TWN Info Service on Sustainable Agriculture
25 November 2024
Third World Network
www.twn.my
Dear Friends and Colleagues
Gap between Policy and Budgetary Support for Agroecology in Southern Africa
This policy brief assesses the extent to which national agricultural policies, and budgeted programmes and projects in four countries―Malawi, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe―support agroecology.
The findings indicate that while existing national policies across sectors are somewhat synchronised with the elements of agroecology, they are situated within an overall framing that primarily promotes export orientation, commercialisation (especially irrigation infrastructure and farm blocks), industrial farming practices and input subsidy programmes. Additionally, less than 50% of agricultural budgets in the four countries are supportive of agroecological practices.
The brief recommends that national governments prioritise food sovereignty and agroecology in policy and financial investments; develop national agroecology strategies to integrate actions across numerous sectors; and diversify input subsidy programmes to enable and support the production and distribution of farmer-led ecological inputs. It further recommends that the Southern African Development Community (SADC) develop regional agroecology support programmes, including research, guidelines, learning exchanges, and cross-country projects.
With best wishes,
Third World Network
______________________________________________________________________
AGROECOLOGY IN SOUTHERN AFRICA: FINANCING THE TRANSITION
The Partnership for Social Accountability (PSA) Alliance
https://actionaid.org/sites/default/files/publications/Agroecology%20in%20Southern%20Africa.pdf
August 2024
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
African countries are increasingly adopting agroecology in national agricultural frameworks as a holistic approach to transforming their agricultural and food systems to improve food security, wealth creation, poverty reduction and to more effectively meet their continental and global commitments. Agroecology offers an integrated approach to key priorities at national and regional levels, including climate change adaptation and resilience, stemming biodiversity loss, improving food and nutrition security, and raising gender equality.
Increasing investment in agriculture to 10% of national budgets is a priority in key continental agricultural agreements. These agreements include the African Union (AU)’s Malabo Declaration and the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP), as well as the Regional Agricultural Investment Plan (RAIP) of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), all of which are up for review in 2024. The proportion of agricultural investment directed towards supporting agroecology, however, has remained unclear. It is estimated, for example, that less than half of the total funding from contributions by Member States for RAIP programmes under the Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources (FANR) Directorate of the SADC Secretariat, contribute to agroecology. With many countries in Southern Africa still reeling from El Niñorelated drought-induced disasters, the need to prioritise investment in agroecology at national, regional, and continental levels to adapt to climate change has taken on new prominence as a critical approach to ensuring long-term agricultural development, food security, and poverty reduction.
This briefing assesses the extent to which national agricultural policies, and budgeted programmes and projects in four SADC countries–Malawi, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe–support agroecology, using the Agroecology Financing Analysis Tool (AFAT). The AFAT was developed and piloted by the Partnership for Social Accountability (PSA) Alliance and is based on 13 agroecology principles as defined by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food and Nutrition Security (HLPE) of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), under the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).
The findings indicate that while existing national policies across sectors are somewhat synchronised with the elements of agroecology, they are situated within an overall framing that still primarily promotes export orientation, commercialisation (especially irrigation infrastructure and farm blocks), and the provision of conventional farm inputs as a core support strategy. Additionally, programme content and budgets in the fiscal year 2023-2024 show uneven correlation with agroecology. Generally, less than 50% of agricultural budgets in the four countries are supportive of agroecological practices. This support tends to promote participation, co-creation of knowledge, and economic diversification (referring to extension of economic activity beyond primary agricultural production, to include ecological input production and distribution, ecotourism and other related economic activities). It is weakest in reducing farmers’ reliance on external inputs, promoting recycling, and improving animal health.
Malawi allocated 12% of the national budget to agriculture in 2023/24. The majority of this was allocated through the Affordable Input Programme (AIP) and the Shire Valley Transformation Project (irrigation and block farms). Despite the high investment in synthetic fertiliser in particular, yields have not been sustained. The estimated budget share compatible with agroecology was 44%.
Tanzania allocated 9% of the national budget to agriculture in 2023/24. There was significant underspending, with unfunded mandates.1 The largest allocation (76%) was to irrigation. The estimated budget share compatible with agroecology was 27%.
Zambia allocated 7.4% of the national budget to agriculture in 2023/24, with instances of significant underand over-spending in the past few years. Fully 80% of the agriculture budget was allocated to the input supply programme. The programme adopts a conservation agriculture framing, but still provides mainly synthetic fertilisers and commercial seeds. The estimated budget share compatible with agroecology was 24%.
Zimbabwe allocated 7.4% of the national budget to agriculture in 2023/24. Input supply programmes (including the Pfumvudza and Command Agriculture programmes) were allocated up to an estimated 50% of the agriculture budget. The estimated budget share compatible with agroecology was 64%, signifying Zimbabwe’s moves towards embracing agroecology.
In all four countries, there is a gap between policy support for elements of agroecology and budgetary support for these elements. Policy “hierarchies” exist in all countries, with environmental concerns tending to be downplayed and dominant financial and economic issues taking precedence. Selected elements of policies are implemented, while others are ignored.
Input subsidy programmes dominate agricultural budgets, with provision of synthetic fertiliser and hybrid maize remaining dominant. These harmful subsidies reduce allocations to public goods such as investment in research and development (R&D), education and training, and extension services.
In all four countries, there is a gap between policy support for elements of agroecology and budgetary support for these elements. Policy “hierarchies” exist in all countries, with environmental concerns tending to be downplayed and dominant financial and economic issues taking precedence. Selected elements of policies are implemented, while others are ignored.
Input subsidy programmes dominate agricultural budgets, with provision of synthetic fertiliser and hybrid maize remaining dominant. These harmful subsidies reduce allocations to public goods such as investment in research and development (R&D), education and training, and extension services.