A Consideration of Agricultural Value Chains, and Their Relevance to Africa

What is an agricultural value chain?

“The focus should be on the full value chain – from farm to fork, not just production”¹. Claudius Kurtna, a fish farmer from Kenya, highlights in simple terms a concept that is hard to delineate in the literature. While there is no universal definition of the ‘agricultural value chain’, I will be operating under the FAO’s characterisation of the value chain as identifying the set of actors and activities that bring a basic product from production to final consumption². At each stage, or link of the chain, value is added to the product: through processing, packaging, storage, transport, distribution and marketing. While value chain models are inherently market-based, they have emerged alongside the realisation that economic liberalisation in the 1980s and 1990s, accompanied by state withdrawal from agriculture, has not translated into significant poverty reduction². This newer discourse focuses on food security and sustainability, and has been compounded by the global food price crisis in 2007-08, and the threat of climate change. Producers, particularly small-scale and of staple crops, are now seen as central players^2,3.

In my opinion, applying a value chain model to food production in Africa is beneficial for several reasons. Firstly, it is inherently bottom-up, as it begins with the producer, and inclusive. It also clearly identifies current barriers to food security in Africa; considering the ‘chain’ as a whole allows us to see the challenges at each stage, which promotes holistic and sustainable improvements. Finally, as it is couched in the realm of business and markets, it promotes efficiency and adaptability. This not only applies to the industrial processes of production and distribution, but also to the inputs into the chain, of which water is one. Therefore, this body of this post will be divided into two parts: the first part will aim to illustrate the points above by discussing food storage as a stage in the chain that has challenges and opportunities specific to Africa; the second will broadly and briefly consider the role of water in the value chain.

           

Storage: hidden barrier?

Often highlighted in literature on African agriculture is the need to invest in infrastructure, however this largely focuses on roads, electricity and telecommunications. I only considered the necessity of storage for farming when I heard Dr Annie Kinwa-Muzinga discuss women and agriculture on an episode of the radio show Congo Live⁴. Without storage there is waste: according the FAO, a third of all food produced in sub-Saharan Africa is lost before it reaches the market⁶. This is due to storage that is contaminated, infested with pests, or of inadequate capacity. Poor quality storage at the transport stage means that produce, particularly staple crops like grain and oilseed, simply spills from the back of dilapidated trucks⁷. Another challenge is ‘forced commerce’: poor smallholders have to sell almost all of their crops at harvest time for low prices, because they are unable to store them⁵. Without investment into the infrastructure that links each stage of the value chain, the benefits of market involvement will not be evenly distributed. Private traders will benefit form these low prices, and poor smallholders will be left without^5.

Beyond the necessity of storage to sustain the farmer, it can be considered as an opportunity to add value to produce directly from farms. Kurtna, the aforementioned Kenyan fish farmer, makes high-protein, high-energy biscuits out of his harvest¹. These have a long shelf life, thus can be stored far longer and with greater ease than fresh fish, and target new consumers; for example schools have already ordered the biscuits. In a similar vein is an example given by Dr Kinwa-Muzinga of a female farming cooperative in Ghana that salt or smoke the fish they catch⁴. This preserves it for longer, and makes the product more desirable and worthy of a higher price.

These examples highlight the role of agriculture beyond just food production. It is a business and an agent of positive societal change, in areas like gender equality, malnutrition and education. Catching fresh fish does not improve child education in Africa, but creating nutritious and long-lasting fish biscuits that are sold to schools might be able to. In my opinion, the value chain model reflects and encourages these connections; between different smallholders and farmers, with new consumers, and between small-scale producers and markets at different levels, from local packaging factories to global trade. We need to consider agriculture beyond the initial product.

Water as a production input, and some general conclusions

The relationship between food and water is inescapable: “no other supply chain needs or consumes a natural resource in the [same] proportions”⁸. Water is necessary at almost every stage of the agricultural value chain: to irrigate land and process produce, in packaging factories, transport and refrigeration³. Professor Tony Allan asserts that about 90% of the water needed by an individual or national economy is embedded in their food consumption, as ‘green water’, ‘food water’ or ‘virtual water’. To me, a recent entrant into this academic world, it seems obvious that viewing water as a production input into the agricultural value chain necessitates efficient and sustainable use; it is a resource with extraction costs, and it has a monetary worth that should be accounted for. However, throughout history water has been largely ignored as an economic input, due to an assumption that it is ‘free’ by producers and an overwhelming push for cheap food by consumers and governments⁸.

For these reasons, Allan calls for a paradigm change around water use. If the majority of water is used to produce food, then the natural managers of water are not hydrologists and governments, but farmers. Yet, farmers have not been provided with the necessary resources to both sustain a secure livelihood and “[steward] the water ecosystems on which society itself depends”⁸.

To me, the perspective of agricultural value chains clearly highlights where there needs to be investment to support African farmers. There is infrastructure at every link of the chain that needs to be improved to make agriculture a successful business. Furthermore, infrastructure must come before intensification; any kind of ‘Green Revolution for Africa’ will be futile and damaging if there is nowhere to store the surplus grain. While the agricultural value chain is just a concept, and a complex one at that, it provides an alternative way of looking at food and water in Africa that has the possibility of being profit-oriented and sustainable, with a role for farmers, private corporations and state regulation in turn.

References

¹ BBC Africa. 2011. Why young Africans are swapping the office for the farm. Accessed 15/11/16 from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-36914887

² Elbehri A & Lee M. 2011. The role of women producer organizations in agricultural value chains: lessons from Africa & India. FAO: Rome.

³ Besada H & Werner K. 2015. An assessment of the effects of Africa’s water crisis on food security and management. Int J Wat Res Dev. 31(1): 120-33.

⁴ Congo Live, 2015. Gender issues in agriculture in DRC and across Africa. Accessed 10/11/16 from: https://www.mixcloud.com/congolive2/gender-issues-in-agriculture-in-drc-and-across-africa-dr-annie-kinwa-muzinga/

⁵ Havnevik K, Bryceson D, Birgegård LE, Matondi P & Beyene A. 2007. African Agriculture and the World Bank: Development or Impoverishment? Nordic Africa Insitute: Uppsala.

FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste – Extent, causes and prevention. FAO: Rome.

⁶ Wildeboer E & Bosch P. 2015. Why we must invest in local food storage in sub-Saharan Africa. Guardian sustainable business. Acessed 20/11/16 from: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jan/15/invest-local-food-storage-sub-saharan-africa

⁷ Allan JA. 2015. Water and Food Security: Food-water and Food Supply Value Chains. In Antonelli M & Greco F (eds.), The Water We Eat, Springer Water: Switzerland.

Urban Agriculture in Nairobi, Kenya

Urban agriculture (UA) is defined as the production, processing and selling of food in and around cities. The specific type of UA that appropriates unused open spaces emerged as a growing practice in the late 1970s, linked to escalating poverty, rising food prices and shortages¹. This was concomitant with increasing population density and economic downturn in much of Africa, exacerbated by structural adjustment policies that decreased government spending and devalued currency. Attitudes towards UA have fluctuated, alongside the wider discourse of African development: as a practice associated with the poor and marginalised, it has been excluded from aims of modernity; it has been undermined as part of the ‘informal’ sector, with little potential for economic growth or independence; it has, more recently, been touted as a sustainable solution that showcases the best of ‘indigenous’ agriculture. UA is clearly an important practice in many African urban centres; it should not be ignored or romanticised, but understood in terms of its contributions and its problems. A limited range of urban agriculture’s costs and benefits will be discussed below, framed by the case study of Nairobi, Kenya and with a focus on the role of water.

Nairobi is a prime UA location for several reasons: historically, colonial ambitions of making it a ‘green city’ with ‘sanitary buffer zones’ (to keep mosquitoes from people, and Africans from Europeans) left swathes of open land¹; furthermore, Nairobi has seen huge urban population growth and an expansion of the city limits that absorbed formerly rural farming areas^{1, 3}. In the late 1980s it was estimated 20% of households in Nairobi practised urban farming; recent estimates are hard to find, but its prevalence is likely to have increased with population density and poverty¹. Farming seems to be practised everywhere possible, from roadsides to the gaps between railway tracks¹. It is disputed whether UA in Nairobi is predominantly for subsistence or cash income^{2, 4}. Subsistence agriculture is largely associated with women, and over 60% of urban farmers in Nairobi are female². While commercial agriculture is often the aim of developers, subsistence farming makes important contributions to the livelihood of the whole household, particularly in terms of nutrition and food security. While all socioeconomic groups practise UA, it is primarily the remit of poor households¹.

The role of water in UA is seldom discussed, perhaps because water and agriculture are only married in more rural images of river basins, large irrigation schemes and dams. For this kind of farming, water is decidedly a ‘production input’ rather than a natural resource². This might be because it is not often from a natural source; in Nairobi for example, water for irrigation is conveyed mainly from Nairobi River and sewers². While this is cost-effective and reduces waste, contamination is a major issue in urban irrigation and can pose serious health risks. Water from the Nairobi River has levels of faecal coliform bacteria similar to that drawn directly from the sewers; a staggering 19,000X the WHO recommended levels for irrigation water². While there is the potential for simple and low-cost sanitation treatments, these might require group cooperation unless carried out individually before use, as well as government regulation; to regularly check water quality, and ensure consumers that what they are paying for is clean and safe².

Methods of conveyance in Nairobi include open channels and motorised pumps, but water scarcity is a major barrier to irrigation, especially as soil moisture and rainfall are low². Water availability could be improved by the building of small dams in peri-urban areas (where there is more space) and rainwater harvesting in the denser parts of the city. However both of these require funding or credit, technical support and collective action. Agricultural collectives or cooperatives can have multiple benefits, but the potential for group formation might vary spatially. In peri-urban areas small plots are controlled by individual farmers or households, leading to competition for resources and trade², however intra-urban farmers tend to cultivate community land, so cooperation is necessary from the get-go.

Limited land and water availability make UA less common in the most densely populated areas of the city: informal or ‘slum’ settlements. These are also the areas that could benefit dramatically from small-scale urban farming, especially to combat malnutrition. This has lead to new innovations in UA, for example Kibera sack farming⁵. Kibera, located in Nairobi and one of Africa’s largest slums, has recently taken up a form of ‘vertical’ farming that uses sacks filled with manure, soil, and small stones than encourage drainage. From the tops and sides of the sacks, vegetables such as kale, spinach, tomatoes and onions are grown. Sack farms are cheap, and save water by retaining soil moisture. This is a great example of the government’s relatively recent engagement with UA, as it is an initiative of the National Youth Agency⁶.

I have attempted to briefly highlight some of the main issues with water use in UA, as well as its potentially extensive benefits. In my opinion, two overarching themes emerge. First: the practises of UA vary extensive within the boundaries of the city; programmes and policies should be willing to engage with this heterogeneity, tailoring interventions and support to specific areas rather than implement sack farming, or small dams, or agricultural cooperatives universally. Innovations often emerge from specific, localised problems and this should be encouraged. Second: while NGOs and donors can have an important role in funding and technical support where necessary, government promotion and regulation is essential. Urban farmers may lack incentives to care for the land they use if the government does not acknowledge them, and regulation is necessary to ensure producers and consumers are not exposed to unnecessary health risks. This appears to be improving in Nairobi with the passing of the 2014 Nairobi County Urban Agriculture Promotion and Regulation Bill, which both encourages the use of vacant land and recognises the need for legislation. Urban agriculture already supports many livelihoods, not just in Kenya, but needs to be recognised as flawed, and always considered as inextricably tied to its local context.

¹ Foeken D & Mboganie Mwangi A. 1998. Farming in the city of Nairobi. African Studies Centre Working Paper. 30: 1-37.

² Cornish GA & Lawrence P. 2001. Informal irrigation in peri-urban areas: A summary of findings and recommendations. DFID’s Water KAR Project R7132. Report OD 144. Wallingford, UK.  

³ Nairobi: Impacts of Urban Growth. UNEP. Accessed 5/11/16 from: http://www.unep.org/pdf/poster_nairobi.pdf

⁴ Memon PA & Lee-Smith D. 1993. Urban Agriculture in Kenya. Canadian Journal of African Studies. 21(1): 25-42.

⁵ Gallaher CM, Kerr JM, Njenga M, Karanja NK & WinklerPrins A. 2013. Urban agriculture, social capital, and food security in the Kibera slums of Nairobi, Kenya. Agriculture and Human Values. 30(3):389-404.

⁶  Mayoyo P. 2015. How to grow food in a slum: lessons from the sack farmers of Kibera. The Guardian. Accessed 1/11/16 from: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/may/18/how-to-grow-food-in-a-slum-sack-farmers-kibera-urban-farming