultivation of marogo plants needs to be encouraged for food security and biodiversity.

• Local people - support in improved seed saving and storage - reduces agricultural input costs. Also requested support with regard to livestock nutrition, disease and breeding – due to illnesses and losses.

• Given the indigenous knowledge base of most households there is strong potential for collaboration between ‘indigenous’ and ‘scientific’ knowledge.

Achieving Food Security in South Africa: Characteristics, Stressors and Recommendations to 2019

The Office of the Presidency

Achieving Food Security in South Africa: Characteristics, Stressors and Recommendations to 2019

The Office of the Presidency

• Main Problem• Despite strong government commitment tremendous disparities in

food security exist between communities and households across the country - reflects continuing social and economic inequalities.

• Despite interventions, there are signs that there is increasing food insecurity in specific places - related to factors: unemployment, HIV/AIDS, food prices, climate change etc.

• In rural areas, most households are net deficit food producers, their access to food is partially or wholly reliant on household income.

• Food security is largely about (direct or indirect) access to cash to purchase food.

• Study focuses on poverty reduction, specifically in the light of food insecurity, policies and programmes of various Departments and the collaboration within them and with non-government agencies.

Research:Research:

• Draws on recent literature and research of the multiple facets of food security in South Africa.

• Compiled by sixteen specialists in this field along with contributions from their institutional collaborators.

• Current government initiatives, such as AsgiSA and an expanded welfare safety net, were also considered.

• Specific focus areas included:• Overview of food security in South Africa• Food accessibility and stability• Food availability• Food intake and utilisation – including nutrition• Policy and institutional issues

• Scenario developed iro the institutional framework required to achieve food security by 2019.

Main Findings: 1Main Findings: 1• Pro-poor growth path required as current growth is increasingly excluding the

poor – jobs not created in sectors where they find employment.

• Success of initiatives such as AsgiSA, are central to the higher rates of food security.

• Social protection system must take cognisance of the 8.3 million people in households in which no one has access to either formal employment or a state pension. These are the most vulnerable.

• Chronic, structural food insecurity is the most prevalent and urgent food insecurity problem in SA.

• Agriculture has a role to play but at the household subsistence level in the poorer rural areas and former homelands.

• Dietary diversity must be encouraged to ensure nutrition is optimal.

• Must recognise diverse character of the livelihoods of the rural and urban poor. Complementary rural enterprises and employment must therefore be part of this strategy.

Main Findings: 2Main Findings: 2• Initiatives must be congruent on current livelihood strategies and

choices and must be founded on strong participation of those affected.

• Food insecurity is highly shaped by local context.

• Food prices and other inflationary issues are key drivers of food insecurity in South Africa.

• A collaborative institutional framework that provides a broad range of services by bringing government and non-government together is required.

• Food security must become part of governments integrated anti-poverty strategy which includes social grants, employment, agricultural policy, etc.

• IFSS requires clearer, dedicated funding, greater participation by civil society and dialogue with other stakeholders. Legislative backing would strengthen the process.

• Food insecurity needs to be monitored continually and must be part of new institutional arrangements.

Recommendations:Recommendations:Recommendations made in light of the existing institutional framework. • Continue to develop an integrated policy framework for poverty reduction that

incorporates within a cohesive policy strategy:• Pro-poor economic growth policy that will enable the majority of South

Africans to achieve food security through employment and effective service delivery by the state.

• Comprehensive, affordable, and sustainable social protection measures, in particular social grants, to provide safety nets for those unable to engage effectively with the economy and who are vulnerable to hunger.

• Actively encourage agricultural development and allied non-farm enterprises to promote the livelihoods of those on the periphery of the formal economy.

• Alter and strengthen the institutional arrangements of the IFSS to transform it into an enabling structure for state and non-state actors to coherently address food security within the context of its multiple dimensions, and as part of an overarching poverty reduction strategy.

• Establish a well coordinated and well managed monitoring and evaluation and information system for food security.