Economic Opportunity Mailing List Archive

["Andy Bullock" <<address removed>>]

I'll reply immediately to Colin's summary of the Week 2 discussion on water and 
food before I get shot down (rightly!) by my water and development peers. 

Under the growth-and-poverty discussion, I have tried to distinguish between 
agriculture and food - as serving different Millennium Goal objectives. Let me 
be absolutely clear that my comments on water availability and rights are 
confined to household food security - they certainly do not apply to the full 
realm of agricultural interventions (many of which have little to do with 
national food consumption), where agriculture is very much in conflict with 
other water use sectors. I am trying to open up the more limited perspective 
that there are opportunities in water and household food security that are 
masked by the wider water and agriculture picture.

Colin has asked about the evidence on economic returns of small-scale 
agriculture, and I'll submit some thoughts on that later. 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Poulton, Colin D 
  To: <address removed> 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 11:48 AM
  Subject: From the Moderator - week 2


  Thanks to all of you for your contributions during the past few days. These 
have been on three main topics.

  Firstly, Jim Miller sent in details of the successful SPFS programme in 
Nigeria that, in two years, has seen more than 30,000 farmers investing in a 
range of enterprises: poultry, rice, various crops, agro processing, livestock, 
artisanal fishing, aquaculture. Perhaps responding to my previous comments, Jim 
saw the availability of credit for carefully devised "modular packages" as key 
to the growth of the programme. Working with farmers in groups is also central 
to the programme's approach. Jim, it would be interesting to know what, if 
anything, the programme has had to do to assist farmers to link up with 
Nigeria's "huge consumer market" for the products in question.

  We welcome other examples of successful programmes that have enabled farmers 
to respond to (new) market opportunities. I would like to put out a hypothesis 
for affirmation or refuting: that a key to success is not just establishing 
links to markets (e.g. through better market information, even facilitating 
linkages between producers and buyers), but simultaneously equipping producers 
to respond to these opportunities (e.g. through access to finance, technical 
advice, improved local availability of the relevant inputs).

  Secondly, Andrew Dorward and Vinay Chand have initiated a discussion thread 
on achieving "critical mass" in marketed surplus, if private investment (in 
processing or in provision of support services) is to be forthcoming.

  As with the comments on success stories above, this raises questions of 
whether simply creating an enabling environment and providing key public goods 
is sufficient to stimulate private investment and market-led agricultural 
development. We may stray into the ground of the Growth and Poverty theme here, 
but thoughts are welcome!

  Whilst taking of the Growth and Poverty theme, in the past few days there 
have been lively debates there on both farmer organisation and extension - both 
of which are of interest to us. As noted last week, you can view these at 
http://dfid-agriculture-consultation.nri.org/theme1/theme1.htm by clicking on 
Archive of Discussions - even if you have not registered for Growth and Poverty 
- and you can always respond to them within this theme if you wish.

  Thirdly, thanks to Andy Bullock, John Dixon and Ian Calder for kicking us off 
in our second main area of interest - access to assets - with discussion on 
water for smallholder agriculture. Andy has argued that neither aggregate water 
availability nor water rights are the problem for food production in most of 
Africa (and that agricultural and non-agricultural uses of water should not be 
viewed as being in conflict in most cases). Rather, the access issue centres on 
the "small-scale 'infrastructure' that brings the necessary control of water 
into crop production". John suggests that this should not just be considered a 
question of irrigation, but also techniques for water control in rainfed 
systems, such as rainwater harvesting, and suggests that there are lessons for 
Africa here from the Middle East and South Asia. Ian qualifies some of Andy's 
statements about water availability in the context of India, but supports the 
point that a mix of irrigation and improved use of water in rainfed systems 
will be needed if international targets on food security and nutrition are to 
be met.

  Both for DFID's and my own benefit (!), perhaps I can ask what the evidence 
tells us about economic returns to (public) investment in these different 
technologies for improving water access and control (irrigation at different 
scales, rainwater harvesting and other similar techniques) in different areas.

  Looking forward to further contributions.

  Best wishes,

  Colin Poulton