Tag Archives: kenya
Crop Crisis: Why Global Grain Demand Will Outstrip Supply
To meet global demand, grain production needs to double by 2050. It’s not going to make it. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center Since the time of Malthus, humanity has worried whether there would be enough food to feed the growing population. Such fears were always overcome and doomsayers all proven wrong: there was always more land to grow our crops when existing croplands failed to deliver, and new ways to get more yield from old crops. Today our planet appears very finite, and the only places to expand agriculture are in our remnant natural grasslands and tropical forests. And the demand for more agricultural crops is relentless, due to not only our rising population, but more importantly, our rising prosperity. The expected 4 billion new members of the middle class who will join the rest of us by 2050 will likely demand more dairy and meat. These require an enormous amount of grains to produce. Add to these the demands biofuel places on agriculture, and we need to boost global agricultural production by 60% to 110% by 2050. To put this challenge in a time perspective, that kind of increase took our ancestors 10,000 years to achieve. So how are we doing? My research team recently published an analysis in PLOS ONE of the local to global scale performance of maize, rice, wheat and soybeans. These are the top four global crops, collectively responsible for nearly two-thirds of all agricultural calorie production. We found that current rates of productivity improvements are nowhere near the rates of productivity gains (2.4% per year) required for growing demand. Instead of the required doubling of crop production by 2050, at this rate the yield increase will be only 38% to 67%, with the problem more acute for rice and wheat. Australia, is the ninth largest global producer of wheat and a major exporter. Its wheat yields have declined at 0.7% per year. In fact, we observed negative yield trends in around 80% of Australia’s wheat cropland areas. Productivity was rising in only a few of the important wheat cropland areas: the South Eastern statistical division in New South Wales; Darling Downs in Queensland; Goulburn, Western district and Central Highlands in Victoria; south eastern region in Western Australia; and outer Adelaide, Murray Lands, and Eyre in South Australia. Even in these regions the rates of wheat productivity improvements were below the 2.4% rate required to double wheat production, except for south eastern region of New South Wales, where we estimated the rate to be 3.4% per year. Does this mean Australians won’t be able to feed themselves, much less feed others, with wheat? It seems very unlikely at only 0.7% per yearly declines. This decline however may worsen as Australian agriculture matures. Australian wheat yields are limited by lack of nutrients and of water, with the latter being a bigger factor as we reported in a paper published in Nature last year. In some areas of Australia wheat productivity was already at the maximum possible value. Looking beyond Australia, we found many countries where the gains in crop productivity are less than those required to keep pace with their population growth. In several countries – such as Guatemala and Kenya – productivity of maize, a significant source of daily dietary energy, is declining and population is growing. In Indonesia – the third largest rice-producing nation on Earth where rice provides about 49% of daily dietary energy – productivity gain is too low to keep pace with population growth. In India, China, Philippines and Nepal, productivity improvement rates in rice are just about enough to maintain per capita production at current levels. Although supply will not meet demand by 2050, all is not lost. We can close the demand–supply gap in one of many ways. We can invest more to boost crop productivity in the faltering regions that we identified. We can bring more of our remaining natural lands under production (but wheat alone would require 95 million additional hectares, more than the total area of New South Wales). We can reduce food waste, which already accounts for nearly half of global crop production (unfortunately, waste sometimes is difficult and expensive to reduce, as in developing nations where it occurs between farm and table due to lack of storage and transportation). Perhaps most controversially, we can change to more plant-based diets. Nobody really knows what members of the new middle class will choose to eat. History shows time and again that as people join the middle class, they look for more dairy and meat. But if they go against previous trends and decide to keep consumption of animal products low – if those of us already in the middle class reduce our meat consumption – we may all have enough to eat after all. 20 June 2013 Continue reading
UNCTAD praises Kenya policy reforms
For more news visit http://www.ntv.co.ke Follow us on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/ntvkenya Like our FaceBook page http://www.facebook.com/NtvKenya Kenya h… Continue reading
G8 Leaders ‘Need To Go Further’ On Food Security In Africa
G8 leaders ‘need to go further’ on food security in Africa by Jonathan M. White 14 June 2013 When they meet at Lough Erne, G8 leaders will have to reconcile two competing visions of the New Alliance initiative started last year to lift millions of people out of poverty, says think-tank The New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition – a joint initiative of African leaders, the private sector, and G8 governments – was launched at last year’s G8 Summit with the ambitious goal of lifting 50 million people out of poverty by 2022. Over the past 12 months, 91 per cent of G8 government commitments have been disbursed on time, and more than half of the private sector investments, worth a total of over $3bn, have commenced. From creating an electronic customs clearance system for agriculture commodities in Burkina Faso to a new seed law in Ghana, New Alliance policy actions could prove to be transformational and strengthen food security in participating countries, which also include Ethiopia, Tanzania, Côte d’Ivoire, and Mozambique. During a pre-G8 Summit event on nutrition last week, Nigeria, Benin and Malawi signed up as well. When they meet at Lough Erne, the G8 leaders will have to reconcile two competing visions of the New Alliance. Some argue that, although well intended, it will not result in sustainable or responsible investments. Big global companies only understand large-scale intensive single crop production models, which are often highly destructive to biodiversity and the social fabric of smallholder farming communities. While the flow of corporate investment and the adoption of modern farm management, skills, and technology will increase agricultural production, these benefits would come at a high cost. Investments will also go toward exportable products and not the local market, making smallholder farmers increasingly dependent on volatile international markets. Others contend that the New Alliance aligns public and private resources with country-led strategies that are consistent with host-country priorities and needs. The initiative is also supportive of multinational guidelines on the governance of land, fisheries, and forests, designed to guard against land grabs and social disruption. Proponents argue that corporate investors, non-governmental organisations, and development partners will assist smallholder farmers integrate into agriculture value chains by helping them organise into cooperatives and engage in contract farming Public-private partnerships and innovative business models will ensure both development and commercial goals are achieved. Which narrative is right? Each holds some merit. In at least four New Alliance countries, there is evidence that local communities have not been sufficiently consulted by investors or governments in land transactions. In two countries, the compensation to households affected by these land investments has been determined to be inadequate. While public-private partnerships are promising, it is clear that some companies simply do not understand how to engage with smallholder farmers. At the same time, the Grow Africa initiative, which is supporting the New Alliance, has reported that more than $60 million invested so far has incorporated smallholder farmers into market-based activities. Approximately 270,000 metric tonnes of commodities were sourced, generating $300m in sales for farmers. Nearly 800,000 smallholders have benefited from a mix of training, service provisions, and market access. While land grabs are a concern, the New Alliance is not dominated by large global corporations. Many sizeable investments are, in fact, driven by African firms and small and medium-sized enterprises. Grow Africa data covers New Alliance countries minus Côte d’Ivoire and plus Kenya and Rwanda. At the heart of the debate over these competing visions is the role of the private sector. Business and trade are often viewed as sources of plunder in Africa – the depletion of oil, gas, and natural resources through shadowy networks of business and government officials. Africa’s economic growth and rising middle class are promising, and African leaders have clearly committed to private sector development. Yet, this has not completely tipped the balance in local perceptions about the private sector. Weak governance and corruption further undermine trust in both governments and business. As the host of the upcoming G8 Summit, British Prime Minister David Cameron will have to navigate this thicket of issues. He is off to a good start, forming a ‘coalition of the willing’ to publish guidelines for land transactions and making progress on nutrition through the Global Nutrition for Growth compact and commitments . Transparency through the release of the 2013 New Alliance progress report will build confidence behind the initiative. But global leaders will need to go further. New Alliance dialogues must be embedded in local contexts, opening them more broadly to public debate through formal platforms or institutions. This means local public and private sector leaders will have to step up. Others can help, but it is these local actors who must ultimately build the mechanisms that will strengthen governance and reveal which investment models succeed or fail, so that we may learn along the way to enabling agricultural transformational in Africa. Jonathan M. White is a transatlantic fellow with the German Marshall Fund of the United States, which first published this article in its Transatlantic Take series as Can the G8 Navigate Competing Visions for Food Security in Africa? Read more: http://www.publicser…a#ixzz2WrP1lKzS Continue reading
