Abstract

Climate change is already negatively affecting Sub Saharan African agriculture. One of the most effective ways to adapt on farm is to switch crop varieties. This technological change depends on the policies and institutions involved in governing the seed systems on which farmers rely for access to suitable seeds. Whilst the need for seed systems to adapt and become more resilient is indisputable, the question of how this is best achieved is debated. The dominant seed system development pathway promoted by international development actors is characterised by formalisation and commercialisation of the seed sector. In order to assess political and social outcomes of this development agenda, we compare maize seed system development in Ethiopia, Malawi and Tanzania, combining policy analysis with quantitative analysis of farmers’ seed use. We show that while the development policies promoted by international donors have similar objectives in the three countries, national policies and the seed systems farmers use differ substantially. National policies are shaped by political and historical factors and established in an interplay between state institutions, international donors and private input suppliers. Drawing on a new livelihood dataset, we show that the formalization agenda is most visible in maize seed systems, with 25%, 61% and 58% of the maize farmers planting improved maize varieties in the study sites in Ethiopia, Malawi and Tanzania respectively. The inroads of improved maize, and particularly hybrid maize, in farmers’ seed systems reflects these seeds high profitability for private seed companies. The tenuous use of improved varieties in crops such as sorghum reflects the limitation of the private sector-based seed system development approach in other crops and illustrates the need for public governance. Comparison of households cultivating improved maize with households cultivating local maize reveals that the first group is significantly wealthier and more food secure than the latter. This suggests that better-off households are likely to benefit first from the commercial formalization agenda. We argue that climate-smart seed policies and seed system development strategies must be sensitive to differences between farming systems and different groups of farmers if they are to deliver socially fair outcomes.

Highlights

  • African agriculture is under increasing climatic stress and farmers on the continent will have to adapt practices and technologies to new climatic conditions (Schlenker and Lobell, 2010; Thornton and Herrero, 2015)

  • In order to understand how climate-smart framings of seed system development shape agricultural development and the implications this has for farmers, we draw on political agronomy (Sumberg et al, 2013; Andersson and Sumberg, 2017) and literature on the political economy of seed system development (Kloppenburg, 2005; Scoones and Thompson, 2011; Thompson, 2012) as well as the emerging political economy literature on climate-smart agriculture (Clapp et al, 2018; Westengen et al, 2018)

  • It is expected that the national seed policy currently in development will be aligned with this “pluralistic” seed system development strategy

Read more

Summary

Introduction

African agriculture is under increasing climatic stress and farmers on the continent will have to adapt practices and technologies to new climatic conditions (Schlenker and Lobell, 2010; Thornton and Herrero, 2015). Studies combining yield impact models with socio-economic models of variety development and dissemination have called for adapting the varieties (i.e., the technology), and the seed systems (i.e., the institutions and policies) involved in the breeding, delivery and adoption (BDA) of the new climate-smart seeds (Challinor et al, 2016; Atlin et al, 2017). The climate-smart agriculture (CSA) agenda has, since it first originated in a FAO report to the Conference on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change at the Hague in 2010, come to encompass a broad range of strategies and approaches to agricultural development (Lipper, 2010; FAO, 2013). When seeking to understand what climate-smart agriculture entails in practice, it is necessary to study the politics involved in operationalizing the concept; what type of technological and institutional changes are called for, by whom and on what grounds?

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call