Ethiopia/Africa: Policy analysis for Sustainable Land Management and Food Security in Ethiopia.
Ethiopia/Africa: Policy analysis for Sustainable Land Management and Food Security in Ethiopia.
Ethiopia, like many African countries is characterised by low agricultural productivity and problems of land degradation resulting in food insecurity and poverty. The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has used a bioeconomic model for land management and agricultural production developed for a community fairly typical of Ethiopia to do its research and produce a report. Bioeconomic models may be a useful tool in policy as they reflect both the biophysical and socio economic conditions essential for decision making in a specific bio economy. The area used in Ethiopia has biophysical and socioeconomic data available for the last 15-20 years, hence analysis of the relationship between population pressure, poverty and land degradation and for testing certain policies (Holden, Pender and Shiferaw, 2005).
The authors, Holden, Shiferaw and Pender state that the objectives of the study in Ethiopia was to analyse the determinants of the development path, including land degradation, population growth, market characteristics, choice of technology, and implications of increased production risk using a bioeconomic model. Moreover, to assess the impact of alternative policies on poverty reduction; increased food security and the promotion of more sustainable land use (IFPRI, 2005).
The report specifically mentions the assessment of the impact of land management; land degradation; household production, income, and food security of
drought risk in combination with land degradation and population growth;
fertiliser credit;
improved access to off- farm income;
access to food-for-work (FFW) programs;
Promotion of planting of eucalyptus on land unsustainable for crop production.
The authors found that due to the recent drought in Ethiopia, households would need to buy cereal at a high price in drought years order to meet their demand for food or would depend on food aid. Secondly, land degradation and population growth increased the need to purchase food over time and the area moved from being surplus supplier to a net buyer of cereals. Thirdly, the drought also decreased the price of livestock.
Further findings were that the provision of credit for fertilizers may increase barley production making more households surplus producers of grain, in the years where there is no drought (Holden, Pender and Shiferaw, 2005). Therefore higher production in good years enables household to cope better with drought year losses. The provision of credit for fertilizer was also found to decrease household welfare over time. However, provision of credit for fertilizers had negative incentives to conserving land as erosion was recorded as higher when credit was provided. Therefore, the report recommends that credit provisions for fertilizers be complemented with conservation requirements.
Holden, Pender and Shiferaw found that better access to off-farm income reduces farm households’ incentives to invest in conservation, leading to more soil erosion and more land degradation. FFW programs were found to improve household food security and to be promoting a more sustainable land management. The authors state that there is however a danger in that FFW programs may undermine private incentives for food production and conservation. Therefore suggest that such programs be linked to conservation investments, may minimise negative side effects.
This report is relevant for policy makers to understand and to apply these findings in cases that might be similar in their specific countries to that of Ethiopia.
This is a summary of the report produced by the International Food Policy Research Institute
‘POLICY ANALYSIS FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT
AND FOOD SECURITY IN ETHIOPIA: A BIOECONOMIC
MODEL WITH MARKET IMPERFECTIONS’ by Holden, S.; Shiferaw, B. and Pender, J.
Available online at:
http://www.eldis.org/cf/rdr/rdr.cfm?doc=DOC19399