Transcript POLICIES AND STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING FOOD …

POLICIES AND
STRATEGIES FOR
PROMOTING FOOD
SECURITY IN SIERRA
LEONE WITH SPECIAL
REFERENCE TO RICE
1.0.
The Food Security Pledge: “Fellow Sierra Leoneans, my own principal objective in
this second leg of our journey together is also centered on a Basic Human RightThe Right to Food. So today with the new mandate you have given me, I shall
make another pledge. This time, I pledge to work even harder and with greater
resolve to do everything in my power to ensure that within the next five years, No
Sierra Leonean should go to bed hungry. Alhaji Dr. Ahmed Tejan Kabba, May
19, 2002.
1.2






Implications on timing, preparedness and logistics
Infrastructural damage (including agric machinery)
70% of 550,000 FF displaced (over 500 fled to Guinea)
Disrupted local authority
Middle of 2002 cropping season
Reliance on poor returnee farmers (lack shelter, seeds, tools)
Reliance on food pipe-line agencies
1. 3






Stakeholder institutions involved
Donor family
Line Ministeries
Farmers and community organisations
Youth and women groups
Traditional rulers
NGOs in Agric.
1. 4







Supportive policies, strategies and legislations
National Recovery strategy
Medium Term strategic Agric. Plan
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (All its 3 pillars are supportive)
Fisheries, Forestry, Education, Health, Nutrition and Sanitation Legislations
Special Programme for Food Security (Farmers Field School)
NGOs operational policy
Investment Promotion Act (2004)
1. 5








Reasons for supporting Food Security Goal
Support peace building/maintenance
Foreign exchange limitations
Comparative Advantage in food production
Economic independence
Fuel development in all sectors
Fresh food available
Sovereignty more meaningful
Health for all more effective
1.6




Food Security Policy pillars
Agricultural intensification
Crop diversification
Natural Resources Conservation
Food safety nets
•







2.0







Reasons for failure of Past Agric. policies
Inconsistency due to limited support, dependence on and influence of donors
Inadequate inter-sectoral collaboration/cooperation
Limited private sector involvement
Limited post project follow-up
Overlap in sectoral mandates resulting in conflicting signals
Differences in donor preferences and priorities
Food scarcity not a major issue
•
•
•




•
•

2.2
Phases of Past Agric. policies
COLONIAL PERIOD
(i) Emphasised upland conservation/ lowland cultivation
Lowland irrigation in Scarcies river areas
Yields affected by soil acidity, iron and aluminum toxicity problems
Lately support to and involvement of small farmers
Input subsidy produced some success






•
•
(ii) Independence to military rule in 1967
Direct GOSL intervention in rice production SLPMP- export crops Rice Cooperationrice production in lowland with little success
Est. of NUC - Agric Extension workers.
(iii)
Period 1968 - 1990
• Focused on small farmers problems
• Stimulated investment in Agric sector – IADPs
• IDPS generally failed because:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Were location specific
Non continuous funding
Had ambitions targets
No marketing and price incentives
Poor loan recovery efforts.
Limited impacts on stakeholders
• Early tractorization failed (poor resource management)
• Green revolution programme focused on improved yield, pesticides
and fertilizer input, credit provision and extension support
• Short lived due to non fulfillment of donor conditions
• ASSP focused on technological development; institutions and
incentive packages in favour of privatization, research
extension linkage etc. second phase never operational
(iv)
Period 1990-2000
Structural Adjustment Policy adopted
•
•
•
•
Liberalized domestic pricing and trade policies
Liberalized exchange rate
Better expenditure control and revenue generation
Private sector development policies resulted in removal of
subsidies on rice, fuel, fertilizer; resulted in low yields and
high haulage costs.
(v)
Interim statement of policy intent
Defined MAFFS mandate as creating enabling environment by supporting:
•
•
•
•
Increased productivity through enhanced input support
Applied research into high yielding varieties and best practices
Market information and price incentives
Value addition and agro-processing
Focused on the following supportive policies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Land use and development
Pricing/marketing
Crop production
Livestock production
Forest conservation
Fisheries development
Support services
Decentralization
Land development
Rice policy development
Period 1991 – 2004 saw the implementation of 7 Agricultural Development Projects, most with
rice production as major component.
•
•
•
Rice produced for consumption (about 5% for seed). Rice consumed
with sauce as main meal. Use in porridge, puddings etc. limited.
ROK 3 used in brewing in late 90s
16 local sorghum varieties being developed for suitability in beer and
“maltina” production.
Failure of Rice Cooperation
•
•
•
•
•
Political interference
Inadequate financial support from GOSL
Unrealistically low prices offered to producers
Corruption
Nepotism
SLPMBs efforts to salvage situation failed because of:
•
•
•
•
Liquidity problem
Low export quality ∴ Low prices
Delayed payment for produce
Private sector involvement supported, leading to competition
Rice Trade Policies
•
•
•
•
•
To ensure adequate supplies of good quality rice
To provide stable prices to producers
Rice mill division est. 1936 supply Dept WWII Rice Corporation
Est. mill in Freetown (1936) }Aimed at reducing Est. mill in Mambolo (1951) }post harvest processing losses
Rice demand/supply balance
Total Annual Req -520,000MT milled
Total Annual Production – 293,150 MT
Import – 160,000MT
Food Aid – 66850MT
Rice production felled from 97% to 67% of requirement in 1990 and
down to 48% in 2000 (pre-war)
3. 1
Crop production potential
Total arable land = 5.4 million hectares of which: IVS = 630,000ha, Bolis (grassland
depressions) = 45,000ha
Riverine grasslands = 130,000ha
Mangroves = 2000,000ha
3.2









Reasons for low crop yield
Lack of or limited farm inputs
Poor timing and low intensity of essential tending operations and applications
Generally infertile soils (nitrate deficiency)
Short fallow periods (incomplete recovery of nutrients)
Heavy leaching and erosion of nutrients
Use of local (low yielding) varieties
High weed/pest damage
30% post harvest losses
Poor time management amongst competing demands
3.3
Estimated crop yields by ecology
a. IVS normally 1.4-1.9MT/ha; up to 3-4MT/ha for developed IVS (2-3 cropping possible).
Limitations of IVS




Inadequate drainage and flash flooding
Irregular flooding due to limited water management
Low fertility + iron/aluminum toxicity
Inadequate residual moisture and water supply during the dries.
b.
Lowland depressions (bolis)

Low in organic content and CEC

Consist of heavy clay/silt

Rice yields of IMT/ha plus crop yields from dry season root and tuber crop
cultivation
c.


Mangroves
Highly productive once salt is controlled
Yield est.3MT/ha
4.




Associated with Sewa and Wangei Rivers in the South
Highly productive using floating rice
3-4MT/ha yield
Mechanization and fertilizer/pesticide application often necessary
5.




Riverain Grasslands
Uplands
Occupy 60% of arable land
Rainfed conditions only (limited or no irrigations)
For matured bush, 2 consecutive croppings possible before shifting
Yield 0.8-1.2MT/ha
4.1 Reasons for food insecurity
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a) -
Insufficient access to food by majority
Insufficient supplies due to low productivity
Unreliability and instability of supplies
Ineffective food utilization by populace.
Low productivity/income insecurity
Low GDP per capital (120USD in 2004)
70% of pop below poverty line
Increasing cost of imported rice due to high freight, insurance and
tax.
(b)
-
Dependence on small farmer (risky)
State farms not feasible
Poor/limited food distribution
Most of the 7800Km of roads in bad state
Feeder roads are terrible in wet season; hence smuggling
Poor food stock management strategies
(c)
-
High haulage costs during the rains
Fewer haulage vehicles during the rains
Sole rice importer in Sierra Leone
Eratic weather conditions (distortion of farming
calendar)
limited availability of HYVs
(d)
-
Poor health
Inadequate knowledge of nutritional status of food
Inadequate water and energy for processing
27% of children under 5 are under weight
34% of children under 5 are stunted
Infant and child mortality of 170/1000 and 316/1000
respectively
4.2
On-going strategies
4.2.1
Support to small farmers
• Develop seed bank through food aid
• Provide credit facilities (NaCSA &NGOs, Cooperative Department)
• Input and tools support
• Support the development, rehab and expansion of cash crop plantations.
• Women targeted programmes (vegetable production, poultry, small ruminant
development)
• Stem rural urban migration
4.2.2.
Safety net
• Provide support to vulnerables victims of war, insane, sick etc
•
•
•
•
Community involvement better
Coordinate to avoid duplication
Impact assessment necessary
Dependency syndrome to be avoided
4.2.4.
Strategies to improve stability of supply
• Improve feeder roads
•
•
•
•
Support with transportation and storage
Reduce post harvest through stores, drying floors construction.
Introduce HYVs
Inculcate good tending practices
5
.0
Monitoring and Evaluation
5.1
Role of stakeholders in National Food Security, Committee
Ministerial Committee (Chairman-Vice President) membership – 13
Ministeries meet quarterly.
(b)
Technical Committee (Chair-DG/MAFFS) members-Un Agencies;
bilateral donors, NGOs, Civil Society meets monthly or more frequently to:
(a)
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
Coordinate stakeholders activities
Clarify tech and organizational matters
Initiate studies and access results
Review update
Monitor programmes
Right to Food Secretariat provides support services.
Food Security coordinating unit to be est in MAFFs and be replicated in all 14
Agricultural Districts.
Conclusions
Food security Policy clearly over ambitious; problems of varying magnitude;
resources limited but planning and implementation on the right path. With adequate
logistics and expertise dream could be realised by 2007.
Thank you !
Table 1. Arable and Cultivated Land by Ecosystem
Ecology
Specific Area (ha)
% of Arable Area
% of Total Area
Upland
4,200,000
78.0
58.1
Inland Valley Swamp
690,000
12.9
9.5
Mangrove Swamp
200,000
3.6
2.7
Bolilands
145,000
2.7
2.0
Riverine Grassland
130,000
2.4
1.8
Total Arable Land
5,365,000
100.0
74.1
Other
1,870,000
-
25.9
Grand Land
7,235,000
-
100.0
A/ consist of basins with little drainage, covered with perennial grass b/ include 294 000 ha of forest reserve
Sources: Ministry of Agriculture, Special Programme for Food Security, 4 October 2001
Table II. Rice National Requirement and Self Sufficiency
Cropping
Year
1
Domestic Production
(‘000Mt.)
Paddy
2
Milled
Equiv.
3
Imports
Milled in
(000Mt.)
4
Total
Supply in
(‘000Mt.)
5
Population
(Million)
6
National
Requireme
nt in
(‘000Mt.)
Self
Sufficiency
(%)
8
National
Deficit in
(‘000Mt.)
9
Imports
%
Total
supply
10
1981/82
523.50
274.84
53.10
327.94
3.16
328.64
83.63
0.70
16.19
1982/83
523.50
274.84
91.70
366.54
3.29
342.16
80.32
24.38
25.02
11983/84
460.20
421.61
36.20
277.81
3.37
350.48
68.94
72.67
13.03
1984/85
504.50
264.86
103.90
368.76
3.44
357.76
74.03
11.00
28.18
1985/86
430.00
225.75
100.10
325.85
3.52
366.08
61.63
40.23
30.72
1986/87
525.00
275.63
118.30
393.93
3.61
375.44
73.42
18.49
30.03
1987/88
547.80
287.60
67.70
355.30
3.70
384.80
74.74
29.5
19.05
1988/89
493.10
258.88
75.60
334.48
3.80
395.20
65.51
60.72
22.60
1989/90
517.90
271.90
120.10
392.00
3.90
405.60
67.04
13.60
30.64
1990/91
534.60
285.39
123.70
409.09
3.99
414.96
68.78
5.87
30.24
1991/92
411.00
215.78
119.40
335.18
4.10
426.40
50.61
91.22
35.62
1992/93
420.00
220.50
82.50
303.00
4.20
436.8
50.48
133.80
27.23
1993/94
486.30
255.31
113.03
368.34
4.33
350.32
56.70
81.98
30.69
1994/95
445.30
233.78
123.80
357.58
4.44
461.76
50.63
104.18
34.62
1995/96
335.50
176.14
185.70
361.84
4.56
474.24
37.14
112.40
51.32
1996/97
391.70
205.60
171.02
376.66
4.67
485.68
42.34
109.02
45.40
1997/98
411.30
215.93
28.90
244.83
4.76
495.04
43.62
250.21
11.80
1998/99
371.84
195.22
249.1
444.32
4.88
507.52
38.47
63.2
56.06
Table III. Estimated Area and Production of Crops
No.
Crops
2001
Ha (000)
Mt/Ha
Crops
Mt (000)
2002
Ha (000)
Mt/Ha
Mt (000)
A
Cereals
I
Rice
273.45
1.14
310.62
Rice
402.20
1.05
422.07
II
Maize
12.75
0.79
10.03
Maize
16.80
0.78
13.06
III
Millet
9.68
0.91
8.77
Millet
23.42
0.75
17.53
IV
Sorghum
14.42
1.07
15.46
Sorghum
28.94
1.07
30.95
B
Tubers
61.79
314.37
Cassava
81.54
4.90
399.67
I
Cassava
8.60
21.21
S/Potato
10.39
2.47
25.45
48.86
Groundnut
126.00
0.78
98.38
C
57.37
I
Pulses
II
Groundnut
F/n/estimated area and production
0.85
Table IV. Production of Major Food Crops (1987 – 2001)
Item
Year Mt 1000
1987/88
1988/89
1989/90
1990/91
1991/92
1992/93
1993/94
1994/95
2000/2001
Paddy
549.9
493.1
517.8
543.7
411.1
420.0
486.3
445.3
310.6
Maize
11.0
11.4
11.7
12.3
11.0
10.0
9.6
8.6
10.0
Millet
22.0
22.0
22.0
24.0
22.0
22.0
21.0
28.0
8.7
Sorghum
19.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
22.0
21.0
25.0
15.4
Cassava
133.0
147.7
174.2
182.4
163.4
203.4
240.5
243.5
314.4
Sweet Potato
32.6
33.6
35.6
38.8
40.8
34.8
39.5
43.9
21.2
Groundnuts
21.7
25.7
28.5
30.0
34.0
31.0
37.8
39.8
48.9
Beans
35.0
35.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
38.0
37.0
40.0
NA
Sources: Ministry of Agriculture, Special Programme for Food Security, National Programme Document, 4 October2001 and
MAFS Crops Survey of 2001