Farmers in Tanzania disadvantaged by late distribution of subsidized inputs

Wherever there are subsidized farm inputs, farmers welcome them because most find that they are not able to purchase enough of the inputs for their needs at full market price.

But the high cost of subsidy schemes for governments cause many problems.

Malawi, Zimbabwe, Zambia and Tanzania are just a few examples of countries where farmers often complain that the the subsidized inputs are made available too late in the crop planting season for optimal yields.

"We have been forced to use substandard seeds instead of quality ones, since the vouchers delay to reach us. We can't afford to buy other seeds in the market," Bakari Somboja, said a farmer from Mabwelebwele village in Kilosa, Tanzania, according to a report in the East African Business Week.  

Somboja said farmers in his area need inputs such as seeds and fertilizer in January, but the subsidy vouchers arrive between February and March. Sometimes they are given 'temporary' vouchers to present, which the agro-dealers reject.

Another frequent complaint is that there are far from enough vouchers distributed for the needs of poor farmers.

 African Agriculture

African cotton producers fear U.S. farm bill will worsen their plight

African countries that have protested American cotton subsidies for years recently criticized the Farm Bill making its way through the U.S. Congress, saying it would keep that support under a new guise, according to a June report by AFP.

The Farm Bill, five-year legislation on the nation's agricultural and food policy currently under consideration in the Senate, allows American farmers to insure their harvests against adverse weather conditions with the backing of the federal government.

A delegation of cotton-producing African countries -- Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali -- were in Washington to express concerns that the farm bill will penalize African cotton growers.

"We are worried, because this new element of the farm bill appears to be a subsidy," said the coordinator of the C4 group, Burkina Faso's trade minister, Arthur Kafando.

The C4 group fears that the insurance program being debated in Senate is "more dangerous" than the direct subsidies being provided by Washington.

Kafando, who met with US Trade Representative Ron Kirk and senators, said he called for "a significant reduction, or the elimination of subsidies no matter where they come from, not only the United States, but also China and India."

The farm bill entails $970 billion in spending over the next five years, a reduction of $23 billion from the expiring program, notably due to the elimination of direct subsidies to farmers.

In 2003, the C4 group launched a sectoral initiative on cotton at the Geneva-based World Trade Organization aimed at countering trade-distorting subsidies. But with the Doha round of global trade talks stalled, the cotton issue has remained at an impasse.

Though US subsidies to cotton producers have been reduced by two-thirds since 2004-2005, currently amounting to about $1.2 billion, that decline was led by a rise in global cotton prices.

AFP

Issues of concern about Malawi's farming inputs subsidy programme

Malawi’s late president, Bingu Mutharika, reportedly treated his country’s much praised farming inputs subsidy scheme “as a personalised presidential programme, kept that way by the numerous awards that were conferred on the president in recognition of the FISP's achievements.”

So writes Blessings Chinsinga, associate professor at the University of Malawi. He further explains, “It was not possible for technocrats to address concerns by development partners, however constructive, because of Mutharika's heavy and direct involvement in the programme.”

Although he was said to be very unpopular when he died a few months ago, Mutharika is widely credited for spearheading Malawi’s current maize self-sufficiency through the Farm Input Subsidy Programme. He instituted it in the face of opposition by ‘international development experts’ and the country's donors, on whom Malawi is said to depend for up to 40% of its budget. Although the donors later came on board on seeing its successful results, perhaps it is not surprising that Mutharika was subsequently sceptical about the advice/concerns raised by the foreign ‘experts’ that are always part of any aid package.

The previous opposition of the donors and their ‘experts,’ as well as Mutharika’s arrogance on the success of his programme meant that he was not much interested in listening to what they had to say. The unofficial aid rule book says that the recipient must take the advice packaged together with the money by the donor, but perhaps Mutharika’s ‘I told you so’ success gave him more leverage in this situation than would be the case in most cases.

However, Mutharika’s thumbing his nose at the donors’ concerns about certain aspects of the FISP did not mean that they were without validity.

Among them, Chinsinga says, were “…the lack of transparency in the cost of the FISP, especially in relation to overheads, and excessive interference in the award of FISP contracts. They worried that the FISP had become more or less a means for settling political debts, since preference in the award of the contracts was given to those with very close ties to the government, whether their bids were competitive or not.”

Chinsinga points out that despite the fact that the FISP is clearly not sustainable as currently structured and (donor) funded, “subsidies have become more or less an integral part of the social contract between the government and citizens. A government that discontinues the FISP risks voter backlash. In other words, maize subsidies are at the core of Malawi's politics. “

Chinsinga’s article is thoughtfully written and a very good read. It is important because of how almost all the issues he touches on in regards to subsidies and food security apply to most African countries.

African Agriculture

Unrest in Egypt may be spurred by greater dependence on grain imports from US, reduced farmer viability

Why does there appear to be so much widespread pent up rage against the US in the Arab world, even in country considered a long time friend like Egypt?

Political analysts of all shades are groping for answers to this question, with the range of answers as varied as the people who give them. Unfortunately and typically of 'the international media,' not many think to simply ask the Egyptians and other Arabs themselves!

Thomas Kostigen has an interesting take on the issue.  In his article 'Behind Arab riots lie U.S. agricultural policies, he argues part of the antipathy is due to "U.S. policies that disrupt people’s lives and darken rays of hope."

Writes Kostigen,  "The backlash by the Muslim segment of the Arab world goes deeper than one recent, hateful film; it goes back to 1992 when small farmers in Egypt lost their land rights under a reform scheme implemented by former President Hosni Mubarak."

Kostigen cites an article he wrote at the start of Egypt's 2011 anti-Mubarak upheavals, and long before the present protests initially attributed by some to anger over a crude anti-Islamic film.

In the earlier article, Why U.S. farm policy caused Egypt crisis,
Kostigen said under U.S. and International Monetary Fund pressure, "the country’s small farmers who were ‘registered tenants’ became subject to rent increases, in many cases triple what they had been paying. As expected, these small farmers couldn’t afford the steep rent increases and were forced off their land. More than half of all Egyptians live in the countryside, and millions were forced into poverty. Moreover, Egypt itself became more reliant on imports."

Kostigen points out a great deal of those imports that have made many farmers destitute come from the United States. The fact that U.S. wheat and other grain farmers enjoy subsidies that make it that much harder for Egyptian and other world farmers to survive, let alone compete, may have just fueled resentments, suggests Kostigen.

Quips Kostigen, "It’s a great thing to provide food at cheap prices to people. But once a population is hooked on cheap food and then prices rise, as they have to their all-time highs, a shift in mood should be expected."

Some will find it easy to reject Kostigen's contentions as a rant against his country, but he provides the kind perspectives on real-world issues affecting people in country's like Egypt that more prominent political talking heads are completely oblivious of.

U.S. president Barack Obama recently announced a grand initiative to help kick-start agriculture in several African countries. It will be significantly private sector driven.

The Egyptian example given by Kostigen is just one of many reasons some agriculturally-engaged people in Africa are suspicious and worried about the 'help' the U.S. proposes to give for African agriculture. Will it be 'help' to African farmers become more productive and competitive, or will it be actually help to American agricultural corporations to create and find new markets at the expense of African farmers, as Kostigen claims has been the case in Egypt?

In agrarian societies, issues like those pointed out by Kostigen are matters of life and death for millions of people. The damage to livelihoods and resentment over them cannot be compensated by then donating military or other aid to the ruling classes.    

Kostigen provides deep, well written and very readable perspectives on some little known but important contributors to Egyptian's love-hate relationship with the U.S. Too bad it is almost entirely predictable that politicians and government bureaucrats in Washington D.C. will pay little or no heed of the warnings of people like Kostigen that the issues and feelings go far deeper than anger over an anti-Islam film.

African Agriculture

Malawi farm inputs subsidy under strain over currency devaluation, dependence on donors

Malawi has had a much-lauded farm inputs (fertilizer, seed, chemicals) subsidy scheme for its farmers for some years now. It has been extremely successful in raising the yields of several crops. Most significantly including making the country (agriculturally, economically, politically), once famine-plagued Malawi has for several years in a row now enjoy surpluses of its staple crop, maize.

But from the beginning, there were always concerns about how long the subsidy could be sustained. It took a big chunk from Malawi's annual budget and was increasingly dependent on international donors. Then there has been the perennial debate about how subsidies distort the development of free, strong markets and how they may create a culture of expectation which could be damaging to the creation of a competitive farming sector.

In the understandable euphoria of Malawi's 'bumper harvests,' all these worries were pushed aside. But recent events have forced renewed focus on the long-term viability of the farm inputs subsidy.

Hyperinflation has significantly devalued the Malawian kwacha, meaning for the same amount of the currency, the country gets much less than before in imported goods like farm inputs. Reduced national purchasing power has reduced how many of Malawi's farmers can have access to subsidized inputs.

Then Malawi's late president Bingu Mutharika had a falling out with Britain and other major donors, causing them to show who is who by slashing their support to the country's budget. This caused Mutharika's government to scale back the reach of the subsidy scheme, while also graphically showing the inherent dangers of a programme so vulnerable to the feelings of foreign governments and institutions.


Activists who are ideologically opposed to the very idea of fertilizers might feel vindicated by the subsidy programme running out of steam in Malawi. But it is also far from obvious that the various agro-ecological  alternatives can be a direct replacement for Malawi's (or any country's) present inputs-based farming in the near-enough term to address the intersecting food security, soil fertility, political and other challenges.

There will be no quick or easy answers, but at least the discussion about the need for Malawi to look beyond its government/donor-funded inputs subsidy programme seems to have begun.

African Agriculture





       

Is Zambia's price subsidy to maize farmers sustainable?

In African countries where maize is the food starch of choice, everything to do with the crop's cultivation and marketing is deeply political. Unfortunately, this utterly dull-to-eat, increasingly hard-to-grow grain of relatively low nutritional value has been allowed to control the agricultural economics of several countries because of puzzling, mythic powers as 'the staple crop.'

Zambia is just one of many African countries enthralled by maize. So much so that the government is content to pay its maize farmers a higher purchase price than it then sells the maize for locally or abroad. Among the most important parts of Africa's Maize Mafia are farmers who must be paid prices attractive enough for them to continue growing enough of the crop to cover local needs.

But a contradictory part of that same mafia are the maize consumers (i.e. voters) who will remember maize prices at election time and reward/punish the ruling party accordingly. The maize consumers want/expect maize which is 'affordable.'

The contradiction of expectations between these two main groups often means the government subdizing maize to raise farm gate prices (above 'free' market) to keep farmers happy, but also subsidizing prices to consumers (below 'free' market) to keep consumers happy!

As long as it rains well for a good crop to be achieved and the government can find the money for this costly political balancing act, everybody stays more or less happy. But this is obviously a very unsustainable balancing act, as shown by how the balancing formula causes all sorts of distortions when there is a shortage or a surplus.

Zambia has enjoyed maize surpluses for several years. But if farmgate maize prices are allowed to fall too low in response to the glut, the farmers will not grow as much the following year, causing shortages which will drive up prices for maize consumers to levels that could cause disaffection with the ruling party.

The donor nations who support Zambia in various ways have recently been pointing out the unsustainability of this state of affairs, but even they recognize it is politically very difficult to stop maize subsidies.

The real pity is that so little effort is being paid to finding ways to reduce the dietary dependence so many Africans have developed for the dull-to-eat, poorly nutritious, ever-harder to grow (increasingly unpredictable rains, tired soils) crop of maize.

African Agriculture   
   

   

Zambia to subsidize inputs for 'all cash crops?'

The newly elected Zambian government of President Michael Sata plans to broaden the country's current maize inputs subsidy to other crops.

The Zambia Daily Mail attributed the policy intention to a statement to that effect by Vice President Guy Scott.

In March 2011, the agriculture minister of the previous government of President Rupiah Banda said a total of 180,000 tonnes of various subsidized fertilizers were to be distributed for the 2011/12 cropping season (October-May). In 2010 the government distributed 90,000 tonnes of urea(nitrogen) and 60,000 tonnes of compound 'D' fertilizers.

Zambia's Farmer Input Support Programme was introduced in the early 2000s. As in other countries, it has been dogged by controversy. Meant for poor farmers who cannot afford the costs of the fertilizer, hybrid seeds and pesticides, there have been accusations that well-to-do farmers who are well-connected politically have often had preferential access to the subsidized inputs. It has also been alleged that it has served as a tool of political patronage. There have also been complaints from farmers that apart from cloudy criteria to access the inputs, they are also often availed late into the cropping season, reducing their potential benefits.

While popular with farmers, questions are perennially asked about the long-term ability of poor countries to sustain inputs subsidy programmes. Neighboring Malawi has had to cut back its equally popular and successful inputs subsidy programme as a result of the withdrawal of budgetary support by Western countries over a diplomatic spat over governance issues. Given these issues of cost and sustainability, Zambia would be setting somewhat of a precedent in the region if it went ahead and provided subsidized inputs for 'all cash crops,' as The Zambia Daily Mail reports him as saying.
     
Nevertheless, the inputs subsidy programme, along with good rains, has led to several years of surpluses of Zambia and the sub-region's main staple crop, maize. Erratic rains for the current season are expected to result in significantly lowered harvests this year.


African Agriculture

Poor rain, access to inputs and finance may slow Zimbabwe agriculture recovery in 2012

The poor rains that have affected most of southern Africa in the 2011/12 cropping season have resulted in reduced farmland put under cultivation, lowering the expected yield of maize and other key crops. Chronic poor availability of fertilizer and other inputs have contributed to the problems, as well as weak farmer access to credit.

The government’s Agricultural Extension Services (Agritex) said Zimbabwe planted

247 000 hectares of maize from November to January, down from 379 993

hectares in the same period the year before because of late rains, according to the Zimbabwe Independent newspaper in late January.

Farmers planted 130 944 hectares of sorghum and other small grains, compared with 136 131 hectares, Agritex said. Cotton planting also decreased from last season. A total of 45 000 hectares were planted compared to 107 727 hectares last season. Farmers planted soybeans on 5,079 hectares compared to 13 674 hectares, and tobacco on 39 393 hectares compared to 43 545 hectares to last season.

Zimbabwe has both a number of fertilizer manufacturing companies and a well developed hybrid seed development and marketing system. However, a variety of operational difficulties over several years, including high power costs and power cuts, have prevented them from being able to fully utilize their installed production capacity. Fertilizer exports were suspended by the government in December 2011 to try and steer all production to the local market.

The government runs a coupon-based seed and fertilizer subsidy scheme through the State-owned Grain Marketing Board, but it has been plagued by late deliveries of the inputs to farmers. In early February a number of GMB officials were arrested for corruption in the distribution of the inputs. There has also been outrage that the subsidized inputs are first snapped up by the political elite before the poor farmers for whom they are intended have access to them. In any case, the US$45 million subsidy programme, targeted to benefit 500, 000 farmers, is a small proportion of farmers’ needs.

The GMB is in charge of buying maize, the country’s main staple crop, from farmers, but takes as long as six months to pay for deliveries, which severely hampers farmers’ operations and preparations for the following season. This has caused some maize farmers to shift to the currently more lucrative tobacco, an export crop sold at auction and for which farmers are paid on delivery. 

At the start of the 2011/2012 season, in October 2011, the GMB had reportedly paid farmers a total of $27 million for delivered maize from the 2012/11 season, but owed them $40 million more.

However, the up-front costs of farming tobacco are much higher than those of maize. The per hectare costs of maize is about US$1200, while tobacco costs are between $9500 and $10000 a hectare. Particularly where agricultural finance is so hard to come by, this presents a significant barrier to entry into large scale tobacco farming.   

The government mandated maize producer price is US$285 per tonne for 2012, a slight increase on 2011’s US$275 per metric tonne. The highest tobacco auction price in 2011 was about $2.75 per kg.

The tobacco marketing season for 2012 has just began (February), with Monica Chinamasa, chairwoman of the Tobacco Industry and Marketing Board saying the sector was ‘targeting 150 million kg.’ The total crop auctioned in 2011 was 132 million kg. Her estimate might not be realizable given the reduction in hectarage planted.

Finance minister Tendai Biti, in his budget presentation for 2012, said, “The financial requirements for adequate support to agriculture are large, translating to around US $2, 5 billion per annum for grain, cash crops as well as livestock production. Of this amount, grain requirements amount to US $702 million.” The total budget for agriculture in 2012 was US$227 million.

Zimbabwe’s agricultural production had been forecast to grow by 11 percent in 2012, compared to an expansion of seven percent in 2011. Key sectors in which increases are expected are tobacco, maize, cotton, soya beans and poultry. After decline in most sectors of agriculture from the year 2000 as a result of poorly planned land reform, steady improvements have been noted in several sectors since 2008.

How the actual yields will compare to earlier forecasts will only become clear towards the end of the current rain season, in April/May.

African Agriculture

Inputs subsidy schemes: does easy fertilizer access discourage good soil management?

by Chido Makunike

Malawi can justifiably be very proud of its farming inputs subsidy programme. For several years in a row, it has produced surpluses of the country’s staple crop, maize. Considering the several prior years of maize famine the country experienced, the turn around is a huge achievement.

From the beginning, there have been questions about the cost sustainability of the programme. Last year, the extent of the subsidy scheme had to be scaled back over a diplomatic dispute with and the subsequent reduction of aid by Britain, a major donor. But none of these challenges detracts from Malawi’s success at addressing a key issue.

Good rains fortuitously accompanied the first several years of the subsidy. The 2011/12 farming season is the first one since the subsidy was introduced that the rain season is expected to be below average. It will be interesting to see what new lessons will be learned from the new variable of poor rains.

However, there is already enough known over many decades for some of the adjustments that may need to be made to the subsidy programme to be highlighted.

The benefits of fertilizer are clear. Availability and cost are the key issues limiting its use in Africa. But one of the downsides of ready fertilizer availability and relatively easy affordability is that they encourage laziness with regards to soil management.

Fertilizer’s effects on plant growth are so quick and dramatic that when many farmers know they will definitely have it; there seems little point in natural soil fertility improvement measures. Yet fertilizer use should ideally go hand in hand with other soil management techniques.

Some of the reasons for this fertilizer-caused soil fertility negligence are obvious and understandable. Most small holder farming is a very hard slog for often very little return. For most farmers, it is already back breaking work before you add the additional tasks of maintaining, say, compost. On poor soils where fertilizer is not available, soil supplementation measures may add to the manual drudgery of farming, but the farmer knows s/he simply cannot avoid it if a reasonable yield is to be expected from that poor soil.

Fertilizer, with its quick, direct shot of basic nutrients to the plant, is therefore a very effective, attractive alternative to the harder work of natural soil fertility supplementation. Farmers are well aware that fertilizer cannot replace natural soil fertility. Nevertheless, when fertilizer is available, the reality of their existence makes sole reliance on it by many farmers irresistible because of its ease of application and its immediate, dramatic results.

But a season of poor rainfall like the present one dramatically decreases the usefulness of fertilizer. Fertilizer application must be soon followed by soil-soaking rain or irrigation. If not, the un-dissolved fertilizer will not only be of no use to the plant, if near physically enough to the plant, it may burn it.

Poor rainfall seasons are when the benefits of naturally rich soils are most apparent. Soil with lots of plant matter in it will have many of the basic nutrients even before or without the additional application of fertilizer. Critically, moisture retention is much higher in such soils, which can make all the difference in whether a plant survives until the next rainfall, or wilts and dies before. If and when fertilizer is applied to such naturally rich soil, it is as a fertility boost, rather than as the only means of feeding the plant. Fertilizer used in this way can be stretched out to cover a larger area without sacrificing per hectare yields.

All these well known facts are often ignored in the excitement of widely available fertilizer and the euphoria of ‘bumper harvests.’ Soil fertility caution is thrown to the wind and fertilizer is treated as if it could replace well fed soils, which it cannot.

Fertilizer subsidies are simply too expensive to continue indefinitely. Sooner or later the long term costs of neglecting basic soil fertility will catch up with a country’s agriculture. Good soil management is a process, not a one time event like applying a dose of fertilizer. Unfortunately, attention to soil fertility is usually paid in times of crisis, when compost, manure or mulch cannot be used as an emergency measure for the sudden absence of fertilizer or sufficient rain. Their use needs to be emphasized on an on-going basis, even when fertilizer is readily available.

The poor rains in Malawi and the rest of the region are likely to result in dramatically decreased maize harvests in 2012. But they may also provide another opportunity to remind farmers and governments that regardless of the success of an inputs subsidy, it is dangerous to treat fertilizer as if it could be a substitute for good soil management. Fertilizer use and good soil management must be treated as complementary to each other.

To ignore this in times of good rains, accessible fertilizer and bumper harvests is to simply postpone reckoning with the problems that build up when soil management is ignored. Those problems will become dramatically apparent in times when one or more of the elements needed for fertilizer to produce its results, such as good rain, is missing.

African Agriculture

Ghanaian farmers ask for fertilizer subsidy to be extended

by Laud Nartey

Farmers in Ghana have called for an extension of subsidy on fertilizer by government beyond the 2015 deadline.

In May 2007, government announced the introduction of the subsidy on fertilizer to mitigate the effects of food crisis. It was also a rapid intervention to help increase food production during the peak of the then global crisis that was adversely affecting poor countries.

The Programmes Coordinator of Peasant Farmers Association of Ghana (PFAG), Victoria Adongo, explained at a stakeholder roundtable discussion with importers and distributors of fertilizer in Accra last week that there was uncertainty surrounding the life span of the program as sustained funding had become a problem.

"The small scale farmers are demanding that the fertilizer subsidy programme be made comprehensive to include funding, sustainability and as 2015 approaches, small scale farmers are jittery," she stated.

She further explained that in 2009, the PFAG did an impact assessment of the coupon or voucher system of the subsidized fertilizer distribution with the objective of assessing small scale farmers' access to the product.

A number of problems that made the access to fertilizer difficult for rural scale farmers especially women were identified.

On his part, the Director of Agric Extension Service of the Ministry of Agriculture, Justice Amoah, stated that fertilizer application rate in Ghana was one of the lowest in the world. He attributed this to the high cost of fertilizers.

"A bag of 50kg NPK sells at 40 US Dollars," he said. He recalled that in 2008, government subsidized 43,176 metric tons of fertilizer to the tune of GHc 20.654 million, in 2009, a quantity of 72,795 metric tons were subsidized, amounting to GHc 34.4 million and in 2010, a quantity of 91,244 metric tons were subsidized and that also amounted to GHc 30.002 million . Thus a total amount of GHc 85,056million was spent on fertilizer over the three year period.

He disclosed that for the 2011 all categories of crop farmers whether Small, Medium or Large scale farmers have been targeted.

Justice Amoah mentioned cost of subsidy to government, sustainability of the programme with increased demand for more subsidized fertilizers, smuggling of fertilizers to neighboring countries and delays in processing payments as some of the challenges facing the programme.

He advised that government should encourage banks to provide guarantees, and set up more distribution channels in remote areas to increase farmers' access. He also called on government to endeavor to establish a fertilizer production plant in the country to take advantage of the by-product from Ghana's crude oil production.

An importer from Ghana-Agre Input Dealers Association (GAIDA), Afia Owusu Nyantekyi, appealed that publicity on subsidy has to be intensified so that the message could get to all farmers across the country.

"Low publicity is a mojor problem facing the farmers and some importers. Some don't hear the announcement and this is a major challenge," she explained.

allafrica.com

Malawi: fuel scarcity paralyzes subsidy fertilizer distribution

by Judith Moyo

Scarcity of fuel especially diesel has led to the delay in transportation of subsidized fertilizer and maize seed to farmers.

All vehicles that are hired to transport the farm inputs use diesel which is a very rare commodity in Malawi. Many farmers in the southern region of the country and part of the central region have already planted maize using seed from other sources.

Although government has completed distribution of coupons to enable households access fertilizer and maize seed, the farmers cannot get the commodities because they are not yet delivered to their areas.

In the few areas where delivery was made, Admarc officials have turned corrupt asking people to pay extra K1000 to buy a bag of fertilizer at the subsidized price of K500. Some have since been arrested.

Principal Secretary for Agriculture Erica Maganga on Tuesday told state controlled Malawi Broadcasting Corporation that government has finished distributing coupons in all the 28 districts of the country.

Maganga also confirmed that the fuel scarcity has affected the distribution of the commodities.

“We have 1 000 Admarc markets and fuel we have not yet reached all of them because of fuel. But there are some filling stations which are allowed only to fuel vehicles which are hired to transport subsidized fertilizer,” said Maganga.

As the delays continue, rains have started coming and most households are likely to do without fertilizer and that would affect next year’s food production.

Nyasa Times

Swaziland: No more subsidized agricultural inputs

Swaziland’s economic crisis has forced the government to put on ice the agricultural input scheme that has made the survival of many subsistence farmers and their families less precarious on communal Swazi Nation Land, where 70 percent of the 1.1 million population live.

“There is no seed subsidizing now. We used to do it, and we are talking about reviving the programme,” said Xoxile Nxumalo of the agriculture ministry. Under the Swazi Agricultural Development Programme, seeds were sold at a discount or provided free of charge to subsistence farmers working on communal land.

Nxumalo said discussions were taking place to provide discount tractor hire. Poor farmers could previously use the government’s tractor fleet at reduced rates but fuel shortages have put a stop to the service. In 2010 a government tractor could be hired for about R130 (US$17.30) an hour, compared to about R200 (US$26.60) per hour for a privately owned tractor.

This is the first growing season where the inputs have been withdrawn. Planting starts when the rains begin, usually between October and November. The mountainous highveld usually has ample rains, and enough rain falls in the warmer middle veld for most of the crop production. In the drought-prone low middle veld and eastern lowveld rainfall is often problematic and food assistance has regularly been required in the past two decades, particularly in the eastern Lubombo region.

A recent long-range prediction by the Swaziland Meteorological Department forecast rains arriving late in 2011, but ending at their usual time in March/April, so reducing the cropping season.

“Seven out of ten Swazis survive as peasant farmers on government-owned land, and while subsistence farming worked when the population was small, a growth in population has meant this old way of doing things is not sustainable. Swaziland has become dependant on food aid, despite the nation’s ability to feed herself,” Amos Ndwandwe, an agriculture field officer in the central Manzini region, told IRIN.

“It is not that Swaziland lacks good land. We have lots of good land, but the land management system is a feudal arrangement that was not made for modern times. If the small landholder farmers could pool their land and get financing for irrigation and modern equipment, Swaziland’s food security would be ensured in one season,” he said.

Thembumenzi Dube, a statistician at the agriculture ministry, told IRIN: “The area planted in 2010/11 was 70,344 hectares, which showed an increase of about 20 percent compared to the previous season. The increase in area planted could be attributed to a number of factors, including the onset of the rainfall season countrywide, with fair distribution.

“The seasonal [rainfall] forecast had also indicated normal to above normal rainfall in the October to December period... The Ministry of Agriculture’s efforts to encourage farmers to make use of available resources such as tractors could have also played a role,” he said.

The maize harvest for the 2010/2011 season was 84,696 metric tons, against a national requirement of the staple grain of 113,000 tons, in a season when small-scale farmers had access to subsidised seed distribution and tractor hire.

The 2011 planting season has coincided with a dry spell and most small-scale farmers are dependent on rain to water their crops. Security of tenure is tenuous on Swazi Nation Land, and the majority have few or no financial resources to improve the land or install irrigation systems.

King Mswati directly appoints Swaziland’s about 300 chiefs, who can arbitrarily evict any of their subjects from communal land. Analysts say this ensures that the ban on political activities reaches all domains of Swazi society, as anyone seen to be involved in political activity can have their land confiscated without recourse.

“I live on the banks of a river [the Nkomati]. My maize crops could easily thrive if I had a simple pump and piping. What I harvest would pay for the loan, but I have no collateral because there is nothing to offer the bank. We Swazis live under chiefs - this land belongs to the king,” Sipho Magagula, a farmer in the eastern Lubombo region.

“The last harvest [earlier in 2011] was better than last year but some people are still on food assistance, especially in the Lubombo region,” Nxumalo said.

More than 100,000 Swazis receive some form of food assistance from governmental programmes and international donor schemes.

Other social services such as educational grants and pensions have either become erratic or have been suspended as the country ruled by sub-Sahara’s last absolute monarch, Mswati III, struggles to deal with the decline of receipts from the Southern African Customs Union, and profligate spending by the government and the royal household.

An agricultural specialist, who declined to be named said, “There are 200,000 OVC [orphans and vulnerable children] in Swaziland, and if you add the growing number of people on Swazi Nation Land with inadequate crop yields, we are looking at least a third of the population needing food assistance.”

IRIN

Nigeria: government probes alleged fertilizer scam

Nigeria’s ministry of agriculture is under fire over what a source in the presidency described as "inappropriate procedure" in the award of contract for the supply of fertiliser and other development programmes.

In a recent communication to the ministry, President Goodluck Jonathan expressed serious concern that "the over N98 billion expended in fertilizer" to boost agriculture this year was not properly utilized.

An insider in the presidency said the president became worried when he ordered the ministry recently to give him an update performance of this year's budget, He was shocked that the ministry may not be able to meet 70 per cent of the fertilizer requirement of the farmers this year.

According to the source, " President Jonathan had promised Nigerians that he would focus on agriculture to increase food production and storage in the country. And billions of naira was allocated to the ministry of agriculture and its parastatals in the 2011 budget. In fertilizer alone, over N98 billion was allocated for its supply to farmers; but from the ministry of agriculture's records, it is obvious that the ministry will only meet 30 per cent of the fertilizer which the federal government ordered. So, what happens to 70 percent of it?"

The source added the presidency became more worried when it discovered that,  "The pre-qualification, bidding, due process and the final award to all the successful bidders or contractors that has always been the tradition in the Federal Ministry of Agriculture was not followed. There are clear records that the ministry decided to select three companies namely, Nortore Chemicals Industries Limited, Federal Supper Phosphate Fertiliser Company and TAK Continental Limited for the supply of fertilisers", the source added.

These same companies were also given fertilizer contracts in the previous year but failed to deliver in accordance with the contract agreement.

For example, it has been gathered that Nortore Chemicals Industries Limited, as a new entrant into the business of fertiliser supply was last year awarded the contract to supply 120,000 metric tonnes of fertilizer. But the company could only supply 29,000 tonnes.

In the case of Federal Supper-Phosphate Fertiliser Company Ltd, it was awarded a contract to supply 30,000 tonnes and they could not deliver even one grain. Tak Continental limited was awarded 80,000 tonnes and the company could not also complete the supply.

The source added: "The president is not interested in who gets the contract if due process is followed, but he is deeply concerned on the issue of the commodity not reaching the farmers it is meant for. The problem is traceable to the states that use the products to satisfy political friends."   

Leadership

Malawi inputs subsidy scaled back

More than 200,000 Malawian farmers who depend on government subsidies to grow enough food to feed their families will have to go it alone when the agricultural subsidy programme is pruned.

President Bingu wa Mutharika introduced the Farm Input Subsidy Programme (FISP) in 2005 to improve national food security and lift the productivity of smallholder farmers after several years of drought brought poor harvests.

The scheme is widely seen as successful in achieving both goals, but expensive. During the 2010/11 farming season 1.6 million farmers received vouchers to buy heavily subsidised fertilizer and maize seed, costing the government and donors 23 billion kwacha (US$152.3 million).

Now, in the midst of a crippling economic crisis, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security has announced that only 1.4 million farmers are eligible to receive vouchers for the 2011/12 season, and only 140,000 metric tons of fertilizer have been purchased for distribution compared to the 170,000 tonnes it bought last year.

Florance Gusito, who lives in Nyenga village in Malawi's Southern Region, benefited from the subsidy programme in previous years and is among the more than 80 percent of the population who earn a living from subsistence farming.

"I didn't receive a subsidy because there was a shortage this year," she said. "I will buy what I can afford from the market, but buying fertilizer will be a problem because money is a problem. There is a possibility that the crop will fail."

The Village Development Committee in Ngomanjira, also in the Southern Region, had the difficult task of determining which 66 households should be registered to receive government vouchers - in 2010 there were enough vouchers for 199 households.

"The government gave us a small number of people who can benefit from the programme," said the committee treasurer, Harry Macheza. "And how can we assist those who are not registered? We don't know.”

Government officials have suggested that reducing the programme reflects its success in lifting the beneficiaries out of poverty, but Tamani Nkhono-Mvula, national coordinator of the Civil Society Agriculture Network (CISANET), is not convinced. "Most of the farmers who were benefiting from the programme, I don't think they've reached a point where they can afford to buy fertilizer themselves," he said.

The country's slowing economy means farmers are facing higher taxes, fuel shortages and falling prices for tobacco, their main cash crop.

Lizzie Shumba, who coordinates a project to improve food security and soil fertility in northern Malawi farming communities, said farmers who did not get government subsidies relied on the proceeds from their tobacco crop to buy fertilizer for growing maize, the main food crop. "The [tobacco] prices were so bad they can't afford to buy fertilizer," she said. "People had enough maize this year, but since they didn't get good prices for their tobacco, they had to sell their maize [to generate cash]. So I'm foreseeing that this season we might have some hunger, and if they don't get fertilizer it will be even worse next season."

Tobacco exports generate around 60 percent of Malawi's foreign currency reserves, but declining sales have contributed to a critical shortage of foreign exchange.

Charles Chanthunya, an economics professor at Blantyre International University, said the shortage negatively impacted the entire economy, including the FISP, which relies on foreign exchange to import fertilizer.

"There are people who won't receive a subsidy this year because the country will not be bringing in enough fertilizer," he said.

Malawi's dependence on maize as the staple food has implications for the food security of the entire population.

Concerns over poor governance and economic mismanagement by Mutharika's administration have seen international donors - including the US-based Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), the European Union and the World Bank - either freeze or terminate assistance to Malawi, which relies on foreign aid for up to 40 percent of its annual budget.

The largest donor, the UK's Department for International Development (DfID), suspended general budgetary support to Malawi in July 2011 - following a diplomatic spat between Britain, the former colonial power and Malawi's government - but agreed to assist the FISP by providing subsidised seeds to 350,000 farmers. According to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), other international donors have also pledged their financial and technical support to the FISP for 2011/12.

However, most of the FISP funding will still need to come from the government and according to Nkhono-Mvula of CISANET, this will mean reduced spending on other areas such as infrastructure and development.

Farmers are now in the process of preparing their fields and planting will start as soon as the Department of Climate Change and Meteorological Services gives the green light.

Erica Maganga, Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, on 2 October told The Nation, a national daily newspaper, that fertilizer was already being distributed to markets countrywide but Nkhono-Mvula said the government was still in the process of procuring fertilizer and distribution had yet to begin. "It's getting late, especially for the southern region," he noted.

Nkhono-Mvula also wondered how the fertilizer would be distributed in view of the fuel shortage. "As of now we don't have enough diesel in the country. I'm not sure how this is going to be solved, but the government is still saying everything will be done in time.

IRIN

Ghana: 110 combine harvesters for Northern Region rice farmers

The Ghanaian government has delivered 110 combine harvesters for distribution to farmers across the Northern Region to improve rice farms.

The machines, which come in addition to 18 larger combined harvesters distributed last year, are expected to reach the farmers early enough for the harvest season next month.

The Northern Regional Director of Agriculture, Mr Joseph Faalong,said that although the region would need more such harvesters, the latest addition would help the farmers a great deal to harvest their crops before they experienced any worse form of flooding.

Rice production in the region is expected to go up this year, following various interventions by the government and development partners under the Breadbasket project, an agricultural productivity programme for the northern part of the country.

Last year, the government subsided 100,000 tonnes of fertilisers to farmers, out of which the Northern Region consumed 39 per cent. This year, 150,000 tonnes would be subsidised to benefit more farmers who, agricultural experts in the north said, were gradually waking up to its importance in increasing yields.

With the subsidies, the farmers purchase the fertilisers for GH¢30 instead of the non-sibsidised price of GH¢45.

About 70 per cent of the total land mass of the Northern Region, measuring about 4.9 million hactares, is arable but only about 800,000 hectares (representing 16 per cent) is under cultivation, in spite of the availability of water resources in the area. About 10 per cent of the Volta Lake lies within the region to the benefit of some 210 communities.

Modern Ghana

Allegations of wrongful enrichment in Malawi fertilizer subsidy scheme

by Lusubilo Sichali

Despite the 2010/11 Farm Input Subsidy Programme (FISP) review faulting the manner in which tenders of the supply and delivery of fertilizer were offered by government, the 2011/12 procurement process is almost a repeat of the previous scenario.

Last year, the FISP review observed that some of the bidders who offered higher prices, such as Mulli Brothers of P/Bag 5145, Limbe and Nyiombo Investments of P.O. Box 40654, Lilongwe were nonetheless given a lion’s share of the programme.

According to information gathered by Nyasa Times, the two suppliers have again this time round been asked by government through the Office of the Director of Public Procurement (ODPP) to supply and deliver a total of 12000 metric tonnes (10000 Urea and 2000 NPK) and 10000 metric tonnes (NPK) each at a cost of about K1.5 billion and K1.3 billion, respectively under the 2011/12 fertilizer subsidy programme.

The two suppliers are suspected to have close links with president Bingu wa Mutharika. Another supplier also with close business ties with the Head of State is Export Trading Group who has also been offered a contract to supply 10000 metric tonnes of NPK and is expected to be paid about K1.3 billion.

Another supplier, Farm-Chem, has been offered to supply 9000 metric tonnes, which include both NPK and Urea at about K1.2 billion.

Mapeto Wholesalers’ cut is 5000 metric tonnes, as is Farmers’ World. Other suppliers include Sealand, Transglobe Produce Export and Elvis Freight, among others. Their tonnages range from 1000 to 5000. Elvis Freight belongs to Noel Masangwi, southern regional governor of the governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of president Mutharika.

Under the 2011/12 Fertilizer Subsidy Input Programme, government has planned to acquire a total of 90000 metric tonnes.

The 2010/11 review, conducted between December 2010 and February 2011 by the World Bank, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Office of ODPP and Central Internal Audit Unit, said the award criterion used in the bidding documents was weak and, therefore, did not ensure value for money.

“Awards were not relative to the unit price offered by bidders. Bidders offering relatively higher prices were in many circumstances awarded higher quantities. This was mainly due to the fact that the use of minimum price as a determinant of quantities awarded was not clearly stipulated in the tender document.

“The prices offered by bidders under the tender were also relatively higher compared with prices received for tenders for similar goods during the same period, implying that bidders perceived higher risks associated with FISP procurement,” the review read in part.

The 2010/11 review had recommended that the ministry of agriculture should publish results of the 2011/12 award in local papers and ODPP website and should write to all disqualified bidders giving reasons for disqualification of their bids. It has not done so yet, despite having already informed the winning bidders.

Nyasa Times

Malawi's farm subsidies are successful but not a long-term solution

It is almost harvest time in Mzimba district, northern Malawi, but Saliet Nyasulu's maize crop looks dry and stunted and it will be hard to feed herself and her three children this year. "[The maize] won't last until next harvest," she said. "I'll have to do piece-work and grow some vegetables by the river."

Nyasulu was among the 1.6 million smallholder farmers who received government coupons to buy maize seed and fertilizer for the 2010/11 farming season at a tenth of what they would normally cost.

"The soil is good only if you use fertilizer," she said, but the two 50kg bags of subsidized fertilizer allotted per household were not nearly enough to get a healthy crop of maize from her one hectare of land, especially after a dry start to the year. "I had to use less than recommended."

The government's farm input subsidy programme was first implemented in 2005 after several years of drought and chronic food shortages left nearly a quarter of the population in need of food aid.

Most small-scale farmers, who account for about 80 percent of the country's agricultural production, grow maize, Malawi's main staple crop. President Bingu wa Mutharika hoped to avoid the need for future food handouts by distributing coupons for maize seed and fertilizer to the poorest 50 percent of farmers.

The government has since credited the programme with several years of bumper maize harvests that have given the country a surplus and contributed to strong economic growth. There is little doubt that the subsidies have greatly improved food security and helped reduce the number of Malawians living below the poverty line from 60 percent in 2004 to less than 45 percent in 2009.

However, a number of smallholder farmers said they either did not qualify for the programme, or did not receive enough subsidized fertilizer to make a significant difference to their yields. Several said they received only one 50kg bag this year and had to share it with a neighbour.

As the programme goes into its sixth year, there are also growing concerns about long-term sustainability and the extent to which it has diverted attention and resources from other initiatives that could help farmers.

"It has really taken people out of hunger," said Elizabeth Sibale, a consultant at the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in Malawi, "but it's not a lasting solution."

The cost of fertilizer and transporting it to farmers all over the country has risen steeply in recent years and by 2008/09 the programme was draining 16 percent of the national budget and nearly 7 percent of GDP.

The government has scaled down the programme in the last two years, but it still cost 23 billion kwacha (US$152.3 million) in 2010/11, according to the UK's Department for International Development (DFID), which is providing 5 percent of funding (since suspended). In total, about 10 percent of the programme is donor funded.

"Other programmes are not getting as much attention and funding," Sibale said. "We're forgetting all the other problems that affect farmers and putting a band aid on them."

One of the main problems faced by farmers in Malawi is an increasingly unpredictable climate. Lake Malawi, several other lakes and hundreds of rivers cover a fifth of the country, but only 3 percent of land is irrigated. Most smallholder farmers depend on a good rainy season for their one harvest of the year.

"If the rains are good, I get a good crop," said another farmer in Mzimba district. "If the rains are not good, then it's a disaster."

Sibale said the government had made some efforts to expand irrigation in the last five years by distributing treadle pumps to farmers. However, the Green Belt Initiative, an ambitious plan to irrigate one million hectares along the Shire River in the south of the country has yet to be implemented.

There are other problems too. When Malawi was less densely populated, farmers could leave a field fallow for a year so the soil could recover. But with increasing pressure on land and easier access to fertilizers, “People have completely forgotten how to keep soil healthy," said Sibale. "Now it's so degraded, they have to use more fertilizer every year."

Victor Mhoni of the Civil Society Agriculture Network (CISANET), a local NGO, said long-term fertilizer use actually contributed to soil degradation by making it dry and acidic unless combined with measures that can restore fertility such as planting nitrogen-fixing trees or growing legume crops.

Programmes promoting agroforestry and growing legumes have already shown impressive results, and farmers eventually need much smaller quantities of fertilizer to produce good yields. In the last five years, the World Agroforestry Centre, in partnership with government and NGOs, has reached nearly 200,000 farmers with tree seeds and training on how to grow nitrogen-fixing trees, as well as fruit trees and fast-growing trees for firewood.

Mesha Khongolo planted gliricidia, a type of nitrogen-fixing tree, using seed he was given by the Ministry of Agriculture's local Extension Development office. He estimated that incorporating the leaves and branches into his soil had increased his yields by more than 50 percent.

Nyasulu tried planting some tree seeds but they failed to germinate and she is now growing pigeon pea, a tall, leafy legume with a similar effect but quicker results. By 2012 she should see an improvement in her soil and get a healthier crop of maize.

DFID's five year commitment to the input subsidy programme ends in June 2011. "We are currently considering options for new support to agriculture in Malawi," wrote Malawi-based Communications Officer Andrew Massa, in an emailed response to questions.

"There's been a lot of rhetoric about food security being solved in Malawi with the input subsidy programme and I just don't think that's true," said Rachel Bezner-Kerr, a Canadian researcher who has worked on a project to promote legume inter-cropping in Mzimba district.

"It's a short-term solution, but in the long term you're really not any further ahead after spending millions of dollars if you haven't found alternative solutions to improving soil fertility."

IRIN 

Senegal: Groundnuts producer price subsidy removed

The government of Senegal has removed price support subsidy paid to farmers of groundnut. As the new rain season begins, the budget set aside to support groundnut farming has been decreased from 38 to 25 billion CFA francs.

The Minister of Agriculture announced at a recent inter-ministerial meeting on the outcome of the last crop year that the government decided to remove the subsidy in the producer price of groundnuts for the 2011-2012 campaign because, "the price of groundnut is already very high. Today you can not have a kilo of peanuts for less than 250 CFA francs, while the official price is 165 CFA francs.''

He said the money saved would be used for farm equipment and fertilizers.

US farm subsidies cuts unlikely to benefit African farmers

by Gemma Ware

Q&A by TheAfricaReport.com with Ambassador Ron Kirk, US Trade Representative before the recent AGOA meeting in Lusaka, Zambia.

...(AGOA) has substantially increased trade between the United States and Sub-Saharan Africa, but when you dig into that though, we are a little bit sobered by the reality that 90 per cent of the commerce under AGOA is still petroleum-related.

Of some 6,000 products that are eligible under AGOA our utilisation rate is probably less than 10 per cent. The challenge we think is an opportunity to help many of the AGOA eligible countries diversify away from oil and begin to look at more value-added products and manufacturing...to really spur job growth, increase exports and attack poverty.

Q: On 31 May the House Appropriations Committee agreed a deal to cut back on farm subsidies in the US, something African producers claim have been a huge burden on them. Is this a signal of something larger to come and is it good news for African producers?

Ron Kirk: We understand that for many in Africa see US or European Union agricultural policy as acting to the detriment of poor farmers, but the reality is that the overwhelming majority of poor farmers in the world are agrarian farmers. They operate on less than a hectare of land, they produce just barely enough to feed their families.

Even if the United States should hypothetically do away with all agricultural export subsidies, its hard for me to conceive a world in which one farmer with a hectare of land is all of a sudden going to become a global competitor, particularly if we can’t address the dire need for improving infrastructure within Africa.

In order to successfully compete globally, you have to have a strong ports system, a strong aviation system, a strong railroad and transportation system to get goods… from farm to market. The sad reality is that in many countries that is lacking.

The issue of the United States attacking export subsidies is just one part of the equation. In order to strengthen the export competitiveness of farmers in Africa, I think we have to take a more holistic look at all the other investments that are required to make that leap.

full interview...The Africa Report

Britain stops fertilizer subsidy support to Malawi

by Mabvuto Banda

Britain has cut financial support for a highly successful seed and fertiliser programme in Malawi, the latest round in a spiralling diplomatic dispute between London and the impoverished southern African nation.

Malawi's former colonial master has also suspended visa-free travel for President Bingu wa Mutharika, his wife, and other top officials pending a "review" of bilateral ties, High Commission political officer Lewis Kulisewa told Reuters.

Britain said last month it was freezing aid worth $550 million over the next four years following the spat, which started with a leaked cable that described Mutharika as "autocratic and intolerant of criticism".

It had been unclear whether the Farm Inputs Subsidy Programme (FISP), as the fertiliser scheme was called, was included in the suspension given the huge benefits it has brought to thousands of Malawian farmers and the wider economy.

"New aid commitments are on hold while this review takes place and the 2011/2012 FISP is part of this," the Department of International Development (DfID), Britain's aid arm, said in an e-mailed response to a query.

The programme, which provides subsidies to small farmers, has been in place since 2004 and has boosted harvests in a country that has historically suffered from food shortages.

In the last four years, Britain has spent $20 million on the programme.

Malawi has already announced that this year it will only import 90,000 tonmes of fertilizer, half of last year's amount.

The number of farmers under the programme is also expected to be reduced from the 1.6 million families that have benefited from the subsidy, so hunger could increase in rural areas.

Malawi is expected to harvest 3.8 million tonnes of maize this year, up from 3.5 million the previous year, despite some dry periods during the year.

Growing harvests have helped annual economic growth to average a brisk 7 percent in the last five years and contain inflation to single digits. Food accounts for 58 percent of the consumer price index.

Reflecting the aid freeze, the finance ministry is planning a budget based on zero funding from the foreign donors that have typically provided 40 percent of government revenues -- a ploy derided by some newspapers as a "time bomb" that could trigger an uprising against Mutharika.

"Let us stop the charade and accept that we are, at best, undertaking an exercise in futility," the Maravi Post newspaper said in an editorial. "

Reuters