Fall Armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (Smith)

5367922

The fall armyworm can colonize over 80 different plant species including many grasses, and crops such as alfalfa, soybean, sorghum, and corn.  Fall armyworm is more likely to be an economic pest in corn and vegetable crops. Fall armyworms are similar in size and shape to other moths in the cutworm family.  They are grayish in color with a wingspan of about 1.5 inches.
Upon arrival to a new field, the female moth deposits egg masses on green plants including important crop hosts.  The eggs hatch about five to seven days after oviposition and the small larvae then begin to feed on plants near the ground or in protected areas such as the whorl of corn plants.  They usually go unnoticed until they are approximately an inch long.  The larva goes through six instars (about 15 to 18 days) before burrowing one to three inches into the soil to pupate.  Adults emerge about one to five weeks after pupation depending on soil temperature.

Adult stage: Adult moths are 20 to 25mm long with a wingspan of 30 to 40mm. Forewings are shaded grey to brown, often mottled with a conspicuous white spot on the extreme tip. Hindwings are silvery white with a narrow dark border. Adults are nocturnal and most active during warm, humid evenings. Females lay eggs in clusters of fifty to a few hundred and can lay up to 2000 eggs in a lifetime. The average adult lifespan is estimated to be 10 days.

Egg stage: Eggs are white, pinkish or light green in color and spherical in shape. Clusters of eggs are frequently covered in moth scales or bristles giving a fuzzy appearance. Eggs are usually laid on the underside of leaves.

Larval stage: Larvae generally emerge simultaneously 3 to 5 days following oviposition and migrate to the whorl. Mortality rate following emergence is extremely high due to climatic factors, predators, and parasites. There are six larval instar stages. In the 2nd and 3rd instar stages larvae are often cannibalistic, resulting in only one larva in the whorl. Mature larvae are 30 to 40mm in length and vary in color from light tan to green to black. Larvae are characterized by several subdorsal and lateral stripes running along the body. Dark, elevated spots (tubercles) bearing spines occur dorsally along the body. Larvae of fall armyworm can be distinguished from larvae of armyworm and corn ear worm by a distinct white inverted Y-shaped mark on the front of the head. They have four large spots on the upper surface of the last segment. Larvae mature in 14 to 21 days after which they drop to the ground to pupate.

Pupal stage: Pupation occurs a few centimeters (2 to 8cm) below the soil surface. Cocoons are generally oval and 20 to 30mm in length. Pupae are reddish brown and measure 13 to 17mm in length. Pupation usually takes 9 to 13 days, following which adults emerge.

  • In optimum conditions the entire lifecycle can be completed in 30 days. Maize crops can normally support two generations.
  • Optimum temperature for larval development is 28۫ C, although the egg stage and pupal stage require slightly lower temperatures.
  • Protracted periods of extreme cold will result in death of most growth stages. The fall armyworm has no diapause mechanism and therefore is only able to overwinter in mild climates and recolonize in cooler climates in the summeConfirmation

Host range

The fall armyworm has a wide range of hosts including maize, rice, sorghum, sugarcane, cotton, alfalfa, peanuts, tobacco, and soybean, in addition to various wild grasses. However, gramineous plants are preferred.

  • Mechanism of damage:Damage is caused by loss of photosynthetic area due to foliar feeding, structural damage due to feeding in the whorl, lodging due to cut stems, and direct damage to grains due to larvae feeding.
  • When damage is important:Severe infestations are uncommon and most plants recover from partial foliar feeding. Under severe infestation complete defoliation of the maize plant is possible. Damage is most severe when worms cause direct damage to the ear. Under severe infestation larvae are frequently observed migrating in large numbers to new fields similar to the true armyworm. Late planted maize and advanced growth stages are more vulnerable to fall armyworm damage.
  • Economic damage:Under severe infestation yield loss ranging from 25 to 50% has been documented.

Monitoring

  • Regularly monitor leaves and whorls for presence of larvae and signs of crop damage.
  • Look for masses of larvae migrating between fields.
  • Pheromone traps can be used to determine incidence of adult moths and disrupt mating during the whorl stages.

Cultural control

  • Plant early to avoid periods of heavy infestation later in the season.
  • Plant early maturing varieties.
  • Rotate maize with a non-host.
  • Reduced tillage methods often result in an increase of natural predators and parasitoids. However, in areas where fall armyworm infestation is high, disking or plowing can effectively reduce the survival rate of pupae in the soil.

Biological control

  • Numerous parasitic wasps, natural predators, and pathogens help to control the population of fall armyworms.
  • The egg parasitoidTelenomus remus is frequently introduced to effectively control fall armyworm and other Spodoptera 

Insecticides

  • Insecticide application should be considered when eggs are present on 5% of seedlings or when 25% of plants show signs of feeding damage. In order to be effective, insecticide application should commence before larvae burrow into the whorls or ears and insecticide spray should penetrate the crop canopy.
  • Insecticides recommended for control ofSpodoptera species include various pyrethroids, carbamates and organophosphates. However, insecticide resistance has been widely reported.

Role of Social Media for Good Governance and Democracy: Literature Review and Personal Observation in Horn of Africa

Social media refers to web-based platforms that allow users to create, share, rate and search for content and information.  These tools become ‘social’ in the sense that they are created in ways that enable users to share and communicate with one another. This includes mixture of web-based technologies and services blogs, micro-blogs, social sharing platforms and social networking services.

This blog part would like to review the role of social media platforms in nation building in the horn of Africa and to a wider region at large. Recognizing the power of this Medias compared with the conventional Medias for public participations in good governance and democratic systems as well as giving attentions to threats related to the technologies including commonly observed provoking and racial remarks/ comments. And to bring attentions to all stakeholders look forward how virtual community at grass root level and social-media giants shall collaborate towards making social media more people centered, developmental, a media for the voiceless and in an effort to build proactive democratic systems while at the same time making sure  the , zero abusive foot-print by embarrassing all basic human rights.

Trends of Internet Penetration in the Region

The applications and effects of social media have ever grown with the expansion of ICT and youth preference to engage actively in politics of respective nations in the horn of Africa and to the regions at large. Facebook, one of the biggest social networks was created in 2004, the biggest video sharing website Youtube did not exist before 2005 and the most popular micro blogging site like Twitter only traces back to 2006. Following this, it has been widely used by public officials, political parties and activist to interact with this ever growing virtual community, which was not a common one decade ago. As we can see from the figure below the trends of internet penetration in the region have been grown since its introduction, this by far shows there is an ever growing population of the virtual community in the region that could be a played a great role to shared commitment towards building a democratic systems and good governance in this fragile region.

Year Kenya Sudan Uganda South Sudan Djibouti Ethiopia Eritrea Egypt* South Africa *
2016 45% 26% 19% 17% 12% 4% 1% 33% 52%
2015 45% 26% 19% 17% 11% 4% 1% 33% 51%
2014 43% 25% 18% 16% 11% 3% 1% 32% 49%
2013 39% 23% 16% 14% 10% 2% 1% 29% 47%
2012 32% 21% 15% 12% 8% 2% 1% 26% 41%
2011 28% 17% 13% 9% 7% 1% 1% 26% 34%
2010 14% 17% 13% 7% 7% 1% 1% 22% 24%
2009 10% 14% 10% 5% 4% 1% 1% 20% 10%
2008 9% 11% 8% 3% 2% 1% 1% 18% 8%
2007 8.0% 8.7% 3.7% 2.0% 1.6% 0.4% 0.4% 16.0% 8.1%
2006 7.5% 5.0% 2.5% 1.8% 1.3% 0.3% 0.4% 13.7% 7.6%
2005 3.1% 1.3% 1.7% 1.4% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% 12.8% 7.5%
2004 3.0% 0.8% 0.7% 1.3% 0.8% 0.2% 0.3% 11.9% 8.4%
2003 2.9% 0.5% 0.5% 1.0% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 4.0% 7.0%
2002 1.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.8% 0.5% 0.1% 0.2% 2.7% 6.7%
2001 0.6% 0.1% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.0% 0.2% 0.8% 6.3%
2000 0.3% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.6% 5.3%
Population

 2016

in million

47.25 41.18 40.32 12.73 0.90 101.85 5.35 93.38 54.98

* Egypt and South Africa used as a comparison, since the two African nations have high internet penetrations rate and study shows that more than 90% of peoples who have internet access have used social medias.

The data for the above figure are collected from http://www.internetlivestats.com/internetusers

The term “Horn of Africa” is not only a geographical expression but it is rather a geopolitical concept. The Horn of Africa proper consists of Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia, the Sudan and South Sudan. Stretchily, it also encompasses Kenya and Uganda. Some are convinced that the nations of the Horn of Africa are endowed with a dynamic, youthful and entrepreneurial population and an abundance of natural resources. Yet, for too many years, peoples of this region have been suffering from hunger, conflicts, poverty and growing inequalities and instabilities. The twin problems of poverty and conflict have various and complex causes. sine from history so far scholars put it as most of the wars / conflict in the Horn of Africa during the past decades have been described in terms of ethnic conflict, both by the adversaries themselves and by external analysts. Sudan civil wars have been characterized as ethnic conflicts with cleavages along religious, racial, cultural, and linguistic lines. The various civil wars in Ethiopia, Somali conflicts and Djibouti have also linked to ethnic conflict.

Good governance

The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) defines governance as “the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises the mechanisms, processes, and institutions, through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences”. One of the fundamental principles of good governance is transparency, which ensures that the decision-making and the subsequently due process monitoring and implementation of this information is freely available and directly accessible by all stakeholders.

The United Nations Development Program views corruption as “the misuse of public power, office or authority for private benefit – through bribery, extortion, influence peddling, nepotism, fraud, speed money or embezzlement”. Corruption does not necessarily appear only in monetary terms. When an official fails to deliver the services that were paid by the government, this may be defined as “quiet corruption”. Quiet corruption thus may include deviations that can be potentially observable, such as being absent from work, but also deviations that are hard to observe, for example to bend rules for personal benefits, or to deviate from the expected conduct

Political Participation

Historically, citizen’s participation in the political processes has been considered a fundamental element of an ideal democracy. Thus, participation represents a significant component in political communication and democratic institution.  Recent reports indicate decreasing youth participation in political activities such as low turnout at elections.

two decades ago, there has been serious academic concern about the low political participation among youth in many parts of developed and developing nations, thus, some scholars have identified this as a threat to good governance particularly in developing nations. Before the coming of social media, space in newspaper and airtime on radio and television were limited and expensive; thus youth, specifically cannot express their opinion nor participate in politics through the old media.  Online social networking sites such as Facebook have brought new hopes and opportunities by connecting youth with politicians and common interest groups to share information and opinions.

Studies have suggested that youth are now using Facebook to seek for political information, mobilize common interest groups, create user-generated content and share political views. Facebook provides a great opportunity to politicians to reach out to their constituents and voters. The technology also link and facilitates interaction between community and elected political representatives by providing a public online ‘Wall’ a space where community members can easily write comments in favor or against their political leaders.

More youth are showcasing stronger reliance on it as their online platform for securing political information they need to make an informed political decision. Hence, targeting and tailoring political messages online to the youth through Facebook and what motivate youth to develop an interest in politics should be an important factor in future campaign strategies for Political parties in their day to day activities as well as during election seasons.

Social media vis-à-vis Good governance and Democracy

Researchers argue that social media has a great potential to increase government outreach, enhance problem solving capacities and improve decision-making processes. Citizens´ demand for a transparent government is fermenting a new age of opportunities through social media, web-enabled technologies, mobile technologies and E-Government. With the emergence of Web 2.0 technologies and new media citizens became able to be journalists themselves avoiding unnecessary mediation of traditional media. As scholars put it: ‘The powerful have been spying on their subjects since the beginning of history, but the subjects can now watch the powerful, at least to a greater extent than in the past’. We have all become potential citizen journalists who, if equipped with a mobile phone, can record and instantly upload to the global networks any wrongdoing by anyone, anywhere.

Freed from the necessities of professional media and journalist skills or the centralized control and distribution of industrial mass media organizations, social media is instead seen to be technologically, financially and accessible to youths. Equipped with social media, the citizens no longer have to be passive consumers of political party propaganda, government spin or mass media news, but are instead actually enabled to challenge discourses, share alternative perspectives and publish their own opinions. In this age of widespread communication and political consciousness, people expect political participation and accountability much more than they did in the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. social media allows citizens not only to influence public debate, public opinion and public policy, but, on a more direct level, also to get the chance to tackle matters of consequences, for example to address deficiencies in infrastructure projects, improve project planning and uncover cases of corruption.

Social media can be empowering to its users as it gives them a platform to speak. It allows anyone with access to the Internet the ability to inexpensively publish or broadcast information, effectively democratizing media. In terms of time, Social media technologies allow users to immediately publish information in near-real time. There is a growing prospects that shows social media must be used by Parliaments, Parliamentarians, governments and political parties as they are highly effective tools to involve and inform citizens in public policymaking and in the formation of governments.

The rapidly advancing world of information technology affects all spheres of life but none more so than politics and the replacement of authoritarian governance with democratic governance. Easy access to information from around the world promotes liberty, competition and choice.  It can also be used to advance respect for the rule of law and human rights and other indices of good governance such as equality and free and credible elections.  Use of the new social media enables group thinking to promote concepts such as the independence of the judiciary, the development of civil society, multiparty systems and democratic institutions which are participatory, transparent and accountable. Such media empower and unite people.  Political leaders can rise social and political issues and shape public opinion, and the media can give a voice to those who previously did not have one. It will also provide members of parliaments with the information they need to hold their representatives accountable in a more transparent system of governance. While the public can use the social media to influence political debate, he said they can also be used by political parties to mobilize voters.  More generally, the social media can also be used to enable faster responses to crises.

The way forward

In general, there is a strong assumption in the literature that social media have a tremendous power to improve transparency, accountability, good governance and democratic system coupled with my observation in the ground. But the ever growing threat that hinders for harvesting the advantage of social media in different parts of the region needs great attentions and further research and strategies shall be raised from the virtual communities for avoiding polarized and extremist contents generated ideas perpetuate among us.

The research questions for further study should include what is the motivation behind posting and commenting so provokingly and in a polarized way, how the majority of the virtual community who have worked for the common goals in politics usually to bring democratic systems and good governance by using social media  shall not be influenced / diverted by this incite posts from fake identities and how institutions responsible for these platforms ( like Facebook) shall came with better options / solutions for users in reporting towards intruders posting inappropriate contents.

If everyone can make little research in this concerns Content generated by Polarized and incite contents usually done with posts came from fake profile usually including but not limited to names of celebrities and public officials. The appearances for fake profiles are lack of regular posts in their own timeline and with rare number of friends in their own circle but surprisingly they are actively comments on posts came from anyone in the virtual space.

whatever the importance of the post to bring the issues for discussions for developing good governance and democratic systems; the comments from these intruders (the one with the fake ID) came up with provocative, insane and with a very nature of sensitive like racism / ethnic/ religious based insulation  remarks that have usually controlling enough to hijacked/diverted the main posts/discussion as well as it has leads most of the users in that space busy with making angry response to this comments.

Even if the virtual communities have aware of the importance of social media in building democratic systems and good governance that would take part  a role/ bring a light for multi-party systems, inclusive development, self-determination / identify, transparency, corruption, systematic exclusion and other issues that came to be important for the prospects of each nations and toward this region ; if we are not systematically approaches and give attentions to intruders came with   ethnic and religious polarizations and extremism that usually done for the purpose of dismantling / diverting the virtual community in the social medias would have its own threats and consequences for fuelling the online drama towards the offline conflicts.

In response to this calamities social media companies and researchers in the region need to initiate to work with social media users at grass root to come up with user friendly reporting systems for inappropriate content includes contents with local language so that the platforms would maintain/remain for the advantage of the peoples at large for interaction, building of democratic systems and good governance.

Climate change in Agriculture: embark upon the cause and effect for food security and solution to revert the warming world through Adaptation-Mitigation options

Agriculture as a cause of Climate change

According to intergovernmental panel on climate change, Agriculture is one of the world’s largest industries; agricultural land alone covers 40-50% of the world’s land surface. The sector accounts for roughly 14% of global greenhouse gas per year that makes agriculture is a major contributor to climate change (IPCC 2007).

According to the Stern Review, in 2000, about 35% of greenhouse gas emissions came from non-energy emissions: 14% were nitrous oxide and methane from agriculture. Total global greenhouse gas contribution of agriculture from both direct and indirect sources reached up to 32%; the most prominent sources includes: land conversion to agriculture, nitrous oxide released from soils, methane from cattle and enteric fermentation (flatulence-produced methane emissions), biomass burning, rice production, manure, fertilizer production, irrigation, farm machinery and pesticide production. About 74% of total agricultural related greenhouse gas emissions originate in developing countries.

Livestock sector expansion also contributed to overgrazing, land degradation, and an important driver of deforestation in addition to its methane and nitrous oxide emissions from ruminant digestion and manure management, and is the largest global source of methane emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions footprint of livestock sector varies considerably among production systems, regions, and commodities, mainly due to variations in the quality of feed, the feed conversion efficiencies of different animal species and impacts on deforestation and land degradation. Besides the livestock production, the waterlogged and warm soils of rice paddies make rice production system a large emitter of methane from agriculture.

Effect of climate change in agriculture

The cumulative impact of climate will have economic consequences and potentially large implications for the wellbeing and sustainable development of rural populations.  Fundamental to this are a wide range of cross-sectorial impacts affecting health, water and energy resources, ecosystems, and land use. The impacts of climate change to agriculture over the next 50 to 100 years may include:

  • Changing spatial and inter-temporal variability in stream flows, onset of rain days, and dry spells (Strzepek and McCluskey, 2006 ),
  • More frequent floods and droughts, with greater erosion rates from more intense rainfall events and flooding (Agoumi, 2003),
  • Increased crop water requirements from higher temperatures, reduced precipitation and increased evaporation, with likely more negative impacts on dryland than irrigated agricultural systems (Dinar et al., 2009),
  • Positive and negative production and net yield changes for key crops including maize, wheat, and rice, among others, over different time periods, resulting in changes in crop and management choices (e.g. irrigation, crop type) (Kurukulasuriya and Mendelsohn, 2006 ),
  • Potentially lengthened growing seasons and production benefits to irrigated and dryland systems under mild climate scenarios (Thornton et al., 2006 ),
  • Increased heat and water stress on livestock, with possible shifts from agriculture towards livestock management (i.e. stock increases) under increased temperatures with a different mix of more heat resistant species than today and possible benefits to small farms (Seo and Mendelsohn, 2006 ; Dinar et al., 2009).
  • Higher temperatures in arid and semi-arid regions will likely depress crop yields and shorten the growing season due to longer periods of excessive heat.

Climate change will not equally affect all countries and regions, even if Africa represents only 3.6% of emissions, the (IPPC, 2007) report highlighted that Africa will be one of the continents that will be hard hit by the impact of climate change due to an increased temperature and water scarcity. The report pointed out that there is “very high confidence” that agricultural production and food security in many African countries will be severely affect by climate change and climate variability.

Climate change will likely have the biggest impact in equatorial regions such as sub-Saharan Africa. This means that countries already struggling with food security are likely to find they struggle still harder in the future. World Bank (2009) study that focuses on developing countries estimates that without offsetting innovations, climate change will ultimately cause a decrease in annual GDP of 4% in Africa. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) warns that an increase in average global temperatures of just two to four degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels could reduce crop yields by 15-35 percent in Africa and western Asia, and by 25-35 percent in the Middle East. While an increase of two degrees alone could potentially cause the extinction of millions of domestic and wild species that have a biodiversity and food security potentials.

Adaptation of Agriculture from climate change

The vulnerability of a system depends on its exposure and sensitivity to climate changes, and on its ability to manage these changes (IPCC, 2001). Three intuitive approaches appear to have informed the prioritization of adaptation programs of actions and strategies to climate change, namely: a) social vulnerability approach (addressing underlying social vulnerability); b) resilience approach (managing for enhanced ecosystem resilience); and c) targeted adaptation approach (targeting adaptation actions to specific climate change risks).

Climate change adaptation enhanced by altering exposure, reducing sensitivity of the system to climate change impacts and increasing the adaptive capacity of the system while simultaneously explicitly recognizing sector specific consequences. With this respect, adaptation in the agricultural sector seen in terms of both short-term and long-term actions. The provision of crop and livestock insurance, social safety nets, new irrigation schemes and local management strategies, as well as research and development of stress resistant crop varieties form the core of short-term responses. Long-term responses include re-designing irrigation systems, developing land management systems and raising finances to sustain adoption of those systems.

Safety nets are likely to become increasingly important in the context of climate change as increased incidence of widely covariate risks will require the coverage and financing that these sources may provide. Some of the options for adapting agriculture to climate change have related cost for Agricultural research, Irrigation efficiency, Irrigation expansion and development of Roads.

Improving the use of climate science data for agricultural planning can reduce the uncertainties generated by climate change, improve early warning systems for drought, flood, pest and disease incidence and thus increase the capacity of farmers and agricultural planners to allocate resources effectively and reduce risks. Better use of assessing risks and vulnerability and then developing the safety nets and insurance products as an effective response is already being piloted in some areas with fairly positive results (Barrett et al. 2007).

Mitigation of Agriculture for climate change

Climate change mitigation refers to an anthropogenic intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases (FAO, 2011d). In other words, mitigation means taking action to reduce the causes of climate change by limiting the amount of heat trapping gases that emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere. Agriculture could increasing carbon sinks, as well as reducing emissions per unit of agricultural product. The agricultural sector: high mitigation potential with strong adaptation and sustainable development co-benefits.

Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture sector includes reduction of emissions, avoided the emissions and creating sinks that can remove emissions. Lower rates of agricultural expansion in natural habitats, agro-forestry, treating of degraded lands, reduction or using more efficient use of nitrogenous inputs, better management of manure, and use of feed that increases livestock digestive efficiency are some of the major mitigation options in agriculture.

soil carbon sequestration have nearly 90% of agriculture’s climate change mitigation potential could be realized, if carbon markets could introduce to “ provide strong incentives for public and private carbon funds in developed countries to buy agriculture-related emission reductions from developing countries. Soil carbon sequestration by improved land use and management can increase and maintain greater soil Carbon stocks (i.e., sequester C) include a variety of practices that either increase the amount of C added to soils (as plant residues and manure) and/or reduce the relative rate of CO2 released through soil respiration. Soil carbon sequestration practices include: 1) improved grazing land management, 2) improved crop rotations, 3) improved fallows, 4) residue management, 5) reduced tillage, 6) organic matter amendments, 7) restoration of degraded lands, 8) rewetting of cultivated organic soils and (9 Agroforestry. More over using improved nutrient management could increase the plant uptake efficiency of applied nitrogen, reduce N2O emissions, while contributing to soil C sequestration. Agroforestry systems tend to sequester much greater quantities of carbon than agricultural systems without trees. Planting trees in agricultural lands is relatively efficient and cost effective compared to other mitigation strategies, and provides a range of co-benefits important for improved farm family livelihoods and climate change adaptation.

Livestock improvements brought about by more research on ruminant animals, storage and capture technologies for manure and conversion of emissions into biogas are additional contributions that agriculture can make towards mitigating climate change. The anaerobic digestion of manure stored as a liquid or slurry can lower methane emissions and produce useful energy, while the composting solid manures can lower emissions and produce useful organic amendments for soils. To reach the full potential of agriculture in climate change mitigation, transformations are needed in both commercial and subsistence agricultural systems, but with significant differences in priorities and capacity.

In commercial systems, increasing efficiency and reducing emissions, as well as other negative environmental impacts, benefits by increasing carbon sinks, as well as reducing emissions per unit of agricultural product. The sustainable intensification of production, especially in developing countries, can ensure food security and contribute to mitigating climate change by reducing deforestation and the encroachment of agriculture into natural ecosystems. Mitigation of climate change through agriculture is an environmental service that smallholders can provide and is often synergistic with improvements to agricultural productivity and stability.

Climate smart agriculture as a way forward

Climate-smart agriculture is a practice that sustainably increases productivity, resilience (adaptation), reduces/removes GHGs (mitigation), and enhances achievement of national food security and development goals. Efficiency, resilience, adaptive capacity and mitigation potential of the production systems can be enhanced through improving its various components. The future of agricultural production relies on both designing new ways to adapt to the likely consequences of climate change, as well as changing agricultural practices to mitigate the cli-mate damage that current practices cause, all without undermining food security, rural development and livelihoods.

Major transformation of the agriculture sector will be necessary and this will require institutional and policy support. Better-aligned policy approaches across agricultural, environmental and financial boundaries and innovative institutional arrangements to promote their implementation is crucial. Enabling policy environment to promote climate-smart smallholder agricultural transformations is greater coherence, coordination and integration between climate change, agricultural development and food security policy processes.

In farm decision-making and practices, the adaptation and mitigation measures are often the same agricultural practices that also benefit farmers by increasing productivity and resilience. However, there may be important trade-offs too. In these situations, where climate-smart practices entail costs for the farmers and these changes are deemed to bring substantial benefits to the society, the farmers facing extra costs should be compensated through different payment mechanisms, rewarding these farmers for the environmental service they provide. With this prospect climate change creates new financing requirements both in terms of amounts and financial flows associated with needed investments, which will require innovative institutional solutions. In synthesizing potential synergies between adaptation and mitigation in smallholder agricultural transitions.

Leaders Commit Billions in Major New Development Initiative for the Horn of Africa

UN Secretary-General, WBG and IsDBG Presidents, and other Agency Heads Visit Region to Link Peace Efforts with Economic Progress

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, October 27, 2014—Leaders of global and regional institutions today begin an historic trip to the Horn of Africa to pledge political support and major new financial assistance for countries in the region, totaling more than $8 billion over the coming years. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the World Bank Group (WBG) President, Jim Yong Kim, as well as the President of the Islamic Development Bank Group and high level representatives of the African Union Commission, the European Union, the African Development Bank, and Intergovernmental Agency for Development (IGAD) are combining forces to promote stability and development in the Horn of Africa.

On the first day of the joint trip, the World Bank Group announced a major new financial pledge of $1.8 billion for cross-border activities in a Horn of Africa Initiative that will boost economic growth and opportunity, reduce poverty, and spur business activity.

The initiative covers the eight countries in the Horn of Africa — Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda.

“This new financing represents a major new opportunity for the people of the Horn of Africa to make sure they get access to clean water, nutritious food, health care, education, and jobs,”said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim. “There is greater opportunity now for the Horn of Africa to break free from its cycles of drought, food insecurity, water insecurity, and conflict by building up regional security, generating a peace dividend, especially among young women and men, and spurring more cross-border cooperation.”

Leading the trip to the Horn of Africa, the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon said “The countries of the Horn of Africa are making important yet unheralded progress in economic growth and political stability. Now is a crucial moment to support those efforts, end the cycles of conflict and poverty, and move from fragility to sustainability. The United Nations is joining with other global and regional leaders to ensure a coherent and coordinated approach towards peace, security and development in the Horn of Africa.” 

The European Union also announced that it would support the countries in the region with a total of around $3.7 billion until 2020, of which about 10 percent would be for cross-border activities; the African Development Bank announced a pledge of $1.8 billion over the next three years for countries of the Horn of Africa region; while the Islamic Development Bank committed to deploy up to $1 billion in new financing in its four member countries in the Horn of Africa (Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda).

The Horn is diverse, with some of the fastest growing economies and huge untapped natural resources. However, it also has many extraordinarily poor people and populations that are now doubling every 23 years. Unemployment is widespread among growing numbers of young people. Women, in particular, face huge obstacles because of their gender, including limited land rights, limited education, and social customs that often thwart their ability to pursue economic opportunity, and improve living conditions for their families and communities.

Countries in the region are also vulnerable to corruption, piracy, arms and drug trafficking. Terrorism, and related money flows are significant and interconnected threats in the Horn of Africa. People-trafficking is also a growing problem in the region. However, there are commendable efforts being made through regional cooperation in parts of the Horn to tackle the root causes of these problems.

The new financing announcement will support those efforts and comes on the first day of the trip led by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, to discuss peace, security, and resilience. In addition to the UN Secretary-General, other leaders making the trip are World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim; Islamic Development Bank Group President Ahmad Mohamed Ali; African Union Commission Deputy Chairperson Erastus Mwencha; Intergovernmental Agency for Development (IGAD) Executive Secretary, Ambassador Mahboub Maalim; African Development Bank Group Special Advisor to the President, Youssouf Ouedraogo; DeputyDirector General for Development and Cooperation, European Commission, Marcus Cornaro and European Union Special Representative for the Horn of Africa, Alexander Rondos.

The World Bank Group said its new $1.8 billion packaging, which is in addition to its existing development programs for the eight countries, would create more economic opportunity throughout the region for some of the most vulnerable peoples, including refugees and internally displaced populations and their host communities. Wars and instability have generated more than 2.7 million refugees along with over 6 million internally displaced people. The Bank Group will also help the region build up its communicable disease surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment capacity.

Many of these diseases are associated with or exacerbated by poverty, displacement, malnutrition, illiteracy, and poor sanitation and housing. Increased cross-border trade and economic activity in the Horn of Africa will necessitate simultaneous investments in strengthening disease control efforts and outbreak preparedness.

The Bank Group will also support greater regional links between countries with regional transport routes, stronger ICT and broadband connectivity, more competitive private sector markets, increased cross-border trade, regional development of oil and gas through pipeline development, and the expansion of university and other tertiary education.

The Bank Group’s pledge includes $600 million from the IFC, its private sector arm, which will support economic development in the countries of the Horn. IFC investments under the new Horn Initiative will include a regional pipeline linking Uganda and Kenya; greater investment in agribusiness expansion in storage, processing, and seeds; possible public-private partnerships in pharmaceuticals, renewable energy and transport; and financial advice and support to government and companies to improve business confidence and investment, access to markets, and access to private finance. Another $200 million is for guarantees against political risks from the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency.

A new World Bank Group paper forecasts that the Horn will undergo dramatic and lasting change when oil production starts in Kenya, Uganda, and possibly Somalia and Ethiopia.

For its part, the European Union’s Horn of Africa approach is based on a strategic framework adopted in 2011. Support programs for 2014-2020 will be guided by the same analysis that underpins the World Bank’s Horn of Africa Initiative and will focus on the development challenges that must be tackled to unlock the region’s considerable potential. EU support will mostly target the three pillars of the Horn of Africa Initiative: boosting growth, reducing poverty by promoting resilience, and creating economic opportunities.

“The EU stands ready to further deepen its long-standing partnership with the Horn of Africa – helping to build robust and accountable political structures, enhancing trade and economic cooperation, financing peace keeping activities and providing humanitarian assistance and development cooperation,” said European Development Commissioner Andris Piebalgsprior to the trip.

Other leaders on the trip said that the Horn of Africa region needs new development assistance in order to secure peace and opportunity to thrive and prevent future conflicts.

The Islamic Development Bank Group said its new financing for Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda over 2015-2017 would focus on critical infrastructure development, food security, human development, and trade. A further $2 billion could be provided by the Arab Coordination Group over the same period.

Commenting on this announcement, Islamic Development Bank Group President Ahmad Mohamed Ali said “The Horn of Africa is an important gateway to Africa and a bridge to Western Asia. Bringing stability and sustainable development to the Horn of Africa will undoubtedly significantly contribute to stability across the entire African continent. The Islamic Development Bank Group salutes this renewed focus on the Horn of Africa and stands ready to work with all partners, including the Arab Coordination Group, to support regional cooperation and the economic revival of the Horn of Africa, especially in its four member countries.”

Given the complexity of the environment prevailing in the region, we must convince ourselves that it is not the financial means that will win in the Horn of Africa region, but our commitment and determination to act under the leadership of the countries in a united and coordinated manner, said African Development Bank Group Representative, Youssouf Ouedraogo, Special Advisor to the President.

African Union Commission Deputy Chairperson, Erastus Mwencha, added, “Our efforts to create peace and stability must be reinforced by investments in the peoples and countries of the Horn.”

A new WBG regional study on the Horn of Africa released today at the start of the trip found reasons for hope for the region: “Despite the challenges the Horn of Africa faces, there are encouraging signs of political momentum for enhanced regional economic interdependence. Increasingly, Horn of Africa countries are members of the East African Community, IGAD in Eastern Africa, and the Common Market for East and Southern Africa. Some countries are showing strong political will to solve both security and development issues through increased cooperation—for example, many have sent troops to participate in peace-keeping efforts and have participated in diplomatic initiatives.”

“This mission is the apex of an ambitious partnership approach that will provide the necessary instruments to strengthen the resilience agenda in the IGAD region,” said IGADExecutive Secretary, Ambassador Mahboub Maalim.

For the UN’s Ban and World Bank’s Kim, this is their third trip in 18 months together to Africa. In 2013, the two travelled to the Great Lakes and Sahel regions, drawing attention to the need to promote both peace and development. During the two previous trips, Kim pledged $2.7 billion for regional projects for programs to improve health, education, nutrition, access to energy, and job training. To see the results of these previous peace and development regional initiatives, visit: http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/afr/brief/world-bank-group-sahel-and-great-lakes-initiatives

To see the new WBG regional paper on the Horn of Africa, please visit: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/10/20316926/

Reblog from 

3-D Printer for Small Holder African Farmers and Agricultural Development  

A Program for labour saving agricultural technologies for smallholder women farmers

 The overall goal of the farmer participatory 3D4AgDev Program is to link the potential of User-Led Innovation with Rapid Prototyping (via 3D printing) to enable women smallholder farmers in Africa to design and develop their own labour-saving agricultural tools, tailor-made for their culture, soils and cropping systems. The 3D4AgDev Program has been kickstarted by a Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) Grand Challenges Exploration (GCE) Phase I grant to the Plant & AgriBiosciences Research Centre (PABC) in the National University of Ireland Galway.

The 3D4AgDev Program is a research partnership program between the NUI Galway PABC and Concern Worldwide which aims to operate as an open-innovation research platform to harness advances in rapid prototyping so that improved labour-saving technologies can be more effectively developed for and by women smallholder farmers.

 

The need for labour-saving agricultural technologies for smallholder women farmers

The overall goal of the farmer participatory 3D4AgDev Program is to link the potential of User-Led Innovation with Rapid Prototyping (via 3D printing) to enable women smallholder farmers in Africa to design and develop their own labour-saving agricultural tools, tailor-made for their culture, soils and cropping systems. The 3D4AgDev Program has been kickstarted by a Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) Grand Challenges Exploration (GCE) Phase I grant to the Plant & AgriBiosciences Research Centre (PABC) in the National University of Ireland Galway. The 3D4AgDev Program is a research partnership program between the NUI Galway PABC and Concern Worldwide.

Over 1000 million smallholder farmers (predominantly women) are farming using labour intensive agricultural hand tools. Such agricultural tools include tools for tasks such as weeding, planting, harvesting and crop/food processing. Smallholder agricultural systems remain largely dependent on human labour, having minimal access to alternative energy sources for cultivation and agri-processing such as draught animals or fossil-fuel powered mechanization.

Routes out of poverty for smallholder rural communities will require a swathe of innovations that improve the labour productivity of their agricultural systems. Smallholder farmers living on less than a dollar a day face this challenge in an era when energy demand and energy costs are increasing to their disadvantage. The innovation challenge is how to enable smallholders to generate more income and agricultural produce while reducing the labour burden on women and rural children so that their livelihoods can improve.

Harnessing user-led innovation of women smallholder farmers

User-led innovation refers to incorporating the opinions, knowledge, and circumstances of end users into the designs of products that those people will be using. Sounds like common sense, but traditional manufacturing often has difficulty applying special customizations since it focuses on mass production to keep cost effective. The plan is to start in Tanzania; women farmers will be involved in the design of the tools they need and prototypes will be printed. A very few tools could be functional in plastic format, like small shovels and germination equipment. Most of farming is a bit more intensive though, so the prototypes will be taken to local blacksmiths to copy, likely with casting.

User-led innovation is increasingly used to develop consumer products  (toys, sports equipment, etc.) and rapid prototyping using 3D printers is now widely used by industrial designers.By linking user-led innovation approaches with rapid 3D prototyping the design process for agricultural tools can be turned upside down. Women smallholder farmers lacking formal education can design agricultural hand tools and household food processing equipment to meet their own needs. Local tool manufacturers (artisans, blacksmiths) can copy plastic prototypes and develop their own modifications to ensure that agricultural tools are suited to both smallholder farmer needs and purchasing power.

Facilitating rural enterprise & labour-saving impacts through 3D printing rapid-prototyping technologies

The 3D4AgDev Program aims a participatory technology development program with women smallholders farmers so that the farmers can develop their own agricultural tool and labour-saving innovations. Labour saving tools for women smallholders can have major impacts, including leading to higher yields, higher incomes, more time for other activities, and reductions in harmful child labour in rural areas. Through linking the women smallholder farmer groups to rapid-prototyping user innovation processes, there is significant potential to improve the status of rural women through fostering an enterprise-oriented “maker culture” for agri-tool innovations.

Source 

 

African Initiatives and Policy Framework for the Right to Food and Food Security: Paper review

The right to food

The right to food is defined by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food (Lidija Knuth and Margret Vidar, 2001.)[1] As the right to have regular, permanent and unrestricted access, either directly or by means of financial purchases, to quantitatively and qualitatively adequate and sufficient food corresponding to the cultural traditions of the people to which the consumer belongs, and which ensures a physical and mental, individual and collective, fulfilling and dignified life free of fear.

The concept of the right to food is not new. The right to food has been formally recognized since the adoption of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Nevertheless in a time of plenty, an estimated 800 million people (Charlotte McClain-Nhlapo, 2004.)[2], primarily in developing countries, are undernourished and food insecure. More disturbingly, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) reports that the number of undernourished people in developing countries is no longer falling rather, it is climbing.

Right to adequate food confers an obligation on states to respect, protect, and fulfill that right. This means that states should not adopt measures that could ultimately prevent access to adequate food, that they should adopt measures to ensure that no individuals are deprived of their access to adequate food, and that they should proactively engage in activities to strengthen people’s access to and use of resources, including means to ensure their livelihood and food security. This last obligation can be met through policies and programs such as microcredit, incentives to the private sector to create jobs, and effective implementation of labor laws and agrarian reform that create economic opportunities for those who are vulnerable and food insecure.

Whenever an individual or group is unable, for reasons beyond their control, to obtain adequate food through the means at their disposal, states have the obligation to fulfill that right directly. Importantly, this obligation also applies to persons who are victims of natural or other disasters. In 2004, governments at the FAO adopted a set of ‘Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security’ (FAO, 2005)[3]. These guidelines aim ‘to provide practical guidance to States in their implementation of the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security, in order to achieve the goals of the Plan of Action of the World Food Summit’. Voluntary Guidelines aim to guarantee the availability of food in quantity and quality sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals; physical and economic accessibility for everyone, including vulnerable groups, to adequate food, free from unsafe substances and acceptable within a given culture; or the means of its procurement.

According to charlotte machlain-nhlapo (2004) [4], the premise of a rights-based approach to ensuring adequate food is empowering poor people and those who are food insecure. Empowerment is integral to any strategy that moves away from the benevolence model of food aid and instead emphasizes enabling environments that support people in feeding themselves. Empowerment also removes the full burden of providing food from states. Nevertheless, as previously stated, in the event that people are unable to feed themselves (because of household shocks or other circumstances), the state must accept the responsibility to assist, whether through social safety nets or other programs and policies that protect vulnerable people from hunger.

According to a currently accepted definition (Lioba Weingärtner, 2004)[5], ‘Food Security’ is achieved when it is ensured that “all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”. Food is here defined as any substance that people eat and drink to maintain life and growth. As a result, safe and clean water is an essential part of food commodities.

According to FAO (2008) from the above definiton, four main dimensions of food security can be identified:[6]

AVAILABILITY

 

Food availability addresses the supply side of food security and is determined by the level of food production, stock levels and net trade.

ACCESS

An adequate supply of food at the national or international level does not in itself guarantee household level food security. Concerns about insufficient food access have resulted in a greater

Policy focus on incomes, expenditure, markets and prices in achieving food security objectives.

UTILIZATION

Utilization is commonly understood as the way the body makes the most of various nutrients in the food. Sufficient energy and nutrient intake by individuals is the result of good care and feeding practices, food preparation, and diversity of the diet and intra-household distribution of food. Combined with good biological utilization of food consumed, this determines the nutritional status of individuals.

STABILITY

 

Even if your food intake is adequate today, you are still considered to be food insecure if you have inadequate access to food on a periodic basis, risking a deterioration of your nutritional status. Adverse weather conditions, political instability, or economic factors (unemployment, rising food prices) may have an impact on your food security status.

 

For food security objectives to be realized, all four dimensions must be fulfilled simultaneously. Here it is noteworthy to take in to consideration Food is only one of a whole range of factors which determined why the poor take decisions and spread risk, and how they finely balanced competing interests in order to subsist in the short and longer term (Maxwell and Smith, 1992)[7]. People may choose to go hungry to preserve their assets and future livelihoods. It is misleading to treat food security as a fundamental need, independent of wider livelihood considerations.

 

Thus, the evolution of the concepts and issues related to household food and nutritional security led to the development of the concept of household livelihood security. The household livelihood security model allows for a broader and more comprehensive understanding of the relationships between the political economy of poverty, malnutrition, and dynamic and complex strategies that the poor use to negotiate survival. The model places particular emphasis on household actions, perceptions and choices; food is understood to be only one of the priorities that people pursue. People are constantly being required to balance food procurement against the satisfaction of other basic material and non-material needs (Maxwell and Frankenberg 1992)[8].

African Initiatives and policy framework for the Right to food and food security

 

Considering the potential for Agriculture and Natural resources sectors for ensuring food security, the Heads of State and Government of the African Union have adopted various decisions and declarations that makes committing Member States to paying particular attention to the development of the different sub sectors of agriculture (Mme Rosebud  Kurwijila, 2007)[9].  And different initiatives were formulated to work on food security with the given framework.

For the African Union Commission, these actions have been translated into programs through different policy tools and frameworks with the Regional Economic Communities as the building blocks. Without an enabling environment and sound policies to support African regional programs, the Right to Food for most of African people will remain elusive.

Hence the African Union Commission has initiated specific programs to enable Member States to achieve the right to food.  Beside the African union as a main actor in developing initiatives and institute to address a right approach to food and food security in Africa region different intergovernmental and non-governmental initiatives are organized in Africa in the past and to date.

Numerous strategies, policies and programs intended to assist Africa’s development have been conceived and implemented by international body’s regional and national institutions.

On average, a typical developing country in Africa is assisted by about 30 aid institutions to implement these strategies, yet Africa is still far from achieving food and nutrition security. This paper examines to overview those strategies and policies the goal of achieving food security and the right to food.

Historical Development

 

Since the independent of most of African nations, according to Franz Heidhues  etal (2004)[10] two early responses to African socioeconomic development crises were the Lagos Plan of Action (LPA) and the Regional Food Plan for Africa (AFPLAN). These started from the premise that, given the limited size and capacity of the private sector, the states had to take on the dominant role in development. Thus governments drew up comprehensive five-year plans, invested in large state-run basic industries and market structures, and enacted pervasive regulations to control prices, restrict trade, and allocate credit and foreign exchange, all generally carried out with full donor support. Publicly funded programs in support of agricultural research and extension, fertilizer supply, export production and marketing, and food distribution were the essential components of the approach.

The main focus of the lagos plan of action includes:

Minimizing Food losses: Careful assessment of the extent of food losses; Formulation of’ national policies for food loss reduction; and Construction of appropriate storage processing and other facilities;

Improving Food security: Urgent steps should be taken by every Member State to adopt a coherent national food security policy. National policies must be translated into concrete actions such as early construction of storage facilities, creation of grain reserves, improvement of grain stock management and better forecasting and early warning systems.

Food production: Food development must be promoted in an integrated manner, and should take into consideration the problem of transportation and distribution of farm products at the level of consumers. Food self-sufficiency should take into consideration the nutritional values of foodstuffs and should solve simultaneously the problems of under nutrition and malnutrition.

The set-up of agricultural production should be based on adequate and realistic agrarian reform programs consistent with political and social conditions prevailing in the respective countries. An improved organization of agricultural production must be given priority so as to increase agricultural production and productivity. Beside it gives more focus and investment in agricultural Research and investment

The second set of initiatives were policies based on the neoliberal understanding of economic development held by donors and international institutions (such as the World Bank and IMF) and were commonly referred to as structural adjustment programs (SAPs). These initiatives formed the frameworks within which food and nutrition security programs and strategies were developed in Africa during the past three decades (Franz Heidhues , 2004).

SAPs and neoliberal policies, often called the “Washington Consensus,” provoked considerable debate within development circles.

 

The Ten reforms that constituted were

  1. fiscal discipline
  2. reordering public expenditure priorities
  3. tax reform
  4. liberalizing interest rates
  5. a competitive exchange rate
  6. trade liberalization
  7. liberalization on inward foreign direct investment
  8. privatization
  9. deregulation

10. property rights

Supporters argued that the reforms they put forward were essential and that reforms should be implemented sooner rather than later. Critics charged that the Washington Consensus paid insufficient attention to the social aspects of development and to the institutional weaknesses of developing countries.

In phases of SAP implementation, the views of strategists began to shift toward a more flexible and gradual approach to budget cutting, largely in response to criticism from African leaders, OAU, ECA, many NGOs, and scholars , with greater tolerance of short-term deficits during stabilization . At the same time, there was increasing recognition of the role governments play in providing the necessary support for education, health, and research and extension, most notably in agriculture, rural credit, and institutional development.

 

Recent initiatives

 

In a recent era, agricultural production/food security initiatives are currently underway in Africa: this includes

  1. FAO’s Special Program for Food Security (SPFS)
  2. World Bank’s Africa Region Rural Strategy (ARRS)
  3. Sasakawa–Global 2000 Africa Food Production Initiative[11]
  4. alliance for green revolution in Africa[12]
  5. Comprehensive African agriculture development program of the new partnership for Africa,
  6. African seed and Biotechnology program
  7. Strengthening early warning systems for food security in Africa
  8. Strengthening programs on agricultural health and food safety systems in Africa
  9. Feasibility study for the Common market for basic food products in Africa.

10. Home-grown School feeding program endorsed by the African Union Summit in 2003 in recognition of the right of African citizens to food.

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has also focused on the issue of the right to food, even though the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights does not explicitly mention the right to food. The commission handed down a decision requiring states to protect and improve existing food sources and to ensure access to adequate food for all citizens (Charlotte McClain – Nhlapo, 2004)[13].

Overview of selected African policy and initiatives

a.    The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program

 

Within the overall vision of NEPAD[14], the vision for African agriculture should seek to maximize the contribution of Africa’s largest economic sector to achieving the ambition of a self-reliant and productive Africa that can play its full part on the world stage. In essence, agriculture must, within NEPAD, deliver broadly based economic advancement to which other economic sectors, such as petroleum, minerals and tourism, may also contribute significantly, but which they cannot achieve on the mass scale that agriculture has the potential to do.

The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) (NEPAD ,2003)[15] has been endorsed by African Heads of State and Governments as a vision for the restoration of agricultural growth, food security, and rural development in Africa. A specific goal of CAADP is to attain an average annual growth rate of 6 percent in agriculture. To achieve this goal, CAADP aims to stimulate agriculture-led development that eliminates hunger and reduces poverty and food insecurity. More specifically, the NEPAD vision for Africa holds that, by 2015, Africa should:

  • Attain food security;
  • Improve agricultural productivity to attain a 6 percent annual growth rate;
  • Develop dynamic regional and sub-regional agricultural markets;
  • Integrate farmers into a market economy; and
  • Achieve a more equitable distribution of wealth.

CAADP is acted as a strategic framework to guide country development efforts and partnerships in the agricultural sector. CAADP directs investment to four mutually reinforcing and interlinked pillars, each with a Framework that guides policy alignment and suggests actions for countries to consider in designing their CAADP Compacts, policy alignment, program design, investments and monitoring and evaluation post compact. These pillars are

Pillar I’s Framework for Sustainable Land and Water Management seeks to extend the area under sustainable land management and reliable water control systems;

Pillar II’s Framework for Improving Market Access (FIMA) seeks to improve rural infrastructure and trade-related capacities for market access;

Pillar III’s Framework for African Food Security (FAFS) seeks to improve risk management, increase food supply, improve incomes for the poor and reduce hunger and malnutrition; and

Pillar IV’s Framework for African Agricultural Productivity (FAAP) seeks to improve Agricultural research, technology dissemination and adoption through strengthened agricultural knowledge systems to deliver profitable and sustainable technologies that are widely adopted by farmers resulting in sustained agricultural growth.

Areas of Primary Action in CAADP in (NEPAD, 2003)[16] are

The proposed initiatives under the NEPAD Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) focus on investment with areas of primary actions of the four pillars.

  1. Extending the area under sustainable land management and reliable water control systems. Reliance on irregular and unreliable rainfall for agricultural production is a major constraint on crop productivity; rain-fed agriculture is moreover often unable to permit high-yield crop varieties to achieve their full production potential. Accordingly, it is of concern that for Africa the percentage of arable land that is irrigated is 7 percent (barely 3.7 percent in Sub-Saharan Africa) while the corresponding percentages for South America, East and South-East Asia and South Asia are 10 percent, 29 percent and 41 percent respectively. Furthermore, in Africa 16 percent of all soils are classified as having low nutrient reserves while in Asia the equivalent figure is only 4 percent; moreover, fertilizer productivity (expressed in terms of maize yield response) in Africa is estimated at some 36 percent lower than in Asia and 92 percent lower than in developed countries. Building up soil fertility and the moisture holding capacity of agricultural soils and rapidly increasing the area equipped with irrigation, especially small-scale water control, will not only provide farmers with opportunities to raise output on a sustainable basis but also will contribute to the reliability of food supplies.

 

  1. Improving rural infrastructure and trade-related capacities for market access. Improvements in roads, storage, markets, packaging and handling systems, and input supply networks, are vital to raising the competitiveness of local production vis-à-vis imports and in export markets. Investment in these areas will stimulate the volume of production and trade, thereby assisting to generate an appropriate rate of return on needed investments in ports and airport facilities. In general, Africa urgently needs infrastructure improvements for development, given that it faces the longest distances to the nearest large markets and that a fifth of its population is landlocked. Its rail freight is under 2 percent of the world total, the marine freight capacity is 11 percent (much being foreign owned but registered for convenience in Africa), and air freight is less than 1 percent; similarly, its power generation capacity per capita is less than half of that in either Asia or Latin America. In parallel with improvements in infrastructure within Africa, adjustments are needed in the promotion and support (including subsidy) policies of developed countries. Exporting countries within the region need to raise their capacity to participate in trade negotiations and to meet the increasingly stringent quality requirements of world trade.

 

  1. Increasing food supply and reducing hunger. Africa currently lags behind all other regions in terms of farm productivity levels, with depressed crop and livestock yields and limited use of irrigation and other inputs. By accessing improved technology – much of which is simple and relatively low in cost – small farmers can play a major role in increasing food availability close to where it is most needed, raising rural incomes and expanding employment opportunities, as well as in contributing to a growth in exports. This requires improved farm support services, pilot projects targeted at poor communities and a supportive policy environment. A sub-component of this pillar is for investment to respond to the growing frequency and severity of disasters and emergencies; it calls for some attention to the fact that rapid humanitarian interventions followed by rehabilitation are required before normal development can resume.

 

 

  1. Agricultural research, technology dissemination and adoption. This long-term pillar, which aims at achieving accelerated gains in productivity, will require:

 

  • An enhanced rate of adoption for the most promising available technologies, to support the immediate expansion of African production through the more efficient linking of research and extension systems to producers;
  • Technology delivery systems that rapidly bring innovations to farmers and agribusinesses, thereby making increased adoption possible, notably through the appropriate use of new information and communication technologies;
  • renewing the ability of agricultural research systems to efficiently and effectively generate and adapt new knowledge and technologies, including biotechnology, to Africa, which are needed to increase output and productivity while conserving the environment; and
  • Mechanisms that reduce the costs and risks of adopting new technologies
  • Countries under the framework of NEPAD / CAADP should Developing an Operational Plan for CAADP

Developing a regional or country-level strategy entails the following 6 steps:

  1. Stocktaking regarding where the region or country is at present regarding CAADP targets;
  2. Estimating the magnitude of change required to achieve the CAADP vision and objectives;
  3. Creating an inventory and identify options to achieve the objectives of the vision;
  4. Prioritizing interventions and costing options to focus on the best returns for an investment plan and addressing the necessary conditions to meet objectives;
  5. Reviewing implementation options, roles, responsibilities and coordination; and
  6. Finalizing and packaging an integrated program that includes an investment and operational plan and institutional arrangements.

 

b.    Alliance for green revolution in Africa

 

African is a net importer of food and most of the foods consumed are produced by small holder farmers. To increase the productivity, profitability, and sustainability of these farms, African farmers need greater access to affordable yield-enhancing inputs, including well-adapted seeds and new methods for integrated soil fertility management, as well as to output markets where they can convert surplus production into cash.

According to the evidence from Gary toenniessen et al (2008) to address these needs, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation established the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)[17]. AGRA is now African led and is working within the context of the comprehensive agricultural development program established by Africa’s leaders. From offices in Nairobi, Kenya, and Accra, Ghana, AGRA support work across all key aspects of the African agricultural value chain to help millions of small-scale farmers and their families lift themselves out of poverty and hunger.

Since agriculture is at the center of life and economies in Africa, about 80% of Africans depend on agriculture for their livelihoods with a small farm of less than two hectares per household. The very low productivity of these farms fuels the cycle of poverty and hunger in Africa. At the same time, their potential productivity provides the basis for a fundamental transformation of African agriculture one which would put Africa firmly on the path of priority.

So the alliance for a green revolution in Africa (AGRA) is an African based and African leg organization working with partner to catalyze change that rapidly and sustainably increase the productivity and incomes of smallholder farmers, most of whom are women and achieves food security in Africa.

AGRA drives innovations, funds demonstration, and works with partners and Africa’s farmers to scale up successes in smallholder farming, with a strong focus on staple food crops in high potential breadbasket areas with a goal of catalyzing a uniquely African green revolution (AGRA, 2009)[18].

AGRA works to achieve a more food secure and prosperous Africa through the promotion of rapid, sustainable agricultural growth based on smallholder farmers. Since Small holders produce most of Africa’s food, and do so with minimal resources and little government support. AGRA  strive to ensure that smallholders have what they need to succeed including good seeds and healthy soils , access to market , information , financing , storage and transport , and supportive policies.

To achieve the above goal AGRA[19] put six strategic objectives around which it organizes the overall activities and investments (AGRA, 2011).

  1. Develop technologies to rapidly increase agricultural productivity in environmentally friendly ways
  2. Increase incomes, improve food security and reduce poverty among smallholders’ farmers in Africa in an economically and environmentally sustainable manner.
  3. Develop an evidence based policy environment and incentives system for improving farmers access to new technologies , knowledge and other resources needed to transform smallholder farming with special attention given to women farmers.
  4. Provide a platform for bilateral and multilateral donors, national governments, research entities, farmers’ organizations and others to forge effective alliance for addressing agricultural productivity.
  5. Inspire action by demonstrating what is possible and
  6. Identify and fill critical financing and human resource gaps by mobilizing national and international resources in support of an African green revolution.

Concerning to AGRA policy and partnership program, AGRA does not set policies for African countries. The main goal of AGRA in this aspect is to organize and support appropriate networks to effect change at the national level and support those networks through the best available evidence on which government can base policy decisions.

In the agricultural value chain, several important policy areas require attention, including seed policies, soil health, staple crop market and trade policies, land and property policy rights, environmental and climate change resilience, and access to finance.

According to AGRA’s strategy , its goals between now and 2020 are 50% reduce food insecurity at least in 20 African nations , double the income of 20 million smallholders farmers and put at least 15% nations on track to attain and sustain a green revolution.

AGRA strategies and program are closely aligned with the comprehensive African agriculture development program, developed by the African union new economic partnership for African development, which provides the framework for agricultural renewal in Africa.

AGRA partners with national governments , agricultural research organizations, farmers , the private sectors , financial institutions , universities , civil society , foundations , farmer cooperatives and other rural development stakeholders to engage and empower resources poor farmer in Africa.

Progress in the Implementation of policy and initiatives

and the way forward:

 

There is a wide recognition that agriculture and rural development must play a central role in economic growth, poverty reduction, and food and nutrition security improvement, as the implication of disinvestment in the sector during the structural adjustment era have become clear.

This recognition is evident in recent intensifying effort at redirecting and committing resources to agriculture and rural development. Prior to the 2003 Maputo declaration, for example, rich countries at the 2002 Monterey conference renewed their pledge to increase their development assistance from 0.2 percent to 0.7 percent of their GDP (Benin ,S, 2010)[20].

Since the 2003 Maputo declaration, the agriculture led approach to Africa development proposed by the head of state has been gaining support at all levels. Culminating in various policies and funding initiatives that support African agriculture and aim to increase food and nutrition security.

So far some African countries have examplifies based on their development track and achieving the NEPAD[21] commitment of 6% of agricultural growth in African member states and 10% of agricultural budget allocation form annual GDP. From the Several countries that have shown increased support for agriculture and reaped the rewards, BURKINA FASO, ETHIOPIA and GHANA demonstrated an averaged 16.9%, 15.2% and 9.1% of public spending on agriculture from 2003 to 2010 respectfully.

Ethiopia’s Agricultural Sector ten-year PIF (2010-2020) provides a strategic framework for the prioritization and planning of investments intended to drive agricultural growth and development in Ethiopia (Nienke beintema and Gert-Jan Stads, 2011)[22]. It outlines and elaborates specific objectives and expected outcomes aimed at attainment of GTP[23] and CAADP goals and targets.

There is some evidence in faces of green revolution in many of farmers, scientists and entrepreneurs who change the landscape of African agriculture with the support of National governments, international community and organizations like AGRA. These is all that can be accomplished when smallholder farmers work with the tools of modern agriculture: robust , high yielding seed , practical integrated soil fertility and water management practices , affordable credit and efficient markets.

In the past efforts, AGRA[24] and other regional initiatives with the CAADP have done some progress in improving food market by building the capacity of agro dealers, improving productivity, train next generation African agricultural researcher and supporting for the preparation of sound policy environment for African development toward achieving food security and the right to food (AGRA, 2010).

…………………………………………………………………………………

The way forward

 

Several major initiatives in the past few years have brought renewed attention and commitment to economic development and food and nutrition security in Africa. The recent economic recovery and the new commitment to change among African leaders and development partner indicate for the first time after decades that Africa is poised to achieve real progress toward food and nutrition security. Sustaining and accelerating growth to reach the poverty reduction and nutrition millennium development goals will require clear strategies to guide future policy and investment decisions.

Ratification of the comprehensive Africa agricultural development program (CAADP) is a key component of the African union’s new partnership for Africa’s development (NEPAD) by an African head of state and government in 2003 signified their commitment to agriculture led development.

If current economic and agricultural growth trends persist, at least half of all African countries will fail to achieve the millennium development goals (MDGs) set forth by the United Nations in 2000. While a number of African countries are currently undergoing a process of economic recovery, evidence shows that efforts may fail to induce broad based improvement in rural areas, home to majority of poor Africans (IFPRI. 2007)[25].

These demands more vibrant Africa policy framework and initiatives that will shape the overall development efforts made in Africa to make sure to achieve MDG and other commitments to fulfill the right approach to African food security.

Postscript

 

This paper is prepared on the objective of taking an overview of African initiatives and policy framework to address the right to food and food security in Africa. In the first part of the document the paper put conceptual definition to the right to food and food security that will be served as a working definition for the next part of the paper.

In the main part of the document historical development of African policy framework and initiatives development are noted since an African independence by the facilitation of African union. At the end of the paper the group selected comprehensive African agriculture development program developed by new partnership for African development of the African union and alliance for a green revolution for detail description to be exemplified as current active African policy framework and initiatives.

Even if food security concept take different forms including food availability, access and utilization (nutrition and sanitation) , this paper give African policy framework and initiatives on focus to food production and productivity with an ultimate goal of  the right to food and food security.


[1]

Lidija Knuth and Margret Vidar . 2001. Constitutional and legal protection of the right to food around the world . Food and agriculture organization of the united nation. Rome. Page 10

[2] Charlotte McClain – Nhlapo .2004. Implementing a human rights approach to food security .international food policy research institute.2020 Africa conference brief.13.whashington. 4P

[3] FAO .2005.voluntary guidelines to supports the progressive realizations of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security. Adopted by the 127th Session of the FAO Council November 2004.food and agriculture of the united nation , rome 2005. P1-14

[4] Charlotte McClain – Nhlapo .2004. Implementing a human rights approach to food security .international food policy research institute.2020 Africa conference brief.13.whashington. P4

[5] Lioba Weingärtner.2004. Food and nutrition security, assessment instruments and intervention strategies. International training course. Page 5

[6] FAO.2008. an Introduction to the Basic Concepts of Food Security .food security information action practical guideline. food and agriculture of the united nation.. www.foodsec.org/docs/concepts_guide.pdf  P5

[7] Maxwell, S. and M. Smith. 1992. “Household Food Security: A Conceptual Review,” in S. Maxwell and T. Frankenberger (eds) Household food Security: Concepts, Indicators, and Measurements: A Technical Review. New York and Rome. UNICEF and IFAD.

[8] Maxwell, S. and T. Frankenberger. 1992 Household Food Security: Concepts, Indicators and Measurements: A Technical Review. New York and Rome: UNICEF and IFAD.

[9] Mme Rosebud  Kurwijila .2007. statement for World Food Day 2007 Celebration Tijjo Woreda in Asela, Arsi Zone,  Oromia Region, ETHIOPIA 14 October 2007. Commissioner rural economy and agriculture African union commission.

[10] Franz Heidhues  , Achi Atsain ,Hezron Nyangito ,Martine Padilla ,Gérard Ghersi and Jean-Charles Le Vallée.2004. Development strategies and food and nutrition security in Africa. An assessment 2020 discussion. Paper 38. .International Food Policy Research Institute.2033 K Street, NW.Washington, DC 20006–1002 USA.December 2004.P14-20

[11] The Sasakawa–Global 2000 program combined the financial backing of Mr. Sasakawa with agricultural know-how in the form of technical packages comprising manual fertilizer and improved seeds, and then supported their transfer to farmers. It gradually expanded from its original base in Ghana, Sudan, and Zambia to about 12 countries, and is continuing its efforts to develop a technology package that is sufficiently attractive to farmers to achieve a wide impact in Africa.

[12] AGRA was established by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation As an African-led, broad-based partnership dedicated 242 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences To helping millions of

[13] Charlotte McClain – Nhlapo .2004. Implementing a human rights approach to food security .international food policy research institute.2020 Africa conference brief.13.whashington. p1-4

[14] The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), hitherto known as the New African Initiative, resulted from the merger of the Millennium Partnership for the African Recovery Program (MAP) developed by Presidents Mbeki of South Africa, Obasanjo of Nigeria, Bouteflika of Algeria and Mubarak of Egypt, and the Omega Plan proposed by President Wade of Senegal.

[15] NEPAD.2003.comprehensive Africa agriculture development programs. New partnership for Africa’s development. JULY 2003 .South Africa. P32-45

[16] NEPAD .2003. Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program. New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD).  July 2003 page 10-30

[17] gary toenniessen, akinwumi adesina,b and joseph devries.2008.building an alliance for a green revolution in africa.Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1136: 233–242.

[18] AGRA. 2009.  Strategy for African revolution, Alliance for a green revolution in Africa. www.agra-alliance.org , Nairobi, Kenya. P1-6

[19] AGRA. 2011. Driving real change. AGRA in 2010.  Nairobi , Kenya: Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). P3-8

[20] Benin ,S. ,Kennedy, A. , Lambert,M. ,McBride ,L. 2010. Monitoring African agricultural development process and performance: a comparative analysis.  ReSAKS  (Regional strategic  analysis and knowledge support system ) annual trend and outlook report 2010. International food policy research institute (IFPRI)  p 1-15

[21] Nienke beintema and Gert-Jan Stads. 2011. African agricultural research and development in the new millennium :progress for some , challenges for many. food policy report. International food policy research institute.washington.p3-8

[22] CAADP.2010. CAADP technical review, summary of key finding for Ethiopia, Addis Ababa September 2010. P13

[23]GTP Ethiopian growth and transformation plan

[24]  AGRA. 2010. faces of African’s green revolution. http://www.agra-alliance.org

[25] IFPRI. 2007. Africa strategy toward food and nutrition security in Africa. Research and capacity building. International food policy research institute. Washington.