OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS...OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS in 13 CoUNtRIeS oF WeSt...
Transcript of OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS...OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS in 13 CoUNtRIeS oF WeSt...
OBSERVATION OF FAMILYFARM DYNAMICS
in 13 CoUNtRIeS oF WeSt AFRICAduring the 2014 - 2016 agricultural campaigns
ReGIoNAl FAMIlY FARMS oBSeRVAtoRY(oFF/RoPPA)
JANUARY 2017
2016
REP
ORT
OF
ROPP
A’S
REG
ION
AL
OB
SERV
ATO
RY O
F FA
MIL
Y F
ARM
SBo
ok
let
Executive Summary of the Report:.................................................................................4Presentation.....................................................................................................................7
Chapter 1 : The 2015/2016 agricultural campaign........................................................9(1) The 2015/2016 AGRICULTURAL CAMPAIGN: better than campaign
2014 / 2015 as a whole ........................................................................................................................10(2) Comments on the agricultural campaign results and first findings...................................15
Chapter 2 : Approaches and results of family farms during the past agricultural campaign..19(3) Approaches and results of family farms in the Sahelo-Sudan countries
(NIGER, BURKINA FASO, MALI)...........................................................................................................24(4) Approaches and results of family farms in coastal countries of the West
Atlantic Facade SENEGAL, GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU) ..............................................................27(5) Approaches and results of family farms in forest-rich countries recently
affected by Ebola (GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA)................................................................33(6) Approaches and results of family farms in the coastal countries
of the South Atlantic Facade (CÔTE D'IVOIRE, GHANA, TOGO, BENIN ................................37
Chapter 3 : The Strategies of Family Farms....................................................................43(7) Types of information produced by the ROPPA national platforms
on family farm strategies ....................................................................................................................44(8) The driving force of family farm strategies...................................................................................44(9) Approaches of family strategies......................................................................................................45(10) Terms of family strategy implementation.....................................................................................48
Chapter 4 : Conclusions drawn by ROPPA on the observation of family farfeatures during the 2014-15 and 2015-16 agricultural campaignsHOW TO STRENGTHEN THE VIABILITY of family farms?...............................................49
(11) The multifunctional dimension of FFs as the basis for their viability and resilience....50(12) Perception of family farm viability by ROPPA platform members:
a conditioned viability ........................................................................................................................51(13) FFs' contribution to national economies and national companie
justifies the interest of States ............................................................................................................52(14) To sustainably improve the viability of FFs, they should be made
more attractive to young people and women............................................................................54
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ..............................................................................56
Tables:
COMPARATIVE TABLE A : THE 2015/2016 CAMPAIGN (indicative data accordinto the platforms analysis)....................................................................................................................10
COMPARATIVE TABLE B : TRENDS IN THE EVOLUTION OF OF FAMILFARM RESULTS (2015/2016) ...............................................................................................................22
Summary
4
The 1st Report of the ROPPA REGIONAL OBSER-VATORY OF FAMILY FARMS (OEF / ROPPA) ad-dresses four issues that successively deliver (i) afarmer’s interpretation of West African familyfarm features over the past two agriculturalcampaigns; (ii) a table of local advisory supportreceived by these FFs; (iii) an analysis of the po-licies these FFs and their central organizationshad to face; and (iv) the OEF perspectives. At thesame time, ROPPA took advantage of the infor-mation generating process that documentedthis first report to analyze its current family farmmonitoring practices. For convenience of use,this report is broken down into four BOOKLETSand one SUMMARY and CONCLUSION docu-ment. The part of the report dealing with the obser-vation of family farm features on the 2 agricul-tural campaigns constitute the core of thisbooklet (BOOKLET 1: OBSERVATION OF FAMILYFARMS). From this observation, it can be noti-ced from one year to another that, dependingon climatic patterns, but also on the intensityof public support, family farms are able tomake significant progress and thus improvethe food security and sovereignty of the re-gion. Thus, 8 countries in the West African re-gion improved their yields for the 2015 - 2016agricultural campaign compared to the pre-vious year. These include Niger, Mali, Senegal,Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leoneand Liberia. For most of these 8 countries, foodshortage was more efficiently dealt with thisyear as family and community granaries werewell provisioned, yields from harvest / coun-ter-season activities were substantial, marketswere well stocked, and prices remained stable.In these 8 countries, the good rainfall in 2015and favorable public policies (especially onsubsidies), coupled with family farm strategiesand the action of FOs, generally favored theseresults. In some areas, natural disasters, civil in-security and shortcomings in the implemen-
tation of public actions have limited the resultsof the agricultural campaign. On this point, thereport concludes that, alongside natural fac-tors, human action (FF strategies, State action)remains equally decisive. It also concludes thatFOs should develop the monitoring of agricul-tural campaigns in order to strengthen theirrole in the setting and implementation of po-licies.This part of the report also lays down an as-sessment of the yields from family farms pergroup of countries that share more or less thesame eco-geographical and socio-culturalcharacteristics. So in the Sudan-Sahel coun-tries (Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger), FFs have beenrather self-sufficient and often in surplus re-garding food production, with an increase inlivestock production, a good marketing, an in-crease in revenues, and a contribution to eco-nomies. The coastal countries of the westernAtlantic seaboard (Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Se-negal) have also had an increase in food andlivestock production and improved marketingconditions, except in one country (Guinea Bis-sau). In the forest-rich countries recently affec-ted by the Ebola epidemic (Guinea, Liberia,Sierra Leone), there has been a distinct in-crease in food production but a slower in-crease in animal and fishery production andthe supply hardly keeps pace with market de-mand. Finally, in the coastal countries of thesouthern Atlantic seaboard (Benin, Côted'Ivoire, Ghana, Togo), there is, on the contrary,a downward trend in food production even iffood security is not threatened. However, lives-tock farming is in progress.The report identifies, for the 4 groups of coun-tries, the factors that have favored or constrai-ned the yields of FFs and provides informationon the strategies implemented by the familyfarms to achieve the objectives they pursuegiven the opportunities and constraints thatarise. Finally, the report concludes that section
Executive Summary of the Report:
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
5
with an analysis of the sustainability of FFs inWest Africa, which will progressively dependon their ability to transform themselves so asto always be more attractive to young peopleand women. Several arguments point to thefact that FFs should draw the interests ofStates in view of their substantial contributionto national economies and businesses.
The observations in BOOKLET 2 (OBSERVA-TION OF FARMER ADVISORY SUPPORT TO FA-MILY FARMS) give an overview of the currentservices offered by FOs regarding advice andsupport to family farms. Outcomes show thatmajor farmer based support systems to FFs existin 5 countries (Burkina Faso, Mali, Senegal, Gui-nea, and Benin), partially functional or under de-velopment farmer systems in 4 countries (Niger,Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana), and that there arenot yet farmer support systems to FFs in 4 coun-tries (Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Sierra Leone,Togo). This booklet also describes and makes acomparative analysis of the practices and sys-tems of farmer support, and an identification ofthe conditions under which farmer practicesand support systems to FFs are developed.Eventually, after a first assessment of the out-comes of these farmer systems, the report sug-gests progress perspectives in this 2nd Booklet,particularly the promotion of a national supportand advisory system to family farms (SNAAP /EF) in each country, based on the FO / Statepartnership, and making it possible to reinforcethe adaptation and proximity of advisory ser-vices to family farms. It should be noted herethat, in this view, 5 countries (Burkina Faso,Gambia, Guinea, Mali and Senegal) already haveproposals jointly developed by the national far-mer platform and the supervisory ministry ineach country. BOOKLET 3 (MONITORING OF PUBLIC POLI-CIES WITH REGARDS TO FAMILY FARMS andEFFECTIVENESS OF FARMERS ACTIONS) givesthe analysis and appreciation by the farmer or-ganizations of the main current public policiesfrom the point of view of their effects on the FFs.This analysis focuses on the main public policiesknown to POs in each country. They are identi-
fied and the effects of their implementation areassessed by area. Six areas were identified: theuse of seeds and other inputs, building facilitiesand infrastructure, support for animal and fishproduction, support for marketing, access to fi-nance and credit, and access to land). The posi-tive effects of recent policies on family farms inmost States are significant in terms of improvedaccess to inputs; they are more mitigated regar-ding product marketing; there are problems forsmall-scale family farmers, for women, for lives-tock farmers in several countries in terms of landsecurity and access to managed land. The pea-sants watch also highlights many policy imple-mentation problems and analyzes the recentwork of national platforms on policies and itsmain results. The second part of this Booklet outlines themain regional policies which ROPPA is involvedin, their instruments and regional implementa-tion programs (regional food security reserve,development programs of UEMOA priority sec-tors, PRAPS - Sahelian pastoralism PRIDEC - far-ming in coastal countries, GAFSP, Sahelirrigation, PAPROSEM, rice offensive). The politi-cal positioning of ROPPA is presented in colla-boration with networks of FOs and CSO partnersand an assessment is made of the results obtai-ned through their lobbying and their expectedeffects on family farms. Significant progress inthe participation of POs in political dialogue ishighlighted. Based on the internal reflections of ROPPAprompted by the results of its policy watch atthe time of the validation of its first report, thisbooklet highlights nine cross-cutting issueswhich ROPPA is and will remain particularly sen-sitive to: (i) the temptation to focus on industrialagriculture to the detriment of family farming;(ii) spatial management and land use planning;(iii) renewal of natural resources and anticipa-tion of climate change; (iv) fisheries and aqua-culture; ; (v) management of pastoralism inpolicies; (vi) inclusion of women in policies; (vii)inclusion of young people in policies; (viii) secu-rity in the rural world; (ix) the definition and im-plementation of policies.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
BOOKLET 4 (MONITORING PRACTICES OFROPPA PO MEMBERS ) presents the picture ofcurrent monitoring practices of agriculturalcampaigns, monitoring practice of family farmbehaviors and results, advisory support prac-tices and the political watch practices of ROPPAplatforms that gathered the information used toproduce the first ROPPA OEF report. This inven-tory, mainly for internal use, should serve as abasis for improving these practices in the pro-cess of progressive consolidation of this obser-vatory.
Finally the REPORT SUMMARY shows the cha-racteristics of this first report, summarizes the
knowledge produced by farmer organizationson the dynamics of family farms, how to followand support them, and the assessments of far-mer organizations on policies relating to familyfarms, as developed in all 4 Booklets, and out-lines the prospects of the ROPPA family farm ob-servatory, particularly in terms of disseminationof this report (which for ROPPA is only the firstof a series), and in terms of the progressive im-provement of its observation and consolidationmechanisms of the ROPPA Regional OEF.
6
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
The observatory of family farms gradually built byROPPA seeks to inform on the behavior of familyfarms over the agricultural campaigns. It is fed bythe information provided by the monitoring of thecampaigns carried out by the PO of each countryand those from the various monitoring systems offamily farms, which remain unevenly developedaccording to the PO.This booklet includes four chapters:• Chapter 1 presents the overall characteristics
of the last agricultural campaigns (2014 /2015 and 2015/2016) retained by ROPPAbased on observations made by its nationalplatforms.
• Chapter 2 presents per country the main ap-proaches and results of family farms duringthese campaigns.
• Chapter 3 : presents the observations made bythe national platforms on the family farmstrategies
• Chapter 4: presents the first critical assessmentof ROPPA based on the observation of the be-havior of farms on the issue of conditions ofthe current viability of family farms
Depending on the nature of the information givenby the PO, the choice was made to present the be-havior of family farms during the last agriculturalcampaigns in a geographical empirical groupingof 4 sets of countries which have some natural orsocio-political features in common:– Countries of the Sahel Sudanian zone
(NIGER, BURKINA FASO, MALIThese three countries do not have coastal ac-cess. They have two to three major agro-eco-logical zones (Savannah, Sahel, Sahara - butthe inputs of Niger and Mali do not deal withthe Saharan areas), and are all affected by theterrorism. These countries are traditionally ce-real growing zones where pastoralism or agro-pastoralism play an important part, butunevenly populated in this report.
– Coastal countries of the west Atlantic fa-cade (SENEGAL, GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU)This grouping is due to its reference to theEbola fever epidemic (MVE) , but seems signi-ficant on the last two campaigns (the disorga-nizing effects of the epidemic are stillperceptible in 2016). What these countrieshave in common is that they benefit from na-tural favorable conditions (strong potential).The share of tubers is important in their agri-cultural production. In Guinea, the rearing oflarge ruminants is very limited by theconstraints of climate. The effects of civil warsare still perceptible in Sierra Leone and in Libe-ria. Space competition with the FF of industrialplantations and the action of companies is im-portant
– Coastal countries of the south Atlantic fa-cade (GUINÉE, SIERRA LEONE, LIBÉRIA)Ce regroupement est conjoncturel par rapportà sa référence à l’épidémie de fièvre Ebola(MVE)1, mais paraît significatif sur les deux der-nières campagnes (les effets désorganisateursde l’épidémie sont en effet encore sensibles en2016). Ces pays ont en commun de bénéficierde conditions naturelles favorables (fort po-tentiel). La part des tubercules est importantedans leur production agricole. Outre pour laGuinée, l’élevage des grands ruminants est trèslimité par les contraintes climatiques. Les effetsdes guerres civiles sont encore sensibles enSierra Leone et au Libéria. La concurrence surl’espace avec les EF des plantations indus-trielles et l’action des firmes y est importante.
– pays côtiers de la façade Atlantique Sud(COTE D’IVOIRE, GHANA, TOGO, BENIN))
1 This epidemic has also had an impact on the agriculture andthe food situation in the southof Senegal because of the closure of the land borders of thecountries affected, which has particularly affected certain weekly and regional markets in thesouth of Senegal, as that of Diaobé
Presentation
7
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
These countries are the umbilical cords of thecountries without coastal access. They have astrong natural potential conducive to diversi-fication, and are attractive for migration andtranshumance, and are therefore areas ofspace tension (land problems) and conflicts(farmers/producers). In these countries withstrong economic and commercial dynamism,family farm is not politically supported. Theissue of the "modernization" of agriculture andlivestock is very sensitive, and the model ofAgribusiness not much discussed
This non-conventional order of presentation willbring us to scan the region in a circular way fromthe North East to the West and going back to theSouth East which is reminiscent of the trajectoryof some large population movements in the his-tory of West Africa, and to revisit the data of its cur-rent History (rise in extremism, epidemic outbreaksof Ebola fever…). Although the priority target of the information col-lected by the platforms is subsistence crops, cashcrops are addressed in an indirect way
Three forms in which cash crops are addressedindirectly in the inputs of platforms :1. The orientation of the FF cash crop stra-
tegies: according to the agro-ecologicalzones where they exercise their productionactivities, some FF can specialize in subsis-tence crops or cash crops, but this choice isnot definitive: it can change according tothe campaigns. In the areas where thechoice is possible, the FFs consider bothfood crops and cash crops, with conse-quences on sown areas: "should they ensurethe food security of their family through ce-real availability? Or should they dispose ofmonetary income?" The trends discussed inthe exchanges at the country level describein some areas a tendency to an orientationtoward cash crops at the expense of subsis-tence crops. These trade-offs are less binding if thechoice spans over one agricultural cam-paign (trade-offs between the millet andpeanut in Senegal). They are much morebinding when it comes to long-term choice(several years): this is the case of the deve-lopment of the cashew tree in Guinea Bissauand in Liberia, or even of the rubber tree inCôte d'Ivoire.
2. These trade-offs are also made by Statesin the framework of public subsidies bet-ween cash crops and subsistence crops. Thisis the case in Mali, between the dry zoneand the area of cotton or in Benin where thedistribution of imported fertilizers till thenreserved for cotton has been extended tosubsistence crops. The orientation of thesegrants or the conditions of access can alsoinfluence the trade-offs at the family level.However the States are evolving in their po-licies and are looking to diversify agro-silvo-pastoral and fishing production whichguarantees national food security2
3. The threat of agro business to familyfarms, oriented toward cash crops, is anissue raised in Senegal, Sierra Leone, Liberia,Togo (risk of an extension of the land codefrom urban to rural regions, concerns aboutagro poles), in Benin (hoarding of land bypublic servants), Ghana (concerns about thecoastal zone), etc. with direct implicationson land tenure and social stability
The monitoring approach of agricultural campaigns and family farm dynamics which have al-lowed the national platforms to achieve these results are described in Booklet 4 (MONITORINGPRACTICES OF ROPPA PO MEMBERS).
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
Presentation : Agricultural campaigns constitute the backdrop against which one can ob-serve the behavior of family farms in relation to the climatic conditions andthe state of natural resources, the evolution of markets as well as the imple-mentation of public policies. The follow-up of the campaigns by the PO allows them to both adjust theirsupport for family farms and supplement the data provided by the nationalmonitoring campaign systems - which they participate to in most countries,and to call on public authorities. Their practices in this area are unevenly advanced depending on the country,and the revival of the Observatory of ROPPA must enable them to graduallyimprove. We will present in the first section of this chapter the main data provided bythe platforms on the characteristics of the last campaign. In the second section we will comment on the presented results
The agricultural campaign 2015/2016
Chapter
01
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
10
Coun
trie
s of
the
Sahe
lo-S
udan
zon
e
NIG
erB
Ur
KIN
a F
aSO
Ma
LI
rem
inde
r on
the
2014
/ 2
015
cam
paig
n
Unp
rodu
ctiv
e ca
mpa
ign
- Del
ay in
rai
ns/s
udde
n st
op-P
est
atta
cks
- Des
pite
impr
ovem
ent
of p
astu
res
fo
dder
bal
ance
in d
efic
it-P
ress
ure
on t
he la
nd li
nked
to
peop
le
and
herd
mig
ratio
n (C
onfli
cts/
inse
curit
y)
→ F
ood
cris
is
Fair
ly g
ood
resu
lts
- lSl
ight
dec
reas
e in
cer
eals
com
pare
d
to t
he 2
013/
14ca
mpa
ign;
del
ays
in
rain
s, g
rani
voro
us b
irds)
, but
in
crea
sed
by 7
% c
ompa
red
with
the
fiv
e-ye
ar a
vera
ge- O
ver
45 p
rovi
nces
, 13
rem
ain
in d
efic
it
→ F
ragi
le fo
od
situ
atio
n (a
lmos
t ha
lf of
the
FFs
hav
ece
real
def
icit
acco
rdin
g to
the
estim
ates
of t
he P
latf
orm
)
Goo
d C
ampa
ign
- Inc
reas
e in
cer
eal p
rod.
22%
co
mpa
red
to 2
013/
14 (
81%
of
the
cam
paig
n ob
ject
ives
- G
ap ←
ra
infa
ll) +
24%
cot
ton
prod
.
→ S
urpl
us o
f cer
eals
com
pare
d to
nee
ds
Obs
erva
tion
sm
ade
at t
he e
ndof
the
2015
/201
6ca
mpa
ign
Bett
er c
ampa
ign
- Abu
ndan
t ra
ins
- Phy
tosa
nita
ry s
ituat
ion
unde
r co
ntro
l- G
ood
reac
tion
of p
ublic
aut
horit
ies
and
farm
ers
stra
tegi
es- S
urpl
us o
f ce
real
s- R
educ
ed a
vaila
bilit
y of
pas
ture
and
w
ater
by
the
end
of t
he d
ry s
easo
n →
af
fect
ed r
esul
ts o
f liv
esto
ck fa
rmin
g
→ F
ood
situ
atio
n im
prov
ed, b
utvu
lner
abili
ty r
emai
ns (
stru
ctur
al fo
odcr
isis
))
Less
goo
d ca
mpa
ign
- A
bund
ant
rain
fall,
but
bad
spa
ce-
time
dist
ribut
ion
(flo
ods,
wat
erst
ress
) - D
ecre
ase
of 6
% in
the
cer
eal
prod
uctio
n- D
ecre
ase
of 1
1% in
the
pro
d. o
f ca
sh
crop
s- 2
0 pr
ovin
ces/
45 in
def
icit
- FFs
ten
denc
y to
incr
ease
cu
ltiva
ted
area
s- S
atis
fact
ory
supp
ly o
f m
arke
ts
→ F
ood
situ
atio
n im
prov
ed th
anks
tosu
bsid
ized
sal
es p
rice
s of
cer
eals
and
pick
ing
prod
ucts
Goo
d ca
mpa
ign
- Goo
d ra
infa
ll- P
hyto
sani
tary
situ
atio
n un
der
cont
rol
- Eff
ectiv
e pu
blic
act
ion
- FFs
Inte
nsifi
catio
n tr
end
(jud
icio
us
use
of s
ubsi
dize
d in
puts
)- I
ncre
ase
in c
erea
l and
ani
mal
pr
oduc
tion(
Goo
d A
vaila
bilit
y)- R
esul
ts h
owev
er li
mite
d by
in
secu
rity
and
bad
tech
n.se
rvic
e pr
actic
es
→Fo
od s
itua
tion
sat
isfa
ctor
y, e
xcep
t in
area
s af
fect
ed b
y flo
odin
g or
inse
curi
ty.
(1)
The
2015
/201
6 A
GRI
CULT
URA
L CA
MPA
IGN
: be
tter
tha
n 20
14 /
201
5 ca
mpa
ign
as a
who
leCO
MPA
RATI
VE
TAB
LE A
: TH
E 20
15/2
016
CAM
PAIG
N (
indi
cativ
e da
ta a
ccor
ding
to
the
Plat
form
s an
alys
is)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
11
Coas
tal c
ount
ries
of t
he W
est A
tlan
tic
Faca
deSÉ
NÉG
aL
Ga
MB
IeG
UIN
Ée B
ISSa
Ure
min
der
on t
he20
14 /
201
5ca
mpa
ign
mau
vais
e ca
mpa
gne
-Lat
e an
d er
ratic
rai
ns- D
ecre
ase
in d
ry c
erea
ls,
grou
ndnu
t, co
tton
, and
tom
ato
prod
.- I
ncre
ase
in r
ice,
oni
on, m
ilk
prod
. and
pou
ltry
prod
ucts
- Dro
p in
res
ults
com
pare
d to
th
e pr
evio
us c
ampa
igns
→ F
ood
safe
ty c
riti
cal i
n 24
depa
rtm
ents
out
of 4
2 dé
part
emen
ts s
ur 4
2
poor
cam
paig
n:pr
oduc
tions
of
cere
als
(incl
udin
g ric
e) a
ndpe
anut
s in
dec
line
com
pare
d to
the
ave
rage
of t
he la
st 4
yea
rs.
poor
cam
paig
n -P
oor
spac
e-tim
e d
istr
ibut
ion
of r
ain
- Cer
eals
: dec
reas
e in
see
ded
area
and
yie
lds;
de
crea
se o
f 38
% o
f th
e pr
od.
-Ric
e: d
ecre
ase
of 3
6%
Obs
erva
tion
s m
ade
at t
he e
nd o
f th
e20
15/2
016
cam
paig
n
Bet
ter
cam
paig
n-E
noug
h ra
in (
at r
egul
ar
inte
rval
s)- I
ncre
ase
in c
ultiv
ated
are
as- I
ncre
ase
of 7
2% in
cer
eals
and
ric
e pr
oduc
tion
- mor
e im
port
ant
surp
luse
s co
mpa
red
to p
revi
ous
cam
paig
ns (
cere
als
stoc
ks)
incr
ease
in p
eanu
t pr
oduc
tion
(57%
), ho
rtic
ultu
ral
prod
ucts
(+1
9%)
-Bet
ter
avai
labi
lity
of p
astu
res;
m
ilk: +
4%
-A
dvan
tage
ous
Prot
ectio
n
Polic
y fo
r on
ion
-Diff
icul
ties
in m
arke
ting
pean
uts
(low
pur
chas
es b
y in
dust
ries,
low
off
icia
l pric
es)
- pu
rcha
se b
y A
sian
s
→N
utrit
iona
l situ
atio
n:im
prov
ed, b
ut s
till p
reca
rious
Bet
ter
cam
paig
n-I
ncre
ase
of y
ield
s an
d
prod
uctio
n (+
10%
), - I
ncre
ase
of c
ultiv
ated
ar
eas
(but
dow
nwar
d tr
end
in d
ry c
erea
ls a
nd r
ice)
-Pub
lic s
uppo
rt-L
imite
d yi
elds
due
to
flood
s an
d la
nd g
rab
-Fa
rmer
app
rais
als
rath
er
nega
tive
→N
utri
tion
alsi
tuat
ion:
sat
isfa
ctor
y
Bet
ter
cam
paig
n- (
hurr
ican
e, f
lood
s)- S
uppo
rt f
rom
the
Sta
te- I
ncre
ase
in c
ultiv
ated
are
as a
nd y
ield
s- I
ncre
ase
in c
erea
l pro
duct
ion
(rem
ains
insu
ffic
ient
), tu
bers
, leg
umes
-V
ery
low
ric
e pr
oduc
tion
(flo
oded
ric
e pa
ddie
s)-
Pers
iste
nt d
efic
it fo
od c
rops
→si
tuat
ion
alim
enta
ire
diff
icile
pou
r les
plu
s
pauv
res
)
(1)
The
2015
/201
6 A
GRI
CULT
URA
L CA
MPA
IGN
: be
tter
tha
n 20
14 /
201
5 ca
mpa
ign
as a
who
leCO
MPA
RATI
VE
TAB
LE A
: TH
E 20
15/2
016
CAM
PAIG
N (
indi
cativ
e da
ta a
ccor
ding
to
the
Plat
form
s an
alys
is)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
12
Fore
st-r
ich
coun
trie
s (af
fect
ed b
y th
e Eb
ola
feve
r)G
UIN
EASI
ERRA
LEO
NE
LIBE
RIA
rem
inde
rca
mpa
ign
2014
/20
15
Ver
y st
rong
neg
ativ
e im
pact
of
the
ebol
a ep
idem
icD
espi
te b
ette
r w
eath
er c
ondi
tions
com
pare
d to
the
201
3/14
cam
paig
n - U
npro
duct
ive
cam
paig
n (d
iffic
ulty
to
acce
ss in
puts
, ine
xist
ent
and
expe
nsiv
e la
bor,
no m
utua
l as
sist
ance
) de
clin
e in
yie
lds
- Str
ong
impa
ct o
n liv
esto
ck (
bord
er
and
mar
kets
clo
sure
s, c
onta
inm
ent)
→ ⇒
30%
pop
ulat
ion
in fo
od in
secu
rity
(70%
in ru
ral a
rea)
Unp
rodu
ctiv
e ca
mpa
ign
Ver
y st
rong
neg
ativ
e im
pact
of
the
EVD
-4.0
00 d
eath
s-4
7% o
f ag
ricul
tura
l act
iviti
es
impa
cted
-Sud
den
inte
rrup
tion
of t
he g
radu
al
rela
unch
of
agric
ultu
ral a
ctiv
ities
si
nce
the
Civi
l War
-Los
ses
and
mod
ifica
tion
of e
cono
mic
an
d ag
ricul
tura
l act
iviti
es
→iF
ood
inse
curi
ty
Unp
rodu
ctiv
e ca
mpa
ign
Very
stro
ng n
egat
ive
impa
ct o
f the
EVD
+ ra
infa
ll is
sues
- Spr
eadi
ng o
f the
epi
dem
ic
durin
g th
e pe
riod
of a
gric
ultu
ral
activ
ities
-Ver
y lo
w y
ield
s; d
ecre
ase
of 8
%
in th
e pr
oduc
tion
com
pare
d to
20
13 (-
12%
for r
ice)
; -I
n so
me
area
s, lo
ss o
f 25%
in
padd
y pr
oduc
tion
⇒in
crea
sed
food
insu
ffic
ienc
y(2
4% in
crea
se in
impo
rts o
f cer
eals
:25
0.00
0 pe
ople
in fo
od in
secu
rity)
Obs
erva
tion
sm
ade
at t
he e
ndof
the
201
5/20
16ca
mpa
ign
Bet
ter
cam
paig
n-E
DV
res
urge
nce
cont
rolle
d-P
rodu
ctio
n an
d ex
chan
ge r
esum
ptio
n-B
ette
r ac
cess
to
inpu
ts, b
ut t
o lim
ited
prod
ucer
s
→N
utri
tion
al s
itua
tion
rem
ains
prec
ario
us, b
ut d
ropp
ed b
elow
the
thre
shol
d of
"cri
tica
l sit
uati
on"
(Acu
te m
alnu
triti
on: 8
%, o
f w
hich
2%
seve
re. C
ritic
al m
alnu
triti
on p
ocke
ts in
Hig
h G
uine
a
reco
very
of
the
situ
atio
nD
espi
te p
oor
clim
atic
con
ditio
ns (
flood
s,ex
trem
e he
at-P
ost-
Ebol
a su
ppor
t fr
om t
he G
vt a
nd
inte
rnat
iona
l ass
ista
nce
-Inc
reas
e in
the
qua
ntiti
es p
rodu
ced
→Si
tuat
ion
is n
ot y
et s
atis
fact
ory;
huge
impo
rts
of fo
odst
uff
Aver
age
resu
ltsD
iffic
ult t
o as
sess
bec
ause
of t
hein
put o
f Lib
eria
(see
ms t
o fe
ar th
atth
e 20
16 ca
mpa
ign
won
’t be
ver
ygo
od b
ecau
se o
f del
ays i
n th
epr
ovis
ion
of su
ppor
t (in
puts
,eq
uipm
ent)
(1)
The
2015
/201
6 A
GRI
CULT
URA
L CA
MPA
IGN
: be
tter
tha
n 20
14 /
201
5 ca
mpa
ign
as a
who
leCO
MPA
RATI
VE
TAB
LE A
: TH
E 20
15/2
016
CAM
PAIG
N (
indi
cativ
e da
ta a
ccor
ding
to
the
Plat
form
s an
alys
is)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
13
Coas
tal c
ount
ries o
f the
Sou
th A
tlant
ic F
açad
e
CÔTE
D'IV
OIR
E G
HA
NA
TOG
OBE
NIN
rem
inde
rca
mpa
ign
2014
/ 20
15
Slig
ht in
crea
se in
a b
road
dow
nwar
d tr
end
(impo
rtan
t yi
elds
in 2
015,
desp
ite a
slo
wdo
wn
in t
heve
geta
tive
grow
th d
ue t
oth
e ea
rly a
rriv
al o
f th
e dr
yse
ason
)
Bet
ter
cam
paig
n
Des
pite
of
the
cam
paig
nfin
anci
ng is
sues
→Fo
r sev
eral
yea
rs, t
here
isa
tend
ency
to th
eim
prov
emen
t of t
he fo
odsi
tuat
ion
Goo
d ca
mpa
ign
Des
pite
the
dow
nwar
d tr
end
and
the
irreg
ular
ity in
rai
nfal
lsi
nce
4 ye
ars.
-Wel
l-pre
pare
d ca
mpa
ign
- Inc
reas
e of
pro
duct
ion
for
all
prod
ucts
, exc
ept
yam
, sw
eet
po
tato
es a
nd s
oybe
ans
- Mar
ketin
g pr
oble
ms
→G
ood
food
ava
ilabi
lity
for
seve
ral y
ears
, but
30%
pop
.in
food
inse
curit
y
Slig
ht in
crea
se in
the
prod
uctio
n of
cor
n,tu
bers
, cott
on; d
eclin
e in
rice
and
sorg
hum
prod
uctio
n (r
ainf
all
varia
tions
). St
agna
nt a
nim
al p
rod.
, fish
prod
. in
slig
ht in
crea
se.
→Se
lf-su
ffici
ency
inve
geta
ble
prod
., bu
tde
crea
sing
; nee
ds in
anim
al a
nd fi
sh p
rod.
are
not c
over
ed
Obs
erva
tion
sm
ade
at t
heen
d of
the
2015
/201
6ca
mpa
ign
Dec
line
in p
rodu
ctio
n(a
div
erge
nce
of o
pini
onbe
twee
n St
ate
serv
ices
and
the
farm
ers)
-Clim
atic
dis
turb
ance
s (h
eavy
but
sho
rt r
ains
, to
rnad
oes)
-See
d in
suff
icie
ncy
-Bet
ter
supp
ort
for
cash
cr
ops
com
pare
d to
food
cr
ops
→Th
e qu
anti
ties
pro
duce
dw
ill n
ot b
e en
ough
toen
sure
food
sec
urit
y
Less
goo
d ca
mpa
ign
-Del
ays
in s
owin
g du
e to
ba
d ra
infa
ll- I
ssue
s w
ith s
uppl
y of
ca
ssav
a cu
ttin
gs- P
ost-
harv
est
loss
es
- Dec
line
com
pare
d to
the
pr
evio
us c
ampa
igns
→D
eclin
e in
the
supp
ly o
fag
ricu
ltur
al p
rodu
cts
(incr
ease
in th
e pr
ice
offo
odst
uff
pret
ty g
ood
cam
paig
n, b
utsl
ight
dec
line
Bad
rai
nfal
l, pe
st a
ttac
ks(A
fric
an a
rmyw
orm
) an
dan
imal
hea
lth is
sues
(pla
gue
and
Avi
an f
lu)
- Ove
rall
prod
uctio
n su
rplu
s - d
eclin
e of
cer
eal s
urpl
uses
→Fo
od s
ecur
ity
ensu
red,
but
less
impo
rtan
t sur
plus
rese
rves
for 2
017
Less
goo
d ca
mpa
ign
-Ins
uffici
ent
rain
falls
(le
ss
rain
y se
ason
, del
ay in
so
win
gs)
- Low
cov
erag
e of
fert
ilize
r ne
eds
- Red
uctio
n of
yie
lds
and
prod
uctio
n of
the
mai
n cr
ops,
incl
udin
g fo
od
crop
s.
→Fo
od b
alan
ce re
mai
ns in
surp
lus
for c
orn,
yam
,ca
ssav
a
(1)
The
2015
/201
6 A
GRI
CULT
URA
L CA
MPA
IGN
: be
tter
tha
n 20
14 /
201
5 ca
mpa
ign
as a
who
leCO
MPA
RATI
VE
TAB
LE A
: TH
E 20
15/2
016
CAM
PAIG
N (
indi
cativ
e da
ta a
ccor
ding
to
the
Plat
form
s an
alys
is)
The overall trend seems better compared to theaverage of the past five campaign 1.
1. Better results in the majority of countriesTable A compares the 2014/2015 campaign andthe 2015/2016 campaign. From a farmer pers-pective, the 2014/15 campaign was bad in 7countries due to poor rainfall and the impact ofthe Ebola epidemic (NIGER, SENEGAL, GAMBIA,GUINEA BISSAU, GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE, and LI-BERIA). For the 2015/16 campaign, 8 countries had abetter campaign than the previous year (NIGER,MALI, SENEGAL, GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU, GUI-NEA, SIERRA LEONE, and LIBERIA). In CÔTED'IVOIRE, official data show a good campaign,though from the farmer perspective this datadoes not reflect the state of affairs in familyfarms. In TOGO and BENIN where a slight dropin production compared to the previous yearhas been recorded, there were surpluses andfood security remains guaranteed
2.A relatively well handled food shortageThe duration and the severity of the periodwhen the granaries are empty (food shortage),constitute, for the farmer, a tangible indicator tomeasure the success of his cropping season. Forthe 8 countries that provided information(NIGER, BURKINA FASO, MALI, SENEGAL, GUINEABISSAU, GUINEA, CÔTE D'IVOIRE, TOGO), shor-tage in the 2016 rainy season (which coincidedwith the month of Ramadan) has had in the Sa-helian countries, a similar duration to that of theprevious year (3 to 4 months depending on theagro-ecological zones); it was shorter in TOGO(2 months). Most families could have two mealsa day (except in some cases in NIGER, where theseverity of the 2016 shortage is however consi-dered moderate).
Defaulting products during the shortage periodare not exactly the same according to the agro-ecological zones of each country, but these aregenerally cereals (NIGER: millet, sorghum, corn;BURKINA FASO: sorghum, corn; MALI: corn, mil-let; in GUINA BISAU, CÔTE D'IVOIRE and TOGOas well) and rice (MALI, GUINEA BISAU, CÔTED'IVOIRE). There has also been shortage of yamsand bananas in some areas of CÔTE D'IVOIRE. InSENEGAL, there has been scarcity of off-seasoncrops (conservation issue) and fish. In livestockfarming areas, good milk production has redu-ced the nutritional consequences of the shor-tage, except NIGER where there has beenshortage of milk and derivatives (butter,cheese).There has been no exceptional movement ofcattle during the 2016 shortage.The analysis of the shortage carried out by theROPPA national platforms highlights six factorsthat helped in mitigating the severity:a) The filling rate of family and community
granaries: where family farms have been insurplus (see Chapter II), there was no shor-tage issues..
b) The availability of harvested products(BURKINA FASO) or off-season cultures
c) The good supply of market allowed fami-lies to buy the products they needed. Withthe exception of areas of insecurity (NIGER)and Guinea where there have been supplydisruptions, the supply of markets has beensatisfactory because stocks had been consti-tuted by the FFs which marketed their sur-plus, by traders (except MALI ) andimporters (NIGER in particular), and by thegovernment.
d) The stability of market prices:Apart fromthe usual increases during Ramadan (GUI-NEA) and Tabaski (SENEGAL), seasonal in-creases have been moderate and similar tothe five-year average in BURKINA FASO; inMALI prices of dry cereals were inferior tothe average price of shortage periods of thelast 5 years; they have been (as well as thoseof fruits) inferior or equal compared to pre-vious years in SENEGAL; there has been aslight increase in TOGO. On the other hand,
1 En ce qui concerne la production céréalière, ces résultats sontselon le RPCA supérieurs à la moyenne quinquennale dans 10pays sur 13 (GHANA : + 2%; GUINÉE : + 13%; TOGO : +15%; NIGER : + 16%; LIBERIA : + 17%; SIERRA LEONE etGAMBIE : + 18%; MALI : + 28%; SÉNÉGAL : + 56%; CÔTED’IVOIRE : + 88%). Ils sont par contre en baisse par rapport àla moyenne quinquennale dans trois pays (BÉNIN : - 1%; BUR-KINA FASO : - 7%; GUINÉE BISSAU : - 8%)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
14
these prices remained higher for some cropsin SENEGAL (vegetables, fish, and meat) aswell as in GUINEA BISAU, and increased by50% in NIGER compared to the 2015 shor-tage, and thus jeopardizing FFs access tobasic food. Livestock product prices havegenerally increased giving an advantage tolivestock farmers (exchange terms of lives-tock/ cereals in favor of livestock farmers -BURKINA FASO).
e) Government intervention : this had posi-tive effects in NIGER, BURKINA FASO (foodsecurity pilot shops, subsidy to cereal prices)in MALI (assistance to populations in diffi-cult food situation) and CÔTE D’IVOIRE(shortage funds). In GUINEA BISSAU food aidintervention also helped in mitigating theseverity of the shortage.
f ) Family adaptation strategies : these stra-tegies are defined according to the resultsof family production, but also according tothe market (GUINEA - over 75% of FF ex-penses monitored by FOs are affected tofeeding).
- Though families did not generally reducetheir daily meals (except NIGER), they havehowever consequently changed their fee-ding habits during shortage periods byconsuming "exceptional food" (NIGER: cas-sava flour, tubers, off-season crops, BURKINAFASO: rather millet than corn in the Sahel,rice imported in the south Sahelian zone;MALI: unusual millet and sorghumconsumption in rice production area; GUI-NEA-BISAU: consumption of products sup-plied through food aid). .
- Moreover FFs have tried to generate in-come to buy the food stuff they needed ei-ther by destocking - their cereal surplus orothers (cowpea, groundnut in TOGO ), butespecially small ruminants and poultry (NIGER , BURKINA FASO, MALI, GUINEA-BIS-SAU, TOGO ) - or by intensifying their non-agricultural activities (crafts, gold mining,woodcutting... ) or by resorting to familysolidarity, including that of emigrants(BURKINA FASO, MALI ) through donations
during Korité (end of Ramadan) and Ta-baski (Muslim sheep celebration) (SENE-GAL) or intensifying exodus and migration( NIGER) .
- Some families could not escape debtwhich occurred in more or less favorableconditions (MALI: debt with cereal produ-cers: 1 bag refunded with1.5 to 2 bagsafter harvest; NIGER: with Nigerian traders;however in TOGO, small borrowings withthe National Inclusive Finance Funds areeasily refundable) .
However, some events have worsened the diffi-culties of the shortage: floods (center of BUR-KINA FASO and Mopti, Segou and Sikassoregions in MALI and also GUINEA BISSAU ); po-pulation displacements related to political un-rest (BURKINA FASO: 29,000 Malian refugees inthe provinces of Soum and Seno, displaced Ivo-rians departing from the Noumbiel province;MALI: emergence of new armed groups in theMopti region resulting into the displacement offamilies of farmers , confrontation between her-ders and farmers around Téninkou). Strong mal-nutrition is recorded in armed conflict zones(MALI, NIGER). .
(2). Comments on the agricultural cam-paign results and first findings
3. Four key factors explain the good results ofthe past campaign• Pluviometry: except Ghana and BENIN
where rainfall deficits have been recordedand some pockets in the other countries, theamount of rainwater was generally sufficientin all countries. The effects of climate changehave been rather significant during the2015/2016 campaign compared to the distri-bution of rainfall which was often disturbed.
• Measures taken by the statesThey are part of the commitments taken byStates in Maputo and the priorities of ECO-WAP / CAADP. They were mainly translatedinto support measures to family farm produc-tion means.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
15
In some countries, the Government has alsostrengthened its advisory system to bringtargeted advisory support to producers (forexample in BURKINA FASO).
The country analysis of these public inter-ventions is presented in Booklet 2 of theOFF report ("OBSERVATION OF FARMER ADVI-SORY SUPPORT: state of affairs in the 13 ECO-WAS countries")
• High Reactivity of FFsIt is illustrated by the important leaps madeby the FFs between 2 agricultural cam-paigns, in particular concerning cereal pro-ductions in Côte d'Ivoire (+88%) andSenegal (+56%), and on the production ofsheep meat in Niger (+31%). In chapter III,we will comment on the strategies of familyfarms that help explain this reactivity.
• Action of the FOs The FOs have often provided services to fa-cilitate access of FFs to public support. So inNiger, the FUCOPRI (organization of rice pro-ducers) used OPVN sales contracts to getcredit in order to facilitate access to inputs;in MALI, the national platform of rice produ-cers gave their moral support to the MalianOffice of Agricultural Products (OPAM) to di-
rectly sign contracts with organizations ofrice producers in order to build the country’sstock (25 000 tons); in SENEGAL agriculturalproducts consolidation and marketing ser-vices developed by the FOs throughcontracting with various sector industries(peanut, rice, tomato...) have partially com-pleted public interventions concentrated onupstream production. In GUINEA, FPFD hasguaranteed the refund of loans granted forthe campaign.
4. Different factors in the country have limitedthe trend of improvement in results :• Natural disasters : :
Persistent consequences of the Ebola epide-mic: GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA; floods,poor distribution of rains BURKINA FASO,GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU; insufficient rain-fall: GHANA, BENIN; pests attacks (not glo-bally important, but locally reported inNIGER, in BURKINA FASO (granivorous birds)and TOGO (African armyworms), diseases(swine fever and avian influenza in TOGO).
• Social disasters:Terrorism related insecurity, insecurity rela-ted population movements: NIGER, BURKINAFASO, MALI; persistent aftermaths of war:SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA, and CÔTE D'IVOIRE.
• Failures in the implementation of policies :limited access to support related to inputs
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
16
• Seed grants: BENIN (free corn and rice, ve-getable seeds); TOGO (536 tons); SENEGAL(groundnut, rice, cereals, potatoes); GUI-NEA BISAU (rice and vegetables), GUINEA,SIERRA LEONE (rice), BURKINA FASO.
• Fertilizer grants: TOGO (decrease from 16000 to 11 000 CFA francs/ bag, for 40 000tons); GHANA (chemical fertilizer subsidyprogram); SENEGAL (fertilizer grants);MALI, BURKINA FASO, THE GAMBIA.
• Agricultural equipment grants: BENIN(tillars); TOGO (Agricultural Equipment),
GHANA (subsidy program to heavy agricul-tural equipment); SENEGAL (agriculturalequipment grant); MALI (tractors), NIGER(tractors), BURKINA FASO (plows and carts)
• Improved animal race grant for livestockfarming: BENIN (3000 cocks of improvedrace); BURKINA FASO (6000 draught ani-mals)
• Grant for livestock food: SENEGAL, NIGER;
A FEW EXAMPLES OF PUBLIC SUPPORT MEASURES
and equipment (available quantities, quality,price, and supply/distribution: GUINEA,SIERRA LEONE, CÔTE D'IVOIRE, GHANA,BENIN) )
We will come back on these limiting factors bygroups of countries in Chapter II of this booklet("Orientations and results of family farms duringthe last agricultural campaign"). ).
5. Main observations It is observed that :• On the whole, pest attacks and phytosanitary
risks have been well controlled (which hadnot been the case in 2014/15).
• Unstable variations in rainfall have destabili-zed farming practices (impact of climatechange), but their negative effects have beenovercome when appropriate support hasbeen given by the Government and led to agood responsiveness of family farms.
• Unlike 2008, farmers have not endured signi-ficant consequences related to the fluctuationof agricultural products on the international
market (they have just suffered the deprecia-tion of naira on trade to Niger and Benin).
• The food situation remains precarious in se-veral countries (Niger –due to the inaccessi-bility of the deficit areas, Mali in besiegedareas, Burkina Faso, Guinea Bissau, Guinea,Sierra Leone, Liberia), but there has been nomajor food crisis. Deficits have often been ad-dressed by imports and food aid.
• In the majority of countries, Government anddevelopment agency actions have helpedamplify the favorable trends and to mitigatethe effects of unfavorable factors, which ledto a good outcome of this campaign. It is ho-wever noted that government efforts to sup-port production are for the most partconcentrated upstream (inputs) and littledownstream of the production (price sup-port).
These observations are similar to those made bythe FAO and the RPCA when the2015/2016campaign was ending.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
17
(FAO, January 2016)The main 2015-2016 agricultural campaign is over and cereal production is estimated to be12 percent higher than the five-year average and 5 percent higher than in 2014-2015 for theWest African region and the Sahel. This is positive for the entire region; however, the dryspells and early end to rains in Chad, northern Benin, Togo and Ghana have caused cerealproduction to decline in these countries. The effects of this fall in production could lead toprice increases in the markets in affected areas. Despite good production forecasts, the foodand nutrition situation of the most vulnerable people in the region could deteriorate duringthe next lean season (June to August 2016) owing to the deterioration of their livelihoods,the early depletion of their stocks, localized increases in food prices and deteriorating termsof trade. In addition, a growing number of the poorest households does not always dependon agriculture and livestock for food and access to income and was not able to profit fromgood agricultural production. The agricultural off-season campaign has started in the regionand could help fill production deficits from the main agricultural season.RPCA (FOOD CRISIS PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT NETWORK/CILSS – (RPCA, April
2016) With mitigation measures implemented by governments and their partners, the numberof people needing food assistance declined from December 2015 to March 2016. However,the region has to deal with 6.7 million people in food and nutrition insecurity of which nearly4.2 million people are displaced due to insecurity in the Lake Chad Basin, in northern Mali, Libya,Central African Republic and Sudan. The mitigation measures implemented since December,allowed to reach about 1.2 million people previously affected by food insecurity. The Networkwelcomes the efforts of States and their partners, and encourages them to continue theiractions.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
18
6. Conclusions> The first lesson that ROPPA draws from
this campaign is that the positive effects ofnatural factors can be valued or their nega-tive effects mitigated by the action of far-mers and government, and it is appropriatethat the Observatory provides ways to mo-nitor this action. Therefore, ROPPA findsuseful that the Observatory monitors theprogress of family farms and advisory sup-port strategies that can strengthen them.We will come back on it in the last chapter(Chapter III on FFs strategies). It is also ad-dressed in Booklet II of the report (" OBSER-VING FARMER ADVISORY SUPPORT TOFAMILY FARMS" and in sections I and II).Fur-thermore, Government action is also cru-cial to facilitate the success of a season and
improving outcomes for farmers: the mo-nitoring of public policies by FOs is the sub-ject of Booklet 3 of the OEF report ("MONITORING PUBLIC POLICIES RELATED TOFAMILY FARMS AND THE EFFECTIVENESS OFFARMER ACTION ")..
> The second lesson that ROPPA draws fromthis first regional campaign analysis fo-cuses on the importance of developing thistype of monitoring for agricultural cam-paigns in different countries as countrysidefeatures enlighten us both on FF resultsand policy impacts. It already appears thatone of the Observatory’s objectives is therefinement of campaign monitoring prac-tices by FOs.
Presentation: In all countries, family farms account for most of the agriculture, forestry,pastoral and fish production. Their results are both determined by the condi-tions in which the season unfolds, and determine the outcomes of the cam-paign. The monitoring of family farms, which is the main purpose of the FFO,thus helps refine and complete that of the campaigns.For each of the groups of countries in this report, the major results attainedby family farms from the viewpoint of food security (crop and livestock pro-duction) and marketing will be presented by country. Then the summary ofthe information provided by the platforms on the factors that explain theseresults (positive, negative, ambivalent).
Guidelines and results of familyfarms during the past agriculturalcampaign
ChapItre
02
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
20
NIG
erB
Ur
KIN
a F
aSO
Ma
LI
Food
pro
duct
ion
Self-
suff
icie
ncy,
and
oft
en s
urpl
uses
Cere
al s
urpl
uses
Miti
gate
d re
sults
Goo
d yi
elds
, sur
plus
es,
inte
nsifi
catio
n
Ani
mal
pro
duct
ion
Incr
easi
ng
Hig
h Pr
oduc
tion
ofca
ttle
/she
ep –
slow
eddo
wn
at t
he e
nd o
fth
e dr
y se
ason
Rela
tivel
y sa
tisfa
ctor
yre
sults
Milk
incr
ease
Fish
cat
ch in
crea
se
Mar
keti
ngG
ood
mar
keti
ng, r
even
ue in
crea
se
Nai
ra d
epre
ciat
ion
rela
ted
issu
es
In p
rogr
ess
in S
ahel
ian
area
s an
d So
uth
Suda
nian
zone
Impo
rtan
t in
cot
ton
prod
uctio
n ar
eas
Favo
rab
le f
acto
rs
No
maj
or c
limat
ic d
istu
rban
ces,
effe
ctiv
e su
ppor
t to
fam
ily a
gric
ultu
reO
rgan
izat
ion
of m
arke
ts in
pro
gres
s
Civ
il in
secu
rity
ten
ds t
o ex
pand
Diffi
cult
y in
acc
essi
ng fe
rtile
land
s (
land
issu
es)
unsk
illed
or
unav
aila
ble
wor
kfor
ceD
efici
enci
es in
ser
vice
del
iver
yN
atur
al h
azar
ds
Unf
avor
able
or
ambi
vale
nt fa
ctor
s
Coun
trie
s of t
he S
ahel
o-Su
dani
an z
one
COM
PARA
TIV
E TA
BLE
B: T
REN
DS
IN T
HE
EVO
LUTI
ON
OF
FAM
ILY
FA
RM R
ESU
LTS
(201
5/20
16)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
21
SeN
eGa
LG
aM
BIa
GU
INÉe
BIS
SaU
in p
rogr
ess
Glo
bal i
ncre
ase,
inte
nsifi
catio
n.10
% in
crea
se
Inte
nsifi
catio
nRi
ce: +
28%
Dry
cer
eals
: + 2
6%
In p
rogr
ess
in a
t le
ast
1 co
untr
y
Milk
incr
ease
94%
cov
erag
e of
mea
t ne
eds
have
been
met
Info
rmat
ion
not
avai
labl
eN
o sp
ecifi
c da
ta
tend
ency
to
impr
ovem
ent
noti
ced
in 1
cou
ntry
Ver
y go
od fo
r on
ions
and
hort
icul
tura
l pro
duct
ion;
Goo
d fo
r th
e FF
tha
t se
ized
the
oppo
rtun
ity g
rant
ed b
y A
sian
mar
kets
Satis
fact
ory
grou
ndnu
t m
arke
ting
FFs
rem
ain
cons
trai
ned
by in
term
edia
ries
Bet
ter
rain
fall
easy
acc
essi
bilit
y to
inpu
ts a
nd e
quip
men
tFa
cilit
ies
and
Infr
astr
uctu
reSu
ppor
t-ad
vise
to
FFs
Coas
tal c
ount
ries o
f the
Wes
t Atla
ntic
Fac
ade
Qua
lity
seed
sIn
put
and
equi
pmen
t su
bsid
ySu
ppor
t/ad
vise
ext
ensi
on
Low
er p
rices
for f
ertil
izers
Dik
es a
nd b
ridge
sCo
oper
ativ
e re
lay
Soil
fert
ility
Supp
ort
to a
few
hitc
hed
cultu
reFa
cilit
ator
s an
d te
chni
cian
s
Fert
ility
deg
rada
tion
Low
leve
l of e
quip
men
tSp
ace
satu
ratio
n an
d la
nd g
rabb
ing
Defi
cien
cies
in s
ervi
ce d
eliv
ery
Insu
ffici
ent
gran
ts t
o re
new
equi
pmen
t,D
elay
s in
gra
nt im
plem
enta
tion,
Land
sat
urat
ion
in t
he g
roun
dnut
basi
n
Lack
of
equi
pmen
t,La
nd g
rabb
ing,
Del
ays
in s
eed
supp
ly
Une
qual
acc
ess
to e
quip
men
t,La
nd g
rabb
ing,
Abs
ence
of
a se
ed p
olic
y,
Envi
ronm
enta
l im
pact
of
cash
ew t
ree
de-
velo
pmen
t
COM
PARA
TIV
E TA
BLE
B: T
REN
DS
IN T
HE
EVO
LUTI
ON
OF
FAM
ILY
FA
RM R
ESU
LTS
(201
5/20
16)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
22
GU
INea
SIer
ra
LeO
Ne
LIB
erIa
Not
icea
ble
prog
ress
Agr
icul
tura
l pro
duct
ion
high
erth
an th
e fiv
e-ye
ar a
vera
ge;
enou
gh s
tock
s in
FFs
Qua
ntita
tive
and
qual
itativ
epr
ogre
ssio
nSu
rplu
ses
in 3
agr
o-ec
olog
ical
zon
es. D
efic
it in
1 A
EZ
Slow
er p
rogr
ess
Not
spe
cifie
dM
argi
nal l
ives
tock
Stro
ng p
rogr
essi
on in
1 A
EZ, a
vera
ge in
2, d
rop
in 1
.
the
dem
and
may
be
high
er t
han
the
offe
r
Nor
mal
res
umpt
ion
ofin
tern
al a
nd c
ross
-bor
der
trad
e
Still
aff
ecte
d by
the
EV
DV
aria
ble
depe
ndin
g on
the
reg
ions
Favo
rabl
e na
tura
l con
diti
ons,
few
haz
ards
in 2
015/
16B
ack
to h
ealt
h se
curi
typo
st-e
bola
reh
abili
tati
on m
easu
res
Fore
st d
omin
ated
coun
trie
s (aff
ecte
d by
the
Ebol
a fe
ver)
Post EVD deficiencies
Unf
avor
able
to
vuln
erab
le F
FsSp
ace pressure
Plot
aba
ndon
men
t, po
pula
tion
and
li-ve
stoc
k di
spla
cem
ents
Post
eV
D d
efici
enci
esLa
ck o
f eq
uity
in s
ervi
ce d
e-liv
ery
Spac
e pr
essu
reD
ifficu
lty fo
r vu
lner
able
peop
le t
o ac
cess
land
Post
EV
D d
efici
enci
esD
elay
in s
ervi
ces
deliv
ery
Spac
e pr
essu
reCo
mpe
titio
n of
larg
e in
dust
rial
plan
tatio
ns
Dow
ntur
n ca
used
by
the
epid
emic
Failu
re t
o im
plem
ent
resu
mpt
ion
mea
sure
sU
nder
-equ
ipm
ent
Insu
ffici
ent
labo
rpr
essu
res
on s
pace
and
land
dis
pute
s
COM
PARA
TIV
E TA
BLE
B: T
REN
DS
IN T
HE
EVO
LUTI
ON
OF
FAM
ILY
FA
RM R
ESU
LTS
(201
5/20
16)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
23
CÔ
te D
’IVO
Ire
Gh
aN
atO
GO
BeN
IN
ass
ured
food
sec
urit
y, b
ut d
ownw
ard
tren
d
Dec
reas
e in
yie
lds,
com
petit
ions
of
cash
crop
sFa
rmer
s do
not
expe
ct s
urpl
uses
In s
urpl
us b
ut s
light
decr
ease
Gen
eral
ly g
ood
resu
lts
for
lives
tock
, dec
reas
e in
cat
ches
for
fish
erie
s
Larg
e liv
esto
ck s
tagn
atio
n,pr
ogre
ssio
n of
pou
ltry,
cris
is in
the
trad
ition
al f
ishi
ng s
ecto
r
Cris
is in
the
trad
ition
al f
ishi
ngse
ctor
Incr
ease
in c
attle
and
poul
try
farm
ing
Cris
is in
the
tra
ditio
nal
fishi
ng s
ecto
r
Incr
ease
in c
attle
Dec
reas
e in
aqua
cultu
reCr
isis
in th
e tr
aditi
onal
fishi
ng s
ecto
r
Abs
ence
of
mar
keor
gani
zatio
nw
hen
ther
e ar
e bi
gm
arke
tsG
ood
(som
e is
sues
with
cer
eals
Land
pb.
Regu
lar c
onfli
cts
Land
pb.
Opa
que
land
mar
ket
Land
pb.
Land
gra
bbin
g
Resu
lts m
ay v
ary
depe
ndin
g on
the
cultu
res
Coas
tal c
ount
ries o
f the
Sou
th A
tlant
ic F
acad
e
Land
pb.
Conc
erns
in c
oas-
tal z
ones
Low
pro
duct
ivit
ySp
ace
mis
man
agem
ent
and
land
dis
pute
sLa
ck o
f ap
prop
riat
e St
ate
supp
ort
Satis
fact
ory
(cro
ss-b
orde
rm
arke
t)
Var
iabl
e m
arke
ting
Food
prod
ucti
on
ani
mal
prod
ucti
on
Mar
keti
ng
Favo
rabl
efa
ctor
s
Unf
avor
able
or a
mbi
vale
ntfa
ctor
s
COM
PARA
TIV
E TA
BLE
B: T
REN
DS
IN T
HE
EVO
LUTI
ON
OF
FAM
ILY
FA
RM R
ESU
LTS
(201
5/20
16)
Goo
d qu
alit
y la
nd, s
eem
s av
aila
ble
to F
FsIm
prov
emen
t of
ski
lled
labo
rD
ynam
ic e
cono
mic
env
iron
men
tpe
acef
ul s
ocia
l clim
ate
or b
eing
pac
ified
(3) Approaches and results of family farms inthe Sahelo-Sudanian countries (NIGER, BUR-KINA FASO, MALI)
A. Generally positive results from FFs
7. from the perspective of food crops tendency toself-sufficiency often with surplus, eUnlike theprevious campaign, this general tendency is noti-ced by the platforms of the three countries. This isespecially observed with cereal production, whichwas generally good.• We know that on the whole, family farms in
NIGER have produced excess of cereals, butno detailed information on the FFs of thiscountry is available. In this country, the pro-duction is focused on agriculture (72 % of na-tional production, better yields for millet,sorghum, groundnut and sesame) and agropastoral production (26 % of national produc-tion, higher yields for rice, Bambara ground-nut, nut edge, onion and tomato; good yieldsfor okra). It may be noted that although theFFs of the pastoral production account foronly a small part in the national production offood crops (0.8%), they record the best yieldsfor corn and cowpea, and yields similar tothose of the agro pastoral zone for most pro-ducts.
• In all surveyed areas (cotton areas, irrigatedareas, dry crops areas) in MALI, the FFs haverecorded an increase of production (average+ 15 % higher compared to the past cam-paign). Yields have been higher (includingrice), and excesses frequent.
• In BURKINA FASO, where national statisticsshow an overall decline of around 6% of ce-real and cotton production, the results of FFsare more in contrast depending on the agroecological zones. More simplified, FFs in Sa-helian zones have improved their results com-pared to the past season and recordedsurplus (+ 19 % in the North Sahel with cerealbalances set between 90% and 120%, + 18 %in the South Sahel with cereal balances howe-ver inferior to 90%). These areas remain, ho-wever the areas where malnutrition rate is the
highest. Besides, the FFs in Sudan zones haverecorded bad results and are often in deficit(average decrease of 12 % in the northern Su-danian zone, and 17 % in the southern Sudanzone). Some FFs have recorded losses in theirharvests due to irregular rains in the South Sa-helian zones (5 % of production) and SouthSudanian zones (8 % of production).
8. from the perspective of animal production inFF : increasing • in NIGER, in all the studied areas (agricultural,
agro pastoral and pastoral) the production ofruminants increased. National statistics indi-cate that cattle, sheep and goat productionhave been particularly large and increasing(in particular for sheep: + 31% between thetwo campaigns in the agricultural zone) inagricultural and agro pastoral areas. Niger's foreseeable feed balance for2015/2016, on the other hand, was negative,regardless of whether the influx of refugeeswas taken into account. The difficulties offood shortage, which started early with lives-tock farmers, confirmed these predictions(poor livestock feeding conditions in pastoralareas).
• in BURKINA FASO, where 80% of FFs breed, li-vestock farmers benefited from favorable li-vestock / cereal terms of trade (1 Saheliangoat for 130 kg of millet on the Gorom-Gorommarket, for 171 kg of millet on Dori market,187 kg on Djibo market - normal: 1 goat = 150kg). Prices of rams and goats increased, butbull prices declined (demand for Nigeria andGhana declined - livestock is the country'sthird largest export destination after gold andcotton).
• in MALI, a big livestock producer, the produc-tion of controlled meat in 2015/16 was65,000 Tons out of an available potential of220,000 Tons, and 9,400 Tons of milk out of anavailable potential estimated at 625,000 Tons.The increase in animal production is noticea-ble on family farms; it is reflected in large ru-
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
24
minants with a particular increase in milk pro-duction and animal sales. This increase is par-ticularly important for poultry (layers andbroiler chickens).
Fishing information is available only for MALI,where an increase in catches (river and lake fi-shing) and fish products is noticeable, but thereis a downward tendency in the size of the spe-cies and in BURKINA FASO, national needs areonly met at 20%.
9. rom the perspective of marketing : : good mar-keting, and a higher incomeProduction surpluses in all three countries sti-mulated the marketing of food crops (includingcereals) and livestock from family farms, and in-creased family cash income.The monitoring systems of Mali’s FOs havemade it possible to observe this in the cottonzone, as well as in BURKINA FASO where this wasobserved in an accurate way in the Sahelian andSouth Sudanian agro-ecological zones.In BURKINA FASO, according to the Federationof Professional Farmers of Burkina (FEPAB) thecereal market is clearly in progress from theviewpoint of the sales over the last three years.But access to different markets remains difficultfor producers under current conditions: stronginfluence and / or competition from traders, col-lectors and resellers; low bargaining capacity ofproducers and their organizations, lack of infor-mation on markets, etc.In the area of the Mouhoun Union of Agricultu-ral Products marketing groups (UGCPA-BM), themajor producers of Burkina’s granaries, each ofthem farming tens of hectares, expressed to thehead of government their concerns related tothe sale of their products although governmentservices such as the Public Company for SecurityStock Management (SONAGESS) buy their ce-reals. New opportunities also exist for poultryand livestock feed manufacturers.In Niger, the depreciation of the naira competedadversely with the domestic FF, favoring the im-port of food from Nigeria.
B. External factors that contributed to thesegood results
10. natural factors : no major problem On the one hand, farmers benefited in generalfrom good rainfall enabling them to producemore. In addition, there were no major attacksfrom pests. Several indicators show that the FFincreased their production not only by exten-ding the cultivated areas (case in BURKINAFASO), but also by intensifying them (in MALI,production has increased by 2% more than theproduction of the cultivated areas). .
11. Input subsidy and supply : Governmentsplayed the role of stimulation In the three countries, the Government imple-mented a subsidization policy of agricultural in-puts (especially for fertilizers and seeds), a policyto which the FF reacted very quickly, as espe-cially shown by the intensification trend obser-ved • in NIGER, 8, 135.51 tons of selected seeds
were distributed to the populations of vulne-rable areas ; 47,294 tons of fertilizers were dis-tributed among several points of sale orcommunal fertilizer provision centers throu-ghout the country; 239, 063 liters of phytosa-nitary products were made available to theFFs to cover 314, 000 hectares.
• in MALI, the subsidy was applied to fertilizers(sold at F 11,000 the bag instead of F 12,500)and to seeds. The Government also grantedsubsidy in cotton areas and in dry crop areasthrough the acquisition of tractors.
• in BURKINA FASO, where seeds were also sub-sidized (provision of 4, 000 tons of enhancedseeds) and where 16,000 tons of NPK fertili-zers and urea were provided, in addition wenotice the effect of individual initiatives of theFFs in using the organic compost (agricul-ture/livestock association, compost and ma-nure pits) and actions of community defenseand soil restoration.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
25
12. prevention of crop attacks : efficientThe efficiency of plant protection services wasparticularly appreciated by the FF and the FO ofNIGER. In BURKINA FASO, local attacks fromseed-eating birds and locusts and crop diseaseaffected however the results of the FFs in theNorthern Sahel
13. Market organization : improvingThe FFs were able to commercialize their pro-ducts owing to the development of three typesof markets:• Local markets that are growing in the three
countries (effect of decentralization).• institutional markets: related to the constitu-
tion of security stocks (WFP, SONAGESS inBURKINA FASO, OPAM in Mali)
• cross-border and sub-regional markets (exam-ple of the export of products from the irriga-ted area of MALI to Côte d'Ivoire, Senegal,Guinea and BURKINA FASO).
The practice of group sales organized most ofthe time by the FOs also improved the sellingconditions of the FFs products (BURKINA FASO).
14. Support actions for the FFs : : improved far-ming practice Dissemination, training, recommendation to fa-mily farm guaranteed by the FOs, the Govern-ment, the NGOs or international assistanceprojects….., the effects of which are being noti-ceable on the improvement of qualifications wi-thin the FFs (noticed in BURKINA FASO in theSouthern Sahel, North and South-Sudaneseareas). ¬See. Booklet 2 (OBSERVATION OFFARMER ADVISORY SUPPORT TO FAMILYFARMS)
C. Factors that limited the production ofgood results Except for the general problem of workforce,these factors are most of the time localized anddid not affect all the family farms.
15. insecurity: tends to spread With the rise of terrorism : • insecurity is directly affecting the North of
MALI and is spreading through the rest of thecountry (attacks in cotton areas)
• in NIGER it is affecting more specifically theChad lakeside and the Diffa region.
• in BURKINA FASO, it is noticeable in the Nor-thern Sahel; armed attacks and livestock theftare increasing in the Southern Sahel.
16. difficulties in gaining access to arable lands orthe shrinking of the space usable by all or some ofthe FFs : the combined effects of fertility pro-blems and land pressure This problem of pressure on the land is raised indifferent terms according to the contexts:• overpopulation : in the refugee reception
zones (NIGER)• soil poverty and/or inadequacy of usable spaces
(areas of dry crops of MALI, sahelian areas andnorthern Sudan in BURKINA FASO)
• reduction of the possibilities to gain access toland (BURKINA FASO: sales /land grabbing inthe northern Sudan area ; withdrawal by thetraditional owners, of the lands formerly lentto foreign-born occupants in the two Suda-nese areas).
17. agricultural workforce : problems related toqualification or availability Mentioned espe-cially in BURKINA FASO: either the family work-force can be mobilized, but is poorly qualified(Northern Sahel) or it is inadequate (exodus/mi-gration, lack of interest of youth – other areas). The development of gold mining in new goldsites diverts the agricultural family workforce inthe 3 countries:• In NIGER : in the areas of Til-labery, Agadez, Northern Zinder, Northern Ma-radi
• in BURKINA FASO : more than 600 sites spreadall over the national territory; about 1 millionof people in the gold mining informal sector)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
26
• in MALI : the closure in 2015 of gold sites inthe cotton region had favored the return ofthe "manpower " in the FFs, but their reope-ning is causing a new loss of the family work-force.
18. service provision : some weaknessesThese weaknesses limited the efficiency of thesupport brought to the FFs by the Government::• in NIGER : delay in the provision of inputs, • in BURKINA FASO : bad quality and bad use
of seeds, non-implication of FOs in their dis-tribution.
• in MALI: bad quality of hybrid seeds (cereals,cotton); insufficient provision of the subsidi-zed fertilizers with respect to the sown areas(in Sikasso area, 42,000 T provided against120,000 T expected
19. natural hazards : localizedLocal problems related to the rainfall mentionedmainly: : • in NIGER (the late arrival of rain which delayed
the beginning of the campaign and causedsome losses)
• in BURKINA FASO (unfavorable distribution ofrainfall and the sudden interruption of rain
leading to the water stress mainly in the Nor-thern Sahel ; flood in the province of Tapoa,Gnagna, and Komandjari, in the East region,the provinces of Nayala and Banwa in theBoucle du Mouhoun and the provinces ofHouet and Kénédougou in the Hauts Bassins
Damages to crops caused by locusts or seed-ea-ting birds also occurred in BURKINA FASO in theprovince of Oudalan.
(4) Approaches and results of family farmsin coastal countries of the West Atlantic Fa-cade (SENEGAL, GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU)
A .The FFs results better than those of the lastcampaign
20. From the food-crop production perspective:improvingIn the three countries, the results of the FFs wereexpected to be higher than those of the2014/15 campaign.• in SENEGAL, where the ROPPA platform has
database supported by the monitoring of2000 agricultural and agro-pastoral FFs andfishermen over 3 campaigns (2010 to 2013),the FOs have a benchmark in order to appre-ciate the results of the FFs.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
27
CLASSIFICATION OF THE FFS ESTABLISHED BY THE CNCR (2013)
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
28
• Consistently from a campaign to another,20% of them are not safe (heavily in defi-cit from the point of view of their agro-pas-toral and/or fish production); they arefarms with poor factors of production (landavailable : an average of 6 ha for 9 active,but that most of the time they cannot fullyoperate due to the fact that they are under-equipped) which cannot live relying on thesole fruit of their agro-pastoral, forestry andfish production (these farmers can onlyfeed their family for less than 3 months outof 12) and are frequently indebted.
• between 10% and 14% (depending onthe campaign) have a surplus production,covering and generating surpluses. These
are FFs that are well-equipped with factorsof production (an average of 11 ha for 9 ac-tive, good equipment). They have the ca-pacity to invest.
• between 66% and 70% (depending onthe campaign) are in an intermediary si-tuation due mainly to the inadequacy ofthe factors of production and they mayfind themselves in one or the other of thepreceding groups depending on the deve-lopment of those factors. 38% of them arelike FFs with surplus, and 29% of them likethe FFs which are not safe.(see : CNCR, "libérer le potentiel des exploi-tations familiales", 2014, 126 pages)
For the 2014/2015 campaign, the farmswith surplus were dominating the NIAYES (ve-getables, with an average covering rate of 15months) and the sub-region of the LOWERVALLEY RIVER (rice/onion irrigated farming,average covering rate of nearly 16 months)and one part of the forest and pastoral Region(Bas Ferlo and Kooya, livestock farming, witha rate of 17 months). The intermediary farms were dominant in EAS-TERN SENEGAL (groundnut, cereals, cotton,positive results, rate of nine months and half )and CASAMANCE (groundnut, rice, fruit, cot-ton, very positive results, rate of 11 months),that nearly reached self-sufficiency ; in theMIDDLE VALLEY area (irrigated farming, floodrecession farming and livestock farming, ave-rage results, rate of 7 months) and in the HI-GHER VALLEY area (same profile as in themiddle valley area, bad results, covering rateof 4 months, the FFs situation was more fra-gile ; in the GROUNDNUT BASIN, the FFs wereclose to insecurity in the North, with poor re-sults and a rate of 3 months, better secured inthe South, with good results and a rate ofmore than 6 months.)
The farms in insecurity were dominating in onlyone sub-region of the FOREST AND PASTO-RAL REGION; the Ferlo (agropastoralism, rateof 1 month and half.) For the 2015/1016 campaign, the exploita-tion of the results of the 2,300 monitored FFs(of which 600 in the groundnut basin) is stillpartial, but shows nonetheless for the BASINand the RIVER VALLEY, an increasing trend ofthe FFs production of rice (which should helpreduce importations), groundnut and localcereals, but a drop of the industrial tomato. These observations are confirmed by officialstatistics showing an increase of 72% of thecereal production (+61% compared to thethree-year average), 57% for rice (+87% com-pared to the four-year average), an increaseof +19% for fruit and vegetables as comparedto the 2014/2015 campaign. As in Mali, theseincreases are not only due to the extension ofthe sown areas by the FFs, but also to the in-tensification (for the cereals, the sown areashave increased by +39%, and the productionby about +72%).A
• in GAMBIA, where the production of local ce-reals represented for the 2015/16 campaign,46% of the domestic agricultural production,the production of groundnut, 32% and thatof rice, 20%, the family farms have increasedtheir agricultural production by 10% (+9% forcereals ; + 22% for paddy rice, 28% for ricegrown in the highlands; + 14% for ground-nuts, 73/33; + 10% for the late millet, but adrop of 2% for the early millet; + 269% for thefonio). This increase is partly justified by thefact that the FFs have extended the farmlands (+7% as compared to the previous cam-paign), but also to the increase of the results(noticeable for the late millet, sorghum,paddy rice grown in the highlands and to alesser extent for the groundnut 73/73) due tothe use of the enhanced seeds and fertilizers.This explains the intensification trend.
• in GUINEA BISSAU, where rain-fed farming isimplemented with only one annual cycle offarming, the family farms have also increasedtheir production noticeably as compared tothe previous campaigns for most crops. Rice(58% of the domestic cereal production ; 38%in the maritime area of the Northern province,44% in the wet area of the Southern province,17% in the Eastern part of Sudan for irrigated
crops) has increased by +28%, but has decrea-sed as compared to the years 2000 (decreaseof rice from the mangroves). Dry Cereals, theproduction of which covers ¾ of the domesticcereal needs (55% of the production guaran-teed in the Eastern area) have increased by26%. Meanwhile, the results have been de-creasing for ten years. Legumes (niébé : +28%, groundnut : + 39%) and tubers (cassava: + 59%, sweet potato: + 61%) have witnessedthe highest increase. Furthermore, the FFshave also suffered some losses (especially inthe wet area of the Southern province) due toerratic rainfalls or to the problems related tothe sale of products (poor conservation ofproducts). The suburban vegetable farming, practicedessentially by women (tomatoes, sorrel, okra,and sweet potatoes) has been increasing for20 years (increase of farm lands and the num-ber of vegetable farmers).
21. From the animal production perspective • In SENEGAL, the analysis made of the
2014/2015 campaign also provides a clear in-sight into the contribution of the livestock far-ming in family farms depending on the areaor the sub-area:
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
29
CONTRIBUTION OF LIVESTOCk FARmING IN THE pRODUCTION OF THE SENEGALESE FFS(2014/2015)
NYAYESGROUNDNUT BASIN
CASAMANCERIVER VALLEY FOREST AND
PASTORAL AREA EASTERN SENEGAL
SouthNorth Centre Lower Mid FerloHigher Bas Ferlo
7% 32% 18% 13% 24% 10% 15% 22% 92% 64% 13%
The 2015/2016 campaign is characterized byan increase of +5% of the livestock farmingsub-sector..
• The industrial maritime fishing had increasedby 22% to the detriment of the traditional fi-shing practiced by families that had slightlydecreased. Problems related to fish supplyduring the 2016 lean period show that therehas been no improvement in traditional fi-shing.
• For GAMBIA, no data on livestock and fishingare available.
• For GUINEA BISSAU, the predominantly bo-vine and ovine livestock farming hasconstantly increased since 1970 and isconcentrated in the Eastern and Northernareas (95% of the total ruminants); we knowthat it does not cover the domestic needs ofmeat and milk (imports), but we have little in-formation about the breeders’ family farms inthis countryThe most important fishing and maritime re-sources of the country are mainly exploitedby the citizens of neighboring countries or in-dustrial fishing units. There are few domesticfamily fishing units earning their living withtraditional fishing (3,500 traditional fishermenin the Southern and Northern area). Aquacul-ture is poorly developed.
28. From the trading point of view : : improvingin the trading conditions in 2 countries out of 3
• In SENEGAL, the monitored FFs have marke-ted on average 60% of their production du-ring the previous campaign (from 35% in thecentre of the groundnut Basin to 92% in theNiayes and the area of the large irrigated sur-faces of the lower Valley). This rate was higherfor the 2015/2016 campaign which enabledsome surpluses. Onion producers have takenadvantage of the domestic market protectionpolicy; the producers of fruit and vegetableshave been able to sufficiently serve the mar-kets, meat supply has simply been insufficientduring the festivals (import of sheep, but alsoonions for the Korité and Tabaski festivals).Only the groundnut sale has witnessed someproblems, except for the FFs that have seizedthe opportunity of the Asian markets in orderto sell at a price higher than the official price.
This good rate of commercialization is stimu-lated by the domestic policy that favors thecreation of many weekly markets (loumas),most favorable to the producers than thefarmgate sale. In addition, the institutionalmarkets have favored the marketing of riceand the practice of contract markets has de-veloped (tomato, cotton, rice, maize, ground-nut, seeds, milk) ; however, the crisis of thetomato processing industry will have in2015/2016, negative consequences on theFFs of the Valley who produce these crops).
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
30
• In GAMBIA, groundnut has been wellcommercialized and paid cash at a satis-factory price (the equivalent of 150F/kg).The improvement of trade conditions isincluded in the domestic policy perspec-tives ("Vision 2020"), and the future prio-rities of Gambian FOs.
• IN GUINEA BISSAU, family farms are vic-tims of intermediaries who impose theirprices and do not guarantee a regularsale. (no warehouses).
B. Factors which favored the production ofgood results at the family farm level
29. Natural factors : have globally played apositive role but differently, depending onthe areas• in SENEGAL and GAMBIA : good rainfall • in GUINEA BISSAU : soil fertility (despite
the over-exploitation – contribution of ar-tificial fertilizers in the lowlands and com-post in vegetable farms)
30. access to inputs for FFs (seeds, fertilizers :has been facilitated• SENEGAL where the "rice self-sufficiency"
program has deeply mobilized the pro-ducers and the Ministry of Agricultureand Rural Equipment (MAER) asserts thatas far as the rice, groundnut and maizesectors are concerned, the quantities ofthe subsidized seeds have reached recordlevels over the past 5 years (but the far-mers’ opinion is more mitigated on the si-tuation)
• GAMBIA: drop in the price of fertilizers,contribution of high-yield rice and maize– PPAAO, FAO, NARI, ADB/FASDEP contri-bution: seed banks, innovation/seed plat-forms, AU-CRAB project. ASPRODEB supports; FOs (AFET, FAN-DEMA) support in the constitution ofseed stocks, the creation of seed coope-ratives and the implementation of seedprograms.
• GUINEA BISSAU : no support
31.Public investments made in infrastructuresand support for the FFs equipment : havebeen effective• SENEGAL : the creation of marketing in-
frastructures, construction – equipmentsubsidies (according to official sources,expenditures related to the mechaniza-tion have increased by 60%, compared totheir value in 2014, a result of the effortsmade by the government these pastyears for the modernization of agricul-ture)
• GAMBIA : construction of dikes andbridges (NEMA/IFAD and GCAV/ADB pro-jects)
• GUINEA BISSAU : some supports to theFFs for the animal drawn cultivation pro-vided by the Government or projects
– Support/assistance guaranteed to theFFs : have intensified• SENEGAL: supports/assistance of the FOs:
grouped provision (inputs, equipment),production of certified seeds, supportand guidance (cotton, rice, global), andmarketing support.
• GAMBIA : program relayed by the coope-ratives
• GUINEA BISSAU: provision of facilitatorsand technicians for the monitoring/assis-tance of the FFs by the Regional Directo-rates of Agriculture and NGOs.
2En terme d’allocation budgétaire, les dépenses d’inves-tissement absorbent plus de 80 % des crédits alloués ausecteur (86% en 2011, 84% en 2015), confirmant ainsil’option du Gouvernement d’orienter les ressources du sec-teur vers l’investissement productif agricole. Comparé auBudget Consolidé d’Investissement global de l’Etat, lesdépenses totales d’investissement allouées au secteur ruralpassent de 15% en 2011 à 19% en 2015, confirmant ainsile choix d’appuyer les segments à haute productivité dusecteur.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
31
C. Factors that have limited the FFs progresscapacities 32. The fertility degradation: generalizedIt is different in the three countries dependingon the agro-ecological areas. In Senegal, thecurrent data show that almost 2/3 of the arablelands (WB, 2009), that is 2.5 million of hectaresand about 34% of the country surface (CSE,2011) are affected by diverse forms of degrada-tion. Out of the 34% of degraded lands, only 5%present a high density of degradation, less than24% is moderate and 4% is poor.
33. The equipment level of the family farms : remainpoor• SENEGAL : this equipment level is rudimen-
tary or worn out in the groundnut Basin, Ca-samance, the forest and pastoral area and inEastern Senegal ; subsidies are insufficienteverywhere in order to improve and renewthis equipment.
• GAMBIA : lack of adequate equipment • GUINEA BISSAU : use of traditional equipment
in the village FFs, difficulties in getting accessto better equipment ; use of modern equip-ment in the farms of ponteiros (major farmowners).
34. The size of the usable areas and land issues :tendency to saturation intensified by landgrabbing • SENEGAL: land saturation in the groundnut
basin, insufficiency of constructions in the Val-ley where the poor capacities of Governmentin supporting the hydro-agriculturalconstructions lead to the privatization oflands in favor of private investors (PDIDAS).
• GAMBIA : land grabbing (especially the trans-border arable lands by foreign firms and in-vestment funds) ; absence of land rightsprotection (evasive and inefficient regulatoryframework)
• GUINEA BISSAU : land is owned by Govern-ment that gives the best lands to ponteiros
(award of concessions from 20 to 3,000 ha re-presenting 27% of the cultivable lands to2,200 farmers equipped with modern meansof production, but who are most of the timeabsent – only 1,200 are really installed).90,000 small village farmers ensure 90% ofthe domestic agricultural production by cul-tivating small surfaces (about 2ha/FF) andhave to rent lands.
35. Political support and provision of services tothe FFsF : some lacks• SENEGAL : subsidies are appreciated by the
FFs, meanwhile, their efficiency is limited dueto the insufficiency of the subsidies quotas(seeds and fertilizers), the delay in their pro-vision and to the fact that private storers takeadvantage of this situation more than vulne-rable families that do not benefit from themechanisms of prioritization. Concerning the amelioration of the rural po-pulation access to basic social servicesthrough the implementation of socio-econo-mic infrastructures the rural families are sup-posed to benefit from, programs have existed(PNDL) or exist (PUDC), but their realizationsare less visible.
• GAMBIA : delays in the provision of seeds (rice– PPAOP program)
• GUINEA BISSAU: absence of seed policy andlegislation in this area; absence of the controlof production, multiplication and certificationof seeds. Some problems in providing the FFswith enhanced and certified seeds.
36. Some natural hazards : even for a good year,the FFs are exposed to natural risks The main climate hazard in these countries hasbeen related to the rainfall: the excess of rains(heavy rains that have affected the productionof the early millet, the salt intrusion into fresh-water in GAMBIA, the passage of the hurricanein GUINEA BISSAU) and floods that have resul-ted from this hurricane and that especially haveaffected rice production.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
32
Attacks from grasshoppers have also affectedthe production in GUINEA BISSAU. We also notice in SENEGAL (Casamance, Niayes)and in GAMBIA, the effects on salinization ofwater on the irrigated crops (rice, market gardening).
D. Ambivalent factors At least two factors contribute to the improve-ment of the financial results of the family farms,but they have adverse effects:
37. lhe lower cost of workforceMentioned in the contribution of GAMBIA, infact it applies to the FFs of all the countries andenables them to limit the cost of production.Meanwhile, there is an obvious problem of so-cial equity and it contributes to moving theyouth away from agriculture and forcing themto emigrate.
38. The development of cashew exploitationMentioned in the contribution of GUINEA BIS-SAU (main producer and exporter of cashewwhere 2/3 of farmers plant cashew trees that in-crease their incomes). The extension of theseplantations is done on the surfaces previouslyoccupied by food-crop production and to theirdetriment. The cashew tree has in addition,some negative effects on fertility. This ambiva-lence of crops is found elsewhere, namely in LI-BERIA, with other speculations (rubber tree,palm oil trees…)
(5) Approaches and results of family farms inthe forest-rich countries recently affected byEbola fever (GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA)
A. A resumption of the FFs contribution afterthe epidemic
39 . From the food-crop production perspective: :a net increase • GUINEA: the main food-crop produced by the
FFs are as follows in order of importance: (1)
rice, (2) cassava, (3) maize, (4) fonio, (5)groundnuts, (6) yams, (7) potato, (8) banana.Salt production is important.Situation during the 2014/2015 campaign
⇢ in the 2 regions affected by the EVD epidemic (MARITIME GUINEA and FOREST GUINEA)
- The FFs have on average ensured a cover of7 months out of 12 (difficult lean period, fre-quent indebtedness of the FFs)
- They have contributed to half of the domes-tic rice production with good results (MG:34% of the production with a yield of2.8T/ha; FG: 17% with a yield of 2.3 T/ha) andvery few losses (respectively 8% and 7%).
- They have contributed to 37% of maize do-mestic production with a yield of 1.15 T/ha(MG) and 1.05 T (FG) and lower losses (2%)
→ in the 2 regions that have not been affected byEVD (MIDDLE GUINEA and HIGH GUINEA)
- The FFs have ensured on average a coveringof 9 months
- They have contributed to 63% of the maizedomestic production with better results thanMG and FG (MG: 32%, 1,37T/Ha; HG: 31%,1,23T/Ha), with more losses (5%).
- They have ensured the other half of rice do-mestic production, with poorer yields andmore losses (MG: 10% of the prod., 1,2T/ha,10% of losses; HG: 38% of the prod., 1,28T/ha,losses: 15%)
Such detailed data are not available on the re-sults of the FFs during the 2015/16 campaign,where the FFs have benefited from the mea-sures taken in order to revive plant produc-tion, but the collected indications show thatthe FFs have really reacted to the encourage-ment and that resumption has effectivelytaken place. Agricultural production has beenabove the five-year average and vegetablecrops have enabled the FFs to store food upand increase their incomes.
• SIERRA LEONE: main food-crop produced bythe FFs are as follows: rice (produced by 85%of the FFs), cassava (consumed in variousforms, higher urban demand), maize, sor-ghum, sweet potato and groundnut. Other
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
33
products: palm oil (main forest product), ci-truses, cocoa, coffee, coconut, sugar cane. The results of the 2015/16 campaign thatcame from the farmer survey carried out bythe platform on an UP LANDS (plains) site andon two LOW LANDS (shallows) sites are notquantified, but show progress in terms ofquantity and quality (considered as aboveaverage), meanwhile, the yield remain ave-rage and losses have increased. Food-cropproduction does not cover domestic needs(significant imports, namely for rice).
• LIBERIA: food-crop production is essentially afamily affair, predominantly rice-growing(basic food produced by 71% of the FFs accor-ding to traditional techniques – slash-and-burn farming; poor results: 1.1T/ha) andlegumes, supplemented by tree crops. 87% ofagricultural lands are dedicated to rice and le-gumes. The field survey carried out by the FOswith the farmers who have benefited from anassistance (leading farmers) for the2015/2016 campaign shows that:
- In the 3 agro-ecological areas, the monitoredFFs have accumulated surpluses: NORTHERNSAVANNAH: very good rice and cereal quan-tities (the highest surpluses), average resultsfor legumes. LOWER TROPICAL FOREST: verygood legume quantity, good rice and cerealsquantities. UPPER HIGHLAND TROPICAL FO-REST (agricultural belt): very good legumequantities, good rice and cereal quantities. Ingeneral, farmers estimate that the resultshave been good (especially in the LOWERTROPICAL FOREST area).In the COASTAL PLAINS area, family farmshave remained in deficit with bad results forrice and cereals, slightly better for legumesand very poor results.
40. from the animal production and fishing pers-pective : very slow increase • GUINEA: livestock farming, bovine predomi-
nantly, ranks second among the most exten-ded activities in GUINEA family farms,especially in the Fouta Djalon. In terms ofvalue, bovine production ranked third beforethe epidemic as far as contribution to the do-
mestic agricultural production is concerned.According to information coming from far-mers, livestock farming, still in 2014/15, en-abled them to ensure the agropastoral FFs, acovering of up to 10 months. However, si-gnificant losses have been witnessed duringthis campaign, especially for aviculture. Dueto prevention measures taken in order to res-train the epidemic, livestock farming has slo-wed down throughout the whole nation. - Bovine losses : in the areas directly affected
by the EVD : MG : 8%, FG : 10%; in non-af-fected areas: MG : 12%, HG : 10%
- Poultry losses: areas directly affected : MG :60%, FG : 70%; other areas: MG : 55%, HG :60%Where fishing is concerned, the2014/2015 agricultural campaign as theother sectors, has also been affected bythe epidemic mainly on landing sites onthe coastline (Forécariah, Boffa, Dubrékaand Boké) leading to the desertion of thefishermen villages
• SIERRA LEONE: livestock farming is relativelymarginal and is not sufficient to cover the do-mestic needs. Cattle breeding is concentratedin the North, with very low rates of parturitionand a high mortality rate. On the nationallevel, poultry represents the greatest part oflivestock farming (depending on the areas,71% to 75% of the interviewed FFs are invol-ved in poultry breeding, 40% in small rumi-nants). According to the platform, products of river,lake and maritime fishing as well as aquacul-ture constitute the main source of proteins forthe majority of Sierra-Leone people (theircontributions to the domestic economy aremore important than those of livestock far-ming). Fishing is an important source of em-ployment and income for the rural familyfarms. Small-scale maritime fishing practicedby families of fishermen is in competitionwith the capital-intensive industrial fishinglead by foreigners. The fishing situation has not been reported inthe contribution of Sierra Leone for the2015/16 campaign.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
34
• LIBERIA: the contributions of livestock far-ming are marginal and even lower when weconsider those of meat from hunting. For cli-matic reasons, cattle breeding is very rarelypracticed, but rather the breeding of small ru-minants (goats, ranked twentieth among thedomestic agricultural, forest, pastoral and fi-shing production before the EVD epidemic,pig breeding (ranked 9th), and the poultrybreeding (ranked 7th). It is in the area ofLOWER TROPICAL FOREST that livestock far-ming is most developed. According to the in-formation collected from farmers in 2006: - For the county of Lofa (NORTHERN SAVAN-NAH) : 3% of the domestic animal produc-tion (3% of the prod. of poultry, 4% ofsmall ruminants, 3% of pig) – average in-crease
- For the county of Nimba (LOWER TROPICALFOREST) : 29% of the domestic animal pro-duction (31% prod. of poultry, 34% ofsmall ruminants, 14% of pig) – stronglyprogressing
- For the county of Bong (UPPER HIGHLANDTROPICAL FOREST) : 7% of the domesticanimal production (5% of the poultry, 8%of small ruminants, 6% of pigs) – averageincrease
- For the county of Bomi (COASTAL PLAINS):3% of the domestic production (3% of thepoultry, 4% of small ruminants, 3% of thepig).- drop.
Where fishing is concerned, it highly contri-butes to food supply and GDP, informationcollected from farmers comes from the areasthat have no maritime access and have to dowith the continental fishing (practiced mostlyby women) and this ensures additional re-sources to FFs. In the four counties taken into
account, the results are down compared tothe previous campaigns. The traditional maritime canoe fishing or fi-shing from the beach along the coastal strip,mainly in the counties of Cap Mount, GrandKou and Montserrado, creates direct or indi-rect employments (fish processing). It has todeal with competition from traditional fisher-men of the neighboring countries and indus-trial fishing.
41. from the product marketing perspective :supply hardly follows demand • GUINEA: for the 2014/15 campaign: whereas
the sale of rice has been affected by the EVDepidemic, this epidemic has mostly affectedthe production of other products rather thantheir commercialization . 2. The scarcity of fishing products has led to the2014/15 fish price boom.
• SIERRA LEONE: over the 3 surveyed sites, thecommercialization of products has been limi-ted and has not fully satisfied the farmers.
3It is estimated that after the border closure in 2013/2014, (in-dividual and group) producers of potatoes would have lostabout 45, 600, 000, 000 GNF (6, 514, 286 USD) of their inco-me that is an average of about 4, 000, 000 GNF per active far-mer in the sector during the rainy season and off-seasoncampaign. The closure of these markets is a loss for the produ-cers, traders, transporters and tax services.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
35
MARKETING2014/15 MARITIME GUINEA GUINEA FOREST REGION
AREAS AFFECTED BY THE EPIDEMIC UNAFFECTED AREAS
MIDDLE GUINEA UPPER GUINEA
30% 40% 45% 70%Rice
Maize
Cattle
80% 85% 45% 40%
95% 97% 98% 97%
85% 60% 95% 80%poultry
• LIBERIA: according to the survey on farmers,marketing of products has been good inNimba (LOWER TROPICAL FOREST), good inLofa (NORTHERN SAVANNAH) and Bong(UPPER HIGHLAND TROPICAL FOREST), butbad in Bomi (COASTAL PLAINS).
B) External factors that favored the resump-tion
42.Natural conditions : favorable in generalIn the three countries, water is abundant and,except in certain areas where lands are poor(Sierra Leone), fertility is good, which favors therelaunch of production. The access of the threecountries to coastal areas with important fish re-sources also gives the fishing industry a goodpotential for growth.
43. Return of security : peace has returned butconflicts still subsistIt especially concerns LIBERIA and SIERRALEONE where the specter of civil war has goneaway. However, new insecurity factors appeararound conflicts related to the access to space(reported especially in Sierra Leone). .
44. Rehabilitation measures post Ebola epidemic :structural measures tend to replace humani-tarian aid• GUINEA : priority is given by the Government
to the support of plant production for the2014/15 and 2015/16 campaigns ; input im-port (fertilizers, phytosanitary products,equipment) sold at subsidized prices ( 45%).
• SIERRA LEONE: support of international Aid;provision of rice seeds, fertilizers, tools anddistribution of food against work (food forwork) – 100,000 beneficiary families. Creationof health centers, free Mother and Infant Pro-tection (PMI) health system.
• LIBERIA: several programs financed by the in-ternational aid (among which we have the re-habilitation program of the agriculturalsector), but it is difficult to measure their im-pacts on the FFs because agriculture and its
monitoring by government services are notpart of the Government priorities.
45.Access to space usable by the FFs :where access is possibleThroughout the Guinean territory, the FFs donot have major problems of access to land. Ac-cess to land is also possible for the FFs of Liberiain the NOTHERN SAVANNAH and the UPPERHIGHLAND TROPICAL FOREST areas. However,access is more difficult in the other regions of Li-beria and in Sierra Leone
C. Factors that have limited the effective re-sumption
46. The epidemic of Ebola fever : continues tohave "delayed effects"On the one hand, the epidemic has led to a losswithin the rural population that deprives todaysome FFs of their valid workforce and increasesthe cost of workforce (noticed by more than80% of the interviewed Guinean farmers), andon the other hand, this epidemic has led to thedisorganization of the rural world that has notrecovered its balance yet (cessation of commu-nity assistance at the time of ploughing and har-vesting, desertion of the affected areas andconcentration of people and herds in the spareareas, interruptions of the supply chains, disrup-tion of services and markets due to some pre-ventive measures forbidding the movement ofpersons and herds).
47. Application of the stimulus measures in theprovision of services to the FFs : some weak-nesses • GUINEA: inadequate system for the provision
of the inputs managed by the National Cham-ber of Agriculture and the decentralized pu-blic services: cash transfer that does not takeinto account the poor economic situation ofthe FFs impacted by the EVD; the cost of thetechnical package (inputs, support-guidance)has discouraged a significant portion of FFs,which in turn reduced the impact on the re-sults.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
36
• SIERRA LEONE: insufficient and limited accessto seeds and fertilizers; poorly supported dis-semination, absence of fairness in the provi-sion of services to the FFs. Difficult access tothe health centers created.
• LIBERIA: delays in the provision of inputs, littlesupport by the government due to the poorinterest in agriculture, absence of financialsupport expected by the farmers in order togrow on larger surfaces. Poor quality of theservices provided for family farms.
48. The under-equipment of family farms: : re-mains an obstacle to improvement This problem is strongly reported in the threecountries and prevents the FFs from improvingtheir farming practices.• GUINEA: demand of equipment by FFs, but
their provision is difficult, existence of com-munity equipment but difficulty in gettingthem.
• SIERRA LEONE: rudimentary family equip-ment (hoes, machetes, poor level of mecha-nization); very poor mechanization ofcommunity equipment and absence of spareparts.
• LIBERIA: rudimentary family equipment; in-sufficient community equipment and infra-structures ("main challenge")
49. workforce: : inadequateThis inadequacy is related to the exodus or mi-gration of young people; it is reported in GUI-NEA (for the areas affected by the EVD (MaritimeGuinea, forest Guinea) and in SIERRA LEONE (mi-gration departure, high costs).
50. Space management and resulting conflicts :pressures on lands and land conflicts • GUINEA: these tensions are one of the conse-
quences of the Ebola epidemic. On the onehand, in the areas affected by the EVD, someplots are abandoned, which reduces thespace used by the FFs; On the other hand, theepidemic has forced major herds to set up onthe lands intended for intensive farming, lea-
ding to an overexploitation of water, grazingand community equipment resources whichresults in conflicts between farmers and bree-ders.
• SIERRA LEONE: land access is difficult for vul-nerable people (women, young people), fre-quent conflicts related to unclear nature ofthe limits of family lands; multiplication ofconflicts between farmers, breeders and landowners, which compromises security.
• LIBERIA: strong space competition betweenthe FFs and the main industrial plantations(rubber tree, oil palm …).
51. Natural hazards : not significant • They are reported in SIERRA LEONE, where
production has been affected by extremeheat eruption and flood. Some landslideshave caused the destruction of homes anddamages to rice fields in Lower Guinea.
(6) Approaches and results of family farmsin the coastal countries of the South Atlan-tic Facade (CÔTE D'IVOIRE, GHANA, TOGO,BENIN)
D. Some relatively stable results
52. from the food production perspective : : Evenif food security is not threatened, some de-cline is observed • CÔTE D'IVOIRE : the government services fo-
recast before the end of the campaign, an in-crease of 9% of the global agricultural, forest,pastoral and fishing production, but farmersnoticed on their farms, based on the analysisof weekly results that food production has fal-len (about 40% for cassava, 30% for plantain).For them, competition from cash crops (espe-cially rubber production) seems to be one ofthe causes of this decline. Losses related tothe difficulties in getting access to plots oflands are important (sometimes ranging from30 to 50%).
• GHANA: Production was delayed due to thelate arrival of rains (the results of the surveys
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
37
THE RESULTS RECORDED BY A MAJOR PRODUCER IN DJIDJA (ZOU)
are therefore not definitive). In the coastal sa-vanna area, production appears to have re-mained unchanged in quantity and qualitywhen compared to the previous campaign. Inthe transition area, the quantity and qualitywere very good and good in the Guinean sa-vanna area; in both areas, there were nolosses and the FF’s debt is low. However, far-mers do not expect any surpluses.
• TOGO: Food production has generally been insurplus, with some fairly satisfactory results,(however, productivity remains poor). This haspermitted to ensure domestic food security.Meanwhile, except for legumes, production isslightly decreasing when compared to the2014/2015 campaign, and the sorghum andmillet have witnessed severe poor perfor-mances (decline of more than the two-thirdsof the production).
• BENIN: the rainfall problem and the lower co-vering of the needs for fertilizers have resul-
ted in the global decline of food production(especially rice, millet/sorghum, cowpeas,groundnut; only maize, yam and cassava areexpected to be in surplus). The farmers’ obser-vations on the results (decline of the resultsfor rice in Atacora and for soya in the foodcrop area of the South Borgou, but we noticea fairly good performance of the cereal pro-duction – sorghum, maize, small millet- , le-gumes - groundnuts, cowpeas – and tubers -yams, potatoes, sweet potatoes) made themmore optimistic in rural areas than the go-vernment services that were expecting a ge-neralized decline of food production (maize :-5%; rice : -13%; millet : -9%; tubers : -11%;market gardening: -8% …). The losses due tothe delayed rains (especially for maize) or toservice provisions (collection of products, forexample seeds from farmers suppliers ofseeds), as well as the important financiallosses due to the sale of products at slashedprices
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
38
« Of the 40 ha of maize I grew, I did not harvest even a single maize cob, although I had already putin the fertilizer. I also grew yam for 20 ha, while I was expecting 40 tons, I only got 20 tons. For cotton,I grew 15 ha but instead of the 2 tons I used to harvest per ha, I only got 1T200 per ha »
53. From the animal production and fishing pers-pective : good results for livestock farming,lower fishing catches
• Livestock farming : has been little analyzed bythe platforms of this group ; In TOGO where90% of the FFs practice livestock farming as-sociated with agriculture and satisfy two-thirds of the domestic needs, the number ofruminant heads is increasing. The same situa-tion is observed in BENIN, but it is stagnatingin CÔTE D'IVOIRE. The CTOP notices that thepoultry farming is increasing in TOGO and forthe ONAPACI, it is slightly increasing in CÔTED'IVOIRE where despite this situation, it doesnot meet the demand.
• Fishing: the effects of global warming on ma-ritime fishing seem to be more perceptible onthe South side of the Atlantic than on theWest side (migration of fish to colder waters),and the decline of traditional fishing is repor-ted in CÔTE D'IVOIRE, in TOGO and in BENIN.As in the other coastal countries of WestAfrica, maritime traditional fishing is sufferingfrom the growing competition of industrial fi-shing which is taking advantage of the situa-tion and is showing increasing nationalresults. The traditional fishing crisis is reflec-ted in the fish processing, essentially carriedout by women (reported in GHANA).The decline of continental fishing and fishproduction is reported in BENIN. In TOGOwhere fishing covers 58% of the domesticneeds, fish production, still less developed,has increased by 15% from 2011 to 2014,whereas fishing production has increasedonly by 1.5% (a downward trend over a four-year average due to the reduction of thecontinental shelf and the illegal industrialoverfishing).
54. From the commercialization perspective: va-riable marketing depending on the country,in a context of growing integration of FFs tomarkets.
• CÔTE D'IVOIRE: product marketing is one ofthe main concerns of the farmers because in-termediaries take advantage of the absenceof market organization. Production and fi-nancial losses are therefore important for thefamily farms and affect the profitability of thefarms. This is a factor of indebtedness and thediscouragement of young people who arethen obliged to go elsewhere in order to getbetter incomes (exodus, working in rubberplantations for a salary…).
• GHANA: product marketing has been good inthe coastal area (opportunities guaranteed bythe market of Accra). Product sale is fast in thetransition area where consumers buy goodson the farms and where there are main mar-kets (some of them are cross-border markets).But it is bad in the Guinean savanna area.
• TOGO: the FF’s production has led to the pro-vision of rural markets with sufficient andgood quality food at generally satisfactoryprices for the producers and the consumers(except for the peak in May and June). Thesale of cereal products has therefore facedsome problems (less competitive maize, fewpromising domestic markets, poor capacity toresearch foreign markets)
• BENIN: the sale was satisfactory. It is based ona good network of local and trans-borderfood markets, and the multiplication of lives-tock markets. It particularly benefits from theopportunities offered by large urban centersand Nigeria (under more or less favorableconditions due to the fluctuation of the Nairaand the handicap of movement of personsand goods that subsist despite the ECOWASlegislation). Most of the times, the FFs actthrough some traders who remove their pro-ducts from the farms and carry them to themarkets. Through their FOs (FUPRO), institu-tional and contract markets also offer someopportunities for the FFs. (National Office forFood Security, National Company for Agricul-ture Promotion, WFP, HCR, Caritas, local go-vernment…).
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
39
B. Several factors potentially favorable to fa-mily farming
55. An important space usable for farming: qua-lity space accessible to family farms in prin-cipleFarmers know that the agro-ecological condi-tions are suitable for their activities and there isthe presence of fertility bases (GHANA, TOGO;BENIN: 60% of agricultural lands, very fertile val-leys – the basin of Ouémé is the most fertile inAfrica after the basin of the Nile). The traditionalland system makes lands accessible to familyfarmers under some conditions (GHANA; TOGO:54% of the lands acquired by inheritance, 13%by grants; 26% of the lands for loan or rental).
56. The existence of a family workforce : the qua-lification level of which is increasingThis workforce has a strong female component(29% of the FF’s workforce in TOGO), and is in-creasingly receiving an attention in the area ofcapacity building for product processing(GHANA). When they have access to capacitybuilding (that is particularly the case of the far-mers, members of the FOs), the qualification ofall the members of the family farm is enhancedby training and guidance offered to them, par-ticularly by the FOs (GHANA, BENIN)
57. An economic dynamism and a relative security :thatshould be promising for the family farmingStimulated by port activities (Ports of ACCRA,ABIDJAN, LOME, COTONOU) and trans-borderexchanges, this dynamism favors the develop-ment of urban centers and business opportuni-ties. The network of large markets and localmarkets that exists in each of these countriesconnects the rural producers to the rich basinsof consumption. The intensity of communica-tion and exchanges puts the rural populationinto contact with innovations in the area oftechnologies and ideas.The social climate is sufficiently peaceful so asto allow the farmers to carry out their businesswithout any problem (return of social peace in
CÔTE D'IVOIRE, disappearance of thefts inGHANA). C. But these positive factors are impeded The main impeding factors are:
58. FF’s difficulty in taking advantage of the natu-ral opportunities : poor productivity For the platforms, this first difficulty is due to fivemain factors:• The accentuation of the climatic variations af-
fecting the rainfall. The delays in the arrival ofthe rain and its irregularity have impacted theproducers farming calendar of the year. Thesowing has been delayed, the emergence andgrowth rates were poor, water stress was fre-quent, especially for rice (BENIN, CÔTED'IVOIRE, and TOGO). In GHANA, droughtshave disrupted crops.
• A trend in fertility reduction and depletion ofsoils and generally in the deterioration of thenatural capital of production. This may be re-lated to :- Access to quality inputs (the supply is less
than the demand and the use of seeds "co-ming directly " from CÔTE D'IVOIRE; 15%of the seeds used in TOGO are enhancedor certified seeds; in BENIN, the needs forrice and maize seeds are covered at about50%, and the needs for fertilizers and phy-tosanitary products at less than 70%)
- bad practices: abusive use of artificial fer-tilizers and treatment products in order toproduce more or compensate the inade-quacy of the workforce, the ageing andnon-regeneration of the orchards, aban-donment of farms and their maintenancedue to the discouragement caused by thefall of the prices (CÔTE D'IVOIRE).
- decapitalization: sale of livestock duringthe lean season (GHANA)
• the deficiencies of the family workforce, a por-tion of which remains unskilled (GHANA),whereas young people tend to leave the farm
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
40
in order to get better incomes elsewhere(they escape to rubber plantations where themonthly salary equals one year of incomefrom food crops – CÔTE D'IVOIRE). The FFs areobliged to use hired labor (CÔTE D'IVOIRE,BÉNIN).
• The inadequacy of farming equipment. Thisequipment remains rudimentary (poor me-chanization) in the majority of FFs of the fourcountries, and working is highly painful.
• The inadequacy of credit which limits the in-vestment capacities. in GHANA, in order toavoid indebtedness, many FFs have refusedthe grant of production credit because of thebad granting conditions (delayed approvalwhich compromises the use of credit in timein order to get good results, high rates), andpreferred to used their personal funds. InCÔTE D'IVOIRE, some FFs that have borrowedmoney in order to enhance their farms wereunable to pay it back and became indebted
59. The FFs difficulties in taking advantage of theusable space and risks of social tension : poormanagement of space and land- relatedconflictsThe dispersal of lands and the difficulties in gai-ning access to these lands can justify productionlosses (CÔTE D'IVOIRE). But above all, there is avery strong competition of space between foodproduction and cash crops (CÔTE D'IVOIRE), orbetween farmers and herdsmen (BENIN), andthe increasing land conflicts are factors of inse-curity and social tension
• in CÔTE D'IVOIRE land conflicts are recurrent(land conflicts between food producers andrubber plantation owners, conflicts about thereturn of the people that have been chasedfrom the classified forests and who find theirformer lands occupied by other people).
• In GHANA: land is available under someconditions in the transition area and the Gui-nea savanna area, meanwhile, small farmersdo not possess lands and have to negotiatecontracts before they can farm. On the otherhand, in the coastal area, small farmers fearthe disturbing developments related to thepossibilities of gaining access to lands (landgrabbing).
• In BENIN, small farms do not have lands dueto their grabbing by wealthy nationals (civilservants, traders).
• in TOGO, the land market is opaque. Landsbelong to communities or individuals butthey do not have any legal document. Theland code which is being elaborated is not fa-vorable to farmers (assimilated to the urbanland code). The government’s policy is to de-velop agricultural centers, which will directlyresult in the grabbing of large farmlands.
60. Farmers feeling excluded from the economicprosperity :
Lack of adequate Government support
• Precarious viability
Under the above-described conditions, theprofitability of the family farms is very low,and farmers are right to worry about their fu-ture when they notice as in Côte d'Ivoire thatthe incomes earned in the industrial farms areconsiderably more important than those theyget from their food production.
The farmer from Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Togo orBenin feeds his country, but does pay a highprice for it.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
41
• A badly assisted farmer
Except for the case of GHANA, where the natio-nal program for the subsidy of fertilizers hasbeen reintroduced in 2016 after its interruption,there is no consistent subsidy policy to familyfarms. In TOGO, the targeted subsidy policy forvulnerable farms is a problem. In BENIN inputsubsidies have been promised in vain in 2016.In CÔTE D'IVOIRE, nothing has been done in thisarea. Observations made by the other ROPPAplatforms show however, that such policieshave been successful in the countries wherethey have been implemented.
The FOs can legitimately ask themselves whe-ther in this last group of well-endowed coastalcountries, public authorities do not simply focuson industrial farming and fail to make farmingtheir priority. See. Booklet 3 (MONITORING OFPUBLIC POLICIES WITH REGARDS TO FAMILYFARMS and EFFECTIVENESS OF FARMERS AC-TIONS).
61. Farmers’ solutions• First solution: farming experience “"It is by using their traditional knowledge thatfamily farms created their plantations, produce,keep and sell their products. (…) Throughoutthe [agricultural] chain value, policies and pro-grams are tacit"(according to the CÔTED'IVOIRE platform contribution).It is on their knowledge and own experiencethat family farms first rely upon in order toelaborate some strategies and develop initia-tives enabling them to survive. So, for exam-ple, the contribution of the platform of Togois aware that 70% of these family farms, theproblems of which it is depicting, are seekingthe improvement of farming productivity byassociating livestock farming to agriculture.This point will be discussed further in chapterIV on family farms’ strategies.
• second solution : les organisations paysannesSince they have been set up by farmers them-selves, they are best placed to support theirstrategies through appropriate neighbo-rhood outreach services. This will be discus-sed later in the second part of this report..
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
42
TOGOLESE FARMERS’ PROBLEMS
Generally, farmers are not able to cover the costs (except for cash crops) of food production, espe-cially maize which is largely produced. Productivity is very low in Togo (lower rate of use of the en-hanced seeds, problems in gaining access to artificial fertilizers, increasing infertility of lands, fewpromising markets) about 1,5 t/ha, which leads to the very high cost of production and this situa-tion cannot enable them to cover the expenditures incurred in the production. As a result, in the majority of cases, they cannot cover the family basic needs (health, education,social needs, etc.). On the other hand, some farmers of the wet and dry agro-ecological areas fa-vorable to cotton farming prefer this crop to provide for their needs. In the forest area too, coffeeand cocoa are the choices adopted to cover the family needs".(contribution of the CTOP – TOGO)
the strategies of family farms
Chapter
03
ADAPTATION OF BENIN’S FF TO OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS
(7 The types of information produced by theROPPA national platforms on family farms’strategies
62. "Family farm strategies" refers here to thetypes of paths and approaches they chose toachieve the objectives they pursue, in view ofthe opportunities and constraints they are fa-cing. A farmer’s observatory is in the best posi-tion to provide its contribution to theknowledge of these strategies which is essentialto develop appropriate approaches for gui-dance, assistance and support.
63. Each national platform of ROPPA organized inJune 2016 analysis workshops which helped gene-rate three types of information:
• the driving forces of family strategies,
• their approaches
• and their implementation procedures.
(8) The driving force of family farm strategies
64. Platforms identified three main types of drivingforces :
- first driving force: main family motivationAs the case may be, securing family liveli-hoods ("Crops are first grown to ensure foodfor own consumption and then the surplus issold to meet social needs" - CÔTE D'IVOIRE),improving income, or conveying property(SIERRA LEONE). Those motivations maychange and sometimes be combined.The main motivation will determine the basicoptions for family strategy. "They choosespecialization within the framework of cashcrops (increase in income, access to institu-tional support) and diversification as part offood security" (GUINEA).
- second driving force : adaptation to opportunitiesor to constraintsOpportunities and constraints are positiveand negative sides of the same coin. Familyfarms (FF) combine their choices dependingon fluctuations in climate (climate change)and rainfall, market trends and possibilitiesfor access to supports. Those opportunitiesmay also influence family trade-offs betweenfood crops and cash crops.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
44
"In the SOUTHERN and CENTRAL Areas of Benin characterized by two rainy seasons, (a shortone and a long one) a year, growers vary crops according to season (they grow in priority duringthe short season, corn, beans and groundnut, and rice during the long rainy season). As chemicalfertiliers are less used by growers from southern and central regions, crops from the short season(bean, corn, groundnut etc.) are used to fertilize the soil through decomposition of leaves forthe benefit of crops of the long rainy season. In addition to those main reasons, some growersdiversify depending on trends in prices of farm products. Thus, there are years during which it iscorn price that is more profitable than the one of bean or it is cassava price that is more cost-ef-fective than the one of potato. If it turns out that a farmer grows nothing but corn and that it isbean price which has increased in that year, that grower would have lost a very great deal ». In the NORTHERN areas of the country where cotton cultivation leads the market, growers per-form diversification to make sure that food crops (corn, bean) benefit from post-effects of fer-tilizers used to cure cotton farms" (BENIN)
- third driving force : solidarity mechanisms
Through mutual help (GUINEA) or contribu-
tions from migrant workers and migrants
(GUINEA BISSAU), this solidarity, "although it
is very strong among the FFs, does not pre-
vent them from suffering" (SIERRA LEONE)
and tends to crumble due to rising individua-
lism (CÔTE D'IVOIRE).
(9) Approaches of family strategies
65. Two major approaches that may be adjustedby a family depending on market conditions :
- Securing family farm
This is the basic approach, and it is the onewhich first prompts family farms to seek toincrease their production. A whole range ofsub-strategies may be implemented, most ofwhich are based on a form of diversificationand may be added up in variable proportionsdepending on constraints and opportunities.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
45
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
46
diversification ofspeculations
Multiplication of speculations, combinationof crops, combination of perennialcrops/horticulture or irrigation farming (todeal with lean season), combinationdepending on circumstances of cashcrops/food crops…
The most common is the combination ofagriculture and animal husbandry (small andlarge animal breeding);agriculture/arboriculture; hunting andgathering (forest areas); agriculture/fishfarming. Some fishermen are involved invegetable farming.
upward trend. Often carried out by women(trade, handicraft, product processing,catering) and youth (provision of service,alluvial gold mining, unskilled worker,motorcycle taxi driving, coal production), butincreasingly by men (livestock trade,transport, logging, wage-earning, sale ofgasoline and spare parts, operation of videoclubs…)
Exodus may lead to urban areas(e.g.Motorcycle-taxi in Sierra Leone) or ruralareas (seasonal employment, mining –Senegal, Liberia). The analysis made inSenegal shows that this mechanism is verydifferent depending on areas and EAZ; inMali one emphasizes the fact that decisionof departure for migration is collective: thewhole family contributes to its financing(sale of animals). In Guinea Bissau, it isreported that migrants’ money transferstend to increase
Combination ofagricultural,fishing andbreeding activities
Parallel conduct ofnon-agriculturalactivities
use of exodus andmigrations
BURKINA, MALI, SENEGAL,GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU,GUINEA, LIBERIA, COTE D'IVOIRE,TOGO
SENEGAL, GUINEA, TOGO, andmore particularly for animalhusbandry : GUINEA BISSAU,GHANA, TOGO, BENIN
URKINA, MALI, SENEGAL, GAM-BIA, GUINEA BISSAU, GUINEA,SIERRA LEONE, CÔTE D'IVOIRE,GHANA, BENIN
MALI, SENEGAL, GUINEABISSAU, SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA
MAIN SECURING STRATEGIES REPORTED BY THE PLATFORMS
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
47
management ofproduction andconsumption
Management of harvests and stocks(management of granaries, part of grainsreserved for own consumption – 100% in someFFs), reduction in family consumption (portionreduction).
anticipation in relation to disasters(agricultural insurance –cotton area), todisease (health mutual scheme) or childeducation (piece of land or speculationdedicated to payment of tuition fees, schooltontines)
In Mali, the use of loan takes place at thebeginning of the lean period (with usurersor MFIs) and is repaid during harvest (lowprices)→ imbalances forecasts. Indebtedness is insome cases very high (Sierra Leone’s FOconsiders that 98% of FFs get loans withtraders, members of their family orneighbors).Difficulty in access to MFIscompel them to borrow money in poorconditions and does not allow them to savemoney in order to invest (Ghana’s womenfish processors)
Thinking ahead
Loan (indebtedness
BURKINA, MALI, SENE-GAL, GUINEA BISSAU,GUINEA, CÔTE D'IVOIRE
BURKINA, MALI, GUINEA,CÔTE D'IVOIRE
MALI, SIERRA LEONE,GHANA
When all the strategies have failed, the family leaves farming (reported in CÔTE D'IVOIRE)
- Increase in FF revenue
This objective is pursued by the FFs when security is guaranteed, or depending on opportunities.
PRINCIPALES STRATÉGIES DE SÉCURISATION SIGNALÉES PAR LES PLATEFORMES
(10) Terms of family strategies’ implementation66. Two main terms of implementation of FF stra-tegies are highlighted by the platforms. They worktogether..- Decision-making within the family
Decisions are related to campaign strategies(choice of production - diversification/spe-cialization, especially when food insecurity isin sight; planning for needs – MALI, BURKINAFASO), family organization of work (divisionof tasks between farm manager, women andyouth, use of external unskilled workers,planning – BURKINA FASO, GUINEA, CÔTED'IVOIRE), satisfaction of the family needs(nutrition, health, schooling – GUINEA). Theissue of work compensation within the FFs isnot clarified ("the FF survival depends inlarge part on unpaid use of women and chil-dren’s work. This dimension is not taken intoaccount by farm managers; they spendmoney lavishly" –SIERRA LEONE).Different decision-making methods are des-cribed. Traditionally, the head of family takesthe main decisions and he is himself respon-
sible for supply and activity monitoring (BUR-KINA FASO), but a change toward collectivedecision-making methods involving all theFFs members is noted (MALI, SENEGAL).
- Backup of farmers’ organizationsIt involves the FFs which are members of anorganization. They rely on their farmers’ or-ganization by using their services, by partici-pating to experience sharing betweenfarmers, and by enjoying the fruits of theiradvocacy actions (mentioned in MALI, GAM-BIA, LIBERIA and GHANA).The use of farmers’ organizations outreachservices complies with family farms’ strate-gies and supports the two strategies pre-viously described (securing the FFs andincreasing income). It depends on the oppor-tunity provided by the existence of those ou-treach services. Those services enable the FFsto better achieve their own objectives.
67. Provision of support and advisory service byfarmers’ organizations will be efficient if it is basedon those family strategies.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
48
increasingproduction toaccumulate surplus
Specialize inprofitable andincome-generatingproducts oractivitiess
by either extending the areas (Burkina Faso,Guinea Bissau) or by intensifying the use offertilizers ( Mali).
agricultural products (according to agro-ecological zones and market opportunities) :in general terms, cash crops, as long as theyare profitable (cotton; coffee, cocoa, rubbertree, palm tree in wet areas); food crops :grains not consumed (cassava, corn sold forlivestock feed in maritime Guinea, rice),arboriculture, animal fattening, poultryfarming… non-agricultural activities: charcoal, logging, trade etc.
Add value to the products by processingthem, by improving their packaging(processing may be done in family or ingroups, especially for women)
In general, strategies are supported by FOs orprojects: adjustment of marketing with pricetrends, group sale, negotiation of contractdeals
Value addedproducts
Improve marketing
BURKINAGUINEA BISSAU MALI
BURKINA, GAMBIA,GUINEA, LIBERIA, CÔTED'IVOIRE, TOGO
SENEGAL, GUINEABISSAU, GUINEA, TOGO
BURKINA, MALISENEGAL, GHANA
MAIN STRATEGIES REPORTED FOR INCREASING REVENUE
Overview : Each commission in charge of FFOs in each national platform, examined inJune the data collected on family farm features in order to validate and drawconclusions from them at ROPPA’s request on the issues of viability of familyfarms and attractiveness to farmers. In November 2016, the Board and theExecutive Secretariat took up those platforms’ contribution to draw conclu-sions at regional level and over 4 points. They are consecutively presented inthis chapter and deal with: 1) multifunctional dimension of FFs as base oftheir viability, 2) perception by national platforms of FF viability and of theconditions that determine it, 3) the analysis of FF attractiveness for Govern-ments, women and youth in rural areas, 4) constraints to be removed so asto make FFs more attractive to youth and women, and ensure a sustainedimprovement of their viability
Conclusions drawn by ROPPA on theobservation of family farm features duringthe 2014-15 and 2015-16 agriculturalcampaigns: HOW TO STRENGTHEN THEVIABILITY of family farms?
ChapItre
04
(11) The multifunctional dimension of FFsas the basis of their viability and resilience68. The analysis particularly dwells on the pro-duction function of family farms. But it shouldbe emphasized that the latter fulfill many otherfunctions which contribute to strengthen theirviability and resilience, and allow farmers to "livedecently" and safely by meeting his basic socialneeds. 69. Farmers’ work highlight 5 main inseparablefunctions when referring to " family farm" :1) Crop, plant, livestock and fisheries produc-
tion which, depending on agro-ecologicalzones and farm categories, contribute in dif-ferent proportions to families’ food securityand to their income building. In general, it isbased on family workforce (or wage-earningworkforce often for cash crops, less for foodcrops), and is generally managed under theauthority of the head of family who makesdecisions concerning production, use of pro-duction factors and production. Those deci-sions have direct impacts on the other fourfunctions of family farms.
2)Consumption and nutrition: they representthe basic needs of family farms, and the firstlevel and socialization of the income of theirmembers: The members of a FF have thesame level of access to food and nutrition. Ingeneral, the management of consumptionand nutrition is the responsibility of women,but it strongly depends of the results obtai-ned by the family on the other functions (pro-duction, natural resource management andconduct of non-agricultural activities), the so-cially responsible nature of consumption andthe principle of production diversification inFFs form a protection against malnutrition inrural areas.
3)Conduct of non-agricultural activities: ithas been described in the family strategies.Depending on agro-ecological zones and
farm categories, its contribution may belower, equal or higher, than that of produc-tion in the management of family consump-tion and nutrition. The conduct ofnon-agricultural activities is observed amongwomen and youth, and may be carried outdepending on environmental opportunitiesand constraints in various areas, especiallypara-agricultural sector (product processing,trade) or services connected with urbaniza-tion in rural areas (transport, handicraft,construction, ...). It may also be performed ina continuous manner, or seasonally in tempo-ral alternation with crop, plant, livestock andfisheries production.
4)Natural resource management: natural re-sources are the base of crop, plant, livestockand fisheries production. The production me-thod of those family farms values biodiversity,through diversification of plant and livestockproductions and their integration. Theconservation and valorization of resources isa natural concern for FFs but they take it intoaccount in varying degrees depending on se-veral factors: location (especially cultural as-pects), industrial or non-industrial characterof agricultural crops (cotton/ dry grains), com-mercial or non-commercial character of theproducts (vegetables/ dry grains), the in-fluence of the guidance of public services andassistance.
5) Transmission and preservation of culturalvalues: :the cultural values belonging to anentire society are owned by each family farmwhich considers them as a critical factor for itsown reproduction and perpetuation. There-fore, cultural values influence the decisionsand behaviors of the different family mem-bers (farm managers, women and youth), andthe possible directions that those decisionsand behaviors may take will be critical to fa-mily farms’ viability and attractiveness.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
50
(12) Perception of family farm viability byROPPA platform members: a conditionedviability70. The first motivation of family farm, as notedin the previous chapter, is to ensure a sustaina-ble provision of food and health needs with theincome earned from crop, plant, livestock andfishing activities. The food balance sheets per-formed in Mali and Senegal by Farmers’ Orga-nizations (FOs) affiliated with ROPPA, and inother countries by other FOs, show that familyfarms combine their needs with other ex-penses (especially the educational ones). Theyalso suggest that FFs capacity to meet theirfood and health needs depends on the types(internal factors) as well as the opportunitiesand constraints of agro-ecological zones (ex-ternal factors) – see Box at point 24, page 28 re-lated to the typology of FFs in Senegal.The 13 national farmers’ platforms that aremembers of ROPPA gave their views on the via-bility of family farms, and consider that it re-mains possible but conditioned . The platformsparticularly consider that viability of familyfarms depends on how attractive they will befor youth and women on the one hand and forthe Government on the other hand.
71. The views of the 4 groups of countries pointout the factors that allowed to achieve goodresults or that limited them and that there are5 types. Excerpts from the platforms’ discus-sions illustrate their points of view..a) NATURAL factors that determine family farmviabilityThese are agro-ecological conditions, cli-mate hazards, or disasters. They fluctuate de-pending on period and areas. They arecurrently exacerbated by climate changes,and the FFs have little control over them.
4During the debates organized in the platforms, one third oforal contributions expressed concern, but two thirds of theleaders who expressed themselves in the national platformsthink that FFs are or may be viable if external factors (natu-
ral, economic, technical, politi-cal)and internal factors (dy-namism and strate gies of families) on which that viabilitydep-ends are present.
Testimonies from platformsFood balance sheet is very different from anarea to another because of weather condi-tions (MALI)In 2015/2016 the viability of agricultural FFsremains a challenge due to the consequencesof Ebola epidemics, worsened by adverse wea-ther conditions (SIERRA LEONE).FF results are weakened by climate hazards(GHANA)
b)ECONOMIC Factors that determine family farmviabilityThese are access to markets (price fluctua-tions of raw material and consumer foods-tuffs, existence or not of market outlets),access to credit and its terms, or access toeconomic infrastructures likely to facilitateaccess to markets (roads, warehouses, etc.).
Testimonies from platformsThe selling prices of their products are low. Inaddition [FFs] have neither production costsnor selling price under control (COTE D'IVOIRE)Except for cases where there is no market, pro-ductions provide value and returns and arecost-effective (LIBERIA)Few growth markets(TOGO)FFs are weakened by difficulties in gaining ac-cess to credit (GHANA)
c) TECHNICAL FACTORS that determine familyfarm viability:The issue of level of equipment and accessto appropriate technical and technologicalinnovations is raised at this stage. Theunder-equipment of family farms compelthem in many cases to practice manual cul-tivation only (GAMBIA, GUINEA BISSAU,SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA, GHANA), or todelay the start of agricultural campaign be-cause one waited for the neighbor to finishin order to borrow his material", Senegal.
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
51
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
52
Testimonies from platformsEven if growers progressively use more modernagricultural inputs such as improved seeds, hoeand machetes remain the most used farmingtools. GAMBIA
d) POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FA CTORS that deter-mine family farm viability: These are mainlypublic policy guidelines and the quality oftheir implementation (especially subsidyprograms, commercial policy (opening/pro-tection of markets for sensitive products),and civil security.
Testimonies from platformsSome factors such as provision by the Govern-ment of subsidized inputs to FFs, outreach sup-port/guidance of FOs to FFs contributed toincrease some productions. (BURKINA FASO)The viability of crop, plant, livestock and fisheriesFFs in 2015/2016 still depends on governmentand partners’ assistance within the frameworkof post-Ebola recovery programs (SIERRALEONE).The areas where studies were conducted indica-ted that the equipment provided by agriculturalsponsors and donors most of time come withdelay ; this is an obstacle to farming activities,since the latter are based on season. They alsopointed out that if inputs are not available ontime, increased productions will not be possible(LIBERIA).Public expenditures for the agricultural sector in-creased from 3% in 2006 to 5% in 2012, but arestill far from the Maputo Commitments(GHANA).
e) INTERNAL FACTORS that determine FF viabi-lity : THE FAMILY STRATEGIESThe family strategies developed in the pre-vious chapter reflect initiatives and optionsthey may take at their own level on practicesof crop, plant, livestock and fisheries produc-tion, management and valorization of pro-duction factors (natural and technical) and
family human resources, or consumptionchoices. Those options are taken to push backthe constraints or to take advantage of theopportunities, generally related to the exter-nal factors mentioned above.
Some testimonies from platformsFood balance of sheet is very different from anarea to another because of climate conditions,access to production amenities and also becauseof strategies deployed by farmer families. (MALI)Viability is different according to areas¬¬, and isvery dependent on rainfall and family strategies(SENEGAL).FFs have no rational management method. Thisexplains marketing inefficiency (COTE D'IVOIRE)Some growers emphasized that their difficultiesare due to their lack of rigor as regards manage-ment and family charges they assume. If havingmany wives and a great number of childrenhelps to better attend the family farm, inducedcosts do not allow the farmer to place his familyand himself at an ambitious level of social life(BENIN).
(13) FFs’ contribution to national economiesand national companies justifies GOVERN-MENTS’ interest72. In generalPlatforms agree that their Governments havefour main reasons to be interested in familyfarms, which represent the most common pat-tern of production in countries where they areestablished:- they bring a key contribution to national nu-
trition (rural areas and towns) and improve-ment of their performances may providefood self-sufficiency, through their self-consumption (on average 52% of crops,plant and livestock productions in Senegal)and marketing of their productions (on ave-rage 48% of productions, Senegal);
- they contribute to stability and social equi-librium by providing jobs in rural areas andby limiting rural migration toward towns (on
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
53
average 9 working people / FFs in Senegal);- they contribute to national wealth and coun-
try’s GDP (14 and 15% of GDP made by pri-mary sector in Senegal in the past 2 years)
- they improve public revenues, especiallythrough collection of foreign currencies as-sociated with exportation of crop, plant, li-vestock and fishing products.
Platforms’ testimoniesThrough their work, FFs succeed in providingfood for the population and cater for the familyneeds; they contribute to stability and socialequilibrium by fighting unemployment and ruralmigration towards towns, they contribute to po-verty reduction and enable youth and ruralwomen empowerment, they also contribute toreduce frequent food insecurity in rural areas(GUIEA BISSAU)They allow the Government of Burkina Faso toimprove the country’s food security, reduceunemployment rate; increase the country’s GDPand increase revenues through levies, direct andindirect taxes on their activities (BURKINA FASO)
73. last agricultural campaign (2015/16Family farms’ contribution to economies has in-creased during the last agricultural campaign. Itcan be assessed based on the monitoring of fa-mily farms in terms of increased food security(no major food crisis), supply of towns (rise insales of food surpluses), but also in terms of es-timation of family production value (gross valueof family crops, plant, livestock and fisheries pro-duction during the campaign). In BURKINAFASO, where accurate calculations have beendone, it is noted that although that country isone where family farm outputs are the mostmixed, the gross value of family crops, plant, li-vestock and fisheries production has increasedon average by 6.5% in the three areas where ithas been calculated (North Sahelian, North andSouth Sudan areas).As mentioned in Chapter 1 related to results ofthe last 2 agricultural campaigns, the significantleaps forward made by family farms in somecountries within one year show their strongreactivity to more favorable conditions. Theirstrong resilience to adverse conditions (climatechange, drought …) should also be emphasized.
75. Subsectors which are developing can respondto the youth and women expectations in ruralareasThese are off-season vegetable farming whichenables to both diversify/increase revenues andimprove nutrition, as well as poultry farming or
sheep fattening that are also regular incomegenerating activities (swift cash flows), and pro-duct processing (milk, fish products, grains,groundnut, forest products) which in mostcountries represents a self-employment nichefor rural women.
(14) To sustainably improve the viability of FFs, they should be made more attractive toyoung people and women
74. Conditions required for FFs to retain the youth and womenThe six following conditions are mentioned in the debates of one or many platforms:
CoNDItIoNS FoR FFs to RetAIN tHe YoUtH Mentioned by the NPF of :
Access to land, herd and canoe
Adequate income, access toremunerative markets
assistance, effective guidance, technicaland financial assistance, access toequipment and access to loans
Training adapted to farming realities,training on farm mechanization,information
Recognizing and valuing the profession
Access to healthcare and socioculturalinfrastructures
1) Access to familyproperty
2) Income
3) Support andassistance brought
4)Access to qualifiedtraining
5) Recognition ofstatus
6) Improvement of theliving environment
SENEGAL
SENEGAL, GUINEA,SIERRA LEONE,GHANA, TOGO
NIGER, SENEGAL,GUINEA, CÔTED'IVOIRE, GHANA,TOGO, BENIN
CÔTE D'IVOIRE,BENIN
GUINEA
LIBERIA, TOGO
Platforms’ testimonies
The youth and women are attracted to cash crops as sources of income (vegetable farming, rice, pi-neapple, palm tree, rubber tree, potato, poultry farming and integrated rice-fish farming, short- cycleanimal husbandry…). (GUINEA)The types of assets to which young people are sensitive and which would encourage them to comeand settle in agriculture or remain in it are the enhancement and improvement of the quality andefficiency of public services provided by the Government, modernization of FFs, farmer status andmaking sure that the market becomes more attractive (GUINEA) Enthusiasm of the youth for agricultural sectors most connected to the market (vegetable farmingin the Niayes and groundnut Basin; banana in the Eastern Senegal; irrigated rice in the Delta; fruitgrowing in the Niayes, groundnut Basin and in Casamance; animal fattening in all the agro-ecolo-gical areas (SENEGAL).
5454
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
76. But constraints are to be removed to make FFsmore attractive to the youth and women and im-prove their viability in a sustainable manner Concerns about the future of family farms ex-pressed by the platforms are related to the issueof their attractiveness to women who ensurethrough their activities (production, processing,marketing, non-agricultural activities, foodconsumption, child upbringing…) a criticalcontribution to family farms’ outputs, and toyoung people who are deemed to take over thefarm when their parents could not manage itanymore.- Women have difficulties accessing land, and
when they have access to it (female house-hold head), a problem arises about how to se-cure it. Actually, in rural areas, women areseldom land owners, and when they have anowner status their land property tends to besmaller and less fertile than that of men .
- The conditions required for family farms to re-tain the youth are often not met.
Platforms’ testimoniesMost young people are not attracted to farmingactivities in Liberia for they think that the latterdo not bring any significant improvement totheir living conditions. In general, the youth is at-tracted to the mining sector. (LIBERIA).Young people are not attracted to FFs for it is notsufficiently remunerative so as to enable them tolive a decent life. (COTE D’IVOIRE).As far as women are concerned, they have diffi-culties accessing land. (COTE D'IVOIRE)In Togo, the agricultural sector is unattractive totoday’s youth. The main problems of the sectorare in particular the arduous nature of the work(low level of mechanization), difficulties in gai-ning access to loans, slowdown in the sale ofgrains, attractiveness of urban life (lack of socialinfrastructures in rural areas, etc.). As a result, fewyoung people dedicate themselves to agricultureand in particular very few undertake to settle inrural areas. (TOGO).
1According to FAO, “in terms of land property, West Africais the most unfavorable area forwomen globally” (8% of owners on average, versus 25 % inEast Africa and 26% in Europe).
Talks with young people both in rural and urbanareas suggest that agriculture has little attract-veness for the youth. Difficulties in gaining ac-cess to financial resources, lack of training andinformation are pointed out by the young peopleas factors which do not encourage them to jointhe farming profession. However, many youngpeople consider that agriculture is a solutionunemployment. BENIN).
77. Platforms and ROPPA focus on the impor-tance of governance of family farms, decision-making processes and their implementationwhich determine the choice of production, oraccess to and control of productive resources,particularly difficult for women. Several exam-ples show how FF governance methods, poorlycombined with other factors, may be an obsta-cle to FFs attractiveness to youth andwomen.ttractivité des EF pour les jeunes et lesfemmes.
78. For ROPPA and its platforms, in addition tothe efforts needed to improve control over ex-ternal factors (natural, economic, technical, po-litical), further approaches and tools should bedeveloped to improve FF governance in orderto enhance their attractiveness to youth andwomen, for beyond current issues, there is theone of future FF takeover by the youth.
79. Outreach assistance and advice may helpthe FFs to better cope with external factors andimprove their internal governance. In this re-gard, the ROPPA Observatory Center has under-taken to draft the guidelines on farmingpractices concerning outreach assistance andadvice. The results of that observation are pre-sented in Booklet 2 of its 2016 report ("OBSER-VATION OF ASSISTANCE AND ADVICE TOFARMERS").
5555
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
56
List of acronyms and abbreviations
Association of farmers, educators and tradersNational association of professional farming organizations of Côte d’IvoireRegional agency for food and agricultureSenegalese association for the promotion of grassroot development
AFETANOPACIARAAASPRODEB
African Development BankWorld Bank
BADBm
Board of DirectorsEconomic Community of West African StatesPermanent inter states committee for the fight against drought in the Sahel regionNational agricultural credit fund of SenegalNational council for rural dialogue and cooperation of Senegal
Ecological monitoring centerCoordination of farmers’ organizations and agricultural producers of Togo
CACEDEAOCILSSCNCASCNCR
CSE
CTOp
A
B
C
E
Regional Agricultural Policy for West AfricaFamily farm
ECOWApEF
Farmers’ association for naturaldevelopment and environmental managementFood and Agricultural OrganizationFood and agriculture sector development projectProfessional farming association of BurkinaInternational Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentFouta Djalon Farmers’ AssociationFederation of the unions of rice producers’ cooperatives of NigerFederation of Benin producers’ unions
F
Guinea Forest RegionEconomic Interest GroupMaritime GuineaGuinean francGovernment
GFGIEGmGNFGVT
G
FANDEmAFAOFASDEpFEpABFIDAFpFDFUCOpRIFUpRO
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
57
H
High Commissioner for RefugeesHCR
m
Ministry of agriculture and rural equipmentEbola virus
National Institute for Agricultural ResearchNational agriculture land and water management developmentproject
mAERmVE
N
NARINEmA
Monitoring center for family farmsFarmers’ organizationOffice of agricultural products of MaliOffice of food crops of NigerCivil society organization
O
OEFOpOpAmOpVNOSC
Support Project for the production and distribution of sustainable certifiedseed in West Africa
Detailed program for agricultural development in Africa
Inclusive and sustainable agribusiness development project in SenegalPlatformGross Domestic ProductNational Program for Local DevelopmentAgricultural productivity program in West AfricaRegional support program for pastoralism in the Sahel regionRegional investment program in favor of livestock farming in the coastalcountriesEmergency program for community development
p
pApROSEm
pDDAA
pDIDASpFpIBpNDL ppAAOpRApSpRIDEC
pUDC
RWest African Network of Peasants and Agricultural ProducersNetwork for the prevention and management of food crisis
ROppARpCA
SExecutive SecretariatNational outreach guidance and support systems for family farms
SESNAAp-EF
UWest African Economic and Monetary UnionUnited states dollar
UEmOAUSD
Z
Agro-ecological areaZAE
OBSERVATION OF FAMILY FARM DYNAMICS
Rue Kanti Zoobré,09 BP 884 Ouagadougou 09
Burkina FasoTel : 00226 25 36 08 25
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Facebook : roppawestafricaTwitter : roppainfo
www.roppa-afrique.org