|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Format for print or mobile
Africa: Shades of Green, 2
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Sep 24, 2012 (120924)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), the
centerpiece of donor-initiated plans for agricultural
development in Africa, is replete with positive language
about food security, sustainable development, and attention
to smallholder farmers. And, notes a new report from the
African Centre for Biodiversity, it also recognizes many of
the limitations of previous Green Revolution experiences in
Asia and Latin America. Nevertheless, the Centre argues, its
emphasis on incorporating African agricultural production
into global value chains ignores the likely outcome of
increased dependence by farmers on large multinational
corporations, which will reap the largest share of the
rewards.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin, sent out by e-mail as well as
available on the web at http://www.africafocus.org/docs12/ag1209b.php, contains
excerpts from this new report, focusing on critical
alternative approaches to the commercialization model of
agricultural development being fostered by AGRA.
Organizations representing and advocating for small farmers,
food security, and sustainable agricultural development, the
report argues, have the difficult but necessary task of
shaping an approach which does not reject the use of new
technology but ensures that its development is subordinated
to the interests of farmers and the public rather than to
the maximization of profit for large commercial investors.
This is one of a series of three related Bulletins released
today. The other two are available on the web but not sent
out by e-mail to avoid overloading your in-boxes with too
much content in one day.
One of these, available on the web at http://www.africafocus.org/docs12/ag1209a.php, contains a
clear description of the main features of the Alliance for a
Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), excerpted from the same
report. This background analysis, which acknowledges that
AGRA has accepted many earlier critiques of the Green
Revolution model, gives further credibility to the nuanced
but strong critique advanced by the African Centre for
Biodiversity.
And a third related Bulletin, available on the web at
http://www.africafocus.org/docs12/ag1209c.php, focuses on
the key issue of "gene grabbing," the privatization of
intellectual p;operty in African seeds drawn from the common
store of resources developed by African farmers of
centuries. Included in this Bulletin are excerpts from a new
overview article by Andrew Mushita and Carol Thompson and
from a 2010 study from the African Centre for Biodiversity
on "The Sorghum Gene Grab."
Note a series to watch on Africa's business boom in
Toronto's Globe & Mail. Neither Afro-optimism nor Afropessimism.
Winners and losers behind the growth rates.
http://tinyurl.com/8rvw75n
The official web site for AGRA is http://www.agra-alliance.org/
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on food and agriculture
issues, visit http://www.africafocus.org/agexp.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++
Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA): Laying
the Groundwork for the Commercialisation of African
Agriculture
African Centre for Biosafety
September 15 2010
http://www.acbio.org.za/
The African Centre for Biosafety (ACB) is a non-profi
organisation, based in Johannesburg, South Africa. ... The
ACB has a respected record of evidence based work and can
play a vital role in the agro-ecological movement by
striving towards seed sovereignty, built upon the values of
equal access to and use of resources.
About this paper and why the focus on AGRA
This paper examines the Alliance for a Green Revolution in
Africa (AGRA) with a focus on its work around seeds. AGRA's
intervention in African agriculture ties together a number
of otherwise disparate initiatives by public sector
institutions, national and multinational government
structures and private companies and investors. AGRA thus
provides an organisational and technical nucleus for the
expansion of profit-making ventures in African agriculture.
It focuses on interventions in seed as one of the central
technologies for the commercialisation of agriculture, and
as a profit centre.
Appraisals of AGRA from sovereignty movements so far have
tended to focus on generic critiques of Green Revolution
approaches to agriculture, and on the links between the Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation (Gates Foundation) and
multinational biotechnology and seed companies, in
particular Monsanto. Most existing critiques emerged soon
after AGRA's launch in 2006 before much had happened, based
on the historical experience of the Green Revolution and the
role of the Rockefeller and USAID programmes amongst others,
based on the historical experience of the Green Revolution
and the role of the Rockefeller and USAID programmes amongst
others.
Enough time has passed now since AGRA's launch to begin
interrogating the initiative on the basis of its practical
experiences. What we have tried to do in this paper is to
dig a bit deeper into AGRA's philosophy and practice to
understand in more detail what they are proposing and
interrogate this. ...
2. Key findings
We have found a fairly complex array of solutions being
proposed by AGRA.
On the face of it, it would appear as if AGRA recognises the
limits of trying to replicate the Green Revolution as it
unfolded in Asia in the 1960s and 1970s in Latin America,
where social and ecological conditions are markedly
different. In this regard, AGRA appears to be proposing an
approach to the introduction of new technologies based on
the Green Revolution model that aims to work around some of
these limits. In this regard, it emphasises the importance
of local adaptation and the blending of different
technological approaches according to context. For example,
AGRA appears to be promoting work with resource-poor
smallholder farmers and participatory plant breeding
andselection.
However, AGRA considers hybrid seed, biotechnology
(including genetic modification), synthetic fertilisers,
irrigation, credit provision and general commercialisation
of agricultural production as long-term goals to strive
towards.
What AGRA has done is to set itself the immediate task of
putting in place the building blocks to move towards the
wider scale adoption of these Green Revolution technologies
without trying to impose them all at once or immediately in
a context where they will not be satisfactorily supported or
taken up.
In this regard, an important focus of AGRA's project is to
work on building both institutional and regulatory systems
that can support the introduction of these technologies.
Working with individuals and organisations with a long
history of agricultural development work in Africa, such as
USAID and the Citizen's Network for Foreign Affairs (CNFA) -
organisations whose key focus historically has been on the
expansion of US agribusiness, AGRA has identified specific
countries and areas within countries where this work can
proceed most effectively. ...
AGRA's emphasis on the profit motive as the driving force of
economic development, and its long-term orientation towards
the rolling out of Green Revolution technologies based on
biotechnology,synthetic fertilisers and debt-driven
commercialisation place it on a potential collision course
with the agroecological approaches being endorsed by farmerbased
sovereignty movements.
...
9. Responding to AGRA
9.1 Technological pathways
How can food and seed sovereignty movements respond to
AGRA's initiatives? AGRA's interventions have technical as
well as social dimensions, which are interlinked. AGRA tends
to separate the technical and social aspects, or rather sees
social benefit flowing from technological process in a one
way stream. It advances a technical response to issues of
agriculture and food production in Africa. According to Sam
Moyo, AGRA seeks to contribute to the 'modernisation' of
African agriculture,essentially through transfer of
technology as the overarching solution to Africa's agrarian
question(ActionAid, 2009:4). ...
Technically, AGRA presents what appears to be a
contradictory process. Aspects of its interventions may find
appeal to some, for example, the development of scientific
capacity, building farmer participation in plant breeding
and variety selection, local adaptation for specific
agroecologies,enhancing soil fertility, and building
distribution networks for inputs to reach more remote smallscale
farmers. While it is our view that there is a role for
science and for appropriate technologies,but if these are
separated from direct producer control over their
development and use, they are open to appropriation for
sectional benefit. The ways technologies are developed and
how they are channelled into societies can create a 'path
dependence', reshaping society through technology in the
interests of those who control the process. The technologies
and distribution mechanisms being pursued by AGRA are
undoubtedly open to capture by corporate interests to
introduce GM and other technologies designed to ensure
private profit; and to open the conduits to flood Africa
with inappropriate technologies that can tie farmers into
unsustainable high-input systems, while simultaneously
destroying existing systems. ... Creating dependence on
powerful, debt-driven external input providers is a very bad
idea.
These are some of the important questions: can the
introduction of technology designed to facilitate the
appropriation of private profit also facilitate the
introduction of useful new varieties? In the long run, would
these displace existing varieties? Can improved access to
manufactured fertilisers offer farmers greater choice
without them necessarily having to buy into the hybrid seed
paradigm?
...
9.2 Farmer organisation
A key struggle will be over ownership and control of
technologies, and consequently the direction of their use.
Issues of power loom large here. AGRA's work on building
farmer associations will necessarily be a top-down process
with farmer associations umbilically linked to AGRA
programmes and products. These kinds of top-down, dependent
civil society associations are structured to serve as
conduits for corporate interest, and it is not always easy
to work from inside such structures to create an independent
voice and activity for producers. The clear counter to this
is to engage on the basis of independent organisation, which
ideally combines farmers with broader constituencies around
food and seed sovereignty. Part of the struggle around
technology is to bring scientists and academics into the
sphere of influence of independent sovereignty movements,
serving the interests of farmers and food consumers rather
than corporations.
An associated question is the need for nascent food and seed
sovereignty movements on the continent to more clearly
define their constituencies. AGRA does emphasise smallholder
producers, which is not such a big deal,given that the
majority of farmers in Africa can be defined as
smallholders. However, AGRA's focus is on adoption of Green
Revolution technologies and commercialisation which will
inevitably lead to concentration and centralisation. The
majority of Africa's farmers will not fit into commercial
agricultural production, including the integration into
formal supply chains. There is need for a diverse production
base, easy access to locally-adapted genetic resources, and
maintenance of biodiversity; as well as to protect access to
land and water for local and household production.
Not all those who distribute seeds can, or will want to,
form a company in order to make private profits from these
activities. By far the majority of farmers will need to
continue saving and exchanging seed outside of formal
markets as the basis of robust seed systems. How can this
base be supported, deepened and extended without 'cherry
picking' a small layer and condemning the rest to become
passive consumers of seed, other inputs and, ultimately,
food? AGRA does not refer to or recognise traditional
ecological knowledge (Thompson, 2012:348), including seed
saving and exchange, which forms the foundation of Africa's
seed systems.
Are the two agendas of integration of smallholders into
commercial value chains and localised production primarily
for local use compatible? If we look at Africa's main Green
Revolution 'success' (South Africa) we can see that a
condition of the expansion of commercial agriculture,and the
adoption of Green Revolution technologies, was the
concentration of land holdings and the marginalisation or
complete exclusion of smallholder farmers, and a
concentration and centralisation of agricultural marketing
systems. We cannot detach the technological basis of South
African commercial agriculture from the accompanying
processes of dispossession. They emerged hand-in-hand with
one another.
AGRA and associated corporate initiatives in African
agriculture threaten to split nascent food and seed
sovereignty movements and farmer associations, dividing
farmers between those who can participate in initiatives for
commercialisation (not only by AGRA, but also by a range of
other state and private sector actors from CAADP to hedge
funds) and those who cannot. ...
So how might smallholder farmers and their organisations
respond to AGRA's initiatives? Let us take these one by one,
in the order of improved seed varieties, input distribution,
soil fertility, and financing.
9.3 Improved seed
AGRA is proposing sustained investment in R&D to develop
improved seed varieties, in close collaboration with farmers
to breed and select varieties, and with privately contracted
small-scale farmers to bulk up the seed for sale. It
proposes to use the freely available genetic base residing
inthe IARCs and NARS, but to privatise the results.
This privatisation must be the first point of contention. If
public resources are being used as the genetic base, the
products must also remain freely available to the public.
AGRA argues that private ownership of the resulting improved
varieties is the only way of 'crowding in' private sector
investment. According to AGRA, states do not have enough
resources or expertise to do this themselves, there is no
other option. This logic needs to be pushed back. Movements
need to think about ways to bring scientists and public
sector R&D institutions closer to independent farmer
associations and movements to work on R&D in the public
rather than private interest. Public sector institutions may
be under pressure to engage in PPPs where the benefits
ultimately flow to private companies. However, there are
units and individuals within these institutions that can be
worked with to develop a counter strategy for the retention
of improved genetic resources in the public sphere. The
immediate task is to explore these possibilities and build
practical links, however small,between public sector R&D and
independent farmer movements and associations.
The second point of contention in the arena of improved seed
is to demand greater R&D work on crops outside the core
'commercial' crops (maize, cassava) in conjunction with
producers. There are thousands of other crops and varieties
that are locally important, even if they do not reach an
economic threshold that is interesting to multinational
corporations. These crops have a consumer base, and a
market, even if it is small. This base cannot be reached
using centralised methods of production and distribution. By
drawing on the "distributed intelligence" of millions of
farmers through decentralising and democratising the tools
of production and distribution, and connecting supply and
demand (rather than imposing standardised products) these
markets can be built(Anderson, 2009). ...
Food sovereignty movements should decide whether
biotechnology (excluding GM) in the broad sense, has a
possible role to play in improving genetic resources and
increasing farmer choice. If so, then this must be
accompanied by a clear orientation towards agroecological
production and opposition to GM technologies, which threaten
to obliterate alternatives on introduction. The key point,
as above, is control over the technology and its
development. A good rule of thumb is whether any development
process increases the direct control and understanding of
producers over a wider array of technologies, or whether the
process results in greater passivity of producers in the
face of technological change. ...
9.4 Seed markets/distribution
For seed distribution, AGRA focuses on agro-dealer networks
based on private enterprises where farmers can buy inputs
including seed and fertiliser, and where the owners can
inform the farmers of the best choices for their conditions.
...
In theory, an 'agro-dealer' network can bring new varieties
closer to farmers, but such a distribution system is reliant
on cash and some travel is also usually involved. An
additional limitation of agro-dealer networks is their
dependence on the sale of the 'hit' seeds for them to remain
profitable as enterprises. The result is a reduction in the
range of varieties made available and an inevitable
narrowing of seed diversity. The role of seed laws in
preventing the sale or distribution of non-registered
varieties, the cost of registration, and outlawing of the
use of germplasm already developed by rights holders works
against locally-developed varieties generated by local
farmers.
Strengthening seed distribution infrastructure has a place
in improving Africa's seed systems,although a key issue is
how open the network is, and whether it enables the
distribution of any seed or only that seed produced through
AGRA's programmes. ...
The priority here must therefore be on strengthening of
public sector extension services, based on farmer-to-farmer
participatory approaches with extension officers playing a
supportive and process facilitation role.
Almekinders and Louwaars' (2002) discussion of seed systems
suggests the most appropriate seed distribution systems
would be rooted in a combination of on-farm seed saving;
with exchange between neighbours, friends and family both
within and outside communities. Rather than building an
entirely separate private agro-dealer network, the question
is how existing distribution systems may be strengthened.
This might include the promotion of seed fairs and other
organised forms of seed exchange for variety, local saving
and exchange for access to locally-adapted planting
material;and on-farm and community seed banks. Distribution
systems of this sort are built on farmer organisation rather
than as separate, profit-driven distribution systems.
9.5 Soil fertility
AGRA recognises that organic and agroecological techniques
(e.g. use of legumes for nitrogen fixing,increasing organic
content of soil, mulching, conservation agriculture/minimum
or no-till) are an important component of increasing soil
fertility. But AGRA argues this is not enough and judicious
supplementary application of synthetic fertilisers is
necessary to increase yields sustainably.
We need to consider what the use of synthetic fertilisers
entails.
- First, synthetic fertilisers emphasise macro-nutrients
(N,P, K) and may underestimate micro-nutrients, with
negative ecological effects. The overuse of nitrogen throws
off the chemical balance of the soil and causes overacidification.
Phosphates lead to the accumulation of
poisonous heavy metals in the soil such as uranium and
cadmium, resulting over time in the sterilisation of the
soil. Farmers thus become dependent on feeding nutrients
into the soil from season to season and the soil becomes a
dead, inert carrier of these external nutrients rather than
a living system that is able to support plants through its
natural fertility.
- Second, synthetic fertilisers require cash. AGRA's
expectation is that increased yields will generate
sufficient cash to allow producers to buy these inputs.
Whether this is borne out in fact must be investigated, but
we know that the results are uneven in other parts of the
world where Green Revolution technologies have been adopted.
The result over time is increasing concentration of
resources and an associated widening of the wealth gap. ...
- Third, synthetic fertilisers necessitate imports because
not all raw materials are found in Africa. This approach
increases farmer dependency on external agents who have
concentrated resources and power.
A priority focus might rather be on improving organic soil
fertility practices, including supporting integrated farming
systems (livestock and cropping) to generate on-farm
resources to improve fertility. This agroecological practice
ultimately requires support and farmer-to-farmer sharing. If
external mineral inputs are required, the first step might
be to look for local ways of producing the necessary inputs,
rather than immediately building dependency on manufactured
imports. This might be done by building domestic, organic
fertiliser production units and making investments in
integrated pest and disease management systems, limiting
imported materials. This in turn may require tariff
protection, which runs counter to AGRA's philosophy of
lowering tariff barriers and opening African markets.
Pretty et al. (2006), coming from the food sovereignty
angle, have reviewed case studies of agroecological practice
in Africa that show an increase in yields compared with
previous practices. These increases are on a scale that
matches Green Revolution technologies, but with longer-term
beneficial social and ecological effects. ...
9.6 Holistic approach to agricultural production
Agricultural production might better be conceptualised in
terms of cycles instead of chains. A chain is a linear
approach where there is a complete disconnection between
input supply and outputs. In contrast, a cycle is a closed
system approach where outputs feed back into inputs.
Rhetorically speaking, AGRA recognises aspects of such
ecologically sustainable closed cycles in the form of
increasing organic content in the soil using crop residues
and legumes for nitrogen fixing. This links inputs and
outputs. But AGRA combines this with aspects of a linear,
chain mentality in the supplementary use of synthetic
fertilisers, which it recognises will continue being
imported because of a lack of raw materials in Africa. Such
a system is not a closed cycle because inputs constantly
flow from elsewhere and their negative imprints remain
behind after outputs have left the production system.
AGRA entirely fails to recognise cycles in the circulation
of seed. In AGRA's view, seed is a once-off input that must
be purchased anew each season. Its emphasis on private
ownership of new varieties via patents ignores centuries
of collective improvements of genetic resources by farmers
on the land. It also breaks the natural cycle of on-farm
saving and exchange that connects seed outputs with inputs.
Thus on the one end of the chain, seed companies provide
inputs, and on the other end agricultural products emerge
with no further connection to agricultural production.
Technology is important, but must be developed in
conjunction with secure access to natural resources, water,
production infrastructure and appropriate technical support.
This requires a "holistic supply response strategy"
(ActionAid, 2009:18). AGRA does not touch on these broader
issues of imbalances in access to natural and other
resources, preferring to treat agriculture as a stand-alone
technical system. In contrast, the connection between land
access and agricultural production is very tight in the
understanding of most independent farmer associations and
movements on the continent.
Current thinking in AGRA does seem to be shifting in the
direction of integrated cropping and livestock systems. This
is a key component of agroecological production, pointing to
mixed farming rather than specialised monocropping.
Integrated farming systems, with agroecological
techniques,increase the availability of sources for on-farm
fertiliser production (manure, cover crops, crop rotation
etc) that can result in increased yields without reliance on
synthetic fertilisers. ...The possibility of AGRA embracing
mixed cropping may produce contradictions in its own logic,
since GM based agriculture is suited for large-scale
monocropped farms.
9.7 Finance and credit
Access to finance is important for farmers to increase
production, especially if they are producing commercially.
Different types of financing are required: working capital
to cover the gap between production costs and receipt of
income; production credit for expansion; and reserves to
hedge against adverse weather and economic conditions.
However, it should be recognised that the provision of
financing can result in rapid indebtedness of farmers,
especially where not all elements of a high-output system
are in place to ensure adequate income to pay off debts. It
is a risky strategy for most farmers to enter into debt
unless they are going to engage in sustained commercial
production with clearly identified markets, and even preexisting
contracts for their products. Despite AGRA's claims
to be targeting the poorest of Africa's farmers, a
commercial financing strategy will always only target a
small elite.
AGRA is offering financing in the form of grants, loans and
equity. Grants for production and capital expansion at least
do not tie farmers into debt. Loans are far riskier for
farmers. Loans are extractive,with financiers taking a
portion of the surplus for themselves. Africa's experience
with World Bank loans and subsequent structural adjustment,
and continuing repayment of loans more than 30 years after
they were originally made should give great pause for
thought about accepting loans at the individual farmer
level. Equity does provide an injection of capital but at
the cost of loss of ownership to external agents. ...
10. Conclusion
AGRA is undoubtedly laying the groundwork for the
commercialisation of African agriculture and its selective
integration into global circuits of accumulation. Benefits
will be unevenly spread and we should expect accelerated
divergences in farmer interests. This will lead to greater
class differentiation and a deepening commodification of
African agriculture (subordinating agricultural products to
the imperatives of exchange for the realisation of surplus
value, rather than as use values in their own right).
The shadow of Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta and other seed and
agrichemical multinationals,and equity funds lie just behind
the scenes of AGRA's show. Building new markets and market
infrastructure for commercial seed in Africa opens the door
for future occupation by multinationals,as they have done
with all the major seed companies in South Africa over the
past decade and a half (Sensako, Carnia and now Pannar). The
focus on private company development (seed companies,agrodealers)
for the production and dissemination of proprietary
(and even public sector) seed is a precursor to potential
acquisition at a later stage. Dupont-Pioneer has been in a
decades-long relationship with Pannar to the benefit of
both, until Dupont decided it was strategically the right
time to take over. Small enterprises are a breeding ground
for the potential extension of circuits of accumulation.
Capitalism is known for ongoing absorption of 'organically'
developed innovation,initiative and profitability by larger
entities. AGRA and other capitalist interests have
identified a profitable ('bankable') investment opportunity
in smallholder agriculture in Africa, linked to Green
Revolution technologies. They are now acting on that.
Food and seed sovereignty movements and small-scale farmer
associations need not, however, be passive bystanders or
recipients of the results of these strategies. There is room
to contest and even engage, and in doing so to strengthen
their own principles and clarity of purpose; possibly to
look beyond a profit-driven, competitive economic system
towards an economic and social system based on co-operation
and mutuality.
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic
publication providing reposted commentary and analysis on
African issues, with a particular focus on U.S. and
international policies. AfricaFocus Bulletin is edited by
William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org.
Please write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to
the bulletin, or to suggest material for inclusion. For more
information about reposted material, please contact directly
the original source mentioned. For a full archive and other
resources, see http://www.africafocus.org
|
