Buyers vs. Sellers

Something that has caught my attention in the literature was Staatz et al.'s suggestion that African smallholders are both the net sellers AND the net buyers of food. Their study of food security in Mali found a record crop harvest in 1989 that led to a surplus of grain. Thus, the government heavily promoted exports in order to boost prices at farm-level, and increase the incomes of the smallholders producing the grain - the net sellers, located in the climatically favourable southeastern region. However, this caused conflict in another region of Mali: the more arid northern area, where farming is less feasible and food such as staple crops are mostly purchased. Putting higher prices on basic food staples, while benefiting those southeastern smallholders, negatively impacted people, particularly poor people, in the northern regions of Mali - the net buyers. In some cases, local officials even attempted to block grain exports as they passed through the northern zones. Here we can see a dilemma constitutive to food policy in many countries, but particularly severe in Africa due to sheer number of rural smallholders: how to reconcile the conflicting needs and interests of net sellers and net buyers of crops, when they may live in the same country, or even the same region?

When considering the variability of Africa's rainfall (see Access Not Amount: Africa's Uncultivated Land) one must not solely focus on how the amount and distribution of water impacts food production. Look further, and it affects the heterogenous means by which individuals and households achieve food security: by growing their own crops, as in wetter southeastern Mali, or relying on markets, like arid northern Mali. Further still, and this impacts the policy interests of individuals, households and regions. Measures of food security have an important role in this discussion as they inform policy and direct interventions such as subsidies or aid. However, overly simplistic measures may present a uniform picture when, as we have seen, there are variable and context-dependent routes to achieving food security, and profiles of food security itself. According to Staatz et al. (1990) commonly used indicators often poor predictors of food security. Consequently, the resulting policy may be overly uniform and ineffective. The measures and indicators of food security need to be improved, for example to be more area-specific; this will be discussed in-depth in a subsequent post. Furthermore, there should be greater focus on strengthening features of agriculture that encourage adaptability and dynamism. Improving productivity, rural markets and agricultural infrastructure can help to decouple individual and household food security from the fluctuations in production due to climate and water availability. For areas even less proximate to food production, it is important to ensure functioning markets outside of, or linked to, agriculture that allow a reliable income stream so food can be purchased. Africa is perhaps set apart from other countries by the significant presence of people growing, selling and buying the same food. Therefore, it may require less strong, static and centrally controlled food policy, and more investment into institutions and organisations that are flexible, and can be controlled locally or regionally. 

Up for discussion: Does food security lessen the impact of water scarcity through 'virtual water'?