"It's the agriculture, stupid!" - why Africa lags behind

Thursday, January 5, 2012

The researchers that participated in the Tracking Development project wondered how it was possible that, having ‘started’ from the same development level in the 1950’s, Southeast Asia and Africa have diverged so much in their respective development paths. In Asia we find a number of so-called ‘tigers’ (Malaysia, Vietnam), and Indonesia is also a country that is doing relatively well, with a sharp decrease in the percentage of people under the poverty line. In Sub-Sahara Africa we see nothing of the kind: things are still as bad as 50 years ago. How come?

Thorough comparative research provided the answer: the Asian countries have spent much more on agricultural development! In Indonesia, for instance, some 20% of public spending goes to agriculture, while most African countries fail to reach even 10%, despite the Maputo promises of 2003. Kenya is an exception, but that country made the mistake of concentrating investments in a small elite of big farmers. Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia stimulated smallholder agriculture, which ensured a broader sharing of benefits.  

It is beyond the scope of this news item to discuss the reasons for these intercontinental differences in policy, but any which way it shows that the work of agri-agencies is very relevant for development. (We knew this already, but confirmation from a scientific source is always nice) Increasing investments in rural development and small farmers’ entrepreneurship will probably only take if rural people can unite forces to demand just that increase. And how can they do that? By joining strong organisations, which is the agri-agencies’ core business exactly. Should we succeed in increasing African  shares of public spending on agriculture by means of our support to farmers’ organisations and their lobby capacity, then we have done a good job!