Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team , FAO- Cairo 2015

Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Wird geladen in …3
×

Hier ansehen

1 von 46 Anzeige

Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team , FAO- Cairo 2015

Herunterladen, um offline zu lesen

Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team , FAO- Cairo 2015

Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team , FAO- Cairo 2015

Anzeige
Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Diashows für Sie (20)

Andere mochten auch (15)

Anzeige

Ähnlich wie Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team , FAO- Cairo 2015 (20)

Weitere von Nena Agri (13)

Anzeige

Aktuellste (20)

Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team , FAO- Cairo 2015

  1. 1. Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region Jacques Marzin CIRAD, Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM, Pascal Bonnet CIRAD, International Coordination Team FAO Cairo 03-03-2015
  2. 2. Small and Family Farms study in NENA regions Part 1. Concepts and approach Jacques Marzin and Pascal Bonnet (CIRAD), Omar Bessaoud CIHEAM-IAMM Département Environement et Société Cairo, March 3rd, 2015
  3. 3.  Origin of the study  Recent (or not) work on family agriculture from CIRAD and CIHEAM-IAMM teams For the IYFF  Maximization of synergies with RI SSA Introduction (1)
  4. 4. www.fao.org/cfs/cfs-hlpe Some publications
  5. 5. Some publications
  6. 6.  RAFAC network  Regional Workshop on FF. FAO-Tunis. Nov. 2013  International Symposium of Montpellier. June 2014
  7. 7.  Technical issues are essential, but focusing on SSA and FF imply not to do just business as usual  What are the consequences of the technical recommendations / activities on SSA / FF? Why consequences of the same technical innovation may be different in different contexts? So, need to understand if and why the technical issue is a success. Need for concepts and contextualization  Definition issues are important. But, the most important is to know them, rather than getting an unique and universal definition Introduction (2)
  8. 8. Regional diversity of holding size patterns in the 81-country subset of FAO-WCA
  9. 9. Size by volumes of sales (USA) 2007 2002 1997 Less than 50 000 US $ / year 78% 79% 76% Source: USDA, 2009. 2007 Census of Agriculture. United States, 739 p. With 30% increase in the less than 2500 US$ class and over 65% 500 000 US$
  10. 10. “Family farming can be defined as a form of agricultural operation where the domestic sphere and production activities share organic links, and which mobilizes only family workers, excluding permanent hired labor” Source : autors A global definition and typology consistent with census and with national strategies
  11. 11. 1. Small scale agriculture and family farming 2. Structural change 3. Policy issues Content
  12. 12.  Not one but multiple pathways to increase income generation:  labor intensification with increasing level of inputs  Diversification of incomes (in and off-farms)  Scale economy : mechanization  Integration of value added at level farm (certification, local transformation and consumption…) Small family farms (1)
  13. 13.  Small and family farms are not just productive enterprises:  Production, indeed, but not just production.  Consumption, self-consumption, gender and generational issues  Different sources of inputs and destination of outputs  Social community interactions (access to resources) Small family farms (2)
  14. 14. SSA –FF in the context of the LiveliHood: Policy instruments that sustain the strategies of households
  15. 15. 1. Small scale agriculture and family farming 2. Structural change 3. Policy issues Content
  16. 16.  Common long term dynamic : changes in the economic specialization  But pathways differ, and challenges have changed :  Existence of exit options from agriculture  Youth employment issues  Industrialization process change  Services, and RH preparation Structural change (1)
  17. 17. -1-.5 0 .5 1 4 6 8 10 12 LNGDPpc (Constant US$-2000) Agri. GDP Share (LCU) Agri. Employment Share Agri. GDP Share (LCU)minusAgri. Employment Share Timmer 2009 A trend …
  18. 18. … but multiple pathways
  19. 19.  Agriculture versus rural approach or farms versus landscape / territorial approach  Employment is not just and agriculture issue. Off farms, migrations, mobility  Public investments matter: roads, local markets, capacity building, provision of public services … Structural change (2)
  20. 20. Source: processing of UN data, World Population Prospects, 2010 Revision South-Est Asia South and central Asia Sub-Saharan Africa 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 Billions of young workers arriving on the labor market 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Employment for youth is a huge challenge
  21. 21. ES and agriculture practices: trade-off and synergies (Foley et al. 2005 Science)
  22. 22. 1. Small scale agriculture and family farming 2. Structural change 3. Policy issues Content
  23. 23.  One doesn’t fit all  Prospective and strategic vision :  what agriculture / population repartition / rural landscape / natural resources availability do we want in 20 years?  What are the real dynamics of :  SSA / family farms  Structural change  Policy coherence / diversity of the tools Policy issues (1)
  24. 24. Family farming and natural resources management No evidence of FF good practices, but specific knowledge
  25. 25.  Policies options exist: Specific tools for SSA / FF or not Different technical pathways (chemical intensification, GMO, agroecology, organic agriculture …) Different organizations of value chain Policy issues (2)
  26. 26.  Many possible policy tools to support small scale and family producers : Land and tenure policies Price policy and regulation Credit and insurance policies Extension and regulation / support Public support to private investments Public support to producers organizations Public investments in infrastructure Policy issues (2)
  27. 27. Thank you so much
  28. 28. Regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region: Objectives, Results, Approach and methodology part 2: methodology, study planning, perspectives
  29. 29. Study In a Nutshell • National studies Objectives – Gather Knowledge on characterizing “Small Scale Family Farming SSA, FF”, structural change, public policies (refer to part 1 concepts) – Identify and Analyze Experiences (projects /stories / case studies) + Policy tools/instruments used – Provide Recommandations for further support by Public Policy, and Methodological Guidelines to replicating studies in other contexts • National studies Steps – Assembling skills – Launching National workshop on methodology – Data collection based on stats and documents, – Interviews and focus groups: identification and analysis of relevant case studies – Debriefing / Restitution to FAO / National Ministries – Study Synthesis (comparative)
  30. 30. Steps • Conceptual framework – Development 2014-2015 – Sharing in meeting held in Cairo, 2015 March 2nd and 3rd • Selection of countries for National studies – five selected countries (Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Mauritania) • 4 focus countries (active in RI) • 1 RI candidate country • Countries with Long standing history of partnership with CIRAD and CIHEAM IAMM , with variety of experience and contrasted policies (including NARS, Ministries, civil society, private sector..) .. to avoid slow implementation of study
  31. 31. Steps • National team formation • National coordinator – Role: Leads the implementation of country studies, with as much interaction as necessary between country teams and the coordination team (CIRAD and CIHEAM-IAMM) • 5 country teams – Analysts in their domain – Strong interactions with FAO representatives and concerned Ministries – Role: Identify a circle of key informants to be interviewed / consulted, Carry out Interview , Analyse document and Data
  32. 32. Deliverables 5 national reports : • A documented analysis based on available secondary data, describing characteristics and dynamics of SSA-FF and their integration into the national economy. – the identification of existing typologies, and how they have contributed -or not- to the design and implementation of targeted public policy; – the identification of necessary information to measure or estimate the contribution of SSA - FF to food, feed and non food production, food security, employment -especially women and young- and the provision of ecosystem services; – the analysis of business models of the different kind of farms and of the modalities of public support (economic or social) that impacts farm incomes • (Issues of access to market, to credit and the social policies for most vulnerable farmers / examples of success and failures; – the situation of SSA-FF’s access to resources: land, water, capital as conditions for their sustainability in a global changing environment – the elements of a prospective reflexion on how the SSA-FF could play a role at improving food security, tackling poverty, aligning agricultural income with the one of other sectors
  33. 33. Deliverables 5 national reports (2) • The identification of the websites of organizations that focuses on the support to SSA-FF in the country in terms of : • research, promotion of innovation and policy tools; • supply of credit services, market information, technical and economic support; • contribution of producers’ organizations, activities targeted to SSA-FF, their governance, and their capacity buildings programs. • identifying the contribution of public institutions involved in SSA-FF’s support.
  34. 34. Deliverables 5 national reports (3) • A documented and historical analysis of the support that SSA-FF are receiving through public policy, including: – the identification of strategies, policies, programs or projects specifically focused on SSA-FF, especially those with positive results (case studies); – a business models analysis of success stories aiming at linking SSA-FF to markets and value chains. The analysis of the reasons for this success, when documented, will be included. • An executive summary to be presented at the final national workshop – WS with key partners aiming at identifying common actions that promote the development of SSA-FF, in the framework of a future national strategy for SSA-FF
  35. 35. Deliverables Regional Synthesis Summary Report • A regional synthesis summary report based on the 5 validated national reports, summarizing the reports of national dialogues & meetings and including: – An analysis of the dynamics of family / smallholder agriculture, conditions to improve their productivity and to better access and benefit from markets/value chains • (issues of rural youth jobs, and to the sustainability of production systems); – Proposals for concrete actions to overcome the deficiencies and gaps identified in terms of knowledge and coordination; in terms of lack of professionalization of farmers associations – Policy recommendations that would lead to a medium-term development plan MTDP for the development of SSA-FF • in order for FAO and its partners to establish plans of action with options for scientific collaboration with Research Organisations, Cirad and CIHEAM • Final regional workshop planned at the end of the study with participation of national and international coordinators for presenting results organized by FAO (including activities for the preparation of the program).
  36. 36. Study Planning in 3 phases Phase 1 • Program within 6 month period • Phase 1 / Month 1.5 (W1-6): Preliminary work & Focus on Methodology • The Validation of the methodology between the international coordination team and national teams with the participation of FAO – Methodology, team formation and precise definition and sharing of tasks • Finalization of database structures to host – Scientific bibliography – Economic secondary data (SD) – Regulatory framework: SD – Institutions and Networks: SD – Emblematic examples / case studies: SD – Interviews: Ministries, Producers Organizations, private sector, political parties, civil society • National Methodological Workshops
  37. 37. Four types of information will be collected • National (Ministries, POs, think tanks …) or International documents – Institutional: Committee on World Food Security / HLPE, FAO (including the synthesis of the regional dialogue in October 2013 in Tunis), IFAD, the World Bank, IMF, CIHEAM, European Union ...) – Academic and Non-academic literature focusing on the SFF, on the regulatory framework and on agricultural public policies will be mobilized; • Macroeconomic data to identify the dynamics of structural change (national statistics); • Information and messages sourced from websites of institutions and networks working on the theme – including national institutions and international organizations such as FAO, the World Bank, ICARDA, ACSAD, ILRI, CIHEAM, CIRAD, World Rural Forum, ADB (AFDB) and key NGOs; • Interviews with national and local stakeholders in the agricultural and rural development: – Key informants: government ministries and local governments - within agriculture, social security, employment, decentralization / local authorities ... - and politicians at national and local level, leaders of producers organizations, organizations of civil society, local development associations, researchers and representatives of private agricultural sector and value chains;
  38. 38. Study Planning in 3 phases Phase 2 • Phase 2 / (W4-18-26): Country study • CS Country study W4: Kick off meeting • Informing W4-W11: Structural change analysis, Access to secondary data, Interviews, Synthesis macro economy, Synthesis SFF, Synthesis success stories, Synthesis regulatory framework / sectorial policies –credit, extension, • First draft of country reports (Country Teams) W11 • Improvement of country reports, exchanges between country team members and national coordinator (Team members) W11-13 • Improvement & Finalisation of country reports W13 -18 (International Coord + National)
  39. 39. Study Planning in 3 phases Ph3 • Regional synthesis – Final global report (synthesis) including final versions of country studies W18-26 • The presentation of the study summary and the debate on results, with eventually the facilitation of a political dialogue and the formalization of final proposals and recommendations.
  40. 40. Perspective and vision…built on the “lessons learnt”• FAO – RI framework: improved coordination and integration with partners involved – Proposals : • knowledge platform to share informations - strengthening appropriation of results of actions supporting Family Farming • Exchange mechanisms (exchange experience and skills..) on FF& SSA • Countries – Thematic Workshop (employment opportunities for youth, rural diversification of activities, gender approach, public policy tools…) – To feed Prospectives (Agriculture for the futur ? Farms models ? Tenure legislation? Rural society..) • Research – Conjointly building of research questions (typologies of SSA, technical model,…) and assisting capacity building (training sessions …) – Promote research networks and research activities in line with your efforts
  41. 41. Thank you so much
  42. 42. Thank you for your attention
  43. 43. Adoption of the regional study on small scale agriculture in the NENA region proposal Discussions Points of clarification, Emphasis
  44. 44. Context / trends Structure Activities Performance / sustainability Environment / determinants Access permitted by… Livelihood platform Composed of and resulting in Composed of With effects on National & internat. trends & context Population & migration.. technological change, .. national policies, Shocks Drough, Floods, Pests, Diseases, Civil war. Institutions •Rules and customs •Land tenure •Markets in practice Organisations •Local associations •NGOs •Local administration •State agencies Liveliho od Strategi es Specialization Diversification Intensification (chemical Ecological), Extensification, Concentration / fragmentation Migration, Rental strategies Combined strategies, including collective Naturel ressources based activities •NR-based non farm and non farm activities •Cultivation (food & market) •Cattering (food & market) •Livestock Non naturel ressources based activities •Wages •Rural trade •Rural services •Rural manufacture •Remittances •Others transfers Economical sust. Production & income level and stability Seasonality Degrees of risk Food security Market integration Environm. sust. ESS/ES Soil & land qualitiy Water Rangeland Forests Biodiversity Energetic balance Carbon balance capabilities / functioning Social relations •Gender /Class •Age •Ethnicity •Urban/rural •Social & political participation Social and human sustainability Gain in education Health situation Social & political part. Collective dynamics Tangible & intangible (claims) assets Natural capital Physical capital Human capital Financial capital Social capital Local trends & context local economic trends (incl. comodity chains), collective dynamics, access to public goods, natural ressources Sourisseau et al, 2012 (derived from Chambers 1991 and Scoones 2009 SRL)

Hinweis der Redaktion

  • What is important is the link between domestic sphere and production activities, between an household and a production unit.
    Considering the nature of this link, there is a gradient of situations, from « pure » family farms to « pure » corporate farms.
    But, to measure FF numbers and contribution, we propose, considering this continuum, to distinguish 3 global ideal types of agriculture.
    The most relevant and operational criteria to qualify the proximity between household and production unit is the nature of the labor mobilized.
    The first ideal type is FF, defined as a form of agricultural operation where the domestic sphere and production activities share organic links, and which mobilizes only family workers, excluding permanent hired labor.
    The second ideal type is FBF, which share FF and CF characteristics, labor is a mix of family and full time hired labor.
    The third one is CF, totally disconnected to family and functioning only with hired workers.
    These typology can be consistent with national agricultural census.
    It looks radical, but it gives an objective and comprehensive approach to identify and measure FF at a global level and insist on strategies rather than size or ideology.
  • Following this pathway, you reach high incomes, and also what Peter Timmer called in 2009 a world without agriculture.
    And he gives evidences, the richer your country is, the lower is the agriculture GDP share, and the lower is the agriculture employment share.
    And that the way it goes.
  • Following this pathway, you reach high incomes, and also what Peter Timmer called in 2009 a world without agriculture.
    And he gives evidences, the richer your country is, the lower is the agriculture GDP share, and the lower is the agriculture employment share.
    And that the way it goes.
  • Third, the employment challenge is huge, specially in SSA and South Asia. Their urban and rural population will continue to increase for the next decades. It’s not because urban part of the population is growing that rural population in numbers diminish. How can these national economies absorb both the continuing flows of workers arriving on urban and rural labor markets + those who are expected to leave agriculture.
  • And finally, still with our definition, we have no evidence of FF goods practices in naturel resources management.
    If their living condition and access to natural resources make them vulnerable, FF can destroy these natural resources. All FF are not acting in a sustainable way.
    On the diagram we can see that they implement technical systems with strong environmental impacts, and that they can also be highly dependent on agri-supplies.
    But evidence exist also on their specific knowledge of their ecosystem, and on their best practices when conditions access are fair.
    FF can potentially manage, if they benefit from the right supports, a sustainable agroecology.

×